20220187 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20220128

fr.,f DW R
mrlsloa of ware. Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
December 6, 2021 Ver 4.2
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
Yes
No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned*
20220187
Is a payment required for this project?
No payment required
Fee received
Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Yeoman Road Residential Development
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Danielle Clark
1 b. Primary Contact Email:
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
1 /28/2022
Nearest Body of Water
Unnamed tributary of Irwin Creek
Basin
Catawba
Water Classification
C (Irwin Creek classification)
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.182946
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Mecklenburg
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Longitude:
-80.883737
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Version# *
1
What amout is owed?*
$240.00
$570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Doug Perez:eads\djperez
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]

Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
29 - Residential Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
Yes No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
Yes No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Gary R. Benfield
2b. Deed book and page no.:
34005-379 and 10174-143
2c. Contact Person:
2d.Address
Street Address
4911 Spring Meadow Lane
Address Line 2
City
Monroe
Postal / Zip Code
28110
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:
[e-mail]
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
Yes No
Yes No
U

2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
David & Ann Palin
2b. Deed book and page no.:
05985-094 and 06025-925
2c. Contact Person:
2d.Address
Street Address
6239 River Cabin Lane
Address Line 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28278
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Tim McCollum
3b. Business Name:
Revolve Residential LLC
3c.Address
Street Address
920 Pecan Avenue
Address Line 2
Suite 100
city
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28205
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Danielle Clark, PWS
4b. Business Name:
Hart & Hickman, PC
4c.Address
Street Address
3921 Sunset Ridge Road
Address Line 2
Suite 301
City
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27607
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
411'. Email Address:
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
U
1. Project Information

1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
14904347,14904331,14904332,and
2b.Property size:
14904333
0.86
2c. Project Address
Street Address
229-253 Yeoman Road
Address Line 2
City
State / Province / Region
Charlotte
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
28217
USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:"
Unnamed tributary of Irwin Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:
C (Irwin Creek classification)
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Catawba
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030501030101
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application: *
The Site consists of four parcels of land located at 229-253 Yeoman Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Site is currently developed with one residence and one
commercial building. Commercial use is to the north; light industrial use and vacant land is to the east; a stormwater management area is to the south; and undeveloped land and light
industrial use is to the west.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes No Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.044
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
0
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The project proposes to develop a multi -family residential development with 19 units to serve the City of Charlotte.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:
The planned development area will be graded with heavy equipment to prepare a level building pads.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
Yes No
Comments:
PJD issued by the Corps on 10/5/2021
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2021-02075
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Julia McGuire
Agency/Consultant Company: Hart & Hickman, PC
Other:
Unknown

