20071441 Ver 1_Staff Comments_20071126

[Fwd: Re: Prosperity Village]
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Prosperity Village]
From: Annette Lucas <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 09:38:36 -0500
To: Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>, Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>
FYI
Subject: RE: Prosperity Village
From: "Kevin Martin" <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:27:44 -0500
To: "Annette Lucas" <[e-mail]>
Annette this looks right to me, to double check I will ask my client and my employees in Charlotte, I know
they were thinking they could get the first phase to you by the end of February. As soon as I hear back I
will email you and you and Ian can draft the revised 401. Thanks Kevin
From: Annette Lucas [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Mon 11/19/2007 2:16 PM
To: Kevin Martin
Cc: Ian McMillan; Cyndi Karoly
Subject: Prosperity Village
Kevin,
I am glad we had the chance to discuss Prosperity Village. It was my
understanding that we agreed on the following items:
1. With the current submittal, the applicant will provide a stormwater
management plan that will treat the stormwater resulting from the
rights-of--way on the site. The stormwater management plan will comply
with the current version of the DWQ BMP Manual. One BMP Supplement Form
with all required items shall be provided for each proposed BMP. (BMP
Supplement Forms are available at:
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/su/bmp forms.htm.)
2. The 401 Certification will be issued as appropriate for a phased
project.. The roadway will be considered the first phase. The
apartments will be the second phase. Before any land disturbing
activity may occur on the second phase, a stormwater management plan for
that phase must be approved by the appropriate authority (Charlotte if
it has obtained approval for its Phase II program -otherwise, DWQ).
Before any building on the site may be occupied, the approved stormwater
management plan must be implemented.
Please let me know if I have adequately captured our conversation.
The web site 1 mentioned above is intended to be a resource to
communities throughout the state -they are welcome to use our BMP
1 oft 11/26/2007 10:33 AM

[Fwd: Re: Prosperity Village]
Supplement Forms if they choose. I was not able to get a copy of the
letter that recently went out to local municipalities about the BMP
Reviewer Certification -but the general concept of local government
certification is discussed in Coleen Sullins' August 20 memo (attached).
Have a great holiday,
Annette
Annette Lucas <annette.lucas(~ncmail.net>
Environmental Engineer III
401 Wetlands Oversight/Express Unit
NC Division of Water Quality
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Re: Prosperity Village.eml
Content-Encoding: 7bit
2 of 2 11/26/2007 10:33 AM

O~O~ W AT ~qpG
e ~
r
> ~
o ~
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Qualiry
September 13, 2007
Mecklenburg County
DWQ Project #07-1441
Mr. Chris Grinelli
The Mulvaney Group, Inc.
7301 Carmel Executive Park Dr.
Charlotte, NC 28226
Subject: Prosperity Village Development
Dear Mr. Grinelli:
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your 401 Water Quality Certification application for the
subject project on August 23, 2007. Mr. Alan Johnson of the Mooresville Regional Office has reviewed your
application and met with your consultant (Mr. Wendell Overby) on September 11th to discuss the project and
the proposed impacts. It was brought to Mr. Johnson's attention that there several issues that need to be
resolved at the site:
1) The Ridge Road Thoroughfare Plan: There is ongoing discussion with the City of Charlotte as to
who is responsible (has ownership) for the road construction through the development. If there are
no public monies allocated to the road construction, the project is consider private and will be
included in the total impacts at the site.
2) Connectivity (stream crossing to adjoining neighborhood): The site plan shows two proposed stream
crossing to the adjacent neighborhood, which are still under discussion with the city.
Given that both items above are still under discussion with the City of Charlotte as to who is responsible
and what is to be required, it may be appropriate to withdraw the application. However, pursuant to 15A NCAC
2H .0507(h), please be advised that this project will be placed on hold until such time as clarification can be
submitted regarding the proposed stream impacts. In addition, this office is requesting that the Army Corps of
Engineers withhold processing the 404 permit until the requested information is provided.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Alan Johnson at [phone] or Ms. Cyndi Karoly in
Raleigh at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert B. Krebs
cc: Corps of Engineers-Asheville Office
Ian McMillan -Wetlands Unit
Wendell Overby - S&EC
Central Files
Surface Water Protection
Regional Supervisor
NonehCarolina
J1~atura!!y
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us FAX [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

