20141284 Ver 1_401 Application_20141214

y
Corps Submittal Cover Sheet 2 0 1 4 1 2 8 4
Please provide the following info PAID
1. Project Name Courtyards at Emerald Lake
2. Name of Property Owner /Applicant EPCON Communities, POC• Mr Rich Heareth
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Carolina Wetland Services, Inc, POC• Mr Gregg Antemann, PWS
*Agent authorization needs to be attached
4 Related/Previous Action ID number(s). N/A
5. Site Address' located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne Road in Stallings, NC
6. Subdivision Name: N/A
7. City: Stallings
8. County-
9. Lat: N35.1397890 Long- W80.6183520 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name Midland, NC dated 1996
11 Waterway: UT to Goose Creek
12. Watershed. Yadkin (HU# 03040105)
13. Requested Action•
X Nationwide Permit # 29 FDENiR a 5
General Permit # N 1
• Jurisdictional Determination Request
2 2014 Pre - Application Request R RE50URR PERMITT,fJt j
The following information will be completed by Corps office.
M
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose-
Site/Waters Name.
Keywords.

CWS550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
704 - 527 -1177 (v)
Carolina Welland Services 704-527-1133 (fax)
December 11, 2014
Mr William Elliott
U S Army Corps of Engineering
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801
Ms Karen Higgins
NCDWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N Salisbury Street, 9th Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Pre - Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29
Courtyards at Emerald Lake
Stallings, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2014 - 3279:2
Dear Mr Elliott and Ms Higgins
The Courtyards at Emerald Lake project is approximately 50 acres in extent and is located north and south of
Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne Road in Stallings, North Carolina The attached USGS Site Location
Map (Figure 1, attached) shows the approximate location of the property On behalf of EPCON Communities,
EMH &' T has subcontracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc (CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting and
Goose Creek Riparian Buffer permitting services for this project A copy of a signed Agent Authorization Form
is attached
Applicant Name: EPCON Communities, POC Mr Rich Heareth
Mailing Address: 8600 Sam Furr Road, Suite 180, Huntersville, North Carolina 28078
Phone Number of Owner /Applicant: 704 - 353 -9959 c/o Wes Smith
Street Address of Project: located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne Road in
Stallings, North Carolina
Waterway: UTs to Goose Creek
Basin: Yadkin Pee Dee (HU# 03050105)
City: Stallings
County: Union
Tax Parcel ID numbers: multiple
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: N35.139789 °, W80 618352°
USGS Quadrangle Name: Midland, NC, dated 1996
Site Conditions
The project area is approximately 50 acres in extent and consists of undeveloped wooded land Typical on -site
vegetation includes loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), red maple (Ater rubrum), southern red oak (Quercus falcata),
winged elm (Ulmus alata), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciva), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virgimana),
Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense), sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus), and greenbriar (Smilax rotund folia)
An aerial photograph of the project area is attached (Figure 2)
NORTH CAROLINA ' SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW CWS-INC NET

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014 - 3278:2
According to the Soil Survey of Union County' (Figures 3 and 4, USDA NRCS Current and Historical Soil
Survey Maps, attached), on -site soils consist of Badm channery silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes (BaB), Cid
channery silt loam, 1 to 5 percent slopes (CmB), Secrest -Cid complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes (ScA), and Tarrus
gravelly silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes (TaB) On -Site Badm soils and Tarrus soils are well drained, and on-
site Cid channery soils and Secrest -Cid complex soils are moderately well drained Secrest -Cid complex (ScA)
is listed on the North Carolina Hydnc Soils List for Union CountyZ as having hydnc inclusions and is listed as
partially hydric on the National Hydnc Soils List for Union County3 (hydnc criteria 2133, 4)
Jurisdictional Delineation
On June'24, 2014, CWS's Kelly Thames, Wetland Professional in Training (WPIT) and Dan McCauley
delineated jurisdictional waters of the U S within the project area (Figure 5, attached) Jurisdictional areas were
delineated (flagged in the field) using the U S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Routine On -Site
Determination Method This method is defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual4,
the 2007 USACE Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebooks, with further technical guidance
from the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplemene, dated April 2012 A Wetland Determination
Data Form representative of non- junsdictional upland areas has been attached as DPI. Wetland Determination
Data Forms representative of on -site junsdictional wetland areas are attached as DP2 and DP3 The locations of
these data points are identified as DP I — DP3 on Figures 5 and 6 (attached)
Jurisdictional stream channels were classified according to recent USACE and North Carolina Division of
Water Resources ( NCDWR) guidance These classifications included sampling with a D- shaped dip net, taking
photographs, and defining approximate breakpoints (location at which a channel changes classification) within
each on -site stream channel NCDWR Stream Classification Forms and USACE Stream Quality Assessment
Worksheets representative of Streams A — D are attached (SCP 1— SCP4) The locations of these stream
classification points are identified as SCP1 — SCP4 on Figure 5 (attached) The approximate wetland
boundaries, stream channels, and data points were recorded using a sub -meter Trimble Geo -XT GPS unit.
Results
The results of the on -site field investigation conducted by CWS indicate that there are four j unsdictional stream
channels (Streams A, B, C, and D) and rune junsdictional wetland areas (Wetlands AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, FF,
GG, HH, and 11) located within the project area (Figures 5 and 6, attached) On- Sitejunsdictional streams
include unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Goose Creek Goose Creek is part of the Yadkm -Pee Dee River Basin
(HU# 03040105)' and is classified as "Class C Waters" by the NCDWR According to the NCDWR, Class
C Waters are defined as "Waters protected for uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish
consumption, aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance of biological integrity, and
agriculture "
On -Site junsdictional waters of the U S total approximately 134 acres (58,370 square feet), including 6,031
linear feet of stream channel On -Site jurisdictional waters of the U.S are summarized in Table 1 (next page)
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2013 Soil Survey of Union County, North Carolina
- United States Department of Agriculture — Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1999 North Carolina Hydric Soils List, USDA -NRCS
North Carolina State Office, Raleigh
' USDA -NRCS Hydric Soils List, hup //sods usda gov /use/hydric /lists /state html, updated April 2012
Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ", Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi
' USACE Jurisdictional Determination Form Instructional Guidebook 2007 USACE Regulatory National Standard Operation Procedures for
conducting an approved Jurisdictional determination (JD) and documenting practices to support an approved JD USACE Headquarters,
Washington, DC
'US Army Corps of Engineers April 2012 Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Eastern Mountains and
Piedmont Region US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, Mississippi
' 'HU #" is the Hydrologic Unit Code U S Geological Survey, 1974 Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina
2

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Protect No. 2014 - 3278:2
Table 1. Summary of On -Site Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.. Courtvards at Emerald Lake
Jurisdictional
Feature °
Jurisdiction
Stream
Class.
Point
(SCP)
NCDWR
Stream
Class.
Score
USACE
Stream
Assessment
Score
Approx.
Length
Linear
Feet (if)
Approx.
Acreage
(ac.)
USACE/EPA
Rapanos
Class.'
Intermittent/
Perennial
Stream A
Perennial RPW
Perennial
SCP1
415
75
5,818
0 800
Stream B
Perennial RPW
Perennial
SCP2
30
34
74
0 010
Stream C
Seasonal RPW
Intermittent
SCP3
27
31
54
0 002
Stream D
Seasonal RPW
Intermittent
SCP4
28
30
85
0 010
Stream Total:
6,031 If
0.82 ac.
Jurisdictional
Feature
USACE /EPA Rapanos .
Classification
Data Point (DP)
Approx.
Acreage
ac.
Wetland AA
Directly Abutting RPW
DP2
0 14
Wetland BB
Directly Abutting RPW
DP2
010
Wetland CC
Adjacent to RPW
DP2
0 01
Wetland DD
Adjacent to RPW
DP2
002
Wetland EE
Directly Abutting RPW
DP2
006
Wetland FF
Directly Abutting RPW
DP3
002
Wetland GG
Directly Abutting RPW
DP3
009
Wetland HH
Directly Abutting RPW
DP2
002
Wetland II
Directly Abutting RPW
DP3
006
Wetland Total:
0.52 ac
Perennial Relatively Permanent Waters
Perennial Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) are those that typically have year -round flow These streams
typically have greater biological resources than seasonal RPWs and non -RPWs and are capable of supporting
those resources that require perennial flow This section describes the on -site perennial RPW streams and the
field observations supporting these determinations
Stream A originates off site and flows southeast along the middle of the project area for approximately 5,818
linear feet until continuing off site (Figure 5, attached) Stream A exhibits strong flow, a five to 10 foot average
ordinary high water width, substrate consisting of cobble and gravel with bedrock outcrops, a moderate
presence of crayfish, and a strong presence of amphibians Stream A was classified as a Relatively Permanent
Water with Perennial Flow (RPW) according to USACE/EPA guidance Perennial RPW Stream A scored 75
out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 415 out of a possible
69 5 points on the NCDWR Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP1, attached)
Photograph A (attached) is representative of Perennial RPW Stream A
s Classifications of streams include Traditionally Navigable Waters (TNWs), Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs), and Non - Relatively
Permanent Waters (Non -RPWs) Subcategories of RPWs include perennial streams that typically have year -round flow, and seasonal streams
that have continuous flow at least seasonally Two classifications ofjurisdictional wetlands are used to describe proximity and connection to
TNWs These classifications include either adjacent or directly abutting Adjacent wetlands are defined as wetlands within floodplams or to
close proximity to a TN W but without a direct visible connection Abutting wetlands have a direct surface water connection traceable to a TN W

