20191346 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20191003

DWR
IDIOM n of Water Resources
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Kim Williams - Land Management Group
1b. Primary Contact Email:* 1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
10/3/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Allen Creek
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
B; Sw
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
34.035537 -78.044729
FA. Processing Information U
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Brunswick
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
* Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
rJ Nationwide Permit (NWP)
F- Regional General Permit (RGP)
F Standard (IP)
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
tial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance
in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
G Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned *
Version#*
20191346
1
Is a payment required for this project?*
* No payment required
What amout is owed?*
* Fee received
r $240.00
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
r $570.00
Reviewing Office*
Select Project Reviewer*
Wilmington Regional Office - [phone]
Chad Coburn:eads\cccoburn
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Audubon Park
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Kim Williams - Land Management Group
1b. Primary Contact Email:* 1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
10/3/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Allen Creek
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
B; Sw
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
34.035537 -78.044729
FA. Processing Information U
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Brunswick
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
* Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
rJ Nationwide Permit (NWP)
F- Regional General Permit (RGP)
F Standard (IP)

1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
F Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
F Individual Permit
29 - Residential Developments
1e. Is this notification solelyfor the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1i. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
r Yes r No r Unknown
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
C Yes r No
F. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying forthe permit?
R Owner r Applicant (other than owner)
1e. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
f Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Calten Company, LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Responsible party:
Mr. Nathan Sanders
2d. Address
Street Address
PO Box 3167
Address Line 2
City
State / Frovinre / R�gicn
Wilmington
NC
Postal / Zip Code
0�untry
28406
USA
2e. Telephone Number: 2f. Fax Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
r Yes r No
r Yes r No
u

1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(d appropriate)
Audubon Park
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Boiling Spring Lakes
Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
1570000106;1570000108
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Fifty Lakes Drive
Address Line 2
City
Boiling Spring Lakes
Bxstal / Zip Qxde
28461
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Allen Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
B; Sw
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12 -digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300050701
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
108
State / province / fegim
NC
Qxuntry
USA
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The site is mostly undeveloped and forested. Several dirt roads exist in the northern and central parts of the site. Jurisdictional ditches are located in the western and southern portions
of the tract. Several wetland pockets exist in the central part of the site. Adjacent land use is mostly residential or undeveloped and forested. A golf course (The Lakes Country Club) is
located just north of the site.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2X11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
Topo Map.pdf 2.23MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
Soils Map.pdf 1.63MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
11 acres
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
N/A
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the project is to construct a residential subdivision within the tract that has both multi -family and single-family residences. Wetland impacts are needed to provide inter-
connectivity per the request of the Town. Jurisdictional ditch impacts are needed to construct multi -family buildings, roads, and stormwater ponds.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The applicant will construct 40 single-family lots, 561 multi -family units, 50' to 60' wide roads, utilities and stormwater ponds within the project area. Because of known red -cockaded
woodpecker clusters within and adjacent to the site, approximately 30 acres of open space will be provided (five times the minimum required for the development).
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
Site Plan.pdf 3.3MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
F Yes r No C Unknown
Comments

5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW -2008-03333
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Corey Novak
Agency/Consultant Company: Land Management Group
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made bythe Corps or DWR
Kyle Dahl with the USACE issued the JD on November 13, 2015.
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
Trevino JD (1).pdf 796.78KB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r^ Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands r Streams -tributaries r Buffers
W Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.190
2h. Comments:
4. Open Water Impacts
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.190
4a. Site #
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type * (?)
2c. Type of W. *
2d. W. name *
2e. Forested *
2f. Type of
2g. Impact
Residential
Residential
Development
P
WA
Fill
Ditch
0.09
Jurisdicition*(?)
area*
1
Road Crossing
P
Pine Flat
WA
Yes
Both _]
0.090
(acres)
2
Road Crossing
PPine
Flat
WA
Yes
Both
0.060
(acres)
Road Crossing
P
Pine Flat
WA
Yes
Both
0.040
_J
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.190
2h. Comments:
4. Open Water Impacts
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.190
4a. Site #
4a1. Impact Reason
ial
Development
4b. Impact type _114c.
P
Name of waterbody
�NVA
4d. Activity type :114e.
Fill
Waterbody typeResiden
Ditch
4f. Impact area
0.21
Residential
Residential
Development
P
WA
Fill
Ditch
0.09
4g. Total temporary open water Impacts:
0.00
4g. Total open water impacts:
0.30
4h. Comments:
4g. Total permanent open water impacts:
0.30

E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Wetland impacts were minimized as much as possible during the site design. These impacts are needed to provide a third access point, which was
requested by the Town because of the proposed density of the project. This road has been designed to be located at an existing road crossing in
order to minimize impacts. Additionally, the road disturbance will be minimized to 50' within the 60' ROW at the wetlands to further reduce impacts.
Note that the Widened road will tie back into the existing dirt road once off property.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
A sedimentation and erosion control permit will be obtained prior to construction to ensure sediment does not leave the site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes r No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
r- DWR W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
R Mitigation bank r Payment to in -lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits Purchased/Requested (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Quantity:
Non -riparian wetland 0.4
Attach Receipt and/or letter
Credit Reservation—Audubon Park Oct 3_2019.pdf
98KB
3c. Comments
We are proposing a 2:1 mitigation to impact ratio for wetland impacts
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes G No
If no, explain why:
Site is located within the Cape Fear River Basin
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes G No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes 6 No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater
program?
6 Yes r No
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
F Local Government W State
State Stormwater Programs
F Phase II R Coastal Counties
F HWQ or ORW r- Other
Comments:
Engineer is preparing a stormwaater plan, which will be obtained prior to site development.
G. Supplementary Information

1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)?*
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
f Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project will not provide utilities or access to adjacent properties. The proposed road connections will be with existing roads. No other wetland
impacts are anticipated for the site.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated
at a treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
Project will tie into the Brunswick County sewer system.
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?
r Yes r- No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r^ Yes r No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r^ Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut anytrees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r^ Yes r No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
(- Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
The NC Natural Heritage Program database was reviewed. Red -cockaded woodpeckers are known to occur within the site. JH Carter III and Associates
has performed a biological assessment for the project (attached) and has contacted the USFWS regarding the project. This BA found that the project
may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the RCW.
Additionally, forested areas within the site may support suitable roosting habitat for the northern long-eared bat. Fbwever, since no hibernacula or
roost trees are known in close proximity to the site, any adverse effect from tree clearing would be exempt per the 4(d) rule.
Consultation Documentation Upload
BSL Land Holdings BA 8-23-2019 (1).pdf 6.13MB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r' Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA EFH Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)

7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes
r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
The SHPO HPOWeb GIS service website was reviewed. No historic occurrences were noted on or adjacent to the site.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?*
r Yes
r No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA Flood Map Service Center website was reviewed.
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Vicinity Map.pdf
Aerial Photo.pdf
850.58KB
2.68MB
Signature u
W By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
. I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
. I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Kimberlee C Williams
Signature
� [J�lvl�orra
Date
10/3/2019

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Uwe, the undersigned, hereby authorize Land Management Group to act as our agent in the
preparation and representation of information related to the Section 404/401 permit application
for the Audubon Park; Brunswick County, NC project. All questions in regard to this project
should be directed to Land Management Group.
Sincerely,
WpplicaW
Print Name

