HomeMy WebLinkAbout23057_Charlotte Van & Storage Co_EMP_20201124
Via Email
November 17, 2020
NCDEQ – Division of Waste Management
Brownfields Program
1646 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1646
Attn: Mr. Peter Doorn
Re: Environmental Management Plan
Charlotte Van and Storage Co.
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No. 23057-19-060
H&H Project No. LEN-008
Dear Mr. Doorn:
On behalf of Lennar Multifamily Communities, LLC, enclosed is the Environmental
Management Plan prepared for the Charlotte Van and Storage Co. Brownfields property which
has been revised to address your comments provided on October 30, 2020. Should you have any
questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us at (704) 586-0007.
Sincerely,
Hart & Hickman, PC
Haley Martin, PG Ralph McGee, PG
Assistant Project Geologist Project Manager
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Patrick Foster, LMC (Via Email)
#C-1269 Engineering
#C-245 Geology
Environmental Management Plan
Charlotte Van and Storage Co.
Brownfields Project No. 23057-19-060
LMC Verbena
213 Verbena Street and
4607 & 4615 Gilead Street
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. LEN-008
November 17, 2020
Environmental Management Plan
Charlotte Van & Storage Co.
LMC Verbena
Charlotte, North Carolina
Brownfields Project No 23057-19-060
H&H Job No. LEN-008
CONTENTS
Completed EMP Template Form
Tables
Table 1 Summary of Soil Analytical Data
Table 2 Summary of Well Construction and Groundwater Elevation Data
Table 3 Summary of Groundwater Analytical Data
Table 4 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Data
Figures
Figure 1 Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Sample Location Map
Figure 4 Shallow Groundwater Hydraulic Gradient Map
Appendices
Appendix A Redevelopment Plan
Appendix B Grading Plan and Cut-Fill Analysis
1
EMP Version 2, June 2018
NORTH CAROLINA BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
This form is to be used to prepare an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for projects in
the North Carolina Brownfields Program at the direction of a Brownfields project manager.
The EMP is a typical requirement of a Brownfields Agreement (BFA). Its purpose is to clarify
actions to be taken during the demolition and construction at Brownfields properties in an
effort to avoid delays in the event of the discovery of new contamination sources or other
environmental conditions. The EMP provides a means to document redevelopment plans and
environmental data for each applicable environmental medium to inform regulatory‐compliant
decision‐making at the site. As much detail as possible should be included in the EMP,
including contingency planning for unknowns. Consult your project manager if you have
questions.
Prospective Developers and/or their consultants must complete and submit this form and all
pertinent attachments, see checklist below, to their Brownfields project manager prior to any
earthmoving or other development‐related activities that have the potential to disturb soil at
the Brownfields Property, including demolition. For the resultant EMP to be valid for use, it
must be completed, reviewed by the program, signed by all parties working on the project,
and approved by the Brownfields project manager. Failure to comply with the requirements of
the EMP could jeopardize project eligibility, or in the event of a completed agreement, be
cause for a reopener
So that the EMP provides value in protecting brownfields eligibility and public health, the
preparer shall ensure that the following steps have been completed prior to submitting the
EMP for review. Any EMP prepared without completing these steps is premature.
☒ Site sampling and assessment that meets Brownfields’ objectives is complete and has
been reviewed and approved by the Brownfields Project Manager.
☒ Specific redevelopment plans, even if conceptual, have been developed for the project,
submitted and reviewed by the Brownfields Project Manager.
2
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Please submit, along with the completed EMP form, the following attachments, as relevant
and applicable to the proposed redevelopment:
☒ A set of redevelopment plans, including architectural/engineering plans, if available; if
not conceptual plans may suffice if updated when detailed plans are drafted.
☒ A figure overlaying redevelopment plans on a map of the extent of contamination for
each media.
☒ Site grading plans that include a cut and fill analysis.
☐ A figure showing the proposed location and depth of impacted soil that would remain
on site after construction grading.
☐ Any necessary permits for redevelopment (i.e. demolition, etc.).
☒ A detailed construction schedule that includes timing and phases of construction.
☒ Tabulated data summaries for each impacted media (i.e. soil, groundwater, soil gas,
etc.) applicable to the proposed redevelopment.
☒ Figures with the sampling locations and contamination extents for each impacted media
applicable to the proposed redevelopment.
☐ A full final grade sampling and analysis plan, if the redevelopment plan is final.
☐ If known, information about each proposed potential borrow soil source, such as aerial
photos, historic site maps, historic Sanborn maps, a site history, necessary for
brownfields approval.
☒ Information and, analytical data if required, for quarries, or other borrow sources,
detailing the type of material proposed for importation to the Brownfields Property.
☐ A work plan for the sampling and analysis of soil to be brought onto the Brownfields
Property. Refer to Issue Resolution 15 in Brownfields Program Guidelines.
☒ A map of the Brownfields Property showing the location of soils proposed for export
and sampling data from those areas.
☒ If a Vapor Mitigation System is required by the Brownfields Program, the Vapor
Intrusion Mitigation System (VIMS) plan will be signed and sealed by a NC Professional
Engineer. The VIMS Plan may also be submitted under separate cover.
3
EMP Version 2, June 2018
GENERAL INFORMATION
Date: 11/17/2020 Revision Date (if applicable): Click or tap to enter a date.
Brownfields Assigned Project Name: Charlotte Van and Storage Co. The development is referred to as
LMC Verbena.
Brownfields Project Number: 23057‐19‐060
Brownfields Property Address: 213 Verbena Street and 4607 & 4615 Gilead Street.
Brownfields Property Area (acres): The Site includes three contiguous parcels (Parcel ID numbers
14903412, 14903416, and 14903415) totaling approximately 5.78‐acres of land located in the lower
South End area of Charlotte. A Site location map is provided as Figure 1, and the Site and surrounding
area are shown in Figure 2.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to RCRA Permit?.......................☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.
Is Brownfields Property Subject to a Solid Waste Permit….……..☐ Yes ☒ No
If yes, enter Permit No.: Click or tap here to enter text.
COMMUNICATIONS
A copy of this EMP shall be distributed to all the parties below as well as any contractors or site workers
that may be exposed to site vapors, soil, groundwater, and/or surface water. Additionally, a copy of the
EMP shall be maintained at the Brownfields Property during redevelopment activities. NOTE, THE EMP
DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF A SITE‐SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN.
Prospective Developer (PD): Lennar Multifamily Communities, LLC
Contact Person: Patrick Foster
Phone Numbers: Office: (704) 998‐0367 Mobile: 410‐842‐5303
Email: patrick.foster@livelmc.com
Contractor for PD: Lennar Multifamily Builders, LLC
Contact Person: Chris Barnhart
Phone Numbers: Office: (704) 998‐0378 Mobile: 757‐217‐6735
Email: chris.barnhart@livelmc.com
Environmental Consultant: Hart & Hickman, PC
Contact Person: Ralph McGee
Phone Numbers: Office: 704‐887‐4621 Mobile: 704‐840‐4775
Email: rmcgee@harthickman.com
Brownfields Program Project Manager: Peter Doorn
4
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Phone Numbers: Office: Mobile: 984‐275‐5391
Email: peter.doorn@ncdenr.gov
Other DEQ Program Contacts (if applicable, i.e., UST Section, Inactive Hazardous Site Branch,
Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste):
Brownfields Property Management Unit
Jordan Thompson
Office: 704‐235‐2166; Mobile: 704‐223‐6549
Email: jordan.thompson@ncdenr.gov
NOTIFICATIONS TO THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM
Written advance Notification Times to Brownfields Project Manager: Check each box to accept
minimum advance notice periods (in calendar days) for each type of onsite task:
On‐site assessment or remedial activities:……………………………………….…… 10 days Prior ☒
Construction or grading start:……………………………………….………………………. 10 days Prior ☒
Discovery of stained soil, odors, USTs, buried drums or waste, landfill, or other signs of previously
unknown contamination: ……………………………….……………………………………. Within 48 hours ☒
Implementation of emergency actions (e.g. dewatering, flood or soil erosion control measures in
area of contamination, ventilation of work zones):…………….……….……… Within 48 hours ☒
Installation of mitigation systems:………………………….………………….……….. 10 days Prior ☒
Other notifications as required by local, state or federal agencies to implement redevelopment
activities: (as applicable): ……………………….…………………………………………..… Within 30 days ☒
REDEVELOPMENT PLANS
1) Type of Redevelopment (check all that apply):
☒Residential ☐Recreational ☐Institutional ☐Commercial ☐Office ☐Retail ☐Industrial
☐Other specify:
2) Check the following activities that will be conducted prior to commencing earth‐moving activities
at the site:
☒ Review of historic maps (Sanborn Maps, facility maps)
☒ Conducting geophysical surveys to evaluate the location of suspect UST, fuel lines, utility
lines, etc.
5
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ Interviews with employees/former employees/facility managers/neighbors
3) Summary of Redevelopment Plans (MANDATORY: attach detailed plans or conceptual plans, if
detailed plans are not available. EMP review without such information would be premature):
Provide brief summary of redevelopment plans, including demolition, removal of building
slabs/pavement, grading plans and planned construction of new structures:
Redevelopment plans for the Site include razing the existing Site buildings (approximate 40,000
square foot (sq ft) warehouse building and approximate 6,000 sq ft garage building located on
the 213 Verbena Street parcel and an approximate 7,000 sq ft automotive repair warehouse
building on the 4615 Gilead Street parcel) for construction of two multistory high‐density luxury
residential apartment buildings. Grading plans generally include leveling the Site for
construction of the two proposed apartment buildings, a clubhouse, asphalt‐paved parking
areas, and access roads. A copy of the most recent redevelopment plan is provided in
Appendix A.
4) Do plans include demolition of structure(s)?:
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
☒ If yes, please check here to confirm that demolition will be conducted in accordance with
applicable legal requirements, including without limitation those related to lead and asbestos
abatement that are administered by the Health Hazards Control Unit within the Division of Public
Health of the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. If available, please
provide a copy of your demolition permit.
5) Are sediment and erosion control measures required by federal, state, or local regulations?
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
☒ If yes, please check here to confirm that demolition will be conducted in accordance with
applicable legal requirements. If soil disturbance is necessary to install sediment and erosion
control measures, they may not begin until this EMP is approved.
6) Which category of risk‐based screening level is used or is anticipated to be specified in the
Brownfields Agreement? Note: If children frequent the property, residential screening levels shall
be cited in the Brownfields Agreement for comparison purposes.
☒ Residential ☐ Non‐Residential or Industrial/Commercial
7) Schedule for Redevelopment (attach construction schedule):
a) Construction start date: 6/1/2021
b) Anticipated duration (specify activities during each phase):
Construction Start: 6/2021
Demolition: 6/2021
Installation of Erosion Control: 6/2021
Start of Grading Activities: 7/2021
Vertical Construction: 10/2021
Building 1 Completion: 2/2023
Building 2 Completion: 6/2023
6
EMP Version 2, June 2018
c) Additional phases planned? ☐ Yes ☐ No
If yes, specify the start date and/or activities if known:
Start Date:
Planned Activity:
There are no additional phases of redevelopment planned.
Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Start Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Planned Activity:
Click or tap here to enter text.
d) Provide the planned date of occupancy for new buildings: 7/1/2023
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
1) Contaminated Media on the Brownfields Property
Part 1. Soil:……………………………………….……………. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 2. Groundwater:.……………………….……..……. ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Suspected
Part 3. Surface Water:.……………...……..…………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 4. Sediment:.……………...……..…………………… ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 5. Soil Vapor:…..…………...……..…………………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 6. Sub‐Slab Soil Vapor:……...……..…………….. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
Part 7. Indoor Air:...……..…………………………………. ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Suspected
2) For the Area of Proposed Redevelopment on the Brownfields Property, attach tabulated data
summaries for each impacted media and figure(s) with sample locations.
