20201492 Ver 1_Nelson Rd PCN_SUBMITTED_20201119

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions WEPG
and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
SAW — 2019 - 01028 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Nelson Road site
2. Work Type: Private F71 Institutional ❑
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
Government ❑ Commercial 11
Nationwide Permit request for a Residential Development
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Century Communities (Applicant)
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC / WEPG
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.1807 N/-80.6540, west of Sunset Drive, Mint Hill, NC
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 13706520, 13706523, 13706517, 13706502
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Mint HIII
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 62a]: Irvins Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03050103
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑� Section 10 & 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
November 20, 2020
Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
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-2019-01028; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP 429 for the Nelson
Road site in Mint Hill, Mecklenbum County, North Carolina
Messrs. Roden -Reynolds, Johnson, Higgins, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit 929 for the Nelson Road site on 31.2 acres located
west of Sunset Drive in Mint Hill, NC. The site is a proposed residential development and
consists of two streams, five wetlands, and one open water pond. Total linear feet of stream and
acreage of wetlands onsite are approximately 615 and 0.568, respectively. A Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination Request was submitted and was authorized in January 2020. Please
refer to the Jurisdictional Determination Information and Approvals/Authorizations sections for
information on onsite surface waters.
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.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include permanent impacts to one
stream, four wetlands, and one open water pond. Total permanent impacts proposed include
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.
0.099 acres of open water impact, 62 linear feet of stream impact, and 0.179 acres of wetland
impact.
Impacts to Wetland D and Stream G are due to the proposed dam rehabilitation to improve Lake
McEwen's existing dam which is in poor condition per Mint Hill sketch plan requirements (the
existing dam has serious erosion issues along the east side of the dam). The proposed safety
upgrades to the dam include adding an outlet structure for channel protection and volume control
which will require raising the top of dam. The proposed side slopes of the dam will be 3:1 per
NCDENR requirements. Temporary access is necessary for dam construction is included with
the impact maps. Additionally, impacts to Wetland C/CC are necessary due to the alignment of
the public greenway and required maximum slopes having both a 5% longitudinal and 3:1 side
grades for pedestrian safety.
The applicant has demonstrated substantial avoidance and minimization efforts avoiding 69% of
onsite wetlands, 90% of onsite streams, and 94% of onsite open waters. As abovementioned, a
majority of the proposed impacts were necessary for safety upgrades to the dam and required
safety requirements for public pedestrian walkways. In efforts to reduce additional impacts to
site surface waters, a conveyance from Open Water Pond I will be installed to maintain
hydrology to the remaining, unimpacted channel of Stream G. Additionally, a pedestrian bridge
is proposed to be installed over Stream B to avoid subsequent impacts within the channel.
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.
All impacted wetlands were assessed using the North Carolina Wetlands Assessment Method
(NCWAM) to identify and qualify their current quality. Due to historical anthropogenic
manipulation of the site, limited adjacent buffers and altered overland flow associated with all
site wetlands, proposed mitigation ratios for the indicated impacted wetlands is at 1.5:1.
Additionally, through conversations with David Shaeffer (October 2019), no mitigation will be
proposed for impacts to Wetland D, Stream G and Open Water Pond I due to the necessary
construction requirements in upgrading the existing dam's safety. Please refer to the Dam
Observation Report for additional details and construction requirements necessary for the safety
updates.
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
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 heath. caldwell(c�r�,wetlands-epg.com.
Sin erely,
Heath Caldwell Len Rindner, PWS
Environmental Scientist Principal
Charlotte Office: www.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
[e-mail]

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

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:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑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:
Nelson Road
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Mint HIII
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Judith Orr
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
25096-900
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
6005 Robin Hollow Drive
3e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28227
3f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
n/a
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:
Gordon Johnston
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Century Communities
4d.
Street address:
7401 Carmel Executive Park Drive, Suite 310
4e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28226
4f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Heath Caldwell
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.:
704-999-5279
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):
13706523, 13706502, 13706520, 13706517
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude. 35.1807 Longitude:-80.654
1 c.
Property size:
31.2 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Irvins Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Catawba
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 is located west of Sunset Drive in Mint Hill, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. It is almost entirely covered with disturbed successional
woods. There is a small lake on site. The topography is gently sloped with the elevation ranging from 730 to 770 ft.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.568
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 615
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Nationwide Permit request 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 (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: saw-2o19 o1o2s
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 (USAGE) on 1/30/20. 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?
El 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 ❑X 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
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.025
W2 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.035
W3 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.106
W4 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.013
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.179
2h. Comments:
W1-Wetland C/CC
W2- Wetland D
W3-- Wetland E
W4- Wetland H
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Fill
Stream G
INT
Corps
6
62
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
62
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 P
Open Water I
Fill
Pond
0.099
O2 T
Open Water I
Fill
Pond
0.08
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
0.179
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
B 1
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 proposed greenway will include the construction of a pedestrian bridge to avoid impacting intermittent stream B and 2:1 slopes are
used where slopes are implemented. Impacts to Wetland C are due to Mint Hill Public Greenway requiring a maximum 5% longitudinal slope for
pedestrian safety.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
Requirements such as 3:1 maximum slopes along the greenway and at the downstream dam slope are required by regulatory agencies.
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
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑X 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:
linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.038 acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.106 acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h.
5.
Comments: I No mitigation will be proposed for impacts to Wetland D, Stream G and Open Water Pond I due to the necessary construction
reauirements in uoaradina the existing dam's safetv. 1.5:1 mitigation ratio is proposed for all other wetland impacts.
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?
50 %
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
El 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 ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ 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 X❑ No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El Yes ❑X 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 X❑ 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 proposed.
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.
facility
Wastewater
generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment 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 and endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species or habitat were identified. Habitat may occur for the Northern
long-eared bat but the project is exempt as described in the attached 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, Mecklenburg county GIS
Heath Caldwell
/f� /1
11/20/20
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
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 certiftcation(s).
Project/Site Name: Nelson Road site
Property Address: Nelson Road, Mint Hill, NC, 28227
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 13706520, 13706523, 13706517, 13706502
Select one: I am other
Name: Gordon Johnston
Company: Century Communities
Mailing Address: 7401 Carmel Executive Park Drive, Suite 310
Telephone Number: 704-709-2890
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
a
Properly Owner / IntereBuyer* /Other#
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current properly 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 28805
[phone]
[e-mail]

urisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3,a
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Judith Orr
Print Name
Mecklenburg County tax parcel IDs:
Capacity: Q Owner ❑ Authorized Agents 13706523, 13706502, 13706520
Date
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
0 I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION',4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. 1, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Judith Orr
Print Name
Mecklenburg County tax parcel ID.
Capacity: 0 Owner ❑ Authorized Agent' 13706517
Date
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
Q I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
November 12, 2020
Gordon Johnston
Century Communities
7401 Carmel Executive Park Drive, Suite 310
Charlotte, NC 28226
Expiration of Acceptance: 5/12/2021
Project: Nelson Road County: Mecklenburg
This is a conditional acceptance letter.
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-di it HUC
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Catawba
03050103*
Warm Stream
62
Catawba
03050103*
Riparian Wetland
0.073
Catawba
03050103*
Non -Riparian Wetland**
0.106
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement.
"Non -riparian wetland credit is not available in this service area. In accordance with the directive
from the February 8, 2011 IRT meeting, non -riparian wetland impacts located in the mountains and
piedmont areas of North Carolina can be accepted, but mitigated utilizing riparian wetland mitigation
credits. 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: Amber Lipsky, agent
Sincerely, J
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
NORTH CAROLINAD_E
DeparNrant of Environmental Quallry
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. ]ones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

