20201132 Ver 1_Towns of Cannon PCN compiled_20200903

WEPG
Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
SAW — 2019 - 02172 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: The Towns at Cannon
2. Work Type: Private Fv_1 Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial ❑
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Nationwide Permit application for a residential development
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Tyson Reilly (Applicant)
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 —or ORM Consultant ID Number]: WEPG, PLLC c/o Heath Caldwell
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.27792 N,-80.79818 W, 1515 Cannon Ave, Charlotte, NC 28269
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 04507101, 04507209, 04509301
9. Project Location —County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Little Sugar Creek
12. watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]:Lower Catawba / 03050103
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
U Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
�✓ Section 10 & 404 ❑
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Oa ks]111141L160%

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
September 3, 2020
Mr. David L. Shaeffer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Mr. Paul Wcjoski
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa St.
Asheville, NC 28801
Subiect: SAW-2019-02172; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP 429 for The Towns at
Cannon site in Charlotte, Mecklenbum County, North Carolina
Messrs. Roden -Reynolds, Johnson, Wojoski and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit 929 for The Towns at Cannon site on +/- 42 acres
northwest of the intersection of Cannon Avenue and North Graham Street in Charlotte, NC. The
site is a proposed residential development and consists of five streams and eight wetlands. A
preliminary jurisdictional determination request was previously submitted and approved by
USACE (D. Shaeffer) on 1/3/2020. Please refer to the Jurisdictional Determination and
Approvals sections for information on onsite surface waters.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include permanent impacts to two
streams and two wetlands for road crossings and minor temporary impacts for utility installation.
Overall impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited
through site selection location, design, and the location/orientation of the proposed lots and
access routes. Total permanent impacts proposed include 128 linear feet of stream impact
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
len. ri [e-mail]
www.wetiands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PM 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
(Stream A and Stream B) and 0.133 acres of wetland impacts (Wetlands T and U). It was not
possible to avoid impacts further due to the centralized location of the stream bisecting the site
and the connections to existing roadways required by the City. These crossings were necessary
due to City connectivity requirements as well as constraints from existing sewer line
infrastructure and onsite stream buffers. Charlotte DOT required crossing Stream A to provide
connectivity from Cannon Avenue to the protected intersection at West Sugar Creek Road. The
crossing location was chosen to avoid the confluence of Stream A and Stream C. The applicant
has demonstrated substantial avoidance and minimization efforts in which 93% of the 2,978
linear feet of stream channel and 90.5% of the 1.4 acres of wetlands will be avoided.
Efforts of impact minimization were implemented during the design process to preserve the
existing hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite natural habitat. Headwalls are
proposed at each crossing and, where possible, 2:1 slopes will be implemented to limit impacts
to site surface waters. With the approval of CDOT, the road was narrowed from 70 feet to 56 feet
to avoid impacts to the surrounding wetlands and shifted to cross Stream A perpendicularly.
Sidewalks were not narrowed due to anticipated low traffic speeds and higher than normal
pedestrian activity. Roughly six acres of the site will be dedicated to the Mecklenburg County
Park and Recreation Department and include extensive trail networks, a portion of which include
public sidewalks on the main spine road where a planting strip separation will provide an added
level of safety. Additionally, the developer purchased additional land near Wetland V to allow
the road to enter the site from West Sugar Creek Road without impacts. To minimize the impacts
at the crossing of Stream B, the sidewalk will be installed directly behind the curb.
In attempts to better quantify the functional capacity of the onsite reach, a NCSAM (Version 2.1)
was conducted for Stream B and a NCWAM for Wetland T. Results of the NCSAM were
skewed by the streamside area and stream buffer metrics as the abutting stream area is composed
of a wide, connected forested area. Overall results of the NCSAM indicated a medium
Functional Class rating for the onsite reach. However, considering the moderately degraded
streambanks, excessive sedimentation, limited to no base flow and flash flows from surrounding
stormwater inputs and lack of in -stream habitat, any potential for stream rehabilitation and
habitat development is severely restricted. Please refer to the NCSAM Stream Assessment
section for metrics scores and ratings summaries. Results of the NCWAM indicated a low
Functional Class Rating due to the >10% of impervious surfaces surrounding the site, low
vegetation diversity, low water quality, and lack of habitat as detailed in the attached NCWAM.
To compensate for the anticipated permanent impacts to onsite wetlands, the applicant is
proposing payment to the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Program at
a 1:1 ratio for 0.045 acres of impacts to Wetland T and 56 linear feet of impacts to Stream B.
This proposed compensation is justified above and in the attached NCSAM/WAM forms. A 2:1
ratio is proposed for 72 linear feet of impacts to Stream A and 0.106 acres of impacts to Wetland
U.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site. No listed
species were identified within the project area and we believe that there will be no effect on
listed species, or their critical habitat as designated under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Charlotte Office: vrww.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PM 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] 2
len. ri [e-mail]

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Act. Please refer to the Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation Section for additional
details on the terrestrial species evaluation. Thank you for your consideration and please contact
me if you have any questions, [phone] or email at daniel.kueflergwetlands-epg.com.
Sincerely,
i
Daniel Kuefler Len Rindner, PWS
Environmental Scientist Principal
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
www.wetiands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PM 283
Asheville, NC 28805

C
O
V
d
d
Q
L.
N
CL
Permit Application

w A rE�QG
T.
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑X Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Towns at Cannon
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Eddie Flow
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
04548/782
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
5527 Manning Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28269
3f.
Telephone no.:
704-596-2509
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Developer
4b.
Name:
Tyson Reilly
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
The Ardent Companies
4d.
Street address:
2100 Powers Ferry Road, St. 350
4e.
City, state, zip:
Atlanta, GA, 30339
4f.
Telephone no.:
803-548-4656
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Daniel Kuefler
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group, PLLC
5c.
Street address:
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e.
Telephone no.:
336-554-2728
5f.
Fax no.:
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
04507101, 04507209, 04509001
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.27792 Longitude:-80.79818
1c.
Property size:
41.75 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Little Sugar Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Catawba/ 03050103
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site consists of wooded slopes and stream corridors of small tributaries to Little Sugar Creek. The topography consists of gentle slopes with the
elevation ranging from 750 to 790 ft.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.4
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 2,978
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Construction of road crossings, utility installations, and BMPs for a residential development.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Fill and grading of the site will use standard equipment, excavator, dump truck, track hoe, etc.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project(including all priorphases) in thepast?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: SAW-2019-02172
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑X Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Nic Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
This site was verified by D. Shaeffer (USACE) on 02/06/20. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the Approvals section.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑X Streams —tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 P
Culvert
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.045
W2 P
Culvert
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.099
W3 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.007
W4 T
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.019
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.17
2h. Comments:
W1-Wetland T
W2-Wetland U
W3-Wetland U
W4- Wetland U
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream B
INT
Corps
4
56
S2 P
Culvert
Stream A
PER
Corps
4
72
S3 T
Stabilization
Stream A
PER
Corps
4
25
S4 T
Stabilization
Stream A
PER
Corps
4
10
S5 T
Stabilization
Stream A
PER
Corps
4
10
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
173
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
Yes/No
B2
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design, and location/orientation of the proposed lots and
access routes. The Stream A crossing location was chosen to avoid the confluence of Stream A and Stream C. Roughly 6 acres of the site will be
dedicated to Mecklenburg County Parks and Recreation Department as well. Please refer to the cover letter for additional details.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Headwalls are proposed at each crossing and where possible 2:1 slopes will be implemented to limit impacts to site surface waters. With the approval
of CDOT, the road was narrowed from 70' to 56' to avoid impacts to the surrounding wetlands and shifted to cross Stream A perpendicularly. The
crossing at Stream B was minimized by shifting the pedestrian sidewalk directly behind the curb. The developer purchased additional land near
Wetland V to allow the road to enter the site from West Sugar Creek Road without impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
MeeklenblbllFg
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑X Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
128 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.133 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: 1:1 compensation ratio proposed for Wetland T and Stream B. See NCSAM/WAM for justification.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
❑ Yes ❑X No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
39.07 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
Storm
water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has
not yet been submitted to Mecklenburg
County but will be designed to meet their criteria.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Mecklenburg County
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Mecklenburg County
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes 0 No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
[]Yes 0 No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes 0 No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes 0 No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No
additional phases are proposed at this time.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater
generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A threatened/endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but the project is exempt as noted in the included T&E report.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO's website: https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.meeklenburgcountyne.gov/
Daniel Kuefler
I
,2-.:,-, �e�
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Agent Authorization Letter
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: The Towns at Cannon site
Property Address: NW of intersection of W Sugar Ck Rd & Cannon Avenue, Charlotte, NC
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 04507209, 04507101, 04509301
Select one: I am other
Name: Tyson Reilly
Company: The Ardent Companies
Mailing Address: 2100 Powers Ferry Road, St. 350, Atlanta, GA 30339
Telephone Number: 803-548-4656 [e-mail]
Electronic Mail Address: 7
Tyson Reilly (Director) - The Ardent Companies September 19th, 2019
Property Owner / Interested Buyer* / Other* Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 2880S
[phone]
I en. ri [e-mail]

