20021224 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20020802

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John R. Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Ron Linville, Regional Coordinator e
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: August 19, 2002
SUBJECT: Review of an application by Steele Creek Subdivision, Westbridge Development, Inc.,
DWQ NO. 021224, Unnamed Tributary Stowe Branch, Mecklenburg County
The applicant is requesting 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality. The NCWRC has reviewed information provided by the applicant, and field biologists on our staff
are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The project as proposed will impact approximately 1/3 acre of wetlands within an 84.23 acre tract
containing 2.4 acres of wetlands for residential lot improvements. The applicant indicates that avoiding
these impacts would reduce the number of lots available by seventeen (17) lots and make this phase of the
project unviable.
Based on our review of the submittal and current drought conditions, we believe that these wetlands may be
more important to water quality and habitat values than they appear. Small tree shaded wetlands are
important for stream recharge, seasonal aquatic habitats, stream habitat quality and hydrograph
maintenance.
Therefore, we recommend that the present plan be reevaluated by designing around these jurisdictional
areas to the extent practicable. Maintaining these jurisdictional areas could provide an aesthetic buffer
between house lots and enhance property values. These wetland areas could continue performing water
quality functions and providing habitat diversity. Regardless of your determinations, we recommend that
any remaining jurisdictional areas be protected and preserved in undisturbed natural conditions through
deed restrictions or other enforceable methods.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions regarding
these comments, please contact me at 336/769-9453.
Cc: Steve Chapin, COE
Mailing Address: - Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 9 Fax: [phone]

August 16, 2002
Mr. Steve Chapin
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regional Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5506
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
C
Re. Request to Withdraw Pre-Construction Notification Application
Phase V- Steele Creek Subdivision
Steele Creek Road, Charlotte, North Carolina
Gentlemen:
Westbridge Development, Inc. respectfully withdraws the referenced Pre-Construction Notification
Application dated July 26, 2002.
Please call of you have any questions or require any additional information.
Sincerely,
Westbridge Development, Inc.
B
Robert H. T en, Presiden
cc: Mr. Richard L. Harmon, P.G., Harmon Environmental
Mr. Arthur Forman, P.E., Lucus-Forman, Inc.
1207 Roseneath Road, Suite 200 • Richmond, VA 23230 - Office [phone] • Fax [phone]
Triage Check List
Date: f)' S - D Z. Project Name: W S u 4d; y.
DWQ#: 02-17-2-4
County: MechJen
To: ? ARO Mike Parker ? WaRO. Deborah Sawyer
? FRO Ken Averitte ? WiRO Joanne Steenhuis
MRO Mike Parker
??? ? WSRO Jennifer Frye
? RRO Steve Mitchell
From: &6 ?. Telephone : (919)
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
? Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
Minimization/avoidance issues
Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
? Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
? Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
? Cumulative impact concern
Comments: atA¢_ 3 ?- .

Harmon Environmental
615 Bruce Thomas Road Phone and Fax: [phone]
Monroe, North Carolina 28112 [e-mail]
July 26, 2002
Mr. Steve Chapin
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5506
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650

Re: Pre-Construction Notification Application Form
Phase V, Steele Creek Subdivision
Steele Creek Road, Charlotte, North Carolina
Project No. 312-03
I Gentlemen:
On behalf of Westbridge Development, Inc., Harmon Environmental respectfully submits the
attached Pre-Construction Notification Application Form for addressing proposed construction
activities associated with Phase V of the Steele Creek subdivision in Charlotte, North Carolina. As
indicated in the attached form, five areas of the site constituting approximately 1 acre, exhibit the
characteristics commonly associated with wetlands. These areas are primarily ephemeral wetlands
and seep wetlands which appear to have been impacted by historic logging of the site and off-site
development.
Westbridge Development desires to fill designated Wetland Areas B, C, D, and E (totaling
approximately 0.95 acres) and make a payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program to mitigate the impacts.
' Westbridge Development does not intent to modify or impact the intermittent stream located on the
subject property during construction of this project.
I
' Gentlemen
July 26, 2002
Page 2
We appreciate your consideration of this application. Please call if you have any questions or require
' any additional information.
Sincerely,
' Harmon Environmental
' Richard L. Harmon, P.G.
President
' Attachments
' cc: Mr. Earl Dickerson, Westbridge Development
Mr. Art Forman, Lucas-Forman, Inc.
1
1
1
1
' Office Use Only: Form Version February 2002
' USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
' leaving the space blank.
' I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
' K] Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
:K] 401 Water Quality Certification
' ? Riparian or Wetlands Buffer Rules
I . Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 39 & GC3362
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
' 4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here:
' H. Applicant Information
' 1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Westbridge Development Inc.
Mailing Address: 1207 Roseneath Road. Suite 200
' Richmond VA 23230
' Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
' 2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be attached
of the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
' Name: Not Applicable
Company Affiliation: _ Not Applicable
Mailing Address: Not Applicable
I
' Telephone Number: Not Applicable Fax Number: Not Applicable
E-mail Address: Not Applicable -
' Page 5 of 12

