19981030 Ver 1_Complete File_19991019

01 ?? W ArFgQG
co
r
Mr. Donny Hicks
Economic Development Commission
P.O. Box 2339
Gastonia, NC 28053
Subject: Gastonia Technology Park Rd. Ext.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek. P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 23, 2005
DWQ# 98-1030
Gaston County
pr-I.- R ME p
JUN 1 2005
DENR - WAFER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND ST()RMWATER BRANCH
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Condition
Dear Mr. Hicks:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to
fill 0.19 acre of wetland and impact 142 linear feet (If) of unnamed stream to Long Creek for the
construction of Technology Park Road in Gaston County, as described in your application received by
the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on April 22, 2005. After reviewing your application, we have
determined that this project is covered by Water Quality General Certification Number 3402, which
can be viewed on our web site at http://h2o enr state.nc.us/ncwetlands. The General Certification
allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 39 once it is issued to you by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Please note that you should get any other federal, state or local permits before
proceeding with your project, including those required by (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion
Control, Non-Discharge, and Water Supply Watershed regulations.
The above noted Certification will expire when the associated 404 permit expires unless
otherwise specified in the General Certification. This approval is only valid for the purpose and
design that you described in your application. If you change your project, you must notify us in
writing, and you may be required to send us a new application for a new certification. If the property
is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of the Certification and approval letter; and is thereby
responsible for complying with all conditions.
In addition to the requirements of the certification, you must also comply with the following
conditions:
1. The Mooresville Regional Office shall be notified in writing once construction at the approved impact
areas has commenced.
2. The culvert shall be installed such that the base flow channel will be maintained. This may require
the placement of baffles inside the culvert and the construction of benches immediately up and
downstream of the culvert.
ftaro
tnaraly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet h2o.enr.state.nc.us FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50°x, Recycled/1 0% Post Consumer Paper
3. All wetlands, streams, surface waters, and riparian buffers located on the project site where impacts
are not allowed shall be clearly marked (example- orange fabric fencing) prior to any land disturbing
activities.
4. The planting of native vegetation and other soft stream bank stabilization techniques must be used
where practicable instead of riprap or other bank hardening methods. If riprap is necessary, it shall
not be placed in the streambed, unless approved by the DWQ.
5. Stormwater discharge structures at this site shall be constructed in a manner such that the potential
receiving streams (of the discharge) will not be impacted due to sediment accumulations, scouring
or erosion of the stream banks.
6. No waste, spoils, solids, or fill of any kind shall be placed in wetlands, waters, or riparian areas
beyond the footprint of the impacts depicted in the Preconstruction Notification application. All
construction activities associated with this project shall meet, and/or exceed, those requirements
specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual and
shall be conducted so that no violations of state water quality standards, statutes, or rules occur.
7. Sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum
extent practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is
unavoidable, they shall be removed and the natural grade restored within two months of the date the
Division of Land Resources has released the project.
8. Upon completion of the project, the applicant shall complete and return the enclosed "Certificate of
Completion" form to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water Quality. Please send
photographs of the upstream and downstream sides of each culvert site to document correct
installation, along with the Certificate of Completion form.
9. Continuing Compliance. The applicant (Gastonia Economic Development Commission) shall
conduct its activities in a manner so as not to contravene any state water quality standard (including
any requirements for compliance with section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act) and any other
appropriate requirements of state and federal law. If DWQ determines that such standards or laws
are not being met (including the failure to sustain a designated or achieved use) or that state or
federal law is being violated, or that further conditions are necessary to assure compliance, DWQ
may reevaluate and modify this certification to include conditions appropriate to assure compliance
with such standards and requirements in accordance with 15 A NCAC 2H.0507(d). Before codifying
the certification, DWQ shall notify the applicant and the US Army Corps of Engineers, provide public
notice in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0503, and provide opportunity for public hearing in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0504. Any new or revised conditions shall be provided to the
applicant in writing, shall be provided to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for reference in
any permit issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and shall also become conditions
of the 404 Permit for the project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send
a written petition that conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
i
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Alan Johnson in the Mooresville Regional
Office at 704-663-1699 or Ms. Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,
A /?, ,,
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Attachments
cc: Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville
Cyndi Karoly, Wetlands Unit
Gaston County Natural Resources
Central Files
Josh Ellinger '
Triage Check List
Date: 4/27/05 Project Name: Gastonia Tech Park
DWQ#: 98-1030
County: Gaston
To: Alan Johnson, Mooresville Regional Office
60-day Processing Time: 4/22/05 to 6/20/05
From: Cyndi Karoly Telephone : [phone]
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Neuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
Check drawings for accuracy
? Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings? F1 I ??
Cumulative impact concern
Comments: As per our discussion regarding revision of the triage and delegation processes,
please review the attached file. Note that you are the first reviewer, so this file will need to be
reviewed for administrative as well as technical details. If you elect to place this project on hold,
please ask the applicant to provide your requested information to both the Central Office in
Raleigh as well as the Asheville Regional Office. As we discussed, this is an experimental, interim
procedure as we slowly transition to electronic applications. Please apprise me of any
complications you encounter, whether related to workload, processing times, or lack of a "second
reviewer" as the triage process in Central had previously provided. Also, if you think of ways to
improve this process, especially so that we can plan for the electronic applications, let me know.
Thanks!

t

f MACTEC
April 12, 2005

Mr. Steve Chapin
-U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification for Nationwide Permit
Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension APR 2 2 2005
Gastonia, North Carolina
MACTEC Project 6229042539 DENR-WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Dear Mr. Chapin:
On behalf of Gaston County and in cooperation with LandDesign, enclosed please find a
completed Joint Application Form with accompanying figures for Nationwide Permit (NWP) No.
39 in the above-referenced matter (Attachment A). Gaston County, has retained MACTEC
Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC) to provide wetlands and permitting services for
this project. The Gaston County Economic Development Commission (GCEDC) has authorized
MACTEC to act as its agent in this matter. An executed `Agent Certification of Authorization'
form is enclosed (Attachment B). The project area is located in Gastonia, North Carolina and is
bordered by Long Creek to the south, Dallas-Bessemer City Road (SR 275) to the northwest and
Biggerstaff Park to the north (Attachment C - Figure 1). Since the proposed project will impact a
jurisdictional stream channel and greater than one-tenth acre of waters of the U.S., including
wetlands, this pre-construction notification (PCN) is being provided in accordance with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) general conditions for NWP No. 39 (Residential,
Commercial, and Institutional Developments).
This project has already been reviewed and approved under NWP No. 39 as per a letter from the
i USACE dated August 17, 2001. The original permit expired on August 17, 2004. Minor
modifications to reflect current design criteria are detailed in this submittal for repermitting.

C
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
2801 Yorkmond Rd., Suite 100 • Charlotte, NC 28208
704-357-8600 • Fax: [phone]

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
Project Background
LandDesign, on behalf of Gaston County, has designed an extension of the road currently serving as
the entrance to the Gastonia Technology Park. The proposed project involves the construction of an
approximate 1,450 linear foot, divided, two-lane extension of the existing entrance road, to include
site grading, drainage structures, paving, concrete sidewalks, curb and gutter, and pavement
markings. The purpose of the extension is to enable the GCEDC to more effectively market the
Gastonia Technology Park site.
On November 9, 1998, the USACE issued a NWP No. 26 to the City of Gastonia for impacts to
0.34-acre of headwater wetlands and approximately 255 linear feet of unimportant jurisdictional
stream channel, for construction of the existing one-mile long entrance/access road (USACE
Action ID. 199930053). In addition, General Water Quality Certification (WQC) No. 3108 was
issued by DWQ to the City of Gastonia on January 15, 1999 (DWQ Project # 981030). As a
condition of the WQC, a Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management for the entire Gastonia
Technology Park (prepared by Woolpert, dated June 16, 1999) was submitted to DWQ.
Subsequently, the approximate one-mile long access road was constructed, including
approximately 850 feet within the Gastonia Technology Park property boundaries.
On August 17, 2001, the USACE issued a NWP No. 39 to the Gaston County Economic
Development Commission for impacts to 0.19-acre of wooded and emergent wetland and
approximately 130 if of perennial stream impact (USACE Action ID. 200131106). Due to
unanticipated project delays the August 17, 2001 permit expired before the permitted activities
could be implemented.
In, 2003 approximately 0.38 acre of wetland area was restored as partial mitigation for future
roadway extension impacts to wetlands in the business park under the existing Nationwide
Permit (NWP) 39 authorized (August 17, 2001). Additionally, stream mitigation consisting of a
25-foot protected riparian buffer on each side of the stream channel, as measured from the top of
each streambank was also implemented. This buffer extends approximately 1,700 linear feet (If)
along Stream A, to the confluence with Long Creek, and was surveyed for deed restrictions
(based on the permit dated August 17, 2001). In July 2004, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

I
n

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
(USACE) representative Steve Chapin verbally requested that a summary report detailing
conditions in the restored wetland be prepared and submitted for USACE review, in order to
determine if further future monitoring will be required (Attachment F).
The NWP No. 39 for this road crossing expired on August 17, 2004, before the construction
began. This application is for the same road crossing with minor modifications to the road
design plan as detailed below.
Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were delineated in the field by MACTEC's Environmental
Scientists, on December 8, 2000 using the Routine On-Site Determination as described in the
1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual"'.
Waters of the U.S. delineated within the project area include two stream channels (Streams A
and B), totaling approximately 205 linear feet (If) and one adjacent wetland (Wetland A)
comprised of a wooded area and an emergent area, totaling approximately 0.62-acre in size.
Reference Attachment D, which includes an Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands
Boundary Map, Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms, USACE Intermittent Channel
Evaluation Forms, and N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Stream Classification Forms.
Streams A and B, and Wetland A, extend beyond the project area (Attachment D - Figure 3).
Stream A, which is a tributary to Long Creek, was determined to be a perennial stream channel,
with three to four foot high banks, four to five foot channel bottom width, and a course sand and
small gravel substrate. Average width of the stream, measured from top-of-bank to top-of-bank,
is approximately eight feet. Fish and numerous benthic macroinvertebrates were observed within
Stream A. Stream B, an unnamed stream, was determined to be a perennial channel, with one to
three foot high banks, one to two foot channel bottom width and silt and fine to medium sand
substrate. Fish and crayfish were observed in Stream B.
' 'Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation ManuaG U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Washington, D. C, pp. 100 and Appendices.

1

I

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
The riparian canopy associated with Stream A includes willow oak (Quercus phellos), sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), and river birch (Betula nigra). The understory and herbaceous
vegetation includes tag alder (Alnus serrulata), willow oak, river birch, greenbriar (Smilax
rotundifolia), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) and black willow (Salix nigra). The riparian
canopy associated with Stream B and the wooded portion of Wetland A include red maple (Ater
rubrum), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis),
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) and sweetgum. The understory
and herbaceous vegetation include river birch, tag alder, black willow, boxelder (Ater negundo),
green briar, and soft rush (Juncus effusus). Vegetation associated with the emergent portion of
Wetland A includes soft rush, arrow-leave tearthumb (Polygonum sagittatum), blackberry (Rubus
argutus), silky dogwood (Corpus amomum) and river birch. Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. in
the project area include approximately 0.62 acre of wetlands and 205 linear feet of perennial
stream.
According to the Soil Survey of Gaston County, North Carolina (U.S. Department of Agriculture,
1989), soils within the project impact area are mapped as Chewacla loam, frequently flooded
(Attachment B - Figure 2). Chewacla loam is identified as a map unit which has hydric
inclusions. Field observations within the aforementioned wetland area identified hydric soils,
with low matrix chromas and bright mottles.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
The proposed Gastonia Technology Park entrance road extension will result in unavoidable
impacts to waters of the U.S. Site grading and the placement of the culvert for the proposed
project will impact Stream A and Wetland A. The proposed bottomless arched culvert placement
in Stream A will impact approximately 142 if of perennial, important stream channel
(Attachment C - Figure 5). The culvert will be placed so that it spans the streambed to meet
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) specifications and to allow low flow
passage and unimpeded movement of aquatic life. Additionally, approximately 0.19-acre of
Wetland A will be impacted by the placement of fill for site grading for the roadway (Attachment
C - Figure 4). These unavoidable impacts resulting from the grading limits and construction of
the roadway extension have been minimized to the extent practicable and are necessary for the
construction of the roadway. Activities on the subject site involving impacts to waters of the

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
U.S., including wetlands, will be required to follow the General Conditions of the Nationwide
Permits and State General Conditions, as applicable.
Alternatives/Minimization
Three alternatives have been considered for the proposed project. A no-build alternative was
considered for the project but is not feasible given the specific project purpose of GCEDC's
ability to effectively access the park and to market the Gastonia Technology Park, and thereby
attract new business to the region.
Alternative 1 would involve the proposed culvert placement, and associated riprap outlet
stabilization, in Stream A will impact approximately 149 if of perennial, important stream
channel. The culverts will be placed at a minimum of one foot below the elevation of the
streambed to meet North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) specifications and to
allow low flow passage and unimpeded movement of aquatic life. Additionally, approximately
0.19-acre of Wetland A will be impacted by the placement of fill for site grading for the
roadway.
Alternative 2 would involve placement of a bottomless arched culvert in Stream A that will
impact approximately 142 if of perennial, important stream channel (Attachment C - Figure 5).
The culvert will be placed so that it spans the streambed to meet North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ) specifications and to allow low flow passage and unimpeded
movement of aquatic life. Additionally, approximately 0.19-acre of Wetland A will be impacted
by the placement of fill for site grading for the roadway (Attachment C - Figure 4). Construction
of a bottomless arched culvert (Alternative 2) will minimize environmental impacts to the
greatest extent possible. As a result, construction of a bottomless arched culvert (Alternative 2)
was selected as the preferred alternative. Minimization efforts included changing the vertical
alignment of the road by reducing fill slopes, and crossing the stream at a ninety-degree angle. In
addition, the road extension was aligned to avoid the wider section of the wetland.
The stream and wetland proposed to be impacted transects the property, therefore crossing the
stream is necessary to access the remaining 120± acres of the proposed future Gastonia

t

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
Technology Park site. The stream and wetland impacts associated with the road extension were
kept to the minimum necessary to cross the stream and wetlands.
Possible sedimentation of the stream during and immediately following the construction phase of
this project will be minimized by implementation of a State-approved sediment and erosion control
plan. This plan will employ a network of sediment traps, check dams, and silt fencing to control the
export of sediment from the project corridor to adjacent undisturbed areas. Erosion and sediment
control devices will be inspected for compliance with the construction contract documents during
and after construction, as well as following major storm events, to identify needed repair,
maintenance, or redesign. GCEDC also anticipates implementation of Best Management
Practices (BMP's) for the Protection of Surface Waters. Following construction of the
temporarily-impacted streambanks will be restored to pre-construction contours (or stabilized)
and seeded/re-planted.
Compensatory Mitigation - Conceptual Plan
The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has defined mitigation in 40 CFR Part 1508.20 to
include: avoidance, minimization, rectification, reduction, and compensation for impacts
associated with wetlands. As previously discussed, the applicant has made every reasonable
effort to avoid wetlands, and to minimize wetland impacts associated with this project. The
applicant hereby offers mitigation to compensate for unavoidable wetland impacts resulting from
the proposed road extension.
In 2003, approximately 0.38 acre of wetland area was restored as partial mitigation for future
roadway extension impacts to wetlands in the business park under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 39.
In addition, the applicant proposes to provide an average 50-foot undisturbed, vegetated buffer
on the remainder of Stream A to its confluence with Long Creek, downstream of Impact Area 2
(average 25 feet on either side of the stream, measured from the top of bank). The buffer will be
preserved in perpetuity and recorded on the deed of record. The entire length of stream to be
buffered is approximately 1,700 If. Please note that an existing sewer line right-of-way will be
excluded from the restrictions.
I

I

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTECProject 6229-04-2539
The applicant has provided enhancement of the emergent wetland surrounding the proposed road
extension at a 2:1 ratio (approximately 0.38-acre) under the permit dated August 17, 2001. The
enhancement specifically targeted the removal of less desirable species, specifically blackberry,
and improve wetland habitat through planting native hydrophytic scrub-shrub and emergent
species. The Wetland Monitoring Summary Report is located in Attachment F. This report
details the location of the enhanced area, findings of the monitoring efforts and methods used to
gather data. MACTEC and GCEDC proposes the before mentioned compensatory mitigation for
the proposed impacts.
Stormwater Management Plan
As a condition of the DWQ Section 401 Water Quality Certification for the existing
access/entrance road, a Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management, dated June 16, 1999, for
the entire Gastonia Technology Park, was prepared in 1999 by Woolpert, and submitted to and
approved by DWQ (Attachment G).
To meet water quality requirements of 85% pollutant removal efficiency for the entire Gastonia
Technology Park, the Conceptual Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) outlines two
strategies. First, wet detention basins are proposed for parcels that drain through off-site
properties prior to discharging to Long Creek. These basins will be designed to meet DWQ's
85% total suspended solids (TSS) removal requirement and Gastonia's 10-year post development
peak flow reduction requirement. One wet detention basin is currently in use, while two
additional wet detention basins are proposed. Secondly, at all other parcels, drywell infiltration
systems are proposed to capture rooftop runoff. Also, parking lot and roadway runoff is
proposed to be directed over riparian buffer strips, which are to be sited adjacent to the banks of
major on-site drainage features, and are each to be a minimum of 50 feet wide (measured from
the top of bank). Level spreaders will be used to direct flow to, and to create sheet flow
conditions, to the buffer strips. Rooftop runoff may also be directed to buffer strips, with the use
of level spreaders. Construction of the currently proposed road extension will comply with the
SWMP.

t

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
Cultural Resources and Protected Species/Agency Coordination
Initial request for evaluation letters dated December 15, 2000, were forwarded to the State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). A
request for evaluation correspondence was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NCNHP) via facsimile on December 21, 2000. This correspondence was forwarded
for solicitation of comments on this project, concerning beneficial or adverse impacts relative to
cultural/historic resources and protected species.
In a letter dated February 12, 2001, SHPO responded that they are not aware of any properties of
architectural, historic or archaeological significance that would be affected by the project. In a
letter dated December 21, 2000, NCNHP responded that they had no records of rare species or
other significant areas within two miles of the site. In a letter dated April 12, 2001, the USFWS
stated that "no listed species or their habitats occur on-site," and that the proposed road extension
"will not affect endangered or threatened species and their habitats." Additional request for
evaluation letters dated February 2, 2005, were forwarded to SHPO, North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program (NCNHP), and USFWS. USFWS indicated in a letter dated March 3, 2005
that "Unless an area has been specifically surveyed for listed species or no appropriate habitat
exists, a survey should be conducted to ensure that these resources are not inadvertently lost."
Based on the specific project area of the road and direct adjacent habitats to be disturbed,
MACTEC has reviewed the project and has determined that it is unlikely that the species listed in
the February 2, 2005 correspondence exist in this area. Please find initial and additional
comments in Attachment E - Agencies Responses.

Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
1 Closing
Your prompt decision in this matter and corresponding processing of this permit will be greatly
appreciated. Please do not hesitate to call Josh Ellinger at [phone] ext. 5554, if you have
' any questions.
' Sincerely,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
' Joshua K. E inger Allen W. Conger, P..S.
Project Scientist Principal Scientist
' By?L-,With Permission
' Enclosures: Attachment A - Joint Form - Nationwide Permit No. 39
Attachment B - Agent Certification of Authorization
' Attachment C - Figures
Attachment D - Jurisdictional Determination Package
Attachment E - Agency Correspondence
Attachment F - Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
' Attachment G - 401 Water Quality Certification (dated January 15, 1999)
cc: Mr. Donny Hicks, CID, Gaston County EDC

Gastonia Technolo Park Road Extension- NWP N
gy No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
i
ATTACHMENT A
JOINT FORM - NATIONWIDE PERMIT No. 39
r

Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DW No.
(if any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1 1.

Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 39
' 3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
1 II. Applicant Information

1

11
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gaston County
Mailing Address: Economic Development Commission
P.O. Box 2339
Gastonia, North Carolina 28053
Attention: Mr. Donny Hicks
Telephone Number: 704.825.4046 Fax Number: 704.825.4066
E-mail Address: dhicks(a-co.gaston.nc.us
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Joshua K. Ellinger
Company Affiliation: MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
Mailing Address: 2801 Yorkmont Road Suite 100
Charlotte, NC 28208
Telephone Number: 704.357.5554 Fax Number: 704.357.8638
E-mail Address: jkellinger ,mactec.com

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
' so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
' drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
' 1. Name of project: Gastonia Technology Park Entrance Road Extension
' 2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 354-22-6208
' 4. Location
County: Gaston Nearest Town: Gastonia
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
t Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): The project site is located in the
Gastonia Technology Park, south of State Route 275 (SR 275) in Gastonia North Carolina
The proposed roadway extension is located on the north side of Long Creek approximately
4,500 feet south of the intersection of SR 275 and SR 277 and approximately 8,000 feet
northwest of the intersection of Interstate-85 and U.S. Highway 321
' '
"
'
"
S. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): Lat: 35 18
13
• Long: 80 12
12
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
' coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres): 200-acres within the Gastonia Technology Park; Approximately 3.5-
acres within entrance road extension corridor.

7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): U.T. of Long Creek
'
8. River Basin: Catawba
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
' River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)

IV.
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The location of the proposed roadway extension is
comprised of undeveloped land, consisting of early successional woodland and open areas,
including a sanitary sewer right-of-way. The existing Gastonia Technology Park access
roadway is approximately one-mile in length, extending westward from U.S. 321.
Approximately 850 linear feet of the existing access road lies within the boundaries of the
Gastonia Technology Park. The existing entrance road currently serves the eastern portion of
the park and the existing Pass & Seymour Legrand facility.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
LandDesign, on behalf of Gaston County, has designed an extension of the road currently
serving as the entrance to the Gastonia Technology Park. The proposed protect involves the
construction of an approximate 1,450 linear foot, two-lane extension of the existing entrance
road, to include site grading, drainage structures, paving, concrete sidewalks, curb and gutter,
and pavement markings. The purpose of the extension is to enable the GCEDC to more
effectively access and market the Gastonia Technology Park site. The types of equipment to
be used includes but is not limited to: Trackhoes Bulldozers Front-end Loaders and hand
tools.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The proposed project involves the construction of
an approximate 1,450 linear foot, two-lane extension of the existing entrance road to include
site grading, drainage structures, paving, concrete sidewalks curb and gutter, and pavement
markings. The purpose of the extension is to enable the GCEDC to more effectively market
the Gastonia Technology Park site.
Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
On November 9, 1998, the USACE issued a NWP No. 26 to the City of Gastonia for impacts to
0.34-acre of headwater wetlands and approximately 255 linear feet of unimportant jurisdictional
stream channel, for construction of the existing one-mile long entrance/access road (USACE
Action ID. 199930053). In addition, General Water Quality Certification (WQC) No. 3108 was
issued by DWQ to the City of Gastonia on January 15, 1999 (DWQ Project # 981030). As a
condition of the WQC, a Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management for the entire Gastonia
Technology Park (prepared by Woolpert, dated June 16, 1999) was submitted to DWQ.
Subsequently, the approximate one-mile long access road was constructed including
approximately 850 feet within the Gastonia Technology Park property boundaries.

On August 17, 2001, the USACE issued a NWP No. 39 to the Gaston Countv Economic
Development Commission for impacts to 0.19-acre of wooded and emergent wetland and
approximately 130 if of perennial stream impact (USACE Action ID. 200131106). Due to
unanticipated project delays the August 17, 2001 permit expired before the permitted activities
could be implemented.
Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
Future development of the Gastonia Technology Park is expected to occur over a 5-10 year
period of time, but will be dependent upon economic trends, and the ability of the GCEDC and
region to attract new business to the park. It is anticipated that future development will include
buildings, utilities, and paved parking areas. A wetland delineation on the park was previously
completed by MACTEC in 1999. Impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands, may our
in association with the future construction of the Gastonia Technology Park, however, the
previous delineation will be utilized in planning efforts to avoid jurisdictional wetlands/waters.
Specific future project impacts are not known at this time.
Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The proposed Gastonia Technology Park
entrance road extension will result in unavoidable impacts to waters of the U.S. Site grading and
the placement of culverts for the proposed project will impact Stream A and Wetland A. The
proposed bottomless arch culvert placement in Stream A will impact approximately 142 if of
perennial, important stream channel (Attachment C - Figure 5). The culvert will be placed to
meet North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) specifications and to allow low flow
passage and unimpeded movement of aquatic life. Additionally, approximately 0.19-acre of
Wetland A will be impacted bathe placement of fill for site grading for the roadway
(Attachment C - Figure 4). These unavoidable impacts resulting from the grading limits and
construction of the roadway extension have been minimized to the extent practicable and are
necessary for the construction of the roadway.

1. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(es/no Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet
Type of Wetland***
1 Fill 0.19 no 50 if Freshwater emergent

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.62 acre
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.19 acre
2. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:

Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
leasespecify)
2 Culvert 142 UT to Long Creek 8 ft. Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.us^s.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 142 if
3. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres)
(if Name applicable) Wate) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.

List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
' 4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
' Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
' Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:

VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The proposed nroiect involves the construction of an apnroximate 1.450 linear foot. two-lane
extension of the existing entrance road within an approximate 6.8-acre corridor, to include site
grading, drainage structures, paving, concrete sidewalks, curb and gutter, and pavement markings.
The purpose of the extension is to enable the GCEDC to more effectively market the Gastonia
Technology Park site, and thereby attract new business to the region. The stream and wetland
proposed to be impacted transects the property, therefore crossing the stream and wetland in
Impact Area Numbers 1 and 2 is necessary to largely access the remaining 120± acres of the
proposed future Gastonia Technology Park.
Minimization efforts included chanl?ine the vertical alicnment of the road by reducing fill slopes
and crossing the stream at a ninety-degree angle. In addition, the road extension was aligned to
avoid the wider section of the wetland. The Gaston County Economic Development Commission
also anticipates implementation of Best Management Practices (BMP's) for the Protection of
Surface Waters for this project.

I
VIII. Mitigation
' DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
' freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
' mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
' for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
' in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
httv://l12o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
'
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
The applicant proposes to provide enhancement of the emergent wetland surrounding the
proposed road extension at a 2:1 ratio (approximately 0.38-acre. This wetland area has already
been created as per the previous permit and the Wetland Monitoring Summary Report is located
in Attachment F.
In addition, the applicant proposes to provide an average 50-foot undisturbed, vegetated buffer
on the remainder of Stream A to its confluence with Long Creek, downstream of Impact Area 2
(average 25 feet on either side of the stream, measured from the top of bank). The buffer will be
' preserved in perpetuity and recorded on the deed of record. The entire length of stream to be
buffered is approximately 1,700 If.
' 2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at

1

1

[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.btm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
' IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
' (federal/state) land?
Yes ® No ?
' If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
' Yes ? No
' If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)

It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No 0 If you answered "yes", provide the following information:

I

I X1.

Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* lmpact
(square feet)
Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
As a condition of the DWQ Section 401 Water Oualitv Certification for the existing access road.
a Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management for the entire Gastonia Technology Park
re ared by Woolpert, dated June 16, 1999) was previously submitted to. and approved by
DWQ.
To meet water quality requirements of 85% pollutant removal efficiency for the entire Gastonia
Technology Park, the Conceptual Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) outlines two
strategies. First, wet detention basins are proposed for parcels that drain through off-site
properties prior to discharging to Long Creek. These basins will be designed to meet DWQ's
85% total suspended solids (TSS) removal requirement and Gastonia's 10 year post development
peak flow reduction requirement. One wet detention basin is currently in use while two
additional wet detention basins are proposed. Secondly, at all other parcels drywell infiltration
systems are proposed to capture rooftop runoff. Also, parking lot and roadway runoff is
proposed to be directed over riparian buffer strips, which are to be sited adjacent to the banks of
major on-site drainage features, and are each to be a minimum of 50 feet wide (measured from
the top of bank). Level spreaders will be used to direct flow to and to create sheet flow
conditions, to the buffer strips. Rooftop runoff may also be directed to buffer strips with the use
of level spreaders. Construction of the proposed road extension will comply with the SWMP.

Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
1 Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Gastonia Technology Park will be connected to the Gaston County Water and Sewer Authority
sanitary sewer service.
1

XII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIII. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A
z /n5
Applicant/ nt's gnature Pate
(Agent's signatur is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 15 of 15
Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229 04-2539
ATTACHMENT B
AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION FORM
MAR-22-2UU5 'I'Ub U8:11 AM UAS I UN UUUN I Y ttUU r hA NU. i U400106UC r. uc
' AGENT CC, RTIFIC.ATION Of AUTHORIZATION ..
46
1, 7DPM I A LAm - to it , representing Gaston County, hereby certify that I
have authorized shwa K. Ellinger of MACT.EC Engineering and Cunsultinb, Inc. to act
I on my behalf and take al I actions necessary to the processing, issuance, and acceptance of
this permit and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
I

11

We hereby ccitify that the above information submitted in this application is trlic and
accurate to the best of our knowledge;.
Applicant's slcrn l c
hf4&,k 2 Z Car
Date
Lrcnt's sign
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.
MAR 22 2005 09:22
PAGE. 02
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
ATTACHMENT C
FIGURES
April 12, 2005
t
i
t
USGS KEY r'
V
_ Natural Vegetation
Areas
¦ Structures
?- Streams
t v
r 1y 7t{??? - i
,L

jµ0.
r l+"
I ?
+
Roads
Ohl
it Park , I %?
I `tip ? ,•' .? 3? Y ,?J .? f 14 ?? I 5
l I ? c ?
Its. ; r XPPROXIMATE _ • r
i L - Y ' .?•
vzzz?
Ill , , _ I 11 II I'1 .A 011 w L,
t
E I I?
i?
r l Q'Avof t
E
'; - 4y?4 '•' r? '•.? - -•,1, : ? ? •'t?n?iryL$kgl.'Ppfk
r ?. _? I y' I I
V -, gall, •: -.777
f v I1AStI1\[A fY} I rat V h l rb4? y i r2. iI? r =- V
,' I ?.' l f.1
? --
F xti? t * WGHWAY

l! •
;a•,I,,Idnnr
EXPLANATION
20,00 1000 O 2000
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF N? I I I
PROJECT SITE BOUNDARY
QUADRANGLE LOCATION APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
REF.: U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF GASTONIA NORTH, N.C. QUADRANGLE, DATED 1993
MACTEC SITE LOCATION/SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
ENGINEERING CONSULTING, INC. GASTON TECKNOLOGY PARK ROAD EXTENSION
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REPA G I I ! DATED IZ b CHEC9DDATEf /L C? KGB NO.
BY 6229-04-2539 FIGURE
-7&
t
t
t

n
o +•
E I
V
r) 2
3
V
U
8 CeD
s
cl
5eD
EXPLANATION
APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
i,' REF.: USDA SOIL SURVEY OF GASTON COUNTY, N.C., SHEET NO. 3, DATED 1976
?r
2000 1000 0 2000
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
K
f r
1.
Ao)
MACTEC SOIL SURVEY MAP
ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC. GASTON TECKNOLOGY PARK ROAD EXTENSION
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PREPA DATE CHEc?I?Epp ,?,, DATE JOB N0. FIGURE
BY y t?'`?l (2 ps" 6229-04-2539 2

' U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
' WILMINGTON DISTRICT
' Action ID: 199931104 County: Gaston
Waters of the U.S. Survey/DelineationVerification
Property owner/Authorized Agent: Gaston County Economic Development Commission
I Address:

1

Telephone Number:
P.O. Box 2339
Gastonia, NC 28053
Size and Location of Property (waterbody, Highway name/number, town, etc.):
Approx. 200 acre "Gastonia Technology Park" located off of Dallas-Bessemer City Road
south of NC 277.
Indicate Which of the following apply:
X There are waters of the U.S. on the above described property which have been accurately
flagged/delineated. We recommend that the delineated lines be surveyed. The surveyed
lines must be verified by our staff before the Corps will make a final jurisdictional
determination on your property.
The submitted survey plat dated for the above referenced property
accurately reflects the limits of waters of the U.S. on the property. Unless there is a
change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed 5 years from the date of this notice.
Placement of dredged or fill material in waters othe U.S. on this property without a Department
of the Army permit is in most cases a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC
1311). A permit is not required for work on the property restricted entirely to existing high
ground. If you have any questions regarding the Corps of Engineers regulatory program, please
contact:
Steve Chapin at [phone]
Project Manager Signature -Date ??- August 16. 1999

LAW
??T
' ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100 Date: July 30, 1999 Project No.: 30100-9-4308
' Charlotte NC, 28208 Project Name: Gastonia Technology Park
[phone] FAX [phone] Attention: Steve Chapin

' Re: Jurisdictional Determination

TO: Mr. Steve Chap
in

U. S. Army Co of Engineers
rps
' Asheville Regulatory Field Office

151 Patton Ave Rm. 143
nue,
Asheville, NC
28801
LE7TER OF TRANSMITTAL
WE ARE
WE ARE
SENDING YOU X Attached Under separate cover via the following items:
' Prints Plans Samples Specifications
Copy of letter Chanee order Other

n

IP FN('T ()QTTRFQ APT: V(1T AC N(1TPn VI J TII V N(1TTGV TTQ AT In XTrV
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
1 7/30/99 1 U.S.G.S. Site Location (Figure 1)
1 7/30/99 2 Soil Survey Map (Figure 2)
1 7/30/99 3 Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map (Figure 3)
11 4/29/99 4 Routine Wetland Determination Forms
4 4/29/99 5 Intermittent Channel Evaluation Forms
1 7/30/99 6 Request for Jurisdictional Determination
1 7/30/99 7 Agent Authorization Form
6 7/30/99 8 Photographs
I HESS ARE I RANSMfITEU as checked below:
X For approval - Approved as submitted _ Resubmit copies for approval
For your use - Approved as noted _ Submit copies for distribution
_ As requested _ Returned for corrections _ Return corrected prints
For review and comment
REMARKS: Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. is submitting the necessary documentation for a wetland
boundarv verification on the approximate 200-Acre Gastonia Technology Park site in Gastonia North Carolina. The
delineation was field-verified by_vou on July 1. 1999. Please contact Michael A Iaanocco at (704)-357-8600. if you have
any questions regarding this information.
I RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
' LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
By C_4cA With Permission
144-atef/Z 4-gncd*c?b?
Senior Environmental Scientist

Copy To: File
By atL,d With Permission
?v .
?Allen W-. Conger
Principal
Environmental Scientist
777
?'?,• ?•? -'- , , „' ? III ?' ;?
u q '2'
Aon
1 ,?. ry i - E7R 713 JL.
' u •
937
I? ? J
Creek n i
'
N) I
fl, ;11
(177
"Natgr ¦ A Karr?y
Tan 13ch ¦ 1
11 ?• l ?_?- II ??• •1 Gaaton, (•,
7§ •Y ?? College w B!,
?? Q i// I X77
\ ii `-?-765• // i ?f ? \?.\\
I ? .1A I ?
• ?,??/ I -- - .. _ ( ??.q Rankin I ake Park ?
X777??..
Imaer
ay I n
> O Mid.
' J Ch lu\ Rankin Lake a
?7es 5 3 _i: '
1'.. 779 / ' ;_) • JT
Itlfvec
in
Doi. k
EXPLANATION
2000 1000 0 2000
APPROXIMATE SITE BOUNDARY
o.
rn APPR07a11ATE SCALE IN EEE'1
REF: U.S.G.S. 75 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF GASTONIA NORTH, N.C. OUADRANGLE DATED 1970.
? LAW
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
L' ID.tiI LOB NO.
By EPA64--A IDA-7/'a 199 1CHECKED
SITE LOCATION
GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK
GASTONIA, NORTH CAROLINA
30100-9-4308 FIGURE

it
x
i
o.
0
0
a
z
i EXPLANATION
1 APPROXIMATE SITE BOUNDARY
2000 1000 0 2000
I I I
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
7,1 REF: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE SOIL SURVEY OF GASTON COUNTY, N.C.; SHEET 3 OF 8, DATED 1989
LAW SOIL SURVEY
u ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK
Y CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA GASTONIA, NORTH CAROLINA
PREPA
&C4 -71 4 RED DATE CHECKED DATE J08 NO. FIGURE 8Y 2 T fog 30100-9-4308 2
' zz
W
N
x
i
N
O
n
' O
O?
3
v
W
0
I
i
00
0
n
0)
0)
rn
i
0
U
O

O

NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
AND WETLAND BOUNDARIES WERE DELINEATED IN
THE FIELD BY LAW ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC. (LAW). JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
OF THE U.S. AND WETLAND BOUNDARIES HAVE BEEN
MARKED IN THE FIELD AND VERIFIED BY THE U.S.
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ON JULY 1. 1999.
EXPLANATION
JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF
THE U.S.
?? PHOTO LOCATION
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AREA
(FLAGGED/DELINEATED)
APPROXIMATE WETLAND BOUNDARY
(NOT FLAGGED/ACTIVE PASTURE)
- "" - APPROXIMATE PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
ODP1 DATA POINT
•SFA1 STREAM FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT
600 300 0 600
APPROMMATE SCALE IN FEET
LAW
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
it PERENNIAL
()IV
cREFK `- BYE C-c
JOB NO.
REF: ELECTRONIC TOPOGRAPHIC MAP PROVIDED BY WOOLPERT, L_-
APPROXIMATE WATERS OF THE U.S.
AND WETLANDS BOUNDARY YAP
GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK
GASTONIA, NORTH CAROLINA
DATE CHECKED DATE
-712--l L o c[
30100-9-4308 FIGURE 3

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Pang 1 of 9
Project/Site: Gk'-f-0NJA' 7rc4A1or aCvy Pfti2{{ Date: 2 22 94
Applicant/Owneres Ij C-6 14 ?V?''X County: CiASTa,.1
Investigator: G?ercd ??,?,,,,,?,,? j m4Ay <4,1 ?nu?e,e?y State: QoriT4 C_/fota L-WA
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes p Plot ID: DF i - Zr I Fu.` A'
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1.7Ur6PeYkAS Viroivliavl.? 9.
2. ?- q Ui) aMbaYra?il kc T ?/t C ` 10.
3. ?Uevc?S
y??oYC? T -AC_Lk 11.
(
4. 0"AeJCUS T' lca - -? S A C (A:' 12.
5. Flae"yiA5 uw?bcll?
1 5 - 13.
6. LoV1iCC?a uVOn G,,
y 14.
7.CX OPaca 5 ?}?- 15.
6. ahoN a C?Qveol a?w H ?C 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC j 2-104
(excluding FAC-). 1
Remarks: ?41)eoph VQJe4-&-Eiavi IS fl+ doMinar?'?.
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs -Inundated
-Other
N
R
d
d D
t
A -Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
o
ecor
e
a
a
vailable -Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: Y a (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: l A (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (a (in.)
Remarks: 1
?JeS E?t
,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Prniar_f/Sifamf%f in. T,D. . .a. o-..e O -f
Map Unit Name
I
I
(Series and Phase): 4elal IG& yaan
t?K (nav?.? ??ka ?n ` 11
lo slotLc.?rainage Class•_ pnv Wall dT "ed
Taxonomy (Subgroup): -bAt" t; l 4a U ?a ?ap Ncl r? ?{ -?,
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
A-
r -12- Z- s y 6 6 ?e ,? C e a
7.s s/g
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
--
-Reducing Conditions Listed on Local Hydric Soils List C MCI u6 "c„5)
'7-
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: ?IcSQV4
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Pre? ent? Yes ? Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes COW
Wetland Hydrology Present. Yes No,
Hydric Soils Present? Yes 1i(o
Remarks: Pe1n+ QSe ?? t S ca 'L
vc?s i?)Uv? ,^v?Sd1CAi(1 cL
"0 C14 'k'[ q X .
1/27/99

f'.

1

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Page I of2
Project/Site: Go?4o.?,g (et r?e?o'1M fAlIP- Date: z1 z.-zl `1'c
Applicant/Owner: Gas?Fn h Co uh+u County: 54-bv.
Investigator. A'11X01-,V\A 1,4 Ct!j MtiIVVA State: t?? i"_arol?ha
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? (De ' No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Q Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes ?No Plot ID: ?f I - wfr (gF'"A1
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. ACey' Yu1o rv,._ T 5 SAC 9.
2. sce\r negurdo `` S FAC_ cy 10.
3. Aiei,c, yc+ral?rr? ? 1-- gGtiJ 11.
4. Covnus Am Cv?+NV^ 5 FACE' 12.
5. L', 1. C4ASCA5 CLJ+ 13.
6. eurex sp. N - 14.
7. SOL?\l v\iryti -T-l'J 0??- 15.
a. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species th at are OBL, FACW, or FAC _ (? oy
?
(excluding FAC-). o
(o
Remarks: ) r a h . ?. ` Jest ?? a R. 0 el 4

HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs Inundated
-Other
- < Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
_.:?LDrift Lines
XSediment Deposits
)k Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data Clnydric MClas'io0
\
J
XFAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: U (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: YI 10. (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks: S _Q ?1?(jvd(d4 u'? 1 „?o-S Avf ?vQSeN"?
L_??
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS PrniP&1.gitP/Pint in- 7\0 i _ tr c„Ae. At
Pane 2 of 2
Map Unit Name '' II
(Series and Phase): _4eleyla s
? 1eAV, ?I Io r. `lo sle?c)Drainage Class h^or?e?a-??4 ulcll Aoaine,
Taxonomy (Subgroup): _ e?rN;c a?? IU u1Es
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descri tp ion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
C) - l z. ___g_ 5 s ??oa ? s_I I- C_
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
Sulfidic Odor is
1Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions /C Listed on Local Hydric Soils List i uc?us an s)
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Gve
fv('SQ? ?-.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Iya No Is This Sam Im Point Within a Wetland? Ye No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No p g
Hydric Soils Present? a No
Remarks:
i
Pd?rl? vgvese, t- a- J?_N V11.5 ?ACL
1/27/99
t

I

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Page 1 of 2
Project/Site: T?JK-ola?ti QaFk
Qq
Date: 3i-+1q1
Applicant/Owner: 2s?e,n Ceant? County: (Za,9frow
Investigator: (sve Q 4 IA?1 tuna M- K'a PkAVV4 State:__' )or-hn CQyol,tea,
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes I n? Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes AO Plot ID:]i? z - wed G F?7
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. ?ei u la ?ligva T s ??CuJ 9.
2._ tievcas 1nioVa
3. 'TV.VICUS ?T asu5 ??L11) 11.
4. CttUCX <Q _ H - 12.
5.nI 13.
1
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC ?2 s I ?0
(excluding FAC-.
Remarks: 1
???y,Priy}?c
J 2?U?li6n r
?c ?Ovn')n v%+. ?? i? OJAhaC TIA'uS Ja.S c?Sv

HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs X Inundated
-Other
X No Recorded Data Available X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Y- Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: - 12 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: nl ?A (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: a (in.)
1
Remarks: ?JeFIa, ??d r#(0? IndiC.+wS ore prr?eh4.

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Prnion*ICiFe/Pin+ in- i-o _ ,.%.,1 C '{ A, r/
0___ 7 _f 9
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): (>60,laclo-
OavV? 4
ue.4
o#A a
LI
al r
Drainage Class: sonict-Jkaf pnDvl t?
Taxonomy (Subgroup):_+?\evmic -Fla112?Q4LAt 1? }ic_? s ?r.dwQPE3 Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
_b - IZ R io Nonlc <_?Lr, ?naYvi
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
? Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils %
Reducing Conditions X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List L+n`ius,w?s j
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: ?. 1 aY; c s?,? ? r) ' ?? rS 0'V2 ?rQ ?CW
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? '? No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Y- No
Wetland Hydrology Present. Yes> No
Hydric Soils Present? Ygs No
Remarks: 1r p9 ?+ ?Q?JQ?Qvs, 4? ;inviS?l 4- -iOhw(- we??4V1d
0'T Q c` .
1/27/99

I

I'.

I

n

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
0 - 7 _f 03
Project/Site: os+aAv a- TeJ?Nalo1V na rk Date:
_?22?`t9 _
Applicant/Owner.K AS+ov% C- "A A:b County: Ga&6h
Investigator: 6M44 AA+t&,a, w% ark W?.. ?va State: rJ AA-In C wo l i v`&-
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ?$ No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situa tion)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes oi Plot ID: bP z - ?r 6
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. ertLwS V% Alra T 'FA/_
? g.
2.7 &+xA .9 occidg'- .?is Z-IG
=- 1FACA)) 10.
3.JuylivevuS JIYy?InlAha
I S F?C?I,- 11.
4. I_.,CjI s4yuw Sine,,SP_ t, c 12.

5. Card Inc, s CLk 13.
6. ?MiI?X VD?nv?c? i )I AL 14.
7, Acei?av4oeuS Cafol;v'?'wus Ff4C 15.
8.. CSI Jo,? 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
l
di
FAC r-71 ~
-
(exc
u
ng
-).
Remarks: dVa i't' +i `IQAe???i w^ s dOM v?AV?"?'.

HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs Inundated
-Other
-/No Rec
d
d D
t
A
il -
-Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
or
e
a
a
va
able -Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
-Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. N (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: t.?I A (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: N I A (in.)
Remarks: N? we??alna ?v??v4?o?y ??I?aEov? prt PveSen+

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Prnipctmitp/Pint 111- h07 - 7r h,a*P_ ?r_ A-G ?. Pano 9 of 9
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): ChC?GIa. rr
`oa?+ ;,Y0$Lktft+1j -
-?- r
tnel?
--- Drainage Class: =b/" H OiwL jv'ihn)
Taxonomy (Subgroup):; c tAVaa,Lkef+ C ! i wAAm. h Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
D - 12 R I Dk(= 3 i?IOnJE SiLTH L'64 r)
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions xListed on Local Hydric Soils List _ I N c (.fit= 'aNjS)
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: 1?D Vl???i'c ?o?t IA 5 G??e P?esevi
f
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes i?i
Wetland Hydrology Present? (No,
Hydric Soils Present? Yes -Nd)
Remarks: T' L? 1
i??ka Palt?? I!C'Q?f `??L'r 5 Ol' ?0A? hV iSd 1 G 1 ON??
q1rn?l gV'Fv?,
1127199

r"'

n

ul
C?
0

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
1 of 2
Project/Site: (ashn is TecJkaleu 4 Aze c. Date: 3 1 111 94
Applicant/Owner 0yo r, 4-ov, C_okAtH County: (7as.4ay.
Investigator. Gore w......? L1.6. ??cks?rrovv` State: N oY Nit C"o I w?
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es? No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes U Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes add Plot ID: > 3 -W d'fLA& GIz
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
j 1. Acct y?eauV?Ja S FAG?1 9.

2. Tan;Lvw. SQ. - 10.
i

i L 11.

j 4.1?1de"s ?vonJaso-
T--k CLJ t
12.
5. 1AV\C.uS Ctt*^sA.( }{ !;:-f1C K) 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC ?- ; OD.?;
+
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks: 4oJ?' ^? l c VC ae o,n
d 15 )0 r-; A"^

HYnRCILOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs -Inundated
-Other Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available -Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
-Water-Stained Leaves
-local Soil Survey Data
?c FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. A J'a (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: r?? a (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 3 (in.)
Remarks: Wz -fiuV-? v-). \ rD?•o?iA Imp 1 C.0- -v t/5 G`V C ?pVQSF?I f

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS PrniPCtJSitP_/Pint Iln• T)02 _ .) X t- , Pane 9 of 9
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): CtVJa.d a L
I Duw, "t YC4urv??4 'f
?oe?a Drainage Class: rto"W ,4- Ooovl a dra,nrd
Taxonomy (Subgroup): - 11&-miC_ 1"-: (kJff$uc1A+? ;C- L?,s+np e-'lT Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descriotion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
o- $ 2.5ysfez Fj p5s SCI, (0o"
?- iz 8

i
' s y sl
i
'
I
Hydric Soil Indicators:
I
_Histosol _
Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfdic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions Listed on Local Hydric Soils List ( J?c?s"S
C Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: t tt??v i c So', IA01 ca? a•!S 0.V A4
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? i No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Y(gs No
Hydric Soils Present? Y4s,• No l
Remarks: ?aku? o'in? Q VCS e,+- 5 C` .??i'S) 1 ?+ o" aj w(? ?r~,`^? aIv>i?
1/27/99

r

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
1 of 2
Project/Site: (-4As+ovl i a -I e?nolo?M ra k Date: 31 ITgQ
Applicant/Owner. G-6,5J-oVI CoLtA±14 County: Qss+w,
Investigator: &0 AvJ u s ¢c.L?,;?row? State: N o vf n Cavro l i rI c?
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No-' TransectID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes o? Plot ID: 7)1?4-y' Q FIl
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. 'kA n Lu S ea's u < FA-C- 4 1 9.
2.-PAv?lCA v1.. Se, N - ! 10.
3. C/II jagn 11.
?
U
14.-F-An?V LA
ti 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC L
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks: G
0 ,1a'A
v'
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs -Inundated
-Other
'>/,No Recorded Data Available -Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. Vl? (I- (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 'A aL (in.)
Remarks: N0 _11,o1 y.o?pa 4 nU1G?(7YS &,tJ IQ/t54.A
U
I 't 1

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Proiect/Site/Plot ID- D?4-- 77 i=1?
Pane 2 of 2
Map Unit Name 1
(Series and Phase): C_ /I ev?l& j a_
? Qav A kwe@uevJ4l r 1
1106)4 Drainage Class: S6- e W{+a+ poy ?N ?y&; id
Taxonomy (Subgroup): `HeywyN c E1%nva4tAt41? 17ush ocw }s Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) A undance/Cont ast Structure, etc,

I
(0 3 _ W S+10
7,5 Y r 15 S'44 CI LV
i
i
i
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol Concretions
_Histic Epipedon --High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ,
-Reducing Conditions =zListed on Local Hydric Soils List
_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors --Listed on National Hydric Soils List
--Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: N? L Sp ?n??ca`>>J: G?VC QlC?S??t?
1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ?& No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes o
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks: VrC'SC'?l+-f 0- V\ pin ?ic?-T 0VV J-
Ue I aA,v a_?r4 .
1127/99

1

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
1 of 2
Project/Site: C76S+0 r ,a e b?Woloa u ?,,v k_ Date: 31Tq
Applicant/Owner. Go, -.+a vi Co AA+4 County: C "+bn
Investigator: &rc ? w.gv\n State: d c e+tA Cavd ;ho.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No ? Plot ID: 7)P$ w C9 ?3 8
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant S pecie
Stratum Indicator
s
1. CD?V1U5 AN/`.eN ',.(M S %F/q CvJ} s
' 1
g, Ci4H, IAY r0?v?A?1?1A14_
2. r' C_ev VUbVak" 7-5 1:-,4c 10.
3. Fatm6k4cuS ea"si s
S
BFI C uJ'
( 11.
4. S0I;u ;A 14 VA 5 pB? 12. I
5. T- s ca?o?iNo. _ S TA CG(.. 13.
I -r
6. S

-,=A(- ,JT

14.
7. QAVeX
8. f"?V V?NJi{/`!\%iJ? OI1QhiA.l1YA ? 7?j LK7 16.
_
Percent of Dominant Species that are 08L, FACW, or FAC 7/ (,60-
U
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks:
ege+i.-? i , v\
\J
J
-1S 6 01^ i?nRH->•: a L?
ro0-I b,Fkr1ss;n , c
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs Inundated
-Other Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
-Drift Lines
X Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
K Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
24 FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: Vl a- (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
`
Remarks: WQt?AV\? ?NO14loq? ;n0'
,.A'?v5 (?V(/ 1 ?CSe.Vt I
1 I

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Prnipct/Sitp/Plnt 12 1\0 S - u] 4'D29
Panp 2 of 2
Map Unit Name I r[?
(Series and Phase): 1-t CkAk I&W ^ TIrCtut „+Iu -E04 a2 a Drainage Class: S0n4 wI,11.k oeov 14 wai y?C?
Taxonomy (Subgroup)A6_vmie_ Flu ud.auevi+;c- ?(s+vec G?volOfS Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descri tion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
D- I Z g 5Y
1
wo nc s; I }y c10.?
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
X Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions Listed on Local Hydric Soils List N\6vSio?l S)
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: y-l y? v i C S?? 1 r p! C f 'r( s t vv' ,
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? At" No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Ye No
Wetland Hydrology Present? a No
Hydric Soils Present? Ye No
Remarks:
1127/99
1

u
1
n

1

J
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
1 of 2
Project/Site: Gras-Nevric v?hh?loay ??rk Date: Z
Applicant/Owner. 'Ca s+o n C oLA"4S4 County: 4a 54 H
Investigator: GY f. State: Nov-Ai Cav6144
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? es No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transept ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Qj?o:) Plot ID: DP 6 - W (9 F61
VEGETATION

Dominant Plant Species
Stratum Indicator i
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1, ulucfctis V0 yq.I?05
% --r S ACW 9•

2.?y7)o ?,}o.s S+yvnr;?lu?-
'T S TA ?+ I
10.
3. i'-KCv yuwNnn 1 S ??? 11.
' 4. 1' i rt k S ?GIQ a '-r c ?j? C 12.
pp 15. /tun ipllArf?( ?t ?- C 13.
6. Ly i a_ C 14.
7. ?'P?gnKN` s0. N 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (60 °?
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks: ??VOP(,Y?l? Vc?e?? I Ova I s ? Owt ?n.c.vt?
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs A Inundated
-Other Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available K Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Second Indicators (2 or more required)
ary
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
)C Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. 6- ( (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 'A o? (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks: ?.? C? ?,l An VLj ? 10l p? 15 ?veS eA4- .

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Prnier_t1.'itPJPInt In. rol _ u) a Pr i
Panes 7 of 7
Map Unit Name
?
? ((`` (!
'
? l
(
J
)
2v?
(Series and Phase):-
oau? tY lq u lN
w s Drainage Ctass: Somcu/h?? I dr??h?
/1pa? N
*
e
Taxonomy (Subgroup): hPvrnrc 1:?J &0"Uej&fir_ I tsf+ -0CA.?n4rield Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc,
o "- Z- v., 0 V1f,
' I
I
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol -Concretions
Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions -Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_,g_Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: ?v SOS (S AVc ?JCSt n? .
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Remarks: i
? ?fl?(rCSQ?n?lt, A GTi J""_o'? Wi+ ?uJ
(,V (CA
.
1127/99

I?
I

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Pa e1 of2
Project/Site: G"4-ovkic, T?noi0g4 ?avk- Date: q9
Applicant/Owner. 6MS -6 A Co u It -+u County: Cxshor%
Investigator: Go 'A7t aw-- State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes NQ Transect I0:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes r o7 Plot ID: 2,?Q 7 - W g M 13
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. ??nv: Se??u?.
T S f}CW 9.

2. L,? srncnse
14
S
Ar-
t I

10.
3. C4?? r? n iC, yr '. 5 'FAC W 11.
4. ALer yNbyum
T 5
?AC ?
12. ?
5. L9n lGtir ',,AP )VI Cti U, AG- 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
l
di
FAC ((??
=
0
?j
(exc
u
ng
-). U
?
Remarks:
1?'?°Ph'?,Ti?
?¢?e=a 6?
1S ?r^1hC? .
V
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs Inundated
-Other X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
>1 - Drift Lines
x Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: D (in.)
Remarks: 'v" ),/-"I aq % n ? c_ 4,
vs S? e ?/e??v1y,
., I

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Prainct/SiWPlnt In-
pans 2 of 2
Map Unit Name ?,,A^
i
S
? i s
"
' C ISt, slges?
uh
er
(
es and Phase): 1
'.`0 ?
C? Drainage Class: Wcl l dray ne?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): e yrh '? e; KAVt H a p I A J H 14-1 Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descr trg ion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc,

Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions I
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy j
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Reducing Conditions -Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Jv.` ?? ?? weic O?SQr11Qd ,
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? QY#; No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Ye No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No
Hydric Soils Present? jAs No
Remarks:
1!27!99

H

1

u

0

1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Page 1 of 2
Project/Site: 2a ein 0'_ Te ha l o o -P Date: - - 2
Applicant/Owner: Gas-6 M 'Lou h 7 u County: CT&shld
Investigator:_G'rq.!JQ Q State: Noy}1n Covol,ha
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? (yt& No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (Eo) Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes (2i? Plot ID: pP9,-
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. A?Y\yS SeJJu S TACVJ 9•
2. ??3 y?u 5 ac c, ?o wWi S T1 ?7A C t?J 10.
3.?-???klus la?tba?•s H AC.+ 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8• 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC :/ _
3 - 00'7.
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks:
Ve 3c4"il 6v" '1S oD^^T?o.iq?
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs Inundated
-Other
L X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
No Recorded Data Available
_) -Water Marks
-Drift Lines
_,)6 Sediment Deposits
'Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
X Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 0-) (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: h I a (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks: (,J2?(a? ?JOI o

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SnILS PrniPr-f1Site1Plnf In- 11?4 - w
Paee 2 of 2
Map Unit Name 1' f
(Series and Phase): tte I evsa Sam `? o_ Q M ? 4C) Drainage Class: o era+ eI ti we11 ?r•??we?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Eherw? : c A? C t lu?ul+s Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0- Co 3 2.5Y ?? I N o A E 5ana? 1 oae^
IZ _ R 1byi2 z?? No t4 E loans
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol -Concretions
Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions -Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: t?? a d j G 5 ?, L
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? :Y s No f?
No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? 4Ces, No
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes.
Hydric Soils Present? No
Remarks: t `
\,J.JQ4la?1 0.V? 6A
1/27199
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
1 of 2
Project/Site: 6i&s46v%.. -T1r_ %Ayau --'FovlL Date: 31,S111
Applicant/Owner.. &D,&+0 In C o ?InTU County: (Qaslfl,n
Investigator: ?? State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Cyj?__S' No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: 3:P $ - ZrC?' WS
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant S pecies Stratum Indicator
1. Ise ??.10. n u ra _ 5 'Fr?LuJ 9•
i

2.
FA c W
10. i
3. L i?iu%? 6VV! ar *VIL4l"1 -7-1 S
?? '?_A C 11.
4.?/IA3Nus oc? )ate+r;.s ---? s FACW - 12.
5. ?_ pn c¢y? V acT: c ti C _ 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are 08L, FACW, or FAC

4/s
s
Q?
(excluding FAC-).
Remarks: \ I aYoe h1 ?ic VJ<1 ?1~k a n iS doM n". V1 '
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs -Inundated
-Other
No Recorded Data Available -Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. N I c. (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0; a- (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks: A? / X04 IVJicw??s NPfQ I?VcSfv?+
I I t
I ?

