20040587 Ver 3_401 Application_20061215

T
.~
~ ` CWS
Carolina Wetland Services
~~~.-
550 E WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (v)
704-527-1133 (fax)
December 13, 2006 ,1
Ms. Cyndi Karoly v J7 O 'S - ~ S g 1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
RECEIVED
Subject: After-the-Fact Permit Application Pursuant to Nationwide Permit Nos. 3 and 13
and Water Quality Certification No. 3353
501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
Carolina Wetland Services Project No. 2005-1130
The 501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project is located in Charlotte, North Carolina approximately one
mile northeast of the North Tryon Street -Sugar Creek Road intersection (Figure 1, enclosed). This
project was intended to prevent further loss of property by stabilizing an eroding stream bank and
replacing a failing stormwater pipe. On May 12, 2004, the USACE approved construction activities on
this project under a Nationwide Permit No. 39 (Action ID 200430928). On October 19, 2005, CSWS
submitted an addendum letter with revised impacts that requested that the project be permitted under
Nationwide Permit Nos. 3 and 13 and Water Quality Certification No. 3353. On October 31, 2006,
CSWS's Isaac Hinson inspected the project for Nationwide Permit/Water Quality Certification
compliance. This submittal addresses additional impacts not authorized in the previous submittal.
Charlotte Storm Water Services (CSWS) contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to
provide After-the-Fact Section 404/401 permitting services for this project.
Applicant Name: Charlotte Storm Water Services, Isaac J. Hinson
Mailing Address: 600 East Fourth Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone Number of Owner/Applicant: 704-336-4495
Street Address of Pro•ect: 501 L les Court, Charlotte, NC ~~l ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~"~ ~ ~~=,
Waterway: Little Sugar Creek ~'~
Basin: Catawba River (HU# 03050103) ~~=C ~ 5 2006
City: Charlotte
County: Mecklenburg ~~rrV~ - Y1~q)-;~R G;~HUr,{;
i LANpS ~,n!17 S7nfi~,1+r1,~T~'R BRANC~i
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: N35.26527, W80.78157
USGS Quadrangle Name: Derita, North Carolina, 1996
Current Land Use
The current land use for the project area consists of single-family residences with maintained lawns.
Surrounding land usages includes residential and institutional (Eastway Middle School) areas.
Dominant vegetation includes common blackberry (Rubus argutus), Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), common blue violet (Viola sororia), wild garlic (Allium canadense), soft rush
(Juncus effusus), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), autumn olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), and poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans). According to the Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County', on-site soils
consist of Monacan soils (MO). This soil type is somewhat poorly drained and exhibits moderate
~ United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1980. Soil survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
CHARLOTTE COLUMBIA RALEIGH
WWW.CWS-INC.NET

December 13, 2006
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Page 2 of 4
permeability and high water capacity. Monacan soils are known to contain hydric inclusions in
Mecklenburg County.2
Jurisdictional Determination
On March 31, 2004, CWS's Andrea Hughes investigated on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. using
the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Routine On-Site Determination Method. This method is
defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.3 No wetland areas were
identified within the project limits. A Routine On-Site Data Form representative of on-site non-
jurisdictional upland areas is enclosed (DP1). Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were classified according
to recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)4 and USAGE guidance. An NCDWQ
Stream Classification Form and USAGE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet representative of Stream
A are enclosed (SCP1).
The results of the on-site field investigation indicate that there is one jurisdictional stream channel
(Stream A) located within the project limits (Figure 1, enclosed). Stream A is a portion of Little Sugar
Creek, which is part of the Catawba River basin (HU# 03050103)5 and is classified as "Class C" waters
by the NCDWQ. Stream A was evaluated to be Perennial and exhibited a ten to twelve-foot average
bankfull width and strong flow. Biological sampling within Stream A resulted in a moderate presence of
crayfish and a moderate presence of benthic macroinvertebrates (SCP1, enclosed). Perennial Stream A
scored 42 out of a possible 71 points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form and 46 out of 100 on
the USAGE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet.
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter was forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on Apri17, 2004 to determine
the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that would be
affected by the project. In a response letter dated April 21, 2004 (enclosed), SHPO stated that they
"are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by the project."
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on Apri17, 2004 to
determine the presence of any federally-listed, candidate endangered, threatened species or critical
habitat located within the project area. In a response letter dated April 13, 2004 (enclosed), the
NCNHP stated that they have "no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or priority
natural areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area."
Purpose and Need for the Project
The 501 Lyles Court Maintenance project was intended to prevent further loss of property by
stabilizing an eroding stream bank and replacing a failing stormwater pipe. The right bank of Stream
A was eroding and threatening the residence at 501 Lyles Court. The fences at this and adjacent
residences were collapsing and required immediate maintenance. Photographs illustrating pre-
construction conditions are enclosed as Photographs A and B. Activities included improving channel
dimension by reshaping the bank and installing hard and soft stabilization along Little Sugar Creek
2 USDA, 1996. North Carolina Hydric Soils List.
s Environmental Laboratory, 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
a North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1999. Stream Classification Method. Version 2.0. 1999.
s "HU#" is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina. U.S. Geological
