20110022 Ver 4_401 Application_20180418

Charlotte-Meckfenburgi
STORM G Charlotte Storm Water Services
600 E. Fourth St., 141h Floor
r r �T�R Charlotte, NC 28202-2844
., AT
ER
January 29, 2018
Ms. Crystal Amschler
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801 PAI
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDENR — Division of Water Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Subject: Louise Ave Capital Improvement Project
(Action ID: 2011-00366, DWR#: 11-0022)
Request for Re -authorization -
Charlotte, North Carolina
Ms. Amschler & Mr. Johnson,
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (CMSWS) is requesting re -authorize Int l
the Louise Avenue capital improvement project. The purpose and need for the project is
to improve the storm drainage infrastructure to reduce flooding and to enhance degraded
stream reaches to reduce erosion and improve water quality. The project is location in
Charlotte, North Carolina, just East of downtown along an unnamed tributary of Little
Sugar Creek (Project Vicinity Map, enclosed.)
On August 18, 2016 a re -authorization for Louise Ave CIP was submitted to both
USACE and NCDWR. The City plans to bid this project out for construction this year,
therefore, an updated permit is required. Nothing which was previously submitted has
been changed. Below is Table 1. Showing impact summaries for Louise Ave CIP.
APR 0 9 1016
Table 1. Louise Avenue CIP Proposed Impacts
Stream Impact
Number
Location (Plan
Sheet)
NWP No.
Activity
Permanent
Impacts (LF)
Temporary
Impacts (LF)
SI
Sheet 3
3
Pipe extension andPlunge pool
10�
S2
Sheet 6
3
Step -pool sequence
56
S3
Sheets 6 and 7
27
Stream enhancement
--
177
S4
Sheet 7
3
Rip rap apron
12
S5
Sheet 7
3
Plunge pool
39
S6
Sheet P 1 and P2
27
Stream enhancement
709
Total Perennial RPW Stream Impacts =
156
942
To report drainage problems; 704 -336 -RAIN hap://storm water. charmeck. org

Charlotte -Mecklenburg
SSTORMil(� j) n>7 Charlotte Storm Water Services
1 t,,►RM 600 E. Fourth St., 141h Floor
IW
/� T j� Charlotte, NC 28202-2844
ServicesLt1b
CMSWS respectfully requests re -authorization of the project under the USACE
Wilmington District's nationwide permit program. Potential adverse water quality
impacts associated with construction storm water runoff will be managed in
accordance with NCDENR NPDES General Construction Storm water Permit,
NCGO1000, and the City's PCCO requirements. I appreciate your prompt attention
to this request. If you have any questions regarding this request please do not hesitate
to contact me at [phone] or helen.simonsonkcharlottenc. og_v.
Sincerely,
Helen Simonson.
Wetland Specialist
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services
Phone: [phone]
helen. simonsongcharlottenc.gov
Attachments:
Annotated Construction Plans for Permitting
Project Area Map
Project Vicinity Map
To report drainage problems: 704 -336 -RAIN http;Ilstomiwater.charmeck.org

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name Louise Avenue Capital Improvement Project (CIP No. 671-06-008)
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: Char-Meck Storm Water Services
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Helen Simonson
*Agent authorization needs to be attached
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s): USACE Action ID 2011-00366
5. Site Address: Intersection of Hawthorne Lane and CSX Rail Line
7. City: Charlotte
8. County: Mecklenburg;
9. Lat: 35.223 Long: -80.818 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name: Charlotte East
11. Waterway: Unnamed tributary to Little Sugar Creek
12. Watershed: Catawba River Basin HUC 03050103
13. Requested Action:
X Nationwide Permit # Re -authorization of NWP 3 & 27
General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
The following information will be completed by the Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

O�oF wAQFq
o �
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.0 November 2008
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.0 November 2008 Version
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit
FM ❑
1b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 3 and 27 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
FEI Yes
® No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ 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 ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® 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
® No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Louise Avenue Capital Improvement Project
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name on Recorded Deed:
Multiple owners - linear storm drainage improvement project
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e.
City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.0 November 2008 Version