►0
Maps/Plans

Rd
P�
($.117, Rr
p
Ili] Star Acres
Wil4)rove 1
RAMMDGE
SITE
Mint Hill
E4GLEWCOD5
fME4'rit $
c ,
lw it HA
Country
Darralr'5 Mus...
q
}
Exc kr5iv&y You
Bridd;
fbrrr►af
eo
FIGURE NO. NELSON ROAD Drawn By
1 �A/E:Dr— Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN
VICINITY MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION
pem 1y'S P
MyEyeDr
Reviewed By:
LSR
DATE:
10/14/16

5
r.•
+� PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
5
Ap
t
•
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC. AERIAL M�
[e-mail] EXISTIN
[phone] SUBJECT
www.wetlands-epg.com
-P

y 4 4-
■ -.�_ 1, 51 M q � i.' _ ■F * :may f, j .•.
7.5
y{I1yy I k
FiNd
jp
ir
ir ou-
f+
yy �
* ■ r r� 4 ;�`T_ PROJECT BOUNDARY { �r * •
STUDY LIMITS
�■ ■ � +t 1 ' '4 � � J L
_ F _
• ','-ram r ��+# *�** ,,r•• * � � 1r+
*' ff e # J • , 1 , u, In • Sch
f y iL
�
' IRVINS
~ CREEK
1p f _ 4 + �� ' •ti . LOCATION
r
l� ;' { * SCALE Lat: 35.1807 °N
{ ; I.•;I * ' LtL r •� ''k 1:24,000 Long:-80.6540 °W
USGS QUAD HUC: 03050103
ACRES
141� Mint Hill, NC 31.2 LOWER CATAWBA
FIGURE NO. NELSON ROAD Drawn By: Reviewed By:
3 p p I Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
USGS MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION
DATE:
10/14/16

H R
F
IrA
CD
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
f eR
eB:
Ni
CefIA
FIGURE NO.
4
Ge
Map Unit Legend
eB
IV
e
0
klacklanburg County, North Carolina {NC119)
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acme in A01
Percent of A01
C@22
Cecil sandy day loam, 2 to 8
22-1
41-3%
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
CeD2
Cecil sandy day loam, 6 to 15
11-9
222%
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
CUB
Cecil -Urban land complex, 2 to
3.8
7.2%
8 percent slopes
HeB
Helena sandy loam, 2 to 6
10-6
19-8%
percent slopes
ma
Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent
3.3
6.1%
slopes, frequently flooded
W
VValer
1-8
33%
Totals for Area of Interest
SS.i
1 100.0%
NELSON ROAD
Mecklenburg Co., INC
Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
NRN -SR
PUBLISHED SOILS MAP DATE:
- WATERS OF THE U.S. - 10/14/16
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION

ZI
Parcel: 13706523
Judith Orr et al.
r 6005 Robin Hollow Drive
Charlotte NC 28227
i
Parcel: 13706520
Judith Orr et al.
6005 Robin Hollow Drive f
Charlotte NC 28227
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS'`.
I �
f
Parcel: 13706517 f
+ -QY• McEwan Associates
(Judith Orr)
9 �
6005 Robin Hollow Drive
Charlotte NC 28227
r �
Parcel: 13706502
- Judith Orr et al.
6005 Robin Hollow Drive
Charlotte NC 2822710
,y C
4P
Acres: Nelson Road Prepared for:
+/- 31.2 Mecklenburg County, NC Century Homes
FIGURE 5
TAX PARCEL MAP Drawn By: Reviewed limmi
5/14/19 Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification DCK LSR

0
A', // G/ 2
o WETLAND E �����2 0 �o� SITE a�
=0,106 AC
O
SpN Rp NA_
WETLAND C/Cc
-761-C� -0,30 AC.
_ USAGE
�
276 ��
�'' \ WETLAND
FORM D���--� t� 7 / 6 ��� �77� �f�6�r
VICINITY MAP
l :• A v 1 I I l V A/ ��� ,� �S�vA V\ \ v L NOT TO SCALE
/ 6�V : \' ��� \ \TAB Vim\ �� ✓ // �l�'' \ \ V A VAL�l �'le' BUA CALCULATIONS:
/ �6� 1 A vv�Il VA1 �,2vi�A s
1 � vv��. o\ v TOTAL SITE AREA = 30.852 AC.
l _ �o I I / k � f I 1 J L �� w� \ \ VA VA �o� v 1 / / l 111 I �� TOTAL BUA = 15.123 AC.
\ 'sq. �� v� / I (/ \ �� Il I) �I V�� A�vA ll ( , j I ���� = 100 = 50.01%
S Ivv 11 s \ 1 %BUA (15.430 30/.852 )
1\6 r VNNCAN
�AXviv
762'T,
/v`/1�� �/I : ���f/� �l %��� ��1�� �vVAv v� �wv �� I/
i ��o ��
�J�/'v1\!f� i -vV�vv�\lsvv��w \s�'76o� I1 \ l F
0\�jj75
WETLAND II ,� o
I/ ��ivI ass III/��� ��✓ /Ill///��/��ii ���� `:per v�' �� =0.013 AC I� i
o r 1 f I l� \ s -��, //lIl/ ,\� _ — — ��' INTERMITTENT
ei-( I
STREAM
„B„
VQ% �, �
NLO --�VA\\ I "/--450 LF
�757—�_=i�i�i!
A l / �/ ( �v v _ �� �c'13 �
( I ��� ' S9� �-- v �3 N CD E O
�v �, STREAM
OA —�� / l / / IA��VA����ii� /may✓ �% 1 � �� FORM B O
USAGE UPLAND <
OPEN WATER 0tj
5� FORM DEL
/ 'POND
-1.56 AC. (ON -SITE)
/�IIIIl11'/� ,�,.,.- �/� 2.725 AC. (TOTAL) r754� /
�I�IIIII ���/ �%//ice\ u �ii WETLAND „A„
i/ ��������' �� , / ` ,(FRINGE AT POND'S EDGE) PRELIMINARY
�� i Jol �� h /����— v �� FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
i I I III =0.05 AC.
�/ • /��%�i�/ %/J////
/ GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 400
\ �� 4/i%�i��/ /%/�� III (lll
> /
•r/lr/r�//// 1 INCH 200 FEET =
WETLAND D `1 \ \`��� �� / McEI,yEN L'4/<C
Prajeat0.099 AC. \�/\ / NELSON ROAD SUBDIV
�� •, / � / ���yl' \��/ gINO e N Ro,4 C INTERMITTENT MINT HILL, NORTH CAI
Y MINT
�STREAM "G" / Hl<< O rr`'>:' rug OVERALL SITE
/ O EXISTING CONDITION
=165 LE
File f 18103—S—WETLANDS.dwg Date: 11/2/2020 Projd
X}> w Desi
ISAACS o Draw
CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SURVEYING C
-0 Scale;
8720 RED
/% PHONE [phone]CHARLOT0E BLVD.,
N.00 FAXB(7104) 527-833 F
i
E:\ProjectFolders\CenturyCommunities\Nelson Road Sketch Plan 18103\Engineering\Design Drawings\Current\SHEETS\18103-S-WETLANDS.dwg, W1.0, 11/2/2020 3:33:06 PM, anewsome, 1:1

