20210748 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210730

DWR
mrlslon of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
June 1, 2021 Ver4.1
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20210748
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
'Information for Initial Review
la. Name of project:
Flats at Whitehall
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Daniel Kuefler
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
7/30/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Coffey Creek
Basin
Catawba
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.148-80.9377
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Mecklenburg
Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
Version#*
1
What amout is owed?*
IT $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Alan Johnson:eads\adjohnson1
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Is this a courtesy copy notification?*
r Yes r No

ID#
20210748
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date
4/12/2021
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:
nick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
DWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form.pdf
File type mast be FCF
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
V Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
r Yes
r No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
fJ 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
Version
1
29 - Residential Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
50.73KB
r 401 Water Quality Certification - E>q)ress
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner fJ Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
YFP Timber LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
r Yes r No
r Yes r No
2c.Contact Person:
Rick Yager

2d.Address
Street Address
1300 Altura Road
Address tine 2
City
Fort Mill
Postal / Zip Code
29708
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Matt Rogers
3b. Business Name:
Evolve Companies
3c.Address
Street Address
2012 Eastwood Road
Address tine 2
city
Wilmington
Postal / Zip Cade
28403
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
amber.li [e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Daniel Kuefler
4b. Business Name:
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
4c.Address
Street Address
10612-D Providence Road
Address tine 2
PMB 550
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Cade
28277
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
daniel.kuefier@v,etiands-epg.com
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2, Project Identification
Slate / Province / Flegion
South Carolina
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Rion
NC
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / Ragion
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
O

2a. Property Identification Number:
2b. Property size:
20130108
36.5
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
city
State / Rovince / Region
Postal / Zip Code
Country
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Coffey Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Catawba
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030501030103
4. Project Description and History
4a. 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 southwest of West Arrowood Road and just northeast of Interstate 485 in Charlotte, North Carolina. The elevation is 600 - 640 ft. The site consists of disturbed
woodlands, wetlands and streams that flow into a small lake with a landscaped corridor along W. Arrowood Road.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3.76
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
1,132
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The proposed project consists of three road crossing and fill for a residential development.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
Fill and grading of the site will use standard equipment, excavator, dump truck, track hoe, etc.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2021-00462
Sc. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Nic Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
This site was verified by B. Roden -Reynolds (USAGE) on 3/8/21. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the Approvals section.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory

1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands W Streams -tributaries
r- Open Waters r" Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
r Buffers
2a. Site #* (?) 2a1 Reason (?) 2b. Impact type * (?) �2c. Type of W. 2d. W. name * 2e. Forested * 2f. Type of 2g. Impact
Jurisdicition*(?) area*
W1
Fill
t
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland A
Yes
Corps
0.039
(acres)
W2
Fill
P
ffornland Hardwood Forest
Wetland A
Yes
Corps
0.006
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.045
21. Comments:
Impacts to Wetland A are for fill for retaining walls for a parking lot
3. Stream Impacts
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.045
(?) Jurisdictio
❑ 3a. Reason for impact (?) 3b.lmpact type * 3c. Type of impact* 3d. S. name * 3e. Stream Type * 3f. Type of 3g. S. width * 3h. Impact
n* length*
S1
Road Crossing
9
Permanent
Culvert
-]
Stream D
Intermittent
Corps
P
6
Average (feet)
71
(linearfeet)
S2
Road Crossing
9
Permanent
Culvert
Stream B
Intermittent
Corps
P
9
Average (feet)
77
(lir�rfeel)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
148
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
148
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
3j. Comments:
Crossing at Stream C will not result in any impacts.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation U
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design, and location/orientation of the proposed lots and
access routes. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and minimization efforts by implementing retaining walls that are designed to avoid
additional impacts due to rip rap, thus avoiding avoiding 87 % of onsite streams and 99 % of onsite wetlands.
1b. 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.
Where possible, 2:1 slopes and the mapmum allowable headwalls will be used to minimize crossing impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
r Yes
r No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
F DWR
W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
r- Mitigation bank W Payment to in -lieu fee r- Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program

4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
r Yes r No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet)
148
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.0456
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4h. Comments
A 2:1 ratio is proposed for wetland impacts. A ratio of 1.5:1 is proposed for stream impacts.
CStormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15ANCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater
program?
r Yes r No
r N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
W Local Government F State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
W Phase II r NSW r USMP r Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
City of Charlotte
Comments:
Storm ureter on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans (Johnston Lake). The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to the City of Charlotte but will be
designed to meet their criteria. Please refer to the 1994 Whitehall- 401 Water Quality Certification for additional information.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional phases proposed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)

4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR forth is project?*
r Yes r Nor WA
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated
at a treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
r Unknown
Si. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
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. A report has been submitted to FWS for concurrence.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an 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 status?*
r Yes 6 No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
SHPO's website: https:Hnc.maps.arcgis.cory
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one
file when possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Qick the upload button a drag and drop files here to attach document
Flats at Whitehall PCN SUBMITTED.pdf 16.69MB
File must be FOF or ME
Comments
A complete PCN package is attached.
Signature
V

17 By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request Within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act');
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Daniel Kuefler
Signature
OlGelWCI;C-0It
Date
7/30/2021

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Matt Rogers
Evolve Companies
2012 Eastwood Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
July 8, 2021
Expiration of Acceptance: 1/8/2022
Project: Flats at Whitehall 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*
Non -Riparian Wetland**
0.0456
Catawba
03050103*
Warm Stream
148
*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 mountain 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].
Sincerely,
At�dut�
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Amber Lipsky, agent
DEQ �� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
_ 217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
NORTH CAROLINA
oePanmam of enm anmemai aueiN /� 919.707.8976

WEPG
Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
SAW — 2021 - 00462 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Flats at Whitehall
2. Work Type: Private Fv_1 Institutional ❑
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
PCN request for residential development
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
Government ❑ Commercial ❑
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Evolve Companies (Applicant)
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 —or ORM Consultant ID Number]: WEPG, PLLC c/o Daniel Kuefler
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.1480,-80.9377
south of W Arrowood Road, at intersection with Johnston Lake Drive
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 20130108
9. Project Location —County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Coffey Creek
12. watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]:Catawba/ 03050103
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 �✓ Section 10 & 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
U Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Oa ks]111141L160%

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
July 30, 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-2021-00462; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP #29 for the Flats at
Whitehall site in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Messrs. Roden -Reynolds, Johnson, Wcjoski, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit 929 for the Flats at Whitehall site on 36.5 acres
located south of W Arrowood Road at the intersection with Johnston Lake Drive in Charlotte,
NC. The site is a proposed residential development and consists of three streams, two wetlands,
and one open water pond. A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Request was submitted for
the proposed project and authorized on March 8, 2021. Please refer to the Jurisdictional
Determination Information and Approvals/Authorizations sections for information on onsite
surface waters.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include permanent impacts to two
streams and one wetland for road crossing access and lot fill. Overall impacts to site surface
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.
waters associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection location,
design, and the location/orientation of the proposed lots and access routes. Retaining walls are
proposed at each crossing and, where possible, 2:1 slopes will be implemented to limit impacts
to site surface waters. It was not possible to minimize impacts further due to site layout and
connectivity requirements. Stormwater will utilize the existing stormwater feature onsite. Please
refer to the Supplementary Documentation section for more information. Total permanent
impacts proposed include 148 linear feet (0.027 AC) of stream impact to Stream B and Stream D
and 0.0456 acres of wetland impacts to Wetland A. Please refer to the Avoidance and
Minimization narrative for additional information. The applicant has demonstrated substantial
avoidance and minimization efforts in which 99% of the 1,132 acres of onsite wetlands and 87%
of the 1,132 linear feet onsite streams will be avoided.
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 2:1 ratio. A ratio of 1.5:1 is proposed for impacts to Stream B and Stream D. Wide buffers on
the streams artificially elevate the NCSAM scores but a reduced ratio is proposed due to their
altered pattern (historic ditching) and location within a highly urban setting. Please see the
NCSAM/NCWAM section for additional information.
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 daniel.kueflerkwetlands-epg.com.
Sincerely,
i
Daniel Kuefler
Environmental Scientist
Charlotte Office:
10612-b Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
www.wetiands-epg.com
2
Len Rindner, PWS
Principal
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