Section A. Applicant Information, continued
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
® Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
Helen Simonson.
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services
4d. Street address:
600 E 4`h Street
4e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC, 28202
4f. Telephone no.:
704-564-7657
4g. Fax no.:
704-432-0966
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. AgentlConsultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
N/A
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
Multiple parcels
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
35.223'N - 80.818'W
1c.
Property size:
N/A (linear project) acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Little Sugar Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c.
River basin:
Catawba (HUC 03050103)
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:
The main project corridor is generally located along Hawthorne Lane and consists of several land uses. The current land
use for the northern half of the project area is mostly residential with maintained lawns and small adjacent wooded areas.
There is also a school with surrounding ball fields. The southern half of the project area consists of industrial and
commercial land uses and includes a rail line. According to the NRCS Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County (2002), on-site
soils are dominated by Mecklenburg -Urban land complex (MkB) for the northern half of the project area and Urban land
(Ur) for the southern half of the project area. There are also small inclusions of Monacan soils and Arents (MS), Helena
sandy loam (HeB), and Cecil -Urban land complex (CuB) (NRCS Soil Survey Map, enclosed).
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
1,731 linear feet
3d.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to alleviate flooding and enhance degraded stream segments within the project area. The
existing storm drainage infrastructure is aging and in disrepair and consequently is insufficient for conveying design storm
flows. As a result, structure and road flooding are frequent occurrences. Furthermore, as documented in a detailed
stability and geomorphic analysis (available upon request), and as agreed upon by the USACE and NCDWQ during field
reviews on October 31, 2008 and June 15, 2010 (Minutes enclosed), the downstream reach of the project area is
degraded and in need of enhancement. In general, indicators of stream impairment consist of vertical and moderately
eroding banks, over -widened channel dimensions, lack of floodplain access, and prevalence of invasive species (mostly
kudzu) along the channel. Representative photographs of the degraded stream reaches are enclosed.
3e.
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
This project proposes to improve the storm drainage infrastructure (i.e., pipe systems and culverts) and to enhance
degraded stream reaches. Infrastructure upgrades consist of replacing undersized or failing pipes with larger pipes that
are sufficient to convey design storm flows. Additional impacts will result from the installation of rip rap aprons and
plunge pools to dissipate erosive forces exiting the newly upgraded infrastructure. Activities and associated impacts to
jurisdictional waters are depicted in the enclosed Louise Avenue CIP Construction Plans. A detailed narrative describing
the proposed impacts to Waters of the U.S. is provided in the attached Cover Letter. Non -jurisdictional channels will also
be enhanced or stabilized to reduce erosion and downstream sedimentation.
Page 3 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.0 November 2008 Version

