20201136 Ver 1_401 Application_20200903

DWR
mrlslon of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
April 11, 2020 Ver 3.1
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20201136
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Select Project Reviewer*
Alan Johnson:eads\adjohnson1
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
COURTESY COPY - 6341 Cora Street Storm Drainage Improvement Project
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Helen Simonson
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
9/3/2020
Nearest Body of Water
UT to Gum Branch
Basin
Catawba
Water Classification
WS-N (Gum Branch 11-120-5)
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.298899-80.900470
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Mecklenburg
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
W Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Version#*
1
Reviewing Office*
Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
U
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?

W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
03 - Maintenance
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
F- 401 Water Quality Certification - E)press
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes f• No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner W Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Storm Drainage easements owned by Charlotte/Mecklenburg Storm Water Services
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Responsible party:
Charlotte Storm Water Services (CSWS)
2d.Address
Street Address
600 East Fourth Street
Address tine 2
aty,
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28202
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
State / Rwince / Ifgion
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
r Yes r No
r Yes r No
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)

3a. Name:
Charlotte Storm Water Services
3b. Business Name:
3c.Address
Street Address
600 East Fourth Street
Address Line 2
(Sty
State / Province / Filegion
Charlotte
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
25202
USA
3d. Telephone Number:
3e. Fax Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
D. David Romans
4b. Business Name:
S&ME Inc.
4c.Address
Street Address
9751 Southern Pine Blvd.
Address Une 2
City
State / Province / Pegion
Charlotte
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
26273
USA
4d. Telephone Number: 4e. Fax Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
AgentAuthNote.pdf 73.32KB
C. Project Information and Prior Project History u
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(d appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
2b. Property size:
03513610 / 03513609
0.19 acres (project area)
2c. Project Address
Street Address
6341 Cora Street
Address Line 2
(Sty
State / Province / Rion
Charlotte
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
25216
USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
UT to Gum Branch

3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-IV (Gum Branch 11-120-5)
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Catawba
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030501011403
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinityof the project at the time of this application:*
The project area is currently made up of a small wooded basin wetland area that is receiving stormwater flow from a riprap lined outfall to a 30" reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) along
Cora Street. This wetland drains into a buried 15" RCP under the driveway at 6341 Cora Street, which has become clogged with debris and has been leading to erosion and flooding of
the driveway. The drainage pipe then runs under a lawn area downslope of a pond embankment, and outfalls into a wooded area to the east. A downslope wetland area and scour pool
is present around the current outfall; this wetland is drained offsite by confined non -jurisdictional channels with occasional areas of visible subterranean flow.
The surrounding area is made up of medium density single family residences with some small wooded lots, as well as the small pond immediately to the north of the project area.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
2_USGS TOPO.pdf
992.13KB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.11
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
0
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the project is to reduce the occurrence of driveway flooding, erosion, and property damage at 6341 Cora Street, as well as to convey runoff from the eAsting city rights -
of -way through a storm drainage system that is sized to meet existing engineering guidelines.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The proposed project will involve the removal of 145 linear feet (LF) of 15" RCP between an upslope wetland and a downslope wetland as well as 28 LF of 12" RCP running from the
base of an eroding retaining wall in the lawn at 6341 Cora Street to the outfall at the downslope wetland. These pipes will be replaced with a continuous pipe system made up of a
segment of 24" X38" elliptical RCP connected to a catch basin located near the current 12" RCP inlet, and then connect to a 36" RCP which will outfall at a new concrete headwall at the
location of the current pipe outfalls. At the upstream end of the system (within the upslope wetland) a redi-rock sill will be constructed with a top elevation at the current ground surface.
This sill will drop down 1.75' to a new stone headwall for the proposed pipe inlet. Some minor grading fill above the new pipe adjacent to the driveway will occur as well.
Construction will be performed by standard commercial construction equipment. No specialized equipment not regularly seen on construction projects is anticipated.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
6341 Cora St Repair Plan.pdf 641.66KB
3_PROPOSEDIMPACTS.pdf 657.63KB
AdditionalPhotos.pdf 1.12MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r' Yes r No r Unknown
Comments:
Delineation completed by CSWS staff
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Helen Simonson
Agency/Consultant Company: Charlotte Storm Water Services
Other:
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
Cora St -WETLAND FORM.pdf 211.37KB
Cora St -UPLAND FORM.pdf 210.71 KB
Cora St-NCWAM.pdf 183.03KB

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands r Streams -tributaries
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
r Buffers
U
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type * M
2c. Type of W.
2d. W. name *
2e. Forested *
2f. Type of
2g. Impact
Jurisdicition*(')
area*
W1
Construction
T
Headwater Forest
Upslope Wetland
Yes
Both
0.015
Disturbance
(acres)
W2
Pipe Inlet Construction
P
Headwater Forest
pslope Wetland
Yes
Both
0.003
(acres)
W3
Construction
Headwater Forest
Downslope Wetland
Yes
Both
0.002
Disturbance
7r7
7�
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.017
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.020
2h. Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.003
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The pipe inlet with redi-rock sill has been specifically designed to maintain current wetland hydrology and limit potential upstream hydrologic impacts to
the wetland. Temporary wetand impacts have been limitied to only the areas required to allow construction access.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Construction will occur "in the dry" via the use of coffer dams and pump-arounds. No staging or stockpiling is to occur within the wetland areas.
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?
r Yes r No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
The project does not require mitigation due to the minimal nature of the impacts (only 0.003 acres permanent loss of wetland, less than 0.02 acres of total wetland impact).
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
Catawba basin buffers only apply to the main channel of the Catawba River.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H .1003(2)?

