20201907 Ver 1_New Haven PCN package_20210218

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions WEPG
wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
SAW - 20 20 - 02268 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: New Haven Drive
2. Work Type: Private❑ Institutional ❑
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
Government ❑ Commercial ❑
Nationwide Permit 29 request for residential development
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Bowman Development Group, LLC
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 —or ORM Consultant ID Number]: WEPG, PLLC c/o Heath Caldwell
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.4042 ON -80.8287 °W
Site is on New Haven Dr, north of Holbrooks Road,
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 01920122, 01920124
9. Project Location -County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Huntersvllle
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: South Prong Clark Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]:Rocky/ 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
U Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
�✓ Section 10 & 404
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Oa 0W411IW1L069%

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
February 18, 2021
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
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Mr. Paul Wcjoski
NCDEQ
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-2020-02268; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP 429 for the New Haven
Drive site in Huntersville, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Messrs. Roden -Reynolds, Johnson, Wcjoski, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit 929 for the New Haven Drive site on 2.6 acres
located at on New Haven Drive, north of Holbrooks Road in Huntersville, NC. The site is a
proposed residential development and consists of one wetland. The site was field verified by
USACE (Bryan Roden -Reynolds) on 2/3/21. An Approved Jurisdictional Determination was
issued on 2/4/21 under SAW-2020-02268. Please refer to the Jurisdictional Determination
Information and Approvals sections for information on onsite surface waters.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will require 0.317 acres of permanent
impact to one wetland (Wetland A) for fill and grading required for the building pad, sanitary
sewer installation, and road stabilization. Overall impacts to site surface waters associated with
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-b Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] 1
[e-mail]

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
the proposed development were limited through site selection location, design, and the
location/orientation of the proposed lot and access route. Proposed impacts are unavoidable due
to the central location of the wetland bisecting the site and the grade requirements for a
residential house pad and surrounding yard and garden area. Additionally, the area adjacent to
New Haven Drive will need to be graded to finish stabilizing the road as it is not designed to
function as an impoundment structure. It was not possible to minimize impacts further due to site
grading and existing sanitary sewer configuration. Efforts of impact minimization were
implemented during the design process to preserve existing hydrology and limit adverse effects
to existing, onsite natural habitat. Construction techniques will implement approved erosion
control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite conveyances. Please see the
Engineer Correspondence section for more information on the site design parameters.
To compensate for the anticipated permanent impacts to onsite wetlands, the applicant is
proposing payment to the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Program at
a 1:1 ratio for the 0.317 acres of low -quality wetland impact. Wetland A is a basin wetland in a
remnant agricultural pond bed in an area highly impacted by the surrounding use and
management. The wetland has substantially altered hydrologic connection, low quality
vegetative composition, and no viable aquatic habitat. For more detail please see the NCWAM
section.
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. caldwellgwetlands-epg.com.
Sincerely,
V�Cav
Heath Caldwell Len Rindner, PWS
Environmental Scientist Principal
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

ID#* 20201907
Version* 1
Regional Office * Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
Reviewer List* Alan Johnson
Pre -Filing Meeting Request submitted 12/8/2020
Contact Name* Heath Caldwell
Contact Email Address* [e-mail]
Project Name* New Haven Drive
Project Owner* Bowman Development
Project County* Mecklenburg
Owner Address: Street Address
13815 Cinnabar Place
Address Line 2
aty
State / Rovince / Region
Huntersville
NC
Fbstal / Zip axle
Country
28078
USA
Is this a transportation project?* r Yes r No
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
* 401 Water Quality Certification - F 401 Water Quality Certification -
Regular Express
* Individual Permit F Modification
F Shoreline Stabilization
Does this project have an existing project ID#?*
C Yes (-- No
Do you know the name of the staff member you would like to request a meeting with?
Alan Johnson
Please give a brief project description below.*
The forthcoming PCN will include a request for Nationwide Permit 29
associated with the proposed New Haven Drive site on 2.6 acres
north of Holbrooks Road in Huntersville, NC. There one wetland on
site. An Approved Jurisdictional Determination will be submitted to the
USACE with the PCN submission.

