20170399 Ver 2_401 Application_20180118

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 2016 - 02206 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]:
Scott's Run
2. Work Type: Private 7
Institutional
❑
Government ❑
Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
The purpose of this project is to develop the property into a single-family residential development in
Charlotte, North Carolina.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: True Homes, LLC.; POC: Mr. Jeffrey M. Reasner
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: CWS; POC: Mr. Gregg Antemann, PWS
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: SAW -2016-02206
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
Northwest of the Mt. Holly-Huntersville Road and Mt. Holly Road intersection in Charlotte, NC
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: 35.3114741, -80.9832741
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 031 15230
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Catawba River
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Upper Catawba (HUC 03050101)
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
❑Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑� Section 10 & 404
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
0 Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133(fax)
January 5, 2018
Mr. David Shaeffer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Satellite Office
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29
Scott's Run
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
SAW 2016-02206
CWS Project No. 2014-3511
Dear Mr. Shaeffer,
On behalf of our client, True Homes, LLC, please find enclosed a Pre -Construction Notification
(PCN) application for the Scott's Run project. The Scott's Run property (Mecklenburg County
Tax Parcel No. 03115230) is approximately 35.9 acres in extent and is located northwest of the
Mt. Holly-Huntersville Road and Mt. Holly Road intersection in Charlotte, North Carolina
(Figures 1 and 2, attached). The purpose of the project is to develop the property as a single
family residential property. True Homes, LLC has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
(CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting services for this project. An executed Agent
Authorization Form is attached (Attachment A). CWS is submitting a Pre -Construction
Notification pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29. A check for $240.00 is attached to cover the
cost of the application fee for the NCDEQ — DWR PCN submittal.
Please do not hesitate to contact Sean Martin at 828-719-1320 or [e-mail] should you
have any questions or comments regarding this project.
Sincerely,
oc�A
Sean Martin
Senior Project Scientist
Cc:
Alan Johnson — NCDEQ DWR
Hy V. Nguyen, P.E. — DPR Associates, Inc.
Jeffrey M. Reasner — True Homes, LLC
NORTH CAROLINA Ll SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS-INC.NET
Page 1 of 2

Nixon Providence Road
Nationwide Permit No. 39
January 5, 2018
CWS Project No. 2016-4101
Attachments: Figure 1:
Vicinity Map
Figure 2:
USGS Site Location
Figure 3:
Aerial Imagery
Figure 4:
Jurisdictional Boundaries
Figure 5:
Original Design — June 17, 2016
Figure 6A:
Alternative Design — November 2, 2017
Figure 6B:
Alternative Design — November 2, 2017
Figure 7:
Proposed Design - Overall Site Plan
Figure 8:
Impact Map — Crossing One
Figure 9:
Impact Map — Crossing Two
Figure 10:
Crossing One — Profile View
Figure 11:
Crossing Two — Profile View
Figure 12:
Crossing One — Section View
Figure 13:
Crossing Two — Section View
Figure 14:
Stormwater Plan
Attachment A
— Agent Authorization Form
Attachment B
— SHPO and USFWS Response Letters
Attachment C
— Stream Classification and Wetland Data Forms
Attachment D
— NCNHP Database Query
Attachment E
— NC SAM Forms
Page 2 of 2

