20051068 Ver 1_More Info Received_20170607

Homewood, Sue
From:Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Sent:Wednesday, June 07, 2017 3:56 PM
To:Homewood, Sue
Subject:RE: Afton
Attachments:Afton Ridge Phase 2 Building 1 - Kannapolis Highlighted.pdf
Sue,

Attached is a letter from the City of Kannapolis. I’ve highlighted the section where they acknowledge the project has
“an approved storm water management plan.”

I hope this is sufficient for you to approve our submittal.

Thanks.

Kevin

From: Homewood, Sue \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 2:58 PM
To: Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Cc: Patterson, Robert D <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

Kevin,

I apologize for the confusion. I will not withdraw the current 401 SMP application. We discussed that you thought that the SMP
had been previously approved but that I can’t find any record of that. To the best of my knowledge the local program
grandfathered this project and did not require SMP approval. If that is not the case then please provide me with documentation
of an approved SMP (not erosion control) for Afton Ridge Building I. Please note that the 401 states that no building can be
occupied until an SMP is approved and installed.

Thanks,

Sue Homewood
Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office
Department of Environmental Quality

336 776 9693 office
336 813 1863 mobile
[e-mail]

450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300
Winston Salem NC 27105

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Kevin Caldwell \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 8:44 AM
1

To: Patterson, Robert D <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

Robert,

The project that was sent to you is on the west side of Coddle Creek (see attached). Our project is located on the east
side of Coddle Creek.

Please call me (704.941.2252) if you have any questions?

Thanks.

Kevin

From: Patterson, Robert D \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 8:18 AM
To: Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

Kevin – I just left you a voicemail. I’m pretty certain this is the same project. The permit application was submitted by ColeJenest
& Stone for Landon Wyatt, III with CK Afton Ridge Land, LLC. This project requires a stormwater permit from us in the DEMLR
Central Office (in addition to the 401/404). They did not submit your design. Their proposed wet detention basin in located east
of the building (I think the one you designed was south of the building. I would suggest speaking with your client to determine
what is going on.

Robert D. Patterson, P.E.
Environmental Engineer

919-807-6369 | [e-mail]
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/stormwater

NCDEQ | DEMLR | Stormwater Permitting Program

512 N. Salisbury St. | 9 Floor
th
1612 MSC | Raleigh, NC 27699-1612

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Kevin Caldwell \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 5:22 PM
To: Patterson, Robert D <[e-mail]>
Subject: FW: Afton

Robert,

Please read the email string and call me. My direct dial is 704.941.2252.

Thanks.

Kevin

From: Homewood, Sue \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 4:39 PM
To: Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

2

I'm unable to call you. It was submitted by another engineer. I would suggest you as Robert if he can provide you
with any more information about who the applicant is

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Date: 5/24/17 4:01 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: "Homewood, Sue" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton
Sue,

Now I am really confused. We did the design on the storm water pond and haven’t submitted anything to the Division
of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources?

Call me.

Kevin

From: Homewood, Sue \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 2:29 PM
To: Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Cc: Patterson, Robert D <[e-mail]>; Johnson, Alan <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

Kevin,

It has come to my attention that an application has been submitted to the Stormwater Unit within the Division of Energy, Mineral
and Land Resources for a Phase II post construction stormwater permit for Afton Ridge II, Building 1. That permit will satisfy the
requirements of the 401. I will therefore discontinue my review of the stormwater plan submitted to the 401 Unit and consider
your submittal “withdrawn”. Once the stormwater permit has been issued from DEMLR the project will be in compliance with
the 401 Water Quality Certification. If you have any questions about that permit, the reviewer is Robert Patterson and I’ve copied
him on this email.

Thanks,

Sue Homewood

Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office

Department of Environmental Quality

336 776 9693 office

336 813 1863 mobile

[e-mail]

450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300

Winston Salem NC 27105

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the

North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

3

From: Kevin Caldwell \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 5:28 PM
To: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

Thanks for the reply Sue. The owner/developer says they remember getting approval on the Storm Water Management
Plan. They are currently looking through their old files for a copy of the approval. I hope to have something by the
end of the week.

From: Homewood, Sue \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 5:11 PM
To: Kevin Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Afton

Kevin,

I tried to reach you by phone earlier. I’ll be helping with a class for the rest of this week and at a workshop early next week so
email will be the best form of communication after today until late next week.

I received the plans you sent related to the Afton Ridge Grading and Erosion Control permit.

Unfortunately, this is not an approved post construction stormwater management plan. When the grading and S&EC plan was
reviewed and approved it was done so with only the S&EC rules/requirements and not reviewed with regard to the post
construction stormwater design requirements. I understand that the intent was to use the basin for post construction
stormwater, however there is nothing that approved the measure to meet the requirements of the 401. When the 401 general
certification was issued, it clearly stated that a final written stormwater mangagement plan was to be submitted and approved by
DWR prior to impacts occurring at the site. There is no record of any previous post construction stormwater approval and that is
what you are seeking for your client at this point in time. I must review the current request using the stormwater design
standards currently in place.