PART 1. Soil – Please fill out the information below, using detailed site plans, if available, or estimate
using known areas of contaminated soil and a conceptual redevelopment plan. Provide a figure
overlaying new construction onto figure showing contaminated soil and groundwater locations.
1) Known or suspected contaminants in soil (list general groups of contaminants):
A tabular summary of available soil sample analytical data in comparison to the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary
Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) is included as Table 1. Soil sample locations are shown in Figure
3. A brief summary of the soil assessment results is provided below.
7
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Laboratory analytical results indicate that low levels of acetone and toluene have been detected
in soil samples collected at the Site at concentrations above laboratory method detection limits,
but below the DEQ IHSB Residential PSRGs. No other VOCs have been detected in soil at
concentrations above the laboratory detection limits.
Semi‐Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs)
Laboratory analytical results indicate that low levels of several SVOCs have been detected in soil
samples collected at the Site at concentrations above laboratory method detection limits, but
below the DEQ IHSB Residential PSRGs.
Metals
Low levels of several metals were detected at concentrations above the laboratory method
detection limits in soil samples collected at the Site. The metal concentrations detected were
below IHSB Residential PSRGs and/or consistent with published levels of naturally occurring
metals in soil and Site‐specific background concentrations with the exception of the hexavalent
chromium concentration detected in samples SB‐3 (1.23 estimated J value mg/kg) which slightly
exceeds the Site‐specific level of 0.54 J mg/kg and the DEQ IHSB Residential PSRG of 0.31 mg/kg.
2) Depth of known or suspected contaminants (feet):
The hexavalent chromium concentration detected in SB‐3 was detected at 1 ft to 2 ft below
ground surface (bgs) near a floor drain located within the automotive repair shop building
located on the 4615 Gilead Street parcel. Impacts represented by soil sample SB‐3 are expected
to be limited in extent to the area near the floor drain.
3) Area of soil disturbed by redevelopment (square feet):
Grading will generally be conducted across the entire Site prior to construction (approximately
252,000 sq ft).
4) Depths of soil to be excavated (feet):
Based on review of the grading plan, cut is planned in the southern portion of the Site and fill is
planned in the northern portion of the Site. Planned cut depths in the southern portion of the
property are expected to be up to approximately 5 feet below the current ground surface (ft
bgs). Deeper cut (up to 8 ft bgs) may also be needed in the areas of utility banks and elevator
banks for each proposed building.
5) Estimated volume of soil (cubic yards) to be excavated (attach grading plan):
Based on the grading plan and cut‐fill analysis, the total volume of soil to be excavated and/or
cut is approximately 7,900 cubic yards. Copies of the most recent grading plan and cut‐fill
analysis are provided in Appendix B.
6) Estimated volume of excavated soil (cubic yards) anticipated to be impacted by contaminants:
Based on the results of the soil sampling, the extent of impacted soil is anticipated to be limited
8
EMP Version 2, June 2018
in the area of SB‐3. It is estimated that the volume of impacted soil is less than 5 cubic yards.
7) Estimated volume of contaminated soil expected to be disposed of offsite, if applicable:
Based on review of the grading plan and cut‐fill analysis, approximately 200 cubic yards of
geotechnically unsuitable topsoil may be need to be transported off‐Site. Soil samples collected
in areas of geotechnically unsuitable topsoil indicate that no compounds were detected at
concentrations above the DEQ IHSB PSRGs or naturally occurring levels in the case of metals (see
Figure 3 and Table 1). Impacted or potentially impacted soil is not proposed to be disposed of
off‐Site.
In the unlikely event potentially impacted soil is encountered and cannot be reused on‐Site as fill,
it will be sampled and managed in accordance with the procedures described in the following
sections.
Part 1.A. MANAGING ONSITE SOIL
If soil is anticipated to be excavated from the Brownfield Property, relocated on the Brownfields
Property, or otherwise disturbed during site grading or other redevelopment activities, please
provide a grading plan that clearly illustrates areas of cut and fill (approximate areas & volumes are
acceptable, if only preliminary data available).
1) HAZARDOUS WASTE DETERMINATION:
a) Does the soil contain a LISTED WASTE as defined in the North Carolina Hazardous
Waste Section under 40 CFR Part 261.31‐261.35?....................................... ☐Yes ☒No
☐ If yes, explain why below, including the level of knowledge regarding processes
generating the waste (include pertinent analytical results as needed).
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ If yes, do the soils exceed the “Contained‐Out” levels in Attachment 1 of the
North Carolina Contained‐In Policy?................................................. ☐ Yes ☐ No
b) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE AND EXCEEDS
THE CONTAINED‐OUT LEVELS IN ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
CONTAINED‐IN POLICY THE SOIL MAY NOT BE RE‐USED ON SITE AND MUST BE
DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND
REGULATIONS.
c) Does the soil contain a CHARACTERISTIC WASTE?.................................... ☐ Yes ☒ No
☐ If yes, mark reason(s) why below (and include pertinent analytical results).
☐ Ignitability Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Corrosivity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Reactivity Click or tap here to enter text.
9
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ Toxicity Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ TCLP results Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ Rule of 20 results (20 times total analytical results for an individual
hazardous constituent on TCLP list cannot, by test method, exceed regulatory
TCLP standard)
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ If no, explain rationale:
Laboratory analysis of soil samples (SB‐2, SB‐4, and SB‐6) collected during
previous assessment activities indicated the presence of lead and/or chromium
at concentrations exceeding the toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria
using the Rule of 20 (Table 1). Therefore, those soil samples were analyzed for
lead and/or chromium utilizing the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) extraction method. Results of the TCLP analysis did not indicate the
presence of lead and/or chromium at concentrations above characteristically
hazards levels. A summary of the soil analytical data is provided in Table 1.
If soils are disturbed during grading which are suspected to contain
concentrations above toxicity characteristic hazardous waste criteria [based on
visual observation or field screening with a calibrated photoionization detector
(PID)], the soil will be sampled and managed in accordance with the procedures
described below.
d) NOTE: IF SOIL MEETS THE DEFINITION OF A CHARACTERISTIC HAZARDOUS WASTE, THE
SOIL MAY NOT BE RE‐USED ON SITE AND MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN ACCORDANCE
WITH DEQ HAZARDOUS WASTE SECTION RULES AND REGULATIONS.
2) Screening criteria by which soil disposition decisions will be made (e.g., left in place, capped in
place with low permeability barrier, removed to onsite location and capped, removed offsite):
☒ Preliminary Health‐Based Residential SRGs
☐ Preliminary Health‐Based Industrial/Commercial SRGs
☒ Division of Waste Management Risk Calculator (For Brownfields Properties Only)
☐ Site‐specific risk‐based cleanup level. Please provide details of methods used for
determination/explanation.
Click or tap here to enter text.
Additional comments:
Click or tap here to enter text.
3) If known impacted soil is proposed to be reused within the Brownfields Property Boundary,
please check the measures that will be utilized to ensure safe placement and documentation of
same. Please attach a proposed location diagram/site map.
10
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☒ Provide documentation of analytical report(s) to Brownfields Project Manager
☒ Provide documentation of final location, thickness and depth of relocated soil on site map
to Brownfields Project Manager once known
☐ Geotextile to mark depth of fill material.
Provide description of material:
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Manage soil under impervious cap ☒ or clean fill ☒
☒ Describe cap or fill:
Documented impacted soils will be covered with impervious surfaces (asphalt pavement,
sidewalks, access roads, buildings, etc.) or a minimum of 2 ft of documented clean fill during
redevelopment.
☒ Confer with NC BF Project Manager if Brownfield Plat must be revised (or re‐recorded if
actions are Post‐Recordation).
☒ GPS the location and provide site map with final location.
☐ Other. Please provide a description of the measure:
4) Please describe the following action(s) to be taken during and following excavation and
management of site soils:
Management of fugitive dust from site
☒ Yes, describe the method will include:
Areas of contaminated soil are not expected to be encountered or disturbed during future
Site redevelopment activities based upon previous soil sampling data and field screening
during previous assessment activities. However, the grading contractor will take into
account conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, and moisture content of soil during
soil grading and stockpiling activities to minimize dust generation. Particular attention will
be paid by contractors to implement dust control measures as needed based on Site and
atmospheric conditions (i.e., by controlled water application, hydro‐seeding, and/or mulch,
stone, or plastic cover). Potentially impacted soil will be managed as described below.
☐ No, explain rationale:
Field Screening of site soil
☒ Yes, describe the field screening method, frequency of field screening, person conducting
field screening:
During soil disturbance at the Site, the workers or contractors will observe soils for
evidence of potential significantly impacted soil. Evidence of potential significantly
impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously
disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
Click or tap here to enter text.
11
EMP Version 2, June 2018
noted during Site work, the contractor will contact Hart & Hickman to observe the suspect
condition. If Hart & Hickman confirms that the material may be impacted, then the
procedures below will be implemented. In addition, Hart & Hickman will contact the DEQ
Brownfields project manager within 48‐hours to advise that person of the condition.
☐ No, explain rationale:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Soil Sample Collection
☐ Yes, describe the sampling method (e.g., in‐situ grab, composite, stockpile, etc.):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ No, explain rationale:
In the unlikely event unknown significant soil impact is encountered during grading
and/or installation or removal of utilities, excavation will proceed only as far as needed to
allow grading and/or construction of the utility to continue and/or only as far as needed
to allow alternate corrective measures described below. Suspect significantly impacted
soil excavated during grading and/or utility line installation or removal may be stockpiled
and covered in a secure area to allow construction to progress. Suspect impacted soil will
be underlain by and covered with minimum 10‐mil plastic sheeting as shown in the Figure
on the final page of the EMP form below. At least one representative soil sample (no less
than 3 aliquot soil samples at a sample ratio of 1 soil sample per every approximately
1,000 cubic yards of soil) will be collected for analysis of total VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA
metals (note the VOC sample will be a grab sample from one aliquot soil sample). If the
results of analysis of the sample indicate that the soil could potentially exceed toxicity
characteristic hazardous waste criteria, then the soil will also be analyzed by TCLP
methods for those compounds that could exceed the toxicity characteristic hazardous
waste criteria. Impacted soil will be managed in the manner described below based upon
the laboratory analyses:
i. If no organic compounds are detected in a sample (other than which are
attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts) and metals are below the Protection of
Groundwater or Residential PSRG (whichever is lower for the detected compounds) and
are consistent with Site‐specific background levels, then the soil will be deemed suitable
for use as on‐Site fill or as off‐Site fill. The proposed location(s) for off‐Site placement of
soil (other than a permitted facility) along with receiving facility written approval for
acceptance of the soil will be provided to DEQ for approval prior to transporting soil off‐
Site.
ii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which do not exceed the DEQ IHSB
Residential PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts or
which are consistent with Site‐specific background levels for metals) and the TCLP
concentrations are below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil may be used on‐Site as
fill without conditions.
iii. If detectable levels of compounds are found which exceed the DEQ IHSB
12
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Residential PSRGs (other than which are attributable to sampling or laboratory artifacts or
which are consistent with background levels for metals) and the TCLP concentrations are
below hazardous waste criteria, then the soil, with DEQ written approval, may be used
on‐Site as fill below an impervious surface, or at least 2 ft of verified compacted clean soil.
If the impacted soil with concentrations above Residential PSRGs is moved to an on‐Site
location, its location and depth will be documented, and its location will be provided to
DEQ.
iv. Impacted soil may be transported to a permitted facility such as a landfill or
landfarm provided that the soil is accepted at the disposal facility. If soil is transported to
a permitted facility, permitted facility written approval to dispose of soil from the Site will
be included with the final redevelopment report. In the unlikely event that the sample
data indicates concentrations above TCLP hazardous waste criteria, then the soil must be
transported off‐site to a permitted disposal facility that can accept or treat hazardous
waste.