5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
The Corps conducted a desktop review and a PJD was issued by Bryan Roden -Reynolds on 10/5/2021 (SAW-2021-02075).
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?"
Yes No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams -tributaries Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type"`
d. W. name*
2e. Forested'
2C Type of Jurisdicition "`
2g. Impact
area
WAA
Fill and grading for level
building pads
P
Headwater Forest
and Area "A"
Yes
-]
Both
0.036
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.036
21. Comments:
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.036
The permanent wetland impact involves grading and fill required to construct a level building pad for the development of two residential buildings and an
associated driveway area.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
Is. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Avoidance and Minimization
The proposed residential development is located along the westerly side of Yeoman Road south-southeast of the intersection of Yeoman Road and
Yancey Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Site consists of four contiguous parcels (Mecklenburg County Parcel ID Numbers
14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333) that total approximately 0.855 acre of land.
H&H reviewed State and Federal threatened and endangered species databases for the Site, and conducted a screening survey of the Site and
surrounding area for the presence of Federal threatened and endangered species or their suitable habitats, and none were identified. H&H also
reviewed the National Registry of Historic Places (NRHP) for Sites located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina and the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office INC SHPO) GIS viewer, and conducted a visual reconnaissance of the Site and surrounding area for the potential presence of
historic, cultural, and/or archeological sites. No recorded sites were noted on or adjacent to the Site. No significant structures were observed on -Site.
H&H requested comment on the Site from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NC WRC), and
INC SHPO in October 2021. Agency responses are included in Appendix D.
To minimize Site impacts, the proposed Site plan was designed to avoid Waters of the US to the maximum extent practicable. The developer chose the
Site as an already developed property with no threatened and endangered species or cultural resource issues, which further minimizes environmental
impact within the surrounding area. The Site buildings, parking areas, and driveway areas have been designed to primarily occupy upland areas. The
developer considered shifting the northernmost residential building to the east to avoid the northern impact to WAA. However, the City of Charlotte is
requiring an open space area along the frontage of Yeoman Road in the area where the building could be shifted. Furthermore, the developer originally
proposed one private driveway within the residential development to minimize Site disturbance. However, the City of Charlotte is requiring two private
driveways in accordance with their zoning code. Additionally, the developer originally proposed 24 residential units and has decreased the number of
units to 19 to accommodate the City's requirements while minimizing Site disturbance to the extent practicable.
The developer is proposing to avoid approximately 0.008 acre of WAA. The area of WAA to remain is located in an area that will not be utilized by the
residential development and will remain undisturbed. Furthermore, the developer is proposing to install subgrade drainage, in the form of a French drain
or similar, along the eastern side of WAA to assist in maintaining hydrology in and to WAA.
During Site development, good erosion and sediment control practices will be followed. Extensive silt fencing will be used on the construction Site
perimeter and wetland boundaries to remain.
Mitigation
Mitigation is typically required by the NWP #29 for wetland impacts greater than 0.1 acre. Although the proposed impact to WAA is less than 0.1 acre,
the Site is located within the 103 Watershed. Permanent impacts within the 103 Watershed which result in the loss of jurisdictional waters require
compensatory mitigation. Therefore, compensatory mitigation for the 0.036-acre impact to WAA is proposed in the form of purchasing mitigation credits
from DEQ's DMS in -lieu fee program. The DEQ DMS acceptance letter is attached in Appendix E. Based on the INC WAM, the wetland quality of WAA is
low. Based on the results of the INC WAM, the proposed mitigation ratio for wetland impacts is 2:1.
u

1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Avoidance and Minimization
The proposed residential development is located along the westerly side of Yeoman Road south-southeast of the intersection of Yeoman Road and
Yancey Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Site consists of four contiguous parcels (Mecklenburg County Parcel ID Numbers
14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333) that total approximately 0.855 acre of land.
H&H reviewed State and Federal threatened and endangered species databases for the Site, and conducted a screening survey of the Site and
surrounding area for the presence of Federal threatened and endangered species or their suitable habitats, and none were identified. H&H also
reviewed the National Registry of Historic Places (NRHP) for Sites located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina and the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (NC SHPO) GIS viewer, and conducted a visual reconnaissance of the Site and surrounding area for the potential presence of
historic, cultural, and/or archeological sites. No recorded sites were noted on or adjacent to the Site. No significant structures were observed on -Site.
H&H requested comment on the Site from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NC WRC), and
NC SHPO in October 2021. Agency responses are included in Appendix D.
To minimize Site impacts, the proposed Site plan was designed to avoid Waters of the US to the maximum extent practicable. The developer chose the
Site as an already developed property with no threatened and endangered species or cultural resource issues, which further minimizes environmental
impact within the surrounding area. The Site buildings, parking areas, and driveway areas have been designed to primarily occupy upland areas. The
developer considered shifting the northernmost residential building to the east to avoid the northern impact to WAA. However, the City of Charlotte is
requiring an open space area along the frontage of Yeoman Road in the area where the building could be shifted. Furthermore, the developer originally
proposed one private driveway within the residential development to minimize Site disturbance. However, the City of Charlotte is requiring two private
driveways in accordance with their zoning code. Additionally, the developer originally proposed 24 residential units and has decreased the number of
units to 19 to accommodate the City's requirements while minimizing Site disturbance to the extent practicable.
The developer is proposing to avoid approximately 0.008 acre of WAX The area of WAA to remain is located in an area that will not be utilized by the
residential development and will remain undisturbed. Furthermore, the developer is proposing to install subgrade drainage, in the form of a French drain
or similar, along the eastern side of WAA to assist in maintaining hydrology in and to WAA.
During Site development, good erosion and sediment control practices will be followed. Extensive silt fencing will be used on the construction Site
perimeter and wetland boundaries to remain.
Mitigation
Mitigation is typically required by the NWP #29 for wetland impacts greater than 0.1 acre. Although the proposed impact to WAA is less than 0.1 acre,
the Site is located within the 103 Watershed. Permanent impacts within the 103 Watershed which result in the loss of jurisdictional waters require
compensatory mitigation. Therefore, compensatory mitigation for the 0.036-acre impact to WAA is proposed in the form of purchasing mitigation credits
from DEQ's DMS in -lieu fee program. The DEQ DMS acceptance letter is attached in Appendix E. Based on the NC WAM, the wetland quality of WAA is
low. Based on the results of the NC WAM, the proposed mitigation ratio for wetland impacts is 2:1.
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?
Yes
No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
DWR
Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
Mitigation bank Payment to in -lieu fee program Permittee Responsible Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
Yes No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet)
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.072
4h. Comments
The applicant proposes 2:1 mitigation ratio for 0.036 acre of wetland impact.
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes
No
If no, explain why:
The Site is located within the Catawba River basin and the development does not propose impact to an applicable riparian buffer.
2. Stormwater Management Plan