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS Proiect/Site/Plot In- 1P mA - -?f
Paae 2 of 2
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Drainage Class: moaV.{ c 14 volt 4V&;k1tA.
Taxonomy (Subgroup):'B^efV"?%c c
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc,
?)? o Y ?o e s;1 ?l o Q?Yl
I
i
i
i
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Reducing Conditions -Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
-Gleyed or Low-Chroma Col ors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 4?-?
Hydric Soils Present? Ye No
Remarks:
?- `lain/ ?r¢?rc;cn}S Q V) D? - Nv?sr?ic-()'ar\ OL CuP?a?? o?ca
1127199

INTERMI
CHANNEL
TTENT
EVALUATION FORM

' S>=a - 1 4 t3z
ACTION ID APPLICANT NAME ?Tat? ?7 CouH y
DATE
PROPOSED CHANNEL WORK (i.e., culvert, relocation, etc.)
WATERBODWRIVER BASIN (.orlq CreeK /L,i?TUtw1A COUNTY/CITY ( d,L4-oy1
RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS I
L0I a ?ookv ?I 1 C ( a
J
J

i
k

P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
x Fish/Shelifish/Crustaceans Present
X Benthic Macro Invertbrates
X Amphibians Present/Breeding
Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function) Igo V, V, SL L& luv a? ae
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells, others)
X Federally Protected Species Present (Discontinue)
x Riffle/Pool Structure
x Stable Streambanks

X Channel Substrate

(i.e. gravel, cobble, rock, coarse sand)
o o m
h? v 'i c so s/ C 1 D y °
X Riparian Canopy Present (SP =/> 50% closure) ®? C ovetccu e
X Undercut Banks/Instream Habitat Structure
Flow In Channel
X Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel (Discontinue)
Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom
(June thru Sept.)
Yl G?
Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June thru Sept.) Vl
X Adjacent Floodplain Present
X Wrack Material or Drift Lines
X Hydrophytic Vegetation in/adjacent to channel
Important To Domestic Water Supply? Y
Does Channel Appear On A Quad Or Soils Map? Y l
L. UIlJ GI N^Yi J?/ ?=*l?1 1G, t?4 1 ,'/L11 .?V1??
Cawx sP,
Approx. Drainage Area:
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll////l//ll///l/l/l//lllllll//lllll/lllllllll/lll//lll/Jllllllll/l1l11llllllllllllllllllllll/llllJllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllllll/ll/ll/lllllllJlllllll/lllllllllllllll
Determination:

?l Perennial Channel (Stop) 8 Important Channel: LF PROJECT MGR Initials
Intermittent Channel (proceed) . Unimportant Channel: LF
Ephemeral Channel (no jd) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
Ditch Through Upland (no id)
Evaluator's Signature:
(if other .O.E. project manager)
llll/lllllllllllllllllllll11111lllllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllllllllJllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllJlllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
P=Present SP=Stongly Present NP=Not Present
' INTERMITTENT CHANNEL
EVALUATION FORM
ACTION ID APPLICANT NAME GaS'} nh CB K ?'4 DATE 3 9
PROPOSED CHANNEL WORK (i.e., culvert, relocation, etc.)
' WATERBODY/RIVER BASIN CaAAwb-- I LOA(4 C-vtt-- ,COUNTY/CITY (56,s-4p
vl
RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS SV\OvJ i Cod , ?e,y'FI,?t LI6t.6

P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
Fish/Shellfish/Crustaceans Present
? ?Ihb'?S
Benthic Macro Invertbrates
x Amphibians Present/Breeding
X Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function) l
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells, others)
X Federally Protected Species Present (Discontinue)
X Riffle/Pool Structure
X Stable Streambanks

X Channel Substrate

(i.e. gravel, cobble, rock, coarse sand)
t
C ou V5L S G.v-? \A J v i
X Riparian Canopy Present (SP =h 50% closure)
Undercut Banks/lnstream Habitat Structure
X Flow In Channel
X Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel (Discontinue)

V br Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom
(June thru Sept.)
V Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June thru Sept.)
X Adjacent Floodplain Present
x Wrack Material or Drift Lines
Hydrophytic Vegetation in/adjacent to channel v`d U r„K
L1?u5+VNM
Important To Domestic Water Supply? Y'-N
Does Channel Appear On A Quad Or Soils Map? Y ? Approx. Drainage Area:
lllllJlllllllllllllJll/lllll/Il/ll1/llllJJl1/l1/llllllllllllJ?l1/lJllll/lllJllJl!llllllll/1/lllJllllllJllJ1/I//l/lllllllJ?I?IIIIIIIJIlllll/Illllll111JllJIJIJJIIIIIl1?lll!/llll//llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllJllllJlllllll
t Determination:
Perennial Channel (stop) Important Channel: LF PROJECT MGR. Initials
' Intermittent Channel (proceed) Unimportant Channel: LF
Ephemeral Channel (no jd) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
Ditch Though Upland (no jd) 1
' etc ?et?s "?) 0Is C,i-I-tJia ?as o, ?C!/zo^ii.\ 41 Evaluator's Signature: _ 0
(if other dl&t.O.E. project manager)
' lllllllll/Illlllllllll//llll/lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/1/lllllllllllll/lll/lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/1111/llllllllllllllllllll/l1//l/l///// lllllllllllllllllllllll
P=Present SP=Stongly Present NP=Not Present

ACTION ID

0

L

r
INTERMITTENT CHANNEL
EVALUATION FORM
-5r& -s G S S
APPLICANT NAME GGS*, N Ca i,,w.?
PROPOSED CHANNEL WORK (i.e., culvert, relocation, etc.)

DATE 5
WATERBODWRIVER BASIN Lbv`ct Cvvek C4-?aw COUNTY/CITY o,5-la?n
RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS Tv?} (( c l nv d
P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
FislVShellfish/Crustaceans Present
X Benthic Macro Invertbrates
X Amphibians Present/Breeding
Svlo,Mwv?r? ?
X Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function)
?t v ?n wl a a e
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells, others) "
?v-k?l c ?c cr s
x Federally Protected Species Present (Discontinue)
x Riffle/Pool Structure
X Stable Streambanks

X Channel Substrate

(i.e. gravel, cobble, rock, coarse sand)
X Riparian Canopy Present (SP =/> 50% closure) -L
X Undercut Banks/Instream Habitat Structure
X Flow In Channel
X Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel (Discontinue)

Y1 10. Persistent PooWSaturated Bottom
(June thru Sept.)
6 Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June thru Sept.)
k Adjacent Floodplain Present
Wrack Material or Drift Lines

X
Hydrophytic Vegetation in/adjacent to channel
-
-71
Important To Domestic Water Supply? Y 1I
' Does Channel Appear On A Quad Or Soils Map? Y(( N., Approx. Drainage Area:
l1/ll//llllllllllllllllllllll/lll/lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllllllllll)/lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll11/llllllllllllllllNlllllllllll
Determination:
owns x Perennial ChannelC156 l?=)(stop)
Urn > Intermittent Channel (proceed)
Ephemeral Channel (no jd)
Ditch Through Upland (no jd)

0

,1 Important Channel: X00 LF PROJECT MGR Initials
Unimportant Channel: LF
(attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
Evaluator's Signature:
(if other C.O.E. project manager)
llllll/l/lllllllll/llllllll///llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/lll/ll//ll/!//l/l////ll/l/ll/ll//l1l/lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllllllllll/ll/lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
P=Present SP=Stongly Present NP=Not Present
' INTERMITTENT CHANNEL
EVALUATION FORM
SrA 4 G T K
' ACTION ID APPLICANT NAME CzaS ti? vt Lok!6"? DATE 3151 9
PROPOSED CHANNEL WORK (i.e., culvert, relocation, etc.)
' WATERBODWRIVER BASIN Loo.a Cv ef1- Z C??c ?Jba. COUNTY/CITY Cs?s-I-ew
RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS 't7 avk?, r__ c

h

L
P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
Fish/Shellfish/Crustaceans Present
Benthic Macro Invertbrates
X Amphibians Present/Breeding
Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function)
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells, others)
x Federally Protected Species Present (Discontinue)
x Riffle/Pool Structure
x Stable Streambanks
Channel Substrate
(i.e. gravel, cobble, rock, coarse sand)
)C Riparian Canopy Present (SP =h 50% closure)
xe Undercut Banks/Instream Habitat Structure
X Flow In Channel
Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel (Discontinue) t \

N' p Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom
(June thru Sept)
v I A Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June thru Sept.)
X Adjacent Floodplain Present
X Wrack Material or Drift Lines
71 . Hydrophytic Vegetation in/adjacent to channel
Important To Domestic Water Supply? Y114&
' Does Channel Appear On A Quad Or Soils Map? Y /(t? Approx. Drainage Area:
lllll/- /llllllllllll/llllll///ll/lllllllllllllllll/ll1/ll/llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/llllll/1 /lll/llllllllll/llll/l1/lllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllll/lllll/lllllllllllllllll
' Determination:
Perennial Channel (stop) Important Channel: LF PROJECT MGR Initials
' ,,C Intermittent Channel (proceed) Unimportant Channel: LF
8
Ephemeral Channel (no jd) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
Ditch Through Upland (no jd)

Evaluator's Signature: &J.14
(if other .O.E. project manager)

1 /llllllllll/lllllll/ll//llllll/lll/llllllllllllllllll/llllllllllllllllll/llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/lllllllllllllllll/llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll/ll

P=Present SP=Stongly Present NP=Not Present
REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
' DATE: June 30, 1999
COUNTY Gaston TOTAL ACREAGE OF TRACT(S) Approximately 200 acres
' PROJECT NAME (if applicable) Gastonia Technology Park
PROPERTY OWNER (name, address and phone):
' Gaston County
Gaston County Economic Development Commission
P.O. Box 2339
Gastonia, NC 28053-2339
Attn: Mr. Donny Hicks, CID, Executive Director, [phone]
NAME OF AGENT, ENGINEER, DEVELOPER (if applicable):
' Law Engineering and Environmental Services. Inc.
' 2801 Yorkmont Drive. Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
' Attn: Michael A. Iagnocco. Senior Environmental Scientist
STATUS OF PROJECT (check one):
' ( ) On-going site work for development purposes
( X) Development in planning stages (Type of development: Commercial)
' ( ) No specific development planned at present
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED:
' Check items submitted - forward as much information as is available. At a minimum, the following first two items must be
forwarded.
( X) Accurate location map (from County map. USGS quad sheet, etc.)
' ( ) Survey plat of property in question
( ) Aerial photograph (from County Assessors office, or other source:
property boundaries shown on the photo would be most helpful)
( X) Topographic survey (provided by WOOLPERT, LLP)
' ( ) Conceptual site plan for overall development

( X ) Routine Wetland Determination Forms/Intermittent Channel Evaluation Forms
( X ) SCS Soil Survey Sheet(s) (Gaston County)
( X ) Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map
By With Permission
Signature of Property wner or
Authorized Agent

AGENT CERTITICATION OF AUTHORIZAI LON
represutting Gaston County, hereby cerri*y
thi l t have authorized Michael A. lagnocco of LAW Engineering end Environmerital Semices,
file to apt un my behalf and take all wiuns necessary to the processing, imsonce, anu
accettance ,f this Icriuit and ally anti ;ill a.andiud and special C0nd4innc AffArhPd
U'v livivb, crrtify thw the aho%t Infant r,.tlon subm:nc.d in tbia appli?atixi i; true acid accurate to
the beat of ,:,ur knoivledbe.
Appimn! I Siiggnat?ture AacnCs signature
n81L Date
Completlon of this Corm will alhm the agent to sign all future s?pplicatlon rfirrmpnndence
r
A

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
April 12, 2001
Mr. Michael A. Iagnocco
Project Manager
LAW Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
Dear Mr. Iagnocco:'
Subject: Gastonia Technology Park Roadway Extension (LAW Project No. 30100-0-1199),
Gaston County, North Carolina
In your letter dated December 15, 2000, you requested our comments with regard to the subject
project. The following comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Endangered Species. According to our records and a review of the information you provided,
no listed species or their habitats occur on the site. We concur with your determination that the
proposed project will not affect endangered or threatened species and their habitats. Therefore,
we believe the requirements under Section 7 of the Act are fulfilled. However, obligations under
Section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the
identified action.
Storm Water. Loss of riparian buffers and inadequately controlled storm-water run-off from
residential and other developed areas are major factors resulting in the degradation and loss of
aquatic resources. Accordingly, we recommend that you develop and implement an adequate
storm-water-control and -treatment plan and that undisturbed riparian buffers (natural vegetation)
be maintained and/or reestablished along any perennial and intermittent streams on the site.
Vegetated riparian buffers serve as filters for contaminants, lessen storm-water velocities,
provide thermal cover, and protect stream-bank stability.

t r
' Erosion Control. Given the proximity of the project to aquatic environments, we want to
emphasize that stringent sedimentation- and erosion-control measures should be implemented
prior to ground disturbance and should be maintained throughout project construction.
' Thank you for allowing us to comment on this project. Please contact Mr. Mark Cantrell of our
staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 227, if you have any questions. In any future correspondence
concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-01-270.
Sincerely,
Brian P. Cole
' State Supervisor
cc:
Mr. Steve Chapin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006

.Q Z0,
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
' February 12, 2001
Michael A. Iagnocco, Project Manager
Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100
Charlotte NC 28208
Re: Gastonia Technology Park roadway extension, Gastonia,
Gaston County, LAW No. 30100-0-1199, ER 01-8367
' Dear Mr. lagnocco:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
Thank you for your letter dated December 15, 2000, concerning the above project. We apologize
for the delay in our response.
' We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties of architectural,
historic, or archaeological significance which would be affected by the project. Therefore, we
have no comment on the project as currently proposed.

f]
1
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section
106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,

David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
' DB:s
Administration
' Restoration
Survey & Planning
Location
507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC
515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC
515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC
Mailing Address
4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617
4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613
4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4618
Telephone/Fax
[phone] •733-8653
[phone].715-4801
[phone] •715-4801
t

11

e??
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
February 7, 2005
Mr. Joshua K. Ellinger
MACTEC
2801 Yorkmont Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Subject: Gaston Technology Park Road Expansion Project; Gaston County
Dear Mr. Ellinger:
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority natural areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. Although our maps do not
show records of such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not necessarily mean
that they are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. The use of
Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if
the project area contains suitable habitat for rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority natural areas.
You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at
<www.ncsparks.net/nhp/search.html> for a listing of rare plants and animals and significant
natural communities in the county and on the topographic quad map. Please do not hesitate to
contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
Sincerely,
Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., Zoologist
Natural Heritage Program
HEL/hel
' 1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] • FAX: [phone] - Internet www.enr.state.nc.us North{CCaarolina
An Equal Opportunity • Affirmative Action Employer - 50 % Recycled • 10 % Post Consumer Paper Natu' Q//
L` ff
t

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
March 3, 2005
Mr. Joshua K. Ellinger
Mr. Allen W. Conger
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
Dear Mr. Ellinger and Mr. Conger:
' Subject: Site Assessment for a Roadway Expansion (1,700 Linear Feet) Within an
Approximately 3.9-acre Construction Corridor (Gaston Technology Park Road
Extension) Located North of Gastonia, Gaston County, North Carolina
In your letter dated February 3, 2005, you requested our comments on the subject project.
(Please note that your letter was incorrectly addressed to Mr. Mark Cantrell. Mark is a
biologist in the Asheville Field Office, but letters requesting U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
input should be sent to the Field Supervisor.) We have reviewed the information you
' presented and are providing the following comments in accordance with the provisions of the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
The proposed project (a 1,700-linear-foot roadway expansion) will be built on land that is
currently an undeveloped mix of open fields and woodlands (based on the aerial photography
provided by the Gaston County GIs web site). As you mentioned, an unnamed tributary to Long
Creek bisects the proposed project site. No description is given of potential impacts to the
stream.
You do not present evidence of any surveys of the project area for federally listed species known
from Gaston County. Unless an area has been specifically surveyed for listed species or no
' appropriate habitat exists, a survey should be conducted to ensure that these resources are not
inadvertently lost. Based on the project location and pictures obtained from the Gaston County
GIs web site, there appears to be suitable habitat for federally listed species. The federally
' endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) and the Georgia aster (Aster

georgianus), a candidate' for listing, have both been found in the project area. The Schweinitz's
sunflower is difficult to identify at any time, but even more so outside the flowering season (late
August to October). Habitat for the Schweinitz's sunflower includes overgrown fields and open
woodland areas. The Georgia aster has been found within 6 miles of the project. site. It is
difficult to identify outside the flowering season (early October to mid-November) and resembles
two other asters that occur in the same habitat. Habitat for this species includes open woodlands
and overgrown roadside areas. Accordingly, we recommend that the botanical surveys be
e conducted during the period of mid-September through mid-October. Enclosed is a list of
federally endangered and threatened species and federal species of concern for Gaston County.
In accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate federal agency or its
' designated representative to review its activities or programs and to identify any such activities
or programs that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. If it is
determined that the proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally listed as
endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated. Please note that
federal species of concern are not legally protected under the Act and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including section 7, unless they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or
threatened. We are including these species in our response to give you advance notification and
to request your assistance in protecting them.
Given the proximity of the project to aquatic environments (unnamed tributary to Long Creek),
we are very concerned with the secondary and cumulative impacts that will result from the
proposed roadway expansion.
' The treatment of storm water leaving the project area and the maintenance of adequate riparian
buffers are of particular concern. The expansion of the roadway will allow the area to be
developed. This development will, in turn, create more impervious surfaces (such as roofs,
roads, and parking lots), which collect pathogens, metals, sediment, and chemical pollutants, and
quickly transmit them to receiving waters. According to the Environmental Protection Agency,
' this nonpoint-source pollution is one of the major threats to water quality in the United States
and is linked to chronic and acute illnesses from exposure through drinking water and contact
recreation.
Best management practices can reduce, but not eliminate, pollutant loadings of common
storm-water pollutants. Designs that collect runoff and allow it to infiltrate the soil have the
highest documented pollutant-removal efficiency, eliminating nearly all lead, zinc, and solids
and more than 50 percent of total phosphorous. Ponds and wetlands, which allow contaminants
to settle out of the water column or be broken down by sunlight and biological activity, can
' 1"Taxa for which the [Fish and Wildlife] Service has on file enough substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. Proposed rules have not
yet been issued because this action is precluded at present by other listing activity. Development and publication of
proposed rules on these taxa are anticipated. The Service encourages State and other Federal agencies as well as
other affected parties to give consideration to these taxa in environmental planning" (Federal Register,
February 28, 1996). Taxa formerly considered as "Category 1" are now considered as "candidates."
' 2

' remove more than 70 percent of bacteria. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
has developed a "Guidance Memorandum to Address and Mitigate Secondary and Cumulative
Impacts to Aquatic and Terrestrial Wildlife Resources and Water Quality" that we support and
encourage you to use. It can be accessed via the Internet as follows:
http: //www. ncwildlife. org/pg07_wildlifespeciescon/pg7c3_impacts.pdf.
To mitigate some of the potential secondary and cumulative impacts that will occur from future
' development in and around this project area, we offer the following recommendations to help
minimize impacts to fish and wildlife resources:

1

t

The construction of new roadways can produce short-term direct impacts as
well as long-term cumulative effects. Studies have shown a serious decline in
the health of receiving waters when 10 to 15 percent of a watershed is
converted to impervious surfaces. Impervious surfaces should be limited to no
more than 7 percent, curb and gutter should be limited in new developments,
and the direct discharge of storm water into streams should be prevented. We
recommend the use of grassed swales in place of curb and gutter and on-site
storm-water management (i.e., bioretention areas) that will result in no net
change in the hydrology of the watershed. These designs often cost less to
install and significantly reduce environmental impacts from residential
development.
2. Loss of riparian buffers and inadequately controlled storm-water runoff from
residential and commercial development areas are major factors resulting in the
degradation and loss of aquatic resources. Forested riparian buffers serve as
filters for contaminants, lessen storm-water velocities, provide thermal cover,
and protect stream bank stability. Riparian buffers also provide travel
corridors and habitat areas for wildlife displaced by development. We suggest
that forested buffers be a minimum of 100 feet wide along perennial streams
and 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and wetlands. We recommend that
all sewer lines, water lines, and utility infrastructure be kept out of riparian
buffer areas. Stream crossings of any utilities should be kept to a minimum,
and multiple utilities should use the same right-of-way whenever possible.
3. We strongly suggest the use of bridges for all permanent roadway crossings of
streams and associated wetlands to eliminate the need to fill and install
culverts. All stream crossings should be made perpendicular to the stream. If
culverts are the only option, the culvert should be buried at least a foot below
the natural streambed to allow for proper water depth and the movement of
aquatic organisms. Under no circumstances should stream channel widening
for culverts occur nor should riprap be placed in the stream channel.
4. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior
to any ground-disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream
3

t

1
11

aquatic resources. Temporary (e.g., rye grain, wheat, millet) or permanent
herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 5 days of
ground-disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
Biodegradable erosion-control matting should be used in conjunction with
appropriate seeding on disturbed soils in steep slope and riparian areas.
Matting should be secured in place with staples, stakes, or live stakes of native
trees (whenever possible).
5. Efforts should be made to avoid the removal of large trees at the edges of
construction corridors and in any surrounding development. Disturbed areas
should be reseeded with seed mixtures that are beneficial to wildlife.
Fescue-based mixtures should be avoided; fescue is invasive and provides little
benefit to wildlife. Native annual small grains appropriate for the season are
preferred and recommended. Where feasible, use woody debris and logs from
corridor clearing to establish brush piles and downed logs at the edges (just in
the woods) of the cleared rights-of-way to improve habitat for wildlife.
Allowing the corridor area to develop into a brush/scrub habitat would
maximize benefits to wildlife. Corridor maintenance should be minimized, and
mowing should be prohibited between April 1 and October 1 in order to reduce
impacts to nesting wildlife. We suggest a maintenance schedule that
incorporates a portion of the area (e.g., one-third) each year instead of the
entire project every 2 or 3 years. Additionally, herbicides should not be used
in wetland areas or near streams.
6. Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary.
Equipment should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes
disturbance to woody vegetation. Equipment should be inspected daily and
should be maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking
fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. All fuels,
lubricants, and other toxic materials should be stored outside the riparian
management area of the stream, in a location where the material can be
contained. Equipment should be checked for leaks of hydraulic fluids, cooling
system liquids, and fuel and should be cleaned before fording any stream.
Also, all fueling operations should be done outside of the riparian management
area.
At this stage of project development and without more specifics about construction locations or
techniques, it is difficult for us to fully assess potential environmental impacts (direct, indirect,
secondary, and cumulative). We therefore recommend that any environmental document
prepared for this project include the following (if applicable):
1. In your letter you pointed to the fact that the current design is the most
feasible alternative present. A comparison of alternatives and their associated
impacts should be included in the environmental document for this project. In
particular, we will need a detailed analysis of stream and wetland impact areas
4

and locations, particularly locations of stream crossings and the construction
techniques proposed for stream crossings within the roadway expansion
project. Plans for all proposed impact areas should include a complete
analysis and comparison of the available construction techniques and
' alternatives (including a no-build alternative). The report should contain
information from all surveys and assessments, including the acreage and a
description of the wetlands that will be filled or impacted and the extent
(linear feet as well as discharge) of any water courses that will be impacted as
a result of the proposed project. A description of any streams should include
the classification (Rosgen 1995, 1996) and a description of the biotic
resources. All wetland areas affected by the proposed project should be
mapped in accordance with the Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. All wetland/stream crossings should be
made perpendicular to the stream, and spanning structures should be used
rather than culverts. Stream buffers, at a minimum of 100 feet on perennial
streams, should be maintained throughout the project area. Any Clean Water
Act 404/401 permit applications (from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
should clearly show why impacts are unavoidable and how impacts that are
unavoidable have been minimized. Unavoidable impacts will require
mitigation.
2. A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within existing and
' required additional rights-of-way and any areas, such as borrow areas, that
may be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed project.
3. An assessment of all expected secondary and cumulative environmental
impacts associated with this proposed work. The assessment should specify
the extent and type of development proposed for the project area once the
' roadway expansion is complete and how future growth will be maintained and
supported with regard to sewer lines, water lines, parking areas, and other
proposed roadways.
' 4. A discussion about the extent to which the project will result in the loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat from direct construction
' impacts and from secondary development impacts. The acreage and location
of upland habitat, by cover type, that will be eliminated because of the
proposed project must be noted.
5. Mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid, eliminate, reduce, or
compensate for habitat value losses (wetland, riverine, and upland) associated
' with any phase of the proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If we can be of any assistance or if
you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Bryan Tompkins of our staff at

11

828/258-3939, Ext. 241. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-05-099.
' Sincerely,
' Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
Enclosure

1

6

ENDANGERED, THREATENED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES AND FEDERAL
SPECIES OF CONCERN, GASTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
This list was adapted from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's County Species List. It is a
listing, for Gaston County, of North Carolina's federally listed and proposed endangered, threatened, and
candidate species and Federal species of concern (for a complete list of rare species in the state, please
contact the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program). The information in this list is compiled from a
variety of sources, including field surveys, museums and herbaria, literature, and personal
communications. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database is dynamic, with new records
' being added and old records being revised as new information is received. Please note that this list
cannot be considered a definitive record of listed species and Federal species of concern, and it should
not be considered a substitute for field surveys.
Critical habitat: Critical habitat is noted, with a description, for the counties where it is designated or
proposed.
Aquatic species: Fishes and aquatic invertebrates are noted for counties where they are known to occur.
However, projects may have effects on downstream aquatic systems in adjacent
counties.
' COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
GASTON COUNTY
Vertebrates
Bog turtle
' Bald eagle
Vascular Plants
Georgia aster
Schweinitz's sunflower

11

KEY:
Clemmys muhlenbergii
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Aster georgianus
Helianthus schweinitzii
T(S/A)'
Threatened
(proposed for delisting)
Cl.
Endangered
Status Definition
Endangered A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
Cl A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient information to
support listing.
T(S/A) Threatened due to similarity of appearance (e.g., American alligator )--a species that is
threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
These species are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7
consultation.
'In the November 4, 1997, Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle (from New
York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south to Georgia)
was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans the collection and
interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation
has no effect on land-management activities by private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern
population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers
the southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.
November 12, 2003 Page I of 1

' Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
r
ATTACHMENT F
WETLAND MONITORING SUMMARY REPORT
r
i

AMACTEC
April 12, 2005
Mr. Steve Chapin
USACE-Asheville
151 Patton Ave., Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Subject: Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
Gaston County Economic Development Commission
Gaston County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project 6229042539
USACE Action ID 2001-13-1106
Dear Mr. Chapin:
' The Gaston County Economic Development Commission (GCEDC) has retained MACTEC
Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC) to provide environmental services for the above-
identified project. On behalf of GCEDC, we are hereby contacting the United States Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) regarding the success of the Gaston Technology Park 0.38 wetland
' restoration area. We request that you respond in writing with comments concerning future
monitoring at the site. The project vicinity and location are presented on the attached Figure 1.
' This report documents the methodology used to assess approximate boundaries of jurisdictional waters
of the U.S., including wetlands and the results of our study.
' Background
The 380-acre Gaston Technology Park is located west of N.C. Highway 321 and north of Interstate
1 I-85 in Gaston County, North Carolina. In, 2003 approximately 0.38 acre of wetland area was
restored as partial mitigation for future roadway extension impacts to wetlands in the business park
' under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 39. Additionally, stream mitigation consisting of a 25-foot
protected riparian buffer on each side of the stream channel, as measured from the top of each
' streambank was also implemented. This buffer extends approximately 1,700 linear feet (10 along
Stream A, to the confluence with Long Creek, and was surveyed and subsequently protected by a
' deed restriction (based on the permit application dated July 3, 2001). The USACE Action ID for
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
' 2801 Yorkmond Rd., Suite 100 • Charlotte, NC 28208
704-357-8600 • Fax: [phone]
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229042539
' this project is 2001-13-1106, dated August 17, 2001. In July 2004, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
' (USACE) representative Steve Chapin verbally requested that a summary report detailing
conditions in the restored wetland be prepared and submitted for USACE review, in order to
determine if further future monitoring will be required.
Wetlands on the subject property were determined using the Routine On-Site Determination
Method as defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual'. MACTEC
Environmental Scientist Josh Ellinger conducted the field review on October 21, 2004.
To satisfy USACE request, post construction monitoring will assess vegetation survival, site
' hydrology, and soil characteristics. Additionally, photographs will be taken from representative
locations to visually document the wetland. Successful maintenance of the wetland will be
' determined based on the continued presence of USACE jurisdictional wetland characteristics.
1 Post Construction Monitoring
' Following completion of wetland restoration efforts in 2003, post-construction wetland monitoring
efforts were completed in 2004. The following documents the condition of the wetland restoration
' project. One site visit was conducted during the post-construction monitoring effort, on October
21, 2004. During this site visit, four permanent monitoring plots (each approximately 0.1 acre in
extent) were established along a single transect. Sampling points were identifying by first
' determining if normal conditions existed and then choosing representative points within the
different plant communities along the transect. Vegetation, soils, and hydrology were then
' assessed at these four locations and were documented on USACE Wetland Determination Forms
(Attachment B). Live woody vegetation within the 0.1 acre radial plot was flagged with blue and
white surveyor's flagging, and was identified by species. A soil sample approximately 14 inches in
depth was then taken at each radial plot location, and was assessed for hydric soil characteristics.
Site hydrology was then observed and documented for each radial plot.
' The center of each permanent monitoring site (radial plot) was marked with a numbered PolyVinyl
Chloride (PVC) pipe approximately four feet in height. The radial plot centers are located as
' follows:
' Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C
100 pp. and Appendices

n

I
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229042539
Site 1: Monitoring site 1 - 35° 18'8.9" North, 81° 12' 11.9" West
Site 2: Monitoring site 2 - 35° 18'8.8" North, 81° 12' 11.7" West
Site 3: Monitoring site 3 - 35° 18' 8.8" North, 81° 12' 11.1" West
Site 4: Monitoring site 4 - 35° 18'8.8" North, 81° 12' 10.9" West
Monitoring Site I
Monitoring Site 1 was the westernmost radial plot sampled. At the time of sampling, this site was
inundated (approximately 1-4 inches deep), was underlain by hydric soils, and contained a
dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (Attachment B). Six living species of vegetation were
observed at this site.
Scientific Name Common Name Strata Indicator Status
Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress Shrub OBL
Juncus effusus Soft Rush Herbaceous FACW+
Helianthus angustifolius Swamp Sunflower Herbaceous FAC+
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Shrub FACW
Acer rubrum Red Maple Shrub OBL
Liguidambar styraciflua Sweetgum Shrub FAC+
Monitoring Site 2
Monitoring Site 2 was located east of Monitoring Site 1. This site was inundated (approximately
14-18 inches deep), was underlain by hydric soils, and contained a dominance of hydrophytic
vegetation. Three living species of vegetation were observed at this site.
Scientific Name Common Name Strata Indicator Status
Juncus effusus Soft Rush Herbaceous FACW+
Saururus cernuus Lizard's Tail Herbaceous OBL
Gratiola viscidula Sticky Hedge-Hyssop Herbaceous OBL
3

I

Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
Monitoring Site 3
April 12, 2005
Monitoring Site 3 was located east of Monitoring Site 2. This site was inundated (approximately 1-
3 inches deep), was underlain by hydric soils, and contained a dominance of hydrophytic
vegetation. Four living species of vegetation were observed at this site.
Scientific Name Common Name Strata Indicator Status
Juncus e?ttsus Soft Rush Herbaceous FACW+
Helianthus angustifolius Swamp Sunflower Herbaceous FAC+
Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak Shrub FACW+
Taxodium distichum Bald Cypress Shrub OBL
Monitoring Site 4
' Monitoring Site 4 was the eastern-most radial plot sampled. This plot serves as an upland data
point. At the time of sampling, this site was not inundated and was not underlain by hydric soils.
' This site did contain a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (Attachment B). Six living species of
vegetation were observed at this site.

