20161039 Ver 1_401 Application_20161016

E3 0� VJA �<G
o � -r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit Section 10 ❑ rmit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑X Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
RAE's Creek at Oak Valley
2b.
County:
Davie
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Advance, NC
2d.
Subdivision name:
Oak Valley Residential and Golf Community
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Oak Valley Associates Limited Partnership
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
Deed Book 169, Page 218
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
C. J. Ramey
3d.
Street address:
P.O. Box 10
3e.
City, state, zip:
Bethania, NC 27010
3f.
Telephone no.:
336.922.4000 336.655.7339 (preferred)
3g.
Fax no.:
336.922.1762
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
PIN: 5871368398
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.9846 Longitude: -80.4408
1 c.
Property size:
2.969 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Smith Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Yadkin Pee Dee
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Mostly grassed areas and some mature trees. Surrounding uses are residential neighborhoods and a golf course.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.01
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 193
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Development of one of the two remaining parcels of the community in order to market new homes in what will be known as RAE's Creek at Oak Valley.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Relocation of existing interm. stream and filling of a small, non-functioning pond & placing fill materials as necessary to construct building pads.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases in the past?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑X Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d.
If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
E&SC permits were procured through the Winston-Salem office of NCDENR, Land Quality Section as well as local zoning approvals from Davie Co.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands Strea X — tributaries Buffers Open \❑ters P X❑d Construction ❑
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Fill
Unk Tributary
INT
DWQ USACE
5.5
193
S2 -
Choose one
-
S3 -
Choose one
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
193
3i. Comments:
Per field survey, 193 If of int stream have been filled.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 P
Unknown
Fill
Pond
0.425
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
O4 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
0.425
4g. Comments: 1 otal pond area is 0.42b ac. Ot this area, 0.242 ac. have been filled. 0.18:3 ac. ot pond area remain open and are to be i e .
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico Dawba C]ndleman Other
6b.
Buffer Impact
number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 -
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Project design contemplates fill of stream and pond only enough to ensure struct. sound bldg. pads and elimination of stagnant, health haz pond area.
1 b.
Silt
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
fencing against Smith Creek and use of small track -machine backhoe and front end loader.
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c.
Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a.
Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h.
Comments:
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
❑ Yes ❑X No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes 0 No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
10%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes 0 No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
Disturbed area will be under 1 acre.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
N/A
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
Q Other: Less than 1 acre area
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑X Yes ❑ No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
See attached documentation from applicant.
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Municipal
sewer available for connection to new homesites.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ YesX❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
criticalhabitat.fws.gov/crithab/.com
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
habitat. noaa.gov/protection/efh/index.com
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
hpo.ncdcr.gov/.com
archaeology.ncdcr.gov/ncarch/articles/articles.htm#piedmont
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Construction will be outside of floodway areas and fill elevations will be above 100 year floodplain elevation per Davie County regulations.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA floodplain mapping and county data as needed.
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.
Page 10 of 10

- - • 1�' ' r - - • •
71,
A •
'ol s
t • .� , � � . .. ' � C eek Dr
.,. • . ,. ..,H �dden r
Ap
• I ♦ ti ♦it
tACc
06
it
• T • �. K e• c�C Dr ;.
41
'f'•• _ � 1, • ��� •
S r .
'i,: � �/ "•�'^, �' • ' • -tri gl '.c. '
mir
, .• .• _ _ = � - ._ Mall y � :.
e
r ° t •A®
N OV Site 110
6.4� T
• JAA '
i I . t•� •y��. SIS !•ti .
t •.� t
r �•.
-� 4 ! `• �' � •�>, �r•� lam.' .O;N, � .•�.i: �.
•� �D� fi M 1 i.�•'r�� y••" •, .�' !_.%Cw�X - _7• , :.i6r`i' .'7•t4 - •.7
`V .i j -*Ii f,4 1 • A ,s i �• fi ;wf - f
06 t
WWI tI
VW
- t � � •Y 7t 1� _
♦ eat—_ �
N. lrf
•
Google earth Q
Ima U.S.Geo - ical S ry y, Y - Oft

