20210915 Ver 1_More Info Received_20211216

L & �-
a0 on
December 16, 2021
US Army Corps of Engineers NC Division of Water Resources
Asheville Regulatory Field Office 401 and Buffer Permitting Unit
Attn: Mr. David Bailey Attn: Mr. Paul Wojoski
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 1617 Mail Service Center
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587 Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Re: Reedy Fork Industrial — +/- 158.5 acres
5955 Summit Avenue Browns Summit, NC 27214
Nationwide Permit 39 Application
Corps Action ID: 2019-02059 / DWR Project #: 20210915
David and Paul:
Atlas Environmental is submitting the enclosed additional information package on behalf of SL
Reedy Fork LLC, Mr. Holden Sabato, for approval of a Nationwide Permit 39 application.
Request for more additional information related to the permit application, received by the Corps
on July 31, 2021, was requested by Mr. David Bailey on November 12, 2021. Additional
information provided by Atlas is located under each item 1 through 7.
1) Impact 52 on the PCN states that the impact is related to a culvert. However, the plans
show that this impact occurs upstream of the proposed culvert. Please clarify the
,purpose of the impact? e.g, will this stream reach be routed into a rip rap lined ditch
along the proposed fill slope and then into the culvert?
Impact S2 is required to relocate this stream reach due to the required fill slope for the turn
lane road improvement. The proposed stream relocation associated with Impact S2 will not be
due to installation of a culvert. The channel will be shifted slightly North of its current location
into a rip -rap lined ditch to provide stable alignment with the culvert and design requirements.
2) Please ,pro vide additional description of the French drain intended to resolve concerns
regarding indirect impacts at Impacts 54/W5. Show this feature on the,plansheet, and
,provide a detail ifavailable;
The French drain system which will be installed at the location of impacts S4 and W5 will mimic
the discussions and installation procedures which we had while on site during the field
verification of aquatic resources. The area of the impact will be "day lighted" and stripped to
allow access. The ground surface will be excavated to a uniform surface. This excavation
depth may vary depending on site conditions but will typically be approximately 2-feet deep. A
layer of filter fabric will be laid onto the soil and the excavated area will be backfilled with
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

L & �-
a0 on
gravel such as 57 stone or other material determined to be suitable by the contractor or
engineer. Filter fabric will then be placed on top of the stone and wrapped around the stone to
the bottom layer of fabric. The design and installation will be verified with the geotechnical
engineer prior to compaction. The area will then be filled and compacted as necessary. The
design and plan view of the proposed French drain is attached to this response package. Also
included is a copy of the geotechnical report for the french drain that was installed at WQ Pond
1. Photographs of the installation are included in this report.
3) The NCWAM forms provided, in additional to the observations I made during my site
visits, suitably justify a compensatory mitigation ratio of 1:1 for wetland impacts W1-
W3;
Atlas Environmental staff agree, and we have no additional comments.
4) We do not concur with a mitigation ratio of 1. 5:1 for wetland impacts W4-W6. The
NCWAM form for these resources rates to a score of Medium, however the subfunctions
primarily score medium and high. The Raleigh Regulatory Field Ohice requires
compensatory mitigation at 2:1 for impacts to wetlands of medium or higher quality
(with limited exceptions such as justification through subfunctional ratings); as such,
compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts W4-W6 will be required at 2.1;
Mitigation will occur at a ratio of 2:1 as required and as confirmed through email
correspondence on December 7, 2021. The SOA in the original application remains valid for
wetland mitigation credits through KCI Technologies Inc.
5) Provide a stream restoration ,elan for the three proposed sewer crossings (Impacts 55-
57);
The temporary impacts proposed at the three sewer line stream crossings (S5, S6, and S7) will
occur in the dry as open -cut temporary trenches. The stream substrate will be excavated
separately from soil and will be stockpiled for replacement after the installation is completed.
The restoration of these crossings will occur by reconstructing the channel bed and banks to the
pre-existing channel dimensions. The stockpiled stream substrate will be placed back into the
bed. The banks will be stabilized with a native seed mix and coir matting. If necessary Atlas
can take before and after photographs of these locations.
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

