20211734 Ver 1_Windsor Park Relief ES_NW14_PCN_20211124

vat
cnw
Charla"e-Mecklenburg ScFmals
",CAU " " F, . 1�.4� T.,".,
November 24, 2021
Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
RE: Application for Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14 and Section 401 Water Quality
Certification for Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Total Permanent Impacts: 0.186 acre wetiand impacts
Mr. Roden Reynolds:
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) is requesting authorization under a Nationwide Permit 14
for unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional waters of the United States associated with vehicle queuing lanes
needed for the Windsor Park Relief Elementary School. Currently Windsor Park, Idlewild, and Winterfield
schools are over capacity and the proposed location is within the geographic attendance zone and central
to the three schools. This project is necessary to accommodate the increased student population in the
area and will help alleviate strain on the existing Windsor Park, Idlewild, and Winterfield elementary schools
that are currently over capacity within the school district.
Enclosed please find a permit package that includes the following:
• Supplemental Information (Appendix A)
• Agent Authorization Form (Appendix B)
• Permit Drawings (Appendix C)
• Approved Jurisdictional Determination (Appendix D)
• Biological Assessment for Federally Threatened and Endangered Species (Appendix E)
• Mitigation Bank Correspondence (Appendix F)
• FEMA FIRM Panels (Appendix G)
• CIVIS Offsite Analysis and Site Layout Options (Appendix H)
• Wastewater Treatment Correspondence (Appendix 1)
Construction activities associated with the school drive and queuing lanes will result in unavoidable
permanent impacts to 0.186-acre of wetlands. The project also includes temporary clearing impacts to
0.010-acreofwetland. CIVIS will mitigate permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. through the
purchase of wetland mitigation credits from the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (CMSWS)
Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank.

CIVIS hereby requests that this project be authorized under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 14. Should
you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at
michael.iagnoccoa-stvinc.com or [phone].
Sincerely,
(44ft
Michael lagnocco, SPWS
Authonized Agent for CMS
cc: Gary Adams, CNIS
Mike Higgins, CMS
Joshua Kotheimer, STV
NCDWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Enclosures

0� \NAT �y
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
I a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit E] Section 10 Permit
I b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
FAI Yes El No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification — Regular E] Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
401 Water Quality Certification — Express E] Riparian Buffer Authorization
I e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
[] Yes E] No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
0 Yes El No
If.
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.
[y] Yes E] No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
E] Yes E] No
I h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
2b. County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no: _FN/A
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Board of Education
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
DB 36585 P 613
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Gary Adams
3d. Street address:
3301 Stafford Drive
3e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC, 28208
3f.
Telephone no.-.
[phone]
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail] 2.nc.us
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
E] Agent E] Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Michael lagnocco
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
STV Engineers Inc.
5c. Street address:
900 West Trade St, Suite 715
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
5e. Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Michael. lag noccoCa)stvi nc.com
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
I .
Property Identification
1 a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
113316103;13314303
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
I Latitude: 35.197824 Longitude: 80.739463
1 c.
Property size:
16.7 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Campbell 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:
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.585
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,884
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
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?
0 Yes El No El Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
E] Preliminary E] Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Joshua Kotheimer, PWS
Agency/Consultant Company: STV Engineers Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
11/21/2021
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
E]Yes E]No El Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
Yes E] 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):
nX Wetlands El streams —tributaries El Buffers El Open Waters El Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.186
W2 T
Hand Clearing
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.010
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 Wetiand Impacts:
0.196
2h. Comments:
Please See Appendix C - Permit Drawings
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
Choose one
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choos
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake con truction 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
Pi
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 mitiqation, t en you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
F] Neuse Tar -Pamlico Catawba F] Randleman E] Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number—
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone I
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
131
Yes/No
132
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.
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
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?
E] Yes E] No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
E] DWQ El Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
El Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
El Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (CMSWS) Umbrella Bank
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Riparian wetland
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity: 0.372
Quantity:
Quantity:
Please See Appendix A (Supplemental Information) and Appendix F (Mitigation Bank Correspondence).
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
El 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
E] Yes FE] N o
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
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1 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: The project is located within the Catawba River watershed but is not located within the main stem of the Catawba River to which
the buffer rules apply.
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 E] No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
35 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
[y] Yes El 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:
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
CMSWS
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Charlotte -Mecklenburg
El Phase 11
El NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
El USMP
apply (check all that apply):
E] Water Supply Watershed
E] Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
El Yes E] No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
ElCoastal counties
EIHQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
E]ORW
(check all that apply):
E]Session Law 2006-246
E]Other-.
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
E] Yes E] No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
E] Yes E] No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
E] Yes E] 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?
I 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
El Yes
[Y] 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.) Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (1 5A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (1 5A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
E] Yes
No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
E]Yes
[y] 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
El Yes
[y] 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.
The school is not anticipated to lead to future development in the area; the school is being proposed in response to ongoing groMh in the geographic
area.
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.
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
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 No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
Yes No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the LISFWS 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?
USFWS IPaC website, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, field surveys conducted during USFWS optimal survey window. Please see
Appendix E - Biological Evaluation
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
Yes FE] N o
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA EFH Mapper
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
E] Yes FE] 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 and HPOWEB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated I 00-year floodplain?
Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Please See Appendix A - Supplemental Information
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA FIRM Panels
Michael lagnocco, SPWS
11-24-2021
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicantft4nM S�gnature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only it an aulixirizatim
Wter from the �ppficant in provided.)
Page 10 of 10

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
APPENDIX A
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

STV �.iyo
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-020-34
Supplemental Information
B 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 Windsor Park Relief Elementary School site is an approximate 16.7-acre site located west of Farm Pond
Lane and south of Executive Center Drive in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Parcel ID No.
13316103 and 13314303). The project center coordinates are (35.197824, -80.739463). The project site is
currently wooded in different stages of succession throughout the site. Evidence of past residential land
use is present with electrical power poles and lines located within the property center and debris scattered
throughout. Historical aerials show buildings on the site as recent as 2002 but the location of the buildings
and open spaces at the time of the aerials is now covered with saplings and underbrush. Other portions
of the property contain mature wooded areas and utility access corridors. Utilities located within the
property include a Duke Energy electrical tower with transmission lines as well as an existing sanitary sewer
crossing the property. The portion of the property west of Campbell Creek is situated mostly within the
floodplain and floodway and includes a conservation easement, a stream restoration project as well as
other streams and wetlands. Streams and wetlands identified within the site were verified by the USACE
during a site visit on November 15, 2021 (See Appendix D). Land use in the general vicinity is mixed with
single family residences, multifamily homes, and commercial buildings.
B 3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project.
The purpose and need for the project is to provide a relief school to alleviate currently overcrowded
conditions at the Windsor Park, Winterfield, and Idlewild elementary schools (ES). CMS needed to identify
a 15-20-acre site and construct a relief school within a specified geographic area/school attendance zone.
B 3e. Describe the overall project in detail including the type of equipment to be used.
Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) is proposing an elementary school on this site to relieve
overcrowding at three schools in this geographic region of the county which include Windsor Park,
Winterfield, and Idlewild elementary schools. The school will consist of a 105,637 square foot main school
building with two wings that has 45 classrooms and the capacity to accommodate an approximate 900
students (See Appendix C). The school will be two stories tall due to the limited space and the need to
avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands as well as a tree save area and FEMA Community Encroachment
area. There will be a bus parking lot located south of the classroom buildings that enters the property from
Frog Pond Lane. This parking lot will have a multi -purpose role and will be used for basketball courts as
well as bus parking. The bus parking lot will have a separate entrance and exit from the main parking lot
to avoid conflicts between buses and passenger vehicles. The required NCDOT Municipal School
Transportation Assistance (MSTA) queueing lanes and parking lot will enter from Executive Center Drive
on the north of the property and will provide approximately 3,000 feet of queuing as required by MSTA.
The queuing lanes will wrap around on the north of the building as well as the east of the building along
Farm Pond Lane and will have parking located along the lanes to maximize use of the space. There will be
two small play areas situated adjacent to the school building, and a playground that includes playground
equipment located on the west side of the main building. Stormwater will be directed through pipes to a
wet pond located on the west side of the building and bus parking lot. The basin will be located outside of
the FEMA Community Encroachment line and will discharge above Wetland C to the west. The sewer will
tie to an existing line within the property east of Campbell Creek and west of Wetland C. Other utilities
will serve the school from either Farm Pond Lane or Executive Center Drive and will not impact any streams

