20131114 Ver 1_401 Application_20131013

WN ;t
20 1 3 1 1 14
Wetland and Natural Resource
Consultants = at • :r:
October 14, 2013
US ACE, Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 -5006
and
NC DWR, Webscape Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Re: Proposed Lot Impacts, 4717 Piper Glen Drive
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina -j✓
To whom it may concern:
The purpose of this correspondence is to request written NW29 Permit Verification and Water Quality
Certification for the proposed impacts as detailed in the attached PCN for the above referenced project. An
acceptance letter from the NCEEP is attached for the proposed compensatory mitigation.
Please contact me if you have any questions, comments, or require additional information.
Sincerely,
Tamp Bandy
Hkkory Office
1646 Machine Shop Road
Hickory, NC 28602
Phone: [phone]
ECEIVE
OCT 1 6 2013

y�oF WA L-1-0�v
O K
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
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Q Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes FA] No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
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 [j] No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑Yes [j] 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.
0 Yes ❑ No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
❑ Yes Q No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes Q No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
4717 PIPER GLEN DR
2b. County:
Mecklenburg
2c. Nearest municipality I town:
Charlotte
2d. Subdivision name:
Piper Glen
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
n/a
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
CELADON DEVELOPMENT LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
28228 -619
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
James Lawrence
3d. Street address:
PO 79001
3e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28271
3f. Telephone no.:
704 - 351 -0172
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Consultant Information
Sa. Name:
Tamp Bandy
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
WNR
5c. Street address:
1646 Machine Shop Road
5d. City, state, zip:
Hickory, NC 28602
5e. Telephone no.:
828- 302 -3437
5f. Fax no.:
59. Email address:
tamp @wetland- consultants.com
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
22542124
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
I Latitude: 35.06797dN Longitude: 80.80792dW
1c. Property size:
0.835 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
UT to Fourmile Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
Catawba
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
undeveloped Lot 24 in Piper Glen subdivision Lot is wooded, and receives surface runoff and drainage from Piper Glen Golf Course. Adjacent lots
are developed with existing single family homes
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.25 acre
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: -100 if
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Lot fill for construction of single family residence in existing subdivision
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Lot fill and site grading utilizing typical earth moving and grading equipment.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑ No Q Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency /Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes Q 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):
A] Wetlands ❑Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 - P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.25
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.25
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
Culvert
UT to Fourmile Creek
INT
Corps
1
-100
S2 -
Choose one
-
S3 -
Choose one
S4 -
Choose one
S5 -
Choose one
S6 -
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
-100
3i. Comments:
stream source of hydrology primarily from surface runoff and likely from golf fairway and green irrigation.
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 individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section d of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other-
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet )
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
development footprint will be minimized as practicable.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
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?
0 Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.25 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: request for credit availability submitted concurrent with PCN. Approval letter to be forwarded upon receipt from NC EEP
S. 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
buffer mitigation?
Yes x0 No
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.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(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 ❑ 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?
tbd %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
to be determined during local approval process
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
❑X Phase ll
3b. Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes Q No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stonmwater 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 ❑ No
attached?
S. 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 S of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. 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 ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes Q No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after- the -fact permit application?
[]Yes Q 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 Q 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.
requesting authorization to construct single family residence in existing subdivision
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.
existing sanitary sewer
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 Q No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes Q No
impacts?
Sc. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
to be confirmed by USAGE
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes Q No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
to be confirmed by USAGE
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 Q 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?
to be confirmed by USAGE
B. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA designated 100•year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
POLARIS GIS
/ Lairf&cr-
Applicant/Agents Printed Name
lican nrs Signatur
jnf7s19Pnatur&&
Date
val id only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is rovided
Page 10 of 10