Survey. 1974.

December 13, 2006
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Page 3 of 4
(Perennial Stream A). In addition, an existing adjacent storm pipe was replaced to correct slumping in
the vicinity of the pipe outfall and to bring the storm drainage system to current City standards.
Avoidance and Minimization
Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. were reduced to the maximum extent practicable.
The project design limited the length of gabion basket to the minimal length necessary to protect
adjacent properties. In addition, soft stabilization was used to protect properties located downstream
of 501 Lyles Court. Proper sediment and erosion control measures were used to minimize
disturbances to downstream waters.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
On May 12, 2004, the USACE approved construction activities on this project under a Nationwide
Permit No. 39 (Action ID 200430928). On October 19, 2005, CSWS submitted an addendum letter with
revised impacts that requested that the project be permitted under Nationwide Permit Nos. 3 and 13 and
Water Quality Certification No. 3353. Authorized jurisdictional impacts to the on-site perennial stream
channel consisted o£ 4001inear feet (400 bank feet) of gabion wall installation along the right bank, an
additional 1401inear feet (140 bank feet) of right bank reshaping with soft stabilization (permanent
erosion control matting), and the installation of a 10-linear foot rip rap apron at the outlet of a storm
drainage pipe replacement. On October 31, 2006, CSWS's Isaac Hinson inspected the project for
Nationwide Permit/Water Quality Certification compliance. Actual project impacts consisted o£ 400
linear feet (400 bank feet) of gabion wall installation along the right bank, an additional 1401inear feet
(140 bank feet) of right bank reshaping with soft stabilization (permanent erosion control matting),
placement of rip rap along the bottom half of 65 linear feet (65 bank feet) of reshaped bank, placement of
an additional 181inear feet (18 bank feet) of rip rap on the bank, and the installation of a 10-linear foot
rip rap apron at the outlet of a storm drainage pipe replacement. Post-Construction photographs are
enclosed as Photographs C and D. Authorized and actual project impacts are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of Actual vs. Authorized Impacts
Jurisdictional
Activity Authorized
ActualImpact Unauthorized'
Feature. ~ act Im acts
Perennial Gabion wall installation along 400 linear feet 400 linear feet N/A
Stream the ri t bank (400 bank feet) (400 bank feet)
Perennial Bank reshaping and soft 140 linear feet 1401inear feet N/A
Stream stabilization (ECM) (140 bank feet) (140 bank feet)
Perennial Rip rap placement along lower
0 if 65 linear feet 65 linear feet
Stream ortion of resha ed bank (65 bank feet) (65 bank feet)
Perennial Rip rap hard stabilization on
0 if 18 linear feet 18 linear feet
Stream right bank (18 bank feet) (18 bank feet)
Perennial Rip rap apron installation at 10 if 10 if N/A
Stream newl re laced i e outlet
On behalf of CSWS, CWS is submitting an After-the-Fact Permit Application with attachments in
accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition No. 13, and pursuant to an After-the-Fact
Nationwide Permit Nos. 3 and 13 and Water Quality Certification No. 3353 (enclosed).
Compensatory Mitigation
Remedial corrective actions were considered but are not practicable as the project has been completed
and fencing has subsequently been installed along the affected properties, which precludes site access.
No mitigation is currently being proposed for this project.

December 13, 2006
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
Page 4 of 4
Please do not hesitate to contact Isaac Hinson at 704-336-4495 or [e-mail] should
you have any questions or comments regarding these findings.
~!~-~
Isaac J. Hinson regg C. Antem nn, PWS
Wetland Specialist Principal Biologist
Enclosures: USGS 7.5' Derita, NC Topographic Quadrangle
NRCS Mecklenburg County Soil Survey
Figure 1. Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary Field Map
Figure 2. Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
After-the-Fact Permit Application Pursuant to Nationwide Permit Nos. 3 and 13
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form (SCP1)
USAGE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet (SCP1)
USAGE Routine Wetland Determination Data Form (DP 1)
Agency Correspondence
Representative Photographs
cc: Mr. Steve Chapin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
File
\VVlss-0Oc10a1server3\2005\ProjeIXs~2005-1130501 Lyles Court Mod~cationWter-the-FactlPennittingWWP3report(USACE).doc

Image Courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey
7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series, Derita, North Carolina, dated 1996.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'
501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project
After the Fact Nationwide Permit Nos 3 and 13 Proiect No. 2005-1130

501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project
After -the -Fact Nationwide Permit Nos 3 and 13O
Project No. 2005-1130
O
E\1 EnD
nD
0
CeB2 Mee 0 EnB
Ce82
tlr j DERITA-- � CeH2 � CeH2 CeOj Ce8'L �o E
WkE
1 EnD Nee' CeD2 EnB
Jag VaB / EnB MeB
PaE
U
Uerila a o � MO
:Ur Cr,02 Nlinerc'tl �; Ce82 N EnD
49
Ce82 Eng Ur
CeD2
Ce82
\ V
Ce82 �r
HeB CeH7 2 GeV�0
CeB2
/ Heg CUB' CUB — -
Ce82 Ur
lVaB CaD2 waterOao� CeB2 EnB
\ (� CeD2 CeB2
Cstate a o
a
MO Ur _ k,', . HeB—...��...
w
CeD2 � � r,eH7
Ur CUB
l
CUD
1/ CeB2
rte' CuB VaB EnB
CeB2 /
' CeD2 CUBel m� ( Ci
el CeB2 CeH2 II HeB x HUB CUB HeB
�O m
G NUB
I MO HeB I /
CeB2 �rgek.
E)g
/ CUB Erie
I !
o HeB
13 ug � H...,1-�. /
j Ur EnB
i HUB CeB2
O
m
CUD HeB O v�
Y He
SITE Ape B
CUB Ur CUB CeB2
�
Nee Cu8EPg N x �...� CUB
,D CUB U m CUB CUB
i CeB2
I. tz r-
iCM
Ce82 Cn �� 1 e82 Ur Ur
Cug 'MO �/ Me[
VaB 1 1
CUB CeB2 .`\' Ur HeB ` HeB
G�' I .� \
EnB ��� HeB
1 �i al Ce62
e
rD Or C
\ / cub UB
CeB2
CUB MO \ HUB
�! k1eB
/•'' CUB ° (;1,132Neg
Gee CeB2 HeB \ /
/Hub
CUB
� CeB2
Cue Ur ouTN6R" ! ti� water �
1`
CUB
7
CU He Ur Cup CUB CeB2 'Z
HUB _ _ r, _ _ i . . :'t=:L.I
Soil Survey Courtesy of the USDA-NRCS
NRCS Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, Sheet No. 4, dated 1980.
Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'

~O
~~
J~
~G
~Q~
' ~
/. ~
v .~':.
~~°~ ,i_
~, ~~~;<
~/
~/~
`/
~~~~~
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DETERMINED AND CLASSIFIED
BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON MARCH 31, 2004. JURISDICTIONAL
FEATURES HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
_. _. ~
.`~ , /~
~ % i
i
.. '. .. ....J /
f
~ i
i i
/~ ,/ ~~ i~
i'~ ~
f,:
/ ~4:
J `t
/ 1
\ `;