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

w A rE�QG
T.
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ 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:
Flats at Whitehall
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
YFP Timber LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Rick Yager
3d.
Street address:
1300 Altura Road
3e.
City, state, zip:
Fort Mill, SC 29708
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 ❑X Other, specify: Developer
4b.
Name:
Matt Rogers
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Evolve Companies
4d.
Street address:
2012 Eastwood Road
4e.
City, state, zip:
Wilmington, NC 28403
4f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Daniel Kuefler
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group, PLLC
5c.
Street address:
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e.
Telephone no.:
[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):
20130108
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.148 Longitude:-80.9377
1c.
Property size:
36.5 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Coffey Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Catawba (03050103)
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is located just southwest of West Arrowood Road and just northeast of Interstate 485 in Charlotte, North Carolina. The elevation is 600 - 640
ft. The site consists of disturbed woodlands, wetlands and streams that flow into a small lake with a landscaped corridor along W. Arrowood Road.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 3.76
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,132
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed project consists of three road crossing and fill 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-2021-00462
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 B. Roden -Reynolds (USACE) on 3/8/21. 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.
Verbal confirmation from Scott Jones (USAGE) that this is a separate project from past surrounding developments
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑X Streams —tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
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
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.0398
W2 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.0058
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:
0.0456
2h. Comments:
Impacts to Wetland A are for fill for retaining walls for a parking lot
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 P
Culvert
Stream D
INT
Corps
6
71
S2 P
Culvert
Stream B
INT
Corps
9
77
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
148
3i. Comments:
Crossing at Stream C will not result in any impacts.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design, and location/orientation of the proposed lots and
access routes. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and minimization efforts by implementing retaining walls that are designed to avoid
additional impacts due to rip rap, thus avoiding avoiding 87% of onsite streams and 99% of onsite wetlands.
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.
Where possible, 2:1 slopes and the maximum allowable headwalls will be used to minimize crossing impacts.
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
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:
148 linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.0456 acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h.
Comments: A 2:1 ratio is proposed for site impacts. A ratio of 1.5:1 is proposed for stream impacts.
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?
35 %
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 (Johnston Lake). The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to
the
City of Charlotte but will be designed to meet their criteria. Please refer to the 1994 Whitehall- 401 Water Quality Certification for additional
information.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Charlotte
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
City of Charlotte
❑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 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
❑X Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
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. A report has been submitted to FWS for concurrence.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO's website: https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.meeklenburgcountyne.gov/
2-
Daniel Kuefler
'/
07-30-2021
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

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Agent Authorization Letter
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Proj ect/Site Name: Flats at Whitehall
Property Address: south of W Arrowood Road, at intersection with Johnston Lake Drive
Parcel Identification Number (PIN):
20130108
Select one: I am other O
Name: Matt Rogers
Company: Evolve Companies
Mailing Address: 2012 Eastwood Road, Wilmington NC 28403
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Property Owner / Interested Buyer* / Other*
2-24-2021
Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg.
PMB 550 Suite 10, PM 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
len. [e-mail]

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Matt Rogers
Evolve Companies
2012 Eastwood Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
July 8, 2021
Expiration of Acceptance: 1/8/2022
Project: Flats at Whitehall 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*
Non -Riparian Wetland**
0.0456
Catawba
03050103*
Warm Stream
148
*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 mountain 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].
Sincerely,
At�dut�
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Amber Lipsky, agent
DEQ �� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
_ 217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
NORTH CAROLINA
oePanmam of enm anmemai aueiN /� 919.707.8976

►0
Maps/Plans

Ae
a
U
W
O
i t-ll�-
_-
¢
�p
x Nf.Q E
CO�
_
_
rn
w Oy
_Ur
LL
�O
ry na«-
"- cn
Pry It p4�
in
d
¢ H
"p
V
m
.� 1
J
C
R
Y E Q
E
�_ Q
O
LiR
O 'r
a
�Z
(>
d Q
a R
coG
co
f61 apla
y
7, M
{
Q
O
s tep
O
2 Q
a
E
f*
��
m q
�
m •'
Q
j
3 a
2 m
�,
cr
W
J
F
a�
J
Q
U
z
W
ea
LU
Q
a
t
O
o
G
O
O R
Slops
`p
P
ifs
4Sb
.. 00.
Z
1
E y
V
E
�
Z
'
¢
mQ
E
co�
Q
v
u
Ln
E
F
a
U
v
c
0
~
`yh�nen�llP�kC'
LL
C)
Ln
a
n a
o
a
a
1-1t0
a. d
o a
N
E
a o
=
o
U-
r
a
@
E
Q1 ��
t
t
d
T 1
■��
��
�
�
co
aQUR
Q
V
N
CA
� CL
fl
o
�
O
�
U Yr,
of
Q
a
.�
•�
..
z
i
C
C
C
ccU
U 1L1
•.
�
CL
=p
Q
R
r a
o
G
41)
aj
O
YA
M
W
CD
5
Lip
C�
f
G�
dd'
.�+
TM
cc
a
LLI
vi
W
xi as�4
0
-
a
�y�
Q
Ir
$1
fl

4 - V.
• ,{ F F �L 4J O w
i\ r M e .� N OC \
�.wt`
{ O t7 \
s, tF
f 1
_ CD
ru
IL co
cli
pL
11 � Co
i` r
r O
40
* - •�%. j '- — ��`"��M� .ram+.,x}r
LU
+r { + r O
}, LU o Q o
5
N
f • O
y� tr �� f . r •�Lti+. -6
MO.
-��,��'4 {��#�'� „�-+.,• ,� can
L
LL
44
•4
i Ii
vi
_ L Q_
`4 ► y E
ti l �A.cliV
L
r r6 >
■ 4 L O
r • - 0
-
L
} 0 + t,. r R
A • 0~C Ln ri r _
Y W ♦— l0 -:{,,- -t
E
_�.7Y� Ste• -t � .. . , '7Fr�;. • . : - - '.'�!� +r � ti

0. M co W O
»! l l Z1 O m \
O
{I 1 • _O oo M � LL
• ,a �_ v J o= o Ln CO
w . • 4J
■ ■ r ■ Of
O 61 3 oJ0
j. ` �. • r n L �'I f�6
66-_ = U
i �
LU
LU
LL
LU
�, _ _'�a ,, s• ram% �', Ln
N
Z
l c
kkLLLn
°
CL
CL
1
I r' v , \
L
10
,F- o•,,
�-.•.. Q D • -� .� a
pp \ • • ■
CL
Lq
en Do
;Z4 as
�� L w • ` • II ` • :• :1�..

Qo
�00
V Ql
C �
(B
O
v
V
w
= -S
O v
V
V v
z
�4
f h.
i
�
a
z
~
L
_
�
m
F
J
0
a
Ln
m
r,k
a
Ln
O
a
z "
co 1%1�
CE
PF
,ww
- W
N WE
ELL
to
0
o
p
o
o
O
r-�
C�
U�
O
a
(Q
r
r
O
r
_
O
O
t
u
m`
a
M
d
N
N
00
O
N
P'I
O
Q
N
G]
U
O
46
6
f9
O
U O
O �
V1
QI
O
O
cV
C Q
c a
N
Z
o
O
v)
a N
N
Q)ID
c C
O O
_
C: a
cm 0
-- qy
i
- L
F
E
- N
CL
a,
IDQ
0
O
33 Q
c co
_0
U Cil
- U
O) y
2
U
N
V
Q
O
i
i
y a
O N
O OD
O (n
f0
2
2
2
N
O
�
E
�
o
_
m
=
a`
Q
IC
`
w
N
O
2
LL
O
m
�
J
Q
w
c
0
a
I
i
v
a
o,
Lu
CQ
O
C
~
�
J
a
v
Q
z
2
�
W
N
0
O
_
on
z
�
o
Q
v
�
N
W
Q
v
O
J
2!
N
LL
N
O
Oa
i
N
o
v
CL
o E
_0 u
v a,
cu >
Q p
>
d W

.-, � -
op
P6• ,
�
.�`.
�
$
C
E
/ E
2 aj
/ 0

LL
-, !• J[ •� . 'ram • r j J
_ _ - .• ,fir'! Zgy7 _ _ _.... ; j� .�
rcr
m
..........
y f a
• a � • Jrg u
lk
LU
LU
Ur. Q
W O c
Q v
LL
CL
Gd- - ..•..- - of
CLCL
.ram-_.... _ _ •• C 0
W
Z ~ i �
Z W LO80
o O a C7 aFL
O O' Vr W O••cp
LU
O = ? Z a ,►
� Z O .►

�' C7 n oN
LL O
� N aOj N
Ca U
O N �
co O
c m
O O _0
O
m U > Q
L
L
14 O LO
y L
C-P co
LU
00
0
v
o
0 z
J
Q U U
Z Q
Coao
a _ Lnv
U E
O O
g� Ln
LL U
Ln
Q
L
7
Q
7
0
6 LL
C
K
C
a
o
U
{ Laj
} Qlb >
U 0
VI � d W
� aj
�� � m J a
LO
a v~i en
O
goo
_ LL.I