I apologize that this is confusing. We no longer issue 401 approvals without a final stormwater management plan because of
these types of situations. Regardless, we’ll need a proposal for this project that meets the current post construction stormwater
design standards. You may request an exception to standards as I mentioned in a previous email, however the fact that the
measure was built to meet S&EC requirements cannot be used a justification for a reduction in post construction design
standards.

Thanks,

Sue Homewood

Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office

Department of Environmental Quality

336 776 9693 office

336 813 1863 mobile

[e-mail]

450 W. Hanes Mill Rd, Suite 300

Winston Salem NC 27105

Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the

North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

From: Kevin Caldwell \[mailto:[e-mail]\]
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 4:30 PM
4

To: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: Afton

Kevin S. Caldwell, P.E.

Senior Vice President
GEOSCIENCE GROUP, INC.

500-K Clanton Road

Charlotte, NC 28217 USA

[phone] (Direct)

(704)-661-2210 (Cell)

[e-mail]

5

KAN�
Planning
Date: February 17, 2017
To: Scott Gregory
From: Joshua Langen, Senior Planner
City of Kannapolis Planning
RE: SP -2016-13 Afton Ridge Ph. II Bldg. 12/13/17 Site Plan 2/13/17— Review
The City of Kannapolis Planning Department has reviewed the above reference site plan and has
the following comments;
• Comments to be compiled following results of 2/20/17 meeting with Childress
Klein
The City of Kannapolis Engineering Department has reviewed the above reference site plan and
has the following comments;
Comments in red reflect review comments from the most recent revised plans. When
resubmitting, provide a response letter addressing each of the following comments:
General:
1. For all obstructions/structures located within a public utility easement, encroachment
agreements with the City will be required.
2. Label the radii for the private driveway.
3. Revise the leader text to the actual FEMA fringe line of Coddle Creek. It references Coffee
Creek, not Coddle Creek.
4. Extend the proposed 20' PUDE access easement on the west side of the fire lane driveway so
that it connects to the public R/W.
Utilities
1. Public water main extensions will be required for this project. The developer shall be
responsible for designing, permitting and constructing water mains in accordance with The
Standard Specifications for Wastewater Collection and Water Distribution for the Water and
Sewer Authority of Cabarrus County (WSACC) and The City of Kannapolis Water & Sewer
Standards and Policies. Provide all necessary NCDEQ & City forms along with the
Engineering Calculations and fees for permitting. (See City of Kannapolis website
http://www.kannapolisnc.gov/Government-Departments/Planning/Applications-Permits-
Documents) (Reference: Kannapolis UDO Appendix C.2.1 Conform to City of Kannapolis
Water and Sewer Policy and City of Kannapolis Water and Sewer Extension Policy) Provide
all necessary forms, fees and calculations for permitting.
KANNAPOLIS PLANNING DEPARTMENT / 401 LAUREATE WAY, KANNAPOLIS, NC 28081
[phone] / WWW. KANNAPOLISNC.GOV

1( 1WIn
KANN)AP S
Planning
2. Show the 8 " RPDA outside of the Public Utility Easement.
3. Show and label the 20' Public Utility Easements on the Site Plan Sheet C1.2.
Storm Drainage:
1. An existing public drainage easement is located on the north side of the site. An access
easement must be provided to the maintenance easement to allow for access. A 20' PUDE
access easement was provided from the existing 20' PUDE to the area listed as an existing
BMP #2 maintenance easement. The BMP easement is not dedicated to the City of
Kannapolis. This easement is associated with a State Stormwater Management Permit. The
City of Kannapolis will be maintaining the existing 48 " RCP drainage system and an access
easement from a public R/W must be provided to connect to the existing 20' PUDE
associated with the 48 " RCP
2. A retaining wall is shown over the existing 48" public storm drainage system. Relocate the
wall or storm drainage systems to prevent any damage to the wall if the culvert has to be
excavated. The retaining wall has been relocated to within approximately 2 feet from the
existing storm drainage easement. Provide documentation that the excavation associated
with pipe maintenance will not compromise the stability of the retaining wall.
3. Show the method of construction for a storm drainage system through the proposed retaining
wall, downstream of inlet S9. Per the response letter, provide shop drawings of the wall
when received.
4. The proposed grading modifications to BMP #2 will require excavation to lower the bottom
of wet pond to elevation 611.0. This grading will expose the existing 48" RCP pipe under
the pond. A minimum of 2 feet of cover must be maintained over the pipe. If the proposed
grading to the pond cannot be revised, the existing 48" RCP will have to be re-routed around
the pond. The pond grading has been revised, including spot elevations to provide a 4' wide
access area with a minimum of 2' cover over the pipe. The cover over the pipe must be
designed to provide an access area at least 10 feet wide for maintenance equipment access.
Provide anti flotation calculations for the pipe to ensure stability.
5. Provide 10 -yr storm event gutter spread and inlet capacity calculations for all storm drainage
inlets (catch basins and drop inlets) documenting the depth of runoff at the inlet. These
calculations are required to document that runoff required to be treated does not bypass BMP
#2. Worksheets for sumps S5 and S6 were not provided. Worksheets for sumps S3 and S4
used an evaluation formula for a single catch basin based on the depth at curb, but double
catch basins were specified at the inlets. Adjust the calculation to use a I " depression rather
than a 2 " depression. The calculation provided indicates that the flow will overtop the curb.
Please note that if roof leaders are piped into storm drainage systems, the surface runoff will
be much less than what is used in the sump calculations.
KANNAPOLIS PLANNING DEPT'u,,i ivi LNT / 401 LAUREATE WAY, KANNAPOLIS, NC 28081
[phone] / WWW. KANNAPOLISNC.GOV