f
(%
r
~;
I~
509
._
/ ~~
/ /i~
/ ~
%/ ~ ~
s-
r
f
500 '~
.. ..
~.- - ~.
I Stream
~ar~r ek)

501 /~
f SCP1
1~ % ~~~ ~~
~-
;'
j / l~/
/ i
,J j, /'I
LEGEND
~~ JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
...... EXISTING CULVERT/PIPE
• SCP1 STREAM CLASSIFICATION POINT
• DP1 DATA POINT
PHOTO LOCATION AND DIRECTION
APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1" = 50'
~~ / r~
~ ~„ ~;
,~' / `~
/;, ~ ,
_.,
;'
%~ ; '~
~,,....
i
~i
r
/ ~ `' i % f
t
Carolina Wetland Services
i~
~' CI~ (r'WS 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
,'~, L Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
i~
j REFERENCE: GIS LAYERS PROV67ED BY IvIECKLENBURG COUNTY LAND USE AND
~ ENVIRONIvtENTAL SERVICES DATED 2002.
~ ,~ ~ Figure 1. Approximate Jurisdictional Boundary
~ Field Map
~ 501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project
~; ~ Charlotte, North Carolina
__ CWS Project No. 2005-1130
//~ PRE~IP,ARED BY D~/ATE CHECKED DATE

NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DETERMINED AND CLASSIFIED
BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON MARCH 31, 2004. JURISDICTIONAL
FEATURES HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
-;
~~~ ~~ Rip ap Plac ent - 6~Lin ar Feet '~~;~~~~
;! /'~ Unau ~ o~ized-l ....pact
Channel- eshaping - 5 Linear Feet
.~ _
~~~ uthori ed ~~ ~ ~~ °' ~~
,-
~+
`~~ ,dip R Placement - 12 Linea Feet ~'
~.~~ k t ~ a:`thorized Impact ,~'
,'
.~.
,.
~~ ___:
508
`y~Fscr ;: G ion Wall - 400 'near Feef
-~ i thorized %~
;.
%~
;;
_ ._ ,~ ~'
~ ~~
'f ~~ ! ,, i'' r / ~ ' /
500 ~'
i
,~,._
,;
Rip Apron - 0 Lines eet
Auth rize '~
°~~~~ Perennial Stream A.
501 ~~~
%~ ~~ ~~~
509 ~~ ~ ,
i %
Rip Rap Place ent & Plastic ~' ;~~~~ ;~~ ~ t
~~ ; ~ -
p 9;~
__Erosion Contro Matting - 65 Lin ar,Feet Channel Resha in 65 Linear-Fee
U ut~ro~ize mpact ;.'Authorized
'~~ ,~ r . f% J.
/ ~` %~ ~ i

~
'
~
~ ` ;
`
f"
°' Carolina Wetland Services '` % ;
i

~'~~
C
S50 East Westinghouse Blvd. /
;

~
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273 / ; '

