20200192 Ver 1_FINAL U-5108 PCN_20200402_20200402

O1 00 y\N� ATF�9QG
1 �J_W`� ti
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-ConstmetionNotification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval soughtfrom the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) num ber: 14 or General Permit(GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified bythe Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval soughtfrom 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 solelyforthe record
because written approval is not required?
For the record onlyfor DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record onlyfor
❑ Yes
Corps Permit:
® No
1f.
Is paymentintoa mitigationbank orin-lieufee program proposed for mitigaton
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
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
U-5108 Northcross Drive Extension
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality/town:
Huntersville and Cornelius
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. orstate
projectno:
U-5108
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
NCDOT (Linear Transportation Easement)
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
N/A
3c.
Responsible Party(for LLC if
applicable):
N/A
3d. Street address:
N/A
3e. City, state, zip:
N/A
3f.
Telephone no.:
N/A
3g.
Fax no.:
N/A
3h.
Email address:
N/A
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if differentfrom owner)
4a.
Applicantis:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: NCDOT
4b.
Name:
NCDOT-Division 10;Attn: Larry Thompson
4c.
Businessname
(if applicable):
N/A
4d.
Street address:
NCDOT HighwayDivision 10, 716 West Main Street
4e.
City, state, zip:
Albemarle, NC 28001
4f.
Telephone no.:
704-983-4400
4g.
Fax no.:
704-982-3146
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Chris Tinklenberg
5b.
Businessname
(if applicable):
Kimley-Horn
5c.
Street address:
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
5e.
Telephone no.:
704-409-1802
5f.
Fax no.:
N/A
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
N/A
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.456395 Longitude: - 80.875820
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
183 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest bodyof water (stream, river, etc.) to
McDowell Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-IV
2c. River basin:
Upper Catawba
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the projectat the time of this
application:
The projectis located from NC 73 in the Town of Huntersville in Mecklenburg Countyto Westmoreland Road in the Town
of Cornelius in Mecklenburg County. Land use within the projectarea consists offorestland, residential neighborhoods,
and an executive park. The projectarea is bound to the east by 1-77 and McDowell Creek bisects the project. The project
vicinity is comprised ofhigh-densityresidential areas and a few pockets of undeveloped forestland.
3b. Listthe total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.61 acres
3c. Listthe total estimated linearfeetof all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
4334linearfeet
3d. Explain the purpose ofthe proposed project:
The purpose ofthis projectis to improve the roadway connectivity within the surrounding area byproviding an alternate
north -south route for local traffic parallel to Interstate 77, U.S. 21 (Statesville Road), N.C. 115 (Old Statesville Road), and
WestCatawba Avenue (S.R. 5544).
3e. Describe the overall projectin detail, including the type of equipmentto be used:
The projectproposes to extend Northcross Drivefrom NC 73to Westmoreland Road forapproximately1.0 mile. The
proposed extension also includes a 11 0-footbridge over McDowell Creek and a roundabout proposed atthe intersection
of Eagleridge Way Lane and Westermoreland Road. Equipmenttypical of roadway construction would be used, including
cranes, track hoes, back hoes, graders, dump trucks, bulldozers, and pavers.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations bythe
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property/
®Yes ❑ No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: SAW-2019-00199
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, whattype
®Preliminary❑ Final
of determinationwas made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/ConsultantCompany: Kimley-Horn
Name (if known): Chris Tinklenberg
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The Prelim inaryJurisdictional Determination dated 04/18/2019 is attached foryour reference.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested orobtained for
El Yes ®No El Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
N/A
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
N/A
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. 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 foreach 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)
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ P ❑ T
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments: Nowetland impacts will resultfrom the proposed construction.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or i nterm ittent stream impacts (including tem poraryim pacts) 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)
Site 1 (SA)
Embankment
McDowell Creek
® PER
® Corps
10
10
® P El
Protection
El INT
El DWQ
Site 1 (SA)
Embankment
McDowell Creek
® PER
® Corps
10
20
El ® T
Protection
El INT
El DWQ
Site 2 (SA)
Embankment
McDowell Creek
® PER
® Corps
10
16
® P ❑ T
Protection
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
Site 2 (SA)
Embankment
McDowell Creek
® PER
® Corps
10
20
El ® T
Protection
El INT
El DWQ
Site 3 (SA)
Embankment
McDowell Creek
® PER
® Corps
10
12
® P El
Protection
El INT
El DWQ
Site 3 (SA)
Embankment
McDowell Creek
® PER
® Corps
10
20
El ® T
Protection
El INT
El DWQ
Site 4 (SB)
Culvert Installation
UT to McDowell
® PER
® Corps
4
225
® P ❑ T
Creek
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
Site 4 (SB)
Culvert Installation
UT to McDowell
® PER
® Corps
4
20
El ®T
Creek
El INT
El DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
343
3i. Comments: Unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional streamswill resultform the proposed extension ofNorthcross Drive.
