20080363 Ver 1_Restoration Plan_20080228

McDowell Creek Restoration Plan
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Prepared For
8/4/2006
60% Design Submittal
McDowell Creed. Restoration Plan
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Report Prepared for
C1r,4-10M-. VecklenWing
Report Prepared and Submitted by Buck Engineering, a Unit of Michael Baker Corporation
1447 South Tryon Street
Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 25203
Phone: 704"334-4454
1^ ax: 704-334-4492
Emily G. Reinicker, PE, CFM
Project Manager
Shawn D. Wilkerson
Principal in Charge
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE ii 81412005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services (MCSWS) proposes to restore 7,555 linear feet (LF) of stream on
McDowell Creek in Mecklenburg County, NC. The stream reach extends from Westmoreland Road to Sam
Furr Road and is located in Huntersville, NC, approximately 8 miles north of Charlotte, NC (Figure 13). The
site lies in the Catawba River Basin within North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin
03-08-33 and United States Geologic Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050101. An existing sediment basin
wet pond adjacent to the Greens at Birkdale residential development will also be retrofitted into an extended
detention wetland storm water best management practice (BMP).
The goals for the restoration project are as follows:
!Create geomorphically stable conditions on the McDowell Creek project site.
Improve and restore hydrologic connections between creek and floodplain.
Improve the water quality in the McDowell Creek watershed.
Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitat along the project corridor.
To accomplish these goals, we recommend the following:
Restore the existing incised, eroding, and channelized stream by creating a stable channel with access to the
floodplain.
Improve water quality by establishing buffers for nutrient removal from runoff, by stabilizing stream banks to
reduce bank erosion and sediment contribution to creek flows, and by treating 128 acres drainage area from a
developed subwatershed in an extended detention wetland BMP.
Improve in-stream habitat by providing as more diverse bedform with riffles and pools, creating deeper pools
and areas of water re-aeration, providing woody debris for habitat, and reducing bank erosion.
Improve terrestrial habitat by planting riparian areas and wetland areas in the BMP
Establish native stream bank and floodplain vegetation in a permanent conservation easement to increase
storm water runoff filtering capacity, improve bank stability, provide shading to decrease water temperature
and provide cover, and improve wildlife habitat,
Table ES.1
McDowell Creek Restoration Overview
Pr`ov'o l'eattire Existing Desi-n ;approach
(';tl "bn Condition
Reach 1 T 2,572 LF 2,485 LF Priority 3 Restoration.
Reach 2 2,382 LF 2,865 LF Priority 1 Restoration
Reach 3 2,601 LF 2,904 lLl- Priority I Restoration
Total Stream Work 7,555 LF 8,254 LF
Sediment Basin Wet Pond 3.1 ac 3.1 ac Retrofit to
Extended Detention Wetland
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE iii 8/4/2005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction and Background .............................................................................................1-1
1.1 Brief Project Description and Location ............................................................. .............. ..................... -1
2.0 Watershed Characterization .................................................................................................2-1
2,1 Watershed Delineation .............. ........................................................................................ ,...... ....,.......2-1
2.2 Surface Water Classification/ Water Quality .......................................................... ......... ............... 2-1
2.3 Geology and Soils .................. ...................................................................................................... 2-1
2.4 Historic Land Use and Development Trends ... .............................................................................. 2-3
2.5 Endangered/Threatened Species ........ ............................................................................................... 2-4
2.6 Federally Listed Endangered Species .............. .................................... ...... ................................. ...... 2-5
2.7 Cultural Resources... ............................................... - ................................. ...................................... 2-7
2.8 Potentially Hazardous Environmental Sites ..................... ................................................................. a, 2-7
2.9 Potential Constraints ......................... ........ ........................................................................... ........... ..... 2-7
3.0 Project Site Streams (Existing Conditions) ........................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Existing Channel Geornorphic Characterization and Classification .... ............................................... .3-1
12 Channel Stability Assessment ............. ,..,...,..,......,............„... ...........................,,......,....... 3-2
33 Bankfull Verification ........................... ............................... ...... ............................................. .......... 3-4
3.4 Discharge .................................. ..........................„... ...............................................,.........................3-5
3.5 Vegetation and Habitat Descriptions .................... 3_6
4.0 Reference Streams ................................................................................................................... 4-1
5.0 Project Site Wetlands ........... ................................................................................................5-3
5.1 Jurisdictional Wetlands ... .......... ................................ .... .......................„....... ........................ ..5-3
5,2 Hydrologic Characterization .................................................................................. ........................ ..5-3
5.3 Soil Characterization ...................................................... ..... ... ........, .................................... ..5-4
5.4 Plant Community Characterization ................................................................... ... .................... ..5-4
6.0 Reference wetlands ............................................................................................................... . 6-1
7.0 Project Site Restoration Plan ............................................................................................. . 7-2
7.1 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives ................................................... .................................... ..7-2
7.2 Design Criteria Selection for Stream Restoration .................................................... ......................... ..7-2
7.3 Design Parameters, ... .................................... .............................................,.............................. ..7-3
7.4 Sediment Transport ............................................................................................................................ ..7-5
7.5 In-Stream Structures ....................................... ......... ......... .......................................................... ..7-9
7.6 HEC-RAS Analysis ................................................. ................................................................. 7-1 1
SUCK ENGINEERING PAGE Iv 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
7.7 Sturm Water BMP Retrofit ................... ...........................................................................................7-11
7.8 Natural Plant Community Restoration . .................................................. ........................................... 7-14
8.0 Performance Criteria .............................................................................................................. 8-1
8.1 Stream Monitoring ................................................................................... ......... .........................8-1.
8.2 Storm Water SMP Monitoring and Success Criteria .............................. .................... ....... .......... ....... 8-2
8.3 Vegetation Monitoring ................................................... . ........................ .............. ....... ................ 8-3
8.4 Maintenance Issues... ..................................................................... ........... ....... ............... ................ 8-3
8.5 Schedule/ Reporting .................................................................................. .................................8-4
9.0 References ................................................................................................................................. 9.1
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE v 614/2405
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
List of Tables
Table ES.1 McDowell Creels Restoration Overview
Table 2.1 Project Soil Types and Descriptions
Table 2.2 Project Soil Type Characteristics
Table 2.3 McDowell Creek Watershed Land Use
Table 2.4 Species Under Federal Protection in Mecklenburg County
Table 3.1 McDowell Creek Reach. Descriptions
Table 3.2 Representative Geomorphic Data for McDowell. Creek
Table 3.3 Stability Indicators -- McDowell Creek
Table 3.4 McDowell. Creek Design Discharge Summary
Table 4.1 Reference Reach Geomorphic Parameters
Table 5.1 Site Precipitation Summary
Table 7.1 Design Stream Types
Table 7.2 Design Parameters
Table 7.3 Sediment Transport Summary
Table 7.4 Proposed In-stream Structure Types
Table 7.5 Proposed Bare-Root and Live Stake Species
Table 7.6 Proposed Seed Mixture Species
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE vi 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Project Location Map
Figure 1.2 Site Topographic Map
Figure 2.1 Watershed Map
Figure 2.2 Project Soil. Types
Figure 2.3 Site Utility Locations
Figure 2.4 FEMA Floodpiain Map
Figure 3.1 Protect Reaches and Surveyed Cross-Section Locations
Figure 3.2 Rosgen Stream Classification
Figure 3.3 Simon Channel Evolution Model
Figure 3.4 NC Piedmont Regional Curves with Project Cross-Section Data and Discharge
Figure 3.5 Cage Survey and Reference Reach Locations
Figure 5.1 Existing Wetlands Locations
Figure 7.1 Proposed Stream Design
Figure 7.2 Proposed BMP Design
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE via 8h412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
List of Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix
Appendix C
Appendix D
Regulatory Agency Correspondence
EDR Transaction Screen Map Report
Existing Conditions Data
Wetland Delineation Data Forms
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE v[ii 814J2005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.1 Brief Pro,*eex Description and Location
Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services (MCSWS) proposes to restore and enhance 7,555 linear feet (LF)
of channelized stream on McDowell Greek. In addition, an existing sediment basin wet pond will be
retrofitted as an extended detention wetland storm water best management practice (BMP) to improve water
quality of the runoff from a 1213-acre subwatershed before this storm water enters McDowell Creek..
The McDowell Creek restoration site is located approximately two miles northwest of Huntersville in
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, as shown on Figure 1.1 The project site extends south from
Westmoreland Road to Sam Furr Road. The site is accessible from 1-77, exit 25. Drive west on Sam Furr
Road; turn north onto Lindholm Drive; park in the Birkdale Village movie theater lot. Access the
downstream end of the project from the east side of parking lot.
The site is located in United States Geological. Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 030150101.
McDowell Creek is listed by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) in the Catawba River
Basin 03-08-33. Figure 1.2 depicts the basin boundaries and HUC's for the project reach.
The area has a history of general agricultural usage with recent development of mixed use commercial and
residential units. The stream on the project site has been channelized and riparian vegetation on portions of
the site has been removed. Riparian vegetation found on much of the site consists of successional and
invasive species such as Privet, Grecenbriar, and Multiflora rose.
McDowell Creek through the project site is a "blue-line" stream, as shown on the USGS topographic
quadrangle for the site (Figalre 1..2). There are several small tributaries that flow into the creek that are not
visible on the USGS topographic quad but will benefit from restoration activities. The total current length of
stream on the project reach is 7,555 LF.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 1-1 81412046
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION
2.1 Watershed Delineation
The McDowell Cheek site is located in Mecklenburg County, in the Catawba River Basin as illustrated in
Figure 1.1. The total drainage area for the restoration reaches ranges from 2.4 square miles at the upstream
end to 3,6 square miles at the downstream end.
2.2 Surface Water Classification/ Water Quality
McDowell Creek is currently included on the NCDWQ 303d list of impaired streams. Also, according to the
NCWRP Basinwide Plan for the Catawba River Basin, NCDWQ noted bank erosion in McDowell Creek that
was severe and instream habitat was generally poor (NCDWQ, 2004). The Plan suggested local initiates be
pursued to fine] solutions to the degrading stream.
The NCDWQ designates surface water classifications for water bodies such as streams, rivers, and lakes
which define the best uses to be protected within these waters (e.g., swimming, fishing, and drinking water
supply). These classifications are associated with a set of water quality standards to protect those uses. All
surface waters in North. Carolina must at least meet the standards for Class C (fishable/swimmable) waters.
The other primary classifications provide additional levers of protection for primary water contact recreation
(Class B) and drinking water supplies (WS). Class WS waters are protected for Class C uses as well as a
source of potable water McDowell Creek is listed as Class WS-IV waters [DW+Q Index No. 11-115-1.5].
WS-IV waters are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds.
2.3 Geology and Soils
The project site is located in northern Mecklenburg. County near the junction of Interstate 77 and NC
Highway 73, and lies within the Charlotte Belt of the Piedmont physiographic province of central North
Carolina. According to the "1 degree by 2 degree geologic map of the Charlotte Quadrangle prepared by the
USES (Goldsmith, Milton, and Horton, 1988, Map 1-1251-E), the project site is underlain by metamorphosed
quartz diorite and tonalite that are late Proterozoic to early Cambrian in age. This rock unit is described as a
gray, medium- to coarse-grained, generally foliated rock composed dominantly of plagioclase, quartz, biotite,
hornblende, and epidote.
Soil types and profiles at the site were researched using Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) soil
survey data for Mecklenburg County, along with on-site evaluations to determine any hydric soil areas
(littp://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx).. A map depicting the boundaries of each soil
type is presented in Figure 2.1, There are three general soil types found within the project boundaries, A
discussion of each soil type is presented in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2-1 81412005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Table 2.1
I' :Ct Soil
Soil ?N anle Location
Monacan Main channel The Monacan series consists of very deep, somewhat
and floodplain poorly-drained soils with moderate permeability on
floodplains. They formed in recent alluvial sediments of
the Piedmont and Coastal Plain. Slopes are commonly
less than 2 percent.
Cecil Adjacent to The Cecil series consists of very deep, well drained,
floodplain moderately permeable soils on ridges and side slopes of
the Piedmont uplands. They are deep to saprolite and
very cheep to bedrock. They formed in residuum
weathered from felsic, igneous and high-grade
metamorphic rocks of the Piedmont uplands. Slopes
range from 0 to 15 percent.
Wilkes Adjacent to The Wilkes series consists of shallow, well drained soils
floodplain with moderately slow permeability. They formed in
residuum weathered from intermediate and mafic
crystalline rocks on uplands in the Piedmont. Slopes
range from 4 to 60 percent..
Note:
NRCS, USDA. Official Soil Series Descriptions
(http://soils.usda.gov/soils/technical/classy fication/osd/in(lex.html)
The predominant soil series within the floodplain area of the site is mapped as Monacan loam series. This
soil type is considered a hydric "C" soil type in Mecklenburg County, indicating that in some areas of mapped
Monacan soils, inclusions of hydric soils can compose up to 20% of the mapped areas.
Table 2.2
Project Sail Type Characteristics
sea'ICs Fl-osioll
iTzaxc f'1<ritin
Depth (ill) Surface t`';?K
Iti
Erosion
Factor 01VI Ue
Monacan Loam (MO) 65 24.2 0.43 5 2-3
Cecil. Sandy Clay (CeB2) 45 411 0213 5 >1
Cecil Sandy Clay (CeD2) 48 43.1 0.28 4 >1
Wilkes Loam (WkB) 15 7.2 0.24 2 51
Source:
NRCS, USDA. Official Soil Series Descriptions
(littp://websoilsurvcy, nres.usda.gov/aapp/WebSoilSu rvey,aspx)
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2-2 81412008
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
2.4 Historic Land Use and Development Trends
The McDowell Creek restoration project area drains a small amount of remaining agricultural and forest land
as well as a significant amount of surrounding residential and commercial areas. Adjacent to the restoration
area there are parallel sanitary sewer and overhead power line easements. In conjunction with the restoration
project, there are plans to develop a greenway trail adjacent to the sewer acid stream restoration conservation
easements.
The McDowell Creek watershed has seen a dramatic drift in the percentage of agricultural land versus
residential and commercial developed land in the recent past. The percentage of land in the watershed
available to agriculture is 25.8% with 74.2% of the watershed seeing some form of development as shown in
Table 2.3. Development in the watershed has induced changes to the creek by introducing physical barriers
such as the sanitary sewer that limits the ability of the channel to create a meandering pattern and by
providing additional storm water runoff from the increased impervious area. In addition to changes brought
on by development, the project site has been affected by land use decisions during agricultural practice, The
channel was straightened and ditches installed to promote drainage of adjacent fields.. During agricultural use
a significant portion of strearnbauk vegetation was removed, Currently the project site has development
pressure on the north and south ends by residential and commercial interests while portions in the middle of
the reach are partially protected by County ownership. Development plans for the vacant lands along the
entire reach are currently underway.. Future buildout of the site will likely include a County park, greenway
trail, commercial buildings and residential housing.
Table 2.3
McDowell Creek Watershed Land Use
Land Use
......... ......................
I3eav Commercial 75.1 3.3
Li ht Commercial 99.9 4.4
Hi h Density Residential 46.9 2.1
licav Industrial 0.59 0.0
Institutional - 24.6 1.1
L,ow Density Residential 76.9 3.4
Medium Density Residential 227.8 10.0
Multi-family Residential 94,4 4.1
Medium Low Density Residential 167.9 7.4
Office/Industrial 52.3 2.3
I_i ht Office/U ht Industrial 57.5 2.5
Rural Residential 448.5 19.7
Transportation 316.7 119
Vacant 557.9 25.8
Note:
I r The above is land-use/land cover data for 2002 developed by Tetra Tech using a combination
of parcel Inforination, aerial photographs, and tree canopy data.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2-3 8/4/2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL. BAKER CORPORATION
2.5 Endangered/Threatened Species
Some populations of plants and animals are declining because of either natural forces or their inability to
compete for resources with the encroachment of humans. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) and United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) composed a list of rare and protected animal
and plant species that contains five federally fisted and thirty-six state listed species known to exist in
Mecklenburg County (USFWS, 2004 and NCNHP, 2004).
Legal protection for federally listed species, Threatened (T) or Endangered (E) status, is conferred by the
Endangered Species Pict of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1534). This act makes illegal the killing,
harming, harassing, or removing of any federally listed animal species from the wild; plants are similarly
protected but only on federal lands. Section 7 of this act requires federal agencies to ensure that actions they
fund or authorize do not jeopardize any federally listed species.
Organisms that are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the NHP list of Rare
Plant and Animal Species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North
Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Species that the NHP lists under federal protection for Mecklenburg County as of September 19, 2005, are
listed in Table 2.4. A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of the federally
protected species follow, along with a conclusion regarding potential project impacts.
Table 2A
Species of Fecle.ral and Stine Status in Mecklvnhu II
t¢a=,?il ' Stientitic. Ntarlle {"cminlim 1+c(le?ral State IL?tllitsat l'ae,5eratl3iaEtl??icaal

I N alne staattis Status t onellasion
Vertebrates
Accipitridae Haaliaeetus Bald Eagle 'r T May affect, but not likely to adversely affect
lenrocephalus
Invertebrates
Unionidac Lasmibona Carolina E l? No/No Effect
deem-aata licelsplitter
Vascular Plants
Asteraccae Echinacea Smooth E SC Suitable [No Effect
laevigataa Coneflower
Asteraceae Heliautha.s Schweinitz's E E SuilablelNo Effect
schweinitzii Sunflower
iAnacardiaccae Rhus anichauxii Michaux's E E-4C Suitable/No Effect
Sumac
Notes:
E An Endangered species is one whose continued existence as a viable component of the state's flora or fauna is determined
to be in jeopardy.
.11 Threatened
SC A Special Concern species is on e that requires monitoring but may be taken or collected and sold under regulations
adopted under the provisions of Article 25 of C hapter 113 of the General Statutes (animals) and the Man( Protection and
Conservation Act (plants).
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2-4 BX2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has been contacted and has not expressed
concerns regarding protected species on the project site. McDowell Creek is not it Designated Public Trout
Water, so trout buffer restrictions do not apply to this site. Buck Engineering will consider the effects of
construction activities and plan to avoid direct and indirect impacts during the project. A copy of the WRC
letter is included in Appendix A.
The USFWS was notified of the project on December 21, 2005 and again on January 17, 2006. Buck
Engineering received concurrence of "no effect" from the USFWS on March 7, 2006. All agency comments
have been incorporated and correspondence on this issue is included in Appendix A.
2>6 Federally Listed Endangered Species
2.6.1 Vertebrates
Haliaeetus leaacocephralus (Bald Eagle)
Bald eagles are large raptors, 32 to 43 inches long, with a white head, white tail, yellow bill, yellow
eyes, and yellow feet. The lower section of the leg has no feathers. Wingspread is about seven
feet. The characteristic plumage of adults is dark brown to black with young birds completely dark
brown. Juveniles have a dark bill, pale markings on the belly, tail, and under the wings and do not
develop the white head and tail until five to six years old. Bald eagles in the southeast frequently
build their nests in the transition zone between forest and marsh or open water. Nests are cone-
shaped, six to eight feet from top to bottom, and six feet or more in diameter They are typically
constructed of sticks lined with a combination of leaves, grasses, and Spanish moss. Nests are built
in dominant live pines or cypress trees that provide a good view and clear flight path, usually less
than 0.5 miles from open water. Winter roosts are usually in dominant trees, similar to nesting
trees, but may be somewhat farther from water. In North Carolina, nest building takes place in
December and January, with egg laying (clutch of one to three eggs) in February and hatching in
March. Bald eagles are opportunistic feeders consuming a variety of living prey and carrion. Up to
80% of their diet is fish, which is self caught, scavenged, or robbed from osprey. They may also
take various small mammals and birds, especially those weakened by injury or disease.
No bald eagle nests or specimens were observed during pedestrian surveys on the site, but because
the proposed restoration project is just over 0.5 miles from open water, the preferred nesting
distance of the bald eagle, there may be it marginal chance of the site being used for winter
roosting. Therefore, large trees in the project area will be avoided if possible without
compromising the integrity of the natural channel design. A determination was made that the
proposed work "may affect, but not likely to adversely affect" for this species.
2.6.2 Invertebrates
Lasmigona decorata (Carolina Hcelsplitter)
The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known to exist in the Savannah fiver system in South
Carolina and in North Carolina in streams and ponds in the Catawba River System around the
Charlotte and Mecklenburg. County area as well as one small stream in Cabarrus County and one
pond in Union County within the Pee Dee River System. Currently only six populations are known
to exist:. In North Carolina one remnant population exists in the Catawba River System in Union
County and one in the Pee Dee River System in Union County.
The Carolina heelsplitter has an ovate, trapezoid shaped shell measuring 4.6 inches
(1.1.8 centimeters) in length, 1.56 inches (4 centimeters) in width and 2.7 inches (6.9 centimeters) in
height. The outer shell color varies from greenish brown to dark brown. The inside of the shell
(nacre) is usually pearly white to bluish white sometimes grading to orange. Older specimens
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2.5 8/412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
maybe mottled pale orange, Historically it was reported in both small and large streams and rivers
as well as ponds (provably mill ponds on small streams). Currently this species is only known to
occur in small streams usually with mud, muddy sand, or muddy gravel substrate along stable well
shaded stream banks. Therefore, a "no effect" determination was made for the Carolina
Heelsplitter.
2.5.3 Vascular Plants
E°chinacea laevigata (Smooth Coneflower)
Smooth coneflower grows up to 1.5 meters tall with smooth stems and few elliptical to lanceolate
leaves. Flowers are normally solitary, raylike, and light pink to purplish in color. Smooth
coneflower can be distinguished from its popular relative Echinac:ea paurpureca (purple coneflower)
by leaves which are never cordate like purple coneflower. Also, the awn of the pale is incurved
while the purple coneflower's is straight.
There are 24 known populations of smooth coneflower with fa known in North Carolina.
Historically, the species habitat was prairie-like, often controlled by fire. Now, due to urbanization
and fire suppression, known populations are limited to open woods, cedar barrens, utility right of
ways, and dry limestone bluffs normally with magnesium or calcium rich soils associated with
mafic rock.
The study site does have suitable habitat for the smooth coneflower along the utility right of ways
within the project corridor A pedestrian survey during the fruiting period was conducted on
September 15, 2005, for potential individuals throughout the project area and none were identified.
A September 16, 2005, search of the NHP database indicated no known populations within five
miles of the study areas. Therefore, a "no effect" determination was made for the smooth
coneflower.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's .Sunflower)
Schweinitz's sunflower, usually three to six feet tall, is a perennial herb with one to several fuzzy
purple stems growing from a cluster of carrot-like tuberous roots. Leaves are two to seven inches
long, 0.4 to 0.5 inches wide, lance shaped, and usually opposite, with upper leaves alternate,.
Flowers are yellow and generally smaller than other sunflowers in North America. Flowering and
fruiting occurs from mid-September to frost. Schweinitz's sunflower grows in clearings and along
edges of upland woods, thickets, and pastures. It is also found along roadsides, power line
clearings, and woodland openings. It prefers full sunlight or partial shade and is tolerant of full
shade.
Suitable habitat exists for the Schweinitz's sunflower within the utility right of ways within the
proposed project area. A survey for this plant was conducted on September 15, 2005, for potential
individuals throughout the project area and none were identified. A September 16, 2005, search of
the NHP database indicated no known populations within five miles of the study areas. Therefore,
a "no effect" determination was made for the Schweinitz's sunflower:
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's Sumac)
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizorrmatous shrub that grows 03 to 3.3 feet (0.2 to 1.0
meter) in height. The narrowly winged rachis supports nine to thirteen sessile, oblong-lanceolate
leaflets that are 1.6 to 3.6 inches (4 to 9 centimeters) long, 0.8 to 2 inches (2 to 5 centimeters) wide,
acute, and acuminate. The bases of the leaves are rounded and their edges are simple or doubly
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2.6 81412006
A UNIT of MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
serrate. Plants flower in June, producing a terminal, erect, dense cluster of four to five greenish-
yellow to white flowers.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods and roadsides. It is dependent on disturbance such
as mowing, clearing or fire to maintain the openness of its habitat. It grows ill open habitat where it
can get full sunlight, and it is often found with other members of its genus as well as with poison
ivy. A "no effect" determination was made Michaux's Sumac.
2.7 Cultural. Resources
A letter was sent to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (5HPO) on December 21, 2005,
requesting a review and comment for the potential of cultural resources in the vicinity of the McDowell Creek
restoration site. A response was received on January 17, 2006, indicating that the SHPO had reviewed the
proposed project and was not aware of any historic resources that would be affected by the project. No
formal surveys [lave been performer) at the site previously. A copy of the SHPU correspondence is included
in Appendix A.
2.8 Potentially Hazardous Environmental Sites
An EDR Transaction Screen Map Report that identifies and maps real or potential hazardous environmental
sites within the distance required by the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Transaction
Screen Process (E 1528) was prepared for the site. A copy of the report with an overview snap is included in
Appendix B. The overall environmental risk for this site was determined to be low, Environmental sites
including Superfund (National Priorities List, NPL); hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities;
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Information System
(CERCLIS); suspect state hazardous waste, solid waste or landfill facilities; or leaking underground storage
tanks were not identified by the report in the proposed project area. During field data collection, there was no
evidence of these sites in the proposed project vicinity, and conversations with landowners did not reveal any
further knowledge of hazardous environmental sites in the area.
2.9 Potential Constraints
Buck Engineering assessed the McDowell Creek project site in regards to potential fatal flaws and site
constraints. No fatal flaws have been identified during project design development. Infrastructure such as
buried sanitary sewer and overhead powerlines present constraints to the restoration of pattern; we will restore
pattern where possible to achieve appropriate meander width.
2.9.1 Property Ownership and Boundary
A conservation easement is being pursued by Mecklenburg County who will retain ownership and
assume maintenance responsibility of the project.
2.9.2 Site Access
The site can be accessed for construction and post-restoration monitoring. Construction access and
staging areas will be identified during final design.
2.9.3 Utilities
Due to the project's location in an urbanized area, there are many different types of utility services
throughout the project area (Figure 2.3). A Transcontinental Gas line crosses perpendicular to the
creek near the southern end of the site near Birkdale Village, at Station 74+50 approximately 1,600
feet north of Sara Furr Road. There is a sanitary sewer crossing located at station 15+40 which
SUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2-7 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
connects to the sanitary sewer line that runs parallel with McDowell Creek on the western side of
the creek. An overhead electric line owned by Energy United runs parallel with McDowell Creek
two-thirds of the length of the project and a Drake Power transmission line crosses perpendicular to
McDowell Creek at Station 28+75 approximately 500 feet downstream of Westmoreland Road.
The stream restoration project will be designed to avoid impacting these existing utilities.
A greenway casement outside and adjacent to the McDowell Creek Restoration Project is also part
of Mecklenburg County's plan for the area. Discrete viewing areas of the stream will be allowed
within the restoration project's conservation easement boundary for educational opportunities.
These areas will be incorporated into the design plans for the restoration project. There is also a 66-
foot wide future road right-of-way which will be excluded from the conservation easement at
Station 135+00, approximately 850 feet north of Sara Purr Road. Although the right-of-way will be
excluded from the conservation easement, restoration of the stream channel will not be interrupted.
2.9.4 Hydrologic Trespass and Floodplain Characterization
The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Mecklenburg County, NC, (Map Number
37119CO046E) indicates that the project is located within a regulatory floodplain. Figure 2.4
illustrates the FEMA snapping near the site.
Preliminary modeling has been performed to evaluate the restoration design approach. The results
of the modeling are discussed in Section 7. The preliminary modeling indicates that the project can
be completed with the Priority 3 and Priority 1 design approach. Detailed flood modeling will be
performed for permitting during final design.
SUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 2.8 81412006
A UNM OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
3.0 PROJECT SITE STREAMS (EXISTING CONDITIONS)
3.1 Existing Channel Geomorphic Characterization and Classification
Buck Engineering performed representative longitudinal and cross-section surveys of the existing stream
reaches to assess the current condition and overall stability of the channels. Buck Engineering also collected
substrate samples to characterize stream sediments. Figure 3.1 illustrates the locations of cross-section
surveys on the project reaches. The following sections of this report summarize the survey results for the
mainstem reaches. Surveyed cross sections, profiles, and sediment data are included in Appendix C.
The existing mainstem channel is depicted in Figure 3.1. Watershed sizes were calculated at the beginning
and at the terminus of each reach.
Table 3.1
McDowell Creek Reach DescrHions
RL'och 1,aYlrith {l,t I Watershwd Nile at Upsli'ealll NV iterhc1 .Size nt 1)mvns?CEani k
1"Indt of Reach (,millare Iililes) t'iidl o ??El ? ?;.: tildes)
.u
Reach 1, Sta. 2,572 14 3.1
13+50- 38+35
Reach 2; Sta. 2,382 3.1 3.4
38+35-67+00
Reach 3; Sta. 2,601 3.4 3.6
67+00-96+04
Total Existing 7,555
Stream
Length
Table 3.2 summarizes the geomorphic parameters of the maainstem. In general, the bedform diversity of
McDowell Creek is poor with limited pool habitat. Few distinct riffles and pools are present on the entire
reach and are separated by long runs. Existing conditions reach breakpoints are defined by a change in.
geomorphic characteristics found in the stream bed.
Reach 1 begins approximately 360 feet downstream of Westmoreland Road and continues 2,572 LF
downstream. The upstream end the reach is bordered by multifamily housing development and a sanitary
sewer easement to the west and by the 1-77 corridor and an early successional forest to the east..
Reach 2 extends 2,382 LF downstream to the outlet of the water duality pond at Birkdale Village. This reach
is bound on the west by a sanitary sewer line, an overhead power line easement parallel to the channel, mixed
terrain open space, and a single family development. The eastern side of the reach is marked by mature
hardwood forest, early successional forest, a single family unit housing development, and a linear wetland
system.
Reach 3 extends 2,601 LF from the water quality pond to a triple box culvert at Sam Furr Road. The
restoration project ends at the culvert. This reach is bordered by a large system of wetlands to the cast, a
significant natural gas pipeline crossing under the channel, a sanitary sewer easement to the west, and
commercial developments adjacent to both sides of the floodplain.
Reach. I of McDowell Creek is classified as a Rosgen G5c while Reaches 2 and 3 classify as Rosgen C5. All
three reaches exhibit characteristics of a stream that has been channelized and has subsequently incised to
regain a stable bed slope. Both G5 and C5 stream types have low sinuosity, high bank height ratios, and low
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 3-1 91412005
A UNIT of MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
'dth _ ---` C s. -

v_ c - ; toe of bank
slope ovidinp resista el evolution
dear r tratinp s stye ik erosion and
s 1 c and a :;war concern on I .v ; n Ceor orphic
d 'a „rn t11

r?,{ 15,E X5,1 - t
2. 32 19
C 41.1 - u test
l
® 5.9 , 7 4,trr
} 3.9 4.2 3,5
/a,') 21,5 250 41.93 t
1.4
>16 10
Channe. I Coarse Sand Coa s Coarse Sand
(Particle Si: rl
t' OJ25 03 0.25 MITI;
1130 11,51 M1 mra
d50 0.70 0,6 0.66 turn
d,,4 3.1 12 13
_ 't.9 -
w: (S) 25 I _ ? Feet per foot
1 ` n osity (1)
I r_ Stream T"ype2 G5 c C5c

" i v , f° ,y `vc c" l streams.

