20091099 Ver 1_401 Application_20091009

1
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
October 15, 2009
Mr. Steve Chapin
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville. NC 28801-5006
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
09-1099
AI'
¦
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068
Qr=c?0adF91
OCT 15 2009
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORWRAM BRANCH
Re: Jurisdictional Determination Request and 404/401 permit (Nationwide
39) application
Bissell Development Site CBP-7
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Dear Mr. Chapin/Ms. Karoly:
The following Preliminary.lurisdictional Determination (JD) request package and
404/401 (NWP 39) application is submitted for your review for the above
referenced project.
The Preliminary JD information presents site conditions evaluated by Kimley-
Horn and Associates, Inc (KHA) staff on September 2, 2009.
The JD package includes the following sections:
• Agent Authorization
• Site Figures
o Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
o Figure 2 - USGS Topographic Map (Weddington Quadrangle,
1968, revised 1988)
o Figure 3 - USFWS National Wetland Inventory and SURGO
Soils Map (2007 Aerial Photograph)
o Figure 4 - KHA Field Assessment (2007 Aerial Photograph)
• USAGE Wetland Data Form (DPI)
• USACE Stream Evaluation Form
• NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
• Site Photographs
• Rapanos Form
¦
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]
I S
? ? ? Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc.
The stream delineation was performed using sub-meter GPS equipment. KHA
has requested afield review to evaluate the site (telephone conversation with
Steve Chapin, USACE on 10/7/2009, and telephone conversation with Alan
Johnson, NCDWQ on 10/6/2009) and is available to meet on-site to discuss the
project and delineation. The site evaluation concluded that there is an
intermittent unimportant stream within the study area, and that there are no
jurisdictional wetlands.
In addition to the Preliminary JD request, a 404/401 (Nationwide 39) permit
application is submitted with this package. In addition to the JD application
information, the following is included for evaluation of the permit application.
• PCN Form
• Project Summary sheet
• Figures
0 5-A - Overall Site Plan
0 5-B - POI A Drainage Area
0 5-C - POI B Drainage Area
0 5-D - Wet Pond Plan
0 5-E - Wet Pond Detail
0 5-F - Wet Pond Cross Sections
0 5-G - Riprap Apron Detail
0 5-H - Riprap Ditch Detail
o Stor mwater Calculations - POI A
o Stor mwater Calculations - POI B
Please feel free to contact me at 919-677-2121 if you have any questions, or if
additional information is necessary.
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chad Evenhouse, PWS
Attachments
Cc: Clifton Coble, Bissell Development
Eric Hampton, Kimley-Horn and Associates. Inc.
I 1

Name: Clifton S. Coble. President
Bissell De\eloprnent
r\ddress: 1 860 Ballantvne Corporate Pk ice. Strife '00
Charlotte, NC 28277
Phone: [phone]
Project Name/Description: Bissell Development Site CBP-7
Date: October 15. 2009
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of l ngincers. At'ilmington District
Attention: Steve Chapin
Field Office: Asheville Regulatory Field Ofiicc. AVihninpton District
Re: A\%etland Related Consultin" and Pernrittino
1-0 Whom It N'lav Concern:
1. the current propertV1 owner. hereby designate and authorize Kimley-l torn and
Associates. inc. to act in 1111,1 atu• behalfas 111v10ur went solely for the purpoSe o'
processing ol'Section 404 permits and Section =101 \VIter Oualit\ Ccl'tifieati0ns
applications and to furnish upon request Supplemental inftarmatiou in sul.)1)01't 01'
applications. etc. from this (1a)- fcarward Lrntil succc5s1'ol c0111hletion ofthe permittirag?
process or revocation by the 0wnca-.
Authorized this the 15th day of October 2009
??.
Clifton S. Coble
- -- ,----_ . _ _ __ _ ......... _
Print Applicant Name App icant Signature
CC: Cindy Karoly.
N.C. Wetlands Unit
1621 rNfail Service Center
Raleigh. N. C. 276x)9-1621

/ N'+ L
s
'harlo e
JN?

i

521
521
Legend
Project Boundary
Municipalities
Interstates NCDOT
- US Highways NCDOT
- State Highways NCDOT
- State Roads NCDOT
- Railroads 0125
Miles

Title Vicinity Map
Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Project Charlotte. North Carolina
Vwpawd I Mecklenburg County
Bissell Develo
ment
p Date
Project Number
Figure
10/15/09 018004010 1
Preparal hY Anna Reuvche tun °'""°"
tiernc
r--
•-• r• - +
1! 41
JD"Ie C
feel t '
e
•? '?b+y?,Lti r
N
yy+ ?,,R * ?. t.
T' *
1-0
A
if -
?m ' t ++.; ? ? 4;._11 ? a
• F? ` ?.
%
Le end
L_ Project Boundary
Soo
Feet --__J 4 F t ?1 r. %
Title
NGS Topographic Map (USGS (Quadrangle: Weddington, Created 1968, Revised 1988)
Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Project Charlotte, North Carolina
Prepared 6"r Mecklenhurg County
Bissell Development
Date Project Number Figure
10/ 1 S/09 018004010 1
Prepared by %nna Keuwh,,
$ WkD
Map ID Soil Series Drainage Class Hydric
Eno sandy I
EnB loam Well Drained No
MO Monocan loam Somewhat Yes
oorl drained
i?
WkD Wilkes loam Well Drained No r4 ks
i
1
? MO °0
r? C
AL_
WkB
"Si r r# I,I ?x
Qp u
"Ole
A
4
ace
R n e
Ol
N
41
Le end ` ;t
Project Boundary
' ??' 113 ?T
SURGO Soils
USFWS National Wetland Inventory
Notes:
Soil layers are slightly shifted from aerial photograph'
No NWI wetlands on-site 4
Title USFWS National Wetland Inventory and SURGO Soils Map (2007 Aerial Photograph)
Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Project Charlotte, North Carolina
rrcr" r" 11 "r Mecklenburg County
Bissell Development
Date Project Number Figure
10/14/09 018004010 1
I'rrparal by Anna Niux'Fx• Clam Ora

a e4
4 \ ..
OWN

// C4 ? ? ? t
- -'?• ?.
4
in
wok
?; ,
P6 r.
Total Site Area
15.72 acres
P5
? r i ?.
., .
.
r
ggg

s ' YOlbpr
B?
Stream Data Point j
tp #' Intermittent
3` Wetland Data Point
Forested, Non-wetland.
f{ K Floodplain area
y ,
AkiwW
y, s
+s: ? a >N

fir, t?
r ,
s ..;
„ ..
Feet
ti

t
Legend z
?
? Project Boundary
••
Mecidenburg Fl 00 way
= Jurisdictional Tributary (Intermittent. GPS surveyed) Q FEMA Floodway
= Non-Junsdictional Tributary (Drainage feature, GPS surveyed) O 100 YR Floodplain, . .
0 Datapoints S - -
Title KHA Field Assessment Map (2007 Aerial Photograph)