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local landmarks
such as towns, rivers , and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property boundaries and
development plans in relationship to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map and site plan must
include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings , impervious structures, or
other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should include appropriate USGS
Topographic and Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property boundaries outlined. Plan
drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion, so long as the property is clearly
defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the USACE requires information to be
submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format; however, DWQ may accept paperwork of
any size. DWQ prefers frill-size construction drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the
full size plans. If full size plans are reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the
applicant will be informed that the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are
provided.
1. Name of Project: Steele Creek Subdivision Phase V
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 19920110
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town: Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Steele Creek Subdivision Phase V
Directions to site (include road numbers, etc.): Take I ighwav 77 to Westinghouse Blvd.
(wes) . Follow Westinghouse Blvd to Steele Creek Road (Hwy 1601 and turn north.
Subdivision located approximately 0.5 miles ahead on left side of Steele Creek Road. .
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): Lat 35 °09'00"N Lon 80°58'58"W
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application: The site
is a wooded tract surrounded by residential commercial properties and undeveloped wooded
tracts
' 7. Property size (acres): 33-Acres (Phase V)
' 8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Unnamed tributary to Stowe Branch
' 9. River Basin: Catawba
(Note - this must be one ofNorth Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The River
Basin map is available at ft.-//h2o enr state.nc.us/adm i//m" .)
Page 6 of 12

' 10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: Westbridge Development proposes to expand the
Steele Creek Residential Subdivision into Phase V consisting of approximately 100 lots.
' 11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: T ical earth moving ui nt
will be utilized for the clearing, and gLaading activities at the site.
' 12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: The propM immediately surrounding the
suject site consists of wooded land residential developments and commercial properties
primarily zoned R-3 and I-1.
IV. Prior Project History
' If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this project
(including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include the USACE
Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application. date, and date permits and certifications were
' issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits, certifications or other useful
information. Describe previously approved wetlands, stream and buffer impacts, along with associated
mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project, list and describe permits issued for prior
' segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with construction schedules.
On Jul 6 ,1999 the USACE issued Notice of jurisdictional Determination (Action No. 199930982)
to Keystone Builders Resources Group for Phase I II III and IV ofthe Steele Creek Subdivision. This
' Determination documented the presence of 2.425 Acres of wetlands within the 84.23 Acre tract.
Disturbances to the designated wetlands within the 84.23-Acre site were limited to less than 1 o fn
acre. V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permits requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work, and
provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
' Westbridge Development is evaluatin,.,g four acres contiguous to the northwest corner of Phase IV. The
purchase and development of this additional acreage will provide sanitary sewer access to the
' VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
' It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to wetlands,
open waters, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent and temporary,
must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site plan. All wetlands and
waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a delineation map, whether or
not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetlands and stream evaluation and delineation forms
' should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this
proposed impact is strictly for wetlands or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section
' VIII below. If additional space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
In -- 17 _ell 11
rare r Vt t/.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed impacts: Five areas exhibiting the characteristics
of wetlands and an intermittent stream channel were delineated at the subject site ;).
Westbridge Development proposes to eliminate Are as B C D and E totaling 0.95 2 Acres. A
description of these wetlands Wetlands Determination Forms photographs are and a description
of the nronosed impacts are 1?resented in Attachment A
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of
Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year
Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetlands**
B Fill 0.112 No adjacent Ephemeral Wetlands
C Fill 0.506 No 30 Seep Wetlands
D Fill 0.054 No 30 Ephemeral Wetlands
E Fill 0.280 No 150 Seep Wetlands

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. impacts include, out are not armtea to: mecnanrzea cieanng, gramng, my
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Yearfloodplains are identified through the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rates Maps (FMM),
or FEMA approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or on line
at httn://www.fema-gov.
*** List awetiand type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond, Carolina
Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.03 Acres &Phase V1
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.952 Acres (Phase V)
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact Site
Number (indicate
on map)
Type of Impact* Length of
impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width of
Stream Before
Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please specify)
None

* List each impact separatety and identity temporary impacts. impacts include, out are not nmtwa to: cuiverrs ano assoc?atea np-n+p, uw.W
(separately list impacts to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain), stabilization
activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream location is proposed, plans
and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the neatest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.um.eov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g. www.tooozone.coni.
www.meoauest.com., etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: None
Page 8 of 12
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic Ocean
and any other water of the U.S.) below:

Open Water Impact
Site Number

(indicate on map)
of Impact*
Type Area of
impact

(acres)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond; estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
None

L
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging, flooding,
drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Construction:
' If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be included
above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should be described
here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
' Pond to be created in (check all that apply): [N uplands ? stream [X wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of draw-
down valve or spillway, etc.): Two ponds will be constructed primarily by excavation with
spillwaxs.
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond, local
stormwater requirements, etc.): These two ponds will be constructed to comply with local
' stormwater requirements.
Size of the watershed draining to the northern pond: 15.67 Acres Expected northern pond surface area: 0.28 Acres
Size of the watershed draining to the southern pond: 11.42 Acres Expected southern pond surface area: 0.20 Acres
' VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
' Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attached drawings of alternatives, lower-impact
' site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts were
minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction techniques
' to be followed during construction to reduce the impacts.
Alternative designs were considered for Phase of the Sterne Creek Subdivision. As indicated on Fig=
2 the access road into Phase V bisects Wetlands Area C. As a results development of Phase V wo d
' require crossing this wetlands Minimizing the disturbance to crossing the wetlands would have
reduced the development by 17 lots Oggroximately 20% of the current planned lots).. This reduction
in pro_ nosed residences would render this Phase of development economically viable.
VIII. Mitigation
' DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC Division of
Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to freshwater
wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial streams.
Page 9 of 12

' USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide Permits,
published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when necessary to
' ensure that adverse effects to aquatic environments are minimal. Factors including size and type of
proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted aquatic resource will be considered
in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable mitigation as proposed. Examples of
' mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include, but are not limited to: reducing the size of
the project; establishing and maintaining wetland and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open
waters such as streams; and replacing losses of aquatic resource functions and values by creating,
' restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached to on order for
' the USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application lacking a
required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete. An applicant
may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's Draft Technical
' Guide to Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/newetlands/strmgide.htmi.
' 1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide as
much information as possible, including but not limited to: site location (attach directions and/or
' map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet) of
mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanics (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a description
' of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach a separate
sheet if more space is needed.
Westbridge Development. Inc. proposes to reimburse the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
' Program for the displacement of 0.952-Acres of wetlands in the Phase V development. Be
wetlands to be displaced included wetland areas B. C. D. and E See Fig= 1).
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment onto the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program
' (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that you would like
to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be reviewed and
' approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants will be notified
early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the NCWRP is available
as an option. For additional information regarding the application process for the NCWRP,
' check the NCWRP website at hft://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ =Lmdex.htm If use of the NCWRP is
proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
' Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0.952
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
L

Page 10 of 12

IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
' Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ? No [
I
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements
of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA coordinator at
[phone] to review the current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a copy
of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to required
state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide justification for
these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein, and must be clearly
identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a map, whether or not the
impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ Regional Office may be included
as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B.0233 (Meuse), I SA
NCAC 2B 0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B.0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer
Requirements), or other (please identify ?
Yes ? No ® If you answer "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer mitigation
is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer multipliers.
Zone* impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
i None 3
2 None 1.5
Total None
Zone I extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
Page 11 of 12
I
t If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation of
Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration/Enhancement, Preservation or Payment
into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0260.
N/A
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream of the
property.
The calculated impervious area for the proposed Phase V subdivision is 152,706 square feet (3.51
' acres) To protect the waters of the US and wetlands down gradient of this proposed subdivision,
Westbridae Development proposes to construct two stormwater retention ponds on the west side of
' the site The northern pond would receive stormwater from approximately 15.67 acres and the
southern pond would receive drainage from approximately 11.42 acres of the site.

r

I I
XU. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater generated in the Phase V development will be disposed of via the City of Charlotte
Publically, Owned Treatment Works (POTW) XUL Violations (DWQ Only)

Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No []
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of the desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may chose to list
constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on work schedules (e.g.,
draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and Threatened Species,
accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).

n
(Agent's signature is valid if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Date
Page 12 of 12

•
v
sar
?

$ s
p
s?oge
?•E T
N mm°^Od
R
?8gK?
4
??8
s

?vgg ?
Q
a
9?o'e •S

3 4qo
sg ?g?

vSo?

??wl!
u .3c °
No$? a
YQ?
I O pQN? I
m D r0..
N?
F
as Him a?aNtr€= 5955E5.?msI=?
mm m
? mZ D D
m
m o
?mmbu" gim mg°?.e,?? ?m4amNau.?+P?m ---
z m .u m
u m
zz 2z2NN NNzz2 D z.NNN D
qVN ? 'vu u-di _$rr'I ?'a? JgJm?i mSJmm
mEJ ?mmm EEEEu ??o •EE

I

i
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
i
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I a I
I I
A

I
m ma
I ??? Nm I
m? ma I
I m
,z ma I ?gA?np i
I

Ian °? I
I
I 'mn °? I ? I
I I
I I
I
I
I I I
I L I
I w;Y ?
m0
?NIzJ
n9§??o
Yn m?
m
?
c
4$ 8?g ?o? "
sssslllill
s'^ a
?q p v=-
n? R$ r ° ? ? O ?
? o
?
sg 4 a ??7'C co
b?

a >b
i _ a
C\v

?Z o d z '
>C w v cn
?
x
d V
e N ti

x ?O

m

W9,61

oA
Y
C+ Y
a C?c) w
z
O Nz «i
_ti
?, o
•y ro
n
N a d
L%J as P.

0 3 a t7 to d

??<?
C CN

go rn ' 'Q

o m ?'

0°a p¢

j Ul
g I?n.?I
?-r ?J
C 7
rT'i I
k Q F R° VI
%? .",
?'
q
N ' N
O o
N
y? E
E
3
^
m
L? ti
o
?8 y -3 o
d ° OD °'o 5

a °°
= a a
0o a
°mp
?p u
p'2 a
.n O o
>> I
O
Y m -
N a
g9
u;N u
F
0
D
z?'?. Q
N Q R
C z
m
s $
°z NC Grid (NAB 83)
n Bred. ?.e? >I
• I e°

CD H ? O
0
o a I

was 11

?P p

°

n
? a'r) tw° p X0 n'

wUzz tl
&?
°N

4
O'7^
Sj

?

n
oZ
U 4?