L & �-
a0 on
6) Proposed stream relocation plan:
a. Note that the impacts proposed for the stream relocation (Impact 53) would be
considered a loss of waters of the U.5 for the purposes of NWP thresholds; J. e.
they are not temporary impacts;
The enclosed PCN has been updated to account for permanent impacts at S3. The current
condition of the existing channel is highly impacted due to municipal utility installation activities.
According to GPS location, photographic documentation, and laser level data the channel has
been moved up to 9.7 feet West of its initial location as documented on the Aquatic Resource
Sketch Map. At the current location the stream has received fill from adjacent excavation to the
point of altering the longitudinal profile (attached) and impounding water. The designed
stream relocation on behalf of SL Reedy Fork LLC will be a drastic improvement of stream
habitat and function compared to the current highly impacted conditions due to water line
installation. Additionally, the adjacent off -site work has filled a portion of the wetland as
delineated by Atlas staff and documented within the "Stream Enhancement Plan" on pages 46-
48 that was submitted in the last additional information package. The relocated channel will
provide physical, chemical, and biological uplift of not only the previous channel conditions but
also the current conditions. The current channel has no vegetation, no stabilization (seed,
straw, matting etc), and has received enough fill along the left bank to move the stream.
b. Will a French drain or similar system be necessary at the groundwater
seen/origin of the stream relocation to maintain the source of hydrology base
flow, given the proposed grading including the directly adjacent WQ Pond 17
A French drain system has already been installed at the origin of the seep adjacent WQ Pond 1.
The installation was completed by site personnel and was observed and documented by S&ME.
See included Daily Report with photographs by S&ME documenting the installation. This
installation was not completed in a delineated stream or a wetland. It occurred uphill of the
headwater wetland.
c. For clarity, label (or provide legend items for) the structures (e.g. boulder toe,
log vane, rock cross vane, etc.) shown in the stream alignment Plan/Details
Pages 1-5;
These areas have been labeled accordingly. Revised maps are attached. Please note that the
exact size and placement of grade control structures may be amended at the discretion of the
environmental professional to promote stability of the channel.
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

L & �-
a0 on
d. Provide a detai%,profile sheet for what appears to be the boulder toes on Detail2
Page 3;
Boulders/rocks will be selected and oriented to align with the designed bankfull height of the
channel. The rocks will be imbedded into the bed and the bank of the channel. Non -woven
geo-textile filter fabric will be placed behind the rocks prior to construction of the floodplain and
flood prone areas (width at 2X bankfull height) to prevent any erosion from behind the rocks.
The upper and lower rocks will be keyed into the bank to prevent water penetration behind the
revetment. The area surrounding all structures will be live staked with woody vegetation to
provide increased stability. A detail sheet is attached to this response package.
e. Additional information is required for your proposed planting plan. Specifically,
,pro vide a ,planting ,elan detail showing ,planting zones for herbaceous species and
live stakes, or a sufficient description of the width and extent of these zones,
Live staking will occur within ten feet of the top of bank of the channel on both sides of the
relocation reach. Live stakes will be planted in three rows located approximately three feet
apart and plants will be staggered in an alternating pattern with plant spacing being 3 feet. A
live stake planting detail was included within the "Stream Enhancement Plan" on page 51.
Herbaceous vegetation species were identified on page 29 of the "Stream Enhancement Plan".
This seed mix will be planted within the 10-foot live staking area along both sides of the
completed channel. No live stakes or wetland/riparian seed mix will be applied beyond 10-feet
from top of bank. Due to overhead utilities along the stream alignment live stake species will
consist of shorter growing shrub species to minimize potential long term maintenance issues.
Species planted may vary depending on seasonal availability but may include silky dogwood,
button bush, elderberry, and ninebark. Willow species will be avoided due to height
requirements.
f. Provide a longitudinal, profile of the Proposed thalweg if available;
The longitudinal profile of the proposed thalweg is attached.
g. With the understanding that initiation of this plan is dependent upon ,permitting,
,provide your intended start date for the grading and planting work proposed;
The proposed start time for the stream work, including the realignment and planting, is
proposed to occur during the late winter to early spring of 2022. This will allow for good
germination of ground cover and good survival of live stakes. The ideal planting period for live
stakes for the best survivability is during the dormant period of the plant. The duration of the
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