REFERENCE: GIS LAYERS PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY LAND USE AND i
j /
~
ENViAONMENTAL SERVICES,DATED 2002. __
~
Figure 2. Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters i ' ~'
~
501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project ~ ! - ~
~
Charlotte, North Carolina ;~ ; ~'~
CWS Project No. 2005-1130
~
PREPARED BY DATE CI-IECKED DATE ~`~

~~~uP,^EI`vT
RECEIVED
'~~~~E ~$~ ~n~y; Fonn Version Apr.12Q01
~;~~A~~ ~~t~o~ ~~ arm, ~~~~ ~o. y3 0~- oSF,'1
If any particular item is not applicable io this project, please enter "Not Applicable'' or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
~. Processi~ag
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project: L- ~'~' ~ ~~~
® Section 404 Permit
^ Section 10 Permit ACC -~ ~ 2Q06
® 401 Water Quality Certification
Ri arian or Watershed Buffer Rules n~~~ ~ ~pT~~~ T~R~BR~c~
^ P ,,,~~,~ ~?~ ste, .
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
Nationwide Permit No. 3 and Water Quality Certification No. ~~ 3 3~1-q ~}
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy'oecause 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 sect7on VIII -Mitigation), check here: ^
II. Appllc:~~t I~aI'o~-mation
I. owner,%Applicant Information
Name: City of Charlotte Stone Water Services, Contact: NIr. Isaac J. Hinson
Mailing Address: 600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Telephone Number: (704) 33b-4495 Fax Number: f704} 336-0586
E-mail Address: ihinson~ci.charlotte.nc.us
2. Consultant Information {A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail ~~ddress:
Pa<~~ 1 of

III. Pra~ect ~~afor~tlon
1. Name of proiect: 501 Lyles Court ~/Iaintenance Proiect
2. T.LP. Project Number (NCDOT Only) N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 089-102-i0
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town: Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From downtown Charlotte, travel
north on Interstate 85 (I-85) to Exit 41 (Sugar Creek Road). Turn right onto Sugar Creek
Road and travel for approximately % mile. Turn left onto Hidden Valley Road and travel for
approximately 1/2 mile. Turn left onto Cinderella Road and travel for approximately % mile.
Turn right onto Bilmark Avenue, then right- onto Sprin,gview Road, then left onto Lyles
Court. The site is located at the end of Lyles Court behind the house at 501 Lyles Court.
Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N3526527, W80.78157
{Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attacb a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
The existing land use of the proiect area is residential.
7. Property size (acres)
0.40 acre
3. Nearest body of water (strealniriver/sound/ocean/lake): Little Sugar Creek
9. River Basin: Catawba River
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina`s seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: The 501 Lyles Court itilaintenance proiect was
intended to prevent further loss of property by stabilizing an eroding stream bank and
replacing a failing stoi-mwater pipe. The right bank of Stream A was eroding and threatening
the residence at 501 Lyles Court. The fences at this and adiacent residences ~.vere collapsing
(Photo~~-aph B, enclosed) and repaired immediate maintenance. Photographs illustrating pre-
construction conditions are enclosed as Photographs A and B. Activities included improving
channel- dimension by reshaping the bank and installing hard and soft stabilization along
Little Sugar Creek (Perennial Stream A). In addition. an existing adiacent storm pipe was
replaced to correct slumping in the vicinity of the pipe outfall and to bring the stone drainage
system to current City standards.
1 i. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: A. trackhoe and typical
excavation equipment ,was used for this proiect.
Pa~~e '= of

12. Describe the land use ire the vicinity of this Project: The iand use surroundin, the nroiect is
inainiv residential.
~~%. ~'rior P~-oJeit isto;ry
On ~/Iay 12, 2004, the USAGE a~roved this proiect under Nationwide Permit No. 39 (Action ID.
200430928). On October 19. 2005. CSWS submitted an addendum letter with revised impacts,
requestin6 a~roval under Nationwide Permit Nos. 3 and 13 and Water Quality Certification No.
~J. ~'nture Project Plans
There are no future prof ect plans for this site.
~%~. P~-opose~l ~anlsacts to ~v~Jatc~s of tlae ~Tnitcsl Statcs/~zlaters of the Stag
1. Wetland Impacts

Wetland Impact Located within
Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Area of Impact
(acres) 100-year
Floodplain n'~ Nearest Stream Type of Wetland*~`*
(indicate on map) (yes/no) Gear feet)
~T/A
List each impact separately and identity temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, till.
excavation, tlooding, ditching%drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding:
100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Ulanagement Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(F1RNl), or FEMA-approved local tloodplain maps. Maps are available through the FENIA Map Service Center at 1-~00-358-9616, or
online at http:iiwww.fema.aov.
*** List a wetland 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 (estilmated) of existing wetlands on the property: N/A
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
2. Stream hnPacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
"L'.~'17biPti.Z' .~ill~]E>f 77l'd~117g71iLF
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact ~` Impact Stream Name ~` ~ of Stream Intermittent`?
(indicate on map) ~ (lf-linear feet) Before Impact (please specify)
(uf-bank feet)
Stream A Gabion wall (nstaitatiou 400 bf Little Sugar Creels 10-12' Perennial
1NWP Nu. L3)
~ Channel reshaping with
Stream A erosion control matting 140 bf Little Sugar Creek 10-12' Perennial
(1`JwP No. l3) ~ ~ ~

~ Stream A Rip Rap Apron ~
1~ if
Little Sugar Creak
10-12'
Perennial
~~~~ ~o _~ I
Page J OI