r Yes r No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
1b. 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 (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?*
r Yes r No
Comments:
Project is a municipal storm water maintenance project, exempt from NEPA/SEPA.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Project is to repair ebsting storm water infrastructure in a fully built -out area.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut anytrees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?'
r Yes r No
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS IPaC report and NCNHP report. No extant element occurrences of federally protected species
have been recorded within a mile of the project site. Habitats present at the site (small wooded wetland, well maintained lawn / dam) is not consistent
with the acceptable habitat for the federally protected plant species. No stream habitat suitable for heelsplitter was present in the project area and
there are no known ebsting populations of heelsplitter in the watershed.
Consultation Documentation Upload
Cora NCNHP Report.pdf 1 MB
Species List Asheville Ecological Services Field Office(3).pdf 377.5KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)

6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
t^ Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper: https://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmapper/
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office HPOWEB GIS Service : http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpomb/
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
SHPOReport.pdf 481.07KB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-yearfloodplain?*
r Yes r No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) GIS data for Mecklenburg County.
Miscellaneous
Comments
Typically these activities would be authorized under RGP 163 (Charlotte Storm Water Services); in this instance, authorization
under NWP 3 is being requested as the wetland was classified as High Quality by NC WAM and RGP 163 is not to be used on wetlands classified as High Quality.
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Signature
rJ By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions AGC);
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Helen Simonson, PWS.
Signature
f 4E ek f6vnplL. yl-
Date
9/3/2020

Memorandum
To: USACE / NCDWR
From: Dave Homans
Cc: Helen Simonson, Charlotte Storm Water Services (CSWS)
Date: August 19, 2020
Subject: 6341 Cora Street SDIP Agent Authorization / Responsibility
Regarding agent authorization for this project:
S&ME has been contracted by CSWS to assist in the preparation of the preconstruction notification and agency
consultation. Though S&ME is functioning as a consultant on this project, we are not operating as a signatory
agent, and actual document submittal will be conducted by Helen Simonson of CSWS, the responsible party for
the project. Therefore, formal Agent Authorization for S&ME is not required.
Thank you.
D. David Homans
Project Scientist
1

P 4�
n
�NL Ct,F`w-
G,Q
sr,N ve"'' Rq -
b
t1 4
tier Rrarrrh �
K!'t LY Rf,
r_ ti
�� _ ✓ Get![ Y Srartc%��_
1 � n
E3
�_ C rrp 1p1AR ON j
O
Z � y
FP
iGN �
(i.Uni }
lJ
7�
EI
0
E
O
0
z
a
-o
N
0
U
0
U
0
6
v�
Oakdale;
Elan sd'
r, si
F ,
-
s� C,Fty
v� ri
a
r.
ti CF
? y
� 4
P
Charlotte I 7°
Reservoir -
s
REFERENCE: USGS USA TOPO STREAMING DATASET
a GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM USGS NATIONAL MAP. THIS MAP IS FOR INFORMATIONAL
PURPOSES ONLY. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED. THEY ARE NOT BASED ON
CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION, UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
0
a USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
III _ 6341 CORA STREET STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Project Location
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
1 " = 2,000 '
DATE:
8-19-20 2
PROJECT NUMBER
4335-20-130