a Niii� -r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
N Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes N No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
N 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes N No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes N 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 N No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes N
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes N No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Scott's Run
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality/ town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
True Homes, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
28992-692
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Mr. Jeffrey M. Reasner
3d.
Street address:
2649 Brekonridge Centre Dr.
3e.
City, state, zip:
Monroe NC, 28110
3f.
Telephone no.:
704-238-1229
3g.
Fax no.:
N/A
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
Agent ❑x Other, specify: Owner
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no.:
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Gregg Antemann, PWS
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:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
03115230
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.311474° Longitude: -80.983274°
1 c. Property size:
35.9 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
UT to Catawba River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -IV, CA, PA
2c. River basin:
Catawba (HUC# 03050101)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use near the project at the time of this application:
The project site is an undeveloped wooded property dominated by mixed hardwood forested areas and remnant pine
stands. Forest roads meander through the project boundary, with off-site connections. An unimproved dirt road (Beagle
Club Rd) connects with the northwestern property boundary east of a powerline right-of-way. Surrounding Ianduses
include single-family residential, overhead powerlines and associated rights-of-way, and undeveloped wooded
properties. One perennial unnamed tributary to the Catawba River is shown on the USGS topo quad as a blueline
(Stream A), flows across the western project boundary from south to north. The northwestern portion of the project
boundary is within the Lake Wylie Watershed Overlay — Critical Area, which requires a 200 -ft wide undisturbed
watershed buffer on the USGS blueline stream. Perennial Stream B flows across the northern property boundary east to
west and bisects the northwestern project boundary at a powerline crossing. Intermittent Stream C flows north across
the property boundary near the eastern portion of the site, and confluences with Stream B. Existing Newfound Hollow
Drive provides access to the project property at the far eastern project limits, through an existing single-family residential
neighborhood.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.234 acre of jurisdictional wetland area
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,018 linear feet of
perennial stream channel, 243 linear feet of intermittent stream channel
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to develop approximately 21.0 of 35.9 acres of the property as a single-family residential
development. This project will provide residential housing within Charlotte, North Carolina to meet the growth and
demand of an area of Mecklenburg County that is experiencing significant population growth due to its proximity to
downtown Charlotte, North Carolina. This property is in a prime location based on its proximity to Interstate 485.
Page 3 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project proposes unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional waters under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 29 with the
construction of a new subdivision road within the project property boundary. Two proposed RCP culverts will be installed
at two separate stream crossings for the construction of the subdivision road to provide access to portions of the property
that are inaccessible or isolated due to stream channels. New culvert installation will result in temporary and permanent
stream impacts, as well as, permanent wetland impacts. A rip rap apron energy dissipater will be installed at the outlet of
each culvert. The proposed rip rap apron will be installed by keyed -in rock placement below stream bed elevation. Rip rap
will result in permanent stream impacts, but these impacts will not result in a permanent loss of jurisdictional waters. The
culvert design maintains the upstream/downstream hydrologic connection, low flows and the aquatic life passage
of jurisdictional tributaries. Figures 7-13 depict the proposed plan overview, impact maps, profile views, and section
views, respectively. Temporary stream impacts will result from flow diversion measures used during the construction
phase to complete work in the dry.
Crossing One
Stream Impacts (S-1 & S-2) - Stream C
Crossing One: proposed road crossing for Newfound Hollow Dr. on Stream C. New culvert installation (S-1) with an
associated rip rap apron (S-2) will result in permanent impacts to Stream C (Figures 8, 10, 12). To construct the proposed
road crossing, a 115 -If x 48 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be installed with a 20 -If rip rap apron on the culvert
outlet. 6 -ft tall precast concrete headwalls will be used on both ends of the culvert. Wetland CC is in the channel of
Stream C, near a historic pipe, within the footprint of the proposed 115 -If RCP. Stream flow has been altered by the
historic pipe and wetland feature, causing a loss of bed and bank and ordinary high-water mark (OHWM) through the
wetland boundary; verified by David Shaeffer with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers during the Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination site visit on November 10, 2016. With the loss of bed and bank and the OHWM through the wetland, no
stream impacts to Stream C will be accounted for within the Wetland CC boundary (approximately 32 -If). Temporary
stream impacts will occur to Stream C with the use of a dewatering device and associated fill for completing culvert
installation in the dry. A total of 15 -If temporary stream impacts and 83 -If permanent stream impacts will result at S-1.
Installation of a rip rap apron on the outlet of the culvert at Crossing One will result in 20 -If permanent stream impact to
Stream C (S-2). The rip rap apron will be keyed -in below the stream bed and the top elevation on the rip rap will match
the original stream bed elevation. S-2 will not result in a loss of a waters, and the 20 -If of permanent impacts associated
with the rip rap apron will not be counted towards the stream mitigation threshold.
Wetland Impact (W-1) - Wetland CC
The culvert installation associated with stream Crossing One will result in 0.004 acre of permanent fill to Wetland CC
(Figure 8).
Crossing Two
Stream Impacts (S-3 & S-4) - Stream B
Crossing Two: proposed road crossing for Newfound Hollow Dr. on Stream B. New culvert installation (S-3) with an
associated rip rap apron (S-4) will result in permanent impacts to Stream B (Figures 9, 11, 13). To construct the proposed
road crossing, a 66 -If x 72 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be installed with a 20 -If rip rap apron on the culvert
outlet. 14 -ft tall precast concrete headwalls will be used on both ends of the culvert. Temporary stream impacts will occur
to Stream B with the use of a dewatering device and associated fill for completing culvert installation in the dry. A total of
15 -If temporary stream impacts and 66 -If permanent stream impacts will result at S-3.
Installation of a rip rap apron on the outlet of the culvert at Crossing Two will result in 20 -If permanent stream impact to
Stream C (S-4). The rip rap apron will be keyed -in below the stream bed and the top elevation on the rip rap will match
the original stream bed elevation. S-4 will not result in a loss of a waters, and the 20 -If of permanent impacts associated
with the rip rap apron will not be counted towards the stream mitigation threshold.
Page 4 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
N Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
N PreliminaryEl Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Aliisa Harjuniemi
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc (CWS)
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
A request for a preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) was submitted to the USACE on November 3, 2016. On -
Site jurisdictional features were field -verified by Mr. David Shaeffer, of the USACE, on November 10, 2016 (SAW -2016-
02206).
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
N Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
A request for a preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) was submitted to the USACE on November 3, 2016. On -
Site jurisdictional features were field -verified by Mr. David Shaeffer, of the USACE, on November 10, 2016 (SAW -2016-
02206).
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes N No
6b. If yes, explain.
Single and complete project.
Page 5 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands N 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. Area
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1
P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.004
W2
-
W3
-
W4
-
W5
-
W6
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.004 ac.
2h. Comments: Permanent fill impacts to Wetlands totals 0.004 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 (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S-1
P
Fill
Stream C
INT
Corps
4
83
S-1
T
Fill
Stream C
INT
Corps
4
15
S-2
P
Fill
Stream C
INT
Corps
4
20
S-3
P
Fill
Stream B
PER
Corps
6
66
S-3
T
Fill
Stream B
PER
Corps
6
15
S-4
P
Fill
Stream B
PER
Corps
6
20
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
219
3i. Comments:
S-1: 83 -If permanent fill impacts from culvert.
S-1: 15 -If temporary fill impacts from dewatering for work in the dry.
S-2: 20 -If permanent fill impacts for rip rap apron (no loss of waters).
S-3: 66 -If permanent fill impacts from culvert.
S-3: 15 -If temporary fill impact from dewatering for work in the dry.
S-4: 20 -If permanent fill impacts for rip rap apron (no loss of waters).
Total permanent impacts with loss of waters: 149 -If
Total permanent impacts with no loss of waters: 40 -If
Total temporary impacts: 30 -If
Page 6of14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
-
Choose One
Choose
02
-
Choose One
Choose
03
-
Choose One
Choose
04
-
Choose One
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose One
P2
Choose One
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. 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. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number-
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
131
-
Yes/No
B2
-
Yes/No
133
-
Yes/No
B4
-
Yes/No
B5
-
Yes/No
B6
-
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 7 of 14
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
Two proposed road crossings are necessary to provide access within the new subdivision and to provide sufficient
ingress and egress for emergency vehicles throughout the development. To avoid and minimize adverse effects to
jurisdictional waters to the maximum extent practicable, four different alternatives were considered. These alternatives
include (1) No Build Alternative; (2) Original Design (June 17, 2015); (3) Alternative Design (November 2, 2017); (4)
Proposed Design (December 1, 2017).
1. No Build Alternative
To minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters while meeting the goals of the project, a "No Build" alternative was
considered. The property is being purchased for providing residential housing to meet the growth and demand of an area
in Mecklenburg County experiencing significant population growth. A "No Build" option would not meet the project goals
of providing necessary housing to meet the current demand. Therefore, the No Build Alternative was eliminated from
further consideration.
2. Original Design — June 7, 2015
The Original Design (Figure 5) exhibits two road crossings to establish future connectivity within the subdivision. This
layout includes crossings of Stream A and Stream B, but disconnects the development to avoid a third crossing for
Stream C. This would result in permanent impacts to high quality waters, per NCSAM evaluation. Stream A scored HIGH
on the NC SAM form at the location of the potential crossing, Stream B scored LOW on the NC SAM form at the location
of the potential crossing, Stream C scored MEDIUM on the NC SAM form. Given that Stream A has the highest stream
quality and function of on-site streams, impacts to Stream A have been avoided in the Proposed Design (Figure 7).
3. Alternative Design — November 2, 2017
The Alternative Design is the same as the Proposed Design with regards to road, lot, stormwater, and utilities layout. The
difference between the Alternative Design and the Proposed Design is in the culvert design. The Alternative Design used
shorter headwalls than the Proposed Design resulting in longer culvert lengths at the two proposed crossings (Figures 6A
& 6B). The Alternative Design would have resulted in 200 -If of culvert installation.
4. Proposed Design — December 2, 2017
The proposed design minimizes impacts to Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and the environment to the maximum extent
practicable. The Proposed Design will avoid impacting HIGH quality waters as the Original Design had proposed. The
Proposed Design has reduced the length of culvert installation in Waters of the U.S. by 19 -If compared to the Alternative
Design.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
Proposed new culverts at Crossings One and Two will be buried a minimum of one foot below the channel bed to allow
passage of aquatic life and maintain low flows. Headwalls at the inlet and outlet of the culvert will be utilized to minimize
channel impacts to the maximum extent practicable. The placement of riprap is necessary to prevent erosional forces
from undermining the culvert outlet, as well as maintain the integrity of the road crossing. This will reduce the need for
maintenance work on the proposed culvert in the foreseeable future and, therefore, minimize the future impacts to the
channel. Proper sediment and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
Construction activities and impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will comply with all conditions of Nationwide
Permits 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 3890. All work will be constructed in the dry.
All riparian areas disturbed by the work shall be re -graded to match pre-existing contours. Disturbed stream banks shall
be graded to their original slope and elevation. Disturbed riparian areas and stream banks will be seeded with a
temporary erosion control seed mix and overseeded with a native mix to promote herbaceous plant growth for long term
site stabilization. Straw will be applied to stabilized riparian areas to maintain soil moisture during seed germination.
Disturbed stream banks shall be stabilized with biodegradable coir fiber matting or other coconut fiber matting.
Page 8 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes M No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ 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: Choose One
Type: Choose One
Type: Choose One
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
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:
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose One
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.
Page 9 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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
❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
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.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(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 10 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes N No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
25.9%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
N 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:
A total of four BMP facilities are on site, all sand filters. All were designed per the most recent Charlotte/Mecklenburg
County Stormwater BMP manual. Topographic maps and field observations were used to delineate the watershed basins
and hydraulic path feeding into the study conveyance system. With this information, hydraulic lengths, time of
concentrations (TOC), and basin slopes were determined for the pre -developed conditions. TOC of 5 min. was used for
all post -developed conditions. The total impervious areas of the development were calculated. The composite curve
numbers (CN) were calculated based on the hydrologic soil types and groups from the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
SCS Mecklenburg County for the pre -developed and post -developed conditions. Adequate surface area for all four
ponds were sized to handle the first -inch of rainfall, per total impervious area of the watershed. These BMP facilities are
designed to treat the 1sl-Inch of rainfall water quality volume using the Schueler simple method and provide the 1 -year,
24 -hr storm channel protection. Modeling results indicate that 2 -year, 10 -year and 25 -year (6 -hr storm events, using
SCS Method) release peak flow rates for the post -development detention routed conditions are less than that of pre -
developed conditions.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Charlotte
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is thisproject?
City of Charlotte
N Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply):
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes N No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HOW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
N Other: N/A
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes N 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 11 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
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)?
1 c.
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
letter.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
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 Scott's Run development is a single and complete project.
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.
The proposed project will be served by municipal sanitary sewer.
Page 12 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?
N Yes ❑ No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?
❑x Yes ❑ No
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?
CWS scientists performed a data review using North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer on
March 6, 2017 to determine the presence of any federally -listed, candidate endangered, threatened species, or critical
habitat located within the project area. Based on the NCNHP review, there are no records of federally -protected species
within the project limits. There are two recorded populations of Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) within
one -mile of the project area. A copy of the NCNHP report is attached.
On March 22, 2017 CWS scientists conducted a pedestrian survey of the project area for federally -protected species.
Transects were assessed along the areas identified as potential habitat, as applicable, for potentially occurring federally -
protected species. A letter requesting concurrence was sent the United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) on
March 30, 2017. A USFWS response letter was received on April 27, 2017 (attached).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes N No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA Fisheries: http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/habitatmapper.htmi
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments
have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status (e.g., National
❑ Yes N No
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 North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on March 7, 2017 to determine the
presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that would be affected by the project. CWS
also consulted the SHPO online GIS service, the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Historic Landmarks Commission online database,
and the Mecklenburg County Polaris 3G historical mapping program and found no historical structures, buildings, sites, or
districts within the project limits. A NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources — State Historic Preservation Office
response letter was received on April 6, 2017. In the response letter it is stated that the project has been reviewed and there
are no known historic resources that would be affected and therefore no comment is being made on the project as proposed.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes N No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No aboveground fill within the FEMA -100 year floodplain is proposed.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Firm No. 3710450700M
Page 13 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

_
Mr. Gregg Antemann 1-5-2018
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 14 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C:\UsersWiisaHarjmiemi\Desktop\Scotts RUN\Revised Permit Maps\Figue 1_Viciniry.mxd