L & �-
work is expected to be approximately 10 days. Atlas has contracted with SL Reedy Fork LLC to
be on site to provide construction oversight during this work.
h. A monitoring plan will be required as a ,Hart of this proposal Although for the
,purposes of this relocation ,project the monitoring would not need to be
consistent with the current Corps Mitigation Rule, it would need to be based on
the 2003 Corps Stream Mitigation Guidelines specifically Monitoring Level 2 (see
,p. 34 of the attached). Please submit a monitoring ,plan accordingly. Note that,
although 5 years of monitoring is required, the Corps can agree to cease
monitoring requirements, prior to the end of the 5 years based on successful
demonstration of channel stability, vegetation survi val, and likelihood of
futur%ontinued success
The monitoring of the stream relocation will be referenced for Monitoring Level 2 requirements
as follows. Monitoring will photograph vegetation plots for plant survival. Due to adjustment of
the bankfull elevation and channel morphology monitoring will also include the collection and
analysis of data to assess stability of the longitudinal profile and four marked cross sections.
Two bankfull events will be monitored, if available during the five-year monitoring period. If
two bankfull events are recorded and the channel is determined to be stable in less than five -
years Atlas will request the Corps evaluate and release the site from monitoring requirements
prior to five years.
i. Provide a contingency, plan if the stream relocation is not successful.
If the initial stream relocation is not successful due to erosion or instability Atlas Environmental
will provide all necessary support to establish stability of the channel. If the relocation is not
successful due to hydrology it may be necessary to analyze effects from climate and
groundwater fluctuations. Due to the current existence of groundwater seeps the likelihood of
a failure due to stability or hydraulics is extremely limited. If none of the stream restoration
techniques are successful in the establishment of a stable channel or the channel has a loss of
hydrology due to adjacent surficial alteration this impact will be re -permitted under a
nationwide permit application.
7) As you have likely heard, the Corps cannot currently verify the use of any NWP reliant
upon a 401 WQC or waiver under EPA s 2020 401 rule, including NWP 39. S,pecifically,
and ,per Corps HQ, "Due to the decision of the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on October 21, 2021 to remand EPA s 2020 401 WQC rule
with vacatur, the Corps of Engineers is not finalizing ,permit decisions that rely on a 401
WQC or waiver under EPA s 2020 rule at this time. The Corps is working to provide
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

i ' • W
more refined guidance that pro Odes away forward that allows us to finalize permit
decisions "Note that we do not have a timeline for resolution of the above noted
vacatur of EPA s 2020 401 rule and its current effects on the use of NWP 39 and other
NWPs issued at that time.
Thank you for the update on NWP 39 permitting. Atlas Environmental understands that this
stay has been lifted.
Enclosed are the necessary permit application documents and additional information. Thank
you for your attention to the enclosed request. Please contact me if you need any additional
information.
Best regards,
je6w�� dl�
Jennifer L Robertson, Ecologist
irobertson(a)atlasenvi.com
Enclosures: Revised Pre -Construction Notification
Existing Longitudinal Profile Graph
Existing Cross Section Graphs and Data
Stream Enhancement Maps
Stream Enhancement Grading Plan
Designed Longitudinal Profile
Boulder Toe Typical
Stream and Wetland Impact Maps
French Drain Typical
Geotech Report at WQ Pond 1
Recent Photographs from December
ATLAS Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
704-512-1206 (o) / 828-712-9205 (m)
www.atlasenvi.com / Offices in Asheville and Charlotte

OEI
OFywa rgF,9
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d.
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
1 e.
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
1g.
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:
Reedy Fork Industrial
2b.
County:
Guilford
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Browns Summit
2d.
Subdivision name:
not a subdivision
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
not a DOT project
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
SL Reedy Fork LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
see the attached parcel reports, SL Reedy Fork LLC recently closed
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Mr. Holden Sabato
3d.
Street address:
195 Morristown Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
3f.
Telephone no.:
973-765-0100 x 4063
3g.
Fax no.:
n/a
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no.:
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Jennifer L Robertson
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Atlas Environmental, Inc.
5c.
Street address:
338 S. Sharon Amity Road #411
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28211
5e.
Telephone no.:
704-512-1206
5f.
Fax no.:
no fax
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
7888-979-239 and 7898-066-252
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 36.186459' Longitude: - 79.705720'
1 c.
Property size:
158.5 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Reedy Fork
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-V, NSW
2c.
River basin:
Haw, 03030002
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: a single family residence, an equestrian area, and a large cattle farm
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.466 acres wetlands and 0.609 acre open water
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 7,115
3d.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project: The purpose is to develop an industrial distribution/warehouse logistics
center that consists of two buildings that provides features and flexibility to attract a tenant(s). One tenant is already in
place and several other potential tenant(s) are showing strong interest.
3e.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The project involves development of the
parcels into two industrial warehouses with associated infrastructure including trailer parking, employee parking, truck
courts, access roads, and three storm water SCM's. Typical construction equipment will be used.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
®Preliminary El Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company: ECS Southeast, LLP
Other:
4d.
If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
6/2/2020
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
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 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. 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
Area of
number
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Corps (404, 10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 P
Fill
Seep
No
Corps
0.012
W2 P
Fill
Seep
No
Corps
0.013
W3 P
Fill
Seep
No
Corps
0.009
W4 P
Fill
Seep
Yes
Corps
0.068
W5 P
Fill
Seep
Yes
Corps
0.112
W6 P
Fill
Seep
Yes
Corps
0.003
2g. Total wetland impacts:
0.217
2h. Comments: The wetlands are medium quality. The site has historically been a cattle farm. The wetlands have been
previously impacted by the land uses. The Corps has concurred with a 1:1 mitigation ratio at impacts W1-W3 and a 2:1
mitigation ratio at impacts W4-W6. Total wetland mitigation required is 0.4 credits.
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.
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)
S1 P
Culvert
CH 100
PER
Corps
2.4
274
(0.015)
S2 P
Relocation
CH 100
PER
Corps
3.3
53 (0.004)
S3 P
Relocation
CH 100
INT
Corps
2.3
261
(0.014)
S4 P
Culvert
CH 700
INT
Corps
0.94
46 (0.001)
S5 T
Other (Type In)
CH 400
PER
Corps
1.5
30 (0.001)
S6 T
Other (Type In)
CH 500
PER
Corps
3.7
35 (0.003)
634'
permanent
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts:
(0.034 ac)
and 96'
(0.007 ac)
temporary
3i. Comments: and S7 T Other (Temporary Trench) CH 600 PER Corps 4.2' 31' (0.003), CH 100 where the majority of the
impacts are necessary for site access is a stream that was relocated during NC DOT road construction, impact S3 is in the
side ditch of an existing road, this reach of stream will be relocated and enhanced, enclosed is the stream enhancement plan,
the 261 linear feet of stream relocation/enhancement will result in approximatley 450 linear feet of new stream
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