*Please note that should the PD elect to transport export soil to a permitted facility or to
a DEQ Brownfields pre‐approved receiving facility, soil will be direct loaded onto trucks
for transport off‐Site.
If soil samples are collected for analysis, please check the applicable chemical analytes:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium
and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium,
Herbicides, etc.): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
☒ Check to confirm that stockpiling of known or suspected impacted soils will be conducted
in accordance with Figure 1 of this EMP. Stockpile methodology should provide erosion
control, prohibiting contact between surface water/precipitation and contaminated soil,
and preventing contaminated runoff. Explain any variances or provide additional details as
needed:
Click or tap here to enter text.
13
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☒ Final grade sampling of exposed native soil (i.e., soil that will not be under buildings or
permanent hardscape). Select chemical analyses for final grade samples with check boxes
below (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead,
selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471.
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
Please provide a scope of work for final grade sampling, including a diagram of soil
sampling locations, number of samples to be collected, and brief sampling methodology.
Samples should be collected from 0‐2 ft below ground surface, with the exception of VOCs
which should be taken from 1‐2 ft below ground surface. Alternatively, a work plan for
final grade sampling may be submitted under separate cover.
Following completion of soil disturbance for future Site development (i.e., after grading
and utility construction), Hart & Hickman will observe the Site for areas that will not be
covered upon completion of the redevelopment with a minimum of 2 ft of documented
clean fill soil, building foundations, sidewalks, asphalt or concrete parking areas and
driveways, or other similar impervious areas (e.g., tightly spaced pavers or bricks). If such
areas exist, a Work Plan will be prepared for final grade soil sampling for DEQ Brownfields
review and approval.
Based on the current Site redevelopment plan, one final grade soil sample will be collected
for laboratory analysis for each approximately 100 ft of linear landscape area or every
approximately 1,000 sq ft of open area. If no such areas exist, documentation will be
provided to the DEQ Brownfields project manager. Final grade soil samples will consist of a
maximum of five (5) aliquot soil samples collected from within each evaluation area which
will be combined and homogenized to form one composite soil sample representative of
that evaluation area and submitted for analysis of SVOCs and RCRA metals plus hexavalent
chromium. In addition, one grab soil sample will be collected for each evaluation area and
submitted for laboratory analysis of VOCs.
☐ If final grade sampling was NOT selected please explain rationale:
14
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Part 1.B. IMPORTED FILL SOIL
NO SOIL MAY BE BROUGHT ONTO THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL
FROM THE BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. According to the Brownfields IR 15, “Documenting
imported soil (by sampling, analysis, and reporting in accordance with review and written
approval in advance by the Brownfields Program), will safeguard the liability protections provided
by the brownfields agreement and is in the best interest of the prospective developer/property
owner.”
Requirements for importing fill:
1) Will fill soil be imported to the site?................................................ ☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
2) If yes, what is the estimated volume of fill soil to be imported?
Approximately 800 cubic yards
3) If yes, what is the anticipated depth that fill soil will be placed at the property? (If a range
of depths, please list the range.)
In general, fill areas are located in the northern portion of the Site (Appendix B). The thickness of
fill in the northwestern portion of the Site will be up to 5 ft.
4) Provide the source of fill, including: location, site history, nearby environmental concerns,
etc. Attach aerial photos, maps, historic Sanborn maps and a borrow source site history:
Where possible, the soil from the cut areas will be utilized in the fill areas on‐Site. However, as
indicated above, approximately 800 cubic yards of import fill will be needed as part of the
redevelopment. The PD plans to import virgin fill material from known quarry (i.e., Vulcan
Materials Company quarry located near Pineville, NC or Martin Marietta quarry located on
Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte, NC). Alternatively, if the PD elects to not import soil from a
known quarry, upon determination of the borrow source, DEQ will be notified and the procedures
outlined below will be implemented.
5) PRIOR TO ITS PLACEMENT AT THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY, provide a plan to analyze fill
soil to demonstrate that it meets acceptable standards applicable to the site and can be
approved for use at the Brownfields property.
The PD plans to import limited amounts of virgin organic rich topsoil from a commercial
landscape material vendor for use in proposed landscaped areas. The PD does not plan to collect
samples of landscaping materials prior to placement at the Site. In addition, the PD may use
limited amounts of lime or concrete as an amending agent for drying soil as needed during
grading and redevelopment activities. The PD does not plan to collect samples of lime or
concrete used as an amending agent prior to use at the Site.
If soil is imported from quarry that has been pre‐approved for import to Brownfields properties,
soil samples will not be collected prior to placement on Site. For import soil needed during
15
EMP Version 2, June 2018
grading that is sourced from an unapproved borrow site, the procedures outlined below will be
followed to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable standards applicable to the Site.
6) Please check the applicable chemical analytes for fill soil samples. (Check all that apply):
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead,
selenium and silver): Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
EPA Methods 6020/7471
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Respective Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent
Chromium, Herbicides, etc.):
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
7) The scope of work for import fill sampling may be provided below or in a Work Plan
submitted separately for DEQ review and approval. Attach specific location maps for in‐situ
borrow sites. If using a quarry, provide information on the type of material to be brought
onto the Brownfields Property.
The PD will follow the procedures outlined below to demonstrate import soil meets acceptable
standards applicable to the Site.
If the PD obtains soil from an off‐Site property that is not a quarry that has been pre‐approved for
import to a Brownfields property, a sampling plan will be developed and submitted for DEQ
review. DEQ approval of the sampling plan and analytical results will be obtained prior to
transporting import soil to the Site.
The specific sampling rate will be outlined in the aforementioned sampling plan. However, if the
proposed borrow source has not been previously developed (i.e., virgin land), soil samples will be
collected for laboratory analyses indicated above at a general rate of one per 1,000 cubic yards. If
the borrow source property has been previously developed, soil samples will be collected for
laboratory analyses indicated above at a general rate of approximately one per 500 cubic yards.
Fill soil will be considered suitable for use at the Site if it does not contain compound
concentrations above DEQ IHSB Residential PSRGs, DWM Risk Calculator risk thresholds, or typical
metals concentrations which are consistent with background levels identified at the Site.
16
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Part 1.C. EXPORTED SOIL
NO SOIL MAY LEAVE THE BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE
BROWNFIELDS PROGRAM. FAILURE TO OBTAIN APPROVAL MAY VIOLATE A BROWNFIELDS
AGREEMENT CAUSING A REOPENER OR JEOPARDIZING ELIGIBILITY IN THE PROGRAM,
ENDANGERING LIABILITY PROTECTIONS AND MAKING SAID ACTION POSSIBLY SUBJECT TO
ENFORCEMENT. JUSTIFICATIONS PROVIDED BELOW MUST BE APPROVED BY THE PROGRAM IN
WRITING PRIOR TO COMPLETING TRANSPORT ACTIVITIES. Please refer to Brownfields IR 15 for
additional details.
1) If export from a Brownfields Property is anticipated, please provide details regarding the
proposed export actions. Volume of exported soil, depths, location from which soil will
be excavated on site, related sampling results, etc. Provide a site map with locations of
export and sampling results included.
Should soil need to be exported from the Brownfields property during redevelopment, a
sampling plan will be developed and submitted to DEQ Brownfields for review and approval once
the volume of soil for export is known. Generally, soil samples will be collected from export soil
at a rate of 1 composite sample consisting of 3 to 5 soil sample aliquots for every approximately
1,000 cubic yards of export.
DEQ approval of the sampling plan and analytical results will be obtained prior to transporting
export soil from the Site. Based on analytical results of soil samples collected from the export
soil, the soil will be transported off‐Site to a suitable location. The PD will notify DEQ
Brownfields of the location receiving the export soil. If not a permitted facility, DEQ Brownfields
approval and written approval from the receiving facility will be obtained prior to transporting
the soil off‐Site.
2) To what type of facility will the export Brownfields soil be sent?
☒ Subtitle D/Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (analytical program to be determined by
landfill)
☒ Permitted but Unlined Landfill (i.e. LCID, C&D, etc.) Analytical program to be
determined by the accepting Landfill;
☒ Landfarm or other treatment facility
☒ Use as fill at another suitable Brownfields Property – determination that a
site is suitable will require, at a minimum, that similar concentrations of the same or
similar contaminants already exist at both sites, use of impacted soil will not increase
the potential for risk to human health and the environment at the receiving Brownfields
property, and that a record of the acceptance of such soil from the property owner of
the receiving site is provided to Brownfields. Please provide additional details below.
☒ Use as Beneficial Fill off‐site at a non‐Brownfields Property ‐ Please provide
documentation of approval from the property owner for receipt of fill material. This will
also require approval by the DEQ Solid Waste Section. Additional information is
provided in IR 15. Please provide additional details below.
17
EMP Version 2, June 2018
3) Additional Details: (if transfer of soil to another property is requested above, please provide
details related to the proposed plans).
Hart & Hickman will contact DEQ Brownfields to obtain DEQ Brownfields and DEQ Solid Waste
approval prior to exporting soil to a non‐Brownfields property or non‐permitted disposal facility.
Part 1.D. MANAGEMENT OF UTILITY TRENCHES
☐ Install liner between native impacted soils and base of utility trench before filling with clean fill
(Preferred)
☒ Last out, first in principle for impacted soils (if soil can safely be reused onsite and is not a
hazardous waste), i.e., impacted soils are placed back at approximately the depths they
were removed from such that impacted soil is not placed at a greater depth than the original
depth from which it was excavated.
☒ Evaluate whether necessary to install barriers in conduits to prevent soil vapor transport,
and/or degradation of conduit materials due to direct impact with contaminants?
☒ If yes, provide specifications on barrier materials:
Results of soil gas assessment activities completed within the proposed building footprints
indicate that no compounds are present at concentrations that pose unacceptable vapor
intrusion risks for either proposed building. However, chlorinated solvent impacts were
discovered in groundwater in a limited area located in the northwestern portion of the Site.
Note that the developer plans to proactively install a passive vapor intrusion mitigation system
(VIMS) during construction of both apartment buildings. As part of the VIMS design, the
locations of sub‐grade utilities will be evaluated to confirm that the proposed VIMS will
effectively minimize potential vapor intrusion from soil vapor associated with groundwater
impacts potentially migrating preferentially through sub‐grade conduits.
☐ If no, include rationale here:
Click or tap here to enter text.
Other comments regarding managing impacted soil in utility trenches:
The contractor and workers will observe soil for potential impacts during utility installation activities.
Evidence of potential significant impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled
or previously disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be
noted during utility work, the contractor will contact Hart & Hickman to observe the suspect
condition. If Hart & Hickman confirms that the material may be impacted, then the procedures
outlined in Managing On‐Site Soil above will be implemented. In addition, Hart & Hickman will
contact the DEQ Brownfields project manager within 48‐hours to advise that person of the condition.
Should impacted soil be discovered during utility trenching activities, appropriate safety screening will
be performed by an environmental professional to protect workers during utility installation activities.
18
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Safety screening activities include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a calibrated
photoionization detector or similar instrument at all times when in utility trenches. If safety screening
results indicate further action is warranted, the work zone will be evacuated until appropriate
engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are implemented.
PART 2. GROUNDWATER – Please fill out the information below.
1) What is the depth to groundwater at the Brownfields Property?
During Brownfields assessment activities conducted at the Site in December 2019, the
potentiometric groundwater surface was measured at a depth ranging from approximately 3 ft
bgs to 14 ft bgs. A tabular summary of temporary monitoring well construction details and
groundwater elevations is provided as Table 2. Locations of the temporary monitoring wells
and piezometers installed during the December 2019 assessment activities are shown in
Figure 3.