Map Source: USGS Southport Quadrangle 7.5 minute
Figure 2
Topographic Mapwww.lmgroup.net
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
N
SCALE 1" = 500’
(when printed at 11”x17”)
L:\WETLANDS\2015\40-15-127A
Trevino Road
Brunswick County, NC
May 2015
LMG # 40-15-127A
P
a
l
me
r
Dr
SShoreDrPar
kwayBarberRd
Pl
ymout
hL ib e rty R dDowningFoxSqui
r
r
el
RdPresidentRdT re v in o R d
M a s te rs D rNicklausRdPi
er
ceRdLexi
ngt
onRd5 0 L a k e s D r
West
wayC
a
sp
er
R
d
B a t t e n R dSandersRd
Gr
ant
Ci
rMoreheadRdFilm
ore
R
d
C h a rle s to w n R d
Beauf
or
t
RdK e n n e d y C ir
Bur
i
ngt
onRdS
prin
g
dale
R
d
Wi
nst
onSal
emRdSt
at
esvill
eRdB re a m R dGrahamCirMorningside SouchakRdEagle Ln
Ke n ne d y Rd 50LakesDr5 0 L a k e s D r5 0 L a k e s D r5 0 L a k e s D r50LakesDr
50LakesDr Mor
eheadRdSITE
Map Source: NRCS Soil Survey
Figure 4
Soils Map
Legend
KrB: Kureb fine sand
Lo: Leon fine sand
Ma: Mandarin fine sand
Mu: Murville mucky fine sand
w: Water
www.lmgroup.net
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
N
SCALE 1" = 400’
(when printed at 11”x17”)
L:\WETLANDS\2015\40-15-127A
Trevino Road
Brunswick County, NC
May 2015
LMG # 40-15-127A
Ma
KrB
Lo
KrB
w
Ma
w
w
Lo
Mu
Mu
w
w
w
w
Mu
Maw
Lo
w
PalmerDr
Par
kwayPl
ymout
hSShoreDrFoxSqui
r
r
el
RdPierc
e
R
d
5 0 L a k e s D r
C
a
s
p
er
R
d
Presi
dentRdSandersRdMor
eheadRdT re v in o R d
K e n n e d y C irGr
ant
Ci
r
Downi
ngMasters Dr
L ib e rty R d NicklausRdBarberRd
Lexi
ngt
onRdFil
m
ore
R
d
B a t t e n R dGrahamCir
Bur
i
ngt
onRdM o r n in g s id e SouchakRdEagle Ln
K e n n e d y R d 50LakesDr50LakesDr
SITE
RiverRdSEGeorgeIIHwySouthport-SupplyRd SE
EMooreStB e th e lR d S ECr
y
s
t
a
l
Rd
S R #1518Da n ford Rd S E
S R #1 5 2 1
EdenDrM illC re e k R d S E
Funston Rd SE
Wildwood Dr SE Ol
dMill
Cr
e
e
k
RdSEGeor
geII
HwySES R#15 31
RipleyDrSEELeonardStP
i
n
e
Rd
We
s
t
Ri
d
g
e
Rd
StuartAveRedwoodRdLongBeachRdSEOceanHwyEAirportRdSE
A n t e n n a F a r m R d S E
P
al
me
r
D
r
P
i
n
e
L
a
k
e
Dr
B eechR dC
e
d
a
r
R
d
ArborCreekDrSEM O T S P A c c e s s R d
P e n d e rR d Gover
nor
sRdSEB e l l S w a m p R d N E
RobinRdL ila c S tF e r r y R d S E
SR#1857 EBoilingSpringRdW i l l ar d D r S E
SwainRdSENa
s
s
a
uRdS R#1 8 5 2
HighpointRd
LongleafRdAcresLnSEC o u g a rR d
Shepard Rd SE
StJamesDr SE
H e r on Ci r S E
E
l
mR
d
HuntersRdCl
ar
kWaySEReidsvilleRd50LakesDrSShoreD rFi
l
mor
eRdM apleRdBrittanyRdH
o
lly
R
d
Irwin DrSE
P e e D e e R dNC-87J o h n s o n Tr l S E
Par
kwaySunsetRdGibralterRdGol
f
vi
ewC a m d e n S tQuail Rd
C h a rle s to n R dWestway
TrailEndSEArgonneRd3rdRdS R #1525NShoreDrOrtonRdSalisburyRd9thRdOakdaleRdDamRdJacksonvi
l
l
eNHoweStSR#1861CactusRdBluebirdRd Kn
o
x
Rd
SR#185812thRd14thRd DosherCutOffSEM a s t e r s D rBu
rt
o
n
RdDi
x
o
n
Rd MohawkRdTaurusLnM illerR d
S
E
RiverR
dWe
s
t
R
i
d
g
e
R
d
Geor
geII
HwyRi
ver
RdSE5 0 L a k e s D r
NShoreDrSources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, increment P Corp., NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI,
Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors,
and the GIS User Community
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Map Source: ArcGIS World Street Map
SITE
N
SCALE 1" = 1 mile
Trevino Road
Brunswick County, NC
May 2015
LMG # 40-15-127A
www.lmgroup.net
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
L:\WETLANDS\2015\40-15-127A
(when printed at 11”x17”)
SITE
Map Source: 2012 NC OneMap Aerial Photography
Figure 6
Aerial Photographwww.lmgroup.net
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
N
SCALE 1" = 400’
(when printed at 11”x17”)
L:\WETLANDS\2015\40-15-127A
Trevino Road
Brunswick County, NC
May 2015
LMG # 40-15-127A
PalmerDr
Par
kwayPl
ymout
hSShoreDrPie
rc
e
R
d
5 0 L a k e s D r
C
a
s
p
er
R
d
Presi
dentRdSandersRdMor
eheadRdT re v in o R d
K e n n e d y C irGr
ant
Ci
r
Downi
ngMasters Dr
L ib e rty R d NicklausRdBarberRd
Lexi
ngt
onRdFil
m
ore
R
d
B a t t e n R dGrahamCir
Bur
i
ngt
onRdEagle Ln
K e n n e d y R d 50LakesDrSITE
Mor
ni
ngsi
de Dr
F o x S q u irre l R d Souchak Rd
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW -2008-03333 County: Brunswick U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Funston
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Austin 512, LLC
408 West 1811 Street
Austin, Texas 78701
Agent: Kim Williams
Land Management Group, Inc.
3805 Wrightsville Avenue, Suite 15
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Size (acres) 107.75 acres
Nearest Waterway Barnards Creek
USGS HUC 03030005
Nearest Town Boiling Spring Lakes
River Basin Cape Fear
Coordinates Latitude: 34.02664 N
Longitude: -78.04484 W
Location description: The review area is located within parcel 218020913918 located north of Fifty Lakes Drive
between Morningside and Souchak Road, in the town of Boiline Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
_ Based on preliminary information, there may be waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area
. We strongly suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA)
jurisdiction. To be considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary
determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33
CFR Part 331). If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district
for further instruction. Also, you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the
JD.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law
or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of
this notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area delineated. Due to the
size of your property and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner. For a more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any
delineation must be verified by the Corps.
X The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified
by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed
and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat identified below. Unless there
is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five
years from the date of this notification.
Page 1 of 2

There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Wilmington, NC, at [phone] to determine
their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Kyle Dahl at 910-251-4469 or
Kyle.J.Dahl(itusace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: This site exhibit wetland criteria as described in the 1987 Corps Wetland
Delineation Manual and the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Regional Supplement. Wetlands on-site are
considered adiacent to an RPW. The site also contains features with an Ordinary High Water Mark and are
considered RPWs. The enclosed map titled "Preliminary Upland/ Wetlands Sketch: Trevino Road" dated May
2015, accurately depict the aeoaraphic extent of jurisdictional wetlands and other waters.
D. Remarks:
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 1/13/2016.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date: November 13, 2015 Expiration Date: November 13, 2020

