20070775 Ver 1_401 Application_20070507

~i
~,~~~ cws
Carole~a We1Wnd Servrces
~-
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 -Phone
704-527-1133 -Fax
TO: ~~~~~~ bC~2o~y ~ NC t~t~16L
FROM: ~ ~~N~, C~ ~ Gr+d ~ ~aa c ~,~sa~ , CS w`S
~J
Date: ~ r 3 (d 7
Project No: Zo~~-/91 ~
It~g~9 _~ Yak `a~3 ;;
~, iN.AY ~ Z00 i
ti4~'TIANC~ p,;JD ~TtiZh~fT4+'1T~F? ~3RF,i~!CH
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
WE ARE SENDING YOU~Attached ^Under separate cover via the following items:
^ Prints ^ Plans ^ JD Package ^ Specifications
^ Copy of letter ^ Change order ^ Wetland Survey Other
TF T'Nf i (1QT TRFC ARF NETT AC AT(1TFTl TtThTT1T V hTlITTFV TTC AT IIT.T!`F
r ~~r•• _.-:~ r
NR t~ Y", ~,. ~?' r~
x ~ ~ ..
t" ¢ '
~~~' t '}. ~~s~f~'.' Jl*~
k~ Y r ~{ ~~~ ~ke~ s.A~ '%~ t ~ ~. fh' ~~- ~ htl` ,~*~ +,~_hyN4,~n iA _~ '~~'~
~ r ~~i `6i: ~x~P ~'js ~1' ~rt~^1y ~ i r~syF .~ .a

A
i L`
.
f ~/310~- 3 ~vu~r~~ rU., o~ M,t,f~
7 ~n '73c57~P1~/~. V~aTh{-eHa~2 ~~T

THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
^For approval ^Approved as submitted
^For your use ^Approved as noted
~As requested ^Returned for corrections
or review and comment
^Resubmit copies for approval
^Submit copies for distribution
^Return corrected prints
^For your verification and signature
REMARKS: ~~eau. ~e. ~~c< 1~..~t c%~ r~ c~~7,~ Gz a-~t ltn ~A cm-va rvicer~/~~~t ~~ ~t 5

Copy to: 5~e>~ ~~~ ~cSfFC F

.i
i
~~GWS
k?, Carolina Welland Services
-~-
May 3, 2007
550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (v)
704-527-1133 (fax)
20470775
Mr. Steve Chapin ~,,,,~~~~`~
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ~~~
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 27
7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
Carolina Wetland Services Project No. 2007-1917
The 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project is located in Charlotte, North Carolina, approximately 1
mile north of the Robinson Church Road - Plott Road intersection (Figure 1, enclosed). The purpose
of this project is to drain an existing pond and construct a new stream channel through the existing
pond footprint. Charlotte Storm Water Services (CSWS) has contracted Carolina Wetland Services,
Inc. (CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting services for this project.
Applicant Name: Charlotte Storm Water Services, Isaac J. Hinson
Mailing Address: 600 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, NC 28202 ~ t~ `*.~-"~ t~~~ ~ ! M~~i~ ~~
Phone Number of Owner/Applicant: 704-336-4495 ~~ ~ ~-' l
Street Address of Project: 7300 Plott Road, Charlotte, NC M.~Y ~ •~ ~/
Waterway: UT to Reedy Creek t00%
DEFV~~ - Vv4 i ~R
BaTyn Chardlotte ~'~rCA~p,; p:ap ~tnnS~t~ia~r ~,CH
County: Mecklenburg
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: N35.239806°, W80.715472°
USGS Quadrangle Name: Mint Hill, NC, 1996
Current Land Use
The current land use for the project area is residential with maintained lawns and small adjacent
wooded areas. Dominant vegetation within the project area consists of red maple (Ater rubrum),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), box elder (Ater negundo), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), willow
oak (Quercus phellos), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), English ivy (Hedera helix), poison ivy (Rhus
radicans), blackberry (Rubus argutus), broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), jewel flower (Impatiens
capensis), cat-tail (Typha latifolia), and various grasses (Festuca spp.). According to the Soil Survey
of Mecklenburg County', on-site soils consist of Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded
(CeB2), Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded (CeD2), Monacan loam (MO), and
Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes (PaE). Cecil and Pacolet soils are well-drained and
exhibit slow permeability. Monacan soils are somewhat-poorly drained and are listed on the National
Hydric Soils List.
t United States Department of Agriculture, 1980. Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
CHARLOTTE COLUMBIA RALEIGH
WWW.CWS-INC.NET

May 3, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 2 of 4
Jurisdictional Determination
On April 24, 2007 CWS's Ron Johnson, PWS, and Matt Jenkins, WPIT delineated on-site jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) -Routine On-Site Determination
Method. This method is defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.2 There
is one jurisdictional wetland area within the project limits (Wetland AA). Routine On-Site Data Forms
representative of Wetland AA as well as non jurisdictional upland areas have been enclosed (DP1, DP2).
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were classified according to recent North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ)3 and USAGE guidance. NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms and USAGE Stream
Quality Assessment Worksheets for Streams A and B are enclosed (SCP1 and SCP2).
