20201102 Ver 1_USACE More Info Requested_20200918

Strickland, Bev
From: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 10:37 AM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: Homewood, Sue
Subject: [External] RE: SAW-2019-01884--May site / cellular tower / 4226 Camp Burton Road /
McLeansville / Guilford County / Commercial
Attachments: QL2 LiDAR Attachment.pdf, Plan Sheet C-2.1 Attachment.pdf
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]
Hi all. I reviewed the PCN and plans for the above referenced site. I am in favor of the plan generally, and it closely
follows my discussion with Paul Pascarosa in the field on 11/21/2019. However, given that this is partially an after -the -
fact action (drive/road originally installed 2015-2017), 1 have to make certain assumptions and use any pre -disturbance
information available to estimate impact amounts. The assumptions that differ with your PCN are as follows:
1) Stream Impacts: The PCN proposes 40 If of stream impacts, which equals the length of culvert pipe proposed.
However, Piedmont streams are rarely straight. In this case QL2 LiDAR was flown prior to the installation of the
drive/road. By georeferencing the project plans and overlaying on the QL2 LiDAR data which clearly shows the
stream channel (see QL2 LiDAR Attachment), a more accurate estimate is 46 If of stream impacts;
2) Wetland impacts: The PCN proposes no wetland impacts. However, the field delineation showed wetlands on
both side of the stream and on both sides of the drive/road that extended to the fill slope. As such, we will make
the assumption that the drive/road impacted wetlands. Further, the project plans appear to show fill slopes
extending a minor amount into existing wetlands. Using a conservative scaled measurement from the project
plans (see Plan Sheet C-2.1 Attachment), the project would impact approximately 0.04 ac of wetlands.
Neither of these revisions would affect the type of permit requested or compensatory mitigation decision (none
required), but rather is included for accuracy and consistency purposes. Please update Section D of the PCN accordingly.
You may submit this information via email for simplicity. If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
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: David. [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.
From: Thames, Joyce A CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 7:31 PM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Cc: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Subject: SAW-2019-01884--May site / cellular tower / 4226 Camp Burton Road / McLeansville / Guilford County /
Commercial
Importance: High
(Submittal Website) [e-mail]
We received your request. We have assigned the request EXISTING FILE# SAW-2019-01884 and forwarded it to (Dave
Bailey) for processing, please refer to this number on all correspondence, and supporting information and send to:
[e-mail]
Also, please feel free to contact assigned Project Manager above via email if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Joyce Thames

SAW-2019-01884QL2 LiDARMay site - cellular tower access4226 Camp Burton RoadMcLeansville, Guilford County
2019-01884
NCDOT GIS Unit
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
³0 60 12030Feet
Elevation (Feet)
Value High : 746.358
Low : 716.162
Proposed pipe and rip rapfrom Plan Sheet No. C-2.1
&ISSUED FOR:CHECKED BY:DLS132151MOUNTAIN LTD, WIRELESPROPOSED 220' SELF SUPPORT TOWERNCC019FA#101422604226-ZZ1 CAMP BURTON ROADMcLEANSVILLE, NC 27301GUILFORD COUNTYTHIS DOCUMENT ISPRELIMINARY INNATURE AND IS NOTA FINAL, SIGNEDAND SEALEDDOCUMENTC-2.1SHEET NUMBER:6&$/(352326(',03529(0(1763/$1




1&&((&(6&$/(352326(',03529(0(1763/$1




1((&352326('
[
/($6($5($
'28%/(6:,1**$7(352326('
:,'($&&(66 87,/,7<($6(0(17352326('/)“
:,'(*5$9(/$&&(6652$'352326('+)5$0(352326('
:,'($&&(66 87,/,7<($6(0(17352381'(5*5281'7(/&2352381'(5*5281'(/(&352381'(5*5281'7(/&2352381'(5*5281'(/(&352326('/)“
:,'(*5$9(/$&&(6652$'352326('
[
)(1&('&203281'352326('
6(/)683325772:(5PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS PLAN/(*(1',1',&$7(6(;,67,1*&217285)* ,1',&$7(6),1,6+('*5$'((/(9$7,21352326('$7 764)7/($6($5($*5$9(/&203281'a3$5(1775$&7)* )* )* )* )* )* 0$7&+/,1($%277205,*+70$7&+/,1($723/()70$7&+/,1(%3$5(1775$&75(029(
(;,67,1*5&3)* )* )* )* )* )* )* )* )* *%*%*%*%)* )* )* )* 

',67$1
&
(
7
2
1
(
$
5
(
6
7
5
(
6,
'
(
1
&
(



127(6$&&(66'5,9(6+$//&216,672)$1$//:($7+(5*5$9(/685)$&(5()(5726+((7()25&$55,(5*5281'(48,30(17,1)250$7,21&352326('6,/7)(1&(7<3727$//)“,167$//7(0325$5<,1/(73527(&7,21&72& ,167$///)$'616'3,3(:,7+(1'6(&7,21625$33529('(48$/6(('(7$,/66+((7&&)* Conservative scaledmeasurement ofwetland impact