?I
F1

Scientific Name Common Name Strata Indicator Status
Toxicodendron radicans Poison Ivy Vine FAC
Quercus bicolor Swamp White Oak Shrub FACW+
Smilax rotundifolia Greenbrier Shrub FAC
Eupatorium capillifolium Dog Fennel Herbaceous FACU
Acer rubrum Red Maple Shrub OBL
Plantus occidentalis Sycamore Tree FACW-
Hydrophytic (Wetland) Vegetation
During 2004 monitoring efforts, vegetation observed in the radial plots was generally dense, with
moderate species diversity. At the time of the site visit approximately 80 percent of the restored
wetland area was densely inhabited with hydrophytic vegetation. Observation of planted tree
species indicated that trees were planted from the waters edge to six feet upland of the waters edge.
A list of the flora observed can be found in Attachment D.
4

Gaston Technolog-v Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
Hydric (Wetland) Soils
April 12, 2005
Soils at the three wetland radial plots displayed consistent hydric characteristics, including gleyed
or low-chroma colors, oxidized root channels, and sulfidic odor. Most soil samples included an
abundance of organic materials and loam-size particles. Soil texture was generally characterized as
sandy loam.
Wetland Hydrology
In the 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual, the USACE defines a wetland as an area that "...is
inundated either permanently or periodically at mean water depths < 6.6 ft, or the soil is saturated
to the surface at some time during the growing season of the prevalent vegetation." Since the
existing water depths at the monitoring sites range between 1 and 18 inches, Wetland A currently
meets the jurisdictional wetland hydrology requirement. Across the entire wetland area, water
depths range from approximately one inch to approximately 24 inches. Wetland A is located on
the floodplain on an unnamed tributary to Long Creek. Based on previous observations made prior
to the construction of Wetland A, during flood conditions the creek spills out onto the floodplain
and temporary fills the wetland area.
Summary
The results of this monitoring effort indicate that Wetland A is a jurisdictional wetland. The
present depth of inundation appears to be favoring vegetation that is hydrophytic. Continued
saturation/inundation in Wetland A is anticipated to maintain hydric soil characteristics in this area.
Photographs which document current conditions are provided in Attachment C. Attachment D
provides a summary of the floral species observed.
5

Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
Closing
April 12, 2005
Please find five copies of the site survey plat for the Gaston Technology Park in Attachment F
detailing on-site mitigation. Please sign the enclosed survey plats, return four copies to MACTEC,
and keep one copy for your file. If you have any questions, please call Josh Ellinger at (704) 357-
8600 extension 5554. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We appreciate your cooperation
with this process.
Sincerely,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, INC.
Joshu ?Zger Allen W. Conger, P.W.S.
Staff Scientist Principal Scientist
By ?')With Permission
RBD/JKE/j ke
Attachments: Attachment A - Figures
Attachment B - USACE Wetland Determination Forms
Attachment C - Photo-Documentation
Attachment D - Final Plat for Gaston Technology Park
6
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229042539
ATTACHMENT A
FIGURES

J

.. ??? ? . •? 1 ? ? is ' ? ` ?? ?
apm
i3i
ee,
I I 1?
• a L: C; •
r Ix
?v 1
i
°' .? ?• ? iu, by
N y) m 4 ti w N
m m oo
N
*, z Q to J -
i ? ¦ 1 II
O
O
U
m
CL
cM
G
M
O
O
a
N
U
Z
O
Z
c
(0
N
U)
Q-
M
U
L
(0
O
X ~
O
a
N ?
O
O ~
N ?
II U)
ii a
a)
2
0
:r
V
O
J
,w
M
0
M
N
d-
0
CY)
N
N
cfl
Qj
W
H
Y
a z
W >,
C O C
c C
?j ? U
C C
O ?O
- cn
U' U
D
c 3
U
i

• 't

A

H

i

•
n

• r'ti
0
?a
a?

> N N

E

U v
,.O. O fn O
Z Q
¦ ? II

H
O
C
O
x
v N
C)
b0
O
'O

T

S•

z
N

CL
U-

V
O
J

Cm m
N
0 o
o m
p
N
C
p N

Q N
N L O
dU a
U
d
L ?
U
Z
(0
.C
O
0
vi
N
(D
U)
N
p U_
1 L ?
CL ?aU
Z
m W
Q > O +?'
O C p C
C C C
O
U U
t C C C
O O
0 LO cu

O CO N
I
Z CO
r
O
N 2

co co
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
ATTACHMENT B
April 12, 2005
USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION FORMS
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Pmject/Site: TS-:; 01 ?er????c??1 Q?ck Date: \b ZI pr
Applicant/Omer. b. `A? A i d hY `A M i
'd'..lo!-,G1•A.tt4 1. (n?,,,.,,.nt Bounty:
Investigator. ?Vr?,nc State: tJC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes® NoD Community ID:
Is the site si?ificantiy disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YesD No®: Transect ID:
Is the area a Rrobiem Area? YesD No® Plot ID:
(II needed, explain on reverse.) ?? -
VEGETATION
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
QStream, Lake
or Tide Gau Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary I
di
t
,
ge
DAerial Photographs n
ca
or;:
®Inundated
DOther ®Saturated in Upper 12 inches
®No Recorded Data Available DWater Marks
?Drtft Lines
Field Observations: ©Sediment Deposits
[]Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water.
(in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
®Oxidlzed Root Channels Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit. (in.) Water-Stained Leaves

Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) DLocal Soil Survey Data
DFAC-Neutral Test

Remarks: Other (Explain in Remarks)
H:ICMCRAEIVIMIrdpslwmyrlioNorm.tloC
Sheet l of 2
6:12 AM W12M
r
HYDROLOGY
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Drainage Class:
Feld Observations
Taxonomy Subgroup: Confirm Mapped Type? YesM No0
Profile Description:
Dept Meft Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
rushes Horizon Munseil moist) (Munseli Moist) Abundance/Contmst 'Structure, etc.
Q_ ( _ ;° I% b l0Y -
} d So,??l i Mann
Hydric Soil Indicators:
HHistic Epipedon
SSulfidic Odor
QAquic Moisture Regime
[DReducinp Conditions
®Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors
Remarks:----
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Concretions
[]High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Solis
QOrganic Streaking in Sandy Soils '
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[Listed on National Hydric Soils List
QOther (Explain in Remarks)
C
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes1 No0 Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes® No[] Yes® No[]
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Remarks:
H:1CMCRAEIwsu.ndD&Wrwwbrff'0M0 e
Sheet 2 of 2
X12 AM W1210D
i
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: (rgsr;o Teo?Vto?nnt? Qat\ Date: 10 2 0
Applicant/Owner. vR?tt?rar•.?rnrnM ??????
C
lrnun.S? i ny\
County: t
T C1 ova
Investigator. State: 'N C
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? YesEg No0 Community ID:
Is the site 6201ficantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YesO No®: Transect ID: t
Is the area a kjoblern Area? Yesf-I
(If needed, explain on reverse.) Nog Plot ID: pp=2
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicato
1.
2. - 4\ -
3. I?CR?tO,Q ?f?SC t???1n _ vt'L-11. _
12.
5. _ 13. - =
6. 14.
7. 15.
16.
Percent of Dominant Soecies that are OBL FACW or FAC
(excluding FAG).
`oOoie
r3 I\ ?, --- rN
Remarks: -----\\y?c?e?•.?;_ ve o
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
[]Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
[]Aerial Photographs
pother
0No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
I Remarks: - - - - - W ek??XVA Yt?1 Lit o\ p o, ?( o.,{ ?•
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
inundated
QSaturated in Upper 12 inches
[]Water Marks
Drift Lines
QSediment Deposits
Drainage Pattems in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
®Oxidized Root Channels Upper 12 inches
®Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
[]FAC-Neutral Test
[]Other (Explain in Remarks)

Sheet ] of 2
8:12 AM 9112100

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS
Map Unit Name \ \
(Series and Phase): Drainage Class: - VJc?.???a
\ \ Field Observations
Taxonomy Subgroup: Confirm Mapped Type? YesO No0
Profile Description:
Depth Matra Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon 1Munsell Mom (Munseil Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etr.
% 61
QLty (?nr r
Hydric Soil Indicators:
UHistic Epipedon
®Sutfidic Odor
QAquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
®Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors
Remarks:____ ?1yac?e Su?? ,s pteSnx??
Concretions
®High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Solis
E31-1sted on Local Hydric Soils List
Ousted, on National Hydric Soils List
QOther (Explain in Remarks)
E
Sheet 2 of 2 e-12 AM W==
WETLAND DETERMINATION
'
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 CO
' (
E Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: G far Date:
APPlicant/Ownero County: arm ;ter
Investigator. State: t
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes® No0 Community ID:
I
th
it
i
s
e s
e s
k?Ificantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? YesO No[q: Transect ID: 1
Is the area a Pjoblem Area?
YesO No® Plot ID:
(If needed, ex lain on
reverse.)
dJP ,
' -
VEGETATION

Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum indicator
1.
S
P?t
u?.e, "
v.c„. - N : Fkb'J4 g•
u
-
2. iw ?C1C+ 10. -
_
J
' 4• 12.
5. 13.
8. 14.
' 7.
15. - =
- -
8. 1s. -
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL FACW or FAC J
' lexcludino FAC-1.
' O O otp
Remarks:
rL
HYDROLOGY

1

L

[Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
[]Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[]Aerial Photographs Inundated
[]Other Saturated in Upper 12 inches
[]No Recorded Data Available []Water Marks
Drift Lines
®Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: © (in.) []FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks) k, V,
Remarks:
NVIA

":`CMCRAn%tlr'dpekwmh imwo^n•tlx Sheet 1 of 2 e:12 AM SM21DO -
SOILS

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): We?l?ywo nc..? \(1!,un Drainage Class: ?voa„s
Field Observations
Taxonomy Subgroup: Confirm Mapped Type? YesO No[]
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrest Structure, ebc_
r'_= - IrLEY? b?IDY - l
5?A?',.
I hom
_ y
Hydric Soil Indicators:
LJHistic Epipedon
®Suifidic Odor
QAquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
®Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors
Remarks:----
WETLAND DETERMINATION
QConcretions
®High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils "
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
t
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes[] No[O Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
20
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes® NoO Yes No[]
Hydric Soils Present? Yes N
Remarks:
": c? , «nr,. ,eo?.ooc Sheet 2 of 2 e:12 AM W120 M

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator

r
2-
a M>
1
0

8. Q?@c c
?
?A; c
? 1
.
- -
U
,
?
or _ S
4. _ F (iC.?Jt
R 11.
=
5. ??n? ??',U? Cao:1?;n\?u1? H B
A u 18. -
6. tc C?A?Cvw. S . 08L 14. -

Percent of Dominant Species that are OBI L, or FAC
texcludino FACE,,
t? ?1 prp
Remarks:-----
HYDROLOGY .
[]Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
[]Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
[]Aerial Photographs []Inundated
[]Other []Saturated In Upper 12 inches
[gNo Recorded Data Available []Water Marks
[]Drift Lines
[]Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: []Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels Upper 12 inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in,) []Water-Stained Leaves
[]Local Soil Survey Data
t?
Depth to Saturated Soil: 1 (in.) ?FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: -----
H.'%CMCRAE1VA*ww 91wmrriordorm.coc Sheet 1 of 2 e:12 AM ar,tioo

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
'
SOILS
' Map Unit Name
\`
(Series and Phase):WA . 6v1 e Sah
?,?1 646\ 6-kVly Drainage Class: - as00.
'
\
Taxonomy Subgroup: w%AC
Ty
Field Observations
as` V
`F
. , Q
? Confirm Mapped Type? Yesn Non
,
Profile Description:
' Dept Meft Color
inc9?es Horizon (Munsell Moist Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concneboru,
(Munsell Mom Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc,

2.5y

%
bvn r
1 R J?6
Wi° , 0i41'. f2\\ 'Qerv?
\al
S??.? c
,

Hydric Soil Indicators:
' QHistosol QConcretions
[]Histic Epipedon High Organic Content In Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
F?Sulfidic Odor ?Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
' QAquic Moisture Regime ?Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
[:)Reducing Conditions nListed on National Hydric Solis List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colons []Other (Explain in Remarks).

' Remarks:---- ?, \\ Q

WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes[ No0 Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? .
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes[] No0
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No[
Remarks:
WCMCRAM%Voba'dDwerrrw, it -d'or ".doe Sheet 2 of 2 e:,z cur w,yoo
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
ATTACHMENT C
PHOTO-DOCUMENTATION
April 12, 2005

Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
' MACTEC Project 6229042539

7

J

April 12, 2005
Page I of 3
Photograph 1: View of Wetland A standing in the northeast corner of the wetland, facing
southwest.
Photograph 2: View of Wetland A standing at the south edge of the wetland, facing north.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Iffl?W'A
wa?
NC ENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
January 15, 1999
Gaston County
DWQ Project # 981030
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Donald Lowe
City of Gastonia
PO Box 1748
Gastonia, NC 28053-1748
Dear Mr. Lowe:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill material in 0.34 acres
of wetlands and 255 feet of streams for the purpose of constructing an entrance road to the Gastonia Technology Park, as you
described in your application dated October 16, 1998. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered
by General Water Quality Certification Number 3108. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 26 when
the Corps of Engineers issues it. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with
your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply
Water shed regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise
specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as modified below. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application.. If the property is sold, the
new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all
conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required
as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the
attached certification and any additional conditions listed below.
1. Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all lots with remaining jurisdictional wetlands and waters to notify the
state in order to assure compliance for all future wetland and/or water impact. These mechanisms shall be put in place within 30 days of
the date of this letter or the issuance of the 404 Permit (whichever is later).
2. An additional condition is that a final, written stormwater plan including measures to meet the 85% TSS treatment standard must be
approved by DWQ before wetland (or stream) impacts occur. A conceptual plan must be sent to DWQ within 60 days of the issuance of
this Certification. Also, before any building is occupied at the subject site the stormwater treatment facilities shall be constructed and
operational and the stormwater management plan shall be implemented.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act
within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter
150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-
7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you have
any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Mooresville DWQ Regional Office
John Domey
Central Files
Mike Iagnocco, Law Environmental
p,inren H w >r. E.
981030.1tr
Division of Water Quality - Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 9 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Ms. Patricia A. Malinowski, PE
Woolpert LLP
8731 Red Oak Blvd., Suite 101
Charlotte, NC 28217-3958
Dear Ms. Malinowski:
e??
NCDENR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 12, 1999
Subject: Gastonia Technology Park
Gaston County, NC
DWQ# 981030
This Office is in receipt of the preliminary stormwater plans for the subject project on
June 18, 1999. Staff from this Office have briefly reviewed the plans and provided comments as
follows:
The use of wet detention basins and forested filter strips is recommended as proposed.
The proper sizing and configuration of these practices will be reviewed as actual specifications
become available and the final plans are submitted for approval. Also, it is important to note that
forested filter strips alone are not considered to remove 85% TSS per the NC DENR Stormwater
Best Management practices Manual (April 1999). In order to meet the 85% TSS removal criteria,
it is possible to construct dry detention basins (with level spreaders at the outlets), prior to
discharge to the filter strip, to meet the 85% TSS removal requirement. (The filter strip is
considered to remove 35% TSS, and the dry detention basin is considered to remove 50% TSS, if
designed according to the NC DENR Stormtivater Best Management practices Manual.) Also,
please note that this Office discourages the use of sand filters in the Piedmont because of their
typically high failure rate and extensive maintenance requirements.
Please be advised that impacts to streams and/or wetlands should not be conducted per
the 401 Water Quality Certification until these final plans are approved. Also, please be advised
that no buildings shall be occupied until the approved stormwater facilities are constructed and
operational, and the stormwater management plan is implemented per the 401 Water Quality
Certification.
4401 Reedy Creek Road, Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
r
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Todd St. John at (919)
733-1786.
Sincerely,
rtlands y
uperv sor
cc: Mr. Todd St. John, Wetlands Unit
Mooresville Regional Office
File
WOOLPF,RT
June 16, 1999
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Non-Discharge Branch
401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27606
t
?S
c,7
} Z^
I
Wor.
3

RE: DWQ Project # 981030, Gastonia Technology Park, Gastonia, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Woolpert L.LP is pleased to submit, on behalf of the Gaston County Economic Development
Corporation, two copies of the Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management at Gastonia
Technology Park, Gastonia, North Carolina. This Plan is intended to fulfill the requirement of
Additional Condition No. 2 to the 401 Water Quality Certification for the subject site, dated January
15, 1999.
As you discussed during previous conversations with Mr. Flint Holbrook of my office and in
Woolpert's letter to you dated March 11, 1999, a dialogue has been initiated with the City of
Gastonia to waive post development storage requirements on parcels within GTP that drain directly
to Long Creek. Unfortunately, this issue will not be resolved until the City Council meeting of.luly
20, 1999. However, this plan has been developed assuming that the requested waiver will be
approved. This assumption is clearly stated in the Plan along with a contingent strategy in the event
this waiver is not approved.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this Plan, please call me or Flint Holbrook at 704-
525-6284.
Sincerely,
PERT LLP_
atricia A. Malinowski, PE
Senior Water Resources Engineer
Enclosures
cc: Donny Hicks, Gaston County Economic Development Corporation
Thorne Martin, P.E., City of Gastonia
Mike lagnocco, Law Environmental
Shawn Coombs, P.E., Woolpert
Project File, No. 56703
W001111-R] UP
8731 Red Oak Bouhward, Suite 101 • Chat lotte, North Carolina 28217-3958
704.525.6284 • 1 ,iv 70.1.525.8529 • www.woo1per1.com
?\? 0-L-

r
WOOLPERT
Conceptual Plan for
Storm Water Management
Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina
June 16, 1999
Soo
1011-
,

I'
LJ
J

1
n

f

Conceptual Plan for
Storm Water Management
Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina
June 16, 1999
,II,?
l ?1

Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management
Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

II

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... i
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Purpose of Report ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Report Format ..................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Storm Water Management Requirements for Gastonia Technology Park ............................................... 1
2.1 State of North Carolina ....................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 City of Gastonia .................................................................................................................................. 3
2.3 Other Design Requirements and Related Issues ................................................................................. 3
3. Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management at Gastonia Technology Park ....................................... 4
4. Conceptual Design Elements .................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Wet Detention Basins ....................................................................................................................... 5
4.2 Dry Wells/ Infiltration Systems ........................................................................................................ 6
4.3 Riparian Buffer Strips .......................................................................................
5. References ................................................................................................................................................ 7
List of Tables
Table 1 - Summary of Conceptual Design Elements for Proposed Wet Detention Ponds,
Gastonia Technology Park ..................................................................................5
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Conceptual Storm Water Management Plan, Gastonia Technology Park
Figure 2 - Typical Dry Well Infiltration System
Figure 3 - Typical Riparian Buffer Strip System
\NI' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

J
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An application for 401 Water Quality Certification to place fill material in 0.34 acres of wetlands and to
disturb 255 linear feet of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. for the purpose of constructing an entrance road
to Gastonia Technology Park (GTP) was submitted to the State of North Carolina on October 16, 1998 by
the City of Gastonia, North Carolina. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR), Division of Water Quality (DWQ) approved the permit application and decided
that the fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification No. 3018. This certification allows the use
of Nationwide Permit No. 26 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) issues it. The approval
requires that the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 be met as well as two additional conditions. The
' purpose of this conceptual storm water management plan for GTP is to fulfill additional condition No. 2.
Neither the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 nor additional condition No. 1 are addressed in this
document.
This conceptual storm water management plan has been developed taking into consideration the design
• Wet detention basins are proposed for parcels that drain through off-site properties prior to
discharging to Long Creek. These basins will be designed to meet both the state's 85% TSS
treatment requirement as well as the City of Gastonia's 10-year post development peak flow
reduction requirement. Two such detention basins are proposed for GTP
1 , one at the northwest
corner of the site (sub-area 9) and one on the eastern edge of the property (sub-area 2). The
location of these proposed detention basins are shown on Figure 1. A wet detention basin for the
southeastern most property (sub-area 1) has already been designed (Woolpert 1998). The basin at
sub-area 1 was designed to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements and also provides
the required 85% TSS removal.
requirements of the State of North Carolina and the City of Gastonia as well as additional design
requirements and other related issues that affect the design of storm water management controls on the
GTP site. The main design requirements considered were as follows:
• Eighty-five (85) percent TSS removal (State of North Carolina);
• Impound all additional water generated during a 10-year frequency storm by the
development or enlargement of an existing development in a storm water detention
structure on sites that discharge directly to Long Creek (City of Gastonia);
• Additional design considerations from Schueler (1987); and
• The location of existing on-site wetlands and boundaries of the 100-year flood plain, limit
the placement of regional storm water controls.
' The conceptual storm water management plan developed for GTP consists of two distinct strategies:
• At all other parcels drywell infiltration systems are proposed to capture all rooftop runoff. Also, it
is proposed that all parking lot and roadway be directed over riparian buffer strips to be sited
along the banks of major on-site natural drainage paths. The location of proposed vegetated
buffer strips are also shown on Figure 1. These buffer strips will be a minimum of 50-feet wide
measured from the top of bank. Level spreaders will be used to direct the flow to and to create
sheet flow conditions to the buffer strips. An alternative to the drywell systems for rooftop
drainage is to direct the flow from the building rooftops to the buffer strips also, again using level
spreaders to distribute the flow. If this option is used, the flow from the rooftops could be mixed
with the parking lot and roadway runoff or handled separately.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management i
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina
r

1. INTRODUCTION
An application for 401 Water Quality Certification to place fill material in 0.34 acres of wetlands and to
disturb 255 linear feet of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. for the purpose of constructing an entrance road
to Gastonia Technology Park (GTP) was submitted to the State of North Carolina on October 16, 1998 by
the City of Gastonia, North Carolina. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR), Division of Water Quality (DWQ) approved the permit application and decided
that the fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification No. 3018. This certification allows the use
of Nationwide Permit No. 26 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) issues it. The approval
requires that the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 be met as well as two additional conditions.

1

1.1 Purpose of Report
The purpose of this conceptual storm water management plan for GTP is to fulfill additional condition
No. 2 of the State of North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification. This condition states that:
"An additional condition is that a final, written stormwater plan including measures to meet
the 85% TSS treatment standard must be approved by DWQ before wetlands or stream
impacts occur. A conceptual plan must be sent to DWQ within 60 days of the issuance of this
certification. Also, before any building is occupied at the subject site the stormwater
treatment facilities shall be constructed and operational and the stormwater management plan
shall be implemented."
Neither the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 nor additional condition No. 1 are addressed in this
document.
1.2 Report Format
Storm water management requirements that apply to the development of the GTP site including the 85
percent total suspended solids (TSS) treatment standard are described in Section 2. The conceptual plan
for storm water management that has been developed for GTP is then described in Section 3. Preliminary
design elements for the various components of this conceptual plan are presented in Section 4. References
are provided in Section 5.
2. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR GASTONIA
TECHNOLOGY PARK
The State of North Carolina and the City of Gastonia both have storm water management requirements
that apply to the development of GTP. These requirements are described in the following paragraphs.
Additional design requirements and other related issues that affect the design of storm water management
controls on the GTP site are also discussed.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 1
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

1
2.1 State of North Carolina
The 85 percent TSS treatment standard imposed by additional condition No. 2 of GTP's 401 Water
Quality Certification is a requirement of North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) Section .1008,
Design of Stormwater Management Measures. This rule provides general engineering design criteria for
structural storm water measures for the control of pollutants associated with storm water runoff from
development of land for residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional use. The measures favored by
this rule, because of their proven effectiveness, are: wet detention ponds; infiltration basins/ponds, swales,
and vegetative filters; and alternative designs including innovative systems as long as they meet the
requirements stated in Section .1008.
Although this plan is conceptual, certain design requirements were taken into account in developing the
plan because they affect the planning process and overall concept for development. The design elements
required by Section .1008 that were considered in the development of this conceptual plan are as follows:
General:
• The size of the system must take into account the runoff at ultimate build-out potential
from all surfaces drainage to the system, including any off-site drainage; and
• The storage volume of the system shall be calculated to provide for the most conservative
approach using runoff calculation methods described on pages A.1 and A.2 in Schueler
(1987).
' Wet Ponds:
• The permanent pool level mean depth shall be a minimum of 3 feet with a surface area
' sufficient to remove 85 percent of TSS;
• The design for 85 percent TSS removal shall be based on USEPA (1986); and
• The discharge rate from these systems following the one inch rainfall design storm shall
' be such that the draw down to the permanent pool level occurs within five days, but in
not less than two days.
Infiltration Systems:
• Infiltration systems shall be a minimum of 30 feet from surface waters;
• The bottom of infiltration systems shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the seasonal high
water table;
• Infiltration systems must be designed such that runoff in excess of the design volume by-
passes the system and does not flush pollutants through the system; and
• Soils must have a minimum hydraulic conductivity of 0.52 inches per hour to be suitable
' for infiltration.
Vegetative Filters:
• A distribution device shall be used to provide even distribution of runoff across the width
of the vegetative filter;
• The slope and length of the vegetative filter shall be designed, constructed and
maintained so as to provide a non-erosive velocity of flow through the filter for the 10-
year storm and shall a slope of 5% or less, where practicable; and
• Vegetation in the filter may be natural vegetation, grasses or artificially planted
vegetation appropriate for the site characteristics.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 2
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina
0

t

n

2.2 City of Gastonia
The City of Gastonia's storm water detention ordinance is applicable to all non-single family
developments one acre or larger. This ordinance requires that all additional water generated by the
development or enlargement of an existing development be impounded in a storm water detention
structure. The design basis is the 10-year frequency storm.
The City of Gastonia's requirement of on-site detention for the reduction of 10-year post-development
peak flows to 10-year pre-development peak flows is a common requirement for development throughout
the country and is reasonable in most cases. The general objective of this requirement is to not increase
flood flows on the collection tributary or any place further downstream within a watershed due to
development in an upstream area.
An analysis was performed to determine the effects of developing GTP and of the implementation of the
City's detention ordinance on Long Creek peak discharges. The conclusions made as a result of this
analysis were:
1. The proposed development of the GTP site will not increase peak discharges on Long Creek at GTP
or downstream; and,
2. The construction of detention basins to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements for new
development on the parcels within GTP that drain directly to Long Creek will not provide the
intended benefit to properties along Long Creek.
Therefore, a request has been made on behalf of the Gaston County Economic Development Corporation,
that the City's ordinance for the reduction of 10-year post development peak flows to those of existing
conditions be waived for those parcels that drain from the GTP site directly to Long Creek. However, this
waiver was not requested for parcels within GTP that drain though off-site properties prior to discharging
to Long Creek. The construction of detention basins to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements
for those parcels will provide the intended benefit of detention to those off-site properties and are needed.
Although, approval from the City of Gastonia City Council has not yet been received for this waiver, this
' Conceptual Storm Water Plan has been developed assuming that it will be. This assumption has allowed
for the incorporation of more natural, innovative and cost-effective techniques for storm water quality
control in this conceptual plan rather than simply constructing several detention ponds on the site. If this
waiver is not approved by the City of Gastonia, regional wet detention ponds will be used to meet all
water quantity and quality requirements for storm water management at the site instead of the alternative
practices described in this conceptual plan.
2.3 Other Design Requirements and Related Issues
Additional design considerations from Schueler (1987) were also taken into account in the development
of this conceptual plan. These are:
Wet Ponds:
• Sizing Rule I for the permanent pool volume (one-half inch of runoff over the entire
contributing area);
• First flush runoff volume (one-half inch of runoff per impervious acre of contributing
area);
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 3
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

• The optimal average permanent pool depth is an average of 3 to 6 feet (pond depths
greater than 8 feet should be avoided);
• Wet ponds are generally not feasible for watersheds of less than 10 acres (the rule-of-
thumb for feasibility of wet ponds on moderate sized watersheds (10 to 30 acres) is 4
acres of contributing watershed per acre-foot of storage); and

i • Pond drawdown potential to be based on local soil conditions.
' Infiltration Systems:
• The watershed area contributing to each trench should not exceed 5 acres;
• To achieve significant pollutant removal, at least one-half inch of runoff per contributing
impervious area should be exfiltrated into the underlying soils; and
• Infiltration devices should be placed a minimum of 10-feet away from building
foundations.
Vegetative Filters:
• To work properly, a filter strip must be equipped with some sort of level spreading
device;
• The top edge of the filter strip should flow across the same elevation contour; and
• Filter strip performance is best on slopes of 5% or less.
' Finally, there are two other issues that were considered in developing this conceptual plan for storm water
management at GTP. Existing on-site wetlands and boundaries of the100-year flood plain, limit the
placement of regional storm water controls such as wet detention basins and in some cases the placement
of infiltration practices. However, the existing wetlands will provide additional cleansing of runoff in
addition to that accomplished by detention basins and the riparian buffers.
3. CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AT
' GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK
The conceptual storm water management plan for GTP consists of two distinct strategies:
• Wet detention basins are proposed for parcels that drain through off-site properties prior to
discharging to Long Creek. These basins will be designed to meet both the state's 85% TSS
treatment requirement as well as the City of Gastonia's 10-year post development peak flow
reduction requirement. Two such detention basins are proposed for GTP, one at the northwest
corner of the site (sub-area 9) and one on the eastern edge of the property (sub-area 2). The
' location of these proposed detention basins are shown on Figure 1. A wet detention basin for the
southeastern most property (sub-area 1) has already been designed (Woolpert 1998). The basin at
sub-area 1 was designed to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements and also provides
the required 85% TSS removal.
• At all other parcels, drywell infiltration systems are proposed to capture all rooftop runoff. Also,
it is proposed that all parking lot and roadway be directed over riparian buffer strips to be sited
along the banks of major on-site natural drainage paths. The location of proposed vegetated
buffer strips are also shown on Figure 1. These buffer strips will be a minimum of 50-feet wide
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 4
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

' measured from the top of bank. Level spreaders will be used to direct the flow to and to create
sheet flow conditions to the buffer strips. An alternative to the drywell systems for rooftop
drainage is to direct the flow from the building rooftops to the buffer strips also, again using level
' spreaders to distribute the flow. If this option is used, the flow from the rooftops could be mixed
with the parking lot and roadway runoff or handled separately.
4. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ELEMENTS
' Conceptual design elements of the wet detention basins, dry wells/infiltration systems and riparian buffer
strips are presented and discussed below.
' 4.1 Wet Detention Basins
' As described in Section 3, wet detention basins are proposed for the two GTP areas that generally drain
through off-site properties prior to discharging to Long Creek. One basin will be designed for sub-area 2
and one for sub-area 9, for full build out conditions. The location of these proposed detention basins are
shown on Figure 1. Locations for the detention structures were selected based on natural topography and
a conceptual plan for parcel development within the GTP site. Minimal off-site runoff will be captured by
these basins and only where it is more cost effective to capture runoff from the existing natural drainage
areas than to divert the natural flow away from the site at GTP property boundaries. Piping and/or grading
will be needed to connect the drainage paths between individual parcels for flow to reach the two semi-
regional basins.