Please give a couple of dates you are available for a meeting.
1 /1 /2021
Please attach the documentation you would like to have the meeting about.
Context Maps 120720.pdf 918.65KB
pdf only
By digitally signing below, I certify that I have read and understood that per the Federal Clean Water Act Section
401 Certification Rule the following statements:
This form completes the requirement of the Pre -Filing Meeting Request in the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification
Rule.
1 understand by signing this form that I cannot submit my application until 30 calendar days after this pre -filing
meeting request.
1 also understand that DWR is not required to respond or grant the meeting request.
Your project's thirty -day clock started upon receipt of this application. You will receive notification regarding meeting location
and time if a meeting is necessary. You will receive notification when the thirty -day clock has expired, and you can submit an
application.
Signature
Submittal Date 12/8/2020

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

a`'oF w A rE�QG
T.
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ 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:
New Haven Drive
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Huntersville
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Bowman Development Group
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
33000/533
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Nate Bowman
3d.
Street address:
13815 Cinnabar Place
3e.
City, state, zip:
Huntersville, NC 28078
3f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no.:
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
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.:
[phone]
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):
01920122, 01920124
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.4009 Longitude:-80.8309
1 c.
Property size:
2.6 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
South Prong Clarke Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Rocky/03040105
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 just south of New Haven Drive and north of Holbrooks Road in Huntersville, NC. The site is partially forested with an old
agricultural pond bed. The elevation is 750-760ft.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.355
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 0
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed project will involve filling 0.317 acres of a wetland for a residential development.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Fill and grading of the site will use standard equipment, excavator, dump truck, track hoe, etc.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project(including all priorphases) in thepast?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: SAW-2020-02268
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑X 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 B. Roden -Reynolds (USACE) on 2/4/2021. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the Approvals section.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams —tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
No
Corps
0.317
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.317
2h. Comments:
For grading associated with a house pad, road stabilization, and sanitary sewer installation.
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.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
Choose one
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design, and location/orientation of the proposed lot and access
routes. Proposed impacts are unavoidable due to the central location of the wetland bisecting the site and the grade limitations/requirements fora
residential house pad and sanitary sewer as well as the grading for the stabilization of New Haven Drive. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance
and minimization efforts by limiting grading into the wetland required for stabilization of the embankment.
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.
Per the engineer, the proposed grading is necessary to achieve cover for the sanitary sewer lateral, the stabilization of New Haven Drive, and for the
house pad and yard/garden area. Additionally the existing 12" pipe that was installed temporarily to support construction of the road will be plugged
and abandoned. The existing 36" culvert will be extended to an elevation at existing ground level that will neither drain or flood the remaining wetland.
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:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.317 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: A 1:1 ratio is proposed for the wetland impacts. Please see the NCWAM section for more information.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
<24 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
Total
imperviousness is under 24%
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Town of Huntersville
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A threatened and endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat may occur for the Northern long-eared
bat but the project is except 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 fish 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/
B. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.meeklenburgcountyne.gov/
Heath Caldwell
vt r,
02-18-2021
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Agent Authorization Letter
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: New Haven Drive
Property Address: New Haven Drive, north of Holbrooks Road
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 01920122, 01920124
Select one: I am the current property owner
Name: Nate Bowman
Company: Bowman Development Group
Mailing Address: 13815 Cinnabar Place, Huntersville, NC
Telephone Number: [phone] x101
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Property) Owner / Interested Buyer * / Other
Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or -formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
dine diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatouy of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatouy.
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com
777
Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550
Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277
Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
len.rind ner a wetlands-epg.com

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Nate Bowman
Bowman Development Group
13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
February 8, 2021
Expiration of Acceptance: 8/8/2021
Project: New Haven Drive 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-digit HUC)
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Yadkin
03040105
Non -Riparian Wetland*
0.40
Won -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 as requested, 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: Heath Caldwell, agent
Sincerely,
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
NORTH CAROLINAD_E
Department of Environ—tal quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

►0
Maps/Plans

erna
�+
Huntersville 4
SITE * o mien Ve rrn i I lion o
o`'�+
IDelLwood M
r
A
fm Green,
z APPROXIMATE Coy
PROJECT BOUNDARY
m 7 STUDY LIMITS
m
Way rr1 er Park Ole, -Rd
11�
1 / Ln
Y11 q
entrarl
N Piedmont
I omFrlunity
College...
Acres: New Haven Drive site Prepared for:
+/- 2.6 Mecklenburg County, NC Bowman Development Group
FIGURE
1 VICINITY MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
11/24/20 Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification DCK LSR ,�,

1 ,
+ h
•F11
I,
PROJECT BOUNDARY - -
STUDY LIMITS
w
--
J%
'�. Jr - 7
Pr
a
f � �
i
1 ,
+ ' %r I
1
rim
bli�,L
r�1
- - dip.. - I —
fib
r F
Tr
J
N
1 + J
Acres: New Haven Drive site
+/- 2.6 Mecklenburg County, NC
FIGURE
2 11/24/20 AERIAL MAP
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
1 t�
I
Aerial Imagery Provided by
Mecklenburg GIS 2020
Prepared for:
3owman Development Group
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
ALL I DCK