N ' b 1? C?7 7
n

J ?
>?
o
N
o9

Q •W
atop,
0?
Ti ry O b :?mD r.G' Ik N
f
, V1
R°
1

:3
NOD
9N
Q,
Do
p.4 71
?O
to ? ?rn 0 No m? ? p

g
H MO ?j
Q ? ^v 6H?M r?N
Z n a
?A S v
y NC Grid (NAD 83)
SYeq? 4 ? a
:I Ry
I Harmon Environmental
' 615 Bruce Thomas Road Phone and Fax. [phone]
Monroe, North Carolina 28112 [e-mail]
' July 26, 2002
Mr. Earl Dickerson
' Westbridge Development, Inc.
1207 Roseneath Road, Suite 200
Richmond, Virginia 23230
' Re. Wetlands and Waters of the US Evaluation
of an Approximately 33 Acre Site Near Steele Creek Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
Project No. 312-01
' Dear Mr. Dickerson:
' Harmon Environmental respectfully submits for your review this report summarizing the methods
and results of the wetlands and waters of the US evaluation conducted at the approximately 33-acre
site located near Steel Creek Road in Charlotte, North Carolina. Figure 1 presents the location of
' the site depicted on an excerpt of a United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute topographic
map of the region.
The elevation of the site ranges from approximately 620 feet above mean sea level (MSL) along the
western property, line to approximately 644 feet above MSL along the eastern property line.
Topographically, the site consists of a shallow valley and ridge, trending to the northeast. A map
depicting the site boundaries and topography are presented as Figure 2. At the time of the site
walkover, the site was entirely wooded with overgrown logging roads, indicating the site has been
_ timbered historically.
Based on a Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, published by the United States
Department of Agriculture in June 1980, three types of soil are present on the site (Figure 3). These
three soil types include the Mecklenburg Fine Sandy Loam (MeB), the Iredell Fine Sandy Loam
(IrA) and the Wilkes Loam (WkE).
The MeB soil has been described as well drained soil commonly associated with broad ridges and
uplands. This soil type typically consists of approximately 7-inches of dark reddish brown fine
sandy loam grading to approximately 27-inches of yellowish red clay with depth. The organic matter
content in the surface of this soil is reported to be low, and the permeability is slow.
The IrA soil has been described as a moderately well drained soil associated with broad flat upland
areas. This soil type typically consists of approximately 6-inches of olive brown fine sandy loam
grading into approximately 22-inches of light olive brown clay and clay loam. The organic matter
in the surface of this soil is reported to be low, and the permeability is slow.
Mr. Earl Dickerson
July 26, 2002
I Page 2
The WkE soil has been described as well drained soil common to the side slopes adjacent to drainage
I ways. Typically, this soil consists of approximately 4-inches of dark grayish brown loam grading
into approximately 8-inches of strong brown clay. The organic matter in the surface of this soil is
reported to be low, and the permeability is moderately slow.
I On March 19, 2002, Harmon Environmental personnel evaluated the site for the presence of streams,
surface water bodies, and/or criteria associated with wetlands. This evaluation was conducted in
' general accordance with Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, published by the US
Army Corps of Engineers in January 1987. During this site visit, Harmon Environmental personnel
observed and documented five areas (Areas A, B, C, D and E) on the site which exhibited the
' characteristics associated with wetlands. These areas were flagged in the field and subsequently
surveyed by Lucas-Forman, Inc. personnel (Figure 4). Photographs depicting these wetlands are
I attached.
In addition to the five areas exhibiting the characteristics associated with wetlands, Harmon
' Environmental personnel observed numerous ephemeral stream channels converging to one
intermittent stream channel on the site. The headwaters and banks of the intermittent stream channel
were also flagged in the field and surveyed by Lucas-Forman, Inc. (Figure 4). Complete Wetlands
Determination for Wetland Areas A through E are included in Attachment A.
Wetlands Area A was observed on the southwest corner of the 33-acre parcel. Area A is
' approximately 0.081 acres, bound to the east by an old logging. road and to the west by the elevated
fill soil associated with the neighboring facilities. This portion of the site apparently receives surface
water drainage from the PCA International Inc. facility to the south and the Roberts Poly-Pro facility
to the west. Based on the elevation of this wetland area relative to the remainder of the site and the
presence of the old logging road, this wetlands does not appear to receive surface water drainage
from on-site. Based on the topography, Area A appears to be an Ephemeral Wetlands substantially
modified by the historic logging of the site and the subsequent development of the surrounding
properties.
The soil encountered in Area A appeared consistent with descriptions of the WkE. The soil profile
described from soil borings conducted in Area A consisted of very dark grayish brown to dark gray
fine to medium sandy silty clay, grading into mottled grayish brown and brownish yellow fine to
medium sandy silty clay at a depth of approximately 12-inches. Groundwater was observed in the
soil borings advanced in this area at a depth of approximately 8-inches below grade.
The predominant vascular plants observed in the canopy of Area A included willow oak (Quercus
phellos), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) and chalk maple (Acer leucoderme). The National List
of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary, published by the US
Fish and Wildlife Service indicates the willow oak to be a facultative wetland (FACW-) plant, and
the red cedar to be a facultative (FAC) plant. While chalk maple is unranked in the National List,
Mr. Earl Dickerson
July 26, 2002
' Page 3
the Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Trees, Eastern Region published in 1980
' indicates this species to be common to moist soils associated with streams and river banks.
FACW- plants are typically described as species that have greater than a 66% probability of being
associated with wetlands. FAC plants are described as species which have approximately a 50%
probability of being associated with either wetlands or uplands.
The predominant vascular plants observed in the under story within Area A included privet hedge
(Ligustrum sinense) and chalk maple. The National List defines privet hedge to be a FAC plant.
' The ground cover and woody vine plants observed in Area A included green briar (Smilax), trumpet
creeper (Campsis radicans) and poison ivy (Toxicondendron radicans). Both trumpet creeper and
I poison ivy are defined in the National List as a FAC species.
Wetlands Area B was observed along the western property line. This wetlands is approximately
' 0.112 acres bound to the west by commercial off-site development and to the east by the remains of
an old logging road. As a result of the site topography and the presence of the old logging road,
surface water received by this wetlands appears to be primarily from off-site. Based on the
' topography of the site, Area B appears to be an Ephemeral Wetlands substantially modified by the
historic logging of the site and the subsequent development of the surrounding properties.