1( 1WIn
MANN P S
Planning
6. The runoff from the area in front of the proposed building to the road was accounted for in
the Afton Ridge Phase I stormwater management plan as defined by the Phase I stormwater
calculations and drainage area map. All runoff from the proposed building was intended to
be included in the Afton Ridge Phase II stormwater management plan, and therefore must
connect to a proposed storm drainage system that discharges into BMP #2. Show the
location of the roof leaders piping system for the proposed building and the connection point
to a storm drainage system so that the runoff is treated by the intended BMP #2. The
response states that a building plan showing the roof drainage was included, but the
information was not included in the engineering submittal. The building plan should indicate
where the roof leaders discharge to (i.e. — surface discharge or a storm drainage system with
underground piping). If a direct connection to a storm drainage system is specified by the
building plan, this will significantly reduce the surface runoff into the inlets being modeled
for storm drainage inlets on the system between SO to S9.
Stormwater Management:
This project is currently has an NC DEQ approved stormwater management plan. The developer
has the option of applying to NC DEQ for a revision to the stormwater permit or requesting that
the permit incorporated into the City of Kannapolis Phase 2 Stormwater Program. The following
comments are based on the assumption that the City will be approving the proposed stormwater
plans.
The response states that the existing NCDENR 401 Water Quality Certification permit will be
revised. Once the permit is revised, a City of Kannapolis Phase II Stormwater Permit will not be
required for the project. A copy of the revised permit must be submitted. The previous
comments have been removed from the plan review.
Floodplain Development:
I. Label the FEMA cross-sections and 100 -year flood elevations on the map based on current
published FIRM mapping. Include a reference for the elevation datum used. No cross-
sections or base flood elevations are located within the plan sheet area. Station 677 is
referenced with a base flood elevation of 613.6, but the datum was not listed. Ensure that the
value matches the elevation listed on the LOMR effective July 6, 2009 (NA VD 88) or the
equivalent NGVD 29 elevation.
2. List the source of the data for the location of the I00 -year Flood Fringe Line, the Floodway,
the FEMA cross-sections, and the FEMA Base Flood Elevations. The source of the 100 year
Flood Fringe Line was noted, but the rest of the data was not labeled.
3. Based on the site notes, the project elevations are based on an NCGS monument with an
NGVD 29 vertical datum. Provide the conversion offset from NGVD 29 to NAVD 88.
(FEMA Mapping Datum) The conversion offset that provided varies significantly from the
typical NC Floodplain Mapping value of 0.8 feet. Ensure that the conversion formula
KANNAPOLIS PLANNING DEPARTMENT / 401 LAUREATE WAY, KANNAPOLIS, NC 28081
[phone] / WWW. KANNAPOLISNC.GOV

KAN I(IWIR S
N)N
Planning
provided is correct for the topo provided. The value will determine if the BMP modifications
will need to be permitted.
4. Label the minimum finish floor elevation for the building based on the highest I00 -year base
flood elevation adjacent to the building. The structure must be at least 2 feet above the 100 -
year base flood elevation. The minimum FFE has been labeled, but the elevation listed
within the building footprint and the elevation listed in the Zoning Code Summary on Sheet
C1.2 do not match.
For above ground detention systems, we recommend that the owner consider installing a fence
around the detention ponds to prevent inadvertent access.
The design and construction of retaining walls must comply with the requirements of the
Cabarrus County Building Inspections Department and the North Carolina Building Code for the
construction of retaining walls on a site. Guardrail or fencing is recommended.
It is the responsibility of the owner and design engineer to ensure that the site complies with
ADA requirements for site access. Private access areas and Public roadways have different
standards of design for ADA compliance. These items are not reviewed as part of the site plan
approval process. The developer should discuss site requirements with the Cabarrus County
Building Inspections Department.
Complying with the above comments does not relieve the Developer of the responsibility of
complying with any and all local, state, or federal regulations concerning this development.
Joshua Langen, AICP
Senior Planner
KANNAPOLIS PLANNING DEPARTMENT / 401 LAUREATE WAY, KANNAPOLIS, NC 28081
[phone] / WWW. KANNAPOLISNC.GOV