Z
/v/
Lq(noo
�
z
z
-
W 5
a
zz
TWO
awa
��//��
VI
at
W
w
¢C70
m
° 8
W
13
NW,
.8L
oat
9
J
6C; 6-99t-666
£0178Z ON 'NOlJNIIN-1IM
II
CIMMI QOOM1St7l ZMZ
Z O
S31NVdWOO 3n-lOn3
Z 0
C)
U
z
`dNIIO2JVO H12iON `311O12PdHO
En
W O
IIVH�UIHM 1V S1VIJ
U
.O
0
4
Qom
0
$ M
ih
N Uj
F-
w m
z
cci 0
ui
w
o
J i
QQ
C• •]
S� PRRO�O o
r z0
c' J w
o w
1
z ¢
a zQ o3 �(` 1� ¢ cn O s
Q
j l z
_ W
z IV
c) '<
w
♦ � vy1�r �^ � w
z
w+I
�V)
9M0'ZAOI ONVl13M—ld\S133HS 101d — 9210\9MO\llVH311HM 1V SITU — 3A10A3 — £00—£O6\f'O8dNS05\:9

Zv
W z
z
d
-
g
6 a
U) O
zz
��O
W N
¢W¢
UZa
°0E
W
•�
0�
oEl
A�
5o,
ul
a � � a a
U - w a U n�
a a
a 2CL = u o 2
g— a Ln z— a
Lu = a g _
o a o o
�i ^ LL N LL
a -i m 0o N
w w w w
L
I
Ms -ssv-sus
`NOiDNIWIIM
U
=O
£Ob8Z ON
(NOU GOOM1SV3 MZ
Q a
S31NbdNOO 3AIOA3
w 2 Q
I °_
ztk (n — w
o
L-i Oo
N
Q
ih N (/7
`dNIIOUdO HiUON'31iO-R:JdHO
O Q
J
w mo �°-�
II`dH�lIHM lb Sl`dl=l
a a
0-
o C/)
?10
R�;44OpO
LLI
Z m M
nn O W W
i
i
E
omazxL aNY-L3%%—'ld\S.L33HS 10-ld — 9aa\oma\T1vN3LlK% Lv SITU — WDA3 — coo—co6\roadNSflS\:9

6 C;U-99t-6 66
=O
Z W
N
£0b8Z ON 'NOIDNIIN�IM
w
V
(IMMI QOOM1St7l ZMZ
w
q
C'3 ac
z
S 1NVdWoO 3n�0AD
Sq_
~oza
U) O O
K K O
W
U
G
�
ccn
�I
ih
N (Jj
N
W
a?
m E
dNll02i dO H12iON 31101bHHO
<
0 i
ui
F- m o
o
W
NW_N
3
II`dH3lIHM lb Sl`dIJ
c~n
�w
w
❑ �z
zjg) P
<8
a
K
LL
Ln
Cl
It
LO
LO
Q
LLJ
Q
U)
O
Ld
CL
�I
oa3
a
��-\
Flo IWO
1
Q
z
Z_ v
U V^
PS
b
r
smazzi L ONVl13M-ld\S133HS 101d - 080\JMO\llVHaLI M 1V SITU - 3N10A3 - coo-£O6\rO8dNSOS\:9

Zvi
z
Z
� a
A.
O
z z
III
wz�aaWvI
zaUWW Nz
5ao,a
6C; 6-99t-666
£0178Z ON 'NOlJNIWIIM
(IMMI QOOM1St/3 ZMZ
S I NVd INOO 3n-Ion3
`dNIlMNO HibON '31iO-R:J dHO
IIVH�WHM iV SiVl=l
=c
a
W
m
g
I
a
Im,°m
�
o
LLI
U
ii
o
a
_
F-
z
a
ui
w m o
}
C
C
w
a��
J
e
i�
omazzi L ONVl13M-ld\S133HS 101d - o8a\OM0\11VH311HM 1V S1V-U - 3A10A3 - £00-£06\POIdNSOS\:0

Zv
i
C'3ac�
W ZZz
F a
t"
�/� 0
V/O
C7
��
t"°
QZ¢
W N
13
~
U z a
m
W
o�Q
3 m
13 at (9
Z > K
5o,
L90 L-99t-6 L6
£0178Z ON 'NOIDNIIN-1IM
(IMMI QOOM1SV71 ZMZ
S I NVd INOO 3n-lOn3 -j
w IL
Ld L >O
`dNlIMNO HibON '31iO-R:JdHO V a
IIVH�UIHM iV SiVl=l
O CD
CN
ti
0
z
w
x
't
cMo
cNo
_
co
Q
w
z
O
5p
coo
't
+
O
w
J
LL
Z
O
U
w
(n
w
J
U
U
0
+
O
O
O
O O
(M N O
co co co co
r
w
J
U-
LL
_
>
w
m
~
w
W
O
w
x
}
I o
w
Of
N
m
co
L*
I
w
�I
w
J
W
�
U
C7
a
9
I9
J
z�
I
U
Q
Of
Q
X
W
LL
J
a
It
co
O
w
J
LL
w
H
w
J
U
U
O
O
+
O
Ln
O
0
0
M.2
F7
a
O
CD
U-
m`
W W
CL a w
N
W O
z
— II
Z Q w W
¢� Fw
H z
W
O
a o
Of
a
O
O
O
+
O
Ln
O
+ +
O O
O CDCD CDco N O
Co co co co
0
O*TCJ06 ONv-u3M-ld\S.L33HS And - SH0\0Md 7TrO LIHM 1V SLTU - 3A10A3 - £00-£OB\POddN505\:9

6C; 6-99t-666
s
£0178Z ON 'NOIDNIWIIM
V
(IMMI QOOM1St/3 ZMZ
q
��_
Lq C'3 ac
z
s�iNedwo� �n�on�
a
W 5
W
V) O
�
U � Z, a o
W
U
N
LL
ii
o tii
w
'311012PdHO
Q
m g
N
z�
m E
`dNIlMNO HibON
N
ui
w m o
W
13
Czz
o�z
3
IIVH�WHM iV SiVl=l
J
�
0- w=
W
oatw
a
y
a
IK
5�g$
M
r
9MOZdOL ONVl13M—ld\S133HS 101d — 98a\9M0\11VH311HM 1V SITU — 3A10A3 — coo—£O6\rO8dNSOS\:9

Zvi
C'3ac�
W ZZz
a
A.
O
zz
W N
z¢
w �
mom$
W
Uza
NWz
a
L 90 6-99t-6 66
=O
£0178Z ON 'NOlJNIWIIM
CN
(IMMI QOOM1St/3 ZMZ
LL
o
S I NVd INOO 3n-lon3
J
O p2
w
i 0
�
'31iO-R:J
U
�
J
a
u
#
H j
o y
N z
`dNIlMNO HibON dHO
ui
w m o
IIVH�WHM iV SiVl=l
a
6
°¢w
2
D
J '
I w
a co
d o ci
�
�
O
�
O
c+
O
'T
J_
LL
ry
Z
0
H
U
w
U)
N
w
J
U
U)
U)
w
J
0
n
w
-j
w J ❑
ofw
Q 2U
w Oa
}
l v
�W
w CO
o ofO
II U F
`O X O
wz
w
4.7'
o:
a
�w
�w
J
U
J aJ Oqo CD CO
CL 0
w C7 z
w J
a a
O
w
J_
LL
L.L
w
N
H
w
J
U
U)
U)
w
J
0
m
O
O
0
0
O
O
+
O
LO
O
O O O
N O
O O O
O
ti
O
O
+
+
O O
O O O O
M N O
O O O O
r
9M0'Zjoz ONVl13M-ld\S133HS 101d - 98a\9M0\11VH311HM 1V SITU - 3A10A3 - £00-£06\fO?JdXSOS\:9

Zvi
z
Z
� a
U) O
zz
WvI
wza
za
ome
W
UHe
N W W
q
❑�z
_>g
3v g
go,
AD
6C; 6-99t-666
£0178Z ON 'NOlJNIWIIM
(IMMI QOOM1St/3 ZMZ
S I NVd INOO 3n-Ion3
`dNIlMNO HibON '31iO-R:J dHO
IIVH�WHM iV SiVl=l
=O
W
0
�°m
a
w
�'
�
U
o
Q
a
r s
`� z
m O
ui
w m w
J
9MOZdOL ONVl13M-ld\S133HS 101d - 9210\9M0\llVH311HM 1V SI" - 3A10A3 - £00-£O6\roHdNSOS\:9

