20170733 Ver 2_401 Application_20171117

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 2015 - 02481 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder F-1 Assign Action ID Number in ORM
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Harrisburg Village
2. Work Type: Private ❑- Institutional F-1 Government F-1 Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and Be]:
The purpose of this project is to build a residential development.
4. Property Owner/ Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Eastwood Homes; POC: Pat Quinn
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: Gregg Antemann, PWS
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: SAW -2015-02481
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
Southeast of the Harrisburg Drive and Roberta Road intersection in Harrisburg, North
Carolina: 35.329911N, -80.642257W
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: Multiple, please see the cover letter and PCN
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Cabarrus
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Harrisburg
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Rocky River
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑E Section 10 & 404
Regulatory Action Type:
F1 Standard Permit
0 Nationwide Permit # 29
E] Regional General Permit #
F-1 Jurisdictional Determination Request
F
]Unauthorized
Pre -Application Request
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)
October 30, 2017
Ms. Catherine Janiczak
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Satellite Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certification No. 4092
Harrisburg Village (SAW -2015-02481)
Harrisburg, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Dear Ms. Janiczak,
The Harrisburg Village site is approximately 51 acres in extent and is located southeast of the
Harrisburg Drive and Roberta Road intersection in Harrisburg, North Carolina (Figures 1 and 2,
attached). The purpose of this project is to develop the property into a residential development.
Eastwood Homes 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 (PCN) pursuant to
Nationwide Permit No. 29 (Attachment B) to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for proposed
impacts to approximately 276 linear feet of stream impacts, 0.15 acre wetland impacts.
Project History
An application for the Harrisburg Village project was completed on June 12, 2017 and delivered
to the USACE and NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) — Division of Water
Resources (DWR), DWR#17-0733, requesting approval for a Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 29.
The Pre -construction Application (PCN) for a NWP No. 29, dated June 12, 2017, was withdrawn
on August 16, 2017 by the USACE due to discrepancies with the delineated wetland and stream
boundaries described in the PJD, as well as, the project design not avoiding and minimizing
impacts to waters of the U.S. to the maximum extent practicable, based on review by the
USACE and NCDEQ-DWR.
On September 8, 2017 CWS scientists re -delineated the Harrisburg Village project site. One
additional wetland area was mapped adjoining Wetland DD. The total extent of the new wetland
area totals 0.24 -acre. This wetland fringe is separated from the original Wetland DD channel by
an upland berm. Additionally, a section on Wetland EE was classified and mapped as a
seasonal (intermittent) stream channel (Stream D), totaling 186 -linear feet. Stream D channel
transitions from a wetland swale (Wetland EE) to a stream channel and back to a wetland,
where the stream channel loses definition and an ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Figure 4,
NORTH CAROLINA • SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS-INC.NET
Page 1 of 2

Harrisburg Village
Nationwide Permit No. 29
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Jurisdictional Boundaries Map, has been updated to show these additional jurisdictional
features, as described.
Four copies of the PCN application are being provided to the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) with a check of $570 for the 401 Water Quality Certification
approval fee. CWS is the Authorized Agent and should be copied on all project
correspondence.
Please do not hesitate to contact Gregg Antemann at 704-408-1683 or [e-mail]
should you have any questions or comments regarding this project.
Sincerely,
)�� (� - 7kZ_-_,,
Gregg Antemann, PWS
Principal Scientist
wiflillsq
WE 4 A" .'. 4
J
w 6.
'R`r�BhIPP 9il1��94;r
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Aliisa Harjuniemi, WPIT
Project Scientist
Figure 2: USGS Site Location
Figure 3: Aerial Imagery
Figure 4: Jurisdictional Boundaries
Attachment A - Agent Authorization Form
Attachment B - Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to NWP No. 29
Attachment C - Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (SAW -2015-02481)
Attachment D - Photopage (Photographs 1-10)
Attachment E - SHPO Map and Response Letter
Attachment F - NCNHP Data Review Report and USFWS Response Letter
Attachment G - Construction Plan Sheets: Proposed Impacts
Attachment H - DMS Acceptance Letter
Attachment I - NC SAM and NC WAM Forms
Cc: Mr. Alan Johnson, NCDEQ
Mr. Pat Quinn, Eastwood Homes
Page 2 of 2

C:\Users\AliisaHarjuniemi\Desktop\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS MapsM Vicinity.mxd

C:\Users\AliisaHarjuniemi\Desktop\Hardsburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\2. USGS.mxd

0C
ARRISEJa-
'' r URGl�R.�
J6.
r
owl
ft - 4N
a
aw O 'l 7 j_- • j�
�. ' /4pN• �C.,
cFNTFRiA
<'I <
` Imo
t - r ��
O r _
i
PHYSICIANS BLVD
Ilk., l3
HAGLERS
T
_ n
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY NC ONEMAP, DATED 2015.
BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY CABARRUS COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2016. 1,
r�
SCALE: DATE:
Ll
4
Legend
E Project Limits (51 ac.)
Streets
Tax Parcels
400 200 0 400 Fed
1 inch = 400 feet 5/31/2017 Aerial Imagery
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2015-3637 AVH Harrisburg Village
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: CAR 0 1-1 N A Harrisburg, North Carolina
GCA WETLAND SERVICES CWS Project No. 2015-3637
C:\Users\AliisaHaduniemi\Desktop\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\3. Aerial.mxd
FIGURE NO.
3

Seasonal RPW Stream BSeasonal RPW Stream C
— 1,056 If -- 74 If
O,
Wetland DD
— 0.28 ac.
Wetland CC
— 0.05 ac. 6
RPW Stream B
— 416 If
RPW Stream A
— 2,282 If
Seasonal RPW Stream D
1— 186 If 11
Wetland AA
— 0.18 ac.
1 Wetland BB
— 0.01 ac.
Legend
Project Limits (51 ac.)
Perennial RPW Stream
......•• Seasonal RPW Stream
® Wetland
Streets
Tax Parcels
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY NC ONEMAP, DATED 2015. BACKROUND
GIS LAYERS PROVIDED BY CABARRUS COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2016. 0--► Photo Location and Direction
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, _
AND MAPPED USINGA SUB -FOOT GPS UNIT BY CWS, INC., ON OCTOBER 29, 2015. THE USACE ISSUED
APRELIMINARY DETERMINATION ON DECEMBER 20, 2016 (SAW -2015-02481) . W4C0 200 0 400 Feet
THE ON SITE WETLANDS WERE RE -DELINEATED ON SEPTEMBER 8, 2017 BASED ON THE SITE VISIT WITH
THE USACE AND NCDEQ ON JUNE 29, 2017.
_77 -
SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 400 feet 10/30/2017 Jurisdictional Boundaries
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2015-3637 AVH Harrisburg Village
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: CAROLINA Harrisburg, North Carolina 4
GCA WETLAND SERVICES CWS Project No. 2015-3637 /
C:\Users\AliisaHarjuniemi\Desktop\Submitted Permits\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\4. JD_NEW.mxd