772
768
764
760
756
0+00
0+50
//
Q
IN LIF CE
CHAIN LINXI< FENCE-
767
765 H*R2Wv
H 768, (D
MP-1-2 7�7 Q7 = 765
1+00
190
TP-60P
PR. CONCRETE ENDWALL,
NCDOT 838.80
�L
6,3
�� R 0�
NV. RCP-1 762.2
12"
-767
6'
57.30 HARDWOOD�� ,S� R 6 6
\ HT - PE
6
�0 ��
_757 -758- �59/ANDg/P S
- 0 5 J INV. RrP 5 760.
_ Ss�
SSE
766
sss
1-:55 SSE -
$ 760.29 SSE
SSMH SANITARY SEWER MANI OIgi r PHARR MAP
RIM=760.29' ��c NES PER IN D8 6406-763 -nON
NVs FRO -BUILT DATA: 1gS7 ANNEXA
INV XCCESSIBLE) SEE: C EDWIN A EA""BY BLACK 0. N0. 633.47
SHEET 24 OF 58 Cm
51
5
1+50
PR. CB, NCDOT
840.32 WITH GRATE
CH
2+00
035-162•
,#MMY OA
JACOUELI
DB 2819!
6322 COI
PR. 118 LF 24" X 38" E
EX. ± 145 LF OF 15"
NC;t N LI�I
-768- -� o
-� �30S 1 \ 30S 34 7GL
- / 15"RCP _ +- -_ - -�- - INV. R
764.233' SSE
- - C�DE11J @8-64�7$3Cnr SSE SDE
-SSE
SSE
EX. ± 28 LF OF 12" RCP TO BE REMOVED SSE
- DJ
SSE
APR. 34 LF 36" RCP (CLASS IV) @ 0.58%
- SEED AND MULCH AS NEEDED
035-136-10
BARRY T. WOLFE
KARLA WOLFE'
DB 6406-783
6341 CORA AW
(SEE EXCEPTION
PARCEL 035-136-09)
SSE
2+50
772
768
764
760
756
2+96
I D 1
-AUTION AND LIMIT
UND EXISTING
PRACTICAL
WETLANDS DETAIL SCALE: 1" = 10'
R/W gy MAINTENANCE
CHAIN LINK FENCER c
C
pSPH.
m
u \000 LINE
CP-30 7693F�C / Z /
`S ____4N V /
y � �
c c H W_n� S SS5-
� �,bFRftDWOB�- -
44..JJ, / 0 HARDWC
MPF �a3 SON CN
AbOD
E : SE 0�SSRANJO2� PM768.03 POP"bfe,
SC
SANITARY ER MANHOLE 66SSMH y CM
JO
RIM=768. O NEED
�767 INVs M AS -BUILT DATA: S
s INACCESSIBLE)
NV IN=763.08'
7 SSE INV our=762.88'
EX. DELINEATED WETLANDS, TYP.\
/y 035-136-09
RONALD LEW1S BYRUM
° HARDWOOD DO 29259-254
WETLANDS6311 CORA AVE
\ DBI N2664 X17B)n�
CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY DIKE OR COFFERDAM UPSTREAM
OF WORK AREA. USE PUMP AS NECESSARY TO DIVERT ANY
BASEFLOW AROUND WORK AREA PER CLDS 31.13 & 30.22A
PR. REDI ROCK R-28B
PR. REDI ROCK R-28HB, TYP.
PR. BRICK ENDWALL, NCDOT 838.11
REPLACE ± 22 SY OF 6" GRAVEL DRIVE,
MATERIAL IS TO MATCH EXISTING MATERIAL
NAME
NEW PAVEMENT OR ASPHALT REPAIR
NEW 2'-6" CONC. CURB
TREE BARRICADE
PROPOSED STORM
DRAINAGE DROP INLET
PROPOSED STORM
DRAINAGE CATCH BASIN
EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING STORM
DRAINAGE MANHOLE
EXISTING STORM STRUCTURE
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING SHRUB
EXISTING UTILITY POLE
EXISTING WATER METER
EXISTING SIGN
EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION
PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
SYMBOL
IL ------,
------11I
11
8
EXIST CB
El
WM
11
-
CORA S'T
r
0
z
PROJECT SITE
1��D
VICINITY MAP NTS
NAME
EXISTING PAVEMENT EDGE
EXISTING STORM PIPE
PROPOSED STORM PIPE
EXISTING PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING BUILDING EDGE
EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY
STORM DRAINAGE ESMT
TEMPORARY EASEMENT
EXISTING FENCE
PROPOSEDFENCE
EXISTING WATER
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING GAS
EXISTING O'HEAD ELECTRIC
EXISTING U'GROUND ELECTRIC
SYMBOL
RAW -
SDE -
e-
x x
x x
W -
SS -
G -
OE -
UE -
EXISTING U'GROUND TELEPHONE TV
EXISTING WETLANDS
EXISTING CONTOURS -770
-768
770
PROPOSED CONTOURS 768
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
1. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARLOTTE LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MANUAL (CLDSM), AND
NCDOT ROADWAY STANDARD DRAWINGS, LATEST EDITIONS.
2. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THE CHARLOTTE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION (CDOT) WORK AREA TRAFFIC CONTROL HANDBOOK (W.A.T.C.H.), LATEST
EDITION.
3. ALL STAGING, EXCAVATION, STOCKPILING, AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY (R.O.W.),
PERMANENT STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT, AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT. NO STAGING, STOCKPILING ETC. IS TO
OCCUR WITHIN THE WETLANDS.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP ALL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT, MATERIAL, AND STOCKPILES OFF OF DRIVEWAYS, UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED ON PLANS.
5. UTILITIES SHOWN WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA MAY BE INCOMPLETE AND ARE BASED ON A LIMITED SURVEY, GIS RECORDS,
AND/OR HISTORICAL MAPPING. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING THE APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND
ASSURING EXISTING UTILITIES ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
6. ALL DISTURBED LAWN AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED TO GRADES AS INDICATED ON THE PLAN, RAKED, SEEDED AND
MULCHED.
7. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ADHERING TO ALL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS NECESSARY PER CITY AND STATE
REQUIREMENTS.
8. LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT STAFF APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR TREE DISTURBANCE AND/OR REMOVAL WITHIN THE R.O.W.
WHEN NECESSARY, NOTIFY STORM WATER INSPECTOR WHO SHALL COORDINATE WITH LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT.
9. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE CAUTION EXCAVATING NEAR EXISTING TREES IDENTIFIED AS PROTECTED IN OR OUTSIDE THE
R.O.W. WHEN NECESSARY, PRIOR TO EXCAVATION TREE ROOTS SHALL BE PRUNED AND CUT CLEANLY USING A DISC
TRENCHER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 01000 OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTE LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS, LATEST
EDITION.
10. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL CLASS III RCP UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLAN.
11. STORM WATER PIPING INSTALLATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH NCDOT STANDARD DETAIL 300.01.
12. PROPOSED STORM WATER PIPING LENGTHS AND SLOPES NOTED ON THE PLANS ARE MEASURED FROM
CENTER -OF -STRUCTURE TO CENTER -OF -STRUCTURE.
13. CONCRETE PAVEMENT SPECIFIED FOR REPLACEMENT SHALL BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED.
14. CONTRACTOR SHALL MATCH EXISTING CROSS -SECTIONS WHEN REPLACING ROADWAY, CURBING, DRIVEWAYS, AND GUTTERS
UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANS.
15. CURB TRANSITIONS AROUND PROPOSED CATCH BASINS SHALL BE PER CLDS DETAIL 10.29.
16. 2'-6" CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER TO 2'-0"VALLEY GUTTER TRANSITION SHALL BE PER CLDS DETAIL 10.19.
17. DROP INLETS TO BE GRADED PER CLDS 20.35 UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE PLAN.
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING NOTE:
1. 401/404 JURISDICTIONAL AREA(S) HAVE BEEN PERMITTED UNDER CHARLOTTE STORM WATER SERVICES RGP #163/GC #4100, OR
APPLICABLE PERMIT DOCUMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FOLLOW ALL APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. COPY OF PERMIT PACKAGE
MUST BE ON SITE.
2. BY CITY ORDINANCE, THE DISCHARGE OF STORMWATER POLLUNTANTS TO THE STORM WATER SYSTEM OR WATER BODIES IS PROHIBITED.
Know what°s below.
Call before you dig.
0 20 40
10 30
SCALE: 1 "=20'
Er P�
:(
133
1L2
0
N
00
N
v fc N co
C N In
fn - W T
t M W
M M
U v _
0
LL � C o
0 C
�j Z O
X N
o 0
W d LL
0
t rn w
U W F
OF
F N W W
12W�
~ OiN�
~ ��Q
Q W FWZ
rn
x
U _j
x LLQ z
WO WX(9
m }z0U5
�W�w
m. UC9N0
O
a.
c.�
rUj
m
�-
<11
0
0
m
0000
17 4
m
) 4
m
D_
00
LID W
U
o
0
L)
Lc]
I�
O O
00
I*
�a
O
l
W
A
� O
�
�Aa
a