O40
,� � ` — GREENWAY WILL USE BRIDGE
�� 0 x u1 i TO AVOID STREAM IMPACT
�)
NCDEO
/�\��� STREAM
WoA �/ ✓ �� 7 �� FORM B O
PERMANENT
WETLAND "D" 'OPEN WATER �I�� �USACE UPLAND
IMPACT NO. 2 ���I �POND 5 � FORM DPT
\ 0.035 AC. >� �v � % =1,56 AC (ON —SITE)
� 2 725 AC. (TOTAL) /
�` WETLAND "A"
(FRINGE AT POND'S EDGE)
� = 0.05 AC.
TEMPORARY ACCESS OPEN WATER "I" 74 ` i� 5 J -�j/ t 11,1 / S f IMPACT N0. 1 = 0.080 AC. 0
WE LAND D
i A 0.099 AC. 1 TA PERMANENT OPEN WATER „„
��� IMPACT NO. 6 = 0.099 AC. Cj
/INTERMITTENT �_j
STREAM
T 65IMPACT AMF „G„ PERMANENT
STREAM "G"
62 L.F. = II =372 S.F./O.009 AC. PRELIMINARY
/ FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
PERMANENT WETLAND "C/
IMPACT NO. 1 =0.025 AC.
PERMANENT WETLAND "D"
IMPACT NO. 2=0.035 AC.
PERMANENT WETLAND "E"
IMPACT NO. 3 =0.106 AC.
PERMANENT WETLAND "H"
IMPACT NO. 4 =0.013 AC.
SUB —TOTAL WETLAND IMPACTS
PERMANENT=0.179 AC.
PERMANENT STREAM "G"
IMPACT NO. 5 = 62 LF/0.009 AC.
PERMANENT OPEN WATER "I"
IMPACT NO. 6 =0.099 AC.
TOTAL PERMANENT IMPACTS
PERMANENT=0.287 AC.
IMPACT NO. 1 =0.080 AC.
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 400
1 INCH = 200 FEET
Project*
kc
NELSON ROAD SUBDIVISION
MINT HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
Tlue:
�...`` OVERALL WETLANDS IMPACT MAP
File f. 1B103—S—WETLANDS.dwg I Date: 11/2/2020 Project Egr. ABC
Design By ABC
»':' .. H ISAACS O Dawn By. AEN
%:"?'%?;;;i;4 CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SURVEYING C
..............................
Scale: 1'=200
8720 RED OAK BLVD., STE. 420
CHARLOTTE, N.C. 28217
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone] FI ure 7
E:\ProjectFolders\CenturyCommunities\Nelson Road Sketch Plan 18103\Engineering\Design Drawings\Current\SHEETS\18103-S-WETLANDS.dwg, W2.0, 11/2/2020 3:33:14 PM, anewsome, 1:1

$LDGI
BLDG I 116E/
� l
BLDG BLDG
6D
I 1II 1 \ \ \\ \\ \\ pE \ \
B6A 16B \ \ \\
1
t S It
A Her �V A BLDG
N V BLDG 17DA
L 17C
/N,A� \
\ -
\ \ I BLDG
\ \ / BLDG BLDG 18D-
18C \ .�
(BLDG 18B
\ \
18A
B I DG BLCIG \ � \ I , , \ \ ' / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \LOT 61B ` � -
1 B
BLDQ
,BLDG 14\D
: GB
MANENT WETLAND "E„ BLDG
14B
\ vBSI v \ \\ `
ePER
InsI IMPACT NO. 3=0.106 AC.
'BLDG Y \ \ \ v v am
BLDG BLDG MC
13A A 13B A \
\ \ \ /A \ \ v DC v N LO \61 \
1 I / BLDG BLDG
/ N
BLDG 12C
/ /BLDG 12B
\ BLDG 11D / / / o A\ \ \ \ \
B G\ I 11 C / / / / o \ \� \ \ \ ►I \ 1 \ \\
I �
75
~/l /\�j ANENT WETLAND "C/CC" dPROP. PUBLIC GREENWAY \ \ �\ 73
,d• / / / IMPACT N0. 1=0.025 AC. REQUIRES 3:1 (MAX.) GRADES
PROP.
PRELIMINARY
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
I PERMANENT WETLAND "H"
IMPACT NO. 4=0.013 AC. \ GRAPHIC SCALE
_cw, 14 \ � 40 0 20 40 80
d
•l.•'. •.� \ \ \
-f � .• ' � \ _ / � v \ 1 INCH = 40 FEET
/ / f 743 : \ , A / LET 13t Project
/ /;...j... MNELSON ROAD SUBDIVISION
.: d, • • �.;dy � -� ���� AR \ V � �
MINT HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
t A o \ \ Lk
/ •.. y -:d - l 1 \ WETLANDS IMPACT MAP
/ / ` \ File 18103—S—WETLANDS.d Date: 11 2 2020 Project E r ABC
v/ %v v j+ v r \ v r v ?� ` �� ¢ a: \ , \ _ Design By ABC
2 1
dYY WY W I'YYY W C —
s I AA
WETLAND � \ � 2 \ \ H S CS O Drawn By. AEN
\ _ \ %iiiiY:::::%%sii;;;; CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SURVEYING C
i w, u• w u• "Cv' SER�S u• w u• w u• w .•
\ { 744 \� \ \ Scale:
� / C1- r\ •�•• _L �. V % v v 8720 RED W Y �Y W W �Y W �Y d.
/� 1�r d •�A�/� '�0,300 Al ES± V A A� .... ........... ..... 2 OAK B.C. 21 420
/ / / , _ d, ••� v v W W ♦ V A �� V A CHARLOTTE, N.C. 28217
i \ ••♦ I \ PHONE [phone] FAX [phone] Figure 8
EAProject Folders\Century Communities\Nelson Road Sketch Plan 18103\Engineering\Design Drawings\Current\SHEETS\18103-S-WETLANDS.dwg, W3.0, 11/2/2020 3:33:29 PM, anewsome, 1:1