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ON THE ??^? DAY OF_
MARC/1_ 2013 AN ACTUAL SURVEY WAS MADE
UNDER MY SUPERVISION OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN ON THIS PLAT, AND THAT T E BOUNDARY LINES AND THE
IMPROVEMENTS, IF ANY, ARE AS SHOWN HEREON
CHORD
, �r
SIGNED ''
28750
iJJ 95
N3777'3J E
132 74
___
OFESSIONAL!! LAND SURVEYOR
\ %jil111 i 1/1"
\N
NN �N CAI? //
/�i�
jE $/O,y�9'��
��Q'Ds
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
RADIUS
LENGTH
BEARING
9r;
;4� SEAL
=
L -4689 Ar
., z
o s �3
,,�.
i /T A$I �1� \ \\\ �TV
g21'16y, —PIPER GLEN
GOLF COURSE
ORS 1,
79 ROAR
°W 9'
ORIO
G'
SEr
ti
515'p8
ROAR
LINE TABLE
LINE BEARING LENGTH
L 1 S4J 43'2J °W 5.94
CHORD
Cl
52935 05 "W 107.32
FOUND 111 \L 1
1
1 \
45' REARYARO `
II \
LOT 24 � am
M1LOT 2j es � °I 0.835 ACRE
� I (J6,373 SF)
VACANT LOT 25
X717 / M8 221765
I�J6'RCP /
JD' SETBACK
ROAR FOUND
(O 39' FROM CP) 11DDl1IE C7 � CP = CALCULATED POINT
47 PWR O/P a OLD IRON PIPE
REBAR 1 NI4� — � R SIP =SET IRON PIN
FOUND I � �
PWR =POWER PAD
FOUND TELE = TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
FRB
(q,55' �� �) RAY s RIGHT OF WAY
f •7 �/�A' CA TV =CABLE 7ELEVIStOW
n = YARD INLET
NOTES C8 =CATCH BASIN
1. PfD 22542114 (MB ?? PG 785� SAY SDMH = ST/ORM ORAI�MEANHOL�T
2 THIS
CHORD
Cl
28750
iJJ 95
N3777'3J E
132 74
52935 05 "W 107.32
FOUND 111 \L 1
1
1 \
45' REARYARO `
II \
LOT 24 � am
M1LOT 2j es � °I 0.835 ACRE
� I (J6,373 SF)
VACANT LOT 25
X717 / M8 221765
I�J6'RCP /
JD' SETBACK
ROAR FOUND
(O 39' FROM CP) 11DDl1IE C7 � CP = CALCULATED POINT
47 PWR O/P a OLD IRON PIPE
REBAR 1 NI4� — � R SIP =SET IRON PIN
FOUND I � �
PWR =POWER PAD
FOUND TELE = TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
FRB
(q,55' �� �) RAY s RIGHT OF WAY
f •7 �/�A' CA TV =CABLE 7ELEVIStOW
n = YARD INLET
NOTES C8 =CATCH BASIN
1. PfD 22542114 (MB ?? PG 785� SAY SDMH = ST/ORM ORAI�MEANHOL�T
2 THIS
RECORDED OR UNRECORDED EASEMfNT� SETBACKS,
BUFFERS. RIGHTS —OF —WAY, OR RESTR/C77VE COVENANTS,
OTHER THAN SHOWN FRB
3 THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED W/THIN AN AREA HANNG A
ZONE DfSfGNATION X BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA), ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE
MAP (FIRM) N0. 3710445800J, WITH A DATE OF
IDEN71FfCAI)ON OF 312109.
4 SURREY MADE WITHOUT THE BfNEFlT OF A TITLE
EXAMfNATION.
5 PROPERTY ZONED- R- 15(CD)
SE78ACK5 SHOWN ARE PER
CURRENT ZONING
CLASSIRCA7fON AND ARE SUBJECT TO fN7ERPRETAAON BY
THE PROPER ZONING ADMlN151RA TfON.
SCALE 1
" =40'
_ PHYSICAL _SURVEY
OF
LOT 24 of PIPER GLEN
CITY OF CHARL0T7F, MECICLENBURG COUNTY, NORI}1 CAROLINA
CELADON CONS7RUC710N COMPANY
VICINITY MAP
wor TO scat¢ �
Q�
CAROLINA SURVEYORS, INC
PC. eox 267
RNEVILLE, N C 26134
(704) 669 -7601
FAx [phone]
axrcrcArc OF Za1roN
NC. C-1242 SC888
SURVEYED FOR
—
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK, 22 _AT PAGE 765 DEED RECORDED BOOK PAGE_,
Y013�80T\PIVER GLEN
DRAWN BY— 7W FIELD WORK_ � � FIELD BOOK /J___ zms\yWaM sUD4
PROPERTY MAY BE SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL S
SSMH = SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
CURRENT ZONING
CLASSIRCA7fON AND ARE SUBJECT TO fN7ERPRETAAON BY
THE PROPER ZONING ADMlN151RA TfON.
SCALE 1
" =40'
_ PHYSICAL _SURVEY
OF
LOT 24 of PIPER GLEN
CITY OF CHARL0T7F, MECICLENBURG COUNTY, NORI}1 CAROLINA
CELADON CONS7RUC710N COMPANY
VICINITY MAP
wor TO scat¢ �
Q�
CAROLINA SURVEYORS, INC
PC. eox 267
RNEVILLE, N C 26134
(704) 669 -7601
FAx [phone]
axrcrcArc OF Za1roN
NC. C-1242 SC888
SURVEYED FOR
—
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK, 22 _AT PAGE 765 DEED RECORDED BOOK PAGE_,
Y013�80T\PIVER GLEN
DRAWN BY— 7W FIELD WORK_ � � FIELD BOOK /J___ zms\yWaM sUD4
" =40'
_ PHYSICAL _SURVEY
OF
LOT 24 of PIPER GLEN
CITY OF CHARL0T7F, MECICLENBURG COUNTY, NORI}1 CAROLINA
CELADON CONS7RUC710N COMPANY
VICINITY MAP
wor TO scat¢ �
Q�
CAROLINA SURVEYORS, INC
PC. eox 267
RNEVILLE, N C 26134
(704) 669 -7601
FAx [phone]
axrcrcArc OF Za1roN
NC. C-1242 SC888
SURVEYED FOR
—
MAP RECORDED IN BOOK, 22 _AT PAGE 765 DEED RECORDED BOOK PAGE_,
Y013�80T\PIVER GLEN
DRAWN BY— 7W FIELD WORK_ � � FIELD BOOK /J___ zms\yWaM sUD4