NOTES:
PROPOSED LAYOUT AND GRADING FOR 35' SETBACK FROM THE R/W 1. All distances shown on this plat are horizontal distances unless otherwise noted.
2. 3/4"iron pipe at all corners unless otherwise noted.
3. There are no NCGS or USC&G or other Geodetic Survey Monuments within
• This map is PRELIMINARY for illustrative purposes and is NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. 2000'feet of this site.
4. All bearings shown on this plat are based on NC Grid-NAD83(2011),as noted.
• Lots shown have been proposed and reviewed by Davie County planning, however, the 5. Parcel Areas are calculated using the coordinate method.
lots are not currently recorded with the register of deeds. 6. Site is currently located in a FEMA designated flood area. The 1%annual
chance,0.2%annual chance flood lines,floodways and base flood elevations
• Existing topo, existing conditions and new conditions are from prior surveys by Beeson shown are from FEMA DFIRM digital data,Map 37007C,dated 06-16-2009.
& Carter, P.A.
• This site is located in a FEMA designated flood area. The 1% annual chance, 0.2% N SYMBOL LEGEND LOCATION MAP N.T.S.
annual chance flood lines, floodways and base flood elevations shown are from FEMA • Pt. Calculated Point(As Shown)
DFIRM digital data, Map 37007C, dated 06-16-2009. o IPS Iron Pin Set(3/4"conduit)
• Minimum Building Lines (MBL) as shown are 35' Front, 10' Side and 5' from Floodway EIP Existing Iron Pipe(As Shown)
W E O EIR Existing Iron Rebar
line. No rear is shown due to lot depths. it, stone Found
FG Flush with ground Lyb'-Ok Rd
• 1500 CY of fill needed to prepare home sites. AG x.xx'Above ground(Distance in ft.) Hidden
• 1180 CY of fill needed to close up remaining pond area. S UG x.xx'Underground(Distance in ft.) °��� c`eekDr
NC Grid-NAD83(2011) ® Sanitary Sewer Manhole PLB Keswick or u"tlerpass Rd
a
$ �°
Aviara Dr yet
SITE
AWw
pyo a
PURPOSE STATEMENT:
The purpose of this map is to illustrate the
0 o r -
AL KVA��EY proposed layout for single family homes and
�o OA YARD s y" grading needed for a 35'setback from the R/W.
_ PVDBsI 6�, t-o1 Wa`l v�.•t+�;{!_.. �: - -
N ,- This map is PRELIMINARY FOR REVIEW ONLY
At * 2p Landscape { AND NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
w • Easement '
p ! ` , r•+