2) Is groundwater known to be contaminated by ☐onsite ☐offsite ☒both or ☐unknown
sources? Describe source(s):
Tabular summary of the analytical data for groundwater samples collected at the Site in
December 2019 is provided as Table 3. Groundwater sample locations are shown in Figure 3.
As shown in Table 3, a low level of TCE at a concentration slightly above the DEQ DWM
Residential Vapor Intrusion GWSL was identified in groundwater sample TMW‐5 collected in the
south‐central portion of the Site near the truck servicing area on the 213 Verbena Street parcel.
A concentration of benzene was also detected slightly above the DEQ 2L Standard in
TMW‐5/DUP‐GW located in the truck servicing area. Benzene and TCE were not detected at
concentration above the laboratory method detection limits in groundwater samples TMW‐2 or
TWM‐3 which are located topographically downgradient of the area of TMW‐5. In addition,
results of soil gas sampling completed within the footprint of the building proposed in the
southern portion of the Site did not identify elevated concentrations of benzene or TCE. Review
of groundwater assessment data and soil gas assessment data indicate that low level impacts
identified in TMW‐5 appear to be limited in extent in the 213 Verbena Street parcel truck
servicing area.
Results of groundwater assessment activities identified elevated concentrations of chlorinated
solvents in a groundwater sample collected from temporary monitoring well TMW‐4 installed in
a topographically downgradient area in the northwestern portion of the Site (Figure 3). The
northwestern portion of the Site is also topographically downgradient of properties located
north and northeast of the Site between off‐Site properties and the unnamed tributary of Irwin
Creek located west of the Site. Based on groundwater assessment results and results of soil gas
sampling, it appears that chlorinated solvent impacts identified in the groundwater sample
collected from temporary monitoring well TMW‐4 are not from an on‐Site source and are limited
to the northwestern portion of the Site. In addition, based on the location of the TMW‐4
temporary monitoring well, uses on nearby off‐Site properties, and the anticipated groundwater
flow direction from properties located north and northeast toward the Site and the unnamed
tributary of Irwin Creek located west of the Site, groundwater impacts identified in the
northwestern portion of the Site are suspected to be originating from an unknown off‐Site
source located north or northeast of the Site.
19
EMP Version 2, June 2018
‘
3) What is the direction of groundwater flow at the Brownfields Property?
Based on measured water levels at the Site, shallow groundwater is estimated to mimic surface
topography and flow generally toward the west toward an unnamed tributary of Irwin Creek
located near the western Site boundary. A shallow aquifer hydraulic gradient map is provided as
Figure 4.
4) Will groundwater likely be encountered during planned redevelopment activities?
☒Yes ☐No
If yes, describe these activities:
Shallow groundwater may be encountered during utility installation activities. If groundwater is
encountered during redevelopment activities, the procedures outlined below will be
implemented.
Regardless of the answer; in the event that contaminated groundwater is encountered
during redevelopment activities (even if no is checked above), list activities for contingent
management of groundwater (e.g., dewatering of groundwater from excavations or
foundations, containerizing, offsite disposal, discharge to sanitary sewer, NPDES permit, or
sampling procedures).
Based on previous assessment activities, contractors will be made aware of areas at the Site
where groundwater is impacted and an environmental professional will be contacted to
conduct safety screening if groundwater is encountered in these predetermined areas. Should
groundwater be encountered outside of areas on known impacts, the contractors will contact
an environmental professional to observe conditions to determine if there are impacts that may
pose a potential risk to workers. Appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken if
groundwater gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted during
construction activities.
The accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate/infiltrate to the extent time for dissipation
does not disrupt the construction schedule. Should the time needed for natural dissipation of
accumulated water be deemed inadequate, the water will be tested and disposed off‐Site (if
impacted), or tested and discharged to the stormwater retention systems (if not impacted
above DEQ surface water quality standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State
regulations for erosion control and construction stormwater control.
5) Are monitoring wells currently present on the Brownfields Property?.................☐Yes ☒No
If yes, are any monitoring wells routinely monitored through DEQ or other
agencies?..................................................................................................................☐Yes ☐No
6) Please check methods to be utilized in the management of known and previously
unidentified wells.
☒ Abandonment of site monitoring wells in accordance with all applicable regulations. It
is the Brownfields Program’s intent to allow proper abandonment of well(s) as
specified in the Brownfields Agreement, except if required for active monitoring
through another section of DEQ or the EPA.
☐ Location of existing monitoring wells marked
20
EMP Version 2, June 2018
☐ Existing monitoring wells protected from disturbance
☒ Newly identified monitoring wells will be marked and protected from further
disturbance until notification to DEQ Brownfields can be made and approval for
abandonment is given.
7) Please provide additional details as needed:
Please note, disturbance of existing site monitoring wells without approval by DEQ is not
permissible. If monitoring wells are damaged and/or destroyed, DEQ may require that the PD
be responsible for replacement of the well.
PART 3. SURFACE WATER ‐Please fill out the information below.
1) Is surface water present at the property? ☐ Yes ☒ No
2) Attach a map showing the location of surface water at the Brownfields Property.
3) Is surface water at the property known to be contaminated? ☐ Yes ☒ No
4) Will workers or the public be in contact with surface water during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No
5) In the event that contaminated surface water is encountered during redevelopment
activities, or clean surface water enters open excavations, list activities for management of
such events (e.g. flooding, contaminated surface water run‐off, stormwater impacts):
When excavating during construction activities at the Site, the workers or contractors will
observe soils for evidence of potential significantly impacted soil. Evidence of potential
significantly impacted soil includes a distinct unnatural color, strong odor, or filled or previously
disposed materials of concerns (i.e., chemicals, tanks, drums, etc.). Should the above be noted
during excavation work, the contractor will contact Hart & Hickman to observe the suspect
condition. If Hart & Hickman confirms that the material may be impacted, then safety screening
will be conducted during work in this area.
If surface water run‐off gathers in an open excavation within an area determined to be impacted
during construction activities, appropriate worker safety measures will be undertaken. The
accumulated water will be allowed to evaporate/infiltrate to the extent time for dissipation does
not disrupt the construction schedule. Should the time needed for natural dissipation of
accumulated water be deemed inadequate, the water will be tested and disposed off‐Site (if
impacted), or tested and discharged to the storm sewer (if not impacted above DEQ surface
water standards) in accordance with applicable municipal and State regulations for erosion
control and construction stormwater control.
DEQ will be notified if newly identified monitoring wells are found on the Brownfields property.
21
EMP Version 2, June 2018
PART 4. SEDIMENT – Please fill out the information below.
1) Are sediment sources present on the property? ☐ Yes ☒ No
2) If yes, is sediment at the property known to be contaminated: ☐ Yes ☒ No
3) Will workers or the public be in contact with sediment during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☒ No
4) Attach a map showing location of known contaminated sediment at the property.
5) In the event that contaminated sediment is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such events (stream bed disturbance):
Not Applicable
PART 5. SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below.
1) Do concentrations of volatile organic compounds at the Brownfields property exceed the
following vapor intrusion screening levels (current version) in the following media:
IHSB Residential Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
Groundwater:.….☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
IHSB Industrial/Commercial Screening Levels:
Soil Vapor:………..☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
Groundwater:…..☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
2) Attach a map showing the locations of soil vapor contaminants that exceed site
screening levels.
3) If applicable, at what depth(s) is soil vapor known to be contaminated?
4) Will workers encounter contaminated soil vapor during planned redevelopment activities?
☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
Nine soil gas samples were collected at depths of approximately 5 ft bgs within the footprint of each
proposed buildings. Locations of the soil gas samples are shown in Figure 3 and a tabular summary of
the soil gas sample laboratory analytical results is provided as Table 4.
Laboratory analytical results indicate that several VOCs were detected at concentrations above the
laboratory method detection limits in each of the soil gas samples. No compound concentrations
were detected above their respective DWM Residential SGSLs and the calculated cumulative
carcinogenic risk and non‐carcinogenic risk for each building using the highest concentrations of any
detected compound are below the DEQ and EMP acceptable levels for cumulative risks.
22
EMP Version 2, June 2018
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities
(trenches, manways, basements or other subsurface work,) list activities for management
of such contact:
As noted above, appropriate safety screening will be performed by an environmental
professional to protect workers during utility installation activities in areas of known impacted
groundwater that may impact soil vapor at unacceptable levels. Safety screening activities
include monitoring the worker breathing zone with a calibrated photoionization detector or
similar instrument. If safety screening results indicate further action is warranted, the work zone
will be evacuated until appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) are
implemented.
PART 6. SUB‐SLAB SOIL VAPOR – Please fill out the information below if existing buildings or
foundations will be retained in the redevelopment.
1) Are sub‐slab soil vapor data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) If data indicate that sub‐slab soil vapor concentrations exceed screening levels, attach a map
showing the location of these exceedances.
3) At what depth(s) is sub‐slab soil vapor known to be contaminated? ☐0‐6 inches ☐Other, please
describe:
Not Applicable.
4) Will workers encounter contaminated sub‐slab soil vapor during planned redevelopment
activities? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
5) In the event that contaminated soil vapor is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact
In the unlikely event impacted soil vapors are encountered during future redevelopment
activities, worker breathing zone will be monitored using a calibrated photoionization detector.
If results indicate further action is warranted, appropriate engineering controls (such as use of
industrial fans) will be implemented. Impacted soil vapors will be determined by contractor
olfactory awareness, observations, and monitoring for worker symptoms such as
lightheadedness.
PART 7. INDOOR AIR – Please fill out the information below.
1) Are indoor air data available for the Brownfields Property? ☐ Yes ☒ No ☐ Unknown
2) Attach a map showing the location(s) where indoor air contaminants exceed site screening levels.
3) If the structures where indoor air has been documented to exceed risk‐based screening levels will
not be demolished as part of redevelopment activities, will workers encounter contaminated
indoor air during planned redevelopment activities? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Unknown
23
EMP Version 2, June 2018
4) In the event that contaminated indoor air is encountered during redevelopment activities, list
activities for management of such contact:
VAPOR INTRUSION MITIGATION SYSTEM – Please fill out the information below.
Is a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) proposed for this Brownfields Property?
☒ Yes ☐ No ☐ Unknown
If yes, ☐ VIMS Plan Attached or ☒ VIMS Plan to be submitted separately
If submitted separately provide date:
The developer proposes to proactively install a vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS)
proposed for future Site buildings in accordance DEQ Brownfields approved VIMS Plan. The
VIMS Plan will be submitted to DEQ for approval under separate cover prior to construction of
future proposed Site buildings.
VIMS Plan shall be signed and sealed by a NC Professional Engineer
If no, please provide a brief rationale as to why no vapor mitigation plan is warranted:
CONTINGENCY PLAN – encountering unknown tanks, drums, or other waste materials
In this section please provide actions that will be taken to identify or manage unknown
potential new sources of contamination. During redevelopment activities, it is not uncommon
that unknown tanks, drums, fuel lines, landfills, or other waste materials are encountered.
Notification to DEQ Brownfields Project Manager, UST Section, Fire Department, and/or other
officials, as necessary and appropriate, is required when new potential source(s) of
contamination are discovered. These Notification Requirements were outlined on Page 1 of this
EMP.
Should potentially impacted materials be identified that are inconsistent with known site
impacts, the DEQ Brownfields Project Manager will be notified and a sampling plan will be
prepared based on the EMP requirements and site‐specific factors. Samples will generally be
In the unlikely event there is evidence of potential indoor air issues (i.e., unusual odors) during future
redevelopment activities, the area will be evacuated and appropriate safety screening of the indoor
air will be performed. If warranted, safety screening procedures will be conducted by an
environmental professional and will include periodically screening by an environmental professional
indoor air for volatile organic vapors with a calibrated photoionization detector when workers present
in the Site buildings identify potential indoor air issues. If results indicate further action is warranted,
appropriate engineering controls (such as use of industrial fans) will be implemented.