C:\Usen\AliisaHujmiemi\Desktop\ScottsRUN\Revised Permit Maps\Figure2_USGS.mxd

C:\Usen\AliisaHujmiemi\Desktop\Scotts RUN\Revised Permit Maps\Figwe3_Aerial.mxd

'' •.F 1' - i Pole—,l Stub -• V,_ ..
'• _ to A -fl.,, ur I Ci i,ui•i it _
4
LPyp
J
pp= npa15[ h4o alio' ;.�
.�`'- •yam` -L' . r i� 1 f ��
RW=
,.
s
Crossing #2
— 1491f Stream Impact
NC SAM Score "LOW"
-
'4uality
:1lndcipated loranon
. .:' :: ,..� � . for plan nir;EN��r,o.ea. •l
lE + _ tc nc pc[crmincp ws
field-mes[i�a[ion`:{ p,
.r�p` 1 U a11i .1rin ��
[.en..."i
�� r•n „r..l v:.. t.•-: � ! t ' . _ Weilmns5crvlce,. d.n brai"vry I9, 2o1s. [a p,,.ve+ow weW, „o, tlxa
p i,�I,f Y'A�a.+ � `+�,. _•"`I r rpnreprPi.ryaroy porynF.l,ywsndareasaM urp,mM1'nure. rl�M euen*n[
1 i'c [i•n:, ii! LL'�lr'., Wn1R [on4ldpr(d {Q Ik prtliminaryn r,ltWrl and •pWOnim.,lc in WcJnOn
.. ,r� u.al:�•rr: .�-y� \lyu.+IrY arra •, .. ..r _ Fe[esf Peb�3.rce
s •L f -� udorgK*siWMm[rarcr4wnomxrcomtl.�rdarrdmnnry nnlr�tl nr
r Y 1 1. (:' •:. P.oSc >J SSreim HvRe ri i5 r i : . - . 1trn0ln, rn•hed lar wffie.ntx le satlsly a eaeee6 n0niminn•
determined farm:' np ' eaunemi+�e
' ry f ether 5eld jiivMigalinn rYl` f'r nsAH inlfie Cuy Fi CIwFr[e 2onlnjfhdinenecmdaFplira �reiWr•Jr
K
.* 4'�. .N'�._ - amW b/LPOr S�errl[ennKnpnfaaronec n
C'.=j .Yi�_-.- .. � pnui •ne m.y hµrt,
ti
Dain
tossing #� -
� -
g e�� �
.�a
Y+ `
+ r i
i
•:L
C oss
r in 1
r g #
'.
1501f Stream Impact
.- .... NC SAM Score HIGH"
4.
�F
..-- .... ' -. •- iia..;. •t-
y _I+
ESPESP Aswciafes, P.A.
rn. re.Iow r.ars�r,p.r e7,.t
e>,awerc.>+I-xrxl rer,,vruuwral
kC - T4ASr%l.W. H' - NOIRe:.NSO
u.c ,oren H UR'1'I-i
s o�nsaNrrneas.e
-a,,; nSparpamt rrP•Sn+ama.am m,mp,uai NA—
Wwnn,nPry, Ma.ari
- :, 7^� • J';' • ❑ n�l,lieac gear may clwripc.h the diem Orr sdarivrnreµ•e,n�1i•ul
r'§
! A tMr
RarW •ce Fai 6r er,l ..W-1
•dy 9e, pmeya a Dun .pa ty peM
•. �. 0.
r' S.'avTraM
etlrn M tunic }M e.HY re'
f
r
L
PotmtlN S[antxlNtt 1[[N
'y
. v - •6'. nna rn .ncw�en+�e andmo
'� '. 7 C Vmed rtrc ry
rSr.
i' ti ., i _ .�:: ':•- rcEto Muctermmm the wimL nJlx[nw�0-1 er.s rlll[I[a.y'es
L •d
i, •,\..�� •.� �'t •!.'�+ - 'r _ •. pia�edc�N�onl Mned �i[rc henc dellned. lsNnl Nd.ni[wunt wlee:i
.. nr �. amny
�,, r 1 ` ►�Ft " o �� vy e> Vie„
..•.'.,.Y _ - _ t nary c ap 4th Yv,^•a./amnFee•rnryrN
aryl P[mprr.-aeex.
h�di rnnt•i,c mx,[m,ni Wilt upm aea. TM
.,rert Ive nni bren tY.aWnd at
in,
-{ • _ .. .- , ti . j, � . .. _ ';;'` •�y yo"r� ".n nnn.. ne.'nr=vromiorrenn.nv.r we tn. i.,nm.nr.n.en,Me
• ,1, .. - - .. :tib::::.- .f •: �'Q .[ deuxnmxli�r, W ldinl Product iMormaeuna4lde aixe[fl [rn mote NLN dlJh 1.
.. .. =-i.- - .- , � 't'[,� _ tnen,n snain.•r ,o ninny. unn lrr -r.
�I
err ti:3.
Pu9 k Ydamytlan
- _ - - ...� � 1 rerpennpr• fire•NrNna Ntft Mb/nmmnGl$.PW 4
r
r
��l-rm n n e r n
- �'i^ mini w �wido n o o e rvpo+rom blKswrcawc �r w� vmnm
-'-
nsv, w ns
.�e�a� de •liner.
411,
-42
.
Orignial Design rejected due impacts to high quality stream.
Original Design
Mer hi's
Figure No.
F Scott's Run
- s
L Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2014-3511
Scott's Run Subdivision CRa � rAP""S`.E raa True Homes
Concept Plan B
WE VALVE WHAT VRELlE
26-7 0,A -ridge 0—cr a•Iya
"ile 10,
lune 17, 2 15 1 INCH -1Ltl Fl. Mourop, NC 7gi 1Q
r
j
-
'{1
A�
Size Data:
^a'
-i
J
Ta. Patrol; 011152�035.27
_-:
AcresTotal A�age: -1Lotation;
J�
Charlotte, MCi
' ''L',
ham,, �r.
•`..f,rrF
:k.
_
-4 Clmter
w�th greater than 2 594 tree save or oloen space area .1
the clwter ri�ision tot the lot site and width of th',12. 1P.
�tY
F44 CrlJ9k@t Let StIndaridgl
r f
_
2s,
SFmvi:
P�ntlat Density: 4- 744 oulikrr�
J
Min
— - 4Y
tii if!
-
gr r+}
`
- -
Z—
tiL
�� r•n „r..l v:.. t.•-: � ! t ' . _ Weilmns5crvlce,. d.n brai"vry I9, 2o1s. [a p,,.ve+ow weW, „o, tlxa
p i,�I,f Y'A�a.+ � `+�,. _•"`I r rpnreprPi.ryaroy porynF.l,ywsndareasaM urp,mM1'nure. rl�M euen*n[
1 i'c [i•n:, ii! LL'�lr'., Wn1R [on4ldpr(d {Q Ik prtliminaryn r,ltWrl and •pWOnim.,lc in WcJnOn
.. ,r� u.al:�•rr: .�-y� \lyu.+IrY arra •, .. ..r _ Fe[esf Peb�3.rce
s •L f -� udorgK*siWMm[rarcr4wnomxrcomtl.�rdarrdmnnry nnlr�tl nr
r Y 1 1. (:' •:. P.oSc >J SSreim HvRe ri i5 r i : . - . 1trn0ln, rn•hed lar wffie.ntx le satlsly a eaeee6 n0niminn•
determined farm:' np ' eaunemi+�e
' ry f ether 5eld jiivMigalinn rYl` f'r nsAH inlfie Cuy Fi CIwFr[e 2onlnjfhdinenecmdaFplira �reiWr•Jr
K
.* 4'�. .N'�._ - amW b/LPOr S�errl[ennKnpnfaaronec n
C'.=j .Yi�_-.- .. � pnui •ne m.y hµrt,
ti
Dain
tossing #� -
� -
g e�� �
.�a
Y+ `
+ r i
i
•:L
C oss
r in 1
r g #
'.
1501f Stream Impact
.- .... NC SAM Score HIGH"
4.
�F
..-- .... ' -. •- iia..;. •t-
y _I+
ESPESP Aswciafes, P.A.
rn. re.Iow r.ars�r,p.r e7,.t
e>,awerc.>+I-xrxl rer,,vruuwral
kC - T4ASr%l.W. H' - NOIRe:.NSO
u.c ,oren H UR'1'I-i
s o�nsaNrrneas.e
-a,,; nSparpamt rrP•Sn+ama.am m,mp,uai NA—
Wwnn,nPry, Ma.ari
- :, 7^� • J';' • ❑ n�l,lieac gear may clwripc.h the diem Orr sdarivrnreµ•e,n�1i•ul
r'§
! A tMr
RarW •ce Fai 6r er,l ..W-1
•dy 9e, pmeya a Dun .pa ty peM
•. �. 0.
r' S.'avTraM
etlrn M tunic }M e.HY re'
f
r
L
PotmtlN S[antxlNtt 1[[N
'y
. v - •6'. nna rn .ncw�en+�e andmo
'� '. 7 C Vmed rtrc ry
rSr.
i' ti ., i _ .�:: ':•- rcEto Muctermmm the wimL nJlx[nw�0-1 er.s rlll[I[a.y'es
L •d
i, •,\..�� •.� �'t •!.'�+ - 'r _ •. pia�edc�N�onl Mned �i[rc henc dellned. lsNnl Nd.ni[wunt wlee:i
.. nr �. amny
�,, r 1 ` ►�Ft " o �� vy e> Vie„
..•.'.,.Y _ - _ t nary c ap 4th Yv,^•a./amnFee•rnryrN
aryl P[mprr.-aeex.
h�di rnnt•i,c mx,[m,ni Wilt upm aea. TM
.,rert Ive nni bren tY.aWnd at
in,
-{ • _ .. .- , ti . j, � . .. _ ';;'` •�y yo"r� ".n nnn.. ne.'nr=vromiorrenn.nv.r we tn. i.,nm.nr.n.en,Me
• ,1, .. - - .. :tib::::.- .f •: �'Q .[ deuxnmxli�r, W ldinl Product iMormaeuna4lde aixe[fl [rn mote NLN dlJh 1.
.. .. =-i.- - .- , � 't'[,� _ tnen,n snain.•r ,o ninny. unn lrr -r.
�I
err ti:3.
Pu9 k Ydamytlan
- _ - - ...� � 1 rerpennpr• fire•NrNna Ntft Mb/nmmnGl$.PW 4
r
r
��l-rm n n e r n
- �'i^ mini w �wido n o o e rvpo+rom blKswrcawc �r w� vmnm
-'-
nsv, w ns
.�e�a� de •liner.
411,
-42
.
Orignial Design rejected due impacts to high quality stream.
Original Design
Mer hi's
Figure No.
F Scott's Run
- s
L Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2014-3511
Scott's Run Subdivision CRa � rAP""S`.E raa True Homes
Concept Plan B
WE VALVE WHAT VRELlE
26-7 0,A -ridge 0—cr a•Iya
"ile 10,
lune 17, 2 15 1 INCH -1Ltl Fl. Mourop, NC 7gi 1Q