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Tyson Reilly
The Ardent Companies
2100 Powers Ferry Road
Atlanta, GA 30339
Project: The Towns at Cannon
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
August 14, 2020
Expiration of Acceptance: 2/14/2021
County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
(8-digit HUC)
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Catawba
03050103*
Riparian Wetland
0.133
Catawba
03050103*
Warm Stream
128
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement.
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
cc: Daniel Kuefler, agent
Sincerely,
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
NORTH CAROLINAD
Department of Emironmental Wality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

►0
Maps/Plans

III Park
New3n �`L•�,n; �b `�rr
Park �e
MINERAL
SPRINGS
r. DERITA
s
f
1 •4,
DE ATESYILLE
m v
SITE
t
HIDDEN
VALLEY
ATANDO 29
JUNCTION
Flom.; • y q,
r �
3f.
LVbing -TRYDN HILLS 9c'1915Micro= is S
VICINITY MAP
LOCATION
Lat: 35.27792 °N, Long:-80.79818 °W
HUC: 03050103 (Lower Catawba)
�m R St x
`N a\es Q
m �O
a�a �` Approximate Site o
o�e`a caF Location
(Not to scale)
Z
Moss Supply
Company ay Inn
ive ityArea �
O Days Inn
hPiq Charlotte is,
aRa North -Speed... u
ii
Cd'nonq�e� cken Box IM
i -National Tire Red Roo YJ Cook Out
Wholesale v
o Unive...
�a Cannon i
3
L
Q
L
Q+
m 41
�4olpme0
t D1
40
IV 40
Service Rd
Sunbelt
�Vt
Rentals
Motel 6
a;end
A
Charlotte - 1L. Wendys
OAd ��tEtSt
Un ivers ity
Wilson Ln continental inn
�YV �u�dget-
Taco Bell "
Inn
500 feet 100 m
Bing Charlotte �'
©2019HERE, ©OpenStreetMap
Acres: THE TOWNS AT CANNON Drawn By: Reviewed By:
(+/-) 41.75 Mecklenburg County, NC PJK ALL
FIGURE
1 VICINITY MAP Prepared for:
09112119 The Ardent Companies
Approximate Location, For Study Purposes Only , ..r.
Subject to USACE and NCDEQ Verification

2019 Aerial Map
A.
Project Boundary
Study Limits F I
(+/-) 41.75 acres `f
1'
a
4 LOCATION
(j 0. — _ Lat: 35.27792 9N, Long:-80.79818 9W
ar HUC: 03050103 (Lower Catawba)
evel a ml
Acres: THE TOWNS AT CANNON Drawn By: Reviewed By:
(+/-) 41.75 Mecklenburg County, NC PJK ALL
FIGURE
2 2019 Aerial Map —Approximate Location Prepared for:
09112119 The Ardent Companies
For Study Purposes Only
Subject to USACE and NCDEQ Verification

USGS MAP - Derita, NC Quadrangle (1993)
12
IT Ib
rt*
a a r
1 r • •j�L� �. Project Boundary , ' * $ I
r _ r
+ Study Limits 7,9 f! : • ■ ■ i � ■ •� �.� 1
(+/-) 41.75 acres
�4 = % ' ' x * `5 Flee
-�-
r � `
- — - ti .' • 5iL
Unnamed Tributary to
r-: Little Sugar Creek _
! I
1 iir
LOCATION
—`
Lat: 35.27792 °N, Long:-80.79818 °W
HUC: 03050103 (Lower Catawba) + ��
I
4.
I — ■.. i { 4
Acres: THE TOWNS AT CANNON Drawn By: Reviewed By:
(+/-) 41.75 Mecklenburg County, NC PJK ALL
FIGURE
3 USGS Map — Derita, NC Quadrangle (1993) Prepared for:
09/19/19 The Ardent Companies
Approximate Location, For Study Purposes Only '1111111; . 1111,
Subject to USACE and NCDEQ Verification

NRCS ARCHIVED SOIL MAP — MECKLENBURG COUNTY
eD14 Cud.
Project Boundary V�
Study Limits
(+/-) 41.75 acres
r
CUB � {,
M0 F r
CaD 2"-� -
fir.
- eD
e � r C it
c F) 2'
CA�B 21 M 0
HeB
UK
En13
LOCATION United States Department of Agriculture, Natural
Lat: 35.27792 °N, Long:-80.79818 °W
Resources Conservation Service. 1980.
�;,y� � Soil survey Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
HUC: 03050103 (Lower Catawba) Sheet 4
Acres: THE TOWNS AT CANNON Drawn By: Reviewed By:
(+/-) 41.75 Mecklenburg County, NC PJK ALL
FIGURE
4 NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP Prepared for:
09119119 The Ardent Companies
(Mecklenburg County, NC. Sheet 4) ,.I •,.
Subject to USACE and NCDEQ Verification

y . 10,9mul- X
Parcel ID: 04507101
Parcel
Parcel ID: 04507209
P
Eddie F w
Eddie Flowe
5527 Manning Road
M I
5527 Manning Road
Charlotte NC 28269
rlot C 9
Charlotte NC 28269
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
I
L Parcel ID: 04509301
F,
Eddie Flowe
5527 Manning Road
Charlotte NC 28269
7
Acres: THE TOWNS AT CANNON Preparpd
+/-41.8 Mecklenburg County, NC for: A\ THE ARDENT
FIGURE Drawn By: Reviewed By:
5 09118119 TAX PARCEL MAP DCK LSR
Subject to USACE and NCDEQ verification

�©
Al
NgRR T
J
B �V
N
vm
�
O
c�TY�FRsi
CINDY LN
NWY g5
a
U
Q
a
z
Q
SITE
J
w
N
v
0
0
rn
o VICINITY MAP
SCALE: NTS
U
O
Q
U
U
Q
H
m
U
C
O
c
c
m
U
�n
_
CD
LOCATION MAP
DATE:
August 21, 2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON
PROJECT NO: 19004
Design Grou PA
P'
rn CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
I
SHEET#
WL-COVER
7621LIp1eMranu�Suih111 ak70441411604
atoe 704-8414UM
SCALE:
NOT TO SCALE