Assessed Intermittent Stream `'s.•�� \ 1�♦
Approximately 100 linear feet �f`o��� y `'f
\ ' `
Assessed Jurisdictional ; , ♦♦ \ f�N og
Wetland ' ♦ /
Approximately 0.25 acre \6. /
I ' •
� '� IN • /
• • ok •
4 ' Assessed Ephemeral
1 's "RCP ' • r y 0 • channels and / or drainaga
• . 0 patterns in wetlands
F
WM ;t Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants
Wetland Delineation Sketch - 06103113
for
James Lawrence
Piper Glen Drive, Huntersville, NC
Wetland Sketch provided for illustrative purposes in preliminary planning and for use by licensed
land surveyors for location of field flagging only. Not intended to be relied upon for exact location,
dimensions, or orientation. All findings and assessments made by wetland consultants regarding
limits of jurisdiction or permitting requirements are subject to verification by the US Army Corps of
Engineers, the NC Division of Water Quality, and other appropriate local authorities. Base
information provided by client; portion of field survey prepared by Carolina Surveyors.
LOT 24 o f PIPER GLEN
------------------- - - - - --
CITY OF CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROL /NA
CEL ADON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
OCMFY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
�S /%F
F�

The National Map
NOTES: Data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program.
Celadon Development, LLC
Piper Glen Lot
HUC- 030501030105
Open in The National Map Viewer 9/17/13 5:22 PM

35° 4'19"
35" T54"
Soil Map — Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
$ n 0 50 100 200 300 '0
Feet
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
6/9/2013
Page 1 of 3
35" 4' 18"
35" 3'5,V

The National Map
NOTES: Data available from U.S. Geological Survey, National Geospatial Program.
Open in The National Map Viewer 6/9/13 10:03 PM