�C;U- »Ba
c
_
mgZONao evw m
Q
a o cloomlsv7l &2
/ -
:
SgINVdWOD 3A]05g
� �
§o\
L.
A.
0
w
o
C)
®
/,-
/!
d nod bo d� o Ho
«
`
§
_
02 %
^^~
4;#
������|�� �� 5����
q
)
m
ate\
m§®
\o,
a
A'N
±
(0
Z/
�< ) �Lo
�wy§&N {
¥)gGo {
§�k)§g ;
)k2LU
2§) )
.� 8§§}L"2 )
0 Lmu Z' !
J"= {
v v )�§�§B |
ƒ ƒ § B\
LLJ
z L.L \
■ ■ m K G
« ��g26§ k
« w &20LLJ ,
k k CL
)§m{�e /
a. V V) z L-Li {
\ 0 0 z Q§eR§-, §
_j o §[/))§ '0
LL �P����
m b « � z LL, !
0 w Q o F- L)
o Et m o ��oj�/ \
\ n Z §§�§$A
� 8mclZ8]
D o@) z
a�cyr
(Q)B±g
z �§<�-
/[&(kk
_ e:__—xSI33HS lMd-_x»ATIV_maSITU - OA3-_—s__ae

ZviM-2
gz
A
�'
WO g
a
A.
O
zz
vI
W
za
w �
aa0
m°$
W
Uza
W
Nz
`fie
a
6C; 6-99t-666
£0178Z ON 'NOlJNIWIIM
(IMMI QOOM1St/3 ZMZ
S I NVd INOO 3n-Ion3
4h
w
U
`dNIlMNO HibON '31iO-R:JdHO
-17II`dH�WHM iV SiVl=l
O O
O
ti
O
0
Z
W
2
Q
W
Z
O
rn
J
LL
O
LI
J
LL
O
EL
Z
_O
H
U
u1
U)
M
H
W
J
U
EL
2
U
O
O
O
O
CM
C0
m
LLI
J
W =
� r
L
0
o W
o
D
In m
rn
c6
LU
m F
III �
-I J
7
W U
0
(' J
zQ W a
a
w O
X W
W J
a m
O
N
C0
O
C0
I O
J O
O
O
O
C0
W
J
LL
O
EL
LI
EL
EL
M
W
J
U
EL
7-
U
O
O
m
0
M.2
o r
F O r > z
ui w m o 0
2pw d o
`s
O O
O
C.0 C.0
O
ti
0
U
O
O
O O
O O O O
CM N O
C0 C0 C0 C0
I
O
L
I
LU
Z�
Z
Q
z l
W J
�W
r
U
Z
O
O0
Of
�
I
9M0'ZjOZ ONVl13M-ld\S133HS 101d - 98a\9M0\11VH31I M 1V SITU - 3A10A3 - £00-£06\MkidMS0S\:9

NCSAM/NCWAM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: SAW-2021-00462 NCDWR #: 20210748
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Flats at Whitehall
3. Applicant/owner name: Evolve Companies
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Catawba
Date of evaluation: 7/27/2021
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.0334N/-80.7442W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream B 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction — assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern — assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile — assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability — assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NIC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Flats at Whitehall Date of Assessment 7/27/2021
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization H.Caldwell/WEPG
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
HIGH

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: SAW-2021-00462 NCDWR #: 20210748
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Flats at Whitehall
3. Applicant/owner name: Evolve Companies
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Catawba
Date of evaluation: 7/27/2021
Assessor name/organization:
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.14871 N/-80.93799W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream D 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3.5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NIC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Flats at Whitehall Date of Assessment 7/27/2021
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization H.Caldwell/WEPG
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
HIGH
HIGH

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
/YIIVIIIF.lQIIICJ
VJCI IYIQIIVQI Y=[a VII J.V
USACE AID #
SAW-2021-00462
NCDWR#
20210748
Project Name
Flats at Whitehall
Date of Evaluation
7/27/2021
Applicant/Owner Name
Evolve Companies
Wetland Site Name
Wetland A
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Coffey Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050103
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
F- Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
35.14775N/-80.93779W
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
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
El ❑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
El
El
El
>_ 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
bufferjudgment 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.
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
❑l
❑l
❑1
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
o❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
c ®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C El Canopy sparse or absent
>,
o ❑A ❑A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
®B ®B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
❑C El Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense shrub layer
t ❑B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C ®C Shrub layer sparse or absent
n ®A ®A Dense herb layer
❑B ❑B Moderate density herb layer
El El 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
s
i
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
Forested wetland adjacent to three tributaries and a large pond.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland A
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Date of Assessment 7/27/2021
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) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) YES
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
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
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summa
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

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

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2021-00462 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Charlotte West
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor:
Evolve Companies
Matt Rogers
Address:
2012 Eastwood Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
Telephone Number:
[phone]
E-mail:
mattOevolvecos.com
Size (acres) 36.5 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Coffey Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.1480
Longitude:-80.9377
Location description: The review area is located on the west side of W. Arrowood Road; approximately 0.3 miles north of the
intersection of W. Arrowood Road and S. Tryon Street. PIN: 20130108. Reference review area description in Jurisdictional
Determination Request package entitled "Figure 1, Vicinity Map" and dated 01/06/21.
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 1/7/2021. 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-2021-00462
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-rynolds( )usace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 03/08/2021.
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/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 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.**
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date of JD: 03/08/2021 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
2021.03.0811:40:57-05'00'

a
w
Q
v
0
Ln
E
?
QQ
N
LL
�r.
U
LU
LA
co
Ln
a
Ln
w
a a
co0
LLI0
J
J
may
r
CL -j
a'
•�
co
LL
...
i'ti�
r
u
LUQ
LU
0)
0LU
_ �
v
. ..._ ,.. .._ r
LU
__ _
0
V
_
•._-_
-J
Q
U
Z
Q
Q
LU
:
Q
�
LU
Z
:�
Ln
v
W
C
O
Y. *
i'r
LL
N
cn
�ati`O
m
a
a
"'•
V z
Q
a J o
C
N
`O
W
V
Z a
O
LL
0
w
C0
z
W
14
ui
z
s�47"
LU
VS
r
G1
-
42
`
J
oc
a
W
=
CA-
w
0
°
E
H
z
-
a)OC
oo
O
o
00
z
_ _
W
00
;.
Z
_ _
LU
•
'�
_
_
_ -
•
u
LOA
0
U
O

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

Q
a
E
CD
Q
O E
O Q
co n_
E
N O
O U
N Q
N a)
O
C
co
2
V
a)
co
U
L
co
V
a)
co
U
L
co
a)
T-
AE
O
U
a)
Q
a)
U)
C
co
co
O
V
N
= I N
Y
co
n 0
> p n_
..
E uE
O O
C � A
O_ I E
U) — O
E �cu Q
- CO V C
L N co
N m a)LL V E ((3:1
co C L v
a)
MI) co >`, a
coW M L .�
0 V i
o aa) a--E E
U' a) t: Q-' co
co �E�V
co
W °) J U)
E vJ ci Q-
N J U
L
^�
LL
Y U
co
O
O E
a)
co
66 Q
co n-
E2(VO
O
O
-0N
co
p >
-0
L6Q
� (o
� �
U)
:t- O
cA
O
o
a
Y
U
L NO1
O
O O
~
>
a)
V
L
E
co
Y
U)
co co
a)
a)
L
-a E
co -
c
co
coO
L
O
-a
L
N
U
a
O
O N
L O
Y
U
C
Q
C
coo
a)
o
n
a)
O a)
U
L
C
U)
U) a
a)
Q
C
OU
a)
U
L
co Q
�? U
O
a
a)
(p L
M OU U)
Y
C
co
co
N
a)
L
� U)Ocu
O
>
L
U
O vi
co
E
co
U
O N
) c
a)
Q
a)
Q a) n -00 0
O dLVI
ac)
c
LcaoE
VC
C'0W
N--aN
)
0
c
0 -
-a
Q
co � p W a) O ate)
cu
>
c
co
U
�},wQ.DC
a) z O �
a (o
co
-a
a)
L Q W
(/) O L -a
O
a)
a)
co
a)
C
E a) � a) C
Ucu
C
2
-C
O } a)L
O O C E O N=
n
A E
cn a) Q" y C
cn
o
Y
o 0
�coa
a
-a
a)
tco
U)O c- U) 7
a"
Q
acn0
-a OU
C
O U) U� C-0
C
a)
U)
O a)
+�
U j C 2 � O cA
U lu
co
C
N
C Q
co +'
C Q a)a O U)>
co
N
a)
~
�+
�
(o
3
C
C a)
0 C N ((�
t
NCU V N a
J E~
Ea 0
a1N�'
��azaa o
o
0
t
cu V
cp
O
U E i i i c +o a)
va)
-0 'a 'a
(na)uwW.2
W
W�douuQW
O 0-
L
--Lc
O
U)r-
N��
to
..
O V
• • • • • •
U)
c0 y a a N a)
C O O
2
LL
m Q' co
a)
a) O
a)
m O C 4
t� O a) 0
C
cl J Y
0-
d
J m J Il
J H J
i
LL