These wet detention basins will be designed to meet both the 85% TSS treatment requirement as well as
the City of Gastonia's 10-year post development peak flow reduction requirement. Table 1 provides the
dimensions and design characteristics for a conceptual design for each basin along with a comparison to
the key design/sizing requirements described above in Section 2.
Table 1- Summary of Conceptual Design Elements for Proposed Wet Detentionponds
Gastonia Technology Park

Design Element Detentioa Basin at
Area 2 Detention Basin at
Sub-Area 9
Drainage Area Characteristics:
Drainage area size (ac.) 20.9 24.2
With development, % impervious 35% 45%
Permanent Pool:
Volume (ac.ft.) 1.12 1.61
Maximum depth (ft.) 5 6
Average depth (ft.) 3.5 4.1
Surface area at max. depth (ac.) 0.72 0.91
Outlet Works:
Riser diameter (in.) 24 24
Barrel diameter (in.) 18 18
Maximum Pond Volume (ac.ft.) 2.86 4.49
Design Characteristics, Peak Flow Reduction (10-Year):
10-Year, 6-hr. rainfall depth (in.)
Runoff depth (in.) 1.35 1.92
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 5
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

?Table 1- Summary of Conceptual Design Elements for Proposed Wet Detention Ponds
j

Gastonia Technology Park

Design Element Detention Basin at
Sub-Area 2 Detention Basin at
Sub-Area 9
Peak inflow, existing conditions (cfs) 31 38
Peak inflow, with development (cfs) 42 75
Peak inflow, with dev., with detention (cfs) 8 20
Peak stage (ft.) 7.1 9.23
Peak storage volume above perm. pool (ac.ft.) 2.25 3.83
R (runoff depth, Eq. A.1, Schueler 1987) (ac-ft) 2.11 3.06
Design Characteristics, TSS Removal (average annual or 1-Year):
Peak stage (ft.) 5.6 7.1
Peak surface area (ac.) 0.49 0.65
Peak storage volume (ac.ft.) 1.4 2.28
TSS % removal (EPA 1986) 98 99
TSS % removal (Sedimot II Model) 91 88
R (runoff depth, Eq. A.1, Schueler 1987) (ac.ft.) 1.26 1.82
Design Guidelines (Schueler 1987):
Permanent pool volume = runoff volume from
'/2 in. per acre of entire contributing area (ac.ft.) 0.7 1.01
First flush volume = %2 in. runoff per
impervious acre (ac.ft.) 0.3 0.45
4.2 Dry Wells/ Infiltration Systems
' Drywell infiltration systems are proposed to capture rooftop runoff from buildings constructed within
GTP. Drywells are proposed for rooftop drainage because this runoff is generally considered to be cleaner
than runoff from parking lots and roadways and it is desirable to keep runoff from these two sources
' separate, if practical. Also, by infiltrating the water back into the ground, the effective impervious area of
the development is reduced and the hydrologic response of the drainage area will more closely resemble
natural conditions. Infiltration systems are reported to achieve 85% TSS removal (NCDENR 1996).
' An alternative to dry wells for capturing rooftop runoff is also proposed and the choice of which system
to use will be left up to the individual site designers. The alternative would be to capture a portion of the
rooftop runoff and discharge it to level spreaders for distribution over the riparian buffer strips. The
rooftop runoff could then be either kept separate from the parking lot/roadway drainage or it could be
combined with it for distribution at the level spreaders.
The drywells will be designed to capture first flush runoff which is defined as one-half inch of runoff
from the impervious portion of the drainage area (Schueler 1987). This would be the entire surface area of
rooftops. A maximum contributing area of 5 acres will drain to each drywell. For runoff exceeding the
' first flush volume, discharge pipes will divert the overflow away from the system. Drywells will be
located at least 10-feet from the building foundation. Rooftop gutter screens would be required to trap
leaves and other debris. The design requirement that infiltration systems be a minimum of 30 feet from
' surface waters will be automatically met because of the location of the 50-feet minimum width riparian
buffers. The soils within the GTP site are predominantly Madison series which consist of well drained,
moderately permeable soils. The permeability of these soils have a minimum range from 0.6 to 2.0 in./hr.
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 6
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

1
Idli
I

down to 3 feet in depth. This is well above the minimum hydraulic conductivity of 0.52 inches per hour to
be suitable for infiltration.
A diagram of a typical drywell system is shown on Figure 2.
4.3 Riparian Buffer Strips
Riparian buffer strips are proposed along the stream banks adjacent to development within GTP as shown
on Figure 1. Natural vegetation will be left in place along the banks. The top edges of the filters will flow
across the same elevation contour. Filter performance is best on slopes of 5% or less. The natural slopes
in the vicinity of the streams in GTP are approximately 3 to 10%. If needed grass buffers will be
constructed upland of the natural vegetation between the wooded areas and level spreaders because grass
buffers provide better particulate removal over wooded or forested buffers. Constructed buffer strips
would have slopes no greater than 5%.
The existing wetlands along several of the natural streams are the best for particulate removal and are
good for treating urban runoff. The existing wetland areas as shown on Figure 1 will provide additional
cleansing of runoff from the site. The buffers, which will be a mix of grass and wooded buffers with a
minimum width of 50 feet from stream bank. The optimum buffer width is 2.5 times the width of the
stream. Woody areas with natural vegetation are reported to achieve 40% TSS removal with some studies
reporting sediment removal of up to 91% (NCDENR 1996). Grassed filter strips are known to provide
greater TSS removal than wooded filters.
Runoff from parking lot, roadways and other paved areas will be collected in typical storm drain systems
and discharged to level spreaders in order to create sheetflow conditions across the riparian buffer strips.
As discussed in Section 4.2, an alternative to directing all rooftop drainage to dry wells is to discharge
this water as well to these or separate level spreader systems.
All areas between the level spreaders and the streams will be protected as part of the riparian buffer strips.
The level spreaders will be designed such that a maximum of 0.2 inches of flow will occur over the top
during the 10-year design storm. The top edges of the level spreaders will be turf reinforced with non-
woven mat behind. This reinforcement will safeguard the integrity of the system during both the design
event and larger flow events. Using the weir flow equation for rectangular weirs and a depth on the weir
of 0.2 inches, the capacity of the level spreaders will be approximately 30 cfs per 100 linear feet of level
spreader.
A diagram of a typical forested buffer strip is shown on Figure 3.
5. REFERENCES
Center for Watershed Management (1997), The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic
Region, August 1997.
Daughtery, Robert L. and Joseph B. Franzini (1977), Fluid Mechanics with Engineering Applications,
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Herson-Jones, Lorainne M., Maureen Heraty and Brian Jordan (1995), Environmental Land Planning
(ELP) Series: Riparian Strategies for Urban Stream Protection, Metropolitan Washington Council of
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 7
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

Governments, Department of Environmental Programs, Urban Watershed Planning Section, December
1995.
North Carolina Administrative Code, Section. 1000, Stormwater Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) (1999), Division of Water
' Quality, Non-Discharge Branch, Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification and Additional Conditions,
Gaston County DWQ Project #981030, January 15, 1999.
' NCDENR (1996), Division of Water Quality, Concept Paper, Draft Plan, Neuse River Nutrient Sensitive
Waters (NSW) Management Strategy, July 12, 1996.
Schueler, Thomas R. (1987), Controlling Urban Runoff A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing
' Urban BMPs, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Department of Environmental
Programs, Washington D.C., July 1987.
Schueler, T.R., The Architecture of Urban Stream Buffers, Watershed Protection Techniques, Vol. 1.
(4):155-163.
' University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture Engineering, Sedimot II,
Hydrology and Sedimentology Model, Users Manual, Lexington, Kentucky.
J

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, HEC-1, Flood Hydrograph Package,
Computer Program and Users Manual
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1989), Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Gaston
County, North Carolina, May 1989.
USDA (1986), Soil Conservation Service, Engineering Division, Technical Release No. 55, 2nd Edition,
Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, July 1986.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1986), Office of Water, Nonpoint Source Branch,
Methodology for Analysis of Detention Basins for Control of Urban Runoff Quality, EPA 440/5-87-001,
September 1986.
USEPA (1995), Water Quality Functions ofA Riparian Forest Buffer System in the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed, EPA 903-R-95-004.
Woolpert LLP (1998), Pass & Seymour/Legrand Stormwater Drainage, Detention, and Erosion Control
Calculations, Gastonia Technology Park, Gastonia, North Carolina, November 1998.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 8
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

1
-r o
i
yyyoa..
' N ~? i. n =
R
Iwo /?\ r m a ?H ; h (L U u m
400 .0 001.,
W o'Q? ?0Q
1
+?;"??. '1 .,cxj Wpb ?? ":?? p,•,..,° p
C$ 6
10
0 xa4'b ;pQ"O?'J:odea??0t 00
V L a0 o.. .000000O'bp0 00000A
ao A n000oaoaaciao.booo
0. oo
10,
tJ"
N ?, a` ?, o b °°o Q 10. Q.
,
a, . 0
oll
'0,C
1
? \
LL
1

11
0

0
1

1

1

W
(All
? rn
co
Q
cl-
W
co C/)
E
39
0
cn
0
0
L
C
S?
3_
0 O

J
u
L

J

C

t
LAO,
WOOLPERT
Conceptual Plan for
Storm Water Management
Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina
June 16, 1999
M

r

1

11,

Conceptual Plan for
Storm Water Management
Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina
June 16,1999

l??I co (5

Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management
Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................
1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................
1.1 Purpose of Report ............................................................................................................................... i
1
1
1.2 Report Format ..................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Storm Water Management Requirements for Gastonia Technology Park ...............................................
2.1 State of North Carolina ....................................................................................................................... 1
2
2.2 City of Gastonia .................................................................................................................................. 3

' 2.3 Other Design Requirements and Related Issues .................................................................................
3. Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management at Gastonia Technology Park ....................................... 3
4
4. Conceptual Design Elements .................................................................................................................... 5
4.1 Wet Detention Basins .......................................................................................................................
4.2 Dry Wells/ Infiltration Systems ........................................................................................................ 5
6
4.3 Riparian Buffer Strips ....................................................................................................................... 7
5. References ................................................................................................................................................ 7

List of Tables
Table 1 - Summary of Conceptual Design Elements for Proposed Wet Detention Ponds,
Gastonia Technology Park ..................................................................................5
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Conceptual Storm Water Management Plan, Gastonia Technology Park
Figure 2 - Typical Dry Well Infiltration System
Figure 3 - Typical Riparian Buffer Strip System

Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An application for 401 Water Quality Certification to place fill material in 0.34 acres of wetlands and to
disturb 255 linear feet of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. for the purpose of constructing an entrance road
to Gastonia Technology Park (GTP) was submitted to the State of North Carolina on October 16, 1998 by
the City of Gastonia, North Carolina. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR), Division of Water Quality (DWQ) approved the permit application and decided
that the fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification No. 3018. This certification allows the use
of Nationwide Permit No. 26 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) issues it. The approval
requires that the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 be met as well as two additional conditions. The
purpose of this conceptual storm water management plan for GTP is to fulfill additional condition No. 2.
Neither the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 nor additional condition No. 1 are addressed in this
document.
This conceptual storm water management plan has been developed taking into consideration the design
requirements of the State of North Carolina and the City of Gastonia as well as additional design
requirements and other related issues that affect the design of storm water management controls on the
GTP site. The main design requirements considered were as follows:
• Eighty-five (85) percent TSS removal (State of North Carolina);
• Impound all additional water generated during a 10-year frequency storm by the
development or enlargement of an existing development in a storm water detention
structure on sites that discharge directly to Long Creek (City of Gastonia);
• Additional design considerations from Schueler (1987); and
• The location of existing on-site wetlands and boundaries of the100-year flood plain, limit
the placement of regional storm water controls.
The conceptual storm water management plan developed for GTP consists of two distinct strategies:
• Wet detention basins are proposed for parcels that drain through off-site properties prior to
discharging to Long Creek. These basins will be designed to meet both the state's 85% TSS
treatment requirement as well as the City of Gastonia's 10-year post development peak flow
' reduction requirement. Two such detention basins are proposed for GTP, one at the northwest
corner of the site (sub-area 9) and one on the eastern edge of the property (sub-area 2). The
location of these proposed detention basins are shown on Figure 1. A wet detention basin for the
southeastern most property (sub-area 1) has already been designed (Woolpert 1998). The basin at
sub-area 1 was designed to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements and also provides
the required 85% TSS removal.
• At all other parcels drywell infiltration systems are proposed to capture all rooftop runoff. Also, it
is proposed that all parking lot and roadway be directed over riparian buffer strips to be sited
along the banks of major on-site natural drainage paths. The location of proposed vegetated
buffer strips are also shown on Figure 1. These buffer strips will be a minimum of 50-feet wide
measured from the top of bank. Level spreaders will be used to direct the flow to and to create
sheet flow conditions to the buffer strips. An alternative to the drywell systems for rooftop
' drainage is to direct the flow from the building rooftops to the buffer strips also, again using level
spreaders to distribute the flow. If this option is used, the flow from the rooftops could be mixed
with the parking lot and roadway runoff or handled separately.
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management i
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

1. INTRODUCTION
An application for 401 Water Quality Certification to place fill material in 0.34 acres of wetlands and to
disturb 255 linear feet of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. for the purpose of constructing an entrance road
to Gastonia Technology Park (GTP) was submitted to the State of North Carolina on October 16, 1998 by
the City of Gastonia, North Carolina. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR), Division of Water Quality (DWQ) approved the permit application and decided
that the fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification No. 3018. This certification allows the use
of Nationwide Permit No. 26 when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) issues it. The approval
requires that the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 be met as well as two additional conditions.
1.1 Purpose of Report
The purpose of this conceptual storm water management plan for GTP is to fulfill additional condition
No. 2 of the State of North Carolina 401 Water Quality Certification. This condition states that:
"An additional condition is that a final, written stormwater plan including measures to meet
the 85% TSS treatment standard must be approved by DWQ before wetlands or stream
impacts occur. A conceptual plan must be sent to DWQ within 60 days of the issuance of this
certification. Also, before any building is occupied at the subject site the stormwater
treatment facilities shall be constructed and operational and the stormwater management plan
shall be implemented."
Neither the conditions of Nationwide Permit No. 26 nor additional condition No. 1 are addressed in this
document.
1.2 Report Format
Storm water management requirements that apply to the development of the GTP site including the 85
percent total suspended solids (TSS) treatment standard are described in Section 2. The conceptual plan
for storm water management that has been developed for GTP is then described in Section 3. Preliminary
design elements for the various components of this conceptual plan are presented in Section 4. References
are provided in Section 5.
2. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR GASTONIA
TECHNOLOGY PARK
The State of North Carolina and the City of Gastonia both have storm water management requirements
that apply to the development of GTP. These requirements are described in the following paragraphs.
Additional design requirements and other related issues that affect the design of storm water management
controls on the GTP site are also discussed.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 1
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

2.1 State of North Carolina
The 85 percent TSS treatment standard imposed by additional condition No. 2 of GTP's 401 Water
Quality Certification is a requirement of North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) Section .1008,
Design of Stormwater Management Measures. This rule provides general engineering design criteria for
structural storm water measures for the control of pollutants associated with storm water runoff from
development of land for residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional use. The measures favored by
this rule, because of their proven effectiveness, are: wet detention ponds; infiltration basins/ponds, swales
and vegetative filters; and alternative designs including innovative systems as long as they meet the
requirements stated in Section .1008.
' Although this plan is conceptual, certain design requirements were taken into account in developing the
plan because they affect the planning process and overall concept for development. The design elements
required by Section .1008 that were considered in the development of this conceptual plan are as follows:

General:
• The size of the system must take into account the runoff at ultimate build-out potential
from all surfaces drainage to the system, including any off-site drainage; and
• The storage volume of the system shall be calculated to provide for the most conservative
approach using runoff calculation methods described on pages A.1 and A.2 in Schueler
(1987).
Wet Ponds:
• The permanent pool level mean depth shall be a minimum of 3 feet with a surface area
sufficient to remove 85 percent of TSS;
• The design for 85 percent TSS removal shall be based on USEPA (1986); and
• The discharge rate from these systems following the one inch rainfall design storm shall
be such that the draw down to the permanent pool level occurs within five days, but in
not less than two days.
Infiltration Systems:
• Infiltration systems shall be a minimum of 30 feet from surface waters;
• The bottom of infiltration systems shall be a minimum of 2 feet above the seasonal high
water table;
• Infiltration systems must be designed such that runoff in excess of the design volume by-
passes the system and does not flush pollutants through the system; and
• Soils must have a minimum hydraulic conductivity of 0.52 inches per hour to be suitable
for infiltration.
Vegetative Filters:
• A distribution device shall be used to provide even distribution of runoff across the width
of the vegetative filter;
• The slope and length of the vegetative filter shall be designed, constructed and
maintained so as to provide a non-erosive velocity of flow through the filter for the 10-
year storm and shall a slope of 5% or less, where practicable; and
• Vegetation in the filter may be natural vegetation, grasses or artificially planted
vegetation appropriate for the site characteristics.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 2
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

L

2.2 City of Gastonia
The City of Gastonia's storm water detention ordinance is applicable to all non-single family
developments one acre or larger. This ordinance requires that all additional water generated by the
development or enlargement of an existing development be impounded in a storm water detention
structure. The design basis is the 10-year frequency storm.
The City of Gastonia's requirement of on-site detention for the reduction of 10-year post-development
peak flows to 10-year pre-development peak flows is a common requirement for development throughout
the country and is reasonable in most cases. The general objective of this requirement is to not increase
flood flows on the collection tributary or any place further downstream within a watershed due to
development in an upstream area.
An analysis was performed to determine the effects of developing GTP and of the implementation of the
City's detention ordinance on Long Creek peak discharges. The conclusions made as a result of this
analysis were:
1. The proposed development of the GTP site will not increase peak discharges on Long Creek at GTP
or downstream; and,
2. The construction of detention basins to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements for new
development on the parcels within GTP that drain directly to Long Creek will not provide the
intended benefit to properties along Long Creek.
Therefore, a request has been made on behalf of the Gaston County Economic Development Corporation,
that the City's ordinance for the reduction of 10-year post development peak flows to those of existing
conditions be waived for those parcels that drain from the GTP site directly to Long Creek. However, this
waiver was not requested for parcels within GTP that drain though off-site properties prior to discharging
' to Long Creek. The construction of detention basins to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements
for those parcels will provide the intended benefit of detention to those off-site properties and are needed.
Although, approval from the City of Gastonia City Council has not yet been received for this waiver, this
Conceptual Storm Water Plan has been developed assuming that it will be. This assumption has allowed
for the incorporation of more natural, innovative and cost-effective techniques for storm water quality
control in this conceptual plan rather than simply constructing several detention ponds on the site. If this
waiver is not approved by the City of Gastonia, regional wet detention ponds will be used to meet all
water quantity and quality requirements for storm water management at the site instead of the alternative
practices described in this conceptual plan.
2.3 Other Design Requirements and Related Issues
Additional design considerations from Schueler (1987) were also taken into account in the development
of this conceptual plan. These are:
Wet Ponds:
• Sizing Rule 1 for the permanent pool volume (one-half inch of runoff over the entire
contributing area);
• First flush runoff volume (one-half inch of runoff per impervious acre of contributing
area);
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 3
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

Lam'

t

The optimal average permanent pool depth is an average of 3 to 6 feet (pond depths
greater than 8 feet should be avoided);
Wet ponds are generally not feasible for watersheds of less than 10 acres (the rule-of-
thumb for feasibility of wet ponds on moderate sized watersheds (10 to 30 acres) is 4
acres of contributing watershed per acre-foot of storage); and
Pond drawdown potential to be based on local soil conditions.
Infiltration Systems:
• The watershed area contributing to each trench should not exceed 5 acres;
• To achieve significant pollutant removal, at least one-half inch of runoff per contributing
impervious area should be exfiltrated into the underlying soils; and
• Infiltration devices should be placed a minimum of 10-feet away from building
foundations.
Vegetative Filters:
• To work properly, a filter strip must be equipped with some sort of level spreading
device;
• The top edge of the filter strip should flow across the same elevation contour; and
• Filter strip performance is best on slopes of 5% or less.
Finally, there are two other issues that were considered in developing this conceptual plan for storm water
management at GTP. Existing on-site wetlands and boundaries of the 100-year flood plain, limit the
placement of regional storm water controls such as wet detention basins and in some cases the placement
of infiltration practices. However, the existing wetlands will provide additional cleansing of runoff in
addition to that accomplished by detention basins and the riparian buffers.
3. CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AT
GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK
The conceptual storm water management plan for GTP consists of two distinct strategies:
Wet detention basins are proposed for parcels that drain through off-site properties prior to
discharging to Long Creek. These basins will be designed to meet both the state's 85% TSS
treatment requirement as well as the City of Gastonia's 10-year post development peak flow
reduction requirement. Two such detention basins are proposed for GTP, one at the northwest
corner of the site (sub-area 9) and one on the eastern edge of the property (sub-area 2). The
location of these proposed detention basins are shown on Figure 1. A wet detention basin for the
southeastern most property (sub-area 1) has already been designed (Woolpert 1998). The basin at
sub-area 1 was designed to meet the City of Gastonia's detention requirements and also provides
the required 85% TSS removal.
• At all other parcels, drywell infiltration systems are proposed to capture all rooftop runoff. Also,
it is proposed that all parking lot and roadway be directed over riparian buffer strips to be sited
along the banks of major on-site natural drainage paths. The location of proposed vegetated
buffer strips are also shown on Figure 1. These buffer strips will be a minimum of 50-feet wide
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 4
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

measured from the top of bank. Level spreaders will be used to direct the flow to and to create
sheet flow conditions to the buffer strips. An alternative to the drywell systems for rooftop
drainage is to direct the flow from the building rooftops to the buffer strips also, again using level
spreaders to distribute the flow. If this option is used, the flow from the rooftops could be mixed
with the parking lot and roadway runoff or handled separately.

4. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ELEMENTS
Conceptual design elements of the wet detention basins, dry wells/infiltration systems and riparian buffer
strips are presented and discussed below.
4.1 Wet Detention Basins
As described in Section 3, wet detention basins are proposed for the two GTP areas that generally drain
through off-site properties prior to discharging to Long Creek. One basin will be designed for sub-area 2
and one for sub-area 9, for full build out conditions. The location of these proposed detention basins are
shown on Figure 1. Locations for the detention structures were selected based on natural topography and
a conceptual plan for parcel development within the GTP site. Minimal off-site runoff will be captured by
these basins and only where it is more cost effective to capture runoff from the existing natural drainage
' areas than to divert the natural flow away from the site at GTP property boundaries. Piping and/or grading
will be needed to connect the drainage paths between individual parcels for flow to reach the two semi-
regional basins.
' These wet detention basins will be designed to meet both the 85% TSS treatment requirement as well as
the City of Gastonia's 10-year post development peak flow reduction requirement. Table 1 provides the
dimensions and design characteristics for a conceptual design for each basin along with a comparison to
the key design/sizing requirements described above in Section 2.

1

Table 1- Summary of Conceptual Design Elements for Proposed Wet Detention Ponds
Gastonia Technology Park

Design Element Detention Basin at
T Sub-Area 2 Detention Basin at
Sub-Area 9
Drainage Area Characteristics:
Drainage area size (ac.) 20.9 24.2
With development, % impervious 35% 45%
Permanent Pool:
Volume (ac.ft.) 1.12 1.61
Maximum depth (ft.) 5 6
Average depth (ft.) 3.5 4.1
Surface area at max. depth (ac.) 0.72 0.91
Outlet Works:
Riser diameter (in.) 24 24
Barrel diameter (in.) 18 18
Maximum Pond Volume (ac.ft.) 2.86 4.49
Design Characteristics, Peak Flow Reduction (10-Year):
10-Year, 6-hr. rainfall depth (in.)
Runoff depth (in.) 1.35 1.92
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 5
June 16,1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

jl
Table 1- Summary of Conceptual Design Elements for Proposed Wet Detention Ponds
Gastonia Technology Park

Design Element Detention Basin at
Sub-Area 2 Detention Basin at
Sub-Area 9
Peak inflow, existing conditions (cfs) 31 38
Peak inflow, with development (cfs) 42 75
Peak inflow, with dev., with detention (cfs) 8 20
Peak stage (ft.) 7.1 9.23
Peak storage volume above perm. pool (ac.ft.) 2.25 3.83
R (runoff depth, Eq. A.1, Schueler 1987) (ac-ft) 2.11 3.06
Design Characteristics, TSS Removal (average annual or 1-Year):
Peak stage (ft.) 5.6 7.1
Peak surface area (ac.) 0.49 0.65
Peak storage volume (ac.ft.) 1.4 2.28
TSS % removal (EPA 1986) 98 99
TSS % removal (Sedimot II Model) 91 88
R (runoff depth, Eq. A.1, Schueler 1987) (ac.ft.) 1.26 1.82
Design Guidelines (Schueler 1987):
Permanent pool volume = runoff volume from
'/2 in. per acre of entire contributing area (ac.ft.) 0.7 1.01
First flush volume ='/z in. runoff per
impervious acre (ac.ft.) 0.3 0.45
' 4.2 Dry Wells/ Infiltration Systems
Drywell infiltration systems are proposed to capture rooftop runoff from buildings constructed within
GTP. Drywells are proposed for rooftop drainage because this runoff is generally considered to be cleaner
than runoff from parking lots and roadways and it is desirable to keep runoff from these two sources
' separate, if practical. Also, by infiltrating the water back into the ground, the effective impervious area of
the development is reduced and the hydrologic response of the drainage area will more closely resemble
natural conditions. Infiltration systems are reported to achieve 85% TSS removal (NCDENR 1996).
An alternative to dry wells for capturing rooftop runoff is also proposed and the choice of which system
to use will be left up to the individual site designers. The alternative would be to capture a portion of the
rooftop runoff and discharge it to level spreaders for distribution over the riparian buffer strips. The
rooftop runoff could then be either kept separate from the parking lot/roadway drainage or it could be
combined with it for distribution at the level spreaders.
' The drywells will be designed to capture first flush runoff which is defined as one-half inch of runoff
from the impervious portion of the drainage area (Schueler 1987). This would be the entire surface area of
rooftops. A maximum contributing area of 5 acres will drain to each drywell. For runoff exceeding the
first flush volume, discharge pipes will divert the overflow away from the system. Drywells will be
located at least 10-feet from the building foundation. Rooftop gutter screens would be required to trap
leaves and other debris. The design requirement that infiltration systems be a minimum of 30 feet from
' surface waters will be automatically met because of the location of the 50-feet minimum width riparian
buffers. The soils within the GTP site are predominantly Madison series which consist of well drained,
moderately permeable soils. The permeability of these soils have a minimum range from 0.6 to 2.0 in./hr.
' Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 6
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

down to 3 feet in depth. This is well above the minimum hydraulic conductivity of 0.52 inches per hour to
be suitable for infiltration.
A diagram of a typical drywell system is shown on Figure 2.
4.3 Riparian Buffer Strips
Riparian buffer strips are proposed along the stream banks adjacent to development within GTP as shown
on Figure 1. Natural vegetation will be left in place along the banks. The top edges of the filters will flow
across the same elevation contour. Filter performance is best on slopes of 5% or less. The natural slopes
in the vicinity of the streams in GTP are approximately 3 to 10%. If needed grass buffers will be
' constructed upland of the natural vegetation between the wooded areas and level spreaders because grass
buffers provide better particulate removal over wooded or forested buffers. Constructed buffer strips
would have slopes no greater than 5%.
' The existing wetlands along several of the natural streams are the best for particulate removal and are
good for treating urban runoff. The existing wetland areas as shown on Figure 1 will provide additional
cleansing of runoff from the site. The buffers, which will be a mix of grass and wooded buffers with a
minimum width of 50 feet from stream bank. The optimum buffer width is 2.5 times the width of the
stream. Woody areas with natural vegetation are reported to achieve 40% TSS removal with some studies
reporting sediment removal of up to 91% (NCDENR 1996). Grassed filter strips are known to provide
' greater TSS removal than wooded filters.
Runoff from parking lot, roadways and other paved areas will be collected in typical storm drain systems
' and discharged to level spreaders in order to create sheetflow conditions across the riparian buffer strips.
As discussed in Section 4.2, an alternative to directing all rooftop drainage to dry wells is to discharge
this water as well to these or separate level spreader systems.