2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
Yes No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater program?
Yes No
N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
Local Government State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
Phase II NSW USMP Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
City of Charlotte
Comments:
Developer to install stormwater drainage infrastructure and detention per City of Charlotte Stormwater Requirements. The net increase of imprevious area will be detained and treated per
the City of Charlotte Central Catawba Basin Requirements, or mitigation will be paid per current City of Charlotte Stormwater Service fees. Existing storm drainage patterns on site are to
be maintained throughout project construction and completion.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?
Yes No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
Yes No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed Site plan will develop the majority of the Site and additional development is not anticipated. Additional phases and/or impacts to Waters of
the U.S. are not planned or proposed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
Yes No N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes No Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
Yes No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
Yes No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
Yes No

51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
Yes No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
DEQ Natural Heritage Program and Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) on-line databases and on -Site reconnaissance.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/pmtection/efh/efhmapper/
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
The National Registry of Historic Places, NC State Preservation Office databases, and on -Site reconnaissance.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
Reviewed FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map ID #3710453200K
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Yeoman Road Residential PCN (SAW-2021-02075)_1-28-2022.pdf 5.22MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Danielle C. Clark
Signature
a�lddE'1�� �lllt>�
Date
1 /28/2022

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- 2021-02075 Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Yeoman Road Residential Development
2. Work Type: VPrivate ❑Institutional ❑Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
The property developer is proposing a residential development on the Site and is seeking verification to use Nationwide Permit #29 to
impact an on -Site wetland.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: Revolve Residential LLC
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Danielle Clark, PWS - Hart & Hickman, PC
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: None
7. Project Location — Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B lb]:
229-253 Yeoman Road, Charlotte, NC 28217 (Lat/Long: 35.182946,-80.883737)
8. Project Location — Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333
9. Project Location —County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte
11. Project Information —Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Unnamed tributary of Irwin Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03050103
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑✓
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
HCompliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