N
a
0
0
C
c
(0
�U
J
J
d O
� L U
V ,� C Q
U "0 a)
L l l L L J 0)-0
cU°6c)r, co
y�-aN a)
-CD
�J o O N CDJm�JI-
i
U
z
c
O
U
2)
s
c
a�
Y n
N E
O
U
(0 Q
s
!E
c n
_ c�
> CIO a) O
0 V) ui
ui LL >
a�
Ln -0
Ln co ca
a co 0)
a) O CIO cn
` CD fA E
=12 *k = co
V s
co a a E
a)sNw O O
U
L
++ �� 0)-c
V CIO V (0 J a) V
U)Z,Q , Q
E �o�-0 c
70 IN (0 L
-BMX aim
(0 w O
�u(a)co
O -a a) >, a)
LL d °� �_ a)
CU E
~ U (B
E ai 02
O � V) U
LL0cn—U
(D
E
ccoc
C•
a)
LL
0
(1)
U
•L
� r
N O
CO
U co
C/) U
o (6 Z
Luo�
> N a>i
a)
Q (C) Q
00
M
N
N
x
rn
M
Ol
M
00
N
00
N
00
a)
C
O
s
a
O
Ol
O
O
N
00
00
N
00
a)
U
v
n
>
O
ui
ca
Ln
E
ca
s
C: d
O N
V
Q O
O N
OL M
CO
U
z
c
O
U
tin
s
c
a2
U
(1)
f6
s
a�
s
n 4�
>
0) M
Ln W
�Ln
Ln
o
NI 0
L
cB d
>W
J
V Q
z
Z �
s "'
X
� u
a)
W
a) y
H N
I-

/
Rd
�
�
o
y m
q
M
3 /
4
2
/
3
®
°
/
�
%
%
3 m o
\
j n 2
%
=
®
o
m o (D
«
\�
>¢
w
0 =
3
G
I k
d
§
7
�
�
2
�
2
E
0
3
E
»
�
ƒ
�
/
�
ƒ
I
»
E
0
0
k
f
�
§
7
�
�
%
% g
2 z
% ƒ
m /
_0 U
v E
e =
\ A ƒ
� 0
-aj/
¥ ° a)A § k >
E A 2 f =
§ 0 A _r
9 E E °
7 m ° E /
cn
k 7 ) d 3 / m E m U-
� > E cu /
< m 0 z
/ �� � -0 o
co: o
�
k \ >N E § G
9 o £ -0 »
I ^ < \
7 % c C:
» _» B 2 <
/ co° -
t G E Lu
\ : / / Lu
e E
2 > E = o
§ § I ± \
�� dƒLn
■
»

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For: Flats at Whitehall
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
Field investigation conducted March 26 and May 13, 2021
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
I en. ri nd ner@wet Ian ds -epg. co m
www.wetiands-epg.com
Ashesrile Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Flats at Whitehall - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Flats at Whitehall site (+/- 36.5 acres) is located just southwest of West
Arrowood Road and just northeast of Interstate 485 in Charlotte, North Carolina.
It can be found on the Charlotte W, NC USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map-,
latitude is 35.1480 N, longitude is-80.9377 W. The elevation is 600 - 640 ft.
The site consists of disturbed woodlands, wetlands and streams that flow into a
small lake with a landscaped corridor along W. Arrowood Road. (Figure 1).
Figure 1:
,L � �� �; �:� , , ---�� � � •. � � ; _ Y _sue � �' ''
Orly is
so
COFFEY CREEiS
73
� - - Fes-- - .r ! � y.. ►A
7i PROPERTY BOUNDARY
• - - STUDY LIMIT5
J 36.S +1- Acres
690
�I=
:chi: •. �: .L '
` OJ6 ?
• �� `'Q1. yea r�if; _ LOCATION
Lat: 35.1480 °N
• .�•.+• • ' •' • V • 3- - ,c` SCALE USGS QUAD Long:-80.9377 °W
ChaTiottew, HUC:03050103
1:24,E 00 NC 1993 LOWER CATAWBR
IWEPG ea —
Prepared For: HAWTHORNE AT WHITEHALL Drawn BV: Reviewed By: FIGURE 1
McrkIon burg Co., NC BILK
USGS MAP 01106120
For study put po%15 vn ly -Subject to USA CE/NCCE4 verification
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Flats at Whitehall - 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 March 26 and May 13, 2021.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on March 26, 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.

Flats at Whitehall - 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#00855 4
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Flats at Whitehall - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
The site consists of disturbed woodlands, wetlands and streams that flow into a
small lake with landscaped corridor along W. Arrowood Road.
The forested areas are a mosaic of young pine dominated patches on the drier
upland and mixed hardwoods on lower slopes and drainages. Canopy species
present include Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata), Loblolly Pine (P. taeda), Virginia
Pine (P. virginiana), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), Sweetgum
(Liquidambar styracif/ua), White Oak (Quercus a/ba), Red Oak (Q. rubra), Black
Willow (Salix nigra), and Green Ash (Fraxinus pensy/vanica). The subcanopy is
composed of Red Maple (Acerrubrum), Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum),
Flowering Dogwood (Corpus f/orida), Redbud (Cercis canadensis), American
Holly (Ilex opaca), Winged Elm (U/mus a/ata), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina),
Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and Black Gum (Nyssa sy/vatica).
The shrub layer includes Black Haw (Viburnum prunifolium), Strawberry -bush
(Euonymus americanus), Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense), Multiflora Rose
(Rosa mu/tif/ora), Blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), and Russian Olive (E/aeagnus
angustifolia). Vines include Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Virginia
Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Catbrier
(Smilax sp.), and Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). The herb layer includes
Christmas Fern (Po/ystichum acrostichoides), Spotted Wintergreen (Chimaphila
maculata), Downy Rattlesnake Plantain (Goodyera pubescens), and Japanese
Stilt Grass (Microstegium vimineum). Wetter areas also support Tag Alder (Alnus
serrulata), Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), Smartweed (Polygonum spp.),
Jack -in -the -Pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), and May Apples (Podophyllum
peltatum).
The property interface with the Interstate 485 road corridor has typical turf grass
along with typical DOT wood and metal fencing. The small lake is surrounded by
woods to the south and west, with the north and eastern sides being surrounded
by maintained landscaping. The edge of the lake has typical wetland fringe
species of Cattails (Typha latifolia), Sedges (Carex spp., Scirpus, spp.), and
Rushes (Juncus spp.).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower along the roadside and
woods edges were examined, and the species was not observed. WEPG
concludes Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) does not occur
on the site.
All potential habitats for Smooth Coneflower along the roadside and
woods edges were examined, and the species was not observed. WEPG
concludes Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea /aevigata) does not occur on
the site.
WEPG400855
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Flats at Whitehall - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
All potential habitats for Michaux's Sumac along the roadside and woods
edges were examined, and the species was not observed. WEPG
concludes Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) does not occur on the site.
• No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings
nor were any nesting sites observed. WEPG concludes Bald Eagle
(Haliaeetus leucoceohalus) does not occur on the site.
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 identified
within this basin. No individuals were observed during the survey, nor
would any be expected on -site. WEPG concludes Carolina Heelsplitter
(Lasmigona decorata) does not occur on the site.
Comparing this site location to the USFWS Range Map for Rusty -patched
Bumble Bee
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap.html)
Mecklenburg County is in it's Historic Range, and as such, Section 7
consultation is not needed. WEPG concludes Rusty -patched Bumble Bee
(Bombus affinis) does not occur on the site.
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office's website
(http-//www.fws.gov/asheville/htm Is/project_review/N LE B_in_WNC. htm I)
WEPG concludes 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.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not
identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further
investigation of the presence of protected species on this site is recommended at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
041XI # 1*e�l
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
May 13, 2021
6
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Flats at Whitehall - 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.