Project Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Charlotte. North Carolina
p qa d l of
Bissell Develo
ment Mecklenhurg County
p Date Project Number Figure
10/ 1 S/09 018004010 4
Preparrd M Anna Hruxhe CMII ==.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: Bissell Development, Ballantyne Date: 9/2/2009
Applicant / Owner: Bissell Development County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Chad Evenhouse, PWS State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: DP 1
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Platanus occidentalis T FACW- 9.
2. Ulmus americana T FACW 10.
3. Ouerczus michaitxii T FACW- 11.
4. Ligustrum sinense S FAC 12.
5. Phvtolacca americana S FACU+ 13.
6. Acer negundo S FACW 14.
7. Parthenocissus quinquefolia V FAC 15.
8. Lonicera iaponica V FAC- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 75
Remarks: The tree canopy is dense with older, mature tree species which has limited herbaceous plants at the
data point location. Shrub layer is dominated with Pokeberry (Phvtolacca americana), and Chinese Privet
(Ligustrum sinense) indicating that the area evaluated was historically wetter than the more recent growing seasons
based on comparison of the tolerance of tree species and shrubs.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other Inundated
-Saturated in Upper 12"
X No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
x Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: None (in.) Secondary Indicators:

Depth to Free Water in Pit: > Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"

30 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 30 (in.) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: The soil profile was taken to a depth of 30 inches and did not indicate saturation, or significant
moisture indicating that water table depth is likely greater than 3 feet. The data point location is approximately 75
feet from an intermittent stream which was entirely dry. There is evidence of flood flows in this area based on the
drainage patterns, micro-topography, and wrack lines. Rainfall of 0.22 inches occurred within 36-48 hours prior to
the evaluation, and rainfall of 0.69 inches occurred within the prior week (Charlotte Douglas Airport).
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Monacan Drainage Class: Somewhat Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaauentic Eutrochrepts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-20 A 10 YR 4/4 Sandy loam
20-30 B 10 YR 4/4 10 YR 5/6 few, < 20%
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol _ Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
Soils
-Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: data point location is in a small floodplain adjacent to an intermittent (dry) stream, and the area
contains many shallow depressions and drainage patterns. The profile location was in a depression area
approximately 3 inches lower than the average ground surface.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No Within a Wetland? Yes_ No X
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No X
Remarks: The site does not meet wetland criteria based on lacking hydric soil indicators. Although the soil
series is listed as hydric, the observed profile indicated that the upper surface is a higher chroma soil (4) and
evidence of reduction (high water table) did not occur until 20 inches from the soil surface, which was in a low
spot in the general area. Although not a problem site, there have been changes in the adjacent land use and
watershed that could affect the hydrology of this location. Upslope there is an on-line impoundment to the
intermittent stream. Down slope there is a channelized portion of the intermittent stream where is crosses the golf
course. Parallel to the forested area and along the toe-of-slope of the floodplain there is a sanitary sewer utility
easement. Therefore, the floodplain does not receive significant flood flow (impoundment), has overland flow
diverted (utility easement), and conveys flow rapidly (incised channel down slope). So although there is evidence
that hydrology indicators are present (wrack lines and drainage patterns), it is unlikely that this location receives
and detains sufficient hydrology to support a wetland community.
USACE AIDS- DWQ ! Site # (indicate on attached maps
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: sS e- if ve loo ,,e .}
3. Date of evaluation: 'aAQS 1
5. Name of stream:11--1.1d fr: b„ d,.rb de 1d CC
7. Approximate drainage area:
9. Length of reach evaluated: " Itey L F
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
AdW
2. Evaluator's name: )n ?&eQ F&Hte? A &J
4. Time of evaluation:
6. River basin:-- C:? t?tctaJb
8. Stream order: St
10. County: t/l?l pc??C? 6 d?4
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex 34872312): 3S• 0& date Longitude (ex -77,556611 ): - rro' X 5"13
Method location determined (circle): GPS o Shee Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
?Jlv- LLB .4 A
Il... ?(e-..?i n? (nr ?rc....[Y F' ??-CC li?c.? OcOL/v?d ?"t16? ?fd?+ ?Or?f COKSC o-?l/?
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: d..Aol mow;.. u if lw1/.' CLerlaff
AriUr Y? ?llvrl © LD`l ' ('G i 11 r/a, L erk 64.,Psr}
16. Site cunditiuns at time of visit:-
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters -Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 4-1
o.? rt 5
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 16 % Residential !Z6 % Commercial -% Industrial _--_% Agricultural
-?L% Forested _% Cleared / Logged 0 % Other ( ea.c, . S e
22. Bankfull width: 3 . G prf 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): /,Z L-o S
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (> 10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight _Occasional bends ? Frequent meander -Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): Comments:-- d ?t
t".161 re4..,? 40 rYa
?--r{ s e L, ?+ [, d:..•.. a /dr.,?. ( sr 1e s a Sd, . t '
Ueca .,. sm--.,alt
Evaluator's Signature /'? I Date 3 [J
This channel evaluati form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
? ?f ?-c?....- :..,pay,.,.-.t...?.., f--- - ......................,.
Qool? ca-,? c? ?psd-nee--? ?.?,( dr-c?-? sd,•?r-?--.?--? r
OP F.:dc-c of k,,*(-e,,{ o<oti..sa?e?.? c,_ 3a--r / e
luc? !,'? .
NCDWO Stream Classification Form
Project Name: (3iase-(I /River Basin: C.?-hkw6y County: valuaior: (I
"ok^( Evt?kei+,.+cj/S
DWQ Project Number. Nearest Named Stream: MCAMs-eLatitude: if' &OZl4 ( l?,? j : q.Klt`t ber?
l ?/y Signature
Date: ?/}161' USGS QUAD: W&W-AWA Longitude: ee?,?' ri`m` ? 3 LocationAir?ctions:
*PLEASE NOTE: if evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a ratan-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessap:
Also, if in the best professbnal judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural .stream-this
rating system should not be ased*
Primarv Field Indicators: 2ircle One Aumber Per Line)
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 I 2
/`NOTE 1lRrd d Bank CaLed By Ditching i d MHOUT Sinuadrv Then mare-D+r
10) Is A 20 Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Togo Mao Artd?r In Field) Present? Yes=3
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS:
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circie one x b,, p,1,,,,)
I I
n Is There A Grade Con ml Point to hannef
5 I
?
3) Does Topography Indicate A
" I S
Natural Drainm
Way?
-
(
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS:_j.s I.5
N-Or
II. Hydroloev Absent Weak Moderate
1) Is This Years (Or Last s) Leatlitter Strong
-
Present In t ' 1
f
.
.5
2[ Sediment On Plants
Or Debris Present? 1
3) Are Wrack L,5 q 0
4) Is Water In
C?hanneI And >48 Hrs. Since
5 1
;
.
w 1.5
5) Is There WIn Channel During Dry 0
.5 1
Conditions Or n Growintt cca.on)' 1.5
6) Are Hvdri SnI P r r a . yr~
(•NOTE:I/'TotaiAbtence OfAiiPlanu/rtSbeombed --I 75 Mostly "`' MotlyFACu MostlyUYL .5 0 A A;2W Above era,. lhi lea Ltvi FCS CAF' Pnsent`1 1 ()
* Aid Vow or
F,
IL Hydroloev Absent Weak Moderate Strone
1) Is There A Groundwater /?
Flow/Discharee Present? ( 01 1 2 3
PRIMARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS:
SECONDARY HYDROLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: r
Photograph 2. Forested tloodplainarea adjacent to the intermittent stream taken at the wetland data point location. This area does not
meet wetland criteria due to a lack of soil indicators.
Title Site Photographs
Project
Prrpar: d i 1.r.
Bissell Development
Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Charlotte. North Carolina
Mecklenburg County
Date Project Number
10/14/09 0180040 I 0
Site Photo Page
Prepared h} Anna Heuti-he rIMFI
Photograph 1. Downstream view of stream (riffle) taken from upstream boundary of the Site.
Photograph 3. West view within the forested floodplain area showing a gully/head-cut that is forming in the floodplain, likely from
stormwater flow concentrating along the sewer easement which runs parallel to the stream valley.
Title I Site Photographs
Project
PrrpareJ i „r:
Bissell Development
Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Charlotte. North Carolina
Mecklenburg County
Date Project Number
10/ 14/09 018004010
Site Photo Page
PreparoJ by Anna Reu,x-ha•
Photograph 4. West vic" ulthe head of the gully/head-cut area towards the forest floodplain area.
a

