20151031 Ver 2_Email_20160824

Strickland, Bev
From: Shaver, Brad E SAW <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 7:48 AM
To: Jeff Soble
Cc: Steenhuis, Joanne; 'Andrew Moriarty'; 'Kim Williams'; 'Tyler Morris'
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] FW: Brad Shaver comments
I intend on getting you a summary email today. Why don't you wait and see if that clears the air, I think it will.
After you and your team have digested it and you still feel a meeting is necessary I may be able to accommodate you on
Friday.
It's really not much more than drawing revisions in anticipation of the permit and securing detailed drawings for future
compliance.
Brad
-----Original Message -----
From: Jeff Soble [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 4:32 PM
To: Shaver, Brad E SAW <[e-mail]>
Cc: 'Steenhuis, Joanne' <[e-mail]>; 'Andrew Moriarty' <[e-mail]>; 'Kim
Williams' <[e-mail]>;'Tyler Morris' <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Brad Shaver comments
Importance: High
Brad,
Kim Williams forwarded your latest thoughts to me from your conversation this afternoon. As you know, we are under a
very hard deadline to get the permit released. Due to that constraint, I think it might be best for us to meet to address
any and all remaining comments and questions that you may have. Would that work for you? Are you available this
week?
Please let us know.
Thankyou
Jeff
From: Kim Williams [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:44 PM
1

To: Jeff Soble <[e-mail]>; 'Andrew Moriarty' <[e-mail]>
Cc: Tyler Morris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Brad Shaver comments
Hi Jeff
I spoke briefly with Brad briefly this afternoon about our submission. He had to run to a meeting, but we went through a
few comments/questions that he had:
1. Profile CC in the cross section drawing, we show a double barrel culvert for the intermittent stream crossing.
Typically they like to see one culvert in the bottom of the stream and one raised a little higher for higher flows. But
headwalls may not work with that layout. Also, what are the sizes of the barrels? Will you need to bury one? The USACE
has some guidance on when burying a pipe in a stream is necessary (see Section 3.6 and 4.1.2 of attached).
2. Potential drainage issue from stormwater pond: Do we have an topographic data for this site? This may help
address potential drainage issues from the pond.
3. Parking: As we were talking, it became clear that I sent him an outdated parking exhibit (the one that stated a
reduction of 113 spaces). I am VERY sorry about that. I emailed both Brad and Joanne the current version, so they do
have that now. On the exhibit, he found a few minor errors when adding up required spaces in a couple of the zones. He
also noted that the required parking for the anchor store in Zone 3 should be 257 spaces, not 255. He also noted that
the parking for the outparcels appeared way above what is required. He wants us to discuss whether parking and
possibly overall outparcel size could be reduced in order to reduce wetland impacts. He understood that any wetland
savings would be isolated and likely wouldn't provide any real function. But we will need to address it anyway.
4. Stormwater: He wants something a little more firmed up than what is stated in our letter. Andrew- can you reach
out to someone in State Stormwater to find out if they would consider permitting sheet flow in the NW corner?
He plans to put all of his thoughts together in an email by tomorrow morning and will include additional detail.
Thanks,
Kim
Kim Williams I Environmental Scientist
Land Management Group, Inc I Environmental Consultants
Direct: 452-0001 x 1908 1 Cell: 910.471.5035 1 Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15 1 Wilmington, NC 28403

Email: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> I Website: Blockedwww.Imgroup.net
<Blockedhttp://www.Imgroup.net/>
<BIockedhttps://www.avast.com/antivirus> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
Blockedwww.avast.com <Blockedhttps://www.avast.com/antivirus>