W1 WETLAND IMPACT
W2 WETLAND IMPACT
0.015 Acres Temporary Impact
0.003 Acres Permanent Impact
Due to temporary construction access
Due to installation of new pipe inlet/
backfilling over new culvert
o
LONTRALTORTO ERLISE CAUTION AND LIMIT
N 190 .Mxr women sRmlar , I.
iF-0Op Ogg pp i "IOG'KJf ""�'
CONSTRUCTION TMTYAROUND EXISTING-
DAM TO THE MAXI UM EXTENT PRACTICAL
= PR. 1'!2LF24-X39'ERCPg1%%
E CONCRETE ENDWALL,
NCUOpR. CB, NCOOT
= NCUOT 999A9 W.UVWH GRATE
--' f.T-y
'' COM
O
l:
3Q5
a t,
y.
P.
P
L D A SSSE
9 EX±MLFOF12"RCPTO BE REMOVED�
A
AA
55E
I E.11
�mr1
S PR 34 LF 3a' RCP ICL.ASS IV) ® D 5&%
z
al
LONSTRUOT TEMPORARY DIKE OR COFFERDAM UPSTREAM
U $SE SEED AND MULCH AS NEEDED
%�_.�
OF WORK AREA. USE PUMP AS NECESSARY TO DIVERT ANY
BASEFLOW AROUND WORK AREA PER CLDS 31.13 A 30.22A
iX`5 YE4 PNPRP
d -,9)]AIMdA CM
PR. REQI ROCK R29111
.
�K•�� T=9xGAIt! .C1 xo. x
3
> 2
>�
W3 WETLAND IMPACT
PR. REOI ROCK R-29HR, TYP.
0.002 Acres Temporary Impact
PR. BRICKENQWALL NCQOT2)B.II
O Due to temporary construction access
U
O
U
0
0
N
REPLACE±22SYOF W' ORAVEL URIVE,
MATERIAL IS TO MATCHE%ISTNG MATERIAL
V
0
0
0
N _
'T 0 40 80
w
Q PROJECT AREA
s (FEET)
® WETLANDS
2
-- EXISTING CULVERTS (TO BE REMOVED)
REFERENCE: 2019 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
s GIS BASE LAYERS WERE OBTAINED FROM MECKLENBURG COUNTY AND NC ONEMAP.
TEMPORARY WETLAND IMPACTS
a WETLANDS WERE DELINEATED IN THE FIELD BY HELEN SIMONSON OF CSWS. DESIGN
= PLANS DATED 4/2/2020. ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED. THEY
PERMANENT WETLAND IMPACTS
2 ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL SURVEY INFORMATION, UNLESS STATED OTHERWISE.
0
SCALE:
FIGURE NO.
PROPOSED PROJECT IMPACTS
1 " = 40 '
DATE:
3
III E
8-20-20
PROJECT NUMBER
6341 CORA STREET STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
4335-20-079