The results of the on-site field investigation indicate that there are two jurisdictional stream channels
(Streams A and B) and one jurisdictional wetland area (Wetland AA) located within the project area
(Figure 1, enclosed). On-Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are unnamed tributaries to Reedy Creek
and are located within the Yadkin River basin (HLl# 03040105)4. Reedy Creek is classified as "Class C"
by the NCDWQ.
Stream A flows north across the project area and drains into the drained pond bed (Figure 1,
enclosed). Stream A exhibited average ordinary high water widths of 4 to 6 feet, moderate to strong
groundwater flow, and significant stream substrate and habitat. Biological sampling within this
channel resulted in a weak presence of benthic macroinvertebrates, fish, amphibians and crayfish.
USAGE Stream Quality Assessment score for Perennial Stream A rated 50 out of a possible 100
points and scored 35 out of 71 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form, indicating
perennial status (SCP1, enclosed). Photographs of Perennial Stream A are enclosed as
Photographs C - D.
Stream B flows west across the project area and drains off-site (Figure 1, enclosed). Stream B has
formed as a result of the overflow pipe of the pond. Stream B exhibited an average ordinary high
water width of 4 feet, moderate groundwater flow, and significant stream substrate and habitat.
Biological sampling within this channel resulted in a weak presence of benthic macroinvertebrates,
fish, and crayfish. USAGE Stream Quality Assessment score for Perennial Stream B rated 37 out of a
possible 100 points and scored 28 out of 71 possible points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification
Form (SCP2, enclosed). Due to the man-made ditching of this channel from the overflow pipe,
parameters 1 and 9 were not scored on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form. The overall score is
below the perennial threshold of 30 points. Photographs of Perennial Stream A are enclosed as
Photographs E - F.
Wetland AA is located in the central portion of the property and is approximately 0.46 acre in size
(Figure 1, enclosed). Wetland AA is hydrologically connected to Perennial Stream A and is upstream
of the drained pond bed. Dominant vegetation within this area includes red maple (Ater rubrum),
sweetgum (Liquidambar styrac~ua), box elder (Ater negundo), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), cattails
(Typha latifolia), and jewelweed (Impatiens capensis). This area exhibited low chroma soils (SY 4/1),
few, distinct mottles (1 OYR 4/4), drainage patterns, and saturation within the upper 12 inches of the
soil profile. A Routine On-Site Determination Form representative of Wetland AA is enclosed (DP1).
z Environmental Laboratory. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
3 North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1999. Stream Classification Method. Version 3.1.
"HU#" is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Cazolina.

May 3, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 3 of 4
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter was forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on Apri125, 2007 to
determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that
would be affected by the project. As of the date of this submittal, a response from SHPO has not yet
been received. This project is located in a residential area dominated by homes built between 1980
and 2000. The occurrence of any area of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance is
unlikely.
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on April 25, 2007
to determine the presence of any federally-listed, candidate endangered, threatened species or critical
habitat located within the project area. As of the date of this submittal, a response from the NCNHP
has not yet been received. The project area is dominated by single family homes with maintained
lawns. The occurrence of any federally-listed, candidate endangered, threatened species or critical
habitat is unlikely.
Purpose and Need for the Project
Water currently overtops a pond overflow culvert and driveway during the two-year storm, causing
driveway erosion and (more importantly) a lack of emergency vehicle access with subsequent safety
issues during rain events. The pond was drained in early April following unsafe conditions due to
heavy rainfall. CSWS is proposing to construct a new stream channel through the existing pond
footprint, and allow the remaining existing pond area to form into a wetland. This pond to
stream/wetland conversion is necessary to allow CSWS to better control and account for the
anticipated flows and to protect the driveway/dam. The driveway is located on the dam of the pond
and is not adequately sized.
Avoidance and Minimization
Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable. No direct impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will occur as a result of this project.