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Proiect No. 2014 - 3278:2
Stream B originates off site and flows east in the southern portion of the project area for approximately 74 linear
feet to its confluence with Perennial RPW Stream A (Figure 5, attached) Stream B exhibits strong flow, a
three to four foot average ordinary high water width, substrate consisting of cobble and gravel, a weak presence
of macrobenthos, and a moderate presence of amphibians Stream B was classified as a Relatively Permanent
Water with Perennial Flow (RPW) according to USACE/EPA guidance Perennial RPW Stream B scored 34
out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 30 out of a possible 69 5
points on the NCDWR Stream Classification Form, indicating perennial status (SCP2, attached) Photograph B
(attached) is representative of Perennial RPW Stream B
Seasonal RPWs
Seasonal RPWs are those streams that exhibit continuous flow seasonally This flow regime is the result of a
lowering of the water table during dry periods that stops groundwater discharge to the stream channel Seasonal
streams do not typically support aquatic life requiring year -round flow for reproductive and maturation stages
Stream C exits a pipe on site in the northern portion of the site and flows east across the project area for
approximately 54 linear feet to its confluence to Perennial RPW Stream A (Figures 5 and 6, attached) Stream
C exhibited strong flow, a one to three foot average ordinary high water width, substrate consisting of sand and
gravel, a weak presence of crayfish, and a moderate presence of amphibians Stream C was classified as a
Relatively Permanent Water with seasonal flow (RPW) according to USACE/EPA guidance Seasonal RPW
Stream C scored 31 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 27
out of a possible 69 5 points on the NCDWR Stream Classification Form, indicating intemmttent status (SCP3,
attached) Photograph C (attached) is representative of Seasonal RPW Stream C
Stream D originates off site and flows east in the southern portion of the project area for approximately 85 linear
feet to its confluence with Perennial RPW Stream A (Figure 5, attached) Stream D exhibited strong flow, a one
to three foot average ordinary high water width, substrate consisting of sand and mud, and a weak presence of
amphibians Stream D was classified as a Relatively Permanent Water with Seasonal Flow (RPW) according to
USACE/EPA guidance Seasonal RPW Stream D scored 30 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet and 28 out of a possible 69 5 points on the NCDWR Stream
Classification Form, indicating intermittent status (SCP4, attached) Photograph D (attached) is representative
of Seasonal RPW Stream D
Wetlands
The USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) define wetlands as "Those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions " 9 The USACE uses three parameters to identify junsdictional wetlands These parameters are as
follows 1) Hydrophytic Vegetation, 2) Wetland Hydrology, and 3) Hydnc Soils Except in certain atypical
situations, all three parameters must be present in order for an area to be determined to be a j unsdictional
wetland This section describes each on- sitejunsdictional wetland and the field observations that led to their
detemunations
Wetlands AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, and HH are approximately 0 14, 0 10, 0 01, 0 02, 0 06, and 0 02 acre in extent,
respectively, and are forested wetlands (PFOIE). Wetlands AA, BB, EE, and HH are located directly abutting
Perennial RPW Stream A and Wetlands CC and DD are located adjacent to Perennial RPW Stream A (Figures
'Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ", Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi
4

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014 - 3278:2
5 and 6, attached) Wetlands AA, BB, CC, DD, EE, and HH exhibit low chroma soils (10YR 511), standing
water up to two inches, saturation to the surface, water marks, water - stained leaves, crayfish burrows, and
wetland drainage patterns Dominant vegetation in these wetlands include slippery elm (Ulmus rubra),
sweetgum, red maple, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), smartweed (Persicaria pensylvamca), and false
nettle (Boehmeraa cylmdrica) A Wetland Determination Data Form representative of Wetlands AA, BB, CC,
DD, EE, and HH is attached as DP2. Photographs E and F (attached) are representative of Wetland AA and
photographs G, H, I, J, and M (attached) are representative of Wetlands BB, CC, DD, EE, and HH, respectively
Wetlands FF, GG, and II are approximately 0.02, 0 09, and 0 06 acre in extent, respectively, and are herbaceous
wetlands (PEM1E) directly abutting Perennial RPW Stream A (Figure 5, arrached). Wetlands FF, GG, and R
are located directly abutting Perennial RPW Stream A (Figure 5, attached) These wetlands exhibit low chroma
soils (2 5Y 5/1), standing water up to three inches, saturation to the surface, an algal mat, a hydrogen sulfide
odor, crayfish burrows, and wetland drainage patterns Dominant vegetation in these wetlands include green
ash, elderberry (Sambucus nigra), buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentahs), soft rush (Juncos effusus), spikerush
(Eleocharis obtusa), fringe sedge (Carex crinita), shallow sedge (Carex lurida), and smartweed A Wetland
Determination Data Form representative of Wetlands FF, GG, and R is attached as DP3 Photographs K, L, and
N (attached) are representative of Wetlands FF, GG, and II, respectively
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
CWS consulted the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) online GIS service10 and found no sites of
architectural, historical, or archaeological significance within the project limits. Additionally, a letter was
forwarded to SHPO on October 21, 2014 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 submittal, no response has
been received from the SHPO
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program ( NCNHP) on October 21, 2014, to
determine the presence of any candidate or federally - listed endangered or threatened species, or critical habitat
located within the project area As of the date of submittal, no response has been received from the NCNHP
CWS also reviewed the NCNHP elemental occurrence GIS layer Based on this review there are no current
elemental occurrences within a mile of the project site
Purpose and Need for the Project
The purpose of the project is to develop approximately 50 acres of property into a retirement community
consisting of 93 single family homes and to provide sanitary sewer service for the new development (Figures 7-
9) This project will helpmeet the increasing demand for retirement communities in the Charlotte region
Impacts to on -site junsdictional waters are necessary in order to provide sanitary sewer service to the proposed
development
Sanitary sewer service will be provided by constructing approximately 4,850 linear feet of 8 -mch sanitary sewer
line and tying into an existing sewer (Figure 9, attached). The sewer line will be running southeast inside the
Goose Creek riparian buffer, parallel to Stream A
10 NC State Historic Preservation Office WebGIS service, http //gis ncdcr gov/hpoweb/ Accessed October 21, 2014
5

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Proiect No. 2014 - 3278:2
Avoidance and Minimization
Impacts to on -site J unsdictional waters of the U S have been reduced to the maximum extent practicable
The Courtyards at Emerald Lake project has been designed to avoid Impacts to jurisdictional waters
wherever possible and minimize the extent of necessary Impacts to Jurisdictional waters. The following
paragraphs outline the avoidance and minimization efforts undertaken during the planning and design phase
of this project
Avoidance
Jurisdictional Waters of the U S have been avoided wherever possible Impacts were completely avoided on
Wetlands AA, CC, DD EE, FF, HH and most of the Wetland BB remains undisturbed The proposed trail
Inside the Goose Creek Riparian buffer is outside the 50 -foot Inner part of the buffer to avoid the stream
disturbances to the maximum extent possible
Impacts to the Jurisdictional waters are united to one utility crossing of Stream A and two utility crossings of
wetlands These crossings are necessary in order to tie into the existing sewer line Other constraints on the
sewer route were also taken into account These constraints include property ownership, site topography, and
geology. In areas where Impacts to Jurisdictional waters of the U S are unavoidable, steps have been taken to
minimize both the extent and seventy of the Impacts
Minimization
Tree removal within the riparian buffer during path construction will be minimal, if not completely avoided
The plan Is to weave the path through the woods avoiding Impacts to the trees Proper sediment and erosion
control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters All unavoidable stream
crossings will be at a near perpendicular angle All channel work will be constructed In the dry in
accordance with Water Quality Certification No 3890
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
Under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No 29, unavoidable permanent impacts to Jurisdictional waters of the
U S associated with this project are limited to a total of approximately 0 053 acre of Jurisdictional wetland
area and 0 061 acre of Goose Creek riparian buffer (Figures 7 -9, attached)
TemDorary Impacts
Proposed impacts include installing 8" sanitary sewer within the Goose Creek riparian buffer The possible
maximum length for the sanitary sewer within the Goose Creek Riparian buffer is approximately 4,850 linear
feet (10 This will result in a total of 5 acres temporary Impacts to the buffer However, Impacts due
construction of a sanitary sewer in the riparian buffer are allowable with approval according the Goose Creek
buffer rules''. Installation of the sanitary sewer will also have temporary Impacts on Perennial RPW Stream A
(8610, Seasonal Stream D (431f), Wetland BB (0 005 acre), Wetland GG (0 011 acre), and Wetland H (0 029
acre) (Figures 8 & 9)
Permanent Impacts
Filling for the purpose of constructing condominium units will result in 0 03 acre permanent Impact on Wetland
BB (Figure 8) Installation of a Rip Rap apron will cause 0 006 acre permanent Impact on Wetland GG (Figure
" Goose Creek Watershed buffer rules, http / /portal ncdenr org/ c/ document _library/get _ file9folderld = 285750 &name =DLFE -8516 pdf
0

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Proiect No. 2014 - 3278:2
8) An asphalt path running through the Riparian Buffer will also cause 0 06 acre of permanent impact to the
buffer (Figure 8) Maintaining the sewer nght -of -way will have 0 011 acre permanent impact on Wetland GG
and 0 011 acre permanent impact on Wetland 11
Table 2. Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
On behalf of EPCON Communities, CWS 1s submitting a Pre - Construction Notification Application with
attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition No 31, (attached) and pursuant to
Nationwide Permit No. 29
Type of
Temporary /
Impacts
Impact
Figure
Jurisdictional Feature
'Impact
Permanent
(10
(acres)
Number
Utility
Crossing 1
Temporary
43
0 007
8
(Sewer)
Perennial RPW Stream A
Utility
Crossing 2
Temporary
43
0 007
9
(Sewer)
Utility
Seasonal RPW Stream D
Crossing 3
Temporary
43
0 004
9
(Sewer)
Fill
Permanent
N/A
0 025
8
Wetland BB
Utility
Crossing 4
Temporary
N/A
0 005
8
Utility
Crossing 5
Temporary
N/A
0 011
(Sewer)
8
Wetland GG
Clearing
Permanent
N/A
0 011
Rip rap
Permanent
N/A
0 006
Utility
Crossing 6
Temporary
N/A
0 029
9
Wetland 11
(Sewer)
Clearing
Permanent
N/A
0 011
Clear (path)
Permanent
380
0 061
8
Riparian Buffer
Sewer
Temporary
3700
50
8&9
Permanent Wetland Impacts
N/A
0.053
Temporary Wetland Impacts
N/A
0.045
Temporary RPW Stream Impacts
129
0.018
Permanent Riparian Buffer Impacts
N/A
0.061 °
,Temporary Riparian Buffer Impacts
N /A°
5.0
On behalf of EPCON Communities, CWS 1s submitting a Pre - Construction Notification Application with
attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition No 31, (attached) and pursuant to
Nationwide Permit No. 29

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Protect No. 2014 - 3278:2
Compensatory Mitigation
Permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U S have been limited to less than 0 1 acre of wetland and less
than 0 1 acre of riparian buffer Temporary impact on perennial RPW stream channel will be less than 1501f
Due to the limited impacts, no mitigation is proposed for this project
Please do not hesitate to contact Gregg Antemann at 704 - 408 -1683, or through email at gregg @cws -inc net
should you have any questions or comments regarding these findings
Gregg Antemann, PWS Alusa Harjuniemi
Principal Scientist Staff Scientist II
Attachments Figure 1 USGS Site Location Map
Figure 2 Aerial Imagery
Figure 3 NRCS -USDA Union County Soil Survey
Figure 4 NRCS -USDA Historic Union County Soil Survey
i
Figure 5 Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Map
Figure 6 Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Map
Figure 7 Proposed Impacts Plan View
Figure 8 Proposed Impacts 1 Possible Maximum Disturbance
Figure 9 Proposed Impacts 2 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Extension
Agent Authorization Form
Pre - Construction Notification to Nationwide Permit No 29
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form
Request for Jurisdictional Deternniation Form
NCDWR Stream Classification Forms (SCP1— SCP4)
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Forms (SCP 1 — SCP4)
Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms (DP1 — DP3)
Agency Correspondence
State Storm Water Management Permit
Representative Photographs
I
cc Mr Rich Heareth, EPCON Communities
File

