20031228 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20030107

?F WATF9 Michael F. Easley, Governor

G William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
N
O orth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
?
>` C Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
p Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
October 14, 2003
Mecklenburg County
DWQ Project #: 03-1228
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATE
City of Charlotte
Attn: Jarron J. Karl
600 East Fourth, 14th floor
Charlotte, NC 28202
Subject Property: Hickory Grove Road Widening
Dear Mr. Karl:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to impact 82 feet of perennial
stream for the purpose of widening a road as you described in your application dated July 22, 2003.
After reviewing your application, we hAve decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Number 3404, which may be viewed on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number
14 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 Watershed 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). This approval shall expire when the corresponding
Nationwide Permit expires or as otherwise provided in the General Certification. For this approval to
be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional
conditions listed below.
Conditions of Certification:
Certification of Completion
1. Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or
applicable Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return
the attached certificate of completion to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of
Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650.
AR
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC: 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
Page 2
Mr. Karl
October 14, 2003
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit.
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 or Alan Johnson at our
Mooresville Regional Office at 704-663-1699.
Sincerely,
JRD/bs
Attachments
Nire for
cc: Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Mooresville DWQ Regional Office
File copy
Central Files
Matec Engineering & Consultants, 2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100, Charlotte, NC 28208
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0260.
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
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.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
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.
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
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
XIV. 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).
k--- ?-a
Applic t/AohKSignature Date
(Age si re is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
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 (DWQ Only)
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
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 213 .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
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* Impact
(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
Page 11 of 12
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.
IX.
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
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetIands/strmgide.htmi.
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.
SEE PLAN
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http:Hh2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. 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):
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Page 10 of 12
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
'Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) 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.):
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.
SEE PLAN
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
Page 9 of 12
Site Number
(indicate on ma) Impact
(acres) 100-year Floodplain**
(es/no) Nearest Stream
(linear feet) Type of Wetland***

* 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.pov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0-1 ac
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0 ac
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams (SEE PLANS)
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?
(please secif )

* 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:es.eov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.maoauest.cotn, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 6000 FT
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Page 8 of 12
It. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Track Hoes, loaders
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: Residential, Industrial
IV. 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.
V. 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:
VI. 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.
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact Type of Impact* Area of Located within Distance to
Page 7 of 12
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.
Name of project Irwin Creek Stream Project
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): _
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): See plan
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long):
(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. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application: FEMA
buyout, wastewater plant
7. Property size (acres): 27-30 ac
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Irwin Creek
9. 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/.)
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: Stream Restoration
Page 6 of 12
Office Use Only: Form Version October 2001
USACE Action ID No.
DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1.
II.
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules

2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide 27
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 (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
Applicant Information
1.
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NC Wetlands Restoration Program_
Mailing Address: 1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-161
OCT - 8 2003
Telephone Number: 919-733-5208 Fax Number: 919-733-5321
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
2. Agent 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:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
NET00/401 GW
Fax Number:
Page 5 of 12
Irwin Creek
Subject: Irwin Creek
From: "Todd St. John" <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:47:32 -0400
To: Jim Stanfill <[e-mail]>, Jeff Jurek <jeff [e-mail]>
CC: "Todd.St.John" <Todd. St.John @ ncmail. net>
Hi, it was good seeing you yesterday... it's been a while.
I know we've had this a while, but I've been a little behind...
Overall, This looks to be a good urban type design proposal.
Anyway:
1) Jeff, I found the typical cross section. I assume it is a pool.
Is there a typical riffle cross section? What will be the minimum
bench width? I would also like to have the proposed longitudinal
profile with thalweg, bankfull and top of bank.
2) The average stream slope is steeper than the valley slope, which
seems improbably. Also, all of the velocity and shear stress
equations were based on that slope.
3) Why do they need the coin logs on the "inner channel berm"?
4) Is the "inner channel berm" designed with anticipated aggradation
accounted for?
5) The root wad typical seems to imply that the root mass will be
completely above the stream bed. This is not the typical method of
installation.
6) Why is there rock toe protection in between the rock vanes?
Properly built rock vanes should act as bank protection.
thanks, todd
1 of 1 10/17/03 11:49 AM
imap://[e-mail]].net:143/fet
Subject: lFwd: Response to your Irwin Stream Restoration Project Quesionsfor the 401 pemnitl
Front: Jim Stanfill <jim.stunfillgncnruil.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 14:10:47 -0500
To: Ruh Ridings <Rob.Ridingsgncmail.net>
Roh,
Please find below the original a-nail that 1 sent to Todd St John on October 27th regarding the questions he raised during his peranit review of the Irwin Creek Stream Restoration project. 1 would like to know if
the response is adequate and when EEP should expect to receive the 401 permit Your timely response is appreciated.
Thanks!
Jim Stanfill
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
-------- Original Message ------
Subject: Response to your Irwin Strewn Restoration Project Questions for the 401 pennit
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 14:33:31 -0500
From: Jinn Santill<jiunsuudillgnoauuil.uet>
To: Told St John <Todd.St.JoIui@ncttalfllel>
Told,
Please find Chris Matthews' (HDR) contents below in regards to your questions regarding the Irwin Creek Stream Restoration Project. Please let me know if these responses ore sufficient to answer your
questions.
'nmmnks!
Jim Stanfill
NC Wetlands Restoration Program
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Irwin Creek(
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 14:36:30 -0400
From: Matthews,Christopher<Chris.Matthewsghdiinc,aan>
To: Jeff Jurek <jefQurekgncnail.net>
CC: Jim Stanfill<jitn.suni illgnctnuil.net>
See my comments below.
Chrls Matthews
Environmental, Water Resources end Planning
Section Manager
III)RONE COMPANY Many Solutions
128 S. Tryon St. I Chublle, NC 178203
Phone: [phone] F- 704-338-67601
nm.tichris.matthews @ hdrinc.com
---- Original Message -
Subject: Irwin Creek
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:47:32 -0400
From: Todd St. John <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: Jim Stanfill <[e-mail]>, Jeff Jurek
<jeff [e-mail]>
CC: Todd.St.John <[e-mail]>
Hi, it was good seeing you yesterday... it's been a while
I know we've had this a while, but I've been a little behind... Overall,
This looks to be a good urban type design proposal.
Anyway:
1) Jeff, I found the typical cross section. I assume it is a pool. Is
there a typical riffle cross section? what will be the minimum bench
width? I would also like to have the proposed longitudinal profile with
thalweg, bankfull and top of bank.
CM - We will provide a typical riffle cross section. Detailed survey data are still forthcoming which will allow finalizing of the proposed longitudinal profile, thalweg, bankfull and top of bank measurements.
2) The average stream slope is steeper than the valley slope, which
seems improbably. Also, all of the velocity and shear stress equations
were based on that slope.
cm- The 60% design estimates of valley and stream slope for Irwin Creek of Table 3 should have been those shown
calculated in Figure 3, (which were based on Meck. Co. Eng. topo.data). Thus the value for the Irwin Creek stream
grade should have been .00118.These values, along with final design riffle and pool grades will be adjusted slightly
once detailed survey control data has been incorporated into the final design.This work is underway, and a revised
version of Table 3 should be available in a few weeks.Velocity and shear stress equations will be adjusted
accordingly.
3) Why do they need the coin logs on the -inner channel berm'?
CM - The colr fiber logs are In place to keep the soil lens placed on top of the berm structures in place. Alternatively, a heavier grade of erosion control fabric can be used (pure coconut fiber) to provlde the long-term prole
1 of 2 12/4/2003 2:33 PM
Irwin Creek Comments
4) Is the "inner channel berm" designed with anticipated aggrad
accounted for?
CM - Yes. We are allowing for 6-8 inches of additional sand and fines. Given the flashy and
5) The root wad typical seems to imply that the root mass will
completely above the stream bed. This is not the typical method
installation.
CM - We will adjust the detail to reflect the typical method of installation.
6) Why is there rock toe protection in between the rock vanes?
built rock vanes should act as bank protection.
CM - The rock vane detail will have the toe protection removed in the next version.
thanks, todd
3 of 3 12/22/03 3:20 PM
Irwin Creek Comments
To: Matthews, Christopher
Cc: Jim Stanfill
Subject: [Fwd: Irwin Creek]
Chris, I agree with Todd, especially the slope issues, since I pointed that out
in my review. Please respond to Jim and I this week on these comments, and
then we will respond to Todd. Thanks.
Original Message
Subject:Irwin Creek
Date:Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:47:32 -0400
From:Todd St. John <[e-mail]>
Organization:NC DENR DWQ
To:Jim Stanfill <[e-mail]>, Jeff Jurek
<jeff._jurek @ ncmail.net>
CC:Todd.St.John <Todd. St.J ohn @ ncmail.net>
Hi, it was good seeing you yesterday... it's been a while.
I know we've had this a while, but I've been a little behind...
This looks to be a good urban type design proposal.
Anyway:
1) Jeff, I found the typical cross section. I assume it is a po
there a typical riffle cross section? What will be the minimum
width? I would also like to have the proposed longitudinal prof
thalweg, bankfull and top of bank.
CM - We will provide a typical riffle cross section. Detailed survey data are still forthcoming w
2) The average stream slope is steeper than the valley slope, w
seems improbably. Also, all of the velocity and shear stress eq
were based on that slope.
CM - The 60% design estimates of valley and stream slope for Irwin Creek of Table 3 should
have been those shown calculated in Figure 3, (which were based on Meck. Co. Eng. topo.
data). Thus the value for the Irwin Creek stream grade should have been .00118. These
values, along with final design riffle and pool grades will be adjusted slightly once detailed
survey control data has been incorporated into the final design. This work is underway, and
a revised version of Table 3 should be available in a few weeks. Velocity and shear stress
equations will be adjusted accordingly.
3) Why do they need the coir logs on the "inner channel berm"?
CM - The coir fiber logs are in place to keep the soil lens placed on top of the berm structures
2 of 3 12/22/03 3:20 PM
50 ft
50 fl
Typical Cross Section for Meander Bend
Case 1
0
inn
0 ft
Typical Cross Section for Meander Bend
Case 2

0
100
D ft
Cross Section Notes
• Inner berms should restrict the low flow channel to 20-25 feet
in width.
• Inner berms should be into existing slope as close to a 6-foot
stage level as conditions permit. When lower tie-ins are used,
the berm should be brought up to 3 ft in height on 2:1 slope
and over to the bank edge tie-in slope point
• In inflection areas the 22-foot low flow channel width is
achieved by using a v-shaped (or tapered) cross vane at the
upper ends of cross vane - riffle zones; and in augmented riffle
zones by extending the leading and trailing edges of the
upstream and downstream inner berms.
• Where feasible, slopes steeper than 1.5:1 should be regraded,
with excess fill moved to inner berm, or spread back onto
floodplain.
• Both riffle and inner berm cross sections should maintain
approximatelly 390 - 420 square feet of cross section area at
the 9-foot stage.
• The riffle cross section has been prepared with a 15-degree
angle from perpendicular to the main channel banks. This
provides a perpendicular cross section view of the low flow
thalweg channel.
• Case 1 is used at locations where sufficient cross section area
allows to use a higher inner berm design.
• Case 2 is used at locations where flow cross section area
requires a lower inner berm design to comply with FEMA no-
rise criteria.
Typical Cross Section for Inflection
50 fl
0
inn
Typical Cross Sections For
Construction - Irwin Creek WWTP
Oft Restoration Reach
November 2003
AssEs T December 2003
Figure A: Irwin Creek Cross Sections
?"'r"'T"'?° Stream Restoration Plan
R£sroanrxN Irwin Creek
_ Project: 09177-021-018
HDRFg. PROGRAM
or Lhe C=1-
Irwin Creek Longitudinal Profile
Right Bank
I
-- Left Bank
1.5-Year Storm
I
2-Year Storm

s1s Riffle
--- Bed Elevation with Proposed Riffles
614
Bed Elevation (Surveyed)
612 -- - Bed Elevation (from RAS)

610
A
----
608 i

606- -

604-
Q --

} Z
602-
CO
a!
v
600 m ! m

iL tr ? L

?,
I ? ?
o
598 cr
¢
i m
n
m

596 ?
r
tt ?
-
N co
r r
-

594

i ? f ?' •- m m

I? ? t ?

? m i

u' I `o i?' m
st
I
592 ul i ?
m
-
590 ?_
- Q lr ? rr
--z

588

Note: Bank full event is est imated between
586 1.5- and 2-year storm events.

584-.
0 200 400 600 800 1 000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 40 00 4200 4400 4600 4800 5000 5200
Baseline Distance (ft)
HABITAT
Figure B: Irwin Creek Longitudinal Profile December 2003
1M A-tiSEssM€NT APc
. Stream Restoration Plan
HDR Engineering. Inc-
of me Camh- PROGRAM 11WIn Creek Project: 09177-021-018
8

00 00

N

1

8

?6

N

> °"

* i°

N

I W
r V V U1 N

Vl M
A
'/1 Q
V
O O
O N ,n O
N V qq?? O
N #
O
r 9F
O
,!1 .-.
'O ?
O, V1
O
M M
?
V

N

V'1

N
II
>
C J
C, M O O M V1 > d
M d U
?y
O c+?jM
S

NN bq
>

a
O >
' .. M N O? N r} :t tb
00

V

Q
N d' r O N
^
M
i
O
M
N
_
"
M
N
,n
M
r
M
O
<
n o
o O O N O p
O

8M

O

V

r

N
- r

«
'6? }"
$" W
s _
r e
r m 00 00 00

N
?O
aF
*
if

h
> bi)
:?

W
O
O

~
,?
M
O?
app
00
N
kn
U
i
_
- p

M

N

M

.fir O? _

M NF?
(i 00 r

O o
o
M
O?
p
8

M
M
r 'O C,
O
M
V1
?. r
a
'r,
N

?I

V
r G O
C O >
d d

f

IN
M ?
VVV???
-:'

O

r

O?

00

N

10

O

N

M
V'1

cq}
M
M
p

m

00 L
i

k

N+
N
8

O
?}

0

r

r ?
W
v
M
Vl
M N V1 O O frC i o0 O M p V N
C) CD _a o ?
N

lv?

`
T
.y.
O
n ?0
O 100
0o
p`E.
.?. O
r `??? sa-
Yi. ..u Le-. y 1r)
16 h n r O O O pN +f P.. Y i ce" O VNi '? S_ ?O (7\]
Y F!
It

?
? O O

r N
w
_ N dF
m <
cl
0 00 0 00
? 1 ?j O,
Q
Q
Q
A
of) '7
cT o

O ..

'
O 1 o bu

C c

o
'

o

b

n

ou

v
2 v 8 d
3 x ? N
- 0 O v U
M , "G
12 c
d b
a b
ca > 3 c? `.

do
3 N
Qti
a
o b
A
2 4,4
? ((
o LL
? cr
"
I
f)
0
0 ;a cd
A N.
41 y
A
w
a
i Cn cn

L
L v Q) (D

- ro

3

m

a a?

¢
00
rj
fl

>

>
C

?

a
°?

¢
o

a°
°'
w

°.

°O

?i

'

a

a
3

cn

v
x°
v
I-Ta
O
U
w
4?y
W
R.
t~
Q)
0
ro
O
v G
0
O '? N
b W a>i
.O 'O O
00
v g rn
? N
a CJ
O p
N bU
fie" O
U
b
C
ti
y
d
W
d
b
7
a1
y
N
A
ti
b
a?
.b
O
iF
O?O? W A T ?9pG

23 December, 2003
Mr. Jeff Jurek
Wetlands Restoration Program
320 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Subject: Irwin Creek Stream Restoration Project
DWQ Project Number 03 1239
Mecklenburg County
Dear Mr. Jurek:
This office received the plans for this stream restoration project on 8 October and sent comments concerning the
design of the project to your office on 17 October. Personnel with HDR responded to these concerns on 24 October.
Recently staff from the Wetlands Unit reviewed the response comments from HDR and found them acceptable. We
apologize for the delay in getting you these response comments.
If you have any questions, please call Dave Penrose at 919/715-3481.
Sincerely,
R. Dorney
ands Unit
cc: Dave Penrose, Wetlands/401 Certification Unit
Alan Johnson, Mooresville Regional Office
File Copy
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (ht!p://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands)
Customer Service #: 1-877-623-6748
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
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality

Irwin Creek Comments
Subject: Irwin Creek Comments
From: "Matthews, Christopher" <C'hris.MatthewsChdrinc.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 16:00:29 -0500
To: <dave.pertrose@ncmaiLnet>
CC: <jeff.jurek(ancmaiLnet>, <jim.stanfill@ncmaiLnet>, "Prospect, Dana" <Dese.Prospect n hdrinc.com>
Dave,
You are the man! Thanks for helping us out on this project.
Here is a copy of my comments to Todd, as well as some updated information (see
attachments) that should clarify the issues Todd had related to comments #1 and #2. The
attachments include the new values for the longitudinal profile, a revised Rosgen table and
images of the longitudinal profile and cross-sections.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Chris Matthews
Environmental, Water Resources and Planning
Section Manager
HDR ONE COMPANY Many Solutions
128 S. Tryon St. Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthews, Christopher
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:38 PM
To: 'Jeff Jurek'
Cc: Jim Stanfill
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Irwin Creek]
See my comments below.
Chris Matthews
Environmental, Water Resources and Planning
Section Manager
HDR ONE COMPANY Many Solutions
128 S. Tryon St. Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Jurek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 8:42 AM
1 of 3 12/22/03 3:20 PM
Table 5
Irwin Creek Lon itudinal Calculations
•:. ?:::::.: ?::::::::

........ ..........

?. : .? ..... ..:::::
.
. . .• . .
?r

:. ':•:•i:> ...::: :.; ...
. .... n

::: .....
.... ... : .: ?:::::::::::. v: ;. ?:.w::: ;: S;L•
. ............ k............ .

y
?'•''\:>:?';:a>2.5?;W;;?:yk:,y:•<}f>ii:i
:L? ?::;?73F:T•JRli.?
........

?:: : v;:: •}}i:ii•:.ii:Jii:t:{: v'•i:•iii'+.Ji:•:•i:i^'•::i•ir:.i}} :.:::::::::::.vv. ?.: ?:::..k'•ii:•v'•i
. .. ... .......................
....... ..v.... n........ n........... ..:..........:.....::.

F?y?/ i:•i4•ii
?:•:•?i?:•:•?i:•ji}+:<t•:•i:•:: `:Y::•.y,; p•: `T:A ii:•:<??+ ?yy?
i iii:tvviiiiii>iii'r:4:??:4t}:?p A/: ' ?A7•?Y?:`::;:}:}{:}}::::;:i:i{i:t
.............. y 4
... MLA......... ......
: : •vv...........v.......
3}\'y,:}}?} :}t}y:;:}i:•:•i:{:<:•ji:?G :j
::::.?::.: i:•i:•}}:•i:4:•:
::54:4:L:•:8:?::::::...v .........v.......... n........ •i:4:•i;:::...• v..:....
..w:: v:4i:4:4......... ?::n;:w:::
......n......v...................:..........

•:•

::•.:'.w:::. ,?{?y,
:<
w::::•n:•i}
.....R..........:.v.v.......

v v
:• x}\::.
;:::::::::::.:w:::::::::......: ?\\
:v: w:: w:•i:•i:J: is i::3
.:...:... n...............

v....: v'?vl..... ''#is2:
...
, .}i:•::L:Sy}}i:Qt}:?vi

• .................. ;........••"
i i::

:>.•.:::::::.:v::::.:::4'i^?.•:L•i.

i$'r}}<i'r:??i'r'ri : iiii'i'riiji$ii:•:

.\•}}::.::::: iii:•i::::: ..:::::
?y ?y

\•:.: v:::v:•::::::.fi.•::•:

:•::::::::::::::::.v. ?:.:: ?

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

y?y?
. •::::::::::.?. ?:.

