20211321 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210902

DWR
Dlrlslon 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
20211321
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:
Ardrey Kell Relief High School
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Heath Caldwell
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
heath.caldvvell@\&etlands-epg.com
Date Submitted
9/2/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Fourmile Creek
Basin
Catawba
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.0705-80.8387
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?*
r $240.00
IT $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#
Version
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date
7/15/2021
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:
nick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
DWR site meeting documentaion_printevent.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
39 - Commercial/Institutional 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:
40.72KB
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:
Catholic Diocese of Charlotte
2b. Deed book and page no.:
06539/366
2c.Contact Person:
Peter Jugis
r Yes r No
r Yes r No

2d.Address
Street Address
P.O. Box 36776
Address tine 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28236
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Mike Higgins
3b. Business Name:
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools
3c.Address
Street Address
3301 Stafford Drive
Address line 2
CRY
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Cade
28208
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
X Email Address:*
amber.li [e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Heath Caldwell
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]
0. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
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 / Fbgion
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Ffgion
NC
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / Fagion
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
O

2a. Property Identification Number:
22348103,22348101,22348102
2b. Property size:
85.52
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
city
Postal / Zip Code
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Fourmile 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.
030501030105,030501030107
4. Project Description and History
State / Rovince / Pegim
Country
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 east of Johnston Road and just north of N. Community House Road in Charlotte, NC. The topography consists of upland ridges grading into moderate slopes and
flat floodplain of Fourmile Creek. The elevation ranges from 530 to 600 ft. The site is covered with a secondary growth mixed pine/hardwood and bottomland forest and is disturbed
throughout.
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:
11.843
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
3271
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The proposed development involves impacts to four streams for grading associated with site access requirements and scholastic infrastructure needs.
41. 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 6 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-2019-02396
5c. 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 D. Shaeffer (USACE) on 2/6/20 and B. Roden -Reynolds on 9/8/20. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the Jurisdictional Determination Information
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
u
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
r Wetlands W Streams -tributaries
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
3. Stream Impacts
r Buffers
F
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
(?) 11.1urisdiction*
length*
S1
Grading
9
Permanent
Fill
Stream D
Intermittent
Corps
P
2
547
Average (feet)
(linear feet)
S2
Grading
9
Permanent
Fill
Stream A
Intermittent
Corps
P
4
113
Average (feet)
(lir�rfeet)
S3
Grading
9
Permanent
Fill
Stream H
Intermittent
Corps
P
3
33
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
�
Road CrossingPermanent
Culvert
Stream B
Perennial
Corps
P
4
56
Average (feet)
(lir�rfeet)
S5
Road Crossing __Temporary::]
emporary
Culvert
Stream A
Intermittent
Corps
4
20
Average (feet)
(linearfeet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
749
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
769
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
20
3j. Comments:
S4- Epsting 24.5 LF culvert to be replaced, 56 additional linear feet will be culverted
S5- Temporary stream crossing will utilize reinforced concrete pipe and coarse aggregate. Pipe will be sized for peak flow conditions and installed at a
right angle to the creek. The crossing will be immediately removed and the stream restored upon completion of the permanent bottomless culvert.
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. Several options were considered to find a plan that best meets CMS's high school programming needs within the available space.
Additional parking and a practice field were omitted. The location/size of the field at the British School was contractually required. The applicant has
shown avoidance and minimization efforts by avoiding construction in the FEMA floodplain and avoiding —77% of onsite streams and all 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. A bottomless culvert is proposed at
Stream A and the proposed crossing at Stream B will be located at an existing culvert location.
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):
r DWR
W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
P Mitigation bank r Payment to in -lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits Purchased/Requested (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Quantity:

Stream
854
3c. Comments
A ratio of 2:1 is proposed for impacts to Streams B (+/_56 LF). 1:1 is proposed for impacts to Streams A, D, and H (+/_692 LF). Please refer to the
NCSAM section. The Bank's acceptance letter is attached.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
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 15A NCAC 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 r State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
17 Phase II r NSW r USMP F Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
City of Charlotte
Comments:
Storm water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to the City of Charlotte but will be designed to meet
their criteria.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)? *
r Yes r No
Comments:*
Per NCDPI, the use of County funds for the construction of anew school in this case does not trigger a review by NCDOA's state clearinghouse under
the State EPA Act.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15ANCAC 21-1.0500), 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 for this project?*
r Yes r Nor N/A

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
Sc. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes IT 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 IT No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r- Yes r No
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 IT 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. Please also see attached for FWS response.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes IT No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r- Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
SHPO's website: https://nc.maps.aregis.corr
There are no NRHP-listed properties or other historic resources recorded in the project area. Please refer to the attached Cultural Resources report
and SHPO response.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No net grade/fill Will occur in the floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
www.ferna.gov
hftps://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Miscellaneous
C^U
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.
Cick the upload button a drag and drop files here to attach document
Ardry Kell Relief High School PCN.pdf 32.26MB
Fie rust be FLF or KVF
Comments
A complete PCN package is attached.
Per Alan Johnson, the site meeting on July 15 fulfills the Pre -Filing Meeting Request requirement.

Signature
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:
Heath Caldwell
Signature
Date
9/2/2021

Ballantyne Archdiocese Site Meeting
Created by: [e-mail] • Your response: /Yes, I'm going
Time
12:30pm - 1:30pm (Eastern Time
- New York)
Thu Jul 15, 2021
Whp—
Endhaven Elementary School, 6815
Endhaven Ln, Charlotte, NC 28277, USA
My Notes
Guests
-/ [e-mail]
Amber Lipsky
-/ [e-mail]
[e-mail]
Heath Caldwell
[e-mail]
0 [e-mail]
Len Rindner

WEPG
Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
SAW — 2019 - 02396 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Ardrey Kell Relief High School
2. Work Type: Private Fv_1 Institutional F71 Government ❑ Commercial ❑
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
PCN request for a residential and institutional development
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools (Applicant)
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 —or ORM Consultant ID Number]: WEPG, PLLC c/o Heath Caldwell
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
35.0705,-80.8387
Just east of Johnston Road and just north of N. Community House Road
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 61a]: 22348103, 22348101, 22348102
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]: Fourmlle Creek
12. watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]:Lower Catawba (03050103)
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
U Nationwide Permit # 39
❑ Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
�✓ Section 10 & 404 ❑
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Oa ks]111141L160%