To South Prong
Clark Creek
i F
qP
r
APPROXIMATES
PROJECT BOUNDARY }
I STUDY LIMITS
elk
k -do Ir
ti
1:
Leamin
d, 1 SCALE
" ' r LOCATION
N USGS QUAD 1:24,000 Lat: 35.4042 °N
Cornelius, NC ACRES Long:-80.8287 °W
AL --AL j_ 1993 2.6 HUC: 03040105 (Rocky)
Acres: New Haven Drive site Prepared for:
+/- 2.6 Mecklenburg County, NC Bowman Development Group
FIGURE
3 USGS MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
11/24/20 Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification DCK LSR

End
kE
0
-OW
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
- f
I
V Af3
i� E
n D6
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acts in AOI
Percent of AOI
EnD
Enon sandy loam. S to 15
percent slopes
0-1
4.3%
VV
Water
0.9
35.3%
VVkE
Wilkes loam. 15 to 25 percent
slopes
1.6
60.4%
Totals for Area of Interest
2.7
100.0%
N FNRCS Soil Survey Manuscript
ecklenburg County 1976
Acres: New Haven Drive site Prepared for:
+/- 2.6 MecklenbCounty, NC Bowman Development Group
urg
FIGURE
4 SOIL MANUSCRIPT MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
11/24/20 Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification DCK LSR Wetlands ) 0 7

i
H01brooks Rd
N
I
is
Acres:
+/- 2.6
FIGURE
5 11/24/20
k
PARCEL ID: 01920122
BOWMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP
tH13815 CINNABAR PL,
UNTERSVILLE, NC 28078
� r
APPROXIMATE _ _-
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
M
i•
1411G-14399 }�
I t
�W
� 4
i w
New Haven Drive site
Mecklenburg County, NC
PARCEL MAP
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
X
to
1_#4 1
New +~�
wpn or
PARCEL ID: 01920124
BOWMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP
144 3
'i Parcel Information Provided by
Mecklenburg County GIS 2020
Prepared for:
Bowman Development Group IWEPG
Drawn By: I Reviewed By
ALL

ww
SITE A \\\\ �+` `\ r lk`'
VICINITY MAP
NO SCALE
j
rl/A/�'�
i
\\ r I�\\'�\\11� �I� 1V eyy T � �• � i q � C'
WETLANDA iv`vvIlll�i,Il'Itl Have
7, ".0.355AC. /ii'lill`v��I�iii�Il �V S'R# n j ',,/ I \ A:
266g
uj
10
r `
olbroo �,�6 i, ; -
GRAPHIC SCALE SHEET TITLE PRO=ND.
200 0 100 200 400 MUS f NG SITE CONDITIONS Si"•`=200'
DALE
02/15/21
PROJECT �jyKp Y
(HECKED BY
IN FEET) a r�K
INCLENBURG COUNTY, NC
TOWN OFNW HU R HAVEN L 1 inch = 200 ft. FOR: BOWMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC.
r4PPm ar: Ymmwum-ghmAms R HOuiz, INC. DRAWING No.
?•L6 PlesNla��rveyiNj o BsjlNll/iMj
BEAPoNGS BASED ON 0' (^
NC NGS BAD 83 1w North � EB87S � �' )troth • V
PER OPUS (ARC S�SSION RaeLtrou— /C-0478 704A661000 704.668.0606(h:1