.
TBM
0,0 0 8 596.91 Opposite tributary #1 Riffle
60.0 1 1 595.99 Riffle
100.0 1 9 595.99 Riffle
150.0 1 0 595.78 Riffle
191.7 595.61 Riffle 191.7 0.0068
200.0 0 9 595.61 Run
250.0 1 3.5 595.61 Run
300.0 1 9 595.57 Run
350.0 1 4 595.61 ?12' above tributary #2 Run
400.0 0 10.5 595.66 Run
450.0 2 4 595.53 Run
500.0 2 3 595.49 Run
550.0 1 8.5 595.53 Run
600.0 0 10.5 595.45 Run
650.0 1 0.5 595.45 Run
700.0 1 7.5 595.41 Run
750.0 1 6.5 595.41 Run
768.0 595.41 Run, X-SECTION #1
800.0 2 2.5 595.41 Below rock vein Run
850.0 2 0.5 595.41 Run
879.0 3 4 595.28 Run
903.0 3 9.5 595.32 Sa rolite Run
950.0 2 4 595.36 Run
993.0 595.28 Run, X-SECTION #2
1000.0 2 1 595.28 Run 828.3 0.0004
1020.0 0 3 595.28 Bedrock Riffle
1050.0 1 9 594.66 Riffle 43.9 0.0141
1063.9 594.66 Run
1100.0 1 6.5 594.66
1101.2 594.61
1150.0 1 2.5 594.61 Run
1161.0 1 2.5 594.61 Run 126.2 0.0004
1190.1 594.61 Riffle
1200.0 2 0.5 594.49 Riffle
1203.0 594.49 Riffle, X-SECTION #3
TP#1 594.49 Bedrock Riffle 30.5 0.0039
1220.6 594.49 Run
1250.0 2 2.5 594.53 Run
1300.0 1 11 594.49 Run
1350.0 0 9.5 594.45 Run 173.9 0.0014
1394.5 594.24 Riffle
1400.0 1 7 594.24 Riffle
1423.1 1 0 594.24 Riffle
1450.0 1 1.5 594.24 Riffle
1484.6 594.24 Riffle
1500.0 0 10.5 593.66 Riffle 155.5 0.0051
1550.0 0 8 593.45 Sa rolite Run
1550.9 593.41 Run
1600.0 1 1 593.41 Sa rolite Run
1650.0 1 5.5 593.41 Run
1700.0 1 11.5 593.32 Sa rolite Run
1750.0 1 10.5 593.32 Sa rolite Run
1800.0 1 10 593.36 Run
TP#2 593.36 Run
1850.0 1 5.5 593.36 Run
1863.0 0 4 593.24 Top of concrete pipe, mid-channel - 592.91 Run 316.0 0.0022
1866.0 0 10 592.74 Riffle
1900.0 1 4.5 592.53 Riffle 64.3 0.0035
1930.3 592.51 Run
1950.0 1 1 592.45 Run
1950.2 592.45 Run
2000.0 1 1.5 592.28 Run
2050.0 1 4.5 592.11 Run
2100.0 1 7.5 592.03 Run
2150.0 1 10.5 591.95 Below road Run
2200.0 2 1.5 591.95 Run
2250.0 2 1.5 591.86 Run
2300.0 1 3 591.82 Run 419.7 0.0019
2350.0 1 2.5 591.70 Riffle
2374.7 591.47 Riffle
2400.0 1 2 591.36 Riffle
2450.0 3 0.5 591.16 Riffle 100 0.0054
2500.0 2 1 591.16 Run 50 0.0000
2502.0 591.16 Pool
2525.0 591.16 Pool 44.6 0.0009
2544.6 1 2 591.11 Riffle
2550.0 1 5 591.07 Riffle 5.4 0.0077
2600.0 3 1.5 590.95 Run
2620.6 590.95 Run
2625.0 590.95 Run
2636.8 590.95 Run
2650.0 1 1 590.95 Run
2700.0 2 1 590.95 Run
TP#3 590.95 Below road Run
2750.0 1 10.5 590.91 Run
2800.0 2 4 590.86 Run
2850.0 2 1 590.86 Run
2900.0 1 1.5 590.86 Run
2950.0 1 11.5 590.86 Run
3000.0 2 7 590.82 Run
3050.0 1 2.5 590.82 Run 550 0.0007
3100.0 1 4 590.70 Pool
3150.0 2 0 590.78 Pool
3178.1 590.78 Pool
Table 5
Irwin Creek Lon itudinal Calculations

::...t1 .:.::.
xxxx: ,. .>::•>::.,,,

..

ft:::::
:::.... ::.:. :.;r:.;:''i

;:
..... .... y:c%•.',?>:::EE'`!'>EEEE>''

6E:A?UN:EEiCtf?::
...................................
:::.::.... ''•.`'•E`EEf?E'"`'`;:;EEE?sE!EE:+.`'•'E>•.`'•EE`<<'t

::::EE:::E:E:::EEEE:E::::i:::EEE:?Q?VIdy1dIY1lE?::::::;E:E:>:EE>EEEE":::::::::::t:E
......................................................................................
:::>:::::
::;:::::»>: »:a:::<? ::::: `::z>EEE!'??E

.............................................

:s:i::a:>;:::::S:S:S:::::::'<:t:t i::::::::::>: #`':?#EE>#

..........................

::>: i:>;>:t::i:::isY.`•:'<i:: ?z;t:::::?::E

..............................

::?c::? i:;:i'<::?c::::%Yt:::::: ::"EEE

.........................

:>::h:::i:::>;:::>.t>::i?'t::? E>':>;:;:;•.`'•?%%

............................

:::::::»:::'t;t:2::::::::i>:<:<
3200.0 2 5.5 590.78 Pool
3250.0 2 4.5 590.74 Pool
3300.0 2 5.5 590.74 Pool
TP#4 590.74 Below dike wall. Pool 250 -0.0002
3350.0 1 6.5 590.74 Run
3400.0 1 8 590.66 Run
3428.2 590.66 Run 78.2 0.0010
3450,0 1 6 590.66 Pool
3500.0 0 10.5 590.66 Pool
3509.0 590.66 Pool
3550.0 2 3 590.66 Pool
3600.0 2 7 590.61 -10' above Wing wall Pool
3650.0 2 4 590.66 Ca) lower wing wall Pool 249.8 0.0002
3678.0 0 10.5 590.61 Riffle
3700.0 1 10 590.41 Riffle 22.0 0.0095
3725.0 590.41 Run
3730.0 590.41 Run
3736.8 590.28 Run 20 0.0065
3750.0 3 2.5 590.28 Pool
3753.5 590.28 Pool
3800.0 3 2 590.28 Pool
3818.9 590.28 Pool 100.0 0.0000
3850.0 2 9 590.28 Run
TP#5 590.28 Run
3900.0 2 0 590.20 Run
3940.7 590.20 Run 90.7 0.0009
3950.0 1 2.5 590.03 Riffle
4000.0 1 8 588.91 Riffle
4000.7 588.91 Riffle 100.3 0.0129
4041.0 588.91 Run, X-SECTION #6
4050.0 1 8.5 588.91 Run
4070.0 588.65 Run
4100.0 1 9 588.57 Run
4150.0 1 9.5 588.45 Run
4200.0 1 10.5 588.41 Run
4250.0 1 9 588.32 Run
4300.0 1 4 588.24 Run
4350.0 1 8 588.07 Run
4400.0 2 3 588.03 0) drainage Run
4450.0 1 5 588.03 Run
4500.0 1 5 588.03 Run
4550.0 2 1.5 587.99 run
4600,0 3 0 587.91 Run
'fP#6 587.86 Run 584 0.0018
4625.0 2 10 587.86 Pool
4639.2 587.86 Pool
4674.0 587.86 Pool, X-SUCTION #5
4675.0 2 7 587.86 Pool 50 0.0000
4725.0 3 4 587.86 Run
4741.0 587.86 Run
4775.0 2 6 587.86 Run, X-SECTION #4
4825.0 3 4 587.86 IZun
4883.0 2 3 587.86 Run
4933.0 1 8.5 587.91 Run
4983.0 1 10.5 587.78 Run
5033.0 1 5 587.78 Run 358 0.0002
5033.0 587.78 'I'P#7 Run
0+00 600.11 Station 0+00 of x-sections 4& S
Minimum 0.0035 0.0000 -0.0002
Notes: Longitudinal profile tied horizontally to x-sections 1,2,3,5,6 and vertically to 4 and Maximum 0.0141 0.0065 0.0009
Treatment Plant outfall wingwalls at 1204 yards (3612 feet) trod 1216 yards (3648 feet). Points 9.0000 12.0000 5.0000
Mean 0.0077 0.0015 0.0002
f MACTECMACTEC ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC.
2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100
Charlotte NC, 28208
704.357.8600 FAX [phone]
TO: Mr. Mike Horan
N.C. Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Date: October 6.2003 Project No. 6229030180
Project Name: Hickory Grove Road Project
Attention: Mr. Mike Horan
Re: NWP 14 Permit Application - DWO Fee Payment
P 4j(
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
WE ARE SENDING YOU ®Attached ?Under separate cover via the following items:
?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 9/17/03 1 DWQ Permit Application Fee - Check No. 273802 ($475.00)
7 10/3/03 2 Draft plan view of proposed mitigation measures (stream enhancement)

THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
? For approval ? Approved as submitted ?
® For your use ? Approved as noted ?
® As requested ? Returned for corrections ?
? For review and comment
REMARKS:
Hi Mike,
ReSUbmll copies for approval
Submit copies for distribution
Rclurn corrected prints
Enclosed, please find a $475.00 check as oavment for the DWO application fee associated with the Hickorv Grove Road
Widening Project. The nationwide permit (NWP) pre-construction notification (PCN) was inadvertently submitted directly
to the Mooresville office in August. Mike Parker (DWO Mooresville) said he would be sending the permit packages to you
last Friday (October 3, 2003). We have also included seven copies of the draft plan sheet for the proposed mitigation effort
(olease include these for review with the oreviously-submitted aoolication oackaees). Please call me at 704.357.5610. if you
have any questions. Thanks, and have a great da
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, INC.
Benjamin L. Leatherland, P.W.S., CPESC
Senior Scientist
Copy to: File
WE4M%1401 GR
OC T - 7 2003
'"ERQUALITYSEC
TI01V
T+• N ? AN
\ J \ \ ,'ilk \\ ?
?"y??I I \ OO \ \\
MCC
\\
01
1
r y
r
bog I ; i `' \\\ \', P?? $ \\ \ ?J
11 1 I I I 11 \ 0`'36 ? ? \ \ ? ?? \ ?
lit
1 \
Oc?p 11 1 ?`? i C ?\ OZ±(DN
W% oI I 1 \ ?? -a? W )Z \ \??
00
EL ao
o:
LAJ
v d / / e \\ W \\ \
C7 W O / o \
0 o? j I e
ci V) U)
z fx- I / e
a ?? a I 1 X733.0. y oW
a H I / j t r.., 1 N Z
(rte ?_ ? a
00
LLJ
v W (n m / / \ fn
V) 2z LZ
0 C-0 C-)
V) cc
LLJ
W Z Q D_' D! a nM M? M i a \
O N \
m a- a-
=a lf% I xo
U O LL1 y N
Q! W a I I
d W N } w
LLJ
Z o
rJ
Z)
V) 0
0 + O 00\
p)
U) - CL
LLJ
MV)ZW
r? .
MACTEC
July 22, 2003 ':(NFIVED
Ms. Amanda Jones 1 ` 7 2003
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office NC DEPT OF ENVIRONMENT
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Asheville, NC 28801 MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification for Nationwide Permit No. 14
Hickory Grove Road Widening i
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
MACTEC Project 3010010123
USI Project 000223
City of Charlotte Project 512-97-087
' Dear Ms. Jones:
' On behalf of the City of Charlotte and US Infrastructure of Carolina, Inc. (USI), enclosed please
find a completed Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Joint Form (Attachment A) with
accompanying Jurisdictional Determination (JD) request package (Attachment B) for Nationwide
Permit (NWP) No. 14 for the above-referenced road widening project. USI has retained
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC) to provide permitting services for this
' project. This PCN is being submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in
accordance with the requirements of Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 14 (Linear Transportation
' Crossings), since USACE Regional Condition 2e (culvert burial) cannot be practicably satisfied.
The City of Charlotte has proposed the Hickory Grove Road Widening Project in east Charlotte,
approximately six miles east of downtown Charlotte, North Carolina. This project is located in
the headwaters of the Campbell Creek watershed. The project corridor encompasses Hickory
Grove Road between Shamrock Drive and Palo Verde Lane, and adjacent areas north and south
of Hickory Grove Road itself (Attachment B, Figure 1). The project corridor extends through
established residential communities, including Hickory Grove to the north, Hickory Ridge to the
' east, and Saddle Point to the south.
In order to widen the existing roadway and meet current storm-water *sig r,§taadards, an
existing 72" reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), approximately 60 linear feet (it) in Ien 6 willf'b2d.
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting ;
' 2801 Yorkmont Road, Suite 100 • Charlotte, NC 28208
704-357-8600•Fax: [phone]
City of Charlotte I
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123 1
replaced by pair of 9'x5' precast concrete box culverts 142 If in length. Completion of this
activity will result in approximately 82 If of piping impacts to a perennial stream (Campbell t
Creek) below the ordinary high water mark. During project implementation, existing riprap inlet
and outlet aprons at the crossing location will also be replaced. This activity will be completed
pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 14 - Linear Transportation Crossings. See Attachment C for
construction plan excerpts. '
Project Background I
Hickory Grove Road serves as an east-west thoroughfare in the eastern part of the City of '
Charlotte. This thoroughfare provides access to residential and commercial areas along Sharon
Amity Road and East W.T. Harris Boulevard. In addition, Hickory Grove Road is utilized by ,
Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) buses, and helps provide a connection between adjacent
residential areas and the uptown employment centers. Traffic analysis performed on this '
thoroughfare indicates that the existing two-lane road is over capacity. The proposed project will
involve widening of Hickory Grove Road to a four-lane facility between Shamrock Drive and
Highland Avenue. Designated bike lanes, aesthetic corridor landscaping, sidewalks with
planting strips, and curb/gutter storm drainage improvements will also be components of the
proposed project. As identified by the Charlotte Department of Transportation (CDOT), the
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission (CMPC), and the Mecklenburg-Union County '
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO), the proposed improvements are designed to
reduce congestion, improve safety, and increase accessibility to economic centers along Hickory
Grove Road while retaining the suburban character of the roadway.

1
l
171
1

City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.

r

e

1

I

Review of the USGS topographic quadrangle (Mint Hill, NC, dated 1993; Figure 1) and the Soil
Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (map sheet 8 of 13, dated 1976), revealed that
Campbell Creek and a tributary to Campbell Creek cross Hickory Grove Road within the project
area. Based upon review of the List of Hydric Soils of Mecklenburg County, no mapped hydric
soils were identified within the project area. However, two mapped soil units, Monacan loam,
and Helena sandy loam, two to eight percent slopes, were identified adjacent to Campbell Creek
and its tributary within the project area, and in the eastern-most portion of the project area. Both
of these soil units typically have hydric soil inclusions and wet spots.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map [U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1991]
indicates three ponds and one wetland north of Hickory Grove Road. The USFWS classifies the
ponds as palustrine, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded, diked/impounded (PUBHh)
features. The wetland (along an upstream reach of Campbell Creek) is classified as a palustrine,
forested, broad-leaved deciduous, temporarily flooded (PFO1 A) feature. The proposed project is
not anticipated to impact any of these areas. The NWI map (Mint Hill, NC, dated 1991) also
classifies Campbell Creek as a riverine system and as an excavated, permanently flooded, lower
perennial stream, with an unconsolidated bottom (R2UBHx). The NWI map does not identify a
tributary to Campbell Creek within the project area. No other evidence of NWI wetlands in the
project area was identified. Campbell Creek has been characterized as Class C waters by DWQ
(DWQ Index No. 11-137-9-1).
Preliminary stream assessment efforts in February 2001 indicated that Campbell Creek and the
Craigwood Drive tributary to Campbell Creek are perennial, jurisdictional stream channels
(Attachment B, Figure 2). These efforts utilized the USACE Intermittent Channel Evaluation
Form and the DWQ Stream Classification Form. The purpose of stream assessments is to
distinguish between non jurisdictional ephemeral streams, and jurisdictional intermittent and
perennial streams. Jurisdictional intermittent streams are subsequently categorized as either
,,aquatically important" or "aquatically unimportant." Those streams designated as perennial are
considered to be aquatically important by the USAGE and meet DWQ's definition of perennial
(i.e., confirmed presence of fish, crayfish, or shellfish). Representative photographs of stream
channels are included in Attachment B.
3
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123 1
Subsequent preliminary wetland determination efforts in April 2001 indicated no potential
wetlands within the project corridor (Attachment B, Figure 2). Wetland determination efforts
utilized the Routine On-Site Determination method as described in the 1987 "Corps of Engineers '
Wetlands Delineation Manual"'. This technique uses a multi-parameter approach, which requires
positive evidence of the following three criteria:
• Hydrophytic vegetation (vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions)
• Wetland hydrology (inundation or saturation of soil at some time during the growing season)
• Hydric soils (soils possessing characteristics of reducing/anaerobic conditions).
Alternatives and Avoidance/Minimization
Taking into consideration the physical constraints of the project corridor, impacts to Campbell
Creek were determined to be unavoidable. Several alternatives were then considered, in an effort
to minimize potential impacts associated with the proposed Campbell Creek roadway crossing.
These included "no action," conventional piping, and bottomless culvert installation. I
A no-action alternative was considered for the proposed project. This approach would leave
Hickory Grove Road as a two-lane roadway and would not increase impacts to the stream
channel. This approach would not address the need for additional vehicular capacity, and could
encourage increased traffic congestion in the future. After consideration of community needs,
this option was excluded from further consideration.
Conventional piping of Campbell Creek beneath a widened Hickory Grove Road was also
considered. This approach would involve use of conventional reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), '
corrugated metal pipe (CMP), or reinforced concrete box culvert (RCBC) structures. This
approach would allow widening of the roadway to address community needs, and could be
implemented with minimal additional impact to the stream channel (approximately 82 if culvert
extension). '
Environmental Laboratory, 1987, "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US
Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

t
t

t
I

t

77
I
I

City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Installation of a pre-cast natural bottom culvert was also considered. This option could reduce
overall impacts to the streambed and would allow road widening, but would be limited by
existing utility lines (sewer and natural gas) and could conflict with project phasing. An existing
natural gas line limits culvert location, while an existing sewer line limits culvert depth.
Additionally, project phasing will require culvert installation in a 59-hour time period during one
weekend of construction (7pm Friday to 6am Monday). This time period would not likely allow
sufficient time to excavate, pour, and cure strip footings for a natural bottom culvert. The time
required to install a bottomless culvert at the proposed location could interfere with commuter
traffic, mass transit, emergency vehicle access for approximately five to seven days. After
consideration of these issues, this approach was excluded from further consideration.
After evaluation of potential environmental impacts, utility line constraints, project phasing
issues, community needs, and design requirements, the recommended alternative was determined
to be conventional piping with reinforced concrete box culverts. The proposed double 9'x5'
precast box culverts were then designed, in accordance with City standards, such that the
finished floor in the upstream house would not be flooded in a 100-year storm event. The
positioning of the culvert and depth of the proposed footing were based on the culvert's
proximity to a Piedmont Natural Gas 12" transmission line and an 8" sanitary sewer line,
respectively. The proposed culvert will be located such that the northern end wall footing will
encroach only two feet into the Piedmont Natural Gas right-of-way. The presence of the existing
8" sewer line will prevent culvert burial beneath the existing streambed.
It is anticipated that the minimal culvert extension (82 If) and accelerated construction schedule
will reduce overall project impacts. There should be no adverse impacts to the stream's
hydrologic or hydraulic performance as a result of the proposed culvert replacement effort.
Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
The proposed project will impact approximately 82 If of perennial, jurisdictional stream channel.
An existing 601f culvert beneath Hickory Grove Road will be removed, and will be replaced by a
142 if double box culvert. The new culvert invert will be set at the existing streambed elevation.
Culvert burial is not an option at this location, due to the presence of other buried utility lines.
During construction, a low concrete baffle will be installed, in order to direct baseflow through a
5
Cite of Charlotte 1
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123 1
single box of the double-box culvert. This baffle will be constructed upstream of the culvert, but
has not been shown on the plan sheets included in this PCN document. I
Secondary and Cumulative Impacts I
The proposed road widening effort will be implemented in a portion of Charlotte that was largely
`built-out' 10-15 years ago. Water, sewer, and other infrastructure facilities have been present
along the existing roadway for many years, and the majority of nearby properties have been
previously built upon. While the proposed roadway widening project will provide increased
traffic capacity, potential secondary impacts should be minimal. Potential secondary air quality
impacts should be offset by current and future emissions regulations (both federal and local),
while potential land use change should be minimized by the presence of established residential
communities and re-zoning requirements. The widening of this existing roadway between and
through previously-developed areas is not anticipated to produce significant secondary or
cumulative impacts.
Mitigation I
As mitigation for the proposed 82 if of piping impacts, the City of Charlotte proposes 85 If of
stream enhancement (streambank stabilization and riparian buffer planting) along an impaired
reach of the Craigwood Tributary (near the Campbell Creek confluence, see Attachment B).
Degraded riparian vegetation and invasive species currently exist along this moderately incised
stream reach. Enhancement efforts will include a combination of streambank re-shaping (at 2:1
'
or 3:1 slopes), bioengineering stabilization, and additional riparian planting of native woody
species, in order to reduce streambank erosion, increase stream shading, and increase the
availability of woody material within the riparian zone. Trees and shrubs will be installed at a
density of approximately 400 seedlings/acre within a 50-foot riparian corridor along the stream
channel, and will be augmented by a native herbaceous seed mix. The seed mix alone will be
used along permanent utility easements, in order to minimize potential disturbance of buried '
utility lines from deep-rooting species. The proposed stream enhancement effort should increase
streambank stability (by increasing riparian root mass), should reduce thermal degradation (by '
shading the stream), should increase the availability of coarse particulate organic matter (CPOM)
I