WEEG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
September 2, 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-2019-02396; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP 439 for the Ardrev Kell
Relief High School site in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Messrs. Roden -Reynolds, Johnson, Wcjoski, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit 939 for the Ardrey Kell Relief High School site on
85.5 acres just east of Johnston Road and just north of N. Community House Road in Charlotte,
NC. The site is a proposed high school and consists of six streams and three wetlands. A
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Request was authorized in February 2020. Please refer
to the Jurisdictional Determination Information section for information on onsite surface waters.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include permanent impacts to four
streams for grading associated with site access requirements and scholastic infrastructure needs.
Overall impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited
through site selection location, design, and the location/orientation of the proposed
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.
buildings/fields and access routes. Headwalls are proposed at each crossing and, where possible,
2:1 slopes will be implemented to limit impacts to site surface waters. Impacts have been limited
by proposing a bottomless culvert for the crossing at Stream A. Additionally, 24.5 linear feet of
an existing culvert will be replaced within the same location by a proposed 70 linear foot culvert.
Total permanent impacts proposed include 749 linear feet of stream impact (Streams A, B, D and
H). These access crossings were necessary due to City connectivity requirements as well as
contractual constraints between the client and the property owner. The design team produced
several options to find a plan that the best meets Charlotte -Mecklenburg School's programming
needs within the limited, available space. The soccer field for the British School was
contractually obligated, but the total area was minimized to the greatest extent possible to reduce
impacts. An additional practice field and parking were omitted to avoid additional impacts.
Please refer to the Avoidance and Minimization narrative and attached exhibits for more
information. The applicant has demonstrated substantial avoidance and minimization efforts in
which 100% of the 11.8 acres of onsite wetlands and 77% of the 3,271 linear feet of onsite
streams will be avoided.
To compensate for the anticipated permanent impacts to onsite wetlands, the applicant is
proposing payment to the City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank at
a 2:1 ratio is proposed for impacts to Streams B (+/-56 LF). 1:1 is proposed for impacts to
Streams A, D, and H (+/-692 LF). Please refer to the NCSAM 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 the Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a "No
Effect" determination for the site. Please refer to the Threatened and Endangered Species
Evaluation section for additional details on the terrestrial species evaluation.
Historic and Archeological Resources were also evaluated for this site. The State Historic
Preservation Office has reviewed the information and concluded that there would be no effect to
historic resources. Please refer to the Cultural Resources Report section for additional details.
Thank you for your consideration and please contact me if you have any questions, (704) 999-
5279 or email at heath. caldwell(c�r�,wetlands-epg.com.
Sincerely,
Heath Caldwell Len Rindner, PWS
Environmental Scientist Principal
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] 2
[e-mail]

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

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Ardrey Kell Relief High School
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:
Catholic Diocese of Charlotte
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
06539/366
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Peter Jugis
3d.
Street address:
P.O. Box 36776
3e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28236
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: Buyer
4b.
Name:
Mike Higgins
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools
4d.
Street address:
3301 Stafford Drive
4e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte NC, 28208
4f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Heath Caldwell
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group, PLLC
5c.
Street address:
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e.
Telephone no.:
[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):
22348103, 22348101, 22348102
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude. 35.0705 Longitude:-80.8387
1 c.
Property size:
85.52 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Fourmile Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c.
River basin:
Lower 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 east of Johnston Road and just north of N. Community House Road in Charlotte, NC. The topography consists of upland ridges
grading into moderate slopes and flat floodplain of Fourmile Creek. The elevation ranges from 530 to 600 ft. The site is covered with a secondary
growth mixed pine/hardwood and bottomland forest and is disturbed throughout.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 11.843
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,271
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed development involves impacts to four streams for grading associated with site access requirements and scholastic infrastructure needs.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Fill and grading of the site will use standard equipment, excavator, dump truck, track hoe, etc.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: SAW-2019 02396
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑X Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known). Nic Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
This site was verified by D. Shaeffer (USAGE) on 2/6/20 and B. Roden -Reynolds on 9/8/20. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the
Jurisdictional Determination Information section.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ 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)
W 1
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
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
Fill
Stream D
INT
Corps
2
547
S2 P
Fill
Stream A
INT
Corps
4.5
113
S3 P
Fill
Stream H
INT
Corps
3
33
S4 P
Culvert
Stream B
PER
Corps
4
56
S5 T
Culvert
Stream A
INT
Corps
4.5
20
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
769
3i. Comments:
S4- Existing 24.5 LF culvert to be replaced, 56 additional linear feet will be culverted
S5- Temporary stream crossing will utilize reinforced concrete pipe and coarse aggregate. Pipe will be sized for peak flow conditions and installed at a
right angle to the creek. The crossing will be immediately removed and the stream restored upon completion of the permanent bottomless culvert.
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
O2
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
B 1
Yes/No
B2
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. 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. Several options were considered to find a plan that best meets CMS's high school programming needs within the available space.
Additional parking and a practice field were omitted. The location/size of the field at the British School was contractually required. The applicant has
shown avoidance and minimization efforts by avoiding construction in the FEMA floodplain and avoiding —77% of onsite streams and all 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. A bottomless culvert is proposed at
Stream A and the proposed crossing at Stream B will be located at an existing culvert location.
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?
X❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Stream
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity: 854
Quantity:
Quantity:
A ratio of 2:1 is proposed for impacts to Streams B (+/-56 LF). 1:1 is proposed for impacts to Streams A, D, and H (+/-692 LF). Please refer to
3c. Comments: the NCSAM section. The Bank's acceptance letter is attached.
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
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?
46 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
Storm
water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has
not yet been submitted to the City of
Charlotte but will be designed to meet their criteria.
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
El Yes ❑X No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes X❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
Yes ❑ 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 ❑X No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.) Per NCDPI, the use of County funds for the construction of a new school in this case
does not trigger a review by NCDOA's state clearinghouse under the State EPA Act.
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes X❑ No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El Yes ❑X No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes X❑ No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No
additional phases proposed.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
facility
Wastewater
generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment via sewer lines.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑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. Please also see attached for FWS response.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO's website: https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/
There are no NRHP-listed properties or other historic resources recorded in the project area. Please refer to the attached report and SHPO response.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No net grade/fill will occur in the floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Heath Caldwell
�,,�f�
09-02-2021
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

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).
Project/Site Name: Ardrey Kell Relief High School
Property Address: North off. Community House Road and Endhaven Lane, Charlotte, NC
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 22348103, 22348101, 22348102
Select one: I am other
Name: Mike Higgins
Company: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools
Mailing Address: 3301 Stafford Drive, Charlotte NC, 28208
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Digitally signed by Michael Higgins
DN:C=US,
Michael Higgins E=mhiggin.@a sk12nr.us, 08-25-2021
CN=Michael Higgins
Date: 2021.08.25 08:21:37-04'00'
Property Owner / Interested Buyer* / Other" Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, INC 28277
[phone]
lcn.rindncr@?wctlands-cpg.com
www.wetlands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Charlaffe-Mecklenburg
STORM
WATER
wl?Services—H�
August 26, 2021
Mr. Mike Higgins
3301 Stafford Drive
Charlotte, NC 28208
600 E. Fourth Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Fax [phone]
Sent via email to Heath Caldwell heath.caldwellg_wetlands-epg.com and Amber Lipsky amber.lipsky&wetlands-ep com
Subject Project: Ardrey Kell Relief High School
HUC#: 03050103 (Lower Catawba)
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
("Umbrella Bank") is willing to accept payment for stream impacts associated with the subject project. Please note that the
decision by the Umbrella Bank to accept the mitigation requirements of this project does not assure that this payment will be
approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the North Carolina Division of Water Quality 401/Wetlands Unit. It is the
responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the Umbrella Bank for impacts associated
with this project is appropriate.
This acceptance is valid for six (6) months from the date of this letter. The following documents must be submitted to the
Umbrella Bank within this time frame for this acceptance to remain valid:
1. 404 Permit Verification
2. 401 Water Quality Certification
3. Executed Memorandum of Understanding between City of Charlotte and Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools
detailing the use of and payment for the credits described in the table below.
Based on the information supplied by your office, the stream and wetland credits that are necessary to satisfy the
compensatory mitigation requirements for this project are detailed in the table below. The total mitigation credits available
for this project are also indicated in this table.
Stream
(linear feet)
Wetlands
(acres)
Credits Requested for This Project
854
0.0
Credits Available for This Project
854
0.0
Mitigation Project Name(s)
Muddy Creek
The stream and wetland mitigation will be provided as specified in the Section 404 Permit or corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification for impacts associated with the subject project in Hydrologic Unit 03050103 of the Catawba River
Basin. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Agreement to Establish the City of Charlotte Umbrella
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, dated June, 16, 2004.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at [phone] or
erin. shanab ergerkcharlottenc. gov.
Sincerely,
Charlotte Storm Water Services
Erin Shanaberger
Mitigation Bank Administrator
cc: File
To report pollution or drainage problems, call: 311
http://stormwater.charmeck.org