STV 1 o o
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-020-34
or wetlands. Grading for the school and more specifically the required queuing lanes and parking will
require fill to be placed within Wetland C totaling 0.186 acre. Additionally, there will be 0.010 acre of
temporary hand clearing to Wetland C to construct the fill slope. Structures to be located on a fill will be
the required queuing lanes with parking with stormwater drainage and sewer pipes crossing Wetland C
underground within the fill limits. There will be retaining walls placed in two areas along the western edge
of the school in order to maximize use of the property and minimize impact. Grading work will be
conducted using heavy equipment such as excavators and bulldozers to establish the final grade. Sediment
and erosion control BMP's will be in place prior to land disturbing activities.
D la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in
designing the project.
Throughout the design process many adjustments were made to better avoid and minimize impacts for
the project. The design process went through multiple iterations within the site trying to find the layout
that would best avoid and minimize impacts while still fulfilling the purpose and need of the school. The
school building and classroom wings were reoriented and designed as a two-story building to maximize use
of ground space. The bus parking lot will have a multi -use function and additionally serve as basketball
courts. Initially there was a large open play area in the design but to better avoid the wetlands the play
area was broken into two smaller play areas to utilize space. The stormwater outfall was initially designed
to extend through the wetlands before discharging closer to the stream but was revised to discharge above
the wetland and avoiding the impacts in that location. Fill slopes across the wetland have been designed
at 2:1 slopes to better minimize the unavoidable impacts. Where practicable, retaining walls have been
incorporated in order to minimize encroachment into the streams, wetlands and floodway.
D lb. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts
through construction techniques.
Measures used to avoid and minimize impacts through construction techniques include using orange safety
fencing to establish the construction limits and preventing unauthorized access to jurisdictional areas.
Hand clearing of wetland vegetation will be performed along the base of the fill slope.
D 3c. Comments.
Compensation for unavoidable impacts to wetlands will be mitigated through Charlotte's "Umbrella
Mitigation Bank". Conversations between CIVIS and Erin Shanaberger with Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm
Water Services have discussed credit availability and needs for the Windsor Park Relief School project.
Additionally, it was determined that the mitigation site from which the majority of credits would be
withdrawn from is located adjacent to the project site. A 2:1 mitigation ratio was proposed for project
related wetland impact mitigation. Please see the attached credit reservation letter and mitigation bank
correspondence located in Appendix F.
E 2d. If this project does require a stormwater management plan, then provide a brief
narrative description of the plan.
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
(MS4) Program is mandated under the federal Clean Water Act. An NPIDES MS4 permit is required for every
MS4 owner or operator with jurisdiction in a U.S. Census Bureau designated Urbanized Area. It also applies
to entities that are designated under state rules [15A NCAC 02H .0151]. The city of Charlotte has been
issued the Charlotte NPIDES MS4 Permit NCS000240. Stormwater management facilities for the school will
meet the requirements set out in the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Post Construction Storm Water Ordinance as

STV �.iyo
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
required by the NPIDES permit. Standards set out in the Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Ordinance
are in some instances higher than the state standards and therefore more protective of water quality. The
stormwater management plan is currently under review; the approval will be provided to the USACE and
DWR prior to completing the authorized impacts.
F 4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or
discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project or the available capacity of the
subject facility.
The proposed elementary school will tie into the existing sewer system located immediately west of the
campus. Wastewater generated by the school, estimated at 15, 660 gallons per day, will be treated at the
McAlpine Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant which has sufficient capacity to accommodate the school's
wastewater. "Willingness to Serve" correspondence from Charlotte Water is included in Appendix 1.
F 8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements.
In order to meet FEMA requirements as well as provide a process for development in the floodplain that is
easier to follow, Charlotte -Mecklenburg has mapped a "Community Floodway Encroachment Line" that is
45 percent wider than the FEMA floodway line (FEMA minimum standard). The Community Floodway
Encroachment line has been modeled to show that if all area up to the line is filled it would only result in a
0.2-foot increase in base flood elevation. The Windsor Park Relief Elementary School project has been
designed to avoid any fills within the Community Floodway Encroachment Line thereby satisfying FEMA
floodplain permit requirements. More information on this process can be found in the Floodplain
Regulations Technical Guidance. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) are located in Appendix G.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Reasons for Discharge
Discharge of fill material into Wetland C is needed to create the vehicle queuing lanes and parking located
south of Executive Center Drive. Additionally, there will need to be temporary hand clearing impacts for
the placement of sediment fencing and to allow access to the lower portion of the fill slope during
construction (See Appendix C — Permit Drawings).
Table 1. Summary of Impacts to Jurisdictional Wetlands
Water ID
Impact Type
Impact Area
Purpose of Impact
Wetland Type
(Impact 4)
(Acres)
(NCWAM)
Wetland C
Fill
0.186
Vehicle Queuing Lanes
Bottomland Hardwood
W1
Forest
Wetland C
Hand Clearing
0.010
Construction Access
Bottomiand Hardwood
W2
Forest

STV 1 o o
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-020-34
Description of Alternatives
No -Build
The No -Build alternative was evaluated as a potential option for the CIVIS school system. Current
overcrowding at Windsor Park, Winterfield, and Idlewild elementary schools would continue to get worse
under the No -Build alternative as population density increases in the area. This option would lead to
increased class size or the need to place additional modular classrooms on school spaces designated for
other uses such as playgrounds and open space. This increased class size coupled with the potential for
decreased school amenities would degrade the educational quality provided to the children in the area.
All three schools have predominantly minority student populations with two of the schools having high
poverty classification and one having moderate poverty classification. The No -Build alternative would lead
to diminished educational opportunities in an already disenfranchised community and would not
adequately address the project need.
Offsite Analysis
CIVIS identified over 30 potential sites for the new school of which only four were deemed credible for
further investigation. Of the four that were deemed suitable for the school the proposed site was
determined to be the best choice to meet the project needs. A summary of the CIVIS site selection process
can be found in Appendix H.
On -Site Alternatives
Option A
Option A was designed prior to stream and wetland delineations and the layout was designed to avoid the
mapped water quality stream buffers, the Tree Save Area and the FEIVIA Community Encroachment Area.
This layout provided all the desired school program areas although the playfield was undersized. A shared
basketball court and school bus parking lot bordered Executive Center Drive and the main drive entered
and exited along Farm Pond Lane. The main drive consisted of the required vehicle queuing and parking.
The main building was situated south of the bus parking area and west of the queuing lanes and parking
lot and had two wings with a playground located between them. Additionally, there was a stormwater
BIVIP located at the south end of the property adjacent to the FEIVIA Floodplain as well as a modular
classroom area between the stormwater BIVIP and the main parking lot.
Option B
Option B was designed after preliminary stream and wetland mapping was received by the designers. This
option was laid out similarly to Option A except the main building was shifted east away from the wetlands
and the queuing lanes and parking were adjusted to accommodate the building shift. This option lost the
area designed previously for modular classrooms and it was determined that the drop off location in the
queue was in an unacceptable location. This option avoids the mapped water quality stream buffers, the
Tree Save Area and the FEIVIA Community Encroachment Area.
Option C
Option C was designed using preliminary wetland mapping. The building configuration was adjusted and
moved to the south of the property west of the queuing lanes and parking. The queuing lanes were
mirrored compared to Option A to allow an acceptable drop-off point. The bus lot and playgrounds were
shifted in the northern portion of the property along Executive Center Drive. This configuration did not
provide access to the space provided for the modular classrooms and did not have remaining space for

STV
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-020-34
playfields. This option avoids the mapped water quality stream buffers, the Tree Save Area and the FEMA
Community Encroachment Area.
Option D
Option D was designed using preliminary wetland mapping and used the building design originally used in
Option A and shifted the building to the south. The queuing lanes and parking area was mirrored from the
original configuration to allow the drop-off point to be placed in an acceptable location. The bus parking
lot and playground were adjusted in the north end. This configuration did not allow for enough space to
accommodate the playfield and the space allotted for modular classrooms did not allow proper access for
future installation and removal. This option avoids the mapped water quality stream buffers, the Tree Save
Area and the FEMA Community Encroachment Area.
Option E
Option E was designed using preliminary wetland mapping and mirrored the building from the original
configuration and moved it to the southeast portion of the property along Farm Pond Lane. The bus
parking lot would be accessed from Farm Pond Lane and the queuing lanes would enter from Executive
Center Drive and wrap around on the west side of the building. This option does allow for access to install
and remove future modular classrooms and has a playground along Farm Pond Lane. This option does not
allow room for the playfield or adequate room for the stormwater BMP. This option avoids the mapped
water quality stream buffers, the Tree Save Area and the FEMA Community Encroachment Area.
For figures showing the preliminary layout of the previously described Options A through E please see
Appendix H.
Option F (Preferred Alternative)
Option F was determined to be the preferred alternative and is described in the supplemental information
above.
Federally Protected Species
Pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), literature and field reviews were conducted to
determine the presence of any federally protected species (species designated as endangered or
threatened) within the study area. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC) online system lists five species in Mecklenburg County as being federally protected
under the ESA. Included on the list are four endangered species (Carolina heelsplitter, Michaux's sumac,
Schweinitz's sunflower, and smooth coneflower) and one threatened species (northern long-eared bat) as
occurring or potentially occurring in Mecklenburg County. Note: Bald eagle is no longer federally protected
by the ESA but was included in the assessment as the species is afforded protection through the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) and is listed as threatened in North Carolina.