F

9y, d ? rf' `
•
M1
ice' '.
? .7n
?

Photograph 5. Down slope view of the vegetated Swale (non-.jurisdictional) that provides hydrologic connection between stream
segments.

3 ti 4. ;?? F+
y r
*??1 ? ? .. t? At`e r,J •. ,. ?? -,y?f? t; ,.rr,

_o"?.t
q
t y a r r
? ? ,
1
?Y
7
Wi7wS?T?I???w
w :•y v5
r t(
11e'
z
I
(
•
?
j? r
F
.
haw
'?
IL
?StPrF•
"R,,1 ?'?
t>
?
?
Y jc:.. n? ,
P
II
t•
?,
a
h yfy,
V
?
,?;?'k?tjfF6V qa
k`, a ?.>
y
1 t? v . #j bt 1 ', r'q}ay , #
"l9t
tIt^3
r
1
?
a
?
7
'
°
, ?,
•at'7'µ
,.
p ?
g
,? q?f
?*•..
i F
?? r
' '' Ali".
?s
?
11vi
1 r 5f. tj
"R '• 7e ?
A
" ?f
`'F •
' I ?t
'
;
. a.
L•
+
4?y
rF f.•? 4 a i s 1 a F '! } .
P ?A 7.:' ? '? ? ?1u 4 ?ti? ? A ?
k
` 77 lGr wL• .?j >, F?1 f 1 V ?.
1 ?, ?? t
1
•
s
? C C.?f• ._, .?J?
`'
A 'r , 'y
?' l?h l4`'t ,dt K?•?#.? -p
',?y! A k t•iil'F tJ" 4q1 8 4 1= ?, ..at fy? f/fP 1, •'?`-o.
Z
?
fi
?llrI
t ??r,In?
V 'C? ` rrm?a? ?3 (
4 srl?a"`
Iva'C ,yt l4F11 I W
F qr;4 ? +." ,t.V L •?1?9? -
O I !fit
[
o 4 Ff6 <`?? i?y
'
.
'
t f
yt
t
Fr r ir , i f r, c .Z 49 }, nk 11P
a. lq tp? r r F' 'L> l Y
if! -%i i
vyyy oi'? d e
???
.??=,Mi ??7N?? ?i!?+' ? ??,
pr ??
s?
l-
,
?
?
rrr
j???
[d
$ ?i` a??i r ?'?>V (r.
R'j?.J ft z?l. gas ?
'? *,0"
a.,e. r /+u ??yy?? ?
?
• '??? 4 ? r" t?T'•" r t °?a.
ry
?
} d,
f
Photograph 6. Vegetated swale. Picture is taken in the middle of the area between stream segments. At this location, there is no
evidence of a stream bed or bank, and the bermuda grass is the dominant vegetation species.
Title Site Photographs
Bissell Development - CBP - 7
Project Charlotte, North Carolina
Mecklenburg County
Bissell Development
Date
Project Number
Site Photo Page
10/14/09 018004010 3
preparM by Anna Nruvhr ion arlw„
maw
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by Billowing the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.06264° N, Long. 780.84427°'W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to McAlpine Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TN W) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050103
B( Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential.jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
? Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION I1: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF.IURISDICTION.
"There Are no "navigable waters ofthe U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA)jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
? Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
"There Are "waters ofthe U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA)jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
TNWs, including territorial seas
? Wetlands adjacent to TN Ws
® Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into'TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Impoundments ofjurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: -645 linear feet: 3 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by OHWM.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to he not jurisdictional.
Explain: Where the intermittent stream flows into the floodplain for the larger perennial stream north of the site (off-
site) the valley slope shanges and the stream disappears. This area has also historically been used as a grass swale
maintained as part of the golf course fairway. The feature does not exhibit wetland indicators, primarilly vegetation,
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
nor a OHWM characteristic of a tributary. Instead, the feature is a maintained grass swale that provides hydrologic
connection to the upslope and downslope stream segments.
SECTION 111: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections II1.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: -80 acres Pick List
Drainage area: -80 acres Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationshipwith'I'NW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 4 tributaries before entering'I'NW.
Project waters are 10-15 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-45 aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: Confluence with T'NW is in South Carolina.
Identify flow route to T N W5: 'T'ributary flows to UT to McAlpine Ck, then to Sugar Creek (in SC), then flows into
Catawba River.
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.
Tributary stream order, if known: first.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply)-
Tributary is: ® Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
® Manipulated (man-altered). Explain: Upstream area includes stormwater impoundment.
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 3 teet
Average depth: 2 feet
Average side slopes: Vertical (1:1 or less).
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/%cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: incised but relatively stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: yes. .
"Tributary geometry: Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface Ilow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
't'ributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank ® the presence of litter and debris
? changes in the character of soil ? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? shelving ® the presence of wrack line
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ? sediment sorting
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ® scour
® sediment deposition ? multiple observed or predicted flow events
? water staining ? abrupt change in plant community
? other (list):
® Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:lower portion of the tributary loses OHWM at change in valley slope where
the V-order stream confluences with the larger UT to McAlpine Creek floodplain. This area also is maintained as a grass swale within
a portion of the golf course.
If factors other than the 0I-1 WM were used to determ
high Tide Line indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects
? line shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
? physical markings/characteristics
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
ine lateral extent of CWAjurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? survey to available datum;
? physical markings;
? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: unknown (no water in channel when evaluated).
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
"A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): portions of the stream have a limited forested buffer, other areas
have been cleared. Mimimal habitat potential.
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: terrestrial animal tracks observed, few crayfish mounds.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat tor:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rnpanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
? TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TN W where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: --645 linear feet-3'width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identity type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs8 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TN W is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section I11.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
? Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
?; Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TN W are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
? Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section I11.C.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see F; below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE1 WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
Sl7CH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
"See Footnote # 3.