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT A:
Agent Authorization Form
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified
herein, do authorize representative of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps 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.S. subject to Federal jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
I, Mr. Pat Quinn, representing Eastwood Homes, hereby certify that I have authorized
Gregg Antemann of Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. to act on my behalf and take all
actions necessary to the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this request for wetlands
determination / permitting and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in this application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
Y Uv 1M ►--
Applicant's signature
G i3
Date
I�Jun_ L ;Avi��,-
Agent's signature
6-7-2017
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT B:
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide
Permit No. 29

a`'oF wa rEgQc
❑ 1;ii� Y
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:
1 c.
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.
N Yes ❑ 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:
Harrisburg Village
2b.
County:
Cabarrus
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Harrisburg
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
JACKSON INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
12302-0195; 12273-0001; 12273-0004; 12273-0007
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Eastwood Homes; POC: Pat Quinn
3d.
Street address:
1209 Oak Crest Trail
3e.
City, state, zip:
Belmont, NC 28012
3f.
Telephone no.:
704-942-0248
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 Other, specify: Client
4b.
Name:
Mr. Pat Quinn
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Eastwood Homes
4d.
Street address:
2857 Westport Road
4e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28208
4f.
Telephone no.:
704-942-0248
4g.
Fax no.:
N/A
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
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.:
N/A
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):
55079984420000, 55170961880000, 55170836530000,
55079940620000, and 55170739150000
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.329911' Longitude: -80.642257°
1 c.
Property size:
51.47 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
UT to Rocky River
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c.
River basin:
Yadkin (HUC 03040105)
3.
Project Description
3a.
Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project boundary consists of five Cabarrus County parcels for a total of 51.47 -acres. The project site consists of a
forested area (see Figure 3, Aerial Imagery). Areas of pines, cleared sections, old forest trails and young vegetation
indicate the site has been logged recently. On-site wetlands and streams appear to have been ditched and straightened
from historic land -uses. Surrounding land -uses are predominantly single-family residential development with several
areas of undeveloped land. Stormwater from the adjoining residential development south of the project boundary is
piped onto the project property via two corrugated metal pipes. Off-site stormwater is conveyed directly to on-site
wetlands and stream channels.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.58 -acre of jurisdictional wetland area
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
2,698 linear feet of perennial stream, 1,316 linear feet of intermittent stream.
3d.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to develop approximately 40 acres of the 51 acres property into a multi -family residential
development. This project will provide residential housing within Harrisburg, North Carolina to meet the growth and
demand of an area of Cabarrus County that is experiencing significant population growth due to its proximity to
Charlotte, North Carolina. This project is being completed in four separate phases, but all the wetland and stream
impacts associated with this project will be included in this permit application. All adjoining subdivisions are owned by
individuals and/or companies not associated with this subdivision. The client is not aware of any Section 404 permits on
adjoining developments.
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:
Under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 29, unavoidable permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters associated with this
project are limited to a total of 0.14 -acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 236 -linear feet of jurisdictional stream channel. The
proposed permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. consist of fill for the construction of lots and roads.
Additional temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. are limited to 0.01 -acre of jurisdictional wetlands and 40 -linear feet of
jurisdictional stream channel from fill and excavation activities related to pump -around operations, sewer line installation,
and installation of stormwater BMP outfall pipes. Impact Maps 1 through 4, included in Attachment G, provide an overview
of the proposed impacts. Preliminary Grading Plan (E-1) and sheets C4-1 through C4-5 provide a more detailed depiction
of proposed site development activities. Pipe profiles and cross-sections are shown sheet E-2.
Fill for Lots and Roads
The proposed fill for units and roads are unavoidable in order to meet the project goals. The associated fill for units and
roads will result in a total of 50 -linear feet of permanent impacts to Seasonal RPW Stream B, 186 -linear feet of permanent
impacts to Seasonal RPW D, and 0.14 acres of permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands CC, DD, and EE. The
proposed impacts associated with the fill for the roads and lot placement are listed below:
S1: Fill associated with a proposed 108 If 48" RCP for construction of subdivision road 'Victoria Way', will result in 50 -linear
feet of permanent impacts and 10 -linear feet of temporary impacts to Seasonal RPW Stream B. Temporary impacts are
associated with fill for the pump -around operation. The plan view is depicted on Sheets C4-1 and C4-3; impacts are shown
on Impact Map Two. The proposed RCP will be countersunk 1 -ft. below the stream bed elevation to maintain aquatic life
movement.
S2: Fill associated with lot development will result in 186 -linear feet of permanent impact to Seasonal RPW Stream E. The
plan view is depicted on sheet C4-4; impacts are shown on Impact Map Three. This impact from fill is essential to create
more usable area on the project property by bringing the existing grade up to the proper elevation for development.
W1/W2: Fill for the construction of subdivision road 'Black Court' and an associated 91 -linear foot 42" RCP, will result in
0.005 -acre and 0.03 -acre permanent impacts to Wetland DD. The plan view is depicted on sheet C4-3; impacts are shown
on Impact Map One. Wetland hydrology will be maintained between the fringe area of Wetland DD and the main channel
with the construction of a stable wetland connector through the upland berm on both the inlet and outlet ends of the
proposed RCP.
W3/W4: Fill for the construction of subdivision road 'Victoria Way' and an associated 108 -linear foot 48" RCP, will result in
0.006 -acre and 0.03 -acre permanent impacts to Wetland DD. The plan view is depicted on sheets C4-1 and C4-3; impacts
are shown on Impact Map Two. Wetland hydrology will be maintained between the fringe area of Wetland DD and the main
channel with the construction of a stable wetland connector through the upland berm on the inlet end of the proposed RCP.
W5/W6: Excavation for construction of stormwater conveyances and outfall pipes from BMP 2, will result in 0.003 -acre and
0.01 -acre temporary impacts to Wetland CC and EE. The plan view is depicted on sheet C4-2; impacts are shown on
Impact Map Three. Trenching activities will involve setting aside excavated wetland soils that will be used to re -fill trenches
following pipe installations. Wetlands will be stabilized by returning to pre -construction grade, matting with bio -degradable
matting, and seeding with native wetland mix. Disturbed forested wetlands will be allowed to revegetate following work and
return to natural condition.
W7/W8: Fill associated with lot development and subdivision road construction will result in 0.04 -acre and 0.03 -acre of
permanent wetland impacts to Wetland CC and EE. The plan view is depicted on sheets C4-2 and C4-4; impacts are
shown on Impact Map Three. These fill impacts are essential to create a usable area on the project boundary by bringing
the existing grade up to the proper elevation for development.
Temporary Crossing for Sewerline
S3: The proposed construction easement associated with the sewer crossing is in the north -central portion of the property
between manholes 6 and 7 (MH-6/MH-7). 30 linear feet of temporary excavation impact is proposed to occur on Seasonal
RPW Stream B (sheet C4-2; Impact Map Four). No permanent impacts are associated with the sewer installation. The
proposed sewerline will cross Seasonal RPW Stream B at a perpendicular angle. The total width of the proposed
temporary construction easement is 30 feet. Temporary fill will be used to create a flow diversion so that work can be
completed in the dry. The temporary structures will be removed after the sewer stream crossing construction is complete.
Disturbed stream banks will be restored to original pre -construction contours, stabilized with biodegradable coir fiber
matting or other coconut fiber matting, and seeded with a native riparian seed mix.
Typical construction equipment such as bulldozer, dump truck, tract hoe will be used.
Page 4 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Nx 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 PreliminaryE] Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): CWS
Other: CWS
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The Harrisburg Village site was delineated by CWS scientists on October 29, 2015. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) issued a Preliminary Determination (SAW -2015-02481) on December 21, 2016 (Attachment C). Figure 4
depicts the delineated jurisdictional features within the Harrisburg Village project limits. Photographs 1-10 are
representative of the on-site jurisdictional features (Attachment D).
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.
An application for the Harrisburg Village project was completed on June 12, 2017 and delivered to the USACE and NC
Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) — Division of Water Resources (DWR), DWR#17-0733, requesting
approval for a Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 29. The June 12, 2017 NWP, Pre -construction Application (PCN) was
withdrawn on August 16, 2017 by the USACE due to discrepancies with the delineated wetland and stream boundaries
described in the PJD, as well as, the project design not avoiding and minimizing impacts to waters of the U.S. to the
maximum extent practicable, based on review by the USACE and NCDEQ-DWR.
On September 8, 2017 CWS scientists re -delineated the Harrisburg Village project site. One additional wetland area
was mapped adjoining Wetland DD. The total extent of the new wetland area totals 0.24 -acre. This wetland fringe is
separated from the original Wetland DD channel by an upland berm. Additionally, a section on Wetland EE was
classified and mapped as a seasonal (intermittent) stream channel (Stream D), totaling 186 -linear feet. Stream D
channel transitions from a wetland swale (Wetland EE) to a stream channel and back to a wetland, where the stream
channel loses definition and an ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Figure 4, Jurisdictional Boundaries Map, has been
updated to show these additional jurisdictional features, as described.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
N Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
This project is a phased project set to be developed in four phases of development, but all the wetland and stream impacts
associated with this project will be included in this permit application.