/ /f / ! / / l THE TOWNS AT \ 1 \\ 4 1ii� 1
11/ /--� \ 1 \\\\ \ 1 I 1 11 1
%/ii/ If CANNON AVENUE,)
II
/ / / BOUNDARY
l
\�\\ \\ ---—�---1 Z \
v
Ik
tilt11 \II\\\ I / / 11 1 v Sg�RE/ Y \\N\
11 it I�¢ A III / IA v
At11j11 j I I I I I 1 lv�R�'`� // A� \ �L \ 1 A v� z l l l l k I
AIIIII 1 1 1 V A �� �V I I p 1 cG I/ A G 1 1 1 \ I r
vv`vAj11111 I V �� 1/—V 1 r/ A I// \ I
11 I 1 1 1 \��� �� 1 / / ",D / /1 I I U
Illl ,vI // Ih�-_/ < III/ 1 1
/ 11j
\IP11�1111174��\ \ 1 \ \.•�—� \ �--/ / 1 ! IIyO�� 1 1 1 \\ \
Al / ♦�a�� 1111111111\VA�� \ _ A 1 V / / / /�� _ 1 v� —,1
' �I // — --���� IIIIIIIIII 1\IZI�I 1 v 1 1 �� AV�E I WETLAND W
�— / ��vv IIIII 11
(0.01 AC) 1 v
\�♦ 1 ! l �� A� �\
I11�1�
EXIST. \ ��%// I UST. INTERMITTENT
CULVERT I \�i/ i I j STREAM B j
o �} — WETLAND V\
(593 LF)— / /rt�'1 1 s -, i t \ �• \ of
I' h� A�1 11 �� / / lVI / Ir�. 1 / /vvl 1 A(0.02 AC) �N,
'1�
/ 1 / r v I 11141v �' '� ��<�-
I / liq
EXIST. PERENNIAL \ / i� ��\1\�-- /%// `��.�� �i i/1%��
1 / _ STREAM A I ys; WETLAND T
(1340Lf)'/ I11 Cs \ \(0.1\ AC)-� I/l kEXIST.INTERMITTENT 1\+
\ \ '// / / \ 'STREAM C I
WETLAND Z > J IIIII l \ \ �\\ r' / /'/ I / f •/ t I l 1 1 I
1 0.21 AC AL —_WETLAND X V .� Av A\ V i �I l I f 1 f I u \\ VI! (453 LI) 1 I l—
( ) \ 1
\VAV1
ON / 'WETLAND Y' \\ \ I I I / ! (
(0.01ACpVvv�vN.:\�!%j
/ ��%�Oq� /�h I l THE TOWNSAT� IA //j 1 IWETLANDU-11�13-\N\ILj`C
�: 1 A I f /1 1 0.92 AC
CANNON AVENUE / / / 1 ( ,) s"\ \ I
PROPERTY ! t /� j f I �I \�—/< 1 (I t{ 1 I I j� I //i --♦ II Oc
1'� // \ \l ! \lli1z I III \IIY /— BOUNDARY I I
\\/ N,\ �\ 1 \ t y \\�w'I III III w 11
EXIST. `��\ \1 EXIST. INTERMITTENT \�I11"% 1' < <; 1 �l �/\ 1 �\ t12, 1 1 III III cwC /
\� v A' 2 /! !I rl G%t [ 11Alll U
CULVERT-N \\ STREAM F
//I,'�/� .✓( �/ ! %\J �/ 1 I/ /i 1�wllllalIV
s�
� /��fr l!� I WETLANDS
V��v �_ /�jl;r(0.04AC)11U),1//i//%
\\�\ \ \e �`\� ` EXIST. / // //ri I i /I NON -JURISDICTIONAL
C r1t•� _a V \ ♦— CULVERTS// / ��. // ( \�/��� r� (GULLY 4 _—vA�A���� y/'ice
Ali
�v _i / III
EXIST. 48" CMPAV
IIIA�
/ / EXIST. BRIDGE
111�T\ -t0�
/f
All
v, v�v
� 1 1 /j111 I
�
% 1 I /�IIIIII I
till
/I
— — — — — — If
/.
0' 200' 400' 800,
N
SCALE: 1 "=400'
DATE:
EXISTING CONDITION August 21, 2020
Landw®rks THE TOWNS AT CANNON PROJECT NO: 19004
n Desl Group, PA SHEET#
g P' IVE, WORK AND PLAY THE ARDENT COMPANIES WL-1
CREATING SPACES TO L
7621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 tel:[phone] CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE: _^
1

STREAM IMPACT SUMMARY
ROAD CROSSING 41 - STREAM B : 56 LF
UTILITIES & ROAD CROSSING #2 - STREAM A: 72 LF
TEMPORARY SANITARY SEWER & WATER IMPACT # 3 : 25 LF
TEMPORARY WATER IMPACT # 4 : 10 LF
TEMPORARY WATER IMPACT # 5 : 10 LF
PERMANENT STEAM IMPACT TOTAL : 128 LF
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT TOTAL: 45 LF
WETLAND IMPACT SUMMARY
ROAD CROSSING #1 - WETLAND T :
1,946 SF
UTILITIES & ROAD CROSSING 42 - WETLAND U :
4,309 SF
PEDESTRIAN TRAIL CROSSING #6 - WETLAND U :
306 SF
TEMPORARY WETLAND IMPACT - WETLAND U :
823 SF
PERMANENT WETLAND IMPACT TOTAL:
6,561 SF
TEMPORARY WETLAND IMPACT TOTAL
823 SF
z �I I
< di I
\w Ilz II
mIlj II
r
PROPOSED \\\y \ PROPOSED ROAD
SAND FILTER#4 \\\� �\ OR\vE��'� CROSSING IMPACT #1
WETLAND Y
PROPOSED TEMPORARY \\\o \ WETLAND T III i
WATER IMPACT #5 \� SAND Q
FILTER #5
WETLAND X OUTFALL � `� e/ G
P
WETLAND
PROPOSED � 5% WETLAND V 1
PROPOSED TEMPORARY 4" WATER `\ WETLAND W II
SANITARY & WATER IMPACT #3 \' `� �.®�® 1 PROPOSED Y1
SAND FILTER #5 III II
PROPOSED ROAD SEWER TIE-IN II p II
CROSSING IMPACT #2 \ LOCATION II
WETLAND ULU
Y
PROPOSED UJ N_--
�q 8" SEWERD TRAIL IMPACT #6 II
I liU" I >% 6D I
PROPOSED ( p
8"WATER �E III
IIII� izUj
III
EXISTING
8" SEWER n I
PROP.
4" WATER
WI 1 __
SAND FILTER #2 THE ORIGINAL REZONING PROPOSED NO ROAD
OUTFALL CROSSING TO AVOID STREAM IMPACT. HOWEVER,
_
PROPOSED
SAND FILTER #1
•+ _ ��� ' CHARLOTTE DOT (CDOT) REQUIRED THE STREAM
_ 7 PROPOSED CROSSING TO PROVIDE BETTER ROAD NETWORK
CAN _ ���- CONNECTIVITY TO CANNON AVE & W SUGAR
NON � SAND FILTER#3 ��.
AVENU-CREEK RD. IN THE EFFORT OF MINIMIZING THE
E s
SAND FILTER #1
_
�%IMPACT TO STREAM A, IT WAS SUCCESSFULLY
OUTFACE
PROPOSED NON-JURISDICTIONALNEGOTIATED WITH CDOT TO NARROW THE
SAND FILTER #2 GULLY CROSSING ROAD WIDTH FROM 71' RIGHT-OF-WAY
PROPOSED TEMPORARY / STREET TO 56' ROW. IN ADDITION, THE
1TLANDS —
WE-1 (ROW)
WATER IMPACT #4 SAND FILTER #3 —.WETLAND
DEVELOPER PURCHASED ADDITIONAL LAND UP
/ OUTFALL WETLAND AREA V TO ALLOW THE ROAD TO ENTER THE SITE FROM WEST SUGAR CREEK RD
jxNJ /'_--__--NEAR
O' 'j 5� PEE\.85 �� \ WITHOUT ANY IMPACTS IN THAT AREA.
MEND
THE ROAD CROSSING IS PROPOSED AT THE
\LOCATION PROVIDEN TO SUFFICIENT
CAPACITY FORT E WATER
QUALITY AND STORM
DETENTION BASINS WHICH IS REQUIRED TO
CAPTURE & TREAT RUNOFF FROM THE ENTIRE
PROJECT AND LOCATED AT THE NATURAL LOWEST
POINT OF THE SITE.
IMPERVIOUS SUMMARY
0' 200' 400' 800,
IMPERVIOUS AREA:
16.03 AC
SITE AREA:
41.03 AC N
PERCENT IMPERVIOUS AREA:
39.07 % SCALE: 1 "=400'
DATE:
o
SITE PLAN FOR STREAM & WETLAND IMPACTS
August 21, 2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON
PROJECT NO: 19004
Design Group, PA
sHEEr#
CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WL-2
N 7621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 te1: 704-841-1604
SCALE:
fax, 704-841-1 04
1 "=400'

