20140843 Ver 1_Email for Application Returned Letter_20150126

Burdette, Jennifer a
From: Burdette, Jennifer a
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 4:54 PM
To: Barnett, Kevin; Devane, Boyd
Subject: Jule Noland Phase II
Attachments: SKM_C224e15012617161.pdf, Eng Board ComplaintForm.pdf
Attached is a copy of the return letter for the subject project. I found out from Jeff Poupart that we need to complete
and submit the attached form to the Engineering Board and attach the letter instead of copying the Board on the
letter. Jeff recommended that a PE sign the form.
Jennifer Burdette
401 /Buffer Coordinator
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
NCDENR — Division of Water Resources
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1617
(919) 807 -6364 phone
0ennifer.burdette @ncdenr.Pov
(Physical Address: 512 N. Salisbury St, Raleigh, NC 27604 - 9r" Flr Archdale Bldg)
*Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to
third parties unless the content is exempt by statute or other regulation. *

FIFWA
A4iVA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of En*onnient and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Donald R van der Vaart
Governor Secretary
January 2],2O15
DVVR#14-O849
Haywood County
CERTIFIED MAIL: 7013 3020 0000 7632 0680
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
John Harmon
Harmon Graham Properties, LLC
Post Office Box l0O
Waynesville, North Carolina 28786
Subject: RETURN OF APPLICATION
Jule Noland Drive, Phase 11
Dear Mr. Harmon:
On August 8, 2014, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received a copy of your 401 Water
Quality Certification Application for the subject project. [Jn October 13,3Ol4, the Division
requested additional information on the Project. Asof today, the Division has not received a
complete response to the additional information request.
At this time, we are discontinuing our review of your stormwater management plan and returning
the application. The version of the Jule Noland Drive Phase || project thatvvasreceivedon
December 11, 2014 includes significant hydraulic design issues and relies on a stormwater
treatment practice that is not capable of meeting the required 85% TSS removal.
After a basic review of the stormwater management plan, the calculations and support package,
the proposal is to use dry extended detention ponds as the stand-alone treatment mechanism to
achieve the 85% TSS removal. Table 4-1 of Chapter 4 of the Stormwater BMP Manual provides a list
of the TSS removal efficiency for major stormnxvatercontrm|devicesusedinthisstate. It indicates
that extended detention basins are only given a 50% removal rate. Please have your engineer
redesign the s1nrnnvvatertreatnnent plan for the site to include mechanisms to meet the 85%
removal rate.
In our review of the stormwater management plan, we found several elements that need to be
revised or more detailed information should be provided. Our initial review comments are listed
Division of Water Resources -401& Buffer Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone]
|nbamotvm^mvnovwstenquaUty.mg
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer — Made in part by recycled paper

Harmon Graham Properties, LLC
DWA#14-045
Return ofApplication
Page 2of3
1. Pond drainage issues
3. Looking at the "Outlet Detail" Dfdrawing S\N2, it appears that there isnV provision to
allow the collected water iD the basin tobereleased. There is an emergency overflow
outlet with a 2' weir but no outlet below that to drain the storrnvvater collected be|Ovv
the weir.
b. From the information provided, the emergency overflow at the top of the concrete box
outlet iDeach basin is the same elevation as the top nf the pond berm. For example,
the drawing for Basin #5 shows the top of the berm at 2574' elevation and the top of
the "storm water emergency outlet" also at2574'. |f this were tO be built as designed,
the 5t0rrnvv8ter would overtop the berm when water reached the emergency outlet
weir. In significant storms, water would overflow the berm, risking its integrity, and
possibly cause back-up in the adjacent parking lots. Also, there is no freeboard provided
onanyVfthebeSinS85isrequiredalthVughthe°OryExtendedDetentionB3sin"
supplement sheets all indicate the availability OfVoffreeboard.
2. Need for drainage area boundaries
|n order todetermine if the proposed stonnvvJt8r plan iS designed according b} state rules
and the BMP Manual, it is critical that we be able to determine the boundaries of the
drainage area for each stornmvvater treatment device. \k/e see drainage area calculations on
drawing 5\N-] for the five treatment devices but vvecannot determine which lines are the
drainage area boundaries. There iso legend that shows o dashed line for the drainage area
and there are several dashed lines on the drawing but we see no way to identify which lines
represent the five drainage areas. Revise the drawings tO clearly identify the drainage
areas.
3. Need to show new contours
Although there is a dark-line symbol for "New Contours" and 8 gray-line symbol for "existing
contours", we identified only afew lines that might show 3final grade. However, the few
final contour lines are not adequate tO evaluate the direction and course Of the 5tOrnovvGter
flows onthe developed project ortoas3ure1hatitiSbuiltinannannerth3tvvillfunCtion
correctly.
4. Clarify contour information
Existing contour lines on the south side of the project areun[1e8r;rnD5tareat4'interxa|S
but many are at 8' intervals. Also, there are contour lines on the drawing that change from
solid todashed. Depict contours with one type of line at8 consistent interval throughout.
5. Need more road information
a. Provide more information about the 18' access road connecting the north and south
portions Of the project. Indicate if the dashed line on the right-hand side i3aditch;
arrows indicate flow but the contour lines do not indicate J ditch.
b. Provide a typical cross-section of the road.