Supplementary
Documentation

After reeordrnZ, iWaru to:
11 hore Space Re.wnvd for Recordhig
TAX CODE NOS.:
SITE ADDRESSES:
FOR REGISTRATION
J. David Granberry
REGISTER OF DEEDS
Mecklenburg County NC
2013 JUN 05 01:10:43 PM
8K:28402 PG:779-786
FEE:$26.00
INSTRUMENT # 2013087730
JACKSED
III I III III III 11111111111
2013087730
Rl:'R1RNED TO CUSMMER
Post -Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices
Operations and Maintenance Agreement
and
Easement Agreement
This Post -Construction Stormwater Best Management Practices Operations and Maintenance
Agreement and Easement Agreement (the "Agreement") is entered into and agreed upon as of
2013 (the "Effective Date") by and among GGT WHITEHALL
VENTURE NC, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the "Responsible Party"), YFP
Timber, LLC (the "Property Owner"), and the CITY OF CHARLOTTE, a municipal corporation
organized under the laws of the State of North Carolina (the "City").
The term "Property Owner" as used herein means the owner(s) of the Property (as hereinafter
defined), together with their successors and assigns who take or succeed to ownership of the Property
(or any portion thereof).
Cl i-3) 42037 vG

WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Property Owner is the current owner of certain real property more
particularly described by two separate deeds recorded with the Register of Deeds of
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, in Deed Book 11138 at Page 392, having tax. parcel
ID 4 201301 19, and in Deed Book 7974 at Page 814, having tax parcel ID420130108, located
at West Arrowood Road (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Responsible Party is the current owner of certain real property that is
adjacent to the Property and more particularly described by deed recorded with the Register of
Deeds of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, in Deed Book 27132 at Page 356, having tax
parcel ID 4 20145115, and located at West Arrowood Road (hereinafter referred to as "the
Adjacent Property")-, and
WHEREAS, the Responsible Party and the Adjacent Property shall benefit fi•om stormwater
drainage on, over and across the Property, and
WHEREAS, the City of Charlotte ("the City"), the Responsible Party and the Property Owner,
their administrators, executors, successors, heirs, or assigns, (the "Parties"), agree that the
health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City require that the Best Management
Practices facility or facilities (collectively, the "BMP Facilities") shown on the approved
development plans and specifications for the Property €711-Ist be constructed and maintained for
the Property; and
WHEREAS, the City of Charlotte Post -Construction Stormwater Ordinance (Sections 18-101
cat sect. of the Charlotte City Code of Ordinances, hereinafter called the "PCO") requires that
the stormwate€- BMP facilities shown on the approved development plans and specifications
be constructed and maintained by the Property Owner; and
WHEREAS, the City, the Property Owner and the Responsible Party desire that the
Responsible Party shall construct and maintain the BM13 Facilities in the manner required by
the PCO; and
WHEREAS, puۥscant to the provisions of the PCO, the City requires that Property Owner and
the Responsible Party execute and record this Agreement and convey the easements and rights
described herein as a condition to the City issuing; Certificates of Occupancy for Property
Owner's development on the Property and/or the Responsible Party's development of the
Adjacent Property; and
WHEREAS, the Property Owner desires to grant certain casements and rights to the
Responsible Party to perform the construction and maintenance of the BMP Facilities as more
particularly set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing promises, the mutual covenants
contained herein, and the following terms and conditions, the Parties hereto agree as follows:
1. 'File BMP Facilities shall be constructed by the Responsible Party in accordance with the
PCO and the approved development plans and specifications for the Property.
2
C11-3142037 v6

2. The Responsible Party shall maintain the BMP Facilities ill good working condition
acceptable to the City and in accordance with the Operations and Maintenance Tasks
and Schedules found in the PCO Administrative Manual ("the Administrative Manual").
3. The Property Owner hereby gives, grants, and conveys to the City a post -construction
control maintenance easement ("PCCE") as shown oil that certain plat recorded in Map
Book 54, Page 992 in the Office of the Register of Deeds of Mecklenburg County (the
"Recorded Plat") which will allow the City to inspect, monitor, maintain, repair or
reconstruct the BMP Facilities.
4. The Property Owner hereby gives, grants, and conveys to the City a twenty (20) foot wide
BMP Access Easement ("Access Basement") as shown on the Recorded Plat that will
connect the BMP Facilities and PCCE to a public right -of- way, which will allow the City
the access it requires to inspect, monitor, maintain, repair or reconstruct the BMP Facilities.
5. The Property Owner hereby grants permission to the City, its authorized agents and
employees, to ente€' upon the Property and to inspect the BMP Facilities whenever the City
deems it necessary. Whenever possible, the City shall provide notice to the Property Owner
and the Responsible Party prior to entry. The right of entry in no way confers an obligation
Oil the City to assume responsibility for the BMP Facilities.
6, The Property Owner hereby gives, grants and conveys to the Responsible Party and its
authorized agents an easement as shown on the Recorded Plat to enter upon the Property to
perform its obligations as set forth in this Agreement, including easement rights to access
the Property and construct and maintain the BMP Facilities.
7. Ill the event the Responsible Party fails to maintain the BMP Facilities as described in the
PCO and the Administrative Manual or approved development plans and specifications for
the Property, the City, after reasonable notice to the Property Owner and the Responsible
Party, may assess fines against the Responsible Party and enter the Property and take
whatever steps the City deems necessary to return the BMP Facilities to good working
condition acceptable to the City. It is expressly understood and agreed by the Pa€lies that the
City is under no obligation to construct, maintain or repair the BMP Facilities and in no
event shall this Agreement be construed to impose any such obligation on the City.
The Responsible Party shall be fully responsible for having the BMP Facilities inspected
anmially by a qualified inspector, as determined by the Storm Water Administrator, and
shall provide to the City, at no additional costs to the City, all Annual Maintenance and
Inspection Repoil as provided in the Administrative Manual (see Appendix D). The
Responsible Party's failure to provide to the City said Annual Maintenance and Inspection
Report within the appropriate time as defined in the Administrative Manual may result ill
fines to the Responsible Party. The Storm Water Administrator at his/her discretion may
make annual inspections of the BMP Facilities to insure that the required maintenance has
been conducted appropriately and the performance of the BMP Facilities is in compliance
with the PCO.
3
CH-3142037 v6

9. In the event the City, pursuant to the Agreement, performs work of arty nature to the BMP
Facilities, or expends any funds in the performance of said work for labor, use of equipment,
supplies, materials, and the like, the Responsible Party shall reimburse the City, or shall
forfeit any required bond upon demand, within thirty (30) days of receipt from the City of a
list for all the costs incurred by the City hereunder. If the Responsible Party has not
reimbursed the City within the above mentioned time period, the City shall secure a lien
against the Adjacent Property ill the amount of said costs. The actions described in this
paragraph are in addition to and not in lieu of arty and all legal remedies available to the City
as a result of the Responsible Party's failure to maintain the BMP Facilities.
10. It is the intent of the Parties to insurc the proper maintenance of the BMP Facilities by the
Responsible Party; provided, however, that this Agreement shall not be deemed to create or
affect any additional liability of any party for damage alleged to result from or caused by
storm water runoff in addition to any such liability otherwise existing under applicable law.
11. Sediment accumulation and other waste materials resulting from the normal operation of
the BMP facilities shall be removed by the Responsible Party, The Responsible Party will
make arrangements at the Responsible Party's expense for the removal and off -site
disposal of all accumulated sediments and other waste materials.
12. In the event the Responsible Party sells or transfers the Adjacent Property, the transferring
Responsible Party shall provide to the City, a Declaration of Transfer of
Inspection/Maintenance Responsibilities of Stormwater BMP facilities as provided in the
PCO Administrative Manual (see Appendix "0") signed by the transferring Responsible
Party and the transferee and witnessed by a public notary to document that all
maintenance responsibilities have been transferred and communicated to such transferee.
Upon such transfer or conveyance of the Adjacent Property by the transferring
Responsible Party, all obligations of the transferring Responsible Party hereunder shall
automatically be transferred and assigned to, and assumed by transferee and such
transferee shall be and become the "Responsible Party" under this Agreement.
13. The Responsible Party hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its
authorized agents and employees for any and all damages, accidents, casualties, occurrences
or claims that might arise or be asserted against the City from the construction, operation,
repair, presence, existence or maintenance of the BMP Facility or BMP Facilities. In the
event a claim is asserted against the City, its authorized agents or employees, the City shall
promptly notify the Responsible Party and the Responsible Party shall defend the City, its
authorized agents or employees at the Responsible Party's own expense against any such
claim. If ally judgmcnt or claims against the City, its authorized agents or employees shall
be allowed, the Responsible Party shall pay for all costs and expenses, including attorneys'
fees, in connection therewith.
14. This Agreement shall be recorded by the Responsible Party among the deed records of the
Mecklenburg County Register of Deeds and shall constitute a covenant running with the
land and shall be binding on the Property Owner and the Responsible Party. The City may
choose to withhold the release of any certificates of occupancy for the Property or the
4
CII-3142037 v6