PROP. NEWFOUND HOLLOW DR 56' ROW
-tf+UU -7+UU -(i+UU -5+UU -4+UU
PROP. RIP RAP APRON
CLASS 2,24" THICKNESS
KEYED -IN & BURIED BELOW
STREAM BED ELEVATION
landscape architecture
:m civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
-3+UU -Z+UU -1+UU U+UU 1+UU L+UU ;i+UU
±125 LF
48" RCP CULVERT
BURY 1'
@ 3.12% SLOPE
CROSSING ONE - ALTERNATIVE DESIGN
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
4+UU 5+UU 6+UU
670
660
650
640
7+00
Scale: 1 "= 10'
Date: 11/2/170 10
.
Job #: 16036 —6
B CNJ ��
r®ooiiiiii6®u®F°®°�°� y.
co
cY)
0
Z
ry
U)
H
H
O
U
U)
PROP. INV. IN
@ 653.00'
PROP. ELEV.
@ 660.73
PROP. 8" PVC SS ��
I_ PROP. HEADWALL
PROP. INV. OUT -�
\
@ 649.00'
�\ } BOTTOM OF EXIST. CREEK -
-tf+UU -7+UU -(i+UU -5+UU -4+UU
PROP. RIP RAP APRON
CLASS 2,24" THICKNESS
KEYED -IN & BURIED BELOW
STREAM BED ELEVATION
landscape architecture
:m civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
-3+UU -Z+UU -1+UU U+UU 1+UU L+UU ;i+UU
±125 LF
48" RCP CULVERT
BURY 1'
@ 3.12% SLOPE
CROSSING ONE - ALTERNATIVE DESIGN
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
4+UU 5+UU 6+UU
670
660
650
640
7+00
Scale: 1 "= 10'
Date: 11/2/170 10
.
Job #: 16036 —6
B CNJ ��
r®ooiiiiii6®u®F°®°�°� y.
co
cY)
0
Z
ry
U)
H
H
O
U
U)

610
600
590
580_7+00
PROP. NEWFOUND HOLLOW DR 56' ROW
• 1 11
_ I _
WL�!
rP- - - -Im • : 1
■1-
SIM
1 - • • - • �■1-
I : 1 �E1�
-t+UU \ -b+UU -4+UU -3+UU -z+UU -1+UU 1 U+UU
PROP. RIP RAP APRON
CLASS 2,30" THICKNESS
KEYED -IN & BURIED BELOW
STREAM BED ELEVATION
landscape architecture
3w civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
1+UU
±75 LF
66" RCP CULVERT
BURY 1'
@ 4.51% SLOPE
CROSSING TWO -ALTERNATIVE DESIGN
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
z+UU 3+UU 4+01)
610
RMC
590
\_7
U 6+00 7+000
BOTTOM OF EXIST. CREEK 1
Scale: 1"= 10'
Date: 11/2/17 Dwcj�O:
Job #: 16036
CNJ EX -7
�Di00 fo zo By:
M
O
CD
T
Z
IL
�y
V'^J
I—
I—
O
U
U)

.LL
L
l
L LLL
i
LLL
qL
LLLL
S-4
landscape architecture
civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, INC 28204
phone [phone] . fax [phone] . www.dprassociates.net
STREAM IMPACT
S-3
I !;IA"AMITAIII! I V
K�j - LLLLLL
LLLLLL \`\11\l'\V)
\
STREAN
S-2
U
STREAM IMPACT / L L L LLLL LLLCLLLLL LLLLL
LLLL LLL LL LLL
. LLL LL
WETLAND
1 WETLAND IMPACT W-1 \\ \
STREAM C I V
J J r ` \W\\� J
SITE PLAN
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
co
O
R EL ID: 031-152-3 (.0
'OTAL SITF AREA,• 35-94 ACRES. z
U)
O
�r/ U
r✓
�� //l� r=J jam•-vJ/fl ��� � I I
7
.LLLL
i
/ I
,t A/
FIGURE NO.7
Scale: 1"- 250' Z Date: 12/1/17 Dwg. No:
Job #: 16036
0 2ao soo By: CNJ ��—

' --R-TD,
1 \ �
i
1
L�
LL
L
STREAM IMPACT
S-1
WETLAND CC `
L
WETLAND IMPACT W-1
Lo 0/ VD
I \ t t
----- IN
J I I Ij
(662) ;��� STREAM C'
landscape architecture
civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
CROSSING ONE
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
N, 70A,^ i �0" cz, �:,rn 3'(T 0 11A
1-
N,F 385-z
TRUE HOMES LLC
EXIST. TOP PARCEL ID
03115230
OF BANK DB 28992 PG 692
�
(TYP.) ZONED: R-3
30' PCSO BUFFER
'—w�, ' pR –40' WATERSHED II I -TO, I )Y. 0 -- /
e
0-
X,
�cF�y'
L— LLLLL� '\-L
FIGURE NO.8
Scale: 1"=40' Z Date: 12/1/17 Dwg. No:
T
Job #: 16036 EX -2
o ao 80 By: CNJ
C-0
M
O
r
z
n
U)
I—
I-
0
U)

'tom
AP
•� 100 YR FLOODLINE A .
Np- �` .�'�- '� ------ Ip v�
Q(0011C
EX. WETLAND BB
LL v�/T S�S''�2 •� �i
`►_► i
* STREAM
i.
landscape architecture
:wq civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
L L
Ill IL
S -a L i
00
110
CROSSING TWO
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
STREAM I M PACT - �L t
.S-3 L44�
�IL
r \
_. y
r�
— L L L L s
— i I L``
_Li t LLL
L L L .. LL L L L L LVN, L L
LLL -1_ - LLL
i' _LLL
STREAM B
L L
1
♦�LLLL
30' PCSO BUFFER
FIGURE NO.9
Scale: 1"-40' Z Date: 12/1/17 Dwg. No:
Job #: 16036
0 40 8o By: CNJ EX -3
M
O
r
z
D
U)
H
H
O
U)
n

PROP. HEADWALL
PROP. INV. OUT
@ 649.00'
i PROP. NEWFOUND HOLLOW DR 56' ROW
I
PROP. 8" PVC SS @ 660. 3LEV.
PROP. RIP RAP APRON
CLASS 2,24" THICKNESS
-8+00 -7+00 -6+00 -5+00 -4+00 -3+00 -2+00 -1+00 0+00
±20' RIPRAP
APPLICATION TRACKING NUMBER:
SAW-_-_-__
landscape architecture
3m civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
±115 LF OF
STREAM IMPACT
CROSSING ONE - PROFILE VIEW
SCOTTS RUN PH. 2
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
1+00 2+00
— ±115 LF
48" RCP CULVERT
BURY 1'
@ 3.5% SLOPE
3+00
PROP. INV. IN
@ 653.00'
670
660
650
BOTTOM OF EXIST. CREEK
640
4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00
Q0
M
O
Z
H
H
O
U
a
CL
Scale: 1"= 10' Date: 12/1/17 Dwg. No:
Job #: 16036r�_ ^ LU
LU
o to 20 �}
By: CNJ t

i
610
600
590
580
PROP. NEWFOUND HOLLOW DR 56' ROW
±20' OF RIPRAP r ±66 LF OF
STREAM IMPACT
APPLICATION TRACKING NUMBER:
SAW- - -
landscape architecture
civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
CROSSING TWO - PROFILE VIEW
SCOTTS RUN PH. 2
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
Scale: 1 "= 10'
0 10 20
Date: 12/1/17
Job #: 16036
By: CNJ
610
600
590
Dwg. No:
EX -7
v

670
..1
650
7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00
APPLICATION TRACKING NUMBER:
SAW- - -
landscape architecture
mm civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
9+50 10+00 10+50 11+00 11+50 12+00 12+50 13+00
CROSSING ONE - SECTION VIEW
SCOTTS RUN PH. 2
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
Scale: 1"= 40'Date: 12/1/17
7''
x
1
Job #: 16036
o ao 80111111111111111111119 MEEEUMMEEMEME9 By: CNJ
c�
0
670
N
2
Q_
Z
Z)
w
U)
H
0
••1
650
X
LU
t=
g
LU
LU
a
2
Dwg. No: �p
N
U
EX-5LU
V
✓ \
I
4000p'I
�
�
15" R\ G
\
/
o
/
220
1 1 �
P
te r—
1
.
12
r
15"RCP
ING
2-23
1
1
ROP. 48" RC.
BURIED 1'
Co
c0
M v
c�o0
co
(0
0 �
��
m
O
(0 cq
m�
CO c0
CO
N
(0 rn
LN
O co
(0
N
I co
ins
CO cn
CO
L0
p co
V)
O c0
CO
O
LO
(0
CO co
CO
O
� co
;z
CO co
(0
O
o u.
�M
CO co
(0
In
m
U,M
O c0
(0
O
� u?
CO c0
(0
00
O
O
cc
7+50 8+00 8+50 9+00
APPLICATION TRACKING NUMBER:
SAW- - -
landscape architecture
mm civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
9+50 10+00 10+50 11+00 11+50 12+00 12+50 13+00
CROSSING ONE - SECTION VIEW
SCOTTS RUN PH. 2
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
Scale: 1"= 40'Date: 12/1/17
7''
x
1
Job #: 16036
o ao 80111111111111111111119 MEEEUMMEEMEME9 By: CNJ
c�
0
670
N
2
Q_
Z
Z)
w
U)
H
0
••1
650
X
LU
t=
g
LU
LU
a
2
Dwg. No: �p
N
U
EX-5LU