.
r
I 'Is
ssive d asition
ionship + ras proposed 1;,
size is pro t 1 . e product of stream
BUCK ENE
slope and discharge, or stream power. A change in any one of these variables causes a rapid physical
adjustment in the stream channel.
A common sequence of physical adjustments has been observed in many streams following disturbance. This
adjustment process is often referred to as channel evolution. Disturbance can result from channelization,
increase in runoff due to build-out in the watershed, removal of streamside vegetation, and other changes that
negatively affect stream stability. All of these disturbances occur in both urban and rural environments.
Several models have been used to describe this process of physical adjustment for a stream. The Simon
(1989) Channel Evolution Model characterizes evolution in six steps, including:
1. sinuous, pre-modified
2. Channelized
3. Degradation
4. Degradation and widening
5. Aggradation and widening
f. Quasi-equilibrium.
Figure 3.3 illustrates the six steps of the Simon Channel Evolution Model.
The channel evolution process is initiated once a stable, well-vegetated stream that interacts frequently with
its floodplain is disturbed. Disturbance commonly results in an increase in stream power that causes
degradation, often referred to as channel incision (Lane, 1955). Incision eventually leads to over-steepening
of the banks and, when critical bank heights are exceeded, the banks begin to fail and mass wasting of soil
and rock leads to channel widening. Incision and widening continue moving upstream in the form of a head-
cut. Eventually the mass wasting slows, and the stream begins to aggrade. A new, low-.flow channel begins
to form in the sediment deposits, By the end of the evolutionary process, a stable stream with dimension,
pattern, and profile similar to those of undisturbed channels forms in the deposited alluvium. The new
channel is at a lower elevation than its original form, with new floodplain constructed of alluvial material
(FISRWG, 1998).
The mainstem channel within the project area is a perennial, channelized stream with a flow regime
dominated by storm water runoff from a moderately developed and minimally forested watershed. The
mainstem channel is incised as evidenced by bank height ratios in the 1.5 to 2.6 range.
Table 3.3 summarizes the geomorphic parameters related to channel stability.
Table 3.3
Stability Indicator,,, McDowell Creek
Parameter
stream,rvoc
Riparian Vegetation
XS3
`stir. 26+00
r
G5c
Wide buffer of young
successional forest in former
pastureland on left bank.
Disturbed sewer casement
parallel to crock on right
bank.
_ XS.4
sta. ?tl+00
G5c
Wide buffer of mature
bottomland forest on the left
bank and <I disturbed sewer
easement parallel to crack on
right bank.
Channel Dimension
XS7
sta. s8+00
G5c
Wide buffer adjacent to
wetlands on the left bank.
Invasive successional
species on right bank in
the disturbed sewer
casement.
13ankfull Area (SF) 1 41.1 1 49.3 1 40.3 1
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 3.3 814/2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Width/Depth Ratio 5.93 4.72 4.77
Channel Pattern
Meander Width Ratio NIA NIA N/A
Sinuosity NIA N/A NIA
Vertica l Stability
Bank Height Ratio (BHR) 2.6 1.9 1.5
Entrenchment Ratio (ER) 1.4 16.5 3
Evolution Scenario k -G-F-C-E E.-G-F-C-E E-G-F-C-E
Simon Evolution Stage' IV IV IV
Notes;
1. NfA Meander Width Ratio and Sinuosity not measured because channel has been straightened.
2. Simon Channel Evolution see figure 3.3.
3.3 Bankfuli Verification
Buck Engineering engaged several methods to verify the bankfull stage and discharge of the restoration reach
of McDowell Creek. Initially when collecting data points for the topographic survey, physical indicators of
bankfull stage were marked and measured. By using survey data, mathematical equations, and computer
modeling we were able to estimate discharge flow rates. Additional verification came from collecting and
analyzing survey data from a USGS gage station located on McDowell Creek downstream of the project
reach. Each method reinforces the ultimate conclusion of a bankfull discharge.
Bankfull stage on the mainstem channel was identified in the field; indicators included a break in slope, a flat
depositional feature, and a consistent scour line. Surveyed cross sections with bankfull indicators were
plotted on the regional curve as shown in Figure 3.4. McDowell. Creek data points plotted on or near the
North Carolina Regional Curve (Harman et al, 1999); indicating that the bankfull stage selected in the field
was comparable with that of other Piedmont streams of similar drainage area.
Manning's equation was used to identify a bankfull discharge. A discharge was calculated for the riffle and
run cross sections. A Manning's roughness coefficient of 0.025 was selected based on the factors including
channel bed material and the presence of small shrubs and grasses on the hanks. Bankfull flow estimated
from the equation ranged from 175 cfs to 300 cfs, with variations attributable to the drainage area and
variations of channel dimension. The calculated bankfull discharges were plotted on the regional curve as
shown in Figure 3.4.
Using the surveyed cross-section data, Buck Engineering also prepared a HEC-RAS hydraulic model, Riffle
and run cross-section data were used to estimate discharge that compared to bankfull features surveyed in
those cross sections. The estimated discharge fell within the same range as calculated by the Manning's
equation. Pool sections were excluded from the analysis because enlarged cross-sectional area typical of
pools would overestimate conveyance area in the channel.
For further verification of these discharges, the NC USGS rural regression equation was used to estimate the
2-year discharge. For the McDowell Creek site with a drainage area of 3.6 square miles, the predicted 2-year
flow was approximately 325 cfs. The generally accepted recurrence interval of a bankfull event is between 1
and 2 years, and often between approximately 1.2 and 1.5 years. The bankfull discharges calculated using
Manning's equation are lower than the 2-year discharges predicted by the regression equation. These results
indicate that the estimated bankfull discharge range falls within the expected recurrence interval for bankfull
events..
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 3.4 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
In order to verify the Piedmont regional curve is appropriate to use in this region, Buck Engineering assessed
the continuing stability on one USES gage that is near the McDowell Creek project location. The McDowell
Greek gage (USGS Gage 0214266000), having a drainage area of 26.3 mix, is located downstream of the
restoration site at Beatties Ford Road. Figure 3.5 shows the location of the gage. The gage station bankfull
discharge should fall on or near the regional curve to verify the applicability of the use of the curves on the
restoration reach.
A detailed survey on approximately 650 Lb" of the gage station site was performed defining channel and bank
features. The survey provided data on the geomorphic characteristics of McDowell Creek at the gage,
Survey data was collected both upstream and downstream of the gage location to allow projection of the
bankfull elevation through the gage location. The surveyed cross sections and profile are included in
Appendix D. Using the rating curve for the station, obtained from USGS, and the average bankfull depth.
interpolated from the survey data, we were able to correlate the bankfull depth to the stage-discharge rating
curve for the station. The bankfull water depth was T2 feet, When plotted on the USGS rating curve, the
estimated bankfull discharge for at the gage is 538 cfs. When plotted on the NC Piedmont regional curve, the
point falls well below the rural regression line, but within the scatter of the data points used to develop the
regional curve.
The annual maximum flows for the gage were analyzed and indicate that a flow of 538 cfs has a recurrence
interval of approximately 1.2 years. The recurrence interval for the discharge supports the 538 cfs discharge
is a bank€ull event. The reason the discharge falls below the rural curve may be attributable to the soil
composition of watershed. The watershed is dominated by sandy soil types coupled with low gradients. The
predominant soil types found in the watershed have a sanely loam composition. These soils have a high
hydraulic conductivity and a moderately fine to coarse texture. Most soils in the watershed are defined as
well-drained. 'T'hese characteristics combine to create a higher infiltration rate and lower surface runoff
potential for the watershed and explain the bankfull discharge falling below the rural regression line.
The unique nature and discharge characteristics of the greater McDowell Creek watershed illustrate the
variability of stream channels in tlae Piedmont region and the broad applicability of the regional curves. The
information from the gage station analyses corroborates the initial bankfull and flowrate assumptions and
indicates that bankfull stage was correctly identified. The design bankfull discharge for the project reach
takes into account the information learned from tine gage station and plots below the rural regional curve.
3.4 Discharge
The insight gained from the discharge at the gage station helped us determine that the discharge values at the
project site are slightly lower than the predicted values on the regional curve. Although the site is located in.
an urbanizing watershed, the bankfull discharge value is at or below the rural regional curve. We estimate the
design bankfull discharge at the downstream end of the restoration project site to be 220 cfs. Table 3.4
summarizes the design discharge by reach.
Table 3,4
McDowell Creek Design Discharge Summary
Project Feature 1}???itastieaita 1Jit ie??yt a-Area Design Discharge
nil`} {'cfs ?
Reach 1 I 3.1 165
1 peach 2 1 3.4 1 190 1
Reach 3 1 16 1 220 1
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 3-5 814!2005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
3.5 Vegetation and Habitat Descriptions
The habitat within and adjacent to the proposed project area primarily consists of fallow agricultural fields
(cleared land) and Piedmont/ Mountain Bottomland Forest (mixed riparian community) as described by
Schafale and. Weaikely (1990). The riparian areas ranged from relatively disturbed to very disturbed.
Examples of major disturbance include power line and sanitary sewer line corridors and clearings for
residential and commercial developments. A general description of each community follows.
3.5.1 Agricultural Fields
This community covers approximately 15% of the project site. The fields have been used for a variety
of agricultural purposes including crap rotation, grazing, and bay production. Vegetation within these
fields primarily consists of herbaceous species with a few shrub species including black willow (Salix
nigra), sumac (Rhas spp.), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), sweetgum, (L iquidambar styraci,Flua), box
elder (Acer negundo), black cherry (Pi-unus serotina), blackberry (Rubes spp.), pokeweed (11hytolaacca
americana), asters. (Aster spp.), foxtaail (Setaria spp.), Johnson grass (Sorghtim halepense), multiflora
rose (Rosa multiflora), milkweed (Asclepias spp.), Japanese honeysuckle (I onicera japonica), and
cockleburs (Xanthittm spp.)
3.5.2 Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest
This ecological community is located in the floodplain adjacent to McDowell Creek for the majority of
the project area, The forested riparian stream buffer varied from narrow corridors of 5 to 10 feet in
width to broad corridors of greater than 50 feet in width. The dominant species in the overstory of these
bottomland hardwood/floodplain areas include northern red oak (Quercus rubra), box elder (Acer
nel=undo), American elm (Ulmrrs americana), sweetgum (1 iquidamhur styraciflua), hackberry (Celtic
occidentalis), sycamore (131ataanus vccidentalis), black walnut (luglaits nigr•a), yellow poplar
(Lit•iodendron tulipifera), and loblolly pine (I' aatrs taeda).
M dcanopy species included box elder, pawpaw (Asimina triloba), sweetgum, winged elm (Ulmrrs
alcala), flowering dogwood (Corms florida), black cherry (1'runus serotina), red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana), hackberry, and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense). Herbaceous and vine species consisted
of Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Nepal grass (Mierostegium virnineum), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radican.s), blackberry (Rubits spp.), greenbrier (Smilax spp.), Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides), cross vine (Bignonia cal)reolata), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora).
There were isolated populations of river cane (Arundinaria gigantean).
3.5.3 Disturbed Areas
The disturbed areas included sanitary sewer easements, power line easements, and residential and
commercial clearing. These disturbed areas were primarily comprised of midcanopy and understory
successional species which include: box elder (Acct- negundo), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
red cedar (Juniperits virginiana), plum (11runrts spp.), winged elm (Ulmats alata), tree-of-heaven
(Ailanthus altissima), winged sumac (Rhos copallina), and silverling (Baccharis halimifolia).
Herbaceous and vines species consisted of Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), asters (Aster
spp.), pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), blackberry (Rubars spp.), multiflora rose (Rasa multiflora),
Nepal grass (Microstegium vimineum), milkweed (A sclepias spp), (oxtail (Setaria spp.), Johnson grass
(Sorghum halepense), river cane (Arundinaria gigantean), marsh dayflower (Murdannia keisak),
goldenrod (Solidago spp.) teaarthumb (1'olygonum sagittatum), soft rush (Juncos effusus), and sedges
(Carex spp.).
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE. 9-6 8/4J2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAILER CORPORATION
4.0 REFERENCE STREAMS
In an effort to determine suitable reference reaches for the design we employed the NCDOT reference reach
database as well as identifying an additional sandbed channel site. Reference reach geomorphic data is
summarized below in Table 4.1.,
Only one undisturbed reference reach could be found within the adjacent reaches or the same watershed as the
project site, :so reference reaches in adjacent watersheds as well as those within a common physiographic
province (Figure 3.5) were identified and reconnaissance performed. Among all of the systems considered,
only UT Edinburgh was determined to be adequately stable and undisturbed to be considered a reference
reach.
The UT Edinburgh reach is a small watershed sandbed creek that had seen limited development to date. Buck
Engineering conducted a survey of approximately 260 LF encompassing two pool and two riffle cross
sections. Surveyed cross sections and profile data are included in Appendix D. The bankfull discharge of the
creek was estimated to be 37 cfs, Additionally, the NCDOT database was reviewed for applicable reference
reach streams. Two additional sites with similar slope and substrate were chosen as appropriate reference
reaches for the McDowell Creek Restoration.
A summary of the reference data are provided in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1
Reference Reach Geomorphic Paramet(,,rs
I

I Mio Nf ax Max Max Min Max
1. stream `r ae E5 E5 E5
2. Drainage Area - sc uarc miles 0.11 1.1 0.15
3. I3ankfull Width wt, - feet 14.8 9.6 12.0
4. Bankfull Mean De th da, t - feet 1.2 2.1 1.4
5. Width/De th Ratio (wld ratio 12.7 4.6 8.6
6. Cross-sectional Area SF 17.1 20,7 18.8
7 Bankfull Mean Velocity vl, ) - fps 2.5 4.3 2.5
€3. Bank ruII Discharge 01, -crs 37 88 47
9. Bankfull Max Depth d,+kl - feet 2.0 23 2.3
10. d bhr 1 d ratio 1.8 1.1 1.5
11. Low Bank Height to d Ratio 1.0 1.0
12. Flood rune Area Width wr,,, - feet 45+ 270 49
13. Entrenchment Ratio ER 712 28.1 4,1
14. Meander len th L,, - beet 52 73 22
15. Ratio of meander length to irankfull width
L lw 3.0 7.6 1.8
16. Radius of curvature R, - feet 12 21 17 41 73 17
17. Ratio of radius of curvature to hankfttll
Width 1 w ) 0.7 1.2 1.4 4.3 0.6 1.4
18. BeIt widih w[„ - feet 58 32 45 45
19. Meander Width patio (w, W ) 3.3 15 3.8 3.8
20. Sinuosity (K) Stream Length/ Valley
Distance 1.17 1.33
21. Valle Slope - feet per root 0.0063 0.0080
22. Channel Slope s 1. ,,,,,i - feet cr toot 0.0052 0.0060 11.0033
23. Fool Slope s - feet per foot 0021 .0070
24. Ratio of Pool Slope to Average Slope
5 ?S } 0.04 1.35 -
25. Maximum Pool Depth d feel 3.7 11 3.1 3,1
26. Ratio of Pool Depth to Average Bankfull
Depth (d 1d, ) 1.9 1.3 1.8 1.8 2.2
27. Pool Width w „ -feet 20.3 13.9 ITI 20.8
BUCK ENGINEENNG PAGE 4-1 81412005
A UMT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORAT[ON
Table 4.1
Reference Reach Geomorphic. Parameters
ti't L"di lbul- 11 Nast Branch IT Io Valve-
Tibb, R(To Je2-1110tc
Mara ivlax iv'Iax iv ax Min ?Iax
28. Ratio of Pouf Width to Bankfull Width 1.4 1.5 1.9 1.7 1.5
(w,-1 )
29. Pool Area A „ - square feet 32 20.6 24.2 26.9
30. Ratio of Pool Area to Bankfull Area
(A.kuPI/ADhd 1.8 1.5 1.7
31. Pool-to-Pool S actin *- feet 37 70
32. Ratio of Pool-to-Pool Spacing to Bankfaall
Width f r- IW 2.1 6 -
3. Ril IkeIc? e ` s?;, -feet er font O.f31!) 0.0100
34. Ratio of Riffle Slope to Average Slope
4.. • 1 J 1.9 1.7
i )rfloii of Riffle. Material
Material d5( Medhim Said Medium Sand Meclirrrn Salacl
d rs - rn in 0.37
c1?z - min 0,65 0.30 -
{I,o - mm 0;9 0.40 0.50
t184 - nom 1,08 to 3.5
cl,15 - inns 4.0 36 -
: dara 11ol available
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 4.2 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
5.4 PROJECT SITE WETLANDS
5.1 Jurisdictional Wetlands
It is likely that much of the project area once existed as a wetland ecosystem, as evidenced by hydric soil
areas across the floodplain of the site. Wetland areas that once existed on the site were drained and
manipulated to promote agricultural uses. The stream was channelized within the project area to improve
surface and subsurface drainage and to decrease flooding. Wetlands have reformed on the site in the southern
portion of the site and where the sanitary sewer line grading has created small impoundment areas.
!Following an in-office review of the rational Wetland Inventory (NWI) map, MRCS soil survey, and USES
quadrangle map, a field survey of the project area was conducted to delineate wetlands and waters of the U. S.
The project area was examined utilizing the jurisdictional definition detailed in the Carps of'Engincers
Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1.987). Supplementary information to further
support wetland determinations was found in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wettands:
Southeast (Region 2) (Reed, 1988).
Wetland determinations were made by evaluating vegetation, soils and observable hydrologic indicators
within the project reach. Wetland flags were subsequently surveyed during the topographic survey in January
2006.
Twenty wetlands, totaling 3,1 acres, were identified within the project areas shown on Figure 5.1. Wetland
data forms are included in Appendix E. The following sections describe USACE jurisdictional areas found in
the project area. A jurisdictional determination has not been submitted to the 1USACE. Most wetlands found
on the project site are hydrologically connected to McDowell Creek through both natural and mechanically
produced drain channels. Existing onsite wetlands are under duress and are threatened by drainage ditch
incision. Drain channels across the site are incising to match the lowered grade of McDowell Creek. Field
observations indicate headcuts are migrating upstream in numerous drainage channels and will have negative
impacts on existing wetland hydrology if incision is not curtailed. Stream realignment and reconstruction
will be designed to avoid wetland impacts to the greatest extent practicable.
5.2 Hydrologic Characterization
Mecklenburg County has an average annual rainfall of 43.5 inches and an average growing season that is 257
days long, beginning on March 10 and ending on November 22 (NRCS, 2003). Suck Engineering collected
rainfall data for the monitoring period from a weather station, located at the Charlotte Douglas International
Airport.. Monthly precipitation amounts from January through December 2005 are compared with
Mecklenburg County WETS table (MRCS 1995) average monthly rainfall, in Table 5.1. These data indicate
that over the entire year, total rainfall was slightly below normal.
Table 5.1
Site Precipitation Summary
Montll-Year Obser? ed Wl I'S 'Libie Awes ape DCNN iatioo of obserued
Precipitation 6n) Monthly Precipitation Got) ?tgE ever;!-~e ;E11)
January-05 1.63 4.00 -2.37
Pcb nary-0_ti 2.84 3.55 -0.71
March-05 4.66 4.39 0.27
April-05 2.95 2.95 0.0
May-05 2.42 3.66 -1.24
June-05 8.2 3.42 4.78
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 5.3 8!412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Table 5.1
Site Precipitation Summary
'vl[rEttlt-Ye.a r
Observed 1VFTSFable Aver agc D(vi?rtirrn rif Observed
Precipitation 6n) lloutbly Prccipitatiorr (in) from Aver.we (in)