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 open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water
impacts:
4g. Comments: no pond impacts are proposed
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID
number
5b.
Proposed use or purpose
of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments: no pond contruction proposed
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. 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 you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer impact
number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
131 -
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total buffer impacts:
6i. Comments: there are no state regulated stream buffers on site, the project team is coordinating with the City of Greensboro
to obatin a stream buffer disturanbance No Practical Alternative approval
Page 5 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
6,385 linear feet of streams will be avoided, impacts are necessary to 10% of the streams on site mostly in order to access the
site, 261 linear feet of stream will be relocated and enhanced which will result in approximately 450 linear feet of stream, 1.273
acres of wetlands will be avoided, impacts are necessary to 15% of the wetlands on site, the steepest side slopes allowed to
obtain local approval has been used to avoid any additional stream or wetland impacts, no open water impacts will occur
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
numerous steep graded slopes are being used to avoid additioanl stream and wetland impacts, additional trailer parking was
desired but eliminated to avoid impacts
2. 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 option will be used for this
project?
® Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: KCI (Haw River Arm)
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity 0.4
Quantity none
Quantity none
3c. Comments: none
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:
none linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
none square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
none acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
none acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
none acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
not applicable
Page 6of10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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
❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
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.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
none
none
3 (2 for Catawba)
none
Zone 2
none
none
1.5
none
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
none
6g. 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).
not applicable
6h. Comments: a No Practical Alternative approval is necessary for stream buffer impacts throught the City of Greensboro,
the project team is coordinating with the City to obtain this approval, stream buffer impacts require mitigation, these
credits are being purchased from Restoration Systems
Page 7of10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
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? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ®No
project engineer is coordinating approval through the City of Greensboro
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
>24% %
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:
Three large SCM's (water quality ponds) will be constructed. The plan is being approved
locally. Storm runoff from the
buildings and impervious surfaces will be directed to the SCM's. The wet ponds will be constructed with forebays and
littoral shelves.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Greensboro
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Greensboro
® Phase II
® 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
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ® No
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ 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 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.
sanitary sewer
Page 9of10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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?
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NCDENR Natural Heritage Program Map Viewer and GIS Layer; see enclosed FWS comment letter
6.
Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
https://www.fisheries. noaa.gov/resource/map/essential-fish-habitat-mapper
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?
NC HPO comment letter enclosed
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:
8c.
What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA floodmaps GIS layer, there is a FEMA floodplain
located on a portion of the project site however no development will occur in this area
Jennifer L Robertson
, f J�� l �
at c�
12/16/2021
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

(U) UOIjBAal3

0
a
0
(D
0
()j) U01}2n213
N
U
C
N
0
0
0
N
O

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
Existing Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name: UT Reedy Fork
Reach Name: Reach 1
Cross Section Name: 0+67
Survey Date: 12/01/2021
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 1 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3.67
97.33
4
5.07
95.93
9
6.19
94.81
13
6.73
94.27
18
7.41
93.59
20
7.97
93.03
20.9
9.12
91.88 Tw
22.4
9.01
91.99 REw
23
8.69
92.31 BKF
24.8
8.45
92.55
27.8
7.93
93.07
36
5.33
95.67
42
3.44
97.56
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
92.74
92.74
92.74
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
92.31
92.31
92.31
Floodprone width (ft)
5.67
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
2.44
1.22
1.22
Entrenchment Ratio
2.33
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.3
0.35
0.25
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.43
0.43
0.37
width/Depth Ratio
8.13
3.51
4.88
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
0.73
0.42
0.31
wetted Perimeter (ft)
2.73
1.79
1.67
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.27
0.24
0.19
Begin BKF Station
20.56
20.56
21.78
End BKF Station
23
21.78
23
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft) 0.89
Movable Particle (mm) 139.9