_.
{~ra;~sa~hi~r'~uti r3rs~f€*~ I
Stream impact ~ Length of I Overage Width ( Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact ° Impact Stream Name*~~ of Stream Intermittent'?
(indicate on map) ~ (tt- linear-feet)
(bf-bank feet) Before Impact (please specify)
~
Stream A Rip Rap placement 83 bf Little Sugar Creek 10-12' Perennial
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include; but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wail, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation 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 nearest
downstream named stream into which it tlows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-355-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several Internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e. g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: NWP No. 13: Hard
Stabilization = 400 bank feet: soft stabilization = 140 bank feet. NWP No. 3: Rip Rap apron
= 10 linear feet. After-the-Fact: Rip Rap placement = 83 bank feet.
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S. I~(/A '
Open Water Impact Area of
Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody
Site Number Type of Impact~'~ Impact
(if applicable) (lake, pond. estuary, sound,
{indicate on man) (acres) bay, ocean, etc.)
Ni A
List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: till, eYCavation, dredging,
Hooding, drainage, bullheads, etc.
~. Pond Creation
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
Le described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of constriction (e.g., dale/embankment, eYCavation, installation of
draw-clown valve or spillway, etc.): ~i/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestocl~ watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): ~iiA
Sipe of watershed draining to pond: N/A
Expected pond surface area: N/A
oayP 1 °1'

~%~?, Impact ~ust331cutio~ {~valcl~~cc a~~l i"a'~i~atl~~j
Irr~pacts to on-site ;urisdictional waters of the U.S. were reduced to the maximum e°tent
practicable. The project design limited the length of ~abion basket to the minimal length
necessary to protect adiacent properties. In addition. soft stabilization was used to protect
properties located downstream of 501 Lyles Court. Prover sediment and erosion control
measures eNere used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
~%~~~. 1~1~tigatlon
Remedial corrective actions were considered but are not practicable as the project has been
completed and fencing has subsequently been installed along the affected prot~erties, which
precludes site access. No mitigation is currently being proposed for this project.
Mitigation may also be made by payment into 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 NCVVRP. 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
NCVVRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCVVRP, check the NCVVRP ~~ebsite at hrtp:Uh2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/iudex.htm. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate'oox on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): t~T/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres j: N/A
~~. , ~nvir~~;mcntal I3~ca~aaacntataan ~~~V~ ~nlv)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes (`~ No ^
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 aNEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at (919) 733-083 to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No 0
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
Page ~ of 7

~. Ps op€~s~rl Impacts on l~ipardan and ~~Iat~rslaed Ba~~~ers ~~~'~IQ Onlr~)
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. T'_ne applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. A11 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 impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the D~~%Q
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 l~A NCAC 2B .0233
(~Teuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify: SWIM Buffer )?
Yes ® No ^ If you answered "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.l~I1A
Zone' Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
Gone L extends out ~U feet perpendicular Yrom near bank of channel; Lone L extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone l .
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). 'lease attach all appropriate information as
identified within I SA ~l`~CAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
CSWS implemented prover erosion and sediment controls and stabilized the buffered areas
immediately foliowin~ constniction. as required by SWIIVI buffer regulations for CSWS projects.
~I. St©rz~yvater (I~~+'Q Only)
Describe impervious acreage {both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stonnwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Sources of nearby impervious cover include roads, driveways, and rooftot~s. Tlais ;project did not
cause an increase in the impervious, coverage of the project area.
Page ~ of ?