►0
Maps/Plans

�5
iaso
Cedarwood Country Club
PIPER GLEN
ESTATES
SITE
13ALLANTYNE
BALLANTYN£
WEST
S4 521 3685
ine Creed
enway �-
HorT�ewood Suites
by'Hiltan Charlotte,
`Hickory Tavern 9
hicken 8allsntyne Nlidwoad SrnoKe use
LA Fitness
Circle
9
SIFCl
Acres:
+/- 85.52
FIGURE 1
09110120
UPDATED
6118121
Red Robin Gourmet
Burgers and Brews
ARDREY KELL HIGH SCHOOL
Mecklenburg Co., NC
VICINITY MAP
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
1 8S
G~
Bev rO W)'pp� a
LS
C1 Camden Touchstone
Apartments
13
echJn ar
rt
p Oro
9�
I
� M15
I
1
4
Fourroile
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
British lnternatianal
School of Charlotte
9
S
m
Endhaven Elementary
z
Prepared OOD • D AQUISITIONS 1y'Al Uel
Wetlands and EnviroDrawn By: Reviewed By: i
Leonard S.in
len.rindnerC11-1
BILK ALL
r

f -
-t
{
i F rf • �`
P.
1 i F
r %?L � l
F ��� •ice � •� � � •.�� .
1
7 4
J
+ # i ++
r' or
+ - F
*I f
k
L� ' ' ti T +lie
F
•
t
Y li
I
+'� " PROJECT BOUNDARY
}� STUDY LIMITS
r
+ } Ak
�+
+� t
A.
40 r
y# ■ 1
r er
J
Aerial Imagery Provided by
Mecklenburg Polaris 3G���
. .. ,
1
Acres: ARDREY KELL HIGH SCHOOL Prepared for:
+/- 85.52 Mecklenburg Co., NC OODFIELD AQUISITIONS
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
FIGURE 2
09110120 AERIAL MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
UPDATED Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification BILK ALLlen• {,-2277
7
6118121

- d r --
JP
Ar-
� a
�f 4F
Aw !_
a FOURMILE CREEK
mdML
r
PROJECT BOUNDARY r
STUDY LIMITS
le
F LP
�
LOCATION _ _ *
Lat: 35.0705 Nam-
Long: -80.8387 W
HUC: 03050103 SCALE USGS QUAD I }
LOWER CATAWBA 1:24,000 Weddington,NC ".
Acres: ARDREY KELL HIGH SCHOOL Prepared for:
+/- 85.52 Mecklenburg Co., NC OODFIELD AQUISITIONS
FIGURE 3
09110120 USGS MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
U� Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification BILK ALL

IF
0
kD
kD
MIC
kEJ
PROJECT BOUNDARY
'
k E
STUDY LIMITS
y - kB
Ur
lie
NRCS Soil Survey Manuscript
Mecklenburg County 1980
r �-
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unkl Name
Acm In AQI
Percent of AOI
IrB
Iredell fine sander loam. i to
0.1
0.2%
pernt slopes
mo
Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent
20-4
25-11%
slopes. frequently Amded
WkS
W&es loam, 4 to percent
10.3
23-7%
shapes
41.0%
Wk1)
WHkes loam, 8 to 15 percent
33.3
slopes
Wks
Wrikes loam, 15 to 25 per -cent
8.2
10.0%
shapes
Totals for Area of Interest
81.3
100-0%
Acres:
ARDREY KELL HIGH SCHOOL
Prepared for:
+/- 85.52
Mecklenburg Co., NC
WOODFIELD
AQUISITIONS
FIGURE 4
9110120
NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP
Drawn By:
Reviewed By:
UPDATED
6118121
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
BILK
ALL

L r
T 1 f
fi q -
r*���#
�f*
_ir
100' SWIM BUFFER i
FEMA FLOODPLAIN AS
r
PER MECKLENBURG GIS '
IF
d +Peer
k
,.
FA
Z7i
y h
s �i• f
r
Acres:
ARDREY KELL HIGH SCHOOL
+/- 85.52
Mecklenburg Co., INC
FIGURE 5
9/10/20
UPDATED
FEMA FLOODPLAIN AND BUFFER MAP
6118121
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
rt'
i
+ +
+ PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
.. r
CO ..
1
Prepared for:
WOODFIELD AQUISITIONS
Wetlands and Environmental Plan
Drawn By: Reviewed By: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
len.rindner@wetlands-el
BILK ALL(704)904-2277
www.wetlands-epg.cc

'5
PARCEL:22348102
PROJECT BOUNDARY
CITY OF CHARLOTTE IN I I- "1' STUDY LIMITS
600 E 4T" ST
CHARLOTTE, NC 28202
f f
tCC1� —aK' L
� d
* � f
I
i
f
i
>I
1
I
liarFette P1
r �w
SIT. 1 's sae h
PARCEL: 22348101
ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF CHLT
PO BOX 36776, CHARLOTTE, NC 28236
�f 91 13 � -- �.���n '
PARCEL: 22348103
a ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF CHLT
PO BOX 36776, CHARLOTTE, NC 28236 Parcel Information Provided N
by Mecklenburg Polaris 3G ��1
Acres: ARDREY KELL HIGH SCHOOL Prepared for:
+/- 85.52 Mecklenburg Co., NC OODFIELD AQUISITIONS
FIGURE 6
09110120 PARCEL MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
UPDATED Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification BLK ALL
6118121

`a
QSci w rX e " �•
Y R
CO
m N
L C
_ U-
c
J
04
LO
Xj
J'
\ yy
/V
n
I _
��/ % / •` rI� �2_ .� si s 4 / � - k < �� /_.34j�� L
__
LL
LL
(nJ NJ
cx E"3` `Wx �M
e`- F , Cl) O
cn
co m d N
Oji
CD S �+ �+
O N O
LO LL
d LC
R J
++ C1 _I
C i � O
� � r
a r

�8
F
5
LL
w
U
J LL LL
LL
D
t0 fD
�
O
CM
LO- Cl
CAD
_ p
Y v z
Nx
a R
to LL LL
'O =�
d
q�
m`'m I U)
Q S O
O
CO le
E�
ti ui <D
fa N
++ r r h
( r In O
y 0
M
N
a
U)
is
QN o¢ S
ECL
m
N 0 w N Z' .O
0 0 o E
d 0V O QV V