A
w
NOTIFICATION OF ADM IINISTRATII, E APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
QUEST FOR AP'
licant: Austin 512 LLC File Number: SAW -2008-03333 Date: November 13 2015
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
A
❑
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter ofpermission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
N
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
F11
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION F- The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at htt,p://www_usace,army.mil[Missions/Civi[Works/Re u� latoryPMgramandPeriiiits.ast,)N_ or
Ca s re ulatibns at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION 11- REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Kyle Dahl
CESAD-PDO
[phone]
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
[e-mail]
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant oragent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Kyle Dahl, 69 Darlington Ave., Wilmington, NC 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

Trevino Tract ^ 107.75 ac
® Arzeas considered to be uplands - 96.75 uc or 9057.
".<._ Flagged wetlands (pending review and approval
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - 11 ac or 10%
Potential Waters of the US (relatively
®'I'r'd"'�"' permanent waters) - 5,200 -linear feet
}OTE: This is not a survey. All boundaries and distances are considered approximate.
This represents a preliminary sketch prepared from field notes. A survey of delineated
areas and review and approval by the US Army Corps of Engineers is recommended prior
to specific site planning.
Map Source: 2012 NC One Map Imagery
Trevino Road
Brunswick County, NC
May 2015
LMG # 40-15-127A
LMGLAND MANAGISMI'NIGROUP,,,
�. brvironnuui lnl Con;ulrnnrs
www.lmgrauDnet
3805 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
SCALE 1" = 400'
(when printed at 11"x17")
Figure 7
Preliminary
Upland[Wetland Sketch

LOWER CAPE FEAR UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK 
STATEMENT OF CREDIT AVAILIBILITY 

October 3, 2019 

TO:  Mr. Nathan Sanders 
        c/o Calten Company, LLC 
        PO Box 3167  
        Wilmington, NC 28406 

FROM: Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 
              c/o Land Management Group 
              3805 Wrightsville Avenue, Suite 15 
              Wilmington, NC 28403 

Project: Audubon Park (Brunswick County, NC) 

Mr. Sanders: 

Pursuant to your recent credit request, the Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank (LCFUMB) is providing 
confirmation of acceptance to supply mitigation credits for proposed  non‐riparian  wetland  impacts 
associated with the Audubon Park project (Brunswick County, NC).  This acceptance is conditional upon 
receipt of payment as outlined below.  Please refer to the table below depicting the type and quantity of 
credits requested and reserved for your project.    

Based upon receipt of your credit request transmitted on October 3, 2019, LCFUMB will reserve 0.4 non‐
riparian wetland credits for a period of up to 90 days from the date of this letter.  Note that requests to 
reserve credits beyond 90 days will require a deposit.  Please contact us if you need a reservation to extend 
beyond the 90‐day period.    

Upon request for receipt of credit transfer, LCFUMB will issue an invoice in the amount of $20,909.60.
Upon receipt of payment, LCFUMB will provide an executed Transfer of Credit Certificate.  Note that all 
payments must be made with certified funds.  It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the credit 
types and amounts requested are consistent with the compensatory mitigation requirements of the permit(s) 
issued.    LCFUMB  and/or  its  agents  are  not  responsible  for  determining  the  applicant’s  mitigation 
requirements.  If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at 
(910) 452‐0001 or by email at [e-mail].  

Sincerely,  

Land Management Group (agent for LCFUMB) 

Christian Preziosi 
Principal Consultant  
Mitigation Type  Credits Reserved  Fee Per Unit  Fee 
 Stream  0.0 $525.65 $0.00 
 Non‐Riparian Wetland  0.4  $52,273.99  $20,909.60 
 Riparian Wetland  0.0  $52,273.99  $0.00 
Total Fee $20,909.60 
Proposed SW
Pond
Proposed SW
Pond
Proposed SW
Pond
Proposed SW
Pond
Wetland Impact #1 =
0.09 acre (3,841 SF)
Impact 50' Wide
based on center of
row.
Wetland Impact #2 =
0.06 acre (2,743 SF)
Wetland Impact #3 =
0.04 acre (1,693 SF)
RPW Impact #1 =
0.21 acre (2,316 LF)
RPW Impact #2 =
0.09 acre (1,266 LF)
Proposed SW
Pond
Proposed SW
Pond
Proposed SW
Pond
Proposed SW
Pond
RPW Impact #1 contd =
0.21 acre (2,316 LF)
08/07/19
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE AUDUBON PARK RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,
BOILING SPRING LAKES, BRUNSWICK COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA

Prepared By:
Ms. Jeanette M. Sabo and Dr. J.H. Carter III
Dr. J.H. Carter III & Associates, Inc.
Environmental Consultants
515 F Midland Road
Southern Pines, North Carolina 28387

Submitted 23 August 2019
To:

Mr. Nathan Sanders c/o
Calten Company, LLC
P.O. Box 3167
Wilmington, NC 28406
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE AUDUBON PARK RESIDENTIAL PROJECT,
BOILING SPRING LAKES, BRUNSWICK COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA

1. INTRODUCTION
Calten Company, LLC plans to develop approximately 107.87 acres (ac.) for the
proposed Audubon Park residential community in Boiling Spring Lakes, Brunswick County,
North Carolina (NC). The proposed project will impact foraging habitat associated with one
active cluster (BSL 33) of the federally Endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Dryobates
borealis = Picoides borealis) (RCW). This assessment evaluates the impacts of this project on
the RCW pursuant to Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as amended.

2. PROJECT AREA
The proposed project is located in the Outer Coastal Plain of southeastern NC (Figure 1).
The area has nearly level topography with gradual slopes leading into drainages. Elevations
range from 20 to 50 feet (ft.) above mean sea level. Mapped soil types in the project area consist
of Kureb, Leon, and Mandarin fine sands and Murville mucky fine sand (US Department of
Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 2019). The project area
is located in the Cape Fear River Basin. Major hydrological features within the project area
include Boiling Spring Lake, Allen, Moore and Orton Creeks, and unnamed tributaries thereof.
Much of the project area has been converted from its historic natural state when the
uplands supported longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) dominated communities and pocosins and bays
were vegetated with pond pine (P. serotina) dominated communities. Logging, drainage,
prolonged fire exclusion and residential and commercial development have altered the natural
landscape in much of this portion of Brunswick County.
The landscape was divided into vegetative community types: Xeric Sandhill Scrub
(Coastal Fringe subtype), Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill, Mesic Pine Savanna (Coastal Plain subtype),
1