CSWS is proposing to seed the existing pond bed with a native wetland seed mix. The new stream
channel has been designed to accommodate the 1.5-year storm, so it should overtop frequently and
provide hydrology for the proposed wetland. This project will restore stream channel and adjacent
wetland areas in the drained pond bed and will provide an overall water quality benefit. The use of
hard stabilization will be limited to the outside meander bends of the newly created stream channel in
order to immediately stabilize the channel. Erosion control (C-125) matting is necessary to provide
stabilization to the newly graded channel, floodplain benches, and driveway slopes. Proper sediment
and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
The proposed impacts for this project will include the potential for indirect dewatering impacts to 245
linear feet of Perennial Stream B (Figure 2, enclosed). Since the pond will no longer be overflowing
through Stream B, there is a possibility of this channel losing its source of hydrology. Perennial Stream
B has cut down and may be receiving enough groundwater to remain intact. Activities proposed under
Nationwide Permit No. 27 include the restoration of approximately 495 linear feet of perennial stream
channel. This activity will result in the net gain of approximately 2501inear feet of stream channel. The
newly created channel will contain the 1.5 year flood. The channel will be sloped at 0.01 ft./ft. and will
have a sinuosity of 1.16. The outside meander bends will be lined with Class II rip rap to immediately

May 3, 2007
Mr. Steve Chapin
Page 4 of 4
stabilize the channel in place. The existing drain pipe in the pond dam will be replaced with a 56', 9'X6'
PRCB and will be buried 2 feet below the stream bed. The side slopes of the channel will be lined with
C-125 matting and the channel bed will remain natural. On behalf of CSWS, CWS is submitting aPre-
ConstructionNotification Application with attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General
Condition No. 27, and pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 27 (enclosed).
Compensatory Mitigation
Construction of this project will result in a net gain of on-site stream channel. These activities will
result in an overall benefit to the water quality of downstream waters and eliminate future flooding
issues. CSWS believes that this project is self mitigating and is proposing no mitigation plan.
Please do not hesitate to contact Isaac Hinson at 704-336-4495 or [e-mail] should
you have any questions or comments regarding these findings.
sap ac J~inson
Wetland Specialist
Ro G. Johnson, PWS
Project Biologist
Enclosures: USGS 7.5' Mint Hill, NC Topographic Quadrangle
NRCS Mecklenburg County Soil Survey
Figure 1. Wetland Boundary Survey
Figure 2. Proposed Impacts
Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 27
Request for Jurisdictional Determination Form
NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms (SCP1, SCP2)
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets (SCPI, SCP2)
USACE Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms (DPI, DP2)
Representative Photographs (A - H)
cc: Ms. Cyndi Karoly (courtesy copy)
Z\2007\Projeds\2007-18402201 Shalimar Drive maintenance ProjecttPennitting\NWP3 report.doc

7300 Plott Road Mainteance Project
Nationwide Permit No 27 Project No. 2007-1917
7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series, Mint Hill, North Carolina quadrangle, dated 1996.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'
Image Courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey

7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
Nationwide Permit No 27 Project No. 2007-1917
Soil Survey Courtesy of the USDA-NRCS
NRCS Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, Sheet No. 8, dated 1980.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'

SCP1
~ LEGEND

JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
L~..,....~ PROJECT AREA
~~"' ,.'
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AREA
DRAINED POND BED
• SCP1 STREAM CLASSIFICATION POINT
• DP1 DATA POINT
PHOTO LOCATION AND DIRECTION
APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1" = 100'

G
Carolina Wetland Services
~.~
CWS 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
C-~-~-`~~" ~~ Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
REFERENCE: GIS LAYERS PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY LAND USE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, DATED 2002.
Figure 1. Wetland Boundary Survey
7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2007-1917
PREPARED BY DATE C ECKED DATE ~ ~, ~„
MLA' °~O•b~ ~~`t) ~;(I "s a [v ~--

~~ ~
r ( ~I
I ~.
~.
~='~ e
~~~ /I
'9~4 ~ L
~~ ' , ~
,` ~_ ~_
~waw> war ~ ~,./,
F
J
U
~' 4
u
N.ff S O
~ ~ ~ ~
4' .a
} 4
~s
~~ 3 ~
v~ ~ ~
x N
Y
Y = t
V
CYi ~ ~~q~q
A- L~."
Q
o
<~
~~a~~
~Woaa
Zawo~w
a ~
~©~Yw
m
~W oa