City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 Jul), 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123
for aquatic macroi n vertebrates, and should eventually contribute additional large woody debris
(LWD) to the stream system.
I Regulatory Implications
Nationwide and regional conditions for NWP No. 14 (except culvert burial) will be met by the
USI design and will be communicated to City of Charlotte contractors. The project design will
also comply with conditions of Section 401 General Certification (GC) for projects eligible for
NWP No. 14 (NCDENR DWQ Water Quality Certification 3375).

t
UH

1

1

Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices, which equal or exceed those outlined in the
most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design
Manual" will be utilized to prevent exceedances of the appropriate turbidity water quality
standard. Additionally, project sediment and erosion control measures placed in waters will be
removed and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources or delegated local
program has released the project.
As part of its Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Program, the Mecklenburg
County Department of Environmental Protection (MCDEP) has established streamside buffers
for perennial waters throughout Mecklenburg County, to include the establishment of buffers
along Campbell Creek and many of its tributaries. At the Hickory Grove Road crossing,
Campbell Creek has a 50-foot SWIM buffer. During project implementation, efforts will be
made to minimize SWIM buffer impacts. Generally, SWIM buffer impacts from road crossings
for connectivity or transportation links do not require mitigation, if the Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Planning Commission has granted site plan approval (Section 12.806, 2a).
Cultural Resources and Protected Species
A letter dated January 11, 200 was forwarded to the North Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources (NCDCR) requesting information regarding potential archaeological and/or cultural
resource issues in the study area (Attachment D). A response letter dated February 24, 2000 was
subsequently received from the NCDCR (Attachment D), with comments regarding Carter's
Store and the Hickory Grove Methodist Church. Subsequent correspondence dated March 17,
7
,
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123
2000 (Attachment D) noted that Carter's Store no longer exists at the noted NCDCR address
(6110 Hickory Grove Road), and that the proposed road widening project should affect only a t
small portion of the Hickory Grove Methodist Church lawn. No impacts are anticipated to the
structural building or to the church cemetery. As of the date of this PCN document, no
additional correspondence has been received from the NCDCR.

A letter requesting information, dated January 11, 2000, was also forwarded to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to determine the presence of federally-listed or state-listed
endangered or threatened species, candidates proposed for listing as endangered or threatened
species, or of critical habitat in the proposed project permit area (Attachment E). A response
letter dated March 27, 2000 was received from the USFWS, with comments regarding the
proposed project (Attachment E). In response to USFWS comments, a protected species field
review was conducted on May 18, 2001. No individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), or Georgia aster (Aster georgianus)
were observed during the field review, nor were any members of the respective genera observed.
Documentation of this effort is included in Attachment E.
The following information is provided in response to specific comments provided in the March
27, 2000 USFWS letter:
1) Alternatives analysis - See previous "Alternatives and Avoidance/Minimization" section
of this PCN document.
2) Fishery and wildlife resources to be affected - The proposed road widening effort will
ated that these areas (in close
d lawn areas
It i
not antici
i
t
i
t
i
i
il ,
.
p
mar
mpac
ma
n
a
ne
s
pr
y
proximity to the existing roadway) provide high quality terrestrial habitat. Aquatic
habitat impacts will include approximately 82 If of additional piping at the Campbell
Creek crossing.
3) Wetland impacts - A wetland determination effort was conducted in April 2001
(Attachment B, USACE Routine Wetland Determination form). No wetlands were
identified within the proposed corridor. No wetland impacts are anticipated as a result 017
the proposed project.
4) Stream impacts - See previous "Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S." and "Impacts to
Jurisdictional Waters" sections of this PCN document for a description of stream
channels and anticipated impacts associated with the proposed project.
8 1
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14
MACTEC Project 3010010123
1
t

1
Jul), 22, 2003
5) Upland habitat impacts - Approximately seven acres of existing uplands (primarily
maintained lawn areas) will be affected by the proposed project. It is not anticipated that
such areas (in close proximity to the existing roadway) provide high quality wildlife
habitat.
6) Secondary and cumulative impacts - See Secondary and Cumulative Impacts section of
this PCN. It is not anticipated that the proposed project will produce significant
secondary or cumulative impacts.
7)

t
n

t
t
t

11

Stream crossing structure selection - See previous "Alternatives and
Avoidance/Minimization" section of this PCN document.
8) Habitat loss, degradation, and/or fragmentation concerns - The proposed project will
impact approximately 82 If of existing perennial stream channel. At present, this stream
reach is incised (Rosgen G4/5), has only a minimal riparian buffer, and may have been
previously channelized.
9) Mitigation measures - Impacts have been avoided and minimized whenever practicable.
See previous "Mitigation" section of this PCN document for proposed stream mitigation
measures. Since no high-quality upland habitat should be impacted by the proposed
project, no terrestrial habitat mitigation is proposed. Since no wetland impacts are
anticipated, no wetland mitigation is proposed.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database was reviewed to evaluate the
potential occurrence of threatened or endangered species within Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina. This database indicated that there are seven federally and/or state endangered species
which may occur in Mecklenburg County, namely the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus),
Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), Georgia aster (Aster georgianus), tall larkspur
(Delphinium exaltatum), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii), and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). The NCNHP was contacted
via facsimile on February 7, 2001 to determine the presence of any federally-listed or state-listed
or candidate endangered or threatened species or critical habitat within the permit area of the
proposed project. A response letter dated February 9, 2001 was received from the NCNHP,
noting "no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or priority natural areas at the
site nor within two miles of this site" (Attachment F).

,
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123
State (North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act Documentation

According to a 1998 memorandum authored by Coleen Sullins (NCDENR DWQ) documenting
interim stream and wetland thresholds for DWQ review under the State Environmental Policy
Act (SEPA), projects disturbing a total of greater than 500 linear feet of perennial stream
channels require SEPA review. Since the proposed activities discussed in this PCN will not
disturb more than 500 linear feet of perennial stream channel with hard structure, these activities
do not fall within the SEPA review threshold and should not require preparation of an
Environmental Assessment (EA) and corresponding SEPA review.

Closing

Your prompt decision in this matter and corresponding processing of this pre-construction
notification and request for jurisdictional determination will be greatly appreciated. Please do
not hesitate to contact Mr. Jarrod Karl at 704.432.0966 (or jkarl @ci.charlotte.nc.us), if you have
any questions.
Sincerely,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING
INC
,
.

arrod J. Karl Richard B. Darling, C.E.

City of Charlotte MACTEC Engineering and Consulting ,
cientist
Wetland Scientist Principal
S
By
RBD/BLL:bll
Enclosures: Attachment A - Pre-Construction Notification Application Form
Attachment B - Request for Jurisdictional Determination Package
Attachment C - Construction Plan Excerpts
Attachment D - N.C. Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR)
Correspondence
Attachment E - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Correspondence and
LAW Protected Species Field Review
Attachment F - N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Correspondence

10 1
t
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
A
t

City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Attachment A
July 22, 2003
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION
APPLICATION FORM

A06U G
U ?
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Application Form
For Section 404 and/or Section 10 Nationwide, Regional and General Permits, Section 401
General Water Quality Certifications, and Riparian Buffer and Watershed Buffer Rules
This form is to be used for projects qualifying for any of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (USACE)
Nationwide, Regional or General Permits as required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and for the North Carolina Division of Water Quality's
(DWQ) associated General 401 Water Quality Certifications. This form is also to be used for any
project requiring approval under any Riparian Buffer Rules implemented by the N.C. Division of Water
Quality. This form should not be used if you are requesting an Individual 404 Permit or Individual 401
Water Quality Certification. The USACE Individual Permit application form is available online at
http://www.saw.usace.army.mi]/wet]ands/Perm app.htm.
The USACE is the lead regulatory agency. To review the requirements for the use of Nationwide,
Regional or General permits, and to determine which permit applies to your project, please go to the
USACE website at http://www.saw.usace.army.miI/wetlands/reiztour.htm, or contact one of the field
offices listed at the end of this application. The website also lists the responsible project manager for
each county in North Carolina and provides additional information regarding the identification and
regulation of wetlands and waters of the U.S.
The DWQ issues a corresponding Certification (General or Individual), and cannot tell the applicant
which 401 Certification will apply until the 404 Permit type has been determined by the USACE.
Applicants are encouraged to visit DWQ's 401 /Wetlands Unit website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands to read about current requirements for the 401 Water Quality
Certification Program and to determine whether or not Riparian Buffer Rules are applicable. The
applicant is also advised to read the full text of the General Certification (GC) matching the specific 404
Permit requested. In some cases, written approval for some General Certifications is not required,
provided that the applicant adheres to all conditions of the GC. Applicants lacking access to the internet
should contact DWQ's Central Office in Raleigh at [phone].
Trout Waters Coordination - Special coordination with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) is also required for projects occurring in any of North Carolina's twenty-five
counties that contain trout waters. In such cases, the applicant should contact the appropriate NCWRC
regional coordinator (listed by county on the last page of this application).
Page I of 14

CAMA Coordination - If the project occurs in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on
the last page of this application) the applicant should also contact the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (DCM) at [phone]. DCM will determine whether or not the project involves a
designated Area of Environmental Concern, in which case DCM will act as the lead permitting agency.
In such cases, DCM will require a Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA) Permit and will coordinate
the 404/401 Permits. ,
USACE Permits - Submit one copy of this form, along with supporting narratives, maps, data forms,
photos, etc. to the applicable USACE Regulatory Field Office (addresses are listed at the end of this
application). Upon receipt of an application, the USACE will determine if the application is complete as
soon as possible, not to exceed 30 days: This PCN form is designed for the convenience of the applicant
to address information needs for all USACE Nationwide, Regional or General permits, as well as
information required for State authorizations, certifications, and coordination. Fully providing the
information requested on this form will result in a complete application for any of the USACE
Nationwide, Regional or General permits. To review the minimum amount of information that must be
provided for a complete PCN for each USACE Nationwide permit, see Condition 13, 65 Fed.Reg. 12893
(March 9, 2000), available at httl2://www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands/nwRfinalFedRe 2.Vdf.
Processing times vary by permit and begin once the application has been determined to be complete.
Please contact the appropriate regulatory field office for specific answers to permit processing periods.
401 Water Quality Certification or Buffer Rules - All information is required unless otherwise stated
as optional. Incomplete applications will be returned. Submit seven collated copies of all USACE
Permit materials to the Division of Water Quality, 401/Wetlands Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650. If written approval is required or specifically requested for a 401
Certification, then a non-refundable application fee is required. In brief, if project impacts include less
than one acre of cumulative wetland/water impacts and less than 150 feet cumulative impacts to
streams, then a fee of $200 is required. If either of these thresholds is exceeded, then a fee of $475 is
required. A check made out to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, with the specific name of
the project or applicant identified, should be stapled to the front of the application package. For more
information, see the DWQ website at http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/fees.htnil. The fee must be
attached with the application unless the applicant is a federal agency in which case the check may be
issued from a separate office. In such cases, the project must be identifiable on the U.S. Treasury check
so that it can be credited to the appropriate project. If written approval is sought solely for Buffer Rules,
the application fee does not apply, and the applicant should clearly state (in a cover letter) that only
Buffer Rule approval is sought in writing. Wetlands or waters of the U.S. may not be impacted prior to
issuance or waiver of a Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Upon receipt of a complete application
for a 401 Certification, the Division of Water Quality has 60 days to prepare a written response to the
applicant. This may include a 401 Certification, an on-hold letter pending receipt of additional
requested information, or denial.

Page 2 of 14 1
n MACTEC
'TEC ENGINEERING & CONSULTING, INC(
I v__i....___n??•J a..:..._ inn /I \II

Date: August 6, 2003 Project No. 6229030180
Project Name: Hickory Grove Road Project
Attention: Mr. Mike Parker
wt ivtntttort 1xoau,.3uttc tvv t
Charlotte NC, 28208
704.357.8600 FAX [phone]
TO: Mr. Mike Parker
N.C. Division of Water Quality
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, NC 281 15
Re: NWP 14 Permit Application
RF" C, E I V E D
2z a A U C 7 2003
NC DEPT OF ENVIRONMENT
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES
WE ARE SENDING YOU ®Attached ?Under separate cover via the fol WW, REGIONAL OFFICE
?plans ?samples ?specifications ?Copy of letter ?Change order ®Other
IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED,
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
7 7/22/03 1 Hickory Grove Road Widening - NWP 1,1 Pormir e „.,r, ....•_
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
® For approval F1 Approved as submitted
® For your use E1 Approved as toted
? As requested F-1 Returned for corrections
? For review and comment
REMARKS:
Hi Mike,

-11-11 1:11t-ePq
#/ 7
Le-
r-.
? ? I Int. C v ?CL t,/?r
Attached, please find seven copies of a Nationwide Permit 14 application 1
NC. Relevant construction plan excerpts have been included with each g
drawings has also been included, to provide additional information. The F
your office shortly. Please call me at 704.357.5610, if you have any questions. Thanks, and have a great day!
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING, INC.
Benjamin L. Leatherland, P.W.S., CPESC
Project Scientist

Eau
Copy to: File

KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE
t
t

Office Use Only: Form Version April 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
' leaving the space blank.

t
t

t

1. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 14
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 (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Jarrod J. Karl, Wetland Scientist
Mailing Address: City of Charlotte
600 East Fourth Street 14th floor
Charlotte NC
28202
Telephone Number: 704.432.0966 Fax Number: 704.336.6586
E-mail Address: ikarl?ci.charlotte.nc.us
2. Agent 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: N/A
Company Affiliation: N/A
Mailing Address: N/A
N/A
N/A
Telephone Number: N/A Fax Number: N/A
E-mail Address: N/A

I Page 3 of 14

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 l l 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: Hickory Grove Road Widening
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): Charlotte DOT Project No. 512-97-087
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Multiple properties
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town: Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Hickory Grove Road passes through Saddle
Point, Hickory Grove, and Hickory Ridge subdivisions
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Take Interstate 85 to exit 45 (W.T.
Haris Boulevard). Take East W.T. Harris Boulevard southeast for approximately 7.50 miles,
until reaching the intersection of East W.T. Harris Boulevard and Hickory Grove Road.
Approximately 0.50 mile of the proposed roadway widening is located east of this intersection
(along Hickory Grove Road), and approximately 1.25 miles of the proposed roadway widening
is located west of this intersection (along Hickory Grove Road). The 100 foot wide project
corridor extends from Shamrock Drive to Palo Verde Lane, for a total distance of
approximateluv 1.75 miles. The proposed stream crossing is approximately 0.60 miles west of
the East W.T. Harris Boulevard/Hickory Grove Road intersection.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35 degrees, 13 minutes, 22 seconds
North / -80 degrees, 44 minutes, 10 seconds West
(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. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:_
Residential land use surrounds proposed roadway widening corridor, along with limited
commerical and institutional properties.
7. Property size (acres): N/A I
Page 4 of 14
1

8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Campbell Creek (crosses beneath
Hickory Grove Road, at a location approximately 0.60 miles west of the East W.T. Harris
Boulevard /Hickory Grove Road intersection).
9. 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/.)
' 10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: To increase the vehicular capacity of Hickory
Grove Road, by widening the existing roadway from two lanes to four lanes.
1 l . List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Track hoes, back hoes,
bulldozers, dumptrucks. and hand tools.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: The existing Hickory Grove Road
corridor is surrounded by residential properties, along with scattered commercial and
institutional properties.
IV. 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.
No previous jurisdictional determinations have been requested for the proposed project site. This
PCN contains a request for iursidictional determination ND) in Attachment B.
1
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future? If so, describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
application:
N/A
VI. 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
' Page 5 of 14

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.
1. Wetland Impacts
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***
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

* List each impact separately ano identity temporary impacts. impacts mciuae, out are not nmttea to: mecnamzea clearing, graamg, nu,
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 ham://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.)
t

t

t

1
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0.0 acres
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.0 acres
Page 6 of 14
t
t
t

1
[i

t

t

[l
t
LLI
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
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?
(please secif )
1 Piping 82 Campbell Creek 3 feet Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated np-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.usas.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: The proposed roadway
wideninq will require approximately 82 linear feet of additional pipe/culvert installation along
Campbell Creek.
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbod
(if applicable) y Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: till, 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
Page 7 of 14
t
lr-.
L_J
VII.
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A