Figure 1. Location of the proposed Audubon Park residential development project in Boiling
Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
Project
site
2
Wet Pine Flatwoods (Typic subtype), Pond Pine Woodland, High Pocosin, Managed Loblolly
and Longleaf Pine forests and Pine Plantations (Schafale 2018, Carter 2012).
Xeric Sandhill Scrub (Coastal Fringe subtype) occurs on xeric, excessively drained
coarse sands. The overstory consists of longleaf pine in varying densities with turkey oak
(Quercus laevis) as the dominant midstory species. Carolina wiregrass (Aristida stricta) is
dominant in the ground cover.
Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill (Coastal Fringe subtype) occurs on fine sands and has an
overstory consisting of longleaf pine and a mixed scrub oak or xeric hardwood
understory/midstory. The ground cover is dominated by Carolina wiregrass and a diversity of
herbaceous species.
Mesic Pine Savanna (Coastal Plain subtype) occurs on loamy sands and has an overstory
of longleaf pine. It is distinguished from the Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill habitat by an absence of
scrub oaks in the midstory. The ground cover in stands subject to regular burning is dominated
by Carolina wiregrass and a diversity of other grasses and herbs. With little or no fire
management, the understory/midstory usually contains mixed mesic hardwoods, where sweet
gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) can be prominent. Infrequent burning, fire exclusion and/or
previous site disturbances (logging, agriculture) can lead to an overstory of loblolly pine or
mixed pines.
Wet Pine Flatwoods (Typic subtype) included seasonally wet, open, grassy longleaf pine
and/or pond pine (Pinus serotina) on coarse sandy spodosols. It naturally has more grasses than
shrubs. The low shrub layer is often dominated by dangleberry (Gaylussacia frondosa), inkberry
(Ilex glabra), sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia), shining fetterbush (Lyonia lucida),
staggerbush (L. mariana), sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana), dwarf azalea (Rhododendron
atlanticum) and switch cane (Arundinaria tecta). The herbaceous layer includes Carolina
wiregrass, eastern bracken fern (Pteridium latiusculum) and a diverse assemblage of grasses and
herbs.
Pond Pine Woodland has a canopy dominated by pond pine, along with loblolly bay
(Gordonia lasianthus), sweetbay, red maple (Acer rubrum) and sometimes inclusions of Atlantic
white cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides). The dense shrub layer includes titi (Cyrilla racemiflora),
fetterbush, sweet gallberry (Ilex coriacea), inkberry, swamp bay (Persea palustris) and switch
cane. The latter species may dominate the shrub layer after severe fires or repeated burns.
3
High Pocosin occurs on poorly drained peat deposits and wet sands and generally has a
canopy of pond pine with a scattering of swamp bay, loblolly bay and sweetbay. Fetterbush, titi,
sweet gallberry, inkberry and laurel-leaf greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia) dominate the dense shrub
layer.
Managed Loblolly and Longleaf forest types occur on old field and/or modified (drained
and/or intensively site prepared) sites. The dominant overstory species are loblolly pine and/or
longleaf pine, sometimes mixed with hardwoods such as sweet gum, water oak (Quercus nigra),
other oaks and red maple. The understory/midstory is often tall and dense and consists of
hardwood saplings, pine regeneration and vines. Herbaceous ground cover is often sparse unless
burned frequently.
Pine Plantations consist of planted pines on various soil types, including wet or drained
mineral soils. The overstory is typically loblolly or slash pine (Pinus elliotti) and a dense
midstory develops quickly. Sweet gum is often the dominant midstory species, but other mesic
hardwoods and tall shrubs also occur. Herbaceous ground cover is often sparse unless burned
frequently.
Several Carolina Bays occurred in the project area. Carolina Bays are elliptic wetland
depressions from one to several hundred acres in size and were originally vegetated with various
hydrophytic communities including pocosin, Wet Pine Flatwoods and Pond Pine Woodland.
Many have been drained and converted to other land uses. These vegetative communities
occurred on Murville mucky fine sand, Torhunta mucky fine sandy loam and Muckalee loam.
Other communities in the project area were Cypress-Gum Swamp and Tidal Freshwater
Marsh. These communities did not contain a significant pine component and would not be
expected to be used for foraging by RCWs. However, they do contain sufficient hardwoods and
dead pines to serve as travel or dispersal corridors.
Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point, located approximately 1.75 miles (mi.) east of the
project site, is listed as a RCW Significant Support Population for the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain
Recovery Unit (US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2003).

3. PROJECT SITE
The proposed Audubon Park residential project is located north of Fifty Lakes Drive,
south of The Lakes public golf course, east of Morningside Road (Rd.) and residential homes
4
and west of Souchak Rd. and the golf course in southeastern Brunswick County, NC (Figure 2).
The project site consists of 2 parcels (Parcel ID #s 157000106 and 1570000108) totaling
approximately 107.87 ac. (Figure 2), including ±11.58 ac. of wetlands (Figures 3 and 4).

4. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Audubon Park project will consist of 6 tracts slated for residential
development, totaling 77.8 ac., including 8.06 ac. of rights-of-way for access roads and utilities,
including water and sewer lines. The project site will also include 18.47 ac. of pine-forested,
managed open space and 11.58 ac. of jurisdictional wetlands (Figure 3). The project includes
approximately 561 multi-family units (Tracts 1-6) and 40 single-family units (SF1 and SF2).
The average lot size for SF1 and SF2 is 0.18 ac./lot. BSL Land Holdings, LLC. owns 160 lots
currently under construction or awaiting development, averaging 0.46 ac. per lot, west of the
project site.
BSL Land Holdings, LLC owns approximately 160 lots averaging 0.46 ac. per lot
adjacent to the Audubon Park. Of the 160 lots, 51 lots occur within the BSL Cluster 33 foraging
partition (Figure 3). These lots are awaiting future development.

5. METHODS
A variety of resources were utilized in preparation for field surveys, including aerial
photographs, topographic maps, the Soil Survey of Brunswick County, North Carolina (USDA
NRCS 2019), cluster and cavity tree data provided by USFWS, and historical RCW cavity tree
data and other data from previous surveys by Dr. J.H. Carter III & Associates, Inc. (JCA).
Natural communities were classified according to Schafale (2018) and plant nomenclature
follows Weakley (2018).

5.1. RCW Cluster and Cavity Tree Status Update
JCA biologists surveyed the project site and a 0.50-mi. radius of the project site for RCW
cavity trees in January 2019. The activity status of all known RCW cavity trees within active
BSL Cluster 33 was updated in January 2019.
Potential RCW nesting habitat was defined as pine or pine-hardwood stands >60 years of
age (USFWS 2003). Commercial and residential areas were checked by vehicle and large
5
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
#0
RIVERG
E
O
R
G
E

I
I
FIFTY LAKESEDENSOUTH SHOREBOILING SPRINGP
A
L
M
E
R
CHARLESTOWNFAIRWAY
LILACB
L
A
D
E
NSUNSET B
E
A
U
F
O
R
T
FI
L
M
O
R
ENICKLAUS
LAURELL
E
X
I
N
G
T
O
N TREVINOMASTERS
CAMDEN
PI
N
E

L
A
K
E
BARB
E
RNASSAUK
N
O
X
WINDEMERE
MIDWOOD LIBERTYNORTH SHOREWHELKFOX SQUIRRELDI
X
O
N
S
P
R
I
N
G
D
A
L
E WIMBERLEYCAROLINAD
OW
N
I
N
G
P
A
R
KW
A
Y
WE
S
TW
A
Y
R
E
E
V
E
S
WOODCRESTM
O
R
E
H
E
A
D MIRROR LAKEPEPPERHILLCOWRIE
P
L
Y
M
O
U
T
H
L
E
N
O
I
R
S
H
A
N
D
S
B
O
R
D
E
A
U
X
D
A
R
N
E
L
L
DUPLINP
I
E
R
C
E
G
O
L
F

V
I
EW PRESIDENTMILLERB
R
I
D
G
E
S
W
I
L
L
E
T
T
S
R
U
S
S
E
L
L
PEE DEECARDINALSAND DO
LLAR PINECRESTB
U
R
T
O
N
LEED
S
CA
S
P
E
R
G
O
L
D
S
B
O
R
O
M
O
R
N
I
N
G
S
I
D
EGARAGE
K
A
N
N
A
P
O
L
I
S BOROSS
T
A
T
E
S
V
I
L
L
EEDGEWOODW
E
S
T