0
a
0
(D
0
()j) U01}2n213
N
U
C
(0
N
0
0
0
N
O

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
Existing Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name: UT Reedy Fork
Reach Name: Reach 1
Cross Section Name: 1+89
Survey Date: 12/01/2021
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 1 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV
NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
9.23
91.77
4
10.07
90.93
7
11.11
89.89
9
12.26
88.74
11.2
12.5
88.5 BKF
12
12.92
88.08 LEw
13.8
13.12
87.88 Tw
15.8
12.96
88.04 REw
16.5
12.28
88.72
19.6
10.41
90.59
24
9.97
91.03
30
9.71
91.29
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
89.12
89.12
89.12
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
88.5
88.5
88.5
Floodprone width (ft)
8.82
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
5.07
2.54
2.53
Entrenchment Ratio
1.74
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.45
0.42
0.48
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.62
0.61
0.62
width/Depth Ratio
11.27
6.05
5.27
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
2.29
1.07
1.23
wetted Perimeter (ft)
5.38
3.27
3.34
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.43
0.33
0.37
Begin BKF Station
11.2
11.2
13.74
End BKF Station
16.27
13.74
16.27
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

0
a
0
(D
0
()j) U01}2n213

RIVERMORPH CROSS SECTION SUMMARY
Existing Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------
River Name: UT Reedy Fork
Reach Name: Reach 1
Cross Section Name: 2+76
Survey Date: 12/01/2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Section Data Entry
BM Elevation: 100 ft
Backsight Rod Reading: 1 ft
TAPE
FS
ELEV NOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------
0
10.89
90.11
3.7
11.31
89.69
7.8
14.12
86.88
12.4
16.8
84.2 BKF
14
17.19
83.81
14.9
17.27
83.73
16
17.32
83.68 Tw
19.6
14.81
86.19
27
14.01
86.99
38
12.84
88.16
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross Sectional Geometry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Channel
Left
Right
Floodprone Elevation (ft)
84.72
84.72
84.72
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
84.2
84.2
84.2
Floodprone width (ft)
5.98
-----
-----
Bankfull width (ft)
4.35
2.17
2.18
Entrenchment Ratio
1.38
-----
-----
Mean Depth (ft)
0.33
0.25
0.41
Maximum Depth (ft)
0.52
0.44
0.52
width/Depth Ratio
13.18
8.57
5.32
Bankfull Area (sq ft)
1.44
0.55
0.89
wetted Perimeter (ft)
4.56
2.66
2.78
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.32
0.21
0.32
Begin BKF Station
12.4
12.4
14.57
End BKF Station
16.75
14.57
16.75
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Calculations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Entrainment Formula: Rosgen Modified Shields Curve
Channel Left side Right side
Slope 0 0 0
shear stress (lb/sq ft)
Movable Particle (mm)

L 29Z 'ON a}}0lJ0g3 b960L'6L— '9999 L'9£ :sa}owipJ00O o;egeS uaploH :u}}d
L Ltl 'P2j xq!wd uojogs 's 8�c
IVIN3WN0 tLZLZ SN `I!uauanS suMoig ollMjojApaabIS :joj
anuand I!uauanS 9969
6ZOZ'ZOaagwaoaQ:pa}opdn �
y� u
P a a LZOZ '6Z jago}00 :a}o0

l 29Z 'ON a}}0lJ0g3 b960L'6L— '99991'9£ :Sa}owipJ00O o;egeS uap10H :u}}d
L Ltl 'P2i hwd uojo4S 'S 8�c
IVIN3WN0 t LZLZ SN `I!LuujnS suMoig ollNjojApaaHIS :joj
anuand I!uauanS 9969
6ZOZ'ZO aagwaoaa :pa}opdn �
u
I ZOZ '6Z jago}00 :a}o0
I I I I I `nk E
O C
o C t
CI `
J ED
o o c �c a a s
c Cc:0 @ co a�
�� CLLa�
@���0)0)
EL �c)rn� c m—
N inN N 5 5 O
') a)N a)X X— O
in000ww�a
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
°°
°°
°°°
°0
O
0
00 °
00 °O
`\ °°
°O°°a
o °a
0
°°°°°°
° oo 000 0
0000
00 ° 00

l 29Z 'ON a}}0lJ0g3 b960L'6L— '9999 L'9£ :sa}owipJ00O o;egeS uaplOH :u}}d
L Lb# 'P2j xq!wd uojogs 's 8�c
IVIN3WN0 tLZLZ SN `I!uauanS suMoig ollNjojApaabIS :joj
anuand I!uauanS 9969 a
6ZOZ'ZO aagwaoaa :pa}opdn
y� u
P a a LZOZ '6Z jago}00 :a}o0

