20120252 Ver 1_401 Application_20120312

February 29 2012
Ms Cyndi Karoly
NC DENR
Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh North Carolina 27699 1650
Re Pre construction Notification
Cox Mill Stormwater System Renovations Project
Cabarrus County NC
Dear Ms Karoly
20 12025 2
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc
5550 Seventy Seven Center Dr Ste 320
Charlotte NC 28217
704 665 2200
FAX [phone]
The Cabarrus Soil and Water Conservation District (CSWCD) in conjunction with Michael Baker
Engineering Inc (Baker) have initiated the design phase for a stormwater renovation project (Project)
located on the Cox Mill Elementary School Campus in Cabarrus County NC The proposed Project is
part of a NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund Grant and will involve the design and construction of
five low impact development best management practices (BMPs) to treat stormwater and reduce
stormwater discharge quantities and velocities from the Cox Mill Elementary School Campus and
Recreation Complex to an existing riparian wetland system The BMPs will include a combination of
bioretention cells grass and enhanced grass swales and a large constructed wetland The protect site will
be protected through a conservation easement as well as a stormwater easement surrounding each BMP
Enclosed please find one (1) copy or our Pre Construction Notification package and the associated
information for your records as it applies to General Permit 3821 Baker understands that since our
impacts to an on site existing wetland are temporary and less than 0 10 acres written Certification is not
required therefore we are not anticipating a response from your agency and have not included a permit
fee This documentation is solely for the purpose of notification to your agency
We have also included one copy of each of the following supporting data on the project
• Agent Authorization Form
• PCN Form
• Associated Project Maps and
• An l l x 17 (1) copy of the Plan Set
Sincerely
1�axr
Knsti Suggs
Environmental Scientist
Enclosures
ti9@[9BW1AP
MAR 7 2012
DENR WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STQRMWATER BRANCH

O�00 WA1,4z,,
>` LII— J_WV�� —�
o -c
20920252
Office Use Only
Corps action ID no
DWQ project no
Form Version 10 November 2008
-- -1wvivnM"AICKCfKAIV M
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form - Version 1 0 November 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A
Applicant Information
1
Processing eJ
la
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number 18 or General Permit (GP) number
1 c
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corpse
® 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
le
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
Cox Mill Stormwater System Renovations
2b
County
Cabarrus
2c
Nearest municipality / town
Concord
2d
Subdivision name
N/A
2e
NCDOT only T I P or state
project no
N/A
3
Owner Information
3a
Name on Recorded Deed
Cabarrus County Board of Education / Cabarrus Soil & Water Conservation District
3b
Deed Book and Page No
Book 03127 Page 0053 / Book 09452 Page 0026
3c
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable)
Cabarrus Soil and Water Conservation District (CSWCD)
3d
Street address
P O Box 707
3e
City state zip
Concord NC 28026 1�3 0 \y a#
:jftt
3f
Telephone no
704 920 3303
3g
Fax no
704 795 6432 MAR 7
3h
Email address
detesterman @cabarruscounty us OENR WATER QUALITY
-- -1wvivnM"AICKCfKAIV M
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form - Version 1 0 November 2008 Version

Section A Applicant Information continued
4
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
❑ Agent ® Other specify Cabarrus County Sod & Water Conservation District
4b
Name
Dennis Testerman
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
Cabarrus Sod and Water Conservation District (CSWCD)
4d
Street address
715 W Cabarrus Ave
4e
City state zip
Concord NC 28027 6214
4f
Telephone no
704 920 3303
4g
Fax no
704 795 6432
4h
Email address
detesterman @cabarruscounty us
5
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Knsti Suggs
5b
Business name
(if applicable)
Michael Baker Engineering Inc (Baker)
5c
Street address
5550 Seventy Seven Center Dr Ste 320
5d
City state zip
Charlotte NC 28217
5e
Telephone no
704 665 2206
5f
Fax no
704 665 2201
5g
Email address
ksuggs @mbakercorp com
Page 2 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