[Fwd: Prosperity Village]
Subject: [Fwd: Prosperity Village]
From: Alan Johnson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:33:03 -0400
To: Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>, Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>
DWQ 07-1441. The attached emails are the project I inquired about a couple of days
ago concerning the thoroughfare plan (which the city doesn't want to be considered
the applicant (and even if they do co sign, but don't pay for, I assume it would
still not fall under "publicly funded" and be the developers responsibility)).
I suggested to the consultant to just withdraw the application until the who's who
issues with the road are resolved and the additional culvert (connectivety) issues
are resolved. Of course he just wants me to issue the 401 for the thoroughfare and
cross the bridge later regarding the possible future impacts relating to
connectivity (which would push the project over the threshold).
Anyhow, I am going to type a letter up to mail to the developer, but will run by
"you" for comment.
This email and attached is for background.
Thanks
Alan Johnson - Alan.JohnsonCncmail.net
North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
Div. of Water Quality
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Subject: Prosperity Village
From: "Wendell Overby" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:45:00 -0400
To: "'Alan Johnson"' <[e-mail]>
Alan,
I wanted to clarify my last email. I don't know whether the Corps will view the thoroughfare road as a completely
separate project from the development, but we do believe it is single and complete so you can process the
application without the other plans. In other words it has utility without the adjacent development so it can be
permitted regardless of the adjacent development since the proposed alignment is pretty much fixed due to the
short nature and the fixed tie ins the site plan will not effect the ability to minimize or reduce impacts for the
thoroughfare or vice versa.
Also we tried mightily to convince the City of the ownership problem for the side streets and even got Cyndi
Karoly to put in her 2 cents worth as well as the attorney for the Corps (Justin McCorkle) and for some reason
the city still refused to sign for those impacts.
I~ hope this makes sense. Sorry for any confusion. Cyndi and Kevin's emails are below:
From: Cyndi Karoly [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Fri 8/10/2007 10:01 AM
To: Kevin Martin
1 of 3 9/13/2007 8:58 AM

[Fwd: Prosperity Village]
Cc: Tom Reeder
Subject: Re: Authorized "signer" for PCN's
Kevin - We would expect the city to sign for the impact associated with
a project they require on their right-of--way. If there are other
impacts (roads or otherwise) elsewhere on the developer's portion of the
property, the application would need to have signatures from both the
city and the developer. I don't know why the city is balking so much at
this. Certainly we get plenty of applications from cities for roadways
and other projects. I'd be happy to call the city for you if necessary.
Kevin Martin wrote:
> Sorry to bother you with another strange situation but it seems like
> that is all I work on lately. We have a situation where a municipality
> is requiring us to connect our project to adjacent existing city owned
> right of way which connects to an existing road. Not unusual so far.
> The developer is being required to build the road on his property and
> on the existing dedicated right of way. The impacts for the road are
> not on our clients property but are on the city's existing right of
> way. We asked the city to co sign the application since part of the
> road and the impacts are on their property. In the past DWQ and the
> Corps have told me that only the owner, authorized agent or a contract
> purchaser can sign the application unless the applicant is an entity
> with imminent domain powers. The city has said they will not sign
> because they do not need to since it is their right of way and they
> are requiring the road. I have cautioned the client that we need a
> read from you and the Corps (I contacted Justin McCorckle) on what to
> do. I do not, nor do I want my client to sign an application that
> states they are the "owner or authorized agent" when they are not the
> owner and have nothing from the city saying they can act as authorized
> agent. The city is perplexed because they say they do it this way all
> the time, Thanks Kevin
> P.S. it goes without saying that the need for the road must be
> justified to your satisfaction, I am just asking who can sign without
> doing so "fraudulently"
Wendell Overby
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
[phone]
This electronic communication, including all attachments, is intended only for the named addressee (s)
and may contain confidential information. This electronic communication may not have passed
through our standard review/quality control process. Design data and recommendations included
herein are provided as a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design. Rely only on
final, hardcopy materials bearing the consultant's original signature and seal. If you are not the named
addressee (s), any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If
you have received this electronic communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and
delete the original communication from your system. Thank you.
'Prosperity Village.eml Content-Type: message/rfc822
2 of 3 9/13/2007 8:58 AM

[Fwd: Re: Prosperity Village]
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Prosperity Village]
From: Alan Johnson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:33:38 -0400
To: Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>, Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>
more info....
Alan Johnson - Alan.JohnsonC?ncmail.net
North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
Div. of Water Quality
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Subject: RE: Prosperity Village
From: "Wendell Overby" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:00:04 -0400
To: "'Alan Johnson"' <[e-mail]>
Alan,
The site plan for the development portion of the project is not complete.
I'll attach a rezoning map that I have that shows the property, pond, roads,
etc. I believe the application is complete since it is a thoroughfare road
(linear project). The way we interpret the Federal Register the
thoroughfare road qualifies as a single and complete project. The other 2
road crossings were submitted by the client and as I mentioned in the field
they don't occur on the property. Since the City believes they don't need
to sign off on the side streets because they are in a public right of way,
the developer sent in an application to the Corps so he can get an official
response. If the Corps says they can't approve the 2 side streets since
they aren't on his property then he will in turn show to the City and tell
them he can't build the road. In the case of the side streets the developer
is in a catch 22 and looking for answers.
Wendell
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Johnson [mailto:Alan.Johnson@ncmail
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 12:24 PM
To: woverbyCsandec.com
Subject: Prosperity Village
net]
Can I get the site plan for the development. All I have is the road
crossing. you may send it pdf. If the other two stream crossing are
proposed those should be included in the application. If there is still
debate...it may be better to withdraw the application until the dust
settles and there is confirmation of all impacts at the site.
Thanks.
Alan
Alan Johnson - Alan.Johnson<~~ncmail.net
North Carolina Dept. of Environment & Natural Resources
1 of 2 9/13/2007 8:58 AM