�✓ /' l
�pSUE
VA • +�,\I'/ICI:A1� 1i y1/✓'I�'+v -` +�-` v�iv A •� - _ T� ��
44 ,I t Vvv• v v '��+ �•� v,� �� `./ _ 7 -�* �"
VICINITY MAP ; /' - \ ' \'✓`,, �` - - �.
NO SCALE
�Y�,' 6 '/ �"� }'/ I Y I , / ' I 11 JL_ •- ��`.
-
lllyy11yy11• �%!I 111 �l I�(' I �� --1 .� / h� ' 6'� J II•ll /
I
I
SKIMMER SEDIMENT BASIN /1 - -
W/ 90MMER AND POROUS BAFFLES
SIOMMEA:4' W/ 7.9OMFIOE r
CLEAR AND GRADE AS NECESSARY t, , STORAGE TOP:
TO INSTALL DI #3. INSTALL TRASH SKIMMER REST 0" 758.%
RACK, TIE SKIMMER TO DI /3 AT _ BASIN EI,OTTCM INVERT: 756.0'
THE INVERT: 750.90 _ - ` r
TOP OF DI ELEV. 755.5 :3
\ ` ��,+ m IMMER BAMEW 11SIN
V K "I CONFIGURATION
"AND FINAL GRADES
IFOR FINAL STABIUZATON
1PHASEh
%�j _ �.• \,.�I`
'•�Jhr
( \ ' s
p
1
/T�y_
V a v
1 PROP. SHED
,
I'
,
PROPOSED LOT
°
-'I�
PROPOSED STORM
'�
GRADING
\\
; %; I i.
(II 14I
DRAINAGE _SYSTEM
WETLANDS IMPACT
WETLANDS IMPACT
_
,
\ PROPOSED
I (
SEE SHEET 3 OF 3
WETLAND ..A., I ` \ B°°rw s a�14ETLANDSIMPACT
13.814 S.F. \ I ` ;� \�It
SEM
0.317 AC.
01
00.
/_A
Cx
I
GRAPHIC SCALE
200 0 100 200 4iC
( IN FEET )
1 inch = 200 ft.
BEARINGS BASED ON
NC GRIO(NAO B3
PER OPUS STATIC SSION
SHEET TITLE
PROPOSED SITE D&ROVFIMM SCE•`--200'
PROJECT
WKD
ED®A0BA DIM
P01M CH
BY
TOWN OF �, MECLUSBURG COUNTY, NC vGK
FOR: BOWMAN
DEVELOPMENT
RaQ1MtnDEVELLOPMENT GROUP.
11VC.
mum RlADuum-WhWAI- ez Hou)� *NcDRAMNNO.
figs
J,c
P1wwlwgSrsu�yiwt I Swq►tws
? Q�ra s
,,.fc_s,I
"U60AM 704MIUD I.) -IT 7

EX.12" PIPE
TO BE PLUGGED
NeW
H
Z %' S, a ven Dr
Mecklenburg \ aFti F� r . R. # 668
PROPOSED WIDE x y / /
GENTLE SWALE Q s:, PIPE INV: PIPE INN
74200
TO MEANDER �TSa.Ro
LLJ
PROPOSED m \ \ \ \ \`\
DRIVEWAY F ( II �A� A� r l l /
Of
PROPOSED \ _• > I o
HOUSE / \ I 314 36" RCP \
96' 30°RCP �\ V AV A I Ifs ' m PROP. SAN. SEWER \� Mecklenburg
I I \I I I I I I I LATERAL IN FILL
PROP. SHED v �:
WETLAND "A" - PROPOSED STORM
' WETLANDS IMPACT _ _ \ � ; ��. I i I
DRAINAGE SYSTEM
13 814 S.F. \ \ \ \ / 4 PROPOSED WIDE
0.317 AC. \� PROPOSED 1 \l \I I I GENTLE SWALE
\11'I GARDEN \ /� \ I ( ' I I\ \ TO MEANDER
AREA
INV OF PROP. PIPE TO 1 ; EXIST. 3 M65 64
MATCH GRADE TO EXIST. SAN.
NOT DRAIN OR I - - _ \ �� SEWER
FLOOD WETLAND �— \
WETLAND AREA TO
REMAIN 0.046 AC. BouNOARY LINE
(2,022 SF.) Mecklenburg
0.317 AC. WETLAND IMPACT
GRAPHIC SCALE
100 0 50 100 200
d ONLY ONE LOT ALLOWED
SUBDIVIDING IS NOT ALLOWED
1 inch = 100 ft.
i
REMNGq.eAsm ON
NC rcKNAATID 4'S9RJ))
PER OPUS
0N
Holbrooks Rd
S.R. # 2446
SHEET TITLE
PROJECT N0.
WETLAND IMPACT DETAIL 'A"
S 1.E 100'
DATE
02/15/21
PROJECT
DRAIN 8Y
WKD
NEW HAVEN DRIVE POND
° VGK BY
TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC
FOR: BOWMAN DEVELOPMENT INC.
�Gp/ROUP.
INC.APPED BY: llAlMROUGH W.ILMAMS & HouLEy I
DRAWNG NO.
Planning o Surveying o Engineering
w�l (m•�)
730 Windsor Oak Court P.O. Box 1198
NC Corporate Charlotte, North Carolina, 28273 Pineville, North Carolina, 28134
8
Registration ¢C-0475 704.556.1990 704.558.0505(fax)
SHT