July-t)5
3.04
3.79 ------------ --
_ , :t5
August-05 1.97 3.72 -175
September-05 0.36 3.53 -3.47
October-05 4.57 3.66 0.91
November-05 2.913 3.36 -038
December-05 5.25 3.1€3 2.07
Total 40.87 43.52 -2.65
5.3 Soil Characterization
The project soils are mapped as Monacan loam according to the NRCS Soil Survey for Mecklenburg County.
The Monacan soil series is on the hydric C. list for Mecklenburg County. The soil survey indicates that these
areas contain hydric inclusions. The Monacan series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly-drained soils
with moderate permeability on floodplains. The seasonal high witter table is at it depth of 0.5 to 2.0 feet from
the surface. A description of other, non-hydric soils on the upland areas of the project site is provided in
Section 2, and a soils map for the site is provided as Figure 2.2.
5.4 Plant Community Characterization
5.4.1 Emergent Marsh Wetlands
Wetlands 1, 2, 4, and 1{1 are emergent marsh wetland systems. 'T'hese wetlands are located in disturbed
areas along the sanitary sewer easement on the western side of the McDowell Creek floodplain corridor.
The total area of these four wetlands comprises 0.1 acres.
Vegetation within these wetlands is dominated by herbaceous species with no woody species identified.
Vegetation consisted of soft rush (Juncos effusus), spotted lady's thumb (1'vlygcsnum pet-icaria), sedges
(Cat-ex spp.), blackberry (Rubus spp.), Japanese grass (Misr ostegium viminetcm), tearthumb
(11olygontim sagittalurn), and burr reed (Sparganium sRp). Wetland hydrology indicators included
inundation and saturated soils. Standing water was observed in all three locations. Depth of surface
water ranged from 1 to b inches. The soils were silty clay loams and were dark grey to grayish brown
(tOYR 311 to 10YR 412) with yellowish red to strong brown mottles (5YR 5/6 to 7.5YR 516).
5.4.2 Scrub-Shrub Wetlands
Wetlands 5-9, 12, 14, 17, 19, and 20 are scrub-shrub wetland systems. These wetlands are located in
disturbed depressional areas adjacent to the McDowell Creek floodplain. The total area of the ten
wetlands is 2.5 acres.
Vegetation in these wetlands is dominated by scrub-shrubs, with no canopy species present, Woody
plant species consists of immature Box elder (Acer negundo), American sycamore (Platantts
occidentalis), sweet gum (Licluidarnbar styracifltta), American elan (Ulmus americana), and red maple
(Acer• r•ubrurn). Herbaceous and vine species consisted of cattails (Typha latifolia), soft rush, spotted
lady's thumb, sedges, blackberry (Ruhus spp.), Japanese grass, tearthumb, deer-tongue witchgrass
(Dichanthelium clandcstinum), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Algae was present in
areas of standing water. Wetland hydrology indicators included inundation, saturated soils, and
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 5.4 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL. BAKER CORPORATION
drainage patterns in wetlands. Standing water was present in most of the wetlands; depth of surface
water ranged from 1 to 18 inches. The soils were silty clays and ranged from dark brown to dark
grayish brown (10YR 411 to 10YR 412) with red to yellowish red mottles (2.5YR 518 to 5YR 5/6).
5.4.3 Forested Wetlands
Wetlands 3, 11, 13, 15, 16 and 18 are toe of slope and headwater forested wetland systems. These
wetlands are located in the eastern floodplain adjacent to McDowell Creek. The total area of the six
forested wetlands comprises 0.5 acres.
Vegetation in these wetlands is dominated by deciduous hardwoods that are 6 meters tall or greater.
Woody vegetation consisted of similar species found in the scrub-shrub wetland community such as
box-elder, American sycamore, sweet gum, American elm, and red maple. Herbaceous and vine
species consisted of soft rush, blackberry, Japanese grass, tearthumb, giant cane (Arundinaria
gigiantea), crossvine (Bignoniia capreal atu), Japanese honeysuckle, and poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans). Wetland hydrology indicators included inundation, saturated soils, water marks, and
drainage patterns in wetlands. Soils were silty clay loams and colors ranged from dark gray brown to
very dark grayish brown (10YR 411 to 10YR 3/2) with dark reddish brown to strong brown mottles
(2.5YH 314 to 7.5YR 518).
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 5.5 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
6.0 REFERENCE WETLANDS
Wetland restoration potential is being assessed at this time and restoration alternatives will be
presented when available.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 6-1 8/4/2006
A UNIT ?F MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
7.4 PROJECT SITE RESTORATION PLAN
This section discusses the design criteria selected for stream restoration and for the storm water BMP retrofit
on the McDowell Creek project site.
7.1 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives
This project site is an appropriate candidate for restoration because significantly more erosion will occur
before the channel is able to achieve a stable, quasi-equilibrium state. Nearly all of the channel reach appears
to be incised and is widening, and bank erosion is likely contributing extensive sediment to the areas
downstream of the project site. Restoration can help to stabilize the channel, halt incision and widening, and
significantly diminish bank erosion.
The mainstem channel is under pressure from development and human impacts. The majority of tlae stream
length is incised and is showing a tendency toward lateral migration. If left alone the redevelopment of
meanders and a. new floodplain would continue through erosion. The restoration approach on the mainstem is
targeted at accelerating the evolutionary process already occurring. A stream with greater sinuosity than now
exists will be constructed in beaches 2 and 3 and aE floodplain bench will be excavated in the Priority 3 reach
to provide energy dissipation in an overbank flooding event. Invasive vegetative species removal efforts and
reforestation of the riparian buffer with native species will complement the channel restoration.
Site conditions will necessitate the use of techniques that will not fully reclaim the abandoned floodplain
across the entire length of the project site. Tire upstream terminus of the project must tie in to an existing
culvert under Westmoreland Road where the floodplain is pinched between tlae valley wall on the right frank
and the 1-77 NCD©T right-of-way on the left bank. In order to effect this transition from existing bed.
elevation to a Priority .f restoration, a section of Priority 3 channel restoration will be required, creating an
active floodplain at a lower elevation. The slope of tlae Priority 3 restoration reach will be minimized to raise
the bed elevation of the stream and bring the top of bank elevation to the floodplain. The point at which the
top of bank meets existing ground elevation is where a Priority 1 restoration will begin. The intersection of
the top of bank and the floodplain occurs approximately 3,850 LF downstream of (lie culvert crossing Lander
Westmoreland Road. Priority 1 restoration will be used for the remainder of the restoration area except for
the final 350 LF where aa. Priority 2 approach will be implemented to step the channel invert back down to the
box culvert invert elevation at Sam Furr Road.
7.2 Design Criteria Selection for Stream Restoration
Selection of natural channel design criteria is based on a combination of approaches including review of
reference reach databases, regime equations, and evaluation of results from past projects.
Selection of a general restoration approach is the first step in selecting design criteria at the McDowell Creek
site. The approach was based on the reach's potential for restoration, as determined during the site
assessment. After selection of the general restoration approach, specific design criteria will be developed so
that the plan view layout, cross-section dimensions, and profile can be described for each reach, for the
purpose of developing construction documents. The design philosophy at the McDowell Creek site is to use
average values for the selected stream types and to allow the extremes to form over long periods of time under
the processes of flooding, re-colonization of vegetation, and geologic influences.
After examining the existing condition, recognizing the potential for restoration, and reviewing reference
reach data, design criteria were developed. Assigning an appropriate stream type for the corresponding valley
that will accommodate the existing and future hydrologic and sediment contributions was considered
conceptually prior to selecting reference reach streams. Design criteria for the proposed stream concept were
selected based on the range of the reference data and the desired performance of the proposed channel.
Following initial application of the design criteria, detail refinements were made to accommodate the existing
valley morphology, to avoid encroachment of easement boundaries and the valley wall, to minimize
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-2 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
unnecessary disturbance of the existing riparian forest, and to promote natural channel adjustment following
construction. The proposed stream types for the project are summarized in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1
Project Design Stream i
Reach Proposed Rationale
Stream
----------------------------------
Priority 3 restoration will be used to raise the bed elevation and allow reconnection
peach 1 C5 of the channel and floodplain downstream. Use of the existing channel will limit
grading rand disturbance. A floodplain bench will be excavated adjacent to the
channel to dissipate flood water energy.
Priority 1 restoration will increase sinuosity, pool development, and reestablish
leach 2 C5 connection with the floodplain. Native re-vegetation will improve habitat and
stabilize the banks.
Priority 1 restoration will increase sinuosity, pool development, and reestablish
beach 3 C5 connection with the floodplain. Native re-vegetation will improve habitat and
stabilize the banks. Priority 2 restoration will facilitate the transition between the
constructed and the existing downstream channel,
7.3 Design Parameters
The primary objective of the restoration design is to construct a strum with a stable dimension, pattern, and.
profile that has access to its tloodplain at bankfull flows while enhancing riparian and aquatic habitat. The
philosophy applied by Buck Engineering throughout the McDowell Creek project area consisted of creating
C-type channels with the potential to naturally adjust where E-type tendencies occur. The proposed design
for peaches 1 through 3 are detailed in Figure 7.1.
The design rationale and design parameters for all of the design reaches are presented below.
Dimension
Throughout the entire proposed design, the cross-section dimensions were adjusted to reduce velocities
and near-bank shear stress. The selected design parameters eliminate incision and restore access to the
floodplain. The lower end of a C-type channel width to depth ratio was chosen so the channel may
narrow to an E-type morphology over time. E-type channels are difficult to construct due to high
instability immediately after construction. A low bank height ratio (BHR) of 1.0 was designed so the
channel has access to the 11oodplain during events having flows in excess of bankfull. Typical cross
sections are shown on the plan sheets.
Pattern
The proposed channel alignment in Reaches 2 and 3 will increase the sinuosity to approximately 1.2.
The overall length of restored and enhanced channel will increase from 7,555 to 8,252 LF. However,
stream length of the Priority 3 portion of the project is essentially unchanged. Higher meander width
ratios on the restored channel were intended to allow for lateral dissipation of energy and provide a
floodplain sufficient for future natural channel development. Some isolated lengths of the channel were
constrained by a narrow valley and utility conflicts. In these locations, the proposed belt width is
limited although vertical profile is restored. Plan views of the main channel are shown on the attached
plan sheets.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-3 8/4/2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Aside from reaches that are confined, radii of curvature fall into the range of approximately two to three
times the channel's proposed bankfull width. In an effort to enhance stability immediately following
completion of construction and prior to establishment of a stabilizing vegetative root mass, a majority
of bends incorporate radius of curvature ratios equal to or greater than 2.3.
Proffle/Bedfolrtn
Although moderately functional and somewhat stable, the channel profile of the existing mainstem is
lacking sufficient vertical grade control, woody debris, and overall bedform diversity. During the
construction of the proposed channel, access to the existing floodplain will first be acquired, followed
by facet development (riffle, run, pool, glide, and step-pool) mimicking those characteristic of the
reference reaches. Average channel slope for Reach 1 ranges between 0.13 percent and 0.27 percent,
while average channel slope for Reach 2 and Reach 3 ranges between 0.25 percent and 0.84 percent.
Riffles throughout the design reaches are between 1.5 and 3.3 times the average slope of the channel.
The maximum pool depth is proposed to be constructed from the meander curve apex to a point one-
third of the distance along the profile from the apex to the head of the next downstream riffle (Copeland
et al., 2001).
Design Reaches
A stable cross-section will be achieved by widening the channel and increasing the width/depth ratio.
The Priority 1 portions of the channel will be designed as a C stream type, and the sinuosity will be
increased by adding meanders to lengthen the channel. Grade control at the bed will be provided to
both the Priority 1 and Priority 3 reaches by in-stream structures such as constructed riffles, log cross-
vanes and log step structures. These structures will improve habitat as well as help to improve bedform
diversity. Bioengineering and in-stream structures will be used at the outside of meander bends
(including root wads, brush mattressing, log vanes and cover lags) to promote additional bank stability
and improve habitat.
Reach 1 is the beginning of the project and starts 1,350, LF downstream of the outlet of the concrete box
culvert passing under Westmoreland Road. This 2,485 LF Priority 3 reach was designed as a Rosgen
Be, having a low slope, minimal meander, and with excavated floodplain benching on the left bank in
order to tie proposed bankfull elevations into adjacent floodplain elevations as quickly as possible. A
variety of in-stream structures will be installed in this reach including log cross vanes, rock sills, and
log drops that will serve to provide vertical grade control and improve habitat quality.
Reach 2 is approximately 3,045 LF and begins at the point where the ;Priority 3 restoration has raised
the bankfull elevation to meet the ground elevation. This point is the beginning of a full Priority 1.
design. The new channel alignment utilizes the existing wide, flat floodplain on the east overbank.
The final 2,774 L1F of the project, Leach 3, begins at the confluence of McDowell Creek with the outlet
Swale of the BMP pond for Birkdale Village and ends at the concrete box culvert located at Saari Purr
Road. The proposed alignment meanders around and through existing wetlands and uses cross vane
structures near the project terminus to bring the channel bed elevation to the box culvert elevation at
Sam Furr Road.
Table 7.2 presents the proposed stream restoration design criteria applied throughout the project area.
Table 7.2
Dvsi n Parimeters and Proposed t:epmorphic [ haracterisiics
iLi..?..

.......... ivlaX

Mill ?'It\ ..

......h'lill Max
1. Stream 'I e Bc C5 C:5
2. Drainage Area - sc uare miles 2.4 3. I 3,6
3, BankfuII W i d I h % i - feet 20 24.5 29
4. Bankfult Mean De th dl, . - feet 2 2.2 2.5
5. Width/Depth Ratio w_d ratio 10 11.1 11.6
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7.4 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL. BAKER CORPORATION
Table 7.2
13esi PIMW-tersFind Characteristics
..................... ...
124-aC I?
............ r
Min ldLA Min Max Min Max
o. Cross-sectional Aren A,, ,, -SF 37 47 59
7. Bankfull Mean Velocit vi, e ->f s 4.5 4.2 3.7
8, Bankfult Dischar a (},, )- cfs 165 196 220
9. Bankfull Max De th d,,,l,k) - feet 3 3 3.2
10. dnLbkr / d, ratio 1.5 1.4 1.3
It. Low Bank Height to d Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0
12. Flood rone Area Width w ,, -feet 55 >100.0 X100,0
13. Entrenchment Ratio ER 2.8 4. 1+ 3.4+
14. Meander len th L -feet w 253 350 260 398
15. Ratio of meander length to bankfull width
(1 , ) - - 10.3 143 9.0 13.7
16, radius of curvature It. - feel 52 87 55 94
17. Ratio of radius of curvature to bankfull width
1 .1 W, - - 2.1 3.6 1.9 3.2
lg. BelI width w,i - feet 115 140 125 150
19. Meander Width Ratio (w IWa ) - 4.7 5.7 4.3 5.2
20. Sinuosit (K) Stream Length/ Valle Distsance - 1.2 1.2
21, Valle Sloe feet er foot 0.003 0.003 0.003
22. Channel Sloes ) - reet Per foot 0.0013 0.0025 0.0026
21 Pont 5lo e s I - feet er foot {} 0 0
24. Maxinium Pool Depth cl -foot 4.0 7.0 4.5 7.8 5.0 8,0
25. Ratio of Pool Depth to Average Bankfull
De th (d , d ) 2.0 3.5 2.1 3.5 2.0 3.2
26. Pool Width w w, - feet 30 32.5 35.5
27. Ratio of fool width to Bankfull Width (wa,Uoa 1
ova, ) 1.4 1.3 1.2
28. Pnol A-ca A square feet 59 72 85
wl mm10(io of hx)l Area to Bankfull Area 1.6 1.5 1.6
30. Pookto-Puol 5 acts - legit 155 250 120 237 120 2:32
31. Ratio of fool-to-fool Spacing to Bankfull
Width (- lw ) 7 10 4.9 9.7 4.1 8.0
32. Riffle Slope (4t (sjCnq) - feet per foot 0.0023 0.0027 0.0035 0.0075 0.0043 0.0084
33. Matzo of Riffle Slope to Average Slope (s,i f?
S), hr) 118 Z.1 1.5 3.1) 1.7 3.2

7.4 Sediment Transport
7.4.1 Methodology
The purpose of sediment transport analysis is to ensure that the stream restoration design creates a
stable channel that does not aggrade or degrade over time. The overriding assumption is that the
project teach should be transporting all the sediment delivered from upstream. sources, thereby
being a "transport" reach and classified as a Rosgen "C" or "E" type channel.
Sediment transport is typically assessed by computing channel competency, capacity, or bath..
Sediment transport competency is a measure of force (lbslft2) that refers to the stream's ability to
move a given grain size. Quantitative assessments include shear stress, tractive force, and critical
dimensionless shear stress. Since these assessments help determine a size class that is mobile under
certain flow conditions, they are most important in gravel bed studies in which the bed material
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7'-5 8f412OO6
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
ranges in size from sand to cobble (of which only a fraction are mobile during bankfull conditions).
In most sand-bed systems; all particle sizes have potential during bankfull flows; therefore, there is
no need to determine the maximum particle size that the stream can transport. Comparing the
design shear stress values fora project reach to those for the existing conditions in it system allows
a quantitative determination of reduction of erosive forces.
Many sediment transport calculations, including Andrews and kosgen methods, rely on a diverse
grain size material distribution and derive relationships based on the median grain size of pavement.
and subpavement samples. The use of these competency calculations for McDowell Creek are
invalid because the nurture of the bed material is fine grained and not well graded; therefore the
resulting ratio values d, e
()paiven,el,lfd,i(t,;,bpaven,cl,f and d;/d5(Jp,,.,,e„1 do not fall within the required
intervals and are not applicable. This is often the case when dealing with substrate consisting
predominantly of coarse sand to fine gravel and finer. For this reason, an alternative calculation is
required. Yang's method (1973, 1984) for computing boundary shear stress and critical velocity
was applied. Like the traditional calculation for competency, this selected function is also based on
the principle of unit stream power as the dominant factor in total sediment concentration. However,
Yang's equation applies to sediment ranging between 0.062 and 7.0 mm. The general transport
equations for sand and gravel using the Yang function for a single grain size is represented by the
following equations:
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-6 9I4/"6
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
lnuut Parar?dm
Temperature, IF T 55 Average Velocity, Afs, V
Kinematic viscosity, ft2/s v 0,€10001315 Discharge, ft'/s Q
Hydraulic Radius.. ft R = Unit Weight water, Ibife y
Slope, S 4
Meidan Particle Diamter, ft do 3
Specific Gravity of Sediment s r 2.35
Constan
Acceleration of gravity, fVs2 g = 32.2
Solar 1.
211
Shear Velocity. ftls,
u. yj•R S
Particle Fall Velocity, ftls,
Use Rubey's equation,
is z 36•y2 36 v

Shear Reynold's Number,
R u* ' Mgr
a
v
Critical Velocity, ftfs,
2.5 +0.66 A`9 c R, ¢ 70
V,:, _ log( ! • d., .' 0.06
2.05) if R. ? 70
Computation of critical velocities for the proposed conditions of McDowell Creek using Yang's
method produces results that are comparable to other stable sand bed channel systems analyzed by
Buck Engineering.
Critical shear stress analysis was also performed on the existing and proposed channel cross
sections. Critical shear stress is a measure of the pressure exerted on sediment particles within a
stream channel may be estimated by the following equation:
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-7 814/2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
-c = yRS, where Equation (1)
T = shear stress (lb/ft)
y = specific gravity of water (62.4 lb/ft)
R = hydraulic radius (ft)
S = average channel slope (ft/ft)
These calculations using the described methods produced lower values for proposed channel
boundary shear stress and increased critical velocity than for the existing channel. Stated simply,
the proposed conditions will result in increased stability for all design reaches,.
7.4.2 Sediment Transport Analysis and Discussion
For sand-bed streams, sediment transport capacity is a much more important analysis tool than
competency. Sediment transport capacity refers to the stream's agility to move a mass of sediment past
a cross section per unit of time, expressed in pounds/second or tons/year. Sediment transport capacity
can be assessed directly, using actual monitored data from bankfull events, if a sediment transport
rating curve has been developed for the project site. Since rating curve development is extremely
difficult, other empirical relationships are used to assess sediment transport capacity. The most
common capacity equation is stream power Stream power can be calculated a number of ways, but the
most common among geomorphologists is:
w = yQS/W, where
Equation (2)
co = mean stream power in W/m2
y = specific weight of water (9,810 N/m'); y = pg where p is the density of the water
sediment mixture (1,000 kg/mI) and g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.$1 m/s'`)
Q = bankfull discharge in m-/s
S = design channel slope (dimensionless)
W = bankfull channel width in meters
Note: 1, ft-lb /sec/ft2 = 14.56 W/mZ
Equation 2 does not provide a sediment transport rating curve; however, it does describe the stream's
ability to accomplish work (i,e. move sediment). For this analysis, stream power values are calculated
and compared to a range of stream power values documented for stable reference streams. Calculated
values for the McDowell Creek restoration fall within the range of values given for stable reference
streams, thus providing confidence that the design stream will be able to transport its sediment load.
Analysis also provides evidence that the stresses predicted for the design channel reaches are lower than
existing conditions. Therefore, the design channel is expected to have adequate stream power to move
its sediment load without resulting in excessive scour.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7.8 81412005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Table 7.3
Sediment transport calculations summary
Design Reach Transport
farnctiosrfsl
Results
Reach I Yang (1973, 1954) Proposed conditions produce: 1) lower boundary shear stress (r) and 2) increased
critical shear velocity (v,,).
Reach 2 fang (1973, .1954) Proposed conditions produce: 1) lower boundary shear stress (T) and 2) increased
critical shear velocity (v,,).
Reach 3 Yang (1973, 1954) Proposed conditions produce: 1) lower boundary shear stress (T) and 2) increased
critical shear velocity (v,,).
7.5 In-Stream Structures
A variety of in-stream structures are proposed for the McDowell Creek site. Structures such as root wads,
constructed riffles, and log vanes will be used to stabilize the newly-restored stream. Wood structures will
primarily be used on this site because that is the material observed in the existing system and it is often
generated during the channel construction process, Table 7.4 summarizes the use of in-stream structures at
the site.
Table 7.4
Proposed In-Stream Structure Type:, and Locations
Structure Fypc Location
Root Wad Outside bank of smaller radius meander bends.
Brush Mattress Outside batik of shorter arcs and larger radius meander bends.
Rock Cross Vane Reach 3 to align stream velocity vectors with existing culvert and step
down bed elevation in a stable spanner.
Constructed Riffle 't'hrough straight, steeper sections to provide grade control.
Rack or Log Vane In meander bends to turn water.
Cover Log In pools to provide habitat features.
Boulder or Log Sill For grade control and pool habitat.
Boulder Cluster For energy dissipation and habitat between riffles in straight sections.

Root Wad
Root wads are placed at the toe of the stream bank in the outside of meander bends for the creation of
habitat and far stream bank protection. Root wads include the root mass or root ball of a tree plus a
portion of the trunk. They are used to armor a stream bank by deflecting stream flows away from the
bank. In addition to stream bank protection, they provide structural support to the stream bank and
habitat for fish and other aquatic animals. They also serve as a food source for aquatic insects. Root
wads will be placed throughout the McDowell Creek project.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7?9 81412006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
Brush Mattress
Brush mattresses are placed on bank slopes on the outside of meander bends for stream bank protection,
Layers of live, woody cuttings are wired together and staked into the bank. Brush mattresses help to
establish vegetation on the bank to secure the soil. Once the vegetation is established, the cover also
provides habitat for wildlife.
Cross Vane
Cross vanes are used to provide grade control, keep the thalweg in the center of the channel, and protect
the stream bank. A cross vane consists of two rock or log vanes joined by a center structure installed
perpendicular to the direction of flow. This centering structure sets the invert elevation of the stream
bed. These structures will be placed in the main channel at both the upstream and downstream project.
limits.
Constructed Riffle
A constructed riffle consists of the placement of coarse bed material in the stream at specific riffle
locations along the profile. A buried log or rock boulders at the upstream and downstream end of riffles
may be used to control the slope through the riffle in steeper sections. The purpose of this structure is
to provide grade control and establish riffle habitat. Constructed riffles will be placed throughout all
reaches. In the higher slope reaches, the constructed riffles and cross vanes will be intermixed to
provide diversity of structure and in-stream habitat,
hock or Lot; Vane
A rock or log vane is used to protect the stream bank. The length of a single vane structure can span
one-half to two-thirds the bankfull channel width. Vanes are located either upstream or downstream
along a meander bend and function to initiate or complete the redirecting of flow energies resulting in
reduced near bank shear stress and alignment maintenance.. Vanes are located just downstream of the
point where the stream flow intercepts the batik at acute angles. In an effort to promote structural
diversity, the proposed restoration indicates a mixed use of rock and logs to construct vanes.
Cover Lag
A cover log is placed in the outside of a meander bend to provide habitat in the pool area. The log is
buried into the outside bank of the meander bend; the opposite end extends through the deepest part of
the pool and may be buried in the inside of the meander bend, in the bottom of the point bar. The
placement of the cover log near the bottom of the bank slope on the outside of the bend encourages
scour in the pool. This increased scour provides a deeper pool for bedform variability. Cover logs will
be used on all reaches.
Boulder or Log Sill
Boulder and log sills consist of either header stones and footer stones or header log and a footer log
placed in the bed of the stream channel, perpendicular to stream flow. The rocks or logs extend into the
stream banks on both sides of the structure to prevent erosion and bypassing of the structure. The rocks
or logs are installed flush with the channel bottom upstream of the rock or log. The footer rock or log is
placed to the depth of scour expected, to prevent the structure from being undermined. Rock and log
weirs provide bedform diversity, maintain channel profile, and provide pool and cover habitat.
Boulder Cluster Placement
Boulder cluster placement is proposed in areas between short riffles. While the short riffles act as grade
control, the boulder placement produces lateral and vertical flow diversity at low flows. At bankfull
flows, the boulders serve as energy dissipation features, adding to the overall bed roughness and
providing local downstream eddy microhabitat.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-10 814/2306
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
7.6 HEGRAS Analysis
7.6.1 Preliminary Modeling
At this 60 % design stage, preliminary modeling has been performed to test the Priority 3 to Priority 1
design approach. The effective HEC-RAS model was obtained from Mecklenburg County. A proposed
conditions model was developed using typical riffle cross sections and a preliminary profile. The upper
third of the project will have a bankfull bench and a very slight slope to allow the channel to approach
the existing abandoned floodpla'in. The remainder of the project will have a channel that is raised so
that the bankfull stage corresponds to the existing floodplain.
Preliminary model results indicate that the proposed design will cause no rise from Sam Purr Road to
the upstream end of the Greens at Birkdale. Upstream of a natural topographic pinch point, a rise in the
100-yeas water surface will result from this design. No insurable structures will be affected by this rise.
The 100-year water surface may rise as much as three feet..
A detailed hydraulic analysis and Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) will be required prior
to construction of the project. Mecklenburg County has recently obtained approval to review CLQMR.
applications at the local level. Following construction, an as-built of the completed project will be
required and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will be required for submittal to Mecklenburg County.
7.7 Storm Water B MP Retrofit
7.7.1 Sediment Basin Wet Pond Existing Conditions
The existing sediment detention wet pond is depicted in Figure 3.1. Buck Engineering reviewed the
original design plans for the existing wet pond developed by Land Design in July 1999. Buck
Engineering :staff also reviewed and surveyed the site to assess its existing condition and function.
The following issues were noted during the site review and survey:
I . Three forebays, as well as other input areas, have accumulated sediment.
2. The initial design did not provide facilities for maintenance access to any of the forebays.
3. The drainage that enters from the west has a high potential of short-circuiting due to the close
proximity of the inlet to the outlet.
4. The pond regularly has excessive algal growth resulting in low dissolved oxygen levels
within, and flowing out from, the BMP.
Despite the potential for short-circuiting of the main input to the pond, the existing pond is likely
removing total suspended solids (TSS) at a moderate level due to its relatively long detention time.
However, the existing pond is removing nutrients, metals, hydrocarbons, and organics at a
lowlmoderate level due to the lack of wetland characteristics (e.g. emergent vegetation) and
associated wetland physical, biological and chemical treatment processes. The large permanent pool
volume of the existing pond results in a long period of time for the permanent pool to be completely
replenished by base flow and storm water inputs (replenishment time). The long replenishment times
result in long periods of sunlight exposure within the system, which is the likely reason for the
excessive algal growth.
7.7.2 BMP Retrofit Resign Goals
MCSWS is proposes to retrofit the existing wet. detention basin (wet pond) adjacent to the Greens at
Birkdale development to improve water quality and riparian habitat within a storm water Best:
Management Practice (BMP). The BMP retrofit is a way to further improve water quality and habitat
quality in the (McDowell Creek watershed and the benefits provided by the proposed BMP retrofit are
similar to the benefits of restoration to the downstream channel. Flexible mitigation credit guidelines
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-11 814/2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
allow for increased mitigation credit when storm water BMPs are implemented upstream of a channel
that is being restored. As such, implementation of the proposed BMP retrofit should increase the
number of mitigation credits awarded for the McDowell Creek restoration project.
The design goals for the BMP retrofit are to:
1. Maximize removal of nutrients, metals, organics, oils and greases, and TSS;
2. Improve habitat for fish and wildlife by decreasing temperatures and increasing dissolved
oxygen (DO) concentrations in the pond and the downstream system;
3. Deduce algal growth problems to the maximum extent practicable;
4, Provide a system that is easily maintained and aesthetically pleasing.
This pond discharges directly to McDowell Creek. Peak discharge attenuation is not a specific design
goal for the pond because of the short time of concentration of this watershed and its proximity to
McDowell Creek. It is better to allow the peak from this pond to pass before the McDowell Creek
peak occurs, rather than storing the peak and then releasing it when it might coincide with, and add to,
the peak discharge in the McDowell Creek watershed.
The preferred design alternative should achieve all of the above-mentioned goals. By doing so, it will
provide benefits to the downstream system. Specifically, implementation of the preferred design
alternative will result in lower pollutant loading rates, lower temperatures, higher DC concentrations
in the BMP and BMP effluent, and improved habitat in McDowell Creek.
7.7.3 Extended Detention Wetland Resign Features
The chosen retrofit design alternative is an extended detention wetland because it is the most effective
at removing the target pollutants: nutrients, metals, hydrocarbons, and organics. In addition, the
extended detention wetland design will decrease the permanent pool volume and replenishment time
of the system. Extended detention wetlands are assumed to provide 85% TSS removal, 40% nitrogen
removal, moderate to high phosphorus, organics and metals removal, and moderate hydrocarbon
removal.
The attached plan set presents the 60% design for the extended detention wetland. This design is
based on the design guidance provided by the NCDENR Updated Draft Manual for Storm water best
Management Practices (Draft BMP Manual), which will be revised summer 2€ 06, The 60% design
may need to be revised based on the requirements and guidance provided in the final NCDENR
Manual for Storm water Best Management Practices. A brief discussion of each design parameter
associated with the extended detention wetland follows.
Permanent Pool Surface Area
The permanent water pool surface area required for a drainage area of 128 acres that is 35%
impervious is approximately 1.97 acres. The proposed design permanent water pool surface area is
approximately 3.1 acres. Therefore, the proposed design exceeds the requirement, which will result
in higher pollutant removal efficiencies than if the proposed design simply met, but did not exceed,
the requirement. The permanent pool volume is approximately 210,000 cubic feet in volume.
Water Quality Volume
The temporary storage depth, based on the existing outlet structure, is 1.25 feet. The surface area at
the water quality elevation is approximately 3.4 acres, The proposed water quality volume is 183,575
cubic feet. The required water quality volume (generated from the inch storm event) is 169,991 cubic
feet, based upon 35% imperious surface coverage over the 128-acre drainage area. Therefore, the
proposed design slightly exceeds the minimum water duality volume requirement.
BUCK ENGINEERING RAGE 7-12 814/2006
A UNIT of MICHAEL BAKER 009POFIATION
Modeling also shows that the proposed water quality volume holds the first half-inch of runoff from
the watershed, which is commonly considered the "first flush,"
Wetland Area
The proposed wetland area is located throughout the central portion of the BMP and comprises
approximately 63% of the BMP surface area (approximately 2.0 acres). The wetland area will receive
and treat drainage from all of the inputs to the system.
Micropool Area
The micaropool area is approximately 0.5 acres, which consists of approximately 16% of the BMP
surface area,
1"orebays
The western forebay has been eliminated because access to the western side of the pond for
maintenance is infeasible. However, the western drainage provides greater than 10% of the total
design storm volume, so it is required to enter a forebay structure. Tile drainage that enters the pond
from the west will be rerouted to the southern forebay, which will remain in its current location. The
swale relocation is discussed below. The northern forebay will remain in its current locution.
The two proposed forebays comprise approximately 21% of the permanent pond surface area (0,7
acres). The forebay berm elevations are approximately 1.5 feet below the spillway elevation and
approximately three inches below the permanent pool elevation.
Basin and Wetland Depths
The proposed forebay and rnicropool depths are three feet. These depths are shallow enough to
prevent the need for aquatic (or safety) shelves and perimeter fencing, which are not proposed in this
design.
The depths within the wetland area vary from zero to 1.5 feet with an almost equal distribution of area
with depths of zero to 0.75 feet as the area with depths of 0.75 to 1.5 feet.
Slopes
The slopes that enter the two proposed forebays and the micropool are 3H:1 V. The terrestrial bench
slope is approximately 3H: IV except near the large, western drainage ditch, where the area is
constrained by the sewer line easement and 2H: 1'V slopes are proposed. The terrestrial areas should.
be maintainable at these slopes. The maintenance access roads to the two forebays and the micropool
have slopes equal to or less than 5H:1V..
Outlet Structure
The existing outlet structure will remain in place. It has been modeled to ensure that the 2- to 5-day
dewatering requirement contained in the Draft BMP Manual is met.. The dewatering time for the
water quality volume is approximately 4 days.
Modeling results show that the existing weir can handle the 50-year, 24-hour storm event. An
emergency spillway has been incorporated into the retrofit design to accommodate flows generated
from storm events larger than the 50-year, 24-hour storm.
Swale Relocation
The existing drainage that enters the BMP from the west is to be relocated to the southern forebay and
enhanced. The existing energy dissipation area is in need of repair because much of the stone has
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-13 81412006
A UNIT of MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
washed away from large flaw events. Class t stone will be placed in the immediate downstream area
of the culvert outfalls at tlae origin of the swale that enters from the west to prevent further scouring.
The existing rock gabion structure on the right bank of the swale is currently being undermined. This
structure will be replaced with large boulders that will be properly keyed in to the toe of the bank.
The left bank of the section of the swale where the relocation begins will need bank protection to
prevent erosion. Large boulders that are properly keyed in to tine toe of the bank will be installed in
this area for bank protection.
The banks of the existing channel will be laid back to 2H.1 V slopes and stabilized with turf
reinforcement matting and sod to prevent channel erosion during large flow events.
Overflow Spillway Channel
During large storm events, flows within the existing drainage that enter the BMP from the west will
breach the overflow spillway and enter the pond through the original drainage alignment. The
existing, original channel banks will be laid back to 2H:1 V slopes. The overflow spillway weir and
the overflow spillway channel will be lined with Class 1 and Class B material, respectively, to
prevent erasion.
Discharge Area
The area between the outlet structure and McDowell Creek will be modified to a step-pool system
that provides aeration and increases dissolved oxygen concentrations of the BMP effluent prior to
entering McDowell Creek.
Vegetation
The emergent vegetation planting is specified in the planting plan. Trees will be planted along the
perimeter of the proposed BMP to minimize the amount of direct sunlight on the water surface and to
decrease temperatures in the BMP and BMP effluent. The upland species to be planted are specified
in the planting plan as part of the BMP details.
Maintenance Access Areas
At a minimum, two maintenance access areas will be provided; one to the northern forebay and one to
tlae southern forebay. Both access areas will come off of the greenway trail along the eastern edge of
the BMP. One additional maintenance access area can be provided to the micropool area at the outlet.
However, this access may not be necessary, as a majority of the sediment accumulation should occur
in the forebay areas. Maintenance access easements will be provided by the Greens at Brkdale
Homeowners Association, Although it is difficult to determine, the forebays should only rewire
maintenance every 10 to "15 years.
Aesthetics
The proposed BMP design will improve the existing wet pond aesthetics by reducing the presence of
algae and introducing many emergent plant species that vary in shapes, sizes and colors. The
emergent plant areas are arranged in natural shapes with deep water channels between them.
Additionally, three distinct open water areas will remain. the micropool and the two forebays.
7.8 Natural Plant Community Restoration
Native riparian vegetation will be established in the restored stream buffer, Also, any areas of invasive
vegetation such as Chinese privet and Japanese honeysuckle will be managed so as not to threaten the newly-
established native plants within the conservation easement.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-14 814[2006
A UNIT OR MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
7.8.1 Stream Buffer Vegetation
Bare-root trees, live stakes, and permanent seeding will be planted within designated areas of the
conservation easement. A preferred 50-foot buffer measured from the top of banks (sometimes slightly
less and quite often, substantially more) will be established along the restored stream reaches. In t`:raany
areas, the combined buffer width for left and right banks will be in excess of 100 feet. Bare-root
vegetation will be planted at a target density of 680 sterns per acre, or an 8-foot by 8-foot grid. The
proposed species to be planted are listed in Table 7.5. Planting of bare-root trees and live stakes will be
conducted during the first dormant season following construction. If construction activities are
completed in summer/fall of a given year, all vegetation will be installed prior to the start of the
growing season of the following calendar year.
Species selection for re-vegetation of the site will generally follow those suggested by Schafale and
Weakley (1990) and tolerances cited in the USAGE Wetland Research Program (WRP) Technical Note
VN-RS-4.1 (1997). Tree species selected for stream restoration areas will be generally weakly tolerant
to tolerant of flooding. Weakly tolerant species are able to survive and grow in areas where the soil is
saturated or flooded for relatively short periods of time. Moderately tolerant species are able to survive
in soils that are saturated or flooded for several months during the growing season. Flood tolerant
species are able to survive on sites in which the soil is saturated or flooded for extended periods during
the growing season (WRP, 1997).
Observations will be made during construction regarding the relative wetness of areas to be planted.
Planting zones will be determined based on these observations, and planted species will be matched
according to their wetness tolerance and the anticipated wetness of the planting area.
Live stakes will be installed two to three feet apart using triangular spacing or at a density of 160 to 360
stakes per 1,000 square feet along the stream flanks between the toe of the stream bank and bankfull
elevation, Site variations may require slightly different spacing.
Permanent seed mixtures will be applied to all disturbed areas of the project site. Table 7.6 lists the
species, mixtures, and application rates that will be used. A mixture is provided for floodplain wetland
and floodplain non-wetland areas. Mixtures will also include temporary seeding (rye grain or browntop
millet), The permanent seed mixture specified for floodplain areas will be applied to all disturbed areas
outside the banks of the restored stream channel and is intended to provide rapid growth of herbaceous
ground cover and biological habitat value. The species provided are deep-rooted and have been shown
to proliferate along restored stream channels, providing long-term stability.
't'emporary seeding will be applied to all disturbed areas of the site that are susceptible to erosion.
These areas include constructed skreambanks, access roads, side slopes, kind spoil piles. If temporary
seeding is applied from November through April, rye grain will be used and applied at a rate of 130
pounds per acre. If applied from May through October, temporary seeding will consist of browntop
millet, applied at a rate of 45 pounds per acre.
I Table 7.5
1 Proposed Bare-Aunt and Live Stake Species
['(3mmon Name. Sdentitic Mine ? Percent Planted b ' Planting Density
species
Streams Restoration and Enhancement Areas- Zone 1 (c15' from channel)
Persimmon Diospyros virginiana 10% 68 stems per acre
Tulip Poplar 1 iriodendron tidiliifera 10% 68 sterns per acre
Green ash F'raxinus pennsylvanica 20% 136 sterns per acre:
Black walnut luglans nigra 14?1l0 68 stems per acre
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 7-15 8/4/2006
A UNIT QP MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION

::::E
F-I
I
CORPORATION
8.0 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA,
The monitoring regime listed below is typical for restoration projects. Monitoring requirements for CWMTF
projects are negotiable and may not be required.
8.1 Stream Monitoring
Channel stability and vegetation survival will be monitored on the project site. Post-restoration monitoring
will be conducted for five years following the completion of construction to document project success.
Geomorphic monitoring of restored stream reaches will be conducted for five years to evaluate the
effectiveness of the restoration practices. Monitored stream parameters include stream dimension (cross
sections), pattern (longitudinal survey), profile (profile survey), and photographic documentation. The
methods used and any related success criteria are describer) below for each parameter.
8.11 Bankfull Events
The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be documented by the use of a
crest gage and photographs. The crest gage will be installed on the floodplain within 10 feet of the
restored channel. The crest gage will record the highest watermark between site visits, and the gage
will be checked each time there is a site visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred..
Photographs will be used to document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on the
floodplain during monitoring site visits.
Two bankfull flow events in separate years must be documented within the 5-year monitoring period.
Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until two bankfull events have been documented in
separate years.
8.1.2 Cross Sections
Two permanent cross sections will be installed per 1,000 linear feet of stream restoration work, with
one located at a riffle cross-section and one located at a pool cross-section. Each cross-:section will be
marked on both banks with permanent pins to establish the exact transect used. A common benchmark
will be used for cross sections and consistently used to facilitate easy comparison of year-to-year data.
The annual cross-section survey will include points measured at all breaks in slope, including top of
bank, bankfull, inner berm, edge of water, and thalweg, if the features are present. Riffle cross sections
will be classified using the Rosgen Stream Classification System.
There should be little change in as-built cross sections. If changes do take place, they should be
evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a more unstable condition (e.g., down-
cutting or erosion) or a movement toward increased stability (e.g., settling, vegetative changes,
deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections will be classified using the
Rosgen Stream Classification System, and all monitored cross sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
8.1.3 Longitudinal Profile
A longitudinal profile will be completed in years one, three, and five of the monitoring period. A
representative 3,000 LF segment of the restored stream will be surveyed. Measurements will include
thalweg, water surface, inner berm, bankfull, and top of low bank. Each of these measurements will be
taken at the head of each feature (e.g., riffle, pool) and at the maximum pool depth. The survey will be
tied to a permanent benchmark.
The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features are remaining stable; i.e., they are not
aggrading or degrading. The pools should remain deep, with fiat water surface slopes, and the riffles
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 8- 7/21/2005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
should remain steeper and shallower than the pools. Bedforms observed should be consistent with
those observed for channels of the design stream type.
8..1.4 Bed Material Analyses
Sulk samples will be conducted for the permanent cross sections on the project reaches. Sediment
collection will be conducted one year after construction and at two-year intervals thereafter, at the time
the longitudinal field surveys are performed. Sediment data will be plotted on a semi-log graph and
compared with data from previous years. Because McDowell Creek is a sand bed system, we do not
expect significant diversification of sediment distribution in riffles versus pools. Data will be collected,
but no success criteria will be seta
8.11.5 Photo Reference Sites
Photographs will be used to visually document restoration success. Deference stations will be
photographed before construction and continued annually for at least five years following construction.
Photographs will be taken from a height of approximately five to six feet. Permanent markers will be
established to ensure that the same locations (and view directions) on the site are monitored in each
monitoring period.
Lateral reference photos. Reference photo transacts will be taken at each permanent cross-section.
Photographs will be taken of both banks at each cross-section. The survey tape will be centered in the
photographs of the bank. The water line will be located in the lower edge of the frame, and as much of
the bank as possible will be included in each photo. Photographers should make an effort to
consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Structure photos. Photographs will be taken at each grade control structure along the restored stream.
Photographers should make every effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Photographs will be used to evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of
riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures subjectively. Lateral photos should.
not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks. A series of photos over time
should indicate successive maturation of riparian vegetation..
8.2 Storm Water BMP Monitoring and Success {Criteria
The extended detention wetland will be inspected quarterly within 2 days after a rain event.
At a minimum, items that will be corrected if observed include:
o Clogging of the outlet orifice
o Appearance of invasive species or development of monoculture
o Erosion on the wetland banks
o Erosion at the inlet and outlet
o Sediment accumulation
o Damage to, or blockage of, the spillway weir
a Woody vegetation within the system
The herbaceous plant cover will be assessed annually for the first five years following construction to ensure
that the vegetative success criteria are met. If a minimum survival rate of 70% of the total number of
herbaceous plantings specified in the planting plan is not achieved in the planted wetland zones after the
second growing season, supplemental planting will be completed. Herbaceous plant cover monitoring will
continue beyond the initial five year period until the success criteria have been met.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 8.2 7/2112006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
8.3 Vegetation Monitoring
Successful restoration of the vegetation on a site is dependent upon hydrologic restoration, active planting of
preferred canopy species, and volunteer regeneration of the native plant community. In order to determine if
the criteria are achieved, vegetation monitoring quadrants will be installed across the restoration site. The
number of quadrants required will be based on the species/area curve method, with a minimum of three
quadrants. The size of individual quadrants will vary from 100 square meters for tree species to 1 square
meter for herbaceous vegetation. Vegetation monitoring will occur in spring, after leaf-out has occurred.
Individual quadrant data will be provided and will include diameter,, height, density, and coverage quantities.
Relative values will be calculated, and importance values will be determined. Individual seedlings will be
marked to ensure that they can be found in succeeding monitoring years. Mortality will be determined from
the difference between the previous year's living, planted seedlings and the current year's living, planted
seedlings.
At the end of the first growing season, species composition, density, and survival will be evaluated. For each
subsequent year, until the final success criteria are achieved, the restored site will be evaluated between July
and November.
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density on the project site will be based on the
recommendations found in the WRP Technical Nate and past project experience.
The interim measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 320, 3-year old, planted
trees per acre at the end of year three of the monitoring period. The final vegetative success criteria will be
the survival of 260, 5-year old, planted trees per acre at the end of year five of the monitoring period. While
measuring species density is the current accepted methodology for evaluating vegetation success on
restoration projects, species density alone may be inadequate for assessing plant community health. For this
reason, the vegetation monitoring plan will incorporate the evaluation of additional plant community indices
to assess overall vegetative success.
8.4 Maintenance Issues
Maintenance requirements vary from site to site and are generally driven by the following conditions
Projects without established, woody floodplain vegetation are more susceptible to erosion from floods than
those with a mature, hardwood forest.
Projects with sandy, non-cohesive soils are more prone to short-term bank erosion than cohesive soils or soils
with high gravel and cobble content.
Alluvial valley channels with wide floodplains are less vulnerable than confined channels.
Wet weather during construction can make accurate channel and floodplain excavations difficult.
Extreme and/or frequent flooding can cause floodplain and channel erosion.
Extreme hot, cold, wet, or dry weather during and after construction can limit vegetation growth, particularly
temporary and permanent seed.
The presence and aggressiveness of invasive species can affect the extent to which a native buffer can be
established.
Maintenance issues and recommended remediation measures will be detailed and documented in the as-built
and monitoring reports. The conditions listed above and any other factors that may have necessitated
maintenance will be discussed.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 8-3 7121/2006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
8.5 Schedule/ Reporting
The schedule for completing monitoring reports and specific report content will he determined in conjunction
with MGSWS at a later gate.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 8.4 7/2112006
A UNIT of MICHAEL. BAKER CORPORATION
9.0 REFERENCES
Brinson, M. M. 1993. A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. US Army Corps of Engineers,
Waterways Exp. Stn. Tech. Rep. WRP-DE-4, Washington, DC. 79 pp. + app.
Copeland, R.R, D.N. McComas, C.R. Thorne, P.J. Soar, M.M. Jones, and J.S. Fripp, 2001. United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE). Hydraulic Design of Stream Restoration Projects.
Washington, DC.
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working. Group (FISRWG), 1995, Stream corridor restoration:
Principles, processes and practices. National "Technical Information Service. Springfield, VA,
Goldsmith, R., Milton, D.J., and Horton, J.W, 1985. Geologic Map of the Charlotte .1° x 2° Quadrangle,
North Carolina and South Carolina. USGS Map I-1.251-E, 3p.
Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.O. Slate, A.G. Jessup, J.R. Everhart, and R.E.
Smith. 1999. Bankfult hydraulic geometry re[ationships for North Carolina streams. Wildland
Hydrology. AWRA Symposium Proceedings. D.S. Olsen and J.P<_ Potyondy, eds, American Water
Resources Association. June 30-July 2, 1999. Bozeman, MT,
Lane, E. W. 1955, Design of stable channels. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers.
Paper No. 2776: 1234-1279.
Reed, Jr., and Porter B. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: National Summary,
US Fish & Wildlife Service. Biol. Rep. 88(24). 244 pp.
Rosgen, D. L. 1994. A classification of natural rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
1996. Applied River Morphology, Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
. 1997. A geomorphological approach to restoration of incised rivers, Proceedings of the Conference on
Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision. Wang, S.&Y, E1 Langendoen, and F.D.
Shields, Jr., eds. 12-22.
®. 1998. The reference reach - A blueprint for natural channel design (draft). ASCE Conference on River
Restoration. Denver CO. March, 1998. ASCE. Reston, VA.
2401a. A stream channel stability assessment methodology. Proceedings of the Federal Interagency
Sediment Conference. Reno, NV. March, 2001.
2001 h. The cross-vane, w-weir and j-hook vane structures... their description,. design and application
for stream stabilization and river restoration. ASCE conference. Reno, NV. August, 2001.
Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, third
approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
NCDEHNR. Raleigh, NC.
Simon, A, 1989, A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface 1'rocessc5 and
I andforms 14(1):1.1-26.
US Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report
Y-87-1. Environmental Laboratory. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg,
M5.
US Array Corps of Engineers. 1997. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Research Program. Technical Note VN-
rs-4.1. Environmental Laboratory. US Array Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg,.
MS.
BUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 9.1 7/2112006
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION
US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1997. Part 650, Chapter
19 of the NRCS Engineering Field Handbook: Hydrology Tools for Wetiand Determination.
. 1996. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States. G.W. Hurt, Whited, P,M., and Pringle,
R.F., eds. Fort Worth, TX.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS). Web Soil Survey
of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/
WebSoilSurvey.aspx
Yang, C.T; 1973. "Incipient Motion and Sediment Transport," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, American.
Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 99, No HY10, October, 1973, pp 1679-1704.
Yang, C.T. 1984. "Unit Stream Power Equations for Gravel," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, American
Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 110, No. 122, December, 1984, pp 17133-1797.
SUCK ENGINEERING PAGE 9.2 7/2112005
A UNIT OF MICHAEL BAKER CORPORATION

1
E
E
Map Inset
r r MC:l Owel8 C:MK
M USCS Hydrologic Unit
L Restoration Prgjee
!."! NCDWQ Sub-basin
M] Counties
11 5
i
E
I
t
t
4i
I
i
i
....... .............. ......
4'.
cosy
ca?z
NeB
HLP

HoH CcB.
1
s
I
i
r.
,

' i?? 9 D[dD 1.5(917 I'

J.

...........

i .........

.
..
.. ......... ..
N C C
of .°

t3)

E
(d U

rnq

g u? u
try

? m C p
?
J,?'-?
ti' T 3
? .n - ,p Q A A
_v } O C ry ? ? n co
N hi K
y
G ? U V V V U

•'
- N
? v
o V
O
..
Cam]
U
U
U
U
N
a Q
0
-" ?
!A ? Q
O U U U V U
r

3 1

?N

"
N
O

r+]
w

v
w

?n
w

cc
w

a
O 73 N
u w ''
?? .?
? ? m n ? ? n a

w
w
w
w y
p
7. . ?? [n •-? p o
N
O

'n

In
y C] m
m m
W
(n
a]
CF)
N M M V V] 10
m _.y a pd Q
_. m m
n Q
p ? ,_. -r
a
m rn
m -r
m r
Co w

as

?,

-Q

w 'C3

x n? Ty 3' ? 9 .a Q
'
g a W

00

.

n
p?
?
?
?N oa C "'
m
L a. ? w S 4i
m
m op
o a ¢ Q 4 Q c

0 10
N

4 V
U 4!2 n
_ _ C? f?7 ` ? A] o
c ? L7 ?
Ul N ?
6
U
m
a
w
u
Figure 3.4 Piedmont Regional Curves
North. Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve
McDowell Creek
Intatl
a
lit
m
3 3.
L-L
I
n.l :,, I{att ?tltw
t)rminage rhea (mi r )
l7rlr:j1 O ma 4 tiural tljta €a Proju+t %iw X-2 F project Sitc X-I___.. x t'WjQUt SiW X-4 1'rnjw Siw X-7
I'nlj? t tii.tc X-1:S z t: Fags star inn. X-sQ hurl s U r [-.djrhur-,,'h Xt - U•f- Hinhurgh Xi - iitrra.l R •gnrsmon --- Urlmn Regr"Mon
North Carolina Piedmont Regional Curve
McDowell Creek
WOO

1IH1
tt• I ] It
Drainage Area ls'I rail
r
e Urban Rata x Rural Data s I'nsycti sits X-2
PfyjVVI Situ X-I A trr
Note: Informalioo gathered for this proAect was not usod in thr3 nt: ression analysis sni)rvn move:
top[)
V,i,l Site X-4 Projucl Site X-?
pr+a•er -I'ou'Lr{tlrlanDal

l

•
i ?
i .

.

i

i
,n

i ?

1 ?
I

l

_.. .....'.. .............. ..., ....._
?... ........ ..............
¦? U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PANT I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Name Of Pmject McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project
Proposed Land Use Stream Restoration
PANT II (To he completed by NRC•S)
ate Ot Land Lvaluat:on Hequest 1119/06
Federal Agermy Involved NCEERIFHWA
- -------- - - -
County Arid .State Mecklenburq County, NC
Date Request Received By MRCS
----------------------------------------------
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local irnportant farmland? `(es No
(If no, the rPPA does not apply -- tiro not con,piete additional parts of ibis form). ? ?
Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
Major Crop(s) rarmable Land In CoA, Jurisdiction
Acres:
----__ -
-
-
- Amount Of FarrrEand As Refired in FPPA
Acres: 11'0
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used - - -
--
--
-
,`dame Of Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
Alternative Site Ratin
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site A Site B Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 0.8
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly 12.0
C. Total Acres In Site 12.8 0.0 0.0 0..0
PART IV {To be co,nipleted by NHCS) Land Evaluation information
-
---- -
-
A• Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland _
B• Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
------ ----
?•. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
D. Percentage Of Farmland In Govt, Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaiuation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of0 to 100 Pints) 0 0 0 0
PART V1 (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explainer) in 7 CFR 658.5(b) Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
-
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
-
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services
10, On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 150 0 0 0 0
PANT VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part L') 100 0 0 0
Total Site Assessment (From Part V1 above or a local
site assessment) 160 0 0 0 0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260 0 0 0 0