Soo op / 6PS� - _ `s� .,• o� �� _ ,i GC�W 31q„go
LES PRS 2i 400 42 ' /� a !�` PROJECT:
Private Drainage ' ���(60R S�eseme
Easement PL ,p�b�O e,y4 Private Drainage
owl
PB 6,PG 150 oP� 16600K6'pa9 ota�l`, Easement �� L
p�a�6 0p�� 150 O
Private
n - X10 2396 Drainage ' 11JLL
5'E �� Easement \ \ , '� ._ . . J
O ea
P<o9o5 e ste
� Nom o � •, �: .,-.- �
M _ `� 26 ^
CD_
- F 1 CD
r O
cn M i a s ,
U Q fl =--` II TI p<N°omy S��e 6� O p *` Q O
CC:SPINDLE _.z o 708 5 ~
N:816351.79' �2� og6+S RES 1050 n t, O (a
CSF00
?0.9999253221 i NP�3377.48' p881 O 707 61539,pG ���p \ON' OAK VALLE vlQra Q O E
710 0600 l Approx.Location - 5D 706 F�OOO� - Plat hook 6 r Y p� 0 00
Stream Channel Now o s Es INS ;
w �+ � CO
t\ �� co
OODE�E n Filled(121.5LF) 2a6y3;PGR a • _ w
33840 UJI
'SQ FnderT APProx.Location of 0...4••°i ♦'Ion �0 7p5 7pa w� -- _ ` Z r
i•••••••�.�
0.777±ACRES Proposed Stream I .SfO,;f°i�i�0�'.°i 706 • 6, 10'Drains a "v ~: U z
” p �i°iii% '�•::'�°�°5 �'i°i�i� Plat Book 6 P asement � (n
Restoration Area(185LF) �.��:�•�•�...� . Io,��.�• .�•�•�•�� '^
nits •�•���•. 764= °���� •�W WWI' • o� age 79 .. t v J C) Q� U
• •c•..•••••�w ♦••�♦ c O
a s��;<�.'"••°i°iii°iii°iii o °iii°i°i LLI U 0- Z
ook 6 P easea7 . �7 ��►�'l�G<i�o••o••••••••000000�o o°o°o°o°o L _
age �Do••o�•••••o o•••000 00000��•p• 0000000000 CoO >
1St) �o���oo�o°o°j °o°o°♦o 0000000000 -, _
••!��i�i�i•�•�•Oi°i°i�i�i�i °° ' Pond Area r
Not Filled CLIENTS:
4- 81788 A rox.Location ���i°iii°iii?' i°i°i°i ,., a OAK VALLEY ASSOCIATES LTD PARTNERSHIP
PP �.•�opo ©�♦ •.` r'' S (/ '�
Nota/ Stream Channel ��•:o Ar°°p�6iow�c������������•� �a C/O Pete Ramey
A °•O' �•°i'Oi°i°i°i♦ ♦Oi°i��♦ ea ' Y
oo� Now Filled(71.5 LF) � '� °i°s° °i°i°i°ii °•°i°iii°i♦ � e PO Box 10
` Nil°g9�T X43 ?L •������!i2i!i!i!:�����2��•20•:�:!i���� Q �a�°' '' Bethania,NC 27010
- ,R x,44 r +, .. L% DRAWN BY: ATC / TLBC
7'• 1 ;, , FIELD WORK: EE / MH
L� j �j _ 2p2, •a.: CHECKED BY: SEB
. +1K' y 8' w
DATE: 10.20.2016
`Y so JOB NO:
oor '� " 15-034
SCALE: 1" = 60'
rA
30 0 15 30 60 120
��", • -�- _` �\� SHEET NO:
y J
�,. FAIRWAY #18 �
1 of 1
BEESOR BCRRTER,PR.
CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND SURVEYORS
/ •; ' LAND PLANNING
Gly, ' 503 HIGH STREET,WINSTON-SALEM,NC 27101
OFFICE:[phone] FAX:[phone]
WEB: www.beesonengineering.com
Corp No.: C-4017