I EXIST.
/ INTERMITTENT
STREAM B
WETLAND T
i �ROP.S 10' WETLAND �\
BUFFER \\.
764
I
PROP. STORM �\
PIPE TO WO BASIN /
PROPOSED ROAD y y y�2:1 SLOPE IS PROPOSED
CROSSING 41 IMPACT y TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
TO STREAM B : 56 LF �/I �' �u� y� IMPACTS OQ
PROPOSED ROAD
I � Q
CROSSING 41 IMPACT
TO WETLAND T: 1,946 SF
/
PROPOSED
760 / w � SAND FILTER#5
s;
�. •; 5 ��
�.. PROP.
WATER1
PROP. LINE
SANITARY
SEWER i f /!ii _ y WETLAND HYDROLOGY y y
—,WILL BE MAINTAINED y y y y
\ PROP. 8' SIDEWALK. l I l y Y y y y y ;� 'WITH PIPE UNDER
THIS PEDESTRIAN SIDEWALK 1 .yl y y y y y/ y y ROAD CROSSING
IS SHIFTED DIRECTLY BEHIND
y y
THE CURB IN ORDER TO i MMQ '1! Z //y y y y y y y y y y y � y y \ y
j MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS. I 'W Jy y\�\
„„�4X y y
Oy
/ y SEE SHEETS WL-6 & WL-8
FOR CULVERT 41 PROFILE,
ELEVATION AND DETAIL
'EXIST.
a
WETLAND U INTERMITTENT
a LEGEND
STREAM C
y
IMPACTED
o
U
WETLANDS
c
° EX. WETLANDS
0' 15' 30'
60'
TO REMAIN
N
M
Ln
SCALE: 1 "=30'
DATE:
STREAM IMPACTS FOR ROAD CROSSING #1
August 21,
2020
o
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON
PROJECT NO:
19004
Design Group, PA
SHEET#
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
WL-3
CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
c� 7621LittleAvenue ,Suite111 tel:[phone]
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE:
a
1 "=30'

EXIST. SANITAR
�� \\ SEWER (TY
TEMPORARY SANITARY SEWER & 8" \
WATER IMPACT #3 (25 LF). STREAM TO \
BE RESTORED TO PRE -CONSTRUCTION
CONDITIONS. SEE SHEET WL-8 FOR
SEWER & WATER PROFILE AT STREAM s'
CROSSING
PROPOSED ROAD I
\\I CROSSING #2 IMPACT
TO STREAM A: 72 LF
I
LOWES PLAC
DRIVE
P.)
m
A-712 \\\
1
� � t
MANHOLE/
1 /
/ PROP 8"
\ WATER
2:1 SLOPE IS
PROPOSED TO �48
i '
\MINIMIZE IMPACTS j PROP STORM PIPE I
TO W.Q.W.. BASIN
1 (TYP.)
STREAM BANK STABILI2ATION
RIP RAP ARMOR TYP. p
RIP RAP TO BE PLACED ON
THE CHANNEL BANKS ±12"
ABOVE THE TYPICAL WATER PROP 4" \ '\
ELEVATION; NOT WITHIN THE / ID
f WATER
STREAM I \\ U)
vv EczTI
rii
i
I I I
I / / PROP.
D FILTER #2
TEMPORARY 4" WATER IMPACT #4
(10LF). STREAM TO BE RESTORED TO
PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS.
SEE SHEET WL-8 FOR WATER
PROFILE AT STREAM CROSSING
LEGEND
IMPACTED
WETLANDS
®TEMPORARY
IMPACTED WETLANDS
EX. WETLANDS \ ;V ,
TO REMAIN
0
0
tY
V
t�
\t
PROP. SAND
fi
FILTER #4
U)z�
�ml
_ c
mi
TEMPORARY UTILITIES IMPACT
i TO WETLAND U: 823 SF
REMOVE 6"-12" OF TOP SOIL OF
PROPOSED DISTURBED AREA.
TOP SOIL TO BE PLACED ON
FABRIC AND REPLACED UPON
COMPLETION.
r '^ PERMANENT MAINTENANCE
I EASEMENT TO BE RESEEDED
>/ WITH NATIVE WETLAND SEED MIX.
INSTALL ANIT-SEEP COLLARS AT
THE DOWNSTREAM (UTILITY LINE
GRADIENT) WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND U
i
' f
li
54\�
SE\N
IN
i � I 953 l
i QQ
1 -�EikDW,4LLS' j � I � t
A� `1��+ •�/�: -� O •gyp. � \I
QI
PROPOSED UTILITIES &
ROAD CROSSING 42 IMPACT
TO WETLAND U: 4,309 SF
PROPOSED SIDEWALK
AS PART OF THE REZONING APPROVAL, THIS PROJECT DEDICATES
ROUGHLY 6 ACRES OF LAND TO THE MECKLENBURG COUNTY PARK AND
RECREATION DEPARTMENT. THE LAND PLAN ALSO INCLUDES AN
EXTENSIVE TRAIL NETWORK - A PORTION OF WHICH IS REPRESENTED
BY THE PUBLIC SIDEWALKS ON THE MAIN SPINE ROAD. ON THE ROAD
CROSSING OF STREAM A, THE SIDEWALK/TRAILS ARE TIGHTENED TO
THE BACK OF CURB AS THERE WILL BE HIGHER THAN NORMAL
PEDESTRIAN AND CHILDREN ON BIKES USING THE SIDEWALKS/TRAILS IN
THAT IN THIS AREA, AND THE PLANTING STRIP SEPARATION WILL
PROVIDE AN ADDED LEVEL OF SAFETY AT THE STREAM CROSSING.
0' 30' 60' 120'
SCALE: 1 "=60'
UAI t:
o
STREAM IMPACTS FOR UTILITIES & ROAD CROSSING #2
August 21, 2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON
PROJECT NO: 19004
Design Groun PA
Group,
SHEET#
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
WL-4
CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
N 7621 LRtlekmnue, Sdh m taL•704-8414604
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE:
a
1 "=60'

"
J
PROP. 8'
PEDESTRIAN
TRAIL
-PROP.
PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE t
LEGEND
N
U IMPACTED
o WETLANDS
0' 30' 60'
120'
�j EX. WETLANDS
N
n TO REMAIN
SCALE: 1 "=60'
DATE:
o
STREAM IMPACTS FOR UTILITIES & TRAIL CROSSING
August 21,
2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON
PROJECT NO:
19004
Design Groun PA
Group,
SHEET#
CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WL-5
N 7621 LRtleAvene.Sulh m taL•704-8414604
SCALE:
a
11