'J

All areas between the level spreaders and the streams will be protected as part of the riparian buffer strips.
The level spreaders will be designed such that a maximum of 0.2 inches of flow will occur over the top
during the 10-year design storm. The top edges of the level spreaders will be turf reinforced with non-
woven mat behind. This reinforcement will safeguard the integrity of the system during both the design
event and larger flow events. Using the weir flow equation for rectangular weirs and a depth on the weir
of 0.2 inches, the capacity of the level spreaders will be approximately 30 cfs per 100 linear feet of level
spreader.
A diagram of a typical forested buffer strip is shown on Figure 3.
5. REFERENCES
Center for Watershed Management (1997), The Economics of Stormwater BMPs in the Mid-Atlantic
Region, August 1997.
Daughtery, Robert L. and Joseph B. Franzini (1977), Fluid Mechanics with Engineering Applications,
McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Herson-Jones, Lorainne M., Maureen Heraty and Brian Jordan (1995), Environmental Land Planning
(ELP) Series: Riparian Strategies for Urban Stream Protection, Metropolitan Washington Council of
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 7
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

r-
Governments, Department of Environmental Programs, Urban Watershed Planning Section, December
1995.
' North Carolina Administrative Code, Section. 1000, Stormwater Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) (1999), Division of Water
Quality, Non-Discharge Branch, Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification and Additional Conditions,
Gaston County DWQ Project #981030, January 15, 1999.
NCDENR (1996), Division of Water Quality, Concept Paper, Draft Plan, Neuse River Nutrient Sensitive
Waters (NSW) Management Strategy, July 12, 1996.

L
I-

Schueler, Thomas R. (1987), Controlling Urban Runoff.- A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing
Urban BMPs, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Department of Environmental
Programs, Washington D.C., July 1987.
Schueler, T.R., The Architecture of Urban Stream Buffers, Watershed Protection Techniques, Vol. 1.
(4):155-163.
University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture Engineering, Sedimot II,
Hydrology and Sedimentology Model, Users Manual, Lexington, Kentucky.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, HEC-1, Flood Hydrograph Package,
Computer Program and Users Manual
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1989), Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Gaston
County, North Carolina, May 1989.
USDA (1986), Soil Conservation Service, Engineering Division, Technical Release No. 55, 2nd Edition,
Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds, July 1986.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (1986), Office of Water, Nonpoint Source Branch,
Methodology for Analysis of Detention Basins for Control of Urban Runoff Quality, EPA 440/5-87-001,
September 1986.
USEPA (1995), Water Quality Functions ofA Riparian Forest Buffer System in the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed, EPA 903-R-95-004.
Woolpert LLP (1998), Pass & Seymour/Legrand Stormwater Drainage, Detention, and Erosion Control
Calculations, Gastonia Technology Park, Gastonia, North Carolina, November 1998.
Woolpert Conceptual Plan for Storm Water Management 8
June 16, 1999 Gastonia Technology Park
Gastonia, North Carolina

1
i
r ? 3
r
co
U. E0 °
..
?- a U cs a
00 U. m"cc'n3 oa4m
1 -?
C 1j?, ? .d
r a? a op 00
-0-0 o
46
, a. pop
2:1 cn
X04 016 '?f3?'.odo?D°a. M
?o
' V U ao o;oaaoaooa.n,o 000000
QO O 00000000, 0000,0000
0 0.
U n O' d10 0l'0;,•o?Yb•Yao!.b?o'
r VJ
400
* to
N.? ?a.. gym cC.'il
Azlo.
CY) (n
b ?
V m
ay' a C ?°
ac
3 G ? '? 5 U
(D 0
y. 41 CN.d a`
r a 2 , LL
r _
O
r
m LL
r
r

1

1
1

cn
??
!F2
CIO -cc
=0-
_w C/?
L /
Q+ ZD
11
O
C ),
LE
LE

O
O
O
O

O
Ln
O !R
3 V
T
O O
a) C:
Q
U)

1

C

r
1

r
1
' Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539

L
iJ

April 12, 2005
Plant Species (Flora) Observed on 10/21 /2004
Common name Scientific name Native/Non-native
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum Native
Soft Rush Juncus effusus Native
Swamp Sunflower Helianthus angustifolius Native
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciua Native
Sticky Hedge-Hyssop Gratiola viscidula Native
Laurel Oak Quercus laurifolia Native
Willow Oak Quercus phellos Native
Swamp White Oak Quercus bicolor Native
Dog Fennel Eupatorium capillifolium Native
Pond Pine Pinus serotina Native
Water Tupelo Nyssa aquatica Native
Swamp Blackgum Nyssa sylvatica Native
Red Maple Acer rubrum Native
River Birch Betula nigra Native
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica Native
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis Native
Greenbrier Smilax rotundifolia Native
Lizard's Tail Saururus cernuus Native
Poison Iv Toxicodendron radicans Native

Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
ATTACHMENT E
April 12, 2005
FINAL PLAT FOR GASTON TECHNOLOGY PARK
Gastonia TechnoloSY Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTECProject 6229-04-2539
1
ATTACHMENT G
' 401 WATER QUALITY CE
RTIFICATION (DATED JANUARY 15, 1999)
1
t
1

01,25:"90 12:5;
CITY CF G9STONIa
ID:?04-864-9732
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Divisian of Water Oua{ity
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. prorton Howard, Jr., PS, Director
WOOLPERT IZI) 0 2 0 0 5
?AN 25' 99 9:34 No. OC2 P, 02
1 ?
NCDENR
NORTH CAR0604A C)EPARTMENT OF
Et4vtavtommeWt AWO NAtrURAL RE_`SOU RCV-5
January IS. 1999 > Q'
Gastan County
DWQ Project # 48 i 030
AT'PROVAL of 401 Water Quality CertlilcoCon tttd kDDITJONAL CONDITIONS
JAN 2 5 1999
' Mn Douaid i.Anve
city of cmatunia
t` Do* t749
0,tt,tonia. NC 28M34749

0

CITY OF GASTONIA
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Dear Mr. Lowe:
You ltave our approval, to accordance with the uarc4ie4 o;,ndition5 end those listed below, tt+ plaos fill trtwerial in (V44 arres
of wetlands and M feet of streams for the putposo of constructing an entrance rued to the Ciaaonia Tochnulogy Falk, as you
dascribett'!n your spill axtiun dated Octc+br..r ld, ? 441;. After reviswingyvur 9pillicati0n. WC hh VC dWide ri that this fill is comal
by titnerat Water Quality Certification Numtw 3105, This catificaoon pliows you to use NttlDrrwido Permit Nurnbar 26 when
the Corns of Bnglpeers issues it, In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local parmits before you go alietd wide
your prolect includins (hut not limited I*) 9edittitnit und Erosion Control, r,:oaatal Stotmwatcr. d on-Dlscha%r, and wuu:+ Supply
Water shed regulations. This approval will expire when tbo it= mpanying 404, or CAMA permit expires; unless othcr wisc
speoined to the t cricral Ccrtilluotinn.
'IN% apprtwal is only valid for the purpose and dosign that you dc"ribcd in your application except as mollified below, If
you change your project. you must notify era and you moo be rsyul d to Rend us anew application, , If the property is said, the
new owner must be given a cagy of this Ccrtificxtian and appmvat letter and is thereby responsible fnr complying with all
oundiutma, If tntal wetland fI1lc for this project (now or in the fume) sexed one tiara, eomponsatory taidgation may be rcyuircd
as demoibed it) 1 SA NCAC 211,0506 (h) (6) land (i), For oils approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions liatml itt the
attached cortifteatinn find any additional conditiow lists4 below,
1. Dwd natifieatians or aintlortntx;hanisrns that! ho placed on all test with remaining ju.401riiOpp, t well 1i-Ik and wnlnrc to notify the
hattc in girder to assuve ctxinptia a for till future wollcmd aadtor water impact. 'these mcchanisms shall be put in place within 3p days of
the omo of thix.leuer or the iisuahcc of the 404 porntit (whichever is later ).
2. An additional condition is that a final, wriasn xtormwuter pith itttludittli measures to meet thr 65%, M. trcatmctt Ktxndu d those tk
approved by DWQ iufort wetland for woom) impacts occur, A conceptual pl2n must be seta to DWQ within 60 days of the istuance of
thiF C;onifiw4liwt. Atom. Wart. Any building is oewup" m thr Nut+jeat silo tuts etotmWster trauntont faeilitiss th%ll lee "non,o-mil unrl
operational twd the slormwater manns meat pt.n rtfiall hs implemented,
If you do not accept any of t}tc cmditlons of this ocrdfication, you may ask for an adjodlcatory hearing. You antst act
within M Oars of the dm that you temive this letter, To ask for it honing, send a written patltiou, which confornti to r'hwpw
1$OR of the North Caroiim OMMMl Statutes to the Offize of Administrative Naa,9ngs, P.O.. Pox 27441, Ralcigt„ NZ, 27611-
7447, Tnis certification and its conditions arc ftty-sl and bimMil; uulusa you dais for a htwriakt?
Tliis letter completrs the review of the Division of Water Quality untksr Section 401 of the C.lttln W titer Act, if you have
any quettiont. plmse ialaphunc John Denney sat 419.711-1729
in .tn Y.
1-0 4AW1d,"7r; P.L.
Attachment
cot Womittgcon Diztriet Corps of Engim„rs
Corps of Bnitiroors Akhevilie Field Orfics
Mooresville DWQ Reglonat Off=
John Dorsey
central Files
Mike lnttwtr, t dw )rtl ?irOrtJnerttal SaYIU?tU:1u
Division of Water Quality ? Non-pigaharp Branch
4401 Ready Crack Rd„ Raleigh, NC 27847 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Afrirrrtalitre Action Employer - SO% recycled/10% post consumor paper
V764 525 6520

t

1
i
i
Gastonia Technology Park
LAW Project No. 30100-9-1308
June 30, 1999
Photograph B: View of Long Creek.

Gastonia Technology Park
LAW Project No. 30100-9-4308
,. f
June 30, 1999
Photograph C: View of stream channel at SFA-1.
Photograph D: View of floodplain wetland, looking west.

Gastonia Technology Park
LAW Project No. 30100-9-4308
June 30, 1999
r1 4%A"
"IF
Photograph E: View of large wetland, looking north.
F: View of wetland, looking northwest.

Gastonia Technology Park
LAW Project No. 30100-9-4308
Jute 30, 1999
Photograph H: View of stream channel, looking south.
w
i
Gastonia Technology Park
LAW Project No. 30100-9-4308
June 30, 1999

Photograph l: View of wetland, along determination/delineation border.
Photograph J: View of wetland inside of active pasture.
Gastonia Technology Park
LAW Project No. 30100-9-4308

Photograph K: View of stream channel, looking northwest.
June 30, 1999
Photograph L: View of seep wetland, looking west.
Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
ATTACHMENT E
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

'SbVEftNOR il' '
1 -1

?194j. HOLMAN

r
9' e:Jti: '1?MM .i
??' ? ??•• r 4 .. ?1,, :try
r rt l:
41
nFr 71 WPM 1,d: 77

December 21, 2000
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Mr. Darrin Peine
Law Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Subject: Gastonia Tech. Park Road Extension
Dear Mr. Peine:
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species or other significant
features within two miles of the indicated site.
Sincerely,

Michael P. Schafale
Natural Heritage Program
MPS/mps
Post-it` Fax Note 7671 Date (Z, c o pages
To
DarrI n k1At,
From
M LL__
IrK.
Co./Dept. L
aV? 5-r Piet h*n ?n
CO^' riYti V'.'
Phone a

Faxa 704-357-g6s- Phone a
"I ItI" 71j' 7? ??N
Fax it qlq-liS-3??S-
1616 MAIL 9GRVICE CENTER, RALEICH, NORTH CAROLINA 27699.1615
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOVSK - SO% RECYCLED/10% VOLT-CONGUMER PAPRN
CIO= 611

fl

I
I
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
April 12, 2005
Page 2 of 3
Photograph 3: View of DP-I through DP-3 standing on the eastern edge of the wetland,
Photograph 4: View of DP-1 and DP-2 standing on the eastern edge of the wetland, facing
west.

Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
April 12, 2005
!+ tf ? 4i_.... - T 1g r1',?"a'15„'- A • t3 §.. ?
t{y ? y ?, ? ? ?. ? •+ ? ra..>7` ; +?1? ?' ,?'?' yht!?.yo-x yYt?,? r;?•.,
}F ? ?a ??? ?!,• ?ti ? '' M'a •1. 4?r, ?73.r tire' ?a. ? ! ? ? ? ,
e ? ??j'.f ??/IfpP9 ?eY •r?t?? 1.. * Y f? .w e. ..
'R P T h ? A
t i ? { `r yl f «
t td ?.• ?jpr7 ! ? ..;n? ? f I ? 1 ?SY / ? .? P? P !„?; r r v '.
f Y ???• Ti a 4tr +'. ?P+ T ^t?• 5` 't'r{? {
f r r, tt 4?
.f . •.- ??. .. ?!r.?':7k ? t { ? ,?"u..i , ?.;}j?.y, ttEt9Ni?i f? ... 'S7.?
Photograph 5: View of DP-3 standing on the eastern edge of the wetland, facing
southwest.

Page 3 of 3
Gaston Technology Park Wetland Monitoring Summary Report
MACTEC Project 6229042539
ATTACHMENT D
April 12, 2005
LIST OF FLORA OBSERVED
m = = s m m m = = = = m ¦¦¦ = = m m
KAuWCID Dmwltp C*Wd d R«a \3004\6721-04-299 GO- TubWDVWW owp O+a-7O0l?wr 7dw? 7M% U Apr 2W - 3ftm n2-W
i

i
rr
A ??77
F! ? E;
rr•

.... .a'1,_..
.. ...
. g 1
1 ,
?
f
?

=
i
-4
.:. ( 3 ........ ......
?i ? N N Y,I ?
'F ri ........
..Q....'
N
O O
N ? p O
4
1 1 1 „
i ,
J
?i EXI' `rT (TO BE REM WED)
d

+ RIMI .91
E9
1W
INVt IN SOZ70
OUT 69262 j
C
I
3
)

r I
V .........
?
I

J 1

T
I
o
i 0 ?kk? j
-Q t

8
a

? o
ffi
PROP. INV. IN 691.01
i
PROP M
I
V
I.-
_..... STA 1+3 ._
.00
1
8 2.02
INV. IN
INV OUTS 891 82
A
U ....
c, r„pr ? j

CI
LJ) , t'Yt 71,.1
t

FYI ?r

1 ?
µ PROP. MH-4
STA. 2+83.17(.
RIM 701.25 MATCH GRADE;
INV. IN 693.0 1
INV. OUT 692.",a2

?. MH-3 i
3+54.961,
701.00 MATCH GRADE
IN 693.611,
OUT 693.41
C1,
a EXIST: (NORTH) j
RIM, 7, .,24 __ .,.,. + __.F. _.?.._
r? INV. IN 694.69 i
>
V t T.
m
Vic
?i to SA
, t r ` t' t 4 4`i
r; r r
i ?
_ ?? C r}F
o
OZ'N u (sj
o u I t
74 NN VN t
N 00
O
?WQ Z
ry
C7 O t_?
N Q 7
o,
-, z
0 R.
l1 i?
f1? ?
i
I ss ? f 11I$?;?f
'r
;Jr{l1,'
cl
1 ?
I ,f ??? ?,©bYO J
l1 K V
6P -u
. N ,
c i
-
3 f
} 1
00 If#`
?Ir a
00
a
r`
4
7 f
=00

f ?t

f ?I C7
ETS
A r7

f O G D''?,OD
??(
O1 = rJ r
? ?

s+
Npoo J, C
N ?04
1i
8

N m (n

P.VmtoCW DfM*W O*Vtftd RwmcwUW4W3-04-799 n -, TodynbgWbw Owp o4.-w2mNwMwMtdws w.4 a M 3s - saw nr..?ro
f
7 f
1 ? t tJ
f
t
1 It
00
/Of"
?r
,, hJ t
t
D
n 1 ? ? t rj
.
1 IrYtx?-4 r'a?n
? I s1 r n i rw c? trs-,.J
EIS a -aa - :x: ea ? ?r
00 mu,
? 11-p-
??'? ? ? Lit ''fl
1 J(
I
...D I

1
1 ? C.i by tA. +
li??? ? Isdl
i LlJU1 f f ??? ?_?
b

/ j

.
r
.,?_f..,'"
is
< ?
J
..
.. .. , .. .... ..... ,
lli

,I
- ?
.X
S,J ?«.. :• ' ,..- r,
.w..,?
a

co $
I p n 2 {
N "? Z t` << #
$ 0
W a ?)
1, tv
* o tv,
l
fo G y PC I
\ $ r fi III
r
41

K r a>
r
f1
F i

t
OQ
i ##
•
+ ?
4.i(
4Ifr
Y° F
9
t _
r
,
t,
-00

#j1l ? i f S..
ffi,.
t SS S
s
?
tt
f t

ry
oo

u0, ' ! f
$ f
t
?
4 ?3
k? s
?I
I
ill
iI !
00\
? I r t f 4,?
r = = = = w ? ? ? m m = m w ¦w m m
?:\AutoCAD Drawings Only\Natural Resources\2004\8229-04-2839 Gaston Technology\Waters of the US flg4.dwg Tue, 12 Apr 2003 - 4:01pm mhorrlso
D

r -4

O Q

'a
Cl)
N
A

;u Q

C
a

g

'
=
Cn c
n
r*
-
Cl
1 CD
D A. 0
9 ?
t?1
lY ^+ =
W
E3 = p
CL
>

° CAI
o

r. CAI
_U
CD
3 O
.
=
i ? -r
r O

r o
S
o
CD
c

e: O

y O
A
?-(0 y-r Z
cn
:3
x,
,
-vc= O r*1 z
c cn D rT1 z O
O O IITTII Z rn rrl
NqzzWROc_
vrni??OM?CA
zOV'mc° offiv
> r<? m ZDOmo,
v1?m'Sz>
N C_ M r
zZl cO
--1rnx?z_?
f1* O D N g rn D
oWAO-zmm
mqF-
Ornz>ww-n
?C > ? 5
in
;u • ?Dn>m
30M. (n
z-<ZNZ'D
<05? 'ma
;lu
_u 0 rn?Dm
r- (/) :n M ?
z0?c r-FA
z'?OVlO D
0zC:> >1n
z O
m
M
cn
V J 1? ?
?a a ?
1 Gastonia Technology Park Road Extension- NWP No. 39 April 12, 2005
MACTEC Project 6229-04-2539
ATTACHMENT D
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION PACKAGE AND VERIFICATION
LETTER
01/13/99 17:20 $704 525 9529 w00LPBRT 0001/002

Woolpert 'Fax
t?'t3?33_Pl'C€P If you do not receive the number of pages listed below,
please call sender or Woolpert at 704.525.6284
To: John Domey
From: Shawn R Coombs
Company: NCDENR, Division of Water Department: SD
Quality
ii
Fax Number: 919.7133.9959 Order Number: 55500
Pages Sent: 2 Date: January'13,1999
(Including cover page)
Copies to: Donny Hicks, Gaston County EDC
Mike lagnocco, Law Engineering
Notes:
As per your request, we are sending you a reduced copy of Gastonia Tcclinology Park to
assist you in your review of Gastonia Technology Park Access Road and Water Line. We are
following up this fax with a full size copy via Fed Ex, If you have any questions or
comments, please contact Mr. lagnocco or myself.
WOOLPERT LLP
8731 Red Oak Boulevard, Suite 101 • Charlotte. North Carolina 28217.3958
704.525.8284 • Fax 704,525.8529 • www.woo4wt.com
1M'
i
ni ii Ainn 17-91 gvk7nd ngn Ango wnnr.PF.RT R002/002
TQ,?- PaAL
pfd ?raAJ-
13?
I
r- P-1-64at?
LOY/ CO r7te-
114.
VIA Lki
?l
v U
a qo /

LAW
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
?., .P:._ ? 671
DEC31la
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. waTER_QUALP S'Fm -
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100 Date: December 29, 1998 Project No.: 30100-8-3612
Charlotte NC, 28208
[phone] FAX [phone]
TO: Mr. John Dorney
NCDENR - Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Project Name: Gastonia Technology Park Access Road
Attention: John Dome
Re: Response to your letter ?yGc?q 9 81o3a
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU X Attached Under separate cover via the following items:
Shop drawings Prints Plans Samples Specifications
Copy of letter Change order Other
IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
1 10/16/98 1 Site Location Figure
1 12/18/98 2 Site Plan Figure
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
X For approval _ Approved as submitted
_ For your use _ Approved as noted
As requested Returned for corrections
For review and comment
_ Resubmit
_ Submit _
Return
copies for approval
_ copies for distribution
corrected prints
REMARKS: Please insert these Figures into our December 18 submittal--they may have been inadvertently omitted
Sorry for the inconvenience. Please contact Michael A. Iagnocco at (704)-357-8600 if you have any questions regarding
this information.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Copy To: File
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
I Z
Michael A. Iag c
Senior Enviro ental Scientist
-. / ?, l ?j 1' l?T OC?C i / • .? •• ,ice •. • ~. • ?_,.. _ /--...
A
?? •• _-• r t??•. I
• 7'. e N f • H ?
{ ?• ?V -277
_J i 7• M / ....•
? I
321
?• ,M, r i w w? Tlnfi &A
M' i? t ; p w GOVA J
"? ?_ 1 ??,•• / ?•e
VI/
• . N I~`'
f e
• 7
/ r ••
ILA
r % AREA. 1 a _•
r/ y ,• RadioTorverM•? ?
J
nt
Rankin l.atka PP?k )? is ? e ? •? .
11-SC •----•--- -4
7' ?iI _ Z (2278) ! \,?
-- i e "F
all; a
gas ??r'I
Js _
NZ,
11
"I
$1 f 111#11111
oil
01 1 •
P M N - /r - ?fill?
0000
$ '? N
.1
Sims
` e f•
'? _ ? ? `?T• ? i Park?'
N
............ APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY 2000 1000 0 2000
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED
ACCESS ROAD APPROXIMATE SCALE IN I=
U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF GASTONIA. NORTH, NC QUADRANGLE DATED 1970.
SITE LOCATION
LAW
n ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK ACCESS ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA GASTONIA, NORTH CAROLINA
e BY PREPAFtED OA20 " ' CHECKED GATE J08 NO. 30100-8-3612 ?? 1
a V 01
lax
? ,,a C C
aoUe?Ew-?a+
FJ I
LO
<00'*
V Wo
a?
o ? II
.r