The soil encountered in Area B consisted of very dark grayish brown fine sandy silt. Groundwater
was observed in the hand auger borings at a depth of approximately 8-inches below the ground
surface.
The predominant vascular plants observed within the canopy in Area B included red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciua), and american elm (Ulmus americana).
Sweet gum is defined in the National List as a FAC+ species. Plants defined as FAC+ typically have
a slightly greater than 50% probability of being associated with wetlands. American elm is defined
in the National List as a FACW species.
The predominant vascular plants observed in the under story of Area B included privet hedge
(Ligustrum sinense), american hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), and red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana). American hornbeam is defined in the National List as a FAC species.
The ground cover and woody vines observed in Area B included green briar (Smilax), trumpet
creeper (Campsis radicans) and japanese honeysuckle (Loniceria japonica). Japanese honeysuckle
is defined in the National List as a FAC- species. Plants defined as FAC- typically have a slightly
greater than 50% probability of being associated with upland areas.
Mr. Earl Dickerson
July 26, 2002
' Page 4
Wetlands Area C and E are contiguous wetlands located along a ephemeral channel upstream of the
I on-site intermittent channel. The combined area of these two wetlands is approximately 0.786 acres.
This portion of the site appears to receive surface water drainage from both on and off site.
Discharges to these wetlands include storm water released from a retention pond associated with
I Phase IV of the Steele Creek Subdivision currently under development immediately south ofthe site.
Wetlands C and E appear to represent a Seep Wetlands located along the banks of an ephemeral
stream channel up stream of the headwaters of the on-site intermittent stream channel. Historic
' logging of the site and subsequent construction activities on the adjoining parcels, including a
stormwater retention pond discharging to this area of the site, have had an impact on this area of the
site.
The soil profile observed in Areas C and E consisted of very dark brown sandy silty clay grading into
very dark gray sandy silty clay at a depth of approximately 12-inches. Groundwater was observed
in the hand auger borings at a depth of approximately 8-inches below the surface of the ground.
The predominant vascular plants observed within the canopy in Areas C and E included red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), sweet gum (Liquidambar styracflua), and chalk maple (Acer leucoderme).
The predominant vascular plants observed in the under story of Areas C and E included privet hedge
(Ligustrum sinense), american ehn (Ulmus americana), and chalk maple (Acer leucoderme).
The ground cover and woody vines observed in Areas C and E included green briar (Smilax), trumpet
creeper (Campsis radicans) and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans).
Wetlands Area D is 0.054 acre area located immediately west of Area B. Area D appears to be an
ephemeral wetlands not associated with surface drainage features on the site.
The soil encountered in Area D consisted of dark gray sandy clayey silt grading into a dark gray
brown sandy clayey silt at a depth of approximately 6-inches. Groundwater was encountered in the
borings advanced in this area at a depth of approximately 6-inches below the ground surface.
The predominant vascular plants observed within the canopy in Area D included red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), sweet gum (Liquidambar styracflua), and chalk maple (Acer leucoderme).
The predominant vascular plants observed in the under story of Area D included privet hedge
(Ligustrum sinense), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and red cedar (Juniperus virginiana).
The ground cover and woody vines observed in Area D included green briar (Smilax) and smart weed
(Polygonum hydropiper). Smart weed is defined in the National List as an obligatory wetland
species (OBL).
Mr. Earl Dickerson
July 26, 2002
I Page 5
For comparison purposes, the upland portion of the site surrounding the five wetland areas has also
I been described on an attached Wetlands Determination Form. As indicated in the above
descriptions, the site has been logged historically. As a result of these historic logging activities, the
upland portion of the site is bisected in several locations with grown over logging roads. On site
I drainage features have apparently been altered by these activities. As indicated above, the eastern
boundary of Wetland Areas A and B appear to be created by the presence of one of these former
roads. Further, two ephemeral stream channels currently bisect the site in an east to west direction.
I These stream channels are generally parallel, and appear to represent man made road side drainage
features for a former logging road.
As indicated in the Wetlands Determination Form the soil type encountered in hand auger borings
advanced adjacent to the wetland areas appears to be MeB. The soil profiles associated with these
hand auger borings indicated the soil to be dark yellowish brown fine to medium sandy silt.
The predominant vascular plants observed in the over story included sweet gum (liquidambar
styraciflua), chalk maple (Ater leucoderme) and red cedar (Juniperus virginiana). The predominant
vascular plants observed in the under story included sweet gum (liquidambar styraciflua), red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana) and privet hedge (Ligustrum sinense).
The ground cover and woody vines observed at the site included green briar (Smilax), trumpet
creeper (Campsis radicans) and japanese honeysuckle (Loniceria japonica).
One intermittent stream channel was observed on the site. This channel consisted of a headwaters
located immediately down gradient of Wetland Area E and flowing off site through a culvert on the
western property line. This channel is generally sinuous, with a weak flood plain present. The
intermittent stream is a first order stream expressing a relatively continuous bed and bank.
The bed of the stream is relatively free of leaf litter with the exception of minor amounts of material
wracked up stream of fibrous roots and rocks. At the time of the site visit, no evidence of fish,
amphibians, turtles or crayfish were observed.
A completed North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Stream Classification Form is
presented in Attachment B.
Based on the March 19, 2002 field observations, five areas exhibiting the characteristics associated
with wetlands and one intermittent stream were observed on the assessed site. The on-site wetlands
appear to be primarily ephemeral wetlands and seep wetlands that have been substantially modified
as a result of historic on-site logging activities, and off site development. The on site intermittent
stream originates in a headwaters immediately down gradient of Wetlands Area E, exiting the site
via a culvert on the western property boundary.
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
r 4??'i? r'S .'{,? ,1!lat •r+t - .. , 141
e4 1,
rte: - r! *l '
--won SITE LQC r'ION
rt `°-gHU?. ;bin, l
,4 Kh'
.
A Y .. ..
ph"
01989-2002 reci: Not rorNauigation
.II Right--v R .er, , _ f r' ;x ter" ' ":' t
SOURCE: MAPTECH.COM
K