STV 100
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
Mecklenburg County Federal and/or State Protected Species
Protected Species
Protection Status
Common Name
I Scientific Name
Federal
State
Animal
Bald eagle
Haliaeelus leucocephalus
BGEPA
T
Carolina heelsplitter
Lasmigona decorala
E, CH
-
Northern long-eared bat
Myolis septentrionalis
T
-
Plant
Michaux's sumac
Rhus michauxii
E
-
Schweinitz's sunflower
Helianthus schweinilzii
E
-
Smooth coneflower
Echinacea laevigata
E
-
E — Endangered, T — Threatened, CH — Critical Habitat, BGEPA — Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
No federally protected species were observed within the study area during the field reviews/surveys and
no known occurrences of protected species have been documented by the NCNHP within or within one
mile of the study area. Based on literature and field reviews, it has been determined that the project would
have a biological conclusion of 'No Effect' on Schweinitz's sunflower, Michaux's sumac, and smooth
coneflower. Based on literature and field reviews, it has been determined that the project would have a
biological conclusion of 'No Effect - Outside of Range' on Carolina heelsplitter. Based on literature and field
reviews, it has been determined that the project would have a biological conclusion of 'May Effect,
however, NLEB is exempt due to consistency with the 4(d) rule' for the northern long-eared bat.
Please see Appendix E for a detailed Biological Assessment containing protected species descriptions,
survey methodology and results, and biological conclusions.
NEPA/SEPA
The proposed Windsor Park Relief Elementary school is locally funded through a 2017 bond referendum
and will receive no federal funding for the school. Due to the lack of federal funding the need for a NEPA
analysis is not required. Additionally, criteria set out in NC Session Law 2015-90 have not been exceeded,
the project will be authorized by a General Certification, and therefore the project does not need a SEPA
review.
Cultural Resources
Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the project has been assessed to
determine potential impacts to cultural resources including historic properties and archaeological remains.
On October 29, 2021 a scoping letter was sent to NC State Historic Preservation Office describing the
proposed project and requesting feedback on any potential issues or concerns that the NCSHPO may have;
no response has been received to date. Additionally, the HPOWEB 2.Owebsite was reviewed for any known
sites of historical significance that the project may potentially impact. There were no known sites listed
within the property boundaries. The closest three sites identified were all over a half mile away from the
project property and included MK3418 (Albemarle Road Presbyterian Church), MK3251 (Cohen-Fumero
House), and MK3699 (Eastland Mall Sign). Due to the distance from each of these known sites it is
concluded that there would be no negative impact to cultural resources related to the project.

STV �.iyo
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
Section 4(f) and 6(f) Resources
No Section 4(f) or 6(f) resources are present within the project study area; therefore, the proposed project
would not result in any impacts to these resources.
CMS Authorized Agent's Signature
November 24, 2021
Date

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
APPENDIX B
Agent Authorization Form
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
1, Gary Adams I an authorized representative of
Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools, hereby certify that I have authorized Michael lagnocco,
PWS of STV Engineers, Inc., to act on my behalf and take actions necessary in the
processing, issuance, and acceptance of this Jurisdictional Determination QD) and the
subsequent required Section 404 permit application.
Representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are also hereby granted permission to
access the proposed Windsor Park Relief Elementary School property comprised of Parcel
9's 13316103 and 13314303, as depicted on the exhibits shown herein, in the processing of
this Request for JD and future Section 404 permitting actions. CMS is currently under
contract to acquire the subject property and is scheduled to assume ownership of the
property by the end of September 2021.
We hereby verify that the information submitted in this request/application is true and
accurate to the best of our knowledge.
cwq S Aims
Appricant's signature
09.01.2021
Date
Agent's signftUe
9/9/2021
Date
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign all future application correspondence.

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
APPENDIX C
Permit Drawings
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034

C) �z
z
co 0
C%l
0
0
IE5
IL
CL
C%l
=
u
=
<
co
6
C%l
4
IL
C%l
z
x
LU
Ln
co
<
co _j
—)
w
>
p
o
>
0
<
U)

APPROX. 3000'DOT MSTA QUEUE LENGTH RETAINING WALL
FACULTY/STAFF PARKING
'ING VISITOR PARKIN
IMPACTED WETLANDS
FEMA FLOOD Y _E_XtCU1­I\q_77Cw�-0—rffJx'q_-- -V 7- T
RETAIN, WALL -
SANITARY SEWER SERVICE
TDOO
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT
ri
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT YARD
RETAINING WALL
<
L W , 1, C)
U
Of 0-
<
of
PLAY U_
LU U_
K1-,A
4_z _ 9
C/) 0-
0
Of
t
2-STORY SCHOOL
BUILDING
UN&STURB
BIKE
X,
TRE�tA PARKING
AREAJ 'k
is D
E� E
FLAG
POLE
WET DETEN I N POND'
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT---//
BUS LOT/ WALKING TRACK/
BASKETBALL/ DELIVERIES
FUTURE MODULAR
CLASSROOM AREA
0 100 200 400
SCALE: 1 "=200' NORTH
A calculations including computer files, draw. �n prepared by Stewart, Inc. are instruments of
ofessional service intended for one-time use. They are subject to copyright and other property right laws and shall remain the property of WETLAND DISTURBANCE
tewart, Inc. They are not to be cor modified, or changed in any manner whatsoever nor assigned to a third party without prior written COVER SHEET
2rmission of Stewart, Inc.
CMS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WINDSOR Project NO: C21020 Ref No:
17A PARK, WINITERFIELD, IDLEWILD RELIEF Scale: 1"=200' Date: 11.05.21
STEWART Drawn By: JOT Drawing No:
111 N T111N ST *1111 1111 1 1011
CHAEL.TTE NO 2_2 CHARLOTTE,NC
T 704 334 7925 PROJECT # C21 020 Checked By: JRB WD 0

EXECLTIVE CENTER DRIVE
60, PUBLIC RIVV
7-
- i
RETAINING VALL
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTIO
PROPERTY LINE .
7
. ...... . .
W2 - WETLAND C TEM PORARY
IMPACT HAND CLEARING OF
WETLAND VEGETA1
W1 - WETLAN
MECHANIZED EQU D
0.010 ACRE OR 466 SQ. FT
PERMANENT PACT
7 TV �
FROM FILL - 0.186 ACRE
WE LAND C - 0.917 ACRE
OR 8,103 SQ. FT
OR 39,955 SQ. FT
OMMUNITY FLOODPLAIN
COMMUNITY ENCROACHMLN 11
EMA F�OibDh�IN
FEMA FLOODWAY 0
77­v-, _:��LqC
J h— _Z'
Loc—" :ic
L
A, i�' - ;�- -
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
PROPERTY LIN
T
FUtURE MODULAR
CLASSROOMS
0 100 200 400
NORTH
SCALE: 1 "=200'
,nts and calculations including computer files, draw. ..fication prepared by Stewart, Inc. are instruments of
ofessional service intended for one-time use. They are subject to copyright and other property right laws and shall remain the property of
WETLAND DISTURBANCE
tewart, Inc. They are not to be co� - �odified, or changed in any manner whatsoever nor assigned to a third party without prior written
ermission of Stewart, Inc.
OVERALL SITE PLAN
CMS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WINDSOR
ProjeCtNO:C21020
Ref No:
W11
PARK, WINTERFIELD, IDLEWILD RELIEF
Scale: 1"=200'
Date: 11.05.21
5TEWART
Drawn By: JOT
Drawing No:
1�lHlAN T111N ST *1111 1111 IIENSE * I
rL.TTE _ 2_2
T - 334 7925 PR OJ ECT # C21 020
CHARLOT T`E, NC
WD 11
F hecked By: JR131