hart hickman
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS
Sent Via Email
January 28, 2022
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Charlotte Regulatory Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Attn: Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds, PWS
Re: Pre -Construction Notification
Yeoman Road Residential Development
229-253 Yeoman Road
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
SAW-2021-02075
H&H Job No. REV-001
Dear Bryan
On behalf of Revolve Residential, LLC, Hart & Hickman, PC (H&H) is submitting the attached Pre -
Construction Notification (PCN) application for the proposed construction of a multi -family residential
development in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Site consists of four contiguous
parcels (Mecklenburg County Parcel ID Numbers 14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333)
that total approximately 0.855 acre of land. The Site is currently developed with one residence and
one commercial building. H&H is submitting this PCN application in order to receive verification to
use Nationwide Permit (NWP) 929.
H&H received a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) for the Site from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) Charlotte Regulatory Field Office on October 5, 2021. The PJD document is
included in Appendix E.
There is one wetland located on the Site: Wetland Area `A' (WAA). WAA is a headwater wetland
located in a depressional area located in the western and central portions of the Site. WAA drains in a
2923 South Tryon Street, Suite 100 3921 Sunset Ridge Rd , Suite 301
Charlotte, NC 28203 Raleigh, NC 27607 www.harthickman.com
704.586.0007 main 919,847A241 main

Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds
January 28, 2022
Page 2
generally northerly direction towards an existing stormwater drainage pipe located in the northwestern
portion of the Site that appears to drain toward a downgradient stream feature located off the Site
The developer is proposing to redevelop the Site with a multi -family residential development that will
consist of 19 units along with appurtenant features such as driveways, parking areas, landscaping, and
amenities. As part of the residential development, the developer is proposing to impact approximately
0.036 acre of WAA. The impact to WAA involves grading required to facilitate the construction of a
level building pad for the development of two of the residential buildings and an associated driveway
area. The developer is also proposing to install subgrade drainage, in the form of a French drain or
similar, along the eastern side of WAA to assist in maintaining hydrology in and to WAA.
Although the proposed impact to WAA is less than the typical mitigation threshold for NWP 929 of
0.1 acre for wetland impacts, the Site is located within hydrologic unit code 03050103 (103
Watershed). Due to the Site's location within the 103 Watershed, permanent impacts which result in
the loss of jurisdictional waters require compensatory mitigation. Therefore, mitigation for the
wetland impact is proposed via the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) In -Lieu Fee
Program. Based on the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM), the wetland quality
of WAA is low. Based on the results of the NC WAM, the proposed mitigation ratio for the wetland
impact is 2:1.
H&H is seeking an NWP 929 verification for this development. A copy of the PCN submittal
package, along with their application fee, has also been submitted to the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources (DEQ DWR).
19
hart hickman
https://hartluck.shuepoint.com/sites/A4mterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Revolve Residential (REV)/REV-001/Wetlands/Permitting/Cover5NkRTtkP�N'VIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Mr. Bryan Roden -Reynolds
January 28, 2022
Page 3
Should you have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact Danielle
Clark at 518-598-2862.
Sincerely,
Hart and Hickman, PC
Bo Cappleman, PG
Due Diligence Manager
Attachments
Danielle Clark, PWS
Sr. Project Environmental Scientist
• PCN Form
• Figure I — Site Location Map
• Figure 2 — Preliminary Wetland Delineation Map
• Appendix A — Agent Authorization
• Appendix B — Wetland Impact Exhibit prepared by LandDesign
• Appendix C — Avoidance & Minimization
• Appendix D — Supplemental Documents
• Appendix E —Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
• Appendix F — Mitigation Acceptance Letter
• Appendix G — NC WAM Form
cc: Mr. Alan Johnson, NC DEQ DWR (via ePCN)
Mr. Tim McCollum, Revolve Residential LLC (via Email)
Mr. Shaun Tooley, PLA, LandDesign (via Email)
hart hickman
https://hartluck.shuepoint.com/sites/A4mterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Revolve Residential (REV)/REV-001/Wetlands/Permitting/CoverS7IMItTERpEt?MRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Pre -Construction Notification
Yeoman Road Residential Development
229-253 Yeoman Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. REV-001
January 28, 2022
hart _V hickman
�y►►►11:iI I:Za jj1►11:�6►[ul I ►tV_ I _I&If]ILl]1[0]►i•I
2923 South Tryon Street, 5uite 100 3921 Sunset Ridge Rd, Suite 301
Charlotte, NC 28203 Raleigh, NC 27607 www.harthickman.com
704.586.0007 main 919.847.4241 main