L 29Z 'ON a}}0lJ0g3 b960L'6L— '99991'9£ :sa}owipJ00O o;egeS uaplOH:u}}d
llb# 'P2i xq!wd uojogs 's 8�c
IVIN3WN0 t LZLZ SN `I!uauanS suMoig ollMjojApaaHIS :joj
anuand I!uauanS 9969 o
6ZOZ'ZO aagwaoaa :pa}opdn
u
l ZOZ '6Z jago}00 :a}00
m
m
0 QQOaa@
m I I I I I IE
a
O (D
C
LL N e
-C _
N ` (0 0 z a F
J O N c C a
U m m >
CFO LLLL>
@ C C C
EL rnrn2)
N fN U) N N O
'-' N N N X X— O
in000wwEa
a
°°
a° °
°
°
0O00
0
0
00 ° 00°
00 00
°°°
°°°°°°
0000
O0
°°
/1 °oo
0
0 00
° 00
°°
o°
0
o °
Y m
U C
m C
L m
U L
m U
0 0
D
m� °00
a °
0 O ° 0° 0°
o 00 00 d
0 0 00
0 0 00
n
c
m
00
d
m
Y
C
m
a
o,
_o
a o m
m o m
0 0 >
a � m
o + o
0
0

l 29Z 'ON a}}0lJ0g3 b960L'6L— '9999 L'9£ :sa}owipJ00O o;egeS uaplOH :u}}d
L Lb# 'P2j xq!wd uojogs 's 8�c
IVIN3WN0 tLZLZ SN `I!uauanS suMoig 3llNjojAp99bIS:joj
anuand I!uauanS 9969 a
6 ZOZ 'ZO aagwaoaa : p a}o p d n
y� u
P a a LZOZ '6Z jago}00 :a}o0

n Gz 'ONam96 wew'w- %Lug 92 :sePgmo: +qE!S u8Pl0Hum
a & 'R «wv uap: s y:
kiN3A N . >LZZZ SN y ± Luny su<q g G,7,Ape q 3:g
anuan y ± ±nS 9969
�Z # m_oe(] Ieir) Mn x
):Oj /§aa/ L3z%z,gOIOO:G100 ,
2
\/
§
c\
cu
/\
2
°
e
»
�
§/E
b 760 16
00 (D U) E \ a
e22o#a%�n6
®mac±=o!\G§K
\k/m}77�)[7
o±%-xw==�!
E 10-C ) m
0LUcTD±\6){
C:(N C:ee°r°
%.0(D
77#\7\228\k
CU c— C M
«�l2eclE=
oo0c Cob
>_�-£_-__
:D :3 ° !

r--A
z n.
I� -Y3w
W
sy into bank for
minimum length
jual to bank
sight Vegetate
sy excavation with
,e cuttings/clumps
sfore backfill.
Toe of bank
1�
Flow
Rock Vane Plan
Flow
__XExisting
Stream Bed
— 2.5' ---
Backfill Anticipated
excavation _ Scour Hole
with cobble
and chink
gaps Rock Vane Section A
Live cuttings/clumps
r � ,
Varies
0.3'
5' to 2'
' to 5'
3' to 4'
Typical Rock Dimensions and Placement
Live cuttings/clumps
Rock Vane Section B
Footer rocks should be
—50% larger than other
Notes: The rocks should be rectangluar or nearly so at the rock to rock contact. The rock to
rock contact should be solid. If rocks are not perfectly flat, the thicker end should be placed
downstream.
"; t
A
rIr.=t `
F ■

Rock—
Riprap
2.
Nail
Sta
or r
Geot
Live Clumps
Live Cuttings
�F Install live clumps and live cuttings
00 into adjacent protection during
construction. Extend to below
stream bed.
Logs (2min)
Rebar anchors Soil anchors
(2min) (optional)
Use logs that are straight, uniform diameter and
free of rot, disease or insect infestation.
Flow> � Rebar
rr Notch
Backfill with cobble
Geotextile --f —
D=
FJIFAI.ILy'
Geot
2 x,e
S1
or
Rock Riprap
z2H
Dar
Drill 1)/8" dia.
hole and drive
#8 rebar
through. Bend
end at top.
End rock elevated
< YaH
Streambed