i
V.
ZUNLAL
68
p,q�� PROPER W 0 .80
S EAMA
50 S.F. OR
001 AC.
C) F
LIMITS 0
. . . . . CONSTRUCTION
0
TT
ly,
WFIR .... ...
iiiii iiiiiiiiiA/---04J—Y—�wi-WETLANDC
—4,1 1
PERMANENT IMPACT
1 4L=
3 8 S
FROM FILL - 0.186 ACRE
--'-I
OR 8,103 SQ. FT
D(�
VV2 - WETLAND C TEMPORARY'
MF )A'
P
I -T HAND CLEARING OF
WETLAND VEGETATION (NO
MECHANIZED EQUIPMENT)
0.010 ACRE OR 466 SQ. FT SECTION - SEE VVD 3
NEX
TURE) k
OODWAY
1EAE S
SAW SA N.. H
RIM 691.90
NV'IN 6 46
' IN=680.46
INW OUT80�8 .24
O�T=6 0.24
VV: ANDC-
7 0.9 ACRE OR
39,955 SQ. FT
0 30 60 120
NORTH
SCALE: 1 11=60'
,nts and calculations including computer files, draw. ..fication prepared by Stewart, Inc. are instruments of
p,ofessional sery ice intended for one-time use. They are subject to copyright and other property right laws and shall remain the property of
W2/W3/W4 WETLAND C
Stewart, Inc. They are not to be co� - �odified, or changed in any manner whatsoever nor assigned to a third party without prior written
permission of Stewart, Inc.
DISTURBANCE ENLARGEMENT
CMS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WINDSOR
Project NO:
C21020
Ref No:
W11
PARK, WINTERFIELD, IDLEWILD RELIEF
Scale:
1" = 60'
Date: 11.05.21
5TEWART
Drawn By:
JOT
Drawing No:
1�lHlAN T111NIT *1111 1111 TIENIE * I
RL.TTE NO 2_2 _ '__ =
T 7W 334 7925 PROJECT # C21 020
CHARLO TTE, NC
WD 21
Checked By: IRBI

TOPOGRAPHICAL PROFILE OF SECTION A -A'- SHEET WD-2
A A'
6i
<
PROPOSED GRADE (2:1 SLOPE)
0
U)
<
0
LU
>
EXISTING
6ADE
I I
-
__+
ETLAND
W,
EgREPEF
L
I
I I
� PERMANENT IMPACT
TEMPORARYIMPACT
UNDISTURBED
WETLAND
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1 20'
0 10 20 40
SCALE: 1 =20' NORTH
,nts and calculations including computer files, draw. �n prepared by Stewart, Inc. are instruments of
ofessi 0 nal service intended for one-time use. They are subject to copyright and other property right laws and shall remain the property of
tewart, Inc. They are not to be co� - ' �odified, or changed in any manner whatsoever nor assigned to a third party without prior written
ermission of Stewart, Inc.
WETLAND DISTURBANCE
DEVELOPMENT CROSS SECTION
Wr'OR
I:,
5TEWART
1�lHlAN T111N IT *1111 1111 IIENIE * I =
rL.TTE _ 2_2
T — 334 7925 Ir.—T-21121
CMS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WINDSOR
PARK, WINTERFIELD, IDLEWILD RELIEF
CHARLO TTE, NC
Project No: C21020
Ref No:
Scale: AS NOTED
Date: 11.05.21
Drawn By: JOT
Drawing No:
WD 3
Pecked By: JRBI

KSTVr- 0
'?xv
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
APPENDIX D
Approved Jurisdictional Determination

SAW-2021-02034
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id..SAW-2021-02034 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC-Nfint Hill
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION
Requestor: Charlotte-Mecklenburt! School
Gary Adams
Address: 3301 Stafford Drive
Charlotte, NC 28208
Telephone Number: 980-343-5953
E-mail: t!arys.adam(&cms,kl2.nc.us
Size (acres) 16.7 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Campbell Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.197824
Longitude: -80.739463
Location description: The review area is located on the northern terminus end of Marlbrook Drive. PINs: 13316103 and
13314303. Reference review area descrintion shown in the Jurisdictional Determination Reouest nackai!e entitled "Fii!ure 1.
USGS Topouaphic Map" and dated 09/01/21.
Indicate Which of the Following Appl :
A. Preliminary Determination
There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 33 1). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
El 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 wedand
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
E] 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.
E] We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wedand delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.

SAW-2021-02034
0 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 11/16/2021. We strongly
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.
El The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Bryan Roden -Reynolds at 704-510-1440 or
bryan.roden-reynolds(&usace.anny.mi .
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the approved iurisdictional determination
form dated 11/16/2021.
D. Remarks: Wetland A and Basin I were determined to be non -jurisdictional.
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 wedand 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)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 33 1. 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: MT. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
PHILIP.A.SHANNINg_USACE.ARMY.MIL
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 11/21/2021.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence."
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Corps Regulatory Official: 2021.11.16 13:18:31 -05'00'

SAW-2021-02034
Date of JD: 11/16/2021 Expiration Date of JD: 09/21/2026
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 our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
hqps://regulatoiy.ops.usace.ariny.mil/customer-service-survey/.
Copy Furnished:
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.ariny.mil/cm___,apex/f?p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: STV, Inc.
Nfichael Innocco
Address: 900 West Trade Street, Suite 715
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone Number: 704-281-7918
E-mail: Nflchael.iat!nocco(a)stN,,inc.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
W7 REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Charlotte-Mecklenburt! Schools, Gary
File Number: SAW-2021-02034
Date: 11/16/2021
Adams
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Penult or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
Z
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
F-1
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The followmig identifies your rights and options regarding an admilstrativc appeal of the above decision.
Additional infonnation may be found at or hl!p://www.usace.army.miUMissions/CivilWorks/ReaulatolyProgramandPenuits.asp
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 33 1.
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 cngm*ccr for final
authonization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authon*zcd. 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 Junisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certami terms and conditions theremi, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section 11 of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the distnict engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your night to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engicer 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 havig determied that the permit should be issued as previously wrlitten. After
evaluatmig 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 Penult, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engicer for final
authonization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is autholized. 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, micludmig its terms and conditions, and approved Junisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to declic the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions theremi,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engicers Admilstrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of
this forin 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: PERMITDENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engicers Admilstrative Appeal Process by
completig Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engicer. This form must be received by the division
engineer withi 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 withi 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 Engmiccrs
Admilstrativc Appeal Process by completig Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the district cngm*ccr. 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 Prelim Miary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contactig the Corps district for further *instruction. Also you may provide new miforr'nation for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION 11 - 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 admilstrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the adm milstrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or mectig, and any supplemental *information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clan*fy 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 inforr'nation that is already in the admilstrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATi7m Nor--,
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. PHILIP A. SHANNIN
Attn: Bryan Roden -Reynolds
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
Charlotte Regulatory Office
CESAD-PDS-O
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST, FLOOR M9
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8803
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
PHONE: [phone]; FAX [phone]
EMAIL: PHILIP.A.SHANNINg_USACE.ARMY.MIL
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engicers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site durmig the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15-day
notice of any site investigation, and have the opportum to participate in all site *invest] ations.
-will
Date:
Telephone number:
I
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Bryan Roden -Reynolds, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits andApproved Jurisdictional Determinations send thisform to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Philip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

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 Fonn Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): 11/16/2021
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Fann Pond Lane, SAW-2021-02034
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the northern terminus end of Marlbrook
Drive. PINs: 13316103 and 13314303. Reference review area description shown in the Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled "Figure
1, USGS Topographic Map" and dated 09/01/21.
State: NC County/parish/borough: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal formal): Lat. 35.197824, Long. -80.739463
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Campbell Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows:
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050103
Z Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
D 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):
Z Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 09/22/21
Z Field Determination. Date(s): 11/15/21
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RRA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CIFR part 329) in the review area.
[Required]
El Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
D 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 are "waters ofthe 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):'
El TNW s, including territorial seas
E]Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
X Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E]Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
X Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E]Wetla,nds adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E]Wetla,nds adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
El Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
El Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetla,nd waters: 1,884 linear feet, wide, and/or acres.
Wetlands: 1.585 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established OHWM
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 year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally" (e.g.,
typically 3 months).
Page I of 7 Form Version 10 June 2020

Elevation of established OHWM (if known): unknown
2. Non -regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain:
Basin 1 was a man-made stormwater control feature and has no outlet structure; therefore, no connection to downstream
waters. Wetland A only connection to downstream waters is via overland sheetflow and therefore, is considered isolated.
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
HLAA and Section ULD.l. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HLAA and 2 and Section
HLDA.; otherwise, see Section HLB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetlandadjacent 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), Le. 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 HLD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section HI.D.4.
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 waterbody' is not an P.PW, 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 HLBA for the tributary, Section IH.B.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 ULC below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 29,874acres
Drainage area: 47 square miles
Average annual rainfall: 43 inches
Average annual snowfall: 0-4inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationsh�ip with TNW:
El Tributary flows directly into TNW.
X Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 20-25 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 15-20 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
4Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and West.
Page 2 of 7 Form Version 10 June 2020