Project Information and Prior Project History
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
Preliminary ®Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: Baker Engineering
Name (if known): Chris Yow
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Amanda Jones field -verified jurisdictional determination on June 15, 2010. Per the field investigation, several stream
jurisdictional determinations were changed and a revised Existing Conditions/Jurisdictional Determination map was
submitted to the USACE for verification on July 27, 2010. A jurisdictional determination was issued on March 2, 2011
concurrent with the issuance of project permits USACE Action ID 2011-00366.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
The Louise Avenue CIP was originally permitted on March 2, 2011, USACE Action ID 2011-00366, DWQ# 11-0022.
However, construction of the Louise Avenue CIP project was delayed and the project permits have since expired.
Additionally, three City of Charlotte projects have been previously permitted along the same 5,000 linear -foot contiguous
stream reach as the proposed Louise Avenue CIP project area (Project Area Map, enclosed), resulting in permanent loss
of Waters of the U.S. These projects were:
1. Louise Avenue Culvert Replacement, USACE Action ID 2006-41402-361, DWQ notification not required
2. Solid Waste Services (SWS) — Otts Street Facility, USACE Action ID 2008-1585, DWQ notification not required
3. Seigle Avenue Culvert Replacement, USACE Action ID 2009-00680, DWQ# 09-0362
While none of these individual projects required compensatory mitigation for permanent stream impacts, it was
determined during an October 31, 2008 field review with the Interagency Review Team (IRT) that, due to their proximity,
the total impacts from these three projects and the proposed Louise Avenue CIP would have to be cumulatively mitigated
(Minutes enclosed). A mitigation plan for the cummulative impacts was developed and permitted under USACE Action ID
2011-00366.
Upon review of the project, evaluation of previously issued permits impacted, and discussion of project particulars
USACE has determined that mitigation will only be required for the current USACE Action ID 2011-00366 Louise Avenue
CIP project and USACE Action ID 2009-00680 Seigle Avenue Culvert Replacement projects. The Permittee Responsible
Mitigation Plan section of the PCN has been revised to reflect the new mitigation requirements and a revised mitigation
plan is also provided.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404,
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
impact
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
Temporary T
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T❑Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
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.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
Stream impact
Type of
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Average stream width (feet)
Impact
number -
impact
intermittent (INT)?
length
Permanent (P) or
(linear feet)
Temporary (T)
pipe
S1 ®P ❑ T
extension
plus
Mainstem (Plan
® PER ❑ INT
5
105
plunge
Sheet 3)
pool
S2 ❑ P ® T
step -pool
sequenc
Tributary 1 (Plan
® PER ❑ INT
4
56
Sheet 6)
e
S3 ❑ P ® T
enhance
Mainstem (Plan
® PER ❑ INT
5
177
ment
Sheets 6 and 7)
S4 ® P ❑ T
rip rap
Mainstem (Plan
® PER ❑ INT
5
12
apron
Sheet 7)
S5 ®P ❑ T
plunge
Mainstem (Plan
® PER ❑ INT
5
39
pool
Sheet 7)
S6 ❑ P ® T
enhance
Mainstem (Plan
Sheets P1 and
® PER ❑ INT
5
709
ment
P2)
3g. Total stream and tributary impacts
1098
Page 5 of 13
PCN Form —Version 1.0 November 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory, continued
3h. Comments: Permanent loss impacts = 156 LF.
Impact S1 - The proposed pipe extension (Plan Sheet 3) is required to meet CSX's rail line loading requirements. The
proposed extension plus the plunge pool energy dissipater at the outfall will result in 105 linear feet of permanent stream
impacts.
Impact S2 - The step -pool sequence within Tributary 1 is necessary to provide a stable and relatively natural transition into
the upgraded downstream pipe system. Temporary impacts from the proposed step -pool sequence total 56 linear feet.
Impact S3 - The perennial mainstem channel segment located along Hawthorne Lane will be enhanced (Plan Sheet 6 & 7) to
remove blockages, eliminate erosion, provide a heterogeneous channel bottom, and alleviate flooding. In order to provide a
stable left bank slope and avoid conflicts with Hawthorne Lane, the enhanced channel will be shifted slightly to the west.
Impacts from stream enhancement activities along this reach will total 177 linear feet.
Impacts S4 & S5 - This perennial mainstem channel will be permanently impacted by the installation of the proposed rip rap
apron (12 linear feet) and plunge pool (39 linear feet), both of which are associated with storm drain infrastructure
maintenance along this same channel reach.
Impact S6 - The 709 linear feet of impacts, as illustrated on Sheets P1 (298 linear feet) and P2 (411 linear feet), will result
from the enhancement of degraded reaches of the mainstem channel located downstream of the CSX railroad crossing. All
enhanced stream segments will be stabilized with biodegradable coir matting and bioengineering measures. Due to the
enhancement activities proposed these 709 linear feet of impacts are not considered a loss of Waters of the United States.
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 individually list all o en water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of
impact number
waterbody
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
— Permanent
(if
(P) or
applicable)