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section iV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County/parish/borough: MECKLENBURG City^CHARLOTTE
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.06797° N, Long. 80.80792 °LTV.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: UT to Fourmile Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 030501030105
B Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential Jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
L] Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION ii: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There 'Air no "navigable ivaterc nj'the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required)
[� Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
(] Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A�, "waters nJ the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
❑ TNWs, including territorial seas
�] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 100 linear feet: 1 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.25 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: k987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters/wetlands (check If applicable):3
❑ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section iii below.
'For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows yeas -round of has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section M.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.I.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent'
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IU.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section EUMA.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section 11111.1 for
the tributary, Section UIX.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section HI.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(1) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick Lis
Drainage area: (Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 5 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are dick Lt's river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick Lisa river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick Lis �j aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: NO.
Identify flow route to TNWS: UT to Fourmile Creek, to McAlpine Creek to Sugar Creek to Catawba River.
Tributary stream order, if known:
`Note that the Instiuctional Guidebook contains additional information regarding s wales, ditches, washes, and erosional features geneiully and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
❑ Artificial (man - made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 1 feet
Average depth: 0.2 feet
Average side slopes: 4;1(0r eater'.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition /stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence ofru driffle /pool complexes. Explain: WEAK.
Tributary geometry: �eladvely straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: easonai flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: ick Lts
Describe flow regime: likely due to supplemental flows from golf course irrigation.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ck Lis . Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
C1 Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
❑ High Tide Line indicated by: ❑ Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/charactenstics ❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: no flow currently present.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: none known.
"A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development of agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
® Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish /spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatictwildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.25acres
Wetland type. Explain:headwater.
Wetland quality. ExplainJow. likely present due to irrigation from adjacent golf course.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: intermittent flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discreti
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: ick Lis . Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 5-ld river miles from TNW.
Project waters MS aerial straighq miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable watt .
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the (Pick Lis _ floodplain.
(u) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings.
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: �
Approximately ( 0.25 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

a
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNW& Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section HIM:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section IiI.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
�] TNWs: linear feet width (fl), Or, acres.
�] Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: observations.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 100 linear feetlwidth (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non -RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section iii.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacentwetlands.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section iii.B and rationale in Section iiI.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: immediately adjacent.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.25 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are, lurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 111.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section li1.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters!
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from 'haters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA - STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold to interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
"See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
'0 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described In the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CIVA Ad Jurisdicdion Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
[] Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands:
acres.
NON4URISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
❑ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes /ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes /ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
in Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study.
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑ Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable /supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