Project waters are I (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: all project waters are contained within North Carolina
Identify flow route to TNW': unnamed tributary to Campbell Creek then to McAlpine Creek then to Sugar Creek then to
Catawba River.
Tributary stream order, if known: unknown
(b) General TributM Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: XNatural
El Artificial (man-made). Explain:
X Manipulated (man -altered). Explain: Stream C is part of a previous stream restoration procjct.
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 2-5 feet
Average depth: 1-6feet
Average side slopes: 3:1.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
• silts X Sands El concrete
• Cobbles X Gravel XMuck
ElBedrock El Vegetation. Type/% cover -
El Other. Explain:
Tributarycondition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: incised
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: riffle/pool complexes present
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 0-2 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for- Perennial
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year. 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: intermittent and perennial
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
El Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
X Bed and banks
X OHWM6(check all indicators that apply):
El clear, natural line impressed on the bank X the presence of litter and debris
El changes in the character of soil El destruction of terrestrial vegetation
El shelving X the presence of wrack line
El vegetation matted down, bent, or absent X sediment sorting
leaf litter disturbed or washed away
sediment deposition
El water staining
El other (list):
El Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
X scour
El multiple observed or predicted flow events
El abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
'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.
6 A natural or man-made discontinuity in the 0HWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the
0HWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OH'WM 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.
Page 3 of 7 Form Version 10 June 2020

El High Tide Line indicated by:
El oil or scum line along shore objects
El fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
El physical markings/characteristics
El tidal gauges
El other (list):
El Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
El survey to available datum;
El physical markings;
El vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.). Explain:
clear
Identify specific pollutants, if known: unknown
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
X Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): 0- 100 feet forested
E]Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
Habitat for:
X Federally Listed species. Explain findings: none were found
El Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
El Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
El Aquatic/wildlife 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: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Choose an item. Explain:
Surface flow is: Choose an item.
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Choose an item.. Explain findings:
El Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
El Directly abutting
El Not directly abutting
El Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
El Ecological connection. Explain:
El Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Choose an item. river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Choose an item. aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Choose an item..
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Choose an item. floodplain.
(ii) 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):
Page 4 of 7
Form Version 10 June 2020

EIRiparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
El Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
El Habitat for:
El Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
E]Fish/spawn areas. Explain fmdings:
El Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
El 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: Choose an item.
Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Direcfly abuts? (Y/N Size (in acres Direcfly 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 food webs?
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 IILD:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs.
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 llLD:
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 llLD:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CBECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
El TNWs: linear feet, wide, Or acres.
Page 5 of 7 Form Version 10 June 2020

E]Wetla,nds adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. 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: Streams A and C and Campbell Creek have the geomorphology, hydrology, and biological indicators consistent with
perennial streams in the Piedmont ecoregion of North Carolina.
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: Streams B and E
have the geomorphology, hydrology, and biological indicators consistent with intermittent streams in the Piedmont ecoregion of
North Carolina.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
X Tributary waters: 1,884 linear feet wide.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWs1 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El 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):
El Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
X Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
El 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 111.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
Wetland B abuts intermittent Stream B and Wetland C abuts intermittent Stream E.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 1.585 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El 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 jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is
provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-R-PWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El 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 III.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.
El Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
ElDenionstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
El Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
'See Footnote # 3.
'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
Page 6 of 7 Form Version 10 June 2020

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):'"
El which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
El from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
El which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
El Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
El Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet, wide.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
El Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECKAILL THAT APPLY):
El 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.
El Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
El Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based lel on e "Mig to
th ra ry
Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: Wetland A lacked a defined
channel connection to downstream waters and its only hydrological connection was via overland sheetflow and therefore, considered
isolated.
Other: (explain, if not covered above): Basin I is a man-made stormwater control feature with no outlet structure; therefore was considered
isolated.
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the NIBR 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):
E]Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):Iinear feet, wide.
E]Lakes/ponds: acres.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
El 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 forjurisdiction (check all that apply):
E]Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams):Iinear feet, wide.
E]Lakes/ponds: acres.
X Other non -wetland waters: 0.026 acres. List type of aquatic resource: stormwater control basin
XWetlands: 0.075 acres.
'Vrior 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 Coirps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction FoHowing Rapanos.
Page 7 of 7 Form Version 10 June 2020

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):
El Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
El Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
El Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
El Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
El Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
El Corps navigable waters' study:
El U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
EIUSGS NHD data.
EIUSGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
X U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Figure 1, USGS Topographic Map (7.5-minute quadrangle Mint Hill, NQ
X USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Figure 2, USDA NRCS Soil Series Map (Web Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County)
El National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
El State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
El FEMA/FlRM maps:
El 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
X Photographs: X Aerial (Name& Date): Figure 3, Approximate Waters of the U.S. and Wetlands Boundary Map (Dated 11/16/21)
Or X Other (Name & Date): Photographs 1-16
El Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter -
El Applicable/supporting case law:
El Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
X Other information (please specify): NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms, Version 4.11 (Dated 06/24/21)
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: Wetland A and Basin I were determined to be non -jurisdictional.
Page I of I Form Version 10 June 2020

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
APPENDIX E
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
Biological Assessment for Federally Threatened and Endangered Species

USTYI-?/
e joo
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 29, 2021
TO: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
FROM: STV Engineers, Inc. -Joshua Kotheimer, PWS &Timothy O'Halloran, WPIT
SUBJECT: Biological Evaluation -Threatened and Endangered Species Survey
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
STV Project No. 4021112
Background
The Windsor Park Relief Elementary School site is an approximate 16.7-acre site located west of Farm
Pond Lane in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Parcel ID No. 13316103 and 13314303). The
project coordinates are (35.197824, -80.739463). Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) is proposing an
elementary school on this site to relieve overcrowding at three schools in this geographic region of the
th th
county. Based on aerial imagery obtained from NC OneMap, and field visits on June 24 , June 25 , and
September 3 oth , 2021, the proposed study area consists primarily of undeveloped mixed pine/hardwood
forest, dirt roadways for vehicle access, and utility line rights -of -way (R/W). The northern site boundary is
bordered by Executive Center Drive and commercial development, the eastern site boundary is bordered
by Farm Pond Lane and residences, the southern boundary is bordered by wooded land and residences,
and the western boundary is bordered by residences
As of October 25 th , 2021, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC) online system lists five species in Mecklenburg County as being federally protected
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. Of the five species listed in Mecklenburg County, surveys
were performed for the three listed plants, Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), Michaux's
sumac (Rhus michauxii), and smooth coneflower (Echinacea loevigatc). The plant by plant surveys were
conducted on September 30, 2021 during the optimal survey window by STV Engineers, Inc. (STV)
Environmental Scientists Joshua Kotheimer, PWS and Timothy O'Halloran, WPIT. An overview of the study
area and photograph locations are shown in Appendix A; Figure I —Threatened and Endangered Plant
Survey Map. Photographs depicting habitats surveyed and species found are shown in Appendix B. In
addition to the plant by plant surveys, the study area was also surveyed for potential habitat for Carolina
heelsplitter (Losmigona decorato) and northern long-eared bat (NLEB) (Myotis septentrionalis).
Species Descriptions
Schweinitz's sunflower is a perennial herbaceous plant limited to the Piedmont counties of North and South
Carolina. The plant grows from one to two meters tall from a cluster of tuberous roots. The sunflower
consists of a flower with a yellow disk and ray flowers formed on small heads. The disc is less than 1.5
centimeters (cm) across and the petals are 2 to 3 cm long. The lanceolate leaves are typically arranged