B
Project Information and Prior Project History
1
Property Identification
1a
Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
46803214760000
lb
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees)
35 392 N 80 736 W
1 c
Property size
62 4 acres
2
Surface Waters
2a
Name of nearest body of water (stream river etc ) to
proposed project
Clarke Creek
2b
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
C
r2c
River basin
Yadkin Pee Dee
Page 3 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1 0 November 2008 Version

B Project Information and Prior Project History
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 project is located within the Cox Mill Elementary School Complex which also serves as the communities soccer and
baseball fields Currently the project site discharges untreated stormwater from an approximate 64 acre school and
recreation complex into a large riparian wetland system (Clarke Creek Heron Rookery designated as a NC Significant
Natural Heritage Site) Clarke Creek is classified for secondary recreation and has been listed as an impaired water in
the 2008 Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin Plan for habitat degradation and low dissolved oxygen from stormwater runoff
Clarke Creek discharges into Rocky River just southeast of Cox Mill Road in Cabarrus County Rocky River is listed on
the 303(d) list and is designated by North Carolina Department of Water Quality as an impaired stream for turbidity and
fecal coliform Rocky River is also listed as an Urban 303 (d) Stream In addition Clarke Creek was listed on the 2010
303(d) list for the poor bioclassification of aquatic life for ecological and biological fish community integrity
3b List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property
1255
3c List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property
00
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
In October 2010 the NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) awarded CSWCD a grant to implement a
series of five low impact development stormwater best management practices throughout the Cox Mill Elementary School
Campus to treat water quality from stormwater volumes (1 t 1 inch flush) The implementation of this project will improve
infiltration rates reduce peak stormwater flows provide educational initiatives facditiate research and improve the water
quality and aquatic habitats within the Clarke Creek Watershed by reducing nutrient and sediment loads to the system In
addition the project will implement a 26 65 acre conservation easement within the 100 yr floodplam and approximately
3 12 acres of stormwater easement for the BMPs The proposed BMPs include two (2) bioretention cells one enhanced
grass swale one grass swale and one constructed wetland
Page 4 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

