20080364 Ver 1_Individual_20080228

__ -
T
` .
08-0364
~rracon A
,
,
~
,
,
f,^ ~ , .
F
2020 Starita Road, Suite E t,.-(~ ;
~
i
~
Charlotte, North Carolina 28206 f4
1'
-~
PHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

TRANSM/TTAL
To: Division of Water Quality
401NVetlands Unit Date: February 25, 2008
1650 Mail Service Center Project No: 71077707
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650
Telephone: [phone] Project Name: UCPS School 'J' Sewer Easement
WE TRANSMIT TO YOU HER EWITH ^x UNDER SEPARATE COVER ^
^ Project Manual ^ For your information and files Sent by:
^ Project Report ^x For comment or approval ^ Mail
D Drawings ^ Returned Deposit ^x Express
^ Brochures or Photos ^ Approved as noted ^ Messenger
^ Invoice ^ Picked-Up
^x Correspondence ^ Email
COPIES SET NO. DATE DESCRIPTION
1 1 2/25/2008 Check for $240.00 made out to NCDWQ
5 1 2/25/2008 PCN Application
5 1 2/25/2008 Overall Site Plan
5 1 2/25/2008 Plan and Profile Sheet C-3
5 1 2/25/2008 Plan and Profile Sheet C-7
~'S 1 2/25/2008 Letter and a-mail correspondence between McKim & Creed and
Union Coun Public Works
a-S 1 2/25/2008 Calculations for the Creek Crossin Flood Stud
REMARKS: Attached is the PCN application fora 401/404 Permit for the above listed site. An overall site
plan, as well as two plan and profile maps, is attached.
Please send a copy of the signed permit to the client and Terracon.
If you have any questions or need anything else please call me at 704-509-1777.
If enclosures received are not as listed above, kindly notify us at once.
l~~rr~con
By: / ~ ^
Heather R. Crutchfi
/.~ _
~~riAR~~S~iyv s~o--~' ~~, ~~~~;, ~8
v,~w..a;~~g~~.C.r

08-036q.
Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide 39
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. A licant Information ~! ~-v "~'~~' ~ ~' ~ ~ ~
~-
1. Owner/Applicant Information ~~~~ ~ ~ ZOD8
Name: Union Count~Public Schools (Mr. Don Hughes)
Mailing Address: 116 North Main Street ~r~~s - ~w~~ t~ ~::~aurr
Monroe, NC 28112 ~ ~~ "` ' ' `~ ~ ~" ~
Telephone Number: 704-296-5960 Fax Number: 704-296-5973
E-mail Address: don.hu hges(a~ucps.kl2.nc.us
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Heather Crutchfield
Company Affiliation: Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Mailing Address: 2020-E Starita Rd.
Charlotte, NC 28206
Telephone Number: 704-509-1777 Fax Number: 704-509-1888
E-mail Address: hrcrutchfield(a~terracon.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 13

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: UCPS Elementary School J Sewer Line Easement
2. T.LP. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):_07099005
4. Location
County: Union Nearest Town: Stallings
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): located approximately
1 500 feet southwest of the intersection of Stallings Road and Stevens Mill Road in Stallings,
Union County, NC.
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.104242 °N 80.668217 °W
6. Property size (acres): The sewer line easement area is 1.48 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: North Fork of Crooked Creek which flows into
Twelvemile Creek which then flows into the Rocky River
8. River Basin: Rocky River / Yadkin-Pee Dee
(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/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: mostly rural residential and high-density residential land
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 13