To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
"' Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
? Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required forjurisdiction. Explain:
® Other: (explain, if not covered above): There is an area of non-jurisdictional vegetated Swale that connects two portions of
Seasonal RPW.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis ofjurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
-judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (fl).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NI ID data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Mecklenburg County, NC (SURGO).
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: GIS datalayer.
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):2007.
or ® Other (Name & Date):Site Photographs 9/2/2009.
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
? ? ? Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc. Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Bissell Development Site CBP-7
Applicant Name and Address: Clifton Coble
Bissell Development
13860 Ballantvne Corporate Place, Suite 300
Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: [phone]
Type of Request: ® Nationwide PCN (NWP # 39) ? Indivic
® Jurisdictional Determination ? Other:
Included Attachments: ® Project Plans ® USGS Map
® Agent Authorization ® Delineation Sketch
® Data Forms (Up & Wet) ® NCDWQ Stream Forms
? NCEEP Confirmation ® Aerial Photo
? Agency Correspondence ? Other:
lual Permit Application
® NRCS Soil Survey
? Delineation Survey
® USACE Stream Forms
® Site Photos
? Other:
Check if applicable: ? CAMA County ? Trout County ? Isolated Waters
? Section 7, ESA ? Section 106, NHPA ? EFH
? Mitigation Proposed (? NC EEP ? On-Site ? Off-Site ? Other)
County: Mecklenburg Nearest City/Town: Charlotte
Waterway: UT to McApline Creek
H.U.C.:03050103
Property Size (acres): 15.72
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.06264 °N
River Basin: Catawba
USGS Quad Name: Weddington, NC
Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): <0.10
80.84427 °W
Project Location: The proposed commercial development site is located in Charlotte Mecklenburg County NC east of
Ballantvne Corporate Place road south of the eastbound ramp to I-485 and west of the Ballantvne Golf Course
Site Description: The project site is mostly forested or cleared upland with a portion of the golf course A small
intermittent tributary is located along the northeast portion of the site
Impact Summary (if applicable): The proposed impacts include the placement of fill material into 254 LF (0.017 ac) of
intermittent unimportant stream channel to relocate the stream to accommodate a stormwater BMP (wet pond)
Open Water Wetland Stream Channel
NWP
# (acres) (acres) Intermittent and/or Unimportant
Aquatic Function Perennial and/or Important
Aquatic Function
Temp Perm Tem Perm Tem . Perm. Tem . Perm.
. . p. . If ac if ac if ac if Ac
39 254 0.017

Total
Total Permanent Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.017
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chad Evenhouse
Direct Number: 919-677-2121
¦ E
P.0 Box 33068 TEL [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina FAX [phone]
276363068
09-1099
9?"0F VvArF9oG
r
o -c
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form -
on W
s
A. Applicant Information I L2
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Bissell Development - CBP-7
2b. County: Mecklenburg
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Charlotte
2d. Subdivision name: Ballantyne
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: OCT 6 2009
3. Owner Information DEW-MTER0^1 Y
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Bissell Company Inc.
3b. Deed Book and Page No. ID# 22316102
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Clifton Coble
3d. Street address: 13860 Ballantyne Corporate PI, Suite 300
3e. City, state, zip: Charlotte, NC 28277
3f. Telephone no.: 704-248-2000
3g. Fax no.: 704-248-2002
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Chad Evenhouse, PWS
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
5c. Street address: 3001 Weston Parkway
5d. City, state, zip: Cary, NC
5e. Telephone no.: 919-677-2121
5f. Fax no.: 919-677-2050
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 22316102
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.06264 Longitude: - 80.84427
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: 166.7 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to McApline Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C
2c. River basin: Catawba
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The CBP-7 Site is a 15.72 acre sub-parcel within the larger 166.7 acre property which also includes the Ballantyne Golf
Course (see attached figures). The CBP-7 Site is undeveloped with areas of cleared forest, forest, and a portion of the
golf course. Land use around the site is predominately commercial development, golf course, and Interstate 485. South
and west of the site is predominately residential development along Ballantyne Commons Road. The northeast portion of
the 15.72-acre site includes an intermittent stream that flows north towards McApline Creek. In the eastern portion of the
15.72-acre site, the stream is forested. Downstream from the forested segment, the stream has been cleared for the golf
course. Further downstream, the stream disappears as the valley slope changes where the small tributary confluences
with a larger perennial stream (LIT to McAlpine Creek) and its floodplain which is off-site, just north of the 15.5-acre site.
This drainageway area where the stream disappears also crosses the golf course. The drainage feature in this area is a
non-jurisdictional vegetated swale that provides a hydrologic connection to the upslope and downslope stream segments.
There are no wetlands within the 15.72-acre site.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
None within the 15.72-acre site
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
645 linear feet within the 15.72-acre site (see that attached figures)
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed development will provide commerical office space to meet demand for the Ballantyne area in South
Charlotte. The proposed fill/excavation is necessary to allow development of the site. The stream has been avoided to
the maximum extent practicable, and unavoidable impacts have been minimized.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed development includes three corporate buildings, two parking decks and minimal surface parking in front of
the buildings along the road (see the attached figures). The development will include stormwater management using wet
ponds.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
Comments: A Preliminary JD request has been submitted
with this application
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ® Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent
DWQ -non-404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ®P ? T Fill First order UT to ? PER ® Corps 3
0 254
UT of McAlpine Ck ® INT ® DWQ .
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P R T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3b. Total stream and tributary impacts 254
3i. Comments: The stream is to be relocated to provide the necessary space to allow construction of a stormwater
d f
pon
or
the proposed development. The relocated channel will be a stablized riprap channel (detail included in the attached figures),
and will be planted with riparian vegetation, although the buffer width will be limited being constrained by the pond and the golf
course.
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
411 Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.

Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland

number (acres)
of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1 Stormwater 254 0.5
P2 Stormwater 0.5
K Total
5g. Comments: The stream will be relocated and routed around the stormwater pond. The pond will not be on-line with the
stream and will be supported by stormwater flow only. The surface area for the stormwater pond will be approximately 0.5
acre.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): Both ponds are approximately 0.5 acre in surface area at normal pool
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres): 7.60 and 8.12 acres respectively
5k. Method of construction: Excavation and dam/water control structure
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ® Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary T impact required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The project site does not have regulated riparian stream buffers.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The proposed development maximizes use of the project area for the construction of three buildings. To minimize site
disturbance and imperviousness, while accomodating the structures and providing parking, two parking decks will be
constructed. Surface parking at the entrances of the buildings will be included as well. Topographically, the site slopes from
Ballantyne Corporate Place road to the northwest towards the stream. A sanitary sewer easement is located parallel to the
stream along the toe-of-slope of the hill. The proposed impact to the intermittent stream includes relocation of the stream so
that the stormwater pond will be constructed off-line. The location and configuration of the pond was chosen to minimize the
length of stream to be relocated. The second pond avoids impact to jurisdictional areas all together by locating in an area
where the stream transitions to a non-jurisdictional vegetated swale. By installing a pipe through that pond, the hydrologic
connection between jurisdictional areas will be maintained, but the stormwater pond will remain off-line. Refer to the attached
figures for more detail.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The stream relocation will be constructed and stabilized prior to the construction of the pond so that construction activites for
the pond will be separate from the stream channel.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ? Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
El Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
The intermittent stream to be impacted will be relocated. This stream is of low quality and did not exhibit indicators
supporting biological habitat (insufficient flow, data forms and documentation attached). Therefore, there are no
anticipated lost functions from the proposed project.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zo
ne 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 65%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ® Yes ? No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, na rrative description of the plan:
Stormwater management measures shall be designed in accordance with the City of Charlotte Post Construction
Controls Ordinance (PCCO) for water quantity and quality purposes. In accordance with the PCCO stormwater quantity
requirements, the 2-year and 10-year peak storm discharge rates and the 1-year 24-hour runoff volume are not to exceed
the predevelopment conditions. Additionally, runoff from the project area is required t o be treated to remove at least 85%
of the Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in the runoff. The site is designed with a series of two Wet Detention Ponds to
handle both the quantity and quality requirements. The project area is exempt from the City of Charlotte S.W.I.M. buffers
due to its approved rezoning in 1993 by the City of Charlotte. At this time, the Stormwater Management Plan has not
been submitted to the City of Charlotte, since further site design is required. However, the proposed stormwater
management is anticipated to be sufficient to meet the City's requirements for the site .
® Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? Charlotte
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HQW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? ORW
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ? Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. 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.
All wastewater will leave the site via gravity sewer and will be treated by public utility.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. El Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A data base review of the NC Natural Heritage Program was performed and showed that there are no known occurrences
of federally-protected species within a one mile radius of the site.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NCDOT list of counties and waterbodies containing EFH. The project is not within one of the 18 coastal counties with
EFH.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A review of State Historical Preservation Office database showed that there are no registered historical areas within a one
mile radius of the site. The site is undeveloped and will not impact any structures.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ? Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? Mecklenburg County floodplain mapping
f1 / f J'
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applicant/ Agent's Signature ate
(Agents signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is rovided.)
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
K:\CSE,LDEV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Stream Permit ting\Dwg\X- BASE.dwg
1 1 ,I
'* ,
Il 0
°>
r w_ o
0 w,
00
r
m
E6_ ARM
1000100
A
to
n
D
r
m
n
N
O
O
Kimley-Horn
Elm
?a and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-A BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
°` "R°°"zazo, PONDS @ HOLE #2
:x;,01 09 a°'°"A OVERALL STORMWATER PLAN CHARLOTTE, NC 10/13/09
o.?
THIS DOCUMENT. TOGETHER MM T E CONCEPTS AND DESGNS PRESENTED HERE". AS AN INSTRUMENT Or SEMG4 5 INTENDED ONLY FOR TNI SP[grlC PURPOSE AND CLEM fOR RHCH a OAS PREPMED. REUSE Or AND 404M OM
RELMNCE 04 TN6 DOURKNT wIiNDUi WRITTEN AOTHORREATGN AND ADMUTON 9Y RRAEY-HORN AND ASSOCATE& NC. SHALL BE RRIIOUf LABUTY TO KOR.EY-HORN µD ASSOCATES INC.

n: \Iar--LVLV\VHOVV• olsseU uevelopmenT\ulu T3ouoncyne ajreom rermiEling \uwg\R-nHat.owg
J ' 40
G
n r/;
`# c vrIl
,
1\ , / Z=vA
? a
? °• II
z >
?, I?
c
D
vD0 t, ;u 0
' -4 -im
zw? o°<DD II
C)o
01 Q'b C: 110'
?sll
?, i ;,u?oZ I e
a' ^' p
C7 9
m ?(7m 9
% 0
D
D ° o
m
x
Q 1J
C3
' ,I Nay C 16 Om
C', 40
$
mg .
i?
v?
22
_ t
n fif?? ? 1Z -r ti
= o
D 6 ? , ` m rz" ? B
40 3.
w+ '/ A
r = a
y G) .•` t 3
0
LIM Kimley Horn
and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-B / BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
PONDS @ HOLE #2
POI A DRAINAGE AREA CHARLOTTE, NC 10/13/09
qen
UH6 DOCUMENT, TOOETKR ON DE CONCEPTS Np DESONS PKESENTED HEREKL AS AN 66TRLAIEW Dr SERYCE. 5 INTENDED ONLY FOR DE SPECnC KOPOSC AND CLIENT rOR ".N R KIAS PREPARED. REUSE Or AND WWWR
RELMNCE ON INS DOCUWENT *IT~ WRITTEN AUTHORIZATM AND ADAPTATON By KMV-MORN AND ASSOCMTES. W- SHALL K RITROUT LMBIUY TO KAR.EY-HORN AND 4L%TES. INC.
A K: \CSE-LDEV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Streom Permit ting\Dwg\X- BASE.dwg
n 41 age
r
r
C _ =y x
c
1 A
25
1
V?D oft
,
? AS I ado;