7 r i - - ,±'� rte•.. ` - ���. .' �'r _
• . � I ��__� ,\`�• � it Q � i r
' a I / i \ s 'Say �, . r • - '
cy,
Lawyers Road R` -0
'`� %i/ I �F �.r ,1•�r � ,r � • - � r_ `erg JrJ[f /r /�
r --� .1 1 �_ - 1111 \� �' L,+! ,�j i•
}y-� -�Jy I • . 0301 - - �� —
_
o•
71
Ad
Hawthorne Road 1 .
-e7 -� r Stevens Mill Road
-
--W o Legend
• '• +. -. _: �. � Project Limits '
�►.� 2,000 11000 0 2,000 Feet
REFERENCE: 7.5 MINUTE USGS TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE MIDLAND, NC, DATED 1996.
SCALE: 1" : 2000' DATE: 6/26/14
I USGS Site Location Map FIGURE NO
CWS PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY:
2014 - 3279:2 KMT w Courtyards at Emerald Lake
('aMMn WMnne Snrrirnr.
PPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: •+� Stallings, North Carolina
TJB WWW.CWS- INC.NET CWS Project No. 2014 - 3279:2

0 BaB 5aC
TaB
EWa y _1
HeB
ScA Y
Gf52 .� Lawyers Road
SSA TaB
rD
t Bas
00
Stevens Mill Road SCA- E3s
W --
TaQ
G4C
n 53C.A
1
f� .. Ei
C_mE3
Tai rim
� � r
ChA Sag f_
TuS
102 CMS T' B
TaB
Soils - Description Legend
BaB - Badin channery silt loam, 2 -8% slopes
Cm6 -Cid channery silt loam, 1-5% slopes Q� = Project Limits
ScA Secrest -Cid complex, 0 -3% slopes
TaB - Tarrus gravelly silt loam, 2 -8% slopes
1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet
REFERENCE: HISTORIC USDA -NRCS SOIL SURVEY OF UNION COUNTY, SHEET 1, DATED 1990 i!
SCALE: 1 : 1000' DATE: 6/26/14 O Historic USDA -NRCS Soil Survey FIGURE NO.
CWS PROJECT NO DRAWN BY: I
of Union County
2014- 3279:2 KMT �/ s Courtyards at Emerald Lake
PPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY. WR'InMSav�e Stallings, North Carolina 3
TJB WWW.CWS- INC.NET CWS Project No. 2014- 3279:2

• f %\ \\ `\� „� \ ; \ \\ ! �1� # � t % l x-11
c CL
ca
III j ma\
^c
I IIII,�I- — �/ ` C Q +.. \\ \� \\ `\�.�` �� I\ ,� #fir � •�
• � i , 1 � '1 \�� '. \�\ ,\ ' /� � • � Lam•
\ 1 i 1 1 ^ \
to
- --
�-� _ � -w �� �° C,3
1
,Ica r' U �— U O � v
Q CL Q
c J
L J
_ 0 CL
n � d a)
- CL j
co- --
` a
CL
c
- - - \\ �\ \ \ \ E O J
J
\ U
,
I `
' 1 I ^ � ' of o - - t \ \ t ",• �� 1
I I+ CD
go
co
CD
n
n \
II N ao n ,
N i - {gyp � I l \ \• .,\`\
Ln
n co I:
1 N ! W ! a ! n Q
j 00
I
Q
I _ Co \
go
co
nr
j
TM.

% / f,�� /
� ,y
,y
Asa
r.
i
-J
i lip
ma E oN° Y
_E3E
r z
6 4F
av�
E. r m < w
. 1 \
1 \
/ \ 1
1
I
I
�-
1
a
8
a
� v
U 8 =
S
a _
C
os
—
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
as�
-J
i lip
ma E oN° Y
_E3E
r z
6 4F
av�
E. r m < w
. 1 \
1 \
/ \ 1
1
I
I
�-
1
a
8
a
� v
U 8 =
S
a _
C
os

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I, Richard Heareth representing EPCON Communities, hereby certify that I have
authorized Gregg Antemann of Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. to act on my behalf and
take all actions necessary to the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this request for
wetlands determination / permitting and any and all standard and special conditions
attached.
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in this application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
" I.
Applicant's s nature
to
Date
e7�iT_
Agent's signature
10/21/14
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

o/"0,F INn7- f;9
>' 1 aGUL
O Niii� 'c
Office Use Only
Corps action ID no
DWQ project no
Form Version 1 3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps I
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1b Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number 29 or General Permit (GP) number
1c
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1d
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply)
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification
❑ Yes ❑ No
For the record only for Corps Permit
❑ Yes ® No
1f
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program
❑ Yes
® No
1g
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties If yes, answer 1h
below
❑ Yes
® No
1h
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a
Name of project
Cortyards at Emerald Laket
2b
County
Union
2c
Nearest municipality / town
Stallings
2d
Subdivision name
N/A
2e
NCDOT only, T I P or state
project no
N/A
3
Owner Information
3a
Name(s) on Recorded Deed
3b
Deed Book and Page No
3c
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable)
N/A
3d
Street address
3e
City, state, zip
3f
Telephone no
3g
Fax no
3h
Email address
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
❑ Agent ® Other, specify EPCON Communities
4b
Name
Mr Rick Heareth, PWS
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
EPCON Communities
4d
Street address
8600 Sam Furr Roaf, Suite 180
4e
City, state, zip
Huntersvdle, NC 28078
4f
Telephone no
(704) 353 -9959
4g
Fax no
4h
Email address
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Gregg Antemann
5b
Business name
(if applicable)
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc
5c
Street address
550 E Westinghouse Blvd
5d
City, state, zip
Charlotte, NC 28273
5e
Telephone no
704- 408 -1683
5f
Fax no
704 - 527 -1133
5g
Email address
gregg @cws -inc net
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1
Property Identification
1a
Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
multiple
Latitude 35139789 Longitude -
1b
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees)
80 618352
(DD DDDDDD) ( -DD DDDDDD)
1c
Property size
50 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc ) to
UT's to Goose Creek
proposed project
2b
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
Class C
2c
River basin
Yadkin Pee Dee (HU# 03050105)
3.
Project Description
3a
Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application
The project area is approximately 50 acres in extent and consists of undeveloped wooded land Typical on -site
vegetation includes loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), red maple (Acer rubrum), southern red oak (Quercus falcata), winged elm
(Ulmus alata), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), Johnson grass (Sorghum
halepense), sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus), and greenbriar (Smilax rotundifolia) An aerial photograph of the
project area is attached (Figure 2)
3b
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property
052 ac
3c List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property
139 linear feet of intermittent stream, 5,892 linear feet of perennial stream
3d
Explain the purpose of the proposed project
The purpose of the project is to develop approximately 50 acres of property into a retirement community consisting of 93
single family homes and to provide sanitary sewer service for the new development (Figures 7 -9) This project will help
meet the increasing demand for retirement communities in the Charlotte region Impacts to on -site jurisdictional waters
are necessary in order to provide sanitary sewer service to the proposed development
3e
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used
Under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No 29, unavoidable permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U S associated
with this project are limited to a total of approximately 0 053 acre of jurisdictional wetland area and 0 061 acre of Goose
Creek riparian buffer (Figures 7 -9, attached)
Temporary Impacts
Proposed impacts include installing 8" sanitary sewer within the Goose Creek riparian buffer The possible maximum
length for the sanitary sewer within the Goose Creek Riparian buffer is approximately 4,850 linear feet (If) This will result
in a total of 5 acres temporary impacts to the buffer However, impacts due construction of a sanitary sewer in the
riparian buffer are allowable with approval according the Goose Creek buffer rules Installation of the sanitary sewer will
also have temporary impacts on Perennial RPW Stream A (86 If), Seasonal Stream D (43 If), Wetland BB (0 005 acre),
Wetland GG (0 011 acre), and Wetland II (0 029 acre) (Figures 8 & 9)
Permanent Impacts
Filling for the purpose of constructing condominium units will result in 0 03 acre permanent impact on Wetland BB (Figure
8) Installation of a Rip Rap apron will cause 0 006 acre permanent impact on Wetland GG (Figure 8) An asphalt path
running through the Riparian Buffer will also cause 0 06 acre of permanent impact (Figure 8) Maintaining the sewer
right -of -way will have 0 011 acre permanent impact on Wetland GG and 0 011 acre permanent impact on Wetland II
Typical construction equipment, such as trachoe, will be used
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the pasty
Comments
El Yes ®No El Unknown
4b
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known)
Agency /Consultant Company
Other
4d
If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
5.
Project History
5a
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
5b
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions
6.
Future Project Plans
6a
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b
If yes, explain
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