24
EMP Version 2, June 2018
collected to document the location of the potential impacts.
Check the following chemical analysis that are to be conducted on newly identified releases:
☒ Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by EPA Method 8260
☒ Semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) by EPA Method 8270
☒ Metals RCRA List (8) (arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, selenium and
silver)
EPA Methods 6020/7471.
☐ Pesticides: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☐ PCBs: Specify Analytical Method Number(s):
Click or tap here to enter text.
☒ Other Constituents & Analytical Method(s) (i.e. Hexavalent Chromium, Herbicides, etc.)
Please note, if field observations indicate the need for additional analyses, they should
be conducted, even if not listed here.
Hexavalent Chromium by EPA Method 7199
Please provide details on the proposed methods of managing the following commonly
encountered issues during redevelopment of Brownfields Properties.
During construction activities, contractors may encounter unknown sub‐surface environmental
conditions (i.e., tanks, drums, or waste materials) that if encountered, will require proper
management. Prior to beginning Site work, Hart & Hickman will attend a pre‐construction kick‐off
meeting with the PD and the redevelopment contractors to discuss the DEQ approved EMP and
various scenarios when it would be appropriate and necessary to notify H&H of the discovery of
unknown subsurface features or potentially impacted media at the Site.
In the event that such conditions are encountered during redevelopment activities, the
environmental actions noted below will be used to assist in appropriate management of sub‐surface
environmental conditions and determination of the most suitable final disposition of potentially
impacted Site media.
Underground Storage Tanks:
In the event that an unknown UST or impacts associated with a UST release are discovered at the
Site during redevelopment activities, the UST and/or UST related impacts will be addressed through
the Brownfields Program. DEQ Brownfields will be notified within 48‐hours of discovery of the UST.
If an unknown UST is encountered, the UST will be removed, if possible, and transported off‐Site for
disposal at a suitable facility. Prior to removing the UST from the ground, residual fluids, if any, will
be sampled for VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals as needed for disposal purposes. If a UST is
encountered that cannot be removed, it may be abandoned in‐place with prior DEQ approval and
construction will proceed. Where appropriate, the bottom of the UST may be penetrated before
25
EMP Version 2, June 2018
abandonment to prevent fluid accumulation. Impacted soil in the vicinity of the UST will be
managed in accordance with the Managing On‐Site Soil section outlined in this EMP.
Sub‐Grade Feature/Pit:
If a sub‐grade feature or pit is encountered, it will be removed from the Site, if possible and
construction will proceed. Where appropriate, the bottom may be penetrated before back filling to
prevent fluid accumulation. If the pit has waste in it, the waste will be set aside in a secure area and
will be sampled for waste disposal purposes for TCLP VOCs, TCLP SVOCs, and TCLP metals and
disposed off‐Site at a permitted facility or the waste will be managed in accordance with the
Managing On‐Site Soil section outlined above in the EMP, whichever is most applicable based on
the type of waste present. If the pit must be removed and the observed waste characteristics
indicate the concrete may potentially be contaminated to a significant degree, the concrete will be
sampled and analyzed by methods specified by the disposal facility
Buried Waste Material:
If excavation into buried wastes or significantly impacted soils occurs, the contractor is instructed to
stop work in that location and notify Hart & Hickman. Hart & Hickman will observe the suspect
materials and collect samples for laboratory analysis, if warranted. Confirmation sampling will be
conducted at representative locations in the base and the sidewalls of the excavation after the
waste or significantly impacted soil is removed. The confirmation samples will be analyzed for
VOCs, SVOCs, and RCRA metals (or other analyses as appropriate based on the type of waste
material). Information will be provided to DEQ Brownfields regarding the permitted facility used for
disposal of the waste or significantly impacted soil. Areas of suspected contaminated soil that
remain at the Site after excavation is complete above the DEQ IHSB Residential PSRGs will be
managed pursuant to this plan.
Re‐Use of Impacted Soils On‐Site:
Please refer to description outlined in the Managing On‐Site Soil section of the EMP above. .
If unknown, impacted soil is identified on‐site, management on‐site can be considered after the
project team provides the necessary information, outlined in Part 1.A. Item 11, for Brownfields
Project Manager approval prior to final placement on‐site.
If other potential contingency plans are pertinent, please provide other details or scenarios as
needed below:
POST‐REDEVELOPMENT REPORTING
☒ Check this box to acknowledge that a Redevelopment Summary Report will be required for the
project. If the project duration is longer than one year, an annual update is required and will be
26
EMP Version 2, June 2018
due by January 31 of each year, or 30 days after each one‐year anniversary of the effective date of
this EMP (as agreed upon with the Project Manager). These reports will be required for as long as
physical redevelopment of the Brownfields Property continues, except that the final
Redevelopment Summary Report will be submitted within 90 days after completion of
redevelopment. Based on the estimated construction schedule, the first Redevelopment Summary
Report is anticipated to be submitted on 1/31/2022
The Redevelopment Summary Report shall include environment‐related activities since the last
report, with a summary and drawings, that describes:
1. actions taken on the Brownfields Property;
2. soil grading and cut and fill actions;
3. methodology(ies) employed for field screening, sampling and laboratory analysis of
environmental media;
4. stockpiling, containerizing, decontaminating, treating, handling, laboratory analysis and
ultimate disposition of any soil, groundwater or other materials suspected or confirmed
to be contaminated with regulated substances; and
5. removal of any contaminated soil, water or other contaminated materials (for example,
concrete, demolition debris) from the Brownfields Property (copies of all legally required
manifests shall be included).
☒ Check box to acknowledge consent to provide a NC licensed P.G. or P.E. sealed, Redevelopment
Summary Report in compliance with the site’s Brownfields Agreement.
11/24/2020
28
EMP Version 2, June 2018
Tables
Table 1Summary of Soil Analytical DataCharlotte Van & Storage Co.Verbena Street and Gilead StreetCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. LEN-008Sample IDSB-3BG-1 BG-2Sample TypeComposite Grab Composite Grab Grab Composite Grab Composite Grab Composite GrabDepth (ft bgs)1-22-4 0-2Date12/3/201912/2/2019 12/2/2019 Range Range MeanUnitsVOCs (8260B)AcetoneNA <0.0108 NA <0.00990.0802 JNA0.0284 JNA <0.0088 NA <0.0101 NA NA12,000 140,000-- -- --TolueneNA <0.0019 NA <0.0017 <0.0019 NA0.0014 JNA <0.0015 NA0.0032 JNA NA990 9,700-- -- --SVOCs (8270D)-- -- --Benzo(b)fluoranthene<0.173 NA <0.167 NA0.202 J<0.147 NA <0.149 NA <0.183 NA NA NA1.1 21-- -- --Chrysene<0.125 NA <0.120 NA0.175 J<0.106 NA <0.108 NA <0.132 NA NA NA110 2,100-- -- --Fluoranthene<0.130 NA <0.125 NA0.353 J<0.110 NA <0.112 NA <0.137 NA NA NA480 6,000-- -- --Phenanthrene<0.108 NA <0.104 NA0.363 J<0.0919 NA <0.0934 NA <0.114 NA NA NA134* NE-- -- --Pyrene<0.118 NA <0.114 NA0.343 J<0.100 NA <0.102 NA <0.125 NA NA NA360 4,500-- -- --Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic1.73NA3.13NA2.64 2.79NA1.88NA0.822NA3.03 1.280.68 3.0 1.28 - 3.03 1.0 - 18 4.8Barium63.7NA200NA85.5 207NA235NA194NA38.1 94.63,100 47,000 38.1 - 94.6 50 - 1,000 356Cadmium0.319 JNA1.14NA<0.1131.00NA1.00NA <0.108 NA0.434 J<0.12214 200ND - 0.4341.0 - 10* 4.3Chromium (total)38.2NA62.8NA44.3 24.6NA24.2NA31.2NA59.9 47.1NE NE 47.1 - 59.9 7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent Chromium<0.334NA<0.313NA1.23 J<0.323NA <0.315 NA <0.363 NA0.540 J<0.3880.31 6.5 ND - 0.540 NS NSTrivalent Chromium 38.2NA62.8NA43.1 24.6NA24.2NA31.2NA59.4 47.123,000 350,000 47.1 - 59.4 NS NSLead30.8NA156NA41.4 229NA197NA6.52NA11.6 7.33400 800 7.33 - 11.6 ND - 50 16Mercury0.0565NA0.0348 JNA0.0391 J 0.145NA0.111NA0.0289 JNA0.0502 0.0365 J2.3 9.70.0365 - 0.05020.03 - 0.52 0.121Selenium0.404 JNA0.554 JNA0.731 0.505 JNA0.325 JNA <0.256 NA1.04 0.586 J78 1,200 0.586 - 1.04 <0.1 - 0.8 0.42Silver<0.203NA<0.190NA<0.220 <0.196NA <0.192 NA <0.208 NA<0.202 <0.23678 1,200 ND ND - 5.0 NSTCLP Metals (6010) (mg/L)LeadNANA0.021 JNANA1.2NA1.4NA NA NANA NA5.0**-- -- -- --Chromium (total)NANANANANA NANA NA NA NA NANA NA5.0**-- -- -- --Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (December 2019)2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Background Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous US soils.*DEQ IHSB Protection of Groundwater PSRG used for compounds for which Residential and Industrial/Commercial PSRGs are not established.**TCLP concentrations compared to the Regulatory Level for Hazardous Toxicity Characteristic.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).TCLP concentrations are reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L)Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Aside from metals, only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown above.