NOTES:
1, John E.Beeson ,certify that this project was completed under my This Survey is subject to any facts that may be disclosed by a full
direct and responsible charge from an actual survey made under my 1 All distances shown on this plat are horizontal distances unless otherwise noted, and accurate title search, NOT furnished me as of this date and
supervision;that this Existing Conditions survey was performed to meet 2. There are no NCGS or US or other Geodetic Survey Monuments within may be subject to easements,rights-of-way, restrictive covenants,
the requirements for a topographic/planimetric survey to the accuracy of 2000'feet of this site. assessments,if any as the same may appear of record in the
Class AA and that the original data was obtained on October 19,2016 3. All bearings shown on this plat are based on NC Grid-NAD83(201 1),as noted. office of the Register of Deeds,Clerk of Court,To or County
that the survey was completed on Oct 19,2016;and all coordinates are 4. Parcel Areas are calculated using the coordinate method. Tax Office or which may have been acquired by prescriptive use.
0%111111,11111based on NAD 83 and realization 2011 and all elevations are based on
ARO
X
1111�111/ NAVD 88. 5. Site is currently located in a FEMA designated flood area. The 1%annual
chance,0.2%annual chance flood lines,floodways and base flood elevations
shown are from FEMA DFIRM digital data,Map 37007C,dated 06-16-2009.
�'s S I
� QC survey:(1)Class of suey:AA
(2)Positional accuracy:10.033'or 1cm
S = (3)Vertical accuracy:10.033'or 1cm
• (4)Type of GPS field procedure:RTK v LOCATION MAP N.T.S.
(5)Dates of survey:October 19,2016 SYMBOL LEGEND
``"•••SU (6)Datum/Epoch:NAD83(201 1) Pt. Calculated Point(As Shown)
(7)Published/Fixed-control use:NCGS VRS/RTN A IPS Iron Pin Set(3/4"conduit)
WAVP (8)Geoid model:20128 C) EIP Existing Iron Pipe(As Shown)
(9)Combined grid factoqs): 0.999925322 W 0 EIR Existing Iron Rebar
(10)Units:US Survey Feet;all distances shown are ground A Stone Found
FG Flush with ground Lybvoovl Rd
L-1828 AG x.xx'Above ground(Distance in ft.) "idar
Professional Land Surveyor Registration Number S UG x.xx'Underground(Distance in ft.) 0 C'ew
NC Grid-NAD83(2011) G Sanitary Sewer Manhole k Dr nde Rd
7 C" Aviary Or
0
(P
SITE
t5 PURPOSE STATEMENT:
The purpose of this survey is to locate the
...... current conditions in order to address a Noti
9 V PAD ce
6 of Violation from the NC Division of Water
00 -
Vanes
Resources and USACOE.This information on
the area of the and filled and the stream
20, impacts is presented as an overlay to a previous
Easement topographical and boundary survey prepared on
Sept.30,2015.
I%L Q
A",
090
14, �04PROJECT:
Private Drainage
Private Drainage 0
svvll ',di\r' Easement
Easement k"
ON PB 6,PG 150
PB 6,P 150 J
'tlBoo (85�
-10
0 es
00504 10'Private
c
'o Drainage
...... Easement
ua
500
Farcel�Area� (0
......
CO 129326 ±SQ FT (84�
(P.
Ci
2.96.9±.ACRSS _3
1P
•
CC:SPINDLE
N.816351.79' > 0
.........
OAK VALLEY Section 4
00
E:1573377.48` 0
7A5 Approx.Location Aviary
CSF:0.999925322 00
Stream Channel Plat Book 6,Page 79
00 00
Now Filled(121.51-F) 7
W (0
(y)
Approx.Location New 705 0W
Stream Channel As
00
Y'- 'A' 0
do 6'-D-—ta in Z U)
Excavated(185LF)
Drainage Easement
Z
�e
7A Ok 6,Page 79
Plat Bo
)N.'A
0
(D
C: 0
Area Filled C13 Z
"e100 � ,
1p
<
Area Not Filled >
10537±SQ FT
........ M
C
150 v" 'n V
9V < CL
X, K FT
0
009 7959±SQ
IN,
0.183 ±ACRES Ar, vv
0
..............................
NI"
(83t
CLIENTS:
EX.POND
Appro
.890 OAK VALLEY ASSOCIATES LTD PARTNERSHIP
A.to X -i
(71, Strearn cau017
009 C C/O Pete Ramey
Soo 0109
NOW Pi ch%yflne/
PO Box 10
104 /Z
ect
Bethania,NC 27010
001 '-0
A ► Z DRAWN BY
Vrt
&
ATC 1TLBC
100
oQ FIELDWORK: EE MH
(82)
5W CHECKED BY:
JEB
DATE:
10.24.2016
30
0 0,.0JOB NO:
0 15-034
lP 10000
FAIRWAY#18 Pt.
SCALE: 1 60'
30 0 15 30 60 120
SHEET NO:
*ql ig A
BEENIOR a CHNITERe IFIL
CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND SURVEYORS
00
�OO
LAND PLANNING
Odti Kor
503 HIGH STREET,WINSTON-SALEM,NC 27101
OFFICE:[phone] FAX:[phone]
WEB:www.beesonengineering.com
Corp No.: C-4017