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.
,
Taking into consideration the physical constraints of the project corridor, impacts to Campbell
Creek were determined to be unavoidable. Several alternatives were then considered in an effort
to minimize potential impacts associated with the proposed Campbell Creek roadway crossing.
These included "no action," conventional piping, and bottomless culvert installation.
A no-action alternative was considered for the proposed project. This approach would leave
Hickory Grove Road as a two-lane roadway and would not increase impacts to the stream
channel. This approach would not address the need for additional vehicular capacity, and could
encourage increased traffic congestion in the future. After consideration of community needs,
this option was excluded from further consideration.
Conventional Piping of Campbell Creek beneath a widened Hickory Grove Road was also
considered. This approach would involve use of conventional reinforced concrete pipe (RCP),
corrugated metal pipe (CMP), or reinforced concrete box culvert (RCBC) structures. This
approach would allow widening of the roadway to address community needs, and could be
implemented with minimal additional impact to the stream channel (approximately 82 If culvert
extension).
Installation of a pre-cast _natural _ bottom culvert was also considered. This option could reduce
overall impacts to the streambed and would allow road widening, but would be limited by existing
utility lines (sewer and natural gas) and could conflict with project phasing. An existing natural
gas line limits culvert location, while an existing sewer line limits culvert depth. Additionally,
proiect phasing will require culvert installation in a 59-hour time period during one weekend of
construction Qpm Friday to 6am Monday). This time period would not likely allow sufficient time
to excavate, pour, and cure strip footings for a natural bottom culvert. The time reauired to install
a bottomless culvert at the proposed location could interfere with commuter traffic, mass transit,
emergency vehicle access for approximately five to seven days. After consideration of these ,
issues, this approach was excluded from further consideration.
After evaluation of potential environmental impacts, utility line constraints, project phasing
issues, community needs, and desian requirements, the recommended alternative was
determined to be conventional piping with reinforced concrete box culverts. The proposed double
9'x5' precast box culverts were then designed, in accordance with City standards, such that the
finished floor in the upstream house would not be flooded in a 100-year storm event. The '
positioning of the culvert and depth of the proposed footing were based on the culvert's proximity
to a Piedmont Natural Gas 12" transmission line and an 8" sanitarv sewer line, respectively. The
roposed culvert will be located such that the northern end wall footing will encroach only two I
Page 8 of 14 1
IJ
feet into the Piedmont Natural Gas right-of-way. The new culvert invert will be set at the existing
streambed elevation. The presence of the existing 8" sewer line will prevent culvert burial
beneath the existing streambed. During construction, a low concrete baffle will be installed, in
order to direct baseflow through a single box of the double-box culvert. This baffle will be
constructed upstream of the culvert, but has not been shown on the plan sheets included in this
PCN document.
I

t

1
1

It is anticipated that the minimal culvert extension (82 If) and accelerated construction schedule
will reduce overall project impacts. There should be no adverse impacts to the stream's
hydrologic or hydraulic performance as a result of the proposed culvert replacement effort.
The proposed road widening effort will be implemented in a portion of Charlotte that was largely
`built-out' 10-15 years ago. Water, sewer, and other infrastructure facilities have been present
along the existing roadway for many years, and the majority of nearby properties have been
Previously built upon. While the proposed roadway widening project will provide increased traffic
capacity, potential secondary impacts should be minimal. Potential secondary air quality impacts
should be offset by current and future emissions regulations (both federal and local), while
potential land use chanae should be minimized by the presence of established residential
communities and re-zoning requirements. The widening of this existing roadway between and
through previously-developed areas is not anticipated to produce significant secondary or
cumulative impacts.
I Page 9 of 14
t
VIII. Mitigation I
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 r
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
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.htmi.
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.
As mitigation for the proposed 82 If of piping impacts, the City of Charlotte proposes 85 If of
stream enhancement (streambank stabilization and riparian buffer planting) along an impaired
reach of the Craigwood Tributary (near the Campbell Creek confluence, see Attachment B).
Degraded riparian vegetation and invasive species currently exist along this moderately
incised stream reach. Enhancement efforts will include a combination of streambank re-
shaping (at 2:1 or 3:1 slopes), bioengineering stabilization, and additional riparian planting of
native woody species, in order to reduce streambank erosion, increase stream shading, and
increase the availability of woody material within the riparian zone. Trees and shrubs will be
installed at a density of approximately 400 seedlings/acre within a 50-foot riparian corridor
along the stream channel, and will be augmented by a native herbaceous seed mix. The seed
mix alone will be used along permanent utility easements, in order to minimize potential
disturbance of buried utility lines from deep-rooting species. The proposed stream
enhancement effort should increase streambank stability (by increasing riparian root mass),
should reduce thermal degradation (by shading the stream), should increase the availability of
coarse particulate organic matter (CPOM) for aquatic macroinvertebrates, and should
eventuallv contribute additional larqe woodv debris (LWD) to the stream system.

Page 10 of 14 1

t

1?

t
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/l*ndex.htm. 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): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
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 (DWQ Only)
t
t

I

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 213 .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 213 .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify N/A )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Page 1 1 of 14

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* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 0 3 0
2 0 1.5 0
Total 0 0
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; 'Lone 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.
N/A
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
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.
The proposed roadwav widenina project will increase the extent of impervious surface from
approximately 4.7 acres (existing roadway approximately 22 feet wide) to approximately 11.7 acres
(proposed roadway approximately 55 feet wide). Stormwater runoff from the proposed roadway
surface will be handled by a curb and autter stormwater collection/conveyance system.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
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.
N/A
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (I 5A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
Page 12 of 14

F??

I

t
t
1

XIV. 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).
WA

Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)

US Army Corps Of Engineers Field Offices and County Coverage
Asheville Regulatory Field Office Alexander Cherokee Iredell Mitchell
US Army Corps of Engineers Avery Clay Jackson Polk
151 Patton Avenue
Room 208 Buncombe
Burke Cleveland
Gaston Lincoln
Macon Rowan
Rutherford
Asheville, NC 28801-5006 Cabarrus Graham Madison Stanley
Telephone: [phone] Caldwell Haywood McDowell Swain
Fax: [phone] Catawba Henderson Mecklenburg Transylvania
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Alamance Durham Johnston Rockingham
US Army Corps Of Engineers Alleghany Edgecombe Lee Stokes
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Ashe Franklin Nash Surry
Suite 120 Caswell Forsyth Northampton Vance
Raleigh, NC 27615 Chatham Granville Orange Wake
Telephone: [phone] Davidson Guilford Person Warren
Fax: [phone] Davie Halifax Randolph Wilkes
Washington Regulatory Field Office Beaufort Currituck Jones
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bertie Dare Lenoir
Post Office Box 1000 Camden Gates Martin
Washington, NC 27889-1000 Carteret* Green Pamlico
Telephone: [phone] Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
Fax: [phone] Craven Hyde Perquimans
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Anson Duplin Onslow
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bladen Harnett Pender
Post Office Box 1890 Brunswick Hoke Richmond
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 Carteret Montgomery Robeson
i
Page 13 of 14

Pitt
Tyrrell
Washington
Wayne
Union
Watauga
Yancey
Wilson
Yadkin
*Croatan National Forest Only
Telephone: [phone] Columbus Moore Sampson
Fax: [phone] Cumberland New Hanover Scotland
US Fish and Wildlife Service / National Marine Fisheries Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service US Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Service
Raleigh Field Office Asheville Field Office Habitat Conservation Division
Post Office Box 33726 160 Zillicoa Street Pivers Island
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726 Asheville, NC 28801 Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone: [phone] Telephone: [phone] Telephone: [phone]
North Carolina State Agencies
Division of Water Quality Division of Water Quality State Historic Preservation Office
401 Wetlands Unit Wetlands Restoration Program Department Of Cultural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center 1619 Mail Service Center 4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Raleigh, NC 27699-1619 Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Telephone: [phone] Telephone: [phone] Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone]
CAMA and NC Coastal Counties
Division of Coastal Management Beaufort Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
1638 Mail Service Center Bertie Craven Hyde Pender
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 Brunswick Currituck New Hanover Perquimans
Telephone: [phone] Camden Dare Onslow Tyrrell
Fax: [phone] Carteret Gates Pamlico Washington
NCWRC and NC Trout Counties
Western Piedmont Region Coordinator Alleghany Caldwell Watauga
3855 Idlewild Road Ashe Mitchell Wilkes
Kernersville, NC 27284-9180 Avery Stokes
Telephone: [phone] Burke Surry
Mountain Region Coordinator Buncombe Henderson Polk
20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway Cherokee Jackson Rutherford
Waynesville, NC 28786 Clay Macon Swain
Telephone: [phone] Graham Madison Transylvania
Fax: [phone] Haywood McDowell Yancey
Page 14 of 14

t
t

1
1
1
1
1
t

t
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Attachment B
REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION PACKAGE
July 22, 2003
P
' REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DATE: July 22, 2003
COUNTY Mecklenburg TOTAL ACREAGE OF TRACT(s) N/A - linear project
PROJECT NAME (if applicable) HickoEy rove Road Widening
' PROPERTY OWNER (name, address and phone):
City of Charlotte
600 E 40' Street
Charlotte North Carolina 28202
Attn: Jarrod J. Karl Wetland Scientist 704-432-0966
NAME OF AGENT, ENGINEER, DEVELOPER (if applicable):
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.*
r 2801 Yorkmont Drive, Suite 100
Charlotte North Carolina 28208
Attn: Benjamin L. Leatherland. Senior Scientist, 704-357-8600
STATUS OF PROJECT (check one):
( ) On-going site work for development purposes
( X) Development in planning stages (Type of development: road widening)
( ) No specific development planned at present
1 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.)
( X ) Survey plat of property in question
( X ) Aerial photograph (from County Assessors office, or other source;
property boundaries shown on the photo would be most helpful)
( X ) Topographic survey
( X ) Conceptual site plan for overall development
(X) USACE Intermittent Channel Evaluation Forms/NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms
( X) Routine Wetland Determination Forms
( ( X ) SCS Soil Survey Sheet(s) (Mecklenburg County)
( X ) Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map
S' ture of Property Owner o
uthorized Agent
* MACTEC completed field work and documentation for the,City of Charlotte but will not be acting as agent.

INTERMITTENT CHANNEL
EVALUATION FORM
SA-1
APPLICANTNAME_ C?'y e CI?rIO DATE
[OPOSEDCHANNEL ?I ?cf?l
WORK (i.e., culvert, relocation, etc.) tll tr? ro A+? t-k?NOAAJ P'S)- rap
ATERBODY/RIVER BASIN -711( Lr ?Pe? ba COUNTY/CITY / clilwb7 ?Gl ar(e?c
ECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS - ?1:??"l ouV na?
P SP NP Observation Comments or Descriution
X Fish/Shellfish/Crustaceans Present r
Y, Benthic Macro Invertebrates
X Amphibians Present/Breeding Aty to, y ' t
Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function) r « Gt? O+n MG r? !
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells, others) T4
Federally Protected Species (Discontinue)
UL Riffic/Pool Structure
X Stable Streambanks ?l
Channel Substrate
(i.e. gravel, cobble, rock, course send)
lC Riparian Canopy Present (SP-/>50V* closure)
k
4., eA
X Undercut BanksAnstream Habitat Structure
X Flow In Channel
Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel (Discontinue)
Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom
,J
A 5
t
,
Se
t
)
h
J m
A.*%
e
at t
n
p
.
ru
une t
(
Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June thru Sept.)

X Adjacent Floodplain Present
Wreck Material or Drill Lines
X Hydrophytic Vegetation in/adjacent to channel

Iportant To Domestic Water Supply? Y / 1'
es Channel Appear On A Quad Or Soils Map?
* W11[ G r"S U W W S C..e-+.,^ I T 0• h o r Ja Gr lr elf I -L i
p/ N Ao„ #; 9 Approx. Drainage Area:',-`i Oa vo-,
NDetermination: (in -Tajf4&r(&)
Perennial Channel (stop) Important Channel: ?M LF PROJECT MGR. Initials
Intermittent Channel (proceed) E] Unimportant Channel: LF
E] Ephemeral Channel (no jd) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
Ditch Through Upland (no jd)
Evaluator's Signature: N(. tic:"t.
(if other than C.O.E. project Manager)
IP = Present SP = Strongly Present NP = Not Present

NCD1V0 Stream Classification Form (1
L
t River6asW (-&h-- +r" - l Evaluator. DGrfin A 14! W
Cottoty: Mt.CK6-
Prvrcct Nanw ^L w 2t,
I
/ /A Neatest Named Strearatc, /rte 11
P
t N
ber:
Dtl'

Latlnde: -IS 13 Signature;
•
rojec
um
Q
r
Dam i Fe4 2PO
A
;
S Q Longitude: gD 11 W
t
LoalionlDireaions S
4
dADu A
.PLEASE NOTE: If emkueer and landmaker erne the fhe Jeran Is e moa.awde dk* Shen an ejdrir jam b nor ,
d
(?
A
fi net a awd(/led
aecenerr- Alm if in the ben pmfessionatjedremmr of the eveluror, the jerare ir e nrawanade lack ai
w aN be swap
h
re 1 ?
t`qt or o
nwnral oresus--shk rrkq srerem s
oo Primary Field Indicators: acirdeomm-obwPwwLi l
e -

M
d
S

. Ceomoroholotrv vn AbOent Wea
I
o
2ente
trom
k
1) Is Tlicre A Riffle-Pool
2) Is The USDA Texture in Streambed

U
aS 31 Are Natural Levees Present?
= 1
U

2 ]
2 ]
xr_- , „ Channel
sa-?
S1 Is There M Active (Or Relic)

1
11. Hydroioo--- Absent Weak Moderate Strone ,
1) Is There A Groundwater ) 2 n
Flow/Discharac •k u
PRIMARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINIS:-Z_

I-
I
3) Does Topography I"cote A ?
.SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS:. S
Il Hvdroloev Absent Weak Moderate Strong '
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) I.Am litter
Present In Sum bed7 r, 1 S 0
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 •S ) Q
S) Is There Water In Channel During Dry U .S l 1.
Conditions Or In Grawrina Season)?
61 Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides
SECONDARY HYDROLOGYINDIG4TOR P011M: 6 I
put M+nwQ4?_
I i Are Fish .k 0 U-51 1.5
2) Arc Ainghibians Present? fim .5 1.5
J) Arc AgualicTurdes Present'l -M 1.5
C?.:ro,tys v ) 1.5
Am MacrQbcnthos Piclent? .5 1.5
r-- S
rC? i rb eye w.. "1 0 .5
Oxidizing
Bactcriat
Prcmnt?
ID?tO?.rQ?Irt•ItL0.4) 7 U Are iron
?ydr,Psy8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed7 SAV Mostly oBL Mostly F?CW Mostly FAC Mostly RACU Mostly UPL
r:e C r•.vrrrE:llTad?b..na.ryduPreM,resnwn.b.d 1 7 .S 0 0
.,eace.va t•1
SECONDARY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS-'-5 , QS ,
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Seeonda 7 7 -(7f Gnarer Than Or Equal To L2 Points The Stream Is At Least
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Nana r msmir - ?+
•N
I11) Is A 2' Order Or Grater Gunnel (As =-14- d No?O
On Tooo Mao Andlk In Fie"` "PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS- Iq
PRIMARY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS:
Secondary Field Indicators: fcm.u.N...br Pe L,-)
INTERMITTENT CHANNEL
' EVALUATION FORM

C r4,y taooa 'Dp .
6,A*3 i clt_ ,T Pr.ji
C,4 tCTION 1D __.APPLICANT NAME C-I't DATE;W
OPOSED CHANNEL WORK (i.e., culvert, relocation, etc.) t4
T.
NATERBODY/RIVERBASIN uLA.Icm,--/ ?4-Aw6 4 ?1, s0,V1 tt?? ,COUNTY/CITY /"IeCK? r ?,cr
DECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS Sunny - Ao Arun ;A 4reaLe? 7 7? ??-
P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
Fish/Shellfish/Crustaceans Present ?,7? D ash 0A1
y
C Benthic Macro Invertebrates
v
h Amphibians Present/Breeding

`l
14
Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function) I -
r roy% Wf t f r?
x Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells, others) ?b
Federally Protected Species (Discontinue)
x Riffle/Pool Structure
X - - Stable Streambanks eaO
Channel Substrate
(i.e. gravel, cobble, rock, course sand) L
MDS3?? Vrft 5-6tr1
- - Riparian Canopy Present (SP--h500/9 closure) Limio a q4
X Undercut Banks/Instream Habitat Structure
Flow In Channel LX 0-k
Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel (Discontinue)
Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom
(June thru Sept.) PA
/•)
Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June thru Sept.) P JA
x Adjacent Floodplain Present
X Wrack Material or Drift Lines
x Hydrophytic Vegetation iNadjacent to channel
t mportant To Domestic Water Supply? Y 65
oes Channel Appear On A Quad Or Solis Map o N Approx. Drainage Area:- 3 s-Au n r
etermination:
Perennial Channel (stop) ;-Klmportant Channel: 11 $O O LF PROJECT MGR. Initials
Intermittent Channel (proceed) Unimportant Channel: LF
Ephemeral Channel (no}d) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
Ditch Through Upland (no}d)
Evaluator's Signature: ???v"`• P,u? ?&f r?n ?•??; A f
(if other than C.O.E. project Manager)
I = Present SP = Strongly Present NP = Not Present
i-
ep
_

NCDWO Stream Classification Form
{;?kory 6rovw
prowl Naine: River Basin: Ca4-wwh• County:AwfN1e1
13 ?2 /j
4t??
i
d
C Evaluator.
Si
A
D
?)
D WQ Projcci Number: 1,) /A e:3S
i-at
tu
Nearest Named Suam:
GwP gluture:
N,t,,
. - r Qµ

Datc:4OLL Z601 r
USGSQUAD- iKJ14 #-Il Lon lwde:2d 4q Ig" .I
w Dl orr:AA•PC, Pe-
Location/Directions: 7tt drt,.W i-19 d t'e4•
• PL EAS E NOTE: tf ewfuetw end lendnaner agree thor the ffesare is a tron.slede &N* them an of thir feral it sot
nemtgorK also, i/in the bar orofessienef jedaemmi ofW evaluator, W ferure Is • men•Numle itch and mat a modyW
xxrr,ref srrrn-•rh4 rrLg s?artnl _MMW war M weJ"
Primary Field Indicators: dcati•oe•ira•,e.rP•rfjW
1. Ceomoroholoey Absent Weak Moderate Strong '
51 Is There M Active (Or Relic)
2) Is Tire USDA Texture

61 Is The Channel Bryided?
71 Are Recent Alluvial Depoits Prtscnt? -------- k- 2
9) Is A Continuous Bed d: Bank Present? 0 1 2
•N
Ill) Is A 2 Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated 62
Ou Tow " o rinoivr U cici'u) P? -"•' Yates]
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POIN73.-LL-
11. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
I
Flow0schurac Present" ) Is There A Groundwater 0 1 () 3
PRIMARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: of

11
(..t.,A./s -
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Nwlural Drainage Way) 0 .5 C 1 J 1.5 '
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: L
II Hydrolocy Absent Weak Moderate Strome '
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leanitter
Present In Sueumbed? 1.5 I?_ 3 0
4)
Last Is Water In Channel And >48 Ha. Since 0 .5 1 Q53 I
r
S) Is There Water In Charmel During Dry 0 .5 1
8) Are Wetland Plants In Svsambed? SAY Mmtly OBL Mostly F&CW Mostly PAC Moray RACU Mostly UPL
r • .NrrTE: (fToror Ae..nc. cKAa Mom- In Swwmb.d ? 1 75 .5 0 0
SECONDARY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: ?• Z-
TOTAL POINTS (Primary + Secondary)- a?l• ((If Greater Than Or Equal To L Poinu The Stream It At Least