.11
590
580
�ti
o�
M
nM
Con
CD
Co
Nv
.
M
w .
ti
co
LO
M o
CO
do .co
CO
cc
M
cliCD
N�
co
�Ln
co
CO
��
co
CO
O�
(o
CO
mM
O U)
CO
'm
00O
O U')
CO
O6
O Ln
CO
I6
m o
Ln
O�
CD co
Ln
Oco
cz to
In
0 O�
O co
C0
O
w
I\
I
4.2—�Z—
II
18" RCP
_
------
--
18"
15" RCP XIN
4-14
•
r �
I �
,
J
4.
`-PROP. 72
RCP
BURIED 1'
�ti
o�
M
nM
Con
CD
Co
Nv
.
M
w .
ti
co
LO
M o
CO
do .co
CO
cc
M
cliCD
N�
co
�Ln
co
CO
��
co
CO
O�
(o
CO
mM
O U)
CO
'm
00O
O U')
CO
O6
O Ln
CO
I6
m o
Ln
O�
CD co
Ln
Oco
cz to
In
0 O�
O co
C0
O
w
21+00 21+50 22+UU 22+50
APPLICATION TRACKING NUMBER:
SAW- - -
landscape architecture
om civil engineering
planning
DPR Associates, Inc. ■ 420 Hawthorne Lane ■ Charlotte, NC 28204
phone [phone] ■ fax [phone] ■ www.dprassociates.net
f•�CQIII �Cfli11 Q/II;
CROSSING TWO - SECTION VIEW
SCOTTS RUN PH. 2
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
24+50 25+00 25+50 26+00
590
580
Scale: 1"= 40' z Date: 12/1/17 Dwg. No:
Job #: 16036 E "n_ 6
o IIIao 80 By: CNJ
M
O
N
2
Z
Z)
w
U)
F-
H
0
U)
to

D
34
1% ANNUAL 00
CHANCE
FLOOD PLAIN 0.2 % ANNUAL
D BOUNDARY CHANCE
LINE (100 FLOOD PLAIN
d YR) N(500
LINEYR) UP fR N
RC4 /,D
?7js �
L- L- L_ LSa� ZONE ' / _ 4_3 F 99
■■,
DPR ASSID t , LIC. ■ 0 ho�rne Lane
phone 3 120 ■ 7 332.121��1
SF
gNORfk'v
N
c�
</ N f c
Pq 3q I%iFf/(< fR a
S
08 RIM:
RIM: '1199 04 Mam
20 �3, f!: 58354g 9 =oINVUT: 582.34PG2�9
R_30 jop
r^ 1
7
o I
g���C�
O \ZVNE 'X"
1hO�Oh°GO ; (FUTURE)
.yry 0� 1 p0
1
EX. PERENNIAL
STREAM "C"
1 ZONI CENTER(; / I
v
EX. SS'
Q- RIM: 599.03 �NN•p
N/F ' I INV III: f
TRUE HOMES, LLC. 586.13
PARCEL ID #031-152-30 INV CUT:
DB 2J10 PG 692 1
585.94
#10211 I /I
BEAGLE CLUB RD.
1,565,568 SF
35.940 AC
ZONED: R-3 _
\ I
i
P•gR��k,(j/F
CC Og 89S/il'03f -C
�M(g! FR'p ' pSPACf
3
\ IX. SSMH 1
RIM:
fMMgn/ fA S te,,.. INV IN: N 1
PgRE C�PfR �OT4 NC�7q �T 46•% ' 868
20'0/486 D 10N F0: '�p37g5 09 CI I 7 32. BARB WIRE FENCE 1
g Mx� 6 , Rq�- �3, / INV 3Ur:
! 587.30
AP, PA--' ARP ?OT \
7578 ION f0 ' - - PgRCfC /OepRRO \
,Mks? 2�fp; #V3/4sR C
HO
74
78
UO\S\ CgTMWNfRS `S2
wOq q
79 P�ofNOTo 1• ER 4Rq 2pA 'fMJ7 g
AV
73 O NEp:Mk A561? x`? 8 RIM: 60284
INV IN: 588.68
^J 80 INV OUT: 588.40
\ � s
HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. INC. CATAWBA RIVE
C9 PLANTATION
PARCEL ID #03145598
a O ZONED: MX -2
r
200' WIDE
UNDISTURBED
W BUFFER
MBR33EPG 873
8z III \ I Illl
PERENNIAL
�. STREAM "A" NIF V,C
\� CENTER Ku,ER. 'A\Z4
PE• gg2A
`\\ LINE—(TYP.) gROp \O
pgGE\'995" PCE
9
SF
171
172
M ppN\5\pN
GpKMERE \ 5U. k6
-� OR�Pt\P532 PG Rik
� pNEp'
WIN NO. AA I
■
1 11
��
100
N
THE CHARLOTTE-
MECKLENBURG
BOARD OF
EDUCATION
PARCEL ID #03145110
DB 23455 PG 34
TRACT 2
ZONED: R-3
SCOTTS RUN
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
TRUE HOMES
GRAPHIC SCALE
50 100 200
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 100 ft.
D
PHASE 2 MAP
MB 37 PG, -BE
U OMES, LLC.
.EL 1 03115230
D 992 PG 692
/10211
AE CLUB RD.
1.565. 8 SES
/3)
140 \
141
O
r,�
N/F = m P
BROOKMERE, LLC
PARCEL ID #03148247
DB 9951 PG 24 �N
COMMON OPEN SPACE
1 BROOKMERE SUBDIVISION BROOKMERE SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1 MAP 4 PMnse t MAP 3
MB 32 PG 246 142 MB 32 PG 2"
ZONED: R-4
1 F
D VE
143 ( R LE WID PUBLICF-)
N/F 385.26'
165 ' TRUE HOMES LL
\ PARCEL ID d' O
#03115230 Q��r < VINYL
40 2 -STORY
SEASONO,L DB 289928992 PG 692
�! STREAM "8" / ZONED: R-3 v-
HousE
CENTER TBM #2: #5 REBAR WITH CAP c� pgqnn�Q✓
LIN.--(TYP.) N:573,977.39
��. E: 1,409,712.72 �_/p CCU
00 �q i ELEV: 666.99SHED tg A? 145 y /
t N`•
X. PERENNIAL
STREAM "A" - C0144 y
CENTER AOL RAY
LINE—(TYP.)
1 30 '>O A /'D CF'/ o'9RC+
PCCO FO,. Rss AR' \� 2�0 S�
IX. JURISDICTIONAL \
AREA (0.002
400
182
S);
0
a
ON
�
�. \ �l � -• ; . �/`� �. %moi
ffame
LPE- ozn o 13
\ �\ 8,557 SF �? I O .Q "
- t 818 SF t, Cb Q; 9• NF
^. O,y/F �Et'S�" Iiy0 °O GUTTER (T/P) CURB de 14
CO,yC EX. 8" OAK
MON p "rq EX. 10" BRADFORD/PEA 15
�FOUND�C 9g 9�?�C �ST /pt�ZON2 gyp. ON \IX. 10" BRADFORD P
0 3) (/ 7J,S. "EX. 6 R FENCE
�99g4Gs��'i1 1) 3
EN;9;8z�92 USS 7 STORMWATER
CGR 0.99984392 v 18\ 2' VALLEY CURB &
GUTTER (TYP.)
6 PLAN
5 1-3-18
4

Scott's Run
Attachments
ATTACHMENT A:
Agent Authorization Form
January 5, 2018
CWS Project No. 2014-3511

AGENT CERTIMCABON OF AUTHORIZATION
1, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the propertylproperties identified
herein, do authorize representative of the Wilmington District, I.T.S. Army Carps of
Engineers (Corps) to ender upon the property herein described for the purpose of
conducting on-site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of
the U,5. subject to Federal ,jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
1, Mr, Jeffrey M. Ruasuer, representing True Homes, LLC, hereby certify that I have
authorized Gregg Antem"n of Carolina Wetland Services, hic. 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.
P ' nt's signature
Date
Z", C. *��
Agent's signature
6-22-2016
Date -
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

Scott's Run
Attachments
January 5, 2018
CWS Project No. 2014-3511
ATTACHMENT B:
SHPO and USFWS Response Letters