\ y-�
L(yT 30
1T 22�
mM14%W,%%\�
I�
f
7.
WET AND
5 M E
A-t— A,45—
---
\
McEWEN
i'. ..' � / / I ✓ I LAKE
I I I
EXIST. POND
W S E _ + 735, 65
(DETENTION ONLY)
OPEN WATER POND "I"
2,725 ACRES ±
-' f
J
\7
/// / � ''��/ S/W�
tiC)
M
oe
-
�/ ' TEMPORARY ACCESS
r / OPEN WATER POND "I"
-"IMPACT NO. 1 = 0.080 AC.
/ FOR DAM REHAB
= I I ✓ // PERMANENT OPEN WATER POND "I'
IIMPACT NO 6 = 0.099 AC.
I / �N T ��j��� / / / I PERMANENT STREAM G IMPACT NO. 5
/AM Vic'
/ / / � / .�;-- 1,. W���•f �` 'c/�'¢'cE / / 1 / / / / / 62 L.F. = 62x6 =372 S.F./0.009 AC.
I —ICI— / / / / / / � �' .Y I �� _ . •� �. `. I, . �,, A � � _ � / � ,, / / /
PROP. 94 LF (TOTAL) OF
II / / / / / /�/ / �D1—�55 �� ��� ���v✓/ = ��i ice/ / / o / f F /
f2" PVC DRAIN PIPE FOR
0�'99jA'A/p. 1 WETLANDS HYDROLOGY
r /c ���' / / / / / / �/ / / l / I .P / I J .
oo - GRAPHIC SCALE
�// I I I
/ss /-'� / / / I / I I 40 0 20 40 80
l l—fit / / l � I I I � / ,/ ,/ / / � 1 � 1
/ PERMANENT WETLAND "D"
PLUNGE POOL OUTLET 4 FEET THICK 1 INCH = 40 FEET
%CLASS 2 ROCK RIP RAP FOR LAKE & BMP' J' "rol I Fk I I I I I IMPACT N0. 2=0.035 AC. (TOTAL) / �1 Pro>eet
ss y �eR,p I I I 1 1 ► / / l / / r I 1 I NELSON ROAD SUBDIVISION
OUTLET DISCHARGE BEFORE WETLANDS
j i�/� /\\ I i RppFR MINT HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
/� I , TYc/ r>» rU WETLANDS IMPACT MAP
/VF
. / / / / / / I i I I I / I \ \\ . , File 18103S—wenArlDS.dwg Date: 11/2/2021 Project Egr. ABC
/
PRELIMINARY
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
E:\ProjectFolders\CenturyCommunities\Nelson Road Sketch Plan 18103\Engineering\Design Drawings\Current\SHEETS\18103-S-WETLANDS.dwg, W4.0, 11/2/2020 3:33:44 PM, anewsome, 1:1

744
742
740
738
736
734
732
730
728
726
724
722
720
J718
LC
C
C
r
0+00
N
N
� O
� �
Ln O
O
O
't
O
0�0
O
CEO
d7 CO
f�
L(� N
L6
d7 Ln
00
0000
O
(00
a7
00
N
N
N
NN
NN
N�
Nr-0
N17
n�
roo
1+00
PROPOSED 2" PVC WETLAND PIPE - PROFILE
1 "=10'
� _ �(,/ //, /��/ /
TEMPORARY ACCESS
OPEN WATER POND "I"
I— I /
IMPACT NO. 1 = 0.080 AC.
FOR DAM REHAB
1=III=III %f= II / PERMANENT OPEN WATER POND "I"
IMPACT N0, 6 = 0.099 AC. \
�NT R TT N \� / i/ / I PERMANENT STREAM "G" IMPACT N0. 5
/7 ���MPc6c / / �I I �' �"' / / / / / 62 L.F. = 62x6 =372 S.F./O.009 AC.
boo / PROP. 94 LF (TOTAL) OF
f +� 2 PVC DRAIN PIPE FOR
�x ) WETLANDS HYDROLOGY
-
/ /,p PROP. 2" PVC WETLAND
` / / / / / O,o PIPE X—SECTION
�� / P POP 2" PVC
N WETLAND
I l IfI / PERMANENT WETLAND "D"
I I I I IMPACT NO. 2=0.035 AC. (TOTAL) I //
GRAPHIC SCALE
40 0 20 40 80
1 INCH = 40 FEET
740
738
736
734
732
730
728
726
724
722
720
oc
744
742
740
738
736
734
732
730
728
726
724
722
720
718
/15
1+50
CO
Cfl
......................:.......................................:..............
PROP. GRADE
...._..-..-.............:......................................
.....................................:.............
......................................_.._..
..............................................................................................
.
..................... ....:.....................................
:...............................................................................
.....................
.......................................
EXIST. GRADE
..............................................................................................................................................................................
.�
.
�
,Y
PROP. 94 LF (TOTAL) OF
...........................%....
......... ......:..............
......................................
2" PVC DRAIN PIPE FOR
................................
.................................
.................................
.................................
...........
FEEDING WETLANDS
.......................................................................................................
.............. :..............
SLOPED 012.5%
O
II
00
00O
N
�
cOp
�
N
d7
0i
(O
00
L6
(.0
4
�t
0i
N
(O
Do
Oi
0+ 00
PROPOSED 2" PVC WETLAND PIPE - X-SECTION
1 "=10'
PRELIMINARY
FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY
GRAPHIC SCALE
10 0 5 10 20
1 INCH = 10 FEET PHONE (7
740
738
736
734
732
730
728
726
724
722
720
0+70
NELSON ROAD SUBDIVISION
MINT HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
WETLANDS IMPACT MAP
File f 18103-S-WETLANDS.dwg Date: 11/2/2020 Project Egr. ABC
ISAACS 0 Deign B. ABC
I O Drawn By. AEN
CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SURVEYING Scale: H:1'=10';V:1'=
8720 RED OAK BLVD., STE. 420
CHARLOTTE, N.C. 28217
)4) 527-3440 FAX [phone], Figure 10
E:\ProjectFolders\CenturyCommunities\Nelson Road Sketch Plan 18103\Engineering\Design Drawings\Current\SHEETS\18103-S-WETLANDS.dwg, W5.0, 11/2/2020 3:34:05 PM, anewsome, 1:1