�LL
U-
L
ca
Qp
+�
E
cn •—
J
CD
M
CO
VJ
� ui
CD
o
�
N
00
�sz
�
>,
a
o
CD b
O
r
i.!
M
J CD
Q
Q i
V
E
cocoo 0
o
m
i
ril

o coo L It
LO LO LO LO
LO
t
C)
O O O In
LO LO L
3
)
G>
>
o
_
p
a
�sz
Cl)
d)
L
V
ACN
o
a
r
N
L
Ci
CL
a=�
E
co
O
0
T
3

oV)
LX)Q
o�
� m
CL w
UO
Q
10 Z
(`7 Q
CO LU !�
Lo O
r, r,
W O
U Lo
nQ
Lo
Lo
O
LQ
1111111�111111�1111�1''��11�11
IIIIIIIIIICIIIIIII�IIIN161111
IIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIICII
11
IIII
Illllllllllllllllllllva
111111
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
111111
AIR
•••••==111111
��wii
��i�
1111'
'•
�
11
0 0
Lo L�
ELEVATION
3
as
a�
4--
0
a
N
m
CD
L
Q
f+
c.i
ca
CL
L
w �
+ wo
Z�
3LU
O>
bz
a
© Q
Qw
CD �
(DC/)
z(D
o
J
Lu Q
O
0
Lo
LD
N
O
N
eri
N
co
O
a
N

J
J
>Q
i
0
LU
N
In
� Q
m
CL w
U (D
Q
Z
o') Q
0 af
w p
O�
00
E
L6
ELEVATION
�
O
V
O
�sz
C
0
V
.�L
CL
Q
T
V
E
O
Q 1�
w10
ZLo
w
p Z
Lo w L9
C)
Q
Z
V)
X
w
7.
M

M
G�
C
LL
Q=
LL c`a
v
d
C•_
Q
(1)
d
to to
•
Z � i A
\ o , ► \\LLJ OL J
i
r
-
� C)
rl

3
as
.�
as
�
o
_
a
_
O
`1
Z
v
>+ Cl)
�
L
a
CLm
v
a
LJ
lJ V)
O
z
z
CO
w Q
<
_
ELEVATION
LU
wF-
m�
O
O
O
O
0
0
N
II �
N
N
C LLI O
N J
N U
06 U) o
0
4

�
Q
m
CL W
U (D
Q
z
o') Q
0 af
w p
O�
O
OE
Q �
�
I
LLD Ln
�
11111
�
0
O
Lo
cD
z
ELEVATION w
O Lo
co r
Ln Lo
C
O
V
a)
o
M
m
C
o
L
N
O
Q
r
_ i
N
N
+�
O
U
N
O
w
Q
N
Q
E
O
un
o
0
0
0

4-0
LL
LLL
4-0
LL
L
LL
L
�
Ln Ln
J
N
a
ca
o o
cc
a••+
• �
M 00
LO
N
u
}+
O
E
i�
L
0
CDT
jn
�
N
N
uj
J
o
N
N
Q
C
I 1
U
U)
o
LLJ
� i
- •_�-
s
------
/
LL
-
/
r/
y > QLL
740/
�Lu, �4�
U
1�

a
a •
3
o
_
p
a
�sz
Q
2
V
J Q
0
�
W W
C�
L >
3
QO
Up
flf
o
O w
c° L
Q
w
O
zo
zJ
NU
O O
p nQ
n)Lq
� 117
fo
Lo wOCY
wc�
w L
111111111111111111111111
1
0
IN
11
11111MA1111111111111111
O
N
T
O
O
T
C 3
U OJ 0
M m <
0LU
0
r w
-1 Z
OJ¢N
w O X
O cLI,Zw
O
O
Lf)
O
L0
IS)
L
Q
CV
o
Q
ELEVATION L
< m
o
zZ
O
SQO
J
zQ
W
o
a_
W Q
W �
co to
a

5
w
O
�sz
t�
Amp
cl�
Q T
V
Z
N
X
n `U
n
n
w
to CL
O O OU Lo
LD � O0o Lr) 0
a_10 C)
O
L0
W
Q
ry
V
ELEVATION Z
X
w
C
O
V
O
W
L
Q
f+
u
m
CL
i�
L
C
O
v
w
cn
E
c�
o O
O L
VLo
.rd
C 1
/ L
- w
j Z
F

NCSAM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: SAW-2019-02396 NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Ardrey Kell Relief High School 2. Date of evaluation: 3/11/2021
3. Applicant/owner name: CMS Schools 4. Assessor name/organization: H.Caldwell/WEPG
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Fourmile Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.069782N/-80.839344W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream A 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0.5 ❑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 A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Ardrey Kell Relief High
Stream Site Name Date of Assessment
School
3/11/2021
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
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(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
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: SAW-2019-02396 NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Ardrey Kell Relief High School 2. Date of evaluation: 3/11/2021
3. Applicant/owner name: CMS Schools 4. Assessor name/organization: H.Caldwell/WEPG
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Fourmile Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.070971 N/-80.837208W
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): 0.75 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 4 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Ardrey Kell Relief High
Stream Site Name Date of Assessment
School
3/11/2021
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
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(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
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: SAW-2019-02396 NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Ardrey Kell Relief High School 2. Date of evaluation: 3/11/2021
3. Applicant/owner name: CMS Schools 4. Assessor name/organization: H.Caldwell/WEPG
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Fourmile Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.068227N/-80.838586W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream H 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 2 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ®Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

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

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

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Ardrey Kell Relief High
Stream Site Name Date of Assessment
School
3/11/2021
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
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(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
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(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
LOW
LOW

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

i;ismb�d plai}pooM
uoijoaijuan 273(]DN/3DVSn of IaalgnS Aluo sasodind Apn;s aoj
dVVY NOlIV3NI13a
1°
c2
°-I LU
N Q 00
o
DN'/�;unoD 2anquajj�aW
U-
:ao; paaedaad
3S3:)0IaH:)HV
3NAINVIIV8
O
z
O
C
O �
i
(=j C ^
m C
H m
Z
\� ~_ N
M Z
Q C w
Z
N
O
U
d CA
LU
En
0 C,
-
W
F
Z.
P
oo O
if )
m
°
O
�
p
Z
~ C
W
L
Z
O p
0 y
N
°
V 00
u
V \
r
°ILI
N c
C C
W
W
J
w N
W
W 01
% \
o w d ''xt
m
~
V
Q
u
W
y
� 1
N
WU O
z
cr
c O
z
R
V LL
Z
y �
u
Z m
n
ga
6
W
fY1
i
C
i
' w
C
H
w
O
CJ Z
W
V
z O
j LL
v Z e
a 0 w O
0
Z
� Q ¢
w C H
N
N 0 e = j
o
�....
L.
14—.
Lo
N
Wrn
f
cc op
ll
C
cF
C
W J
QQ
F
VI W
z
O Q A
C F Ln
w Ln
H I!1
F
w >. W
o
e
C
g Lq
F
z
_
7 Z
ED
o