O
C'7
Qi
zo o ap
4.4
1.4
o
a
o?
W V

O O
Oz4
Z ,;
x?
W o
z?
o?
r
1

N
LL
.s,i - =i n m - a..nloswrM mwtw%v
ND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
- i) ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
., Suite 100 Date: December 18, 1998 Project No.: 30100-8-3612
!08 Project Name: Gastonia Technology Park Access Road
kX [phone] Attention: John Dorney
Re: Response to your letter
TO: Mr. John Dorney '
NCDENR - Division of Water Quality 1
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607 i,
L of DEC 2 21998
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
WETLANDS GROIlN
GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU X Attached Under separate Ver via the following items:
Shop drawings Prints Plans Samples Specifications
Copy of letter Change order Other
rF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
1 12/18/98 1 Response to your letter
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
X For approval _ Approved as submitted
_ For your use Approved as noted
As requested _ Returned for corrections
For review and comment
REMARKS: On behalf of the City of Gastonia, Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc., is submitting this
response to your letter dated December 3, 1998 regarding the proposed Gastonia Technology Park Access Road in Gaston
County, North Carolina. Please contact Mr. Michael A. Iagnocco at [phone], if you have any questions regarding
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Copy To: File
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
--
f?? By
Michael A. Iagnocco
Senior Environmental Scientist
_ Resubmit
Submit
_ Return
copies for approval
copies for distribution
corrected prints
LAW
LAWGIBB Group Member
December 18, 1998
Mr. John Dorney
NCDENR
Division of Water Quality
Environmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Subject: Gastonia Technology Park Access Road
Gaston County, North Carolina
DWQ Project No. 981030
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
Dear Mr. Dorney:
As you are aware, Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. (LAW) is the authorized
agent for the City of Gastonia with respect to the Section 404 Wetlands Permit and Section 401
Water Quality Certification in the above referenced matter. This letter responds to the issues
raised concerning the proposed Gastonia Technology Park Access Road in your letter addressed to
the City of Gastonia dated December 3, 1998.
The City of Gastonia has proposed the construction of an access road to serve the future Gastonia
Technology Park site. This approximate one-mile roadway will connect the proposed industrial
park with U.S. Highway 321 (US 321) via the existing interchange at C. Grier Beam Boulevard
(Figure 1). Access to US 321 is critical to the marketability of the approximate 380-acre park
(Note: Approximately 180 acres have already been purchased and/or optioned for purchase by the
City of Gastonia and Gaston County). US 321 affords the park effective and convenient access to
the Interstate System, including I-85 and 1-40, to the south and north, respectively. It is important
to note that without the proposed access road, the park site is essentially landlocked. While
approximately 1,500 linear feet of the park property fronts NC 275, the City of Gastonia and
NCDOT have denied access from NC 275 due to the existing over-capacity of the roadway. It is
also important to note that the proposed access road provides access to the easternmost portion of
the park site and does not serve the park interior.
The Gastonia Technology Park will represent a key resource in the City of Gastonia's and Gaston
County's ongoing efforts to strengthen its manufacturing base and create good jobs for the region.
Over the past two years, Gaston County has lost an alarming number of jobs due to plant closings,
consolidation, and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The attached letter
prepared by Mr. Donny Hicks, Executive Director of the Gaston County Economic Development
Commission (EDC), underscores the critical role that the Gastonia Technology Park will play in
the future economy of the region (Attachment 1). The future park is of such importance that the
County will invest an unprecedented 1.6 million dollars in providing access to the site.
Construction of the access road will allow the EDC to effectively market the park and recruit new
business, thereby expanding the local tax base and electricity consumer base.
LAW Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road • Charlotte, NC 28208
704-357-8600•Fax [phone]
Mr. John Dorney
December 18, 1998
Page 2
The enclosed memo prepared by Woolpert, LLP (WOOLPERT) provides a brief narrative of the
alternatives considered to access the park (Attachment 2). Given the location of the park, location
of the existing interchange, and local constraints, it becomes apparent that there is no other
practicable alternative to access the park site. Consequently, the proposed access road's crossings
of the two streams identified on Figure I are unavoidable.
As further described in the WOOLPERT memo, several existing constraints strongly influenced
the alignment of the access road. Notable constraints included the Duke Energy right-of-way
(R/W), including several electric transmission line towers, Gaston College to the north, and the
100-year floodplain. The proposed access road will be constructed as a limited access facility.
The proposed road R/W has intentionally avoided several existing properties/businesses south of
the proposed facility (Martin Marietta, Duke Energy), in order to both eliminate future
development along and deter access to the roadway. Similarly, the road will be constructed with a
center median, further limiting access.
The proposed bridging of the two streams along the alignment in order to access the park is not
economically feasible. Since impacts to waters of the U.S. were determined to be unavoidable,
LAW's and WOOLPERT's efforts focused on the minimization of these impacts. Because
Wetland B was determined to be the most functional wetland area to be impacted by the project,
steps were taken to prioritize the minimization of impacts at this particular crossing. As detailed
in the pre-constriction notification (PCN), minimization strategies employed at the Wetland B
crossing included shifting the road alignment to a narrower crossing further upstream, reducing the
width of the road by eliminating the center median, steepening fill slopes, and lowering the road
elevation. Current impacts at Wetland B are estimated to be 0.23 acre. The location of two large
electric transmission line towers and associated R/W has dictated the roadway alignment across
Wetland A. Impacts at Wetland A are estimated to be 0.1 1 acre. The estimated 255 linear feet of
impact (0.01 acre) to the above-the-headwaters, non-perennial Stream A, concluded by the Corps
of Engineers to be providing unimportant biological function, is unavoidable and necessary to
obtain the nearly perpendicular crossing at Wetland B. All totaled, the current proposed alignment
has minimized impacts to waters of the U.S. from approximately between one-half and one acre,
as originally designed, to approximately 0.35 acre.
A drawing has been attached depicting the approximate boundaries of the park in relation to the
access road (Figure 2). As indicated, the access road serves to provide access to the easternmost
portion of the park and does not serve the park interior. The park will be subdivided in the future
as dictated by prospective tenants. As further indicated on the drawing, roughly 25% of the
approximate 380-acre Technology Park is situated within the 100-year floodplain.
Any impacts to waters of the U.S. associated with the future development of the park will be
addressed appropriately as the park develops. Optimistically, the development of the park may
occur over the next 5 to 10 years. Future tenants will be responsible for permitting of their
respective parcel. In addition to addressing Section 404/401 issues, future tenants will also need \
to address 100-year floodplain and stormwater issues, as necessary, within the regulatory
I
framework in place at the time this development occurs.
As previously stated in the PCN, the park will be designed to meet the City of Gastonia's design
standards in preparation for future annexation by the City. The City of Gastonia has current
Mr. John Dorney
December 18, 1998
Page 3
regulations that limit development activities within the 100-year floodplain. The City of
Gastonia's zoning ordinance also requires new development to incorporate storm water
management. The ordinance calls for equal quantities of storm water runoff emanating from the
site pre- and post-construction, which requires storm water detention based on a ten-year design
storm. This ordinance will be invoked even on those future parcels that border the 100-year
floodplain. A copy of the zoning ordinance and excerpts of the design procedures are attached
(Attachment 3).
In accordance with current Section 404 regulations, future tenant development resulting in above-
the-headwaters impacts that exceed 1/3 acre of wetlands or greater than 150 linear feet of
jurisdictional stream channel, will anticipate the need for a Storm Water Management Plan
(SWMP) Certification from DWQ. Future SWMP Certifications will be integral components of
future PCNs and prerequisites of corresponding Section 401 Water Quality Certifications. These
SWMPs will be required to provide permanent pool wet detention and/or other suitable best
management practices in accordance with DWQ guidance.
Future tenants will address potential wetland issues, including avoidance, minimization, and
mitigation, as necessary, on their respective sites. Where practicable and feasible, preserved
conservation easements or other similar mechanisms will protect wetland areas. It is difficult to
predict future Section 404 permitting requirements, particularly those associated with Nationwide
Permit No. 26, which is scheduled to expire in September 1999.
The Corps of Engineers issued the Section 404 permit in this matter on November 9, 1998 (Action
ID 199930053). We trust that the enclosed information will elicit an expeditious approval of the
401 Water Quality Certification. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call Mike
Iagnocco at [phone] ext. 3357.
Sincerely,
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
4- 6" With Permission
Michael A. Iagnocco
Senior Environmental Scientist
446,0L. w (
By 6c4 With Permission
Allen W. Conger, P.W.S.
Principal
Environmental Scientist
Enclosures: USGS Site Location Map with Site Boundaries and Access Road (Figure 1)
Gastonia Technology Park Site Plan (Figure 2)
Donny Hicks Letter (Attachment 1)
Woolpert, LLP Memo (Attachment 2)
Storm Water Ordinance (Attachment 3)
cc: Charles Schwartz, DWQ MRO
Donald K. Lowe, City of Gastonia
Shawn Coombs, P.E., Woolpert LLP
Donny Hicks, GCEDC
Steve Chapin, USACE
Ave
', ? K ,? ? - ire e k ? ? • ? ••, ?,?,? .' •, rt • ?, ..: } _ _ _.
.n ?. ? n• f/ ? N• I
• \ ?, • , •? ?: 277 :11 ;;.. ! .•?+ -
•1 ?'• '? 3,2
r , °? ?1N>r1 •r ? .e
N'i / , • Tjn &A
ei
if .'A
••:
r
-- -----------
uxo
/ i • r ??? 1 • e 'i BM 2215 •.•. •II•
WEiLA
n•
l AREA Q y .. o
? • ? RaQio Tor+enM•'
(Vj1AAT()
Graf NG r 6
JO '
i? M • 7 _ `•- l
y? . psnkin lake Potk • ?`I ?? ? e ? ?
• •?,? I -?•w ,„Y
a, rl
' ?. 1 l ' ( ?22i81 ir ,%jll I ?,;
IWVI
C-N
oil
p .ltiisA?rr4?
a • - ?? -_. .. Ire _ ? , ? :?
T V•_ ??NNn
t?/ o• ?. n
!r ' ? j • ,t RJl ? Slurs ; o.
?P k'
• ? w .. r ,. ?' ?' DIY
EXPLANATION
N
............ APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARY 2000 noon 0 2000
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED
ACCESS ROAD APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF GASTONIA. NORTH, NC OUADRANGLE DATED 1970.
'S SITE LOCATION
8 LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK ACCESS ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CARGUNA GASTONIA, NORTH CAROLINA
PREP D DAI' ' CHECKED DATE JOB NO. 30100-8-3612 GUR 1
BY C
December 11, 1998
Mr. Michael A. lagnocco
Law Engineering
Post Office Box 11297
Charlotte, NC 28220
Dear Mike:
I appreciate your assistance with the permitting process for the proposed entrance road
to the Gastonia Technology Park. The City of Gastonia and Gaston County have
committed more than $3,700,000 to the initial development of this park. It is a key part
of our strategy to continue to diversify and strengthen our local tax base. Gaston
County, because of its economic base of traditional manufacturing industries, has
suffered staggering job losses over the last several years. We are continuing to try to
strengthen our manufacturing base and create good jobs. The Gastonia Technology
Park is a key fa :tor in that process.
Listed below are the job losses we have suffered just in the last two years.
Plant Closings and Lay-Offs
In Gaston County
1996-1998
Year _ Company Action Lost
1996 Ithaca Lay-Off 70
1996 Carlton Mill _ Closed 187
1996 Pharr Yarns Closed 0
1996 Dixie Yarns, Threads USA Closed 137
1996 Pretty Fc!iar Lay-Off 27
1996 American & Efird Lay-Off 20
1996 Homelite, Inc. Closed 112
1996 Frei htliner Corp. Mt. Holly) Lay-Off 408
1996 Rauch Industries Lay-Off 215
1996 Rutland Fire Products Closed -
1996 Carolina International Textiles Closed 85
1997 Lions Manufacturing Closed 225
1997 Ithaca Industries Layoff 50
1997 Cramerton JPS Automotive Layoff 250
1997 John Deere Layoff 150
1997 FMC-Lithium Layoff 120
P.O. Box 2339.'71 PFyIli ROKI ROAl), (rvtil??yI v. Xomli (,.vRol INv 28053-2339 • ?(1? 867 ?? 1 • F:vs 704-861-8302 - vvvvvv.gaston.org
Mr. Michael A. lagnocco letter
December 11, 1998
Page 2
Plant Closings and Lay-Offs
In Gaston County
1996-1998 Continued
1998 AMP Inc. Relocating 250
1998 Weyerhaeuser Closed 80
1998 Lida Stretch Fabric Bankruptcy 142
1998 Chicago Rawhide Closed 330
1998 China Grove Textile Layoff 147
1998 Talon Closed 231
1998 Deere Closed 700
As you can see from the closings listed above we have suffered an unusual amount of
job losses due to consolidation, plant closings and NAFTA. In fact the jobs at John
Deere were very high paying jobs and were not what you would consider a traditional
candidate to move to Mexico under NAFTA.
This park is a key consideration for the City of Gastonia to expand their industrial and
commercial electricity base. Electricities, to which the City of Gastonia belongs, owes
more than 6 bi:lion dollars of public debt. With the City of Gastonia and Electricities
facing the real possibility of deregulation in the next 24 months it is critical for them to
have as strong electrical base as possible. The City of Gastonia will serve this site with
electricity and is a key factor in their long term health. If electrical delivery service in
North Carolina is deregulated without some form of paying this public indebtedness the
City would have to raise their tax rate more than 20 cents to cover the loss. This is why
Gaston County has become extraordinarily proactive in trying to develop these sites to
recruit new business, expand our tax base and help the City of Gastonia expand their
electrical base.
I look forward to you, continued assistance with this project and look forward to moving
forward with the construction of the road.
Sincerely,
0, C('L-
Donny Hicks, Executive Director
Economic Development Commission
DH/kcm
WOOLPERT
WooWert Memo
To: Mike lagnocco - LAW Engineering
From: Derek Salfia, Shawn Coombs
Date: December 16, 1998
Subject: Gastonia Technology Park - Roadway
The following information represents an explanation and justification for the current
alignment and location of the Gastonia Technology Park Roadway. Specifically impacts to
the drainage area at station 22+00.
Site Access: Approximately 180 acres have been purchased and/or optioned for
purchase by the City of Gastonia and Gaston County for the proposed use as an
Industrial Park. The irregular shaped property is bordered by Long Creek to the
South. Gaston College and Martin Marietta to the East, and private property to the
North and West. Approximately 1,00 linear feet of the property does front on
Dallas-Bessemer City Highway (North Carolina Highway 275). Due to the property
configuration and location the only two potential access points are Highway 275 and
through adjoining property to C. Grier Beam Boulevard. The City of Gastonia and
NCDOT have denied access from NC Highway 275 due to the existing over-capacity
of the roadway. Therefore, the only remaining option for access to the park is through
adjoining property, as reflected in the final construction documents.
Roadwgy Aiibirmeirt: Because roadway access to the proposed Industrial Park will
traverse through adjacent property, the intent is to limit impacts to the property as
much as possible. The current alignment impacts two properties, Gaston College and
Our Savior Lutheran Church. The horizontal alignment has been designed (utilizing
NCDOT standards and guidelines, as well as Citv of Gastonia standards and
guidelines) to be as close as possible to property lines while maintaining acceptable
distance from multiple adjacent property owners such as Duke Energy and Martin
Marietta. Through negotiations for purchase of roadway rights-or-way, each of the
property owners requested that the roadway be located in areas that would not divide
their land into small unusable parcels. This was unavoidable for Our Savior Lutheran
Church property, thus additional land had to be purchased. The resultant alignment
did consider this issue on the Gaston College property. Consequently the location of
the roadway was determined to be as far to the South and East as possible, yielding
the College the maximum net usable land.
WOOLPERT LLP
8731 Red Oak Boulevard. Suite 101 - Charlotte, North Carolina 28217-3958
704.525.6284 • Fax [phone] • www.woolpert.com
December 16, 1998
Page 2
100 Year Flood Plain: The original roadway alignment did impact the 100 year flood
plain. At the request of the City of Gastonia, the roadway was realigned
approximately 200 feet to the North to avoid disturbance within the flood plain. The
final alignment indicates the realignment to the North.
Wetlands and Major Drainage-way: A primary focus in the design of the roadway
has been to limit impacts as much as possible in the major drainage-way located at
station 29+00 and its associated wetlands. Considerations included, lowering (vertical
alignment) the roadway to limit fill, utilizing 2:1 side slopes, and crossing at 90
degrees. Given these considerations, alignment/design options have been limited at
the secondary drainage crossing at station 22+00. The crossing at station 22+00 did
include and implement the same considerations at the crossing at station 29+00.
Given the parameters noted above, it is not possible to cross the existing drainage-
way at station 22+00, at 90 degrees. Additionally, the crossing as shown yields the
least amount of impact to the drainage area. Alternatives such as crossing with a
tangent section, have been considered but actually caused more disturbance than the
alignment shown. Furthermore, by complying with design requirements of crossing
the Duke Power right-of-way and considering the drainage crossing at station 13+00,
alternatives for further reduction in impacts at station 22+00 have been severely
limited.
`:`CHARLOTT\SRVLN\SD\SSSOO'.CORSP' 1_1798mem doe

zoo
W ? ? F?1 F?1 O ?w

?" V •-'
0 0
vO t
0
A
H
l a ?
OZ
4
w
Z
FJ I
W o
? HV
0-4 o
o Z N
N - -? V?
U W O
V3
O ? II
U _

<010

1
0
nW
.
W
1

Zoo
• / ,
44
*

xW11 - we vs Aw - &+w %mwwus Wv
ZONING § 17-141
Sec. 17-139. Orientation of single-family and manufactured homes in single-family
residential zones.
In any single-family residential zoning district (R-1, R-1S, R-2, R-3, and R-4), any
single-family dwelling moved onto the lot, modular dwelling or manufactured home shall be
situated on the lot so that the external wall which, by design, is intended to be the front,
generally faces a street adjoining the lot. This requirement shall not apply in either of the
following situations:
(1) The dwelling is located on a "flag" or "panhandle" lot; or,
(2) The dwelling is set back at least 100 feet from the street right-of-way on an interior lot.
Relief to this requirement may be granted by the planning commission subject to the
following findings:
(1) The dwelling cannot practically be located on the subject lot in any other manner; and,
(2) The dwelling shall have sufficient architectural treatment so that the end wall does not
appear to be an end wall.
(Ord. of 1-21-97, § 5.19; Ord. of 3-17-98(2), § 1)
Sec. 17-140. Stormwater detention.
(a) Development other than single-family residential in any zone other than the C-B zone,
shall provide for stormwater detention.
(b) The location and design of flood control and stormwater detention structures and
devices shall be shown on the site plan. The structures, devices, and methods used shall be
planned, designed, constructed, and maintained so as to provide effective protection from the
peak runoff rate as defined herein. During construction and after completion of the site
improvements, the peak runoff rates shall be no greater than those presently existing.
Provisions shall be made either on-site or off-site for the detention or retention of that quantity
of natural stormwater runoff from the site which is equal to the calculated difference in runoff
from the site developed as proposed less than site as it is not developed or undeveloped.
(c) A ten-year frequency storm shail be used in determining the amount of stormwater
runoff generated. The impoundment of stormwater runoff may be incorporated in the design of
open spaces, parking lots, loading areas, playgrounds, and building structures provided the
health, safety, and welfare of the public is not endangered. Sites of one acre or less in size shall
be excluded from the requirements of this paragraph unless such site is part of a larger
subdivision or other project areas.
(Ord. of 6-19-97, § 5)
Sec. 17-141. Outdoor lighting and reflectivity.
(a) Outdoor lighting shall be located so as to not endanger motorists traveling on any street.
The reflectivity of any structure constructed after the effective date of this chapter shall in no
way hamper or cause endangerment to motorists traveling on any street.
Supp. No. 11 CD17:179
1
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS
p? C A
l 'a
` i
V ?
o / ?
P"H CAika
(atf11 -of ? SfDxti
P. O. BOX 1749
(Fasfortia, ?-Norfh @aroliita 28052
DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR STORM WATER
DETENTION BASIN
CITY OF GASTONIA, N. C.
Introduction
The City of Gastonia has adopted a storm water detention ordinance
which is applicable to all non-single family developments one acre
or larger. This ordinance requires that all additional water generated
by the development or enlargement of an existing development be im-
pounded in a storm water detention structure. The quantity of water
to be impounded, the size of the basin and the detention or storage
time is based on a?10 year design frequency storm.-
The type of storage, the basin design and the design procedure to be
used in compliance to this ordinance is up to the disgression of the
developer's engineer. The type of storage can range from simple
parking lot or surface holding basins, to roof top storage. Underground
storage in tanks or enlarged pipe systems may also be considered. The
basin design and configeration should be such that the system will
not only function properly but will also not distract from the beauty
and appearance of the development. The design procedure may range from
a detailed flood routing procedure to a simple one step flood routing
procedure developed by the City and described in later paragraphs.
A7 -
In submitting a site plan (as required in Section 2<-13 of the City
of Gastonia Code of Ordinances), the developer should include an
analysis of the storm water detention system including: off-site
drainage areas, time of concentration, calculated flow from property
before development, calculated flow from property after development,
size and dimensions of outlet pipes or wiers, volume of storage, "C"-
factors used, spot elevations or contours of basin and other data
that may be pertinent to the design review.
PrnrPIurP
40 The City of Gastonia uses
in combination with a one
the storm taater detention
that other methods of cal
end does no L
r e ?, 1 dc' thu
the Rational Method and Manning's Formula
-step flood routing procedure to calculate
storage requirements. This does not mean
culating the storage volume are not acceptable
usc, of these methods o`

1. Determine flow quantities for existing development, Qo
2. Determine flow quantities for proposed development, Qp
3. Develop flow hydrograph for existing and proposed conditions
4. Calculate Volume of Storage from hydrograph
5. Design out-flow pipes for flows based on existing development (Qo)

6. Using volume of storage needed, design basin to hold volume
{
7. Design overflow pipe system or device to handle 10 year flow of
proposed development (Qp)

ONE -STEP FLOOD ROUTING PROCEDURE
dart?hc? v? 1 ?P 24•104 k?`?c?ro9r> L1 -vr PY'C a
rZ.??al? ? ? de?Cl?pMrn
`LJ? I Q a "
' v I
{! I 4_1 -PxiSh?q conc?i cv1S
TM: Rn c„? ? 1
? 1 ?.MP o-? base E?YO ,? -= l h -?.
D = Duration of rainfall \\
for purpose of most areas Duration of rainfall is assumed
to be equal to the Time of Concentration (tc) or a 10 minute
minimum time.
D = tc = 10 minute (minimum)
L = Lag time = the time from the centroid of the rainfall (tc/2)
to the peak flow
L = 0.6 D
Tp = Time of peak flow
Tp = tc/2 + 0.6 D or D/2 + 0.6 D
Tp = 1.10 D
Tb = Time o storage
TI) - 2.67 Tp = 2.94 D
In every pipe or culvert- I here are losses due to entrance
conditions, frictional factors, turbulence in flow and these losses
are discussed at length in many of the reference materials, Tne
City of Gastonia usually adds a proportional amount to the total flow
to overcome these losses.
41
v
r
0
e
Entrance Condition
% Efficiency
Rounded entrance with flush headwall
Unaltered conc. tongue and groove w/flush headwall
Squared edge entrance w/flush headwall mitered
Rounded mitered projecting entrance
Thin walled mitered projecting (CMP)
Thin walled projecting (CMP)
100
95
74
73
62
59

% Added to
Flow
O
5
26
27
38
41
2.7 Storm Water Impoundment
In the
? past, the normal approach to storm water management has
j been to provide pipe sizes large enough to pass 100% of the storm water
down stream. This has been accomplished with some disastrous effects.
Nil
We have designed pipe systems to carry water away from one site to
relieve a flood problem, but in doing this, we have simply passed the
problem on to the downstream site.
A modern approach to this problem is to have each property retain
a portion of this flow and release it during off-peak flow times,
t
This procedure is intended to reduce the
V peak outflow from the
water shed to some acceptable flow downstream, (The Gastonia Ordinance
allows a development to pass-on the flow from the site which would be
generated from an R-8 single family subdivision or which is presently
generated from the site, The design process for this type of structure is
X97 1. Determine flow quantities for existing conditions.
No ---..52. Determine flow quantities for R-8 conditions.
3. Determine flow quantities for proposed conditions.
NA 4• Determine flow hydrograph for proposed conditions and R-8 or existing
conditions.
5. Calculate volume of storage (by Modified Rational Method).
6, Design out-flow pipes.
Modified Rational Method
One method used in calculating tl-w storage volume is the modified
Rational Method. This method uses the Rational Formula to calcul=te the
rate of flow from the site as discussed in earlier sections (Q - c i A).
It then uses the one-step flood routing procedure to calculate the storage.

For each drainage area there is sometimes a secondary storm
of longer duration but lower intensity which yields a higher storage volume
needed than D =tc; therefore, we should check this secondary period for
volume requirements. According to the research done by Malcom and
New, this secondary period can be found by a graph of Qp _ Qo
Qp
vs. DIA. and called the "Basin Sensitivity to Long Storm" curve,
Vs' = 1, 469 (Q p - Qo) D'
Volume of storage required = Vs or Vs' (whichever is larger),
. Other methods of calculating the volume of storage required are
available. One method is "Flood Routing". This method is explained
in the report of Malcom and New (reference 10), This method is long
and tedious, but provides a more exact calculation of inflow volumes
and outflow volumes.
Example:
I
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
0 WA
4 00
0?lr
NC ENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 3, 1998
DWQ Project # 981030
Gaston County
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
City of Gastonia
PO Box 1748
Gaston, NC 28053-1748
Dear Sirs:
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your plans for the discharge of fill material into 0.32 acres of
wetlands and 255 linear feet of streams located in Gaston County for development of an industrial park. Insufficient
evidence is present in our files to conclude that your project must be built as planned in waters and/or wetlands in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506. Therefore, unless modifications of the proposal are made as described below,
we will have to move toward denial of your 401 Certification as required by 15A NCAC 2H .0507(e) and will place this
project on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information once we receive this information, our
processing time will start. Until we receive additional information, we are requesting (by copy of this letter) that the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or the N.C. Division of Coastal Management place your project on administrative
hold.
Please provide us with information supporting your position that states your project must be constructed as
planned and that you have no practicable alternative to placing fill in these waters and/or wetlands. Specifically can you
construct your road crossings with less than 150 feet of total stream impact? Also a site plan for the park must be
provided so we can assess the likelihood of future, cumulative impacts. If not, then a comprehensive stormwater
management plan will be needed for the entire park. Any documentation such as maps and narrative that you can
supply to address alternative designs for your project may be helpful in our review of your 401 Certification.
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending a copy of this information to me and one
copy to Mr. Charles Schwartz, Mooresville Regional Office at 919 North Main Street Mooresville NC 28115. If we do
not hear from you in two weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the
project as withdrawn. I can be reached at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions.
cerely,
Jo . Dorney
W ter Quality Certific n Program
cc: Mooresville DWQ Regional Office
Wilmington Office Corps of Engineers
Central Files
John Dorney
Asheville Field Office Corps of Engineers
Mike Iagnocco; Law Engineering
981030.nty
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 • Telephone [phone] • FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact: Charley Schwartz
Non-Discharge Branch WO Supervisor: Rex Gleason
Date: 11 /6MS
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Gastonia Technology Park County Gaston
Project Number 98 1030 County2
Recvd From APP Region Mooresville
Received Date 10/19/98 Recvd By Region 10/26/98
Project Type commercial development
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
26 F-- PV 0 N F- 11-129-16- r C F-030836 0.34 r
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y 0 N
Did you request more info? 0 Y 0 N
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? 0 Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q Y 0 N
Comments: Recommendation: 0 Issue 00 Issue/fond 0 Deny
**Impacts due to construction of access road that will service future industrial park area (Possible
additional impacts related to subsequent development)- road constructed by county.
**f% 4 4____ ..Y .-...a a- \AI-&I-.-J A .....aL.....J ....... .d.... A..-:-- ..:a- . .:-:L a_ L_ .Y ?J?....a? a_ 1-...
**0.23acre impact to Wetland B - appears to be a high quality wetland - fish collected within pools
in
..._al_.-J ---I - An 4!111 -1__.- _I-....L_ __ _J _ 2_._. I-__J_ _1_-_-__-1 :.-
**255' impact Stream A - channel is approximate! -4' deep with sandy bothm - good flow and
several pools observed during visit - multiple attempts to find fish/crawfish made with net
up&downstream but unsuccessful - does not appear to have significant aquatic life.
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Ik\
LAW
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
981030
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100 Date: October 16, 1998 Project No.: 30100-8-3612
Charlotte NC, 28208 Project Name: Gastonia Technology Park Access Road
[phone] FAX [phone] Attention: John Dorne
Re: NWP No. 26 - PCN ,
TO: Mr. John Dorney
NCDENR -Division of Water Quality p
4401 Reedy Creek Road' OCT f 9
Raleigh, NC 27607 !
i WETUNDS GROUP
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU X Attached Under separate cover via the following items:
Shop drawings Prints Plans Samples Specifications
Copy of letter Change order Other
M GN!'T nQITAFQ ARP NnT A¢ NnTPn KTNInT.Y NnTTFY T'C AT nNCP
L OPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
7 10/16/98 1 Cover letter describing project
7 10/16/98 4 Figures 1-2C
7 10/16/98 2 PCN Application Form (NWP No. 26)
7 4/16/98 3 Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms

E
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
X For approval - Approved as submitted
_ For your use _ Approved as noted
_ As requested _ Returned for corrections
For review and comment
Return
copies for approval
copies for distribution
corrected prints
REMARKS: On behalf of the Ci!y of Gastonia Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc., is submitting the
necessary documentation for a NWP No. 26 - PCN for the proposed Gastonia Technology Park Access Road in Gaston
County North Carolina. Please contact Mr. Michael A. Iagnocco at [phone], if you have any questions regarding
this information.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Copy To: File
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
A? ???-? -- By (9rd With Permission
Michael A. Iagnocco
Senior Environmental Scientist
Resubmit
Submit
l
r

Mr. Steve Chapin
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Rm. 143
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
LAW
LAWGIBB Group Memberj&
F. if
Subject: Nationwide Permit #26 Pre-Construction Notification
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road
Gaston County, North Carolina
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
Dear Mr. Chapin:
On behalf of the City of Gastonia, enclosed please find a completed Pre-Construction
Application Form with accompanying figures for a Nationwide Permit No. 26 in the above-
referenced matter. The City of Gastonia has retained Law Engineering and Environmental
Services, Inc. (LAW), in cooperation with Woolpert, L.L.P. (WOOLPERT), to provide wetlands
and permitting services for this project. The City of Gastonia has authorized LAW to act as its
agent in this matter. An executed `Agent Certification of Authorization' form is enclosed. The
project area is located in Gaston County, about 3 miles north of the City of Gastonia along U.S.
Highway 321 at the Grier Beam Road Exit (Figure 1).
The City of Gastonia has proposed the construction of an access road to serve the future site of
the Gastonia Technology Park. The proposed project involves the construction of an estimated
one-mile roadway to include, grading, drainage structures, paving, curb and gutter, utilities and
pavement markings. The proposed project will impact approximately 255 linear feet (0.01 acre)
of above-the-headwaters stream with unimportant aquatic function and an estimated 034 acre of
wetlands located on the subject site. This letter will serve as a pre-construction notification
(PCN) being provided pursuant to Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 26 (Federal Register, Vol. 61,
No. 241; December 13, 1996).
LAW Engineering and Environmental Services. Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road • Charlotte, NC 28208
704-357-8600•Fax_704-357-8638
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCN NWP No. 26 October 16, 1998
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
O
The jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and wetland areas depicted on Figures 2A, 2B, and 2C were
delineated in the field by LAW on April 16, 1998, using the Routine On-Site Determination
Method as described in the 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual",, and
confirmed by you during our pre-application meeting held on April 30, 1998.
The project will result in unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. The locations of involvement with waters of the U.S. are indicated on Figure 1.
Jurisdictional wetland areas impacted by the roadway include an estimated 0.11 acre braided
wetland area (Wetland A) and an estimated 0?3 acre of marsh-type wetland area (Wetland B).
Project involvement with these wetland areas is detailed on Figures 2A and 2B, respectively.
n
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. impac red by the proposed construction include the piping of an
estimated 255 linear feet of an above-the-headwaters stream (Stream A). Details of this crossing
are presented on Figure 2C. This intermittent stream is an unnamed tributary of Lone Creek.
LAW scientists repeatedly sampled this stream at several locations utilizing a "D"-shaped 12-
inch diameter dip net. These efforts failed to document the presence of fish, crayfish, and/or
shellfish in the channel. The proposed 36" reinforced concrete pipe has been sized by
WOOL PERT engineers to accommodate the corresponding 91-acre drainage area. In accordance
with "Low-Flow Characteristics of Streams in North Carolina, United States Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 2403." based on the size of the drainage basin (i.e., less than one square
mile) and its location in the Charlotte Belt and Milton Belt hydrologic area, both the 7Q10 and
30Q2 flows for this stream have predicted zero values. Based on this assessment, the
intermittent stream is concluded to be non-perennial and compensatory mitigation to the N.C.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is not required.
The typically two-foot wide, incised channel bed of Stream A exhibited a hard clay bottom and
lacked a secure gated channel substrate. The channel further lacked a hydric channel bottom,
adjacent hydrophytic vegetation, and flow. LAW's field observations concluded that this
intermittent channel does not provide important aquatic function. Consequently, project impacts
to this channel have not been included towards the linear feet permitting thresholds associated
'Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Washington, D.C. pp. 100 and Appendices
2

Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCV NFVP No. 26
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
October 16, 1998
with Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 26. Based on an average width of 2 feet, the piping of this
stream will impact approximately 0.01 acre of waters of the U.S. In summary, project impacts to
jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands, total approximately 035 acre.
The original road design would have resulted in wetland impacts estimated between one-half to
one acre. Subsequent efforts to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U.S. have included
shifting the road alignment, reducing the width of the road, minimizing fill slopes, and lowering
the road elevation. Subsequent to LAW's delineation of wetland boundaries, WOOLPERT
realigned the roadway further north (upstream) to cross a narrower portion of the braided
wetland area (Wetland B), thereby minimizing impacts to this jurisdictional wetland area. In
addition, the cross-sectional width of the road and associated till were reduced by eliminating the
median at the Wetland B crossing and lowering the vertical elevation to 10- 12 feet from 15 feet,
respectively. Further impact minimization was accomplished by steepening fill slopes from 3:1
to 2:1. The incorporation of these design elements has effectively reduced wetland impacts to
0.34 acre.
It is LAW's understanding that wetland mitigation will also be accomplished in the future
development plans for Gastonia Technology Park. The park will be designed to meet the City of
Gastonia"s design standards in preparation for future annexation by the City. The City of
Gastonia has current regulations that prohibit development activities within the 100-year
floodplain. Consequently. a no fill/no development policy within the 100-year floodplain will be
adhered to in future park plans. The preservation of this floodplain will act to buffer wetland
areas from future development activities within the park.
A sediment and erosion control plan is currently being developed by WOOLPERT. Activities on
the subject site involving impacts to waters of the U.S. will be required to follow the General
Conditions of the Nationwide Permit (Federal Register, Vol. 61, No. 241, December li, 1996)
and State Consistency Conditions, as applicable. Since the project will impact greater than 150
linear feet of jurisdictional stream channel, this PCN package has also been forwarded to DWQ
for written concurrence.
3
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCV N6VP No. 26
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
October 16, 1998
In summary, the Gastonia Technology Park access road project will result in the unavoidable loss
of 0.35 acre of waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Roadway design has implemented waters of
the U.S. avoidance/minimization strategies to the maximum extent practicable. These efforts,
combined with the long-term preservation of 100-year floodplain areas, adequately compensate the
impacts associated with this project.
Your expeditious processing of this pen-nit will be greatly appreciated. Please don't hesitate to
call Mike lagnocco at [phone] est. 3357, if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
Ai-c-h4laeLl ,? ?_By With Permission A. [agnocco avid Wallace, P.E.
Senior Environmental Scientist Principal
Enclosures: Pre-Construction Application Form
Figures 1 through 2C
Agent Authorization Form
Data Sheets
cc: Mr. Donald K. Lowe, City of Gastonia
Mr. Donnv Hicks, Gaston County EDC
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. Shawn R. Coombs, P.E., Woolpert
4
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCN NWP No. 26 October 16,1998
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
FIGURES
897
%
Creek it •1 •? ?? I .--
•-? I Qei
? 11 . ?, ? r'.9??'°• • ? ? / 11 I ` " F. t.- f( -?j_` ??%, ' ? R-,
11 (/ 1 f / Ij ? E l ?\ i it Y
1 1' ! \ ( 277 " _ 3?
• •••
7 a/
ROO
•321 f
•Ton
Tin r I arr{?y t
la r a ` ?? &h
if i ?' 11 •? Gaatgn.J
I ?? r li ? Cb1USe ! `? a_.
• ? it ?sd /.• ?. ! t !? ?...?
II
r
• ?? ?^S ?`??. Gintlaw
ii ?a' ?`? J 1 f
y /I- /Y - I • _•-•-___
?q _
/ oo
-- ----------
•n
AWEA
AREAS u o
a Radia TowenAA..
GravelX II ,(Vi1AAK)
'Pit
------------------ Rankin L9ke PpIrk _ • ° f
I { +Z 2210
.t ( 11 w • c- •i .yitr
. -// ` VAk _-: 11 ?? • (r ` /
765
Ir _
1
0 46
\Cree k
lot,
FYk -ch?
o?
N IF 7
o° / I l Jr H n ¦ rl
SIm ;a Apr VIII ?O
- ?•? •?? ?0?/?? pars D k'. W6Whill }II'?
r ? r i? III ?
EXPLANATION 2000 1000 0 2000
r APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED
T
ACCESS ROAD APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF GASTONIA, NORTH, NC QUADRANGLE DATED 1970.
i
LLAA SITE LOCATION
ENGINEEANO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES GASTONIA TECHNOLOGY PARK ACCESS ROAD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA GASTONIA, NORTH CAROLINA
i PREP ED OATa " ' CHECKED DATE
BY C ?t JOB N0. 301 00-8-361 2 FIGURE 1
.^
N
r
o?` o t °a
IL ?
9 .Z °
CL N
?$1 3 p ? Z
U
U a
w, 04 <Q < w Q
ma En
z -K
a Q
M t CL No.
a CL
Y Z N
779
O .n Z I
a 3 J z M
?U O 1
W a o
zz
m O z M
pp CC 0
'- IL
c
-r a z
v! 11 ? ? .L S a
Q \ ''??• -C, c,
v- 6 V v
0 U o
1 ?
W
\ k z
/ OV P,
z w?
z
? W?
W
00
m z? v
_ a
--_- l w o
= - a
z^z W
.? CL
CL
V) v
z . (A) Q o
m w
Z?Z o-?W ? a
C / Ln + LI: W
OD a CO
<?`i OW
v
<v
%z? O? ? O
O
-cv
Z L ? L
^ W.
f j Z
_?ZC T 00 ?k b
00
! LLi y i ? ??
xS
O
OL H G •-("? 0??
5
y LL
? W r
OldMvHDI VZ:?t 96/9t/60 vZ Old 6'P'SONYU3M\ZL9f\9661\OOLO£\SI33POMd\''J

? n .
z z
? = 1
z v Y
? Z <
Z n Z
J
z Y
Z :.
3z.
?z
Z G z
Z ^
n y Z Z
J Z .. J
J
Z ` z
Jz
y
Z =
;Z
x
? T 4
NN Off'!

m
N
V Q
s
J? W Q
X0 m Q
oo V) 3
LIJ
j
P of v 20 P
a
W? ?
` 0 z N
Y
O< ?O O Q a IL
U r7
a o
L? g a cD 0
c x d
w \? ??p cn
Z d
O y a
C?
Q
V ?
s
W V
v ?a' b
U y?
W
? Z
U W
I.- W p U
tZ
W
a
awe
Q, w
o
?g 5
H
?R W W
~? Q Q`
w W
IA a
z
a W `J
a?
cr T

P-
1 a i
a o
<Q ~? ^ r-
a
Xo ?O U J
°z -1 00
a r- a ?-- N
<3 o ?.
Z
OidMYH01 VZ'til 96/9l/60 OZ -01! 6-P-SONS U3M\Zl9C\9661\00=\S1O3PONd\:9

U U
CN
zoo
p
a Z
?
?OJ
WU W
Q.
zin LL
JNW
°

`
j
co W
<
?
UZ
U
O
Saa i O
O cr ?c
Z? W p3Ix U
z.,iz N O
O v Ci o<
-F < V? }ix
r- O
tZ 8Z
a
J 'o
3Z
Z z
a X
<d
m 1
?
Qz^_
zJ
/
? u
c?? W~
o ~ O
< O
O
,Z
?Z 1= <O
Z
.-
-
-
W Q = (a Z
U O O
r?
,Z--r5

,,z
,

LL

t
QO
?+
N
o
:2 -
?Q
O <
a c?