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

f S WETLAND E
_,r I -0.106 ac
WETLAND C/CC CULVERT0.30 ac
USACE WETLAND H
WETAND
0.013 ac
FORM D
1 2
6 INTERMITTENT
a 4 STREAM B
450If
T
} ,,• 'F, S. NCDEQ STREAM FORM B i
t` 8 5 G
Q.►+ USACE '
' } UPLAND ' •. +. ,
FORM +
OPEN WATER WETLAND A DP1
f
POND I (range at pond s edge)
-0.95 ac 0.05 ac
3 i-
`"a
} f
LEGEND
.."
Project boundary study limits
ti
r. WETLAND D INTERMITTENT
Stream
0.099 ac STREAM G
Wedarld
- =
165If
N
- 0_0.0175.035
0.07 Miles _ � _
I
�
Landscape phota�direction
FIGURE NO. NELSON ROAD
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
12
Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
•
DELINEATION MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S. DATE:
\ EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 9/3/19
SUBJECT TO USA CEINCDEQ VERIFICATION

N
a- J
N
N
rvoo
U
Z
NCWAM Results

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
SAW-2019-01028
NCDWR#
Project Name
Nelson Road Subdivision
Date of Evaluation
11/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
Century Communities
Wetland Site Name
Wetland C/CC
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Irvins Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050103
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.1807N/-80.654279W
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
Wetland adjacent ditched/manipulated area abutting McEwen Lake.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland C/CC Date of Assessment 11/10/2020
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
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
SAW-2019-01028
NCDWR#
Project Name
Nelson Road Subdivision
Date of Evaluation
10/17/19
Applicant/Owner Name
Century Communities
Wetland Site Name
Wetland D
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Irvins Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050103
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.1807N/-80.654W
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
JI
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
Wetland situated at toe of pond dam.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland D Date of Assessment 10/17/19
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
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
SAW-2019-01028
NCDWR#
Project Name
Nelson Road Subdivision
Date of Evaluation
10/17/19
Applicant/Owner Name
Century Communities
Wetland Site Name
Wetland E
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Irvins Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050103
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.1807N/-80.654W
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
❑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
JI
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
Wetland formed through past agricultural grading to remove/divert hydrology from entering site.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland E Date of Assessment 10/17/19
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) 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 Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
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
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
SAW-2019-01028
NCDWR#
Project Name
Nelson Road Subdivision
Date of Evaluation
11/10/2020
Applicant/Owner Name
Century Communities
Wetland Site Name
Wetland H
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Irvins Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050103
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.18149N/-80.654W
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
❑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
JI
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
Wetland area confined to a historically excavated, linear trench

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland H Date of Assessment 11/10/2020
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) 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 Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence
(Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

a-J
L
0
Q
oC
0
.4-J
05
V)
n
0
E
co
r)
Dam Observation Report

Site Observation Report
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam
Mint Hill, North Carolina
July 5, 2018
Terracon Project No. 75185103
Prepared for:
Century Communities
Charlotte, NC
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Greensboro, NC

July 5, 2018
Century Communities
7400 Carmel Executive Park Drive, Suite 205
Charlotte, NC 28226
Attn: Mr. Gordon Johnston
P: 704-709-2890
E: [e-mail]
Re: Site Observation Report
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam
Mint Hill, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 75185103
Dear Mr. Johnston:
Irerracon
Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed dam observation services for the above
referenced project. This study was performed in general accordance with our proposal number
P75185103 dated June 22, 2018. This report presents our observations and provides
recommendations concerning remedial work and potential future repairs that may be necessary
for the dam.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact our office at (336) 854-
8135.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Russell A. Bendel, P.E.
Senior Associate
NC: PE-024430
James D. Hoskins, III, P.E.
Office Manager/Principal
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 7327-G West Friendly Ave Greensboro, North Carolina 27410
P [3361 854 8135 F [3361 365 7020 terracon.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1
2.0
PROJECT INFORMATION.............................................................................................1
2.1 Site Location and Description of Dam..................................................................1
3.0
VISUAL OBSERVATIONS OF THE DAM.......................................................................1
3.1 Upstream Slope of the Dam.................................................................................1
3.2 Crest of Dam........................................................................................................1
3.3 Downstream Slope and Toe of Dam....................................................................2
3.4 Reservoir Drain System.......................................................................................2
3.5 Primary Spillway..................................................................................................2
3.6 Drainage/Seepage Control...................................................................................2
3.7 Operation and Maintenance.................................................................................2
3.8 Emergency Action Plan........................................................................................3
3.10 NCDENR Dam Safety Inspections.......................................................................3
4.0
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................3
4.1 Conclusions.........................................................................................................3
4.2 Recommendations...............................................................................................4
5.0
GENERAL COMMENTS.................................................................................................5
APPENDIX A — SITE LOCATION AND AERIAL MAP
APPENDIX B — PHOTOGRAPHS
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable

SITE OBSERVATION REPORT
NELSON ROAD (MCEWEN LAKE) DAM
MINT HILL, NORTH CAROLINA
Terracon Project No. 75185103
July 5, 2018
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of these services is to provide information regarding the recent observed visual
condition of the dam and engineering recommendations relative to potential future use for
development. Investigations and analysis are not included in the scope of work and will be
recommended when necessary.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Location and Description of Dam
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam is located south of Nelson Road and immediately north of
McEwen Lane, in Mint Hill, North Carolina. The dam consists of a 165-feet long earthfill dam
embankment that impounds a 2.75-acre lake. The dam is is currently not on the NC Dam Safety
Inventory List, and it appears the dam is Exempt according to the size and impoundment capacity
of the dam based on the current NC Dam Safety Laws.
3.0 VISUAL OBSERVATIONS OF THE DAM
(References to "left" and "right" are based on looking downstream while standing on the dam)
3.1 Upstream Slope of the Dam
The reservoir water level was approximately 1 foot below the crest of the dam at the time of our
visit. The upstream slope consists of a block/rock wall at the upstream crest of the dam. The
wall is not level. Several areas of the wall are below the water level, which allows the crest to
slope down on top of the wall (Photographs 1, 2). There appears to be a few areas where animal
activity is evident at the water line.
3.2 Crest of Dam
The crest of dam is covered with tall weeds, grasses and trees inhibiting thorough observations
(Photograph 3). Numerous holes are present in the crest approximately 50 feet from the right
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable

Site Observation Report Irerracon
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam Mint Hill, North Carolina
July 5, 2018 Terracon Project No. 75185103
abutment (Photograph 9). The holes extend to a large hole and channel on the downstream slope
(Photograph 10).
3.3 Downstream Slope and Toe of Dam
The downstream slope has a poor vegetative cover. There are signs of surface erosion and
possible overtopping on the right side of the spillway outlet channel near the left abutment of the
dam. Numerous trees (approximate 4 to 8 inch diameter) are growing on the downstream slope
and toe of slope, including at the spillway outlet (Photographs 4, 5 & 6). A few larger diameter
trees (about 12-inch diameter) are also present on the slope and toe of the embankment. Woody
undergrowth is present among the trees across the slope of the dam. The majority of ground
cover observed consists of fallen leaves across the slope. A trail present from the toe to the crest
of the dam on the downstream slope appears to have heavy animal traffic (Photograph 6). Beaver
activity is apparent based on observations of some downed trees. A few trees have fallen over
on the slope fo the dam. An approximate 8 to 12 feet deep eroded channel exists along the left
side at the spillway outlet and the channel banks are near vertical (Photographs 7, 8).
3.4 Reservoir Drain System
We did not observe any signs of a system in the pond or on the dam for draining the reservoir.
3.5 Primary Spillway
An apparent spillway is located on the left side of the dam. It appears to be an approximate 4 to
5 feet wide channel near the water line. The outlet channel has experienced headcutting and
severe erosion, and has extended upstream within 5 feet of the water line (Photograph 8). The
headcutting and erosion has created near vertical slopes in the channel near the water line. An
approximate 3- or 4-inch diameter steel pipe that has been capped protrudes from the
downstream slope near the toe of dam in the central portion of the embankment. The is no flow
present nor seepage observed at this pipe. It appears the lake level is being maintained by a
combination of the holes in the crest of dam near the right abutment and the spillway at the left
abutment. There also appears to be an auxiliary spillway near the right abutment, as there is a
short block/rock wall approximately 10 feet long on the downstream side of the crest at an
apparent low area on the dam.
3.6 Drainage/Seepage Control
There does not appear to be an embankment drain system present.
3.7 Operation and Maintenance
There does not appear to be a formal maintenance schedule for the dam.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

Site Observation Report Irerracon
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam Mint Hill, North Carolina
July 5, 2018 Terracon Project No. 75185103
3.8 Emergency Action Plan
An Emergency Action Plan (EAP) is used to identify conditions on the dam that would indicate
potential problems with, or potential failure of the dam; outline a plan of action if the conditions
are observed; and establish a list of contacts to be notified in case emergency situations occur.
It is unknown if an Emergency Action Plan exists for the dam.
3.10 NCDENR Dam Safety Inspections
The lack of NCDENR correspondence and inspections indicates the dam is not currently in the
NC Dam Safety inventory of dams.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Conclusions
The apparent lack of maintenance is compromising the integrity of the dam and its performance,
and could lead to a failure of the dam. There does not appear to be a maintenance program or
schedule in place for the dam. An Operation and Maintenance Manual should be developed to
aid the owner in knowing the maintenance items that need to be addressed on a regular basis for
the dam.
The vegetation on the upstream slope and crest of dam is uncontrolled, unmaintained, and in
poor condition. The downstream slope of the dam has poor vegetative cover, and are mostly
fallen leaves and woody undergrowth. Grass vegetation needs to be established on the
downstream slope.
The trees growing on the downstream slope and toe of the dam are undesirable. Trees, brush
and weeds provide habitat and forage for burrowing animals. Properly maintained grass
vegetation allows the owner/maintenance personnel to observe changes in the dam that might
indicate problems are developing. Trees are susceptible to wind and ice damage, and if they
should fall during a storm, the dam would be weakened and susceptible to seepage through the
dam due to the rootball being uprooted from the dam. An extensive effort should be put into
removing the leaves, brush and weeds and vegetating the downstream slope with grass. The
trees should also be removed from the downstream slope and toe of the dam. In addition, cut
weeds, brush, trees and briars should never be left on the slope or along the downstream toe of
the dam, as this can promote animal activity and habitat, and inhibit thorough observations or the
ability to observe changes in the condition of the dam. These materials should be deposited a
minimum of 20 feet away from any feature of the dam.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 3

Site Observation Report Irerracon
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam Mint Hill, North Carolina
July 5, 2018 Terracon Project No. 75185103
The principal spillway consists of an unlined channel located in the left groin of the dam
embankment. The erosion and headcutting in the channel is creating a serious condition at the
dam and could lead to a failure of the spillway and a sudden release of the lake through the
spillway. There is a lack of energy dissipation measures and protection at the spillway discharge
to prevent erosion of soils. The current spillway system needs to be re-evaluated and abandoned,
and a new spillway should be considered for the dam.
It appears there is an extensive amount of design and construction work necessary to bring the
dam into compliance with State standards and/or prudent dam performance standards. An
alternate to rehabilitating the dam and spillway would be to permanently breach the dam thus
eliminating recurring maintenance costs. Breaching the dam may have an adverse affect on the
property values around the lake and should be part of the consideration for how to move forward
with the plans for the dam.
4.2 Recommendations
The dam is in poor condition, especially regarding the spillway and holes through the dam, and is
in need of redesign and repair in the very near future. Significant storm events could cause
overtopping of the dam embankment, or significant additional erosion at the spillway outlet, which
could cause failure of the dam. The following actions are recommended:
1. Plan to replace the spillway.
2. Repair the holes through the dam and consider flattening the slope to provide long-term
stability and allow for future ease of maintenance.
3. Remove the trees along the downstream slope and toe of the dam.
4. Remove/kill weeds and brush on the downstream slope of the dam if flattening the slope
is not considered. Establish grass vegetation on the downstream slope of the dam.
5. Modify the dam embankment on the left side of the dam to accommodate a new spillway
and the outlet channel in a new location, possibly on the right side of the dam.
6. A reservoir drain should be added to the dam to allow the owner to lower the lake level for
maintenance or in the event of an emergency with the dam.
7. It may be desirable to dredge the lake during any planned repairs, as the upstream
portions of the lake appear very shallow.
8. Should the owner want to eliminate the pond and dam, the dam could be permanently
breached per an engineered plan.
9. A planned breach of the dam could be utilized as part of development of the property, with
consideration of stream restoration and permanent easements involving the wetland bank
program for local municipalities.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 4

Site Observation Report Irerracon
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam Mint Hill, North Carolina
July 5, 2018 Terracon Project No. 75185103
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS
Terracon should be retained to provide or assist with preliminary and/or final design plans and
specifications for implementation of our recommendations. Terracon also should be retained to
provide or assist with construction observations and testing services during construction of repairs
for the project.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based upon our visual
observations, experience on similar projects, and from other information discussed in this report.
This report does not reflect variations that may occur across the site, or due to the modifying
effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until after
weather events occur. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further
evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the
project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. In the
event that changes in the nature or use of the site are planned, the conclusions and
recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews
the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5