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surfaceNS= Not Specified; NA = Not Analyzed; -- = Not Applicable; NE = Not Established; ND = Not detected at concentration above laboratory detection limitJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. AST = Aboveground storage tank; UST = Underground storage tankmg/kgGilead Building - Air Compressor AreaSB-4/SB-DUPSample LocationSB-512/4/20190-2Regional Background Metals in Soil (2)SB-112/3/20193-Point Alluvial Soil2-3 0-112/3/2019SB-23-Point Truck Wash Area4-5AST Fuel DispensersGilead Building - Floor Drains12/2/2019Site-Specific Background MetalsIndustrial/CommercialPSRGs (1)ResidentialPSRGs (1)BackgroundCompositeS:\AAA‐Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN‐008 Verbena Assemblage\Brownfields Assessment\Tables\Charlotte Van & Storage Co. (LEN‐008) Data Tables aem2/3/2020Table 1 (Page 1 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 1Summary of Soil Analytical DataCharlotte Van & Storage Co.Verbena Street and Gilead StreetCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. LEN-008Sample ID SB-7BG-1 BG-2Sample TypeGrab Grab Composite Composite Grab Composite Grab Composite GrabDepth (ft bgs)0-2 6-8 0-0.52-4 0-2Date12/3/2019Range Range MeanUnitsVOCs (8260B)Acetone<0.0092 <0.0111 NA NA <0.0097 NA <0.0102 NA <0.0115 NA NA12,000 140,000-- -- --Toluene<0.0016 <0.0019 NA NA <0.0017 NA <0.0018 NA <0.0020 NA NA990 9,700-- -- --SVOCs (8270D)-- -- --Benzo(b)fluoranthene<0.170 <0.197 NA <0.168 NA <0.180 NA <0.194 NA NA NA1.1 2.1-- -- --Chrysene<0.122 <0.142 NA <0.121 NA <0.129 NA <0.140 NA NA NA110 2,100-- -- --Fluoranthene<0.127 <0.148 NA <0.126 NA <0.135 NA <0.146 NA NA NA480 6,000-- -- --Phenanthrene<0.106 <0.123 NA <0.105 NA <0.112 NA <0.121 NA NA NA*134 NE-- -- --Pyrene<0.116<0.134NA <0.115 NA <0.123 NA<0.133NA NA NA360 4,500-- -- --Metals (6020/7471/7199)Arsenic 1.33 1.98NA1.83NA0.817NA1.16NA3.03 1.280.68 3.0 1.28 - 3.03 1.0 - 18 4.8Barium 247 313NA54.2NA112NA146NA38.1 94.63,100 47,000 38.1 - 94.6 50 - 1,000 356Cadmium<0.109 <0.114 NA<0.106NA<0.110NA<0.124NA0.434 J<0.12214 200ND - 0.4341.0 - 10* 4.3Chromium (total) 19.6 128NA40.9NA47.8NA22.4NA59.9 47.1NE NE 47.1 - 59.9 7.0 - 300 65Hexavalent Chromium<0.348 <0.364 NA<0.339NA<0.351NA0.680 JNA0.540 J<0.3880.31 6.5 ND - 0.540NS NSTrivalent Chromium 19.6 128NA40.9NA47.8NA21.7NA59.4 47.123,000 350,000 47.1 - 59.4NS NSLead 12.9 6.26 57.433.5NA5.58NA5.46NA11.6 7.33400 800 7.33 - 11.6 ND - 50 16Mercury 0.0183 J 0.0186 JNA0.0566NA0.0168 JNA0.0116 JNA0.0502 0.0365 J2.3 9.70.0365 - 0.05020.03 - 0.52 0.121Selenium 0.350 J 0.745NA0.423 JNA<0.261NA0.468 JNA1.04 0.586 J78 1,200 0.586 - 1.04 <0.1 - 0.8 0.42Silver<0.211 <0.222 NA<0.206NA<0.213NA<0.240NA<0.202 <0.23678 1,200NDND - 5.0NSTCLP Metals (6010) (mg/L)LeadNA NA NANANANANANANANA NA5.0**-- -- -- --Chromium (total)NA <0.0330 NANANANANANANANA NA5.0**-- -- -- --Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Inactive Hazardous Sites Branch (IHSB) Preliminary Soil Remediation Goals (PSRGs) (December 2019)2) Range and mean values of background metals for North Carolina soils taken from Elements in North American Soils by Dragun and Chekiri, 2005. Background Cd and Ag concentrations were taken from Southeastern and Conterminous US soils.*DEQ IHSB Protection of Groundwater PSRG used for compounds for which Residential and Industrial/Commercial PSRGs are not established.**TCLP concentrations compared to the Regulatory Level for Hazardous Toxicity Characteristic.Soil concentrations are reported in milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg).TCLP concentrations are reported in milligrams per liter (mg/L)Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Aside from metals, only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown above.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surfaceNS= Not Specified; NA = Not Analyzed; -- = Not Applicable; NE = Not Established; ND = Not detected at concentration above laboratory detection limitJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration. AST = Aboveground storage tank; UST = Underground storage tankmg/kgSample LocationIndustrial/CommercialPSRGs (1)Site-Specific Background Metals in SoilRegional Background Metals in Soil (2)Drip Line Residential PSRGs (1)0-3SB-93-612/3/2019 12/3/2019Former UST BasinSB-612/4/2019SB-8Potential Cut AreaComposite4-5Potential Cut Area12/3/2019Background12/2/2019S:\AAA‐Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN‐008 Verbena Assemblage\Brownfields Assessment\Tables\Charlotte Van & Storage Co. (LEN‐008) Data Tables aem2/3/2020Table 1 (Page 2 of 2)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 2Summary of Well Construction and Groundwater Elevation DataCharlotte Van & Storage Co.Verbena Street and Gilead StreetCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. LEN-008Well IDTOC Elevation (ft MSL)Total Depth (ft bgs)Screen Length(ft)Static Depth to Groundwater (ft below TOC)Groundwater Elevation(ft below TOC)TMW-1723.5816 10 10.40713.18TMW-2712.5416 10 3.35709.19TMW-3 716.61 20 10 12.83703.78TMW-4 710.31 20 10 8.69701.62TMW-5 719.27 16 10 7.16712.11PZ-1 719.24 16 10 6.01713.23PZ-2 718.89 20 10 10.73708.16 Notes:TMW = temporary monitoring well; PZ = piezometer TOC = top of casing; ft = feet; bgs = below ground surface; MSL = Mean Sea‐LevelDepth to groundwater measurements were collected by H&H on December 4, 2019S:\AAA‐Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN‐008 Verbena Assemblage\Brownfields Assessment\Tables\Charlotte Van & Storage Co. (LEN‐008) Data Tables aem2/3/2020Table 2 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 3Summary of Groundwater Analytical DataCharlotte Van & Storage Co.Verbena Street and Gilead StreetCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. LEN-008Sample ID TMW-1 TMW-2 TMW-3 TMW-4 Trip Blank 1Sample LocationBackground Downgradient - ASTDowngradient - Gilead Street buildingNorthwest Corner Trip blank Date12/3/2019 12/4/2019 12/4/2019 12/4/2019 --UnitsVOCs (8260B/6200B/602)Benzene<0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.301.7 1.6<0.15116691,1-Dichloroethane<0.27 <0.27 <0.271.4 J<0.27 <0.27 <0.276 76 3301,1-Dichloroethene<0.24 <0.24 <0.2413.8<0.24 <0.24 <0.24350 39 160cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.29 <0.29 <0.2919319.7 18.7<0.2970 NE NE1,2-Dichloropropane<0.19 <0.19 <0.198.8<0.19 <0.19 <0.190.6 7.2 30Diisopropyl ether<0.22 <0.22 <0.22 <0.440.30 J 0.31 J<0.2270 1,400 5,900Methyl-tert-butyl-ether (MTBE)<0.28 <0.280.48 J <0.558.6 8.1<0.2820 4,500 20,000Naphthalene<0.35 <0.35 <0.35 <0.700.40 J 0.38 J<0.356 35 150Tetrachloroethene<0.16 <0.16 <0.16250<0.16 <0.16 <0.160.7 12 48Toluene<0.24 <0.24 <0.24 <0.49 <0.240.26 J<0.24600 3,800 16,000Trichloroethene<0.22 <0.22 <0.221941.91.9<0.2231.04.4SVOCs (8270D/625)Diethylphthalate<2.4 <2.4 <2.4 <2.4103 C7, M1<2.4 NA600 NE NEMetals (6020B/7470A)Arsenic<0.250 <0.2500.322 J<0.250 <0.250 <0.250 NA10-- --Barium153 72.0 76.0 62.0 28.6 28.2NA700-- --Cadmium<0.160 <0.160 <0.160 <0.160 <0.160 <0.160 NA2-- --Chromium (total)1.46 J 5.9611.14.02 2.51 2.64NA10-- --Lead0.356 J 1.08 J 2.24<0.2400.426 J 0.252 JNA15-- --Mercury<0.0490 <0.0490 <0.0490 <0.04900.673 0.687NA1-- --Selenium<0.380 <0.380 <0.380 <0.380 <0.380 <0.380 NA20-- --Silver<0.310 <0.310 <0.310 <0.310 <0.310 <0.310 NA20-- --Notes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) 15A North Carolina Administrative Code 02L.0202 Groundwater Quality Standard (2L Standard) effective April 2013.Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per liter (μg/L).Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Bold indicates concentration exceeds 2L StandardUnderline indicates concentration exceeds DWM Residential GWSLGrey shading indicates concentration exceeds the DWM Non-Residential GWSLAside from metals, only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown above.Laboratory analytical methods are shown in parenthesesVOCs = volatile organic compounds; SVOCs = semi-volatile organic compoundsNE = Not Established; -- = Not Applicable; NA = Not AnalyzedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.C7 = Analyte is a possible laboratory contaminant (not present in method blank)M1 = Matrix spike recovery exceeded QC limits. Batch accepted based on laboratory control sample recovery.AST = Aboveground storage tank2) DEQ Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Groundwater Screening Levels (GWSLs) (Februrary 2018)2L Groundwater Standard (1)Residential Vapor Intrusion GWSLs (2) Non-Residential Vapor Intrusion GWSLs (2)µg/LTMW-5/GW-DUPPotential Cut Area12/3/2019S:\AAA‐Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN‐008 Verbena Assemblage\Brownfields Assessment\Tables\Charlotte Van & Storage Co. (LEN‐008) Data Tables aem2/3/2020Table 3 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Table 4Summary of Soil Gas Analytical DataCharlotte Van & Storage Co.Verbena Street and Gilead StreetCharlotte, North CarolinaH&H Job No. LEN-008Sample ID SGP-1 SGP-2 SGP-3 SGP-4 SGP-6 SGP-7 SGP-8SGP-9Sample LocationDate12/4/2019 12/4/2019 12/4/2019 12/4/2019 12/4/2019 12/4/2019 12/3/201912/3/2019Depth (ft bgs)5555 555.55.5UnitsVOCs (TO-15)Acetone80.5 65.9 53.1 16.4 21.6 22.4 21.8 27.7 77.3 33.4 J220,000 2,700,000Benzene38.2 52.8 18.6 0.62 J 21.8 20.2 21.1 67.1 41.1 79.7120 1,6001,3-Butadiene<0.38 <0.27 <0.32 <0.27 <0.254.1<0.25 <0.36 <1.7 <1.814 1802-Butanone (MEK)22.9 26.4 25.5 2.9 J 7.9 6.7J 12.4 6.9 J 15.9 J 6.8 J35,000 440,000Carbon Disulfide134 95.3 70.4<0.4677.3 70.9 89.8 71.8 29 724,900 61,000Carbon Tetrachloride<1.3 <0.90 <1.1 <0.90 <0.83 <1.31.1 J<1.2 <5.7 <6.0160 2,000Chloromethane1.3<0.33 <0.390.59 J 1.2 1.4 3.7 6.7<2.1 <2.2630 7,900Cyclohexane33.6 63.9 10.4<0.74 <0.68 <1.171.5<1.027.4 45.742,000 530,0001,3-Dichlorobenzene106 35.8 79.2 3.4 31.9 29.3 43.1 66.9 26.6 29.5NE NEDichlorodifluoromethane3.4 2.0 J 2.4 J 2.6 2.8 3.3 3.1 2.8 J<3.9 <4.1700 8,800Ethylbenzene60.1 83.2 24.2<0.6423.6 22.3 38.1 23.2 60.6 79.3370 4,9004-Ethyltoluene8.6 11.2 3.7 J<1.28.4 8.1 12.6 7.9 8.7 J 13.2 JNE NEn-Heptane45.4 71.6 20.3<0.8028.6 26.4 52.1 46.4 41.1 70.62,800 35,000n-Hexane58.4 110 23.3 2.7 35.3 33.4 76.3 80.5 35.5 66.14,900 61,0002-Hexanone2.3 J 3.5 J 3.3 J<1.6 <1.4 <2.3 <1.4 <2.1 <9.8 <10.5210 2,600Methylene Chloride41.5 26.2 26.1 19.9 26.7 28.6 25.1 12.8 21.9 J<17.14,200 53,0004-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)3.8 J 6.7 J<1.3 <1.1 <1.0 <1.69<1.5 <6.8 <7.321,000 260,000Naphthalene<3.9 <2.8 <3.3 <2.8 <2.5 <4.06<3.7 <17.3 <18.521 260Propylene672 1,160 112<0.29194 179 641 674 47.9 84.821,000 260,000Styrene1.2 J 1.9<0.87 <0.720.95 J<1.00.73 J<0.97 <4.5 <4.97,000 88,000Tetrachloroethene12.2 19.4 5.4<0.6627.8 26.5 50.4 28.3 12.8 19280 3,500Toluene479 728 190 4.6 251 229 292 119 465 66035,000 440,000Trichloroethene1.7<0.530.83 J<0.533.4 7.5 0.62 J<0.72 <3.3 <3.614 180Trichlorofluoromethane (Freon 11)1.7 J 1.6 J 1.1 J 1.0 J 1.4 J 1.6 J 2.9 1.5 J<4.8 <5.2NE NE1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane (Freon 113)<1.71.6 J<1.4 <1.2 <1.1 <1.71.6 J<1.6 <7.4 <8.035,000 440,0001,2,4-Trimethylbenzene15.9 20.1 8.3<0.9519.7 18.7 32.6 18.9 20.1 28.6420 5,3001,3,5-Trimethylbenzene5.8 7.6 3.1<0.846.8 6.5 10.6 6.4 7.0 J 9.6 J420 5,300Vinyl Chloride<0.374.8<0.32 <0.26 <0.24 <0.381.2<0.36 <1.7 <1.856 2,800m&p-Xylene230 307 89.1 3.0 J 87.4 83.6 140 82.3 240 324700 8,800o-Xylene59.8 78.6 23.4 0.86 J 26.1 24.7 44.4 23.9 66.2 84.8700 8,800LICRHINotes:1) North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Division of Waste Management (DWM) Vapor Intrusion Sub-slab and Exterior Soil Gas Screening Levels (SGSLs) (February 2018) Compound concentrations are reported in micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3)Compound concentrations are reported to the laboratory method detection limits.Only those compounds detected in at least one sample are shown above.Laboratory analytical method shown in parentheses.VOCs = volatile organic compounds; ft bgs= feet below ground surface; NE = Not EstablishedJ = compound was detected above the laboratory method detection limit, but below the laboratory reporting limit resulting in a laboratory estimated concentration.LICR = Lifetime Incremental Cancer Risk; HI = Hazard IndexDEQ and EPA use a cummulaitve LICR of 1 x 10-4 and a cummulative HI of 1 for comparison and risk evaluation for potential structural vapor intrusion.Residential SGSLs (1)Non-Residential SGSLs (1)µg/m3SGP-5/SGP-DUPProposed Northern Building Footprint Proposed Southern Building Footprint12/4/201957.7 x 10-611 x 10-40.511.3 x 10-50.25S:\AAA‐Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN‐008 Verbena Assemblage\Brownfields Assessment\Tables\Charlotte Van & Storage Co. (LEN‐008) Data Tables aem2/3/2020Table 4 (Page 1 of 1)Hart & Hickman, PC
Figures
TITLE
PROJECT
SITE LOCATION MAP
CHARLOTTE VAN & STORAGE CO.