KSTV 100
MEMORANDUM
Page 2 of 5
opposite in pairs on the lower part of the stem and singly and alternate on the upper part. The typical habitat
for this plant includes roadsides, old pastures, transmission line R/Ws, open areas, and edges of upland
woods. Periodically maintained R/Ws are typically considered good potential habitat for the Schweinitz's
sunflower. Major characteristics of soils associated with suitable Schweinitz's sunflower habitat include thin
soils, soils on upland interstrearn flats or gentle slopes, those which are clayey in texture (and often with
substantial rock fragments), those which have a high shrink -swell capacity, and those which vary over the
course of the year from very wet to very dry. Flowering generally occurs from August through October or
the first frost of the year.
Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows in sandy or rocky, open,
upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam soils with low cation exchange
capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales and depressions in the fall line
Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power
line, and utility rights -of -way; areas where forest canopies have been opened up by blowdowns and/or
storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine
or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing
natural succession. In the central Piedmont, the plant occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The
plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, and
periodic fire) maintains its open habitat. Flowering occurs from June to July and fruit is produced through
the months of August to October.
Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open woodlands, the ecotonal regions
between meadows and woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility
rights -of -way. In North Carolina, the species normally grows in magnesium- and calcium -rich soils associated
with gabbro and diabase parent material, and typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and Picture soil series.
The plant grows best where there is abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and
periodic disturbances (e.g., regular fire regime, well-timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents
encroachment of shade -producing woody shrubs and trees. On sites where woody succession is held in
check, it is often characterized by several species with prairie affinities. Per USFWS guidance the optimal
survey window for smooth coneflower is late -May to October.
Carolina heelsplitter is a freshwater mussel species with an ovate, trapezoid -shaped shell. The outer surface
of the species' shell is yellow -green to brown in color with green -black rays, and the inner shell is iridescent
to mottled pale orange in color. The average size (width) of the shell is 78 millimeters (mm) across. The
species is found in small to large streams and rivers with cool, clean, well -oxygenated water and silt -free
bottoms. Individuals are typically found in undercuts among buried logs and rocks along well -shaded banks
stabilized with extensive tree roots. Per the USFWS's Carolina Heelsplitter Five -Year Review: (2019) eleven

KSTV. 100
MEMORANDUM
Page 3 of 5
populations of Carolina heelsplitter are known to exist, three of which occur within North Carolina.
Specifically, two small remnant populations exist in Union County within the Catawba River system including
one within Waxhaw Creek and one within Sixmile Creek. Another small population is known to exist in Union
County within Goose Creek, a tributary to the Rocky River, located within the Pee Dee River system.
Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) is a medium-sized bat approximately three to 3.7 inches in body length with
a wingspan of nine to 10 inches. As its name suggests, this bat species is distinguished from other species in
the genus Myotis by its long ears. The range of the NLEB consists of the eastern and north central portions
of the United States including 37 states. In North Carolina specifically, the NLEB primarily occurs in the
western part of the state in the mountain region. Only scattered occurrences have been documented in the
piedmont and coastal plain regions of the state. In western North Carolina, NLEBs spend winter hibernating
in caves and mines. During the summer, NLEBs roost singly or in colonies within trees including underneath
the bark, in cavities, or in crevices. Roosting trees can be both live and dead and are typically �t three inches
diameter at breast height in size. Males and non -reproductive females may also roost in cooler places such
as caves and mines. The NLEB has also been observed roosting in man-made structures including barns and
sheds, under eaves of buildings, behind window shutters, in bridges, and bat houses. Foraging habitat
includes forested hillsides and ridges, the airspace above waterways, and along woodland edges. Mature
forests are generally considered to be an important habitat type for foraging.
Methodology
STV Environmental Scientists Joshua Kotheimer, PWS and Timothy O'Halloran, WPIT, conducted field
reviews on September 30, 2021 for the federally endangered H. schweinitzii, R. michauxii, and E. laevigata.
Pedestrian transects were performed in an effort to determine the presence of these endangered plants
within the study area. In addition to the field surveys, aerial imagery and soil data obtained from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) was utilized to identify
potentially suitable habitat for the plants. Data was obtained from the NC Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) database to check if any species have been documented within one mile of the study area; none
of the five listed species in Mecklenburg County were documented.
Additionally, prior to visiting the study area, STV visited a known reference population of H. schweinitzii
along US 21 in Rock Hill, York County, South Carolina to ensure that the plants were flowering.
Findings of Field Review
Schweintz's sunflower, Michaux's sumac, and smooth coneflower were not observed within the study area
during the field surveys conducted during the optimal survey window by STV Environmental Scientists. Per
review of the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no occurrences of protected species have
been documented within one mile of the study area.

KSTV 100
MEMORANDUM
Page 4 of 5
Natural habitat communities within the study area include upland hardwood forest, mixed hardwood -pine
upland forest, successional forest, stream/tributary, and wetland. Six streams, including Campbell Creek
and five unnamed channels, were identified within the study area. Wetlands were identified within the study
area and were determined to be headwater forest and bottomland hardwood forest wetlands. These
features were delineated by STV in June 2021 and the boundaries were field -verified by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers on November 15, 2021. Other habitats or land uses located within the study area include
disturbed dirt roads and utility line rights -of -way (R/Ws).
Potential habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is present in the study area within disturbed areas, along
roadside edges located along the northern and eastern boundary of the study area, and along the southern
boundary along the maintained wooded edge. Potential habitat is also present within an electric
transmission line R/W that crosses the study area from north to south and then changes direction and
continues east to west. Plant by plant surveys of these areas of potential habitat were conducted on
September 30, 2021 during the flowering season, and no individuals were observed. Species of similar
appearance were observed throughout the study area and were determined to be Jerusalem artichoke
(Helianthus tuberosus) and beggar's tick (Bidens loevis). Based on the literature and field reviews, it is
determined that the project would have 'No Effect' on Schweinitz's sunflower.
Potential habitat for Michaux's sumac is present in the study area within disturbed areas, along roadside
edges located along the northern and eastern boundary of the study area, and along the southern boundary
along the maintained wooded edge. Potential habitat is also present within the electric transmission line
R/W located within the study area. Plant by plant surveys of these areas of potential habitat were conducted
on September 30, 2021 during the fruiting season, and no individuals of Michuax's sumac were observed.
Based on the literature and field reviews, it is determined that the project would have 'No Effect' on
Michaux's sumac.
Potential habitat for smooth coneflower is present in the study area within disturbed areas, along roadside
edges located along the northern and eastern boundary of the study area, and along the southern boundary
along the maintained wooded edge. Potential habitat is also present within the electric transmission line
R/W located within the study area. Plant by plant surveys of these areas of potential habitat were conducted
on September 30, 2021 during the flowering season, and no individuals of smooth coneflower were
observed. Based on the literature and field reviews, it is determined that the project would have 'No Effect'
on smooth coneflower.
Potential habitat for Carolina heelsplitter exists within Campbell Creek which flows through the study area
from north to south. However, Campbell Creek is a low -quality urban stream with high turbidity and
sedimentation. The USFWS record status of the Carolina heelsplitter in Mecklenburg County is
probable/potential; however, based on USFWS guidance on March 24, 2021, no surveys are needed in any
county unless the project is located in Waxhaw, Sixmile, Duck, or Goose Creeks. Based on the literature
review and the project being located outside of the above -mentioned watersheds, the biological conclusion

KSTV. 100
MEMORANDUM
Page 5 of 5
for Carolina heelsplitter is 'No Effect - Outside of Range.'
Potential foraging and roosting habitat for NLEB, including trees and the air space above Campbell Creek
and other unnamed streams throughout the study area, is present. The field surveys conducted by STV
Environmental Scientists concluded that no caves or mines (potential hibernacula) exist in the study area
and no evidence of bats was discovered upon inspection of the culvert beneath Executive Center Drive that
Campbell Creek flows through. The project may require tree clearing but no pile driving, blasting, or
percussive activities are anticipated. Based on the findings and in conforming to SLOPES procedures it has
been determined that the USACE's Alternative Local Procedure (ALP) Situation 2 would be applicable. The
biological conclusion for NLEB is'May Effect, however, NLEB is exempt clueto consistencywith the 4(d) rule.'
Conclusion
No federally protected species were observed within the study area during the field reviews/surveys and no
known occurrences of protected species have been documented by the NCNHP within or within one mile of
the study area.
Based on literature and field reviews, it has been determined that the project would have a biological
conclusion of 'No Effect' on Schweinitz's sunflower, Michaux's sumac, and smooth coneflower.
Based on literature and field reviews, it has been determined that the project would have a biological
conclusion of 'No Effect - Outside of Range' on Carolina heelsplitter.
Based on literature and field reviews, it has been determined that the project would have a biological
conclusion of 'May Effect, however, NLEB is exempt due to consistency with the 4(d) rule' for the northern
long-eared bat.

Threotened ond Endongered Species Survey
Windsor Pork Relief Elementory School
Chorlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
November 23, 2021
Appendix A
�b.."�TV�-n.inn
F I Afff -Z'.
Threatened and Endangered Plant Survey Map

Threatened and Endangered Species Survey
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
November 23, 2021
Appendix B
Representative Photographs
S
T ioo

. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rt—
"14
he'
Vol
WIt
OKI
. te
44

View of roadside habitat along the eastern boundary of the study area; facing south.
r L
It, . r
4.
Y

Threotened ond Endongered Plont Survey
Windsor Pork Relief Elementory School
Chorlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Photos Token September 30, 2021
-24641-
A-;44p;
jib
Photo 5 — View of an access road to the sewer line easement within the study area.
S- F N.-
Photo 6 — View of roadside habitat along the eastern boundary of the study area; facing north.