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Td. SAW-2019-02396 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Weddington
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Woodfield Acquisitions, LLC
Chad M. Hagler
Address: 7804-C Fairview Road
Charlotte, NC 29226
Telephone Number: 704-560-2793
E-mail: chagler(iwfinvest.net
Size (acres) 75 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway McAlpine Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.0705
Longitude:-80.8387
Location description: The review area is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Endhaven Lane and North
Community House Road. PINS: 22348103 and 22348101.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 10/25/2019. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity- on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly

SAW-2019-02396
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David L. Shaeffer at 704-510-1437 or
david.l.shaeffer(&,,usace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 2/6/2020.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. if you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Phillip Shannin, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Digitallysigned by
SH AEF FER.DAVI D.LEIGH.1260750573
Corps Regulatory Official: �• Date:2020.02.0609:52:37-05'00'
Date of JD: 2/6/2020 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

SAW-2019-02396
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/V`p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, WEPG
Daniel Kuefler
Address: 10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: 336-554-2728
E-mail: daniel.kuefler(a wetlands-eve.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Woodfield Acquisitions, LLC, Chad M.
File Number: SAW-2019-02396
Date: 2/6/2020
Ha lei
Attached is:
See Section below
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
RED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of ermission
B
DENIAL
LAPPROVED
C
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
INARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Re ug lator.T�gramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations a '3 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section TT of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section IT of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Cotes to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION ii - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: David L. Shaeffer
CESAD-PDO
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1 OM15
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunit to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: David L. Shaeffer, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Phillip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8501
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 2/6/2020
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Woodfield Acquisitions, LLC, Chad M. Hagler,
7804-C Fairview Road, Charlotte, NC 29226
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Ballantyne Archdiocese Site, SAW-
2019-02396
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the northeast
corner of the intersection of Endhaven Lane and North Community House Road. PINS: 22348103 and 22348101.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.0705 Longitude:-80.8387
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: McAlpine Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): 1 /21 /2020 by the Corps
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Estimated amount of
Geographic authority to
Type of aquatic
Latitude (decimal
Longitude (decimal
aquatic resources in
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic resource
Site Number
review area (acreage
"may be" subject (i.e.,
degrees)
degrees)
wetland vs. non -
and linear feet, if
Section 404 or Section
wetland waters)
applicable
10/404)
Intermittent
35.06990000
-80.83970000
375If
Non -Wetland
404
Stream A
Waters
Perennial
35.07080000
-80.83750000
1000 if
Non -Wetland
404
Stream B
Waters
Wetland C
35.07050000
-80.84020000
0.05 ac
Wetland
404
Intermittent
35.07090000
-80.83760000
725If
Non -Wetland
404
Stream D
Waters
Wetland E
35.07330000
-80.83950000
1.1 ac
Wetland
404
Intermittent
35.07040000
-80.83980000
550If
Non -Wetland
404
Stream F
Waters
Wetland G
35.07140000
-80.83910000
4.1 ac
Wetland
404
Intermittent
35.06850000
-80.83850000
150If
Non -Wetland
404
Stream H
Waters
Fourmile
35.07490000
-80.83890000
1800If
404
Non -Wetland
Creek
Waters

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

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject tile. Appropriately reference sources below where
indicated for all checked items:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Figure 6 dated 10/25/2019
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
® U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:Nationalma og_v
® USGS NHD data.
® USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: ESRT Soils Mapservice
®National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWT Mapservice
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ❑Aerial (Name & Date):
or ®Other (Name & Date): Photos 1-6 dated 6/4/2019
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been
verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
Digitally signed by
SHAEFFER.DAVID.LEIGH.126
' 0750573
Date: 2020.02.06 09:53:21
-05'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
2/6/2020
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable) 1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the
established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an
action.

uoijvwijiaan 273O.7N/3,)vs 1 of laalgnS Aluo sasodind Apn;s aoj
0. •O
dVVY NOlIV3NI13a W
Ln
:)II'suoi;ismb:)d plai;pooM D
DN'AjunOD 2anquajj:)aW o
c-I
:ao; paiedaad 3S3:)0IaH:)HV 3NAINVIIV8 LL
_
w W Q •g
F `Ln
U a C ^ `;e, v
m
J
H w F N Q m w []
F O rn Z Z O as
W e�-I -- - , W W O
' CD
F `� rrj J iU
L1
W
� Z Q
Z
r y rr g d i
J S W O
- • • 17a >j Z
o
LO
I�
cr
z W p� Q > Z
Z F
LL
• if y. � � v �,� tr o - �-�yy`�_
z
LLL
W ry W
LU
Ln
Ln `V
til yaj ' •�•:v-'
Z llti ;i' Ln
cr Z r F C
1` ••. W �'` O F
Z -+ V Z W
zui
C C OC
W yaj F K O Z
HOW 1 7 o rY -
d f5
-d LU CD
Occ
o
_ ~ Z ~ u
■ w Ln D m
Ln
_ •e' ;fir• .. .� s V
v ti
Z m f Z O N
a

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

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For: BALLANTYNE ARCHDIOCESE
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
August 31, 2020
Field investigation conducted August 26 & 27, 2020.
Charlotte Office: www.wetiands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550
Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277
Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
I en. ri nd ner@wet Ian ds -epg. co nn

Ballantyne Archdiocese - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Ballantyne Archdiocese site (+/- 75 acres) is located just east of Johnston
Road, and just north of N. Community House Road in Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina. It can be found on the Weddington, NC USGS Topographic
Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.0705 N, longitude is-80.8387 W. The topography
consists of upland ridges grading into moderate slopes and flat floodplain of
Fourmile Creek. The elevation ranges from 530 to 600 ft. (Figure 1). The site is
covered with a secondary growth, disturbed mixed pine/hardwood and
bottomland forest, and is disturbed throughout.
Figure 1:
r �
/r ~'� � PouRILm� CREEK
APPROXIMATE
PRO}ECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS _41
r
�`
LOCATION f f —
Lat: 35.0705 N
Long.-80.83S7 W
HUC:03050103 SCALE U
S"
AD
LOWERCATAWBA I:24,000ingtan,NC
A,r; 9AL LANTYNE ARCH DI GEESE Prepared For!
r1- R.S MN klrnhurg Cn., NC TERWILLiGER PAPPAS
f IGURE 1
USGS MAP nr,�wr, Ry: R ;awed RV:
5/]3/PI Subjerr m USACE^ CdC4 vcrftoiiart
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Ballantyne Archdiocese - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ was
referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and
Protected species for Mecklenburg County North Carolina, the results of which
are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and
the site was investigated on August 26 and 27, 2020.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on August 26, 2020
Group Name Status Record Status
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona Endangered Current
decorata
Invertebrate Rusty -patched Bumble Bee Endangered Historic
(Bombus affinis)
Vascular Plants Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea Endangered
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.