TOP OF WA
ELEV. =±76(
7E
SLOPED WINGWP
(BEYO�
STREAM BANK STA
RIP RAP AI
RIP RAP TO BE F
THE CHANNEL E
ABOVE THE TYPIC
ELEVATION; NOT V
EXISTING GRAD
AT INTERMITTEN
STREAM
75
I'MIN. BURY IN PIP
PER NCDENR 4
PERMIT REG
74
CL
PROPOSEDLL
GRADE
o
TOP
OI
w
I
ELE
._
J Q
.3
of
a
,
LL
LOPED
I
D
(BEYOND)
i
31LI
ATION
42" RCD/
;M
.
LACED
ON
AN
S ±12"
—
TOP OF
A
AL
WATER
STREAM B
NI
fIT
RIP RAP ARM
S
REAM
RIP RAPT
BI
THE CHAN
EI
E
T
T
ELEVATION;
N
STREAM
TOTAL STREAM
MPACT: 56LF
STREAM0— (MEASURED77—
C/L
XI STING ST
EP
E
C/LGGRRADE
01
D.
CULVERT
CROSSI
G #1
PROFILE - ROAD CULVERT CROSSING #1
SCALE H: 1 "=40' V: 1 "=10'
STREAM
RIP RAP
ROAD CULVERT #1 ELEVATION AT HEADWALL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
WALL
±760.5
'60
VGWALL
JK
STABILIZATION
DR TYP.
PLACED ON
BANKS ±12"
(PICAL WATER
OT WITHIN THE
'50
M
'46
NVERT OF 42" PIPE
12" BELOW FIN. GRADE
;MIN.)
UA I t:
o
CULVERT PROFILES & ELEVATIONS
August 21, 2020
rn
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON AV
PROJECTNO 19004
Design Group, PA
Q P'
SHEET#f
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
WL-6
rn CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
76YfLRdeManuaS010 t&70�41-I�
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE:
a _M I
AS SHOWN

TOP OF WALL
ELEV. = ±748.i
75
PROPOSE[
HEADWALL
Ito] a$70:7-1011i
STREAM BANK STAI
RIP RAP AF
RIP RAP TO BE P
THE CHANNEL E
ABOVE THE TYPIC
ELEVATION; NOT V
74
EXISTING GRAD
AT INTERMITTEN
STREAM C
PROP. 4" DIP WATE
732
PROPCSED
GRADE----
c a'
T
JOQI
E
UOO�
a
L
66" RC
P
BI
1
M
EF
EF
31LIZATION 77�:_-�
;MOR TYP.
LACED ON
STREA
ANKS ±12"
/
EEO./
STABIL
AL WATER
RIP RA
'ITHIN THE
RIP RA
STREAM
ON THI
62 LF PROP
CULVERT
BANKS
TYPICE
TOTAL STREAM
IMPACT: 72LF
ELEVA
\
T
(MEASURED
AT
THE S�
S I REAM
C/L)
1`
PROP.
8" DIP WATERJ
CLi
R
PROP. 8" DIP SEWER
CULVE
T CROSSING
#2
PROFILE - UTILITIES & ROAD CULVERT CROSSING #2
SCALE H: 1"=40' V: 1"=10'
3 - 66"
HEADWALL
FOOTING
1.5' SILL
1.0' SILL
ROAD CULVERT #2 ELEVATION AT HEADWALL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
TOP OF
HEADWALL
-1-1.5' SILL
)P OF WALL
_EV: = ±749.1
'50
DPED WINGWALL
:YOND)
N. BURY IN PIPE
NCDENR 401
MIT READ.
0 BANK
IZATION
ARMOR TYP.
TO BE PLACED
:CHANNEL
±12" ABOVE THE
L WATER
ION; NOT WITHIN
REAM
TING STREAM
'RADE
'34
-INVERT OF 66" PIPE
12" BELOW FIN. GRADE
(MIN.)
NOTE: THE SILLS ARE PROPOSED AS SHOWN
TO MAINTAIN THE FLOOD ELEVATION.
THE FLOOD ELEVATION CANNOT BE RAISED
TO AVOID FLOODING ON ADJACENT
PROPERTIES AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.
DAI t:
o
CULVERT PROFILES & ELEVATIONS
August 21, 2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON AVE
PROJECT NO: 19004
Design Grou PA
P'
SHEET#
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
WL_7
CREATING SPACES TO LIVE. WORK AND PLAY
N 7621 LMNAww45dbm a1704-8414604
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SCALE:
AS SHOWN

CC
HE
CC
WI
CON
FOO
ENLARGED UULVtK I i& HtzAUVVALL Utz I AIL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE PROP. GRADE
EX. GRADE
765 PROP.GRADE
760
755
100 YR.
FLOOD
ELEV.
750
745
ii
z 740
z
t
735
IG STREAM
ELEVATION
PEINVERT I
-
1
■■■
I■1■■■s
I■1�■■I■
I■11■■I�
I■■1■■11
I■■I■■lti
1
■■■
\■■
ANN
U■■
WIN
IMI■'■■I
■■■■■■■■
�■■■■■
I■■■■■�■■■
I■■■�■■■■
WEill■■■II■
,
A■■■I�ILi■■I/
■1\\■■IIII■■■■%I
■\■■IIII■■■I/�■
■■No
■■��■■■■■I■■■�■■■■
■■\
�����i■■
■■ � . � ■
11
■■■1\\■■■■■IIII■■■�/i■■■
■■■111■■■■■111
I ■■■■Ill
■■■
■■■■\■■■■■IIII■■■■I/I■■■
■■■■1\1■■I■■■
■■■Ill
■■■■
■■■■■
►
■■■■■■
. J
RADE
¢ 7
1+00 1+80 ~
y GENERALNOTES 750 750
1. TEMPORARY OPEN CUT SANITARY SEWER & WATER IMPACT.
2. STREAM TO BE RESTORED TO PRE -CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS.
3. BORING UNDER STREAM FOR SEWER & WATER NOT FEASIBLE DUE TO 745 745
DEPTH REQUIREMENT FROM BOTTOM OF STREAM TO TOP OF PIPE.
P ROP.4" D1
WATER LINE 74
1 +00
o TEMPORARY SEWER & WATER
IMPACT CULVERT #3 740 0
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
TEMPORARY WATER IMPACT #5
n
n
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
DATE:
STREAM & WETLAND IMPACT FOR
August 21, 2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON
PROJECT NO: lsooa
Design Group,PA
SHEET#
n CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WL-g
T621LRd•Avw•�• Sulbm t*704-s41_16a
SCALE:
i foe 4604
1
NOT TO SCALE

WATER QUALITY NOTES:
1. WATER QUALITY BMP'S SHALL BE INSTALLED
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF CHARLOTTE
POST CONSTRUCTION CONTROLS ORDINANCE
(PCCO), AND THE MECKLENBURG COUNTY BMP
DESIGN MANUAL.
2. BMP DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE
APPROVED BY CITY OF CHARLOTTE
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
====I= Ili
ul
O u
III
O
PROPOSED ROAD
\ CROSSING IMPACT#1 j
� I I
PROPOSED A� ��� / . pl
SAND FILTER #4�G
SAND FILTER
#4 OUTFALL
PROPOSED ROAD
CROSSING IMPACT #2 PROPOSED
SAND FILTER #5
SAND FILTER#5
OUTFALL 9
/j Lu
110
iIm
�
z w
Luw
of V
(D
PROPOSED
SANDFILTER#3
NON -JURISDICTIONAL,
PROPOSED
-q SAND FILTER #1
_
CgN�lp --- — � GULLY
NAVEN<IE
U SAND FILTER #1
a—
a OUTFACE
-�
PROPOSED SAND FILTER #3
SAND FILTER#2 OUTFALL
z
SAND FILTER #2--/
LLI
OUTFALL
,NJ Ira
a
C
0' 200' 400'
800,
C)
N
n
SCALE: 1 "=400'
o
WATER QUALITY MASTER PLAN
DATE:
August 21, 2020
Landworks
THE TOWNS AT CANNON AVE
PROJECT NO: 19004
a Design Group, PA
CREATING SPACES TO LIVE, WORK AND PLAY
THE ARDENT COMPANIES
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SHEET#
WL-9
a 7621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 tel: [phone]
SCALE:
A' Chadotte. NC 28226
fax:[phone]
1 "=400'