B Project Information and Prior Project History
3e Describe the overall project in detail including the type of equipment to be used
The Cox Mill Campus property extends from Cox Mill Rd to the centerline of Clarke Creek The drainage area to the
proposed project area consists entirely of the Cox Mill Campus to the centerline of Cox Mill Rd The drainage area
discharges predominantly from east to west and is divided into 3 main drainage areas The Cox Mill Campus was built in
2002 and the recreational complex which lies within the 100 yr FEMA regulated floodplain is located at the western side
of the campus and was built in 2008 Currently there is an existing stormdrainage system located throughout the site
however excessive erosion flooding sedimentation and drainage system failures are common throughout the site This
proposed project will retro fit the existing site through the implementation of a series of BMPs that will treat urban
stormwater run off by regrading swales redirecting stormwater flows increasing run off infiltration adding stormdrainage
infrastructure and tying into the existing stormwater drainage system to include the entire drainage area
Drainage from the northern end of the site will capture run off into a new stormdrainage system that will tie into the
existing system and discharge into a constructed wetland (Site 8) that is to be implemented on the western side of the
project area adjacent to a large existing wetland system
Drainage from the center of the project site will be captured in two separate drainage divides The majority of the
drainage on the eastern side of the campus is currently captured within the existing stormdrainage system Additional
areas within this drainage divide will be incorporated and included into the existing stormdrainage system and rerouted to
discharge into Site 8 The remaining drainage consists mostly of a parking lot and concession area located in the center
of the recreational complex and four of the main sports fields Run off from the parking lot and part of the concession
area drain to the north and southwestern sides of the parking lot and will be captured by two bioretention areas (Site 6 &
Site 7) Stormwater overflows from Site 6 & 7 will be discharged into a regraded swale and an existing stormdrain system
that will ultimately discharge into Site 8 Site 7 has been designed to treat the entire 1st flush of storwater from its
drainage area however Site 6 was purposely undersize by 30% in order to provide a post construction cost/benefit
analysis for water quality reductions in urban areas whey space is limited for BMP implementation The remainder of the
drainage from the four centrally located sports fields will also drain into the regraded swale and /or the existing stormdrain
system that too will ultimately discharge to Site 8
Approximately three quarters of the southern part of the site drains into an existing rip rap channel that discharges directly
into the adjacent wetland system The southwestern side of the rip rap channel will be replaced by a pair of grass swales
(Site 5) one of which will be enhanced by upfitting the centerline of the swale with a underdram pipe and mixed media
amendments A level spreader will be installed at the head of each swale to spread out the flow evenly between the two
swales (Post construction cost/benefit comparison between the two swales for water quality reductions will also be
studied for Site 5 ) A level spreader and outlet protection will be implemented at the tail of the swales before discharging
the treated stormwater into the wetland area
Site 8 is a constructed wetland and has been designed to capture and treat the entire 1s` flush of stormwater runoff from
its receiving drainage areas before discharging into the adjacent wetland system The constructed wetland is located
within the FEMA regulated floodway of Clarke Creek and will be constructed by excavating the floodplain and grading the
wetland slopes to finished grade Stormwater discharges will enter Site 8 in three locations and flow through the
constructed wetland area before discharging into the existing natural wetland system through a nser /outfall structure
centrally located on the western side of the constructed wetland dam A rip rap apron will be installed below the pipe
outfall No permanent wetland impacts will occur to implement Site 8 however minor temporary impacts will occur to
access the area and construct the wetland dam on the western side of the constructed wetland
Equipment to be used for excavation installation and grading of the project site are a trackhoe and a dump truck Some
of the excavated material will be used to finish the grade of the constructed wetlands earthen dam as depicted in the
design plans The remainder of the excavated material will be hauled off site See the plan set and associated project
maps for for additional information The wetland will be constructed in the dry with the use of a dewatermg system to
minimize impacts After construction of the Site 8 is complete and stabilized the existing natural wetland area will be
regraded stabilized and replanted with native wetland vegetation Mud mats will be used when accessing the wetland
area to minimize impacts Site 8 will be constructed first so as to act as sediment and erosion control BMP for the
remainder of the site All work for this project will follow and comply with the NC Erosion and Sediment Control Planning
and Design Manual
Page 5 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

Project Information and Prior Project History
4 Jurisdictional Determinations
4a Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
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 Habitat Assessment and
Restoration Program Inc (HARP)
Name (if known) John T Soule
Other
4d If yes list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
On November 17`h 2011 Steve Kichefski (USACE) John T Soule (HARP) Knsti Suggs (Baker) and Dennis Testerman
(CSWCD) met on site to review the wetland delineation for jursidictional determination conducted by HARP on Nov 24
2008 Upon review of the project area Mr Kichefski gave verbal approval of the delineation area and stated that a
jundictional determination would be issued for the project site At this time the JD issuance is still pending final
documentation by Mr Kichefski
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 6 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

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 for each wetland area impacted
2a
2b
2c
2d
2e
2f
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps 404 10
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
impact
(if known)
DWQ — non -404 other)
Temporary
W1 []POT
Equpme
nt
Bottomland
® Yes ❑ No
® Corps
0 002
Access
Hardwood Forest
® DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P [:IT
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P [IT
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
2g Total wetland impacts
0 002
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
Stream impact
Type of
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Average stream width (feet)
Impact
number
impact
intermittent (INT)?
length
Permanent (P) or
(linear feet)
Temporary (T)
S1 ❑ P [IT
❑ PER ❑ INT
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER ❑ INT
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER ❑ INT
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER ❑ INT
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER ❑ INT
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER ❑ INT
3g Total stream and tributary impacts
3h Comments
Page 7 of 15
PCN Form — Version 10 November 2008 Version

C Proposed Impacts Inventory continued
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 o en water impacts below
4a
4b
4c
4d
4e
Open water
Name of
impact number
waterbody
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
— Permanent
(if
(P) or
applicable)
Temporary
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 [:1 PDT
04 ❑P ❑T
M Total open water impacts
4g Comments
Page 8 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