VERBENA STREET AND GILEAD STREET
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE:
JOB NO:
REVISION NO:
FIGURE:
1-6-2020 0
1LEN-008
SITE
0 2000 4000
APPROXIMATE
SCALE IN FEET
N
U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP
QUADRANGLE
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC)
CHARLOTTE WEST, NORTH CAROLINA, 1996
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. LEN-008
DATE: 7-13-20
FIGURE NO. 2
CHARLOTTE VAN & STORAGE CO.
VERBENA STREET AND GILEAD STREET
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
PARCEL BOUNDARY
DUMPSTER
POLE-MOUNTED TRANSFORMER
AST
FLOOR DRAIN
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
ABANDONED MONITORING WELL
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
CAROLINA MOLDINGS
(4601 MACIE STREET)
BAKER CONSTRUCTION CO.
(129 VERBENA STREET)
VACANT COMMERCIAL BUILDING
FORMER ZESPA INDUSTRIES
(4516 NATIONS CROSSING ROAD)
VE
R
B
E
N
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
YEOM
A
N
R
O
A
D
GIL
E
A
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
LIGHT FIXTURE OUTLET/
SUN STONE MARBLE & GRANITE
(301 VERBENA STREET)
KUB'S AUTO UPHOLSTERY
QUALITY AUTO PAINTING
PAINT BOOTH
AIR COMPRESSOR &
DRUM STORAGE
TRUCK SERVICE
GARAGE
DRUM
UNDEVELOPED
WOODED LAND
DEBRIS
TRUCK
WASH
DISPENSERS
8,000-GALLON DIESEL/
GASOLINE AST
500-GALLON
WASTE OIL AST
RINSE FLUIDS
HOLDING TANK
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
COVERED
LOADING
DOCK
EQUIPMENT
STORAGE
TRUCK SCALE
STORAGE/DISTRIBUTION
WAREHOUSE
ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICES
RESIDENTIAL
VACANT COMMERCIAL BUILDING
FORMER TODDY'S AUTOMOTIVE
(4528 NATIONS CROSSING ROAD)
NOTES:
1.AERIAL IMAGERY OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG
COUNTY GIS (2017).
2.AST = ABOVE-GROUND STORAGE TANK
3.UST = UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK
PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS
(112-338 VERBENA STREET)
213 VERBENA STREET
4615 GILEAD STREET
4607 GILEAD STREET
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
FORMER UST BASIN
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN-008 Verbena Assemblage\Figures\Site Map_recover.dwg, FIG 2, 7/13/2020 2:15:15 PM, SVincent
730
720
7
1
0
SB-1C
SB-1B
SB-1A
SB-6
SB-5A
SB-5B
SB-2A
SB-2CSB-2B
SB-3A
SB-3B
SB-4
SB-7B
SB-7A
SB-7D
SB-7C
SB-9C
SB-9B
SB-9A
TMW-3
TMW-2
TMW-1/BG-1
TMW-5
PZ-1
PZ-2
TMW-4/BG-2
SGP-4
SGP-3
SGP-2
SGP-1
SGP-6/
SB-8B
SGP-7/
SB-8A
SGP-8
SGP-9
SGP-5/
SB-8C
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. LEN-008
DATE: 11-5-20
FIGURE NO. 3
CHARLOTTE VAN & STORAGE CO.
VERBENA STREET AND GILEAD STREET
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
BROWNFIELDS ASSESSMENT SAMPLE
LOCATION MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
ELEVATION CONTOUR (FT ABOVE MSL)
CURRENT SITE BUILDING FOOTPRINT
HISTORICAL RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT
ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANK
FLOOR DRAIN
PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
PROPOSED AREAS OF CUT
SOIL BORING
ALIQUOT SOIL BORING FOR COMPOSITE SOIL
SAMPLE
CO-LOCATED BACKGROUND SOIL BORING/
TEMPORARY GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
TEMPORARY GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
PIEZOMETER
SOIL GAS MONITORING POINT
ESTIMATED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)
License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
VE
R
B
E
N
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
YEOM
A
N
R
O
A
D
GIL
E
A
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
PAINT BOOTH
TRUCK SERVICE
GARAGE
TRUCK
WASH
DISPENSERS
8,000-GALLON DIESEL/
GASOLINE AST
500-GALLON
WASTE OIL AST
RINSE FLUIDS
HOLDING TANK
NOTES:
1.ELEVATION CONTOURS OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG
COUNTY LIDAR (2013).
2.HISTORICAL RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT OBTAINED FROM
OVERLAY OF A 1965 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
FORMER UST BASIN
AIR COMPRESSOR
STORAGE/DISTRIBUTION
WAREHOUSE
KUB'S AUTO UPHOLSTERY
QUALITY AUTO PAINTING
730
PROPOSED
MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
PROPOSED POOL
MAINTENANCE
BUILDING
CLUB HOUSE
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
OF IRWIN CREEK
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN-008 Verbena Assemblage\Figures\Site Map_recover.dwg, FIG 3, 11/5/2020 5:42:20 PM, sperry
730
720
7
1
0
TMW-3
TMW-2
TMW-1/BG-1
TMW-5
PZ-1
PZ-2
TMW-4/BG-2
700
710
720
REVISION NO. 0
JOB NO. LEN-008
DATE: 11-11-20
FIGURE NO. 4
CHARLOTTE VAN & STORAGE CO.
VERBENA STREET AND GILEAD STREET
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER
HYDRAULIC GRADIENT MAP
LEGEND
BROWNFIELDS PROPERTY BOUNDARY
ELEVATION CONTOUR (FT ABOVE MSL)
CURRENT SITE BUILDING FOOTPRINT
HISTORICAL RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT
ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANK
FLOOR DRAIN
PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINT
CO-LOCATED BACKGROUND SOIL BORING/
TEMPORARY GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
TEMPORARY GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
PIEZOMETER
GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (FT ABOVE MSL)
ESTIMATED GROUNDWATER ELEVATION
CONTOUR (FT MSL)
ESTIMATED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION
2923 South Tryon Street-Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203704-586-0007(p) 704-586-0373(f)License # C-1269 / #C-245 Geology
VE
R
B
E
N
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
YEOM
A
N
R
O
A
D
GIL
E
A
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
NOTES:
1. ELEVATION CONTOURS OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG
COUNTY LIDAR (2013).
2. HISTORICAL RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT OBTAINED FROM
OVERLAY OF A 1965 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.
3. GROUNDWATER ELEVATION DATA COLLECTED BY H&H
ON DECEMBER 4, 2019.
4. MONITORING WELLS SURVEYED BY H&H ON DECEMBER
4, 2019.
730
712
(709.19)
(713.23)
(713.18)
(712.11)
(708.16)
(703.78)
(701.62)
(709.19)712710706704702708712
710
708
706
704
702
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
OF IRWIN CREEK
S:\AAA-Master Projects\Lennar (LEN)\LEN-008 Verbena Assemblage\Figures\Site Map_recover.dwg, FIG 5, 11/11/2020 8:18:23 PM, sperry
Appendix A
Redevelopment Plan
UBERFOODDELIVERY6
8
10 11
6
16 12
814
1817
5
9
5
9
9
76 VISITORVISITOR2
5
13
7 6
9
10
12
7
8
11
13
10 11
8
3
8 COMPACTORDUMPSTER2
C C CLOADINGSPACE
CCCCCBUILDING
#1
NATIONSCROSSING ROADGILEAD STREETVERBENA STREET
CHALMERS STREET
MACIE STREET
YEOMAN ROADFORM
E
R
L
Y
O
L
D
B
RI
C
K
Y
A
R
D
R
O
A
D
BUILDING
#2
POOL CLUB
HOUSE
MAINT.
BLDG.