Temporary T
01 ❑PEI
02 ❑P❑T
03 ❑P❑T
04 ❑P❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
Page 6 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory, continued
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or
(acres)
number
purpose of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
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.
❑ Neuse El Tar -Pamlico El Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number—
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact (square
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
for impact
Stream name
mitigation
feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
B1 ❑P❑T
1
❑Yes El No
B2 ❑P❑T
El Yes El No
B3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes ❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 7 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
After multiple plan revisions, impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum
extent practicable. The plunge pool at the outlet of the extended pipe (Sheet 3) is necessary to dissipate energy from
flows exiting the pipe and to protect the proposed downstream enhancement reaches. This plunge pool and the one at
the pipe outlet on Sheet 7 are proposed in lieu of rip rap aprons to minimize the linear feet of permanent stream impacts
at these locations. In addition, natural channel design principles are incorporated into the proposed enhancement
activities on Sheets 6, 7, P1, and P2. This should result in the functional lift of these currently degraded channel
segments. In response to comments from the June 15, 2010 field meeting (Minutes enclosed), the step-pool sequence
within Tributary 1 on Sheet 6 (detail on Sheet 2R) has been modified from previous plan submittals to eliminate rip rap
from between each cross-vane and to decrease the dimensions of each vane to maintain the approximate 4-foot channel
cross-section. Additional design revisions from the previous plan submittal are proposed for the Mainstem Stream
located along Hawthorne Lane on Sheets 6 and 7. Changes include removal of rock toe protection along the entire reach
and the incorporation of in-stream structures to enhance stability and in-stream habitat.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
To prevent sedimentation of downstream waters, construction will be conducted in the dry. Proper sediment and erosion
control measures will be implemented as outlined in Sheets EC1-EC9 (Construction Plans enclosed). Best Management
Practices employed for this project will be in compliance with the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and
Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual" and the local governing authority. Sediment and erosion control measures
placed in waters will be removed and the original grade restored within two months after the Division of Land Resources
has released the project. After construction, disturbed areas will be restored and stabilized as early as possible.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
® Yes ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
® Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
El Payment to in-lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type stream
Quantity 198
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:
warm, cool, cold
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
Page 8 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.0 November 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation, continued
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.
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
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
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.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
Total buffer mitigation required:
6c. 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).
6d. Comments:
Page 9 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included?
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Determination if the Project Requires a Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Does the project require a Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit?
❑ Yes ® No
2b. Is the project subject to General Certification 3704 or 3705?
❑ Yes ® No
3. Determination of Stormwater Review Jurisdiction
3a. Is this project subject to any of the following state -implemented stormwater
❑ Coastal counties
management programs (check all that apply)?
❑ HQW
❑ ORW
If so, attach one copy of the approval letter from the DWQ and one copy of the
❑ Session Law 2006-246
approved stormwater management plan.
❑ Other:
3b. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Charlotte
3c. Is this local government certified to implement a state stormwater program?
® Yes ❑ No
If so, attach one copy of the approval letter from the local government and one copy
of the approved stormwater management plan (or one copy of the approved
Stormwater management plan stamped as approved).
4. Information Required for DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
4a. What is the overall percent imperviousness according to the most current site Ian?
N/A - linear storm drainage project
4b. Does this project contain any areas that meet the criteria for "high density" per
❑ Yes ® No
General Certifications 3704 and 3705?
4c. If the site is over 24% impervious and/or contains high density areas, then provide a brief narrative description of the
stormwater management plan.
4d. Has a completed BMP Supplement Form with all required items been submitted
❑ Yes ❑ No
for each stormwater BMP?
Page 10 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.0 November 2008 Version