D
A
M
W
I
N
D
O
V
E
R
R
O
C
K
I
N
G
H
A
M
P
I
N
E

N
E
E
D
L
E
S POPLARJACKSONV
ILLE
B
R
I
A
RW
O
O
D
T
U
R
N
E
R
BATTON
ONSLOW
KENNEDY GRANTSANDERS
WI
N
S
T
O
N

S
A
L
E
M
VIRGI
N
I
A
MANCHESTER
SI
G
M
A
N
TWIN LAK
E
S
A
D
A
M
S CAMBRIDGE
PALMETTOMYRTLEEAGLE
B
U
R
L
I
N
G
T
O
N
M
O
N
R
O
EWESTWOOD SUMMITBERRYHILL
POLKT
A
T
E

L
A
K
E
ACACIA
T
Y
L
E
R
WATTS
BAYSIDE
DUKEB
I
R
D
I
E
B
U
C
H
A
N
A
N
SO
U
C
H
A
K
WA
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N JACKGREENBAY
PINEDALESEMINOLEGREENVIEW
FL
O
R
A
L
H
A
R
T
S
V
I
L
L
E
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
LITTLER
J
A
C
K
S
O
NGRAHAM WARMOUTH
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
V
A
N

B
U
R
E
N
TONEY DARTMOUTHB
R
E
A
MBUCKBEENORTH SHORESOUTH SHOREBOROSBRU 2
BRU 40
BRU 7
BRU 33
BRU 13
BRU 26 BRU 37
NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
RCW cavity trees 2019
Active
Poss. Active
Inactive
Relic
Healed Over
Dead
Cut down
0.5 mile radius foraging partitions
RCW survey area
Audubon Park project site
BSL Land Holdings, LLC-owned lots
Streets
0 0.5 10.25 Miles /
Figure 2. Location of red-cockaded woodpecker (Dryobates borealis) (RCW) foraging habitat partitions, clusters and cavity trees impacted by the proposed Audubon Park residential development and BSL Land Holdings, LLC owned lots in Boiling Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina. The RCW cavity tree survey area is also shown.
6
Tract 1
Tract 3
Tract 2
Tract 6
Tract 4
Tract 5
FIFTY LAKESFAIRWAYEDENG
E
O
R
G
E

I
I SOUTH SHOREFI
L
M
O
R
ETREVINOPA
L
M
E
R
MASTERSWINDEMERE
FOX SQUI
R
REL
S
P
R
I
N
G
D
A
L
E
LIBERTYD
OW
N
I
N
G
P
A
R
KW
A
Y
WE
S
TW
A
Y
M
O
R
E
H
E
A
D
P
L
Y
M
O
U
T
H
P
I
E
R
C
E
PRESIDENT
CHARLESTOWN CARDINALN
O
R
T
H

S
H
O
R
E
L
E
ED
S
CA
S
P
E
R
M
O
R
N
I
N
G
S
I
D
E BOROSG
O
L
F

V
I
EW
B
E
A
U
F
O
R
T
P
I
N
E

N
E
E
D
L
E
S
BATTON
KENNEDYGRANTBARBER
SANDERSL
E
X
I
N
G
T
O
N
MIDWOOD
B
L
A
D
E
N PALMETTOEAGLE
B
U
R
L
I
N
G
T
O
N
WI
N
D
O
V
E
R
POLKT
Y
L
E
RHERONB
I
R
D
I
E
B
U
C
H
A
N
A
N
S
O
U
C
H
A
K
JACKCOWRIENICKLAUS SEMINOLECAMDEN
H
A
R
T
S
V
I
L
L
E
LITTLER
J
A
C
K
S
O
N
M
O
N
R
O
ECARPWATTS
WILL
E
T
T
S
LON
G
W
O
O
D
V
A
N

B
U
R
E
N
B
R
E
A
MSOUTH SHOREP
I
E
R
C
ENORTH SHOREBOROS0
0
00
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
9 8
7 54
3
2
1
36
23201918
17
15
11
10
262
260
259
258
249
238
234
233
232
223
210209
208
200
190
189
185
183 182
180
179
177
176175174
170
132131
130129
128 127
125
122
261
js9
js8js7
js6js5
nt 7
nt 6
nt12nt10
nt 9
nt 5
nt 4
nt 3
nt 2
nt 1
nt 21
nt 15
nt 14
nt 20
nt 16
nt 19nt 18
nt 17
nt 13
nt 11
nt 23
nt 22
BRU 33
BRU 7
BRU 13
BRU 2
BRU 40
NC OneMap, NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis, NC 911 Board
Merged RCW cavity trees
RCW cavity trees 2019
Active
Poss. Active
Inactive
Relic
Healed Over
Dead
Cut down
0.50-mile radius foraging partitions
BSL Holdings-owned lots
Wetlands
SF1
SF2
Pine-forested open space
Tracts
ROW
Streets
0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles /
Figure 3. Proposed future development including a preliminary site plan for the Audubon Park residential development and BSL Land Holdings, LLC-owned properties in Boiling Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina. Red-cockaded woodpecker (Dryobates borealis) cavity trees and foraging habitat partitions are also shown.
7
forested tracts with potentially suitable habitat were surveyed on foot using parallel transects.
Surveys were conducted and transects spaced so that all suitable habitat was viewed at least
once.

5.2. Foraging Habitat Analysis
A 0.50-mi. radius foraging circle was drawn around the center of the affected RCW
cluster (BSL 33) and subsequently modified by using the Territorial Partitioning Method (JCA
1995). Territorial Partitioning better approximates individual RCW territories where multiple
foraging circles overlap one another. This method of analysis establishes an axis between the
center of each overlapping cluster and extends a perpendicular line from the mid-point of that
axis to the perimeter of the 0.50-mi. radius circle or an intervening partition line.
A foraging habitat analysis (FHA) was completed for BSL Cluster 33 in January and
February 2019. North-south transects were plotted on aerial photography and placed 5 chains
apart (1 chain = 66 ft.) within the 0.50-mi. radius RCW foraging partition. Sample plots were
placed 5 chains apart along transect lines 5 chains spaced apart. Foraging substrate was
measured with a 10-factor basal area (BA) prism using the prism-plot method. Pine BA the
number of pine stems >4 inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) in 2-inch diameter classes and
the age of a representative dominant pine were obtained in each plot.
Foraging habitat was analyzed using pine stems ≥8 inches dbh because of site conditions
that resulted in slow growth and a paucity of pines ≥10 inches dbh. The low pine BA and low
numbers of pine stems ≥10 inches dbh are natural conditions of xeric sands, Wet Pine Flatwoods,
Pond Pine Woodland and pocosin communities in the area. Poor growing conditions due to
excessive soil dryness or wetness and low soil fertility can prevent pines on such sites from
reaching 10 inches dbh in less than 100 years, perhaps never on some sites. Therefore, pines
trees ≥8.0 inches dbh were counted as available foraging habitat and the lack of pines >10 inches
dbh should not be interpreted as representing poor or insufficient RCW foraging habitat (Carter
2012).
Pine stands were also assessed by the density and height of the midstory. Determining
midstory density was subjective, but followed these basic criteria: a stand with a sparse
hardwood midstory had few or no hardwoods present; a stand with a dense hardwood midstory
had limited visibility and movement through the stand was difficult; and a stand with a
8
moderately dense hardwood midstory was intermediate. Each community type was further
subdivided according to hardwood midstory height. Midstory hardwoods <7 ft. in height were
considered low, hardwoods from 7-15 ft. in height were considered moderate and hardwoods
>15 ft. in height were considered tall.
Vegetative communities were divided into 4 stand types: sparse pine (<40 square feet
(ft2) of pine BA/ac., moderately dense pine (≥40 to ≤70 ft2 of pine BA/ac.), dense pine (>70 ft2 of
pine BA/ac.) and non-foraging or unsuitable RCW habitat. Non-foraging or unsuitable RCW
habitat consisted of hardwood-pine drains, bays or pocosins devoid of pine trees, clear-cuts,
agricultural lands, treeless developed areas, road and power line rights-of-way and other
permanently cleared areas.
Project removals were based on project designs provided by Calten Company, LLC.
Project removals within the RCW partition were calculated using ArcGIS software and were
subtracted from the affected stands. The total acreage and pine BA in Tracts 1-6 (Figure 3) were
based on 85 percent (%) pine removal and were subtracted from the pre-project totals for the
BRU Cluster 33 foraging partition. Project removals for SF1 and SF2 were based on 100% pine
removal due to the small lot size. The 51 tax parcels (lots) owned by BSL Land Holdings, LLC,
were included in the analysis based on 85% removal of pine BA.