New Haven Dr
S.R.# 2668 �W
¢g
a �ia
w
�w
chi w
W W W W d
j I EX. STREET 1 I
3.91' 17 39, 3.23'
EX. 8" DIP
761.32 7A1 nZ SAN. SWR.
INV: 756.32
EX. 6' W.M. 3.08'
TOP: 758.3
EX. 12CP
OF POND TO BE"PLUGGED
GgOSTOM
EX151�N
EXISTING CONDITIONS
New Haven Dr o
S.R.# 2668
ag
�w
CL 0
w w =)m
W X W r0
[ EX. STREET
6' 17.39' 3.2.'
SHOULDE
EX. 8' DIP
SAN. SWR.
INV: 756.32
761.32 761.02
PROPOSED GRADE TOP OF DI 3 3:1 MAX. SLOPE 33EX. 6 PROP. MH 2
755.5 TOP: 758.3 3.50' RIM:755.6
ROPOSED GRADE 3.55' 2.83'
�-88.30'0
PROP�36VRCP 0.50%
PROP. DI 3
INV. 750.66
PROP. MH 2
INV. 750.22
PROP. HW 3
INV. 737.03 PROP. 48"RCP 19.90'0 0.13% INV. 737.00
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
qW
SHEET TITLE
PROJECT N0.
WETLAND IMPACT DETAIL "A"
S i"'� 30'
DATE
02/15/21
PROJECT
oRAwN BY
WKD
NEW HAVEN DRIVE POND
CHECKED BY
VGK
TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC
FOR: BOWMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.
YAPPm BY: YARBROUGH-WIIII.II.YA1bdS 8[ HOU%B9 INC.
DRAWING N0.
Planning o Surveying o Engineering
730 Windsor Oak Court P.O. Box 1198
NC Corporate Charlotte, North Carolina, 28273 Pineville, North Carolina, 28134
n
Registration ,yC-0475 704.558.1990 704.558.0505(tes)
7
stir

Q
U
Z
NCWAM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual Version b.0
USACE AID #
SAW-2020-02268
NCDWR#
Project Name
Nelson Road Subdivision
Date of Evaluation
2/3/2021
Applicant/Owner Name
Bowman Development
Wetland Site Name
Wetland A
Wetland Type
Basin Wetland
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
South Prong Clark Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03040105
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
I-1 Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Lonaitude (deci-dearees)
35.40137N/-80.8309W
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.
AA WT
T
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
CU ®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
s ❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
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
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 is within an excavation/embankment for an adjacent roadway.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland A
Wetland Type Basin Wetland
Date of Assessment 2/3/2021
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
NA
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention
Condition
NA
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Particulate Change
Soluble Change
Physical Change
Pollution Change
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW
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

Engineer
Correspondence

YARBROUGH-WILLIAMS & HOULE, INC.
Planning *Surveying • Engineering
NCBELS C-0475
SC COA332
February 17, 2021
New Haven Drive Site Design Parameters
The purpose of this project is to create a building site for one single
family house including a driveway, shed, garden area and yard.
Design considerations:
I. A Sanitary sewer lateral will be installed from the existing sanitary
sewer trunk located on the east side of the property to the
proposed house site on the west side of the property. It will be
necessary to grade to achieve cover for this lateral.
2. The proposed house site, driveway, and area for the proposed
shed, yard and garden will also need to be graded to achieve a
usable site.
3. The area adjacent to New Haven Drive will need to be graded to
finish stabilizing the road. The road is not allowed to function as
an impoundment structure and was not designed to be an
engineered dam.
4. The existing 12" pipe was installed to support construction of the
road crossing and will be plugged and abandoned. The existing
36" culvert will be extended to an elevation at exist ground level
to neither drain nor flood the remaining wetlands on site.
730 Windsor Oak Court, Charlotte, NC 28273 • P.O. Box 1198, Pineville, NC 28134 • 704.556.1990 • fax [phone]

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

+ I+ ' h r + r , , ' Y i J k• jo�d.
� •■ 1 rI I, ! ! !TEMPCULVERT•! ■-installed during• !construction• • r' , ■ �+
■ ; ROADBED CULVERT +�'+ NEW HAVEN !:++ �•
L ; ' • " - ROAD !
, ' � I 1 �• + i+ —�r T�• �i 4J F i F + ! r+,+
L
J "
op
Y '
,�+ +' ! ' ■ ' ! { • 1
!' FORMER POND
y+' EXTENT AS SHOWN
ON POLARIS + ; •� ', ■ Y " i i { ! -
, Y • 1 • Y
WETLAND +', •{Y '+,
! , ■ +
' �� _. -- � "•r'''r' ,+ ; Y i I FORM DPI ■ }' 'S'i `ice
� + r ` • Y Y ' f i
•Y Yi •'5 `5 _ `+ •5.5 • J
5 *1 � ``{'S - 'S}5~Y •5.5 •, � ', �, JURISDICTIONAL
5 ' S • ', 4
WETLAND A/AA
" a�5 -0.374 AC
'`5 • 1
L5 WETLAND
`i FORMA 1 I . r L €• '. . �, �•Y 'S
`5i•i' i, ■ ■ 1 1 � ' 1 t; 5 5 'S ' -
1 5
'+ • ' { ' ' Y ' ',Y'1- +'� 5 4 •Y •`L• `5y ai5 ``•Y',
5 ' S ' ' PROJECT BOUNDARY ``iyi'S ` r 5`}
STUDY LIMITS •, '+ `L , • +- _ , �• ,
■ + 1 i
USACE VERIFICATION
'Y
Acres: NEW HAVEN DRIVE POND Prepared for:
+/- 2.6 County, NC Bowman Development Group
Mecklenburg
FIGURE
10 DELINEATION MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By
11/17/20 Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification N RN ALL , . h ,