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
❑ 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,
❑ Yes
® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes
® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes
® 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.
N/A
Page 11 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.0 November 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information, continued
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NC Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) Natural Heritage Program
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on November 19, 2010 to determine the
presence of any federally -listed, candidate endangered, threatened species or critical habitat within the project area. In a
reply letter dated December 3, 2010 (enclosed), NCNHP indicated that it has no record of rare species, significant natural
communities, significant natural heritage areas, or conservation/managed areas at the site nor within 0.2 mile of the
project area. NCNHP's records show a colonial wading bird colony (heronry) located about 0.2 mile to the east of the
eastern end of the project, but it would not be impacted by the project. The project area is comprised of residential,
institutional, and industrial development with small forested areas. Undeveloped wooded areas and stream -side zones
are dominated by invasive plant species, so the occurrence of any federally -listed, candidate endangered, threatened
species of critical habitat is unlikely.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website
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 ® 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?
NC Department of Cultural Resources (NCDCR) State Historic Preservation Office
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on November 19, 2010 to
determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that would be affected by the
project. In a reply letter dated January 21, 2011 (enclosed), the SHPO indicates the project will not adversely affect any
historic resources. A search of the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Historic Landmarks Commission list of designated historic
landmarks revealed no historic properties that would be affected by the project. Due to the nature of the project, land -
disturbing activities will predominantly occur within railroad and road right-of-ways and within existing drainage features.
As such, potential impacts to any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance are unlikely.
Page 12 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information, continued
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Helen Simonson.
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.
2/2/2018
Date
Page 13 of 13
PCN Form — November 2008 Version