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 © 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
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.005
W2
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.03
W3
'
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.006
W4
'
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.03
W5
T
Excavate
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.003
W6
T
Excavate
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.01
W7
p
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.04
W8
p
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.03
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.15 ac.
2h. Comments:
Temporary wetland impacts: 0.01 -acre.
Permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands total 0.14 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)
S1
P
Fill
Stream B
INT
Corps
3
50
S1
T
Fill
Stream B
INT
Corps
3
10
S2
P
Fill
Stream E
INT
Corps
3
186
S3
T
Excavate/Fill
Stream B
INT
Corps
3
30
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
276
3i. Comments:
Temporary impacts to streams total 40 -linear feet.
Permanent impacts to streams total 236 -linear feet.
Page 6 of 14
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)
B1
_
Yes/No
B2
_
Yes/No
133
_
Yes/No
134
-
Yes/No
135
_
Yes/No
136
_
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.
No Build Alternative
In an attempt 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 the purpose of providing residential housing to meet the growth
and demand of an area in Cabarrus 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.
Proposed Design Plan
The current plan has been modified since the last PCN submittal in June 2017. Plan revisions include eliminating 10 lots
that have resulted in reducing permanent wetland impacts by 0.01 -acre. However, following the re -delineation of the
project site, a 186 -linear foot section of Wetland EE was changed to intermittent stream (Stream D). This jurisdictional
water of the U.S. is located within the central portion of the project boundary, and to bring the surrounding site up to
grade, impacts to the stream were found to be unavoidable. This accounts for an increase of permanent stream impacts
with the proposed plan.
Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and stream consist of fill for the lots, a road crossing, and one temporary sewerline
stream crossing. The three on-site linear wetlands (Wetland CC, DD, and EE) bisect the site and divide the property into
several portions. Therefore, alternative designs for the proposed subdivision, while avoiding impacts to jurisdictional
streams and wetlands, are limited.
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands, were taken into consideration in the planning phase. The following
design aspects demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of adverse impacts to the jurisdictional waters of the U.S.:
1) The proposed roadway (Black Court) is placed as close to the southern property line as possible to impact only a
small portion of Wetland DD.
2) Individual lots and structures were terminated at the cul-de-sac of Maplewood Avenue to avoid stream and buffer
impacts.
3) 10 lots eliminated north of Black Court along Wetland DD.
4) The extents of grading will be outside of the FEMA floodplain.
5) Headwalls will be used to limit culvert lengths to the maximum extent practicable.
6) Piping of jurisdictional waters have been minimized to the maximum extent practicable to facilitate construction of
subdivision roads to ordinance standards with road shoulders, curb and gutter, and proper embankment slopes.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Wetland hydrology within Wetland DD will be maintained by means of three new wetland swales (connectors). The
wetland connectors will be created across a narrow upland berm that separates fringe the wetland area from the main
wetland channel. The wetland connectors will consist of a 10 -15 -foot -wide stabilized swale that will be at grade and will
be seeded with a wetland plant mixture. Hydrology will be able to migrate between the main channel (historically ditched)
and the fringe area where piping is proposed with the current plan.
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
Permit 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092. All work will be constructed in the dry.
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?
N Yes ❑ No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ N Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
N 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.
N Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
236
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Stream
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.25 acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h.
Comments:
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6.
Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a.
Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes N No
6b.
If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Page 9 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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?
>24 %
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:
Harrisburg Village is a 248 -lot subdivision comprised of 51 single family and 197 townhome units located in Harrisburg,
Cabarrus County, North Carolina. The site consists of 51.37 acres. The high-density option will be utilized (maximum of
70% impervious). Treatment of the first inch of rainfall is required. The runoff rate for the
site post -development shall not
exceed pre -development rates for the 1 -year and 10 -year, 24-hour storm events. Three proposed sand filter BMP's will
be utilized to meet these requirements. Roof drainage along the existing stream and
wetlands has been designed to
drain by diffuse flow into the existing buffers and water features to keep the features charged, as recommended by
NCDEQ for 401/404 permitting.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Town of Harrisburg
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Harrisburg
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
❑ HQWEl
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 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 project is single and complete project and will not result in additional future development.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The proposed sewers will tie into the existing municipal sewer infrastructure off site at the northeast corner of the
property.
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
0 Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
Nx Yes ❑ No
impacts?
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 May
25, 2017 to determine the presence of any federally -listed, endangered species, 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 or within a mile of the project area. A copy of the NCNHP report is attached (Attachment F).
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS), Raleigh Field Office, North Carolina Distribution Records of
Endangered, Threatened, and Species of Concern list for Cabarrus County was reviewed. The USFWS database lists
the Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), and bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) as potentially occurring in Cabarrus County. Additionally, the project area is within Northern
long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) range.
Prior to the field work, CWS scientists visited a known population of Helianthus schweinitzii on May 22, 2017 to
determine the condition of its stem, leaves, and flowers. Based on the site visit, the aboveground plant parts are
identifiable but flowers were present. On May 25, 2017, CWS scientists conducted a pedestrian survey of the project
area for federally -protected species. Transects were completed within identified areas of supportive habitat, as
applicable, for potentially occurring federally -protected species.
Based on the literature search and the results of the on-site assessment for federally -protected endangered and
threatened species, it has been determined that habitat was observed for the Schweinitz's sunflower, Carolina
heelsplitter, and northern long-eared bat (NLEB). However, any incidental take on NLEB that may result from
associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. As a potential habitat was present but no individuals of Schweinitz's
sunflower were observed within the project limits, this project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect this species.
As no individuals of Carolina heelsplitter were observed within the project limits,the observed habitat was marginal, and
there are no known populations within the Rocky River watershed, where the project is located, this project will have no
effect on this species. As no nesting habitat was observed for the bald eagle, this project will have no effect on this
species.
A letter of concurrence was sent to the (USFWS on June 5, 2017), and a determination of no effect was provided in the
July 3, 2017 USFWS response letter (Attachment F).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes 0 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.html
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
N Yes N No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Page 13 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 May 31, 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 and found no historical structures, buildings, sites, or districts within
the project limits (SHPO Map, Attachment E). On June 23, 2017 a concurrence response letter was received from NC
Department of Natural and Cultural Resources concluding the project will not have impact historic resources (Attachment
E).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes © No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
There will be no fill in the FEMA floodplain. Additionally, the extents of grading will be outside of the FEMA floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA FIRM No. 3710550700J and 3710551700J
Z-n-
10.30.17
Mr. Gregg Antemann
Applicant/Agent's Signature (Agent's
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
signature is valid only if an authorization letter
Date
from the applicant is provided.)
Page 14 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT C:
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
(SAW -2015-02481)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action I.D.: SAW -2015-02481 County: Cabarrus U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -HARRISBURG
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Agent: Mike Kemp, Eastwood Construction, LLC
Address: 2857 Westport Road Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
Telephone No.: 704 421 6541
Property description:
Size (acres): 51 acres
Nearest Waterway: Rocky River
Coordinates: 35.329911, -80.642257
Nearest Town. Harrisburg
River Basin: Upper Pee Dee
Hydrologic Unit Code: 03040105
Location Description: The site is located at Harrisburg Town Center, Southeast of Harrisburg Drive -Roberta Road
intersection, in Cabarrus County, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following App1 :
A. Preliminary Determination
X_ Based on preliminary information, there may be waters and wetlands on the above described property. We strongly
suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. Tobe
considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331). ). If you
wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
Also, you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
D. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
There are waters and wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We strongly suggest, you have the waters and wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property
and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a
more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by
the Corps.
X_ The waters and wetlands on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps.
We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by
the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to
exceed five years.
The waters and wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344), Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.