Oak Valley Associates Limited Partnership
P. O. Box 10
Bethania, N.C. 27010
336.922.4000
October 25, 2016

Memorandum & Letter Of Transmittal

To: Sherri V. Knight, P.E., Sue Homewood - North Carolina Division of Water Resources
John Thomas – US Army Corps of Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Field Office

From: C.J. Ramey – Oak Valley Associated Limited Partnership

RE: Oak Valley Subdivision – NC PIN# 5871368398 – NOV-2016-OP-0007 and
Action ID : SAW-2016-02049

As requested in Ms. Knight's letter of October 11, 2016 and in Mr. Thomas' letter of October 12,
2016 regarding the above-referenced matter, please find attached the following information for
your review:


An explanation of why appropriate 401 Water Quality Certifications and 404 Permits for
the cited actions were not secured.

A statement of project impacts, justification and proposed mitigation.

A Pre-Construction Notification (after-the-fact) requesting Nationwide Permit 39
approval for the project impacts.

A project area site plan illustrating project boundaries, Smith Creek, proposed and
present fill areas, floodplain data, the proposed stream restoration area and building
footprints of future homesites.

A field-surveyed map illustrating the project area, impacted stream and pond areas and
present alignment of re-located stream and proposed stream restoration area.

A 1993 Google aerial photo for historical reference.

A portion of the Salisbury, NC 30 min. x 60 min. USGS Quadrangle Sheet illustrating
what is believed to be the original stream alignment and its proximity to a landing strip.

A check in the amount of $570.00 is included in the application to NCDWR for permit processing
fees. Four (4) copies of the application and attachments are included with the check.
This information is being transmitted via email in its entirety to Mr. Thomas.

Contact either myself or Russ Willard with questions or comments at:
[e-mail]
338.978.4728

[e-mail]
336.655.7339

Oak Valley Residential and Golf Community
Davie County, North Carolina
RAE's Creek Neighborhood
October, 2016

PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION - IMPACT JUSTIFICATION and
MITIGATION

The Oak Valley Residential and Golf Community is a 600 plus acre Planned Residential
Development (PRD) located in Davie County, North Carolina and includes a 175-acre Arnold
Palmer-designed golf course. The community was constructed during the early 1990's with the
first home sales beginning circa 1994. There are fifteen home neighborhoods within the
community with homes ranging in price from the mid- $200,000 to in excess of $1,000,000.00.
The concept of a PRD allows the facilitation of development of areas designated for residential
use on the general plan by permitting greater flexibility and, consequently, more creative and
imaginative designs for the development of such residential areas than is generally possible under
conventional zoning or subdivision regulations. It is the intent of the developers (Oak Valley
Associates Limited Partnership) to design and develop its property in a manner compatible and
complementary to existing and potential residential developments in the immediate vicinity of
this 2.969-acre project site. Site planning on the project perimeters are to provide for the
protection from adverse surrounding influences as well as protection of the surrounding areas.
In the case of the planned RAE's Creek Neighborhood, the Aviara Neighborhood borders the
property to the east (and adjacent to Smith Creek) and The Bluffs Neighborhood adjoins the
property to the west. The three neighborhoods are adjacent to and south of Oak Valley Blvd., a
main thoroughfare through the community.