C Proposed Impacts Inventory continued
5 Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction pro osed then complete the chart below
5a
5b
5c
5d
5e
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or
(acres)
number
purpose of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f Total
5g Comments
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes permit ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
51 Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
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 any impacts require mitigation then y ou 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 (square
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
for impact
Stream name
mitigation
feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
B1 ❑P ❑T
El Yes ❑No
B2 ❑P ❑T
El Yes [I No
B3 ❑P ❑T
El Yes El No
6h Total buffer impacts
61 Comments
Page 9 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

D
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1
Avoidance and Minimization
1a
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
The project was designed to maximize the treatment of the site s stormwater runoff while minimizing impacts to the
adjacent wetland system Site 8 was purposely enlongated and the outfall was strategically placed so that no permanent
impacts would be incurred and to minimize temporary impacts during construction Site 8 will be constructed in the dry
with the use of a dewatenng system to minimize impacts Due to the needed placement of Site 8 and limited space
available to retrofit the project site temporary impacts to the adjacent wetland system to access and construct Site 8 were
unavoidable Site 8 will be constructed first so as to act as sediment and erosion control BMP for the remainder of the
site All work for this project will follow and comply with the NC erosion and sediment control specifications
1 b
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
Construction of Site 8 will be performed with care and during low flow conditions High hazard silt fence will be installed
between the existing wetland and the project area Only when the limits of disturbance cross the delineated wetland
boundary will the high hazard silt fence be allowed to be temporarily removed to access the limits of disturbance and
bring the berm of Site 8 to grade Any section of removed high hazard silt fence will be required to be reinstalled by the
end of each work day Mud mats will be used when accessing the wetland area to minimize impacts After the
construction of Site 8 is complete and stabilized the existing wetland area will be regraded stabilized and replanted with
native wetland vegetation if needed All work for this project will follow and comply with the NC erosion and sediment
control specifications
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
❑ Payment to in lieu fee program
projectl
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a
Name of Mitigation Bank
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
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
Page 10 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1 0 November 2008 Version

D Impact Justification and Mitigation continued
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan
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
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1 5
Total buffer mitigation required
6c 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)
6d Comments
Page 11 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

E
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1
Diffuse Flow Plan
la
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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
2
Determination if the Project Requires a Stormwater Management Plan
2a
Does the project require a Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit?
❑ Yes
® No
2b
Is the project subject to General Certification 3704 or 3705?
❑ Yes
® No
3
Determination of Stormwater Review Jurisdiction
3a
Is this project subject to any of the following state implemented stormwater
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
management programs (check all that apply)?
❑ ORW
If so attach one copy of the approval letter from the DWQ and one copy of the
❑ Session Law 2006 246
approved stormwater management plan
® Other N/A
3b
In which local government s jurisdiction is this project?
N/A
3c Is this local government certified to implement a state stormwater program?
❑ Yes
❑ No
If so attach one copy of the approval letter from the local government and one copy
of the approved stormwater management plan (or one copy of the approved
Stormwater management plan stamped as approved)
4
Information Required for DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
4a
What is the overall percent imperviousness according to the most current site plan?
N/A
4b Does this project contain any areas that meet the criteria for high density per
❑ Yes
® No
General Certifications 3704 and 3705?
4c
If the site is over 24% impervious and /or contains high density areas then provide a brief narrative description of the
stormwater management plan
4d
Has a completed BMP Supplement Form with all required items been submitted
❑ Yes
El No
for each stormwater BMP?
Page 12 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1 0 November 2008 Version

F
Supplementary Information
1
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes
❑ No
use of public (federal /state) lands
lb
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)?
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 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
N/A
Page 13 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1 0 November 2008 Version