Threatened and Endangered Plant Survey
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Photos Taken September 30, 2021
STV 100
Photo 7 — View of beggar's tick (Bidens laevis) located along Campbell Creek within the study area.
Photo 8 — View of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus) observed within the study area.

Threotened ond Endongered Plont Survey
Windsor Pork Relief Elementory School
Chorlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Photos Token September 30, 2021
S'I'V
Photo 9 — View of Campbell Creek, a perennial stream that provides potential habitat for Carolina
heelsplitter and potential foraging habitat for northern long-eared bat. Campbell Creek is an urban stream
with an abundance of sediment.

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
APPENDIX F
Mitigation Bank Correspondence

/ Gm nb!�!-Iwvc-A � rk, I I rp
4e STORNI
5���:WATER
so"ka ��
StormWater.CharMeck.org
600 East 4TH Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank Credit Request Form
Form Instructions: Completely fill out the information below and return to the Mitigation
Bank Administrator (MA) or Mitigation Specialist (MS) via email. Contact information is
provided below. The Project Manager is the City representative for the project.
Request Date
11/24/21
Project Name
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Project Manager
Gary Adams
Project Manager Contact Information
(Please include phone # and mailing address)
3301 Stafford Drive, Charlotte INIC, 28208,
(980)-343-5963, garys.adams9cms.k1 2.nc.us
Requestor
(If differentfrom Project Manager)
Michael lagnocco, STV Engineers Inc.
USACE Action ID
(If available)
SAW-2021-02034
Project Location
Parcel ID or nearest intersection
13316103; 13314303
Project 8-cligit HUC
03050103 (Lower Catawba)
Impact Amount
(Please specify LF or AC)
Linear Feet 0.186 Acres
Proposed Mitigation Ratio
Stream Wetland 2:1
Requested Credit Amount
(Please specify SMUs or WMUs)
SMILIS .372 WMILIS
*If you have varying ratios for different features, please provide a table with this request that details the ratios by feature.
For information on current mitigation credit rates, please visit our website. If, throughout the
permitting process, your project mitigation needs change, please contact the MA or MS for a revised
Credit Reservation Letter (CRL) or to cancel your request. Your CRL will remain valid for 180 calendar
days upon receipt. After 180 days, you will need to resubmit your request, and updated credit rates
will be applied (if applicable). Copies of all permit approvals should be submitted to the MA or MS
as soon as possible upon receipt to ensure payment can be processed prior to the start of project
construction.
Mitigation Bank Administrator Mitigation Specialist
Erin Shanaberger, PWS Jacey Meador
[e-mail] a [e-mail]
[phone] [phone]
96CITY.q CHARLOTTE

Ch.-40ft044Ck*-,bVrg1
STORM
se"ices ER
November 24, 2021
MT. Mike Higgins
3301 Stafford Drive
Charlotte, NC 28208
Sent via email to Mike lagnocco (0 Michael.iagnaccogstvinc.com
Subject Project: Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
HUC#: 03050103 (Lower Catawba)
600 E. Fourth Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Fax [phone]
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the City of Charlotte Umbrella Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank
("Umbrella BanW') 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. Payment for credits requested or agreement between CMS and CMSWS otherwise detailing the process for
payment
Based on the information supplied by your office, the stream and wedand 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
0
0.372
Credits Available for This Project
0
0.372
Mitigation Project Name(s)
Muddy Creek (0.32 WMUs) & Reedy Creek* (0.052 WNWs)
*Reedy Creek site is located in ITUC 03040105, which is adjacent to 03050103 but still within the Charlotte Umbrella Bank service area.
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 (704) 5 62-2691 or
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
Charlotte Storm Water Services
Erin Shanaberger, PWS
Mitigation Bank Administrator
cc: File
To report pollution or drainage problems, call: 311
http://stormwater.charmeck.org

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
APPENDIX G
FENIA FIRM Panels
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034

[VAY M-OJ- Fjj= RMPAME PROWMI11
X
oo
lip
Ri 111111r,
fit;
L IF fit
fill
I
v 1p
IDO! in ;0 !0 RIEM,
its!
A. I
ij,
r4
'fit i!l TH
I
I
I

lit
1119-1 f I
IF
Fi
1; Ral I
I I I I i R
M11 I
.. y
14
vr
it
79.1
4A j j
If I
Do! 0 !o !90! m
WOOL FLM wKwam tpmxdm i I
if I
I
AD11 1 '11 1 fit
Ul Ni
I I 1i
j . :11. IR
Hill,
LC I ii
I
fit If

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
APPENDIX H
CMS Offsite Analysis
and Site Layout Options
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034

Windsor Park/ldlewild/Winterfield Relief Elementary School
November 2020
Summary
The Charlotte -Mecklenburg Board of Education (CMBE), via Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools (CMS), is in
the process of acquiring two parcels of land (collectively, "Site"). The Site will, when assembled from
two independent owners, comprise 18.107 gross acres. The Site is located at the intersection of Farm
Pond Lane and Executive Center Drive in east Charlotte, NC. Wetlands mitigation is a key component of
the development of the Site, which is intended as a baseline elementary school to relieve Idlewild,
Windsor Park, and Winterfield elementary schools.
Proposed Land Uses
The proposed land use for the Site is a public elementary school. The school was a part of the 2017
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for CMS. The CIP was approved by voters as a general obligation bonds
referendum vote in November 2017.
This school will have 45 classrooms and be built to accommodate a nominal capacity of 900 students.
Code and MSTA required vehicular stacking and staff; visitor; and bus parking will be constructed, as will
two playgrounds and a play field.
The public elementary school is being constructed by Charlotte -Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) to serve a
new student boundary, which is intended to provide relief for the three significantly overutilized
elementary schools: Idlewild, Windsor Park, and Winterfield elementaries. The new school is scheduled
to open in August 2023 and represents an investment of $37.2 million.
Rationale for Location Selection
When CIVIS constructs a relief school, it must necessarily be located in the boundaries of the school(s)
identified for relief. The schools in this area are overcapacity. The student populations in the schools
identified for relief are generally of lower socioeconomic status and/or are of limited English proficiency.
CIVIS provides additional staffing to schools with these population characteristics.
This methodology, referred to as "Student Weighted Staffing," creates situations where a school may be
overutilized but have a smaller student count. Simply put, imagine two schools with 10 classrooms.
One of the schools has a weighted teacher to student ratio of 1:20, and another school has a weighted
teacher to student ratio of 1:10. This means that one school has a student capacity of 100, while the
other accommodates 200 pupils.
To relieve the three elementary schools identified with this project, CIVIS had to focus its efforts on siting
the new school within the contiguous existing boundaries:

Ei�
VONW, IH
) I \,,r-
.. �"" b: NS" 0
A RY WINDSO
R
-N AieZYLARK
0 1 N
T-Ini 17),
HIC
G
0, Q
TERFIEL AL
'\,,.,,o �!Yjq
CIVIS always begins the site selection process by determining if there are any landbanked sites, edge
conditions, or other CMBE-owned assets available on which to site a proposed school. In this instance,
there were no options already in CMS inventory. As an example, CMS operates a school on the former
Eastland Mall site, and no additional acreage was readily available.
There is significant student density generated from this immediate geography, and all currently CMBE-
owned real estate within the boundary was developed. Adaptive re -use of non -school buildings is not a
consideration, as claylighting and other factors for effective and equitable educational spaces are
difficult to achieve.

"ACV%
&P16
43T9.55 2024 49
P4k
Next, CIVIS sought to negotiate an agreement with Mecklenburg County Government to co-clevelop,
along with Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation Department (MCPRD), the existing Reddman Park
site. This would have been a satisfactory location, situated within the attendance boundaries identified
for relief; would have avoided any expenditures of capital dollars to acquire real estate; and would have
avoided removing assets from property tax rolls. This last point is especially significant, as property tax
revenues are the primary means of support for school districts in North Carolina; boards of education do
not have taxing authority. Negotiations were held over the course of a year, before being terminated by
Mecklenburg County.