I ?
I
o F , 1'

tJ O . ?; I
so L I >
A` °0 D° ZZ '.
sv`L it

1
\\ ,
1 'q , .. T
= Iii ?y?yjl
p7R

0
4e
G

4QI,
O
to
n
D
r
m
0
0
1- '0 5M
r
3 D ! ??;\ y
1
?4 m r 1 ?,
M v_ o I `
'Zo O' I, ?\\
I m 013 n
O II D W '
i o°mvci 11 -? ?'
DwD? M
n=.ZJ,?? m"?2
p I A? I
I > D
CF)
UJ. , S
I I m °>
I
N
D y=
1
I.'O L71-
•
air
~ 1
`s
1 to • .j?
ITT
w I i ?,?z 2 %?\ ^ru it
" I Q m • i` S6 -i
• i } • tTi p
.?? C ! G y
• I \> Z ;;
I
! ? v?0
AIR
! ?I • o
Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-C BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
CH^ 0 -R11CA?°?z?W PONDS @ HOLE #2
-NE -1335-0 10/13/09
,a
(1.1w° ,I,°
° POI B DRAINAGE AREA CHARLOTTE, NC
E"-
THIS DOCUMENT. TOGETHM 111" L[ CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED IEREN. AS AN INSTRUUENT Or SERVICE. 5 INTENDED ONLY TOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT rOR NIRCIH IT TMS PREPARED. REUSE Or AND NiROPER
RELMNCE ON THIS DOCWENT WITHOUT IMTTEN AVTHDR TON AND ADAPTATION RY RALEY-14044 Alp ASSOCIATES. INC. S1MLL DE WITHOUT LIABILITY TO KOLEY-NORN AND ASSOCATES. INC.
K: \CSE•_LDEV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Streom Permit ting\Dwg\X- BASE.dwg
N
z
l'- 2 01M> IV
.09A OUIU T'1/UA 1
o-
?-Z O Fm
co
10
N Z
<
rs -Z Zm
y ; Q 65

Z?Zp
m; kyZ A r 0
m=
N
?"
>, 0O 0
Z Sr)
Oy n
-
ArNnO
y CCy-tAOr'

Z ?
z
M D
;0;0:6 ;0;0:6 U ?
-
l'/IQO.
Z 0 yy N m -a0
? T
r ... lA ; A
D m
M
d Om AA
SOD ICfm 400 ZOON,
rn„ Lz7
""3 Z
' ?p9 U,,m 00Oin
m ;mfo
M
y
n
rn; 'DZ?
m ?ON
V 0 I? m 00
OM Mzz
in M 0
O
?
p
'x
r7
DO. n z
r? x
--3a
o

o m
M l3
r

Cn O m
n? 0
m?
m
r1
??cr Wt?iRC '..
n,

V
n -
A
Z H? .m p

D
o
O J
z ?y an ..0
M
? C

1 ' I
F
`
0 V)
:

N
[?'J
! ,

? A Z
?
O
A ITT

R?
nAS
N
N

0
n ., 0
z
D

z N'

o"
A?
°

y Z
~
m c
08 M
Z? ti
0
r 0003;0^_sM
C
rm<? Z z
(A> ~
U
-aZ
Aov ?
'
0
ern mm ?

..
D7 r)
T;*T?Z .
?fv"'r ? r w NA

A _
Z
O; <<
rn 0
Z

0 mIA
GS
rz
r-
m f?lrmv Z

Z

m u,

-{ rl
yyr
CO~?Zf
DO S?
m
N y0{ m0 C)(n
O ??0 y0 Z U nm

Cf) 0
D m N ,.,.. 0 y m
rn
n m
A m
z 0 M>
n?
!
N p D
r- 2 Z
z
M

? Kimley-Horn
Mn and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-D BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
PONDS @ HOLE #2
0
"° WET POND PLAN CHARLOTTE, NC 10/13/09
IH6 DOMINENT. TOGETHER MTH THE CONCEPTS AND OESCNS PRESENTED HEREN. AS AN INSTRUMENT Or SMICC, R MENDED ONLY rON THE SPECrIC PURPOSE AND CLIENT TOR M+tCH IT *AS PREPARED. REUSE Or AND qp oPER
R DANCE ON T16 DOCUMENT WITHOUT RRRTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION 1 T ER1EY-MORN AND ASSOCIATES RTC. SRIALL BE WITHOUT UABUTT TO RR0.EY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES NC.
E K: \C5L_LOLV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Streom Permit ting\Dwg\X- BASE.dwg

Son
M C -
w w ZIII J
I
m q
M
m I I I E
Z
° s
p

III m

N
F
itp
r- M A LA
III
?o
A

+ 0 o I I I ?
? A r
?
z x
S a o

A N

-

- U)

°
"'3 "A 17; M
m 0

m
p _ p
tIIJ 0
a m
90 O
Z '00
o? r -si0
A
Z V - o N
C17
d mO
ut p m
O
m ,I
.I am

Z y
m
O
S
m S:A
mZ
ti
EA y
Z K
C 1 r ti
ADO m
II ?sg?
I Z Z_
III Z ? m A
- 1 s G,
?
III ?
=

-
I }. ?, 'IAO
? O nCa
III '?? ;"m

?.fi.' m
Y
III
= +y
..J'?(•bS.31•
tC ;m
y
m f A V Z C
III 1
=?`? m
° p
ITS
. I o
-TI ? = p
Ov?zi rm-mF
`
J g 2a=
a'^ n _
M III !- m rim m°
CD O
U °
?z
F
-
S