a`'pF wArE�Q�
fl qqlt:� 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
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit
❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 In
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Yeoman Road Residential Development
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name:
N/A
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Gary R. Benfield
David & Ann Palin
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
34005-379 and 10174-143
05985-094 and 06025-925
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
N/A
N/A
3d.
Street address:
4911 Spring Meadow Lane
6239 River Cabin Lane
3e.
City, state, zip:
Monroe, NC 28110
Charlotte, NC 28278
3f.
Telephone no.:
704-283-8836
704-588-8384
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Site Developer
4b.
Name:
Tim McCollum
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Revolve Residential LLC
4d.
Street address:
920 Pecan Avenue, Suite 100
4e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28205
4f.
Telephone no.:
704-965-2535
4g.
Fax no.:
N/A
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Danielle Clark, PWS
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Hart and Hickman, PC
5c.
Street address:
3921 Sunset Ridge Road, Suite 301
5d.
City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27607
5e.
Telephone no.:
518-598-2862
5f.
Fax no.:
919-847-4261
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.182946 Longitude:-80.883737
1 c.
Property size:
0.86 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Unnamed tributary of Irwin Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C (Irwin Creek Classification)
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:
The Site consists of four parcels of land located at 229-253 Yeoman Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Site is currently
developed with one residence and one commercial building. Commercial use is to the north; light industrial use and vacant land is to the east; a
stormwater management area is to the south; and undeveloped land and light industrial use is to the west.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.044
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 0
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The project proposes to develop a multi -family residential development with 19 units to serve the City of Charlotte.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The planned development area will be graded with heavy equipment to prepare a level building pads.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: pJD issued by the Corps on 10/5/2021
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑X preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Julia McGuire
Agency/Consultant Company: Hart & Hickman, PC
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The Corps conducted a desktop review and a PJD was issued by Bryan Roden -Reynolds on 10/5/2021 (SAW-2021-02075).
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b.
If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.036
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.036
2h. Comments:
The permanent wetland impact involves grading and fill required to construct a level building pad for the development of two residential buildings and
an associated driveway area.
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
O2
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
p1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1
Yes/No
B2
Yes/No
B3
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Not Applicable
Page 5 of 10

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See Appendix C
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See Appendix C
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑X Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑X Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
0 linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
0 square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.072 acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4h.
Comments: The applicant proposes 2:1 mitigation ratio for 0.036 acre of wetland impact.
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
N/A
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
64 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
N/A
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan:
Developer to install stormwater drainage infrastructure and detention per City of Charlotte Stormwater Requirements. The net increase of imprevious
area will be detained and treated per the City of Charlotte Central Catawba Basin Requirements, or mitigation
will be paid per current City of
Charlotte Stormwater Service fees. Existing storm drainage patterns on site are to be maintained throughout project construction and completion.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Charlotte Stormwater Services
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
City of Charlotte
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑X Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑X Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑X No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑X 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 ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
El Yes ❑ 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.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El Yes ❑X No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed Site plan will develop the majority of the Site and additional development is not anticipated.
Additional phases and/or impacts to Waters
of the U.S. are not planned or proposed.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater
will enter Charlotte Water sanitary sewer infrastructure and will be piped to an off -Site Charlotte Water wastewater treatment plant.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑X Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
DEQ Natural Heritage Program and Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) on-line databases and on -Site reconnaissance (See information
in Appendix D).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmapper/
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The National Registry of Historic Places, NC State Preservation Office databases, and on -Site reconnaissance (See information in Appendix D).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Reviewed FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map ID #3710453200K
�~
Danielle Clark, PWS
01-28-2022
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