v W
. ~ ~"' S
,iyr
C~ W N ~ q ~ ~ c%~
~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~o a
,~ o o ~ ' ~ Pr ~ ~ a
L p
~ ~ U ~ c ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ c
~ ~ ~ a °vN A
0
~GOz~~
~ ~~ o °p.~z~"
O it U p„i p +~'+ L
o ~.~ ~ Nara, ~
I V o ~~+UV o~n
°' ~ o°
~ ~ ~
w
f ~ ~ A ~~
/ ~ q ~~
~'
~~
V ~ a
i ~
a ~~31
m '~
$' ~ E
47 6
'~ 4
7 n ~ ~
G7 W ai w m
~ ~ -' ~ _-
-1 ~- ~~ r
~~ _ ~

Oy'9SS __1_- ~ ~

/
~~ I

~

~
~~.
N ~ 1
~ V ~.,~ 5
~ r i m
~m
`'

~f.
~ I ~~'4~
_
_ 1 Fp
m
4 ~

'
~ ~ eo-
.lfX ± ~
...
fi 1 '
~,
a PS
\gg V ~ 1 -

~~.:
, ~~
I~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~k~ c~
O ~ I i ~ ~ ~ W~ F '~
;' ~ ; ~~, r. '~ f.
J ~,
o~
_ ~~~..
i ~ ~ ~ 'e
~aooU ~f ad
Z~Y~,o~ ~ .. r~ ~ r 1t \ 1
~ ~n \ i`
Z~G10~ ~ ~ \ i
oO ~ t
~~~mc. .~ ~ n i
3' r ~,
+` ~ ~ ~ '~
8 i ~ ~. ~ .Q ,~ ,
a ~~
mn~ O w r2'~~~U1 3j ll~: °0 1 ~ ~ 5~°~°' ~a°, ~ ~~
~~y$ay ~ ~ y}~ ~ ~i ~' < ~'7cJN rI jt
y ~^ I K Ft/ ~ ~ 0 1 f~ n~
J ~ }p k ~
,' i ~
W QQ' ~ ~~~ ~}`~ 60ti c __._.,._ ._ ~_~~~ C ,~ ~ ~ JAI ~ ~~~
.. <~ -. t ...__ ~
~:' 1 ,
_ s+ -r A
o ~,, ~ ~ 892 ~~ ... _ - _. __ . _.: - -- __ J
a
t Y
m ~ ~ a-
~ ~~:
~ 3„00,90.98-N - _-'
c~
e p / ~~
I'
0
~> ~
>~oa
Boa
gJ~~
ZVYOOi
~~
~~~°
d~ °

F
z
~"
~ ' ~
~
i
~ ~ ~ FF
~ ~ ~
U

! E

O~
~ #
} w U ~
f a
? ~ ~ o -
I ~ e
~
a z ~
"
~ ~ ~
~ o
I ~ I
~!
~ ~~

~~ z ~''
K!

'

~'~
~'

-a ~ ~

1
4
f
F
a
U
I
ic1
N
M
~~ '
I.
0
Hof
...
i0 ,-
I_o~ A
N 4 ~ ~ A
4ti
tD
Z W C 6! 2
+ _
g °. ~
i, h W
e} LL h o
~1=_ (p 0
~ 3 ~UN
i
I'
a
Y
v ~ P
o
~r v
J
F ?
P 4
1`- ~
t
t
$ ~ d ~_
R~_ ~~~
z~
Y : ~ yi.
'<

2pp7p77.5
Office Use Only: Form Version Apri12001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
I. Processing
+~~ .~~
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project: ~~y ~ ~'''~~' °~~`~ ~
®Section 404 Permit MAY ~ 2pQ7
^ Section 10 Permit
^ 401 Water Quality Certification ~,~~,vr~ - ~~~ ~~ ~~~~-ice
^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules >l~~a«:= x`b~ "~t()~a~.t~RYER ~RR.~1GH
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
Nationwide Permit No. 27
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII -Mitigation), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Crty ^f Charlotte Storm Water Services Contact: Mr. Isaac J. Hinson
Mailing Address: 600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte North Carolina 28202
Telephone Number: (7042336-4495 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: ihinson(c~ci charlotte nc us
2. Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 1 of 7

III. Project Information
1. Name of project: 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town: Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From Interstate 85 (I-851, take the
Harris Boulevard / NC 24 E exit Exit #45A) and then mere onto West WT Harris
Boulevard / NC 24 E Travel approximately 4 8 miles and turn left onto The Plaza. Travel
~~roximately 1 1 miles and turn ri¢ht onto Plott Road Travel approximately lmile and the
site will be on the left.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N35.239806° W80.715472°
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
The existing land use of the~ro~ject area is residential.
7. Property size (acres): 1.0 acre
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Reedy Creek
9. River Basin: Yadkin River
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: Water current~y overto~ps a pond overflow
culvert and driveway during the two near storm causing driveway erosion and (more
importantly emer~encX vehicle access and safetyissues The pond has been drained m early
April followin¢ unsafe conditions due to heave rainfall CSWS is proposma to construct a
new stream channel through the existing pond footprint and allow the remamm~ existm~
pond area to form into a wetland This pond to stream conversion is necessary to allow
CSWS to better control and account for the anticipated flows and to protect the
driveway/dam The driveway is located on the dam of the pond and is not adequately sized.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: A trackhoe and typical
excavation equipment will be used for this project
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: The land use surrounding; the project area
is mainly residential dominated bX maintained lawns.
Page 2 of 7

IV. Prior Project History
The pond has alreadX been drained in early Apri12007
V. Future Project Plans
There are no future project plans for this site _
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
1 Wetland Im acts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
Type of Impact*
Area of Impact Located within
100-year** Distance to
Nearest Stream
Type of Wetland***