6341 Cora Street Storm Drainage Improvement Project
Site Photographs
Charlotte, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 4335-20-130
1
2
Location / Orientation (Center of upslope wetland area, looking east
Remarks �/iew of conditions within the upstream wetland area.
O
N
O
N
N
V
E
Location Orientation
long berm immediately west of the driveway at 6341 Cora
/_.
Remarks
[replaced.
ypical yard conditions over the existing pipe which is to be

6341 Cora Street Storm Drainage Improvement Project
Site Photographs
Charlotte, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 4335-20-130
=0
O
N
O
Ln
Location / Orientation Downstream of the culvert, looking east.
3 Remarks View existing pipe outfalls and wetland at the downstream
end of the proposed pipe replacement.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: 6341 Cora St
Applicant/Owner: SWS
Investigator(s): HMS.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): basin
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P
Soil Map Unit Name: Wilkes loam, WB
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes x No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes x No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
City/County: Mecklenburg
State: NC
Section, Township, Range: NA
Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): NA
Lat: 35.299 Long: -80.900 Datum: 1983
NWI classification: moderately well -drain
Sampling Date: 4/21/2020
Sampling Point: Wetland
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
within a Wetland? Yes x No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This small basin wetland is adjacent to a pond, which feeds joins several other pond/stream systems
to feed into Gum Branch. The wetland is crossed by a 15" pipe underneath the front yard of 6341
Cora St.
HYDROLOGY
rs:
LI Surface Water (Al) LL
0 High Water Table (A2) L
0 Saturation (A3)
0 Water Marks (131)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132) r�
❑ Drift Deposits (133) L
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑. Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
✓❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes x No
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Saturation Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary frinae)
NA
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
❑ Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Depth (inches): 3
Depth (inches): 0
Depth (inches): 2 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
gauge, monitoring weu, aerial pnotos, previous
Concave small basin wetland upstream holding approximately 2-3inches in its interior, free water in
pit 2 inches adjacent to that and further uphill soils continue saturation. The existing 15" RCP is
buried about 1.5ft. Grades are presently held in place by a mixture of rip rap, roots and soil.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Wetland
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
liquidambar styraciflua
20
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
2
acre rubrum
60
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3.
ulmus americana
20
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
100
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
FAC species x 3 =
1
ulmus americana
40
FACW
FACU species x 4 =
2
zanthoxylum clava-herculis
30
FAC
UPL species x 5 =
3
alnus serrulata
5
OBL
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
ligustrum sinense
20
FAC
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8.
3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
95
= Total Cover
_
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1
Sedges species
20
NI
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2
osmorhiza claytonii
20
NI
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
4.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height.
6.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
8.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
9.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
10.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11.
height.
12.
40
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
1
wisteria frutescens
10
FACW
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
10
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Maples only seen within wetland area, as well as mixture of moss and grasses. Elaeagnus was
pleasantly not seen within wetland either. (osmorhiza claytonii was not 100% identified, no fruits or
flowers present.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: wetland
to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-3 10 YR 3/1 100 loamy clay
4-12 10 YR 4/4 40 5 YR 3/4 60
12+ 10 YR 4/1 100
RM M clay mottles bright red
clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
.❑,
Histosol (Al)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
.❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
TTT❑
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) LJ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
.❑
.❑,
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
H Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) _❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Layers (A5)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
.❑Stratified
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ (MLRA 153B)
.e
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
�✓ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �--I Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8) LJ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
.❑
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U) Other (Explain in Remarks)
.❑
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
.❑
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
.❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
.❑
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
.❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
.❑
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
.❑
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
.❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: NA
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Wilkes- Enon is listed in the soil survey as 'well -drained' on gently sloping to steep, with
predominantly clayey subsoil.
Soil samples were all saturated.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: 6341 Cora St
Applicant/Owner: SWS
Investigator(s): HMS.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P
Soil Map Unit Name: Wilkes loam, WB
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
City/County: Mecklenburg
State: NC
Section, Township, Range: NA
Local relief (concave, convex, none): convex Slope (%): NA
Lat: 35.299 Long: -80.900 Datum: 1983
NWI classification: moderately well -drain
Sampling Date: 4/21/2020
Sampling Point: Upland
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Sample taken on hillslope adjacent to small basin wetland.
HYDROLOGY
rs:
LJ
El
Surface Water (Al)
�L- i
LJ
❑
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
❑
❑
Water Marks (131)
❑_
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
El
❑
Drift Deposits (133)
LJ
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑
Q
Iron Deposits (135)
❑
a
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X
Water Table Present? Yes
No X
Saturation Present? Yes
No X
(includes capillary frinae)
NA
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
gauge, monitoring weu, aerial pnotos, previous
no water stained leaves, drainage patterns, etc to denote wetland
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1
liquidambar styraciflua
30
y FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2
quercus phellos
20
n FACW
Total Number of Dominant
3.
ulmus americana
20
n FACW
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 86 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
8
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
70
= Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
FACW species x 2 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft )
FAC species x 3 =
1
ulmus americana
10
n FACW
FACU species x 4 =
2
elaeagnus pungens
60
y NI
UPL species x 5 =
3
morus rubra
10
n FACU
Column Totals: (A) (B)
4
Iindera benzoin
10
n FAC
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
6.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
7.
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
8.
3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
90
= Total Cover
_
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30 ft
)
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
1.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
2.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
4.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
5
height.
6.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
7.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
8.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
9.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
10.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
11.
height.
12.
40
= Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
30 ft )
1
rhus radicans
30
y FACW
2
vitis spp.
10
n NI
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
40
= Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes x No
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Maples only seen within wetland area, as well as mixture of moss and grasses. Elaeagnus was
abundant outside of wetland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Upland
to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-2 10 YR 3/2 100 clay
3-12
10 YR 5/4
100
clay
12+
10 YR 7/4
100
clay hard and dry
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
.❑,
Histosol (Al)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
.❑
Histic Epipedon (A2)
TTT❑
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) LJ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
.❑
.❑,
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
H Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O) _❑ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3) 0 Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
.❑Stratified
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ (MLRA 153B)
.e
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) �--I Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8) LJ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
.❑
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U) Other (Explain in Remarks)
.❑
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
.❑
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
.❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
.❑
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
.❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
.❑
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
.❑
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
.❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: NA
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Wilkes- Enon is listed in the soil survey as 'well -drained' on gently sloping to steep, with
predominantly clayey subsoil.
2-12 samples showed some light mottling sprinkled throughout, which was not predominate
nor deep enough in chroma to key.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Kating (:aicuiator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name 6341 Cora St Date 4/21/2020
Wetland Type Basin Wetland Assessor Name/Organization HMS
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Gum Branch
River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050101
i+ Yes r No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.299/-80.901
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately 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? 1' Yes j'o No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F_ Anadromous fish
F_ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F_ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
F_ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
7 Publicly owned property
F_ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F_ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F_ Designated NCNHP reference community
F_ 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
F_ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) j` Lunar f7� Wind ` Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? r Yes is No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?
r Yes ': No
r'Yes is No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
A 1 A Not severely altered
B f— 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)
2. 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. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. 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 ditch
sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
(` A r A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
(o B 1 o B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C J— C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. r A r- A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
1- B f B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
1: 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. i 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
1: C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric
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 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. f- A Sandy soil
f: B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
f- C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
r D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
r E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ro A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
r B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. fo A No peat or muck presence
f- 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 fi` 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
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). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F, A P, A r A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
F B r B r B < 10% impervious surfaces
F C F C F C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F D r D 7 D >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F E F E F E >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F F F r F >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F, G F, G r G >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F H F H r H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
r Yes 1 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 the 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 weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
r A >_ 50 feet
r B From 30 to < 50 feet
r+ C From 15 to < 30 feet
r D From 5 to < 15 feet
r 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.
(e <- 15-feet wide f� > 15-feet wide f� Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
r Yes 1: No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
r# Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
r Exposed - adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in
each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the
wetland
complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
A
(- A
>_ 100 feet
(' B
r B
From 80 to < 100 feet
r C
r C
From 50 to < 80 feet
(" D
r D
From 40 to < 50 feet
r E
r E
From 30 to < 40 feet
(' F
(' F
From 15 to < 30 feet
( G
(` G
From 5 to < 15 feet
rH
rH
<5feet

