20230754 Ver 1_USACE additional information received_20230622

From: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2023 5:27 PM
To: Lawrence, Jennifer L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homer, Seren M <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] RE: SAW-2022-02268 Old Lexington Road (Forsyth) Questions
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Report suspicious emails with the Report Message
button located on your Outlook menu bar on the Home tab.
Jennifer —the impact totals are correct; the stream is wider at the top impact that is just fill than at the bottom impact
that is just rip -rap dissipater. Both are based on civil grade survey of the OHWM of the stream. I am considering the
permanent impact from the rip -rap dissipater to be a permanent impact/net loss. Although the rip -rap pad is shown at
existing stream elevation in the cross section, it is not being keyed into existing stream bed and bank elevations and
would be considered a net fill loss (i.e. over excavated and returned to similar grade with stone, not stone knuckled into
existing stream bed and bank elevations). My experience is this is generally considered a loss by the Corps. This is also
highly desired by the contractor and engineer to not be required to key it in because of the existing topographic
conditions and areas they will need for S&EC device while the stream is being filled and wall is being constructed. The
culvert is not going in the stream channel, its tying into the stream at the headwall to rehydrate unimpacted portions
with existing off -site drainage area. The stream will be filled over the top with clean earthen fill. There will be a
sediment and erosion control device (i.e. rock check/doughnut, etc.) at the most down -gradient impact location (i.e.
location of permanent impact from rock fill dissipater) to prevent sedimentation from affected down -gradient
unimpacted waters. Because the stream is being filled over the top, there is no possible way or reason to dewater the
permanently impacted portion of stream.
Happy to answer any other questions you or DWR may have, thanks.
Sincerely,
Bradley S. Luckey, PWS
336.708.4997 (c)
336.310.4527 (o)
PO Box 128
Kernersville, NC 27285
www.pilotenviro.com
bluckev@pilotenvir< .com
From: Lawrence, Jennifer L CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2023 3:40 PM
To: Brad Luckey <[e-mail]>
Subject: SAW-2022-02268 Old Lexington Road (Forsyth) Questions
Good Afternoon Brad,
I wanted to confirm that the proposed impacts in square feet for this project listed on the plans are the correct impacts:

C4Z45ELL STREET
FURL IG
--j
til e
LIMITS dF f fr e
EASTURBAHCE
f
:r: A/Z
PERMAKFKT 5TREANt IINPAOTMI L=
PaR-M NEF{f 9T] EAM IWAGTIWP }"-
TOTAL IWA-TL
The impacts table has them lumped together; I record stream permanent impacts separated from stream permanent
loss in our database.
Also, will they need to dewater to put in the footers for the retaining wall? I think the State may have questions about
sediment/erosion for this installation, so they may have to add in some temp impacts for dewatering.
Thanks,
Jennifer Lawrence, PWS (she/her)
Regulatory Specialist, Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, NC 28262
Email: [e-mail]
Cell: [phone]
Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized
state official.
3