The planning phase of the RAE's Creek tract (one of two remaining tracts to be developed within
the Oak Valley Community) began in the summer of 2015. At that time, is was general knowledge
of the developer group that the price point of homes in this neighborhood would likely be in
excess of $500,000 in order to complement home values of the Aviara and The Bluffs
neighborhoods. It was also general knowledge that the existing open water body, as noted in this
application, appeared to be a somewhat stagnant and mosquito-laden pond and was heavily
deposited with sediments from accumulations due to many years of stormwater runoff. In fact,
sediment deposits were such that the unnamed intermittent stream which used to feed the pond
had mostly bypassed it and was then flowing to a second pond immediately to the south.
Additionally, the silting process over time had reduced the capacity of the pond by more than
50% and it is obvious from aerial photography review that there is a continuing shrinking of this
pond.

There were several engineering and architectural design factors considered when determining
how to develop the tract to best accommodate new home building pads. These included flood
plain and floodway considerations, home front yard and side yard setback distances similar to
adjoining neighborhoods, visual aesthetics and proximity of underground utilities, to name a few.
Analyses of all of these factors, after many iterations, concluded that the optimum building pad
setback and house footprint area would be 50 feet and 3,000 square feet, respectively. A lesser
home setback distance or footprint area for the construction of a product and associated
amenities could be a detriment to adjacent neighborhoods as in the inherent philosophy of a

PRD. In order to achieve the desired building pads, it was also determined, after review of
several design concepts, that fill material would need to be placed on the tract in order to ensure
that the building pads were at the required elevations necessary to comply with local building
flood plain codes (See attached Project site plan). It was also determined that existing northern-
most open water body on the tract would need to be filled
in order to eliminate the stale water smell, the obvious mosquito health hazard and to improve
the backside appearance of the future lots. Consequently, relocation of the then existing
intermittent stream, which attempted to feed this pond area, would also be required in order to
fill the proposed western-most building lot as necessary to optimize that piece of the property.
This tract of property, after completion of the necessary grading, filling and stream relocation
phases will be suitable for marketing as future homesites which will nicely complement the
adjoining neighborhoods and the Oak Valley Residential and Golf Community as a whole.

While it is acknowledged that an error of omission has occurred with respect to procuring the
necessary regulatory permits to fill the existing pond and to relocate the intermittent stream, the
opportunity now exists, after regulatory review and procurement of after-the-fact permits, to
restore the newly relocated intermittent stream which will incorporate the necessary features for
a

s
u
c
c
e
s
s
f
u
l

p
r
o
j
e
c

Oak Valley Associates Limited Partnership
The process of developing lots known as “RAE’s Creek”

Circumstances As To Why Permits Not Applied For

October, 2016

Oak Valley is a residential and golf community begun in 1993 by a development group known as
Oak Valley Associates Limited Partnership. Fifteen “neighborhoods” have been developed along
with an 18-hole golf course on about 600 plus acres of land. The last platted lots were sold in
early 2016. However, there are two significant pieces of land previously denominated as “Future
Development” that remain and need to be dealt with.

In 2015 several partners of Oak Valley Associates Limited Partnership began working on
th
developing these last 2 areas into possibly 5 or 6 lots. This site next to the 18 tee box and
fairway consisting of approximately 2.969 acres was one of these two parcels. Much of the land
was in a flood way and/or floodplain which restricted its use and usefulness. Based on its size it
was thought that 2 and possibly 3 lots could be created there for high-end homes which would
match those lots which were in close proximity to this parcel and which are of similar size and
house placement. An engineer was hired to see how to best develop these lots with their peculiar
circumstances.

In early 2016 a plan was developed to potentially place 3 building pads on three separately
created lots. It was quickly apparent that one of the proposed lots did not make sense as it would
have to be totally filled because of the flood plain engulfing the whole lot. And it also needed to
have the relocated intermittent stream passing through it as it did in the period prior to the
development of this property. This land was therefore going to be deeded to the adjoining golf
th
course to continue to be a part of the green space around the 18 tee-box and fairway (and the
golf course maintenance folks would be the responsible party for continuing maintenance for this
stream flow). The other two parcels could support building pads which would be partially in the
flood plain (not flood way) and needed to be filled to 2 feet above the base flood elevation of 705
feet per the Davie County regulations.

Several choices for setbacks on the two houses that could be built were considered. The
attractive visual appeal of this area as it was approached by automobile was considered a plus for
the entire Oak Valley community and needed to be preserved as much as possible (this was why
it was one of the last pieces to be developed.) The homes further to the west of these potential

lots were already set back 35 feet from the road right-of-way and this was considered to be the
target setback for these lots by the marketing partners.

Meeting on-site in mid-2016 the partners, with their engineer, determined that the pond in the
rear of both potential lots was not functional, was in fact disappearing because of silting and lack
of continually flowing water and needed to be removed. This would eliminate a health hazard
from mosquitoes, a safety issue for children who might move into the two new homes and allow
the rear of these pads to blend in with the existing terrain. This pond had been created in about
1995 by the developers to catch a small flow of water running under the road from a very small
tributary associated with a newly created golf course water feature in front of golf hole #17. The
golf course designers had expanded this naturally flowing water into this water feature but
redirected its outlet in a new path. The developers, needing to deal with this new flow, had
directed it into this “pond” as a means of creating what they believed was going to be an
attractive erosion control management facility/water feature but which in fact turned out to be a
failing water depository without any permanent functional usefulness and was destined to fail
completely over time.

In conjunction with the expressed needs of the engineer for additional ground surface on the rear
of the pads to smoothly support the pad and its higher contours, the partners decided to eliminate
this problematic water feature. In doing that, the small flowing trench that provided the water to
this area needed to be directed away from the ponding area so that the water could run its course
to Smith Creek which was its expected outlet. Thus it was decided by the partners to make all of
this happen to: 1. build two of the last lots in Oak Valley; and 2. make sure the water that
wanted to pass through this area could in fact do that. In fact the chosen rerouting of the flow
tried to move it back to its pre-1993 status as seen by an attached google map for 1993 and the
attached 1985 U.S.G.S. map showing the intermittent stream parallel to Smith Creek with a
private air strip running in between the two water flows.

Given the minimal nature of the water flow and “pond” as it now stood, it did not occur to
anyone that this relatively minor change required any permits (when it was created in 1995, it
required no permits and it was thought this action would just return this flow to its previous
meandering through this tract). While one of the Oak Valley partners was familiar with the
general idea of consideration of needing permits when working in and around water-related
areas, it did not occur to him to question this minimal reshaping of the water course and he went
about doing what the marketing arm of the Oak Valley group wanted done (his most recent
dealings with filling/breeching a pond and riverbank reshaping, while some years ago, had not
required any written permits or permission per his feedback from the NC DWR at the time that
previous projects were being done.) Apparently this process had changed over time and that was
made abundantly clear to him upon the visit by the NC DWR personnel. His unfamiliarity with
the changes for pond removal and stream bank reshaping when he undertook this should not be
imputed to the development group even though he is one of the partners. And there was certainly

no bad faith in these activities no matter where the responsibility for the decision making
ultimately lies.

There was no intent, knowing about the water course concerns, to skip the permitting process. It
was just not thought to be necessary in this case because: the focus was on providing a safe and
healthy lot configuration that would provide two homes similar in nature to those in close
proximity; the required work, considered minimal, was to return the area to its previous drainage
circumstances; and the partner’s previous personal experience with working around ponds and
reshaping stream slopes had not required any written permits or permission. Obviously the
thought that no permit or permission was necessary was a wrong assumption and/or
understanding of the current regulations and policies. Now it is necessary to correct this
unfortunate misstep by satisfying the environmental concerns of the NC DWR. Hopefully in this
correcting process there will be the ability to build two new homes on this site which will be in a
positive relationship with the environment as directed by NC DWR and the US Army Corps of
Engineers.

►ice- �'-, �� !,�d�
i