20191652 Ver 1_More Info Requested_20200122

Strickland, Bev
From: Homewood, Sue
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 2:00 PM
To: Brad Luckey; Greg Garrett
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point,
Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-02095
Attachments: 20191652 Ver 1-Stream Determination_20180723.pdf
Hello Brad/Greg,
A couple quick questions on the new plans:
The overall plan sheet text indicates that there are "stormwater ponds" but I only see one pond (I think, based on the
scale I'm not quite certain). Can you please provide a plan sheet that shows the location of all stormwater ponds within
the development at a clear scale.
Based on the stream determination documents I have (attached), stream SE was determined to be perennial (Pilot map)
but I think it is shown as intermittent in the application documents. Can you please clarify/double check.
Sue Homewood
Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office Department of Environmental Quality
336 776 9693 office
336 813 1863 mobile
Sue. [e-mail]
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105
-----Original Message -----
From: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2020 12:24 PM
To: David. [e-mail]; Greg Garrett <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point, Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-
02095
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to [e-mail]<maiIto: [e-mail]>
David and Sue --please utilize these attachments. We caught some discrepancies in impact numbers on the overall map
that was previously provided and to avoid confusion I wanted to re -send. No other changes outside of updated impact
numbers on the overall impact drawing. I apologize for the inconvenience. Thanks.

Sincerely,
Bradley S. Luckey, PWS
336.708.4997 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
[e-mail]
-----Original Message -----
From: Brad Luckey
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2020 11:18 AM
To: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Greg Garrett
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point, Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-02095
Good Morning David,
On behalf of the applicant, please find the attached information and below responses. Please let me know if you require
additional information. Thanks.
USACE Comment 1) Please note that stream and wetland impacts for additional phases of the Meadow Valley s/d
were authorized via NWP 29 and 12 on 9/12/2007. However, based on evaluation of the previously permitted plans, our
site visit in 2018, and the most recent aerial photography, none of the authorized impacts were constructed. Further,
the NWP 29 and 12 verification dated 9/12/2007 has since expired. As such, the currently proposed stream and wetland
impacts will be evaluated as the entirety of proposed impacts for the Meadow Valley single and complete project
Applicant Response: The applicant acknowledges.
2) Provide a plan view of the lot layout and infrastructure (roads, utilities, stormwater, etc.) for the entire proposed
Meadow Valley s/d overlaid on a survey of the stream and wetland delineation approved by the Corps. This plan is
necessary to evaluate avoidance and minimization measures and potential indirect impacts for the project
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
3) Is rip rap proposed to be placed in the stream channel associated with Crossings A or B? If so, include the rip rap on
the plan and profile views of these crossings, and ensure that the stream and/or wetland impacts associated with rip rap
is included and itemized clearly on the PCN and plans.
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
4) Include a graphic (not text) scale on all plan sheets
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
5) Crossing A plans:
a. The PCN proposes 108 Lf. of stream impacts. However, the profile drawing shows the footprint of the culvert and
headwalls to be 111 Lf. Further, it the stream has any sinuosity the actual stream length impacted by the culvert and

headwall footprint would exceed the length of the structure. Please re-evaluate all proposed impacts and update the
PCN and plans accordingly
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
b. The plan view appears to show that the pipe is aligned such that the outlet occurs outside of the existing channel. If
the culvert pipe will be aligned such that the inlet and outlet are in -line with the existing stream channel, please update
the mapping to depict accurately. If not, please update your plans to meet this requirement (Regional Condition 3.6.1)
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
C. The profile view twice shows "Existing 'Intermittent' Stream Invert." Change to "Existing 'Perennial' Stream Invert."
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
6) Crossing B plans:
a. Clearly show the center line of the intermittent stream on the plan view
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
b. Provide a profile view for this proposed crossing
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
7) Temporary impacts:
a. For the proposed temporary wetland impact, clarify that the wetland will be restored such that the top 12" of
wetland soil will be segregated and placed back as the top 12" of soil upon restoration of this wetland area
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
b. Provide the proposed seed mix to be used in the restoration of temporary wetland and stream impacts
Applicant Response: Please see attached.
8) Please note that responses to the items above (especially item 2) may prompt additional information requests to
allow full evaluation of the proposed project.
Applicant Response: The applicant acknowledges.
Sincerely,
Bradley S. Luckey, PWS
336.708.4997 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
[e-mail]
-----Original Message -----
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)[maiIto: David. [e-mail]]
3

Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2019 11:51 AM
To: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>; Greg Garrett <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point, Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-02095
Hi Brad, and thanks for the question. As you point out, there are various NWP General and Regional Conditions that
address restoration of temporary impacts; 3 of which are cited below. The information provided in the PCN did not allow
me to confirm that these conditions would be met (3.11 in particular), and it is within my discretion to request this
information in order to ensure that they are.
NWP General Conditions:
13. Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to
pre -construction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate.
23(a). The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both temporary and
permanent, to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e., on site)
NWP 29 regional Conditions:
3.11 Restoration of Temporary Impacts to Stream Banks Upon completion of work involving temporary stream bank
impacts, stream banks are to be restored to pre -project grade and contours or beneficial grade and contours if the
original bank slope is steep and unstable. Natural durable materials, native seed mixes, and native plants and shrubs are
to be utilized in the restoration.
Thanks again, and have a great 2020.
-Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.
-----Original Message -----
From: Brad Luckey [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 10:38 AM
To: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Greg Garrett
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>

Subject: [Non-DoD Source] RE: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point, Guilford Co.; SAW-
2018-02095
David -a little clarity please on request 7b. I am unfamiliar with the regulations that require seeding mixes to be
provided. I am familiar with temporary impact restoration requirements in general condition 13 of NWP 12/29 and
regional conditions 3.10 and 3.11. Please advise. Thanks.
Sincerely,
Bradley S. Luckey, PWS
336.708.4997 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com <Blockedhttp://www.pilotenviro.com/>
[e-mail]<maiIto: [e-mail]>
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)[maiIto: David. [e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 9:52 AM
To: Greg Garrett <[e-mail]>; Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point, Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-02095
Messrs. Garrett and Luckey,
Thank you for your PCN and attached information, dated and received 11/26/2019, for the above referenced project. I
have reviewed the information and need clarification before proceeding with verifying the use of Nationwide Permit 29
(Blockedhttp://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2017/2017NWP29.pdf). Please submit the requested information below
(via e-mail is fine) within 30 days of receipt of this Notification, otherwise we may deny verification of the use of the
Nationwide Permit or consider your application withdrawn and close the file:
1) Please note that stream and wetland impacts for additional phases of the Meadow Valley s/d were authorized via
NWP 29 and 12 on 9/12/2007. However, based on evaluation of the previously permitted plans, our site visit in 2018,
and the most recent aerial photography, none of the authorized impacts were constructed. Further, the NWP 29 and 12
verification dated 9/12/2007 has since expired. As such, the currently proposed stream and wetland impacts will be
evaluated as the entirety of proposed impacts for the Meadow Valley single and complete project;

2) Provide a plan view of the lot layout and infrastructure (roads, utilities, stormwater, etc.) for the entire proposed
Meadow Valley s/d overlaid on a survey of the stream and wetland delineation approved by the Corps. This plan is
necessary to evaluate avoidance and minimization measures and potential indirect impacts for the project;
3) Is rip rap proposed to be placed in the stream channel associated with Crossings A or B? If so, include the rip rap on
the plan and profile views of these crossings, and ensure that the stream and/or wetland impacts associated with rip rap
is included and itemized clearly on the PCN and plans;
4) Include a graphic (not text) scale on all plan sheets;
5) Crossing A plans:
a. The PCN proposes 108 I.f. of stream impacts. However, the profile drawing shows the footprint of the culvert and
headwalls to be 111 I.f. Further, it the stream has any sinuosity the actual stream length impacted by the culvert and
headwall footprint would exceed the length of the structure. Please re-evaluate all proposed impacts and update the
PCN and plans accordingly;
b. The plan view appears to show that the pipe is aligned such that the outlet occurs outside of the existing channel. If
the culvert pipe will be aligned such that the inlet and outlet are in -line with the existing stream channel, please update
the mapping to depict accurately. If not, please update your plans to meet this requirement (Regional Condition 3.6.1);
The profile view twice shows "Existing 'Intermittent' Stream Invert." Change to "Existing 'Perennial' Stream Invert."
6) Crossing B plans:
a. Clearly show the center line of the intermittent stream on the plan view;
Provide a profile view for this proposed crossing;
7) Temporary impacts:
a. For the proposed temporary wetland impact, clarify that the wetland will be restored such that the top 12" of
wetland soil will be segregated and placed back as the top 12" of soil upon restoration of this wetland area;
Provide the proposed seed mix to be used in the restoration of temporary wetland and stream impacts;
8) Please note that responses to the items above (especially item 2) may prompt additional information requests to
allow full evaluation of the proposed project.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
-Dave Bailey

David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]<maiIto: David. [e-mail]>
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: Blockedhttp://corpsmapu.usace.army.miI/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.