PHOTO 1 - WETLAND A -AA
DATE/TIME 2020:09:24 - 12:48:00 COORDINATES: 35.4016,-80.8314
PHOTO 2 -VIEW WETLAND A -AA
DATE/TIME 2020:11:17 - 12:25:00 COORDINATES: 35.4016,-80.8314
New Haven Drive Pond
Yff PG Mecklenburg Co., NC— 09/24/20 and 11/17/20
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

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: New Haven Pond
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
Field investigation conducted on February 17, 2021
Charlotte Office: www.wetiands-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]
I en. ri nd ner@wet Ian ds -epg. co m

New Haven Pond -Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The New Haven Pond site (+/- 2.6 acres) is located just south of New Haven
Drive and just north of Holbrooks Road near its intersection with S. Old
Statesville Road in Huntersville, North Carolina. The site consists of an old,
agricultural pond bed. It can be found on the Cornelius, NC USGS Topographic
Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.4042 N, longitude is-80.8287 W. The elevation is
750 - 760 ft. (Figure 1).
Fiaure 1:
To South Prong
Clark Creek
r � �
r` APPROXIMATE f '�
PROJECT BOUNDARY k '
STUDY LIMITS
�
NZ
1
Learnin
a SCALE LOCATION
N USGS QUAD 1:24,000 Lat: 35.4042 9N
r Cornelius, NC ACRES Long:-80.8287 ?W
I , 1443 2.6 HUC: 03M105 (Rocky)
r
,uPs' New Haven Drive site Prepared for-
6 Mecklenburg County, NC Bowman Development G roup
EPG
FIGURE
1 USGS MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By
I V24120 subject to USACE/NCOE4 verification DCK LSR -
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

New Haven Pond -Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ was
referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and
Protected species for Mecklenburg County North Carolina, the results of which
are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and
the site was investigated on February 17, 2021.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on February 17, 2021
Group Name Status Record Status
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona Endangered Current
decorata
Invertebrate Rusty -patched Bumble Bee Endangered Historic
(Bombus affinis)
Vascular Plants Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea Endangered
laevi ata
Vascular Plants Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus Endangered
schweinitzii)
Vascular Plants Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) Endangered
Vertebrate Northern Long -Eared Bat (Myotis
septentrionalis)
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus)
Threatened
Current
Current
Current
Probable/Potential
Protected under the Bald Current
and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

New Haven Pond - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS:
Three plant species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Mecklenburg County:
• Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally Endangered,
is typically found in open habitats which historically have been maintained by
wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most occurrences are limited to
roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility rights -of -way (ROW).
• Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), listed as Federally Endangered, is
typically found in open woods, cedar barrens, roadsides, clear cuts, dry
limestone bluffs and power line rights -of -way, requiring abundant sunlight and
little competition from other plant species.
• Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii), listed as Federally Endangered, requires
habitat of sandy forests and woodland edges. This species requires periodic fire
as a part of its ecology.
Four animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Mecklenburg County:
• Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large bodies of open water
such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers, where there are suitable fish
populations and tall trees for nesting and roosting.
• Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally Endangered, is
restricted to cool, clean, well -oxygenated water. Stable, silt- free stream beds
are required for this species. Typically stable areas occur where the stream
banks are well -vegetated with trees and shrubs.
Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), listed as Federally Threatened.
During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies underneath
bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non -
reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. It
has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. Northern
long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula.
Rusty -patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis), listed as Federally Endangered,
live in colonies that include a single queen and female workers. Rusty -patched
Bumble Bees historically occupied grasslands and tallgrass prairies. Bumble
bees need areas that provide nectar and pollen from flowers, nesting sites
(underground and abandoned rodent cavities or clumps of grasses), and
overwintering sites for hibernating queens (undisturbed soil).
WEPG#00801 4
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