NCI. Sewage I~ispasa3 {~~~%~ I~nly)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater ~eneratedr'rom the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A y
~~~~. '~iolatioaas ~~~~ ~~I3')
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (I SA NCAC ZH .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No ^
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ® No ^
~~Y. ether ~irc~stances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
wor}~ schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules far lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems; or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
,~:
12/13/06
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
{Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter fiom the applicant is provided.)
Page 7 of

NC1~W® Stream Classification Form SC'Pl -Perennial Stream A
Project Name: ~O1 Lyles Court Maintenance Proiect River Basin: Catawba River County: Nlecklenbur~ Evaluator(s): IIH and ALH
DWQ Project Nutnber: Nearest Named Stream: Little Sugar Creek Signature(s):
Date: .i/31/04 USGS QUAD: Derita. NC Longitude: W80" 4b' S4" Latitude: N35" 15' S4" ~~~ , ~
Location/Directions: From downtown Charlotte. travel north on Interstate 85 (I-851 to Exit 41 (Suear Creek Road). Tum fight onto Sugar Creek Road
and travel for approximately %z mile. Tum left onto Hidden Valley Road and travel for approximately 1/2 mile. Turn left onto Cinderella Road and
travel for approximately %z toile. Turn right onto Bilmark Avenue, then right onto Sprinwiew Road, then le$ onto Lyles Court. The site is Located at
the end of Lyles Court behind the house at 501 Lyles Court.
*PLEASE NOTE: Lf evaluator and landowner agree that t/re feature is n nran-nwde r/itch, then use of U:is form is not necessary. Also, if in the beat projessianal judgement ojthe evaluatoq the
feature is n nrnn-mode ditch and not a nmdified natural stream-this rating system should oat be used*
Primary &'ield Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
I. Geomorpholow Absent Weak Moderate Strong
I) Is_Tbere A Riffle-Pool Sequence? 0 1 ® 3
2) Is "The USDA Texture Tn Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terrain?
0
1
2
®~'
3) Are Natural Levees Present'? (a 1 2 3
4) Is The Charme] Sinuous? 0 ~ 2 3
~) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
0
~
2
3
6) Is The Channel Braided? ® I 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 2
*( .NOTE._If Bed & Bank Caused By Ditching And WITHOUT Sirnrosity Then Score=0*)
10) Is A 2nd Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Tono Man AntUOr In Field) Present? Yeses No=O
PRIihfARY GEDNIORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 18
II. Hvdrolow Absent Weak Moderate Strong
I) Is There A Groundwater
PRIlYIARY HYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 3
Secondary Field Indicators: (CircleOne!VumberPerLine)
I. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Charnel? ® OS 1 15
2) Is There A Grade Control Point In Charmeh 0 0 5 1 l~a.
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Wav? 0 0.5 1
SECONDARY GEO~YIORPHOL OGY INDICATOR POINTS: 3
II. Hvdrolow Absent Weak Moderate Strom
I) Is Tlvs Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
TOTAL POINTS (Prinrm'v ~- Secondm•v)= ~I2 (If Greater Tltmr Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least Intermiitent)
PRINIARYBIOLOGYLVDICATOR POINTS: 8
Last %norvn Rain? (*NOTE.~ If Ditch Indicated Gr #9 Above Skip This Step And #5 Below ^)
5) Is There Water Hi Cbarmel During Dry 0 0.5 I 1©.
Conditions Or In Growing Season)?
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Cbarmel (Or In Headcut)? Yes No=O
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATORPOINTS: ZS .
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW -'IosUy FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
(* NOTE: If Total.Absence Of All Plants In Streambed 2 I 0.75 0.5 0 0
As Noted .°lbove Skip This Step UNLESS SAV Present*1.
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDIC,9TOR POI!VTS: 1.5

_.._
OFFICE USE ONLY: USAGE AID# DWQ #
_....._ _.___~...___._____.._ _.._.~._.. _.._ . _.,._.. .. _u,,__._~..__..___ . _~._.._.___.__.___._•_,____.M_._._.. _~_,•_._ ~_.._~__.~_...~M ._....__~ ..._....__._.___.w..
_._......__. ~~~Y - ~~rv~ffiaa~ ~~~-~~;ilt~ ~
3~
~ ,;~
1. Applicant's Name: Charlotte Storm Water Services 2. Evaluator's Name: Isaac Hinson and Andrea Hughes
3. Date of Evaluation: 3/31/04 4. Time of Evaluation: 11:00 am
5. Name of Stream: Little-Sugar Creek 6. River Basin: Catawba
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 595 acres
Stream Order: Second
9. Length of Reach Evaluated: 150 linear feet 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From downtown" Charlotte, travel north on Interstate
85 (I-85) to Exit 41 (Sugar Creek Road). Turn right onto Sugar Creek Road and travel for approximately '/z mile. Turn left onto
Hidden Valley Road and travel for approximately 1/2 mile. Turn left onto Cinderella Road and travel for approximately 'h mile.
Turn right onto Bilmark Avenue, then right onto Springview Road, then left onto Lyles Court.- The site is located at the end of Lyles
Court behind the house at 501 Lyles Court.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 15' S4" W80° 46' S4"
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): Channel reshaping and stabilization
14. Recent Weather Conditions: Rain within;48 hours
15. Site conditions at time of visit: 55° and cloudy
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation poinf? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 1.4 acres
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 80 % Residential % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
Forested % Cleared /Logged 20 % Other (Institutional )
21. Baulcfull Width: 10-12' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank):
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous Braided Channel
instructions for completion of bvorksheet (located on page. ~): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Seores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0' and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
'Total Score (from reverse): 46 Comments: A moderate presence of crayfish and benthic macroinvertebrates,
consisting of chironomid midges, damselfly larvae, and caddisfly larvae, were sampled from the stream.
Evaluator's Signature ~~?~ 11( Date ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~'
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. 'The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USAGE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

A~~1'~ilit ~1'7~ ~ KJT~~~A~.l~ 1 ~ t ~~4J 11:: ~I.Y T~~ ~S~~li3.ll.JiL'J~
' 7 yy I ~ ~~~iJ~w ~'.~311 ~'Y S "~Y 1~V i ~~~~~ ~
~~~
~ Oastal ~.
~ iedrt;ont ~ ~~ountain
1 ' 9?i ~5 ~ir~e of ~~o~~ ~ persistent pools in stream j ~~
~
~~ ~ nc tl~~~ or ,atuz at7~1~ - ~ ~ ,7 ~,
); strong tlo v = n1zY poilitsl 0 - ~
~ 0 - -1- ~
I i 0- ~ 4
~ ! '°~~idcace of east human alteration ~ I

j !
(e°ten57 e alt ,raison= 0: no alteration = maY aoints~7
0- 1
j ~ ~paiian zone