Action Id.: SAW -2015-02481
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have anyquestions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact William Elliott at 828-271-7980.
C. Basis For Determination
The site contains wetlands as determined by the I987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Interim
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Region. These
wetlands are adjacent to stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The
stream channel on the property is an unnamed tributary to Rocky River which flows into the Upper Pee Dee River. Yadkin
River joins the Uwharrie River to form the Pee -Dee River. Pee Dee River enters the Atlantic Ocean through
Winyah Say in South Carolina. So drainages in Iredell, Rowan, and Wilkes drain to Yadkin River (before it's
confluence with Uwharrie River). Drainages in Cabarrus, Mecklenburg, Stanley, and Union drain to Pee -Dee River.
D. Remarks: Jurisdictional "Waters of the US" have been identified on this property as depicted
by submitted Jurisdictional Request Package on file.
E. Attention USDA Program. Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved ,jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that approved
jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a request for
appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following
address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address within 60 days of the issue date below.
"It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.
w
Corps Regulatory Official: William Elliott
Issue Date: December 21, 2016 Expiration Date: December 2.0, 2021
2

The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at h :ll er2.nw .usace.ami .mil/surve .html
to complete the survey online.
CF: Gregg Antemann,PWS, 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28273
3

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND A do
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
ANW& MW
Applicant: Mike Kemp, Eastwood Construction,
File Number: SAW -2015- Date: December 21,
LLC
02481 2016
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit at Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
X PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at
http://www.usace.artny.mil/CECW/Pages/reg_materials.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
+ ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the pen -nit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer.
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)
modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered pen -nit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section IT of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a pen -nit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section I1 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record
i
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However,
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record,
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
process you may contact:
also contact:
William Elliott, Project Manager
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
USAGE, Asheville Regulatory Field Office
CESAD-FDO
151 Patton Ave
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
RM 208
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1 OM 15
Asheville, NC 28801
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
828-271-7980
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process, You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: William Elliott, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, V.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

ATTACHMENT A
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDI TIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD); November2, 2015 '� Fj
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Eastwood Construction, LLC; POC; Mike Kemp
2857 Westport Road Charlotte, NC 28208
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:cf S4we06
/��/� I
Wilmington District 4, j W-
10
sTwoW Ca'^/c Mot crio�
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Located southeast of lho Harrisburg Drive -Roberta Road interseotion in Harrisburg, North Carolina
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES AT DIFFERENT
SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Cabarras City: Harrisburg
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat. 35.329911 ON; Long. -80.642257 °W,
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
Name of nearest waterbody: Rocky River
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non -wetland waters:
3,828 linear feet: 2-6 width (ft) and/or 0.45 acres.
Cowardin Class: R51,IB2, R4UB2
Stream ROW: 2,698 If perennial, 1,130 If seasonal
Wetlands: 0.52 acres.
Cowardin Class: PF41
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal:
Nen-Tidal:
1

E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
0 Field Determination. Date(s): October29,2015
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD
(check all that apply - checked items should be included in case file and,
where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
0 Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
❑✓ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
❑Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps
0 U.S. Geological Survey map(s), Cite scale & quad name: 1;24,D0o,Harrisburg,NC1098.
W]
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: Cabarrus County Soil Survey
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 1 00 -year Floodplain Elevation is:
(National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
W1Photographs; 0 Aerial (Name & Date): FsH. accessed 2015 or
ZOther (Name & Date): Sllepholographsofslreams (May andOetober2015).
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
2

9. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (9) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 339,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 339.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.

This preliminary JD finds that there "may be" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later "urisdictional determinations.
* 11/9MI5
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
/ ;12 a //r;L Ovl�
4
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

r
Perennial Stream
Seasonal Stream C 416 if
= Seasonal Stream B —74 If f
1,056 If 3 )
r
J Wetland DD -A I
�m
0.09 ac.
Wetland CC
z� 0,11 ac.
Wetland EE
10.15 ac.
rtF
e 1 ,
Wetland AA
0.1fi ac.
Wetland BB
i 0.01 ac. -0
Perennial Stream A
2,282 If
' _H SIGtANS 13LV
1
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIs LAYERS PROVIDED BY CABARRUS COUNTY, NC, DATED 2
THE ONSITE FEATURES WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND
SURVEYED WITH SUBFOOTTRIMBLE GPS BY CWS, INC. ON OCTOBER 29, 21)15.
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USAGE.
Legend
Project Limits
Perennial RPW
...... Seasonal RPW
®Wetlands
• DP Data Point
A S CP Stream Classification Point
y Photo Location & Direction
_ S
400 200 0 400 Feet
scALE:1" : 400'
Dnr� 11--3-2015
CAROLINA E
Approximate Jurisdictional
Boundary Ma
FIGURE NO.
WS PROJECT NO;
2015-3537
DRAWN BY:
KIM
Harrisburg Town Center Site
Harrisbrg, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
PPLICANT NO.
K:
CHECKED BY-,
KMT

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
ATTACHMENT D:
Photopage (Photographs 1-10)

- .� �. _ Vis'" .',rr•r;- Sze,,
� �� •. 'r -�_►.'•"• ''3-�•-ter` .•rte
.rber
IV
t—A. • .,p.
is `i •. .. ,x �.
R Z a
r
:. --:.
•"fir
.:y_•
'
,�•T`:
r..
r•.'_
Cj'S
.
�,
�;
•
ger �

Harrisburg Village October 30, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Photograph 3. View of Perennial RPW B, facing downstream (May 2015).
R_
Photograph 4. View of Seasonal RPW B, facing downstream (October 2015).
7.
art
Photograph 3. View of Perennial RPW B, facing downstream (May 2015).
R_
Photograph 4. View of Seasonal RPW B, facing downstream (October 2015).

Harrisburg Village October 30, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
U
4 �
P4.
v ow
x
-A
Photograph 5. View of Seasonal RPW C, facing downstream (October 2015).
Photograph
x
Photograph 6. View of Wetland AA, facing southeast (October 2015).
U

Harrisburg Village October 30, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
.t• �• rya '�•• - .r �:... f t _
Ate, "_:!�.•�-+fir - .��. .�. ..r ... .,� .. .� _ �c:`-��r• a"�
' s
T!
_ 7
iP~ . All
Photograph 7. View of Wetland BB, facing northwest (May 2015).
Photograph 8. View of Wetland CC, facing northeast (October 2015).
1V

Harrisburg Village October 30, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Photograph 9. View of Seasonal RPW D, facing downstream (October 2015).
war - =: d�..- • � - v..:t� �•;•�, • ��
ijr�
r..: i T#+�,t DQE
c
Photograph 9. View of Wetland DD, facing southwest (October 2015).
v

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
ATTACHMENT E:
SHPO Map and Response Letter

#SI' s
Parr,
mh ,�
c
4jli:r Or d
8 i
56
V O yy
yy�ra s "m nr 'V-6
1 � SVa }• .
h cis Or 541'
f'rakL
177
9
(LO `.5y '71y�r1 �. MUIl qV Rq
CAU 561 Matthewdank lin
0. CA BA RR U S Teett3r Hiause N13
�;yaihix[kRU
+! Jar�ltl Qr '7�
kJsdlsal5
harti ffg
t ~
Ito s* *�',� C U59{I Wad wroth Hn s-e
MCI, Crt ■
y {:AU483 Jackson Linx eg
a P Farm
'� :AU 482 M d4i n 4Ey-Quay
F#ausE 1939
Oyu s{ } CA-D424 BamuelWEshingt3n
a�
Cl TA Query Rd x HRFFi5HDtsC-
_ 1�
o 4 �yockY RryrE
ME°�;14LENBURG
.1I2,Sl ititi
b. ncV Dr
May 25, 2017
NR Points
M NR Individual Listing
NR Listing, Gone
r.rr,r im - r -.___I
1:48,215
0 0.4 0.8 1.6 mi
0 0.5 1 2 km
Sources: Esn, HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan,
Esri Japan, MET, Esn China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand),
Mapmylndia, NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User

btu. STATE,,
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
June 23, 2017
Pat Quinn
Eastwood Homes
2857 Westport Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Develop Harrisburg Village Residential Subdivision, Harrisburg Drive & Roberta Road,
Harrisburg, CWS 2015-3637, Cabarrus County, ER 17-1060
Dear Mr. Quinn:
Thank you for your letter of May 31, 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.reviewkncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
�C� av_ckuL-tajkt�
jfvRamona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
ATTACHMENT F:
NCNHP Data Review Report and
USFWS Response Letter