4 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point. W-1
Pr'Slect/Site' 4717 Piper Glen Drive oty/County: Charlotte, Mecklenburft Sampling Date: 6 -3 -13
ApplicanVo,ner: Celadon Development, LLC state. NC Sampling Point, W-1
Invesfigator(s). Bandy Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hhllslope, terrace, etc.). hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) 136 Lai 35.06797d N Long: - 80.80792d W Datum: WGS 84
Sod Map Unit Name: Wilkes NWI classification-
Are climatic /hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of yearl' Yes No _.K_ (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation _, Sod or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are •Normal Circumstances" presern? Yes No X
Are Vegetation _, Sod or Hydrology X naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, Important features, etc.
Hydrophybc Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Hydnc Sal Present? Yes X No is the Sampled Area
within a Welland? Yee _X No
Wetland Hydrology Presem9 Yes _X_ No
Remarks
above normal precipitation
HYDROLOGY
Welland Hydrology Indicators:
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Status
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reguhredl
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that aoolvl
_ Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_ Surface Water (A1)
— True Aquatic Plains (1314)
— Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
X High Water Table (A2)
X Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
X Drainage Patterns (B10)
X Saturation (A3)
X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
— Moss Trim Unes (816)
_ Water Marks (Bt)
— Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
— Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
— Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (CO)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
— Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
X Algal Mat or Crust (134)
— Other (Explain in Remarks)
— Stunted or Stressed Rants 011)
X Iron Deposits (135)
10
— Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
7. Liguidambor styraciflua
— Shallow Aquitard (133)
X Water - Stained Leaves (139)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
— Microtopographhc Relief (D4)
— Aquatic Fauna (813)
. Total Cover
— FAC - Neutral Test (D5)
Reld Observations:
20% of total cover. 24
OBL species x1-
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size' 15' 1
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Eloeaanus anaustifolia
Water Table Present? Yes X No_
Depth finches). 10
FAC spaces x3=
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
Saturation Preseml? Yes X No
_ Depth (inches) 10
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Includes capillary fringe)
5
Y FACW
UPL species x5-
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
Y FACW
Cclumn Totals. (A) (B)
hydrology assessed to be significantly increased by golf course irrigation
Tree Stratum 30'
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
(Plot Sao: )
Soeaes?
Number of Dominant Species
1 Acre rubrum
30
Y FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 8 (A)
2. Platanus occidentalis
20
Y FACW
3 eeiulo nigra
20
Y FACW
Total Number of Dominam
Species Across al Strata: 11 (B)
4 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y FACU
5 Juniperus virainiana
10
N FACU
That Are of Dominant Spades 72 7
That Are OBL, FACW, a FAC (IVB)
6. Quercus phellos
10
N FACW
7. Liguidambor styraciflua
10
N FAC
Prevalence Index worksheet:
120
. Total Cover
Total % Cover of Multiply by
50% of total cover: 60
20% of total cover. 24
OBL species x1-
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size' 15' 1
FACW species x 2 =
1 Eloeaanus anaustifolia
10
Y FACU
FAC spaces x3=
2. Liriodendron tulipifera
5
Y FACU
FACU spades x 4 =
3 Cornus ommomum
5
Y FACW
UPL species x5-
4 Foxinus pennsylvanica
5
Y FACW
Cclumn Totals. (A) (B)
5
Prevalence Index . B/A -
8'
Hydrophylic Vegetation Indicators:
7'
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophydc Vegetation
8'
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
50% of total cover. 12.5
25 of total al Cover
_
— 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size. )
Problematic Hydrophyhc Vegetation' (Explain)
1 Toxicodendron rodicons
20
Y FAC
—
2 Microstegium viminea
20
Y FAC
3 Juncus effusus
15
Y FACW
'Indicators of soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic-
4 Lonicero japonica
10
N FAC
Definitions of Four vegetation snare:
5
6
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in p 6 am) a
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7
height.
B
SeplinglShrub- Woody plains, excluding vines, less
9
than 31n DBH and greater than or equal to 3 28 it If
10.
m) tall
11.
Herb- All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
65
a Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3 28 It tall
50% of total cover, 32.5 20% of total cover: 13
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3 28 it In
Woody Vine Stratum (Rot sae )
height.
1
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
Vegetation
X
= Total Cover
Present? Yes No
50% cf total cover
20% of total cover:
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)

SOIL
Sampling Point: W-1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
finches) Color (moist) _%
Color (moist) TvooT Loci Texture Remarks
0 -2 10 YR 4/3 100
f
2 -16 10 YR 6/2 90
10 YR 5/6 10 c ELI
f
'Type: C- Concentration D =De lotion RM =Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains ''Location PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A18)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 138, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (All 0) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F8)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain In Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (St) (LRR N,
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 138)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 188, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (35)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S8)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks.
uzo rarmy Corps or engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

I*-
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
September 24, 2013
James Lawrence
Celadon Development, LLC
PO Box 79001
Charlotte, NC 28271 Expiration of Acceptance: March 24, 2014
Project: 4717 Piper Glen Drive County: Mecklenburg
This is a conditional acceptance letter. The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project
under the conditions stated below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by
the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to
determine if payment to the NCEEP will be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits,
reeulations or authorizations associated with the proposed activity including SL 2009 -337: An Act to Promote the Use of
Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by S.L. 2011 -343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certification /CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In-
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned to NCEEP for this impact is determined by
pe itting a encies and may exceed the impact amounts shown below.
Impact
*Non- riparian mitigation credits are not currently available in this huc. EEP can accept payment if use of riparian credits and
the use of the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area are allowed by permitting agencies. Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take
responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the N.C. Department
of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
River
Basin
CU
Location
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer 11
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Ri arian
Non -Ri arian
Coastal Marsh
Catawba
03050103*
0
0
0
0.25
0
0
0
0
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 707 -8915.
Sincerely, azo
James. 116
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWR Wetlands /401 Unit
USACE - Asheville
Tamp Bandy, agent
File LT A
R�DYLKg... Enka"... Pro" Ow fM& MCDMR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mad Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919- 707 -8976 / www.nceep.net