Ballantyne Archdiocese - 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#00574
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Ballantyne Archdiocese - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
Most of the site is covered with a secondary growth, mixed pine/hardwood forest,
grading into a bottomland forest and disturbed floodplain of Fourmile Creek.
There is a sewer line right of way along the creek corridor. There are old dirt -
gravel roads traversing portions of the site. There are turf grass strip buffers with
cultivated trees and shrubs as well as overhead power lines along the eastern
perimeter on Johnston Road, behind the adjacent commercial property, and
down to Community House Road. Portions of the power line corridors had been
recently mowed at the time of the survey.
The disturbed tree cover grades from being dominated by pines on the uplands,
to mixed hardwoods on the slopes and bottomland forest into the floodplain.
Canopy species include Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Short -leaf Pine (P.
echinata), Virginia Pine (P. virginianus), Willow Oak (Quercus phellos), White
Oak (Q. alba), Southern Red Oak (Q. falcata), Sweet Gum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and Red Maple (Acer rubra).
Floodplain trees include Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), Cottonwood (Populus
deltoides), and Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). Subcanopy species include
Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), Flowering
Dogwood (Corpus f/orida), and American Holly (Ilex opaca). The shrub layer is
dominated by Russian Olive (Elaeagnus umbellate) and Chinese Privet
(Ligustrum sinense), with Tag Alder (Alnus serrulata), Multiflora Rose (Rosa
multif/ora), and Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) in the wetter areas. Vines
include Trumpet Creeper (Campsis radicans), Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera
japonica), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans),
and Catbrier (Smilax sp.). The herb layer is thin on the drier uplands and slopes,
increasing on the lower slopes and includes Christmas Fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), Elephant's Foot (Elephantopus tomentosus), Crane -fly Orchid
(Tipularia discolor), Grapefern (Botrychium sp.), and Japanese Stiltgrass
(Microstegium vimineum). Additional herbs observed in the more mesic areas
and in the floodplains include Sedge (Carex spp.), Rush (Juncus spp.), River
Oats (Chasmanthium latifolium), False Nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), River Cane
(Arundinaria gigantea), Swamp Rose Mallow (Hibiscus moscheutos), and
Knotweed (Polygonum sp.).
Along the Fourmile Creek corridor there is a utility road and sewer line right of
way that is maintained by mowing and bush hogging at different intervals, with
semi open, disturbed scrub/shrub thickets of Blackberry (Rubus spp.), Winged
Sumac (Rhus copallinum) and Groundsel Tree (Baccharis halimifolia).
Transitional areas along the power lines, tree lines, and road edges are
dominated by common weedy species including Johnson Grass (Sorghum
halepense), Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), Ragwort (Packera sp.),
Indian Hemp (Apocynum cannabinum), Broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus),
Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Pokeweed
WEPG#00574
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Ballantyne Archdiocese - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
(Phytolacca americans), Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium obtusifolium), Beggars
Ticks (Desmodium sp.), and Dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower along the roadsides, utility
rights -of -way, transitional areas 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 roadsides, utility
rights -of -way, transitional areas and woods edges were examined, and the
species was not observed. WEPG concludes Smooth Coneflower
(Echinacea /aevigata) does not occur on the site.
• All potential habitats for Michaux's Sumac along the roadsides, utility
rights -of -way, transitional areas 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 /eucoceaha/us) 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 Lona-eared Bat.
WEPG#00574 6
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Ballantyne Archdiocese - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not
identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further
investigation of the presence of protected species on this site is recommended at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
August 31, 2020
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Ballantyne Archdiocese - 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

ua
United States Department of the Interior FSERVIUE
.�
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
June 14, 2021
Ms. Lisa Gaffney
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
1070 Tunnel Rd. Bldg. 1 Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805
[e-mail]
Subject: Ballantyne Archdiocese Development; Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Gaffney:
On May 13th, 2021, we received your letter or information requesting our comments on the
subject project. We have reviewed the information that you presented, and the following
comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy
Act (42 U.S.C.§ 4321 et seq.); the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
661 - 667e); the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703); and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 - 1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project would entail the construction of
multifamily housing and public high school with roadway appurtenances on approximately 74
acres in Charlotte, North Carolina. Onsite habitats consists of successional forested areas,
transitional habitats, rights -of -way and corridors of Fourmile Creek. Your correspondence did
not provide site plans, impacts or proposed impact avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation
measures.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Service records show historic occurrences for the federally endangered Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii), Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii) and Smooth coneflower
(Echinacea laevigata) in the project vicinity and suitable habitat occurs onsite. Targeted surveys
for these species were conducted, August 26th, 2020 and August 27th, 2020, during their
respective optimal survey windows. No evidence for these plants was detected at that time.
Based on the information provided, we have no concerns for any other federally protected
species and we require no further action at this time. Please be aware that obligations under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals
impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not
previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may
be affected by the identified action.

We offer the following general recommendations on behalf of natural resources:
Erosion and Sediment Control
Construction activities near aquatic resources, streams, and wetlands have the potential to cause
bank destabilization, water pollution, and water quality degradation if measures to control site
runoff are not properly installed and maintained. In order to effectively reduce erosion and
sedimentation impacts, best management practices specific to the extent and type of construction
should be designed and installed prior to land disturbing activities and should be maintained
throughout construction. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as
synthetic netting can trap animals and persists in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
Land disturbance should be limited to what can be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of
the workday. Once construction is complete, disturbed areas should be revegetated with native
riparian grass and tree species as soon as possible. For maximum benefits to water quality and
bank stabilization, riparian areas should be forested; however, if the areas are maintained in
grass, they should not be mowed. The Service can provide information on potential sources of
plant material upon request.
A complete design manual that is consistent with the requirements of the North Carolina
Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act and Administrative Rules, can be found at the
following website: https://deg.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources.
Low Impact Development
The Service is concerned about the potential storm water -mediated impacts to streams onsite.
Where detention ponds are used, storm -water outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior
to reaching any natural stream or wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow
for the slow discharge of storm water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm water
surges; thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Since the purpose of
storm water control is to protect streams and wetlands, no storm water control measures or best
management practices should be installed within any stream (perennial or intermittent) or
wetland. We recommend that retention ponds be located at least 750 feet from small wetlands to
minimize hydrologic disturbance and ecological function. We recommend that consideration be
given to the use of pervious materials (i.e., pervious concrete, interlocking/open paving blocks,
etc.) for the construction of roads, driveways, sidewalks, etc. Pervious surfaces minimize
changes to the hydrology of the watershed and can be used to facilitate groundwater recharge.
Pervious materials are also less likely to absorb and store heat and allow the cooler soil below to
cool the pavement. Additionally, pervious concrete requires less maintenance and is less
susceptible to freeze/thaw cracking due to large voids within the concrete.
Pollinators
Pollinators, such as most bees, some birds and bats, and other insects, including moths and
butterflies, play a crucial role in the reproduction of flowering plants and production of most
fruits and vegetables. Over 75 percent of flowering plants and about 75 percent of crops are
pollinated by these types of fauna. A recent study of the status of pollinators in North America
by the National Academy of Sciences found that populations of honey bees (which are not native
to North America) and many wild pollinators are declining. Declines in wild pollinators are a
result of disease and the loss, degradation, and fragmentation of habitat. Because loss of habitat
2