Because negotiations were not progressing, and well before the conversations broke off, CIVIS
undertook a concurrent search for an alternative site to serve as a fallback. In all, more than 30 sites
were identified; only 4 of these were initially deemed credible for further investigation. A portion of the
list of parcels which were considered is below:
The four potential targets of acquisition were evaluated individually. They were also assessed relative to
the other subjects in consideration. The evaluation criteria included whether a property was listed for
sale, or had a willing seller, to avoid the need for condemnation; total cost of the acquisition, as verified
by an independent appraisal; net buildable area being sufficient to accommodate the elementary school
program; the requirement that any site to be acquired receive a clean Phase I environmental evaluation;
and geographic location within the boundaries of, and in relation to, the three schools identified for
relief.
Ultimately, the Site that is now being assembled was determined to be the best overall option. One of
the two subject parcels was actively marketed for sale and had received an arm's length offer by the
time CIVIS made its initial contact. The other was owned by a commercial entity and was not listed for
sale.
Mecklenburg County Government had approved a total acquisition budget of $2.5 million; the two
parcels in the assembled Site are being acquired for less than $2 million, as supported by appraisal.
Both parcels had been previously undeveloped, and a satisfactory Phase I ESA was accomplished. CIVIS
has a two-story elementary prototypical school, which fits well on the assembled Site and provides the
necessary amenities and circulation.
Not only is the Site well -located within the target boundaries, but it is also fewer than 2000 linear feet
away from Reddman Park, which had been the anchor of the search radius. The Site is the large red pin;
Reddman Park is the thumbtack; and the three relief schools are each represented by a yellow
thumbtack in the below image:

External Constraints
Public school construction projects have a well-defined design, delivery, and occupancy timeline; the
first day of school for students each year is mandated by the state government. Failing to open for the
start of a given school year means that the delivery has essentially been missed by an entire academic
calendar year. Much of the adjoining parcels have been developed; uses include single- and multi -family
housing; office; and retail.
CIVIS must design, permit, and receive inspections and occupancy permits related to individual projects,
much like any other developer. Additionally, CIVIS is required to accomplish a Transportation Impact
Study (TIS) because of the potential impact on the existing road network. Finally, CIVIS must also submit
its plans for review by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI).
The Site is bounded by public roads. The local (Charlotte Department of Transportation, or CDOT) and
state (North Carolina Department of Transportation, or NCDOT) transportation agencies impose
requirements upon CMS; these requirements differ slightly due to the scope(s) and perspective(s) of
each agency. It is expected that CDOT will be the sole entity addressing connectivity to and across the
Site.

Internal Constraints
CIVIS has a variety of constraints and restrictions upon its capital program. The two largest reflect the
fact that the capital program is primarily funded by locally approved General Obligation Bond referenda.
Therefore, CIVIS functions under the mantra of "Promises Made, Promises Kept." CIVIS must also ensure
its efforts, as a County -wide entity, are equitable. To that end, baseline standards and programs have
been developed for comprehensive and magnet elementary (ES); kindergarten through eighth grade
(K8); middle (MS); and high (HS) schools.
Other constraints reflect the standard physical program for schools. All CIVIS baseline ES projects include
45 classrooms; multipurpose spaces; media center with maker space and ancillary spaces; and
administrative and guidance offices, with ancillary spaces. External amenities include two playgrounds,
one each for grades K-2 and 3-5; basketball goals and track striping on the bus lot; and a play field to
accommodate both unstructured play and the physical education curriculum. Separate personally
owned vehicle (POV) and bus lots are required, to not intermingle vehicle types. POV lots include
designated areas for staff and visitors and must accommodate the stacking and queuing related to the
pick-up and drop-off of students. These stacking and queuing distances are proscribed by NCDOT's
MSTA office, and do not recognize urban public -school environments.
Attendance boundaries, as noted earlier, and educational program offerings, are internal constraints.
All students who are residents of Mecklenburg County are guaranteed a seat in their home school, as
defined by attendance boundaries. These boundaries are adopted by CMBE; and apply at all levels (K-
12). When a school is (or schools are) identified for relief due to overcapacity situations, CIVIS staff must
identify site(s) within the attendance boundaries of the schools in need of relief. In areas of
Mecklenburg County, including east Charlotte, this can be a challenging exercise. That said, the Site is in
the best possible position to provide relief to the three schools identified in the CIP.

Overall Proposed Site Plan
The overall proposed site plan is attached and submitted herein. It should be noted that significant
effort has been exerted to minimize environmental impacts, especially upon wetlands. The baseline
elementary school program has been modified to a two-story classroom wing; parking and circulation
is being held to the minimum necessary to address the rezoning and permitting process.
I I. I I P r I �f +f
J i _-
r
5-a
Mitigation Bank and Other Permitting Considerations
CIVIS has had preliminary conversations with the City of Charlotte (City). The City and CIVIS have a
history of collaboration on both the creation and use of mitigation bank credits. The potential for CIVIS
to access the mitigation bank for this project was viewed favorably; and is subject to final determination
of the amount needed.

r
El
z
0
F-
CL
0
-j
0
0
L)
F-
z
LU
5
LU
-j
LU
L)

dim..
0 co
w
w
U)
w
w
w
z
0
F-
CL
0
0
LL
0 F--
Cl)
LU
LU
C)
x
z LU
LU
2
LU
-j
LU
L)

FARM POND LN
fro
LU
LLJ
X
LLJ
El El
U)
U)
<
El
C) LU
co
------------
C2
r
......... . ,
Al
H
w
w
U)
5W,
z
0
p
CL
0
0
LL
0 F--
U)
LU
LU
C)
X
z LU
LU
2
LU
-j
LU
L)
V)

W.
mm
L
FARM POND LN
LU
z
LU
LL,
D
C)
LLJ
X
LLJ
EIEI�
U)
F-I E-1 U)
H
:,� 7 -
w
w
U)
w
w
Ir
tm-,�A
1W
z
0
F-
CL
0
0
LL
0 F--
Cl)
LU
LU
C)
X
z LU
LU
2
LU
-j
LU
L)
V)

W.
mm
711
U)
U U)
<
U)
)
C) W LU
F--
OD
0 Co
w
w
U)
w
w
w
z
0
F-
CL
0
0
LL
0 F--
Cl)
LU
Lu
C)
X
z LU
LU
2
LU
-j
LU
L)

LL
z
0
F-
CL
0
0
LL
0 F--
Cl)
LU
Lu
X
z LU
LU
5
LU
-j
LU
L)

KSTvr- 0
'?xv
Section 404/401 Nationwide Permit 14 Application
Windsor Park Relief Elementary School
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
SAW-2021-02034
APPENDIX I
Wastewater Treatment Correspondence

CHARLOTTE
W4jTER
September 16, 2021
Mr. James R. Baysinger
Stewart, INC
101 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
SUBJECT: WILLINGNESS TO SERVE
CMS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WINDSOR PARK
5932 FARM POND LANE, CHARLOTTE, NC 28212
After an analysis by Charlotte Water's Capacity Assurance Program (CAP) of the sanitary sewer
system associated with the proposed CMS NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WINDSOR PARK
development, it was determined that there is currently sufficient capacity within the existing public
gravity sewer to accommodate the proposed sewer flow (15,660 gallons per day), at the connection
point(s) indicated for transmission to the McAlpine Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (NPDES
Permit # NCO024970).
Please note that availability of flow is subject to change, and this Willingness to Serve (WTS)
review does not guarantee future capacity or reserve capacity in the public sewer system. A
full CAP application with fully engineered site utility plan must be submitted and approved to
reserve sewer capacity for this project. Please contact New Services at 704-432-2854 for official
submittal guidelines to the Capacity Assurance Program.
CLTWater agrees to furnish water to the subject project. The water quality to the subject project is
regulated by the State Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986 and, The Water Supply
Management Plan, PWS ID # 0160010, on file with the Public Water Supply Section of NC
DEQ. However, CLTWater cannot guarantee a constant pressure or quality of flow.
The applicant should understand that due to the involvement of other agencies and continuing
growth of the water and sewer system, the ability to provide service for future projects cannot be
guaranteed nor reserved. Connection to the CLTWater and sewer system is accepted on a first
come, first served basis.
The applicant should understand that this letter is not an authorization to construct or extend private
water or sewer systems, as the appropriate local or State permits are required prior to construction.
The analysis performed determines available capacity within the existing public gravity sewer
system. The development is responsible for any additional private or public sewer infrastructure
required to convey flow from the proposed development to the existing public sewer.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone]
Sincerely,
4!�aWzrm.o- Akvzo4zL.,
Guillermo Anzola / Engineering Assistant
CHARLOTTE WATER / charlottewater.orq
Charlotte Water S1 00 &'ookshire Blvd. Charloue, NC 28216 charloaewater.org
Operazed by the City of Charfouc