20190062 Ver 1_More info requested_20190204

Strickland, Bev
From: Homewood, Sue
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2019 2:26 PM
To: Perry Isner; Patrick Quinn
Cc: Munzer, Olivia; 'Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)'
Subject: RE: [External] Request for Additional Information: Verona s/d, Burlington, Guilford Co.;
SAW -2018-01856
Perry,
DWR has the same concerns/comments as the USACE regarding this project. Please submit a copy of your response to
the items below to DWR. With regards to Item 2a, the Division is seeking input from the NCWRC, and will comment
separately on this issue as soon as possible.
Please note that the Jordan Buffer rules are delegated to the local governments and therefore you must apply to the
City of Burlington for a Buffer Authorization.
Thanks,
Sue Homewood
Division of Water Resources, Winston Salem Regional Office
Department of Environmental Quality
336 776 9693 office
336 813 1863 mobile
Sue. [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: Bailey, David E CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2019 4:02 PM
To: Perry Isner <[e-mail]>; Patrick Quinn <[e-mail]>
Cc: Homewood, Sue <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Request for Additional Information: Verona s/d, Burlington, Guilford Co.; SAW -2018-01856
External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
[e-mail]
Messrs. Isner and Quinn
1

Thank you for your PCN and attached information, dated 12/21/2018 (received 1/2/2019), for the above referenced
project. I have reviewed the information and need clarification before proceeding with verifying the use of Nationwide
Permit (NWP) 29 (http://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NWP2017/2017NWP29.pdf). Please submit the requested information
below (via e-mail is fine) within 30 days of receipt of this Notification, otherwise we may deny verification of the use of
the Nationwide Permit or consider your application withdrawn and close the file:
1) Your PCN and plans propose a discharge of fill material into 0.476 acre of riparian, non-riverine wetlands for
road crossings and fill/grading for Lots 29, 53, 71, 72, and 103-107. You have not demonstrated avoidance and
minimization to the maximum extent practicable for the proposed wetland impacts related to these Lots, as
required by NWP General Conditions 23(a) and (b).
a. It is not clear that project viability is dependent on the inclusion of 9 lots, when the overall development
proposes 129 Lots. Please provide additional information to this effect. The plans do not show any
indication that attempts were made to avoid impacts to Wetland Area 3, or the top of Wetland Area 2.
Could the project be redesigned to eliminate Lot fill for any of these areas? If project plans are changed
as a result of this evaluation, please provide the updated PCN and plan sheets as necessary.
b. Several of these Lots, including 53 and 105-107, could potentially support a dwelling and access without
impacting wetland areas. Could measures such as retaining walls or other means be used to limit fill and
grading activities within these Lots to upland areas, thereby minimizing wetland impacts?
c. Will remaining wetland areas (particularly Wetland Area 2) retain hydrology to remain jurisdictional, or
would grading/stormwater plans redirect water such that wetland areas will lose their hydrologic
inputs?
2) Regarding the proposed Stream 1 crossing:
a. We are concerned that Stream 1 could be subject to headcutting above the proposed culvert given the
proposed V burial and the stream slope (>2%). Please confirm with NCDWR regarding whether or not
culvert burial is required/advisable in this situation. If burial of the culvert pipe is not advised, please
redesign accordingly and update the PCN and applicable plansheets;
b. Please adjust the Stream 1 crossing profile view on Sheet W3 to show how the rip rap pad will tie in with
the existing stream grade. Further, please add a note to the profile and plan view plansheets for the
Stream 1 impact (Sheets W3 and W5) that clearly states that the rip rap pad within the stream channel
will be imbedded into the streambed substrate such that low water flow will flow over the top of the rip
rap (this should promote aquatic life passage following installation of the road crossing);
c. Please provide a longitudinal cross-section of the rip rap pad to demonstrate how the feature will
comply with NWP 29 Regional Condition 3.6.4 (see attached picture as an example);
3) In Section C.3 of the PCN, please further itemize proposed impacts, and add these itemizations to the plan
sheets. The total line items in this section should include the following:
a. Stream 1 Crossing culvert, rip rap pad, and temp impacts/dewatering (3 items);
b. Stream 2 Crossing culvert and temp impacts/dewatering (2 items);
c. sewer line trenching/temporary crossing;
d. Wetland Area 1 fill/riprap
e. Wetland Area 2 road fill and lot fill (2 items)
f. Wetland Area 3 road fill and lot fill (2 items)
4) There is a discrepancy on Sheets W1, W2, W4, and W5 regarding the existing culvert pipe under US 70 and the
new proposed pipe extension into Stream 2. Is the existing pipe and proposed pipe extension pipe 15" or 24"?
Further, the Sheet W4 profile view shows that 30.2 Lf. of pipe will be added, whereas the Sheet W4 plan view
shows an impact to Stream 2 of only 29 Lf.; please explain/correct this discrepancy and update the PCN/plans;
5) Wetland LWL 1 along Stream 2 is not shown on Sheets W1 and W2. Does this feature occur within the subject
property? If so, please add this feature to these Sheets.
6) Please provide a vicinity map that shows the full extent of the proposed 8" sanitary sewer extension from the
proposed development to the existing sewer infrastructure. This exhibit will allow our office to determine if a
site visit is necessary to verify the location and extent of potential waters of the US;
7) Given the addition of Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) to USFWS's list of Endangered,
Threatened, and Candidate Species, and Federal Species of Concern for Guilfrod Co., and due to potentially

suitable habitat for this species occurring in the project area, we will initiate informal consultation with the
USFWS. Please note that the Corps cannot verify the use of a NWP until Section 7 consultation is complete.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
-Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE -SAW -RG -R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: David. [e-mail]
We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer Service Survey is
located at: http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/f?p=136:4:0
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.