C Proposed Impacts Inventory
1 Impacts Summary
la Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2 Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted
2a
2b
2c
2d
2e
2f
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 ❑ P ®T
Utility Crossing 4
PF01 E
❑® No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
0 005
W2 ❑ P ®T
Utility Crossing 5
PEM1 E
® Yes
❑ No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
0 011
W3 ❑ P ®T
Utility Ctossing 6
PEM1 E
®❑ Nos
® Corps
❑ DWQ
0 029
W4 ®P ❑ T
Fill
PF01 E
® Yes
❑ No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
0 025
W5 ®P [:IT
Rip Rap
PEM1E
® Yes
❑ No
® Corps
❑ DWQ
0 006
W6 ®P ❑ T
Clearing
PEM1 E
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
0 022
2g. Total wetland impacts
0 098
2h Comments Permanent impacts to wetlands total 0 053 acre
3 Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
3g
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ®T
Utility Crossing 1
Stream A
® PER
® Corps
5 -10
43
(sewer)
❑ INT
® DWQ
S2 ❑ P ® T
Utility Crossing 2
Stream A
® PER
® Corps
5 -10
43
(sewer)
❑ INT
® DWQ
S3 ❑ P ® T
Utility Crossing 3
Stream D
❑ PER
® Corps
1 -3
43
(sewer)
® INT
® DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
129
31 Comments Temporary Impacts to Jurisdictional Streams total 129 If (0 018 acre) of stream channel
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U S then individually list all open water impacts below
4a
4b
4c
4d
4e
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number—
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P)
or Temporary T
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g Comments
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below
5a
5b
5c
5d
5e
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g Comments
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
51 Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico ®Other Yadkin
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b
6c
6d
6e
6f
6g
Buffer impact
number —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary T
im act
required?
B1 [:I P ®T
Sanitary
Stream A (UT to Goose
El Yes
217800
sewer
Creek)
® No
B2 ®P ❑ T
Path
Stream A (UT to Goose
❑ Yes
2660
(clearing)
Creek)
® No
B3 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
6h Total buffer impacts 1
220,060
61 Comments Permanent impacts to the Goose Creek Riparian buffer total 2660 square feet (0 061 acre)
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1 Avoidance and Minimization
1a Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
The Courtyards at Emerald Lake project has been designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters wherever possible and
minimize the extent of necessary impacts to jurisdictional waters The following paragraphs outline the avoidance and
minimization efforts undertaken during the planning and design phase of this project
Avoidance
Jurisdictional Waters of the U S have been avoided wherever possible Impacts were completely avoided on Wetlands AA,
CC, DD EE, FF, HH and Most of the Wetland BB remains undisturbed The proposed trail inside the Goose Creek Riparian
buffer is outside the 50 ft inner part of the buffer to avoid the stream disturbances to the maximum extent possible
Impacts to the jurisdictional waters are limited to one utility crossing of Stream A and two utility crossings of wetlands These
crossings are necessary in order to tie into the existing sewer line Other constraints on the sewer route were also taken into
account These constraints include property ownership, site topography, and geology In areas where impacts to
Jurisdictional Waters of the U S are unavoidable, steps have been taken to minimize both the extent and severity of the
impacts
Minimization
Tree removal within the riparian buffer during path construction will be minimal, if not completely avoided The plan is to
weave the path through the woods avoiding impacts to the trees Proper sediment and erosion control measures will be used
to minimize disturbances to downstream waters All unavoidable stream crossings will be at a near perpendicular angle All
channel work will be constructed in the dry in accordance with Water Quality Certification No 3890
1b, Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
The Courtyards at Emerald Lake project has been designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters wherever possible and
minimize the extent of necessary impacts to jurisdictional waters The following paragraphs outline the avoidance and
minimization efforts undertaken during the planning and design phase of this project
Avoidance
Jurisdictional Waters of the U S have been avoided wherever possible Impacts were completely avoided on Wetlands AA,
CC, DD EE, FF, HH and most of the Wetland BB remains undisturbed The proposed trail inside the Goose Creek Riparian
buffer is outside the 50 ft inner part of the buffer to avoid the stream disturbances to the maximum extent possible
Impacts to the jurisdictional waters are limited to one utility crossing of Stream A and two utility crossings of wetlands These
crossings are necessary in order to tie into the existing sewer line Other constraints on the sewer route were also taken into
account These constraints include property ownership, site topography, and geology In areas where impacts to
Jurisdictional Waters of the U S are unavoidable, steps have been taken to minimize both the extent and severity of the
impacts
Minimization
Tree removal within the riparian buffer during path construction will be minimal, if not completely avoided The plan is to
weave the path through the woods avoiding impacts to the trees Proper sediment and erosion control measures will be used
to minimize disturbances to downstream waters All unavoidable stream crossings will be at a near perpendicular angle All
channel work will be constructed in the dry in accordance with Water Quality Certification No 3890
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
❑ Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State?
2b if yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply)
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3 Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c Comments
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑ Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only)
square feet
4e Riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4f Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
acres
4h Comments
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ❑ No
6b If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
I
Zone
6c
Reason for impact
6d
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1 5
6f Total buffer mitigation required:
6g If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e g , payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund)
6h Comments
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form —Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1a
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
626%
2b
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
2d
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan
Impervious to the wet pond (at the entrance) is 14 59 ac out of 22 45 ac (65% impervious)
Impervious to the sand
filter /dry pond is 2 09 ac out of 4 19 ac (50% impervious) Impervious as a total site is 16 68 ac out of 26 64 ac (62 6%
impervious) A copy of the approvet State Stormwater Management Permit is attached
❑ Certified Local Government
2e
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
® DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
❑ Phase II
3b
Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply)
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
3c Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a
Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply)
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other
4b
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
® Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

F.
Supplementary Information
1
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1b
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter )
Comments
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0200)?
2b
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
The project will not result in additional future development
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
N/A
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1, 3 December 10, 2008 Version

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
E:1 Raleigh
5c
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted
❑ Asheville
5d
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program ( NCNHP) on October 21, 2014 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 submittal no response has been received from the NCNHP CWS also reviewed the NCNHP
elemental occurrence GIS layer here are no current elemental occurrences within a mile of the project site
6
Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA Fisheries http / /sharpfin nmfs noaa gov /website /EFH_Mapper /map aspx
7.
Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a
Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e g , National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A letter was forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on October 21, 2014 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 submittal no response has been received from the SHPO CWS also consulted the SHPO online GIS service and
found no sites of architectural, historical, or archaeological significance within the project limits
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a Will this project occur in a FEMA - designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b
If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements
8c
What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA FIRM No 3710551100L and 3710551000L
Mr. Gregg Antemann, PWS
C •� ,
12 -11 -2014
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided
Page l 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): 12/11/2014
B. , NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
EPCON Communities
POC Mr Rich Heareth
8600 Sam Furr Road, Suite 180
Huntersville, NC 28078
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District —
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: located
north and south of Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne Road in Stallings, North Carolina
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State NC County /parish /borough- Union City Stallings
35 1397890 N, Long. 80 6183520 W.
Universal Transverse Mercator NAD 83
Name of nearest waterbody UTs to Goose Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 6,031 linear feet 2'— 6' width (ft) and /or 0 82 acre.
Cowardin Class: R5UB1, R4SB3
Stream Flow. Perennial /Intermittent
Wetlands: 0.52 acre
Cowardin Class PFO1 E, PEM1 E
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal
Non - Tidal:
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination Date
® Field Determination Date(s) June 24, 2014

1 The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2 In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre- construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions, (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization, (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable, (6) accepting a permit authorization (e g , signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C F R Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C F.R 331 5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable
This preliminary JD finds that there "may be" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
2

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- 'checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below).
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps
❑ Corps navigable waters' study
❑ U S Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s) Cite scale & quad name.1 24,000,
Midland, NC, Dated 1996
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Citation
Union County Soil Survey.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s) Cite name-
❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s)
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps-
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
® Photographs ❑ Aerial (Name & Date)
or ® Other (Name & Date).Site photographs of stream channel
(June, 2014).
❑ Previous determination(s) File no. and date of response letter
❑ Other information (please specify)
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
3
ZT--a- C- 7J;R�--�
12/11/2014
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the
signature is impracticable)

Site
Number
Latitude
Longitude
g
Cowardian
Class
Estimated
Aquatic Amount of
Resource in
Review Area
Class of Aquatic
Resource
Stream A
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
R5U61
5,818 linear feet
non - section 10 -- non -tidal
Stream B
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
R5U131
75 If
non - section 10 -- non -tidal
Stream C
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
R4SB3
54 If
non - section 10 non -tidal
Stream D
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
R4SB3
85 If
non - section 10 -- non -tidal
Wetland AA
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PF01 E
0 14 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland BB
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PFO1 E
0 10 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland CC
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PF01 E
0 09 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland DD
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PF01 E
0 02 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland EE
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PFO1 E
0 06 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland FF
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PEM1 E
0 02 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland GG
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PEM1 E
0 09 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland HH
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PF01 E
0 02 acre
non - section 10 - wetland
Wetland II
N35 139789°
W80 618352°
PEM1 E
0 06 acre
non - section 10 - wetland

Jurisdictional Determination Request
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington Distnct
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting ajurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request You may submit your request
to the appropriate Corps Field Office (or project manager, if known) via mail, electronic mail, or
facsimile. A current list of county assignments by Field Office and project manager can be
found on -line at littp //www saw.usace army.mil /Missions /RegulatoryPermrtPro r� am aspx , by
telephoning- 910 -251 -4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Autry Corps of Engineers
I51 Patton Avenue Room 208
Asheville North Carolina 28801 -5006
General Number (828) 271 -7980
Fas Number (828) 281 -8120
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 I Ierrtaae Trade Drive_ Suite 105
Wale Fotetit North Caroltna27587
General Number (919) 554 -4884
Fax Number (919) 562 -0421
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US At my Cotps of Engineers
2407 best Fifth Street
Washinaton North Carolina 27889
General Number (910) 25 1-46 10
Fax Number (252) 975 -1399
WIL'NIINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Fngmcers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number 910 -251 -4633
Fax Number (910) 251 -4025
1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
INSTRUCTIONS
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E and F.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES• If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part G.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION. Please be aware that all JD
requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the
determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary This form must be
signed by the current property owner to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS Property owner authorization /notification for JD
requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be
conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: Corps approved and preliminary JDs identify
the limits of CWA (and RHA, if applicable) jurisdiction for the particular site identified in your
request. The JD 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

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
® Property Information
Address located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne
Road in Stallings, North Carolina
County Union
Directions from I -485 take exit 47 for Lawyers Road Go east on
Lawyers (away from Charlotte) for approximately 0.9 miles. Project area is located on the north
and south side of Lawyers road approximately 0 9 miles from I -485
Parcel Index Number (PIN). multiple (5 parcels) — see PID information sheets (attached)
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
®
Name- Gregg Antemann, PWS
Mailing Address 550 E Westinghouse Blvd, Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone Number: 704 - 408 -1683
Electronic Mail Address. gregg @cws- mc.net
Select one.
❑ I am the current property owner
® I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
® Name. EPCON Communities
Mailing Address. 8600 Sam Furr Road, Suite 180, Huntersville, NC 28078
Telephone Number- 704 - 353 -9959 c/o Wes Smith
Electronic Mail Address3.
® Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS /Parcel /Tax Record data)
1 If available
Z Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
s If available
3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, do
authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to
enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and
issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Property Owner (please print) Date
Property Owner Signature
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
® I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property /project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS5 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation. (proceed to F and G
below)
❑ I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property/project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property /project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat)
a For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT /USACE protocols, skip to Part E
5 Waters of the United States
4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. ALL REQUESTS
® Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
® Size of Property or Project Area 50 acres
® I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
® Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determation Form6
m .
® Project Coordinates: Latitude- N35 139789° Longitude- W80.618352°
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay.
® Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum* streets, intersections, towns
® Aerial Photography of the project area
® USGS Topographic Map
® Soil Survey Map
® Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplam maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable)-
Wetlands-
A,
►1
/1
AS
Wetland Data Sheets?
Upland Data Sheets
Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries
® USACE Assessment Forms
® Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes.
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
6 See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No 08 -02, dated June 26, 2008
' Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland /community type
5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage /linear footage of aquatic resources
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of a Delineation:
❑ Project Coordinates: Latitude Longitude
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum. streets, intersections, towns
❑ Aerial Photography of the project area
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable).
Wetlands.
❑ Wetland Data Sheets8
❑ Upland Data Sheets
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
❑ Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
❑ Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage /linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
❑ Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
❑ Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
$ Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland /community type

jurisdictional Determination Request
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard -
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 11 "x17'
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than 11 "x17', may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e -mail to the requestor.
Plats submitted for approval must
❑ be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
❑ be legible
❑ include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
❑ include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings /metes and
bounds /GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
❑ clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
❑ clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
❑ when wetlands are depicted.
*include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
*identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
❑ when tributaries are depicted-
*include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
*include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using
approximate widths or surveyed OHWM)