(indicate on map) (acres) Floodplain
(es/no linear feet
( )
N/A

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. lmpacts include, but are not i,m,tea,o: mecnan,ccu ~lcalllg, ~~au~.~s, .._.,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: N/A
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
~ Q+raam Tmnanrc ;ncl„rl;na all intermittent and perennial streams
~. ~,~~.,..~
Stream Impact ~~ ~...r~.,..., __------ ---- ---- ------------ --- -
Average Width
Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Length of Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on ma Impact Before Im act leases eci

Stream B Dewatering 245 if UT to Reedy Creek 4' Perennial
Stream A Restoration +495 if UT to Reedy Creek 3' Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated r,p-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several Internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: Net gain of 250 linear
feet of stream channel.
Page 3 of 7

Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S. N/A
Open Water Impact

* Area of
Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody

estuary, sound,
pond
(lake
Site Number Type of Impact Impact (if applicable) ,
,
etc.)
ocean
ba
(indicate on ma (acres) ,
,
N/A
' d • f 11 vation dyed ing
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not hmrte to. i , exca g ,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A
Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Im acts to on-site 'urisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable No direct impacts to~urisdictional waters of the U.S. will occur as a result of
this_project CSWS is proposing to seed the existing; pond with a native wetland seed mix.
The new stream channel will has been desi,Fned to accommodate the 1.5-year storm, so rt
should overtop frequently and provide hydrolo.~y for the proposed wetland. This protect will
restore stream channel and a~acent wetland areas in the drained pond bed and will provide
an overall water ualit benefit. The use of hard stabilization will be limited to the outside
meander bends of the newly created stream channel in order to immediately stabilize the
channel Erosion control (C 1251 matting is necessary to provide stabilization to the newly
graded channel floodplain benches and drivewaylopes Proper sediment and erosion
control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
Page 4 of 7

VIII. Mitigation
Construction of this project will result in a net ¢ain of on-site stream channel. These
activities will result in an overall benefit to the water quality of downstream waters and
eliminate future flooding issues CSWS believes that this project is self miti~atin~ and is
proposing no miti atg_ion plan
1. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes ® No ^
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Page 5 of 7

Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify: )?
Yes ^ No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers. N/A
*
Zone Impact
s uare feet)
Multiplier Required
Miti ation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Gone 1 extends out su teet perpenaicuiar nom near oanx ui ~nnauici, c.u„~ ~ ~n«.,u~ ~,.
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Sources of nearby impervious cover include roads driveways and rooftops. This project will
not cause an increase in the impervious coverage of the ~roiect area
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Page 6 of 7

XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ^ No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Construction is scheduled to bin immediately following receipt of the appropriate permits.
c
.~A.~,~
5/3/07
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 7 of 7

REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
DATE: May 3, 2007
COUNTY Mecklenbure County North Carolina TOTAL ACREAGE OF TRACT 6 acres
PROJECT NAME (if applicable) 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT (name, address and phone):
Charlotte Storm Water Services
POC• Mr Isaac J Hinson at [phone]
600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte North Carolina 28202
NAME OF CONSULTANT, ENGINEER, DEVELOPER (if applicable):
STATUS OF PROJECT (check one):
( ) On-going site work for development purposes
(X) Project in planning stages
(Type of project: flood control/stream restoration )
( ) No specific development planned at present
( )Project already completed
(Type of project: 1
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIItED:
Check items submitted -forward as much information as is available. At a minimum, the following first two items must be
forwarded.
(X) USGS 7.5-Minute Mint Hill, NC Topographic Quadrangle
(X) NRCS Mecklenburg County Soil Survey
(X) Wetland Boundary Survey (Figure 1)
(X) Proposed Impacts (Figure 2)
(X) Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 27
(X) NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms (SCP1 -SCP2)
(X) USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets (SCP1 -SCP2)
(X) Routine On-Site Data Form (DP 1 - DP2)
(X) Representative Photographs (A - H)
A~wc--
Signature of roperty Owner or
Authorized Agent
Mr. Isaac J. Hinson

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
gate: 04/24/2007 ProJBCt' 7300PlottRoadMaintenance Latitude: N35.239806°
Evaluator: RGJ & MLJ site: SCP1 Longitude: W80,715472°
Total Points: Dther Perennial Stream A
Stream is atleasfintermittent 35.U~ county: Mecklenburg C.9•QuadName:
iiz 99 or erennral i{? 3t7
A. Geomorpholo y (Subtotal = 17.5 ~ Absent Weak Moderate Strong
Continuous bed and bank
1a 2.0 0 1 2 3
.
2. Sinuosity 2.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1.0 0 1 2 3
Soil texture or stream substrate sorting
4 1.0 0 1 2 3
.
5. Active/relic floodplain 3.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 3.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 3.0 0 1 2 3
9 a Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0.0 0 1 2 3
Grade controls
11 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
.
12. Natural valley or drainageway 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existin
No = 0
Yes = 3
USGS or MRCS map or other documented
evidence. 0.0
" Man-made aitcnes are not ra~ea: see oiscu~ai~na u. niauum
,~..~.~..~..~ _ o n
~. ~ , .., u..,
14. Ground~rrater flo~Mdischarge
2.0
0
1
2
3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain. or 0 1 2 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season 2.0
0
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1.5 1 0.5
17. Sediment on plants or debris 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines} 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic featiures} present?1.5 No = 0 Yes = 1.5