1. UPON COMPLETION OF STREAM CROSSING WORK, CONTRACTOR SHALL BACKRLL
AND MECHANICALLY TAMP (NO SPECIFIC DENSITY) SOILS INTO PLACE AND DRESS
DISTURBED SURFACES
2. BEGINNING AT A POINT 2' ABOVE WATER SURFACE ELEVATION, GRASS DISTURBED
AREAS (SEED. FERTILIZER k STRAW MULCH) STREAM BANK, TOP OF BANK AND
DISTURBED AREAS UPLAND OF STREAM
3. INSTALL COIR FIBER NET/MAT STARTING MINIMUM 12' BELOW WATER SURFACE
ELEVATION AND EXTENDING A MINIMUM 5 BEYOND TOP OF BANK. MINIMUM
SPECIFICATIONS FOR COIR FIBER NET/MAT AS FOLLOWS:
— MIN. THICKNESS OF 0.30 INCHES
— 100% COCONUT FIBER AND WOVEN INTO TONE
— AVG. WEIGHT OF 20 OUNCES/SQ. YD.
4. COIR FIBER NET/MAT SHALL BE SECURELY HELD IN PLACE WITH USE OF WOODEN
STAKED AND WIRE STAPLES (AS NEEDED)
5. INSTALL LIVE STAKES BEGINNING AT WATER SURFACE ELEVATION AND EXTENDING
2 VERTICAL FEET UP THE STREAM BANK. SEE LIVE STAKE DETAIL FOR
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
6. INSTALL SILT FENCE W/1WRE REINFORCEMENT ALONG TOP OF BANK (ADJACENT TO
END OF COIR FIBER NET/MAT) FOR WIDTH OF DISTURBED SOILS
WATER SURFACE ELEVATION
COIR FIBER NET/MAT
GRASS (SM, MULCH do FERTILIZE) —
REMAINING DISTURBED STREAM BANK
AREAS INCLUDING TOPS OF BANK
(UNDER COIR NET/MAT)
LIVE STAKE (WLLOWS OR —
SPECIES APPROVED BY
COW/DHEC) FOR FIRST 24'
ABOVE NORMAL WATER
SURFACE ELEVATION
24'3
12't
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY 24'IN LENGTH
2. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE 0.5'-1.5' IN DIAMETER AT THE TIME
OF PLANTING
]. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE BLACK WALLOW OR SPECIES
SPECIFIED BY COE/DH£C OR CONSULTANT
I1.
i. SPECIES SHALLBE DpiMANT AT THE TIME OF ACQUISITIONAND
PLANTING AND LOCALLY GROWI/HARVESTEOS.
LIVE STAKES SHALL BE SPACED Y D.C.
6. LIVE STAKES SHALL BE PLANTED A MINIMUM OF 18' IN N
DEPTH VATH NO MORE THAN 4'-8' OF STAKE EXPOSED
EXTEND COIR FIBER MAT
W BEYOND TOP OF BANK
1-I I i
;-
I EXTEND COIR FIBER NET/MAT
4 1 k l 12' BELOW WATER SURFACE
ELEVATION
STREAM BANK STABILIZATION - LIVE STAKE
TYPICAL DETAIL — N.T.S.
5 ❑ 2.5 5 10
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE
( IN FE>r'1' )
20 ❑ 10 20 40
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE
( IN FEET )
INSTALL SILT FENCE
REINFORCED WITH HOG
WIRE AT TOP OF BANK
(EDGE OF CDIR FIBER
NET/MAT)
LARGE ROC[ (SNOT OR IMPORT)
MAY BE USED TO REFORM
STREAM BANK (STACKED), 16' OF
SOIL SHALL COVER STREAM
SIDE FACE OF ROCK STACK.
(USE OF ROCK TO ANCHOR BANK
IS OPTIONAL)

O
.4—j
c�
.E
v
v
we
jurisdictional
Determination Information

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Td. SAW-2049-02172 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Derita
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor:
The Ardent Companies
Tyson Reilly
Address:
2100 Powers Ferry Road, Suite 350
Atlanta, GA 30339
Telephone Number:
803-548-4656
E-mail:
treillyn thearden tcom pan ies.com
Size (acres) 41.75 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Little Sugar Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.2779
Longitude:-80.7981
Location description: The review area is located directly north of the intersection of Cannon Avenue and Equipment Drive.
PIN: 04507101, 04507209, and 04509301.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 10/25/2019. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity- on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly

SAW-2019-02172
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David L. Shaeffer at 704-510-1437 or
david.l.shaeffer(&,,usace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 2/6/2020.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. if you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Phillip Shannin, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an
RFA (form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
ned
�---/ f, � Digitally 0.02.0 0
SH AEFFER.DAVID.LEIG H.1260750573
Corps Regulatory Official: Date, 2o2o.02.o6oe1s2s-os'oo'
Date of JD: 2/6/2020 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

SAW-2019-02172
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/V`p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, WEPG
Daniel Kuefler
Address: 10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: 336-554-2728
E-mail: daniel.kuefler(a wetlands-eve.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: The Ardent Companies, Tyson Reilly File Number: SAW-2019-02172 Date: 2/6/2020
Attached is:
See Section below
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of ermission)
A
RED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of ermission)
B
DENIAL
LAPPROVED
C
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
INARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identities your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.miliMissions/CivilWorks/Re ulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section 11 of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section IT of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section IT of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION IT - REQUEST FOR YEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMTT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
F CONTACT F QUESTIONS RR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: David L. Shaeffer
CESAD-PDO
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opporntunit to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: David L. Shaeffer, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 2/6/2020
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: The Ardent Companies, Tyson Reilly, 2100
Powers Ferry Road, Suite 350, Atlanta, GA 30339
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, 1515 Cannon Avenue, SAW-2019-
02172
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located directly north of
the intersection of Cannon Avenue and Equipment Drive. PIN: 04507101, 04507209, and 04509301.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.2779 Longitude:-80.7981
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Little Sugar Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 1 /3/2020 by the Corps
TABLE OFAQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site Number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude (decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount of
aquatic resources in
review area (acreage
and linear feet, if
applicable
Type of aquatic
resources (i.e.,
wetland vs. non-
wetland waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
Wetland S
35.27880000
-80.79840000
0.04 acres
wetland
404
Wetland T
35.28180000
-80.79720000
0.11 acres
wetland
404
Wetland U
35.28010000
-80.79770000
0.92 acres
wetland
404
Wetland V
35.28200000
-80.79570000
0.02 acres
wetland
404
Wetland W
35.28180000
-80.79620000
0.01 acres
wetland
404
Wetland X
35.28120000
-80.79850000
0.08 acres
wetland
404
Wetland Y
35.28060000
-80.79780000
0.01 acres
wetland
404
Wetland Z
35.28140000
-80.79900000
0.21 acres
wetland
404
Stream A
35.28170000
-80.79890000
1340 linear feet
non -wetland
404
Stream B
35.28160000
-80.79720000
593 linear feet
non -wetland
404
Stream C
35.28190000
-80.79600000
453 linear feet
non -wetland
404
Stream E
35.27880000
-80.79810000
71.7 linear feet
non -wetland
404
Stream F
35.27990000
-80.80180000
520 linear feet
non -wetland
404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review
area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an
approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the
various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General
Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or
requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has
not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit
applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official
determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD
before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or
different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than
accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant
can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that
permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AJD
constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g.,
signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area
affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such
jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any
administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD
or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual
permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be
administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over
aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic
resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is
practicable. This PJD finds that there "rnay be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"
navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the
review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject tile. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Figure 1 dated 10/25/2020
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
® U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:Nationalma og_v
® USGS NHD data.
® USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:ESRT Soils Mapservice accessed on 12/10/2019
®National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:USFWS NWI Mapservice accessed on 12/10/2019
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ❑Aerial (Name & Date):
or ®Other (Name & Date): Photos 1-12 dated 8/15/2019 and 8/18/2019
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been
verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
Digitally signed by
SHAEFFER.DAVID.LEIGH.126
0750573
Date: 2020.02.06 06:15:58
-05'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
2/6/2020
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable) 1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an
action.