INDEX OF SI]FETC
C'uver Steel ... ..................... .................. .. _..... _ .............1
General S, -2D, SW
Stream DeYW___...._.._._�._2Q-2S
Sturm MO.— S,mm.ry ...._2U -2V
Plan & PraRk....___...___.._..._.......... _..__..------ _... }18
Ero.ko Control Pl.na.... ..... ........... .... _.... ECI-ECP
Tnllic C.— Pkna and Detaur...... .... _.... ____._..._ TCI -TCI
PMI
Curb R.mp
Chmtotie Mtthknbarg UHlitlm Plana _.__..._...._�____. I -J
Swum Miagatl.v
Convmtbn.l Symbols ............ ...._._._.___......_.._� CSI
DeYik.._.__..._......... ...... _... _.._..... _... _.._ Dl -DP
Ch.... Smtloea_..._..__..._....___._......_.._.._ ESI
Plan & Profile._�._.._...�..._._�.._...._._ PI -PJ
Lmdaeape Pl.v..__..�_..__...___..___ LPI-LPS
Seigk Avenue Culvert RepW... .__._.._.._. SAl
TOTAL SHEETS ]8
VICINITY MAP
NTS
SURVEY PR>:PAR1,� BY:
CTI'YOFCHARLOT ESURVEY-MAPPMC—GISFROM Iii,
LOCALIZED COORDINATESYSTEMDEVELOPEDFOR "TRIS
PROJECT IS BASED ON STATE PLANE COORDINATES
ESFABUSBED BY: NCGS MONUMENT-SEIGLE" WITII
NAD HEED STATE PLANE COORDINATES OF
NORTBING: SQ523.89 EASTING:145ND437
ELEVATION NAVD: NOTESTABLISHED
THE AVERAGE COMBINED GRID FACTOR USED ON TRIS
PROJECT (GROUND TO GRID) IS: O.PPNN2
VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD SE
ALL LINEAR DU S1 NS ARE LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL
DISTANCES. DATE RANGE OF SURVEY: 08115(!005 TO 07/2Lr1015
PERMITTING PACKAGE
TSI USINeRASTRUCTURE
OF CAROLINAu INC.
n�ikee c lsso axe zRot
(vlAwortE�281a]LU
.._.."...w.._ w 2012 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
C ARWTTE.
ENGINEERING 8 PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT
Construction Plans of Proposed
Louise Avenue CIP
Project No. 671-06-008
Project Features.
Pn-earl Rd W-1 Cm—Bot Culverk
Rd foreed C.nmete N,
S.Mtary Sewer
Cvrb and Gutter and Sid -11,
AapbWt Paving
Ch'... Improvement
_
G1.
LOCATION MAP
NTS
tt��un��ttyi �ykltPI cmtnrtwdm Wurnlin,
4Wg� J,m_:.g� R Wrd8 I�11�1
iGl
ki
CONVESTIONALSIGNS
I iia I�w I. a-
� 5�
�rld
.rrrhi
?P
N N
r r.r.r
Hers Mflk ___.�
P.Pored Propery 1.lue..__.....................__..
CDOT- Dnlgv
• 05x cnno<>ti'...
EM,tkg Property
Vert Protl4.__
—
' lseaJ mgrnoss
= I
Evktivg Stneturm __
— — —_ _
Fncrncc:/+:
• �..._.. �5 ,.•
ar
Rsikmd
SNsm WaterProject Mavager
•r•r [. r,
a.amed Rlgheor-way
tae
CMLr
Propomd Edge of P.vemml _._..........
':' �
,c
��y t�' . „
��Pr�rplYti'ti
1PJ�'
n � h':
Fevice _.... ....__.... .....
Temponry CavrnacHoo Eaumevf _�
a
e
g�Ry
'�
f
Propmed Utility Easement _.._._............
Storm D-l"ge F..emeet
S..., Sewer Easement._—____.
sx
Elb", Gas Lloe..._.__._... _._...... —
s —
E.ktivL Wakr Lin e ...... __..............___—
EMrtlng Wakr Semdk Uoe...... _._..... __.
SAW., Ssnikry Sewer._. .......... ....... _.._—
E.I.tlngUvdergromdTelecommunbHom
uT
EWstivg Overhead T.M, Sigval—
EMrtivgUudergromd Eirelrlc........._.._—_—.--ur
_.
E.Wivg U,deM.— Flber Optl..... _.__
ro
Eakting Sturm Drainage ..... ____.__.----~"`=---
Propmed Sbrm
Proposed Draloage SwWeCmkrW
� --
Pipe Plug avd FIII.......__.....
�_..
E4—H I...._ .... _..�._
E.ktl.g WakrMekr._._...._....___.—_._.....__...._..___
„
EMativg Wakr Valve.._.r_____.
EM.Hvg Gas VMve__.._....�_.._....__.._..____..___�_
oa
E.Ivtlng Sav1Yry Smer Mavhvle._.__.__.._..��_��/
Propomd SaWYry Smer Mvnhole._........ ......
...... O
Eai—g Storm DnlnManhole......... __..... _...
..._._ ..........
rroposkl worm Dnln Mn�hole.......__..�.....
...... __..........
EMslmg TMepbme Mauhme._..__..__._._....--._.._---
ProposN Telephone Manhole __..... _...__.__�..__._�
Q
Eakting El—k Manhole _ ... _..... _...... _._��.__...._.._
Q
Propo.ed—M, hLvhole.......... __......... _...
�..._ O
E.Istlng C." B.w........... _...___�._.._..__.._,.___
8
P."p 1 Cutch B.A.
S
F.listkLLlghtPole_....___.._....__._.._..........
_........ .... � #
Y
P Pmed Light Pole.__.......
Eaktlng UIBIry Pok ...._.._.....
1
-5 I ..f i�y`Inwre ,� 171 '.
G.,
Guy Wke......____.._.._._..._.__...._....._...__
I
P P—, Utility Pok ........ _......._..._......_..
. .__........ w
Proposed Curb &Getter, C ­Drive. Sldew @ J'
IronPW__..-.__...._...._.._.___..___..__..._..._....__�.._
E.I.H Fin
O
PropO.M ASPbalt Prvement _..____.. ____._
g Hydnvt._.._..�____._
. ...._. h
""'—" ._
Proposed 1W M1111n •.
Proposed Fire Hydnot_....... ._..___._.__�...._
....... __
Pm,—d Rip Rap Diteh..___....____
EM.Hng Drop In1eE._._.... .................................... I - J
Proposed GraYW _...__.._..__
Pmpo.ed Drop WW____._...._._..._.____.._.__........
1S
EM.Hn Bulidln r -----T
Lg-•---___._...._._._.._
Accevlble Ramp....__.._.._._._._....�_.._.
_____�
Prolw. tlFill (P—H,Vie 1 ..... ..�'
Tree Prote.................._..
:1 RFCOMMFNDED I d- ..
Pp sed Cuardna _...__.._..... _ _
sit,F
...... ...
s FOR CONSTRI FTION
...... ........
tt��un��ttyi �ykltPI cmtnrtwdm Wurnlin,
tryaF+yyy'
sormw.tercon.kneunn
�
N N
storm Water Q..ery
Plm Vkw _"_
?P
N N
Gadaape May.gemmt
Hers Mflk ___.�
CDOT- Dnlgv
}
@ 1
Vert Protl4.__
CDOT•kvPkmmktlev
10 is
CLTWater
SNsm WaterProject Mavager
1 tl� IIJ Iw
_ Bid Set No.
� 2 � 6 r p � Hoaar,oaePTv
APPROVED
%
L.v. CITY ENGINEER DATE
U