F Supplementary Information continued
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?
El Raleigh
5c If yes indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted
® Asheville
5d What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Data review of the project area was conducted to determine if suitable habitat was present on site for the Carolina
heelsplitter and the Schweinitiz s sunflower using the endangered species list for Cabarrus County available from the US
Fish and Wildlife s website (http / /www fws gov /nc es /es /countyfr html) Upon review it was determined that suitable
habitat was present for the Schweinitiz s sunflower so a field survey of the project area was conducted on September 29
2011 to determine the absence /presence of the species No individuals or populations were located within or adjacent to
the project area and a no effect determination was made for both the Carolina heelsplitter and the Schweinitiz s
sunflower On 10/25/2011 USFWS sent a letter of concurrence with our determination for the project A copy of the
response letter from the USFWS is included with this application
6 Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitats
❑ Yes ® No
6b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
Though the project is not located in area designated essential for fish habitat or as a SA Water Baker sent a letter to the
NC Wildlife Resource Commission (WRC) requesting their assitance in the review of the project area The NCWRC
responded on 11/3/2011 with concurrence that the project would not result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic
resources A copy of the response letter from the NCWRC is included with this application
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?
We reviewed the Google Earth layers for the National Register of Historic Places in North Carolina provided on the
website (http / /www hpo ncdcr gov / digital /NCHPO_Digital_Start _ Page html) From these layers we determined that
there are three surveyed properties still remaining within a two mile radius of our proposed project area We then asked
SHPO to review the site to verify our findings and to provide comments as needed SHPO concurred with our findings
on 10/28/2011 A copy of their response letter is included with this application
Page 14 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

F Supplementary Information continued
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 Baker is submitting a No Impact analysis along with our floodplain
development permit application to the Cabarrus County Floodplain Administrator for approval Results from the No
Impact analysis shows that the proposed project will not have an impact on the floodplain nor the floodway
8c What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? Consultation with Cabarrus County Floodplain
Administator for required analysis and the No Impact analysis and its associated Engineering No Impact Certification
(2/28/12)
Knsti Suggs
2/28/2012
AppLkarwAgenfls Si ature
Applicant/Agent s Printed Name
(Agents signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
Date
is provided
Page 15 of 15
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I Dennis Testeiman representing Cabarrus County Soil Watei Conservation Distnct_(CSWCD)
hereby certify that I have authouzed Kirsh Suggs of Michael Balser Engineering, Inc to act on
my behalf and take all actions necessary to the processing, issuance and acceptance of this
jurrsdretional determination and /or permit and any and all standard and special conditions
attached
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to
the best of our knowledge
r
Applicant s signature Agent s rgnatur
Date —�
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence
Dowmentl
Page 1 of 1

Q�PQ��gNT
Cd p United States Department of the Interior
o
� a
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
�ggCH 3 + Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville North Carolina 28801
October 25 2011
Ms Knsti Suggs
Baker Engineering
5550 Seventy Seven Center Drive Suite 320
Charlotte North Carolina 28217
Dear Ms Suggs
Subject Stormwater System Renovations for the Cox Mill Elementary School Campus
Cabarrus County North Carolina
We received your letter of October 3 2011 (received October 20 2011) requesting our
comments on the subject project The following comments are provided in accordance with the
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U S C §4321 et seq ) and section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended (16 U S C 1531 1543) (Act)
According to our records and a review of the information you provided no federally listed
endangered or threatened species or their habitats occur in the project area Therefore we
believe the requirements under section 7 of the Act are fulfilled However obligations under
section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if (1) new information reveals impacts of this
identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the
identified action
Thank you for allowing us to comment on this project If you have any questions please contact
Mr Allen Ratzlaff of our staff at 828/258 3939 Ext 229 In any future correspondence
concerning this project please reference our Log Number 4 2 12 015