and diminished native food sources have decreased the populations and diversity of pollinators
throughout the country, we recommend that development projects be sited in areas that are
previously disturbed (fallow fields, closed industrial sites, etc.) or sites that do not impact mature
forests, streams, or wetlands.
We have records of rare species in the area, including monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus
plexippus), a federal candidate for listing.' Monarch butterflies east of the Rocky Mountains
used to number in the hundreds of millions but the population has declined by approximately 80
percent. Loss of habitat due to genetically modified crops, overuse of herbicides and
insecticides, urban, suburban and agricultural development, disease, climate change, and
overwintering site degradation are the leading causes of monarch decline. Adults use a wide
variety of flowering plants throughout migration for nectar and breeding. However, milkweed
plants (Asclepius spp.) are essential to monarch breeding as these are the only genus of plants
that can host monarchs in their larval form. For a regional and seasonal list of plants important
to monarch butterflies, please visit the Xerces Society website at:
http://www.xerces. org/monarch-nectar plants/.
Although the provisions of section 7 of the Act do not currently apply to candidate species or
other non -listed pollinators, we would greatly appreciate your assistance in determining if
monarch butterflies or suitable habitat for the species is present on the proposed project site. If
individuals or suitable habitat is present, impacts should be avoided. More specific information
about monarch butterfly can be found at the Service website dedicated to the species at:
https: //www.fws.govlsavethemonarchl.
To reduce development impacts to monarch butterflies and other pollinators and/or to increase
the habitat and species diversity within the project area, we recommend the following measures
be incorporated into project designs:
1. Throughout the site, avoid non-native seed mixes and plants. Instead, sow native seed mixes
and plant species that are beneficial to pollinators.
a. Avoid seed mixes and plants that have been pre-treated with insecticides, such as
neonictinoids.
b. Taller -growing pollinator plant species should be planted around the periphery of the
site and anywhere on the site where mowing can be restricted during the summer
months. Taller plants, not mowed during the summer, would provide benefits to
pollinators, habitat for ground-nesting/feeding birds, and cover for small mammals.
c. Native low-growing/groundcover species should be planted in areas that need to be
maintained. This would provide benefits to pollinators while also minimizing the
amount of maintenance, such as mowing and herbicide treatment.
d. Using a seed mix that includes milkweed species is especially beneficial for monarch
"Taxa for which the [Fish and Wildlife] Service has on file enough substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. Proposed rules have not yet
been issued because this action is precluded at present by other listing activity. Development and publication of
proposed rules on these taxa are anticipated. The Service encourages State and other Federal agencies as well as
other affected parties to give consideration to these taxa in environmental planning" (Federal Register, February 28,
1996). Taxa formerly considered as "Category F are now considered as "candidates."
3

butterflies. The following website provides additional information and a
comprehensive list of native plant species that benefit pollinators:
http://www.xerces.org/pollinator-resource-center/mid-atlantic. We also offer our
assistance with developing seed mixes that can be used in conjunction with fast
growing erosion control seed mixes for overall soil stability and pollinator benefits.
e. Additional information regarding plant species, seed mixes, and pollinator habitat
requirements can be provided upon request.
2. Mowing and grounds maintenance, including pesticide use, should be scheduled to not
interfere with monarch breeding or nectaring at project sites that occur along the migration
route. To reduce harm, we advise mowing in the fall or winter when flowers are not in
bloom.
3. Provide nesting sites for pollinator species. Different pollinators have different needs for
nesting sites. Therefore, we recommend project designs include a diverse array of habitats to
accommodate varied pollinators. For example:
a. Hummingbirds typically nest in trees or shrubs.
b. Many butterflies lay eggs on specific host plants.
c. Most bees nest in the ground and in wood or dry plant stems.
d. For additional information and actions that can be taken to benefit pollinators, please
visit the following website: https://www.fws.gov/pollinators/.
4. Minimize effects of outdoor light pollution. Recent studies indicate that artificial lighting
disrupts the natural reproduction and feeding patterns of nocturnal pollinators such as beetles
and moths. This disruption results in a decrease of pollination rates in plants and a decrease in
the health and diversity of nocturnal pollinators. When developing an outdoor lighting plan or
installing any outdoor lighting devices, we recommend the following measures be considered
to minimize potential adverse effects of outdoor lighting:
a. Decrease the number of light fixtures, as practicable, to meet lighting objectives.
b. Install lighting only in areas that need illumination for safety (e.g. paths, roads, etc.).
Avoid lighting landscape features such as trees, shrubs, or building facades.
c. Install fully shielded lights that direct light downward.
d. Use only low-pressure sodium (LPS), high-pressure sodium (HPS), or light emitting
diode (LED) light sources that emit "warm" light. "Warm" light sources are those that
contain low amounts of blue light in their spectrum. Choosing light sources with a
color temperature of no more than 3,000 Kelvins will minimize the effects of blue
light exposure.
e. For additional information and actions that can be taken to reduce outdoor light
pollution, please visit the following website: https://www.darksky.org/our-
work/lighting/lighting for-citizens/lighting-basics/.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Ms. Karla
Quast of our staff at [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-21-302.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

U
Cultural Resources
Report

R.S. Webb & Associates
Cultural Resource Management Consultants
2800 Holly Springs Parkway, Suite 200 • P.O. Drawer 1319
Holly Springs, Georgia 30142
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
June 16, 2021
Mr. Heath Caldwell
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
3714 Spokeshave Lane
Matthews, North Carolina 28105
Subject: Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review (Revised)
Ballantyne Archdiocese Development Tract
Whiteoak, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
R.S. Webb & Associates No. 21-649-138
Dear Mr. Caldwell:
BACKGROUND
During May and June 2021, R.S. Webb & Associates (RSWA) conducted a cultural resources
literature review for the proposed Ballantyne Archdiocese development tract in the Whiteoak
community of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The proj ect area covers approximately 86 acres
and is located southeast of the confluence of McAlpine Creek (west) and Four Mile Creek (north)
and northeast of the current intersection of the Johnston Road and North Community House
Road/Endhaven Lane in south Mecklenburg County (Figure 1).
For this study, a cultural resource is defined as a discrete area of human activity that is at least 50
years old. Cultural resources include, but are not limited to, archeological sites, historic structures,
military earthworks, mines/mining features, historic cemeteries, and historic landscape features. The
purpose of the current study was to determine if previously recorded cultural resources are located
within the project area.
METHODOLOGY
Through the State Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) HPOWEB database, information was
reviewed regarding National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties, Mecklenburg County
surveyed -only historic resources, local landmarks, state study -list sites and historic resources
determined by the SHPO to be eligible for the NRHP. The North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology (OSA) provided RSWA with information via email regarding archeological sites within
1.6 kilometers (km) (1.0 mile) of the project area. This information included site forms, location
maps and partial or full reports. Historic county maps were examined online through North Carolina
Maps, a collaboration of the University of North Carolina, the State Archives of North Carolina, and
the Outer Banks History Center. Historic aerial photography and additional historic maps were
accessed through Historicaerials.com, Earthexplorer.usgs.gov, Legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/, and/or
Alabamamaps.ua. edu.
The following primary sources were found to be useful in searching for historic resources within and
adjacent to the project area:

Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review, Ballantyne Archdiocese Tract (Revised) Page 2
June 16, 2021
• 1891 Official Military Atlas of the Civil War (Davis et al. reprinted, 1983)
• 1905 USDA Charlotte, North Carolina -South Carolina 15-Minute quadrangle
• 1910 USDA Soil Map of Mecklenburg County
• 1911 County Commissioner's Map of Mecklenburg County
• 1912 Rural Delivery Map of Mecklenburg County
• 1938 and 1953 State Highway and Public Works Commission Map of Mecklenburg County
• 1955, 1960, 1968, 1978, and 1983 aerial photographs of Mecklenburg County
• 1968 USDA Weddington, NC -SC 7.5-Minute quadrangle
• 1993-2018 Google Earth aerial photography.
RESULTS
Previous Archeological Investigations: OSA records indicate no fewer than nine previous cultural
resources investigations located within 1.0 km of the study tract, two of which were located within
approximately 300 m of the study tract (Figure 1). These surveys include an archeological survey
for a roadway interchange located southwest of the current study tract (Lautzenheiser 1989) and an
archeological evaluation/survey for a proposed sewer line corridor located south and east of
McAlpine Creek which passed through the northwestern corner of the current project area (Holm et
al. 2000) (Figure 1).
Previous Architecturallnvestigations: According to SHPO personnel, the North Carolina HPOWEB
database is the definitive source of all architectural survey information for Mecklenburg County.
National Register of Historic Places: There are no NRHP-listed historic properties located within
1.0 km of the current study tract.
Mecklenburg County Historic Resources: The HPOWEB database identifies no state study -list sites,
local landmarks or properties determined eligible for the NRHP within 1.0 km of the study tract.
Recorded Archeological Sites: The OSA database indicates that 11 recorded archeological sites have
been identified within 1.0 km of the project area, the closest of which, 31MK526, is in or near the
Johnston Road corridor and 300 m southwest of the project area (Figure 1). The recorded site is
known by a surface collection of late 19' or early 20' century artifacts from a disturbed area near
a mill pond dam. The associated survey report indicates that subsurface testing produced no
additional artifacts and that the site did not appear to be eligible for the NRHP (Lautzenheiser 1989).
Revolutionary War Actions/Features: There were at least five reported Revolutionary War military
engagements in Mecklenburg County and several other such events in surrounding counties; no such
events took place within 12 km of the study tract (Lewis 2021).
Civil War Actions/Features: Review of the Official Military Atlas of the Civil War (Davis et al.
1983) revealed that no significant Civil War military activity occurred in present Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. Union General William T. Sherman, following the capture of Columbia,
South Carolina on February 17, 1865, moved north to the vicinity of Kershaw, Lancaster County,
South Carolina (61 km southeast), but his army then turned northeast and moved toward Laurel Hill
and Fayetteville, North Carolina, thus bypassing the project region (Davis et al. 1983).

Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review, Ballantyne Archdiocese Tract (Revised) Page 3
June 16, 2021
Historic Cemeteries: The USGS topographic maps reviewed show no cemeteries mapped within 1.0
km of the project area.
Structures on Historic Maps and Aerial Photographs: Early 20th century maps indicate that
Endhaven Lane is a historic road corridor that split south of the project area and continued beyond
the project area to points west and south. As many as four buildings were present near this road
corridor, approximately 160 m southwest of the project area (Figure 1). By 1968, it appears that the
westerly branch of the historic road corridor (to McAlpine Creek) was abandoned and the south
branch became primary; no other roads appeared in or near the study tract prior to the late 1980s or
early 1990s. As many as nine structures, some within complexes, may have been located within the
southern part of the project area during the middle to late 20th century; two other structures were
present just beyond the southeastern project area boundary during this period (Figure 1).
Aerial photographs from 1955 reflect the aforementioned abandonment of the west -branch road,
south of the project area. The project area was mostly in cultivation or pasture with islands of woods
throughout the tract. This use of the project tract appears to have been associated with a dwelling -
outbuilding complex dating to the middle of the 20th century located within the southern part of the
study tract north of Endhaven Lane; two additional dwellings were in place within the southwestern
project area boundary by 1965 (Figure 1). After 1960, cultivation in the study tract ceased and
reforestation occurred. Aerial photographs taken in 1978 and 1983 suggest that the older dwelling/
outbuilding complex had been abandoned and its site was reclaimed by woods; the two above -
referenced dwellings were still present in the southern part of the prof ect tract. The prof ect area was
unimproved and entirely wooded as of 1983. Modern utility work occurred in the project area during
the late 20th century, with the balance of the study tract being wooded. Aerials from 1994 show that
the modern school campus with associated open space in the south central and southeastern part of
the project area were in place by that time.
CONCLUSIONS
There are no NRHP-listed properties, determined -eligible properties, study -listed resources,
designated local landmarks, cemeteries, otherwise recorded historic resources, or recorded
archeological sites located within or adjacent to the study tract. The closest known cultural resource
is an archeological site located 300 m southwest of the project area. Aerial photographs indicate
middle 20th century agricultural use of the study tract apparently associated with one or more
structure complexes located in the southern part of the study tract.
CLOSING COMMENTS
Mr. Caldwell, we appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any
questions or comments, please contact me at 770-345-0706.
Sincerely,
iR.S. WEBB ASSOCIATES
J Y
Robert S. (Steve) Webb
President and Senior Principal Archeologist
Attachments: Figure 1

Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review, Ballantyne Archdiocese Tract (Revised) Page 4
June 16, 2021
REFERENCES
Davis, G.B., L. J. Perry and J. W. Kirkley, compiled by C. D. Cowles
1983 Atlas to Accompany the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies.
Reprint of the 1891-1895 edition. The Fairfax Press, New York.
Holm, M.A., S.E. Bamann, and L. Lautzenheiser
2000 Archaeological Evaluation and Survey of Portion of McAlpine Creek, Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. Coastal Carolina Research, Inc. Tarboro, North Carolina.
Lautzenheiser, L.
1989 Archaeological Survey of US 521 Relocation, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
Coastal Carolina Research, Inc. Tarboro, North Carolina.
Lewis, J.D.
2021 The American Revolution in North Carolina. Internet -Online. Found at:
http://www.carolana.comNC/Revolution/home.html. Accessed April 2021.

N.
QUADRANGLE LOCATION
30�
• Recorded Archeological Site
❑ Structure on Historic Maps and Aerial Photographs
Map Reference: 7.5-Minute USGS Quadrangle
Weddington, North Carolina (2019)
F
D4VFN L
MEG Wp
--- Road on Historic Maps and Aerial Photographs
— Previous Archeological Project
Scale
0 305 meters
0 1000 feet
Figure 1 Previous Projects and Recorded Cultural Resources

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Reid Wilson
June 28, 2021
Heath Caldwell
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
heath. caldwellkwetlands-epg
Re: Construct multi -use development, Ballantyne Archdiocese property, intersection of Toringdon Way
& North Community House Road, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, ER 21-1265
Dear Mr. Caldwell:
Thank you for your letter of May 12, 2021, regarding the above -referenced undertaking. We have reviewed
the submittal and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or environmental.reviewkncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
(1,�-o-Q-. uQ- to
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
cc: John Hamby, Restoration Systems, LLC
jhabmy_(r)c restorationsystems.com
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599