20191652 Ver 1_Updated Owner Contact Info_20200214

Strickland, Bev
From: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 8:39 AM
To: [e-mail]; Homewood, Sue
Subject: [External] RE: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point,
Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-02095
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Please change applicant representative to Mr. Brian Shugart. 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]
From: Brad Luckey
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:11 PM
To: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Homewood, Sue
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Request for Additional Information: Meadow Valley s/d, High Point, Guilford Co.; SAW-2018-02095
David/Sue-just following up to check review status. Thanks.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 28, 2020, at 11:21 AM, Brad Luckey <[e-mail]> wrote:
David and Sue,
Please find the attached and below responses. Please let me know if you require additional information
to complete your review. Thanks.
NCDWR Comment 1) 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.
Applicant Response: See attached updated overall map showing locations of stormwater ponds.
1

NCDWR Comment 2) 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.
Applicant Response: The stream is perennial. See attached updated PCN and plan sheets.
USACE Comment 1) The plansheet showing the overall development indicates that a portion of the
development (PIN 180005740000100068) was not included in the delineation verified in the field on
7/10/2018. There are two areas of concern based on geomorphic position and remotely sensed data
(aerial photos and LiDAR) that require field evaluation:
a. The drainage including and upstream of Stream ESA 1-5 delineated as part of the sewer
corridor component of the Meadow Valley s/d;
b. The entirety of the broad topographic depression centered at Lat/Lon 36.041578, -
80.033232;
Please evaluate both of these areas for the presence/absence of potential waters of the US,
including wetlands and streams. Provide wetland/upland data forms per the most recent
version of the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement for these areas. We also
request the most recent version of the NCDWR stream form for the areas described in item 1)a
above. Based on the information provided, the Corps may require a verification site visit for this
parcel. If pictures and other provided information would be helpful in facilitating an office
verification, please provide that information as well;
USACE Comment 2) The plansheet showing the overall development indicates that the added parcel
identified above would be fully built out with residential dwellings and related infrastructure. If potential
waters of the US are found within the parcel above, either include the proposed impacts in an updated
PCN/plans, or re -design to avoid those areas;
Applicant Response: The applicant does not own or have options to purchase the parcel indicated
above. The above referenced parcel is not included in proposed overall site development. Additional
evaluation or consideration of this parcel is not warranted since it is not part of the overall proposed
project. See attached impact exhibits.
USACE Comment 3) The plansheet for Crossing "C" (sewer line) indicates that, in addition to the
proposed crossing, there would be sewer line running parallel to Stream SC extending both east and
west of the proposed crossing. Further, the field verified delineation included a narrow corridor for
future sewer in which several streams and wetlands were mapped. However, no additional impacts
related to the sewer are proposed in the PCN/plans. Further, we are unaware of any separate sewer line
projects constructed or proposed that would extend sewer parallel to this stream and connecting to this
development. Please provide plans for the overall development clearly showing proposed utilities,
including those that connect to existing off -site infrastructure. This information is required to evaluate
all cumulative impacts associated with this development. If additional sewer impacts are required,
please add them to the PCN and provide plans accordingly.
Applicant Response: Wastewater will be pumped from the pump station towards Basswood Avenue and
connect to existing municipal sewer force main beneath Basswood Avenue. See attached overall impact
exhibit. There are no other impacts proposed to waters associated with the development of the site or
providing the site municipal sewer service outside of those proposed within this application.
Sincerely,
Bradley S. Luckey, PWS
336.708.4997 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)

PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www. com
bluckev@ com
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2020 2:21 PM
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
Brad,
Thank you for your updated PCN and attached information, dated 1/8/2020 (received 1/9/2020), for the
above referenced project. I have reviewed the information and need clarification before proceeding
with verifying the use of Nationwide Permit 29 (http://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) The plansheet showing the overall development indicates that a portion of the development
(PIN 180005740000100068) was not included in the delineation verified in the field on
7/10/2018. There are two areas of concern based on geomorphic position and remotely sensed
data (aerial photos and LiDAR) that require field evaluation:
a. The drainage including and upstream of Stream ESA 1-5 delineated as part of the sewer
corridor component of the Meadow Valley s/d;
b. The entirety of the broad topographic depression centered at Lat/Lon 36.041578, -
80.033232;
Please evaluate both of these areas for the presence/absence of potential waters of the US,
including wetlands and streams. Provide wetland/upland data forms per the most recent
version of the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement for these areas. We also
request the most recent version of the NCDWR stream form for the areas described in item 1)a
above. Based on the information provided, the Corps may require a verification site visit for this
parcel. If pictures and other provided information would be helpful in facilitating an office
verification, please provide that information as well;
2) The plansheet showing the overall development indicates that the added parcel identified above
would be fully built out with residential dwellings and related infrastructure. If potential waters
of the US are found within the parcel above, either include the proposed impacts in an updated
PCN/plans, or re -design to avoid those areas;
3) The plansheet for Crossing "C" (sewer line) indicates that, in addition to the proposed crossing,
there would be sewer line running parallel to Stream SC extending both east and west of the
proposed crossing. Further, the field verified delineation included a narrow corridor for future
sewer in which several streams and wetlands were mapped. However, no additional impacts
related to the sewer are proposed in the PCN/plans. Further, we are unaware of any separate
sewer line projects constructed or proposed that would extend sewer parallel to this stream and
connecting to this development. Please provide plans for the overall development clearly
showing proposed utilities, including those that connect to existing off -site infrastructure. This
information is required to evaluate all cumulative impacts associated with this development. If
additional sewer impacts are required, please add them to the PCN and provide plans
accordingly.

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]
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: Thursday, January 9, 2020 12:24 PM
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 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
Blockedwww. pi lotenvi ro.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 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
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:
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
Blockedwww. pi lotenvi ro.com
[e-mail]
-----Original Message -----
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)[maiIto: David. [e-mail]1]
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: 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.
-----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
Blockedwww.pilotenviro.com <BlockedBlockedhttp://www.pilotenviro.com/>
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)[mailto:[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 (Blocked 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);
C. The profile view twice shows "Existing 'Intermittent' Stream Invert." Change to "Existing
'Perennial' Stream Invert."
6) Crossing B plans:
Clearly show the center line of the intermittent stream on the plan view;
b. 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;
b. 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]<mailto: David. [e-mail]>
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer
Service Survey is located at: BlockedBlockedhttp://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.
<3736.1_Meadow Valley_Response to USACE Comments 1.28.19.pdf>
10