RCW RSMS foraging habitat standards for the Outer Coastal Plain in southeastern North
Carolina and northeastern South Carolina (Carter 2012)
The Regional Standard for Managed Stability (RSMS) (Carter 2012) guidelines require a
minimum of 3,000 ft2 of pine BA on at least 75 ac. of good quality suitable foraging habitat as
defined (USFWS 2003) or modified below. The minimum dbh of pines varies from 4 to 10
inches dbh depending on vegetative community type. Because the minimum pine BA
requirements also vary among community types, the minimum area necessary to achieve 3,000
ft2 of pine BA will usually exceed 75 ac.
The following Standard for Managed Stability guidelines (USFWS 2003) are applicable
in southeastern NC and northeastern South Carolina (SC) with the RSMS (Carter 2012) changes
in bold below and listed in Table 1.
(1) Pine stands must be at least 30 years of age or older.
9
(2) Average BA of pines ≥8 inches dbh should be between 30 and 70 ft2/ac. Exceptions:
in High Pocosin and bays where pine BA can be as low as 20 ft2/ac. in stems >4
inches dbh and in Old Field/Managed Loblolly & Longleaf Pine stands and Pine
Plantations where pine BA should not be less than 40 ft2/ac. in stems ≥10 inches
dbh.
(3) Average BA of pines <8 inches dbh should be less than 20 ft2/ac. Exceptions: High
Pocosin and Pond Pine Woodland which do not have a maximum BA for pines <8
inches dbh.
(4) No hardwood midstory exists, or if a hardwood midstory is present, it must be sparse
and/or less than 7 ft. in height, except in High Pocosin and Pond Pine Woodland
where there is no hardwood midstory height or density limitation.
(5) Total stand BA, including overstory hardwoods, should be less than 80 ft2/ac. (see 7
below for exception).
(6) Overstory hardwood BA must be ≤10 ft2/ ac.
(7) Total stand BA can exceed 80 ft2/ac. if the maximum limits for overstory hardwood
BA and pines <8 inches dbh are not exceeded and the BA in pines 8-14 inches dbh is
30-70 ft2/ac. (in other words, the excess in BA is comprised of pines ≥14 inches
dbh) (W. McDearman, USFWS, pers. comm.) This situation is most likely to
occur in Old Field/Managed Loblolly & Longleaf Pine and Pine Plantations.
• Additionally, all land counted as foraging habitat must be within 200 ft. of another
foraging stand or the cluster and all stands counted as foraging habitat should be within 0.25-mi.
of the cluster (USFWS 2003). Foraging habitat available for a cluster was first evaluated within
the 0.25 mi. radius partition. If there was insufficient suitable and potentially suitable foraging
habitat, the 0.50-mi. radius partition was used. RCW foraging habitat separated by more than
200 ft. from other foraging habitat was considered non-contiguous and was not counted as
available RCW habitat (USFWS 2003).
Pine stands that met the RSMS Guidelines (Carter 2012) for overstory BA and had a
sparse hardwood midstory, a moderately dense hardwood midstory that was low in height or a
dense hardwood midstory that was low in height were considered “suitable” foraging habitat
(with the exception of High Pocosin and Pond Pine Woodland vegetative communities).
10
“Potentially suitable habitat” was described as stands that met most requirements, but
exceeded the maximum limits for pine BA in certain dbh classes, hardwood midstory density/
height and/or overstory hardwood density. These stands have the necessary pine BA and could
meet the RSMS with midstory removal, prescribed burning and/or thinning. Stands with suitable
overstory characteristics containing a moderately dense or dense midstory that was moderate or
tall in height were in this potentially suitable category.
All stands on sites managed for pine dominance that did not fall into the suitable or
potentially suitable categories were classified as “future potential habitat.” These stands will
require time and management to meet the RSMS requirements.

Table 1. Summary of red-cockaded woodpecker RSMS foraging habitat requirements in the
Outer Coastal Plain of southeastern North Carolina & northeastern South Carolina.

6. RESULTS
6.1. Red-cockaded woodpecker (Dryobates borealis)
The RCW is a small black and white woodpecker with horizontal bars on its back,
spotted flanks and a white belly. The cap and chin stripe are black and the male has a small,

Xeric
Sandhill
Scrub

Pine-
Scrub
Oak
Sandhill
Mesic
Pine
Savanna
Wet Pine
Flatwoods/
Sandy Pine
Savanna
Pond Pine
Woodland
High
Pocosin
Old
Field/
Managed
Loblolly
&
Longleaf

Pine
Plantation
Pine BA
(Min.)
30 ft2/ac.
(8 inches dbh min.)
20
ft2/ac. (4
inches
dbh
min.)
40 ft2/ac. (10 inches dbh
min.)
Pine BA
(Max.) 20 ft2/ac. (<8 inches dbh) N/A 20 ft2/ac. (<10 inches dbh)
Hardwood
BA
(overstory
maximum)
<10 ft2/ac
Midstory/
Understory
Density &
Height
Sparse and/or <7 ft. in height N/A Sparse and/or <7 ft. in
height
11
difficult to see red spot on each side of the black cap. RCWs are most easily identified by the
large white cheek patch that distinguishes them from similar species (USFWS 2003).
The RCW is endemic to mature, fire-maintained pine forests in the southeastern United
States, where it was historically common. Typical nesting habitat includes pine or pine-
hardwood stands with a minimum age of 80 to 120 years where the RCW excavates nest and
roost cavities in living pines. The RCW also requires a large area of pines >30 years old for
foraging habitat with a foraging preference for pine trees >14 inches dbh (Walters et al. 2002).
Logging, fire exclusion and conversion of forestlands to agricultural and other uses have
destroyed most of this species’ habitat.

6.2. RCW Clusters Impacted by the Project
BRU Cluster 33 is the only impacted cluster/foraging partition. It contained 33 trees with
cavities in various stages of completion and suitability (Table 1). Four cavities were active and 2
cavities and one start were possibly active during a site visit in January and February 2019. Two
adults were seen roosting in the cluster during an evening follow in January 2019.
Eighteen cavity trees occur within 200 ft. of proposed rights-of-way or ponds. Of the 18
cavity trees, 7 trees with inactive and relic cavities occur within 30 ft. of proposed rights-of-way
(Table 1). Eleven inactive and relic cavity trees occur within Tracts 1-4 (Figure 3, Table 1).