~-
P
(no hu'~ler = U. conti~r~lous, ~,videbuffer= mas oints~i U - 6
~ ~ 0 -l ~ 0 - S
'~
2
~
I F47denee of nutrient or chcmicaI discharges. ~
_

~
~xtens7 ~-e discha «~ . _ -~~ -
L i _~. O; no dtschai ~e5 ma1 t ~. mts) 0 -
~ ~ (~.- ~ 0 -
1
(~iounds~ater discharge ~ I,
~~ ~ ~
(no discharge=0, >nnn~~. peeps, ~cetlanci, ete. = nlax points) ~_ 0-3 0-~ ~ 0-4 ~ 3
~ ` ~
~ ~ Presence of adjacent.floodplain
~`
~
,~, - (not~oo~i,lain = 0: eatensi~-eflood lain =max ~o7nts'
I ~
P 0 -- a 0 ~ 0 2` 2
~ _ r Entrenchment ! fioodplain access
-' '~~

j rdeeply ~ntr~nc}ieu = i)- frecuent flo~~din~ = n,al pointsl
0~
0~
0 ~
~ 2
~ ~ presence of adjacentwetlands j
~ (no ~.ve~~ a2d~ _ 0. tar;~u adjacent ~cetlands = m2~ pcinrs) 0 - 6 ~ 0 -~ ~ 0 - ~' l
I 9 Channel sinuosity '
~ 0
`1 0

iett°rsiv~ ~ ilan7~ellzation O; natural 7nc~ulder - ma;; pomtsl
--
~ ~
-
- l
0 Sediment input _
_ ~ (e~~°nsi~ a deposition-0; little or nu sediment= max points] ~ 0 - `~ 0 - ~ I
1 i i Size ~ diversity of channel bed substrate

-_ i _
~ t7r~; Homogenous =-0: large;: diversesizes --max points) NA' i - 4
'~ i? - ~ 3

t, I
Er-idence of channeLincision or widening - -

-
(deeply incised 0;: stablebed & banks -max points) i)~ 0~ 0 ~ 2

Presence of major bank faIlures
_ -
_

_

(severe erosion= 0; no`erosion, stable banks = max points) ~

~i
i~ - ~
~i _
n - , 2
s ~' Root depth and density on banks _
~, I _ i
' I ino visible roots. - 0; dense roots throughout= n~a:c r,omr;i '; ~~~ - ' r
'') ~ _ i) - ~ ~
=°~~ ~ ~
l ; ~ Ianpact by, agriculture of livestock pp-odfiction ~ ~ ~ - ~-

_ _
~
~
substantial.impact.=O;,noevidenc~ =m~i~ points) ~
-- ~~ - ; ~) - '. '~~
- 0 4
~
~ ~
~I
Presence`_of riffle-pooUripple-pool cou7piexes __ _
_ '

~

i~u~ ~_~ lea/ripples ~i pools Q;,wel1 dc~~~!~pcdma~cn_oints) ~
~
~? - ~
- ~
O - ~
~
~) n
-" ~
~
1"'
~
~ ~ab~i:atsompksits
~~
(I ~t~~e or nc aabir.7t ~?: 1r~ gt_ent, r~u-ed lrahi~~~t~ = maY p~,i_nts~
-- _ ~
~~ -b

~ - - ~
uC
0 -6
3
:
~
) t
~ dn0('t COWi. l~P OTC] STCCdII1bCfI ~ -
_

v Gno snac_>j7~ , ~._et~~n~~n = i i ~ ~rt?17~ ut~s c 1~~, „~ ; „~
~V = 7 1 ~ i l.1ntS 0 - - 0 - ~~ 0 - ~ ~ 3
f ly ~~ '~ubstratc emb~ddcdnrss
''~
~
--
!:
idec~i;%enlh,dce~ ~J:1o~~ r -~,
_ - l =su ~tu~e 1~~a;t,l ~=~ ~)--1 0-~ 2

lsY-esen~c t~fstrcaln invertebrates i
I _

~" -_
(7 o e1- _de.lcc U: ~onunon, numcroes t-~~~es - n a~ poinul ~
-
I
-

~~ '~
~
~. ,
' r'resen~e of amphibians
I
~, --
' ~~~ - ' r;- ~ r~ ~ n
~,r i;it -'>1~ic.1~C ~~ ' ~'`IIIIP,i?ii. nt?Ine1OU9 C`~11eS =iT!:l:ijJ071'1;.5) I
j, „1 ~I, Sn1"(,_E'.Ill'(' f)i ~1S11
- j r11
~n ~ i I t _; er = ~, _ ~n1.nGiL :;U?TiCrOIlS t ~c5 = ~11~: 'J01:1t~1 ;
'~ I 1= ~ideii~c of ~~~ ldliie use
~ -- ~ _ ino ~~ ~,1~7.ce ii; abu7r~aant :id~nc~ :17~.~< ,oinc~ ~~ 0-6
Total I?r~ints vassible ~i 100
'~~~~~~ ~~'t~~~ (~i1~~7 el~zer ~~n f_rst 11a~~e)
These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
0-
0-~ ~I 0~ 2