Jurisdictional Determination Request
*include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"
❑ all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
❑ include the location of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
❑ include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently subject to
the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands ", "non - jurisdictional
waters "). NOTE. An approved JD must be conducted in order to make an official
Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not, jurisdictional.
❑ include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that transport
WoUS
CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
❑ When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundary is depicted
include the following Corps Certification language
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual "
Regulatory Official
Title.
Date
USACE Action ID No.:

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ When uplands may be present within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary.
include the following Corps Certification language
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U S Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual "
Regulatory Official
Title
Date
USACE Action ID No
GPS SURVEYS
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as
❑ be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
❑ include an accuracy verification
One or more known points (property corner, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross - referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds)
❑ include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized
E

NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: OUI( 9 4 b oy
Project/Site (.ow ?ilJ1� ens
Latitude: N
Evaluator: }- (V4wus U/QIr
County: LAvijqvi 'N
Longitude:vq
Total Points:
Stream Is at least Intermittent �',
Stream Determination (circI e)
Ephemeral intermittent ere I
Other S� 1
e g Quad Name: SkfflhhA
if 2 19 or perennial If _ 30`
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= 7i •`�
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
im
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
0
3 in- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
n le- ool sequence
0
1
2
1 5
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
3
5 Active /relict floodplain
0
1
2
1 5
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
0
2
3
8 Headcuts
CU
1
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
1 5
10 Natural valley
0
05
15
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. HYdrolow (Subtotal = 9 )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
1
2
3
14 Leaf litter
C
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
3
1
1 5
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
3
1 5
17 Sod -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
C Biology (Subtotal
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
05
1
1 5
23 Crayfish
05
15
24 Amphibians
0
05
1
1
25 Algae
&
1 05
1
1 5
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 15
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch

NC DW® Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Obi f 2 H /I y
Prolect/Site �W ` S C���
Latitude:N 3r..IZgTg I
Evaluator. 9 ' I ,4 w,ti1 kp+r
County. Rvt iy-'
Longitude:>
Total Points:
Scream is at least intermittent 3�
rf 2 79 or erennra! rf >_ 30' J
Stream Determination (circle ne)
Ephemeral intermittent P�l
Other SClP�2
e g Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal=
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
0
3 In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
n
ripple-pool sequence
0
1
[�
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
3
3
5 Active /relict floodplain
No = 0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
i
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
9
1
2
3
8 Headcuts
1 5
1
2
3
9 Grade control
0
0
1
(17-5
10 Natural valley
0
(0 5)
1
T 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hvdroloav (Subtotal = C 1
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
1
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14 Leaf litter
Q52
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
2
3
1
1 5
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
3
15
17 Soil-based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
1
U tfloloQV (Subtotal = t"r, )
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
2
3
22 Fish
05
1
1 5
23 Crayfish
05
1
15
24 Amphibians
0
05
1 5
25 Algae
05
1
1 5
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5
Other= 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch

NC DWQ Stream Identification form Version 4.11
Date: 'I 'i
Project/Site tow � e-
Latitude:
Evaluator: �[% 5)
County. LWF-vi
Longitude: W?V, (A3610
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent a
Stream Determination (circle one)
Ephemeral erns nt Perennial
Other S�'P.y
e q Quad Name: s�'>°wc-
rf Z 19 or perennial if a 30`
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal= `�
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
0
3 In- channel structure ex riffle-pool, step -pool,
n le- ool sequence
0
1
Q
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
r
3
5 Active /relict floodpiain
&
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
0
2
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8 Headcuts
0
25 Algae
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
10 Natural valley
0
0 5
1
11 Second or greater order channel
No
Yes = 3
° artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 9 _� )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
1
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
1
2
3
14 Leaf litter
5
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
2
05
1
1 5
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
3
1 5
17 Sod -based evidence of high water table?
No
Yes = 3
C. Siolow (Subtotal = t, S )
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
05
1
15
23 Crayfish
0
0
1
15
24 Amphibians
0
05
1 5
25 Algae
05
1
1 5
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 15
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: IX jpi/f
ProjectlSite 6"If, f, 'S e-
Latitude: 95 1�0/TEI 0
Evaluator: t[ ' I s u*,Ujl 4) %
County: UK4,to
Longitude: W OP 61 8352
Total Points:
Steam is at least intermittent ��'
Stream Determination circle one)
Ephemeral I rmttte Perennial
Other s �!
e g Quad Name: ,S Qryt•Yt /J
if _ ig or erennial if? 30'
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = / )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
05
3
3 ,In- channel structure ex riffle -pool, step -pool,
-pool sequence
0
3
(,D
3
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
IT
3
5 Active /relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
0
2
3
8 Headcuts
0
25 Algae
2
3
9 Grade control
0
05
1
15
10 Natural valley
0
05
15
11 Second or greater order channel
No 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B Hvdroloqv (Subtotal = 9 -r )
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13 Iron oxidizing bacteria
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
1
2
3
14 Leaf litter
1
1
05
0
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
3
1
15
16 Organic debris lines or piles
0
2
1
15
17 Sod -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
G t31010ov (Subtotal = Ili � )
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
0
1
0
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20 Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21 Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22 Fish
0
05
1
1 5
23 Crayfish
01
05
1
15
24 Amphibians
0
5
1
1 1 5
25 Algae
05
1
1 15
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1 5
Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes
Sketch

OFFICE USE ONLY USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP1 — Perennial RPW Stream A
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
AQF
1 Applicant's Name EPCON Communities 2 Evaluator's Name K Thames, WPIT
3 Date of Evaluation 6 -24 -14 4 Time of Evaluation 11 AM
5 Name of Stream Perennial RPW Stream A 6 River Basin Yadkin (HUC # 03040105)
7 Approximate Drainage Area approx 380 acres 8 Stream Order 2nd
9 Length of Reach Evaluated 200 if 10 County Union
11 Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks) located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of
Hawthorne Road in Stallings, North Carolina
12 Site Coordinates (if known) N35 1397894 °, W80 6183527°
13 Proposed Channel Work (if any) n/a
14 Recent Weather Conditions
15 Site conditions at time of visit hot, humid, overcast, low 90s
16 Identify any special waterway classifications known _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters .
17 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluati
18 Does channel appear on USGS quad map9 YE NO
20 Estimated Watershed Land Use 50% Residential
Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (i -IV)
on pomt9 YE NO If yes, estimate the water surface area — 2 1 acres
19 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey9 YES NO
10 % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
30 % Forested 10% Cleared / Logged % Other ( )
21 Bankfull Width 5' -10' 22 Bank Height (from bed to top of bank) 2' — 5'
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): 75 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature 1 r "°" Date 6 -24 -14
This channel evaluation form is intendid to be used 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 call 919- 876 -8441 x 26

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP1 — Perennial RPW Stream A
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE _
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
-
, ,Mountain
°
AW11,
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0'— 5
0-4
0 — 5
4
no flow or saturation = 0, strop flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
°no
0 -6
° 0 =5
0 -51
4
extensive alteration = 0 alteration = max hints
{
3
1 Riparian zone
0-6
0-4 °
0-5
3
no buffer = 0, contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
� Evidence of nutrient 6r chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
extensive discharges = 0, no discharges = max points)
"4
5
Groundwater discharge °
0 = 3
0-4
0-4
3
U
°
no dischar e = 0, °s nn s, seeps; wetlands, etc = °max points)
°
Presence of adjacent floodplain °
6
no floodplain = 0 extensive floodplain = max omts
0— 4
0— 4
0— 2
3
7
Entrenchment/ floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0 - 2
3
p
(deeply 1 entrenched = 0, fre uent floodin = max oints
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
.0-2
2
no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
4
extensive channelization = 0, natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment-input
0-5
0= 4
0-4
2
extensive deposition= 0 little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
° NA*
0-4
0 —°5 °
4
fine, homogenous = 0, large, diverse sizes = max omts
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
2
>q
(deeply incised = 0, stable bed & banks = max poi ts
E".
13
Presence of major bank failures
0' —,5
0 — 5
0 — 5
3
J
severe erosion = 0, no erosion, stable banks = max points)
Q14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 4
0-5
3
no'visible roots = 0, dense roots throughout = max p oints
-
15
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0-5
0 4
0-5
3
substantial impact =0, no evidence = max buits
+
Presence of riffle- pool/ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
5
16
no riffles/ripples or pools= 0, well-developed = max points)
d
17
H abitat complexity
0 = 6
0-6
0 — 6
4
littlekor no habitat = 0, frequent, varied habitats = °max points)
a
d
i Canopy coverage over streimbed
18
no shading vegetation = 0, continuous cano =max omts
0-5
0 — 5
0-5
5
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0- 4
3
dee 1 embedded = 0 loose structure = max
°
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0 - 5
3
y,
no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
C21
Presence of.amphibians
`p
0-4
0-4
0-4
4
a
no!evidence = 0, common, numerous es = max points)
0L
Presence of fish
0-4
0= 4
0-4
2
no, evidence = 0, common, numerous es = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0 - 5
0-5 °
3
no evidence = 0, abundant evidence.= max point s
g Total Points Possible r
400
100f
°
1
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
75
4- .1, �o>
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY USACE AID# DWQ #
SCP2 — Perennial RPW Stream B
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET f
I Applicant's Name EPCON Communities 2 Evaluator's Name K Thames, WPIT
3 Date of Evaluation 6 -24 -14 4 Time of Evaluation
5 Name of Stream Perennial RPW Stream B 6 River Basin Yadkin (HUC # 03040105)
7 Approximate Drainage Area approx 20 acres
8 Stream Order 1 st
9 Length of Reach Evaluated 50 if 10 County Union
11 Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks) located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of
Hawthorne Road in Stallines. North Carolina
12 Site Coordinates (if known) N35 1397894°, W80 6183527°
13 Proposed Channel Work (if any) n/a
14 Recent Weather Conditions hot, sunny, mid 80s
15 Site conditions at time of visit hot, humid, overcast, low 90s
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 point9 YE NO If yes, estimate the water surface area
18 Does channel appear on USGS quad map9 YES NO 19 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey9 YEAS GD
20 Estimated Watershed Land Use 50% Residential 10 % Commercial _% Industnal % Agricultural
30 % Forested 10% Cleared/ Logged % Other ( )
21 Bankfull Width 3' -4' 22 Bank Height (from bed to top of bank) 2'-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): 34 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I "'" Date 6 -24 -14
This channel evaluation form is intendid to be used 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 call 919- 876 -8441 x 26