APPROXIMATE SCALE 1 INCH=2000 FEET
0 2000 4000
HARMON ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 1
815 BRUCE THOMAS ROAD SITE LOCATION MAP
MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA 28112 WESTBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT
[phone] PHONE & FAX 33-ACRE SITE OFF STEELE CREEK ROAD
HARMONOINTERLM-CAFLCOM CHARLOTTE NORTH CAROLINA `

N
O
C
n
m
r
c
n
D
I
m
O
Z7
D
Z
Z
n
O
O
m
0
N
O
O
N
--1
O
O
G7
-0
s
n
D
0
I
? I

o
0

?
z?
=X
II ?
0?
c?
60
Z x
g

c?i Z
yc
N O

'
z I

0i

x

c
p
Z
m I
oho
Zo
° x

m
c
D
n
0
r -
m
G)
m
z
0
APPROXIMATE
NORTH
HARMON ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 2
615 BRUCE THOMAS ROAD TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA 28112 WESTBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT, INC.
[phone] PHONE & FAX 33-ACRE SITE OFF STEELE CREEK ROAD
HARMON®INTERLINK-CAFE.COM CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA

3
APPROXIMATE SCALE 1 INCH=2000 FEET
SOURCE: SOIL. SURVEY OF MECHLENBURG COUNTY 0 2000 4000
HARMON ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 3
815 BRUCE THOMAS ROAD SOIL MAP
MONROE. NORTH CAROLINA 28112 WESTBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT
[phone] PHONE & FAX 33-ACRE SITE OFF STEELE CREEK ROAD
MARMON*INTSRLlNK-CAFE.COM CHARLOTTE NORTH CAROLINA
MM M m m m ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ttttttt? tltt? 11111111111P ttlttl?
s
•
_ wife
X g

1^ ?o gRi it

z=??F
?
aglf
?
a
9
?rys

,cif orb,
w?
F
m? p?$ gqC
R?e ?
y
q r
b
SI m ? ?
<m
? 5g F

?qa?s
S? m;4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
m g - n - n
yn?g??m 2nE?b"?°a:? u6mxr 'poi t,H?a???
dun. ?.1 ?S>Rv?Lw?c ?ffi?8°;?BS??z 'x°:aN?z
n =
m
CD
R!m s ':dm °.'ddrlA E F F E_u F° . E E `I

I
I
I
',IIIIIi111
s% `d
y? ,•,........

?.?
10

i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I $$Lp,
? N S >
9
A4
i
H?
9
9
f!
1 0 h t'r7 v _
o o O -
?
I m C) .P
.n
A (D ?i W N s .
X
?/1 r. IrE
-
p
y 0y
•' '? " 64wo!'N rq
(D
?
cD
lh O r?
?y? N
1-4
" a'' _ - _ _ _