S -
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
April 6, 2017
Aliisa Harjuniemi
Carolina Wetland Services
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Develop Scott's Run Subdivision, Mt. Holly Road, Charlotte, CWS 2014-3511,
Mecklenburg County, ER 17-0471
Dear Ms. Harjuniemi:
Thank you for your letter of March 7, 2017, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
(�� ):�Lvck�A-�QA�
jam' Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
April 27, 2017
Gregg Antemann
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
Dear Mr. Antemann:
FISH WFLDMF6
aEffV'0"
Subject: Scott's Run Residential Development Project; Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-17-326
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence received via email on March 30, 2017 wherein you request our comments with
regards to potential project impacts on federally protected species. The Service submits the
following comments in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321
et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, you (on behalf True Homes, LLC) are seeking a
Nationwide Permit 29 to develop an approximately 36 acre parcel of land near Mount Holly,
North Carolina. The project area is dominated by mixed hardwood forest with some transition
habitats bordering a maintained utility line right-of-way that bisects the project parcel. The
project vicinity is primarily composed of residential and commercial landuses.
You indicate that jurisdictional stream (and possibly wetlands) occur onsite and the proposed
project will impact these features. Beyond this, you did not provide a detailed project
description, site plans, description of impacts to waters of the U.S., or proposed impact
avoidance/minimization/mitigation measures.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Suitable roosting habitat may be present within the action area for the federally threatened
northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). However, the final 4(d) rule (effective as of
February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared bat associated with activities
that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from
a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June 1 — July 31). Based on the
information provided, the project (which may require tree clearing) would occur at a location

where any incidental take that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule.
Although it is not required, we encourage the Applicant to avoid tree clearing activities
during the maternity roosting season from May 15 — August 15 if possible.
Several populations of the federally endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii) occur within the project vicinity (including offsite occurrences within the utility line
right-of-way that intersects the project parcel). CWS staff identified and delineated potential
suitable habitat for this species within the proposed project area. You visited a reference
population prior to conducting pedestrian surveys on March 22, 2017 and determined that above
ground vegetative structures which are diagnostic of the species were present at that time. No
individuals were observed during targeted onsite survey efforts of potential habitat, and you have
determined that the project would have no effect on this species. We appreciate your survey
efforts and accept these results. Since numerous occurrences of this plant are known in the
project vicinity, we wish to remind you that obligations under section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act must be reconsidered if new information reveals impacts of this action that may
affect listed species in a manner not previously considered. Accordingly, contact this office if
you or other project proponents identify the presence this species during subsequent onsite
activities.
Based on the lack of suitable habitat and/or negative survey results, you determined that the
proposed project would have no effect on any other federally protected species.
Please be aware that in accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate federal
agency or its designated representative to review its activities or programs and to identify any
such activities or programs that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. If
it is determined that the proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally listed as
endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated.
Without additional project information the Service cannot offer specific comments and
recommendations that may help to conserve, protect, or enhance fish and wildlife resources.
However, we offer the following general comments and recommendations.
Impervious Surfaces and Low Impact Development
Increase in development results in commensurate increases in impervious surface area and
storm -water runoff. Impervious surfaces (such as roofs, roads, and parking lots) collect
pathogens, metals, sediment, and chemical pollutants and quickly transmit them (via storm -water
runoff) to receiving waters. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, this non -point
source pollution is one of the major threats to water quality in the United States, posing one of
the greatest threats to aquatic life, and is linked to chronic and acute illnesses in human
populations from exposure through drinking water and contact recreation. Increased stormwater
runoff also directly damages aquatic and riparian habitat, causing stream -bank and stream
channel scouring.
Best management practices can reduce, but not eliminate, pollutant loadings of common
stormwater pollutants. Designs that collect runoff and allow it to infiltrate the soil have the
highest documented pollutant -removal efficiency, eliminating nearly all lead, zinc, and solids
and more than 50 percent of total phosphorous. Ponds and wetlands, which allow contaminants
2

to settle out of the water column or be broken down by sunlight and biological activity, can
remove more than 70 percent of bacteria. Where detention ponds are used, stormwater
outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior to reaching any natural stream or
wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow for the slow discharge of storm
water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm -water surges; thermal spikes; and
sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Also, because the purpose of storm -water -control
measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no storm -water -control measures or best
management practices should be installed within any stream (perennial or intermittent), wetland
or riparian area.
Areas of 10- to 20 -percent impervious surface (such as roofs, roads, and parking lots) double the
amount of storm -water runoff compared to natural cover and decrease deep infiltration
(groundwater recharge) by 16 percent. At 35- to 50 -percent impervious surface, runoff triples,
and deep infiltration is decreased by 40 percent. Therefore, we recommend the use of low -
impact -development techniques, such as grassed swales in place of curb and gutter, rain gardens,
and wetland retention areas, for retaining and treating storm -water runoff rather than the more
traditional measures, such as large retention ponds, etc. Sufficient retention designs should be
implemented to allow for the slow discharge of storm water, attenuating the potential adverse
effects of storm -water surges; thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges.
These designs often cost less to install and significantly reduce environmental impacts from
development.
Stream Crossings
Where feasible, we encourage the permittee to first consider using bridges or spanning structures
for any necessary permanent roadway crossings as they have the least impact on riparian habitats
when correctly designed and installed. If culverts are the only stream crossing option, they
should be designed and installed to provide for a minimum water depth during low-flow/dry
periods. Sufficient water depth should be maintained in all flow regimes so as to accommodate
both the upstream and downstream movement of aquatic species. Water depth inside the culvert
must be adequate for fish to be completely immersed and all other aquatic life to move freely.
The culvert should be designed and installed at the same slope as the stream grade to maintain an
acceptable water velocity for aquatic life passage and for stream substrate characteristics to be
retained within the culvert.
Where feasible, we recommend the use of multiple barrels, in addition to the low -flow barrel, to
accommodate flood flows. Floodplain barrels should be placed on or near stream bank -full or
floodplain bench elevation and discharge onto floodplain benches. Where appropriate, install
sills on the upstream end of floodplain barrels to restrict or divert the base stream flow to a single
barrel. If the culvert is longer than 40 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be
installed in a manner that mimics the existing stream pattern. This will enhance the passage of
aquatic life by: (1) depositing and retaining sediment in the barrel, (2) maintaining channel
depth and flow regimes, and (3) providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms.
Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground -disturbing
activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing native vegetation
3

should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native grass and tree species as soon as the project is completed.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 225, if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-17-326.
E.c David Schaeffer; USACE
Olivia Munzer; NCWRC
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet A. Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

Scott's Run
Attachments
ATTACHMENT C:
January 5, 2018
CWS Project No. 2014-3511
Stream Classification and Wetland Data Forms

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: /a, j I- ;�vl (f
Project/Site: S(D 'S fjA,41
Latitude: 35. 3111330
Evaluator:" AVtlCounty:
M��
Longitude: - 80. 984656°
Total Points:
Scream is a: least intermittent �,
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other rjcpl,
ii? 19 or plremal if? 30"
Ephemeral Intermittenterennia
a. g- Quad Name:
A. Geornor holo (Subtotal
F Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
1
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool. step -pool,
ripple -poo! sequence
0
1
2
1 1.5
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
25. Algae
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
FACW = 0.75;
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
Notes:
3
S. Headcuts
fr
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No=
0
Yes =Q)
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology {Subtotal = �J
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2
13. Iran oxidizing bacteria 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1 _ 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0. 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0 Yes
C. Biology Subtotal = &.5' w
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
2 3
21. Aquatic Maliusks
1
2 3
22, Fish
0
0.
1 1.5
23. Crayfish
0
1 1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.
1 1.5
25. Algae
0.5
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:
� V .7�f/
JV AvIr
l
�•a�
D Lt ° ,W
1�ev +'li(if
e- &
11L
i/s

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:r �'- ap�
Project/Site: 'Sys
Latitude: 35.3122480
Evaluator:
County:
Longitude: - 80. 9820941
Total Points:
Stream is least intermittent
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other (/P�
at
Ephemeral Intermittent �D
e.g. Quad Name: s a Q
if ? 19 or erenr+ial if ? 30'
2
A. Geomorphology [Subtotal = rk ]
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18 Continuity of channel ped and hank
0
1
2
4
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
4
1
2
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
1
3
5. Activelrelict floodplain
0
1
1
3
5. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
1.5
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1
3
S. Headcuts
❑
FACW = 4.75;
2
3-
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.
10. Natural valley
❑
0.5
1
.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 4
Yes
3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = a )
12. Presence of Baseflow ❑ 1 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0. 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0 Yes 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = -0--) A V
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
4
24. Macroberithos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
Q3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
❑
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
1
1.5
25. Algae
.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 4.75;
OBL = 1.5 Other = 4
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
dotes:
Sketch:
P
3fi vrc��s'��5
EJ U

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
[ate: �
ProjectfSite:SC
Latitude: 35.3113871
Evaluator:]� i�i 2L ��.�
1
County: !�
Longitude: - 80. 9807780
Total Points.
Stream determination circle one)
Other
Stream is least l ID �
-
Ephemeral termitten Parannial
e.g. Quad Name:
ifa 19ra
if2mi`'
rf? 99 or perennial i{� 3t7' C`
a
2
3
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
12 Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
1 1.5
1
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
/+1
z
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
Q
1
1 1.5
3
5. Active/relict Floodplain
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual,
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
Cv
2
3
8. Headcuts
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No -
Yes
= 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 1,s )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
(D 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
9 1
2 3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = [0 ]
18. Fibrous roots in stream bed 3
02
1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in stream bed
2
1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0
2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2 3
22, Fish
0.5 1
1 1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1 1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1 1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1 1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OR = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual,
Notes:
Sketch:
�i]�trN�t�
�•��r 1'G��
`S.l
�V�' L��tfl �� l��S