Adjacent Property until such time that this Agreement has been recorded by the Responsible
Party with the Register of Deeds in Mecklenburg County
15. This Agreement may be enforced by proceedings at law or in equity by or against the Parties
hereto and their respective successors in interest.
16. invalidation of any one of the paragraphs of this Agreement shall in no way affect any other
paragraphs and all other paragraphs shall remain in full force and effect.
17. In such cases where development has been deemed single family residential by definition,
the Property Owner or the Responsible Party may petition the City to accept major
maintenance responsibilities for the Best Management Practices for that development only
after a two year warranty period has expired and the City has determined that the BMP
Facilities meet the design requirements of the BMP Design Manual and Laud Development
Standards, and that all maintenance responsibilities have been upheld during this two year
period succcssfi€Ily. It is further understood that the Responsible Party will continue to
provide routine maintenance activities as identified in the Administrative Manual after the
City has agreed to accept the I3MIl Facilities for maintenance. Should at any time the City
discover that the Responsible Party has not performed the routine maintenance activities
identified in the Administrative Manual in an acceptable manor; the City may impose all
fines and remedies allowed by law against the Responsible Party.
S
CH-3142037 0

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of this day of
ATTEST
" � " � �' "/, �- -'), � � I /-�' - � -.. -
(Signature)
(Printed Name)
1'0R;THXCT
(SignatU16
STATE OF c,r V-, C.q , c
COUNTY OF _tN—
Printed Name and Title)
On this _day of ,�� �. 20_17� _. before me, the
undersigned officer, a Notary Public in and for the State and County Aforesaid, personally
appeared az,e. ^� Z, ,V , who acknowledged himself to be
of CA, and he as such authorized to do so,
executed the foregoing instru113ent for tl'le pLu'poses therein c011tained by signing his name as
c for said R{on C_, Oc.l
Witness mvInd a
p
ires
Mfth 28, 2014
My commission expires _ --
Notary Public
CI-1-3142037 vG

ATTEST:
(Signature)
ktuitue 1-(
(Printed Name)
STATE OF _ _ A10 t�c� �tii
COUNTY OF Me r-K1 -tivcL
PROPERTY OWNER
YIP Timber, LLC
On this 2Z day of rT ?Y, , 20j, before me, the
undersigned officer, a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, personally
appeared A6g& , who acknowledged himself to be
rAAcu*94— , of '/FP -T ,r,beg LI �_, and he as such authorized to do so,
executed the foregoing instrument for the purpose therein contained by signing his name as
AGE for said yF_ _Fj nj �,
Witness my hand and Notarial Sea]
SEAL
My commission expires
Notary Public
Seen and approv
Governing dy)
Seen and ap ved
overning Body)
7
CH-3142037 v6

ATTEST: RESPONSIBLE PARTY
GGT WHITEHALL VENTURE NC, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
By: WF Arrowood, LLC, its Operating Member
By: 0/'v'jV1'
Name: Chad M. Kier
Title: Manager
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
On this 29A day of 6, 20, before me, the
undersigned f icer, Nv;1,,1r-,y,7,e,1-
Mawia�fev- blic in and f r the State and County aforesaid, personally
ap red, who acknowledged himself to be
, of , and he as such authorized to do so,
exe/,,cujed t foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained by signing his name as
!�l4bk)4A 1,V for said
Witness my hj00vAYA*gprial Seal
SEAL ��ss
My commission expires 1/8,
Seen and a r ved
(Govern' g Body)
Seen and a proved
overning ody)
J
Notary Public
CH-3142037 v6

LEONARD S. RINDNER
Environmental Planning Services 7113 Hickory Nut Drive
Landscape Architecture Raleigh, NC 27613
Land Planning (919) 870 - 9191
September 7, 1994
Mr. John R. Dorney
Wetlands and Technical Review Group
NC Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Re: Whitehall - 401 Water Quality Certification:
Response to Letter of August 25, 1994
Dear Jahn:
On behalf of Whitehall Limited Partnership I am providing the following information and
clarification to address your concerns in your letter of August 25, 1994, in order to obtain
a 401 Water Quality Certification.
Project Background
To summarize, Whitehall is a proposed t600 Acre Mixed Use Regional Center which will
include retail, office, industrial, and multi -family residential development. It is an area
identified for significant growth in the Charlotte -Mecklenburg 2005 Land Use Plan and the
Southwest District Plan. The project will be bisected by the proposed Charlotte Outer Belt
(1-485), proposed Arrowood Extension - a major thoroughfare per the Thoroughfare Plan,
and it is at the intersection of NC Highway 49 (York Road). York Road will have an
interchange with the Outer Belt and it is scheduled for widening to a multi -lane facility in
the near future. The Rezoning Plan has also been approved by the Mecklenburg County
Board of County Commissioners.
In conjunction with the proposed development Johnston Lake is proposed to be restored
and Moody Lake enlarged. Also, 45 Acres of Depressional Swamp, forested buffer and
wildlife corridor, reserved for purchase by the State, have been incorporated within the
overall plan. The plans for this area were developed through a cooperative effort of
Federal, State, and Local regulatory agencies ad organizations, and the developer.

Mr. John R. Dorney
September 7, 1994
Page Two
The project site is generally characterized by gently rolling open grassland and broad
upland, nearly flat ridges and is well suited topographically for a large scale development
such as Whitehall. Incidentally, and unusually, the highest ground on the site in general
is the Porter Road Swamp Preservation Area.
Johnston Lake - Arrowood Extension / Dam Construction
In order to restore Johnston Lake and construct Arrowood Road Extension, a new dam will
be required. The existing dam was purposely breached over safety concerns and it's
potential for failure due to leaks and seepage undermining the base of the dam. The
wetland areas associated with the base of the dam are probably related to or were
enhanced by this seepage. It is expected that the remaining portion of the existing dam
will need to be removed. The new dam which will go in it's place is intended to support the
proposed Arrowood Extension, a multi -lane thoroughfare with a minimum 100' Right -of -
Way. Consideration was also given to minimizing impacts to Coffey Creek in the planning
of the overall alignment by providing a perpendicular crossing. It will be designed and built
to NCDOT design criteria and standards.
As with most dams of this nature there will be the required foundation, slope stability, and
earthwork analysis, and the resulting potential special treatment and design considerations.
It is also expected that there will be a need for undercutting to remove alluvial soils to
provide a stable soil foundation as well as other design and construction issues. With
these considerations, combined with the design requirements and grading limits, avoidance
of the impacts to this seepage wetland will be very difficult and not practicable.
During the preliminary review process this unavoidable roadway / dam impact was
determined to be part of the Whitehall Project by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACOE) and minimization and mitigation measures were developed and incorporated
into the permit application. This includes the construction of a bio-filter and littoral shelf in
conjunction with the restoration of Johnston Lake. The new lake with bio-filter will be
approximately ±7 to +7.5 Acres, a net increase of ±4 to 4.5 acres of Jurisdictional Waters.
The bio-filter and littoral shelf will serve as protection and a buffer of the receiving waters
of Johnston Lake and provide valuable wildlife habitat. A 25' development buffer as
described in the report around the lakes will also be provided and the restored fake will
revitalize the fringe vegetation along the existing lake banks. Impacts to downstream
waters will be minimized through strict adherence to an approved Sedimentation and
Erosion Control Plan and the other Section 404, and 401 Water Quality Certification
conditions.