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Governor Roy Cooper Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
May 24, 2017
Aliisa Harjuniemi
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
RE: Harrisburg Village; 2015-3637
Dear Aliisa Harjuniemi:
NCNHDE-3577
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 Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butler o_ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
MAILING ADDRESS: Tele hone: [919', 7D7-8107 LOCA.TICN
16`1 MaiI Ser,rice Center �n�rr&ncnh2.org 121 'Nest hones S-reat
Ralaigh, NC 27899-1881 Ralaigh, NC 27603

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Harrisburg Village
Project No. 2015-3637
May 24, 2017
NCNHDE-3577
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
EO ID Scientific Name
Common Name Last
Element
Group
Observation
Occurrence
Date
Rank
Freshwater
14825 Villosa vaughaniana
Carolina Creekshell 1993-04-22
E
Bivalve
Vascular Plant
2809 Acmispon helleri
Carolina Birdfoot-trefoil 1992-08-06
C
Vascular Plant 34035 Hexalectris spicata Crested Coralroot 2014-09-10 D
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Accuracy Federal State Global State
Status Status Rank Rank
3 -Medium Species of Endangered
Concern
2 -High --- Special
Concern
Vulnerable
2 -High --- Significantly
Rare Peripheral
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Catawba Lands Conservancy Preserve Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Cabarrus County Open Space Cabarrus County: multiple local government Local Government
G2 S3
G5T3 S3
G5 S2
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on May 24, 2017; source: NCNHP, Q2 April 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 2 of 3

NCNHDE-3577: Harrisburg Village
N
W+E
S
May 24, 2017
❑ Project Boundary
❑ Buffered Project Boundary
Managed Area (MARBA)
Page 3 of 3
irrtar- %I i ii
1:24,756
0 oz 0.4 0.8 mi
0 0.325 0-65 1.3 km
Sources: Emi, HERE, OeLon—, Inh—p, Increment P Corp., GESCO, USGS,
FAO, NPS, NRCAN, Gea8aw, IGN, Kadastm NL. Ordnance Survey, E swi .Japan,
METE- Esti China (Hong Ko*swl tops. MaWylndia. ® OpenStie jMap
"InhlAors, and the GIS Vser Community

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
July 3, 2017
Gregg Antemann
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 E. Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
Dear Mr. Antemann:
Subject: Harrisburg Village Residential Development Project; Cabarrus County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-17-375
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed your correspondence received via
email on June 5, 2017 wherein you request our concurrence with your determination of project
effects 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 of your client, are seeking required permits
for impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. associated with the construction of a 258 unit
residential development on a 51 acre parcel in Harrisburg, North Carolina. The current project
area landcover is dominated by successional pine -hardwood forest (including riparian forest),
and developed open space. You indicate that several invasive exotic plant species occur onsite.
According to the information provided, the proposed project would result in permanent impacts
to wetlands and RPW streams (unnamed tributaries to the Rocky River). However, these
impacts were not quantified in your correspondence, nor were proposed mitigation activities.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to the information provided, Carolina Wetland Services staff identified potential
habitat for the federally endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) and
conducted targeted surveys on May 25, 2017. Prior to conducting surveys you visited a nearby
reference population of this species and confirmed that above ground flower parts were present
and could be used to diagnose the species in the field. You also provided us with a map
delineating the surveyed project areas which contain potential habitat. No evidence of this
species was detected by your survey. You have determined that the proposed project may affect,
but is not likely to adversely affect this species. Based on the information provided, we agree
with your assessment and would concur with a commensurate action agency determination.

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 or may not 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 not required, we encourage the Applicant to avoid any associated tree
clearing activities during the maternity roosting season from May 15 — August 15.
No bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) or their nests were observed during your pedestrian
surveys, and the project is not located in close proximity to a large water body. Therefore, we
agree with your determination that the project would not affect this species.
You have determined that the proposed project would have no effect on any other federally
protected species. We concur with your determination based on Service records and the
information provided. However, please be aware that obligations under section 7 of the Act
must be reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may
affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is
listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
The proposed project is located approximately 1,000 linear feet upstream from the Rocky River.
This reach of the Rocky River and some of its tributaries may provide habitat for several federal
species of concern including: rosyside dace (Clinostomus funduloides), Carolina darter
(Etheostoma collis), and Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughniana). Although the Act does not
afford federal protections to these species at this time, incorporating proactive measures to
protect them may preclude the need to list them in the future. We offer the following comments
in the interest of protecting the species above and other natural resources:
Mitigation
The Service highly values the functional value for the streams and wetlands to be impacted by
this project. If your client seeks in -lieu fee mitigation for impacts to streams and wetlands, ratios
should be informed by NCSAM/NCWAM data. The Service generally recommends that a
minimum mitigation ratio of 2:1 to offset proposed impacts to features rated "medium" or
better.
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
2

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
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 to reduce
potential adverse effects of storm -water surges, thermal spikes, and discharges of sediment,
nutrients, and chemicals into receiving waters. Since the purpose of stormwater-control
measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no such measure should be installed within
any stream (perennial or intermittent), wetland or riparian area (including the 100 -year
floodplain).
We are concerned about impacts associated with the proposed increase to impervious surface.
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.
Erosion Control
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
should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Regardless of
slope, disturbed areas should be stabilized with biodegradable erosion control matting
(coir), and revegetated with native grass/tree species as soon as the project is complete.
Pollinators
Pollinators such as most bees, some birds, bats, or other insects including moths and butterflies,
play a crucial role in flowering plant reproduction and in the production of most fruits and
vegetables. Many wild pollinators are declining as a result of disease and habitat loss. The rusty -
patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis; federally endangered) historically occurred in Cabarrus
county. Although not required, we encourage your client to consider the recommendations
below to benefit the rusty -patched bumble bee and other pollinators. Moreover, the creation and
maintenance of pollinator habitats in the proposed buffer and greenway easement areas may
increase the value of the project for the community, and help reduce the spread of invasive exotic
plants:
1. Sow native seed mixes in disturbed areas or in designated pollinator areas with plants
that bloom throughout the entire growing season.
2. Taller growing pollinator plant species should be planted around the periphery of the
site and anywhere on the site where mowing can be restricted during the summer
3

months. Taller plants, left un -mowed during the summer, would provide benefits to
pollinators, habitat to ground nesting/feeding birds, and cover for small mammals.
3. Low growing/groundcover native species should be planted in areas that need to be
maintained. This would provide benefits to pollinators while also minimizing the
amount of maintenance such as mowing and herbicide treatment. Milk weed species
are an important host plant for monarch butterflies.
4. Avoid mowing of flowering plants. Designated pollinator areas show be mow only
50% of the plant height, but no lower than 8 inches.
5. Leave slash piles, mulch piles, or loose dirt piles along woodland edges. These areas
provide nesting habitats and/or nest materials for some pollinators.
6. Avoid the use of pesticides and specifically neonicotinoids.
7. Additional information regarding plant species, seed mixes, and pollinator
habitat requirements can be provided upon request.
The Service appreciates your consideration for our interest to protect fish and wildlife resources.
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 4-2-17-375.
e.c. Jason Randolph; USACE
Olivia Munzer; NCWRC
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet A. Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT G:
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Construction Plan Sheets: Proposed Impacts

GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
1. APPROVAL OF THE PLAN IS NOT AN AUTHORIZATION TO GRADE ADJACENT
PROPERTIES WHEN FIELD CONDITIONS WARRANT OFFSITE GRADING, PERMISSION
MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS.
2. ALL CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS REFLECT FINISHED GRADES INCLUDING
ASPHALT. REFER TO PAVEMENT CROSS SECTION DATA TO ESTABLISH CORRECT
SUBBASE OR AGGREGATE BASE COURSE ELEVATIONS TO BE COMPLETED UNDER
THIS CONTRACT.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL BLEND NEW EARTHWORK SMOOTHLY TO TRANISITION BACK TO
EXISTING GRADE.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL IMMEDIATELY REPORT TO OWNER OR ENGINEER ANY
DISCREPANCIES FOUND BETWEEN ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS AND CONSTRUCTION
DOCUMENTS AND SHALL WAIT FOR INSTRUCTION PRIOR TO PROCEEDING.
5. ALL EARTH FILL TO BE COMPACTED TO MINIMUM 95% OF STD. PROCTOR MAXIMUM
DRY DENSITY.
6. TOP 12" OF SUBGRADE OF BUILDING PADS TO BE COMPACTED TO MINIMUM 100% OF
STD. PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY.
7. ALL RCP CULVERTS TO BE MINIMUM CLASS III RCP WITH TONGUE AND GROOVE OR
BELL AND SPIGOT WATERPROOF JOINTS. JOINT MATERIAL SHALL BE BUTYL RUBBER
MASTIC PER FSS -SS -S-00210.
8. SUBGRADE OF ROADS TO BE PROOF ROLLED PRIOR TO STONE PLACEMENT AND MEET
NCDOT SPECIFICATIONS.
9. ABC STONE TO BE COMPACTED TO 100% STD. PROCTOR.
10. BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT BASE COURSE SHALL BE COMPACTED TO NCDOT
SPECIFICATIONS. BITUMINOUS INTERMEDIATE COURSE SHALL BE COMPACTED TO
NCDOT SPECIFICATIONS. BITUMINOUS SURFACE COURSE SHALL BE COMPACTED TO
NCDOT SPECIFICATIONS.
11. ALL CONCRETE FOR SIDEWALKS AND CURBS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM 28 -DAY
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 3600 PSI. THE CONCRETE MIX AND CONSTRUCTION
SHALL BE INACCORDANCE WITH NCDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.
12. ALL CATCH BASINS, DROP INLETS, AND JUNCTION BOXES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED
PER TOWN OF HARRISBURG AND NCDOT STANDARDS.
13. RETAINING WALL DESIGN TO BE PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR'S WALL DESIGN
ENGINEER. RETAINING WALL DRAWINGS TO BE PROVIDED TO ENGINEER FOR REVIEW
AND APPROVAL. SHALL BE APPROVED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
14. REFER TO C-7 SERIES FOR ROAD PLAN AND PROFILES.
15. ALL PIPE SHALL BE INSTALLED AND BED IN ACCORDANCE WITH NCDOT SCD 300.01.
16. FINAL MASS GRADING OF SITE SHALL BE COMPLETE, AND SITE STABILIZED WITH
TEMPORARY SEEDING PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT BY TOWN OF HARRISBURG.
I
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY.
3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
I10)1
\ 1
Egg
/
.I I
II o
OEM
We
,i fl � � . / tip , _ 1�� a� ._--��� j � � D � `�.� _ _ ® � . ` )�,� . • 1 1
'`, IIII IIII ,
'� I ol,l� ��1������ �. • • _ _ - L�� �,�(. I..��.•o;-_— .
-- ` � �� � _- ► -- _-�`""�• __ tea` V) � • � � • _
_ / � �►i
•.I lil �
//�� .�� ,���!►ii ® yam, - i � � 'S .r.�� ♦ `•e �%�— �
NO®. �� _,
1,.1,1 � m, ► � � � �
0,
�I,=. -,�. �, •� — � � �t � `���w� ��� • � rte- - �V�� � � _�'�< � ��� �"�'� � � �� � ������I � —
/(/ / ✓ � � rte- \ /� • _ ��'1�'Ji s ,� ��yi�� �,��� I�I� �� . �� �� , �=� �� I®ia 61
,..�l�fl/i�la��� ���.�`��-.:,�. �,..N . ��■Ir.rl�i i�11\n���i�►1,/%��//r1.�,�,��,®_ _ cl L� \ �G�i_�i ��. i��n!_■!���m`I�1■ �
Ell It'; 0'. 1 pI
—
r • \ �'� _ ! �' i� IIS
Ej
_ .� � � •-,.�.,�r- � r� I � _• Ian �� ;���.� .� l��lr�,,,� ��.��I�•� ,j 1�. �
�. .I, . i 1 ♦ , ��® �� ., ��) ���I . 1 il..`�.7�a,, � �`—IIII ■ � �I � 1 I � � _�.
I Evil
m /r •�� —� • • d� �.-� j���.1 �I■������RI ��.�� 11 ® �iU y��� .ate
// ��� ..,y _,_, � ` I. �� � ® 1I,S 1 I/■III '� � ���� I ,,.III I�I��� � � ///��
A'�/I� - ®\� ,� �+ ��I � 1 I 1 I• u. l ■ ® � ���\I �I�� ..`� --�r/� a Ili ��il I�r���l� � ����� i� �—��1 .
s 1� �!®.� � ���� ,� � I � '�— � I �r�a�1x .III �� -� ,, � .,-, �11- _I .,� � r�a••�� I ,�� ►.I�•��I , • , �,�,.� �
��.•���.�� � I�Ih �I1�1�� i f. .�i r.����■, �, �� � ■[ •-� �� I .-�_ — %� ���� III/1�,]�
�JL�1 �� Iii ■Irl■\r�� 1 �° 111��� S 1 i/ ������
��� ��II . ea ��� � � ®® ®��� � ��� I �I���_ � ������ �I �1 I�■JI� ®�� �I j(��■� 1�' � ;�� � � I ,o�mii; � • � a um
�►1 � ►. � ,L � Q � ►�..�.,��, II I SII - I IL®]%� 1 Ir�ll��l�,l �!I!L'� ..® 1, �I���►�� ► � .� I m
�.� 1`�®� ��i�l>•�___��r --• •�i'sa;�� .•�Il - �� -III i® ® I • III,' , �.Ipl . I■I�I
l �!`\r'.. - J����i ��� a ��,• � , 11 ���111��.L ® ���� Iil�l►® , � � � ® �: • �i • _ � ��I I I
�► v���■�q . �r®1�1, � � — � ��9 r\`� � ���;_� a � IIII � � �� �' . , i ®� -
„ �■ �I. • ■� � , �` � ire •■ � �-��...�' ii �:a �r_w.c■■ 1� . �
�L ., � IIS � I'I� ►", �L-,+ei� - + ,..__ - _� i�� II �� ` ` �-- .� ��:, —'—� _ ..��_--,..:�...--- �I� _ C�.'1r. /�)
VVITE
t'�� I �� � � / I � � ► � �i �I�� �� 7■ ■r —��.� ,■�,_■■ f+ 1 e - • �..� ��r�_ _�_•���.�a.n.=
�I I ` ®��� ��'� l " 1��111 � ��i l 1 . , ►'� %� �►i i R'i+� - - ���-i!�j11i ��`sl�� ��� �� ��� ��- = N I���
,, � I.JM ► �ly� . �, _ ® ®�N� ; II.� 11 �► 1 .. � ►r, GO,,- euIMC�®�
I 'r� r� i - - --� - �- — - �_®_ III ��_ .� � I � / � sJ � — S) I I •
o ��� Iml i. r ., - - �iL�� llt1 �— =®! - �'�■�� 1� ��_ ��� 111A
® IIII
�- �� IIF
�� 1 ■��I E ���\ �71p�� 11® . � _� _ . 1
DEN
IN
ME—
�. .. \ - tri, •—_�h►
R it
r;
ON ■
I
•
•
NOTES: r\ \� I I \
I
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT MANAGER:
DEB
1. WETLAND FILL AND STREAM IMPACTS PER \ �I I it
GRAPHIC SCALE 401/404 PERMIT (PENDING).
SHALL BE PROVIDED
STRUINVERT
o so' 100' 200' 2 ON CONCRETE
3. EACH FRAME AND GRATE CASTING SHALL
DESIGNED BY:
AL
DRAWN BY:
AP
BE PERMANENTLY IMPRINTED WITH THE
IMAGE OF A FISH AND THE FOLLOWING \ \
IN FEET STATEMENT: "DUMP NOW WASTE! DRAINS ��ST
TO RIVERS "/��
PROJECT NUMBER:
DV37.400
ORIGINAL DATE:
5/5/2017
4. ROOF DRAINS SHALL NOT BE TIED
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 100 ft. DIRECTLY TO STREET GUTTERS.
000000001
SHEET:
E-1