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP2 — Perennial RPW Stream B
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
#
j CIIA °RACTERIS TICS'
ECOREG I®N POINT
RANGE`
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0
0-5
4
no flow or saturation = 0, strong flow = max oints
-4
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
0
extensive alteration = 0 no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone `°
0-6
0-4
0-5
0
no buffer = 0, contiguous, wide buffer = max poin
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
extensive discharges = 0, no discharges = max poi ts
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0 - 4
2
U5
no discharge = 0, springs, see s, wetlands, etc = max points)
..
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
.0- 4
0-4
0 - 2
1
no flood lam = 0 extensive flood lain = max oints
x
Entrenchment / floodplain access
p
7
(deeply entrenched = 0, frequent flooding = max p omts
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
0
extensive channelization = 0, natural meander = max points)
Sediment input
10
extensive 'de osition= 0 little or no sediment = max points)
0-5,
0- 4
0-4
2
Size & diversity of channel bed °substrate
.
11
NA*
0-4
0-5
2
fine, homogenous = 0, large, diverse sizes = max p omts
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
3
�•
(deeply incised = 0, stable bed & banks = max points)
Presence of major bank failure`s
13
severe erosion = 0, no erosion, stable banks = maz points),
0-5
0 , 5
0 - -5
2
Q14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 4
0-5
2
F„
no visible roots = 0, dense roots throu° hout = max
-
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
15
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
3
substantial impact =0, no evidence = max points)
Presence of riffle - pool/ripple -pool complexes
16
no riffles/ripples or podis =° 0; well-developed = max points)
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
F-
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
°
0 - 6
1
little?or no habitat = 0,, fre uent, vaned habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage-over streambed
Q
18
no shadm vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
1
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = 0 loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0 - 5
1
y,
no, evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
`Presence of amphibians
21
no,evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max omts
0-4
0-4
0-4
2
O
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
notevidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use °
0-6
0 - 5
° 0-51
1
xio evidence = 0, abundant evidence- max points)
°Pmts
Total' Possible
100
100
100„
TOTAL SCORE' (also enter on first page)
34
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY USACE AiD# DWQ #
SCP3 — Intermittent RPW Stream C
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET f-
1 Applicant's Name EPCON Communities 2 Evaluator's Name K Thames, WPIT
3 Date of Evaluation 6 -24 -14 4 Time of Evaluation 12PM
5 Name of Stream Intermittent RPW Stream C 6 River Basin Yadkin (HUC # 03040105)
7 Approximate Drainage Area approx 18 acres
9 Length of Reach Evaluated 50 if
8 Stream Order 1 st
10 County Union
11 Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks) located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of
Hawthorne Road in Stallings, North Carolina
12 Site Coordinates (if known) N35 1397894°, W80 6183527°
13 Proposed Channel Work (if any) n/a
14 Recent Weather Conditions hot, sunny, mid 80s
15 Site conditions at time of visit hot, humid, overcast, low 90s
16 Identify any special waterway classifications known
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters
17 Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluati
18 Does channel appear on USGS quad map? Q NO
20 Estimated Watershed Land Use 50% Residential
_Section 10 Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV)
Dn pomt9 YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area — 1 1 acres
19 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey9 YES GO
10 % Commercial % Industrial % Agncultural
30 % Forested 10% Cleared / Logged _% Other
21 Bankfull Width 1' -3' 22 Bank Height (from bed to top of bank) V — 2'
23 Channel slope down center of stream _Flat (0 to 2 %) -2L--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): 31 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I r -wvV - `""L,/ Date 6 -24 -14
This channel evaluation form is intendid to be used 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 call 919- 876 -8441 x 26

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP3 — Intermittent RPW Stream C
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
> SCORE
°
Coastal
Piedmont
Moui tain
°
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5 °
0-4
0 - 5
4
no flow or saturation = 0, strong flow = max points)
Evidence of past human alteration
2
0-6
0-5
0-5
0
extensive alteration = 0 no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0_ 5
0
no buffer = 0, contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or °chemical discharges
0 - 5 •
0-4
0 - 4
1
extensive discharges = 0, no discharges max o t s
m
,a
5
Groundwater. discharge
° ° °°
0 -3`
0 -4
0 -4
1
no discharge =0, s rin s, see s, wetlands, etc = max omts
Presence of adjacent °floodplain
6
no flood lam = 0 extensive flood lam = max points)
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
1
S
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
p"
(d6eply (deeply entrenched = 0, frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
1
no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
0
extensive channelization = 0, natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment °input
0-5
° 0-4
0-4
1
extensive deposition= 0 little or no sediment a max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
ANA* AW
0-4' °
0-5
1
fine, homogenous = 0, large, diverse sizes = max ° oints
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening °
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
2
°
(deeply incised = 0, stable bed & banks = max points)'
13°
° Presence of major bank failures
0 -5
0 -5
0 -5
2
severe erosion = 0, no erosion, stable banks = max points)
°
Q
Root depth and density on banks
°
0 < 3
0-4
0 - 5
2
F
no ,visible roots = 0, dense roots throughout = max p omts
H
Impact by °agriculture or °livestock production `°
°
15
0-5
0 - 4
W- 5
3
substantial impact =0, no evidence = max points)
16
Presence of riffle - pool/ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 - 5
-0-6
1
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0, well-developed = max points)
l
I Habitat complexity
°varied
0- 6
0- 6"
0-6
1
little,or no habitat = 0, frequent, habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
(no shading vegetation = 0, continuous canopy = max points)
0 -5
0 -5
°
0 -5
2
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA *
0-4
O-°4
1
(deeply embedded = 0 loose structure = max)
de
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0 - 5
1
�.
(no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
21
s Presence of amphibians °`
0-4
0-4
0-4
2
a
no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
-0-4
0-4
0
no, evidence = 0, common, numerous es = °max points)
^
Evidence of wildlife use
°
23
' no evidence = 0, abundant evidence = max °omts
0-6
0 - 5
0 - 5
2
Total Points Possible
+
X100 ro
100
1000.
°
TOTAL'SCORE° (also enter on first page) °
31
(
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

OFFICE USE ONLY USACE AiD# DWQ #
SCP4 — Intermittent RPW Stream D
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1 Applicant's Name EPCON Communities 2 Evaluator's Name K Thames, WPIT
3 Date of Evaluation 6 -24 -14 4 Time of Evaluation IPM
5 Name of Stream Intermittent RPW Stream D 6 River Basin Yadkin (HUC # 03040105)
7 Approximate Drainage Area approx 30 acres 8 Stream Order 1 st
9 Length of Reach Evaluated 80 if 10 County Union
1 l Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks) located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of
Hawthorne Road in Stallings, North Carolina
12 Site Coordinates (if known) N35 1397894°, W80 6183527°
13 Proposed Channel Work (if any) n/a
14 Recent Weather Conditions hot, sunny, mid 80s
15 Site conditions at time of visit hot, humid, overcast, low 90s
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 pomt9 YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area
18 Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 019 Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20 Estimated Watershed Land Use 50% Residential 10 % Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
30 % Forested 10% Cleared/ Logged _% Other
21 Bankfull Width V -3' 22 Bank Height (from bed to top of bank) 1' — 2'
23 Channel slope down center of stream _Flat (0 to 2 %) -2L--Gentle (2 to 4 %) _Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
24 Channel Sinuosity Straight X 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): 30 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature I f V Date 6 -24 -14
This channel evaluation form is inten d to be used 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 call 919 - 876 -8441 x 26

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP4 — Intermittent RPW Stream D
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
ECOREGION POINT'RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE.
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
4
no flow or saturation = 0, strong flow = max poin ts °
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0— 6
0— 5
0— 5
0
extensive alteration = 0 no °alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
1
no buffer = 0, contiguous, wide buffer = max' points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
4
$
extensive ° dischar es = 0, no discharges = max pol ts
0-5
0 - 4
0-4
1
,.�
Groundwater discharge
twetlands,
0-3
0 — 4
0-4
2
U5
no discharge = 0, springs, see s; efc = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
no floodplain = 0 extensive floodplain = max p omts
, Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
2
CIO
(deeply entrenched = 0 frequent flooding ° = max omts
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
l
no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)°
9
s Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
1
extensive channelization = 0, natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
points
0-5
0-4
0-4
1
extensive deposition= 0 little or no sediment = max
11
, Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
l
fine, homogenous = 0, °lar e, diverse sizes = max points)°
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening °
-0-5
0-4
0 - 5
2
�.
(deeply incised = 0, stable °bed & banks = max points)
E�
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
2
severe erosion = 0, no erosion, stable banks = max points)
W
I Root depth and' density on banks
14
no visible roots = 0, dense roots throughout = max points)
0— 3
0— 4
0— 5
2
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0 4
0-5
3
15
substantial impact =0, no evidence = max points)
0-5
-
Presence of riffle- pool/ripple -pool completes
16
no riffles /n " les or °ools = 0, well- developed = max points)°
0-3
0— 5
0-6
1
d
1
Habitat complexity
0-6 °
0-6
0 — 6
1
httle,or no habitat = 0; frequent, vaned habitats = max omts
Canopy coverage over streambed
18
no shading vegetation = 0, continuous canopy = max points)
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
1
19
Substrate embeddedness
"'NA*
0-4
0 - 4
1
(deeply embedded = 0 loose structure = max )*
20
Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0 - 5
0
y,
no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
21
Presence °of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
a
not evidence = 0, common, numerous types = max points)
C
; Presence of fish
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
no, evidence = 0, common, numerous es = max omts
E23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
1
no evidence = 0, abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points
Possible °
100 °
100
100
° TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
30
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project /Site Covr gclS S + ,ty,coupty IItW &AAd'`� Sampling Date
Applicant/Owner, &PCOki CAd11 t,e.t.et 'fS State N1 J, Sampling Point �davj
d
Investigator(s), �, ��1 Section, Township, Range stnIGAOS
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc,) Local relief (concave, convex, none) iot v Slope 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA), _ Pd1L �t Lac 3 5.13°1 nT Long W80. Io I8 S 5a ° Datum ,�-
Sod Map Unit Name 'SAX(est -Ct e Wc r D —9 mil• &1049 Lsc q) NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _�K No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X_ No
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes _,k_ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes No::T: within a Wetland? Yes No _X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No--I-
Remarks,
flN;tk �a,v� t' j s �{� vt- of h , o m — j ur,scLl'L'6' (v✓At 1+ f is wrA .
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
— Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (85)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(B7) i
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (89)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (DS)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes
No --;K— Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes
No )" Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes
No __y Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No_
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Pont- ON- eIALtd
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2 0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet i
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
Yf jjr
S A
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC ( )
2
, '_
�� �— f
3
,
V1f
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata_ (B)
4
5
Percent of Dominant Species
�
That Are OBL , FACW, or FAC -4 (A /B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet-
Total Cover
Total % Cover of Multiply by,
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
OBL species x 1 =
_�
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FACW species x 2 =
1
"T�_[��C►n Y1VLS► /LGt,
FAC species x 3 =
2
IAIVhVC CA4 f& Y(5 G
FACU species x 4=
3
hf r n,,�I_
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
4
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation indicators.
7
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is s3 0'
= Total Cover
50% of total cover .c_ 20% of total cover,
_
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations {Provide supporting
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2
3
TIM G C r a' N�
Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
be
4
— —
ifnciea� e�dra✓� iaD I'ca 15 AN
present, unless disturbed or probienatic
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata -
_
5 /Zbt 14 ( �t r� -T,�1i fS �pn C
14 �—
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height
8
Sapling /Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9
than 3 in DBH and greater than or equal to 3 28 ft (1
m) tall
10
1
6— = Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
50% of total cover 1.2.9 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
height y vine –Ali woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
i
2,
3
Hydrophytic
4
5
= Total Cover
Vegetation \`
Present) Yes No
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2 0