LINE Irl
SEE SHEET PI FOR - \I 1
CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS A _ Q
xv
' E
e
w,
.ao� IAS � � �� - @' • � -� � � y.,_ � � �� �� ,-. a
ooers.w.r wwa ...ano.rs � � 4.. - �;�� 14 _. IS `, � `- `-'� � •� .
nti—
sea-
\, 14x50ZD
L� W
5
mem r°` ��II`: - �.-+� • 16 MpT SEE SHEET W O
I
W� QWo
az
ios lfa e�aeaem awn , l2t ..,c i .`mm) z 3
RutlwlxeE un0er NWP J `
pZ tFaace eneaaw�eaa � al�f 'F 'i wnuW1.._ � — � ���• •........
�••'
�

0
M
LINE L-3
M -W
NOTE: SEE REAL ESTATE
, ECIALPROVISIONS RELATED
IE
TO WORN ON PARCEL 15
MV.
77
�T.
w u
4
.2
wkw'YYTW 140
I Sol- m
LINE L-1
A-
BIMPACTS
27
Crossfift., .d
2)
41, 50
-7
areMIA)
�T.
w u
4
zi.
M
Q
o'
lo

. . ........... . . . . . ............ fe
.. . . . .......
ka
a—M
M
...........
.... . ...... ................ . ...
........... ... .
ry
........... . ..... ...... ................ . ............ ..... . . . ..... . .. . .
. . ................
B
n.r
LINE
6 & 7) d Temporary -d
lM1prixetl antler NWP 27
d
—Jrm
T_xxa
.T
It
39 LF DI PI—It lmpetl
A
uMer p
13 LF of Pe nl ImDetlHA.THORNE LANE
(Pa� P -o
jjk SEA
eel
LINE IA

Il e •
4
f , I � e \ ♦ "'.are'' \\" � � j
PZ
s
P °
1
fl ,
J,
.-_ ite
I
- -- -- -.�
OENI
y �! 'rFi' •� �, III I I - - �y- [..1 �°.
fm -�•.+.►.�!-Ye .. - ss - sev.Mau�wi.
r __.1' u i� 1 / � ' f +' - sc�"--"e'WC�.="moi. ,��,.. -—•R•.-..�-_Ycc. �-__--- :vt ]4 �. w'
r cc
/ ` J xs° L� Oue it Tom orc j6-
­=­27
sa w
Ivmam e„naxemenrs l.,vw�.p cnamnre-aneprq, a,diw,dkrion o�ap sms� �� Sr
PROPOSED REACH i PROFILE t
nNan mercnu, ,rcp.e veo roNx �m.es. arce r. vw:�¢1 '
Ir
----------
91
°---------
° ------ ----
zz I zz -E� zt c° "`'. G
j tt tz ;t ti iz zz z

- --`~_-
J
Im
~
�
�
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~

O
0.
� asst

LOUISE AVENUE CIP ra.wrrersnPi 5","m
STORM
LANDSCAPE PLAN WATER •
LP5 (31ARLOYth
REACH 2 ®�

n�
r
a, v
ot
4.
a`
Or
-i .,,
"
IC
SWS-
•
lid
Louise Avenue CIP ProRect Area Map
low
Louise Avenue CIP Project Area
Approximate Drainage Features
r
az ~
v
I
• - -
Proposed Mitigation Reaches
Streets
1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet
—Me � ...,.,....9t za .° �=� � x —�. � 6: � V';;.t

�a
N
eta
�Gay�\ Rage
�a e
Huc d
�o
v
t Ra 4 �a
o y�
hC �L f'S'a N m
4i -n a
�f a ake o
yO�y e� 6M o n
Unt Q�' \ G� Spr/ngs e<ea C�
tiol/y �,a F V N a a
Y
O eN\G Rd a O °
to v cA
o b O`Q G
(on>A
�hGLe'° tia
J °� he Pla a
85 \ g5 \A �e0 o 'A
a �Q�
m
m
O s
m Wilkinson
a 5 F
m
m
\g� 5 Sr f63, L9
�ee� es Qa °da r F /naeP emac\e Rd
Sf hdenoe \b
W ru r ^�
�0 COCD
Q oe R
e
I t'°oa/
awn
coe O
�1e cc PQ qOo
Br wn-grier 0)o 2'0
W shnghOuse g� �d �� Louise Avenue CIP Project Vicinity Map
1
a �d Louise Avenue CIP Project Area
a
�o o �� Mecklenburg County Limits
_v
H milton Rd z Charlotte City Limits
CP
0,
Z 4 2 0 4 Miles
dcey Ke
r, --j -)