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: ScoHS />� City/CDunty: k�fn r Sampling Date: L1
T
Applicant/Owner: / Y',` /lo, --7e 5 � .�. L State: Sampling Point: 4A
Investigator(s): AMI /`I/1Z Section, Township, Range: ��tzr�o 4
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.); CYt HLC Local relief (concave, convex, none): C-O-%ec-" Slope (%): 0 V
Subregion (LRR or LR ): 131. Eat: 35.3124480 Lang: -80.9848660 Datum: N409 3
Soil Map Unit Name: fn,Q,Cco , L", f 0,2-11, SCJ cS NWI classification: 6-144
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes �>C No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes lC 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? YesNo Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes >,-No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
DSS �or.t.( f`S 7e Cff-+Q-.Y�S�rL1Lr�zc
wcrf-<<,.d a acS
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one Is required; check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
" True Aquatic Plants (1314)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
kDrainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Mass Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (Bl)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
>� Crayfish Burrows (CB)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
Geamorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes ._,_. No
Depth (inches): 0 z
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes JL No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), If available:
Remarks:
(�Ift�C,+r�YS �tyY
`` )1 + f1
WC�f�U �(�iolgc, x
r fJ6,1
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -- Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants,
�f Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum {Plot size: ) % Cover _5pecies? Status
1. Ge�tpin, ,j !ro _7 - Ir44
3. 6
4.
5.
7.
i7 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: � 520% of total cover: J9
Sapling/Shruh Stratum (Plat size:_ IS F�_ }
1, L, i d-e..b,t f ,tc:#,k - ro 7 rpt
2. C ns s 0.M 4.,, c• — �rytttl
3.
4.
5.
7
9.
I �- = Total Cover
50% of total cover: _ 20% of total cover: Z.
Herb Stratum (plot size: 1 0 �- )
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
6
Species Across All Strata:
2. L� r�Y«G.
Percent of Dominant Species
A/
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3. C3oGl�/� c r��; c
Prevalence Index worksheet:
/V
A/RA
OBL species X1
FACW species x 2 =
5, a mss l/1`Geetni�c s --
�"
/✓
476L
6. t! O�l'4 Lr� t carrlCy
Column Totals: (A)
r -^L
8.
9.
11.
G I = Total Cover
50% of total cover: $ 20% of total cover:
WoodV Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 �4 )
3
4
5
Z = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 1 20% of total cover: 2
(Include photo numbers here or an a separate sheet.)
by n/, P- e d",tncr.4 1/C­�c.���-t
Dc WC { ki,
Sampling Point: Qrl-WLthl4M
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
6
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(AIB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species X1
FACW species x 2 =
FAG species x 3
FACU species x4=
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = BIA =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.01
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
he present, unless disturbed or problematic.
of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 It (1
m) tall.
Herb – All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.26 ft tall.
Woody vine –All woody vines greater than 3.28 It in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation �/
Present? Yes /\ No
C,IC r11C
DS Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color moist % Color (moist) % Type Loc
0- / s /v I K 5/2- g 8 7, S y.< l L 2 c r�
/S-20 /y0
Hydric Soil Indicators;
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Mucic (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
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):
Sampling Point:
Texture Remarks
Location: PL -Pore Lining, M -Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (59) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
lndr-.+.tS /nrf N�J4,C
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Other (Fxplain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Sail Present? Yes .mac Na
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region I
Project/Site: Scots Aon City/County: Sampling Date: {
Applicantlowner: Tr`C %ai-+CS LL C State: A/L SamplingPoint:9�
Investigator(s): Y�f M/'IL Section, Township, Range: L6tsr 144
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): GTC`c� Local relief (concave, convex, none): ­01LC- slope (%): 6
Subregion (LRR or Lt }: it 3 Lat: 35.3126030 Lang: -80.9849370 Datum: 4//1P $3
Soil Map Unit Name: P-t'le-4- Se, �%� �---A 7- 5- q S,y' djwt f NWI classification:
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Na (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Sail 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 Na Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nar within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: p t
fcXn'ta rOa1�n`1 1�x i Coe st"t-4 �� �o�{ a /� � �� � Y, S C/10,,�­? c l
c�rl��i r
CA 169,
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators,
Secondary Indicators minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
— Surface Sail Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres an Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
~ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sails (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
" Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No_ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No A_
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
)
1 u O j r�fjLG Ca. ( S �o �N"r 4cn pit Y Y 0tlO,� L
a Y[ fi 5c -L I,
US Army Corps of Fngineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Paint:
rrtt
Tree Stratum (Piot size: U t` 1 )
1. cc, -to/ tg
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
.50 4
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are 0BL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are CBL, FACW, or FAC:
{
(A)
r'
y (B)
U
o (AIB)
2. n,1'k 4-0
4. �1^r�?�pticj V�1 ���rc�n Nr�-
5,L; r�vL�..dr� 1,Jr {LAG L V /V Q
7
Prevalence Index worksheet:
L b - Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of jotal cover:
rfi 20% of total cover: 211
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub
Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species x 2 =
1
FAC species x 3 -
FACU species x4=
UPI -species x 5 -
2
3
4
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence index = BlA =
5.
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
B.
2 -Dominance Test is a50%
9.
_ 3 -Prevalence Index is s3.01
= Total Cover
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
10 t-
20% of total cover:
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb
1
Stratum (Plot size: )
7',0,<j C"', 4, AY-1 rare , 5
Ll
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2.
LoiLZY-% j -c YQrA1(0
�� — /,5jt
3.
P� A k ,2c.tsz s Q ,, {
-
�� �a1 1I
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
•�.r7cx a� .d red
2- 11� !r/fi�
befinitions of Four Vegetation Strata;
1—ce, }'z, 2— N y/i
5—
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7•
height.
8.
SaplinglShrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 R (1
10.
m) tall.
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:
9, 5 20% of total cover:
Woody
Sf�
Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
1.
�+
2.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes 'z�__ No
50% of total cover: 20% or total cover:
photo numbers here or on as separate sheet.)
J�
/A
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2,0

SOIL 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 molst %
Calor moist % Type To
Texture Remarks
0-10 /()w `t `06
10`Z() 2, y 1G (►
5�,. s,�
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix,
Hydric Soil Indicators;
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
—2 cm Muck (A1o) (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 Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (51) (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 (1719) (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):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Nz �oo
k Gid
y7 d C SCS 7 ,
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: c- -Hs �!`/^ utylCounty: /7(rL�-tO` V Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner. / b r"e- /'7`r z 5 State: �� Sampling Paint: W t 6L
Investigator(s): AkIl A X) M Section, Township, Range: 6,cr 10, K
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): k<y(r c e— Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope m: C�
Subregion (LRR or LR ): J11'3i •b Lat: 35. 3110310 Lang: -80.9807010 Datum: WAD 9 �
Soil Map Unit Name: i` 5' �f'^ 2 S (S Sly ej NWI classification:
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (if no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes i` 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 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
'rte ffa��l!1E�L4lSd'L i
�t(����d GYT+i.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
W Drainage Patterns (1310)
>C, Saturation (A3)
7< Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
_ Water Marks (Bi)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
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 (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Dl)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
)C Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): r
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):T
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): Uri
' `
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 Point: 01 3"'Veoi-c-C
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum {Plot size: u ) X. Cover Soecies? status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: -5 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species�)
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: % U (A1B)
Prevalence Indox worksheet:
7.
S = Total Cover / Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover: Z 20% of total cover: i OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: l 5 i tiT ] FACW species x 2 =
1 FAC species x 3 =
2 FACU species x 4 —
3 UPL species x 5 =
4 Column Totals: (A) (B)
5_ Prevalence Index = BIA =
7. _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
B. 2 -- Dominance Test is >50°%
9. 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
= Total Cover ~ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: r� Y�data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 i � `rte �� � �^ Z r—A( _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3 'Indicators of hydric sail and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5.
6 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
10, m) tall,
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: Z- 20% of total cover:
) Wvine —All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: P height.
1.
Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes T No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
f w 4 i T'
U5 Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
or
Depth
(inches)
Matrix
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type Lac
Color (moist)
%
U-
N y,(S
'�. 5 y/ -.S) � 3 C ez
2" z
-7 yX 6 c fl-
z_-
J-26
C P�
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosal (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
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 (55)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Sampling Point; 1J4- 3uei C(
Texture Remarks
RM -Reduced Matrix, MS -Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
�?Y
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (SB) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
,Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Hmbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Sails (F19) (MLRA 948)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic,
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
k1_6 A- (- 5 'ad+ --<< r i -r -5c" 4
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Version 2.0