C ?0
?
?
n
02
? a

• t~
C.--y' , co nn9 ?wZ"?3 $N m C) n
?"
C7
0
d
d
' m z
$ A
m ® ?
?
'
" a
R .°. o
v. o
4 at CI. "a O
B
M1
?N.y 75
! (n l J O O r 1??1 v GD-J tr C) on
O Q O 10 a 1'S f/1
(
'*1 W x 1 k ti O F {t° V1 10
C o fn
N 5

n VI >C
c
:E "0
t~ cn ; ao c? O =1
7y °
`? w N N O O N ° °c p ?i O
o
;y ° NC Grid (N AD 83)
= Sr

y ctz) > 10 I Nm' ?..I
?' 'cy b O O
p
1 z b
?}
- e
Ni NO

I Ro
y

O N
?
M (D c
"'I Ov
m3
?A u
PHOTOGRAPH 2. View of Wetlands Area E (July, 2002)
HARMON ENVIRONMENTAL WETLANDS PHOTO(
615 BRUCE THOMAS ROAD PROPOSED STEELE CREE]
MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA 28112 PHASE V
[phone] PHONE & FAX CHARLOTTE, NORTH 1
PHOTOGRAPH 1. View of Wetlands Area C (July, 2002)
PHOTOGRAPH 3. View of Wetlands Area D (July, 2002)
PHOTOGRAPH 4. View of ephemerial channel (July, 2002)
HARMON ENVIRONMENTAL WETLANDS PHOTOGRAPHS
615 BRUCE THOMAS ROAD PROPOSED STEELE CREEK SUBDIV
MONROE, NORTH CAROLINA 28112 PHASE V
[phone] PHONE & FAX CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
i
i
Attachment A
Wedand Determination Forms
DATA FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Applicant Application Project
Name: Westbridae Development Inc. Number: Name: Steele Creek - Phase V
State: NC County: Mecklenburg Legal Description : Township : Range:
Date: 03/19/02 Plot No: A Section:
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)].
observed morphological or known physiological adaptions with a asterisk.
Indicator
Species Status Species
Trees
1. Quercus phellos
2. Acer leucoderme
3. Juniperus virginiana
Sa lljWj shrubs
4. Ligustrum sinense
5. Acer leucoderme
6.
Herbs
FACW - 7.
8.
FAC 9.
Indicate species with
Indicator
Status
Woody vines
FAC 10. smilax
11. Campsis radicans FAC
12. Toxicodendron radicans FAC
% of species that are OBL, FACW., and/or FAC. > 60% Other indicators: Buttressed Trucks
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes X No Basis: Predominance of FAC and FACW- species
Soil
Series and phase: Wilkes loam On hydric soils list? Yes No X
Mottled: Yes X No _ Mottle color: 10YR6/6 ;Matrix color: I OYR5/2
Gleyed: Yes No X Other indicators: Water a, Approx. 8-inches
Hydric soils: Yes X No , Basis: Depth to groundwater
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No X Depth of standing water: None
Saturated soils: Yes X No - Depth to saturated soil:_Approx. 8-itches
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes X No Basis: Saturated Soil
Atypical situation: Yes No X
Normal Circumstances? Yes X No
Wetland Determination: Wetland X Nonwetland
Comments:
Area flagged A-1 to A-8
Determined by:
B4 Appendix B Blank and Example Data Forms
DATA FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
' Applicant Application Project
Name: Westbridge Development Inc. Number: Name: Steele Creek - Phase V
State: NC County: Mecklenburg Legal Description : Township : Ranger
' Date: 03/19/02 Plot No: B Section:
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)]. Indicate species with
'
observed morphological or known physiological adaptions with a asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
S ecies Status Species Status
' Trees Herbs
1. Liquidambar styraciflua FAC+ 7. Juniperus virginiana FAC
2. Juniperus virginiana FAC 8.
' 3. Ulmus americana FACW 9.
Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. Ligustrum sinense FAC 10. Smilax
'
5. Carpinus caroliniana FAC 11. Campsis radicans FAC
6. Juniperus virginiana FAC 12. Lonicera japonica FAC-
% of species that are OBL, FACW., and/or FAC. > 50%
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes X No
Soil
Other indicators: Buttressed Trucks
Basis: Predominance of FAC and FACW species
Series and phase: Wilkes loam On hydric soils list? Yes No X
Mottled: Yes No X Mottle color: ;Matrix color: 10YR3/2
Gleyed: Yes No X Other indicators: Water . Approx. 8-inches
Hydric soils: Yes X No _ Basis: Depth to groundwater
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No X
Saturated soils: Yes X No
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes X No
Atypical situation: Yes No X
Normal Circumstances? Yes X No
Wetland Determination: Wetland X ;
Comments:
Area flagged B-1 to B-12
Depth of standing water: None
Depth to saturated soil: Approx. 8-inches
Basis: Saturated Soil
Nonwetland
Determined by:
A-
B4 Appendix B Blank and Example Data Forms
' DATA FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
' Applicant Application Project
Name: Westbridge Development Inc. Number: Name: Steele Creek- Phase V
State: NC County: Mecklenburg Legal Description : Township : Range:
' Date: 03/19/02 Plot No: C&E Section:
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)]. Indicate species with
observed morphological or known physiological adaptions with a asterisk.
'
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs
' 1. Liyuidambar styraciua FAC+ 7.
2. Acer leucoderme 8.
3. Juniperus virginiana FAC 9.
' Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. Ligustrum sinense FAC 10. smilax
5. Acer leucoderme H. Campsis radicans FAC
'
6. Ulmus americana FACW 12. Toxicodendron radicans FAC
% of species that are OBL, FACW., and/or FAC. > 50% Other indicators: Buttressed Trucks
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes X No Basis: Predominance of FAC species
Soil
Series and phase: Wilkes loam On hydric soils list? Yes No X
Mottled: Yes X No Mottle color: ;Matrix color: I OYR2/2
Gleyed: Yes No X Other indicators: Water 0, Approx. 8-inches
Hydric soils: Yes XX No _ Basis: Depth to groundwater
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No X Depth of standing water: None
Saturated soils: Yes X No Depth to saturated soil: Approx. 8-inches
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes X No _ Basis: Saturated Soil
Atypical situation: Yes No X
Normal Circumstances? Yes _X No
Wetland Determination: Wetland X Nonwetland
Comments:
' Area flagged C-1 to C-2I and )sl to E-13
Determined by:
B4
1
Appendix B Blank and Example Data Forms
DATA FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
' Applicant
Name: Westbrid a Development Inc.
State: NC County: Mecklenburg
' Date: 03/19/02
Legal Description : Township : Range:
Plot No: D Section:
Project
Name: Steele Creek Phase V
Vegetation [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only 1 or 2 layers)].
observed morphological or known physiological adaptions with a asterisk.
' Indicator
Species Status S ecies
Trees Herbs
' 1. Liquidambar styraciua FAC+ 7. Polygonum hydropiper
2. Acer leucoderme 8.
3. Juniperus virginiana FAC 9.
' Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. Ligustrum sinense FAC 10. Smilax
5. Juniperus virginiana FAC 11.
'
6. Liquidambar styrac j?ua FAC+ 12.
Indicate species with
Indicator
Status
OBL
% of species that are OBL, FACW., and/or FAC. > 50% Other indicators: Buttressed Trucks
Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes X No Basis: Predominance of FAC species
Soil
Series and phase: Wilkes loam On hydric soils list? Yes No X
Mottled: Yes No X Mottle color: :Matrix color: 10YR4/2
Gleyed: Yes No . X Other indicators: Water A rox. 6-inches
Hydric soils: Yes X No _ Basis: Depth to Groundwater
Hydrology
Inundated: Yes No X Depth of standing water:
Saturated soils: Yes X No Depth to saturated soil: Approx. 6-inches
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes X No Basis: Saturated Soil
Atypical situation: Yes No X
Normal Circumstances? Yes X No
Wetland Determination: Wetland X Nonwetland
Comments:
Area flagged D-1 to D-5
Determined by: ?.?.
Application
Number:
B4 Appendix B Blank and Example Data Forms
' DATA FORM 1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
' Applicant Application Project
Name: Westbridge Development Inc Number: Name: Steele Creek Phase V
State: NC County: Mecklenburg Legal Description : Township : Range:
' Date:03/19/02 Plot No: Non-Wetland Areas Section:
Ve eg motion [list the three dominant species in each vegetation layer (5 if only I or 2 layers)]. Indicate species with
' observed morphological or known physiological adaptions with a asterisk.
Indicator Indicator
Species Status Species Status
Trees Herbs
' 1. Liquidambar styraciua FAC+ 7.
2. Acer leucoderme g.
3. Juniperus virginiana FAC 9.
' Saplings/shrubs Woody vines
4. Ligustrum sinense FAC 10. smilax
' 5. Juniperus virginiana FAC 11. Campsis radicans FAC
b. Liquidambar styracflua FAC+ 12. Lonicera japonica FAC-
% of species that are OBL, FACW., and/or FAC. < 50% Other indicators:
' Hydrophytic vegetation: Yes No X Basis: Soil decd tion and hydrology
' Soil
Series and phase: Mecklenburg fine sandy loam On hydric soils list? Yes No X
Mottled: Yes No X Mottle color: ;Matrix color: 10YR3/4
Gleyed: Yes No X Other indicators: None observed
' Hydric soils: Yes _ No X Basis:
Hydrology
' Inundated: Yes No X Depth of standing water: None
Saturated soils: Yes No Depth to saturated soil: None
Other indicators:
Wetland hydrology: Yes No X Basis:
' Atypical situation: Yes No X
Normal Circumstances? Yes X No
' Wetland Determination: Wetland Nonwetiand X
' Comments:
' Determined by:
I B4 Appendix B Blank and Example Data Forms
i
i
t
J
Attachment B
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form