Im pacts to streams will resultfrom the installation of culverts to carrythe stream beneath the proposed extension and from
embankment protection on McDowell Creek.
Page 4 of 12
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 waterof
the U.S. then individual lylist all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name ofwaterbody
impactnumber-
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbodytype
Area of impact(acres)
Permanent(P) or
Temporary(T)
01 ❑ P❑ T
02❑P❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: No open water impacts will resultfrom the proposed construction.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Com ments: No ponds or lakes will be constructed as partof the proposed project.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permitrequired?
❑ Yes ®No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected ponds urface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If projectwill impacta protected riparian buffer, then complete the chartbelow. If yes, then individuallylistall bufferimpacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Projectis in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number-
Reason
Buffer
Zone impact
Zone 2impact
Permanent(P)or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(squarefeet)
(square feet)
Temporary(T)
impact
required?
B1 ❑P❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: No buffer im pacts will resultfrom the proposed construction.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specificallydescribe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed im pacts in designing project.
Im pacts to streams within the projectarea have been avoided and minimized to the extent practical through design. The footprint
of the proposed roadwaywas specificallyalignedto avoid streams SC and SD. Abridge is proposed over Stream SA(McDowell
Creek) to avoid im pacts to the channel bed and banks. Im pacts to Stream SB have been minimized to the greatest extent
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

practicable byproposing ape rpendicularcrossingand maximizing sides lopes at headwall locations. The 60" RCPwiII be buried
1-ft below the existing channel bed to promote aquatic passage. Embankment protection sites have been limited to the lengths
necessaryto reduce discharge velocities and maintain bank stability.
1b. Specificallydescribe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed im pacts through construction techniques.
Im pacts to streams within the corridorwill be avoided and m inimized to the extent practical throughoutthe construction process.
To avoid unnecessaryim pacts to streams within the project area, staging, storage, and construction access will occur in upland
areas where feasible. Siltfencing will be installed alongthe construction limits to ensure all equipment and work stays within the
permitted boundaries. Stormwater and erosion control measures will be utilized to avoid sedimentation impacts to downstream
waters and control runoff from the construction site.
1. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation optionwill be used forthis
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
® Paymentto in -lieu fee program
❑ Perm ittee Responsible Mitigation
2. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receiptand letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
3. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes ❑ No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
225linearfeet
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: Stream mitigation is proposed ata 2:1 ratio for the 225 linearfeetof permanent impacts resulting from the
culvert installation and embankment protection. Mitigation will be secured through the NCDMS ILF program. The Credit
Reservation Letterwill be provided once it is received.
4. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigationplan, provide a description ofthe proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impactwithin a protected riparian bufferthat requires
❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the squarefeetof impactto each zone ofthe riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculatethe
amountof mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reasonforimpact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss whattype of mitigation is proposed (e.g., paymentto private mitigation bank,
perm ittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, paymentinto an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacentto 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:
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
32.2%
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, narrative
description of the plan:
The project plans to maintain existing drainage patterns to the maximum extent practical. The proposed drainage systems
were designed and sized with future development taken into account and the following items were incorporated to minimi2e
water quality im pacts: the align mentwas designed to minimize wetland and stream crossing impacts, 2:1 slopes are going
to be utilized to reduce structure length, grassed swales will be implemented to the
maximum extent practical, and open
channel designs with riprap on the banks will be implemented where practical to reduce jurisdictional stream impacts.
❑ Certified Local Government
2e.
Who will be responsible forthe review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
® DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government'sjurisdiction is this project?
Mecklenburg County
❑ Phasell
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ 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
(checkall that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meetthe appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all ofthe 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public(federal/state/local) funds orthe
® 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 pursuantto the requirements of the National or State
® Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
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 SEPAfinal approval
letter.)
® Yes ❑ No
Comments: A Categorical Exclusion has been prepared for the proposed project
and is attached.
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15ANCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15ANCAC 21-1.1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15ANCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permitapplication?
❑ Yes ® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation ofthe violation(s):
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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 nearbydownstreamwater quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submita qualitative or quantitative cumulative im pactanalysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
An "Ind irectand Cum ulative Effects Report" dated May 7, 2019 was prepared for this project. In a letter dated May 30,
2019, the NCDWR concluded that"the analysis performed is sufficient and no further analysis is warranted atthis time."