ProjerUSite:
Applicant/Owner;
Investigatar(s);
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
City/County: /V k ["-6t Sampling Date:
%y �t 'Jr•?^--rS L L State: %"L Sampling Point:
Section, Township, Range: C p" % ip4k
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): {� Locarelief (concave, convex, none): /"'� Slope (%): U I
Subregion (LRR or LR ); 1 3 G La 35.31 . 1 021 ° Long: -80.9806190 Datum: ImW
Soil Map Unit Name: �' �k'a 2 �._ Lt Q' ' I' S Iv k r NWI classification;
Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes -lc__ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil 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—,V Is the Sampled Area +'
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No �c
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks: !!
'e -
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
~ Saturation (A3)
LC Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
— Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water-Stalned Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No .X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No 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.
Absolute Dominant Indicato
Tree Stratum (Plotsize: 30 t4 ) %Cover Species? Status
i.
2.
3.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size; r rt 1
1. ce,hi'j 4��� lclS b ��CV
2.
6.
7.
a.
9.
Z d = Total Cover
50%Q of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ( u �� )
1. L / (r aG 'c �-„ /c Z Ll FIqC
2. i2t. a ^oCrS <LS L<_ Z n(V
4. 013},c1��. cca�Slcir�cS '2— %'fl
5. - "rIiLImo/
7
Sampling Point:, blo� `p(j
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
V (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
J
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
{J (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 = BIA =
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_~ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9, than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 It (1
10, m) tall.
11 • Herb – All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
t'y = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3,28 ft tall.
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover;
1 �a� Woody vine – All woody vines greater than 3,28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot Size: ) height.
1.
4. Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
= Total Cover Present? Yes No
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
0 -,l
G- YL fP ( 0 �
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont –Version 2.0

SOIL_
Sampling Paint: —`--orf—A
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 (mois°A Type Loc
t
Texture Remarks
v-- z l 2
; S yc j i 3 C /9C_
sd r.. - -.
/_ 3 rUy
sc.✓� lrs�
1l�-ZD loo
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, 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 Fpipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,
148) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thln Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (i=19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
r, Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ 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 947, 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 prohlematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
7Hydr,,,5,il
Depth (inches):
Present? Yes No
Remarks:
�< cc •tea �
J
f J1�i SoSis GYC �SZ�v.-'i.
1l-� _ � �
�
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -- Version 2.D

Scott's Run
Attachments
ATTACHMENT D:
N CN H P Database Query
January 5, 2018
CWS Project No. 2014-3511

� F
No tura; CIA d
Cultural Resvurcvs
March 6, 2017
Aliisa Harjuniemi
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
RE: Scott's Run; 2014-3511
Dear Aliisa Harjuniemi:
ROY COOPER
cdter?m
SUSI E. SQLNIELTO_Y
5acrarca3
Attachment D
N C N H D E-3072
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural
heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have
been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is
included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) easement,
or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Matthew Hebb at matthew.hebb&ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
-Nothing Compares--
aaeeof wi th Carolina I ❑epartmentef flaturad and Cultual Resaurr s I tiatur A Heritage Program
121 W_JonesStreet I Raleigh, KC 27W3
D351 Mail 52rvim Center j Raleigh, NC 2760-1651
www-ncnhp,org 1 373707-6107

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Scott's Run
Project No. 2014-3511
March 6, 2017
NCNHDE-3072
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Federal
TaxonomicI
EO ID
Scientific Name
Common Name.
Last
Element
Group
5 -Very
---
Significantly
G3G4
Observation
Occurrence
Rare
3 -Medium
Date
Rank
Butterfly
34493
Neonympha helicta
Helicta Satyr
1940-06-15
H
Freshwater
31504
Strophitus undulatus
Creeper
2005-05-03
E
Bivalve
---
Significantly
GNR
SH
Freshwater
29548
Villosa delumbis
Eastern Creekshell
2005-05-03
E
Bivalve
G3
S3
5 -Very
---
Endangered
Moss
23253
Fissidens scalaris
A Plume Moss
1934-11-08
H
Natural
33726
Mesic Mixed Hardwood
---
2015-04-08
C
Community
Endangered
Forest (Coastal Plain
G3
S3
2 -High
---
Significantly
Subtype)
S1
Vascular Plant
13743
Delphinium exaltatum
Tall Larkspur
1800s
Hi?
Vascular Plant
16831
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's Sunflower
1999-06-30
D
Vascular Plant
20625
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's Sunflower
2010
X
Vascular Plant
34548
Ilex longipes
Georgia Holly
2015-04-08
BC
Vascular Plant
23042
Matelea decipiens
Glade Milkvine
2015
E
Vascular Plant
23043
Parthenium auriculatum
Glade Wild Quinine
2015
E
Natural Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name Representational Rating
Shuffletown Powerline Rare Plant Site R2 (Very High)
Long Creek Bluff R2 (Very High)
Page 2 of 4
Accuracy
Federal
State
Global
State
Status
Status
Rank
Rank
5 -Very
---
Significantly
G3G4
S1?
Low
Rare
3 -Medium
---
Threatened
G5
S3
3 -Medium
---
Significantly
G4
S4
Rare
3 -Medium
---
Significantly
GNR
SH
Rare Other
2 -High
---
---
G3
S3
5 -Very
---
Endangered
G3
S2
Low
3 -Medium
Endangered
Endangered
G3
S3
2 -High
Endangered
Endangered
G3
S3
2 -High
---
Significantly
G5
S1
Rare Peripheral
3 -Medium
---
Significantly
G5
S3
Rare Peripheral
3 -Medium
---
Significantly
G3G4
S3
Rare
Throughout
Collective Rating
C4 (Moderate)
C4 (Moderate)

Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name onil
NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund Easement NC DNCR, Clean Water Management Trust State
Fund
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https�Hncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on March 6, 2017; source: NCNHP, Q1 January 2017. Please resubmit your
information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 3 of 4

NCNHDE-3072: Scott's Run
March 6. 2017
❑
Project Boundary
❑
Suffered Projacl Boundary
0
NHP Natural Area [NHNA]
❑
Managed Area [MARPA]
Page 4 of 4
f 23.921
0 0.2 OJ 0$ mi
1 11
0 0.325 0155 1.3 km
' . Evi. HERE D .. ini ,r memeni P C p �� vSGs.
FAO, 4P . NRG N. Gm W. IGH. 4daaler NL. G<ewroe Sway. E�n.lq�rt
W-. Eu. Jw IIbMI �+0] •mwupo 4epFryiMl. G upHu`ae m
—.rte ub cis — e�

Scott's Run
Attachments
ATTACHMENT E:
NC SAM Forms
January 5, 2018
CWS Project No. 2014-3511

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM Perennial Stream A - SCPI
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #: Attachment E
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Scott's Run 2. Date of evaluation: 2/17/2016
3. Applicant/owner name: True Homes, LLC 4. Assessor name/organization: KMT & AVH; CWS
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Catawba River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.311474; -80.983274
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SCP1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 659 If
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5' ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 10' 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A ���
valley shape (skip for ®B
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mit) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) ❑Size 4 (>- 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (01 ❑II ❑III DIV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish 0303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/suDDlementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? FYes MNo
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
®A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent—❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y U)C ❑I Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) LM ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots L) 2 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Perennial Stream A - SCP 1
6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ®A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
®A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 0 ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent—❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y U)C ❑I Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) LM ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots L) 2 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12
Perennial Stream A - SCP1
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ®Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ®Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ®Other fish
❑ ®Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water > 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ON ON
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
OF None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
®A ®A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >- 230
Notes/Sketch
Perennial Stream A - SCPI
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB
RB
®A ®A ®A
®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B
❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C
❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D
❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E
❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure -
streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A
Mature forest
❑B ❑B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E F
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
®A ®A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity - assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >- 230
Notes/Sketch

Stream Site Name Scott's Run
Stream Category Pb2
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1 Perennial Stream A - SCPI
Date of Assessment 2/17/2016
Assessor Name/Organization KMT & AVH; CWS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
HIGH

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM Perennial Stream B - SCP2
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Scott's Run 2. Date of evaluation: 2/17/2016
3. Applicant/owner name: True Homes, LLC 4. Assessor name/organization: KMT & AVH; CWS
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Catawba River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.311474; -80.983274
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SCP2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 1,815 If
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 6' ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5' 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION: Perennial Stream A - SCPI
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑AB
valley shape (skip for ®
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mit) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) ❑Size 4 (>- 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (01 ❑II ❑III DIV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish 0303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric Perennial Stream B - SCP2
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
®A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses °, ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) g E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
®C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) LM ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots L) 2 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams) Perennial Stream B - SCP2
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ®Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ®Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ®Salamanders/tad poles
❑ ®Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water > 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ON ON
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
OF None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width —streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams) Perennial Stream B - SCP2
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E F Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ®A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet Perennial Stream B - SCP2
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Scott's Run Date of Assessment
2/17/2016
Stream Category Pb2 Assessor Name/Organization
KMT & AVH; CWS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
HIGH

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM Seasonal Stream C - SCP3
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Scott's Run 2. Date of evaluation: 2/17/2016
3. Applicant/owner name: True Homes, LLC 4. Assessor name/organization: KMT & AVH; CWS
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Catawba River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.311474; -80.983274
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): SCP3 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 247 If
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 6' ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3' 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑AB
valley shape (skip for ®
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mit) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) ❑Size 4 (>- 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (01 ❑II ❑III DIV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish 0303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
®C > 25% of channel unstable

7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
®A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses °, ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) g E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) LM ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots L) 2 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Seasonal Stream C - SCP3
6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
®A ®A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
❑B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
®A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses °, ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) g E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y LC ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) LM ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
®D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots L) 2 ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12
Seasonal Stream C - SCP3
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ®Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
® ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tad poles
® ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
®A ®A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water > 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
ON ON
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
❑A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
®B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

Seasonal Stream C - SCP3
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E F Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E 230
Notes/Sketch

Seasonal Stream C - SCP3
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
HIGH
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
(2) In -stream Habitat
Stream Site Name Scott's Run Date of Assessment 2/17/2016
MEDIUM
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization
KMT & AVH; CWS
MEDIUM
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
MEDIUM
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
LOW
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
MEDIUM
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
MEDIUM
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
MEDIUM