20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
21 b. Rooted plants in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthas {note diversity and abundance) 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 5AV = 2.0; Other = 0
i~erv.r ~n ~nr! 77 fnnic ~~ rnP nresenre of upland p lants. I tem 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Sketch:
Notes; (use back side of this form for additional notes.l
Fish, turtle, crayfish, and amphipods present.
a

North Carolina DiWision of Water Quality -Stream Identification Farm; Version 3.1
Date: 04/24/2007 PraJeCt.7300P1ottRoadMa;ntenance Latitude: N35.239806°
It?`raluator: RGJ & MLJ site: SCP2 Longitude: Wg0.715472°
Total Points: Other Perennial Stream B
Stream rs at least +ntermittent ~1 Q~oo county: Mecklenburg e.g. Quad Name:
it? 19 or ,oererrnia! if ? 3D Lr U
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 9.5 ~ Absent Weak Modeirate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0.0 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 1.0 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 2.0 0 1 2 3
4. Soi I texture or stream substrate sorting 2.0 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0.0 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 2.0 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0.0 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 2.0 0 1 2 3
9 `Natural levees 0.0 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0.0 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existin
USGS or MRCS map or other documented
Pvidenc~ 0.~
No = 0
Yes = 3
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussions in manual
n u,.,.~...i...-.., rC„h+.,+~1 - ~ ~ 1
14. Groundwater flo~vldischarge 2.0 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain. or
Water in channel -- dry or grrnr~in season 2.0 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hvdric soils (redoximorphic features) present?1.5 No = 0 Yes = 1.5
,-. ~;..~,...., rte. ~~.~,.+.,~ _ ~ n nn ~
.....ter ~---__~_. - - - ,
20~. Fibrous roots in channel 3.0
3
2
1
0
21 t'. Rooted plants in channel 3.0 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 1.0 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos {note diversity and abundance) 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton 0.0 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacterialfungus. 1.0 0 0.5 1 1.5
7a ~nlat~anrl plants in streambed 0.00 FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants. Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or ~~~etland plants.
Sketch:
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.}
Due to the man-made ditching of this channel from the
over ow pipe, parameters an were not score
~_
5 ~.s I

OFFICE USE ONLY:
USACE AID#
DWQ#
_. _ . _ _ _. _ _._. _ .. t _..._.. _ . _._ _ _.__ _ ....
SCP1-Perennial Stream A
f
~ ~ ; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET '~
1. Applicant's Name: 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 4/24/07
5. Name of Stream: UT to Reece Creek
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 300 acres
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 2001f
4. Time of Evaluation: 11:30 am
6. River Basin: Yadkin
8. Stream Order: First
10. County: Mecklenburg-
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Interstate 85 (I-85) take the Harris Boulevard /
NC 24 E exit (Exit #45ALand then mer e onto West WT Harris Boulevard / NC-24 E Travel approximately 4.8 miles and turn left
onto The Plaza Travel~nroximately 1 1 miles and turn right onto Plott Road Travel approximately lmile and the site will be on the
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.239806° W80.715472°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): None ProRosed
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within the ast 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: sunn 75 de ees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? ~ NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ~ NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 100 % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
Forested % Cleared /Logged _% Other (_
21. Bankfull Width: 3-6' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank)
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight -Occasional Bends X Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 50 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature ~~/~~ Date ~> IS /~~
This channel evaluation form is inte ed to be use my as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the nited States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
crul - Uoro„t„al C+rPam A
/J~1 1
ECOREG ION POINT RANGE
SCORE
## CHARACTERISTICS -Coastal ` Piedmont ' -Mountain
Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 3
1 no flow or saturation = 0• stron flow = max oints
Evidence of past human alteration 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 1
2 extensive alteration = 0• no alteration = max oints
Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 2
3 no buffer= 0• Conti uous wide buffer = max oints
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 2
4 extensive dischar es = 0• no dischar es = max oints
Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 3
5 no dischar e = 0• s rin s see s wetlands etc. = max oints
~ Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 2
6 no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max oints