Site Selected:
Date Of Selection Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes No
Reason For Selection:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10.83)
This form was elaclronically produced by Nationat Prcducrion services staff
December 21.2005
Marella Buncick
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28$01
Subject: McDowell Creels Stream Restoration Project,
Mecklenburg County, NC
Dear Ms. Buncick:
The purposes of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that ini?,ltt emerge with
respect to threatened and. endangered species and migratory birds from as stream restoration project
conducted on the attached site (Vicinity units and USCS site maps with approximate property lines
enclosed).
The ?owvell Creek Stream Restoration Project Site, located in l luntes:sville, INC approximately eiglit
pules north of the City of Charlotte, has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind restoration for
unavoidable stream channel impacts, Several sections of channel have been identified as significantly
degraded. Jhip: stream restoration site was selected based on its probability to restore high quality stream
habitat where it has ceased to exist. The conceptual restoration plan calls for the restoration of these
channels to at stable condition. This process will involve the restoration of natural channel dimension,
pattern and profile and the reestablishment of forested riparian buffers within the project area.
Buck Engineering reviewed both the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and the US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) lists of rare; and protected anintaal and plant species acid found that five Federally listed
species are known to occur in Mecklenburg County: Smooth coneflowver (Echinacea laevi?,ata),
Schweinitz's sunflower (Heliawhus schweinilzii), Michaux's sumac (Bleats michazi.xii), bald eagle
(Haliaeelus leucocephalus), and the Carolina heelsplitter (La onigona decorata).
Since the project involves primarily degraded streams and wooded areas, federally protected species are not
expected to be impacted by the proposed project. Suitable habitat, all hough marginal, does exist for the
smooth conellovwer, Schweinitz's sunflower, and Michaux's sumac asking the utility ri' ht-of-ways and
small sections of open woods in the project area. Marginal habitat (toes exist for the bald eagle ;since the
proposed project area is within 0.5 miles from opera water Dise to the degraded conditions of the stream,
suitable habitat (..toes not exist for the Carolina heelsplitter
A pedestrian trvey of the project area was conducted on September l5, 2005 for the smooth coneflower,
Schvwreinitz's sunflower, and Michaiux's sumac. No federal protected species were observed in or adjacent
to the project area during the field survey. A September 16, 2005 search of the NCNFIP database indicated
there are no known populations of these species within five miles of the study area. Therefore "no effect"
detenn were made for the smooth coneflowwrer, Schwweinitz's sunflower, and Michaux's sumac.
No bald eagle nests or specimens were observed during the pedestrian surveys, but because the proposed
restoration project is just over 0.5 miles from open water, the preferred nesting distance of the bald eagle,
there may be a marginal chance of the site being used for winter roosting. Therefore, all large trees in the
project area will try to be avoided without compromising tine integrity of the natural channel design. A
"tmay effect, but not likely to adversely affect" determination was made for this species.
The Carolina beelsplitter is usually found in mud, muddy sand, or muddy gravel substrate in cool,
slow-moving, small to medium-sized streams or rivers along stable, well-shaded strearnbanks. The
stability of the strearnbanks appears to be a very important factor in the habitat. Its range has been
drastically reduced by impoundments and deterioration of habitat and water quality by siltation and other
pollution resulting ftorn stream channnelization, dredging, sand mining, sewage effluents, and poorly
implemented agricultural, forestry, and development practices, Known populations in North Carolina are
located in Goose Creek (Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin) and Waxhaw Creek (Catawba River Basin) in Union
County, according to the NC Natural 1-1critage Program database.
Based on the heavily degraded conditions of McDowell Creek, suitable habitat does not exist for the
Carolina heelsplitter. McDowell Creek does not drain into either Moose Creek or Waxhaw Creek. No
record has been reported in Mecklenburg County in the past 20 years. `Therefore, it is anticipated that
project construction will have "no effect" on the Carolina heelsplitter..
We wish to obtain your concurrence that no ianpact assessment or additional studies are needed for this
project. Your correspondence will be forwarded to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Prorgrarn
for consideration. Thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel frce to
contact us with any questions that you may have concerning ilia extent or site disturbance associated with
this project.
Sincerely,
1 f?7
Andrea M. Spangler
1447 S. Tryon Street, Suite 2{1
Charlotte, NC 28203
Ph: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: 3,?i filer rr bucken ineer % corn
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
-1i. S;ratcfi?eck, ;ldn?ittarasc?r
Nficiaacl F, 9 ,:sslep, ("overnru Officc of Areltivcs ,tlld f [istnfy.
I;i.lict,ia f:. csetart Divispota (if Itworic'A Izcsaurces
acffrey j. e:row, Deputy';-mretary David Pirt o , Dirtxtor
ialy 2006
Andrea Spangler
Buck 4: ngineering
1447 South Tryon Street
Suits 200
Charlott ', 28203
Re-, McDowell Creek Stream Restoration, F-luntersville, lviecldcnburg County, ER 05-2952
Dear Ms. Spangler:
-hank you for )rout letter of December 21, 2005, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the 1?roje°ct and are aware of no historic resources that would be affected by
the project. "Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comixients are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisor, Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codifted at 36 CFR
Dart 806.
you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the. above comment,
contact Renee G edhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
comi-aunication concerning this project, please cites the above-referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
eter Sandbeck
I.acatidn Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
t'%XI N SO N. lilaunt $trcet, Ralcig1t NC 4617 Mail Scrvicc Ccntct, Raleigh Nt; E7699-46 I 1 (19)733A763/ 753-8653
RFS1'0RATION 515 N. lilnunl 44rect, Rakigh NC 4617 lwfail Surc`ic4 Center, Raleigh NC 27699•A617 M9)733 65471715•ABnt
SURN'TY & PLANNING 515 N. 1Slntsnt. Street, Raleigh, NC. 4617 b3ail Sen•ice Center, llalcigh NC, 27699-4617 (]a'3}731-r5A5/71S•dRtPt
December 21, 2005
Renee Gledhill-Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
Environmental Review Coordinator
Survey & Planning Branch
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 2.7699-4617
Subject: McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
Dear Ms. Gledhill-Earley:
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that
might emerge with respect to architectural or archaeological resources From a stream
restoration project conducted on the attached site (Vicinity map and USES site neap with
approximate property lines enclosed).
The McDowell Creek Strearn Restoration Project Site, located in Hus tersville, NC
approximately eight miles north of the City of Charlotte has been identified for the
purpose of providing) in-kind restoration for unavoidable stream channel impacts. Several
sections of channel have been identified as significantly degraded. This stream
restoration site was selected based on its probability to restore high duality stream habitat
where it has ceased to exist.
The site has been disturbed in the past by development, utility crossings, and agricultural
use. No architectural structures or artifacts have been observed or noted dining
preliminary surveys of the site for restoration purposes. We have enclosed a copy of the
USGS topo Waal) that includes the proposed stream) restoration project site. We ask that
you review this site based can the TUGS topo map in your office to determine the
presence of any architectural or archaeological resources.
The conceptual restoration plan calls for the restoration of the chaaaaiels on this site to a
stable condition, 'This process will involve the restoration of natural channel dimension,
pattern and profile and the reestablishment of forested riparian buffers within the project
area.
The restoration site will be protected through a conservation easement. If there are any
conceptual protection mechanisms germane to your expertise: that you would dike
amended to the casement. please f=orward them when you reply to this request.
We believe that no impacts will occur from restoration efforts, however, no surveys by
archaeologists have been conducted, and we wish to obtain your concurrence that no
impact assessment or additional studies are needed. Your correspondence will be
forwarded to the North Carolina Ecosyste n Enhancement Program for consideration.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please fuel free to
contact us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent or site disturbance
associated with this project.
;Sincerely,
Andrea Spangler
1447 S. 'rrvon Street, Suite. 200
Charlotte, k 24203
Ph. [phone]
Fax: [phone]
I? mail: asp l le_t`,buckengi eerin x rrt
[;l closures: Project Vicinity Mal)
USGS Site Map with Approximate Project f ouRdary
January 4, 200
Subject: i#cDowell C°rec:k Stream restoration Project,
Nlee.klerrbur County, NC
Dear Mr. Smith:
The purpose of ffiis letter is to request review and comment on any issues that nnF[it emerge with
respect to farmland from r strearn restoration project conducted on the attached site (vicinity map,
USES site snap and soil map with approximate project boundary lines enclosed).
The McDowell Greek Stream Restoration Project Site has been identified for the purpose of
providing in-kind restoration for unavoidable streams channel impacts. Several sections of
channel have been identified as significaandy de rtade& This streaarrr restoration site was selected
based on its probability to restore high quality stream habitat where it has ceased to exist.
While he project area clues include Ntonocan soils, this area is frequently flooded; therefore we
do not believe that the l)rqicct area contains pritne, unique, statewide or lowil important farmland.
We wish to obtain your concurrence on this issue. Your corre=spondence will be for rar-ded to die
:'forth Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program for consideration.
W thank you in advance for your tinie[y response and cooperation. Please feel tree to contact us
with any cluestiotas that You may have concerning the extent or site disturbance associated with
this project.
Enclosures, Project Vicinity Map
US GS Site Map with Approximate 'reject Boundary
}il'
Chs3rir?ttc?
...
Map Insat
+^ LEGEND Project icittily Nhp
T- yell i re+ k
{ HU Counties Stream Ittstoration
rgd a.
DWO Sub-basin
t?
4 1 i t!
Soil Map IblcDowell Q;r"k
streiam. Restoration p1ml
/? 1
December 21„ 2005
Ron Lineville
Wildlife Resource Commission
Western Piedmont. Region
3855 ldlewild Road
ernersv€lle;, NC 27284-9180
Subject: lOcDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project,
Mecklenburg County, NC
Dear Mr. Linville:
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment oil any passible issues that
might emerge with respect to protected species from a stream restoration project
conducted oil the attached site (Vicinity naap and USGS site map with approximate
property lines enclosed).
The McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project Site, located in Huntersville. NC
approximately eight miles north of the City of Charlotte; has been identified for the
purpose of providing in-kind restoration for unavoidable stream channel impacts. Several
sections of channel have been identified as significauatly degraded. This stream
restoration site, was selected based oil its probability to restore high duality strewn habitat
where it has ceased to exist.
We have enclosed a copy of the vicinity map and USGS topo map that includes the
proposed stream restoration project site. We ask that you review dais site based can the
USGS topo map in your office to determine the presence of any constraints concerning
trout Nvaters or protected species.
The conceptual restoration plan calls €"or the restoration of these channels to a stable
condition. `I'bis process will involve the restoration of natural channel dimension, pattern
and profile and the reestablishment of forested riparian buffers within the project area..
The restoration site will be protected through a conservation easement. If there are any
conceptual protection mechanisms germane to your expertise that you would like
amended to the easement or construction of this project, please forward them when you.
reply to dais request. Your correspondence will be forwarded to the North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program for consideration.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel fi•ec to
contact us with any cltaestions that you may have concerning the extent or site disturbance
associated with this project.
Sincerely, j ?,-
?-_ ..
Andrea Spangler
1447 S. Tryon Street, Suite 0
Charlotte, C 28203
Ph. [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: j an $ler laucke =in rim in
Enclosures: Project Vicinity klap
USES Site Map with Approximate Project Boundary
North. Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
January 4, 2006
Ms. Andrea Spangler
Buck Engineering
1447 S. Tryon St, Sac 200
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
RE: McDowell Creek Stream Restmatiort Project, Mecklenburg County
Dear Ms. Spangler:
This correspondence is in response to your letter of December 21, 2005. Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) are familiar with habitat values in the area. The NCWRC is authorized to comment and make
recommendations which relate to the impacts of this project on fish and wildlife pursuant to Clean Water Act of 1977, North
Caroline Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act (16 U. S. C. 1531-1543; 87 Stat 884), and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Slat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 551-667d).
The project is to restore natural channel dimension, pattern and profile plus establishment of forested riparian buffers. Specific
details of the project were not mentioned in your correspondence; however, our data review indicated that the Santee Chub,
Cyprinellra zanema (NCSR) and the Northern cup-plaid, Silphrwn perfoliatum (NCSR-P) are found in the general vicinity of the
projec L Please be advised listed plants arc under the purview of the NC State Park's Natural Heritage Program.
Based on our review, we are not aware of any issues that would prevent the project. Consideration should be provided during
project planning to avoid impacts to the Santee chub habitats from direct impacts or indirect impacts (such as sedimentation).
You should visit and review our website found at httnllw,vw:0 +vildtife crra/ 17_W` 011 i1eSMiesCmk7-s3?moacts.pdf for
additional information about buffer width recommendations and secondary and cumulative impact issues. All restoration
activities must comply with US Amy Corps of Engineers and NC Division of Water Quality requirements as well as be done
using state-of-the-art natural channel designs. Autochthonous species must be used for the project. Restoration activities roust
follow conditions specified by the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, including the Divisions of Land
Resources and any applicable (Hoffer requirements.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment during the early planning stages of this project. If you have any questions regarding
these comments, please contact me at 3361769.9453..
Sincerely, h' zl'E . I
Ran Linville JAN 1 0 2006
Regional Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program r 1Z K
_x
F.,c: Sarah McRae, NHP
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries . 1721 Mail Service Center * Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
Xom: [e-mail]
ent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 12:30 PM.
'o: aspangler cr buckengineering.com
?ulbject: McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project
t.ndrea,
ubject: McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
le provide the following comments in accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered
pecies Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act). We have reviewed the information
rovided regarding the subject project. Given the degraded status of the stream and the field reviews
rr listed species, we agree there will be no effect to federally listed species from the proposed stream
;storation project. We believe the requirements under Section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled regarding
3ted species for the subject project. However, obligations under Section 7 of the Act must be
,.,considered if; (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed
pecies or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently
Codified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical
abitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action..
you have further questions, please contact me.
larella
iarella buncick
ISFWS
80 Zillicoa St.
.sheville, NC 28801
28-258-3939 ext 237
)ogs are our link to paradise. They don't know evil or jealousy or discontent. To sit with a dog on a
illside on a glorious afternoon is to be back in Eden, where doing nothing was not boring---it was
eace." Milan Kundera
January 27, 2006
Mr, Alan Walters
USDA MRCS
Salisbury Area Office
530 W Innes Street
Salisbury, NC 28147
Ali 1006 born
McDowell Creek Streaatn Restoration Project,
Mecklenburg County, NC.
Lean- Mr. Walters
Per your January 25, 2006 letter, i have enclosed the completed the AD 1006 form, Farmland
Conversion Impact Rating, for the McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project. Please let me
know if you need anything else for your records,
Sincerely,.
Andrea M. Spangler
1447 S. Tryon Street, Smt; 00
Charlotte,. NC 28203
Ph: [phone]
Fa : [phone]
Email, aspaanglerfa7buckcngtqeerin- conj
Enclosures: AL 1006 For
U.S. DeparMrnrent of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request 1119/06
Name Of Project McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project Federal Agency Involved NCEEPIFHWA
-
Proposed Land use Stream Restoration County And State Mecklenburg County, NC
PAIN f# fro be completed by MRCS) Date Request Reoelved By NRCS
Does the site.contaln prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(if no, the PPPA does not apply -- do not c=omplete addlt i?l part, of this farm).

d
9 Ass bated kvgrage F

,+. J
tulajor Crop(s) FarTmibl - nd I oW. lirri ction
Acres: Amount Of Farmland. Defined In FPPA
Roes: Z-2
Of La val System s ; Narne Of Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
Altemetive Site Rati
DART Ill (To be completed by Federal Agency) Stte A Site B Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 0.8
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly 12.0
C. Total Acres In Site 12.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
PART IV (To be completed by 1dRCSl land Evaluation Information
A-Total Acres Prime And. Unique',Farrnland
B. Total Acres Statewide And. Local Important Farmland .
C. Percentage Of Farmland In: County Or Local Govt, Unit To Be Converted
D. Percientage.01 Farmland to Govt. Judsdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
PART V (T6 be completed by NRC;S) Land Evaluation Criterion
Reiative.,!V4lue.2f Fa..rrnland7p Be-Converted. f5cale.of 0 l'p T ?. Pornts o 0 0 p
PART VI (To be oomplet+ed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These afters are explained In 7 GFR 656.5(b) Maidmurn
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
1
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use 14
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed c')
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government tv]
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
6. Distanoe To Urban Support Services A/A
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
8. Creation Of Non%rmable Farmland
9. Availats lity Of Farm Support Services
10. On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion Can Farris Support Services
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use C7
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 0 0 0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (Frmm Part V) 100 0 0 0
ate a She ssume t ment (From Part VI above or a leaf
1 160. 0 0 0
TOTAL POINTS fTofal of above 2lines) 260 0 0 0
Site Selected: Date Of Selection Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes 13 No fl
Reason For Selection:
(See Instructions on reverse side) Form Ate-706 (10-83)
Thrs farm was eierxraNrairy pmducad by Nadmai Pmdud6on seN s SraFf
USDA-NRCS
Salisbury Area {office
530 W., Inner Street
Salisbury, NC 28147
January 25, 2006
Dear Ms, Spangler;
Enclosed is the Ate 1006 -m, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating. I have completed
sections It, IV and V. ' When the form is completed, plcasc send a copy of it back to nie
for our files,
T ar ks,.
Alan Walters
EDRI Environmental
Data Resources Inc
The EDR Radius Map
with eoChecV
McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project
Sara Furr Road to Westmoreland Road
Huntersville, NC 28078
Inquiry Number: 01585712.1-r
January 04, 2046
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Management information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 00401
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone].
Internet: www.edrnet.com
Fo U•ERH
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECT ON
PAGE
Executive Summary -----_-----------------... ------------------------------------------------------- ES1
Overview Map-„----------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 2
Detail Map--------------------------------------------- --------------- 3
Map Findings Sumernary---------------------------------------------------- 4
Map Findings---------------------------------------------------------- 6
Orphan Summary-------------------------------------------------------- 24
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum ------------------------------------------ A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary--------------------------------------- --- A-2
Physical Setting Source Map---------------------- ------------------------------------------------ A-7
Physical Setting Source Map Findings--------------------------------------- A-8
Physical Setting Source Records Searched----------------- ---------------- A-10
Thank you for your business.
Please contact E DR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably target to Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. It cannot be conducted from this Reort that other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSinformation for the and OEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTALexistfmm
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK I$ ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED To A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS' Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2006 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part; of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission,
FOR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the property their respective owners.
TC01585712.1 r Page t
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
SAM FURR ROAD TO WESTMORELAND ROAD
HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
COORDINATES
Elevation: 734 ft, above sea level
USGS'TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property: 35080-D8 LAKE NORMAN SOUTH,. NC
Source: USGS 7.5 min quad index
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPIL------------------------- National Priority List
Proposed NPL----------- ---- Proposed National Priority List Sites
Delisted NPL --------------- National Priority List Deletions
NPL Liens -------------- --,. Federal Superfund Liens
CERCLIS ------ ....... -.... Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
. System
CEIRC-NFIRAP_.............. CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
CORRACTS ................. Corrective Action Report
RCRA-TSDF------------- ---- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
RCRA-LQG-------------- ---- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
RCRA•SQG-------------- -- -- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
ERNS ----------- --------- -- -. Emergency Response Notification System
HMIRS------- -......... -- - -- Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
US ENG CONTROLS......,. Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL ..... .... Sites with Institutional Controls
TC01585712.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DOD. ........................ Department of Defense Sites
FURS------------------------ Formerly Used Defense Sites
US BROWNFIELDS--.,.._._, A Listing of Brownfields Sites
CONSENT ------------------- Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD____________ Records Of Decision
UMTRA ...................... Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
ODL ...................... . Open Dump Inventory
T°RIS .......................... Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA ...................... Toxic Substances Control Act
FTTS INSP..._________.___._., FiFRA/TSCA Tracking System - FIPRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, &
Rodenticide Act)JTSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
SSTS---------------- -------- Section 7 Tracking Systems
PADS_..... .................. PCB Activity Database System
MILTS _....................... Material Licensing Tracking System
MINES ....................... Mines Master Index File
RAATS ...................... RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
SH11WS ----------- ......... Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
SWFILF... .................. List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI .......................... Old Landfill Inventory
LUST TRUST---------------- State Trust Fund Database
AST------------------------. AST Database
INST CONTROL_____________ No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
VCP------------ .---- ........ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
DRYCLEANERS............. Drycleaning Sites
Drownfields ................. Brownfields Projects Inventory
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV------ .---- .. Indian Reservations
INDIAN LUST________________ Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian. Land
INDIAN UST ................. Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants--_ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified.
Elevations have been determined from the USES Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on
a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been
differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property..
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed
data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
TC01 585712.1 r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FEDERAL RECORDS
FINDS:The Facility Index System contains both facility information and "pointers" to other
sources of information that contain more detail. These include: RCRIS; Permit Compliance System (PCS);
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS); FATES (FIFRA [Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act]
and TSCA Enforcement System, FITS [FIFRAITSCA Tracking System]; CERCLIS; DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to
manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes); Federal
Underground Injection Control (FURS); Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS); Surface Impoundments (SIA); TSCA
Chemicals in Commerce Information System (GIGS); PADS; RCRA-J (medical waste transporters/disposers); TRIS;
and TSCA. The source of this database is the U.S. EPAINTIS.
A review of the FINDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 0912912005 has revealed that there is 1
FINDS site within approximately 0.75 miles of the target property.
Lower Elevation Address Dist I Dir Map 1D Page
CIRCLE K#2705102 9101 SAM FURR ROAD 1/2-1 S 3 8
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
HSOS.The Hazardous Substance Disposal Sites list contains locations of uncontrolled and
unregulated hazardous waste sites. The file contains sites on the national priority list as well as the state
priority list. The data source is the North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis,
A review of the NC HSDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/21/1995 has revealed that there is 1
NC HSDS site within approximately 1.75 miles of the target property.
EquallHigher Elevation Address Dist I Dir Map ID Page
FOAMEX/REEVES BROTHERS 1 -2 ENE 0 6
IMD:Incident Management Database.
A review of the IMD list, as provided by E DR, and dated 10124/2005 has revea led that there are 5 IMD
sites within approximately 1.25 miles of the target property.
EquallHigher Elevation Address Dist I Dir Map ID Page
CRESCENT EMC - CORNELIUS #2 18014 STATESVILLE ROAD 112 -1 NE 1 6
KINGS POINT MARINA 17939 NC HWY 73 112. 1 WNW 4 8
SNIP & SHORE 17505 HWY 73 112 - 1 NIN 9 18
LAKE NORMAN. TIRE & AUTO 18816 STATESVILLE ROAD 1-2 NNE 11 23
Lower Elevation Address Dist I Dir Map 1D Page
SP 02313 (CIRCLE K 5102) 9101 SAM F°URR ROAD 112 _ 1 SSE A6 12
TC0158571Z1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LU :The Leaking Underground Storage 'dank Incidents Management Database contains an inventory
of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environment, A
Natural Resources' Incidents by Address.
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDD, and dated 09102/2005 Inas revealed that there are 3
LUST sites within approximately 1.25 miles of the target property,
Equal/nigher Elevation Address Dist 1 Dir Map ID
Page
KINGS POINT MARINA 97939 SW HWY 73 172 - ?
SHIP H 17505 HWY 73 9- 9 IRS 9
9
Lower Elevation Address Dist / Dir Map IN
Fuge
BP 02393 (CIRCLE K 5102) 9909 SAM PURR ROAD 11 - 9 SSE AS
9
UST,The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs. USTs are regulated under
Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The data come from the Department of
Environment & Natural Resources' Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
A review of the LIST list, as provided by ECR, and dated 08/0112005 has revealed that there are 5 LIST
sites within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dist / Dir Map ID
Page
VINEYARD POINT HWY 73 1/2-1 W 2
7
KINGS POINT MARINA INC 17939 KINGS POINT CSR 1/ - 1 WNW 7
1
CORNELIUS AMOCO 1 405 STATESVILLE ROAD 1/2 -1 NNE 8
16
SAME MART 19 16814 CALDWELL GREEK NO 1/2-1 P 10
20
Lower Elevation Address Dist 1 Dir Map ID Page
CIRCLE K 2705102 9101 SAM FU RR RD 1/2 - 1 SSE AS 10
TC01585712.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address '.iformation, the following sites were not mapped;
Site Name Database(s)
MAINTENANCE SUPPLY CO INC FINDS, IMD, LUST, FTTS
INSP
FOAMEXfREEVES BROTHERS SHWS
HAMMORYIKINCAID FURNITURE SHWS
CALDWELL COUNTY DRUM SHWS
DUKE POWER LANDFILL SWF/LF
LAKE NORMAN TIRE AND AUTO LUST
REEVES BROTHERS, INC.IRYDER TRUCK IMD, LUST
FREEMAN'S GROCERY IMD, LUST
CANNON CROSS ROADS DELI & GROCERY IMD, LUST
KINGS POINT MARINA 2 IMD„ LUST
NCDOT HUNTERSVILLE MAINTENANCE FAC. IMD, LUST
CLONTZ ROBBINS ESTATE LUST TRUST
AMOCO #968 LUST TRUST
KINGS POINT MARINA LUST TRUST
HUNTERSVILLE CITGO UST
ANNIE MCCOY BRADFORD AST
M&T DRUM SERVICE INC RCRA-SQG, FINDS
UNNAMED CREEK NEAR HWY 21 AND HARRIS BLVD INTERSECTION ERNS
MCDOWELL CREEK WTP FINDS
RAMSEY CREEK PARK-LAKEFRONT FINDS
ROSE CLEANERS IMD
NCDOT - STATESVILLE RD STATION IMD
HOLBROOK RD. LF OLI
MAINTENANCE SUPPLY SERVICE CORP SSTS
TC01585712.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
4j
i
I

\ I

E

0
Target Property
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property
• Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
A Manufactured Gas Plants
National Priority List Sites
Landfill Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
v
Indian Reservations SIA Hazardous Substance
Power transmission lines Disposal. Sites
Oil & Gas pipelines
100-year flood mane
500-year flood zone
federal Wetlands
SITE NAME: McDowel't Creek Stream Restoration Project CLIENT- Buck Engineering
ADDRESS: Sarn Furr Road to Westmoreland Road CONTACT: Andrea Spangler
CITY/STATE. HuntersvilleNC INQUIRY#: 01586712.1r
ZIP' 28078 DATE: January 04, 2006

f
r
,
f

t'