HW -2 TO HW -1
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 10' 20' 40'
( IN FEET )
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 20 ft.
0+00
I
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY.
3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
0+50 1+00 1+50
HW -2 TO HW -1
PROFILE
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 2' 4' 8'
0 20' 40' 80'
( IN FEET )
VERTICAL 1 inch = 4 ft.
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 40 ft
Lu
D
V
DESIGNED BY:
z
Q
580
J
580
J
O
>
U
575
575
580
580
Z
U
580
48"
570
570
57F
R P
575
580
570
t147 F O
24" °
570
Co
O
7
36" 1RCP @ 0.50%
565
62 M
565
560
+
Z
—
Z
—
N
O
Co
558
55--a—
LOo
�CD
Co
r
Lo Ln
I` Lo
Co
_ o
O�
Ln Lo
M L6
Lo
575
1
1
1 1
0)
575
Cq
M I
M Ln
Lo 0
�z
580
2 50,
575
575
O 48" CP
1.52%
91 or
—
cP 2
570
L
570
4" R P
570
570
8" VC
565
565
36" RC
565
560
565
560
558
558
m o ���
�00
n CD c°'o
Ln Ln Ln Lo Ln
0+00
I
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY.
3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
0+50 1+00 1+50
HW -2 TO HW -1
PROFILE
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 2' 4' 8'
0 20' 40' 80'
( IN FEET )
VERTICAL 1 inch = 4 ft.
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 40 ft
5+50
HW -2 TO HW -1
CROSS-SECTION
HW -4 TO HW -3
GRAPF -C SCALE
0 10' 20' 40'
( IN FEET )
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 20 ft.
Lu
D
V
DESIGNED BY:
z
Q
580
J
580
J
O
>
U
575
575
580
580
Z
U
Q
48"
570
570
57F
R P
575
570
t147 F O
24" °
570
565
7
36" 1RCP @ 0.50%
565
62 M
565
560
560
558
55--a—
LOo
�CD
Co
r
Lo Ln
5+50
HW -2 TO HW -1
CROSS-SECTION
HW -4 TO HW -3
GRAPF -C SCALE
0 10' 20' 40'
( IN FEET )
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 20 ft.
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
HW -4 TO HW -3
PROFILE
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 2' 4' 8'
0 20' 40' 80'
( IN FEET )
VERTICAL 1 inch = 4 ft.
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 40 ft
Irl®r�
d11116mM
m V\\
Lu
D
V
DESIGNED BY:
z
Q
585
J
585
J
O
>
U
I..L
Lu
580
580
Z
U
Q
585
57F
R P
575
570
t147 F O
24" °
570
585
62 M
565
565
562
I` Lo
Co
_ o
O�
Ln Lo
M L6
Lo
C) Z
Q >
0)
580
Cq
M I
M Ln
Lo 0
�z
580
2 50,
575
575
91 or
—
cP 2
4" R P
570
570
8" VC
565
565
562
(o O
o
00
u0 Lr)
N 00
N
� 1­�
Lo Lr)
o
n
uo
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
HW -4 TO HW -3
PROFILE
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 2' 4' 8'
0 20' 40' 80'
( IN FEET )
VERTICAL 1 inch = 4 ft.
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 40 ft
Irl®r�
d11116mM
m V\\
11+50
HW -4 TO HW -3
CROSS-SECTION
m
Z
O
U)
Lu
W
w
W
0
O
z
Q E
d m o
U
O U
O Z � m U M
C/3U) ui o c a
U) 't E O J
W N!nU - Z
• LICENSE NO.:
C-0587
oZ
0
Z 0 �
J0�
NW z z
I..V O
� U
Lu
D
V
DESIGNED BY:
z
Q
585
J
585
J
O
>
U
I..L
Lu
580
580
Z
U
Q
57F
R P
575
570
t147 F O
24" °
570
565
565
562
I` Lo
Co
_ o
O�
Ln Lo
11+50
HW -4 TO HW -3
CROSS-SECTION
m
Z
O
U)
Lu
W
w
W
0
O
z
Q E
d m o
U
O U
O Z � m U M
C/3U) ui o c a
U) 't E O J
W N!nU - Z
• LICENSE NO.:
C-0587
oZ
0
Z 0 �
J0�
NW z z
I..V O
� U
N
W
m
O
2
O
O
H
C0
Q
Lu
PROJECT INFORMATION
Lu
D
V
DESIGNED BY:
z
Q
U)
J
U)
J
O
>
U
I..L
Lu
Z
U
Q
N
W
m
O
2
O
O
H
C0
Q
Lu
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT MANAGER:
DEB
DESIGNED BY:
AL
DRAWN BY:
AP
PROJECT NUMBER:
DV37.400
ORIGINAL DATE:
5/5/2017
SHEET:
E-2

I
1,
QjCSA 28
D-UMPROWNROW
M�..

ISM
I
�NU
ILI
® :
��, , I�� . • ,�k � .�� �; of
jai/ �t �i;,/__ 1 • %1�'- ,1/�,-%�
ML
'MORM is
� ♦ 1
40` A
Rib pp
RIO -
01 XA s
NO
• ,5, ,,.�__�• �. �. �, . WE k;1W I Allin MMM
cc r"MMOM; (91)mOx
.� t►.� ��
JI
U w
LLJ QUA
W �z�
_ 5;IMo
cn �mU)
U CO
Z
Of
co
Q ¢ Q
Q = U
c�
O
z
w
ry
ILLO
O
0
N
2
N
CO
U
z
m
O
m
0
cr mU
W
LLI
Z
Y
0
J
Cn 6
J F
U (N
U
JI
U w
LLJ QUA
W �z�
_ 5;IMo
cn �mU)
U CO
Z
Of
co
Q ¢ Q
Q = U
c�
O
z
w
ry
ILLO
O
U
2
U
z
o
z0
o
cr mU
LLI
C1
co
0
J
Cn 6
J F
U (N
Q w
N ❑
J
wm
ZULU
j�,
J 1J N
`/) (D
O �_ o�w
0
aW F N N
E� U
F W r
JI
U w
LLJ QUA
W �z�
_ 5;IMo
cn �mU)
U CO
Z
Of
co
Q ¢ Q
Q = U
c�
O
z
w
ry
ILLO

oilr
,R st",��
WIAVMFI� \►_
Is �� i/� r �.! "�►.1
�il�►,1
I< �` ■ . 111 k,_ ' ► � ■. M-
«1. 0' ,:;�h`''� Gam•/��� ���•` ■' �_
■
It
[p1-470

C)
<
124 C6-424 Y
C-4.5 2O
C)
0
00
z
LU
122 QE3423 nl-A7A
Lij
F-
<
LU
<
of
T -
(10)i
MH -21 I�~ / /I/I 1
o
z
cn
LU
2
5'
WETLAND
U)
LU
z 0
< 0
AA
LU
0- co
co
-j
~ / /
C)
U)
u C4
a_ U)
0- <
< LU
FES -15
rel
Z 2
It 1
-0
\ \\ \ \ ::..'. I I I'4 // STREAM A
0 Z U)
II I
\7\
\ \\\\® i� \\\\ / I I I ul III III�I�
00-0 < LU
-i �: 0
UJ C)
:.'. I
I
Lf)
U) 00-
\ \ \\\ \ I IIS J,�
LO
LU
< Z Z
i
WET N D
ui
1
C/)
-j - Z)
5; 0'� ou
(,,, E., (f)
BB
-9
D U) Z)
Co D y W
llf w
Z
il� < <
<
0
z
LU
0�
D
(D
LL