Entrenchment / floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 3
a ~ dee 1 entrenched = 0• fre uent floodin = max oints
Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 2
8 no wetlands = 0• lar a adjacent wetlands = max oints
Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 2
9 extensive channelization = 0• natural meander = max oints
Sediment input 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 2
10 extensive de osition= 0• little or no sediment = max oints
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 1
11 fine homo enous = 0• lar a diverse sizes = max oints
Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 3
y~ 12 dee 1 incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max oints
C
i Presence of major bank failures 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 3
~
'
~, 13 severe erosion = 0• no erosion, stable banks = max oints
Root depth and density on banks 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 3
14 no visible roots = 0• dense roots throu out = max oints
~ Impact by agriculture or livestock production 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4
15 substantial im act =0• no evidence = max oints
Presence of riffle-poollripple-pool complexes 0- 3 0- 5 0- 6 2
16 no riffles/ri les or ools = 0• well-develo ed = max oints
Habitat complexity 0- 6 0- 6 0- 6 3
F 17 little or no habitat = 0• fre uent varied habitats = max oints
C!~ Canopy coverage over streambed 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 3
Q 18 no shadin ve etation = 0• continuous cano = max oints
T Substrate embeddedness NA* 0- 4 0- 4 1
19 dee 1 embedded = 0; loose structure = max
Presence of stream invertebrates 0_ 4 0- 5 0- 5 2
20 no evidence = 0; common numerous es = max oints

~ Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 1
p 21 no evidence = 0• common, numerous es = max oints

O
22 Presence of fish 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 1
no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max oints
~ Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
23 no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max oints

Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL. SCORE (also enter on first pale) so
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
___... _ _...__. __ _ _ --__-_ _._.___- _.I
.. _, _.
SCP2 -Perennial Stream B
,~~ .
~~ .
~ ~ ; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ~ a s,
1. Applicant's Name: 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project 2. Evaluator's Name: Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins
3. Date of Evaluation: 4/24/07
5. Name of Stream: UT to Reedy Creek
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 200 acres
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 200 if
4. Time of Evaluation: 12.30 pm
6. River Basin: Yadkin
8. Stream Order: First
10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Interstate 85 (I-85), take the Harris Boulevard /
NC 24 E exit (Exit #45A) and then mer a onto West WT Harris Boulevard / NC-24 E Travel approximately 4.8 miles and turn left
onto The Plaza Travel approximatelX 1 1 miles and turn right onto Plott Road Travel annroximately lmile and the site will be on the
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35.239806° W80.715472°
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): maintenance
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within the past 48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: sunn 75 de rees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? ~ NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 0.7 Acres
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 100 % Residential % Commercial _% Industrial ._% Agricultural
Forested % Cleared /Logged _% Other
21. Bankfull Width: 3-6' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 4'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -.Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: X Straight -Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of
100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 37 Comments:
/~, ,
Evaluator's Signature ~7"'l~ Date ~ ~ j0~
This channel evaluation form is inten ed to be use only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 05/03. To Comment, please ca11919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP2 -Perennial Stream B
ECOREG ION POINT RANGE
. SCORE
# CHARACTERISTICS
Coastal Piedmont Mountain

1 Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
2
no flow or saturation = 0• stron flow = max oints

2 Evidence of past human alteration
0 - 6
0 - 5
0 - 5
1
extensive alteration = 0• no alteration = max oints
3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0= 5 2
no buffer = 0• Conti ous wide buffer = max oints

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 4
2
extensive dischar es = 0• no dischar es = max oints
5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 2
no dischar e = 0• s rin s see s wetlands etc. = max oints
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 0
no flood lain = 0• extensive flood lain = max oints
~' ~ Entrenchment /floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 1
dee 1 entrenched = 0• fre uent floodin = max oints
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
j 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 0
acent wetlands = max oints
no wetlands = 0• lar a ad
9 Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 1
extensive channelization = 0• natural meander = max oints
10 Sediment input 0- 5 0= 4 0- 4 2
extensive de osition= 0• little or no sediment = max oints
11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 1
fine homo enous = 0• lar a diverse sizes = max oints
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 1
~ dee 1 incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max oints
rE•~ 13 Presence of major bank failures 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 1
'd severe erosion = 0• no erosion stable banks = max oints
14 Root depth and density on banks 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 2
~,,., no visible roots = 0• dense roots throu out = max oints

15 Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
4
substantial im act =0• no evidence = max oints
16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes 0- 3 0- 5 0- 6 2
no riffles/ri les or ools = 0• well-develo ed = max oints
F
~
17 Habitat complexity
0 - 6
0 - 6
0 - 6
3
little or no habitat = 0• fre uen varied habitats = max oints