PLACE COIR ROLLS PARALLEL
TO THE STREAMBANK ALONG
A HORIZONTAL CONTOUR
T
12'
(600mm)
a o 0
DOUBLE STAKES OPTIONAL
REQUIRED FOR OFFSHORE
INSTALLATION
x
^� O
\ pf�
U z 1 1/2 " X 1 1/2 "
(38 X 38 mm)
RECOMMENDED
LENGTH OF STAKE
DETERMINED BY THE SUBSTRATE
PLACE COIR ROLL SUCH THAT THE ROLL EXTENDS
2" (50 mm) ABOVE MEAN WATER ELEVATION
i
MEAN WA TER
ELEVATION
DRIVE STAKE
THROUGH NETTING-
0
O
M
Project Name: Reedy Fork
Location: 5955 Summit Avenue Brown Summit, NC 27214
VVIRONIMVENTAL I For: SL Reedy Fork LLC Attn: Holden Sabato
Coordinates: 36-18668,-79.70964 Date: Dec. 02, 2021

J
/- -- - �AIII
IIj/II
I II �10
/ Fo
U�/ o 1
LLJ
/III
1 ]ll I aifTa- IIII � I
IT
w U
Ln O
// I o `- O
II w �
�
l / /
l/I / H L z
Uw0
LU m
w
cr
yu
� ���.✓" � i � / / I �� � I I ll I IIII __ � �-�
1A I
� � � / � �//� � i �•; � 11 II �< III � I �
� I
1 1
w
Ill Ate' Ii� wNM�
Oz W=-
a� o
-8Joon
/ m O
ill//�� / l ///�Il// //� it I / ` ' Illll \ ��I /l l \\`_• // OW WU 3

N
O O O O O O O O O O O
O 00 W �T N O 00 W �T N 0
0 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 00 00 00 00 00
O
O
O
Ln
O
Ln
t
O
O
O
t
O
O
Ln
m
O
0
O
m en
v
3
fo
t
U/
OLn c
O fu
fo
t t
N U
C
hU
U/
O IO
O
N
O
O
Ln
t
O
O
O
t
O
O
Ln
O
O
O

NG,L--1.
1. Tilt branches down into the slope 10°-20° min.
2. Brushlayering may be constructed with non —compacted or compacted backfill
without damage to the brush layer.
J. Branches irrespective of length, should protrude 8-18in. (0.20-0.50 meters
beyond the face of the slope.
rRI
VIRONIVIENTAL
338 S. Sharon Amity #411
Charlotte NC, 28211
Brush Layering
with Rock Toe
Protection
Scale: Not to Scale Sheet: 1 of 1
Construction Typical
Brush Layer/Rock Toe
Drawn By: ©1999 John McCullah
*Conceptual Plan - Not For Construction

�� � �(���
�7 �i�1����1 ��✓ �(�
I
11 �1
„�� ���/��/rf 1(� �11���,11)1111
t�i<ZvIII/h�_����]J/�, ti •-�i�i�l� li 1• ��. ��)IS 11(,1
�,
I
/
7lzLU
"II
II
j�
I
za
o
] M
O
l o
W
ti j
W K
;Q a E
H O
\
r (� r 1�
s
�/�w
vN�
z0pm
O
-� ,
'n'
Z
Y.
� r% 0
?= a;
-
(
c�
OZ
w
XO
LU
��
to

145
V/ 1 S =�� d `�� \ 1 s/' z
� �'�;�� � � � f r l 1 V uJLL
Q
a
LLJ
Ll a�Q� \ill l V� w w
I
w
IFo
7-7
���
Lu
0
1O �/�P (� _j//�//S/��l �_�o M
Z.
�l l ail �r, ` �a NON°u
W M
\\10A� 9a L ��W//��o� Q��a
vow 80
n O
J
-,. ✓ � z� ��� ��1��5. /mot \\J/

ILI—
Aso / / / I r1 I l
V ✓� 17 > �� � \ �� �� / ono � � �' / /� �VLLI
�l /l/i �� �l ✓', �
z
Q�2
a H
1,7
7
LLI
LLI
�� / // /�� I /�I ✓� Q w
LLJ
11
11
�7so
�h° / r / Bch/7 -G ^y°�5 t ��J � �� � � �� ���� � I t/✓
�4e �45 5 ��� o � L,o � v� ^ �I� I�������/I fl/✓
�35 �35 ��� � � I� � ✓/�1 P� II �J�I (�l� I y %
�z30
s
�zo Sao Sao a ��VI�YI�I V/ti l�
o
zee
'AI�IIv11��1�f{���
ti� ✓/ \ V/A�V A/ /VA \ij l��lf�\
ImoV A/ ✓ �A A ��V A\ V �� A\�� ������A�A s �` ro
V /�� /� ✓ /��✓✓// /j/I/ �����;_ z LLU
om i E
¢ ^ o
0012