r '
■'{ { '.� Wetland a
0.11 acres - Wetland W * •
r!i h, y , ! Stream -�
I �I - f • evaluation -
1 .7 I • {� form (DP3) {'�■ 'i +Y , •� •
Perennial Stream A 1 `' Intermittent Stream B 0. 1 -`� �. '
1340 linear feet
593 linear feet
%_ •• , • ■ ~
_ r•' CUIVert '� •■ '* ,yi '� I ' - `■ �� '} `� �ti �� t, ~�� •
•I 1 L ti 1 ' h • _ 7 Y a L y 1
%
Wetland data 4 1 ` ', �` '{ •
Wetland Z �; % I. • �■ �t ter` • _' +* ! ` A ', ~, • `N 'L , , — '
form (DPI) ■ ,r I r + a
0.21acres 1 ',t ■ • ■ 3 titi`-■ F i• { ' ■ * ■ •
7 ,
Upland data �, L
F r 1 i tit t
PROJECT BOUNDARY form (DP2) f •',�•• 3 , ', y _ _ _ _ s -'� *� r+ _ _ • _ ', +� •
LIMITS OF STUDY r �,;; +• ' .r +�
(+/-) 41.75 acres (Total) F ~*i� ` ' . .' Wetland V `_ 4
+ _ ■ #•y`~'� r ' 0.02 acres
4 IL
'' , 'r r+'• ' ■ r F+l+ ■ y * �} f fir' � ■ F ,f ' - ! - � I� ' Y J
'ki ,��=�� ! r ■ I'! ■ ' `h ~1% ~�� �ti ;i T r ■r ■ # r I ■ , L rA■L L Q
Intermittent Stream F _- �' * +r ' 'y 1 �� F■ +� ; ' r �, Intermittent Stream C
■ L ■ + ` ■ 1 ■ + L fC O
520 linear feet '+ `,y y, 6 { ; ' { ; 453 linear feet CL
rn
.7 ram} _ # Wetland 'L `y i'#■ !h { y 1 { ` =—i 1 +` F ' ' y 0 Y « i rn
r- 0.08 acres ■i }
4 w
Wetland Y •' y •k yL' _ b y • h F ti• I 1 iii v
' y `■ y + r + # +F {r ' ti` F ' ' Wetland U Q H N N Q
4 �
- (0.01 acres) '' '' L ■ ■I ~ i I' r+ ' #h { yi ` h y■ 0.92 acres Q ± a
1 r • oo-1
IF b
Stream + ■ i { rF + r r r + 1 i k ,` i ■ ■ + ,art
4.
evaluation form ' r i f { h F ■ I + ' h ' h ■ r .. + M
y '
`, y (DP4) • { h +++ • ' r ■ '� 4 • 1 1 ' h 1 ■
`� Li y 'i ■ j y `■ ■ ' I +• F { I r ' 7 ! �w ■ { I iw +E • ` L iMl Z Z O
+y `�i L*t i. % �i + '! ! Jr r h ■ ' . ' J { ■' yL t L + ■ • Z
y■ ; az 3i • ~y `+ Ir ■ • l` 1 I �! 1 15 ' yL, f 4 + 4�7 '� 1 ! V O *..
�� ~ '� 'yi'a Yt Wetlands rF F ■ �' yr I ' y L _ h h L L � � ', •, y1h L~+ `%. H U C,
h i ti ` y ■ F' A' fi r ■ ' ■ ■ 1 + ■ ' L Q qA sZ Z
■ • 0.04 acres ■F r� { ■ L f i '+�-• Z *�'�
h `+ '' *■ f • �� ~,tii F r r F'r �`■ r'' ,r a "; L { , ■+ i•+ ' .+ 'F E a a
+ i ■ ti L ! si s+ �■ ■r !+ �■ • . I # I , y � K ■ b aJ R U
ti h .y 10 `ty �i +r a r f !■ , r + !, I F i --ti 1■ i L _ { W Y C
F
i 4 ! - r r r■ ! ,. ' r 1 * ■ r■ r 1 I ■ ' y; 4 •I = V L O
' + - *-a •' r rr • ■r 1 r _ 1 i ■ r i ' + , '�L - F *� � ' a1 CL LL
CUIVert •+ r r rr.} # r h - { h 4 ■ 1 '■ a ,--I ~ G QqM O
i ■ a Fr 1 L y �+ v
f �' ■ r i L ■ - + - �+
# IL
� ' _ ♦ F III ti� I i f +f i ■ { - r a - :
LOCATION i +- �4 { 4.
; '� .r�*'■ ■ i •F+ r' �+F�f r ���_
Lat: 35.27792 oN + -
Long:
-80.79818 °W i - - f F. r dr _ ; ■ �
`y
HUC: 03050103 (Lower Catawba) Bridge 9 +
Culvert _ , - _ ~` _ r■
r � r • . _ _ F ; � FIGURE 17
F ••
LEGEND `'�.. f 'r• + `� _-- - yt+ r ,' ,,',• 1
po IyI Tributary F,'{ F` y +f'r. •� Non -Jurisdictional Gully _.f�;+�rr,+-'��,''.'r■•++•Fh,
® Wetland ***USAGE VERIFICATION 1/3/20***#� * ,r.' '� L + F ,r .r r -4 r:
+ , i r�
Photo location and direction x� x; r',:•r r' r• M _
SCALE DATE:
200 100 0 200(Feet) 10/25/19
0 Project boundary study limits ***NCDEQ VERIFICATION 12/4/19*** y y ' - _ _

NCSAM / NCWAM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
2019-02172
NCDWR#
Project Name
Towns at Cannon
Date of Evaluation
8/19/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
The Ardent Companies
Wetland Site Name
Wetland T
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Little Sugar Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050103
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
F1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.2818N/-80.7973W
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

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

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

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

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland T Date of Assessment 8/19/2020
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization H.Caldwell/WEPG
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: SAW-2019-02172 NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Towns at Cannon
3. Applicant/owner name: The Ardent Comp
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Catawba
nies
2. Date of evaluation: 8/19/2020
Assessor name/organization
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
H.Caldwell/WEPG
03050103
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.281 N/-80.7975W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream B 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water— assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
®C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Towns at Cannon Date of Assessment 8/19/2020
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization H.Caldwell/WEPG
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
OMITTED
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
HIGH

a- J
i
O
Q
v
oC
22
Threatened & Endangered Species
Report

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
I en. ri nd ner@wet Ian ds -epg. co m
For 1515 Cannon Avenue
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
August 14, 2020
www.wetiands-epg.com
Ashesrile Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