?ZZG
3
¢? _
Q {??
~
L11ZU Z
O
N

2
? ?QZ a q?

-
- N
-
n a N O /
C ?

L-5 i Lj-
C t?.
V)
V

N
LL' U U W
r=- <
Z M
LL. cv
Ll O Q W
Z
W
W
l
LL a
\. -
J 3 Z O
?y?
V ?
'9 W
m
1
T \ y
,?
A \
= p
a
P
N LL- W
a
1 O o *&, - a o
O W
a
+
M
N Q
J
0'
G
W

w
W a
y?

U
N

) w
O
/ 3 WU
M.
00 t
N W O
I
V
J
o
J
X m
a=
0 I
Z
u9 U H
!
? v ?
N Q'
I

¦
¦
Oldr4vHOl ?Z-Vt 96/9!/60 8Z 'OU 6mP'S(3M/113M\Zl9f\8661\OOLOC\S1:)3POMd\'
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCN NWP No. 26 October 16, 1998
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
PCN APPLICATION FORM (NWP No. 26)
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): 26
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE N.C. DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE FIELD
OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN (7) COPIES
SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES
SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
OWNERS NAME: City of Gastonia
MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1748
SUBDIVISION NAME: N/A
CITY: Gastonia STATE: NC ZIP CODE: 28053-1748
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE): Gastonia Technology Park Access Road
POC: Mr. Donald K. Lowe. Citv Traffic Engineer
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): N/A (WORK): 704-866-6765
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER: LAW Engineering and Environmental Services Inc
2801 Yorkmont Road. Suite 100. Charlotte. NC-28208
POC: Mr. Michael A. Iagnocco Senior Environmental Scientist
4a. TELEPHONE NUMBER (WORK): [phone] Ext. 3357 (FAX): [phone]
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE): (See Figure I)
COUNTY: Gaston NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Gastonia
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.): The proposed
access road is located approximately 1.7 miles north of the U.S. Interstate 85 and U.S. Highway
321 intersection at the Grier C. Beam Road Exit The access road will begin directly opposite of
the southbound on-ramp to U.S. Highway 321
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Long Creek
RIVER BASIN: Catawba
7a. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW),
WATER SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES ? NO ® IF YES, EXPLAIN: N/A
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES ONO
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST OF
COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
N/A
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES ?NO ®IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF PREVIOUS PERMIT
AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401 CERTIFICATION):
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE FUTURE?
YES ?NO ®IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND:
N/A linear transportation project
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUiVIBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
N/A linear transportation project
2
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: 0.34 Acre-includes piping of 0.01 acre of waters of the U.S. - Stream A
EXCAVATION:
FLOODING: OTHER:
DRAINAGE: TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: Approximately 0.35 Acre
I Ob. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED, PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION:
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A LINEAR FT. AFTER: N/A LINEAR FT.
WIDTH BEFORE (based on normal high water contours): 2 FT.
WIDTH AFTER:N/A FT.
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE: less than 1 FT.(approx. I inch) AFTER: N/A FT.
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNELS
(Note: Non-perennial channel - see cover letter)
CHANNEL EXCAVATION: CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING: 0
OTHER:
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND? N/A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA? N/A
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8'/" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Construction of approximately one mile of 2-lane divided roadway. This construction will include
gradine, drainage structures. paving. curb and butter. utilities and pavement markings.
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: To provide an access road serving the future Gastonia Technologv
Park.

14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT IN
WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
The original road design would have resulted in wetland impacts estimated between one-half to
one acre. Subsequent efforts to avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U.S. have included
shifting the road alignment, reducing the width of the road minimizing fill slopes and lowering
the road elevation. Subsequent to LAW's delineation of wetland boundaries WOOLPERT
realigned the roadway further north (upstream) to cross a narrower portion of the braided wetland
area (Wetland A), thereby minimizing impacts to this iurisdictional wetland area In addition the
cross-sectional width of the road and associated fill was reduced by eliminating the median at the
Wetland A crossing and lowering the vertical elevation to 10-12 feet from 15 feet respectively.
Further impact minimization was accomplished by steepening fill slopes from 3.1 to 2:1. The
incorporation of these design elements has effectively reduced wetland impacts to approximately
0.34 acre.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES
SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR
LISTING ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE
PERMIT AREA THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE
CONTACTED: (ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
District Engineer to coordinate with USFWS for comments
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED
PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: _
District Engineer to coordinate with SHPO for comments
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES ® NO ? (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL, POLICY ACT?
YES ? NO
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES ? NO ?
4
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF PROPOSED
ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO
WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES AND
PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY
MUST BE SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE I INCH EQUALS 50 FEET
OR I INCH EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
b. IF AVAILABLE, REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPH OF WETLANDS TO BE IMPACTED
BY PROJECT.
c. IF DELINEATION WAS PERFORMED BY A CONSULTANT, INCLUDE ALL DATA SHEETS
RELEVANT TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE DELINEATION LINE.
d. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Institutional/Vacant
IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N/A
SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION. AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE
PROPOSED ACTIVITY IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
I?L" 10/1 ?-
WNER' GENMT S I NATURE DA E
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (I 8G.))
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCN NWP No. 26 October 16, 1998
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION FORMS
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
aG
5 9444
Applicant/Owner: CrrY r
Investigator: 02-<G Sl( CI
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? 1_ No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (Ra
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes
VEGETATION
1 of 2
Date: `t// /911
_
County: GASi D4J
State: 1?14tzi?I Cata[.wk
Community ID: Zr
TransectlD:
Plot ID:
09miinant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Oominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9.
2.?1f'wL i. ?1,' SG b?
S CIF CL') 10.
4./017 j Nleoq Jh -?-
-1 - 1? 12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(excluding FAC-). = ov v
Remarks: \
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Wetland Hydrology Indicators:

-Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators

-Other
No Recorded Data Available Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
-Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
-Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
-Water-Stained Leaves
-Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: -(in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 3 (in.)
Remarks: I?Q+?O"A) ?vl o i 5

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

?pP I --v
Paae 2 of 2
Map Unit Name I
(Series and Phase):
ktr 0. S511J 1 ' o
41 r I J a i) Drainage Class: o? Pfr~ 1? U w?l l ?r o i+? t?
j ?
`
Taxonomy (Subgroup): A$,1^t t 1 rhT k" Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descriotion:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Munseli Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
12- 13 S1 R $ Non1E sAN,?y
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_Gieyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: v ZN 171 ChTlJ 2 S (h=
S o t l_ S?'`? S
r-} 'tj be- (c
wt4 ? ?StrzU? '
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? es o
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes o
Remarks:
Por..T 15 w ??i?
Upl_4 N D.
(Circle)
Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
7-E-AtJ5Cn4,J pUA -fizor A rnlc???nl? T3
2/27/98
v DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
e1 of2
Project/Site:-&4s]Mv 11A7rL0wot, u5 N P (h«?5 204-4) Date: I
Applicant/Owner C rry . uF (?itsw?/q County: ft^)
Investigator: 2. &xmkt? STAB I tir r p5 A/1 a nouA State: N ord. C11Xotlta
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? <"e No Community ID: P 1 '
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (R4) Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Lo> Plot ID: UL NIA4, 4 A
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
v? C? yt?
1 9
. s ?1 C .
S ACV) 10.
3. SG,I?'i VAi,yo_ 5 0?? 11.
4. L i ?$ , ? J Auk ;o • J %2 C1- 12.
_ i
?rA(''.AJ +
13.
6 ??`Cvv+ k1a?d?AlU/fin 9L 14.
7. ?(?.+t1?S C?DIA5i3 H TACIA1 15.
8. Y?x ci?tr?r,ti ri? cant
V A C
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC

(excluding FAC-). a,
3 = (? ??
Remarks: N y,,, U G ^4, a? 30A, ; Ac.vl} ,

N? s+p.- a
_,,,,w.,

HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs x Inundated
-Other
` XSaturated in Upper 12 Inches
--No Recorded Data Available X Water Marks
-Drift Lines
-)Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data "cius:?ns?
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: ' (in.)
Remarks: (,??f /ArrJ Giyd,-o/OG Y is ?avs-"44-.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual) p P -
SOILS pans 2 of 7
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): e I An d r?
? oa -Drainage Class: Ma r*, l IAI?d
Taxonomy (Subgroup): -6n CVP.1 i A t
a, LC tt0.p 114, ?u ( {'S
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Oescription:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inches) Horizon (Mun3ell Moist)
cHazr -*l) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
M07TIES
I Z" 5 5 cry ?
zY ?/6 s? foam
.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -
-High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime V, Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions
_K: Gleyed or Low-Chrome Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: ?Y?'I'4Yi? -C)?! ? Id!'ic 5?i ? a?( ?N?, T-?"e?('v?t` `-o? ? `QrP
1?
? ri ? I h??kSl ovls
?
WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Y No
Wetland Hydrology Present. No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Remarks: j Lj y k/ ??K N
2t27t9a
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
1 of 2
Project/Site: csokSTD"/AqV?.?--II,joLO&ti PA!j S- C;4CC 6 SS a? D) Date:-?4,/1_ (' /f q
Applicant/Owner: CA" of Cers-ra NI jt County: _Cy*5" j
Investigator: 6X-r-ZG Aw i ',f'nM?-.J C E ?wA ab State: i-101t l+ cAlzo Lid*
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ? No Community ID:_ DP-2-
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (Ii-0 Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes AoJ Plot ID:_ wE'r?-+? D Pj
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
'FACW 9.
2. Ct%f v?hVNM 5 10.
,t, ,a?uA? s _
AC?+ 11.
q, V av nu rr d¢ 4J-1'. 5 C'W 12.
5:-"'M?qc L' r"O--')q y1 S' f74CO 13.
6. LOA ic...c
. n0ua
za 14 14.
gq
\\
.7 ?XicJ?QnrlvDn 1ri?./ ;cnvg }.l\ q-G 15.
as ? J) ?? a ?a . ?! og L 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
l
di
FA 7 o
(exc
u
ng
C-).

}
Remarks: y `
`?? Y o

V t l ?'^

IS
HYDROLOGY
-Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
-Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators
-Aerial Photographs >1 Inundated
-Other
No Recorded Data Av
il
bl Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
a
a
e Water Marks
Drift Lines
-Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
-Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
,Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. / (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks: w C{/ n n d J V? 1 u 7 Ts
?Yf S f /`,'
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
SOILS
T)P-2
wE.rLA rj
---
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): 2? t
50
too""-
?
-
??I
Drainage Class: Qrti ?
Taxonomy (Subgroup): _wok. i c 11
kv i c ti a O,
?y
?-,S
y
?
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description;
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(Inch
e
s
)
Horizon (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc,
-
?
?
?
I n e z 4? G (o?kn?
?(LY 2 5L L
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol Y -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Y- Listed on Local Hydric Soils List C 1,1 j uslon s)
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Listed on National Hydric Soils List J
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Indi,c4WS 9(cst^ 4. ? o.. ?

WETLAND DETERMINATION
(Circle) I (Circle)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?? No
Wetland Hydrology Present? No Is This Sampling Point Within a Wetland? No
Hydric Soils Present? No
Remarks: 1 1 I 'T
? Ill 7?
arch ems-,, ?? sti?v?}ea? w-?5? rT -I''(^? ??C?_?/ ,
?127!98
Gastonia Technology Park Access Road -PCN NWP No. 26 October 16, 1998
LAW Project No. 30100-8-3612
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORYZATION
I Damn o_ Crew . representing the City of Oastonis, hereby
oortify that 1 have authorized Miottael A. lagnoaoo, Senior Environmental Scientist with LAW
Engineering and ,F,nviromnenta) $ervioee, inc., to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary
in the processing, review, and issuance of this permit and any and all atendard and special
conditiono attAchad.
cenity that the above information submitted in this application is true aact accurate to
our knowledge.
s signature
10/09[98
pate
Age»t's signature
10 /'t
IQg
Date
Completion of this forvt will alluw the agent to sign all future application correspondence
WOOLPER7'
March 11, 1999

Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Non-Discharge Branch
401 Reedy Creek Road
1?a1"iall, NC ?7606
RE: DWQ Project # 981030
Gastonia Technology Park, Gastonia, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Donley:
This letter is in response to the 60-day requirement for a conceptual storm water management plan of
Additional Condition No. 2 to the 401 Water Quality Certification for the subject site, dated January
15, 1999.
As you and I discussed today during our telephone conversation there are outstanding issues that
need to be resolved with local officials whose outcome will significantly affect the types of storm
water management techniques that would be feasible at the Gastonia Technology Park site. The most
significant issue is the possibility that the City of Gastonia may waive post-development storage
requirements because of the location of Gastonia Technology Park within the Long Creek watershed
and the proximity of the site to the creek. A dialogue was initiated with the City on March 10, 1999
to waive this requirement.
We feel that we will have this issue resolved within three months from the original 60-day deadline,
or by June 17, 1999. If there is a problem with this extension please notify me as soon as possible at
704.525.6284. I1'I do not hear from you I will assume that the extension is approved.
Sincerely,
WOOLPERT LLP
K. Flint flolbrook. PE, PI 1
Water Resources Group Manager
cc: Donny Hicks. Gaston County Economic Development Corporation
Mike Immocco, Law Environmental
Shaven Coombs. Woolpert
Project File, No. 56703
WOOI PERT I_I P
tt7 i 1 Rid ( )A Boitlevmd,',mW 101 • ( limIotle, Noilh Caro I im -18 1 7- M58
%(14.5-1 5.628-1 • 1,1t:7U-1.525.852') • tc????.?tionll?crl.?(mi

G: ~SD~55500~MASTER1 DONNYHICKS.dwg -JAN 11, 1999 - 11:14:10
- ,

~ ~
t'' ~
t7i rr • ~
`-3
; ice' . _ ,.c

N Oo ~ n 00 `1
~NxW r ~ ~ ~

~ J J ~
o~ r ~
Od A d!!Nf 11679Nr d 6fArM _ _
- i N ~ ~ N -T--P- ~ - _ _ - - - - J _ - - - - - _ r ~ _ . _ ~ . ~ - -
M ~ _ ~ V1 ~ I ~ _ . ~ ~
~ ~ - t~ i N _ , . " - ~ ~ r _ ~ ~ , s ~ O - ~ f• O
00 N ~ _ i / ~ ® _ ~p ~ ~ , r i ; ~ _ ,
~ . , r ~ _ . ~ . ~ t~ _ v~ _ _ a ~ ~ _ , Ca
, C - ~ . • _ ~ _ . a ~ - ~ 0
d i : ~ ~ o ,
. , ~ i ~ , ~ ~
. I ,1 :~l ' ~ i G 1 ~ - 1 , , ' 1 _ ~ ~ , _ f r ~ . , ~
~ 1i 1 _ ~ G 0 p ~ O.
'1 1 1 . ~ I~, , ~ \ ~ ~
i a~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ 4C
~ ~ - i~ ~0 ~ ~ h o o a
i ~ - i I t - ' O Q ~ . ~ p I ~ \J , v 1 ~ ,
\ ~ C~ _
0 _ - -
~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ - ` _ w 1
- - - - - - - - - ~ ~ . r----,---- r-- ti
- I W ~ '
_ - ~ , ; ~ _ ' ~ _
~ , "o F.
~ ~ 0 ~ _ . . ` ~ ~ 0 Q e ~ _
I - ~ / ~ V - ~ ? ~y~- ' _ -Q" ~ a ~ o _ _ ro o ~ ,
~ ! I i i I ~ _ _ _ _ ~ ' - ~ = _ ! x
u ~ - ; : . -
~ ~ \ ~ - _ r , ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ , / 9 ~ ~ _ _ _
~ ~ ~ ~ f ~H / . ~ b ~ r 9 ~ ~ , r ti, 1 • , ~ _ e. , i 9 ~ ~ , ; ~ r, _ - ; ~ _
x ~
p C3 / / , ~
l w~ i ~ o~ a ~ y._ - Q ~ a \ U J p ~ / _
~ , o U] ~ I - _ u Il
g . ~ ~ - ~ . ~ _ ~ , x, U D
- _ - - _ i f ' D . , , q ~ _
~ _ - - - - ---y - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - A - - - --r---- - - - _ - - - ~ 0 a _ ~
- - - - o _ ' a I ~ ~ _ ~ - ~ a _ _ -
, , ; . i - , - . ~ , _ _ L1~
i _ . . , v - b L7 x: , ~ ; , 7 / ~ I
_ ~ ~ ~ ? i r ~ i ~
a_ _ 1. r, ,
_ _ , - ~ ~ ~ - _ _l ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~
, i . . ~ . - ~ r , J } ~ ~ J~ J ,
- _ - . . , . ~ . _ -
' ~ ~ _ . _ _ ~ c--~ -
- - - 1 ~ \ - .i ~ , , ~ ~ '
~ 1, - , ~ . ~ `1
® t , a i; r . - ~ r~ _ , - ~ - ~ ~ - _
i _ _ _ _ - - - _ '
- . ` _ - - _ - n . ~ - , ~ - r~ ~ ~ - w ~ i. _ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ , _ - ~ w - _ _ r~ \ ~ ~ ~ , _ v ~ .
` ~ r { - _ , ~ 0
_ _r___ _ _ - - _ i . ~ + ~ ~ _ ~ r r _V -
1 . _ ~ _ i ~ - _ 1- I, -~I ~ ~ \ Sul _ _
i~ ~ - t ~ i ~ i I = - - ~ _ c a
r ~ . NOA'fg ~ i ~ t ~ _ , , ~ r
_ _ C ~i - / ~ ~ ~
- _ ~
- _ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ _ l
.t _ ~ ~ . ~ f_
. - _ _ _ - - , ~ i ~ , ~ i
, ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ < / _ ! i
t ~ ~
' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! l I j / ~ , i - ~ ~ , ~ / \
i . r v I, ~ ,A O : - ~ : ~ ~ ; ~ ~
: ~ ~ _
9: r i ~ ~ ~ ~ J J , ~ Y ~ O
l i '~-L j~ /:j 4 ~ L.! ? w _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
_ . . ~ . _ i, E.~~ G - ~ - ~ ~ x G i 0 ,
- - - _ _ _ - - ~ = - - - - - - - - - - - r-- - - - - ~ \i Q _ ~ J. n _
_ _ _ _ . _
,Y / I J~ L ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ , o~
~ I.~~ ~ I ^F\' . _ _ _ _
: - . , . - ~ _ - - . . _
- ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ KIh16 I ~ -
, i_. ~ ~ i ~ ? _
~ ~ _ ~ _ - i ~ p; p - i - I - - ~ _ . ~ ~ _ ; .
i ~~~1 _ ~ ~ - i ~ ~ _
' '~I; ~ ~ i ~ i \ J - _ v ii ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ i ~ ~ t N ~
j i . i r~ ~ o _ i -
_ . . I ~ 1 ,
! i _ - 1 `i ~l' ~ ~ 1 ~ °r` ~ ~ C~ l ~ ; ~ - ~ ~ I ~ i ~
~ ~ ' ~ , i - _ - ~ _ ..f--~ - >
. ~ ~ _ _ P ~ - PARK - i ~ - A. _
- _ _ _ , ~ _ _ i _ y ,
~ _ ' ' l _ _ i ~ r _ ~
' ~ - -i'- - - i i ~ r ~ _ ~ a _ _ _ _ _ _ - . ~ . ~ i , -
rei T - _ i - _ - - I I _ _ _ , I-
j ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - ~ ~ - . , n,.- - - h , ; . - ~ ~ - . - ~
I ~ r - _ i ~ ~ i ..i , : _ , ~ ~ _
t -
_ _ am ~ i, - - ` ;
_ . ti ~ i _ . - _ ~
~ ~ ~ - _ 1- _ . r . . z I 1
- , ` ~
~ 0 ~ O 1 t 4~ 1, _ b
~ - _ \ ~ ~ ~ - - 0
~ _ ; ~ ~ Quo ~ r o w ~
~ P,.: J
` - ~ 1r ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~
l . - . . ~ i
~ ~ r.. ~ ~ ~ _ ~ 1 ~ a
~ A ~
- - -.~i.~. _ - ` _ _ T__,-. .p_
H..
I
~ C H
V I4
5i it illy
RU °7 l~~ ;r: z ~ rY ~ ~ _ ~ d
I~IIb'I' ti i".: iii -
h i ~ OD ~ ~
l~, h Y.. ~ ~ ~
V
i I' n
it
~ y
° o o ~ r m
~ 'o ~o o ~ m y °
~ v D D ~ z
•

G: ~SD~55500~MASTER1 DONNYHICKS.dwg -JAN 11, 1999 - 11:14:10
- ,

~ ~
t'' ~
t7i rr • ~
`-3
; ice' . _ ,.c

N Oo ~ n 00 `1
~NxW r ~ ~ ~

~ J J ~
o~ r ~
Od A d!!Nf 11679Nr d 6fArM _ _
- i N ~ ~ N -T--P- ~ - _ _ - - - - J _ - - - - - _ r ~ _ . _ ~ . ~ - -
M ~ _ ~ V1 ~ I ~ _ . ~ ~
~ ~ - t~ i N _ , . " - ~ ~ r _ ~ ~ , s ~ O - ~ f• O
00 N ~ _ i / ~ ® _ ~p ~ ~ , r i ; ~ _ ,
~ . , r ~ _ . ~ . ~ t~ _ v~ _ _ a ~ ~ _ , Ca
, C - ~ . • _ ~ _ . a ~ - ~ 0
d i : ~ ~ o ,
. , ~ i ~ , ~ ~
. I ,1 :~l ' ~ i G 1 ~ - 1 , , ' 1 _ ~ ~ , _ f r ~ . , ~
~ 1i 1 _ ~ G 0 p ~ O.
'1 1 1 . ~ I~, , ~ \ ~ ~
i a~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ 4C
~ ~ - i~ ~0 ~ ~ h o o a
i ~ - i I t - ' O Q ~ . ~ p I ~ \J , v 1 ~ ,
\ ~ C~ _
0 _ - -
~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ - ` _ w 1
- - - - - - - - - ~ ~ . r----,---- r-- ti
- I W ~ '
_ - ~ , ; ~ _ ' ~ _
~ , "o F.
~ ~ 0 ~ _ . . ` ~ ~ 0 Q e ~ _
I - ~ / ~ V - ~ ? ~y~- ' _ -Q" ~ a ~ o _ _ ro o ~ ,
~ ! I i i I ~ _ _ _ _ ~ ' - ~ = _ ! x
u ~ - ; : . -
~ ~ \ ~ - _ r , ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ , / 9 ~ ~ _ _ _
~ ~ ~ ~ f ~H / . ~ b ~ r 9 ~ ~ , r ti, 1 • , ~ _ e. , i 9 ~ ~ , ; ~ r, _ - ; ~ _
x ~
p C3 / / , ~
l w~ i ~ o~ a ~ y._ - Q ~ a \ U J p ~ / _
~ , o U] ~ I - _ u Il
g . ~ ~ - ~ . ~ _ ~ , x, U D
- _ - - _ i f ' D . , , q ~ _
~ _ - - - - ---y - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - A - - - --r---- - - - _ - - - ~ 0 a _ ~
- - - - o _ ' a I ~ ~ _ ~ - ~ a _ _ -
, , ; . i - , - . ~ , _ _ L1~
i _ . . , v - b L7 x: , ~ ; , 7 / ~ I
_ ~ ~ ~ ? i r ~ i ~
a_ _ 1. r, ,
_ _ , - ~ ~ ~ - _ _l ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~
, i . . ~ . - ~ r , J } ~ ~ J~ J ,
- _ - . . , . ~ . _ -
' ~ ~ _ . _ _ ~ c--~ -
- - - 1 ~ \ - .i ~ , , ~ ~ '
~ 1, - , ~ . ~ `1
® t , a i; r . - ~ r~ _ , - ~ - ~ ~ - _
i _ _ _ _ - - - _ '
- . ` _ - - _ - n . ~ - , ~ - r~ ~ ~ - w ~ i. _ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ , _ - ~ w - _ _ r~ \ ~ ~ ~ , _ v ~ .
` ~ r { - _ , ~ 0
_ _r___ _ _ - - _ i . ~ + ~ ~ _ ~ r r _V -
1 . _ ~ _ i ~ - _ 1- I, -~I ~ ~ \ Sul _ _
i~ ~ - t ~ i ~ i I = - - ~ _ c a
r ~ . NOA'fg ~ i ~ t ~ _ , , ~ r
_ _ C ~i - / ~ ~ ~
- _ ~
- _ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ _ l
.t _ ~ ~ . ~ f_
. - _ _ _ - - , ~ i ~ , ~ i
, ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ < / _ ! i
t ~ ~
' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! l I j / ~ , i - ~ ~ , ~ / \
i . r v I, ~ ,A O : - ~ : ~ ~ ; ~ ~
: ~ ~ _
9: r i ~ ~ ~ ~ J J , ~ Y ~ O
l i '~-L j~ /:j 4 ~ L.! ? w _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
_ . . ~ . _ i, E.~~ G - ~ - ~ ~ x G i 0 ,
- - - _ _ _ - - ~ = - - - - - - - - - - - r-- - - - - ~ \i Q _ ~ J. n _
_ _ _ _ . _
,Y / I J~ L ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ , o~
~ I.~~ ~ I ^F\' . _ _ _ _
: - . , . - ~ _ - - . . _
- ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ KIh16 I ~ -
, i_. ~ ~ i ~ ? _
~ ~ _ ~ _ - i ~ p; p - i - I - - ~ _ . ~ ~ _ ; .
i ~~~1 _ ~ ~ - i ~ ~ _
' '~I; ~ ~ i ~ i \ J - _ v ii ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ i ~ ~ t N ~
j i . i r~ ~ o _ i -
_ . . I ~ 1 ,
! i _ - 1 `i ~l' ~ ~ 1 ~ °r` ~ ~ C~ l ~ ; ~ - ~ ~ I ~ i ~
~ ~ ' ~ , i - _ - ~ _ ..f--~ - >
. ~ ~ _ _ P ~ - PARK - i ~ - A. _
- _ _ _ , ~ _ _ i _ y ,
~ _ ' ' l _ _ i ~ r _ ~
' ~ - -i'- - - i i ~ r ~ _ ~ a _ _ _ _ _ _ - . ~ . ~ i , -
rei T - _ i - _ - - I I _ _ _ , I-
j ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - ~ ~ - . , n,.- - - h , ; . - ~ ~ - . - ~
I ~ r - _ i ~ ~ i ..i , : _ , ~ ~ _
t -
_ _ am ~ i, - - ` ;
_ . ti ~ i _ . - _ ~
~ ~ ~ - _ 1- _ . r . . z I 1
- , ` ~
~ 0 ~ O 1 t 4~ 1, _ b
~ - _ \ ~ ~ ~ - - 0
~ _ ; ~ ~ Quo ~ r o w ~
~ P,.: J
` - ~ 1r ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~
l . - . . ~ i
~ ~ r.. ~ ~ ~ _ ~ 1 ~ a
~ A ~
- - -.~i.~. _ - ` _ _ T__,-. .p_
H..
I
~ C H
V I4
5i it illy
RU °7 l~~ ;r: z ~ rY ~ ~ _ ~ d
I~IIb'I' ti i".: iii -
h i ~ OD ~ ~
l~, h Y.. ~ ~ ~
V
i I' n
it
~ y
° o o ~ r m
~ 'o ~o o ~ m y °
~ v D D ~ z
•