SOIL
Sampling Point 0101-L
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators }
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) °/a Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture t
Remarks
—o °� "Af r a9 Q J-10al
'Type C= Concentration, D= Depletion,
Hydnc Soil Indicators,
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
— Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (AS)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11.
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type -
Depth (inches)
Remarks
RM= Reduced
MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matnx
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
— Polyvalue Below Surface (SB) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
— Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No
Vi o Wifl 6 Yc1
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site Cwfki Adds city/County i/tV14'M 89"44- pp 1� Sampling Date D� s
ApplicantlOwner L j\% 0A)Jdtt►'lM*U f7'P. S State 1V% Sampling Poin a
t --tf* Agf
Investigator(s) K n I&�bdto' 1'j?) T- - Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillsiope, terrace, etc) 0 PAO la4 A _ Local relief (concave, convex, none) p� /yt 144 Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) /�� A Lat N 35.1 31108 Long WQU• to 1835x Datum NW3
Sod Map Unit Name 0,92 U- Ld °(MALAC b `E Z 51aaP1` I SCA NWI classification
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes _ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _ No
Remarks
t'-ewis, A4, 58, C D D
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators;
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Sod Cracks (66)
X Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plan's (B14)
— Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
K High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3) ,�
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _, Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6) Crayfish Burrows (C6)
Drift Deposits (B3) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) —
T_
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aguitard (D3)
Water - Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations.
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
u
Depth (inches) -_.2
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches) `e 3'r
Saturation Present? Yes _ CK No
Depth (inches), ®r
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants
t,PZ - *A , 681(C.,0D j 66-1 fy' I
Sampling Point
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size _) % Cover Species'? Status
—
Number of Dominant Species
�a zw Ye(S{
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC � (A)
2
j �� its✓ `'� /�/
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata (B)
- -���
3 /QQ
4
�' � L�d� AID _
5
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100 (AIB)
6
7
worksheet-0
Prevalence Index
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of Multiply by
50% of total cover 20% of total cover_
OBL species x 1 =
S
lin !Shrub Stratum (Plot size )
FACW species x 2 =
1
fiAK. /1 V OQVtYtC4IV4*14 UL 10 14S f l., vv
FAC species x 3 =
2
IA f IV %f fS ,ICJ
FACU species x 4 =
3
yV\ _9 + G
UPL species x 5 =
4
U ���Y1 �(_
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
��,
C �n �� f�i�h adW,6t�tivl �_ r° v�
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
= Total Cover
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
_
r
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
e - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
—
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1,
eS f.l
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
0 Yt s
Nti
'Indicators of hydnc sod and wetland hydrology must
4
_�-
/1�4��
=�— -Lp=- 3"
� SSI/L � 5 f? r�/
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata.
5
6
!�
�/ o yf"
$ IS ` -1�SL— �--is�
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7,6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
�_
height
��_ ZCtt v�
B
Sapling /Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9
than 3 in DBH and greater than or equal to 3 28 ft (1
m) tall
10
11
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
=Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
50% of total cover_ 20% of total cover r6
Woody vine -All woody canes greater than 3 28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
height
1
2,
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes 4_1 No
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Remarks (include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

SOIL
pP2 -11A 06,1C,Dp,E_E,
Sampling Point f-1H
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators)
Deptn Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
Y 1411 SV S an
*-ay dD `f,le 5zj 170 6 yiz " 3 ) D C .hoc hq
'Tvoe C= Concentration, D= Deoleuon, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains `Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Hisuc (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (173)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed).
Type
Depth (inches)
j vI ok S 0 jet, drt' c, sail S a t e eNW- .
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region 0
Prcject/Srte s f City /County �dU 61%� m� . Sampling Date (0n f
Applicant/Owner ,` IRCO tV vn V&A � State C Sampling Point 41 A fi',13 Lm ,
Investigator(s) 4 S WN T Section, Township, Range �
Landform (hdislo pe , terrace, etc) ( Local rel_ ief (concave, convex, none) V p v Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) ML"Dp A Lat Datum h
o
T Sod Map Unit Name (Ad lv,4 ax 1 d 6 �
NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes A— No (If no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation Sod or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes is the Sampled Area
No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No within a Wetiand7 Yes No
Remarks
0 ltvdS FP, (.� G
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reawred check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
X Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B 14)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aqurtard (D3)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations.
Surface Water Present? Yes No
i
Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches) V°
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches) r�
Wetland Hydrology Presenter Yes !' No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
Arc
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2 0

vwi= i m i ivie trour auata) -use scientitic names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size ) % Cover Species? Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size
[c�Xl oW vrctnln T)�ta.W►cct _� fe Ft}cW
3 JWAIA VS. d C AAA6_A* ,l �— Y.15 A GL_
4
5
6
7
8
9
Total Cover
50% of total cover s S 20% of total cover 1 5
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL FACW, or FAC � r (A /B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of
Multiply by
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators•
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
, )t un(+us e_4fvKik(
�n
�_
�i�L
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2 P1 tP!(.k6t�S C) t, ftkSCy
O1� L
3��
")
1 n
i�S
OR L.
Indicators of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must
4 i VY-N Lt_.triAA,
1 11:9
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
`
5 14 11A
10
—
FALW
�tr,Q
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata
6 rst in S �
10
Y��-��
yvL�
CL�
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in (7 6 cm) or
7 t G �S C.
�C —
�,
t-��
more m diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height
9
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
10
than 3 in DBH and greater than or equal to 3 28 ft (1
m) tall
11
�� = Total Cover
50% of total cover _t 20% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1
2
3
4
5
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover _
numbers here or on a separate sheet )
r
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 ft tall
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3 28 ft in
height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes A No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

6'1i1M
Sampling Point,
Profile Description. (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc' Texture Remarks
MS= Masked Sand
Hydric Sod Indicators
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Soils'
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Fioodplain Sods (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F, 2) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodpiain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
\V-d'IC JV(S of
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes _x_ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

CWS550E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
704 - 527 -1177 (v)
L Calol na Wetland Services 704- 527 -1133 (fax)
October 21, 2014
Ramona Bartos
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -4617
Subject: Request for Records Search
Courtyards at Emerald Lake
Stallings, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2014 - 3279:2
Dear Ms Bartos
On behalf of our client, EPCON Communities, we are hereby contacting the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Office regarding the presence of any historic properties or cultural resources
within the referenced project area The project is approximately 49 73 acres in extent and is located
north and south of Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne Road in Stallings, North Carolina The
attached Union County GIS Map (Figure 1, attached) shows the approximate location of the property
The attached USGS Site Location Map (Figure 1) was prepared from the Midland, NC Quadrangle,
dated 1996
The project is located within undeveloped wooded area The purpose of the project is to construct a
residential development and to provide sanitary sewer service for the new development Construction
of this project will cause unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U S and require Section
404/401 permitting
Based on a review of SHPO's online GIS Mapping Application', there are no historic properties listed
within the project limits Photographs A-J (Figure 2, attached) are representative of the site
Please provide a written response concerning your determination regarding the presence of any historic
properties or cultural resources within the project area Feel free to contact me with any questions at 704-
626 -9850 or at alusa @cws -inc net Thank you for your attention to this matter
Sincerely,
Ah>sa Harjumemi Gregg Antemann, PWS
Staff Scientist II Principal Scientist
Attachments Figure 1 USGS Site Location Map
Figure 2 Topographic Location Map
Photopage
http Hgis ncdcr gov/hpoweb/ Accessed October 21, 2014
NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW CWS -INC NET

CWS
Carolina Wetland Services
October 21, 2014
550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
704 -527 -1177 (v)
704- 527 -1133 (fax)
Ms Allison Weakley
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
North Carolina Department of the Environment and Natural Resources
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1601
Subject Request for Records Search
Courtyards at Emerald Lake
Stallings, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2014 - 3279:2
Dear Ms Weakley
On behalf of our client, EPCON Communities, we are hereby contacting the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program regarding the presence of any federally - listed, candidate endangered or threatened
species, or Critical Habitat within the referenced project area The project is approximately 49 73 acres
in extent and is located north and south of Lawyers Road and west of Hawthorne Road in Stallings,
North Carolina (Figure 1, attached) The attached USGS Site Location Map (Figure 1) was prepared
from the Midland, NC Quadrangle, dated 1996
The project area consists of an undeveloped wooded area The purpose of the project is to construct a
residential development and to provide sanitary sewer service for the new development Construction
of this project will cause unavoidable impacts to Jurisdictional waters of the U S and require Section
404/401 pennittmg
Please provide a written response via email to al>>sa _,cws -mc net concerning the presence of
federally - listed, or candidate endangered or threatened species or Critical Habitat within or near the
project area Thank you for your attention to this matter
Sincerely,
Alnsa Harjumemi,
Staff Scientist II
Attachment
Figure 1 USGS Site Location Map
Figure 2 Topographic Location Map
Figure 3 Aerial Map
C f_
Gregg Antemann, PWS
Principal Scientist
NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW CWS -INC NET