18 Canopy coverage over streambed
0 - 5
0 - 5
0 - 5
3
no shadin ve etation = 0• continuous cano = max oints

19 Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
dee 1 embedded = 0• loose structure = max
20 Presence of stream invertebrates 0- 4 0- 5 0- 5 2
~ no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max oints
~ 21 Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 1
O no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max oints
a
O
22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max oints
~ 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 1
no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max oints
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 37
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project Date: 04/24/07
Applicant/Owner: Charlotte Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator(s): Ron Johnson, PWS, and Matt Jenkins, WPIT State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: wetlan
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: 1
If needed, ex lain on reverse.
VC/'_CTATInAI
Dominant Plan S ecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 Acer rubrum tree FAC 9
2 Liquidambar styrac~ua tree FAC+ 10
3 Acer rubrum shrub FAC 11
4 Liquidambar styrac~ua shrub FAC+ 12
5 Acer negundo shrub FACW 13
6 Alnus serrulata shrub FACW 14
7 Typha latifolia herb OBL 15
8 Impatiens capensis herb FACW 16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
100%
Remarks:
100% of the dominant
plant species are FAC or wetter.
uvnonl nrv
yRecorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
-Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: -~ Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) ~ Water-Stained Leaves
-
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: <12" (in.) ~ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrolot7y are present.
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 1 of 2 4/30/2007

suul~
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Monacan IOam Drainage Class Somewhatpoorlvdrained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermlC Fluva luentic Eutrochre is Confirm Mapped Type? Ye No
Profile Descri tion:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moistl (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 B 5Y 4/1 lOYR 4/4 few/distinct silt
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon _
_ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime ~-Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
-
Reducing Conditions ~ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
-~ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of hvdric soils are present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Ye No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of a jurisdictional wetland area.
Hpprovea oy n~,twr+~c ~~~~
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 2 Of 2 a/3o/2007

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project Date: 04/24/07
Applicant/Owner: Charlotte Storm Water Services County: Mecklenburg
Investigator(s): Ron Johnson, PWS, and Matt Jenkins, WPIT State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: u land
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: 2
If needed, ex lain on reverse.
T.A.,
VtbC IAI IVIV
t S ecies
t Pl
i
Stratum Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum Indicator
an
nan
Dom
1 Acer rubrum tree FAC 9 Rubus argutus herb FAC
2 Liquidambar styraciflua tree FAC+ 10 Fescue spp.
herb
3 Acer rubrum
shrub FAC
11 Rhus radicans
vine
4 Liquidambar styrac flua shrub FAC+ 12 Hedera helix
vine
5 Juniperus virginiana shrub FACU- 13
6 Quercusphellos shrub FACW- 14
7 Sassafras albidum
8 Andropogon virginicus shrub FACU
herb FAC- 15
16
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
67%
Remarks: "Please note this species was not identified to species and was therefore excluded from the FAC-Neutral test.
Greater than 50% of the dominant plant species are FAC or wetter.
wA. AAV
nturcV~VVr
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Field Observations:
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: N/A (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
There are no indicators of wetland hydroloe y are p resent.
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 1 of 2 4/30/2007

~~~~ ~
~~~~~
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes Drainage Class Well drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermic T iC Kanha ludultS Confirm Mapped T pe? Ye No

Profile Descri tion:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon ~Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 B SYR 4/6 loam
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indicators of hydric soils are present.
\111CT1 AAII"\ 1'1CTCCMIAIATI~IAI
~r~.. r ~r+rw vim..-..~.~~......
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of anon-jurisdictional upland area.
Approvetl by r+uusACt zroz
Routine On-Site Data Forms Page 2 of 2 4/30/2007

7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
Nationwide Permit No 27 Project No. 2007-1917
..:. ~_;
., ..
_ _ __ _ _
__._ _...._.w_
.,.,
~.
..~.
._. , ., ,
_ ._
t R ,~w
,b f
_ ~ ~r
y ~'f ~++ r
,, °~ ~*~w~t'~,, s
1 ~ ~7r 'alt. ~'+~7! R^V *~ti, ~ h4~ 'ACS Cv:.i~~', yiy~i!~
1, t S '~ h ,~ .~ 3 'A AK' ~i~''v
x =yf y ~ YY..
.Y' . F Y
1~ J _ - yy Mrv ~:~"C~ y~ 4~< y~r f ~ ~ ~ 1 Cam'.
_ X ~y~1(,fff~ ~f ~g~r'q ,. ,. 4 ~ y~yl~yi ~ t`~V ~'~ 't ~. ~+, r'S ~ f~i.:
~i ~f +~~ C W Q3µ
`.~~._: 1: ._.. Lr.4Zr ~rtl~~d'Fa ~.~'"i~,'1~i~rPw ...~~` ... ~~~~'.}. f~. ~-,~tk~ a,..:.~:. ~.`

Photograph B. View of drained pond bed, iacmg west.
Photograph A. View of drained pond bed, tacmg south.

7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
Nationwide Permit No 27 Protect No. 2007-1917

7300 Plott Road Maintenance Project
Nationwide Permit No 27 Project No. 2007-1917