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Typical
heavy equipment will be used in the land clearing and during the construction of the sewer
utility line.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the proposed construction is to
provide sewer to Elementary_School Site `J'
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
theuUSACE 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. A Notification of Jurisdictional Determination for Elementary School `J'
was issued December 3, 2007 (USAGE Action ID #200703656
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.
No future impacts are planned or anticipated at this time.
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. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should 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. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: An 8" pine encased by 6" of concrete
above and below the pipe, and 12" on either side of the pipe will be imbedded in the stream.
The pipe and encasement will protrude 11" vertically from the bed of the stream. There will
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 13

be a permanent impact of 20 linear feet of stream which includes 17' 4" of rip rap which will
help protect the pipe. Pooling resulting from the obstruction of the stream is anticipated to be
375 linear feet.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of 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.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
( es/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Wetland Impact (acres) None
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: None on the
Easement
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, 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. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Sewer Line North Fork of
Crooked Creek Permanent
(Temporary)
Perennial
30.5 20
(40) 0.014
(0.028)
Sewer Line North Fork of
Crooked Creek Pooling caused by
Obstruction 30.5 375' 0.263

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 40' 0.028
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if a licable) (lake, ond, estua ,sound, bay, Im act
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 13

(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.028
Wetland Impact (acres):
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.028
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 40
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. 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.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
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. Because of the shallow depth of
the outfall receiving the proposed flow, the sewer line had to be placed at the _proposed depth.
Terracon (the consultants and McKim & Creed (the site civil met with Mr. Alan Johnson from
the NC Division of Water Quality at the site on November 29, 2007 to discuss alternatives to the
proposed plans. Mr. Johnson requested that Union County Public works be contacted to discuss
the appropriateness of an aerial crossin o~ f the proposed sewer line. On December 6, 2007, Mr.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 13

N. Michael Garbark from Union County Public Works issued a letter (attached) to Mr. Brian
Dey of McKim & Creed indicating that because the sewer line would have minimal cover under
the existing creek due to the depth of the outfall, they would prefer the line constructed and
encased as displayed in the attached plans. Later, Mr. Garbark stated that because of the stream
impact issues the sewer line could be an aerial crossin ag s long as it adhered to state guidelines.
The state guidelines require the pipe to be above the 25 year flood. According to the flood study
by McKim & Creed this could not be accomplished. Mr. Garbark stated in an email (attached)
that whatever would meet the Corers approval would suffice.
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 January 15, 2002, 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 NCEEP 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/ncwetlands/strm~ide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 10 of 13

2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five 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 ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. 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
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 11 of 13

2. If "yes", 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.
* Impact Required
Zone ,_~__ - r ~~ Multiplier *,~;+;~„+;~~
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (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. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. Not applicable
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
Not applicable
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 12 of 13

If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. 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).
We have been trying to be proactive about getting this issue resolved since the middle of
November 2007. Now, after many meetin sg and phone calls, we are submitting this permit
application. We are under extreme time constraints now, so expedition of this permit would be
rg eatly appreciated.
a~/a
_ Applicant/Agent's Signature U Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 13 of 13

UNION COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
Christie L. Putnam, P.E., Director
December 6, 2007
Brian Dey, PE
Mckim and Creed
8020 Tower Point Drive
Charlotte, NC 28227
RE: Sanitary Sewer Trunk to serve School `J'
Dear Mr Dey:
The sanitary sewer proposed to serve School `J' will have minimal cover under the existing
creek due to the depth of the outfall receiving the proposed flow. Versus the alternative of an
aerial crossing, UCPW prefers the trunk constructed, and encased, as displayed in the approved
plans. We anticipate less maintenance with the sewer buried to a depth the existing grade
permits and the trunk will be more accessible to future development.
If you have any questions please call me at 704-296-4239.
Sincerel ,
~~.
N Michael Garbark, P.E.
Assistant Engineering Director
Cc: Alan Johnson
Heather Crutchfield
500 North Main Street. • Monroe, North Carolina 28112 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: ('704)296-4232