N T
V Z
p -1 1
O
4 -
Z p
T
N
/V
p
p
w
Z y
Zr

O (
(
??
>y 7C
I I
IA Z
I O m
-
D? g III W
l .0% F C%
mr Ili .o m
o > I O
j
A
8C O -
I
J, y
O
°
00

pm
m

III

A?
p
CC??
<
()
0
I

Z
0
A ,
"I
m
-
C
m
_II
I-

I
mmm I

?^'
Q A
Zm
<
A??F= III D
; C2
_
I
I p
Z 1

°
N o POspZ, III <
O Z 0 R Zrpn Z
g I ii m
CY, to m
M .I A
D
rv A f -
M

KimleyHorn
and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-E BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
TIa?A???`? ?o PONDS @ HOLE #2
-1
PM -, .-IN,T,=o,
`"°W° ."'°"° WET POND PROFILE CHARLOTTE, NC 10/13/09
INS DOCUMENT. TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIGNS PRESENTED HERE"' AS W NSTRWENT Or SERVICE. 6 NTENDED ONLY FOR THE SPECM PURPOSE AND CLIENT FOR MRCH IT RAS NRPAREO. OEM or AND *PROPER
RELMNCE ON THIS DOCUMENT RDHOUT RRRTEN AUTHORIZATION AND ADAPTATION BY RRIEY-HORN AND ASSOCWE& NC. SHALL BE RITHOUT UABIUrY TO KIMEY-MORN AND ASSOCMTES. INC.
4 K: \CSE:LDEV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Streom Permit ting\Dwg\X- BASE.dwg
a a Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-F BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
PONDS @ HOLE #2
FFII: (]°CI iOSIBI°
WET POND CROSS SECTIONS CHARLOTTE, NC
Q'ewu
INS DOCUMENT, TOGETHER MM I .E CONCEPTS AND DESQNS PRESENTED HEREIN. AS AN NSTRONENT Dr SERICE, 5 NTENO[D DNLr rDR THE SPECi1C PWPp$( AND CLIENT rDR M+C? IT IILlS PREPARE0. R[TJ$E Or AMp AiROPER
RELMNCE ON iH6 ODCDNENT MTHD{/T MRTTEN AUtIpRIzATIDN AND ADAPTATgN DY RR<EY-110RN AND A$SDCATES, NC. SNALL BE MTTgUf LARUTY lp KWLEV-HORN AND ASSOCATES. TNC.
E K: \CSE,LDEV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Streom Permit ting\Dwg\X -BASE. dwg
0
1
i
OI??
VV

CT; tin n
, 3 oN

w
„?, ?
p
= vci

m _
ID

m

V

O,

N

W

N
p 2'A
?-. n°'° " inDCN Ly

; Z
O

r
2 =

m
om
U ICm

D
p
2 ?0, N,
RRig
O
S
d " m iO-,A
r 01 Z N = OAI r
-+
iA ?DI gm m?

n d
??m? ?m
mZ
mn
CD
0m8
NAyOAmmN_
D
°mN
?
y
OO
C'

C C
T7 "?
°?
! m V,A - p
m 6 m A
c I ?m ?CI mN
Ao
?A NZ
n
n I
=o
rim I
O
i° cm?
O ID
I
mIm°
c
M?
Zm IA
O;
Zm
r
O N
N o D C
' M O° AN
O m D U n
C r0
Z
m
A D'+
m =r
ti
Cnmlm
S =L
Zp
y'
x

x
2 A

Y
G.j?
.T. 12 .
- - N
O; O D r v O r
-..
r N rl
<m AI
2xz
X. mo o
zCm y
Or mm
<-

IA Z
r
E-3 o o'
ME z F r m I OmtiIF 110 to Z-0
-3 N M
O O
? p ° 0 O 1TTI A
m O N
Z Nm p
y Ga
` Z yy
y
Z Zp t Z
Z
m
&Z >p
OD ; O
FA
m yy
Z
d
a O
Z m p n
g z O A
n 0
o ;
cxN FA1 .7Nti2 Q
Ox
-to
N °
m
d CSO V

D

Z S

j -
y r^om>m

y
AO Amy

U°i o n
Z r
ni ?? m= Cm Z Z
C A O Z v m mt
o y D o
m' C
0 a.
O
0 Z
2 O OC
m? ,
?
F°FrniAmrxi
0.3
Om ?y0
V Z
s
s -
i
A 2

Z C n

z
D
?

m
m

n
0
m0

-+ YZ
000
r, z

m z
n 0z y
y
°-DO

N_
co
Z Z

°
y D

C z Z
P y

L m

n Zx

Om D

;ir ti
O X
t
.ZI
-;

V
I
;;0 o r A
n Z z
n y np i?mA
o•
m Mcz
O
v z o
.... m
A ?v p
_
-D _ O Z; -g o
m D
mm m A O
D
' 0
_ m
v °o z
O _u x
-I D
M
£
O
-i Z

D D
Z
'z

D _?
? A°
? ?
aln; R ? m

M
C

i ~ D-i ? $
-
m
D a
z ly
`
F_ KI)
(/) n
F ?°{ I
F, wag ?
?)
f
b I
A
n
tJ x
O
rQ
W N -
A ? .......
_'. .....
s
C