New Haven Pond -Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
The site consists of an old, agricultural pond bed. New Haven Road on the dam
side of the old pond is under reconstruction and the entire area is currently under
some disturbance. The area upstream of the old pond is also under construction
adjacent to Holbrooks Road. There are no remaining naturally vegetated areas
on the site other than typical wetland fringe species of Cattails (Typha /atifolia),
Sedges (Carex spp., Scirpus, spp. ), and Rushes (Juncus spp. ).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• There is no habitat for Schweinitz's Sunflower, Michaux's Sumac and
Smooth Coneflower on this site. No individuals of Schweinitz's Sunflower,
Smooth Coneflower, or Michaux's Sumac were observed.
• No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings
nor were any nesting sites observed.
• This site does not have suitable habitat to support populations of the
Carolina Heelsplitter.
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office's website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html) it
appears that the site meets the "exempt" criteria which requires no further
action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the Northern
Long-eared Bat.
Comparing this site location to the USFWS Range Map for Rusty -patched
Bumble Bee
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap.html)
Mecklenburg County is in its Historic Range, and as such, Section 7
consultation is not needed. WEPG concludes that Rusty -patched Bumble
Bee is not present.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

New Haven Pond -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
February 18, 2021
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

New Haven Pond -Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist/ Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and natural resource biologist and
has conducted field work and investigative studies covering thousands of
cumulative acres in both North and South Carolina since 1996, including:
• Discovered Schweinitz's Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC.
which led 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.
• Located and identified numerous previously unreported populations of
Federally Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
• Located and identified numerous previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora).
• Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory. Organized, directed,
and conducted field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory. Organized, directed, and
conducted field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities
Evaluation for over 55,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 -
present.
• Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in both
North and South Carolina.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

EN
Approvals /
Authorizations

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2020-02268 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Cornelius
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor:
Bowman Development Grout)
Nate Bowman
Address:
13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
Telephone Number:
[phone] x101
E-mail:
natebowman15(&t!mail.com
Size (acres) 2_6 Nearest Town Huntersville
Nearest Waterway Clarke Creek River Basin Upper Pee Dee
USGS HUC 03040105 Coordinates Latitude: 35.4009
Longitude:-80.8309
Location description: The review area is located on the north side of Holbrooks Road; approximately 0/1 miles east of the
intersection of Holbrooks Road and Central Avenue. PINS: 01920122 and 01920124. Reference review area description shown
in Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled "Figure 1, Vicinity Mad' and dated 11/24/20.
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 DATE. 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-2020-02268
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 Bryan Roden -Reynolds at 704-510-1440 or
brvan.roden-reynolds(&u sace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the approved iurisdictional determination
form dated 2/4/2021.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/deternimation has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/deternimation 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 10M15
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 04/21/2021.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Corps Regulatory Official: 2021,02.0412:08:10-05'00'
Date of JD: 2/4/2021 Expiration Date of JD: 02/19/2026

SAW-2020-02268
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/f?p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Wetlands and Environmental Planning Grout)
Heath Caldwell
Address: 10612-D Providence Road
Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: [phone]
E-mail: heath.caldwell(&wctlands-ct)g.com
Property Owner: Bowman Development Grout)
Nate Bowman
Address: 13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
Telephone Number: [phone] x101
E-mail: natebowman15(&t!mail.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Bowman Develo ment Grou , Nate Bowman I File Number: SAW-2020-02268
Date: 2/4/2021
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑X
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
❑
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.miUMissions/CivilWorks/ReaulatoryProgramandPenuits.asi)
OZI& 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 II 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 II 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 II 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 II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
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.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR 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: Bryan Roden -Reynolds
CESAD-PDO
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1 OM15
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 opportunit to participate in all site investi ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Bryan Roden -Reynolds, 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]

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
® NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
I. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
Completion Date of Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD): 2/4/2021
ORM Number: AW-2020-02268
Associated JDs: N/A
Review Area Location': State/Territory: City: Huntersville County/Parish/Borough: Mecklenburg
Center Coordinates of Review Area: Latitude 35.4009 Longitude-80.8309
II. FINDINGS
A. Summary: Check all that apply. At least one box from the following list MUST be selected. Complete the
corresponding sections/tables and summarize data sources.
J The review area is comprised entirely of dry land (i.e., there are no waters or water features, including
wetlands, of any kind in the entire review area). Rationale: N/A or describe rationale.
❑ There are "navigable waters of the United States" within Rivers and Harbors Act jurisdiction within the
review area (complete table in Section 11.13).
❑x There are "waters of the United States" within Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area
(complete appropriate tables in Section II.C).
* There are waters or water features excluded from Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area
(complete table in Section II.D).
B. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Section 10 (§ 10)2
§ 10 Name § 10 Size § 10 Criteria Rationale for § 10 Determination
V/A I N/A
C. Clean Water Act Section 404
Territorial Seas and Traditional Navi able Waters a 1 waters :3
a 1 Name
a 1 Size
a 1 Criteria
Rationale fora 1 Determination
Tributaries a 2 waters):
(a)(2) Name
(a)(2) Size
(a)(2) Criteria
Rationale fora 2 Determination
N/A
N/A I
N/A.
Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters ((a)(3) waters):
a 3 Name
a 3 Size
a 3 Criteria
Rationale fora 3 Determination
i Map(s)/figure(s) are attached to the AID provided to the requester
2 If the navigable water is not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide or included on the District's list of Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigable waters list, do
NOT use this document to make the determination. The District must continue to follow the procedure outlined in 33 CFR part 329.14 to make a Rivers and Harbors
Act Section 10 navigability determination.
s A stand-alone TNW determination is completed independently of a request for an AID. A stand-alone TNW determination is conducted for a specific segment of river
or stream or other type of waterbody, such as a lake, where upstream or downstream limits or lake borders are established. A stand-alone TNW determination should be
completed following applicable guidance and should NOT be documented on the AID Form.
Page 2 of 2 Form Version 10 June 2020 updated