IMPACT TABLE
NAME TYPE EXTENT
W1 FILL -PERMANENT 0.005 AC
W2 FILL -PERMANENT 0.03 AC
91 LF 42" RCP
i
\s0 `p Ck C
Ug�c RT
ETLAN D 4)Q•' - `
WETLAND
CONNECTOR
WETLAND
I M PACT W2
WETLAND \
IMPACT W 1
I
I
WETLAND` ' ` ' ` '
CONNECTOR ..... ..
I
I
I
I
I TLAN •DD•' •' •' -' •' -' •' -' • `
I
I �
FIGURE NO. IMPACT MAP ONE CAROLINA SCALE: 1:20 DATE: OCT. 27, 2017
WETLAND SERVICES CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:SAM
550 E. WESTINGHOUSE BLVD 2015-3637
HARRISBURG VILLAGE CHARLOTTE, NC 25273
HARRISBURG, NCl(� PH: 704.527.1177 APPLICANT: CHECKED BY:
CABARRUS COUNTY—cws-inc.net EASTWOOD HOMES

NAME
I
IMPACT TABLE
TYPE EXTENT
W3
FILL -PERMANENT
0.006 AC
W4
FILL -PERMANENT
0.03 AC
S1
FILL -PERMANENT
50 LF
S1
FILL -TEMP
10 LF
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
PH: 704.527.1177
APPLICANT:
CHECKED BY:
w .ms-inc.net
EASTWOOD HOMES
I
FIGURE NO.
108 LF 48" RCP
VIC TO
R\VVIpRHVwAYS
I A SE
STREAM B
STREAM
IMPACT S 1
WETLAND :.. ' . - -
IMPACT W3 ...
' WETLAND
' - - - • y •y' _ _ I M PACT W4
WETLAND
CONNECTOR y • • y • y
WETLAND DD yyyyyyyyy
IMPACT MAP TWO
HARRISBURG VILLAGE
HARRISBURG, NC
CABARRUS COUNTY
SCALE: 1:20
DATE: OCT. 27, 2017
CAROLINA
WETLAND SERVICES
CWS PROJECT NO:
DRAWN BY: SAM
550 E. WESTINGHOUSE BLVD
2015-3637
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
PH: 704.527.1177
APPLICANT:
CHECKED BY:
w .ms-inc.net
EASTWOOD HOMES

IMPACT TABLE
NAME TYPE EXTENT STREA IB
S2 FILL -PERMANENT 186 LF -_
L =
W5 EXCAVATE -TEMP 0.003 AC
W6 EXCAVATE -TEMP 0.01 AC = v WETLAND EE -
W7 FILL -PERMANENT 0.04 AC - - - - - -
W8 FILL -PERMANENT 0.03 AC - -- - -
WETLAND WETLAND
\ IMPACT W5 / IMPACT W6 -
/" h WETLAND CC
f
- WETLAND
IMPACT W7
J
/
-T -�L -
STREAM E
STREAM IMPACT S2 WETLAND
IMPACT W8
/ K O A27,2011 i�R FIGURE NO. LE:1:ao DATE:
IMPACT MAP THREE CAROLINA
WETLAND SERVICES CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: SAM
550 E. WESTINGHOUSE BLVD 2015-3637
HARRISBURG VILLAGE CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
HARRISBURG, NC PH: 704.527.1177 APPLICANT: CHECKED BY:
CABARRUS COUNTY w .ms-inc.net EASTWOOD HOMES

IMPACT TABLE
NAME TYPE EXTENT
S3 EXCAVATE -TEMP 30 -LF
\ I /
� I
\ I \
II \ \
I
TRAIL - BOARDWALK
I, CROSSING, NO
IMPACTS
STREAM B
STREAM IMPACT co I
I
I
I
L-------------------
FIGURE
-----------------
FIGURE NO.
IMPACT MAP FOUR
CAROLINA
WETLAND SERVICES
550 E. WESTINGHOUSE BLVD
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
PH: 704.527.1177
—cws-inc.net
SCALE: 1:20
DATE: OCT. 27, 2017
CWS PROJECT NO:
2015-3637
DRAWN BY: SAM
HARRISBURG VILLAGE
HARRISBURG, NC<�
CABARRUS COUNTY
APPLICANT:
EASTWOOD HOMES
CHECKED BY:

Piped Diversion Detail
Work Area -\
Diversion Pipe
Energy Dissipation
<-- FLOW
WWAWAV
AWAV_�
Impervious Dike
Dewatering Device
Note:
Ensure To Anchor All Pumps and Pipes Securely
Source: NCDOT BMP's for Construction and Maintenance Activities (August 2003)
Pipe Diversion SAW -2015-02481
Detail DWR#17-0733
CWS#2015-3637
Diversion Pipe
HARRISBURG VILLAGE
Harrisburg
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
I I I IV- V 1- -F-
` Work Area
Drawing Not Scaled
CAROLINA
WETLAND SERVICES
LCYC",
550E. WESTINGHOUSE BLVD
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
PH: 704.527.1177
www.cws-inc.net

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT H:
DMS Acceptance Letter
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

Afitigation ,Sff-w es
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
October 30, 2017
Pat Quinn
Eastwood Homes
2857 Westport Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Project: Harrisburg Village
R.OY COOPER
Gnremor•
MICHAEL.'5, REGAN
Secrernrt•
Expiration of Acceptance: 4/30/2018
County: Cabarrus
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location Impact Type F—Impact Quantity
Yadkin 1 03040105 1 Riparian Wetland 1 0.14
Yadkin I03040105 Warm Stream 236
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely,
James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Gregg Antemann/ Aliisa Harjuniemi, agent
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 I 217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000
919 707 8976 T

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
October 30, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
ATTACHMENT I:
NC WAM and NC SAM Forms

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
user mianuai version c. -i
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): Harrisburg Village
3. Applicant/owner name: Eastwood Homes
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Yadkin-PeeDee
2. Date of evaluation: 9.8.17
Assessor name/organization: CWS
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Rock
River
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.329751, -80.642471
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream D 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 186
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 ❑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 ❑A,' l ®B
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 mit) ❑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 (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑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 ®303(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
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
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)
01 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) M ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o Y ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y L ❑l Sand bottom
EIC Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) t o ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑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)
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/amph i pod/crayfish/sh rim p)
❑ ❑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?
®N ®N
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-1 IF 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

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 ❑E 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:
Urban stream. Buffer consists of pine stands

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Harrisburg Village Date of Assessment 9.8.17
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization CWS
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YE
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent
(1) 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
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(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
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(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

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
El ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
®B ®B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
Accompanies user rvianuai version o.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Harrisburg Village
Date of Evaluation
5.25.17
Applicant/Owner Name
Eastwood homes
Wetland Site Name
NC WAM 1
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
CWS
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Rocky River
River Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03040105
County
Cabarrus
NCDWR Region
Asheville
® Yes ❑ No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
35.329835, -80.645034
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
El ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
®B ®B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
®A
®A
®A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑C
❑C
❑C
>- 20% coverage of pasture
❑D
❑D
❑D
>- 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
®E
®E
®E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer- assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
®A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15 -feet wide ❑> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
El Exposed - adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
®H ®H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
®A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size -wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
❑A
❑A
❑A
>- 500 acres
❑B
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
❑D
From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
❑E
From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F
❑F
❑F
From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G
❑G
❑G
From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H
❑H
❑H
From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I
❑I
❑1
From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J
®J
®J
From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K
❑K
❑K
< 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness - wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>- 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas - landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>- 500 acres
®B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect - wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >- 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
®B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity - assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
®A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
TAA WT
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
g ❑A ❑A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B ❑B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C ®C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense shrub layer
1E ❑B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C ®C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
_ ❑B ❑B Moderate density herb layer
®C ®C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
611
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
®C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Directly abutting tributary flowing to Rocky River that is 303(d) listed stream. Evidence that the area has been burned in the past (black marks in
the trees). Overland flow altered by the development at the higher gradient with significanly high percentage of impervious surface.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name NC WAM 1 Date of Assessment 5.25.17
Condition
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization CWS
Hydrology
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Condition
Function Sub -function Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Retention Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Hydrology
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Habitat
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veqetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM