20150172 Ver 1_Request for Withdrawal_20161209

Burdette, Jennifer a
From: Smith, Cherri L
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 9:39 AM
To: Montalvo, Sheri A; Burdette, Jennifer a
Subject: FW: PCN Application: Green Level HS -H-7: Sanitary Sewer Modification
(SAW -2008-03131) (NCDWR #15-0172)
Hi Sheri and Jennifer,
Please see request to withdraw this application (#15-0172 v2). I think that applications have to be withdrawn through the
Central Office, but please let me know if that's not the case. Thank you.
Cherri
From: Deborah Shirley [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 4:07 PM
To: [e-mail]; Smith, Cherri L <[e-mail]>
Subject: PCN Application: Green Level HS -H-7: Sanitary Sewer Modification (SAW -2008-03131) (NCDWR #15-0172)
James & Cherri:
Per the email below, and a confirmation from the project engineer, we request to withdraw the subject PCN
application submitted to your offices on November 29, 2016.
Apologies for this confusion and the time wasted in dealing with this project. James ... I know you are thinking "I
told you so".
I do not know what the outcome will be, but have alerted them that they are very close to NWP thresholds.
Thanks and have a good weekend.
Debbie
Debbie Edwards Shirley
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
919-846-5900 (office)
919-673-8793 (mobile)
www.SandEC.com
THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT
From: Glenn Medlin [mailto:gmedlinCa clhdesianpa.com]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 1:48 PM
To: Wilkins, John; Zak Pierce; Stan. GodwinCatownofcar .org; Jamie.Bissonnetteptownofcar ,org
Cc: Kenneth A. Loring; Smith, Laura; shawleyC�fhai.com; Thomas Harden; Deborah Shirley; Christine L. Hilt
Subject: RE: Green Level HS San Sewer Revision - Minor Alteration Application
Importance: High
1

We met with Town of Cary this morning for further discussions on this issue. Unfortunately, the current design will not
work per Town of Cary Standards. (In brief, this design direction was agreed upon in previous meetings with CLH, Balfour
and TOC. The one section of pipe being exposed through the creek is the particular item of concern and is one that is not
and cannot be designed to meet their standards).
So, based on our meeting this morning, the current options are: 1) Pump station or 2) Aerial across the wetland. Jamie
and Stan are going to have further discussions within their departments to determine if TOC will accept a pump station
(and are willing to accept the maintenance). The bore would decrease in size to a 4 -in DIP and would stay the current
length of 325'. At this point in time and given the schedule, the pump station is most likely the less expensive and fastest
option between the two.
The aerial would require additional approvals from TOC as the manholes would be farther apart than the TOC maximum
of 400' and the pipe spans across the creek would most likely need to be longer than the TOC maximum of 20'. This
option would be much more expensive and would require much more investigation from the design team, as there would
need to be a geo-technical and structural engineer brought in for design. This would also require much more
environmental permitting.
Once we receive input from Town of Cary on their decision, we will let everyone know.
Thanks,
Glenn Medlin ASLA, PLA, LEED AP
Principal
Colloborotive Landscape Architecture and Civil Engineering
400 Regency Forest Drive, Suite 120
Cary, NC 27518
919.319.6716, ext. 4008
Twitter/ Linked In /www.c I hdesignpa.com
E-mail Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this transmission is confidential and may be subject to protection under the law. The message is intended
for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, distribution or copying of the
message is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the material from
any computer.