[Fwd: Re: Prosperity Village]
Div. of Water Quality
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Re: Prosperity Village.eml
Content-Encoding: 7bit
2 of 2 9/13/2007 8:58 AM

Prosperity Village [Fwd: Map]
Subject: Prosperity Village [Fwd: Map]
From: Alan Johnson <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:37:30 -0400
To: Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>, Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>
This may help
You can see the proposed thoroughfare (the city requires, but doesn't want to pay
for or co-sign). One of the crossing to the adjacent neighborhood has been
removed.
One of those once in a blue moon projects.
Thanks
Alan Johnson - Alan. JohnsonCncmail.
North Carolina Dept. of Environment
Div. of Water Quality
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ph: [phone] Fax: (704)
net
& Natural Resources
663-6040
Subject: Map
From: "Wendell Overby" <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:05:03 -0400
To: "'Alan Johnson"' <[e-mail]>
Forgot the attachment.
Wendell Overby
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
[phone]
This electronic communication, including all attachments, is intended only for the named addressee (s)
and may contain confidential information. This electronic communication may not have passed
through our standard review/quality control process. Design data and recommendations included
herein are provided as a matter of convenience and should not be used for final design. Rely only on
final, hardcopy materials bearing the consultant's original signature and seal. If you are not the named
addressee (s), any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If
you have received this electronic communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and
delete the original communication from your system. Thank you.
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Map.eml
Content-Encoding: 7bit
Prosperity Village rezoning map.pdf Content-Type: application/pdf
1 of 2 9/13/2007 8:58 AM

Prosperity Village [Fwd: Map]
Content-Encoding: base64
2 of 2 9/13/2007 8:58 AM

l ~ - .,..~.. ,.,.,,,..,..,
.... ~, ,.
.~. ._. ~
_. 1 t ~ ..
..~..
- --._ _ ~, t ,....,. ,
1 _ s i - ~~ ~ ,.=a..K,.~.
..., ,
....__.
r. ~~ ~,t,,,,..... J '"'~
f
~: m ~~ ~'
~.
~. ~,
ET 4 ~ ~ J _
ON COMM _ rt - -~ _
TYPICAL S~Ci`1 ;: ti
'-'- ~- ~_~ + _rYa'~-~,;,, x 4g~i~ ~~` ~kAT.1U e. p r ~'i-- ~~~ I ~.
~ Ol
~ 1 ~
_ >-
~ ,;
~~s ~ ...- n ' ,
._ - ~ d - ~a, w.
1
F- ~ • t '-"~~je j°
.,..~ ~ --TRh('f --T~. ,-A ~.-,,,1.~'EV`~'F" at - ~it~ 1
,y,,. ~,~ s~ ~ ti. f
~ .~ ,ate,. ~ Y~3 {'=
~..-aRi4 rYE5cfiLF1-. 11 t ~ 1
-~- ~ '~ ~~
1 1~~1i , • ~ _ t ro ~mriac~x.~ ~ 1 +' ~ CA,:[if '~`
1 ~g~ri~if, I( ~ - /~ 4 f 4~
~ ~ ~- L ~ - ~...,,. _ ~-~ ~ ~ . ~~ ~ ~-/ ~ t~ , ¢ , v.. ~ ~ ~n
5 ~~ ; ~~ ~
1 ~-~ .~ .. ~i .._ ~' f' rte' ~ e`X s. V ~ <6~ ~ ~~~~ ~
~ _k
vv,~:rva •~ ~
_~?_~
~~`
,., ,
}--- - t- --- ~ _ _ -- --- _ __
_-
~~
~--_ _ _ _ - -- -- - _- - - - _. '' ~ _- a ~-- -- __ ..
-_.~-- --T.._-----+---
------ t
PROPOSE7~ NORTH CHARLOTTE OUTER LOOP -485
-~ 4 T_
~._
~r__.. ..._ .._ _-_ -__-_ -- ~ l ~ _._.. _,~ _ -.
~__~ --
•.~__
a wwf
~LiaMiLY fi: IRI/AC.)
i
r
~~ ~ u~ y~r ~ ww.~p
~ ~.
7
9dr_ lYw
T.~00 ~,.~ .w.s.
RtDGE ROAD R~ZONl~IG ~ >m w ~_ ~
rtxv~sw~.• rv ~~ow"~'~ n~~~~~^crrtss rfar~cnn~-r>rn n.~w.a
TECHNICAL T~ATA PLAN
1.rvYf®hc ?7a"~