411
ztv
o
is
SISj
TE
IL
V $ x' / -- Pinewood
P
a.. r. Copyr,ight:© 201f3P, tionaI Geographio Society, I -cubed
TITLE
I 0 2,000 4,000 SITE LOCATION MAP
I V SCALE IN FEET PROJRESIDENTIALAND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
229-253 YEOMAN ROAD
v CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
r U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE MAP } 2923 South Tryon Street - Suite 100
Karl hlckman Charlotte, North Carolina28203
CHARLOTTE EAST AND WEST, NORTH CAROLINA 2013 Livens # C-1 69 �o4--245 Geology
og
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS License # C-1269 / # C-245 Geology
QUADRANGLE DATE: 6/8/2021 REVISION NO: 0
7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) JOB NO: REV-001 FIGURE NO: 1

pxw-Z ain6id\sain6�\sPueRaM\In3n) I�luagsaa anpnail\sVabid ialseW-yyy\5

Appendix A
Agent Authorization

Agent Certification of Authorization
1 Tim McCollum , representing the prospective developer of the residential and
commercial properties located at 229-253 Yeoman Road which are represented by Parcel Numbers
14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333 in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina (approx. 0.86 acres), certify that I have authorized Hart & Hickman, PC to act on the
prospective developer's behalf and take all actions necessary to the processing, issuance, and
acceptance of a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination and 401/404 permitting for this property.
Prospective Applicant's Signature
Name/Title:
Company:
8/27/21
Date
Revolve Residential
920 Pecan Avenue, Suite 100
Charlotte, NC 28205
704-965-2535
[e-mail]
Agent's Signature
Danielle Clark, PWS
Hart & Hickman, PC
08-24-2021
Date

Appendix B
Wetland Impact Exhibit prepared by LandDesign

a
I _ — — _ U
w z
W w
� m
w
0 a �s zw / I
w O 00 00 1
z (W7 Oz Oo
OQ FO
U W dm Ow
M>
/
X X Do
w w mC) m�
I
1
1
❑ O
Q
Q
I g sk
LL � LL LL LL LL
I 1
.09 oz
Ll / .09 as 1-
10
1
i
I
/
\
ui
ui
ui
ui
LL /
LL
LL
� LL
�z wOrz
a< QmO�
(Qow mw�w
'I mztm mJmm
QoO OON
w� QZQo
I W' n
I z
1Q2O
_ OQm
Cu)
uMm �I w
(Do
z��o I o
w s s
I
I
I LL LL LL LL LL�
LL LL LL � LL I
19W Tw
o ao
Z0 oo a—Qe I
0 00 U)
m Wm
m am g
U U / O '
Q I.,
v � f
X
Q / —� / �� WOE � /
/ / \ / C—
O
0 F F
O
a
0
0
0
¢ .z
LL
ZLLz LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
¢n¢ LL
LL
LL
LL
g