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
Adjacent wetlands ((a)(4) waters):
(a)(4) Name
(a)(4) Size
(a)(4) Criteria
Rationale fora 4 Determination
Wetland A
0.374
acre(s)
(a)(4) Wetland
Wetland A has a connection to a downstream
abuts an (a)(1)-
jurisdictional water via a culvert. Wetland A is
(a)(3) water.
physically separated from an (a)(2) intermittent
stream but has direct hydrologic connection via
a culvert which allows flows during a typical
year.
D. Excluded Waters or Features
Excluded waters b)(1) — b 12 :4
Exclusion Name
Exclusion Size
Exclusions
Rationale for Exclusion Determination
N/A.
III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION
A. Select/enter all resources that were used to aid in this determination and attach data/maps to this
document and/or references/citations in the administrative record, as appropriate.
❑x Information submitted by, or on behalf of, the applicant/consultant: Figures 1-11
This information is sufficient for purposes of this AJD.
Rationale: N/A or describe rationale for insufficiency (including partial insufficiency).
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: Title(s) and/or date(s).
❑x Photographs: Aerial and Other: Figure 2, Aerial Map (Dated 11/24/20), Figure 3 1938 Historic
Aerial Map (Dated 11/24/20), Figure 4, 1956 Historic Aerial Map (Dated 11/24/20), Figure 5 1960
Historic Aerial Map (Dated 11/24/20), Figure 11, Delineation Map (Dated 11/17/20), and Photographs
1-2
L Corps site visit(s) conducted on: 02/03/21
❑ Previous Jurisdictional Determinations (AJDs or PJDs): ORM Number(s) and date(s).
❑x Antecedent Precipitation Tool: provide detailed discussion in Section 111.B.
❑x USDA NRCS Soil Survey: Figure 7, Soil Manuscript Map (Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County
Dated 1976) and Figure 8, NRCS Soils Map (Web Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County)
❑ USFWS NWI maps: Title(s) and/or date(s,
❑x USGS topographic maps: Figure 6, USGS Map (7.5-minute quadrangle Cornelius, NC) and Figure
9, 1960 Historic Topo Map (USGS)
Other data sources used to aid in this determination:
Data Source (select)
Name and/or date and other relevant information
USGS Sources
N/A.
USDA Sources
N/A.
NOAA Sources
N/A.
USACE Sources
N/A.
State/Local/Tribal Sources
N/A.
' Some excluded waters, such as (b)(2) and (b)(4), may not be specifically identified on the AJD form unless a requester specifically asks a Corps district to do so.
Corps districts may, in case -by -case instances, choose to identify some or all of these waters within the review area.
s Because of the broad nature of the (b)(1) exclusion and in an effort to collect data on specific types of waters that would be covered by the (b)(1) exclusion, four sub-
categories of (b)(1) exclusions were administratively created for the purposes of the AJD Form. These four sub -categories are not new exclusions, but are simply
administrative distinctions and remain (b)(1) exclusions as defined by the NWPR.
Page 2 of 2 Form Version 10 June 2020 updated

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
® NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
Data Source (select)
Name and/or date and other relevant information
Other Sources
Figure 1, Vicinity Map (Dated 11124120) and Figure 10, Parcel Map (Dated
11 /24/20
B. Typical year assessment(s): The consultant (i.e., Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group)
conduced a site visit on 11/17/20. The Antecedent Precipitation Tool (APT) was used for this date
and determined the site was under wetter than normal conditions. The Corps conducted a site visit
on 02/03/21. The APT was used for this date and determined the site was under normal conditions.
C. Additional comments to support AJD: The proposed project area only contains one jurisdictional
wetland.
Page 2 of 2 Form Version 10 June 2020 updated