o 'ls ?? if
t ? I
p, ? ' Of. !I
rC1Ur.S'? .
1CC
A? L]
fa' :L
}
Target Property
Sites at elevations higher than
or equal to the target property Indian Reservations. BIA Hazardous Substance
Disposal Sites
• Sites at elevations lower than Oil & Gas pipelines
the target property
100-year flood zone
A Manufactured Peas Plants 500 -year flood zone
.9 Sensitive Sensitive Receptors Federal Wetlands
National priority fast Sites
Landfill Sites
Dept. Defense Sites
SITE NAME: McDowell Creek Stream Restoration Project CLIENT: Buck Engineering
ADDRESS: Sam Furr Road to Westmoreland Road CONTACT: Andrea Spangler
CITY/STATE: Huntersville NC INQUIRY #: 01585712.1r
ZIP: 28078 DATE: January 04, 2006
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Target Distance Total
Database Property (Miles) a 118 118 - 114 114 - 112 112 - 1 > 1 Platted
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL 1150 0 0 0 0 0 0
Proposed NPL 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
Delisted NPL 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
NPL Liens 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
CERCLIS 1.250 0 0 4 0 0 0
CERC-NFRAP 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
CORRACTS 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
RCRA TSD 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
RCRA Lg. Quan. Gen. 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
RCRA Sm. Quan. Gen. 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
ERNS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
HMIRS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
US ENG CONTROLS 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
US INST CONTROL 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
DOD 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
FUDS 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
US BROWNFIELDS 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
CONSENT 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
ROD 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
UMTRA 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
ODI 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
TR'IS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
TSCA 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FTTS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
SSTS 0750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
PADS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
MLTS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
MINES 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
FINDS 0.750 0 0 0 1 NR 1
RAATS 0.750 0 0 0 0 NR 0
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
State Haz. Waste 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
NC HSDS 1 ,750 0 0 0 0 1 1
IMD 1.250 0 0 0 4 1 5
State Landfill 1.2.50 0 0 0 0 0 0
OLI 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
LUST 1.250 0 0 0 3 0 3
LUST TRUST 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
UST 1.000 0 0 0 5 NR 5
AST 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
INST CONTROL 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
VCP 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
DRYCLEANERS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
BROWNFIELDS 1,250 0 0 0 0 0 0
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
TC01585712.1 R Page 4
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Search
Distance Total
Database (Mlles) c 118 118 - 114 114 - 112 1/2-1 > 1 Plotted
INDIAN LUST 1.250 0 0 0 0 0 0
INDIAN UST 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants 1.750 0 0 0 0 0 0
NOTES:
TP = Target Property
NR Not Requested at this Search Distance
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TG0158571 Z.1 r Page 5
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
HSDS FOAMEXlREEVES BROTHERS
Region
ENE NC
>1
896'9 ft.
FOR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
NC HSDS 5102442614
NIA
NC HSDS:
Facility Name: FOAMEXIREEVES BROTHERS
Latitude: 35 27 52.947068 Longitude: 80 51 3.625101
Site Type: State Superfund ID #: 000 0075
1 CRESCENT EMC - CORNELIUS #2 IMD 3105912225
NE 18014 STATESVILLE ROAD NIA
112-1 CORNELIUS, NC
3353 ft.
Relative: IMD:
Higher Incident Number: 19031
Region: MOR
Actual: Date Occurred: 1415/1998 0:00:00
805 ft. Submit Date: 615/2002 0:00:00
GW Contam; Yes
Soil Contam: Not reported
Operator: BROWN, DALE
P,O, BOX 8
CORNELIUS, NC
MECKL County
Contact Phone: Not reported
Priority Cade: B
Priority Update: 10114/1998 0:00:04
Site Priority: 80
Derry Contact: AHP
Wells Affected: No
Num Affected: 0
Sampled By: Samples Include:
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: 066K
Incident. Desc: SEE CRESCENT EMC - CORNELIUS (UST#6888) SOLVENTS HAVE BEEN DETECTED
DURING MONITORING AT UST RELEASE SITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH A CORRECTIVE
ACTION PLAN REQUES
Ownership: Federal
Operation: Residential
Material: 1,1, DCE
Qty Lost: Not reported
Qty Recovered: Not reported
Material: 1,1,1 TOE
Qty Lost: Not reported
City Recovered: Not reported
Source: Unknown
Type: Other inorganics
Location: Facility
Setting: Rural
Wells Contam: Not reported
Sampled By: Responsible Parties
Samples Include: Groundwater Samples
Owner Company: CRESCENT EMC
Lat/Lo ng: 35.457777 0.843055
Risk Site No
Lat/Long Dec mal:35.77181.40
Lat/Long Number 3545771808430
GPS: EST Agency : DWQ
TC01585712.1r Page 6
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation v
CRESCENT EMC - CORNELIUS #2 (Continued)
Incident Phase: AS
NOV Issued: Not reported
45 Day Report: Not reported
Public Meeting Held: Not reported
Corrective Action Planned: Not reported
Reclassification Report: Not reported
Close-out Report: Not reported
Closure Request Date: Not reported
ERR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
5105912225
Last Modified 61512002 0:00:00
SOC Sighned: Not reported
RS Designation: Not reported
2 VINEYARD POINT
West HWY 73
112-1 CORNELIUS, NC 28031
3720 ft.
Relative: UST:
Higher Facility ID: 0-021237
Telephone: [phone]
Actual, Owner name : THE LAKE NORMAN CO.
807 ft. Owner Address: PO BOX 1320
DAVIDSON, NC 2.8036
Owner Phone : [phone]
Tank capacity : 4000
Comment : Not reported
Tank product ; Gasoline, Gasoline Mixture
Tank material : Steel
Interior Protection: None
Exterior Protection: Unknown
Piping material Steel
Certify Type Not reported
Leak Detection Type : Not reported
Leak Detection Type 2: Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1: Not reported
Corrosn Protec Tank: Not reported
Corrosn Protec Pipe: Not reported
Spill and Overfill : Not reported
Financial Responsiblity: Not reported
Region: 03
TanklD: 1
Date installed: 09/06/87
Date removed: 01115195
Status: Permanent Closed
Compartment Tank: No
Main Tank ; No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: Not reported
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date: I 1
Corrosion Piping: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Elate: ! 1
Overfill: Not reported
Spill Overfill Date: 1 1
Financial Responsibility Code: Not reported
Financial Responsibility Description: Not reported
Surface Water: Not reported
Water Supply Well: Not reported
Tank Last Used Date: 11
Tank Certified Number: Not reported
UST U001199735
NIA
TC01585712.1 r Page 7
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft .) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
VINEYARD POINT (Continued) 0001199735
Date Last Certified: 1 !
Begin Certified Number: 1 /
End Certified Number: ! !
Lat/Long ; 010
LaULong 1: Not reported
GPS String Confirmed: No
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS: Not repotted
Tank ID Number: Not reported
Last Update: 07/06/92
3 CIRCLE K#2705102 FINDS 1007707092
South 9101 SAM FURR ROAD 110018836859
112-1 HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28070
3733 ft.
Relative: FINDS:
Lower Other Pertinent Environmental Activity Identified at Site:
NORTH CAROLINA-FACILITY INFO RMATION TRACKING SYSTEM
Actual:
708 ft.
4 KINGS POINT MARINA IMD 5102089401
WNW 17939 NC HWY 73 LUST NIA
112-1 HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
3891 ft.
Relative: LUST:
Higher Incident Number: 15482 Date Occurred: 02107/96
5 Min Quad: 066N LatlLong: 352713 / 805328
Actual: Source Type: Not reported Region. Mooresville
796 ft. Facility ID: 0-025572 GPS Confirmed: 7
UST Number. MO-4591 Testlat; Not reported
Product Type: Petroleum Date Reported: 05124/96
Responsible Party:
Company: KINGS POINT MARINA
Contact Person: JIM & LEIGH ISLEY
Address: PO BOX 470577
CitylStatlZip: HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28247 - 0577
County: MECKLENBURG
Comm I Non-comm UST Site; Commercial
Tank Regulated Status: Regulated
Regionat Officer Project Mgr: AJS
Risk Classification: L
Risk. Classification Based On Review: L
Corrective Action Plan Type: Not reported
Level Of Soil Cleanup Achieved: soil to GIN levels
Closure Request Date: 11
Close Out: 48124105
Contamination Type: GW
NORR Issued Date: 05117196
NOV Issued. Date:05/17/96 Phase Of LSA Req:Not reported
Site Risk Reason: Not reported Land Use: tndustriallcommerdal
MTBE: 0 # Of Supply Wells: 0
Telephone: Not reported Flag: 0
Error Flag: 0 LUR Filed: 1 1
Error Code: Not reported LUR Filed: 1 1
Valid: F Date Occur: 02/07196
TC01585712.1r Page 8
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction -
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDIT ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
KINGS POINT MARINA (Continued)
5102089401
MT"BE1: Yes Flagl: No
Cleanup: 02107/96 Current Status: File Located in House
RBCA GW: G2 PETOPT: 3
CD Num: 0 Reel Num: 0
RPOW: False RPOP: False
RPL: False
PIRF1Min Said : Pirf
Ownership: Private Location: Facility
Owner/Operator: JIM & LEIGH ISLEY Operation Type: Commercial
Site Priority: 06DE Priority Update: 05115198
Wells Affected: No Wells Affected #: 4
Samples Taken: 3 Samples Include: 1
5minquad: Not reported Error Type: Not reported
Submitted: 05124196
Description: SOIL AND GW CONTAM. CONFIRMED. BTEX AS HIGH AS 13,000 PPB AND TPH AT 13,400
PPM.
Last Modified: 06119/96
Incident Phase: Closed Out
NOV Issued: 05!20!96 NORR Issued: ! I
45 Day Report: SOC Sighned: ! J
Close-out Report: RS Designation: ! 1
Public Meeting Held: 1 !
Corrective Action Planned: 1 !
Reclassification Report: 1 J
Closure Request Hate: J 1
Comments: Not reported
IMD:
Incident Number:: 15482.
Region: MDR
Date Occurred: 2/711996 0:00:00
Submit late: 512411996 0:00.00
GW Contam: Yes
Sall Contam: No
Operator: JIM & LEIGH ISLEY
PO BOX 470577
HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28247 0577
MECKL County
Contact Phone: Not reported
Priority Code: L
Priority Update: 511511998 0A0:o0
Site Priority: 060E
Dem Contact: AJS
Wells Affected: No
Num Affected: 0
Sampled By: Samples Include:
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: 066N
Incident Desc: SOIL AND GW CONTAM. CONFIRME D. BTEX AS HIGH AS 13,000 PPS AND TPH AT
13,404 PPM.
Ownership: Private
Operation: Commercial
Material: GASOLINE
Qty Lost: Not reported
Qty Recovered: Not reported
Source: Leak-underground
Type: Gasolineldiesel
Location: Facility
TC01585712.1 r Page 9
Map ICJ
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
KINGS POINT MARINA (Continued)
Setting: Residential
Wells Contam: Not reported
Sampled By: Responsible Parties
Samples include: Groundwater Samples
Owner Company: KINGS POINT MARINA
Lat/Long: 352713 1805328
Risk Site L
Lat/Long Decimal: 35,45 180-89
Lat/Long Number 352713 / 805328
GPS: 7
Incident Phase: Closed Out
NOV Issued: 512011996 0:00:00
45 Day Report: Not reported
Public Meeting Held: Not reported
Corrective Action Planned: Not reported
Reclassification Report: Not reported
Close-out Report: Not reported
Closure Request Date: Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
5102089401
Agency DWM
Last Modified 6/1911996 0:00:00
SOC Sighned: Not reported
RS Designation: Not reported
AS CIRCLE K 2705102 LIST U003138468
SSE 9101 SAM PURR RD NIA.
112-1 HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28070
3959 ft.
Site 1 of 2 In cluster A
Relative:
Lower UST:
Facility ID: 0.035140
Actual: Telephone: [phone]
711 ft, Owner name CIRCLE K STORES INC
Owner Address: 2440 WHITEHALL PARK DR SUITE 800
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
Owner Phone : [phone]
Tank capacity 15000
Comment: Not reported
Tank product : Gasoline, Gasoline Mixture
Tank material : Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic
Interior Protection: FRP
Exterior Protection: FRP
Piping material FRP
Certify Type ? Installer certified by tank and piping manufacturers
Leak Detection Type : Automatic tank guaging
Leak Detection Type 2: Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1: Interstitial monitoringldouble-walled tank andlor piping
Corrosn Protec Tank: FRP tank/piping
Corrosn Protec Pipe: FRP tank/piping
Spill and Overfill : Catchment basins
Financial Responsiblity Not reported
Region: 03
Tank ID: I
Date installed: 07107196
Date removed: Not reported
Status: Currently In Use
Compartment Tank` No
Main Tank : No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: Not reported
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tankl: Not reported
TC01585712.1 r Page 10
.. Fags l l
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Database(s) EPA ID Number
CIRCLE K 2705102 (Continued) 0003138468
Overfill: D
Spill Overfill Date: 47107196
Financial Responsibility Code: Not reported
Financial Responsibility Description: Not reported
Surface Water, Not reported
Water Supply Well: Not reported
Tank Last Used Date: 1 I
Tank Certified Number: 2005054200
Date Last Certified: 08146105
Begin Certified Number: 01107105
End Certified Number: ! 1
Lat/Long : 35.44323 / 80.87333
LatlLong 1 : 35 26 35.61 1 80 52 23.98
GPS String Confirmed: Yes
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS: BCN
Tank ID Number: Not reported
Last Update: 07/23104
A6 BP 02313 (CIRCLE K 5102) IMD 5106406357
SSE 9101 SAM FURR ROAD LUST NIA
112-1 HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
3959 ft.
Site 2 of 2 in cluster A
Relative:
Lower LUST-
Incident Number: 27697 Date Occurred: 03105/44
Actual: 5 M,in Quad: Not reported Lat/Long: 35442873/ 80873565
711 ft. Source Type: C Region: Mooresville
Facility ID: 0-035140 GPS Confirmed: 7
UST Number: MO-6985 Testlat: Not reported
Product. Type: Petroleum Date Reported: 43/45/04
Responsible Party:
Company: CONOCOPHILLIPS
Contact Person: Kim Alderman
Address: 10154 Highland Manor Drive
City/StatlZp: Tampa, FL 33514
County: Not reported
Comm 1 Non-coma UST Site: Commercial
Tank Regulated Status: Regulated
Regional Officer Project Mgr: AJS
Risk Classification: L
Risk Classification Based On Review: I
Corrective Action Plan Type: Not reported
Level Of Soil Cleanup Achieved: Residential levels
Closure Request Date: I I
Close Out: I I
Contamination Type: GW
NORR Issued Date: I I
NOV Issued Date:/ 1 Phase Of LSA Req:2
Site Risk Reason: Surface water Land Use: Industrial/commercial
MTBE: 0 # Of Supply Wells: 0
Telephone:. [phone] Flag: 0
Error Flag: 0 LUR Filed: I 1
Error Code: Not reported LUR Filed: I I
Valid: F Date Occur: 03105104
MTBE1: Yes Flag1: No
Cleanup: 03108104 Current Status: File Located in House
RBCA GW: G2 PETOPT: 3
CD Num: 0 Reel Num: 0
TC01585712.1 r Page 12
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
MAP FINDINGS
BP 02313 (CIRCLE K 5102) (Continued)
RPOW: True RPOP: False
RPL: False
PIRFIMin Soil : Not reported
Ownership: Private Location: Residence
Owner/Operator: Not reported Operation Type: Commercial
Site Priority: Not reported Priority Update: I I
Wells Affected: No Wells Affected #: 0
Samples Taken: Yes Samples Include: Not reported
5minquad: Not reported Error Type: Not reported
Submitted: 03605104
Description: ESA sampling revealed groundwater contamination as high as 1,400 ppb in
benzene.
Last Modified: I 1
Incident Phase: Follow Up
NOV Issued: I I NORR Issued: 1 1
45 Day Report: 1 1 SOC Sighned: 1 1
Close-out. Report: I I RS Designation: f !
Public Meeting Wield: I I
Corrective Action Planned: i 1
Reclassification Report: 1 l
Closure Request Date: I I
Comments: ESA sampling revealed groundwater contamination as high as 1,400
ppb in benzene. Site check indicated no failures and minimal
soil contamination. LSA required. LSA Indicates intermediate
risk - groundwater > 10 X 2B (benzene at 5000 ppb) and soil
a soil-to-groundwater. SL 2004-924 letter distributed.
IMD:
Incident Number: 27697
Region: Not reported
Date Occurred: 315/2004 0:00:00
Submit Date: 31512004 0:00:00
GW Contam: Yes
Soil Contam: No
Operator, Kim Alderman
10150 Highland Manor Drive
Tampa, FL 33610
Contact Phone: [phone]
Priority Code: Not reported
Priority Update: Not reported
Site Priority: Not reported
Dem Contact: AJS
Wells Affected: No
Num Affected: Not reported
Sampled By: Samples Include:
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: Not reported
Incident Dese: ESA sampling revealed groundwater contamination as high as 1,400 ppb in
benzene.
Ownership: Private
Operation: Commercial
Material: Not reported
Qty Lost: Not reported
Qty Recovered: Not reported
Source: Leak-underground
Type: CGasotineldiesel
Location: Residence
Setting: Not reported
Wells Contam: Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
5106406357
TC01585712.1 r Page 13
Map iD
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation SSi19
EDR ID Number
Carat -() EPA ID Number
P 1 -, _ 5102, s e-wed)
Sampled Y
Samples Include: Not reported
Owner Company: CCNOCCPHILLIPS
Agency : Not reported
Last Modified Not reported
SCC Sighned: Not reported
RS Designation, Not reported
CHARLOTTE, NO 28247
Owner Phone [phone]
Tank capacity 10000
Comment : Not reported
Tank product . Gasoline, Gasoline Mixture
Tank material ; Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic
Interior Protection: FRP
Exterior Protection: FRP
Wiping material : FRP
Certify Type : Not reported
Leak Detection Type Automatic tank guaging
Leak Detection Type 2: Interstitial monitoring/double-walled tank andfcr piping
Leak Detection Piping 1 : Automatic line leak detectors
Corrosn Prot e Tank: FRP tank/piping
Corrosn Frolics: Pipe: FRP tankfpiping
Spill and C+ Catchment basins
Finncis r -- ty Not reported
Region: 03
Tank ID: At
Date installed: 02113196
Date removed; Not reported
Status; Currently In Use
Compartment Tank : No
Main Tank : No
Product Type. NON
Piping System Type Code: Not reported
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Ta nk1: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Ta nk Date: 02/13196
Corrosion Piping: Net reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Date: 02/13196
T
TC01585712Jr Page 14
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number

KINGS POINT MARINA INC (Continued) 0003202461
Overfill: D
Spill Overfill Date: ! 1
Financial Responsibility Code: Not reported
Financial Responsibility Description: Not reported
Surface Water: Not reported
Water Supply Well: Not reported
Tank Last Used Date: 1
Tank Certified Number: 2605029360
Date Last Certified: 01103105
Begin Certified Number: 01104/05
End Certified Number?..- I I
LatlLong : 35.45894180.89347
LatlLong 1 : 35 27 32.24 1 80 53 36.48
GPS String Confirmed: 'rt`es
Initials of Individual Confirming GP& MAB
Tank ID Number: Not reported
Last Update: 04103103
Facility ID: 0-025572
Telephone: [phone]
Owner name < RINGS POINT MARINA INC
Owner Address: PO BOX 470577
CHARLOTTE, NC 28247
Owner Phone ; [phone]
Tank capacity : 4060
Comment : Not reported
Tank product: Gasoline, Gasoline Mixture
Tank material a Steel
Interior Protection: None
Exterior Protection: Paint
Piping material : Steel
Certify Type : Not reported
Leafs Detection Type Not reported
Leak Detection Type 2: Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1.: Not reported
Corrosn Protec Tank: Not reported
Corrosn Protec Pipe: Not reported
Spill and Overfill Not reported
Financial Responsiblity : Not reported
Region: 63
Tank9D: 1
Date installed: 09122186
Date removed: 07102196
Status: Permanent Closed
Compartment Tank: No
Main Tank No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: Not reported
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tankl: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date: t f
Corrosion Piping; Not reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Date: 1 1
Overfill: Not reported
Spill Overfill Date: I
Financial Responsibility Code: Not reported
TC01585712.1 r Page 15
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.)
Elevation Site
MAP FINDINGS
KINGS POINT MARINA INC (Continued)
Financial Responsibility Description:
Surface Water:
Water Supply Well:
Tank Last Used Date:
Tank Certified Number
Date Last Certified;
Begin Certified Number:
End Certified Number:
Lat/Long ;
Lat/Lang 1
GPS String Confirmed:
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS:
Tank ID Number:
Last Update:
Not reported
Not reported
Not reported
I I'
Not reported
/1
35.45894
35 27 32.20 / 80 53 36.48
Yes
MAB
Not reported
44103/03
8 CORNELIUS AMOCO
NNE 18405 STATESVILLE ROAD
112-1 CHARLOTTE, NC 28031
4692 ft.
Relative: UST:
Higher Facility ID:
Telephone:
Actual: Owner name:
779 ft. Owner Address:
0-036215
[phone]
MARK OIL COMPANY INC
PO BOX 32064
CHARLOTTE, NC 28232
Owner Phone : [phone]
Tank capacity 15000
Comment : Not reported
Tank product : Gasoline, Gasoline Mixture
Tank material : Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic
Interior Protection: FRP
Exterior Protection: FRP
Piping material 10
Certify Type : Installer certified by tank and piping manufacturers
Leak Detection Type : Automatic tank guaging
Leak Detection Type 2: Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1: Automatic line leak detectors
Corrosn Protec Tank: FRP tank/piping
Corrosn Protec Pipe: Flexible Piping
Spill and Overfill : Catchment basins
Financial Responsibllty ; State funds
Region: 03
Tank ID: 1
Date installed: 09115100
Date removed: Not reported
Status: Currently in Use
Compartment Tank : No
Main Tank: No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: P
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date: 09115/00
Corrosion Piping: I
Corrosion Protection Piping Date: 09/15/00
Overfill: D
Spill Overfill Date: 09/151oo
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
U003202461
UST 0003756210
NIA
TC01585712.1 r Page 16
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID !Number
CORNELIUS AMOCO (Continued) 0003755210
Financial Responsibility Code: Not reported
Financial Responsibility Description: STATE FUND
Surface Water, Not reported
Water Supply Well: Not reported
Tank Last Used Date: 1 /
Tank Certified Number: 2005054510
Date Last Certified: 08106/05
Begin Certified Number: 01/07105
End Certified Number: 1 1
Lat/Long : 010
Lat/Long 1 : Not reported
GPS String Confirmed: Not reported
Initiats of Individual Confirming GP5: Not reported
Tank ID Number: Not reported
Last Update: 04134102
Facility ID: 0-436295
Telephone: [phone]
Owner name : MARK OIL COMPANY INC
Owner Address: PO BOX 32064
CHARLOTTE, NC 26232
Owner Phone : [phone]
Tank capacity: 10000
Comment : Not repotted
Tang product Gasoline, Gasoline Mixture
Tank material Fiberglass Reinforced Pl astic
Interior Protection: FRP
Exterior Protection: FRP
Piping material : 10
Certify Type, Installer certified by tank and piping manufacturers
Leak Detection Type Automatic tank guaging
Leak Detection Type 2: Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1: Automatic line leak detectors
Corrosn Protec Tank: FRP tanklpiping
Corrosn Protec Pipe: Flexible Piping
Spill and Overfill : Catchment basins
Financial Responsiblity : State funds
Region: 03
Tank ID: 2
Date installed: 09/15140
Date removed: Not reported
Status: Currently In Use
Compartment Tank: No
Main Tank No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: P
Piping System Type Description, Not. reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date: 09115100
Corrosion Piping: i
Corrosion Protection Piping Date: 09/15100
Overfill: D
Spill Overfill Date: 09/15/00
Financial Responsibility Code: Not reported
Financial Responsibility Description: STATE FUND
Surface Water: Not reported
TC01585712.1 r Page 17
Map ID MAP FHD1ONG5
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
CORNELIUS AMOCO (Continued) U003755210
Water Supply Welt: Not reported
Tank Last Used Date: I /
Tank Certified Number: 2005054510
Date Last Certified: 08105105
Begin Certified Number: 01107/05
End Certified Number: 1 I
LatlLong ; 010
Lat/Long 1 : Not reported
GPS String Confirmed: Not reported
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS: Not reported
Tank ID Number: Not reported
Last Update: 041307102'
9 SHIP & SHORE
NW 17505 HWY 73
112-1 HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
4761 ft.
IMD 5101643180
LUST NIA
Relative: LUST:
Higher Incident Number: 14130 Date Occurred: 11/07/94
5 Min Quad: Not reported Lat/Long: Not reported
Actual: Source Type: Not reported Region: Mooresville
812 ft. Facility ID: Not reported GPS Confirmed: Not reported
UST Number: MO-4357 Testlat: Not reported
Product Type: Petroleum Bate Reported: 11/22194
Responsible Party:
Company: THE LAKE NORMAN COMPANY
Contact Person: MS. LISA DULA
Address: PO BOX 1120
City/StatlZip: DAVtDSON, NC 28036
County: MECKLENBURG
Comm / Non-comrn UST Site: Commercial
Tank Regulated Status: Regulated
Regional Officer Project Mgr: AJS
Risk Classification: L
Risk Classification Based On Review: L
Corrective Action Plan Type: Not reported
Level Of Soil Cleanup Achieved: Not reported
Closure Request Date: / I
Close Out: 02109/05
Contamination Type: SL
NORR Issued Date: 06/13195
NOV Issued Date:/ ! Phase Of LSA Req:Not reported
Site Risk Reason: Not reported Land Use: Not reported
MTBE: 0 # Of Supply Wells: 0
Telephone: [phone] Flag: 0
Error Flag: 0 LUR Filed: ! I
Error Code: Not reported LUR Filed: 1 1
Valid: F Date Occur: 11107194
MTBEI: Unknown Flag1: No
Cleanup: 11/07194 Current Status: File Located in House
RBCA GW: Not reported PETOPT: 3
CD Num: 0 Reel Num: 0
RPOW: False RPOP: False
RPL'. False
PIRFIMin Soil Pirf
Ownership: Private Location: Facility
Owner/Operator: MS, LISA DULA Operation Type: Commercial
Site Priority: E? Priority Update: 05/15198
TC01585712.1r Page 18
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SHIP & SHORE (Continued) 5101643180
Wells Affected: Not reported Wells Affected #: 0
Samples Taken: Not reported Samples Include: Not reported
5minquad: Not reported Error Type: Not reported
Submitted: 06/16195
Description: TPH LEVELS OF 2635 PPM WERE DISCOVERED.
Last Modified: I 1
Incident. Phase: Closed Out
NOV issued: I I NORR Issued: 06113195
45 Day Report: 1 1 SOC Sighned: 1 1
Close-out Report:/ I RS Designation: I I
Public Meeting Held: I 1
Corrective Action Planned: 1 1
Reclassification Report: 1 I
Closure Request Date: 1 1
Comments: 1-41K GALLON GAS UST. SOIL CONTAMINATION FOUND UNDER LINE AND
EXCAVATED.
MAD:
Incident Number, 14130
Region: MOR
Date Occurred: 11!711994 0:00:00
Submit Date: 611611995 0:00:00
GW Contam: No
Soil Contam: Yes
Operator: MS. LISA DULA
PO BOX 1120
DAVIDSON, NC 28436
MECKL County
Contact Phone: [phone]
Priority Code: L
Priority Update: 511511998 0:00:00
Site Priority: E?
Dem Contact: AJS
Wells Affected: Not reported
Num Affected: 0
Sampled 8y: Samples Include:.
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: Not reported
Incident Dese: TPH LEVELS OF 2635 PPM WERE DISCOVERED.
Ownership: Private
Operation: Commercial
Material: GASOLINE
Qty Lost: Not reported
Qty Recovered: Not reported
Source: Leak-underground
Type: Gasoline/diesel
Location: Facility
Setting: Residential
Wells Contam: Not reported
Sampled Sy: Not reported
Samples Include: Not reported
Owner Company : THE LAKE NORMAN COMPANY
Lat/Long: Not reported
Risk Site L
LatJLong Decimal:Not reported
LaVLong Number Not reported
GPS: NOD Agency
Incident Phase: Closed Out Last Modified
OWM
Not reported
TC01585712.1 r Page 19
I ID
L._t;
I IL
TC T Page 20
Map 10 i
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SAMS MART 19 (Continued) 0003092179
Begin Certified Number: 01/10104
End Certified Number: I /
Lat/Long : 35.44339 / 80,86648
Lat/Long 1 : 35 26 36.20 1 80 5159.32
GPS String Confirmed: Yes
Initials of Individual Confi rming GPS: BCN
Tank 10 Number:.. Not reported
Last Update: 07/13/04
Facility ID: 0.034650
Telephone: [phone]
Owner name : LSAA. INC DBA SAMS MART
Owner Address: 6415 IDLEWILD RD, STE 218
CHARLOTTE, NC 28212
Owner Phone : [phone]
Tank capacity 10000
Comment : Not reported
Tank product : Gasoline, Gasoline M ixture
Tank material : Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic
Interior Protection: FRP
Exterior Protection: Paint
Piping material FRP
Certify Type : Installer certified by tank and piping manufacturers
Leak Detection Type : Inventory control
Leak Detection Type 2: Interstitial monitoring/double-walled tank and/or piping
Leak Detection Piping 1: Automatic line leak detectors
Corrosn Protec Tank: FRP tanklpiping
Corrosn Protec Pipe: FRP tankipiping
Spill and Overfill : Catchment basins
Financial Responsib6ity Letter of credit with standby trust fund
Region: 03
Tank I'D: 2
Date installed: 03130/95
Date removed: Not reported
Status: Currently In Use
Compartment Tank : No
Main Tank: No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: Not reported
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date: 1 1
Corrosion Piping: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Pip ing Date: 1 1
Overfill: D
Spill Overfill Date: 1 1
Financial Responsibility Code: F
Financial Responsibility Description: 1 ST UNION NAT BK
Surface Water: Not reported
Water Supply Well: Not reported
Tank Last. Used Date: l 1
Tank Certified Number: 2004071770
Date Last Certified: 08/27/04
Begin Certified Number: 01110/04
End Certified Number:
Lat/Long : 35.44339180.86648
T001585712.1 r Page 21
...
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA I'D Number
SAMS MART 19 (Continued) U003092179
LaVLong 1 : 35 26 36.20180 51 59.32
GPS String Confirmed: Yes
Initials of Individual Con firming GPS: BCN
Tank ID Number,: Not reported
Last Update: 07113/04
Facility ID: 0-034650
Telephone: [phone]
Owner name ° LSAA. INC DBA SAMS MART
Owner Address: 6415 IDLEWILD RD, STE 218
CHARLOTTE, NC 28212
Owner Phone [phone]
Tank capacity ° 10000
Comment : Not reported
Tank product : Gasoline, Gasoline M ixture
Tank material Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic
Interior Protection: FRP
Exterior Protection: FRP
Piping material : FRP
Certify Type : Installer certified by tank and piping manufacturers
Leak Detection Type ; Inventory control
Leak Detection Type 2: Interstitial monitoringldouble-walled tank and/or piping
Leak Detection Piping 1: Automatic line leak detectors
Corrosn Protec. Tank: FRP tank/piping
Corrosn Protec Pipe: FRP tank/piping
Spill and Overfill Catchment basins
Financial Responsiblity : Letter of credit with st andby trust fund
Region: 03
Tank ID: 3
Date installed: 03130195
Date removed: Not reported
Status: Currently In Use
Compartment Tank: No
Main Tank : No
Product Type: NON
Piping System Type Code: Not reported
Piping System Type Description: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date: 1 1
Corrosion Piping: Not reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Date: I I
Overfill: D
Spill Overfill Date: I 1
Financial Responsibility Code: F
Financial Responsibility Description: 1 ST UNION NAT' BK
Surface Water: Not reported
Water Supply Well: Not reported
Tank. Last Used Date: I 1
Tank Certified Number: 2004071770
Date Last Certified: 08127104
Begin Certified Number: 01/10/04
End Certified Number: I I
Lat/Long 35.44339 / 80.86648
LaVLong 1- 35 2.6 35.20180 51 59.32
GPS String Confirmed: Yes
Initials of individual Confirming GPS: BCN
TC01585712.1r Page 22
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft.) EDR ID Number
Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
SAMS MART 19 (Continued) 0003092179
Tank ID Number: Not reported
Last Update: 07/13/04
11 LAKE NORMAN TIRE & AUTO IMID S'107405238
NNE 18816 STATESVI'LLE ROAD NIA
> 1 CORNELIOUS, NC
6499 ft.
Relative: I MD:
Higher Incident Number: 27945
Region: Not reported
Actual: Date Occurred: 6110!9997 0:00:40
756 ft. Submit Date: 912912005 0:00:00
GIN Contam: No
Soil Contam: Yes
Operator: NANCY L. LACKEY
103 PIER 33 DR. UNIT 216
MOORESVILLE, NC 2.8115
IREDE County
Contact Phone: [phone]
Priority Code: Not reported
Priority Update: Not reported
Site Priority: Not reported
Derr Contact: AJS
Wells Affected: No
Mum Affected: Not reported
Sampled Sy: Samples Include:
7.5 Min Quad: Not reported
5 Min Quad: Not reported
Incident Desc: Not reported
Ownership: Private
Operation: Commercial
Material: Not reported
Qty Lost: Not reported
Qty Recovered: Not reported
Source: Leak-underground
Type: GasolineMlesel
Location: Facility
Setting: Not reported
Wells Contam: Not reported
Sampled By: Y
Samples Include: Not reported
Owner Company: Not reported
LatlLong: Not reported
Risk. Site Not reported
LatlLong Decimal:Not reported
Lat/Long Number Not reported
GPS: 7 Agency Not reported
Incident Phase: Closed Out Last Modified Not reported
NOV Issued: Not reported
45 Day Report: Not reported SOC Sghned: Not reported
Public Meeting Held: Not reported
Corrective Action Planned: Not reported
Reclassification Report: Not reported
Close-out Report: Not reported R5 Designation: Not reported
Closure Request Date: Not reported
TC01585712.1r Page 23
v
A
?
LL
w
z
y
LL
z
-j LL
r ?. Q r r
D LL
V) J J i/) II J J F J VA
U) 0
W
LL CIA J J ll,. ' U7 ¢ Q1 LL ? J " '. ? - J 0 ? ;l