rage I or 4
Crutchfield, Heather R.
From: Brian Dey [[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 3:29 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; Crutchfield, Heather R.; debbie green
Subject: FW: School JSewer -UPDATE
Steve,
Good afternoon. I am working on the School J offsite sewer in Union County, NC. I wanted to see if we could
open a dialogue about possible solutions for providing sewer service to the new school. As part of our submittal
to Union County Public Works, we investigated several possible alignments. The other alignments we investigate
would have required installation of more than a mile of sewer. The only economically feasible alignment for the
school is the one provided. We have tried to cross the creek using an aerial crossing, however, it will not meet
state requirements (see below). Is there any modification that can be made to lessen the impact of concrete
encasement?
Please call to discuss at your earliest convenience.
Thanks,
Brian Dey, PE, LEED®AP
M~IQM~CREED
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
8020 Tower Point Drive
Charlotte, NC 28227
704.841.2588
704.841.2567 fax
http://www mckmcreed..com
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: i ionday, January 28, 2008 2:3~ Pi i
To: Weston Boles
Cc: [e-mail]; Brian Dey; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: School JSewer -UPDATE
Brian, Weston,
I received the aerial technical report on the School 'J' creek crossing today indicating the 25 year
flood cannot be observed as the water would overtop the banks as a result of a 25 year flood. I
also understand that you cannot install the sewer at the initial elevation due to the water backing
up.
Whatever elevation meets the CORP criteria will suffice in this situation. Once you have the
2/21 /2008

rake ~ or ~+
crossing approved by the Corp please submit a copy of the Corp approval to me for the files. Since
the crossing will not meet the 25 year flood elevation, UCPW has to submit a certified letter with
your asbuilts asserting we will inspect the aerial crossing after every significant rainfall. Since the
certification has to come from the owner (which would be UCPW at that point), I want to have the
letter in the file that we had no other recourse for the pipe location other than what is installed.
Also Brian....could you seal the technical report concerning the flood study and resubmit us a copy?
Thanks,
Mike
Mike Garbark, PE
Assistant Engineering Director
Union County Public Works
500 N Main Street
Monroe, NC 28112
---=-"Weston Boles" <[e-mail]> wrote: -----
To: <[e-mail]>
From: "Weston Boles" <[e-mail]>
Date: 01/10/2008 01:47PM
cc: "Brian Dey" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: School J Sewer
Sorry for the confusion. The sewer has not yet been install. It has been permitted through the
state, but the corp permit is lagging behind.
The major permitting issue comes when we impact more than 300 ft of stream. Then we go from
applying for a nationwide permit to an individual permit. This permit will be much more difficult to
obtain.
Weston Boles EI
M~k~M~CREED
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
704.841.2588
704.841.2567 fax
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 12:54 PM
To: Weston Boles
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: School J Sewer
Isn't this sewer already in the ground? If so why would the corp let you construct it and then say
2/21 /2008

ra~,c ~ ul ~t
something about it? Or was this permit overlooked before construction began?
If it is in the ground, is a major stream crossing a big enough deal to go ahead and pull out the -
pipe and then reconstruct? What is the difference between a major permitting issue and a minor
one?
Thanks for any information.
Mike
Mike Garbark, PE
Assistant Engineering Director
Union County Public Works
500 N Main Street
Monroe, NC 28112
-----"Weston Boles" <[e-mail]> wrote: -----
To:' <[e-mail]>
From: "Weston Boles" <[e-mail]>
Date : O 1/ 10/2008 11: 49AM
cc: "Brian Dey" <[e-mail]>
Subject: School J Sewer
Mike,
Good Morning. We have been trying to permit the stream crossing for the sewer serving
Elementary School J though the Corp. The concrete encasement for the sewer is sticking
approximately 10 inch above the stream bed. This is causing the water to backup over 300
ft upstream. The Corp is considering this as a permanent impact and it will be a major permitting
issue. After looking at the plans we have determine that an aerial crossing could be put in to
eliminate the ponding issue. The bottom of the sewer pipe would be approximately 1.5 feet above
the stream bed. Would this be possible?
Weston Boles EI
M~k~VI~CREED
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
8020 Tower Point Drive
Charlotte, NC 28227
704.841.2588
704.841.2567 fax
http. ;//vrwwmckimcreedcom
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in
error please notify the system manager. Please note that any
views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of
2/21 /2008