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
3 November 2011
Ms Kristi Suggs
Baker
5550 Seventy Seven Center Drive Suite 320
Charlotte NC 28217
Subject Stormwater System Renovations for the Cox Mill Elementary School Campus Cabarrus County
North Carolina
Dear Ms Suggs
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
information Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat 401 as amended 16 U S C 661 667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G S 113 131 et seq )
The Cabarrus Soil and Water Conservation District and Michael Baker Engineering Inc propose to
construct five low impact development best management practices (BMP) to treat stormwater discharged from
Cox Mill Elementary School The site drains to Clarke Creek in the Yadkin Pee Dee River basm There are
records for the federal species of concern and state endangered Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughaniana) and
the federal species of concern and state special concern Carolina darter (Etheostoma collis) in Clarke Creek
Also as detailed in the document the Significant Natural Heritage Area — Clarke Creek Heron Rookery — is
located within and adjacent to the site
Managing stormwater at the site should improve downstream water quality and aquatic habitat in Clarke
Creek Provided measures are taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation from construction activities we do
not anticipate the project to result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposed project If we can provide further assistance
please contact our office at [phone]
Sincerely
Shari L Bryant
Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Mailing Address Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 1721
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Z d S29L 6-+$' 966 4ueRja l ieyS e0t, 60 TT 60 ADN

North Carohna Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M Bartos Administrator
BeN a ly Ea s Perdue Cox emor
Ianda A Carhsle Secretary
Jeffr y J Cro v Deputy Secretary
October 28 2011
Knsti Suggs
Michael Baker Engineering Inc
5550 Seventy Seven Center Drive
Suite 320
Charlotte NC 28217
Office of Archn es and History
D vision of Historical Resources
David Brook Director
Re Cox Mill Elementary Stormwater System Renovations Cabarrus County ER 112054
Dear Ms Suggs
Thank you for your letter of October 4 2011 concerning the above project
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill Earley environmental review coordinator at 919 807 6579 In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number
Sincerely
(a�
LzYRamona M Bartos
Location 109 Ea, t Jo es Street Raleigh NC 27601 Madmg Address 4617 Mail S rvi a Cent r Ral igh NC 27699 4617 Telephone /Fax [phone] 6599

1
`� ♦ 49 �
CABARRUS
F >.. a"" MECKLENBURC f' !..
Vicinity Map 1VIap Vicinity LEGEND
0 N
Cox Mill Stormwater Renovations -- Creeks
Cabarrus County, NC
t7-! NC Subbasin
CABARRUS Reference: NC DOT, 2002 ° a s
Soil& Water USGS HUC
Conservation I Gastonia "z Project Site
Muncipality
DISTRICT 0 0.5 1 2 Charlotte
I - -1
Miles N L_I Counties
1" = 2 Miles A Cabarrus County, NC

1Y.
•
yl
•rp •• ••r••+F - ,�,� -�
a , .
� ti i � • ' 1
i
I tj
r el-y-11
A 08 I CIO
�• r
41
so
Ste• `•i, •�•ir•♦ ••r•
• ♦�• ••� M X'.
5�lelll 00
• jjj,
M
'ti 4 t i 1 "
USGS Topographic Map Map Vicinity LEGEND
29 Grass Swales _. Property Boundary
Cox Mill Stormwater Renovations
� Bioxetentions
Cabarrus County, NC
C °`' "'P °'s"� © Constructed Wetland
Reference:
CABARRUS »�
USGS Topo Quad - Kannapolis Project Site - -- Drainage Areas
Soil& Water
o Proposed Drainage Swales
Conservation ,
DISTRICT 0 100 200 400 Proposed Drop Inlets N
Feet
Existing Storm Pipes
I" = 400'
74 �' Cabarrus County, NC Existing Drop Inlets

r
Site 6
Site 7 ,
h
f
1
I , r
�.. INSET
4" v v "
� r f
.� i ✓� .r � i -'`,.� �� a -s i ��� ems, r [
• � r I +S
a
:} o-
Temporary Wetland Impacts = 0.002 acres
U 25 50 100
INSET q ,,
r
L ' <s
Proposed Temporary Wetland Map vicinity LEG �tNi 7i ct
Impacts Map 29 - -
q
h
Cox Mill Stormwater Renovations Propo, c Drainage Swats s
Cabarrus County, NC corA K p oi�
�z s' hinihs of Di> turbancc '
4 }
r
o�.
'4