iI)
FI« ? 9 9 R h
jl? ?aaoo NN Q o c o a a
N [
N +f
M N N LTV N N N? ?
Z
a
w
ui
w
z
0
J
m
?n
I
z
Z
¢ ?¢ w w
00 0
0 w 0 L
?r Job a
d' J Z 7 J --. Z
< 19 o Lo < `7© ap.D V77Z 0 C%l 0 PwM
Y ,n fl0.' a Q CC W X U" Z X Y -?
C) n r A
0 ¢ Y g V7 III CC
'? r r
LA r W Y LL . w m °n i^J m z 2 i 2 0) 0?¢
Ups '? m d Fw h- n"? U ti F¢.- G z L0?
U) r m r CL CIA Q) m z ca T PY _ - os T z Y- VI N v) J
m
z
m
C5
Q
7
J
Ad
N
U w (L u m
w
Q O <
Z
L) Q _
1iA ? w 0 06 U w h N
LL zi
z z > ? J >- Z A N ] Lu
_j -j z
wviW<Uj0??CLL.7aw D zzC
tX [ C -
Of c xZ?cr LL `Ra c?lAp ?WUwlz ?
L) w z O C7 z > cwy w
© r» to F- ?' ctc ?
Jw¢ [YOB v)?70 L AU?yaa[ YZZZZr0-
J 411 CC co of " U vA ? Z - t U ? (] o PA] ? U J
® w Yu ? z N wME w w- a D Z 0 N Fw° Q Q< pr_
4 w p w z Z W a z z w j ?? z J
e?}a rya fp?(y w p??7} r N aA r[a M N N a an co C", 3,
S7 KY CWi M ?a (?+ ? qa Q ti tl00 A 0 P t r 0)
? 4y O! .Rp Ci p ?tl Pa ?L"pf O Sa u) 61 N M 07
?Pa Cy71t- 1p N M SQ V, pLD sh N ry N O r- w ? ti n C It to co
ko L" a Q 6? D O r7 a
I, to m C] C3 d O p a© G7 O O O a p 0 a rJ
W Gn Vy N CPj Pq ,?? Gig N ¢ 7 U) o © 0 in Z7
o
t,]
w w w LEF w w 1AA w w w w w w CAl
J J J ..,A J J J J J .l „„} ..J J J
J J J ..ll J J J J J J ..l J J J
vA m R!A rn vs Pn uA > y'S 7 a 5 7 7
F-- :2 5 ?---w?Cf) w?Na:0 I'? wwC ?
? J J J W. J .3 f!' [A' a dX. CC fl` LL' fY d' LL` Q` !Y w EY
J w w w w wW w w u) w w w w w w w w w w w w w 0
Z Z z z Z Z Z w z z z z z z~ z z z z z z z z
2? Q D?© ? O¢ 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 w
U C] U U U LJ [J U U` 2 T T T T T T T ? T T T S 2 J
w
v,
ra
CL
rs
U
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED 1 DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required.
Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days
from the date the government agency made the information available to the public.
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL: National Priority List
National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 9,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices.
Date of Government Version: 10114105
Date Data Arrived at ED R: 11/02105
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/07105
Number of [lays to Update. 35
NPL Site Boundaries
Source: EPA
Telephone: NIA
Last EDR Contact: 11!02105
Next Scheduled E D R Contact: 01130106
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
Sources:
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 3
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 6
Telephone: [phone]
EPA Region 8
Telephone: [phone]
Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites
Date of Government Version: 10114105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11102105
Date Made Active in Reports: 12107/05
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: EPA
Telephone: NIA
Last EDR Contact: 11/02105
Next Scheduled E D R Contact: 01130!06
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate.
Date of Government Version: 10/14105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11102105
Date Made Active in Reports: 12107105
Number of Days to Update: 35
Source: EPA
Telephone: NIA
Last EDR Contact: 11102/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01130!05
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order
to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability.
USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
TC01585712.1r Page GR-1
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10/15/91
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02102194
Date Made Active in Reports: 03/30194
Number of Days to Update: 56
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08122/05
Next Scheduled E D R Contact: 11/21105
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response,. Compensation, and Liability Information System
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities,
private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA), CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities
List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL,.
Date of Government Version: 09/19/05
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10/21/05
{late Made Active in Reports: 10/27105
Number of Days to Update: 6
Source: EPA.
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 10121105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12119/05
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
As of February 1995, CERCLIS sites designated "No Further Remedial Action Planned' (NFRAP) have been removed
from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found,
contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to he placed on the NPL, or the contamination
was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately
25,000 NFRA'P sites to lift the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has archived them
as historical records so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations in the future. This policy change is
part of the EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities, states, private investors and affected citizens
to promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites.
Date of Government Version: 08/22/05
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/20105
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/27/05
Number of Days to Update: 37
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09/20105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12119105
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report
CORRACTS identities hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity.
Date of Government Version: 10113105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10127/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 12107/05
Number of Days to Update: 41
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09106105
{Text Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/16106
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
RCRA: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
TC01585712.1r Page GR-2
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRAInfo replaces
the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS).
The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat an&or dispose of
hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small
quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous
waste per month. Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per
month, Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste,. or over 1 kg
of acutely hazardous waste per month, Transporters are individuals or entities that move hazardous waste from
the generator off site to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the waste. TSDFs treat, store,
or dispose of the waste.
Date of Government Version: 10/14105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10127/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 12107105
Number of Days to Update: 41
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 10127105
Text Scheduled EDR Contact.. 12126105
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances.
Date of Government Version: 12131104 Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01/27/05 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 03124105 Last EDR Contact: 01/27105
Number of Days to Update: 56 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/24105
Data Release Frequency: Annually
HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT.
Date of Government Version:. 06127105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10118/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/07105
Number of Days to Update: 50
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
Telephone. [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 10118105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01116106
Data Release Frequency: Annually
US ENG CONTROLS. Engineering Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with engineering controls in place, Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building
foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental
media or effect human health.
Date of Government Version: 08102105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08112105
Date Made Active in Reports: 10/06105
Number of Days to Update. 55
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 07/05/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01102/06
Data Release Frequency: Varies
U5 1NST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls
A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures,
such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation
care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally
required as part of the institutional controls.
Date of Government Version: 01110/05
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02111105
Date Made Active in Reports: 04106105
Number of flays to Update: 54
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 01103/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/03105
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC01585712.1 r Page GR-3
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED 1 DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
DOD: Department of Defense Sites
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Date of Government Version: 10101!03
Date Data Arrived at ED R: 11112103
Date Made Active in Reports. 11121103
Number of Days to Update:. 9
Source: USGS
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08109/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/07105
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
FURS: Formerly Used Defense Sites
The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the U5 Army Corps of Engineers
is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions.
Date of Government Version: 12131104
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06/29/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 08108105
Number of Days to Update: 40
Source. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08/29/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10103105
Data Release Frequency: Varies
U5 BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields
properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA's Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA
Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots-minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with
brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding andlor technical assistance for environmental assessments
at brownfields sites throughout the country, Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts
under EPA's Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement
Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become Brownfields Cleanup Revolving
Loan Fund (BCRLF) cooperative agreement recipients when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the
U.S. EPA. EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients based on a proposal and application process. BCRLF
cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified
brown fi elds-related cleanup activities.
Date of Government Version: 08/18/05
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08118/05
Date Made Active in Reports; 101'06105
Number of Days to Update: 49
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact:. 08111105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12112105
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released
periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
Date of Government Version: 12114/04 Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 02115105 Telephone: Varies
Date Made Active in Reports: 04125/05 Last EDR Contact: 01127/05
Number of Days to Update: 69 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/24/05
Data Release Frequency: Varies
ROD. Records Of Decision
Record of Decision. ROE) documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical
and health information to aid in the cleanup.
Date of Government Version: 06/08105
Date Data. Arrived at EDR: 10120/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 12147105
Number of Days to Update: 48
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 10/06/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02106
Data Release Frequency: Annually
TC01585712.1 r Page GR-4
UMTRA. Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs, When the mills
shut down, large piles of the sand-flke material (mill tailings) remain after uranlum has been extracte r m
the ore, Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases taflings
were used as construcrion materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized, In 1978,
24 inactive uranium mill tailings sites in Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexicoi Texas, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Pennsylvania, and on Navajo and Hopi tribal lands, were targeted for cleanup by the Department of
Energy.
Vate, Data Arrived at EDR: 01/07105
Date Made Activ* in Repgrts� 03114105
Number of Days to Update: 66
Source: Department of Energy
Telephqne� 505-845-0011
Last EDR Contact: 12121104
W" I
HIMISIMMM-t
ODI- Open Dump Inventory
An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Pail 258
Subtitle D Grilled&
Date of Government Version: 06130185 Source: Environmental Protection Agency
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08/09104 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports', 09/17/04 Last ECR Contact: 05123195
Number of Days to Update: 39 Next Scheduled EOR Contact NIA
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
TRIS,, Toxic Chemical Release inventory System
Toxic Release Inventory System, TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313,
Source� EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact, 07113/05
TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act
Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site.
Date of Government Version: 12/31102
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04127104
Date Made Active in Reports; 05121104
Number of Days to Update: 24
Source. EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact- 07118105
Next Scheduled EOR Contact. 10/17105
Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years
FTTS- FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)ITSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPC RA {Emergency Planning and Community 'Right -to -Know Act), To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis,
Date of Government Version. 07/15105
Source-, EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Date Data Arrived at EDR- 10/31105
Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports,, 12/20105
Last ERR Contest: 09/19105
Number of Days to Update: 50
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12119105
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED 1 DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Gate of Government Version: 07115105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10131105
Date Made Active in Reports: 12120105
Number of Days to Update: 50
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 09119/05
Next Scheduled EDR Contact:: 12/19105
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year.
Date of Government Version: 12131103
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 01103105
Date Made Active in Reports: 01125105
Number of Days to Update: 22
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 11/29104
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/17/05
Data Release Frequency: Annually
PADS: PCB Activity Database System
PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storeys and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities.
Date of Government Version: 08/30/05
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/13/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 10127105
Number of Days to Update: 44
Source: EPA
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact 09/13105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/07105
Data Release Frequency: Annually
MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements, To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis,
Date of Government Version: 07/14105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10131105
Date Made Active in Reports: 12/20105
Number of Days to Update: 50
Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 10/03105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/02/06
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
MINES: Mines Master Index File
Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes
violation information.
Date of Government Version: 08112105 Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09/27105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11114105 Last EDR Contact: 09/27/05
Number of Days to Update: 48 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 112126105
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annuatly
FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail. ED'R includes the fallowing FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFtS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System).
Date of Govemment Version: 09129145
Date Data Arrived at. EDR: 10/04/05
Date Made Active in Reports: 11!14105
Number of Days to Update: 41
Source: EPA
Telephone: NIA
Last EDR Contact: 08129105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01102/06
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
TC01585712.1r Page GR-6
I
i
p , > ?C.
I'
I
-i i 'fanned
i a a
a
12/05
I
p ,
d
f 1 MUD, L
I
1 udes sites on the
I- f=``-° gra Mtc Inforn end Analysis
L
L f°
RCY°a yy
. I
i n
List
.... a.. t __er..e ..._ r
lie
2.1 r P£
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 06109105 Source: Department of Environment and Natural 'Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 06109105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 06129/05 Last EDR Contact: 06106/05
Number of Days to Update: 20 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10124/05
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
OLt: Old Landfill Inventory
Old landfill inventory location information. (Does not include no further action sites and other agency lead
sites).
Date of Government Version: 10106105 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at ED R: 11109105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active In Reports: 11130105 Last EDR Contact: 10/26105
Number of Days to Update: 21 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01/23106
Data Release Frequency: Varies
LUST: Regional UST Database
This database contains information obtained from the Regional Offices. It provides a more detailed explanation
of current and historic activity for individual sites, as well as what was previously found in the Incident Management
Database. Sites in this database with Incident Numbers are considered LUSTS.
Date of Government. Version: 09102105 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
[fate Data Arrived at. EDR: 09/08105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 10107/05 Last EDR Contact: 09108105
Number of Days to update:. 29 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12105/05
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
LUST TRUST: State Trust Fund Database
This database contains information about claims against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs.
Date of Government Version: 11/04/05 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11/09/05 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11134105 Last EDR Contact: 11109/05
Number of Days to Update: 21 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 42106/06
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
UST: Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST"s are regulated under Subtitle i of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available
information varies by state program.
Date of Government Version: 08/01105 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 09108/05 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 10125105 Last EDR Contact: 09108/05
Number of Days to Update: 47 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12105105
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
AST:. AST Database
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons.
Date of Government Version: 08131/05 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10117105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11117105 Last EDR Contact: 10117105
Number of Days to Update: 31 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01116106
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
tNST CONTROL: No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
TC01585712.1r Page GR-8
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED 1 DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version: 10111105 Source: Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10112105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11111105 Last EDR Contact: 10110145
Number of Days to Update: 34 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 01109106
Data Release Frequency: Quarterly
VCP: Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Date of Government Version: 10111/05 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 10112105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11111105 Last EDR Contact: 10110105
Number of Days to Update: 30 next Scheduled E D R Contact: 01109/06
Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually
DRYCLEANERS: Drycieaning Sites
Potential and known drycleaning sites, active and abandoned, that the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program has
knowledge of and entered into this database.
Date of Government Version: 11102105 Source: Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11102/05 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11130/05 Last EDR Contact: 11102/05
Number of Days to Update: 28 Next Scheduled EDR Contact. 41115106
Data Release Frequency: Varies
BRQWNFlELDS: Brownfields Projects Inventory
A brownfield site is an abandoned, Idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
has hindered its redevelopment. All of the site s in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control.
Date of Government Version: 03131105 Source: Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 08115105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 08126105 Last EDR Contact: 08105105
Number of Days to Update: 11 Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/31/05
Data Release Frequency. Varies
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations
This snap layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater
than 640 acres.
Date of Government Version: 10101103 Source: USGS
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 11112103 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 11121103 Last EDR Contact: 08109/05
Number of Days to Update: 9 Next Scheduled E D R Contact: 11107105
Data Release Frequency. Semi-Annually
INDIAN LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTS on Indian land in Florida, Minnesota, Mississippi and North Carolina.
Date of Government Version. 06106105 Source: EPA Region 4
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07111105 Telephone: [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports: 08/05105 Last EDR Contact: 08125105
Number of Days to Update: 25 Next Scheduled E D R Contact: 11121105
Data Release Frequency: Varies
INDIAN UST: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
Date of Government Version: 061061055
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 07111105
Date Made Active in Reports: 08105105
Number of Days to Update: 25
Source: EPA Region 4
Telephone: [phone]
Last EDR Contact: 08125/05
Text Scheduled EDR Contact: 11121105
Data Release Frequency: Varies
TC01585712.1r Page GR-9
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCMED 1 DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
Date of Government Version: 11/15105
Date Data Arrived at EDR: 12105105
Date Made Active in Reports 12128105
Number of Days to Update: 23
OTHER DATABASE S
Source: EDR, Inc.
Telephone: NIA
Last FOR Contact:. 12105105
Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 03/13106
Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a. specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report.
Oil/Gas Pipelines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs
from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily
gas pipelines.
Electric Power Transmission Line Data
Source: PennWell Corporation
Telephone: 4800} 823-6277
This map includes information copyrighted by PennWell Corporation. This information is provided
on a best effort basis and PennWell Corporation does not guarantee its accuracy nor warrant its
fitness for any particular purpose, Such information has been reprinted with the permission of PennWell.
Sensitive Receptors. There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity
to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all
sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities = schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers,
and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located.
AHA Hospitals:
Source: American Hospital Association, Inc.
Telephone: [phone]
The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association's annual survey of hospitals.
Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing
Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Telephone'. 410-786-3000
A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services,
a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Nursing Homes
Source: National Institutes of Health
Telephone: [phone]
information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States.
Public Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on elementary
and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical
database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are
comparable across all states.
Private Schools
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone: [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on private school locations in the United. States.
Daycare Centers: Child Care Facility List
Source: Department of Health & Human Services
Telephone: [phone]
TC01585712.1 r Page GR-10
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EQR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2402 from the U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service.
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2004 Geographic Data Technology, Inc., Rel. 07/2004. This product contains proprietary and confidential property of Geographic
Data Technology, Inc. Unauthorized use, including copying for other than testing and standard backup procedures, of this product is
expressly prohibited.

TC01585712.1r Page GR-11
GEOCHECK'% PHYSICAL. SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM
TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS
MCDOWELL CREEK STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SAM FURR ROAD TO WESTMORELAND ROAD
HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES
Elevation: 734 ft. above sea level
EDR's GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in
forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration.
Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principle investigative components:
1_ Groundwater flow direction, and
2. Groundwater flow velocity.
Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics
of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the
geologic strata.
TGQ1585712.1 r Page A-1
GEOCHECW - PHYSICAL. SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
Gp')!1` ': TER FLOW DIR f C 'N INFORMATION
Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional
using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other
sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data
collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers).
TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to
assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or,
should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY
USGS Topographic Map: 35080-D8 LAKE NORMAN SOUTH, NC
General Topographic Gradient: General SE
Source: USGS 75 min quad index
SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES
rm
c
Q H
V V p? -4 -4
,`i ,.wj ? ? N A A W VV H ?V} (e.}1 +} y^i? p
41 _ iA ?. W WA M N y ? ? H H
ua w
r ?• a . t - . E . r . r y . r. r? r eN • ? ?? r .Wr r
G
North
TIP
South
V A H tlb

? yHp?
O y
O - ??nr w??
SU

West
? y ? {q Im ? iyj, V N IV A
W r9 -? VAI• ?h
..... ......... .... ......... ......... ......... .....
912 1
Target Property Elevation: 734 ft.
Source: Topography has been determined from the USES 7.5' Digital Elevation Modei and should be evaluated
on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
should be field verified.
TG09585792.9r Page A-2
GEOCHECW - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flaw, Such hydrologic information can be used to assist
the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should
contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways
and bodies of water).
FEMA FLOOD ZONE
Tar et Pro ert Count
MECKLENBURG, NC
Flood Plain Panel at Target Property:
Additional Panels in search area:
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
NWI Quad at Target Pro ert
LAKE NORMAN SOUTH
FEMA Flood
Electronic Data
'YE=S - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map
37015800158
37015800208
00000000000
37015800358
37015800308
NWI Electronic
Data Coverage
YES --refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map
HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator
of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area, Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the
environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should
contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted.
AQUIFLOWO
Search Radius: 1.000 Mile..
EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater
flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory
authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined
hydrogeologicaily, and the depth to water table,
LOCATION GENERAL DIRECTION
MAP ID FROM TP GROUNDWATER FLOW
1 112 - T Mile NW Not Reported
For additional site information, refer to Physical Setting Source Map Findings.
TC01585712.1r Page A-3
GEQGHECW? - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY 11 Groundwater flow velocity informai: rn tar a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional
using site specific geologic and soil strata 6ata. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary
to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil
characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes
move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils.
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY
Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed
at which contaminant migration may be occurring.
ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT
GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION
Era: Paleozoic Category: Plutonic and Intrusive Rocks
System: Ordovian
Series: Lower Paleozoic granitic rocks
Code: Pzg1 (decoded above as Era, System & Series)
Geologic. Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Sc'hruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology
of the Conterminous U,S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman
Map, USES Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN {GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil
Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information
for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns
in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGQ) soil survey maps.
The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service STATSGO data.
Soil Component Name: CECIL
Soil Surface Texture: sandy clay loam
Hydrologic Group: Class B - Moderate infiltration rates. Deep and moderately deep,
moderately well and well drained soils with moderately coarse
textures.
Soil Drainage Class: Well drained. Soils have intermediate water holding capacity. Depth to
water table is more than 6 feet.
Hydric Status: Soil does not meet the requirements for a hydric soil.
Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: HIGH
Depth to Bedrock Min: a 60 inches
Depth to Bedrock Max: > 60 inches
TC01585712.1r Page A-4
GEGCHECKJ' - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
Soil Layer Information
Boundary Classification
Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil Permeability Soil Reaction
Rate (in/hr) (pH)
1 0 inches 7 inches sandy clay loam Silt-Clay COARSE-GRAINED Max: 2,00 Max: 6.54
Materials (mare SOILS, Sands, Min: 0.60 Min: 4.50
than 35 pct. Sands with fines,
passing No. Silty Sand.
200), Silty
Soils.
2 7 inches 11 inches sandy clay loam Sill-Clay COARSE-GRAINED Max: 2.01) Max: 5.50
Materials (mare SOILS, Sands, Min: 0.60 Min: 4.50
than 35 pct. Sands with fines,
passing No. Silty Sand.
200), Silty
Soils.
3 11 inches 50 inches clay Silt-Clay FINE-GRAINED Max: 2.00 Max: 5.50
Materials (more SOILS, Silts and Min: 0.60 Min: 4.50
than 35 pct. Clays (liquid
passing No. limit 50% or
200), Clayey more), Elastic
Soils. silt.
4 50 inches 75 inches variable Not reporters Not reported Max: 0.00 Max: 0.00
Min: 0.00 Min: 0.00
OTHER SOIL TYPES IN AREA
Based on Soil Conservation Service STATSGO data, the following additional suhord nant soil types may
appear within the general area of target property.
Soil Surface Textures: sandy loam
loam
clay loam
silt loam
very channery - silt loam
gravelly - sandy loam
Surfcial Soil Types: sandy loam
loam
clay loam
silt loam
very channery - silt loam
gravelly - sandy loam
Shallow Soil Types: silt loam
sandy play
clay
Silty clay loam
very channery - silt loam
loam
Deeper Soil Types: weathered bedrock
fine sandy loam
silty clay loam
unweathered bedrock
sandy clay loam
TC01585712.1r Page A-5
GEOCHECe - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY
LOCAL 1 WATER AGENCY RECORDS
EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental
professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in fanning an
opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells.
WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION
DATABASE SEARCH DISTANCE miles
Federal USGS 1.000
Federal FRDS PWS Nearest PWS within 1 mile
State Database 1.000
FEDERAL USGS WELL. INFORMATION.
LOCATION
MAP ID WELL ID FROM TP
Na Wells Found
FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION
LOCATION
MAP ID WELL ID FROM TP
2 NCO160405 112 -1 Mile NNE
Note: PWS System location is not. always the same as well location.
STATE DATABASE WELL. INFORMATION
MAP 10 WELL ID
No Welts Found
LOCATION
FROM TP
TC01585712.1r Page A-6
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP 01585712.1r

e
1 i

'
r y i
?
I i
l
i
I
? f
1 k
` f f
t

i
`
k

i
i
County Boundary
Major Roads
Contour Lines
Earthquake epicenter, Richter 5 or greater
Water Wells
Public Water Supply Wells
Cluster of Multiple Icons
U lid
Groundwater Flow Direction Wildlife. Areas
Indeterminate Groundwater Flow at Location Natural Areas
Groundwater Flow Varies at Location Rare & Endangered Species
SITE NAME McDowell Creels Stream Restoration Project CLIENT- Buck. Engineering
ADDRESS: Sam Furr Load to Westmoreland Road CONTACT Andrea Spangler
CITY/STATE- Fluntersville NC INQUIRY #: 01585712.1r
ZIP: 28078 DATE: January 04„ 2006
GECCHECI4? - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Elevation Database DR ID Number

1 Site ID: 15482
NW Groundwater Flow: Not Reported AQUIFLOW 40941
1/2 -1 Mlle Shallowest Water Table Depth: 5.92
Higher Deepest Water Table Depth: 8.93
Average Water Table Depth: Not Reported
Depth to rock - shallowest: Not Reported
Depth to rock - deepest: Not Reported
Depth to rock - average: Not Reported
Date: 0611919 995
2
NNE FRDS PW5 NCO160405
912 -1 Mite
Higher
PWS ID: NCO160405 PWS Status: Active
Date Initiated: 770E Date Deactivated: Not Reported
PW5 Name: LAKEHOUSE RESTAURANT
HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
Addressee 1 Facility: System Owner/Responsible Party
DOGWOOD RESTRNT MOTEL
RT 2
HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
Addressee / Facility: System Owner/Responsible Party
DOGWOOD RESTRNT MOTEL.
RT 2
HUNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
Facility Latitude: 35 27 50 Facility Longitude: 080 52 20
City Served: HUNTERSVILLE
Treatment Class: Untreated Population: 00000125
PWS currently has or had major violation(s) or enforcement: No
TC01585712.9r Page A-8
AREA R,ADOH I : FORMATION
Federal EPA Radon Zone for MECKLENBURG County: 3
Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi1L.
Zone 2 indoor average level - 2 pCi1L and - 4 pCVL.
Zone indoor average level < 2 pCi/L.
Federal Area Radon Information for Zip Code: 28078
Number of sites tested: 1
Area Average Activity % <4 pCi1L % 4-20 pCi/L % >20 pCi/L
Living Area - 1st Floor 0.400 pCi1L 100% 0% 0%
Living Area - 2nd Flog Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
Basement Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
TC01585712.1r Pa e A.-
PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED
TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
USES 7.5' Digital Elevation Mattel (DENT)
Source: United States Geologic Survey
EDR acquired the USGS 7.5' Digital Elevation Model in 2002.7,5-Minute DEMs correspond to the USGS
1:24,000- and 1;25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps.
HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION
Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 1017-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA.
NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION
AQUIFLOWR Information System
Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information
EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater
flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has
extracted the date of the report, hydrogeotogically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table
information.
GEOLOGIC INFORMATION
Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphlc Unit
Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital
representation of the 1974 P.B, King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994).
STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database
Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's {USDA} Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) leads the national
Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil
survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation
of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO)
soil survey maps.
WA 1,..
FEDERAL WATER WELLS
PWS: Public Water Systems
Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water
Telephone: [phone]
Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at
least 25 people for at least 64 days annually, PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources.
PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data
Source: EPAIOffice of Drinking Water
Telephone: [phone]
Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after
August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS).
USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS)
This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface
water andlor groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater.
TC01585712.1 r Page A-10
s.
-? 32
T
A I-
T
at
err
s 4'
I rata
T
a
T 2tt
N .-V--.