Mr. John R. Dorney
September 7, 1994
Page Three
Wildlife Travel Corridors
Coordination and cooperative efforts of the regulatory agencies, local environmental
groups, and the developer were important and instrumental in designing and determining
buffers around the depressional swamps. Representatives of these local environmental
groups as well as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission,
USACOE, and NCDEM at the NCDOT coordination meetings also requested that a
significant forested corridor to connect the separate swamp areas be incorporated in to the
plan. As a result of this cooperation a 200' wide corridor was made available. Also, as
described in the Nationwide Permit conditions, a minimum 4' wide culvert crossing will be
provided to connect the depressional swamp and wetland area crossed at the narrowest
point by the Southern Connector Road. This will provide a wildlife corridor for small
mammals, amphibians, and other aquatic organisms. As you can see on the attached
Figure 4.0, the Porter Road Swamp Preservation Area is separated from Moody Lake by
the 350' Wide 1-485 Charlotte Outer Belt Right -of -Way. Although a hydrological connection
will need to be retained, a wildlife corridor will probably greatly depend on the treatment
of the drainage and drainageways through this wide right-of-way. While this issue may be
beyond your regulatory authority, I do appreciate your concern. Perhaps this issue can be
considered in the design of the Charlotte Outer Belt in this area. Although not a
requirement, if NCDOT can achieve a wildlife corridor through the ROW, the developer is
willing to consider taking part in coordinating efforts to complete the connection from the
ROW to Moody Lake. We will be better able to do this in the future when more specific
plans are developed.
Bio-filter and Littoral Shelf
The final bio-filter and littoral shelf specifications for Johnston Lake will be forwarded to the
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management as well as the USACOE.
Stormwater Management
The developer is committed to provide wet detention for water quality as required. On -site
stormwater management ponds as described in the permit application will be provided for
all commercial and industrial uses. In our conversation on 91 1 / 94, 1 explained that the
final plans for the individual tracts have not been developed and that it would be difficult
to identify the final locations or number of ponds required and requested your acceptance
of a conceptual plan. Based on your'agreement a conceptual plan will indicate potential
pond locations and final plans will be forwarded to the NCDEM for approval. You also
requested that I remove the asterisk's from Moody Lake and Johnston Lake on Figure 12.0

Mr. John R. Domey
September 7, 1994
Page Four
and verify that pond locations are shown on all proposed commercial 1 industrial areas. As
directed pond locations are depicted conceptually in the major drainageways and
additional ponds have been shown in Parcel I at this time.
I hope this letter f report adequately addresses your concerns and clears the way to obtain
a 401 Water Quality Certification from NCDEM. Please let me know if you have any
questions or require further explanation.
Thank you.
k,
Leonard S. Rindner
Environmental Planning Consultant
NC Landscape Architect 9578
cc: Jim Merrifield
Brad Davis
Kim Colson
Steve Lund
domMTlsr

Lr� 1.T-��'` 1 Lf--.� 41 . 1•' _ _ O . \r� r•—.`.ux•.r v •.�.
aK+r.• L
+ ��� ,� e� �. �� �n �' BYO -• •'ti"s•':r�i
- � �-rY •' �.� s �� � - � ' O •ice ,. �'1' �'.a.�i, ': -
Te
��\- ram_' - - .... • Y• �• � . ._ .�\ - t,' ..: `., _��• ., .'-..- - .__ - —
Ak
WHITEHALL PROJECT VICINITY .r, ,J,'• ' . ,`
_. � '' �`:- , ' yam, .' . ;.._ • � .,: • � ; ':' .:.. , _
JG
" rao
�Qt FIGURE - 2.0 ;r=`•`''#
:..
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG
THOROUGHFARE PLAN

LLJ
LIJ
G,
LLJ
LU
- f!' (c13�f ; �s: _�•� ` ,�• ..J Q �HJ ...E
Ld
� :�t �� ��. • `\ fl i] ate. a
'1t1F •�• _ / �,� . •`CI ..� ..1 - ti _�"• l�'. �t (1 J�1
cn
/, Div 1 . `. � ' — � VV c�h �• /.� ;.r �� f .�.—�:_�_} ' .al
l_`, ; � � • .
Vl� In
r` �' � ''� i! �s •ter ��`�$;/ 4
it
for
It
.. �" 4 f'� f �� It L � �l' sky• • `s� ��� �s / •C
� � _/!^/r.' ` / � '2• f "����j��'-�,'-,�".i� Wit..- l t, 1 {IE; `
i /46
f A v , • i .rye '•tj�. . [1
cn
w
LU w
'P� c .• n A l LU U
W
uj
a
BEE
in
ul
B
�E11f�
�I

WHITEHALL
PROJECT SUMMARY
TOTAL PROJECT AREA: 731.35 ACRES
PARCEL-
GROSS
EXISTING
PROPOSED
USE
BUILDING
OPEN SPACE
AREA
ZONING
ZONING
AREA
R.0.1V
1
101.2 AC
R-3
CC
Commercial
500.000 SF
5.6 AC
18.3 AC
II
16.5 AC
R-3
0-1 (CD)
Neighborhood
167,000 SF
5.69 AC
-•2.19 AC
Office
* Ill
84.4 AC,
R-3
R-3 (CD) `
Single Family
246 LOTS
4.21 AC
---
Residential
* (PARTIAL)
IV A
98.1 AC
R-3
R-17 MF(CD)
Multi Family
1269 D.U.
15.88 AC
9.54 AC
Residential
IV B
6.5 AC
R-3
R-17 MF(CD)
.Multi Family
74 D.U.
1.I8 AC
.64 AC
Residential
* lV C
23.8 AC
R-17 MF/I-1
R-17 MF(CD)
Multi Family
Residential
304 D.U.
3.04 AC
--
V
43.6 AC
R-3
0-2 (CD)
Corporate
Office
470,000 SF
2.22 AC
12.02 AC
VI
165.9 AC
R-3
BP (CD)
Business Park
1330 000
SF ~
33.1 AC
21.68 AC
VII A
152.7 AC
R-3
I -I (CD)
Light
1,000.000
58.43 AC
27.31 AC
Industrial
SF
* VII B
30.9 AC
R-17 MF/1-1
1-1 (CD)
Light
Industrial
400,000 SF
2.56 AC
1.5 AC
TOTAL
723.6 AC
134.91 AC
93.18 AC
QPEN SPACE
R.O.W.
GREENWAY . .... . . . .4-.59 AC
I-485 (OUTER BELT) .. ...... . . . .
70.10 AC
OPEN SPACE . ... .. .
. 21.75 AC
ARROWOOD RD. EXTENSION.... . . .
13.93 AC
LAKES... ... .... .
. 21.70 AC
PROPOSED SOUTHERN CONNECTOR . .
. 9.15 AC
BUFFERS ... . .... .
: 40.25 AC
TOTAL ......... . ....... . . .
93.18 AC
LANDSCAPE AREA .. .
Ei 62 A
TOTAL . . .. . .... .
104.91 AC
TECHNICAL DATASHEET
* THESE SITES WERE INCLUDED IN THE REZONING
PROCESS TO CREATE AN INTEGRATED LAND USE PLAN
HOWEVER WILL BE DEVELOPED BY SEPARATE OWNERS
FIGURE -- 2.2
ZONING MASTER PLAN
PROJECT SUMMARY

zr,
Il`I
U
w
K.R[i
j���
a
0
LU
w
_
w
w
F r
m '
�'
['r
Y L
RKiiK
1
I
d -
• i
_
0
-
I
r•
'
I
fIi
•
A r
CL
>
I
,.
W
LLJ
"'
LU
V,
t
I
I
•.
r ✓ U
w
1 = i l��.dl-0S.
• . • f .
r
r
L •�'; 4P tt
g' '. P
xx r a[�°� •$
fl
N
C4
r
. d•. c �
oY
� •'
N
r n � • y
> Ii4
r I r•f0 {
n r
r
'
rr �
r
P
in
w
W
[
J4
{'i�S•z
� • •r •
•
U
e
•
r
4
rlj
,
w
co
LU
=
1LL
f
�!
I
•
\ •
•'i •
r
II in
a
W
•
¢
..
.d ��.
�.Q
2
ar7
LU
LL
'
r
LU
F1
.
LU >_ i l
l
y1}I
1
F
U
Q
O
ui
Rr
W
Q
0
O
z
O
Li
W
w
a
0
a
a
Q O
w
W
O

ID#* 20210748
Version* 1
Regional Office * Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
Reviewer List* Alan Johnson
Pre -Filing Meeting Request submitted 4/12/2021
Contact Name* Daniel Kuefler
Contact Email Address* [e-mail]
Project Name* Hawthorne at Whitehall
Project Owner* Evolve Companies
Project County* Mecklenburg
Owner Address: Street Address
2012 Eastwood Road
Address Line 2
aty
State / Province / Region
Wilmington
NC
Postal / Zip axle
Country
28403
USA
Is this a transportation project?* r Yes r No
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - F- 401 Water Quality Certification -
Regular Express
F- 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 and include location information.*
Forthcoming PCN will include a request for a NWP 29 for the
Hawthorne at Whitehall site on 36.5 AC on the west side of W.
Arrowood Road; appro)amately 0.3 miles north of the intersection of
W. Arrowood Road and S. Tryon Street. PIN: 20130108.
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.
• I understand by signing this form that Icannot submit myapplication until 30 calendar days after this pre -filing
meeting request.
• I 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 4/12/2021