the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
company. Finally, the recipient should check this e-mail and
any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company
accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
transmitted by this e-mail.
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in
error please notify the system manager. Please note that any
views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
company. Finally, the recipient should check this e-mail and
any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company
accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
transmitted by this e-mail.
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in
error please notify the system manager. Please note that any
views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
company. Finally, the recipient should check this e-mail and
any attachments for the presence of viruses. The company
accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus
transmitted by this e-mail.
2/21 /2008
rage 4 or 4

vM~~~c~

1
1

School 'J' Sewer Crossing
1
M C # 4634-0010

CALCULATIONS FOR:

Creek Crossing Flood Stud y

.,i--^~T
~~°
DATE: 02/19/08 •°''°""'""~~
~:~Q HESS/p•~r/ °+
"! ~ • P
r
REV.' "! ~ ,Q~ ' , '
1`p~^r,7~J~ •
• EA ;
`~ •
~ ~ ~ 7528
~ ~~~~
E
FEES , ~ ~ ~'•~NGINE, •~ ~:

1
8020 TOWER POINT DRIVE. CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28277
TEL [phone] FAX [phone] www.mckimcreed.com

1

1

1

1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Technical Report
TO: Union County Public Works
FROM: Weston Boles
DATE: January 24, 2008
RE: 25 Year Storm
North Fork Crooked Creek
M8~C#: 046340010
The purpose of this Technical Report is to outline the results of the 25-year storm event in North
Fork Crooked Creek at the location of the School J sewer crossing. Our results indicate that an
aerial crossing would not be feasible.
Flood Study
The drainage area for North Fork Crooked Creek at this location is 1,719 acres. We computed
a flow using the rational method based on a rain intensity for the 25 year storm (5.76 in/hr) and
a C value 0.70. It was determined that the 25 year storm will cause the water surface elevation
to rise above the top of the existing channel, approximately 4-feet above the top of the aerial
crossing.
Conclusion
The state regulations require that an aerial crossing has to be designed to allow the 25 year
storm to pass underneath. It has been determined that an aerial crossing will not be feasible for
the 8" sewer crossing.
S:\4634 Union County Public Schools\0010 UCPS J Offsite Sewer\20-Tech\Flood Study\Tech ,~_ ~„~.,,., `~~-~

1

1
1

1
1

1

Worksheet for Trapezoidal Channel - 1
Project Description
Friction Method Manning Formula
Solve For Discharge
In
ut Data
p
Roughness Coefficient 0.020
Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft
Normal Depth 5.00 ft
Left Side Slope 12.95 ft/ft (H:V)
Right Side Slope 6.00 ft/ft (H:V)
Bottom Width 16.15 ft
' Results
Discharge 1499.53 ft~/s
' Flow Area 317.63 ft2
Wetted Perimeter 111.51 ft
Top Width 110.90 ft
' Critical Depth 3.60 ft
Critical Slope 0.00455 ft/ft
• Velocity 4.72 ft/s
Velocity Head 0.35 ft
Specific Energy 5.35 ft

' Froude Number
Flow T
e 0.49
Subcritical
yp
GVF Input Data
' Downstream Depth 0.00 ft
Length 0.00 ft
' Number Of Steps 0
GVF Output Data
Upstream Depth 0.00 ft
Profile Description
Profile Headloss 0.00 ft
Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s
Upstream Velocity Infinity ft/s
Normal Depth 5.00 ft
Critical Depth 3.60 ft
Channel Slope 0.00100 ft/ft
Critical Slope 0.00455 ft/ft

'
Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.01.088.00]
' 2/19/2008 10:22:29 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA [phone] Page 1 of 1

1
1

1