100

~ ;r~r ---- --
1

®AT.A ~0~9VI
E~OUT9NE ~J!/~T~AN® ®~T~~6YiENATiON
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 5®I ~.~~es C®urt l~a~aatenancc P~®~ect Date: ®~/3I/0~
Applicant/Owner: Chard®tte St®rm ~ate~- Services County: 1~'Icc~e:abux'a
Investigator(s): Isaac Ilins®n aid ~nsirea ~I'tIl~hes State: lIVC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: ~~l
If needed, explain on reverse.
V~GETATiON
Dominant Plant S ecies
1. Liguidambarsryraciflzza Stratum
tree Indicator
FAC+ Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9. Album canadense herb FACU-
2. Liriodendron ndipifera tree FACU 10. Juncus effizsus herb FACW+
3. Elaeagnus umbellata shrub - 11.
4. Rzzbus argz~ttzs shrub FAC 12.
5. Lonicera japonica vine FAC- 13.
6. Toxicodendron radicans vine FAC 14.
7. Polystichum acrostichoides herb FAC 15.
8. Viola sororia herb FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
7J%
Remarks:
lore t~~a~ 50% of sioffiinant ve~et~tion its ~A~ or avetter.
~9VDROLOG~
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
~ No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
_ Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: hT/L~ (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: I~/A (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
~ Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >i2 (in.) _FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks) .
Remarks:
Wettand ~vdrolo~v ixndicators ire absent.
Routine On-Site Data Form Pa~~ 1 Of ? 4/8/2004

St3EL~
Map Unit Name
;Series and Phase): I~®H1aCadA soils Drainage Class w®®rfl}~ draii;~-ed
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): tlflerIIffiiC li'luvas lue~~iC ~+ 81tr®Cl9re~-ts Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon ~Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) AbundancelContrast Structure, etc.
0-~Z ~ 7.~~'~ 4/3 1~/A N/r~ silt 1®axn
_ Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime ~ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
_ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
~vclric s®il inclica~ars are abse~at.
WE~L,~~1® ®E~E~9VIENa4Tl®BV
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
~a~a ~®int is representative ®~ a ~a~n-~urisdicti®aaal ~alala~cl area.
Approved by HQUSACE Zl92
Routine On-Site Cata Form ~abC 2 O~ ~ 4/8/2004

~„" ynr~a
0.4~
1 ~Y cq
7 :Y'
. ~
1 0
'Em~,M,:~'=
~>ta~~ ~a~~®irlc ~~~~arx~v~~~>~ ~f~e~
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Office of Archives and History
April 21, 2004
Brenda Wichmann
Carolina Wetland Services, Inca
5000 Nations Crossing Road, Suite 230
Charlotte, NC 28217
Division of Historical Resources
David L. S. Brook, Director
Re: 501 Lyles Court ylaintenance Project, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County,
ER04-0909
Dear NIs. Wichmann:
Thank you for your faY of April 7, 2004, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the proposed undertaking and are aware of no historic
resources which would be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the
undertaking as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and die 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, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above-
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
=.~David Brook ~.,
~U
~~i`
,~'~~~
J
www.h po.dcr.state.nc. us
Locafion ~tailirig Address Telephone/Fax
AI9iYIINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 (919) 733=}763 a733-8653
RESTORATIQN 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 461', Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-4-617 [phone] x715-4801
SURVE3' & PLAPd"NING 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 ivfail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 (9191733-t7F3 a715-4R(11

i ®.s
~~...~- ~
~~®
Nor$i1 Caroiina D~~artmen~ of En~irori~er$ end N~tt~r~l ~esour~cos
Michael F. Easley, Governor
April 13, 2004
Ms. Brenda Wichmann
Carolina Wetland Services
5000 Nations Crossing Road, Suite 230
Charlotte, NC 28217
V}/illiam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Subject: 501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project -Channel Stabilization; Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County CWS Project No. 2004-0619
Dear Ms. Wichmann:
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority natural areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. Although our maps do not
show records of such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not necessarily mean
that they are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. The use of
Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if
the project area contains suitable habitat for rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority natural areas.
You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at
<www.ncsparks.net/nhp/search.html> for a listing of rare plants and animals and significant
natural communities in the county and on the topographic quad map. Please do not hesitate to
contact me at 919-715-$b97 if you have questions or reed further infor°nation.
Sincerely,
~ ~~ J' ~
Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., Zoologist
Natural Heritage Program
HEL/hel
1601 Niail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 One
Phone: 919-?33-4984 ^ FAX: [phone] ° Internet: www.enr.state.nc:us ~£}1~1~ar011I1a
An equal Opportunity ° Affirmative Action Employer - 50 % Recycled ° 10 °,% Post Consumer Paper ~~lt"~.~1~'lZ~~~

501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project
After the Fact Nationwide Permit Nos 3 and 13 Proiect No. 2005-1130
Photograph A. Pre-Construction view of Stream A at Lyles Court.
Photograph B. Pre-Construction view of eroding banks along Stream A.

501 Lyles Court Maintenance Project
After the Fact Nationwide Permit Nos 3 and 13 Proiect No. 2005-1130