1
1

.SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDIC4 TORPOIA73: -1
PRIMARY BIOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS-f_
Secondary Field Indicators: fGrrrl. Ux.Nu•A.r Pv lJnq
m m i s m m m m m m m m = r m i m r m
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1997 COE Wetlwids Delhteaft Monier
PmjeeUSke: ¢n h Dale )
AppkcanUOwner r- 1 f u o Cotir - /N?.t lt? dv
ktveskgator. 1 o Sb .. NC
Do Normal Ckcunnbw oss GXW on the site? YesEr No0 Cwmaatlhr ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Skuadon)? Y Transact ID:
Is the area a P V- I an Area? Y Plot ID: ?-
-L^?4 exoNti an nNew.l
rEGETATiON
Pwa Sm
t ile 111
. ?;daT ?.,La . SMG:tl?a :'f =F _ ?rGU bw
z. i1[.HU S a 1e.1-a
T : Flt to• a r (:

s.
?'
s - _

l w
o . w.v.
. FAc.
na
f- ae.
a T _FA- t. S? c,\,s. d1 a _ N _FAca
4• Uln?.S a ?e?-A _ $It _FALU+ 12- L m,:ktrw lsO on Ga _ N _FA?,-,
e luv,: tun wt yira:w,s.?A _ $ t _fACU' 13. .4111 u?yh?ci5 n.iT t

p
14.
--
/I pp
-
ua.. s os - sl3 .fACW- lei,
e• L i dav?b rw s+ rem 4 t4 : 5 f : f Ac-+• 1e _ _
DO dim SoKJr rut en COL FACN of F <
Nx aMArb F v r 3 - Y b
Remarks:
?Y ?,,,c Q 1? ?-, ? ? ??+Q? „-,,ate ?sI•uMa?-?-'
4YDROLOGY
QReemW Dab (Describe In Remarks): Wedwid Hydrology Irtdiaton:
Qstream, Lake, or Two Gaups Primary kwkskn-.
C]AwW Plto WWW in Lipper 12 krdrss
Prw Recorded Doh Avokobb Marks
tJnas
Deposits
FkW Observations: Prosrrts In VUsltutds
Depth of Surface Water: (IrL) Chmmds?v,?2 Yrdiss
Lemmas
Depth to Free Water In Pit: (In.) @RWoot
t Survey Date
Depth to Sdtsrabd Soft (IrL) Ted
ni'M In Rarnarks)
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMWIATION
(1917 COE Wedw DeMneathm Norman
Map Unit Name 1). S
(Serbs and Phase): , `sow?t Qu JjU L OM, ?"?f/? chess: - W
Field Observallona
Tastororrty Subgroup:
4 • Mew? firm Mapped +Type? YNo(-]
4jr . Ica 8d C so: s.tirvs
D WO Mok Cdw mom Cebn Mottle Traere, CaraMorr
MI coy 2 q •t Altl d S : f
!A-_ :4-10 ? toy 1C `ll 'verve ?? t t 1
n-• =7 rD- o yR s7 6 N? s
Ffydrle Solt Indicators:
EpiP.don QHiph Orom Cwdw* In Sts %m Lryrr In Sw* Sob
C]SuMft Odor quit E Skm@Wq in Sandy Sak
0AqWc Moisture Room Len Local Hyddc Solve Lid
H CardltorM an Nracrrel Hydrle Sob l st
or Low4h=m Colas lcxpkAn in Rerneft)
no
WETLAND DETERMINATION
R/drophyle vegetation Present? Y is this Sampknp Polnt VY" a Wetland?
Wetland Hydrobgy Present? Y YeaO N90
Hydric Sok Pfeeertl? Y
Remarks .....
Nom- ? -? 3 ?•-? PNes?i?
Renterks: - - - - - o L..j Q- a,1

s

t

t

t

1

a?
m
U
Q
1 y ? ?} ? R 1 y, ?.
?, "" .tip ? r'L ?,.. v S r rt r *??? ?'t?ir r,sst ?h •?+ ]'r.?
.r s•ldx •y Q t?b 1? fr ?? .. _9, S 7 ? 0.
T
J", fv?gr• ?,' '. 1a ?a 1 .:C t.a ? f4F "lMr. r?"'?.,; r? O
• E R ? bA
F,.
is a
- r r 1aA r '+ ?t. f+. i 7 .I Mr? ? bA
{ l4 ?{? ? M ./rte N
'.Ta•.i?-ur ?r•5 r - 1, w?IIM ti ?F oA
m INA
r 4
,W a ',g +trr, •!"~? Q' >
O
5
A ;Irr• y ,rr•Y ' ?' f lr?' ??` ?lr?q I ? '?' . 1J "' r • ', cCLV `v ? r C
a b 41p t OC In
5 r\ y/ 1+? n W O G N
(iii ((1) L. f0
?.':' ? ? R r "` AAf?? ;r ik 1 ? i?' ..lr.lrt 1 ?? •f':. ?? ? r) - '? O y ? V
mr:
t
t
ZTD P2WZCf
NjXm PROJEcr
IMPORTANT
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM
CAMPBELL CREEK
ILADnDTAAIT CTDCALA
Z-
0
I
4v
4
d
L
wo 300 0 600
APPROXIMATE SCAM DI FM
EXPLANATION
" ' - WATERS OF THE U.S.
? DIRECTION OF STREAM FLOW
S• 1 STREAM ASSESSMENT LOCATION
0 DATA POINT LOCATION
DP-1
REF.: ELECTRONIC DRAWING FILE: CONCEPT.dwg PATH XREF DRAWING PUBUC.dwg,• DATED APRIL 19, 2000.
NOTES:
1. JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED IN THE FIELD BY
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. (LAW) ON FEBRUARY 27, 2001.
BOUNDARIES OF WATERS OF THE U.S. HAVE BEEN MARKED IN THE FIELD BUT HAVE
NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
2. NO WETLANDS WERE IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE 200 FT. CORRIDOR CENTERED
ALONG HICKORY GROVE ROAD.
3. USE OF THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR PRELIMINARY PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY.
i m i i i i i i i i i i
i i i
i i i i
t
t
t
I
35-Foot SWIM
Buffer
Proposed Mitigation Area -
Stream Enhancement
Craigwood Drive
Tributary
Campbell
Creek
50-Foot SWIM
Buffer
Proposed Impact Area
Roadway Crossing
Source: Mecklenburg County Polaris Geographic Information System (GIS)
Legend;
35-Foot SWIM Buffer
<-, 50-Foot SWIM Buffer
Stream Channel
0 Building Footprint

North Carolina Vicinitv Map
500 ft. Mecklenburg County
Vicinity Map
Approximate Scale Prepared: r3G,; 7131u
Checked: 'T7yJ 7-3-03
G:/Projects/30141 Natural Resources/2001/0123-Hickory Grove Road/Figures/Figure 4_Aerial.ppt
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening AMAI"TEC Project Elements
Project No. 512-97-087
Mecklenburg County, NC
Project 3010010123 Figure 4

.t.0'
'
3.0
1
Darn o around ! i
irn. CUI?[rr
_ _- - - P p, -srn M17. FABRIC
? I
IOf60 ?
INAL DRAWING
R RNNwtl !er Comtwottos

1 FOR
ER AND
=LINE
OVEMENTS Rl"

f r

_ - 20• PIE DMONT ? ?? _ ?? .
Jr

Source: US Infrastructure, Sheet 24 of 33, c
s
City of Charlotte
i Hickory Grove Road Widening
Project No. 512-97-087
Charlotte, North Carolina
O
5_Culvert.ppt
NOT TO SCALE
7/3
/0303
Checked: /
Prepared: TTW 713 103
Culvert Replacement
Figure 5

City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening
W CTEC Proiect 3010010123
July 22, 2003

cp!;j??r.

I
ri{ _
Photograph 2: Campbell Creek (perennial stream), upstream of existing Hickory Grove
Road (view upstream).
INIMM OF ?
Shed
Notes I
2A
rypiaiseehons 2B-ZE

2F
Structure Details 2H-2J
StructweSdwdm>' 2K
Phu & Pre6le Qb`- . 333
siffary Sewer PLdPreBe Shect U-1
l Cosanl4heetz TC1-TC3
Pavemat Msrlvg & Signing Sbeeti- PM1-PM4
Erosion Cos" Sbed? .___ _. ECl -EC6
t pm SheMx SPl

S[gnal nstaBatia -SI
SIGl SIG2
Niveway Section Sheeh_ DSl -DS6
-rm section Shteta_ XS] - XS44

' X
W +E
NOT TO SCALE

2402 UVA3MARD
>PALFJM s?a
P USinfmstmeture of Carolina, Ine-
U5I 1043 E. Morehead Street, Suite 203
Charlotte, North CaroHns 28204
•
-
ENGINEERING & PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT
WIDENING
Project No. 512-97-087
Project Features:
Grading
Road Widening
Curb & Glitter
Concrete Sidewalk
Storm Drainage
Asphalt Paving
PavemeUt Marking
Stec 10t01.09Ir1
Cmishicbon
17+00.00L-1
AL
1HCXXW GROV6B0AD L-1
Sit 10+40.13+50

Sea IS+A • Il+IS ore

Sn.19+25-Zeros _

sta24+40. ?f
Sean+A-350+1 o-r7
8x.35+40.0+5 ?+t
SON. 40+25 -BN0
SOL45+0- 5

Slt Sk2S ve.n 11
_ 12
Stu 0+75-is+x 13
5x.0+51.71+Q0 Qb•-14
sta7"-75+75 x"15
Sx.75+75-$1440 X16
SLL 61+0+-Ifi?

sea I"-lZiM a-+i!

5x.92+40•!7+i1.. +a..+is
Sx.r1N1-lll+al._--- sh .20
VAMANV1EWDRY-2
8x.10+40.13+lllt X21
EAS1WYCXEFL Y-ZA

Sit 10+41.OHL ??
LAWRENCE ORR80V-1
Stn IN40.11+iSla sW+22
CRAIGWOODFLY3
Se..I"-13+2712 X23
Construction Plans of Proposed
HICKORY GROVE ROAD
CULVI= STA 15+11311'1
Bra 1NN•13+1L°a o.r 21
C.&MGMx! Da Y-4
Sta. lom-llHi76 s""25
MCAL.-M NY3
st..1/+40.12+nn cr-ss
MARx71A'SRHN$DRYf
SLL 10+"-I1+ZL7'7 0-.21
8011"THIJ WY-7
Sea 10+40-124f215 9" 77
DOGWOOD 1LY-0
M. 10N1-11+71as X27
0MALL-I
MCWHy MM UMMM MWERODW CHURCH
81a 10+40 -15+2L56-
MARNNT Sr Y-11
sx.10+40-13+" X29
HIGMAem AV Y-13
3x.10+40 .13+11 P d" 31
OUI7ALL-2 Upaxini wromISTH OMB
stn 1040-ll+f6.K x"31
OUTFALL-3 SUSANDRY-16A
stn 10+1-If Ua X32
OUIYALL-3 SUSIN
DR Y-1"
10+1RN
Sit 11+40 - x"33
End
Sts 10!
40ya n
R'
aekuy Ca.-ar1A
tutu 1. 1 54Z . ., N t
a ? 4
Y.y
IL-1 1-
a
m
iB "%yWN ME"
NOT TO SCALE
z"Nott3w DASA
PROJECT LENGTH =1.570 Mi
ADT =18,400 (1998)
ADT=25,400 (2020)
T=2%
V design = 40 MPH (Shamrock-Harris)
17 a..1-- = 2c mrPu fu--ic ffiohlsmd)
FINAL DRAWING
Nat nalae-W For Cow*llcb a
Q>RAPSZC BCALH? ???t
Contract Administration
Plan View
l,aodeape M-n-t
2/ 10 60 Design
Herz Prose.--
CDOT
4 8 12
!ts counts Rouen
CpIfPMl140IIA a a a
Existing Right of Way line .... , ... . ----
PrepNedRightofWaplme......... .
Proper Ume .................. . _._.------- .-----
Existing Faee .................. .
Slope StukeLINE . ............... .-C-C-F-
TemporarpCoosaraction Easement .....
-.-.-.-
.
PerNanentDrainage Easement ...... .-D-0--0-
PermaatSanltarySeweRummt, . , .-E-E-E-
PeNasentUtility Easement ......... . ruE
Pennaent Sidewalk & Unity Easement Paw
Existing GNllx ...... . ... . ..... .-,-c- .?-
Existing waterUse .............. ._ ::-v-w-
Existing SaaitarySewer . ...... . ....
wing Underground Telepho40..... . .-.. _- sr
. -, -T -- s-
Fxisting Underground Fibs Optic.. , . .-; :- o-- t
Emting StNm Drainage....
Proposed StermDrainage ..........
Proposed Traffic Signal Conduit .?taaat?

0
Existing Catch Basin ........ . .....
Proposed Catch Bain.......... .. ... .
.... . .
Proposed Offset Catch Basin ... . .... . .......... JE
Existing Drop laid ............... ..... I .... ,
Proposed Drop Lkt .............. ........... .
Proposed Eadwall ..............
Storm Drain Manhole .......
Existin ............
............ v
g
Pr oposed Slarm Dri isJSanitary Serer Manhole....... .
Existing Flared EndSection ......... ............
Proposed Flared Fad Section ..... . .. ....... ....
Existing Fl- Hydrant............ .. ..... 'J
Proposed Fie Hydrant ............ ......... . ..
signs ......... .,.,.. ?.,......,.. 4
rH
Water Meter. I ........... .... ....... C.
tR
Proposed Water Meter ....... . .... ..... . ... . . I
Existing Water Valve . ........... ... ... .. .

Proposed water valve ............ r0+
............. ??

Existing Gas Valve .............. CV
..... ....... 'y
F.ristLg Sanitary Serer Manhole ..... .............
O
Existing Telephone Manhole ........ . .... . . .....
Existing Telephone Pedestal ......... .... ....... ? Q1
Existing L*M Pate ... . .......... ... . ........ . s
N
Proposed IA& Pole ............. ............. ? sal
Existing Utility Pak .............. ........... .
Proposed Utility Pole ............
x
.............
O

Existing Mailbox ...............
.. ..... ... r
F
Existing lra Pia ............... ..... . . ..... 0
Existing Pedestrian Pedestal ........ .............:
Proposed Pedestrian Pedestal .......
TratLcCentral Box
Existin ............. El
........
g .............

Proposed Traffic Control Box ....... ®
......... . . O
Existing Pull Ba ............... ............. m 09
Proposed Pall Box ...... . ....... ..... . ...... . e 1
Accessible Ramp ........ . ...... .............
Guy Wire .............. .. . .. ............. - V
Tree Protection. .. . ......... ........
Tree Removal ................. .............
Proposed Handrail ..............

Proposed Cart & Gatrer, . . F*
..... . . . . ...
Proposed Concrete Drive .......... ............ .
Proposed Asphalt Drive . ........
proposed Gravel. Drive . . . . ..... . ..... .... . . .
. . ...........
fdt?t
Proposed Asphalt Widening ....... ........ . . . .. O
ProposedSidewan ..... . ........ ........... . r.' a
Proposed Grass Charnel . ...... . .. .... ® W
Proposed Rip Rap ..... . ........ ............. O

Bid Set No. ?

C ARLOYM o

MANAGBAENT r l
a
WZG=z%@Y Is"
' c URB ELEVATIONS:
-II.MST PROPOSED CURB ELEVATIONS AS NECESSARY TO 049JRE
RAINAGE. ME CONTRACTOR SMALL RETAIN EXISTING PAOEYENT.
nY', AND SIDEWALKS:
z tFS5 OTHERWISE NOTED.
'..; THE BALI( CF GAD OR EDGE OF PAVEMENT. PROPQ!SED DRIVEWAY
' I.IM EXPANSION JOINT TO EXPANSION JOINT. `LATCH. PLACEMENT MATERIALS TO
•:ENENT CONCRETE (3600 PSI).
it'L S 9.5 B AND 3.5' ACIC. TYPE 1 19.0 S.
.. ', IIVUE
Ir:: SIC`: (t) THICK. AND SIX INCHES (6") THAT( AT DRIVEWAY CROSSINGS, PER
' . 11AAY PIPES:
'. ALL DITCHES BEHIND PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER SHALL RE
.?.Iro. ALL IX6VLMAY PIPES WHICH ARE NO LONGER NEEDED GUE TO THE
I'IALL BE REMOVED OR PLUGGED ACCORDING TO THE FCLLONNO_
?.mFns, RUG PIPES UNLESS OTHERWISE INSTRUCTED BY THE DIGINM
NID GRAVEL DRIVES, REMOVE DRIVEWAY PPU UNLESS OTHERWISE
s.2LR.
r,j, .E STRUCTURES:
-0 LOCATIONS SNOW ARE APPROXIMATE. AS ORECTEO BY THE ENGINEER, THEY MAY BE
EI:'OATE UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS STATIDIS OFFSETS AND ELEVATIONS REFER TO THE
IMANHOLES AND JUNCTION BOXES AND THE MIDPOINT OF THE LP FOR CATCH BASINS.
IYPE CATCH BASINS (STCB) ARE TO THE WAR ALL PIPES BULL BE RCP CUSS M.
„1ED-
I >••f ILLING:
'r. rMY WARRANT BACXFILUNC WITH BORROW MATERIAL BEHIND PROPOSED
.•x:aF5 AS SHOWN ON BANS.

11 HIES:
' IIi-'TED FOR IEFORMATON PURPOSES ONLY. THE CITY. DESIGN CONSULTANT. AND/OR
IIE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACCURACY OF UTILITY LOCATIONS. SIZES, DEPTHS OR FOR
N UILITY IFORMATDk
IRUCTKN, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ALL UTEFTY OWTERS MDSE FACILITIES WEL SE
i. CRMiNE UTILITY LOCATIONS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL UTILITIES FROM DAMAGE
is OPERATIONS OR THOSE OF HIS AGENTS THE COFTRACTOR SMALL HOD THE Cr HARMLESS
WARTY INCONVENIENCE CREATED BY WORK OF MS OWN FORCES OR THAT OF HIS AGET9.
' EYONTRACTOR SMALL AGXST/RELOCATE THE SANITARY SEWER AND WATER LINES ONLY. ALL
tNTS/RELOCATDNS WILL BE PERFORMED BY THE VARIOUS UTILITY OWNERS. THE CONTRACTOR
AE *ARK WIN UTUTY OW6% SO AS NOT TO ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PROJECT SCHEDULE
+7T BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR MY DELAYS OR DISRUPTIONS IN THE SCHEDUUE WE TO THE
UTILITY OWNERS.
LOCATES CALL NORTH CAROLINA ONE-CALL 01-BIN-632-4949.
CF UTLJTIES NOT MEMBERS OF NORTH CAROLINA CE-CALL CONTACT PROJECT ]JAMAIER
InP SMALL ADJUST ALL WATER VALVES. WATER METER BOXES AND WATER VAULTS TO FFWSHED
METERS LOCATED IN SIDEWALKS W CONCRETE DfiVEWAYS SMALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN
_S
.i S WILL BE ADJUSTED/RELOCATED BY PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS A REPRESENTATIVE OF PIEDMONT
ANJST PRESENT JUST PRIOR TO AND ORI NG AMY CONSTRUCTION DEAR EXISTING GAS LIES
'ICR SHALL CONTACT PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS AT LEAST TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
IOU WTHN ME 12" TRANSMISSION UE AREA (PLAN SHEET (S 10 a N). CONTACT MR.
:..II1 R HOURS IN ADVANCE AT 704-525-5585 EXT. 7344.
FOR MUST SUPPORT AND PROTECT ANY EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES ENCOUNTERED DURING
,VATCN ANO/OR PIPE INSTALLATION.
1
1 XISTING SANITARY SEWER AND WATER LINE:
ACTOR SHALL USE CARE WHEN WEWOMG AROID SANITARY SEVER AND WATER LINES SHOULD
?.':'ACTOR DAMAGE DMTING SEWER OR WATER LINES, HE SHALL IMMEDIATELY REPLACE THE LYE. AT
n'£ MTN CLASS 350 OUCTU HON RIPE THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE SANITARY SEWER
aAIER LIES WITH CUSS 350 DUCTILE INN PPE NTH A MINIMUM TEN FOOT SECTION. WHEN
PPE COMES WITHIN TWO FEET OF SAID LINES. VERTICALLY OR HORIZONTALLY.
., G.TUH FROM CHARLOTTE-MECLEN"G UTNRES SHALL BE NOTIFIED PRIOR 10 THE BEONNNG OF
r;"/OR SANITARY SEWER WORK
R SEWER LINES ARE TO REMAIN ACTIVE DURING CONSTRUCTION. IF NOT POSS7&E. THEN
FUR SHALL FOLLOW C LU. PONCES PROCEDURES. STANDARDS AND SFECDGTICb MANUAL