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory
Governor
September 23, 2014
Mr. Rich Heareth
Carolina VP Operations
EPCON Communities
8600 Sam Furr Road, Suite 180
Huntersville, North Carolina 28078
Subject: Stormwater Permit No. SW3140902
Courtyards at Emerald Lake
Dear Mr. Heareth:
John E. Skvarla, III
Secretary
The Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources (DELMR), received a complete Stormwater
Management Permit Application for the subject project on September 18, 2014. Staff review of the plans
and specifications has determined that the project, as proposed, will comply with the Stormwater Regulations
set forth in Title 15A NCAC 21-1.1000 and Session Law 2006 -246. We are forwarding Permit No.
SW3140902, dated October 10, 2014, for the construction, operation and maintenance of the subject project
and the wet pond and bio retention basin. This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until
October 9, 2022 and shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein, and does not
supersede any other agency permit that may be required.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you have the right to
request an adjudicatory hearing by filing a written petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings
(OAH). The written petition must conform to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, Per
NCGS 143- 215(e) the petition must be filed with the OAH within thirty (30) days of receipt of this permit.
You should contact the OAH with all questions regarding the filing fee (if a filing fee is required) and/or the
details of the filing process at 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -6714, or via telephone at 919-
431 -3000, or visit their website at www.NCOAH.com. Unless such demands are made this permit shall be
final and binding.
This project will be kept on file at the Mooresville Regional Office. If you have any questions, or need
additional information concerning this matter, please contact Mike Randall at (919) 807 -6374; or
mike.randall @ncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
for Tracy E. Davis; PE, CPM, Director
cc: SW3140902 File, Mooresville Regional Office
ec: Robert L Cash, PE, Sr. Project Manager, EMH &T
Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
Energy Section - Geological Survey Section - Land Quality Section
1612 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 - 1612.919- 707 -92001 FAX: 919 - 715 -8801
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 - Intemet• htto: / /Dortal.ncdenr orglwebAd
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50 % Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

State Stormwater Permit
Permit No. SW3140902
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of
North Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
EPCON Communities
Courtyards at Emerald Lake
Located off Lawyers Road in Stallings, North Carolina
Union County
FOR THE
construction, operation and maintenance of one bio retention basin and one -wet pond
in compliance with the provisions of Session Law 2006 -246 and 15A NCAC 2H .1000
(hereafter referred to as the "stormwater rules') and the approved stormwater
management plans and specifications and other supporting data on file with and
approved by the State and considered a part of this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until October 9, 2022, and shall
be subject to the following specified conditions and limitations:
I. DESIGN STANDARDS
This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of stormwater
described in the application and other supporting data
2. The retention basin and wet pond are approved for the management of
stormwater runoff as described in the application documents and as shown on
the approved plans.
3. All stormwater collection and treatment systems must be located in either
dedicated common areas or recorded easements. The final plats for the project
will be recorded showing all such required easements, in accordance with the
approved plans.
4. The runoff from all built -upon area within the permitted drainage area of this
project must be directed into the permitted stormwater control system.
5. The built -upon areas associated with this project shall be located at least 30 feet
landward of all perennial and intermittent surface waters.
Page 1 of 4

State Stormwater Permit
Permit No. SW3140902
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. During construction, erosion shall be kept to a minimum and any eroded areas of
the system will be repaired immediately.
2. The permittee shall at all time provide the operation and maintenance necessary
to assure the permitted retention basin and wet pond functions at optimum
efficiency. The approved Operation and Maintenance Plan must be followed in
its entirety and maintenance must occur at the scheduled intervals including, but
not limited to:
a. Semiannual scheduled inspections (every 6 months).
b. Sediment removal.
C. Mowing and re- vegetation of slopes and the filter strip.
d. Immediate repair of eroded areas.
e. Maintenance of all slopes in accordance with approved plans.
f. Debris removal and unclogging of all drainage structures, level spreader,
filter media, planting media, underdrains, catch basins and 'piping.
g. Access to the cell and outlet structure must be available at all times.
3. Records of maintenance activities must be kept for each permitted BMP. The
reports will indicate the date, activity, name of person performing the work and
what actions were taken.
4. The permittee shall submit an annual summary report of the maintenance and
inspection records for each retention basin and wet pond. The report shall
summarize the inspection dates, results of the inspections, and the maintenance
work performed at each inspection.
5. The retention basin and wet pond shall be constructed in accordance with the
approved plans and specifications, the conditions of this permit, and with other
supporting data. , ,
6. Upon completion of construction, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy,
and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a certification must be received
from an appropriate designer for the retention basin and wet pond certifying that
the permitted facility has been installed in accordance with this permit, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting documentation. Any
deviations from the approved plans and specifications must be noted on the
Certification. A modification may be required for those deviations.
7. If the stormwater system was used as an Erosion Control device, it must be
restored to design condition prior to operation as a stormwater treatment device,
and prior to occupancy of the facility.
8. The permittee shall submit to the Director and shall have received approval for
revised plans, specifications, and calculations prior to construction, for any
modification to the approved plans, including, but not limited to, those listed below:
a. Any revision to any item shown on the approved plans, including the
stormwater management measures, built -upon area, details, etc.
b. Project name change.
C. Transfer of ownership.
d. Redesign or addition to the approved amount of built -upon area or to the
drainage area.
e. Further subdivision, acquisition, lease or sale of all or part of the project
area. The project area is defined as all property owned by the permittee,
for which Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan approval was sou ht.
f. Filling in, altering, or piping of any vegetative conveyance shown on t�e
approved plan.
Page 2 of 4

State Stormwater Permit
Permit No. SW3140902
9. A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by
the Permittee for a minimum of eight years from the date of the completion;of
construction.
10. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one
or more of the minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame
specified in the notice, the permittee shall submit a written time schedule to the
Director for modifying the site to meet minimum requirements. The permittee
shall provide copies of revised plans and certification in writing to the Director
that the changes have been made.
III. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. This permit is not transferable except after notice to and approval by the Director.
In the event of a change of ownership, or a name change, the permittee must
submit a completed Name /Ownership Change form signed by both parties, to the
State, accompanied by the supporting documentation. The approval of this
request will be considered on its merits and may or may not be approved.
2. The permittee is responsible for compliance with all permit conditions until such
time as the Division approves a request to transfer the permit.
3. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may
subject the Permittee to enforcement action by the State, in accordance with
North Carolina General Statute 143- 215.6A to 143 -215 6C.
4. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with
any and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances, which may be imposed by
other government agencies (local, state, and federal) having jurisdiction.
5. In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation
of nuisance conditions, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective action,
including those as may be required by this Division, such as the construction of
additional or replacement stormwater management systems.
6. The permittee grants DENR Staff permission to enter the property during normal
business hours for the purpose of inspecting all components of the permitted
stormwater management facility.
7. The permit issued shall continue in force and effect until revoked or terminated.
The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The
filing of a request for a permit modification, revocation and re- issuance or
termination does not stay any permit condition.
8. Unless specified elsewhere, permanent seeding requirements for the stormwater
control must follow the guidelines established in the North Carolina Erosion and
Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual.
9. Approved plans and specifications for this project are incorporated by reference
and are enforceable parts of the permit.
Page 3 of 4

State Stormwater Permit
Permit No. SW3140902
10. The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the Director from reopening and
modifying the permit, revoking and reissuing the permit, or terminating the permit
as allowed by the laws, rules and regulations contained in Session Law 2006-
246, Title 15A NCAC 21-1.1000, and NCGS 143 -215.1 et.al.
11. The permittee shall notify the Division in writing of any name, ownership or
mailing address changes at least 30 days prior to making such changes.
12. The permittee shall submit a renewal request with all required forms and
documentation at least 180 days prior to the expiration date of this permit.
Permit issued this the 10th day of October, 2014.
�l
for Tracy E. Davis, P.E., CP
Director Division of Energy, Mineral, and Land Resources
Page 4 of 4

State Stormwater Permit
Permit No. SW3140902
EPCON Communities
Courtyards at Emerald Lake
Located off Lawyers Road in Stallings, North Carolina
Union Countv
Designer's Certification
I, , as a duly registered in the
State of North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically/ weekly/
full time) the construction of the project,
(Project Name)
for (Project Owner) hereby state that, to the
best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the project
construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial
compliance and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
Noted deviations from approved plans and specification:
Signature
Registration Number
Date
SEAL
cc: NCDENR -DEMLR Regional Office
Page 1 of 1

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014 - 3279:2
Photograph A. View of Perennial RPW Stream A, facing downstream.
Photograph B. View of Perennial RPW Stream B, facing downstream.

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014- 3279:2
Nhoiograph C. View of Seasonal RPW Stream C, facing upstream.
Photograph D. View of Seasonal RPW Stream D, facing downstream.

Courtyards at Emerald Lake
December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014 - 3279:2
Photograph E. View of Wetland AA, facing north.
Photograph F. View of Wetland AA, facing south.

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014- 3279:2
Photograph G. View of Wetland BB, facing northwest.
Photograph H. Viekv of Wetland CC, facing south.

Courtyards at Emerald Lake December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Project No. 2014- 3279:2
Photograph G. View of Wetland BB, facing northwest.
Photograph H. View of Wetland CC, facing south.

A.4j �` ' � . .� -..'� V .a �� •.
nom• «cm t 1 c9 Yd�asS e U j j cj
`fin •, i,• „',,fit•^ rt^^�. _ jet
l"� r i .a,., '•[�
T i.
_�-}' ����i .0 �.v � w tire- tia ?�•`N a � tar f. Y, {, a t
. • ���`,.�a ` 1,J."►,s,y �� t�' tv L � ,.�Y, r1 ',� " r 1�+`� YA �✓ ,� F ,.rY .{"�.. .
� � rrY Y,t• � 1 `
t fde �1 \atr� 4Rt *i
tr J` J Sz `.dd /dutkf
to
l
{
3'r t:•. t ... n`��+a ! .>3'` :-K. �� 4 1. ;* r bTM.� � .� r �-�ty'�•� `�
�? - ��} w r�'Vi�}`��- �"'�Gt�t`�yY it � _, -t�.t f •�
i �, .Y i � y, �� 'i .�.+ +- 1 1 � 1'.F-5'�"_ -T - f �"�7�� •r. 67 ,�/
� t f TMr � �, '1�.,t i [ �-a. ���1� � ' 1.,'��t j�}�7t K.. ` ...YY`�IIG r j� � •'.i � f jI
k ,t r �, rr . � ,?, � —., �e��ti�4��ttv'3t r kr� � J •. �; ��-�� � � �y / J �'����� 5, tik 7�"
9} 1{tk e rte`- r '\w0.`' - iE r �h-'' r/ `� tip'. ,i �' 'f' ° / `r, • �t + �' 9
jd
r .� i A9 `� r ��.p d 4 �4:y r , � r s ` tr•' � 5.. 1r r� ' I
�t 1 , ^�t_.J'• ���'l�" Y r , IIJ✓ Y�,js'� R f,�.. /Jt� ��\ `� _ f i
�' i 't(rl�. (Qi r.•!., !' ° �t'� � 5 ` t!'tl��.sT ,lt 4 .?. 7 h�,,[ "11r� •�' //' h�'1��; �3'�-�' "1\ a�

Courtyards at Emerald Lake
December 11, 2014
Nationwide Permit No. 29 CWS Proiect No. 2014 - 3279:2
Photograph M. View of Wetland HH, facing north.
Photograph N. View of Wetland II, facing west.