Harmon Graham Properties, LLC
DWR# 14 -0843
Return of Application
Page 3 of 3
c. At the north end of the road at the "transition curb ", there is not enough information to
determine how that water, or the discharge to basin #5, get to Factory Branch. Indicate
if there is a conveyance ditch on the right -hand side of the road. The flow arrow is on
top of the road. Also, clearly indicate "new contours" for the road and depict that
symbol in the legend.
6. Wetland area questions
It is difficult to tell where the stormwater discharging from basins #'s 1 -3 will eventually
reach Mauney Cove Branch. Indicate whether the released stormwater sheet flows across
the wetland or if there are ditches in the wetland area directing the water to the Branch.
More final contour information and a few spot elevations in the 2.2 acre wetland area are
needed. In addition, all discharge pipes should have some method of energy dissipation at
the outlets.
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0507(e), the Division is unable to approve your application. For
the reasons listed above, your application is hereby returned. Once you have addressed the
problems and /or inadequacies with your application as it was submitted, you will need to reapply
to the Division for approval including a complete application package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under Section 401 of the Clear Water Act for this
activity and any work done within waters of the state would be a violation of North Carolina
General Statutes and Administrative Code.
Please contact Kevin Barnett at 828- 296 -4657 or ke0n.barnett 2 n de,_q ov or Jennifer Burdette at
919 -807 -6364 or g rin�f a�.bur tie sic e if you have any questions or concerns.
cc: Wanda Austin, PE, Wanda Austin, PE Engineering, 45 Homespun Road, Sylva, NC 28779
David Brown, USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Todd Bowers, EPA, Sam Nunn Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303
DWR ARC) file
DWR 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit file
Filename: 140843JuleNolandDrPhll (Haywood)_401_IC_Return.docx

NORTH CAROLINA BOARD OF EXAMINERS
FOR ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
4601 Six Forks Road, Suite 310
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
COMPLAINT FORM
Complainant
Use Additional Pages As Needed
(Name)
(Physical Address)
(Mailing Address — If Different)
(Daytime Telephone Number)
(E -mail Address)
Complaint
Against:
(Name — Include Name of Company if Applicable)
(Address)
(Telephone Number)
(E -mail Address)
(License Number — If Applicable)
Witness:
(Name)
(Address)
(Telephone Number)
(E -mail Address)
Witness:
(Name)
(Address)
(Telephone Number)
(E -mail Address)
Witness:
(Name)
(Address)
(Telephone Number)
(E -mail Address)
Use Additional Pages As Needed

Details of
Complaint: (Name of specific design plan, survey or report)
Use Additional Pages As Needed
Please enclose copies of any referenced documents and any evidence
Signature of Complainant
NOTARY STATEMENT
State of
County of
I , a Notary Public for County and said state do
herby certify that personally appeared before me and being
by me duly sworn, stated that he /she executed the foregoing instrument.
Witness my hand and official seal, this the
(Official Seal)
day of ,
Notary Public
My commission expires