SUBSURFACE PLANS:
SUBSURFACE NVESTICATKNS OF A LIMITED SCOPE ARE AVOWABLE FOR THIS PROJECT CONTACT THE
CITY TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE GEOTEOIACAL REPORT F DESIRED. THE CONTRACTOR SHAM MAKE
HIS/MER OWN INVESTIGATION AS TO ME SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
MAIL BOXES:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RELOCATE ALL MAIL BOXES. AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 107-12 OF THE NCDOT
STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR ROADS AND STRUCTURES. CCORONATE THIS WORK NTH THE U.S. POSTAL
SERVICE.
FENCES:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND RESET ALL FENCES. AS NOTED ON THE RAMS AND/OUR AS DIRECTED
BY THE ENGREER FENCES THAT REOURE REMOVAL AS OETERMED BY THE ENGINEER ARE TO BE REPLACED
WITH A FENCE U EQUAL DUALITY AS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER.
TREES, SHRUBS AND HEDGES:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL TREES AID SWIM OUTSIDE OF CUT/FILL LINES. IN ADDITION TO
THOSE THAT RECEIVE TREE/SHRUB PROTECTION BARRIERS THE CONTRACTOR IS ALSO REQUESEO TO SAVE
ALL OTHER WISING TREES AND SNUBS WIDE POSSIBLE.
WHEN ROOT RROWG n NECESSARY. CUT ROOTS CLEANLY USING A DISC TRENCHER IN ACCCDMCE WITH
SECTION 01000 OF THE CITY OF 04ALOTTE LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS USE PLYWOOD FORS
NEIL TREE ROOTS ARE ADJACENT TO PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER OR SIDEWALK
SIDE SLOPES:
THE CON ACTOR SHALL SHAPE ALL SIDE SLOPES TO A 3:1 MAXIMUM GRADE A NT SLOPE OF 21
MAXIMUM WILL BE USED DAY AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
EROSION CONTROL:
THE CONTRACTOR SOUL MAINTAIN ER09CN CONTROL DE'IICFS N ACCORDANCE NTH THE AWRORIATE CITY
OR COUNTY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL ORDNANCEI PREVENT ANY STANDING WATER DUE TO
CONSTRUCTION. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE
ENGINEER. REFER TO EROSION CONTROL PUNS
ACCESSIBLE RAMPS AND DEPRESSED CURB:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONSTRUCT ACCESSIBLE RAMPS AT ALL INTERSECTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
NCDOT STANDARD 849.05.
SAWCUTS:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SAWCIIT EXISTING ASPHALT AND/OR CONCRE17 SURFACES PRIOR TO REMOVAL,
UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER SAWC/T SHAM BE ONE (1) FOOT MINIMUM FROM EXISTING
EDGE OF PAVEMENT AND A MNwDY 2' DEPTH. SAWCIT PAVEMENT SHALL BE REPLACED AS WELL AS
ADDITIONAL PAVEMENT REQUIRED TO TIE-IN TO FACE OF PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER
TRAFFIC CONTROL:
REFER TO THE TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS
THE FOLLOWING ROADWAY STANDARDS APPEAR IN THE CHARLOTTE-YECATFNBLRG LAND DE,ELOPMENT
STANDARDS MANUAL (JANUARY 1996 AND LATEST WASIONJ THE NORTH CARgIIU DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSIAMTATICN (NCOOT ROADWAY STANDARD DRAWINGS (JANUARY 200 AND LATE- REWSON)? MID THE
CHARLOTTE-MFOOENBURG UTUiY DEPARTMENT STANDARD MA"U"' AND ARE AP7Ud.B1E R MAPS
PROJECT AND BY REFERENCE ARE CONSIDERED A PART OF THE PLANS
CHARLOTTE-M ECKLEN BURG:
STANDARD NO, ME
10.O1A LOCAL RESIDENTIAL STREET
IOD2A LOCAL LIMITED RESIDENTIAL STREET
10.nAdB CURD I GUTTER
10.19 CURB TRANSITION
10.22 CONCRETE SIDEWALKS
10241. TYPE E CDIERCIAL k RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY
1025A TYPE I RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY WITH PLANTING STRIP
10.256 TYPE 11 COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY WITH PUNTING STRIP
10.27 TYPE I REWENTAL DRIVEWAY (2'-0- VALLEY GUTTER)
10.28 TYPE N DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE
10.29 CATCH BASH N VALLEY GUTTR
10.30 CATCH BASIN PLACEMENT AT HTERSECMM!
10.35 STANDARD PLACEMENT OF ACCESSIBLE RAMP / GENERAL NOTES
2003AWB BRICK DOUBLE CATCH BASIN 15' THRU 24' PIPE
20.D4M BRICK DOUBLE CATCH BASIN 30' THRU 36' PPE
20.23 RP RAP WREN PPE OUTLETS
20.25 TRENCH DETAIL FOR STORM PPU
2027 RIP RAP DITCHES
30.06 TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
30.09 SILT FENCE STORM MET SEDIMENT TRAP
30.10 TEMPORARY ROCK EEC( DAM
3012 GRAVEL AND RIP RAP FILTER BEAM BASIN
3017AJB SEEDING SCHEDULE
301a COgIADION WIRW CREEX BAN(
4002 TREE PROTECTION
40.13 TEMPORARY THEE PROTECTION DETAIL
50.a TYPICAL HANDRAIL
60.01A WAITING PAD WITH PLANTING SKIP
M03A WNTNG PAD WIN 5'd0' BOX SHELTER NTH PLANTING STRIP
60.07A CONCRETE DETAILS
60,079 ACCESSIBILITY PROWSONS MO 071ER NOTES
NCDOT:
STANDARD NO. TI
310.01 FLARED END SECTION
E61001 METHOD OF SHOULDER CONSTRUCTION
636.11 BRICK ENDWALL FOR SINGLE AND DOUBLE PIPES
83&57 REINFORCED 9RICK FNOWAU.
94001 STANDARD SECY. CATCH BASIN
810.03 CATCH BASIN FRAME GRATE AND HOOD
84015 STANDARD BRIO: COO? INLET
6:0.16 DROP INLET FRAME AND GRATE
640.32 gdCA JUNCTION SGX
64034 TRAFFIC BEARING JUNCTION BOX
87051 STANDARD BRICK MANHOLE
840-54 BRICK WNHO E FRAME /HO COVER
64066 DRAINAGE STRUCTURE STEPS
840.7, CONCRETE AND BRICK PPE PLUG
61072 PIPE COLLAR
646.01 CONCRETE CURB. GUTTER AND CURB I GUTTER
a520, CONCRETE ISLANDS
a5ZO5 METHOD OF PLACEMENT OF DROP INLETS N ISLANDS
862.01 GUARDRAIL PLACEMENT
120501-1205.10 PAVEMENT MARKINGS
t 25001 PAVEMENT MARKER SPACING
1251.01 RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS
CHAR-MECK UTILITY DEPARTMENT:
STANDARD NO I=
5 - WATER FIRE HYDRANT DETAIL
5 - SEWER PRECAST MANHOLES F AND S' DUTAETER ./ OUTSIDE DROP

PREPARED BY,
IJSI
USIrr?xASTxu TURE
1043 E MOREHEAD STREET, SUITE 203
CHARLOTTE IMTH CAROLINA 28:04

ACC ACCESSIBLE RAMP
APPROX. APPROXIMATE
BIT. BITUMINOUS
a/c BACK OF CURB
CBU CURB AND GUTTER ALIGNMENT STREET NAME PLAN SHEET NO
OB CATCH BASIN
C/L CHAIR LINK L-' .... HICKORY GROW ROAD ... .... 3-20
CMLD CNARIOTTE-iMECKLENBURC LAW DEVELOPMENT Y-T SHAMROCK DRIVE. .. 4
CND CHARLOTTE-YEOOENBLRRG UTLITIES Y-2 .... VALLEYNEW DRIVE . .. 21
CONC. CONCRETE Y-2A .. EASTWYCKE PUCE. ..... 22
CER CORRUGATED STEEL PIPE Y-3 CRAIGN000 DRIVE Z3
DI DROP MET Y-4 .... GAYIELF DRIVE ... .... 25
OF DUCTILE RCN PIPE Y-5 MICALPINE LANE .. 25 z
DS DEED BOOK Y-E .. NARTHAS RIDGE DRIVE .. 26 y
OCB. DBLCB
EL ELA'Y. DOSE CATCH BASIN
ELEVATION Y-7
Y-8 HOBBS HILL DRVE. . 27
L LAWRENCE ORR ROAD... 22 w
/N
ECP EDGE OF PAVEMENT T-9 DOGWOOD PUCE . ... 27 wr p
o
v
Ew ENDWAI Y-10 HARMS BOULEVARD. .. 16
3
?
mo
/
w W

u
EA. EXIST. EXISTING Y-fa . SUSAN DRIVE.... . 32. 33 O1
1
FES RAGED END SECTION Y-11 ... MARKET STREET.. ...... 29

`
N
O
0. GAS RUE r-12 . ....HIGHLAND AVENUE .. 30 to
ER y
O F

GV
CAS VALVE
CULVERT STA 45+14.31 L-1 ........ 24
AA .q
i
WW O W
F
? C u
'
HW HEADWALL W z /
?
???IIF
111
C7 -
NV. INVRT n
8 JUNCTION BOX O F a w DI M
tl
8 W/Mh JYDININ 80% (NTH MANHOLE RING W COYER) W V z ?
IF LIEN FEET r N ' O
r_1
/ a
MH MANHOLE MANHOLE
0 x
PC POINT OF CURVATURE U
PG
POC PACE
POINT ON CURVE
O Q
PT POINT OF TANGENT Fy
I

PROP.
PROPOSED ?
r
V

RCP
REINFORCED CONCRETE PPE H
FFI
M
RCHEP REINFORCED CONCRETE HORIZONTAL ELLIPTICAL PPE F
I
R/w MGT-OF-WAY
SOMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
SS SANITARY SEWER
SSCO SANITARY SEWER CLEAR OUT
SSW SAMTARY SEWER MANHOLE
STA. STATION
STCB SLAB TYPE CATCH BASIN
SRO. STANDARD
TBJB TRAFFIC BEARING JUNCTION BOX (NTH MANHOLE RNG A COVER) FINAL DRAWING
N WATER LINE
NA WATER METER Not RW--d Fm Cooolr "

WV WATER VALVE W,/01
DATL BEET OF
2A 33

F NOBIA31 AV Uya 'ON IN ON
ffe9wo- I1AYd311,10'J
01M0'e133 513316/01 CEL000 rOV"09
b M
?
g
R ASCROVddY
)rs Sz+Ot Wis OZ 00+S£ Wis
1
J a c
A903WMD vi a v od HA02I0 A1d0?I3IH

i m A3o
a avail
- - - , LSO-L6-US 'ON 133fOlld g a ;
AaoaA3Aam gNzma IM avod 3AOHD ARO?IOIH
? 3uovnla

?

a
n ? 6 133HS 33S
9Z+07 'V1S 9NIl H?1VW
a ?
,? n ? ? Z
?
3

133HS 33S
r 3 ;
?c9r lno NI
z
60,11 L NI
Y ?

' I II
ll ,00 9E Le 1 +0?
BO 'd
W
,F
I
1
) II
II
,
I '4 ? I I
. . ---.. -- -
go•t L - 3 Nil I I
CC•efl BC - 1S 1A I I
-- - ----- -------
I ? I I
Q, IC I

_I
I?
II LST*L
WMIL

1
06- - fa 13 Ad
9x•09 1S lhd
I -
-
'--
--
--
I
?
b ?
WGI L }!10 AM
v0?L 1?) re ANI
e ecc Lr NI ml
t
.0. 31
110 if
m
1n , '9E 66* ,0+2c as V"L
Bo ' d I
I g

I
g
I ?

2?L 0 'AN
Imot
10'91 LC Y
1
dotl I

II

10*+0 low
+

S4
?
I

161

• e
I ^
O1' ft (9 NI ' 1 R 101 f $
-- - I - - --
eo eo d I ?I

Ox 11

( )
Nil
I
eves 1n0 • I 1 'I ' I 9 '9CL
( ) NI ' I
W
T LNI• I'I
I
?+ p , L IN ,00' Z le'L +9c
11 ,19 9L• +pC
' is I BO 'd0 d
n y 10
d d
1 r9•e
• c no •ANI
'
? - -
'
'
dd
1 O L
C?L
L•eu CL NI
x3 Ni ANI
'ANI -- --• ?B
E?L
?e•x LI0
A
NI ' I
I
x '
'LIL
rum

9'L?L

u
g
11 M 91, Z? of 1S tl 100' W 9C Y
BfBI ' tld 0 'd

p e r?c no I I 14

.09'
CL'?L
9C Y
I
?"
I ? . •
0 'dOtl 1y ''
I • '6
„'

z •9?+9 tow I b er "L (wc I nµN
K*" (?Cs) 'ANI
e •0?+flC ISOM3
17 1N .0L'CC 9'9C+ C Nis
I ?• LI HM 'd0tld

9 '"t .11
p I

° d
? 91 ms 1000"
Apt

I r '"

1 I ltl ,O CO, 'LC+

Yl
C
V
i!
S I 10 0
U

gZ+p7 'V1S 9NI-I HD1VW
tl
Z<7 F I b I ?? n
Nola. 9 ??? I ??
g
u I M1 r 1 d/ Q? V
I I 4{{ m>t ,? r",
t I
I. {( a
o W (
a s I , } I yf
pro o e EI C "Sf'` it I I
0-1 U € !S ki y n I I." Id fig
g vl O
?S a
ILD
N
N i
N I 1yI • c O
r~i) o'n1 f (M/M 109) £-,( 011 J
w = ••.31 Q
J 111 u
n /
Uj 5.
de taopppr i - ' ?---•7Q, k Ci ? Qj?
`-J x',73 1 /? t' r M
16
gyp{ p 34.1 u 7 I h1
J
i O ?y 4 ??C R?
Y 'S "' e R iv \.
$1• ,I??a /" '? ?
hty" ? g rci`d 'v?
-URI
I (V oo "Cy]
?'' I Ur e
'Nlol -' S• ? ??•• ?ti Ie e ° •? ? ° pa
j0k
\ ? O ? ` I ' ,Vd f i y
} l 0 a~ tl I a?'?
?f i• I n
n r` n r, n n n n " a
L 133HS 33S L A31-IS 33S
00+92 'V1S 3N1? H31VW 00+9q 'V1S 3NI l HO1VW
¦? e r

N
N
O
J
Q
H
N
W
Z
J
S
U
H
Q
MANAGEMENT
50 PREPARES By:
r M*
UJ!
Nl
46
USI NFRASMUCTLW
tat E. u
0R
34A
0 SIREEi
:
W1T
E
20

A
?8
RLOtTE
,NOR1
H
QYi04R
2
40
CHA
O
42 O
N
1 O
QLU
F- W
38 N
S
W
Z N ,
JLU
LU
SN
V
34 Q

I

1

7

T
E
30
26
22
40+50 41+00 41+50 42+00 42+50 43+00 43+50 44+00 44+50 45+00
,n
N
O
J
w
-~
W
N
LL
W2
ZN
-J w
uN
ti
Q
F
FINAL DRAWING ° ° g x
Releaw d For Construed"
I I
TREE By OTHERS
EX. CON- DRIVE/ t5 ?.
STA. 40F4 R :2624.67 I
(F 1 L •466.78: 099-274-02 A`+
PROP. 16 OF ?y i t01,'Z3' MCXORr GROVE CHURCH OF GOD ? I
CWD SID.I 16- CONgW DRIVE T :234.01' OB 4157 RC 7f; TEMPORARY GUY AND ANCHOR EASEMENT
Mtl:6 ONES TO BE REWATED BY OTHERS 5(37 HfCKCW1?GROHE R0
v
j F
OL COFIC DRIVE 11610 POLE TO BE RFlDG1E0 BY OTHERS
'k A 40+96.57. OFFSET 40.43' ET GUY TAPES TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS
I ` s " F PROP. 24 lF OF OCNC, DRIVE . 5' CONC. SIDEWALK (TYP.)
• CMLO SID. 10.256 TYPE 1 REMOVE 483 LFS OF RCP I j 60P WA IN V
' PIAIIf91G STRIP (Tn.) I 73299
C RELOCATE IX. WATER VAIAT PROP. 150 IF OF 24- RCP 0 1.505 PROP. 4
1 a Iti
C C C e C -- C -- -C a 4 4 ° -- ° . 2'-6' C&G (TSP.) PROP. 170 LF OF 24• RCP 0 1.435 f 4 ^W r a Qo
C - C C PROP. R/1Y C C° C4 ° ° e e e s e e -- F--dF 3' F Ham., Q Q T F
C C - C - F F- - - f ` `n

.t, RELA'E?7 t72FF•-(??.P? -
` _ 't?_%id¢'sm
_
- - -
,?, _
.._ _ _ _.
- _ _ -
O

C ' +
- 41+00

- az+aD HICKORY GROVE RO
t
' a?
N

•+4 ?u tie . ADi

43+00
1 +ao
_- - - - CONSTRUCTION £ 44 oa a ,a:
45
W
=.
a - ?
(RLIy Y4Rl€
?J
- - - - - - - - - - - r
?xy ?
y
? ?W 43+sD.ooi-t 14
aD'
PROP. 1? ? R
- w4 STACK TO ,r GAS TRr>sDR
LINE TO TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS
Y
J
Z W

_ '^?»
arr' YI•-r _ _ ` _ _
BOY WEYERC Mcac
P-A1 -"
n
37+85
-
- -
?
ufNR1' PftE 10 tiFlm-i aTEO F? VE95 , W
S N
-'
?
-
?
" PROP. RAN ' •?,:. ... R
- a .- ----- t'• 'u 7?:

° F -
> .?-
r _ x
F

2? F
-,
,_
_ -
10,
PROP. R/W
F Z F
4
_ - - - -
-
A
-_ - - - - -
F
V :r Ro aF ,, T'!Yn^!?'Y1'YYY m'tyT^ivY?-
F y^n^ .•?-r?^m ?
F m1 MNY POLE TO BE
RELORAFD BY O1NW5
GTHERS
lRElfY POIF TO RFLOGIED BY ODERS y ° p F F F
20 LF3 PLASTIC SPLIT RAIL t1P1RY PO.E TO BE RELOCATED BY QOIERS /
`
! N10 ANCHOR
Nf
FENM 1D' (MN.) 90*0 PROP. R/`8 7
/ PROP. 148 lF Qi 15' ALP 0 1.785 ' =
° __ PROP. 170 LF OF IS
RCP 0 1.BOS
STA. Q REMOVE ? VEGETATCH WITHIN _ PROP. 15 lF F cac. DRIVE
".71,36

60 I
LIMITS 0-25A /
Cl4D STD. BTO. 10254 E
IO3-3'5'-07 1 J UTEIEY PGLE TO BE RaDCATED BY OTHERS REPLACE EX GRAVEL DRIVE
1K4RIANO N. ROSADO, F I 703- 31-09
\
/

t ES7HER ELDER

/ A- BRUCE GE7T'S
\
APPROX 76' OF T?LPl7RAM
05 09100 PC 325
5400 NICKORY CROW RD l 7 PC 0
OB 04)BI PC QTS
IMCX07Y GROVE RD PRO7EC110.4 FENCE CND STD. 40.13
I
i ?/ I

QN
C1n aid
/ ?
Wz
Wz ;
00 9
0? ?e4
+
Q

H
08/02

7•

' 7;
o
O
u7
C 7;
N
' w
w=
z
J W 7,1
Lli
= Tn
U
' F-
Q
F
72
72

71,

a

L ,
U
1? ? I
I ? rA{E ,
i
PROP. 1} 8 U OF 36• RCP 2W% (LT')-
/i5'f4Os i 47 ro 51
! P71OP. 14 V tx 24• CLLIhW- •
RoP 0 0.805 kW) "''. N. 75 Nv. art.
W.. N 4' '
W. N 15q, (7RYp72aJ
1NY. N ? (36• LT)-nlo
W. N /8I! (24' RT)=7223
0"8 =°--
158 LF OF 24• RCP a 200% (FIT)