6.3. Foraging Habitat Analysis
The cluster does not meet the 0.25 mi. radius RSMS guidelines. The RSMS data analysis
for the 0.50-mi. radius foraging partition follows.
RSMS
The pre-project RSMS foraging habitat totals for the 0.50-mi. radius foraging partition
were 4,342.46 ft2 of pine BA ≥8 inches in dbh on 66.37 ac. of suitable habitat, 7,401.25 ft2 ≥8
inches in dbh of pine BA on 119.83 ac. of potentially suitable habitat and 497.96 ft2 of pine BA
≥8 inches in dbh on 29.43 ac. of future potential habitat (Figure 4; Table 2).
In areas where 100% of pines will be cleared (SF 1 and 2, ROW and pond structures),
approximately 782.20 ft.2 of pine BA ≥8 inches in dbh on 20.13 ac. of suitable, potentially
suitable and future potential habitat will become non-foraging habitat.
12
Table 1.Status of red-cockaded woodpecker (Dryobates borealis ) cavity trees within the 0.50-mile radius
foraging partition for BSL Cluster 33, Boiling Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
Cluster
Tree
Number Activity Stage Easting Northing
Trees within 200
ft. of proposed
ROW and/or
ponds (ft.)*
Trees within
proposed
residential
development**
BSL 33 1 Not Found -218729.058833 3769512.05110
4 Relic Cavity 218732.011924 3769479.23090 198.60
5 Dead Dead 218736.576584 3769465.99162 155.11
7 Relic Start 218559.259380 3769440.30023 Y
15 Cut down Cut down 218151.656542 3769904.04634
125 Relic Cavity 218319.569738 3769930.50567
177 Relic Cavity 218634.061418 3769360.32028 27.92 Y
185 Relic Cavity 218735.418215 3768735.96089
223 Not Found Not Found 218343.854485 3769597.03187
258 Relic Start 218433.348452 3769893.89113
259 Possibly active Cavity 218657.297996 3769560.06921 112.41
260 Dead Dead 218740.577229 3769507.83852
261 Relic cavity 218663.741270 3769149.69316 Y
nt 1 Active Recently completed 218927.294284 3769263.61604
nt 2 Possibly active start 218873.878476 3769374.44657 110.00
nt 3 Active cavity 218837.834349 3769684.80970
nt 4 Active Recently completed 218809.193809 3769483.08766 49.20
nt 5 Possibly active cavity 218790.161592 3769390.36397 88.00
nt 6 Inactive start 218692.318915 3769677.10699 158.83
nt 7 Relic start 218415.321658 3768939.70454 Y
nt 10 Relic cavity 218916.774559 3769065.00029 1.86 Y
nt 11 Relic cavity 218903.990393 3769128.99564 148.60 Y
nt 12 Relic cavity 218900.361688 3769086.40217 9.03 Y
nt 13 Relic cavity 218887.108461 3769086.72252 10.65 Y
nt 14 Inactive cavity 218822.894077 3768958.24121 196.94 Y
nt 15 Relic cavity 218803.082778 3768854.64350 Y
nt 17 Relic cavity 218564.508598 3769147.75418 37.66 Y
nt 18 Relic cavity 218643.899976 3768860.81370
nt 19 Dead Dead-Standing 218651.074805 3768877.48604
nt 20 Active Recently completed 218852.249541 3769412.37390 83.00
nt 21 Relic Cavity 218568.290295 3769363.50941 10.98 Y
nt 22 Relic cavity 218657.332969 3769375.42326 19.65 Y
nt 23 Inactive cavity 218538.924770 3769446.58300 19.76
*ROW = rights-of-way (access roads and utility lines).
**Will require permission from USFWS if removal is necessary.
nt = not tagged
13
BSL 33
BSL 13
BSL 7F
D
A
B
E B
C
B
A
D
B
A
F
C
B
E
B
C
B
E
E
D
C
C
B
B
E
D B
B
ED
B
AB
D
E
E
B
A
B
EE
E
B
E
A
E B
E
B
D
C
B
A
D
A
B
C
C
F
E
A
B
C
E
B
E
E
E
E
A
B
E E
E
E
E
A
B
E
E
A
E
E
E
E
E
B
A
A
B
E
B
B
A
B
B
E
C
E
A
E
A
A
E
B
A
B
A
B
B
E A
A
B B
A
B
A
E
E
A
B
A
A
E
A
A
E
AEAA
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
C
A
A
A
/
Figure 4. Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) foraging habitat types and project removals for the SOPI Cluster 33 partition, Audubon Park residential development project, including 51 BSL Landing Holdings, LLC-owned lots in Boiling Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles
RCW cavity trees 2019
Active
Poss. Active
Inactive
Relic
Healed Over
Dead
Cut down
85% pine removals
100% pine removals
Midstory Height
Low
Moderate
Tall
Sparse
Moderate
Dense
Non-foraging habitat ,,,,,,,,,
,,,
,,,
Pine Density Midstory Density
Sparse
Moderate
Dense
Open water
14
Table 2. Pre-project, project removals and post-project foraging habitat totals for the 0.50-mile radius red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) foraging habitat partition for BSL Cluster 33 using the Regional Standard for Managed Stability Guidelines (Carter 2012), Boiling Spring Lakes, Brunswick County, North Carolina.Post-project pine BA 85% removalAvg. StemsAvg. BAAvg. StemsAvg. BAAvg. StemsAvg. BAAvg. StemsAvg. BAAvg. StemsAvg. BA Avg. BA Acres BA Acres BA Acres BA Acres BA Acres BA Acres BA Acres BA Acres BAA 29.43 79 46.17 10.77 29.22 16.92 0.00 0.00 75.39 27.69 29.22 16.92 2.54Sparse Sparse Tall10.63 179.86 3.10 52.45 5.97 15.16 1.56 26.40Moderate Moderate4.87 82.40 4.83 81.72 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.51Moderate Tall6.29 106.43 3.83 64.80 2.32 5.89 0.14 2.37Dense Moderate5.92 100.17 0.51 8.63 0.93 15.74 4.48 75.80Dense Tall1.72 29.10 1.47 24.87 0.09 1.52 0.16 2.71Sub-total0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.43 497.96 13.74 232.47 9.32 38.34 6.37 107.79B 70.16 57 50.16 10.20 56.15 34.80 5.30 7.60 111.61 52.60 61.45 42.40 6.36 0.00 51.7 Moderate Sparse Low 0.25 10.60 0.25 10.60Sparse Tall 10.83 459.19 2.76 117.027.79 330.30 0.28 11.87Moderate Tall12.32 522.37 9.34 396.022.98 126.35Dense Low 6.85 290.44 0.49 20.784.04 171.30 2.32 98.37Dense Moderate11.48 486.75 1.37 58.098.70 368.88 1.41 59.78Dense Tall28.43 1,205.43 22.67 961.214.98 211.15 0.78 33.07Sub-total17.93 760.23 3.50 148.40 52.23 2,214.55 33.38 1,415.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.51 1,081.63 7.77 329.44C 26.35 71 21.48 5.83 50.80 27.50 19.31 30.84 91.59 64.17 70.11 58.34 8.75 0.00 0.0 Moderate Sparse Tall 5.86 341.87 2.87 167.442.99 26.16Moderate Tall 7.49 436.97 2.37 138.275.12 44.80Dense Moderate 4.60 268.36 0.59 34.423.57 31.24 0.44 25.67Dense Tall 8.40 490.06 5.87 342.462.53 22.14Sub-total26.35 1,537.26 11.70 682.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.21 124.34 0.44 25.67D 28.84 87 21.62 5.00 53.80 32.72 6.19 10.01 81.61 47.73 59.99 42.73 6.41 0.00 28.3 Moderate Sparse Tall 3.20 136.74 1.321.88 12.05Moderate Moderate1.71 73.07 1.53 65.380.18 7.69Moderate Tall11.31 483.28 0.80 34.187.78 49.87 2.73 116.65Dense Moderate6.25 267.06 0.07 2.995.40 34.61 0.78 33.33Dense Tall6.37 272.19 4.86 207.671.15 7.37 0.36 15.38Sub-total3.20 136.74 1.32 0.00 25.64 1,095.60 7.26 310.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.21 103.90 4.05 173.05E 47.56 66 57.46 11.75 118.07 72.75 17.40 24.75 192.93 109.25 135.47 97.50 14.63 0.77 14.2 Dense Sparse Tall 5.60 546.00 5.60 546.00Moderate Tall18.48 1,801.80 11.82 1,152.455.48 80.17 1.18 115.05Dense Moderate2.76 269.10 2.76 269.10Dense Tall20.72 2,020.20 18.65 1,818.381.75 25.60 0.32 31.20Sub-total5.60 546.00 5.60 546.00 41.96 4,091.10 33.23 3,239.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.23 105.77 1.50 146.25F 13.29 68 18.52 5.00 79.08 52.50 37.05 50.00 134.65 107.50 116.13 102.50 15.38 0.00 71.1 Dense Sparse Tall 9.38 961.45 3.84 393.605.54 85.21Dense Tall 3.91 400.78 3.91 400.78Sub-total13.29 1,362.23 7.75 794.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.54 85.21 0.00 0.00Total 215.6366.37 4,342.46 29.87 2,171.37 119.83 7,401.25 73.87 4,965.47 29.43 497.96 13.74 232.47 78.02 1,539.19 20.13 782.20BA = basal areaStand DescriptionsAcreageSuitablePotentialFutureTotal-AllTotal-S&P2 dbh = diameter at breast heightTotal Pre-Project 66.37 119.83 29.43 215.63 186.20Hwd = hardwoodTotal Post-Project 29.87 73.87 91.76 195.50 103.74HGC = herbaceous ground coverBAS&P = Suitable and Potentially Suitable habitatTotal Pre-Project 4,342.46 7,401.25 497.96 12,241.67 11,743.71Total Post-Project 2,171.37 4,965.47 1,771.66 8,908.50 7,136.84Stand F - 68 year old, dense Pond Pine Woodland.4.0+ inches dbhStand TypeAcresStand Age4.0-7.9 inches dbh8-13.9 inches dbh 14.0+ inches dbhCanopy Hardwood BAHGC (%)Pine DensityHardwood Midstory DensityPre-Project Pre-Project Hardwood Midstory HeightStand A - 79 year old, sparse Xeric Sandhill Scrub, Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill and Wet Pine Flatwoods.Stand B - 57 year old, moderately dense Xeric Sandhill Scrub, Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill and Wet Pine Flatwoods.Stand D - 87 year old, moderately dense Xeric Sandhill Scrub, Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill and Wet Pine Flatwoods. Post-Project (outside project site)8+ inches dbhDense pine stands with a BA of >70 ft2/acre were counted as suitable if the excess BA was in pines >14 inches dbh (USFWS pers. comm.). Value does not meet Regional Standard for Managed Stability requirements (JCA 2012).Stand E - 66 year old, dense Xeric Sandhill Scrub, Pine-Scrub Oak Sandhill, Mesic Pine Savanna and Wet Pine Flatwoods.Stand C - 71 year old, moderately dense Pond Pine Woodland.Post-Project (outside project site)Non-foraging habitat post-projectPost-Project Totals within project site 85% pine removalPost-Project (outside project site)Pre-Project Suitable Habitat Potentially Suitable Habitat Future Potential HabitatUnsuitable Habitat15
In areas where 85% of pines will be thinned (Tracts 1-6 and BSL Land Holdings, LLC.
lots), approximately 1,500.85 ft.2 of pine BA ≥8 inches in dbh on 68.70 acres of suitable and
potentially suitable habitat will become future potential or unsuitable habitat. Approximately
38.34 ft.2 of pine BA ≥8 inches in dbh on 9.32 ac. of future potential habitat will decrease from
16.92 ft.2 of pine BA ≥8 inches in dbh/ac. to 2.54 ft.2 of pine BA ≥8 inches in dbh/ac. post-
project.
The post-project RSMS foraging habitat totals for the 0.50-mi. radius foraging partition
were 2,171.37 ft2 of pine BA on 29.87 ac. of suitable habitat 4,965.47 ft2 of pine BA on 73.87 ac.
of potentially suitable habitat and 1,771.66 ft2 of pine BA on 91.76 ac. of future potential habitat
(Figure 3; Table 3). This partition will meet the RSMS requirements post-project assuming
potentially suitable habitat is made suitable (Carter 2012).

7. BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION
The proposed Audubon Park residential project and planned future development on 51
BSL Land Holdings, LLC-owned lots will clear approximately 20.13 ac. and 782.20 ft.2 of pines
≥10 inches in dbh and thin 78.02 ac. and 1,539.19 ft.2 of suitable, potentially suitable and future
potential pine BA by at least 85% from the 0.50-mi. radius foraging partition associated with
active BSL Cluster 33.
BRU Cluster 33 meets the RSMS guidelines post-project using both suitable and
potentially suitable habitat. A moderately dense to dense hardwood midstory occurs within 77
percent (%) of the BSL Cluster 33 foraging partition. Forest management activities, such as
hand/mechanical clearing, could improve potentially suitable habitat to suitable habitat.
Due to the proximity of the project to active cavity trees, there may be limits on
construction activity during the months of April to July. This project may affect, but is not
likely to adversely affect the RCW. Once a final site plan is chosen, project removals will need
to be recalculated because significant portions of Tracts 1-6, currently calculated as 85%
clearing, will ultimately be 100% cleared.

Biological Determination: May Affect, but is not likely to Adversely Affect
16
8. LITERATURE CITED
Carter, J.H., III. 2012. Red-cockaded Woodpecker regional standard for managed atability
foraging habitat guidelines for the Outer Coastal Plain and southeastern North Carolina
and northeastern South Carolina. Dr. J.H. Carter III and Associates. 6 pp.

Dr. J.H. Carter III and Associates, Inc. 1995. Unpublished proprietary information on territorial
partitioning.

Schafale, Michael P. 2018 working draft. Guide to the natural communities of North Carolina:
4th approximation. NC Natural Heritage Program, Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina. 217 pp.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2019. Web
soil survey. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed 4
January 2019.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Red-cockaded woodpecker recovery
plan: 2nd revision. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 296 pp.

Walters, J.R., S.J. Daniels, J.H. Carter III and P.D. Doerr. 2002. Defining quality of red-
cockaded woodpecker foraging habitat based on habitat use and fitness. Journal of
Wildlife Management 66(4):1064-1082.

Weakley, Alan S. 2018. Flora of North Carolina (subset of Flora of the South): Working Draft
of 4 October 2018. UNC-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. 1069 pp.

17