\ H- F7 \ N + `
FFLP
W
O ��
W
� C 9 r
d33Q Z
\
m
\
w
-
�
0
1
1
I w
On
IWAMMIi
I1� 01
w
U
z
a
m
D a
0 J
o
z a
Q Y u
w O
LL 0
0 z
LU
LLJ
0 m
= N
U z
z LU
w LU
cr-
H C7
0
W
W
J
0
M
Za
7
r> . r:
O0
N
W Z
MZ
V i
..wwW
vNy,W
Z R�
0�� p
ii�
zaa3
W
O 2
X U
J
0
O
0

DAILY REPORT
Report #: DR-000003
Report Date: 09/22/2021
S&ME, Inc.
8646 West Market Street, Suite 105
Greensboro, NC 27409
Phone:[phone]
Fax:[phone]
Client:
Reedy Fork LLC
195 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Project:
211918B
Reedy Fork Site Lot 1
5955 Summit Avenue
Greensboro, NC 27214
EARTHWORK - Fill Placement - Backfill - Generally Conforms with Required
09/17/2021 - John VARITIMIDIS - Continuous -
S&ME was on site from 7:45am to 12.00 noon. During this time the contractor undercut 2ft deep at
the north end of bottom of the pond 1 embankment area. Area was 45ft long and 35ft wide. They
placed filter fabric and 2ft of compacted washed stone #57 with filter fabric wrapped on the top.
Then the contractor placed two lifts of 8 inches of compacted soil on top of the stone/fabric. Using
my probe rod I qualitatively checked the area and backfill area felt very firm. After lunch they will
continue to backfill in 8 inches lifts. S&ME will be here in the afternoon to test for compaction.
EARTHWORK - Fill Placement - Backfill - Generally Conforms with Required
09/17/2021 - WILLIAM PARKER - Continuous -
Observed the continued placement of backfill for the pond embankment in the afternoon. Lifts were
placed in 8 to 10 inch loose increments and compacted with a pad -foot roller. Qualitatively probed
the lifts with a steel T-rod and appeared firm.
The presence of S&ME at the project site shall not be construed as an acceptance or approval of activities at the
site. S&ME is at the site to perform specific services and has certain responsibilities which are limited to those
specifically authorized in our agreement with our client. The results of tests or observations performed are only
applicable to the time and location of the tests or observations. Testing frequency is dependent on our being
informed of work in progress at the site and staffing level. In no event shall S&ME be responsible for the safety or
means and methods of other parties at the project site.
Page 1 of 2

DAILY REPORT Report#: DR-000003
Report Date: 09/22/2021
III E
S&ME, Inc.
8646 West Market Street, Suite 105
Greensboro, NC 27409
Phone:[phone]
Fax:[phone]
Client:
Reedy Fork LLC
195 Morristown Road
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Project:
211918B
Reedy Fork Site Lot 1
5955 Summit Avenue
Greensboro, NC 27214
Reviewed/Prepared by:
Stephen LACZ
Sep 22, 2021
The presence of S&ME at the project site shall not be construed as an acceptance or approval of activities at the Page 2 of 2
site. S&ME is at the site to perform specific services and has certain responsibilities which are limited to those
specifically authorized in our agreement with our client. The results of tests or observations performed are only
applicable to the time and location of the tests or observations. Testing frequency is dependent on our being
informed of work in progress at the site and staffing level. In no event shall S&ME be responsible for the safety or
means and methods of other parties at the project site.

Reedy Fork Site Photographs: December 01, 2021
0.
":
{I
AL"
1: Upstream of enhancement reach looking DNST
2: Upstream of enhancement reach lookup up slope
4: Seep along existing silt fence near french drain
5: Current channel conditions near cross section 0+67 Ft
'°I
3: Seep along existing silt fence near french drain 6: Channel
Note: Date and time stamp on photos is not correct

Reedy Fork Site Photographs: December 01, 2021
7: Current channel conditions near cross section 1+89 Ft
8: Channel
10: Fill obstructing channel
11: Fill obstructing channel
ZO&
9: Current channel conditions near cross section 2+78 Ft 12: Fill obstructing channel
Note: Date and time stamp on photos is not correct

Reedy Fork Site Photographs: December 01, 2021
13: Fill obstructing channel
T.
RA �74
14: Wetland abutting channel at station 4+00 Ft
16: Station 4+25 Ft
A nz
_ � 5
15: Station 4+00 Ft at edge of forested area
Note: Date and time stamp on photos is not correct

Lower reach of channel near culvert under Summit Ave: Plastic mesh matting in channel
Lower reach of channel near culvert under Summit Ave: Plastic mesh matting in channel
Note: Date and time stamp on photos is not correct

Reedy Fork Site Photographs: December 01, 2021
Lower reach of channel near culvert under Summit Ave: Fill in channel
Lower reach of channel at culvert under Summit Ave: Erosion control device (rip -rap check dam) in channel
Note: Date and time stamp on photos is not correct