5 ?14M_ - G
T -
PROP. 16 LFIOF 15•
RCP 0 I.OOX: (RT) 'PRCP
(#&3-I84) RCP 0 ,.ax (0
-%`Z - LPNOP. lr5 LF OF 30• RP 0r (LT)
i s 1
3
c o rM
PROP. 140 OF 24- RCP 0 352% (RT) •? o? dm
? am e rio ? .
e ? I nWGo? 0 99
--'-- r --- ., n .
z ``>>
zz?
lz 2-;
1 Se
] -- l
746
742
738
N
0
734 L) -
F-
0 W
W
w2
N
730 Z
] W
=N
U
H
Q
F
726
722
718

PRE°AREO BY.,
USI
USIh?xgsrxu -fun
1043 E. MOREHEAD STREET, ANTE 203
CHARL.07E NORTH CAROLINA 28204
- ) •s*?+ a/+5W 48+00 48+50 49+00 49+50 -50+00
SEE SHEET U-1 FOR
SANITARY ISEWER AND
WATER FINAL DRAWING
IMPROVEMENTS NotReleased F«Constructlon
%- t/- SEE SHEET 25 FOR PROFILE /;
acarxa}Qnxu2 ?cw? ?f/??? j
® t • ??? 5° / , ?% / AND CURB RETURN DATA /
7° 4
m
FOR CRAIGWOOD DRIVE Y-4
AIDw ;157 4u7 vd 777 DANIEL ?a7 ip M=Ry GROW RD ° f(/?
POLE
!! PC 477 a' PROP, 27 IF OF 36• RCP'* 130% RESET 15 LF1 OF DL SPAR RAIL FENCE '""?'? CIPr CROlf ,70 OB X165 Po OW / I
a c aac PROP. 29 Li OF 78" RCP 0 1.00.5 5601 8 HXKOI?Y CRONE RO
! f !
1E1pDLaY GUY AM ANCHOR EASEMENT 1 I.O• (AWL)"PROP. R7w MATCH PROP. 165 OF 30" RCP 0 200% i
U
SEE SHEE=4F PROP. 68 (F OF HANDRAIL N RPACE Ez ? DRIVE S14r: 10+75 LIGHT POLE TO BE RETDCAED BY 07HM PROPOSED / I of a IACCORDANCE +6n wn s a xia47+2X,2 PROP. sa F of ,e RCP o ,.eo%, PROP. 2 s GONG (rP.)
INSTALL AS PER CYDS ,0.36 - I5 C50D S M. OF COW- DRIVE
_TD. ,0151 TEL Atli TO BE ADJU57ED BY OTHERS ° PROP. 4• PLANTING STRIP MM.) r
'2.WV pRY WYNO EASEMENT ' * o I J
f I o f I ` 20 lF OF GN• LID MLXDiANCHOR R6ET is IFt OF E%. SPLIT RN. FENCE • ' 4Se ®" pIDNS PROP. r CONC. SIOE7ULR CM.) It RADKIS zs tis OF RCP i a D (MN) EEHm PROP. RjV PROP. TAI r G R k ` I •° JO' . 132
e r f?.. / PROP. 92 U OF CONC. R-30'. ?
RCP 0 0 1.7Di
1. ?
, I C Itt A PROP. 72B LA OF Sfi' RCP 0200.1 oLLD 50. 60.07A 30' RCP 0 3.68X PROP. I4 `z
F F F F F F 5' RCP ? CI
'm mcmm _ R r -
- Paav PFtT R W r .. N
L 1
., .'?r4s?1.?.ar3sC _? .? s t ?*"fi f" rt:y ?' h s «. •• Z? I' Q 00 ? L
;-M4 Sg7 N w E?„I -
un La A&NOLY+?EX RCP ,) us 1? - _ ._c V- O ; -
H W R?ER U-QW.T10N'91 D
!n W 040 PROP. 11 IF 6F 24' RCP 0 1.501 a ® POLE TO BE RELOCATED BY OTHERS ?.T .. '::. '`- °»?s - E y __ _ y---y- Jcs8Yl00N-EX.WtOR-,--"•-- Q y- > a
W N - - 7r L-1 CONSTRUCTION q+OO 2VI 2'E +6+00 v7
p0,] Sit `Sr r? - & e°;149+ao WICKORY GROVE W
ROAD L-1 50:00
wQI V V 3
J W °9GP T e?al 0.f = STA. NTERSECTiON I, 1 \` MINT Pas 70 BE RELWIFED OF otFEPS 7X.79' Prmv ,6 LF OF 13' RCP O a SOl 48+ .16 L-I (R/W VARIES) z N
w F 45+74.34 W W a v+i
/ ? STA. 12+78.00 Y-1 3 (CIRVERf) 1 7 LF; A 1.ODx STA 1
U!n - -7- - .. REHNp,E I6 LF} OF RCP - - REM01E i6 tF316 RCP FRCP. 218 LF Of IC RCP 0?3.W% J W LLJ
C)
Q 8 S k q)R _ .•. - e -?„?,e -'{? i _ Ex. WV'. Trg?6ya'E HF/OLWL O .106 lFt Of PCP = V)
s5 fP o_ rmsk; . ( e w r P?F.ID$ a RELocAx 1xaRr ( ., RELaaTE oc 1"? . ax 0-4 77

2? A 10L4 57 --s
.. .• _ .

PROP. 14 LF OF
18• RCP 0 I.OOX PROP. R-,'W
ry r RATER LINE REPLACEMENT
]a2z SEE SHEET U-1
z ?
f/ F 7
?E F

51 e
f - PROP. 158 LF OF 24' RCP 0 2A9%
14 U OF 21 Po7 0 Q817i
PROP. 68 LF OF HANDRAIL N

° 1

1

V ACCORDANCE WITH CMLD SM. 50.04
INSTALL AS PER CLLDS 10.36
62
N.i-155-52
OELNAS L NACNp7S
•
pp
I L-S
W ?
5512 VIXOPY CROW RD VW,
OB 05922 PG TT
!
ii F}? F F F F F FF-_ F Y
113
:` ?. f STA 47+20.90 REPLACE EX FIFE HYDRANT
PROP. 15 LF OF CONC. DRIVE PER CWD STD. DETA 05
r CYlO SID. 10251 STA. 49+71.02
PROP. Ts LF-OF'Ca(C. DRIVE
/ REPLACE EA GRAVEL DRIVE STA. b sLF OWE
GILD STD: l"
PROP. 140 LF OF 24• RCP o '?,^ GILD SID. 10 0 ! ) (;
I IRELOCATE IN 35 LFS OF ER WIRE R FENCE j
\L)i?(rtP TO (uu? eowD PROP. P. R/o ? GRADE AREA TO DRAIN R? DI. ? ofa?u
E G
TO I RE, SRD.?O W!&. OPINE ROAM PUNTER WITHIN COISIAOCIIOR Lp1T5 " c:VU '•.,`r?.'
15 Q LIMIT Pas TO BE RELOCATED BY 0TEIS A
_ e ) 103-15
155-80 l t0.i-755-79
R?PLACE EX GRAVEL DRIVE arrlu?eac
u
?ll? POLE ? .
/?o0itm BY o1rERs
I w
1 A
]D,6-155-76
?Q
? x
x
P•lE .MS6i (F
20' H 10 3;
4- V -

,M
STA. ?t+71%
¢av,
SCE SHEET U-1
PI{OP. BB LF OF HM46 AL
' PRO,. BB LF OF eANDRt $ AN WATER EINEI

736 CHILD 510. 50.04 STA. 12+00.00
LEV 7331
STD. 50.04
1
I PROVENENTS

STA. 11+59J3
ELEM. 73529 ELEV. 73271
1
-i 12+40.87 ELEV. 71.}16
?? 1
PROP. F7O WAIL G
4

I
TOP OF ELEV. 72970

/

, z

gg
RRY OUT 721.95 I !
-4MYL 12'
ICE CS !

I
F ?T1Y wA
, j _ 3C RCP
,
j ... ?
T
EXtSTNG
AOINO £ .
T .
r
?(
t t „
L x

? 4

± .: --t--- ---
--
_
zss
ai 1
- ------
j q trm r2O
- - - - - PROP. NP7t11`SI>m110 - --
- - - - I ? (/19A-C?LVO J
24
? j
-'
SEE rAP9 THIS 2m 1
7
' . 18' RCP
(/SW-CLlYER1)
SEE t0

j PROPS 142 LF OF 2-7x5

PROP
LASS 1 ? RAP APRON
PRECAST 80% COWRTS'O 0S6i •
.

!
I
I L°,5', TF21', t-Ir. M-2
I
I
71
! PROP. 3f ROP REELECT 9' GAS YNl I

j 712
I $ SEEM 10 BY O1M75 j
i
I

10150 11+00 11+50 12+00 12+50 13100 13+50

t

C

FINAL DRAWING
Rot ReMaoed For CantructMn
EE SHEET U1 FOR 1 M ?"? / wEEE R/w /
SANITARY SEWER AND CONTACTOR TO PUCE 2.0' DEEP X 10.0• WIDE x 1 1 ' . °0P. 73299 BB DJY-l A12,49
850' LONG COMPACT FILL MATFTIL OWR PNG IS / t9
WATE LINE IMPROVEMENTS A I2 TRNWISSOI LANE FROM E16RNG RIOT EOP 099-97'3-OZ Nis
103-151-09 TO TFI9VRARY CONSTRUCTION ?IpLfCRY GROW ChVR(>i OF GOO
A BRUCE GE71YS Oe 4157 PG 717
08 4781 PC M
HICKORY CROW RD / :? ?+,. tM•xM{?""- / 5431 MCNO7Y GROVE RD
1 / / / ?4 ?? i •'t` 1 ?\` PROP. 88 LF OF1W DRAL N ACCOMI fie OID 510. SO.O4 PER
cMID STD- loJe /
CONTRACTOR TO PUfY 20 oEID x 10D• WIDE x
100.0' LONG COMPACT FILL MA30VI OVER PNG
---PROP . 76 UFt OF SILT FENCE AROUND 12' TRNNSMSO1 LINE FROM DMSING LEFT EDP rw
/ ?? GPS R
DUKE POWER TPANSMISSDN i _ I •' / AROLIND SILT DTOWER TO TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT / PIELIV•"' _?l?yt
OPENINGS E AS i ANT AURAL / / NEEDED FOR PROPER DRAINAGE . •• ?',-'.,i ?\ . PROP 142 LF of 2 P?T BOX CULVERTS 0 036RL
1
20
/ ,yAx LU /' F PROP. PASS 7 -RAP /PROM /TUNER FABRIC
LNLDSID.
20
/
ea tsiS, 9421r8', , t-18' Ik2
NOT OtSItM ROCK FOOT BRIDGE
i
PROP 40 OUE POWER3G Y A4A40M PENCE AROUND
NO POLE
/ / j I l ( DO NOT DISTURB DURING INSTALLATION
• ?" , OF swcvn SEWER. IX CHANNEL To REMAIN
/ - -
1
DL CHANNEL TO REMA114
L a.
12 1
PROP. STLLM BASIN
SEE DETAL 116 BEEF
£ n4 ry L Es' 12 M?? PIEDMONT NVLPIL GAS RESERVES THE
OT PERFORM EXCAWTOM OPERATIONS
THE 12' TRANSMISSION LINE.
NOTES, 1. TE R PROPOSED 12' GATE VALVES ALONG THE E)OSIRO 12' WATER : ' c • E(c • ?® s ?1? ?-i
MAN ARE MENDED TO ALLOT FOR ISOLATION AND REMOVAL OF 7W 12• ^• PROP. Lib LF OF IWOPAL N * ''• yi' % GM ;c,=
WATER RAN tIRM THE CULVERT EXCAAND U umrm
TTY R ACCOflSTAL WITH OED 5N. 50b4
REFER TO AND TRAFFIC DETAILS OF OP TTROLW PLANS AIA SEVEEDCAncN PUNS INSTALL PER PER OED STD. ,OJT
2
FOR
R TIMING lua OETA WATER AND SEREIE R RELOCATXNS L Y ',? m 16
Q
1 THE 7 X S RECAST CONCRETE BOX CULVERTS SHALL MEET THE F03-155-61 T \ O ??` 099-273-14
RFAMFIENT5 OF ASTM C 1433 I.
LELINA9 L. /IAIIIO/b Wa ? S 1 ? \ ROII£ S FAULKAEF
4. PIMA PLOWABLE FLL BETWEEN THE BIT( CULVERT BARRELS. DB 5922 PG 171 •A OB 6116 PG 576
9 KC(O7Y GROW RD
5.571 NIOGOPY GROW RD _ =i't ?
^ 'PROP CULVERT SECTION B B TOTO
B 4.0' ".."
CLASS II RIP RAP
SECTION C-C
9.00 1 27.00'
APRON POLO
CLASS II RIP RAP
PROP. CULVERT +
10'
11 40, 1 10 J ,- `-FILTER FABRIC I I
NOTE:
CONTRACTOR SML SUPPORT AND
PROTECT E)6OO U1EITES DURING
CULVERT IMSTAULATION
MA
PREPARED BY
Adlfflfth?
UA7E
Itaw
USI m- m-TRUCIVRE
1043 E WOREH AD STREET. SU17E 203
CRARLO7- E, NORTH CAROLINA 28204

a?
C9
W
r

Oh aF» W a

wz S
g V
0U

a
?a

AUK
W
OA/02
DtTE 9AET O
by N 24 32
1
¦

1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Attachment D
July 22, 2003
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF CULTURAL RESOURCES (NCDCR)
CORRESPONDENCE

JUL-rJJ-cr?r?? VJ• ?J ? ?.v, , .---
U S I , 00"
I?

w
7b
r
r
r
r
March 17, 2000
USINFRASTRUCTURE7 INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Ms. Renee Gledlsill-E9rley
Environmental Review Coordinator
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Historic Preservation Office
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601-2807
Subject: Hickory Grove Widening
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
City Project # 512-97-087
UST Project # 990214-001
Dear Ms. Gledhill-Ea)-ley:
Thank you for your response to our request for information regarding properties along the hickory
Grove Road project conidor.
In your letter, dated I'ebrurLry 24, 2000, you listed two sites of historical or architecture.) importance:
1. Carter's Store (MK 1771), located at 61 10 Hickory Grove Road.
2. Hickoy Grove United Methodist Church (MK 1772). located at 6301 Hickory Grove Road.
The address associated with Carter's Store is no longer recognized as a valid address, Apparentlti .
the store has been demolished, and an Eckerd's Drug Store has been built at this location.
Enclosed is a copy of the conceptual plan for the roadway widening near the Hickory Grove United
Methodist Church.. As shown, the proposed right-of-way and temporary construction easements do
not effect the stru.cturzil building. Rowever, the front lawn will be impacted due to the roadway
wicleni.ns. The proposed sidewalk will be 26 feet closer to the front of the building, and several large
txees Ml.l be removed. Setbacks from the proposed right-of.-way based on local zoning ordinances
will not be violated.
We are aware that some properties' historical or architectural importance may be related to the
properly setting or surrounding grounds as well as the buildings on the property. Because of the
project's impact to the front lawn of the Church, we wanted to provide you with the opportunity to
view the limits of the proposed improvements and comment on the proposed project.
Research - Planning, - Enginecrmg - l.tanagemenr
301 S h1cDowell Steco - Scare 300 - Clinrlorre, Norrh C.uoGna - 2820.1
[phone] - Fax [phone]
JUL 03 2003 09:51
7043421666 PAGE.05
JUL-IOJ-CIOVOJ U'7?C7 rlCU?'I•u71

Also, some minor right-of-way and construction easements are shown for Cie property across from
the Church at the cemetery. The easement shown on the plan is for construction of drainage pipe
and the proposed right-of-way shown is for the sidewalk. No graves would be involved in the
construction of e.itber the storm drainage or the sidewalk. The storm drainage is required near the
dirt drive accessing the cemetery. The right-of-way required, is one foot behind the proposed
sidewalk, but would not require the stone wall to be relocated.
The Planning Report for this project has a deadline of. March 31, 2000. We hope to document
concerns and comments from all agencies such as the North. Carolina Department of Cultural
Resources in this report.. I understand this gives you a short time to review the drawing and make
an assessment. However, the City of Charlotte is very concerned about preserving historical
structures and your input is important.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. Please let me know if you need additional information
regarding the proposed project.
Sincerely,
USInfrastructure
WG?-n I?c?tiLL,
Alan Morrison, P,E.
Project Manager.
Enclosure
cc; Rebecca Chambers. Project Manager. City Engineering and Property Management

OWAMS1
TO,
1
JUL 03 2003 09:51 7043421666 PAGE.06
sTAII
FILE COPY
m, a,r.N
North Carolina. Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administ.r•ltor
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division, of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain. Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
February 24. 2000
Mr. Alan Morrison, P.E.
USinfrastructurc, Inc.
301 S. McDowell Street, Suite 300
Charlotte, NC 28204
Re: City of Charlotte, Hickory Grove Road Widening Project, Mccklonburg County.
City Project No. 512-97-087, USI No. 990214-001, ER 00-8562
Dear Mr-Morrison:
Thank vote for your letter of January 11, 2000, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and filet and have located. the following structures of historical or
architectural importance within the general area of the project:
Carter's Store (MK 1771), located at 6110 Hickory Grove Rd.
Hickory Grove Methodist Church (MK 1772), located at 6301 Hickory Grove Rd.
Your letter refers to a. "cemetery located across from Hickory Grove United Methodist Church." If the subject
project will not impact the cemetery we have no comment. However, if the subject project impacts the cemetery any
graves that will be moved are subject to North Carolina statutes. If unmarked graves will be moved please provide
our office with plans so that we may provide additional comments, Should it be necessary to .move unmarked -graves
we would recommend that the cemetery be mapped by an archaeologist to asciet in delineating the unmarked.grnves. .
The above commonts 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 eodiflod at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment, please
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Si cerely,
&-'a- %U- I -
?Y David Brook t
Deputy State Historic Precervsrion Officer
cc: W. Gilmore
ADMINISTRATION
ARCHAEOLOGY
RESTORATION
SURVEY & PLANNING
Location
Mail)nR Addmix
Telephone/FAX
[phone] 733-8653
[phone] 7154671
[phone] 715-4AN
[phone] 715-4901.
PAGE. 04
JUL 03 2003 09:51
507 N. Blount St.. Rnl6gh NC 4617 Mnil Service Center. RnlciRll NC 27699.4611
421 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4519 Mnil Service Center, Ralcigh NC 27699.4619
515 N. Blount St.. Ralcipth NC 4613 Mail Servicc Center, Ralcigh NC 27699.4613
515 N. alnuni St.. Ralcigh NC 461F MA0 Servicc Ccnicr, Raleigh NC 27699.4618
7043421666
JT U SINFR.A.STRUCTUR.E, INC.
t, CONSULTING ENGINEERS
11'q'000
I?