The following summarized the indirect and cumulative analysis results:
The proposed projectwould increase accessibilityto and through the currently landlocked, undeveloped site in the
FLUSA It is notthe onlyfunded projectthat would provide access to the site (U-6171, Bailey Road flyover would provide
access to the site from the east), but the Northcross Drive Extension is scheduled sooner in the STIP than the Bailey
Road flyover, and thus would accelerate opportunityfor development. The Northcross Drive Extension mayalso affectthe
type of developmenton the site.
There are approximately55 acres in the FLUSA There is no wateror sewer in the FLUSH, but both are available nearby.
There has been no developmentin the FLUSH, butthe surrounding area is primarilybuilt-out. According to the property
owner, there has been interestoverthe past 15 years in eitheroffice or residential developmenton the propertywithin the
FLUSH, but there are no specific plans. The site is zoned Corporate Office.
There are no known protected streams in the FLUSH, although the known stream within the FLUSAflows to McDowell
Creekwhich is on the 303(d) list, and mostof the McDowell Creek Watershed has been designated as a Water Supply
Watershed. There are no buffer rules, butthere are land use plans and zoning plans in place. Stormwaterand
development regulations are in place in Cornelius, Huntersville, and Mecklenburg Countyin addition to NPDES Phase II
rules.
The indirecteffects matrixindicated thata "Likely Land Use Scenario Assessment" was needed. Following
coordination with NCDOTand the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), itwas determined thata Land Use Scenario
Assessmentwill be developed to further investigate potential water qualityim pacts.
Cumulatively, STIP Project U-5108 and other planned transportation improvements should enhance mobilityand improve
travel time locallyand regionally.
There are no plans atthis time, but the propertyowner indicated there has been pastinterestin eitheroffice or residential
development. If Project U-6171 is also built, the flyover will likely impactsome ofthe currentlyavailable property, reducing
the extent of development. Depending on the timing of ProjectU-6171 in relation to potential development, the Bailey
Road flyover in conjunction with the Northcross Drive Extension mayaffectthe type of development proposed on the site.
Water and sewerare notavailable in the FLUSH, but both are available nearby.
Directnatural environmental impacts byNCDOTprojects will be addressed byavoidance, minimization,ormitigation,
consistentwith programmatic agreements with the natural resource agencies during the Mergerand Permitting
processes. All developments will be required tofollow local, state, and federal guidelines and permitting regulations.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearlydetail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge ordischarge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, oravailable capacityof the s u bject facility.
No wastewaterwill be generated as a resultof the proposed project.
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this projectoccurin or nearan area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whetheryoursite would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The USFWS lists sixfederallyprotected species for Mecklenburg County: Northern long-eared bat(NLEB), Rusty -
patched bumblebee, Carolina heelsplitter, Michaues sumac, Schweinitz's sunflower, and Smooth coneflower.
Suitable habitatfor Michau)es sumac, Schweinitz's sunflower, and Smooth coneflowerwere found in the studyarea,
however, it is determined that the project will have no effect on theses pecies due to lack of recorded occurrences and
lack of observed individuals in the projectarea. No effect was also determined forthe Carolina heelsplitteras suitable
habitat was not present with in the studyarea.
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) records indicated there are no known roosting sites or
hibernacula of the NLEB within 1.0 mile of the studyarea. Based on the presence of potentiallys u itable habitat within the
project area but the lack of known occurrences, hibernacula, or roosting sites, the proposed project"May Affect, Not
Likelyto Adversely Affect" the NLEB.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this projectoccurin or nearan area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whetheryoursite would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapperwas reviewed on January8, 2020. No essential fish habitatwas found within
the projectarea or within the vicinity of the project.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this projectoccur in or nearan area that the state, federal ortribal
governments have designated as having historic orcultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trustdesignationorproperties significant in
North Carolina historyand archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determ i ne whether yours ite would impact historic or archeological resources?
The North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office HPOWEB GIS Service (Accessed January9, 2020) shows no
National Register or Nation Register Study Lists ites within the project studyarea.
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this projectoccurin a FEMA-designated 100-yearfloodplain?
® Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: An individual floodplain development perm itapplication and flood
impactanalysiswas completed forthe project. The results ofthe flood studyare as follows:
The Revised model which represents the proposed Northcross Drive bridge over McDowell Creek demonstrates this project
would create a maximum increasein base flood level of0.84 ft at a location directly upstream ofthe proposed bridge.This
increase does not affectany structures. A floodway revis ion is necessaryfor this project, to show the floodwaylim its within the
proposed bridge opening, as the structure does notovertop during the base flood event. The revised floodwaylimits match
the effective floodwaywidths at all other locations exceptfor at the bridge location.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? The FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM)
Panels 3710464200K and 3710463200K (effective September 2, 2015).
Larry Thompson, PWS, LSS
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
4/2/2020
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent'ssignature isvalid onlyif an authorization letterfrom the applicant
isprovided.)
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version