fl

NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
Project Name: Steele Creek Phase V River Basin: Catawba County: Mecklenburg Evaluator: R?ic and H on
DWQ Project Number: Nearest Named Stream: Stowes Branch Latitude: 35°09'00" Signature: f^" J
Date: 8/24/01 USGS QUAD: Derita, NC Longitude: 80°58'57" Location/Directions:
'PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary. Also, if the best professional
judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream - this rating system should not be used'
Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
L Genmornholoev Absent

5) Is there An Active (Or Relic)
Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present?
0) Is a 21 Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Topo Map and/or in Field) Present? Yes = 3 No 0
PRIMARYGEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATORPOINTS. I I
II Hvdroloev Absent Weak Moderate _ Strone
1) Is there a Groundwater
1 1-inierharoP Pr~nt? 0 3
INDICATOR POINTS:
PRIAL4RYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
IL gydp* Absent Weak Moderate Strong
T7r% 7e r c a fitter

Drainage Way? u .a u '•
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: !-
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 5 j ll ?J
Conditions (OR In Growing Season)
6) Are Hydric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel
(Or In Headcut)? Yes =f?5 No = 0
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 6 e5
As Noted Above Stop This Step UNLESS SAV Present)
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICATORPOINTS: TOTAL POINTS (Primary & Secondary) = 2A5.!2 (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Pints The Stream Is At Least Intermittent)