APPENDIX A
SITE LOCATION AND AERIAL MAP

R �,� ' II ���•� � i /Y//,r Fl �\``�' I ( �Jf�I I_II ! • • �� �/� r • I ICI �t [i5'�
� �'` tit Y i4'� � _ �, 1 �T� JF•I� � 'e f J' � � ���J � rl ,a I _ —_
I I •, - rl - - 5'', J I y I
:.� t � r 7 { r I r r: I I }+ • LX-+ I� � ,. ti} _ � i I
�'•I� k / fr r 111 \' F•�g,?�j I \ \. T
71
•r - r1 .t C.BfFtJr. Ti rueLrg'ha ""' -J5 +III -�.�\ � rA. �ap'J
Ch
j.
- Field 77e�'
I': +
j ' � - `x irk � `, r �• J� r f t: "_ + •I - I L I
�;. j� ��I•�+ L - �>��k d r f-- - i ` f.• r 5 `l�� ICJ.
-j h = I'-I4 µ I F '� •"\\ -F' j r JIB oe I ��1-^ham r ) _
r •I >� � L I�r
I
774
IF WV.
ktJ�', t 1 ✓jr(.rr' [ "�Tl1�� L��ylw
1
�aa �f
a -;.
rr t ail
1
5 _ 'rr • .rf
1lil s �' r
•'... `�. - ! "�`y'r r _�-• - � � '1• � RA1 nI Se•�; � g�„�, \ - �-� i � - .'r i l�
V.
.. 7. it i�` , `, .�}} �•, _-\fir+, -. ,4; , �.J�
/y �.-li`C //'-�,��.�.r - �•;,. 7r' wsll 1Y 1'ti�A wt�t f �r',�r2�r
fi.�
-
}
- Ill r ./� �•• �`` - � ti _ �� o `� 1�� ;� f i f� I -_s � N�.
'ti • _
Intl ' � 4 � � �._� � � �� r `•� � r
/z 76,
1'
_ r t
1 1 Y� � +\ } I •' � I � ' l � lti ' ' i �+ r ICI 11 ��' - � �� �r _ -'.�I I - I Li
•I �� �, ��\, A .;Ill I
J •� I I _ °E •� r 4':'ti4� I ,`� I ,� `,w' � Il`: Y r �6ki'I i �`�� .,� I
r '��l �r ''1 9 a � _ti Y1 - V'1 +r- _t' .� h' - - ♦ `,I I '-,G� `f _
r•� � }x< 1. ' �`� � ��! ', � •-! �-' �'�� �`� "�w Y� �I r ' ��-
(, , 1 I''i _� • n tit i �, ,� I \4ti5 I -� �t I f i
773,
IfF�I
:.5 r l : ' iJ 17-U yy �
,�' I . }� I ~, tip_: ���'"� ', +I' l : a/�• ; l � I I.: i � 1•,��•jf. I ,) � I I� li I �l%/ I , I� '�
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP IMAGE COURTESY OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
QUADRANGLES INCLUDE: MINT HILL, NC (1/1/1993).
ProjedManage^:^n ProjedNo.^r•�^ SITE LOCATION Exhibit
Drawn by: RAB Scale:
1 "=2,000'
Checked by: RAB File Name:
Approved by: Date:
JDH 7/6/2018
1 erracon
7327 W Friendly Ave, Ste G
Greensboro, INC 27410-6253
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam A-�
7802 Nelson Rd.
Mint Hill, NC

M
1 A 7.
I.
W
t *J
• _ _ i . Y
ti
N '
I ,
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS
NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED
BY MICROSOFT BING MAPS
Project Manager:
Project No
RAB
75185103
SITE AERIAL PLAN
Exhibit
Drawn by: RAB
ScaIPSSHOWSHOWN
Irerracon
Checked by:
File Name:
Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam
A-2
RAB
7327 W Friendly Ave, Ste G
7802 Nelson Rd.
Approved by:
JDH
Date:
7/6/2018Mint
Greensboro, 27410-6253
INC
Hill, NC

APPENDIX B
PHOTOGRAPHS

ih• ,
• r
� ems' r. • ��. ` ,:� '�: °' r �
;'. r•' J
I�i 111n • I � _�
7L : r;• F , F•.,�r,�-- +"'
v �
•r'7 �
{;

.� � ' �. '>�.•..:_ fir:
i AM,

Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam
Mint Hill, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 75185103
Date Photos Taken: June 28, 2018
7. Severely Eroded Spillway Outlet Channel (Looking Downstream)
k
t � .
}
8. Severely Eroded Spillway Outlet Channel (Looking Upstream)

Nelson Road (McEwen Lake) Dam
Mint Hill, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 75185103
Date Photos Taken: June 28, 2018
Irk 1 r M Y
9. Holes in Crest of Dam Extending to Downstream Slope
10. Large Hole on Downstream Slope with Active Flowing Seepage
(Apparent Connectivity to Holes in Crest of Dam)

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
For: Nelson Road
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
June 30, 2019
Charlotte Office: www.weLlands-epg.com
Asheville 6 ce:
10612-D Providence Rd.
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550
Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277
Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
[e-mail]

Nelson Road - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Nelson Road site (31.54 acres) is located just south of Nelson Road, and
just west of Sunset Drive in Mint Hill, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. It
can be found on the Mint Hill USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map; latitude is
35.1807 N, longitude is 80.6540 W. The site is almost entirely covered with
disturbed successional woods. There is a small lake on site. The topography is
gently sloped with the elevation ranging from 730 to 770ft. (Figure 1).
Figure 1:
I
46
•y� PROl ECT80UNDARY
STUDY LIMITS.r
r4 _
'r• - 'y�.i• I I' ` r�� � _+ +may i # �\ y rw
• . - • -- .'� �} _ fit_ �'�`r _ _ _ - � 'r a
I ' �, *.• -. _ _• if �.-' � �.'�'• * ' , + fir[' �J&111 ciC}f �- I
a
CREEK
_.. .1 •r _�. LOCATION
SCALE Lat: 35.1907 4N
F 1 r •; { J . ` �_ r' f Lon-90.6540 2W
124,000 R
USGS QUAD ALRES HUC:03050103
' �` iJ' • -:L�,' l Mint Hill, NC LOWERLATAWBA
31.51
FIGII RE1
NELSON ROAD
Mecklenburg Cu, NC
US(H MAP —WATE RS OF THE US.
EXISTING CON DIT IONS S T UDV
5U81E Cr r0 U5ACF VEJ?JFJ CA rJO"
Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DAT E:
10/14116
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
2
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Nelson Road - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/mecklenburg.htmi 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 week of June 30, 2019.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on June 30, 2019
Group
Name
Status
Record Status
Invertebrate
Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona
Endangered
Current
decorata
Invertebrate
Rusty -patched Bumble Bee (Bombus
Endangered
Historic
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 leucocephalus)
Protected under the Bald
Current
and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Nelson Road - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS:
A total of 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.
A total of 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.