PROPOSED 6"X12" STEPS
DUMPSTER/RECYCLE AREA W/GATED SCREENED ENCLOSURE (SEE
ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
STANDARD 2'-6" CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (CLDS 10.17A) (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
7'X22' PARALLEL PARKING SPACE (CLDS 50.09C)
STANDARD CONCRETE SIDEWALK (CLDS 10.22) (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
TYPE II MODIFIED DRIVEWAY. (CLDS 10.25E) (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
DIRECTIONAL ACCESSIBLE RAMP WITH DETECTABLE WARNING (CLDS 10.40)
(SEE DETAIL SHEET)
SITE LEGEND
A
B
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
PLANTING STRIP
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
STANDARD 1'-6" CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (CLDS 10.17A)
24"X24" "STOP" SIGN (R1-1) (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
24" WHITE STOP BAR (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE, TYPICAL (CLDS 50.10A)(SEE SITE
DETAIL FOR ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE SIZE AND SIGN)
C
STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
STANDARD DUTY 5' WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
PIANO STYLE CROSSWALK (CLDS 50.14) (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
RETAINING WALL (CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE FULL ENGINEERED PLANS
AND PERMIT THROUGH COUNTY AS REQUIRED)
6' HIGH DECORATIVE FENCE
POOL AND AMENITY AREA (SEE AMENITY PLANS BY OTHERS)
HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
4' SWING GATE
U DIRECTIONAL PAVEMENT MARKING (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
V BIKE RACK (FOR 4 BIKES) (SEE SITE DETAIL SHEET)
SWSL @ 4" - SINGLE WHITE SOLID LINE/4" WIDE
SWSL @ 24" - SINGLE WHITE SOLID LINE/24" WIDE
STRIPING LEGEND
1
2
PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER
PROPOSED PARKING SPACES
PROPOSED ASPHALT PAVEMENT
PROPOSED STD. CONCRETE SIDEWALK
PROPOSED STRUCTURE
LEGEND FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
100
EXISTING LOT LINES
BOUNDARY LIMITS
PROPOSED EASEMENT
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
PROPOSED HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT
PROPOSED HEAVY DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT
PROPOSED SITE NOTE11
PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
PROPOSED STORM EASEMENT
PROPOSED SPILL CURB AND GUTTER
FOODDELIVERYG:\NCA\Projects\Lennar Multifamily\6874-00 - LoSo Verbena\03 - DWG\PlanSheets\C2-0 SITE PLAN.dwg Layout: SITE Plotted: 3/18/2020 3:07:06 PMDESCRIPTIONREVDESIGNED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
DRAWN BY:DATE121 W. TRADE STREET, SUITE 1030CHARLOTTE, NC 28202www.bgeinc.comNC LICENSE #C-4397Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R FILE NUMBER:
DATE: 03/18/2020
6874-00 c 2020LENNAR MULTIFAMILY605 LEXINGTON AVENUE, SUITE 200CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28203VERBENAMULTIFAMILY213 VERBENA STCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 2821721345SITE DEVELOPMENT DATA
SITE ADDRESS
VERBENA MULTIFAMILY
213 VERBENA STREET, CHARLOTTE, NC 28217
TAX PARCEL ID# 149-034-12, 149-034-15, 149-034-16
ACREAGE 5.91
EXISTING USES INDUSTRIAL
PROPOSED USE RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY APARTMENTS
PROPOSED UNITS 272
BUILDING HEIGHT
MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT 50' (75' WITH BONUS)
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT PROPOSED 54.65'
OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE PUBLIC ON-SITE OPEN SPACE
OPEN SPACE PROVIDED N/A ACRES
ZONING CODE SUMMARY
EXISTING ZONING TOD-TR (TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - TRANSIT
TRANSITION)
JURISDICTION CITY OF CHARLOTTE
SETBACKS AND BUFFERS
REAR YARD 0'
SIDE YARD 0'
FRONT SETBACK 16' MIN. FROM (FUTURE) BACK OF CURB
PARKING
PARKING SPACES REQUIRED0 SPACE(S) IN TOD DISTRICT
PARKING SPACES PROVIDED 292 STANDARD SPACES ( 10 HANDICAP, 8 COMPACT SPACES)
27 OFF-STREET PARKING
321 TOTAL SPACES
SHORT TERM BIKE SPACES REQUIRED 55 SPACES (1 PER 5 UNITS) 272 UNITS / 5 = 54.4
LONG TERM BIKE SPACES REQUIRED 44 SPACES (80% OF REQUIRED SPACES) 54.4 X 80%
= 43.5
SHORT TERM BIKE SPACES PROVIDED 61 SPACES (8 ONSITE SPACES WITH 53 WALL
HANGERS WITHIN UNITS)
LONG TERM BIKE SPACES PROVIDED 44 SPACES (WALL HANGERS WITHIN UNITS)
WASTE MANAGEMENT
SOLID WASTE REQUIRED: (1) X CU.YD. DUMPSTER PER 30 UNITS=
(272 UNITS / 30 UNITS X 8 CU. YDS.)= 72.5 CU. YDS.
32 CU. YD. DUMPSTER (8'X18'X6'HT)
SOLID WASTE PROVIDED:ON-SITE COMPACTOR
RECYCLING REQUIRED:(272 UNITS / 30 UNITS X 8 CU. YDS.)= 72.5 CU. YDS.
RECYCLING PROVIDED: PRIVATE SERVICES
SEE PLAN FOR LOCATION OF POSSIBLE FUTURE RECYCLING
AREA LOCATION
COMPLETION TIME LINE
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION: JULY 1, 2020
COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION:JULY 1, 2021
NATURAL AREA
REQUIRED NATURAL AREA N/A
NOTE
ALL CURB RADII 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
SITE PLANC2-0
S
MK
J
I
I
I
H
F
G
G
G C
(TYP.)
C
(TYP.)
A
A
B (TYP.)
E
E
E
E
I
E
E
E
8.50'
18.50'
R10.00'
R10.00'
R5.00'R10.00'
R14.50'
R3.50'R3.50'
R5.00'
R5.00'
R10.00'
R5.50'
R5.00'
R5.00'
R15.00'
R5.00'
R5.00'
17.00'
8.50'
18.50'
26.37'
8.00'
22.00'
0 40'80'20'
SCALE: 1" = 40'
22.00'
23.0'
23.00'
23.00'
24.00'
23.00'
23.00'
17.00'
17.00'
R10.00'
8.50'
17.00'
8.50'
23.00'
8.50'
R25.00'
R15.00'
R10.00'
R10.00'
R1.50'
R8.00'
23.00'
R10.00'
R5.00'
R5.00'R5.00'
16.00'
7.50'
N
PROP. 15' SDE
PROP. 15' SDE
DOG PARK
(SEE AMENITY PLANS
BY OTHERS)
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
R
R
R
R
R10.00'
23.0'
7.00'
SIDEWALK
8.50'
8.00' SIDEWALK
2.0'2.0'
10.0'10.0'10.0'
34.0'
11.4'11.4'
A
TIE INTO EXISTING CURB
TIE INTO EXISTING CURB
A
O
SEE SHEETS R1-0 & R1-1 FOR
GILEAD STREET DESIGN
K
H
F
A
T
T
T
E
P
T
INSET A - GATED ENTRANCE INSET B - DRIVEWAY 1
INSET C - DRIVEWAY 2
DRIVEWAY 1 (TYPE II MODIFIED) - SEE INSET B
GATED ENTRANCE - SEE INSET A
DRIVEWAY 2 (TYPE II MODIFIED) - SEE INSET C
26.0'
8.0'
12.0'12.0'
R1.0'
8.0'
13.0'
14.00'
LOADING AREA
DMH
DMH/RLW
ECH
I
23.00'
18.50'
8.50'
16.00'
8.50'
17.00'
B
12.00'
18.00'
24.00'
12.00'
18.00'
N
25.00'
PCCE
8.00' SIDEWALK
8.00' SIDEWALK
8.00' SIDEWALK
V
U (TYP.)
12.00'
EFFECTIVE SETBACK IS ROW (16' FROM BACK OF CURB)
7.00'
17.00'
12.00'
A
K
U
V
(TYP.)
B
H
A
K
H
B
R
B
26.00'
R8.00'
R8.00'GILEAD STREET25.00'
PCCE
15' SDE
EFFECTIVE SETBACK
IS ROW (16' FROM
BACK OF CURB)
N
R8.00'R8.00'R1.00'R1.00'
R1.00'
SCALE: 1"=10'SCALE: 1"=10'
SCALE: 1"=10'
O
M
24.00'
O
M
M
M
L
M
L
L
L
L
L
L
LL
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
TR
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
N
D
D
D
D
EOPEOP
EOP
EOP
EOP
EOP
EOP
R
EOP
NPOOL MAINTENANCE BLDG.
8.00' SIDEWALK
8" - #57 STONE GRAVEL PATH
CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND SUPPLEMENT EXISTING
TO PROVIDE CONTINUOUS PATH TO YEOMAN ROAD
V
2
2
1
1
1 (TYP.)
1 (TYP.)
1 (TYP.)
1 (TYP.)
1 (TYP.)
R20.00'
R20.00'
R4.00'
R10.00'
R8.00'
R8.00'
R8.00'
R8.00'
8' WIDE STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PATH
Appendix B
Grading Plan and Cut-Fill Analysis
GILEAD STREETVERBENA STREET
Forme
r
l
y
O
l
d
B
r
i
c
k
Y
a
r
d
R
o
a
d
CHALMERS STREET0+001+002+003+004+005+006+006+20BP: 0+00.00
EP: 6+19.81 715712
721723 724724727722 720722718
714712711711712706710710711
71
2 713
709
71
0
708
705
699
709
707708709717 712712
723720715718716
714
719720 721722723724725726
727728729730731732733730
721
722
720
719
718
717
716
715
713
717
716
710
707708
714
713
711
712
716718
719718
7187177177
1
6
715
714
712710705 712
711
714
713714715
717 719720
717713715
723 725 726
727
720FF=712.0
FF=712.0FF=716.0 FF=726.0717716
715
714
713
712
711
710
709
708
707706705706706
FF=726.0 FF=716.0711.00 711.00
709.50
715.98
711.00 713.00711.73
715.70
715.71
715.71
715.69 715.70
715.70
715.69
714.76
711.60 711.60
711.70
711.70
711.50 711.50 711.71
711.99
711.70
711.61
713.02
710.37
720.43 7287267
2
2
7
2
3
720717716723721710711713 715717715
714
712
712713714715715
714
713
712 71171
2
720719718716726
725
725
718
724
721 726726
719.70
SCALE: 1" =
0
40'
20'40'80'G:\NCA\Projects\Lennar Multifamily\6874-00 - LoSo Verbena\03 - DWG\References\xP.ROUGH GRADING.dwg Layout: 36X24 PDF Plotted: 7/12/2019 3:27:05 PMDESCRIPTIONREVDESIGNED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
DRAWN BY:DATE121 W. TRADE STREET, SUITE 1030CHARLOTTE, NC 28202www.bgeinc.comNC LICENSE #C-4397Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R FILE NUMBER:
DATE:
6874-00 c 2019LENNAR MULTIFAMILY500 E MOREHEAD ST, SUITE 300CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202VERBENAMULTIFAMILY213 VERBENA STCHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28217NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SEAL
XX
XX
XX21345
CONCEPTUALGRADING PLANCG - 1
07/12/2019
Project Information
Project Name:LoSo Verbena
BGE Project #:6874-00
Designed by:DMH Date:7/12/2019
Revised by: Date:
Checked by:JAB Date:7/12/2019
Input Values
Building Finished Floor ELEV Varies
Raw Cut Volume (CAD)7,904 CY
Raw Fill Volume (CAD)11,501 CY
Shrinkage 15%
Volume in Volume in
IMPORTED MATERIAL Area Thickness % In % In Cut Area Fill Area
(sf)(in)Cut Fill (CY)(CY)
HD Asphalt 12 75%25%- -
SD Asphalt 117,049 10 50%50%1,806 1,806
HD Concrete 12 75%25%- -
Building 42,459 10 25%75%328 983
Sidewalk 4 75%25%- -
Total Imported Material Volumes 2,134 2,789
TOPSOIL GENERATED
Topsoil Strippings 108,625 8 40%60%1,073 1,609
Other Unsuitable Volume - - 100%0%- -
Total Topsoil Generated 1,073 1,609
TOPSOIL TO REMAIN ON-SITE 2,167 CY Assumes 6" on pervious areas
SUMMARY VALUES CUT/FILL HAUL
GENERATED REQUIRED ON-SITE OFF-SITE IMPORT NOTES:
TOPSOIL 2,682 2,492 2,492 190 -
AVAILABLE FILL MATERIAL 8,965 9,796 8,965 - 831
CUT/FILL BALANCE 11500 CY
TOPSOIL STOCKPILE 2700 CY
TOTAL SOIL IMPORT 800 CY (Includes fill and topsoil)
TOTAL HAUL OFF 200 CY (Includes fill and topsoil)
FFE Delta 0.50 Lower Site
EARTHWORK ANALYSIS
Page 1 of 1
7/12/2019 at 3:21 PM
Preliminary
07/12/2019 3:21:57 PM