Kimley-Horn
?a and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-G BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
- o„NAPONDS @ HOLE #2
"?d'° a RIPRAP APRON DETAIL CHARLOTTE, NC 10/13/09
INS DOCUMENT, TOCEDIER MM HIE CONCEPTS AM DESIGNS PRESENTED HEREIN, AS AN NSTIKNMI Or SERVI". R INTENDED OWY rDR ME SpEC/IC PNAIPOSE AND CLIENT rp! RNATN I WAS pR pAT REUSE D, AND AoINOPER
RELOINCE ON INS DOCUMENT OTHOUT WHEN AUTHDRLZATOR AND ADAPGTION BY KRAEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES. R6. SHWA BE RNTHOW UAWTY 10 KOLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES. INC.
4 K: \CSE?LDEV\018004 Bissell Development\010 Bollontyne Streom Permitting\Dwg\X-BASE.dwg
}
o
r
Igo
y
?i
R:
t N r
± Z DO
v
r0 ? Ell
A b = -
S
y ? ? v
x -I
m C-
-3 0
3 Z y I ??D
( v \o /?
a
i \ m
D =
o D
o r=
n
> v -
Z \
D > s
\ N n D
v r .
z
A C: T
z y
T I I v
;u ;u
T ?' 9 s
LJ Z O O 1 a,
O f) (1 n
m
v
(A Ul
D =-
^ z N A W N
Z A O rnn cUnv ~2: -F m0?
z m M x> z+ n m p rv
T O OZ mZri Z a m 0."w
I O 'Um Am2O 0 zm _ Omp
'^ .TI > Z C) O x? A T7
V J p m m ° O m> y'z O g O D
p C GO 9 A O 20 1 A f z
2 N 2 t-a2 A N Z U1 P
m N D m
O Z l
O O A
2
+, ? ?? Z N Am00
r) A
j? = A O > m ti 2 2
2 A C) p N O m O ti f1
r O - O A
Z i &o °m ?>
xrt
O ^ K? °
v C pn r
m m m
f m ';a ,0=
z O , Z Z
> mm N A O x
NO O i No z !^D.0 mmm
T. m m r
p 0 0 A
V
V C C m 0
D
r
m
KimleyHorn
and Associates, Inc FIGURE 5-H BALLANTYNE CORPORATE PARK DATE:
PONDS @ HOLE #2 10/13/09
RIPRAP DITCH DETAIL CHARLOTTE, NC
THIS DOCUMENT. TOGETHER WITH THE CONCEPTS AND DESIONS PRESENTED HEREIN. AS AN INSTRUMENT Or SEW'CE. IS WENDED Owv rOW THE SPECK PURPOSE AND CL[NT roe "IC" ?T RYAS PREPARED. REUSE Or AND AWROPER
RELMNCE ON THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT YTRTTEN AUTNORUZATON AND ADAPTATION BY RRIC/-HORN AND ASSOCMTEA NC. SN111 BE MTMOUf LMIBEJIT TO RIYLET-NORM AND ASSOCLATES INC.
rZm'q Horn
„ ,dASSx-a ,Inc.
WET POND
Project Information
Hydrologic Site Parameters
Project Name: Pond @ Hole #2
KHA Project #: 018004001
Designed by: ECH Date: 10/13/2009
Revised by:
Revised by:
Sub Area Location: POI A
Drainage Area (DA) = 11.0E acres
Impervious Area (IA) = 1.01 acres
Percent Impervious (1) = 9.1 %
CN = 80.42
Tc = 9.42 min
Sub Area Location: POI A
Drainage Area (DA) = 7.80 acres
Impervious Area (IA) = 4.2 acres
Percent Impervious (I) = 55.0 %
CN (Post-Development) = 89.23
Tc (Post Development) = 5.00 min
Water Quality Volume Calculations - 1 "- 6 hr Storm
Rv = .05 + .09'1 (eq. 3.1 CM BMP Design Manual) = 0.55
P (Rainfall Depth) = 1.00 in
WQv (Water Quality Volume) = 1.0'Rv'A/12 (eq. 3.2 CM BMP Manual) = 0.345 acre-ft 15,035 cf
WQv (Water Quality Volume) = 1.0'Rv (eq 3.3 CM BMP Manual) = 0.55 in
PPV (From CAD) 49,500 cf
WQV/PPV = 0.30
CNm (Modified CN for 1-in, 6-hr Storm for SCS Method) = 94.70
WQp (Water Quality Peak Flow from HydroCAD) = 10.70 cfs (from HydroCAD)
Water Quality Peak Time from HydroCAD = 3.15 hrs (from HydroCAD)
Channel Protection Volume Calculations - 1 yr - 24 hr Storm
S (Petention Maximum Soil Retention) = 1.21 in
P (Accumulated Rainfall for Storm Event) = 2.58 in
Q (Accumulated Runoff Volume) = 1.54 in
CPv (Channel Protection Volume) = 0.98 acre-ft 42,544 cf
Wet Pond Design
Pre-Development Runoff (from HydroCAD):
Release Rate for CPv = 0.328 cfs
01 Y-24hr= 13.78 cfs
Q10, -sh, = 30.57 cfs
U25 years hr = 43-53 cfs
Qso Y--6 h, = 4183 cfs
Forebay, Permanent Pool and Extended Detention Calcs:
Forebay Volume= (Imp Acres)'(0.2")"(1'/12") = 0.070 acre-ft OUTLET(
WQv/PPv= 03 OPTIMAL

PPv (Permanent Pool Volume) = 1.15 acre-ft
C aye nY?eiata:, Inc,
Project Information
Hydrologic Site Parameters
WET POND
Project Name: Pond @ Hole #2
KHA Project #: 018004001
Designed by: ECH Date: 10/13/2009
Revised by:
Revised by:
Sub Area Location: POI B
Drainage Area (DA) = 4.03 acres
Impervious Area (IA) = 0.21 acres
Percent Impervious (1) = 5.2 %
CN = 80.42
Tc = 9.42 min
Sub Area Location: POI B
Drainage Area (DA) = 8.12 acres
Impervious Area (IA) = 5.3 acres
Percent Impervious (1) = 65.0 %
CN (Post-Development) = 89.23
Tc (Post Development) = 5.00 min
Water Quality Volume Calculations -1"- 6 hr Storm
Rv =.05 + .09'1 (eq. 3.1 CM BMP Design Manual) = 0.64
P (Rainfall Depth) = 1.00 in
WQv (Water Quality Volume) = 1.0'Rv"A/12 (eq. 3.2 CM BMP Manual) = 0.430 acre-ft 18,717 cf
WQv (Water Quality Volume) = 1.0'Rv (eq 3.3 CM BMP Manual) = 0.64 in
PPV (From CAD) 61,500 cf
WQV/PPV = 0.30
CNm (Modified CN for 1-in, 6-hr Storm for SCS Method) = 96.07
WQp (Water Quality Peak Flow from HydroCAD) = 7.32 cfs (from HydroCAD)
Water Quality Peak Time from HydroCAD = 3.15 hrs (from HydroCAD)
Channel Protection Volume Calculations - 1 yr - 24 hr Storm
S (Potention Maximum Soil Retention) = 1.21 in
P (Accumulated Rainfall for Storm Event) = 2.58 in
Q (Accumulated RunoffVolume) = 1.54 in
CPv (Channel Protection Volume) = 1.04 acre-ft 45,455 cf
Wet Pond Design
Pre-Development Runoff (from HydroCAD):
Release Rate for CPv = 0.351 cfs
01 year-24 hr = 4.99 cfs
Qtoy-s hr = 11.58 cfs
Q25 year-6 nr = 16.93 cfs
050years hr = 16.82 cfs
Forebay, Permanent Pool and Extended Detention Calcs:
Forebay Volume = (Imp Acres)`(0.2")'(1'/12") = 0.088 acre-ft

WQv/PPv = 0.3 OPTIMAL
PPv (Permanent Pool Volume) = 1.43 acre-ft