1515 Cannon Avenue - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The 1515 Cannon Avenue site (+/- 41.75 acres) is located just north of Cannon
Avenue, and west of W. Sugar Creek Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina. It can be found on the Derita, NC USGS Topographic
Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.2779 N, longitude is-80.7981 W. The topography
consists of gentle slopes, creeks, and riparian corridors, with the elevation
ranging from 750 to 790 ft. (Figure 1).
Figure 1:
USGS MAP - Derita, NC Quadrangle (1993)
�� '' t �r: . s •'I rita
Project 8arrndary / r• - -'
Study Limits
:I
f(a- 1+1-) 51-75 ages � � �'`vp
-
Ath19t'C
field_
'INTERCHANGE 4
93 . ■� .F $5 _ ` Nil
■� - - l
Unnamed TrlGu[ary to � • + tit `
/ .. Ufla.SLrgar Erask
67 • 1 / -1'
LOCATION
Lat' 35-77792 9K, Long:-80.79818 9W
HUC:03050103 (Lower Catawba)
-7
acres: 1515 CANNON AVENUE on>rn uy- uc��rwmd uy:
{+/-1 41-75 Mecklenburg CauntV, NC "K
FIGURE
1 p9119/I9 USGS Map — Derita, NC Quadrangle (1993) me kdc a cnmvanW' _
ApproA mate Localim, For5tudy Pu'p tSeS Un�y
S.NMt to U5ACC NCaO, and CAa55 vrArmfion
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

1515 Cannon Avenue - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ was
referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and
Protected species for Mecklenburg County North Carolina, the results of which
are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and
the site was investigated during the weeks of October 14, 2019 and August 10,
2020.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on October 14, 2019 ***Updated August 10, 2020
Group Name Status Record Status
Invertebrate
Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona
Endangered
Current
decorata
Invertebrate
Rusty -patched Bumble Bee
Endangered
Historic
(Bombus affinis)
Vascular Plants
Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea
Endangered
Current
laevi ata
Vascular Plants
Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus
Endangered
Current
schweinitzii)
Vascular Plants
Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii)
Endangered
Current
Vertebrate
Northern Long -Eared Bat (Myotis
Threatened
Probable/Potential
septentrionalis)
Vertebrate
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus
Protected under the Bald
Current
leucocephalus)
and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

1515 Cannon Aveyi»e - T177-eatened / Endangered / M-ntected Species Evaluation
SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS:
Three plant species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Mecklenburg County:
• Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally Endangered,
is typically found in open habitats which historically have been maintained by
wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most occurrences are limited to
roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility rights -of -way (ROW).
• Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), listed as Federally Endangered, is
typically found in open woods, cedar barrens, roadsides, clear cuts, dry
limestone bluffs and power line rights -of -way, requiring abundant sunlight and
little competition from other plant species.
Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii), listed as Federally Endangered, requires
habitat of sandy forests and woodland edges. This species requires periodic fire
as a part of its ecology.
Four animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Mecklenburg County:
• Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large bodies of open water
such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers, where there are suitable fish
populations and tall trees for nesting and roosting.
• Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally Endangered, is
restricted to cool, clean, well -oxygenated water. Stable, silt- free stream beds
are required for this species. Typically, stable areas occur where the stream
banks are well -vegetated with trees and shrubs.
Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), listed as Federally Threatened.
During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies underneath
bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non -
reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. It
has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. Northern
long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula.
Rusty -patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis), listed as Federally Endangered,
live in colonies that include a single queen and female workers. Rusty -patched
Bumble Bees historically occupied grasslands and tallgrass prairies. Bumble
bees need areas that provide nectar and pollen from flowers, nesting sites
(underground and abandoned rodent cavities or clumps of grasses), and
overwintering sites for hibernating queens (undisturbed soil).
WEPG 4
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

1515 Cannon Aveiiw, - T177-eatened / Fndanger(,d / M-ntected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
This site is in an urbanized setting. It is surrounded by a residential
neighborhood to the north, commercial and light industrial businesses to the east
and west, and Interstate-85 corridor to the south. The site consists of wooded
slopes and stream corridors of small tributaries to Little Sugar Creek. There is a
strong presence of non-native invasive species throughout the site. This
condition is not uncommon in older, urbanized areas in the city.
The majority of the site is covered in a mixed hardwood forest with mature trees.
Many of the trees are covered with climbing English Ivy (Hedera helix), which is
also the predominant ground cover in some areas. Canopy tree species include
American Elm (Ulmus americans), Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Black
Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), Willow Oak (Quercus phellos), White Oak (Q.
alba), Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera),Cottonwood (Populus deltoides), Black Walnut (Juglans nigra), River
Birch (Betula nigra), and Red Maple (Acerrubra). Sub -canopy species include
Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum),
Flowering Dogwood (Corpus f/orida), and American Holly (Ilex opaca). The
primary shrub species present is Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense). Additional
shrub species includes Blackberry (Rubus sp.), Multiflora Rose (Rosa multif/ora),
and Red Tips (Photinia sp.). English Ivy (Hedera helix) is the strongly dominant
vine. Additional vines observed were Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica),
Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), and Catbrier
(Smilax sp.). Herbs present include the dominant Japanese Stiltgrass
(Microstegium vimineum), along with Christmas Fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), Ebony Spleenwort (Asplenium platyneuron), Panic Grass
(Panicum sp.), False Nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), Jumpseed (Tovara
virginiana), and Knotweed (Polygonum sp.).
The slopes and adjacent uplands on the western side of the site are covered with
mixed mature and young Loblolly (Pinus taeda) dominated pine stands along
with Short -leaf Pine (P. echinata) and Virginia Pine (P. virginiana).
There is an old fence line along Cannon Avenue, with overhanging tree limbs
and climbing English Ivy. The boundary along the roadside is shady. The thin
transitional areas are dominated by common weedy species such as Goldenrod
(Solidago sp.), Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium
obtusifolium), and Pokeweed (Phytolacca americans).
WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

1515 Cannon Avenue - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower, Michaux's Sumac and
Smooth Coneflower along the roadside, transitional areas and woods
edges were examined and none of these species were present.
• No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings
nor were any nesting sites observed.
The streams on site do not have the habitat characteristics required to
support populations of the Carolina Heelsplitter. Based on existing
documentation, Carolina Heelsplitter populations have not been previously
identified within this basin. No individuals were observed during the survey
nor would any be expected on -site.
Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office's website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html) it
appears that the site meets the "exempt" criteria which requires no further
action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the Northern
Long-eared Bat.
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Range Map for Rusty -patched
Bumble Bee
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap.html)
Mecklenburg County is in it's Historic Range, and as such, Section 7
consultation is not needed. WEPG concludes that Rusty -patched Bumble
Bee is not present.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not
identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further
investigation of the presence of protected species on this site is recommended at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
041XI # 1*e�l
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
August 14, 2020
6
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

1515 Cannon Avenue - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist/ Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and natural resource biologist and
has conducted field work and investigative studies covering thousands of
cumulative acres in both North and South Carolina since 1996, including:
• Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory. Organized, directed,
and conducted field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory. Organized, directed, and
conducted field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities
Evaluation for over 50,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 -
present.
• Located and identified numerous previously unreported populations of
Federally Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
• Located and identified numerous previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis nanif/ora).
• Found Schweinitz's Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC.
This discovery led (in part) to the purchase of the site by the State of North
Carolina Plant Conservation Program, now called Redlair Preserve. This
population has become a Recovery Site for the species.
• Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in
Mecklenburg, Union, Cabarrus and Gaston Counties, North Carolina.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
7
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.