No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20221625 Ver 1_More Info Requested_20221229Baker, Caroline D From: Homewood, Sue Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2022 9:14 AM To: Sullivan, Willie; Hopper, Christopher D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) Cc: Radford, Emma Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - Cherry Lane Industrial - Alamance County - DWR#20221625 Good morning Willie, I have reviewed the above noted project. Please copy me on your response to the USACE Request for Information email below. As noted in Item #5 from the email below, DWR requires construction plans and profile drawings in order to complete our review. Please note that upon review of this information, the Division may require additional information again. The Division will consider this application on hold until receipt of a complete response to information requested. Please also note that buffer impacts must be reviewed and approved by the local municipality, therefore DWR's review and any future approval will not include buffer impacts. Thanks, Sue Homewood Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office Department of Environmental Quality 336 776 9693 office 336 813 1863 mobile Sue. Homewood@ncdenr.gov 450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300 Winston Salem NC 27105 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Sullivan, Willie <William.Sullivan@kimley-horn.com> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2022 7:00 PM To: Hopper, Christopher D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <Christopher.D.Hopper@usace.army.mil>; Homewood, Sue <sue.homewood@ncdenr.gov> Cc: Radford, Emma <Emma.Radford@kimley-horn.com> Subject: [External] Re: SAW-2022-01256 / Cherry Lane / Alamance County / NWP 39 Application - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to Report Spam. Chris and Sue, 1 Just wanted to send an update here. We are drafting a response to these questions and plan to have it over to you this week. Thanks, Willie From: Hopper, Christopher D CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <Christopher.D.Hopper@usace.army.mil> Sent: Friday, December 9, 2022 4:35 PM To: Sullivan, Willie <William.Sullivan@kimley-horn.com>; Homewood, Sue <sue.homewood@ncdenr.gov> Subject: SAW-2022-01256 / Cherry Lane / Alamance County / NWP 39 Application - REQUEST FOR INFORMATION Good Afternoon, William: Thanks for your application to utilize Nationwide Permit 39 to construct stream and wetland crossings associated with construction of the proposed Cherry Lane Industrial site. We require some additional information to ensure the project qualifies for this permit. Please see below and do not hesitate to call or reply with questions or concerns. 1. Please complete the Aquatic Resources tab of the attached ORM spreadsheet. I've attached the most recent version for your convenience. 2. There is a lot of information shared on each impact exhibit. These would be attached to the verification and should be clear to construction contractors building the project. Others with similarly complex impact areas have submitted a 404 set of exhibits without buffers and simpler legends, as one possible solution to consider. 3. The impact to Wetland W5 occurs within an area marked as temporary buffer impact. Would fill be introduced? The text provided states this would be for construction access. Please expand on the purpose and need for this impact (what would this impact provide access to?), as well as any avoidance and minimization that was considered. 4. Wetland W9 — same question. The text states the area would be impacted for construction access, but the impact table lists the permanent impact as mechanized clearing and grading. Please expand on purpose, need, avoidance, and minimization. Was a retaining wall considered here? Are fill slopes dictated by design standards or could they be steepened in this area? 5. Nationwide Permit 39, Regional Conditions 8 and 9 detail considerations for design and construction of riprap stabilization and culvert installation. Please provide construction details that contractors would reference at each crossing. Please show the proposed burial of each stream impact via profile and cross -sectional views. 6. The 10-foot proposed utility crossing and easement isn't discussed much in the application. If I overlooked this discussion, please accept my apology. The mitigation section refers to this as a non -electric crossing. Would this be an open -cut / aerial / trenchless crossing? This crossing also traverses the Back Creek Floodplain. Christopher D. Hopper Regulatory Specialist U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, NC 27587 O: (919) 554-4884, Ext. 35 M: (919) 588-9153 We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey can be accessed by copying and pasting the following link into your web browser: https:Hregulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/. Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.