NORTH CAROUNA
ROY COOPER ,EnOeonmertralQuarrty
c
MI HAEL S. REOAN
Se—tary
UNDA CULPEPPER
In fcrim Arecw
July 23, 2018
Mr. Michael Brame
Pilot Environmental Inc.
P.O. Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
Subject: On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500)
Subject Property: Meadow Valley Subdivision, High Point NC, Guilford County
Dear Mr. Brame:
On July 10, 2018, at your request, Sue Homewood conducted an on -site determination to review features
located on the subject project for stream determinations with regards to the above noted state regulations.
David Bailey with the US Army Corps of Engineers was also present during the site visit.
The Division acknowledges the areas and boundaries identified as jurisdictional wetlands by the USACE.
The attached sketch accurately depicts all stream determinations conducted during the site visit.
Please note that at the time of this letter, all perennial stream channels and jurisdictional wetlands found on
the property are subject to the mitigation rules cited above. In addition, the Randleman Lake Buffer Rules
may apply to some streams at this location, please be sure to contact the local government for further
information regarding the Randleman Lake Buffer Rules
The owner (or future owners) should notify the Division (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in
any future correspondences concerning this property. This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years
from the date of this letter.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Winston-Salem, NC 27107
336.776-9800

Page 2 of 2
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the Division or Delegated Local
Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a determination by
the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650. Individuals that
dispute a determination by the Division or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" surface water from
the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you
receive this letter. Applicants are hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not start until
the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. The
Division recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be certain that third party
appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the mitigation rules and the buffer rules and does not approve
any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State or their associated buffers. If you
have any additional questions or require additional information, please contact me at 336-776-9693 or
sue.homewoodgncdenr. gov.
Sincerely,
Sue Homewood
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Enclosures: USGS Topo Map
Pilot Environmental Stream Map
Cc: Shugart Enterprises LLC ([e-mail])
David Bailey, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
DWR, Winston-Salem Regional Office

Drawing
U3GSTopographic Map !'
KernersviUe, NC Quadrangle
Scale: l" = 3,000' 0 m—`mm���,m ',° M
^-�~�~ 0
P 1 fq��7'
LEGEND
Site Boundary
USGS Topographic Map
Meadow Valley Subdivision
Approxinnate45 Acre Tract
High Point, Guilford County, NC

FLAG NUMBERS/INFO
WETLAND FLAGS =
STREAM FLAGS = C
Stream Flags = 40
Wetland Flags = 115
Total Flags = 155
ISA 1-5
■
ESA 1-5 \
e
SC — Not
Flagged \
s
SE 1-15
WB 1-62 /
WC 1-3 DP-1
WCA 1-4 DP-2 O
0
SB 1-8 \
WBA 1-29
SD 1-7
W D 1-7
WA 1-10
I
u :1
MON-0
1 LL`LIUM
Site Boundary
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Intermittent Stream
Perennial Stream
Wetland
SA 1-5 Flag Number
DP-1 O Data Point
THE LOCATIONS OF FEATURES SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE PRELIMINARY AND APPROXIMATE. THEY WERE VERIFIED BY MR. DAVID BAILEY
WITH THE USACE AND MS. SUE HOMEWOOD WITH THE NCDEQ-DWR ON JULY 10, 2018.. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SURVEYED OR
GEOLOCATED.
Drawing 5 Wetland Map
Aerial Imagery from ESRI Meadow Valley Subdivision
and Pilot Field Notes
Scale: 1" - 500' Approximate 45 Acre Tract
�� "" High Point, Guilford County, NC
Date:5.23.18 �' PII®®�
PILOT ENVIR0NMENTAL,INC Pilot Project3736
Revised: 7.12.18