Nelson Road -Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
The site is almost entirely covered with disturbed successional woods. There is a
small lake on site. There is an overhead power line that parallels the road
corridor along Nelson Road in part, and also along Sunset Road. There are
more pines in the canopy in the eastern sector of the property, with mixed
hardwoods becoming dominant on the western slopes. There is a residence
near the northern side of the lake with a dirt and gravel access road and a small
power line cut. There is also an old remnant homesite near Nelson Road with
scattered large trees and a semi -open field.
The forest cover is mature with some of the largest trees over 2 ft. in diameter.
The average diameter at breast height (DBH) is 12". Canopy trees include
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Shortleaf Pine (P. echinata), Virginia Pine (P.
virginiana), White Oak (Quercus alba), Black Oak (Q. velutina), Southern Red
Oak (Q. falcata), Northern Red Oak (Q. rubra), Willow Oak (Q. phellos), Post
Oak (Q. stellata), Mockernut Hickory (C. tomentosa), Pignut Hickory (C. glabra),
Shagbark Hickory (Carya ovata), Sweetgum (Liquidambar styracif/ua), Yellow
Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). The
subcanopy contains Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), American Beech
(Fagus grandifolia), Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), American Holly (Ilex
opaca), Red Maple (Acer rubrum), Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana),
Flowering Dogwood (Cornus f/orida), Redbud (Cercis canadensis), Red Mulberry
(Morus rubra), Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica), Winged Elm (Ulmus alata), and
Black Cherry (Prunus serotina). The shrub layer includes Blueberry (Vaccinium
sp.), Black Haw (Viburnum prunifolium), Autumn Olive (Elaeagnus umbellate),
Paw Paw (Asimina triloba) and Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense). Vines
present are Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Chinese Wisteria
(Wisteria sinensis), Trumpet Creeper (Campsis radicans), Virginia Creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), and Poison Ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans). The herb layer includes Christmas Fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), Crane -fly Orchid (Tipularia discolor), Spotted Wintergreen
(Chimaphila maculata), Dayflower (Commelina sp.), River Oats (Chasmanthium
latifolium), and Japanese Stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum).
The small lake has mostly wooded perimeters with transitional wetland edge
habitat dominated by typical wetland vegetation including Sedges (Carex spp
Cyperus spp., Scirpus spp.), Rushes (Juncus spp.), and Water Primrose
(Ludwigia sp.).
The old remnant homesite near Nelson Road has scattered large trees of White
Oak, Willow Oak, Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandif/ora)and Pecan (Carya
illinoinensis), and a semi -open field dominated by Fescue (Festuca sp.) that is
seasonally mowed.
WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Nelson Road - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
The disturbed roadsides and power lines along Nelson Road and Sunset Drive
are dominated by planted Fescue with mixed shrubs, vines and herbs that
typically occur in this habitat including Johnson Grass (Sorghum ha/epense),
Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium obtusifolium), Tickseed (Coreopsis major),
Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Beggars Ticks
(Desmodium sp.), and Thoroughwort (Eupatorium sp.).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower, Michaux's Sumac and
Smooth Coneflower along the roadsides, power line rights -of -way,
transitional areas and woods edges were examined and none of these
species were present.
• There were no Bald Eagle sightings nor were any nesting sites observed.
The on -site streams 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/m idwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap. htm I)
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.
WEPG 6
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Nelson Road - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
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,
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
June 30, 2019
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Nelson Road - 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 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 1997-1998. Organized,
directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 2000-2001. Organized, directed,
and worked in 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 45,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 - present.
• Located and identified at least six previously unreported populations of Federally
Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
• Located and identified four previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora).
• Located a previously unknown population of Federally Endangered 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.
WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

EN
Approvals /
Authorizations

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Td. SAW-2019-01028 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Mint Hill
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Century Communities
Gordon Johnston
Address: 7401 Carmel Executive Park Drive, Suite 310
Charlotte, NC 28226
Telephone Number: 704-709-2890
E-mail: gordon.iohnston(i�eenturycommunities.com
Size (acres) 31.2 Nearest Town Mint Hill
Nearest Waterway Irvins Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.1807
Longitude:-80.6540
Location description: The review area is located on the south side of Nelson Road, 0.22 miles southwest of the intersection of
Wilgrove-Mint Hill Road and Nelson Road. PINS: 13706520,13706523, 13706517, 13706502.
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 9/3/2019. 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-2019-01028
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 1/30/2020.
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.**
Digitally signed by
SHAEFFER.DAVID.LEIGH.1260750573
Corps Regulatory Official: f. Date:2020.olso 14:14:56-05'00'
Date of JD: 1 /30/2020 Expiration Date of JD:Not applicable

SAW-2019-01028
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: Century Communities, Gordon Johnston File Number: SAW-2019-01028 Date: 1/30/2020
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: 1 /30/2020
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Century Communities, Gordon Johnston, 7401
Carmel Executive Park Drive, Suite 310, Charlotte, NC 28226
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Nelson Road Site, SAW-2019-
01028
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the south side
of Nelson Road, 0.22 miles southwest of the intersection of Wilgrove-Mint Hill Road and Nelson Road. PINS:
13706520, 13706523, 13706517, 13706502.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Mecklenburg City: Mint Hill
Center coordinates of site (latdong in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.1807 Longitude:-80.6540
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Irvins Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 8/30/2019 by the Corps
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Estimated amount
Geographic authority to
Type of aquatic
of aquatic resources
which the aquatic
Latitude (decimal
Longitude
resources (i.e.,
Site Number
degreel
rees) )
(decimal degrees)
in review area
wetland vs. non-
resource "may be" subject
(acreageand linear
(i.e., Section 404 or
wetland waters)
feet, if applicable
Section 10/404)
Wetland A
35.18060000
-80.65410000
0.05 ac
Wetland
404
Intermittent
35.18070000
-80.65290000
4501f
Non -wetland
404
Stream B
Wetland C/CC
35.18090000
-80.65370000
0.3 ac
Wetland
404
Wetland D
35.17915000
-80.65610000
0.15 ac
Wetland
404
Wetland E
35.18190000
-80.65400000
0.1 ac
Wetland
404
Intermittent
35.17940000
-80.65580000
185If
Non -wetland
404
Stream G
Wetland H
3S.18070000
-80.65240000
0.05 ac
Wetland
404
Pond I
35.17990000
-80.65510000
0.9S ac
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 5 dated 9/3/2019
® 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:
® USGS NHD data.
® USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:Nationalmap. og_v
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey Mapservice.
National wetlands inventory map(s) mapservice.
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
® FEMA/FIRM mapsservice.
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ❑Aerial (Name & Date):
or ®Other (Name & Date): Photos 1-8 dated 5/1/2019
❑ 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
1HAEFFER.DAVID.1EIGH.1
260750573
Date: 2020.01.30 14:18:10
-05'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
1 /30/2020
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.