I- c+ --
A f v
Radon Survey.
I o lasted at
7s.
I star ' r Fos of C.4. t v ted indoor
ursr a eric
n
TC015 d r 12.1 r Page A-11
ash

?w

4)
N

0
a
a a
? c
? o
? a
a o
4 Q
Q Q
o a
o°', ?
o ?

C) m OD rl- C
-------------- ---
T
4
w
Q?
41
L

.F 1.
CD
r?
r?
1
CO)
x (D
4) to
Cl)
J
Q

a --
v

0
a F o -0? 0? - - 4
a r IUGOJOd

- ? ? ?
V I I I
? ?
?- n

i0o
r
r
a
a

0
O
CJ
b
c•?
4 4 O 'O C3 4 O b ? 4
C) CD C) 0 C) C> 0
0) ffl
T
A. ! I' MJ
C]
ca
cn
0

d
J
? N
L Hr
2
C7
C3
rn
r`
Q
d
LL
rn
act
m
J
SO
a+
C7
C
Cl
C
[°T
C]
C7
Cf]
CV
0
C7
m
r
C]
07
ul7 0 U') C7 LO a LC? C7 U)
? h M r- (0 0) CD co
(f7 [L7
UOIJBABJ3
- is PI D•:," .
_ L
Gross-.scclian &la. tII+BO
724
777
7211
71g
7Z
714
712
710
1000 1020 1040 1000 1480 1100 1120 1140 1160
$'I',
U- MU
fl. - bv3yrvnr.
"4fflSSSflt?1nn 11,111: ?..
t :?.D
720 __-- _. ___.. __-____?.__•_. - ?- -
718
79M1
712
714
798
7[qi
701
1400 1020 3040 9064 1080 1100 1120 1160
Stan"
ff emu - a. • lWddMwee

Gross-A.rrr,- ZE-
71 Bps
774
712' i
710 y
708 i7?+/rT
70$
Sop 1900 142{7 1949 5.} 1 1194 ti
stauan
Criss-5eal?"'3?
Crtass-sotllam 24ap)
7ia
i4
Pit
L lip
i3 108
709
1040 1080 4190 111-0 1149
3latlan
Crass- - i— U.Ix XS a
4toat•3ciN b9+S4
3018 n..... ................. .. .
3i}d
aoa
�a2
�tzs
:ti! W4,Q 1090 114, 1M 9254
$R%iioh
•.• @anktud •.yj , F64odp:mn1�
Croxt,t"Uoh Daw XS E3
Cracs.seerion 65a8f.
794 _.
i9S
960 i494 1420 iOQ 10">{t 198Q lM 8120 114E 1RW ii&4 12
'. Staiaa
{."aer&,54Cdon Caw X55
Cf654.5rt••'Cw4n'iti &6
awry. __. __......_..�.,� ,....._._._... ._
Spa. a... .::.. ... ...
aW
e9s
css
fa04
975 In, s4.T.=s RF25 IM 1215
SR0-
>:E5Hng1�,.ex--f'ahp4nb
cm &- "a Dn Data: s::a.11
FEMi
69S
375 iP2i W75 1425 M, 1225
SIaNtlrt.

Croto-seeflon DaW X3 7
708
706
704
702
700
698
696
so'l
692
son
980 1000 1020. WO 1060 1080 7100 1120 4140 1t60 11419
Cross-section Data: XS9
92+23
704
702
700
858
896
yyy 88'1
852
690
68a
995 1040 too 1140 too 1 4
sedion . - . So'knp

DATA FORM WETLAND SITE McDowell Creek Restoration IL 1
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANI)s DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 3, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Duck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)` Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell WIL 1
VFsfzFTA rl,I0N
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum Shrub OBL 9. Rebus spp, Herb
2.,Iuncts effusres Herb FACW+ 10.
3. Cyperus strigvsus Herb FACW 11
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAG-) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric.
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 1 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Fit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated.
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
x Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil. Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Wetland 2 is located in a sanitary sewer easement that receives water from overflow from an upland pond
9
Cc s
Hi n Surface
T .,
fi , Sails
Is List
L Soils List
y Other m.
DATA. FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creep Restoration WfL 2
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDs DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 3, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the sate? Yes No Community 1D:
is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W/L 2
VF.f.F.TATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum Shrub 013L 9. Duals spp. Herb
2. Celtis occirdentulis Shrub F'ACU 10.
3. Quercus° nigra Shrub FAC 1.1
4_1uncus° effiasus Herb FACW+ 12.
5; Crarex hilmlinca Herb OBL 13.
6. Cyperus strigosus Herb FACW 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are 013L, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 53.3%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric.
HYDROLOGY
11 - Recorded Data (Describe in ;Remarks):
- Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
x Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
11 Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 1-3 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in. Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil. Q (in.)
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
x F"AC-Neutral 'l'est
- Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Wetland 2 is located in a sanitary sewer easement that receives water from overflow from an upland pond
SOILS
McDowell W/L 2 cont.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon Munsell Moist Munsell Moist
1-3 10 YR 512
3-1.2 10 YR 4l1 10YR 516
12-15+ 2.5 YR 4/1 T5 YR 5/6
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
Silty clay loam
Common/Faint Silty Clay
Many/Distinct Silty Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic ]Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
?x Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chrorna Colors
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
® Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: Wetland #2 is located in an existing sanitary sewer easement dominated by herbaceous species. Hydrology is
fed by overflow from an adjacent upland pond. A large head cut near the wetland drains into the eastern side of McDowell
Creek.
?Approved by HQUSACE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creep Restoration W(L 3
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINXFION
(1157 COE WETLANDS DELINExrm MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering
Do Normal. Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical Situation)? Yes No
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum
1 Acer negundo `Free
2. Liquida bar styraciflua Tree
3. Acer negundo Shrub
4. Comas camomuit Shrub
5. Lett othoe racemosa Shrub
6. Cyperus strigostas Herb
7. Arundinaria gigantean Herb
8. Bignonia cat:reol ata Vine
Indicator Occasional Plant S e?cies
FACW a .
FAC+ 10.
FACW 11.
FACW+ 12.
FACW 13.
FA.CW 14.
FAC'W 1.5.
FAC 16.
Date: January 4, 2006
County; Mecklenburg
State: North Carolina
Community ID:
Transect ID:
Plot ID: McDowell W/L 3
Stratum Indicator
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) :100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric.
HYDROLOGY
® Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indic=ators
Primary Indicators;
-Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge x Inundated
Aerial Photographs x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Other x Water Marks
Drift Lines
x No Recorded Data Available Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water- 1-3 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in,)
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
x Water-Strained Leaves
-. Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Wetland 3 is located in a bottom floodpiain.
SOILS
McDowell W/L 3 cont.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) {Munsell Moist) Abundance Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 10 YR 312 silty clay
3-18+ 10 YR. 411 2.5 YR 314 many/distinct silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Concretions
Histosol _ High Organic Content in Surface
Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Sails List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric. -
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Remarks: Wetland #3 is toe of slope forested wetland
is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
=Approved by HQUSACE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration 1L 4
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1:987 COE WE.TLANDs DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 17, 2006
Applicant/Owner Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W/L 4
V EUKI A'1'10IN
Dominant Plant Species Stratum
1. Li:quidambar styracif to Shrub
2. Ju`zcus effuses Herb
3. SSparganium slip. Herb
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
FAC+ J.
FAC:W+ 10.
OBL 11.
12.
1.3
14.
15.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FA.C-) JOO%o
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. No canopy species present.
HYDROLOGY
® Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
- Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge x Inundated
® Aerial Photographs x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Other x Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
x No Recorded Data Available _ Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Field Observations: Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Depth of Surface Water: 3-6 (in.) - Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Standing water present
SOILS
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase); Monacan Learn
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon Munsel1 Moist (Munsell Moist)
0-3 O 2,5 YR CIl 10 YR 518
3-12+ 2.5YR4{1 10YR414
11
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Hi:stosol
Histic Eplpedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
x Reducing Conditions
x Cleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
McDowell W/L 4 cont.
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
many/prominent clay loam
many/distinct clay loam
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils Last
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: This wetland is located in a power line easement at the toe of slope.
n!'F'1 avers ray [? r,`a, u.3.v [.? ?1 ??
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration WIL 5
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETt ANDs DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Bate: January 17, 2000
Applicant/Owner- Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator Eric Mularski Duck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem. Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell WfL

VEGETATION

Stratum ................ .
Indicator
{Occasional Plant Speci
1 Liq __!dambar styracif ua Shrub FAC+ 9. Lonicera jal)onicca
2. Q. rercus' fCalecat[a Shrub FAC+ 10..
3. CEarcx Slap. Herb 11.
4. Juncus effiesus Herb FACW+ 12.
5, Bignonia capreolata Vine FAC 13.
6. 14.
7, 15.
8. 16.
Stratum Indicator
Vine FAC-
percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. No canopy species are present.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
- Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water 3 -5 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Sail: () (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
x Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Weiland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Sail Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Standing water present
SOILS
McDowell W/ L 5 coat.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
latches Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Structure, etc.
0-12+ 2.5 YD 512 5 YD 510 many/distinct silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators°.
_ Concretions
Histosol High Organic Content in Surface
Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy `soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on. Local Hydric Soils. List
x Deducing Conditions ® Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present`? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling; point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: Disturbed toe of slope scrub-shrub floodplain wetland.
Approved by HQUSACE .31512
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L G
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DE.INExriON MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 18, 2006
Applicant/Owner Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)`) Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No blot 11): McDowell WIL G
VF,Ct1%TATTnN

Dominant Plant Species_ Stratum wmdw?
Indicator
Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer negundo Shrub FACW 9. Lonicera japonica Vine CAC-
2, Plcatanus occidentalis Shrub FACW- 10.
3. Licluidambar Styr aciflua Shrub FAC+ 11
4. Acer rubrum Shrub FAC 12.
5..Iuncus effuses Herb FACW+ 13,
6.13olyg onum carifolium Herb OB1, 14.
7. Diclianthelium c landestinum Herb FACW 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Only mideanopy and herbaceous species present.
HYDROLOGY
:Recorded DaLL (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Fake or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
Gather
x. No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 0-3 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: [l (in.)
Wetland. Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 1.2 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Standing water present
SOILS
lV1ap Unit 1 ame:
(Series and Phase), Monacan Loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Look UP
Profile Descri tion
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) (Mansell Moist)
U-2 O 10 YR 5/2
2-12 10 YR 5/2 5 YR 5/8
12+ 10 YR 4/1 7.5 YR 4/6
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
_ Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
x Reducing C=onditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma. Colors
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND MERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: This wetland is located in a disturbed floodplain area. Drainage ditches from the adjacent upslope residential
area account for the hydrology of this wetland
McDowell W/L 6 cont.
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Mottle 'T'exture, Concretions
,Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
many/prominent silty clay
common/distinct
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in. Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Sails List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Approved by HQU,SACE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 7
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wt;TLANDs DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 18, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? "Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W/L 7
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer negundo Shrub FACW 9. Loniceru jca,panicca Vine FAC-
2. P'lcatcanus occidentGalis Shrub FACW- 10.
3. Liquidrambur styrcacif to Shrub FACE- 11.
4. F'olygoiium carifolium Herb 0131, 12.
5. Dich antheliaam clcandcstinum Herb FACW 13.
6-11111cus• effusus Herb FACW+ 14.
7. 15.
S. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) '100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Only midcanopy and herbaceous species present. Algae is present in standing
water.
HYDROLOGY-
Il - Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks);
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 0-3 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Fit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
_ Water Marks.
_ Drift Lines
® Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Lipper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Standing water is present in ditch. Connects with Wetland #6
SOILS
McDowell W/L 7 cont.
Nlap [knit Name.
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth. Matrix Color ;Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) Munsell Moist AbundancelContrast Structure, etc.
0-12+ 10 YR 4/2 7.5 YR 5/6 common/distinct silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Concretions
® Histosol High Organic Content in Surface
Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ® Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
UCI'LAND U.t+ I'L;RMINA'li1UN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Sails Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks:. This wetland is located in a disturbed floodplain area. Drainage ditches from the adjacent upslope residential
area are present. This wetland connects with Wetland #G.
Approved by HQUSACE 3192
DATA FORM WO 'LAND SIT E: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 8
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1087 COE WETLANDS DELINEA'I'IC}Itit MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 17, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County:. Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID.
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell WCL 8
VF -IRA A11f OIV
Dominant Plant Species Stratum. Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 , Acer negundo Shrub FACW 9. Lonicei-a japonica Vine FAC-
2. Platanus occidentalis Shrub FACW- 10.
3.1'olygonum arifolium Herb OBL 11.
4. Dichanthelium clandestinum. Herb FACW 12..
5. Juncus cffusus Herb FACW+ 13.
6 0 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
I (excluding FAC-) 1010%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Only mid-canopy a nd herbaceous species arepresent. Algae are present in
standing water,

HYDROLOGY
11 _ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Wetland. Hydrology Indicators
Primary indicators:
x Inundated
_x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Field Observations.
Depth of Surface Water: 0-6 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: tl (in.)
Remarks. Standing water present
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name.
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile Description:
McDowell W/L S cont.
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Depth. Matrix Color Mottle Colors.
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist)
0-6 0 1.0YR412 10YR416
6--12+ 10YR4/1 5YR518
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
® Histic Epipedon
_ Sulfidic Odor
Aguic Moisture Regime
x Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance/Contrast Structure eta
common/faint silty clay
many/prominent silty clay
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Strewing in Sandy Soils
® Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National 'Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: This wetland is located in a disturbed floodplain area. Drainage ditches from the adjacent upslope residential
area are present.
Approved Uy HQUSACE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 9
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE W lYTLANDs DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek. Restoration Date: January 18, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No
VEGETATION
Community ID:
`I'ransect ID:
Plot ID: McDowell W1L 9
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer neguntlo Shrub FACW
2. Pluttinus occidentalis Shrub FACW-
3. Liquidamhar styracif ua Shrub FAC-t-
4. Acer rube- m Shrub FAC
5. .Judas effuses Herb FACW+
6. llolyl,>onum ai,iff)lia. m Herb OLB
7. LDichanthelium clandestiazum Herb FACW
Occasional Plant Sr)ecies
9. Lrrnicerra j at onica
10.
I1.
12.
13.
14.
15.
M.
Stratum Indicator
Vine FAC-
8.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks, Vegetation is distinctly hydric.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data. Available
Field Observatioals
Depth of Surface Water 0-66 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 1 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Remarks: Standing water is present.
..........
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
_x Saturated in upper 12 inclies
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland. Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 1.2 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
McDowell WIL, 9 cont.
Map Unit Marne:
(Series and Phrase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained.
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Meld Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Descriptiow.
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-1.2+ A 10 YR 5/2 7.5YR 516 many/distinct silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Concretions
Histosol High Organic Content in Surface
Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy Soils
® Sulfidic Odor - Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime ® Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions ? Lusted on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
vVKI'LANU DKI'L4 KMINA VION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this sampling point within a wetland?
Remarks: A toe of slope wetland that is located in a disturbed power line easement.
Yes No
Approved by HQ L]]SA+t E 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 10
ROUTINE WE'T'LAND DETERMINATION
(1.987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 17, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes. No Plot ID: McDowell W{L
10
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant-Species - Stratum
1. Aeer negirndo Shrub
2. Juncus of fusus Herb
3. Ccrex slrjr. Herb
4. Juncus effitsus Herb
5. Polygon= arifoliurn Herb
6.
7.
8.
Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum
FACW 9. Xanthium spar. Herb
FACW+ 10.
OBL IL
FACW+ 1.2.
OBL 0.
14.
15.
16.
Indicator
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, 1KACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Scarce mideanopy species with herbaceous species dominant. Algae is present in
standing water,
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge x Inundated
Aerial Photographs x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Other x Water Marks
Drift Lines
x No Recorded Data Available _ Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 3-6 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in,.)
Remarks: Standing water present
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Moot Channels in Lipper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
es a ' '1: jr -tc 7 a--i
canomy p).
Sails a ,
115
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 11
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINAT10N
(1987 COE WETLANDS Dt~LINF.AxiON MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 18, 2006
Applicant/Owners Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County; Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State. North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W1L
ti
VEGETATION
?omina nt Plant Species
1 Ultnus americana
2. 111 alarms occidentcalis
3, Liquielumbar styr-acifl eca
4. Accr r egundo
5? Celtis occidentalis
6. Bignonira calJreolata
7:
8.
Stratum Indicator
Tree FACW
Tree FACW-
TreefShrub FAC+
Shrub FAC:W
Shrug FACU
Vine FAC
Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9.
10.
11
12.
13.
14.
15.
16,
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):.
® Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
]Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 0-66 (in..)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in,)
Remarks: Areas of standing water
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
McDowell W/L 11 cont.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained.
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field. Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0- 12 10 YR. 5/2 7.5 YR 5/6 many/distinct silty clay
12+ 10 YR 4/3 2.5 YR 4/6 many/ prominent silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Concretions
Histosol _ High Organic Content in Surface
Histic lpipedon Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfldic Odor : Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND DFrERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: This is a forested toe of slope wetland. An ephemeral drainage ditch enters from the northeastern part of the
wetland..
;Approved by HQUSACE 3192
P
_ R

na
9
L* ?
SOILS
McDowell W/L 1.2 cont.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon (Munsell Moiso (Munsell Moist)
0-18 10 YR 512 5YR 518
Hydric Soil Indicators.
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidc Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped 't'ype: Yes No
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
common/distinct silty clay
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
® Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytit Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: Wetland is located in a gas pipeline easement adjacent to McDowell. Creek's eastern floodplain. Seaver activity
is evident on the southern end of wetland.
Approved by HQUSACE 3192
3

i.
VEGETATION
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE, McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 13
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(14187 COE WET1,ANDs DELINEAnON MANUAL)
t _ ;=n,ant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer net=undo Tree FACW
2. I iquid arr b ar styr•caciflu a Tree FAC+
3. Acer• negunclo Shrub FACW
4. Asimin a trilobca Shrub FAC
5. Juncus cffusus Herb FACW+
6, Bignonia ciapreolcara Vine FAC
7. Toxicodenclron rcacliccans Vine FAC
8.
Percent of Dominant Species that are 013L, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAG) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric.
Ocfas'.on I Plant Soccies
9. Lonicerca j a,l onica
10.
11.
1.2.
13..
14.
15,
16.
Stratum Indicator
Vine FAC-
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water...;. 0-5 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: €1 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
x Water Marks
x Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
- Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
- Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 5, 2006
Applicant/Owner Mecklenburg County Storrs Water Services County Mecklenburg
Investigator; Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North. Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Arena? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell WJL
1.3
SOILS
McDowell W/L 13 cont.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon ?Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 D 7.5 YR 411
2-12+ 10 YR 4/2 5YR 416 many/distinct silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Concretions
Histosol High Organic Content in Surface
® Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy Souls
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Sails
Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chrorna Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND DETERMINA ON
Hydrophytic Vege:t:;tion Present?
Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Remarks: Forested floodp.lain wetland system
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
pproved by I QUSACE 3192
SITE- ; il, 14
DATA
L
(1087 C WET LANE L-LI E "I° -N .°i ??

rr ` ?ct Site. P, wroration
lica °JC County Storm Water Services
j --ski lick Engineering

o J 41C l._a._ . I. `i's exist on the site? Yes No
; --,a site signs -_ - L bed (Atypical Situation)? it's No
s the area a liotenl Areas? (Describe i Remarks) "des

.. ... ?... r / C t
1. aancus effusia T- ' AC + 11.
4. igaicinm capreol a Vine PAC 12.
5. 7oxica.tclc:ndron. Vine AC~ ld.
1.
15=

cut of Dominant Species that are DEL, ? or
eluding FAC-) 100%
c -larks. Vegetation is distinctly y ric,
cc v
Tran% 713;
Plot ID: McDowell JL
1

.' 1'd Observations; wetland vdrolo v Indicators
SOILS
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist} (Munsell Moist)
0-12+ O 10 YR 5/2 5YR 416
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regixne
x Reducing Conditions
x: Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Kemarks: Wettand is on a border of a torested and disturbed area. An intermittent tributary enters from the nortnwest co
the south end of this wetland system.
McDowell WIL 1.4 cont.
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance/Contrast Structure, ,et
many/distinct silty clay
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
- Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
,Approved by HQUSACE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration WJL 15
ROUTINE ''WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1,987 COE Wr'TLANI)s DELINEA ON MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 17, 2{}{}h
Applicant/Owner- Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the :site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
1
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot Ill: McDowell W1L
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum
I. Ulmus americanca Tree
2, Plataraaas occidentalis Tree
3. dicer negundo Shrub
4. Salix nigra Shrub
5. 1uncus effusus Herb
6.
7.
S.
Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
FACW 9. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC-
FACW- 1{}.
FACW it.
OBL 12.
FACW+ 13,
14.
15.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100% 11
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Limited herb and shrub layer
HYDROLOG
_,_,, Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water;- 0-3 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: {} (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x `saturated in tipper 12 inches
x Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage; Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
- Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks
.. ;£ s c
: homy (Subgroup :
c IV, ?
?. - -. - LT it
T o aerations
Soils are hydric. Sails are sandy can wetland fringe.

# r D( 0
,? d .
I.

T,

s No

la
d

SOILS
McDowell W/l--,16 coat.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam
I Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile Description:
Matrix Color Mottle Colors
Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist
O 7.5 YD 311
A 10 YD 4/1 2.5YD 3/6
Hydric Soil Indicators:
® Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
® Arluic Moisture Regime
x Deducing Conditions
x Cxleyed or Low-Chrorna Colors
Remarks Soils are hydric.
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
silty clay
common/distinct silty clay loam
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils Last
Other (Explain in Remarks)
WETLAND DETERMINNFION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: Forested floodplain wetland. Berm is present on the southern end of wetland. Wetland has already been flagged
and passible determination may already exist. De-flagged.
Approved by HQUSA+CE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration WIL 17
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WErI,ANDs DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January Ili, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County Mecklenburg
Investigator- Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W1L
17
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant species Stratum Indicator Occasional Plant 5gccies Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rar.gundo Shrub FACW 9. Lonicera jtapanicea Vine FAC-
2.1'latanus occidentcalis Shrub FACW- 10. Rebus spp.
. Liquidarrbar slyrcaciflua Shrub FAC:+ 1.1.
4. Ul;mus umericana Shrub FACW 12.
5. ,Dichcanthelium cltandestinum Herb FACW 13.
6.1olygonum carif6hum Herb OBL 14.
r 7. TylAra spp. Herb 013L 15.
S. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are 013L, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Only midcanopy and herbaceous species are present. Algae is present in standing
water.
HYDROLOGY
....... ....
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
-Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: 042 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: l (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Remarks: Areas of standing water
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 1.2 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil. Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
® Other (Explain in Remarks)
- Cale _
{t Colors
l'+ - - t
t c it Creek..
s
Ott nd? 1
)m the toe
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 18
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(;1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEA'T'ION MANUAL)
`i
FAppliigacant/Owner t Site. McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 17, 2006
Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
j tor: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W1L
18
VEGETATION
Dominant Pl,, , Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar sty"raciftuu Free FAC+
2, Plutunus occidentalis Tree/Shrub FACW-
3. Acer negundo Shrub FACW
4. Acer rubrum Shrub FAC
5. Juncus effissus Herb FACW+
6. Saurunts cerntuas Herb OBL
7. Arundinaricc gigantea Herb FAC'W
Occasional Plant Species
9. Lonicera jaj.?lnica
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Stratum Indicator
Vine FAC-
8.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks. Vegetation is distinctly hydric.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
- Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
x Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. 340 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth: to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Standing water
SOILS
McDowell IL 1.8 cant.
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type. Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon fMunsell Moist) (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12+ A 10 YR 512 2.5 YR 4/ many/distinct silty clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Concretions
Histosol _ High Organic Content in Surface
Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor _ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
i Ayuic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
`LAND DETER:MINATTON
..........
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: A toe of slope wetland forested wetland. Berm is present on the southeastern side of wetland. Re-flagged from a
previous wetland delineation.
Approved by HQ USA CE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 19
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1957 COE WETLANDS DELINENt• ON MANUAL)
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date.: Ja,nzuary 19, 2006
Applicant/Owner: Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Flat ID: McDowell WIL
19
VF.C:Fi..T'A'TI !N
Dominant Plant Species_ Stratum
1, Liquidambar styr•caciflu a Shrub
2. Acer° negundo Shrub
3. Alnras serrulata Shrub
4 Juncus effusus Herb
5: Bignonica capr-eolcatca Vine
6. Car•cx ,spp. Herb
7
8.
Indicator Occasional Plant Species Stratum Indicator
FAC+ 9. Lonicer•a japcwrtica Vine FAC-
FACW lo.
FACW 11.
FACW+ 12.
FAC 13.
14.
15.
16,
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks: Vegetation is distinctly hydric. Algae is present in standing water.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
-. Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
- Aerial Photographs
I? Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water..' 0-6 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (1 (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
x Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ PAC-Neutral Test
® Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Areas of standing water.
SOILS
McDowell W/L 19 cont.
Map Unit Name.
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure,
0-12+ 2.5 YID 5/2 5 YR 5/6 many/distinct silly clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Concretions
Histosol High Organic Content in Surface
Histic Epipedon Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime ® Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric.
NlE<°FLAND lll+;'.EYL;.KIV INAVIVN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Remarks: Scrub-shrub toe of slope wetland.
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Approved by H USACE 3192
DATA FORM WETLAND SITE: McDowell Creek Restoration W/L 24
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1957 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
`s
i
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant SIDecies
1. Acer net>a ndo
2. funcats effusus
3. Sparganium .slap
4.
5.
6.
T
8..
Stratum Indicator Occasional Plant Species
Shrub F ACW 9
Herb FACW+ 10.
Herb OBL 11.
12.
13..
14.
15.
M.
Stratum Indicator
Project Site: McDowell Creek Restoration Date: January 19, 2006
Applicant/Owner Mecklenburg County Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Eric Mularski Buck Engineering State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly d'istur'bed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? (Describe in Remarks) Yes No Plot ID: McDowell W/L
20
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
® Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photograph,,
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations-
Depth of Surface Water: 0gi6 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (ill.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Remarks: Areas of standing water
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Primary Indicators:
x Inundated
x Saturated in upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Draft Lanes
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetland
Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators
(2 or more required)
® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name:
(Series and Phase): Monacan Loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors
inches Horizon Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist)
0-2 O 7.5 YR 311
3-12+ 10 YR 0/2 5 YR 518
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Mastic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
x Reducing Conditions
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
McDowell \ /L 20 cant,
Drainage Class: somewhat poorly drained
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Mottle Texture, Concretions
Abundance Contrast Structure, etc.
many/distinct clayey clay
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface
Layer in Sandy Sails
® Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soils are hydric. Layer of bright soils washed down from industrial park,
E'I'LANI) Vlk I'LKMil lNI'IION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Is this sampling point within a wetland? Yes No
Remarks: Wetland is located in a pond created by rip rap on the western end.
Approved by HQUSACE 3192
1L' 30 Fine 1',
a) Do we have signed contract in house? 1 have the ATP..
b) We've not billed for this project thus far, will we be billing through January?
b) Last billed in September (Tasks "10 y- 30 100% complete). Will we be billing through January?

a) Will we be billing through January?
; !.
t09761
a) Will we be able to bill through. January? Last time we billed was in August of last year.
b) May I have the copies of the supplement so i can update our contract files (hard copy as well as
electronic) I'm referring to the most recent one that you received.
(,re...
a) Will the City release payment for the August invoice that we've submitted? Or will we have to
redo?
b) Will the City release payment for the September invoice that we've submitted? Or will we have to
redo also?
c) Based on a and b above, can we bill for October, November and December?