Ms. R ee pled.hil.l-Earley
Environm ntal Review Coordinator
Historic Preservation Office
Department of Cultural Resources
4617 Mail Smice Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
SUBJECT: Hickory Grove Widening
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
City Project # 512-97-087
USI Project 4 990214-001
Dear Ms. Gledhill-Earley:
Piz f cp Y
The City of Charlotte Engineering and Property Management Department has retained USInfrastructurc, Inc.
(USI) to perform a conceptual planning study for the proposed. Hickory Grove Widening Project. This letter
serves to introduce your agency to the project end solicit any comments you may have during this phase of
the project development.
Hickory Grove Road is currently a 2-lane minor thoroughfare that serves the eastem side of the City. The
proposed improvements would widen the existing road to 4-lanes with designated bike lanes from Sharnrock
Drive to Highland Avenue. The attached map shows the project limits and the surrounding area. In
addition, the project will include resurfacing the project limits, side street intersection improvements, curb
and gutter, storm drainage, sidewalk and planting strips, landscaping, and street lighting.
We are aware that the cemetery located across from Hickory Grove United Methodist Church has grave sites
dated around 1850. However, we are not aware of any other historic properties within the corridor. As a
part of the Planning Phase, please comment regarding the presence of any historic sites or structures that may
be affected by the proposed project.
Please let the know if you need additional information regarding the proposed project.
Sincerely,
USInfrastruncnture, Inc.
Alan Morrison, P.L.
Project Manager
enclosure
cc: Rebecca Chambers, Project Manager, City Engineering and Property Management
Racnrch - Planning • Enginccring - Management
301 S. McDowell Strcrr • Su.irc 300 - Charlotrc, North Catohnn • 28204
[phone] * Fax [phone]
JUL 03 2003 09:50
7043421666 PA5E.02
JUL-03-2003 09:29 FROM: USI 704J4e1bbb _ I U: rdb.Sb r. ee1? u6b
Hickory Grove Widening
Ran?C DLIIJ-
a J
? D
Z ti
r n1 ?°
e Q11:? Grove Pork Blvd o a ?` Q
!
Iry Ct moo,
Hick ry Grove
imm rly Glen Ln 1
Hie cry Grov El arl?.IrySe oo '
o? b Hickory Gr ve Rd Q Andora Or ,
ro '
•? ? / '? ? o? ? he lotte f'-'(C, Oopnrfrne?rt
?` ?1 ? Jfia??fr CJ
Cricklewood Ln 0 ,
?a
00T
?P oh^g? ?a
?e
J r Glerwanraor+-
l' co F1111 Rdi
1cc
• o_ ? a m
€ m
O h
M p
C
7 O1 -1 , IMP
F ur See s Ln 1O
?Il Albemarle Pd y'
0 krn 0.5 ?
Streets 98
Cool right O 15IBR•199T, 141=03CA Cefpa•nllon enolor AP LupPliare All nohli rnonryed Plnnna Ylsll air rnb alln Nl ntla'.//T9l!A.PR?19fIIa.Cnln. PPpn 1 '
JUL 03 2003 09:50 7043421666 PAGE.03
t
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Attachment E
July 22, 2003
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS) CORRESPONDENCE
AND LAW PROTECTED SPECIES_ FIELD REVIEW
' United States Department of the Interior
P
N p
? a
' FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
AC 3Asheville Ficld Office
160 2illicoa Street
Asheville. Noah Carolina 28801
March 27, 2000
FILE COPY

' Mr. Alan Morrison, P.E.
Project Manager
US Infrastructure, Inc. .
' 301 S. McDowell Street, Suite 300
Charlotte, North Carolina 28204
Dear Mr. Morrison:
Subject: Hickory Grove Widening (USI Project # 990214-001), Charlotte, Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina
In your lener of January 11, 2000, you requested our comments on the subject project. The
' following comments are provided in accordance with. 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).
I According to the information provided with your letter, the City of Charlotte plans to improve
Hickory Grove Road from its current two-lane configuration to a four-lane facility with bike
' paths. The project will also involve the installation of curbs and gutters, storm drainage,
sidewalks and planting strips, landscaping, and street lighting. The project will cross a stream.
' Enclosed is a list of species from Mecklenburg County that are on the Federal List of
Endangered and 77ireatened Wildlife and Plants and species of Federal concem that may occur
in the project impact area. We recommend surveying the project area for these species prior to
' any further planning or on-the-ground activities to ensure that no adverse impacts occur to these
species. We do have records from the project area of the endangered Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii) and Heller's trefoil (Lotus helleri), a species of Federal concern.
Species of Federal 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. The
presence or absence of these species in the project impact area should be addressed in any
environmental document prepared for this project.

nrT Al POOR 14:13 7043421666 PRGE.04
UCT-&5 db 14: 11 rKUI'1: U7livrrcn? i rcu? i ur?c? 1iv? r?-ra-rciooo

The environmental document should contain the following information, if pertinent:
,
(1) A complete analysis and comparison of the available alternatives (the build
and no-build alternatives).
(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 road '
improvements.
(3) The acreage and description of wetlands that will be filled as a result of '
the proposed road improvements. We are concerned about potential
wetland areas along Campbell Creek, a tributary to McAlpine Creek. '
Wetlands affected by the proposed project should be mapped in
accordance with the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands. We recommend contacting the U.S. Army '
Corps of Engineers to determine the need for a Section 404 Clean Water
Act permit.
'
(4) The extent (linear feet as well as discharge) of any water courses that will be
impacted as a result of the proposed project. We are concerned about impacts
to Campbell Creek. A description of any streams should include the '
classification (Rosgen 1995, 1996) and a description of the biotic resources.
(5) The acreage of upland habitat, by cover type, that will be eliminated '
because of the proposed project.
(6) A description of all expected secondary and cumulative environmental t
impacts associated with this proposed work.
(7) An analysis of the crossing structures considered (i.e., spanning structure, '
culvert) and the rationale for choosing the preferred structure(s). We prefer
stream crossings that span the bank-full width of the stream and do not impede ,
natural stream functions or fish passage.
(8) 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.
(9) The mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce, or compensate for habitat value losses (wetland, riverine, and
mod) associated with any phase of the proposed project. ,
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these scoping comments and request that you continue
to keep us informed as to the progress of this project. If you have any questions about these
1
nrT 617 BOOR 14:13 7043421666 PAGE.05
r
i

comments, please contact Mr. Mark A. Cantrell at 828/258-3939, Ext. 227. In any future
correspondence concerning the project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-00-086.
Si ere y,
l
Brian P. Cole
State Supervisor
Enclosure
OCT 03 2000 14:13
7043421666 PAGE.06
OCT-03 00 14:11 FRUM: U`J1M-KH51 KUU 1 UKt, UM.. flro404CIooo • JJ I IJVJV ??
ND FEDERAL
PEC
ES '
I
A
ENDANGERED, THREATENED, AND CANDIDATE S
SPECIES OF CONCERN, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
' '
s County Species List. It is a
This list was adapted from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
for Mecklenburg County, of North Carolina's federally listed and pruposed endangered, threatened,
listing
,
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 herbariums, literature, and personal
communications. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database is dynumic, 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.
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.
'

SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
COMMON NAME
MECKLENBURG COUNTY j
Vertebrates

Carolina darter Etheostoina collis c•ollis FSC '
Bald eagle Hfaliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened
Invertebrates '
Carolina heelsplitter Lasmigona decorata Endangered
Vascular Plants '
Georgia aster Aster georgianus C1
Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum FSC"
Smooth conetlower Echinacea laevigata Endangered* '
Schweinitz's sunflower Ifelianthus schweinitzii Endangered
Virginia quillwort Isoeres virginica FSC
Heller's trefoil Lotus helleri FSC '
Michaux's sumac Rhus rnichauxii Endangered'
,
KEY:
Status Definition

Endangered A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range." '
Throwened A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
C1 A taxon under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient information to
support listing.
FSC A Federal species of concern--a species that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly
C2 candidate species or species under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient ,
information to support listing).
December 20, 1999 Page 1 of 2 ,
-,.T -- 1-nM • , 7043421666 PAGE. 07
OCT-03 bb 19: It r•rKU1'1- u0i'.
1 Species with 1, 2, 3, or 4 asterisks behind them indicate histonc, obscure, or incidental records.
'Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago,
1 "Obscure record - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
--IncidentaUmigrant record - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.
""Historic record - obscure and incidental record.
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
' December 20, 1999 Page 2 of 2
,,,-T ram nnnn , A • , 7043421666 PAGE. 06
1
1 June 5, 2001

1

LAwGIBB
GROUP
Mr. Robert E. Wilson, P.E.
USlnfrastructure of Carolina, Inc.
301 South McDowell Street, Suite 300
Charlotte, North Carolina 28204
Subject: Protected Species Field Review
Hickory Grove Road Widening
Charlotte, North Carolina
LAW Project 30100-1-0123
Dear Mr. Wilson:
A*14 F
Law Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. (LAW) is pleased to submit this update conceming the
protected species assessment on the approximate 8,100 linear foot (If) Hickory Grove Road Widening
project, located in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The approximate site location is shown
on the attached Figure 1. As noted in previous communication, the proposed Hickory Grove Road
Widening project study area is located approximately six miles east of downtown Charlotte. The project
area encompasses Hickory Grove Road between Shamrock Drive and Palo Verde Lane and areas adjacent to
the north and south of Hickory Grove Road, within an approximate 100-foot wide construction corridor.
Areas previously identified as potential habitat for protected species, discussed in a preliminary Natural
Resources Report prepared by LAW and submitted to you on March 26, 2001, were revisited on May 18,
2001. A pedestrian visual review of these areas was conducted to determine the presence or absence of
protected species known to occur in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. This report documents the
methodology used to assess potential protected species habitat or sensitive environments, and the results of
our studies.
A preliminary field review, conducted on February 9, 2001, identified three locations within the project
area that contain potential habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and smooth
LAW Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road. Suite 100 • Charlotte. Borth Carolina 28205
704-357-8600• Fax: [phone]
Servino the Charlotte area for over 50 Years

Mr. Robert Wilson
June 5, 2001 '
Page 2 of 3

coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), two federal and state listed endangered plants and Georgia aster (Aster
georgianus), a state listed threatened plant (Figure 2). 1
• Area l - an open field just west of Market Street on the north side of Hickory Grove Road. '
• Area 2 - a transmission line right-of-way on the west side of Campbell Creek and south of Hickory
Grove Road '
• Area 3 - an open field and former home-site, just west of Valleyview Drive, on the south side of
Hickory Grove Road. ,
No individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower, smooth coneflower, or Georgia aster were observed during the '
February 9, 2001 field visit; however, winter identification of these plants, particularly Schweinitz's
sunflower and Georgia aster, is not optimal. ,
To further assess potential impacts of the proposed project on sensitive species or communities, LAW's
Catherine McRae, Environmental Scientist/botanist, conducted a field review of the areas previously ,
identified as potential habitat on May 18, 2001. Schweinitz's sunflower, smooth coneflower, and Georgia
aster are typically found in similar habitat, characterized by an open canopy, areas of exposed soil, and a ,
moderate disturbance regime, such as mowing or burning. Areas of the proposed project site exhibiting
these characteristics were reviewed for presence or absence of listed species known to occur in '
Mecklenburg County. Schweinitz's sunflower typically blooms in September, but can be identified by a
combination of vegetative characters throughout the growing season, including a scabrous upper leaf
surface, soft-pubescent lower leaf surface, and pubescent stem. Georgia aster blooms in October, but can
be identified by leaf vein characteristics, which are present throughout the growing season. Smooth ,
coneflower, which typically blooms in June and July, is difficult to identify in the vegetative state, but
generally has persistent flowering stalks that remain throughout the winter until the next blooming period. ,
Persistence of flowering stalks was confirmed by a recent field visit to the only known population of
smooth coneflower in Mecklenburg County.

i
Mr. Robert E. Wilson
June 5, 2001
Page 3 of 3
r
The three areas previously described as potential habitat are currently dominated by fescue (Festuca
r eliator), rabbitfoot clover (Trifolium arvense), red clover (Trifolium pratense), common yellow thistle
(Cirsium horridulum), sericea lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), vetch
r (Vicia sp.), Indian hemp (Apocynum cannabinum), and ox-eye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum).
No individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower, smooth coneflower, or Georgia aster were observed during the
' field review, nor were any members of the respective genera observed. Additionally, no individuals of
rare but unprotected plants known to occur in Mecklenburg County, including Heller's rabbit tobacco
(Gnaphalium helleri), southern anemone (Anemone berlandieri), sessile tick-trefoil (Desmodium
r sessilifolium), or Carolina thistle (Cirsium carolinianum) were observed during this pedestrian field
review of the three areas previously identified as potential habitat.
1
We appreciate the opportunity to conduct these environmental services for USlnfrastructure. If you have
any questions regarding this report, please call Michael A. lagnocco at 704-357-5543.
r Sincerely,
LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.
1
Catherine A. McRae
Staff Environmental Scientist
r

CAM/MAL cam
Attachments: Figure I - Site Location Map
Figure 2 - Field Reconnaissance Observations Map
UMicdhaoel A. la n o, P.W.S.
Project Mana r
? ¦
fr ! , _, l ? `? ?, ``1 a / ` II 1 / / ¦
?I;• II ,? /- 1 Or-. \J2)>{tf It l?i`\ 'l I it ` , \?
'_.1 l o t ?i?jl ? ??t ?r?-x•• ??I « ?!1 I / i ?? ? 1 ;1.
Urvone trr 11 t !i i •11 if
Sth exonxhln+L_ ! ., i i \ ? I ? ? i' , ?I ,
,`I ,. f j .?? ?? a? } \? ?•?i \ }I Ir `/Ti _-:1 I'?1. "i 742'.
?; •r =.-?t ?. ,? ` / t?, j l\ ,?•r + ?1, 111' 1.r ,I4 1 1 ? l - '
1 '^' t 11 l ?} iI I( l r, ?'`- ??+ ??\? \ •,: 1 t fit, F i ? ? . l ?`1
r f 1 C ? l?,lt Ury. `?' r\ ?l? ? I r 1 1..
''\\ ?r II 1 ?? - H .\ C'It 14 I ,`? I . ] '? ?\ I T f ` + "fl t J I \ I `l
111 ? ii N. \?? ?1....??y ,`? _ ?t1 '?? r',.' ?`\???.?. `?• I. (t -?1-?? t ../ .?,- ?7? Il?j,? j ',? tt r//.
~`10' '?+r -<hof1ltt?H161
I 4 , , _ Cl`?t?•? l ? , ?:.1 ??\ \ ..' ?ll? , ? ...:?{ J r ? +r I ? ?lrl '1+•+ 1 J ? I ? 1?'? n ! v??/t?.-'V.
ry? .nr t i d1y ? ti i ? l ?r ?ll !"?J ?1 ;?1 I t' 1 •` i/? ? ?,c I ((I
1:{
¦• t ? 767,
y?r ?y. 'YJ 1? ?. \ i t?.' i Armltul Hall \.
???.t'•' \ ,, '' I ? ' Vht ? l '?l 7v;? ,
; l• t. .?',/?k 11?? ? 1 rS4ly.---H?•rleC'15? ? ? J ,I ? \ - 7tr'
Ir /\ 1?l
?,?\? ? _ \ hL `' j )1 -tiJr- I ? jl ,? ? 1Qe ?? 1' 1 1 t(?? ', 1 _\•
1. (:I i;_ „?9? I.1 ?\t '•.1?. \t • `??ylj ??.T7!,. j 1t, ?1,T?\'k'.i 1\ ? ih° t , l .?-.'( ?.tit? ``?_??\.
+
c ? 1; I ?C
mt, vu
(f q? ? l ? y ? t ? ??rr r ( x v "1 r.
4 \
\` 1 ) 1 <??,/ .•:?????, ? ph //?,?;? ? ?.a h? ? 11? I F? / ? i t, n\ ' ? CS f/" ( I l I Y
?? ?? ? ? ?\? ? H t '? ?1It ?• / TS , ? re,?'°el? ? I•.? I i ?,,`? i t' ?: ?? ? ? ?I? '?, ' ?,?t ? 1'? ? `
92
?' i ?. 779 t e ?' / r', '•r. r / r.
f7?\F
1+ •r / ' _l t/ ,) ` r I I a 4^'°.h4L ?9*ar • / i i? I 1 ??
N
i.„' ?.: ?? t t :•, ?? i?7 t{ `
ti? .1 _ rc 8
t ? h rt 1, , I Itn ?i,;c?a?* I 'f ;?,• rig 1?? Y ?k? ?n err
%i?a .?? y. ,t ? , 11? r• i s ? fr
_ ? 1 `ti, ?`\ ? 14..,1 , ? ! ? ,, ?J / \lill ?2 r• ,\ t I'e„o c, ? ,,,5 .u/ 1?'?t ' ? ? r? ,,
s ? '/e.' :? ?? ??,• 9?rf ' ?11 y?/ .... ?I L,ti ii' I"tt ? L \ ?. \. a i ? g{/' Q/Cy
r / r:n'< c t ?? I ? ?CY• 4 ?' I II ' 1 I F ? >. t?. ??+x/j ?? 7,? r'['
1 (? t t!J
4 S
. t I S Y
11 ? + l /! ?/? f 'a-3Z ? y/ ' r i'•. 853 ? S ; + ? •\? I ' ? .,( A y ?^?` 1 9 ???
?,y ?. '. `' t •?? f,'+r r? ?, .?t.? i I?.}1 y?`, y ,.lt.,; \ -.` \J ..+ 77?(.;1: 4 15...
pFf ? ,t ?? 1. Ill / ? r 'I k•rl '\ ?? lh Sod' \ ' I 1 ?J ?? \? ??? ``• •.?? ??,
,Yft" I 1 , 1; 4? i I t?
D I' 11 \ 4 ..]xYbs Ion ?i? r
.1 7
1... ?,II' ''d? ! `'} ,?tp?rl r ?,` 1' ' ? frl• '' ?, 1. pJ.. ? I?q ? t I 1i
' .s 1 ' ?!{.II q• ??r "? . `.y{? \l (bj a? l od Ache < 7(l
N 111 .1 , . \I T , i s ('20 ' a u- I; „ ,. ' '•:
5 :
S EXPLANATION
i r--+ APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROJECT AREA 2000 1000 0 2000
z
w
APPRO)MLATE SCALE IN F'=
H REF: U.S.G.S. 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF MINT HILL, NC QUADRANGLE, DATED 1993.
g -
s SITE LOCATION
"" " HICKORY GROVE ROAD WIDENING
L) ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
Y
1
FIGURE
PREPARED ??tK DATE 3?Zrbl CHECKEDAII DATE 3x22101 JOB NO 30100-1-0123
By ,

Z" nom=
a=t
EXPLANATION
POTENTIAL HABITAT FOR
® HELIANTHUS SCHWEINITZII
- ' ' ' - WATERS OF THE U.S.
? DIRECTION OF STREAM FLOW
REF: ELECTRONIC DRAWING FlIE: CONCEPT.dwg 18TH XREF DRAWING: PUBUC.dvg. DATED APRIL 19, 2000.
NOTES:
1. LAW ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. (LAW)
PERFORMED A FIELD REVIEW OF POTENTIAL HABITAT FOR PROTECTED
SPECIES AND SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS ON FEBRUARY 9, 2001.
2. JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. AND WETLANDS WERE
APPROXIMATED IN THE FIELD BY LAW ON FEBRUARY 9, 2001.
BOUNDARIES OF WATERS OF THE U.S. HAVE BEEN MARKED IN THE
FIELD BUT HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS.
3. NO WETLANDS WERE IDENTIFIED WITHIN THE 200 FT. CORRIDOR
CENTERED ALONG HICKORY GROVE ROAD.
4. POTENTIAL HABITAT FOR HELIANTHUS SCHWEINITZII EXTENDS
TO THE EDGE OF EXISTING PAVEMENT OF HICKORY GROVE ROAD.
5. USE OF THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR PRELIMINARY PLANNING
PURPOSES ONLY.
600 300 0 600
APPROMU E SCAM IN I=
i
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM AREA 2
(INCLUDES POTENTIAL
WETLAND AREA)
City of Charlotte
Hickory Grove Road Widening Project - NWP No. 14 July 22, 2003
MACTEC Project 3010010123
Attachment F
N.C. NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM
(NCNHP) CORRESPONDENCE
1 I
' North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources N15WA
oil
Division of Parks and Recreation
Michael F. Easley, Governor
NCDENR
WillamG. Ross Jr., Secretary
Philip K. McKnelly, Director
February 9, 2001
Mr. Bert Patterson
' Law Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.
2801 Yorkmont Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Subject: Hickory Grove Road widening project near Charlotte
Dear Mr. Patterson:
' The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority natural areas within two miles of this site.
' 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 919-715-8687 if you have questions or need further information.
1 Sincerely,
Harry LeGrand, Zoologist
' Natural Heritage Program
HEL/hel
1

1615 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1615
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR/
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY \ AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED / 10% POST CONSUMER PAPER