9.
Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric
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
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
(r` A
Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
(o B
Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
(r` 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
C A i:`" A >_ 500 acres
r B
r B r-- B From 100 to < 500 acres
r C
(" C r C From 50 to < 100 acres
r D
r D D From 25 to < 50 acres
r E
(" E `" E From 10 to < 25 acres
r F
( F �`" F From 5 to < 10 acres
re G
r G r G From 1 to < 5 acres
r H
(- H i-' H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
r I
(" I r-- I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
r J
(✓i J (:" J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
r K
r K r 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.
I' B
Pocosin 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
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric 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, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
r A `" A >_ 500 acres
r B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
r C `" C From 50 to < 100 acres
D `" D From 10 to < 50 acres
E : E < 10 acres
r F `" F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b.
Evaluate for marshes only.
r Yes t'� 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)
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.
r A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
(i B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear-cut
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. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity - assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
C 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.
r C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
is Yes i 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.
I` 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.
AA
WT
A
fe A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
°c
r B
r B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
8
r C
r C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
(" A
rA
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B
fi B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
r C
r C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
ft A
("` A
Dense shrub layer
f4 B
r B
Moderate density shrub layer
0
f: C
(i C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
ft A
r A
Dense herb layer
a�
f4 B
r B
Moderate density herb layer
=
f: C
fe C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
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
C A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
r B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
fo C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
r A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
(: B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
C A B f`C D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands 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.
( A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
(" B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
r C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
(: D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name 6341 Cora St Date 4/21/2020
Wetland Type Basin Wetland Assessor Name/Organization HMS
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
NA
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
NA
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Conditon
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NCHPO HPOWEB
Qa k
4
,, grl On Cr
t 7
#y
P"DYGI c'0, -a
5k SN
�'fyUe 49
�
i a
e
? x
¢
ro
PFea err
IVIK1487 John C. Abenlathy
ti
Q' r
e '}�
r1
��.¢ 1 1
5 �'
"};
i
� t ffm
OF
O
Tr,
westbourne
tqa k
wOF
r
°
1n
? t
JCL* OakdalellOrih o�4r 3
U p
o
_ k
rya#
d.'
a
,,*�ti�TSi r.Ulll: 13111
�1L713i #
kL rk
+Y VJ
f{drend 214 Dr -
'_Vn
ILiI_i=1
•/ -
O PaUStnc
*l59
L:QLd 4d
eemcrL7�'
~k
IVIK1488 Richard B.Abernath"
, _
{i
C tRlhYl hlrh'
�"� 4
HOLI3e
-10k
k55
i
Ad.
�
+1��4i
C"
*.: 11:4i,
1
1Y'�`36
-
'
.3
O
�(e4 ,
S�
'P
W{A�03�
•
y1�
I•"�'s;tl.lrsvd
:�nOF
:1'i=}[
1p
';ke'S
r
h'Li23
e
i
�l#.
6 pa f Ln
cztr
'11 I
i
O5
Y"
0akd40 F
*
ki9FI�9G�4'k x,_.
bra{5
n
I
C �
4IU •
��5
L���� I
�•`� y
4 '�+y
:Y.a -3�
Llcr+c
1
e -'
I'11'
roo
ME KLE;13tj 8�
tis
*oar°`
`Yb V
5%
Q
4
1:111m V h1 rr 11
tlC vlJ LF
'
'S
F I agl rr Ln
rrM�
r]"hrnny
4 fa G* 4
fie]
S
}'3y
Sri
o
Q'
#
Of G7 tr #
x.
Gaki1,11d 5OL11h
a
' 4r,
?
s
".
L
F1rez
0¢ 4
C13
�f�"i14
}yam
VS`
ye
b
A pad4hw04d Dt
EOnr
Cr 1rclon Pam
e 1¢ 8$
+}{
poLkfiw and EaC!
rCaG`I'- Park 1 n
4'4ash
x
',
a
f}
i+tloA
a
led
r.
Dr
C
13
° �
�
1 r� it19
ID
AP
o` ,
MK1307 William L. McConnel
tly lei S
6F
fdear ty ¢ 4 a ¢
f
dtiHouse
?3d.
9 4# o a
O
2003
FA
�0
q q
$ �arri90M1
�. .sabX
F�1
C:5ah3rt Lh
A-
t
a
C4mmamr5' 't4J�drlflxq
f. a
#� S
ktA
F1U RF•' �►A
9L
#
� g1 G
f{o77E108-Fa rY J�r,1
8/19/2020, 1:06:46 PM
1:24,000
■
■..: Local districts &boundaries
Surveyed in NRHD
Surveyed Area in NHRD
SL and DOE
SL individual resources & centerpoints
p
0 0.23 0.45 0.9 mi
Local individual resources & centerpoints
Surveyed Only, Gone
DOE districts &boundaries
SL and DOE, Gone
SL Individual Entry
0 0.38 0.75 1.5 km
Local Landmark
Determined Eligible Boundary
SL and DOE entry
Surveyed in NRHD, Gone
DOEHD Center Point
Local Landmark, Gone
Block -face- Multiple properties
Both DOE and Study List Boundary
SLDOEHD Center Point
Study List Entry, Gone
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,
Local HD Center Point
DOE individual resources & centerpoints
p
SL and DOE, Gone
NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri
Block -face in NRHD
SL districts & boundaries
(Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
Surveyed Only individual resources & centerpoints
Determined Eligible
I —I Study List Boundary
SLHD Center Point
User Community
Surveyed Area, No designation
Surveyed Only
DOE, Gone
Both SL and Determined Eligible Boundary
9 Y
SLDOEHD Center Point
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
City of Charlotte, State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS

■ ■■■ Roy Cooper. Governor
00 0 NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
■■L■■ NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
IN won Walter Clark, Director, Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-12654
August 11, 2020
Ashley Bentz
S&ME, Inc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
Raleigh, NC 27616
RE. Cora Street Stormwater Infrastructure Repairs
Dear Ashley Bentz.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence, the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rodnev.butlerWncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOVRCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 16S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH. NC 27699
& OFC g19.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Cora Street Stormwater Infrastructure Repairs
August 11, 2020
NCNHDE-12654
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last � Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group servation Occurrence Status tatRank Rank
i , Date Rank
Vascular Plant 13743 Delphinium exaltatum Tall Larkspur 1800s Hi? 5-Very --- Endangered G3 S2
Low
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner wner Type
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httr)s://ncnhde.natureserve.ora/heir). Data query generated on August 11, 2020; source: NCNHP, Q3 July 2020. Please
resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-12654: Cora Street Stormwater Infrastructure Repairs
L
S n
4a southm rtster
15
s..
o°
h
Westb me
Oakdale North - ,'" _
—lain V ` T E - - %r,,""
Sunset Its
nd a _ rp v . _ - Goff Cour
me
Mary Rave roa'e I:r
161 _ lklg/,!C.
yer
Is,
me
=
c`
y
��°
Oakdale
Bel/ Lai
Oakdale
Elementary
.air
l7
s
�
,
tittv
Gore
pJsiOn HrUn
O
oQ If,
woo,
of
Oakdale South
N
Coulwood East
e,
---
-- _ U`
-
ti
%€y 701
\
Pr
�
?.
Dale Pz
� Firestan
Pea","rn Cr ar
o Gden P
l
Ptl
a`
0
4
Pco
46
aim I
u
k
\\eRe
O
rr o
�
>� Sweai+'9�ri Rtl T`:c` -.
P
yo
1
tr
_ Hudson Graham Lin
N
6 Auten t7d
\�G Fire sbre
WF., "Fs Co P"'k
Fa k
P,e
C r
August 11, 2020
Project Boundary
Buffered Project Boundary
Managed Area (MAREA)
1:20,395
0 0.175 0.35 0.7 mi
0 0.275 0.55 1.1 km
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,
FAO, NIPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan,
METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
User Community
Page 3 of 3

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/couMfr.html
In Reply Refer To:
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2020-SLI-0916
Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
Project Name: 6341 Cora Street Storm Drainage Improvement Project
August 19, 2020
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The attached species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. Although not required by
section 7, many agencies request species lists to start the informal consultation process and begin
their fulfillment of the requirements under section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
This list, along with other helpful resources, is also available on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) Asheville Field Office's (AFO) website: https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/
cntylist/nc counties.html. The AFO website list includes "species of concern" species that could
potentially be placed on the federal list of threatened and endangered species in the future. Also
available are:
Design and Construction Recommendations
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/Recommendations.html
Optimal Survey Times for Federally Listed Plants
https://www.fws.gov/nc-es/plant/plant survey.html
Northern long-eared bat Guidance
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html
Predictive Habitat Model for Aquatic Species
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/Maxent/Maxent.html

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could require modifications of these lists.
Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act,
the accuracy of the species lists should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website or the AFO website (the AFO website dates each
county list with the day of the most recent update/change) at regular intervals during project
planning and implementation for updates to species lists and information. An updated list may be
requested through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the
enclosed list or by going to the AFO website.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts) that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a Biological
Evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12 and on our office's website
at https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/assessment guidance.html.
If a Federal agency (or their non-federal representative) determines, based on the Biological
Assessment or Biological Evaluation, that listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be
affected by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to
50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, and
proposed critical habitat be addressed within the consultation. More information on the
regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or license
applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at: http://
www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF.
Though the bald eagle is no longer protected under the Endangered Species Act, please be aware
that bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16
U.S.C. 668 et seq.), and projects affecting these species may require additional consultation (see
https://www.fws.gov/southeast/our-services/permits/eagles/). Wind energy projects should follow
the wind energy guidelines (http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/) for minimizing impacts to
migratory birds (including bald and golden eagles) and bats.
Guidance for minimizing impacts to migratory birds for projects including communications
towers (e.g., cellular, digital television, radio, and emergency broadcast) can be found at: http://
www. fws. gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/towers/towers.htm;

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
3
http://www.towerkill.com; and http://www.fws.gov/migratoI3Lbirds/CurrentBirdlssues/Hazards/
towers/comtow.html.
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Tracking Number in
the header of this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project
that you submit to our office.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• Migratory Birds
• Wetlands

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191 2
Project Summary
Consultation Code: 04EN1000-2020-SLI-0916
Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
Project Name: 6341 Cora Street Storm Drainage Improvement Project
Project Type: ** OTHER **
Project Description: Pipe replacement / improvement project within a wetland in urban
Charlotte
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www.google.com/maps/place/35.299053566193656N80.90046549822954W
L
Counties: Mecklenburg, NC
�Fib
a�4
Ekhmrdty
i

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME
STATUS
Northern Long-eared Bat Myotis septentrionalis
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9045
Clams
NAME
STATUS
Carolina Heelsplitter Lasmigona decorata
Endangered
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3534

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191 4
Flowering Plants
NAM L- STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECTAREA UNDER THIS OFF ICE'S
JURISDICTION.

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Actz.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS
Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location.
To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see
the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that
every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders
and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data
mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For
projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative
occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional
information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory
bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found
below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
BREEDING SEASON
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Probability Of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
■ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Wood Thrush --- i i —�� I — - -- --'— ---- ---- — — -- . .
BCC Rangewide (COI)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/
management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migrator3Lbirds/pdf/
management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures. pdf
Migratory Birds FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified
location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding-,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191 4
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my
project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab
of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of
interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your
migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your
project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191 5
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Lorin.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

08/19/2020 Event Code: 04EN1000-2020-E-02191
Wetlands
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
THERE ARE NO WETLANDS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.