Appendix C
Avoidance and Minimization

Appendix C
Avoidance and Minimization
Yeoman Road Residential Development
229-253 Yeoman Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
H&H Job No. REV-001
Avoidance and Minimization
The proposed residential development is located along the westerly side of Yeoman Road south-
southeast of the intersection of Yeoman Road and Yancey Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. The Site consists of four contiguous parcels (Mecklenburg County
Parcel ID Numbers 14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333) that total approximately
0.855 acre of land.
H&H reviewed State and Federal threatened and endangered species databases for the Site, and
conducted a screening survey of the Site and surrounding area for the presence of Federal
threatened and endangered species or their suitable habitats, and none were identified. H&H also
reviewed the National Registry of Historic Places (NRHP) for Sites located in Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina and the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NC SHPO)
GIS viewer, and conducted a visual reconnaissance of the Site and surrounding area for the
potential presence of historic, cultural, and/or archeological sites. No recorded sites were noted
on or adjacent to the Site. No significant structures were observed on -Site. H&H requested
comment on the Site from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (NC WRC), and NC SHPO in October 2021. Agency responses are
included in Appendix D.
To minimize Site impacts, the proposed Site plan was designed to avoid Waters of the US to the
maximum extent practicable. The developer chose the Site as an already developed property
with no threatened and endangered species or cultural resource issues, which further minimizes
environmental impact within the surrounding area. The Site buildings, parking areas, and
driveway areas have been designed to primarily occupy upland areas. The developer considered
shifting the northernmost residential building to the east to avoid the northern impact to WAA.
However, the City of Charlotte is requiring an open space area along the frontage of Yeoman
1 hart 'ti hickman
https://huthick.shuepoint.com/sites/A4mterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Revolve Residential (REV)/REV-001/Wetlands/Permitting/C - Avoid and MinimiJ.doc
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Road in the area where the building could be shifted. Furthermore, the developer originally
proposed one private driveway within the residential development to minimize Site disturbance.
However, the City of Charlotte is requiring two private driveways in accordance with their
zoning code. Additionally, the developer originally proposed 24 residential units and has
decreased the number of units to 19 to accommodate the City's requirements while minimizing
Site disturbance to the extent practicable.
The developer is proposing to avoid approximately 0.008 acre of WAA. The area of WAA to
remain is located in an area that will not be utilized by the residential development and will
remain undisturbed. Furthermore, the developer is proposing to install subgrade drainage, in the
form of a French drain or similar, along the eastern side of WAA to assist in maintaining
hydrology in and to WAA.
During Site development, good erosion and sediment control practices will be followed.
Extensive silt fencing will be used on the construction Site perimeter and wetland boundaries to
remain.
Mitigation
Mitigation is typically required by the NWP 929 for wetland impacts greater than 0.1 acre.
Although the proposed impact to WAA is less than 0.1 acre, the Site is located within the 103
Watershed. Permanent impacts within the 103 Watershed which result in the loss of
jurisdictional waters require compensatory mitigation. Therefore, compensatory mitigation for
the 0.036-acre impact to WAA is proposed in the form of purchasing mitigation credits from
DEQ's DMS in -lieu fee program. The DEQ DMS acceptance letter is attached in Appendix E.
Based on the NC WAM, the wetland quality of WAA is low. Based on the results of the NC
WAM, the proposed mitigation ratio for wetland impacts is 2:1.
2 hart Eti hickman
https://huthick.shuepoint.com/sites/A4mterFiles-1/Shared Documents/AAA-Master Projects/Revolve Residential (REV)/REV-001/Wetlands/Permitting/C - Avoid and MinimiJ.doc
SMARTER ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Appendix D
Supplemental Documents

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary D. Reid Wilson
November 17, 2021
Dan McCauley
Hart & Hickman, PC
3921 Sunset Ridge Road, Ste 301
Raleigh, NC 27607
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.
dmccauleygharthickman.com
Re: Development, 229-253 Yeoman Road, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, ER 21-2450
Dear Mr. McCauley:
Thank you for your letter of October 8, 2021, regarding the above -referenced undertaking. We have
reviewed the submission and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or environmental.reviewgncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
�Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898

BNT OR Tye' FISHSERVICE
�o United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
gRCH 3 1Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street Suite B
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
January 7, 2022
Mr. Bo Cappleman
Hart & Hickman, PC
3921 Sunset Ridge Road, Suite 301
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Subject: Proposed Redevelopment at Yeoman Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
Dear Mr. Cappleman:
On October 8, 2021, we received (via email) your information requesting our review of the subject
project. We have reviewed the information that you presented for this request and the following
comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C.§ 4321 et seq.); the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661 - 667e); and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 - 1543) (Act).
Proiect Description
According to the information provided, an undisclosed project proponent proposes undisclosed
redevelopment of three parcels on approximately 0.86 acres at 229-253 Yeoman Road in Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
Federally Listed Species
An assessment of suitable habitat and presence/absence species surveys for six species were conducted by
environmental specialist with Hart & Hickman, PC (H&H) on August 27, 2021. The findings were
compiled and included in the review request submitted to our office on October 8, 2021. The following
species and their associated habitats were evaluated.
Species
Status'
Carolina heelsplitter
Lasmigona decorata
E
Michaux's sumac
Rhus michauxii
E
Northern long-eared bat
Myotis septentrionalis
T
Rusty -patched bumble bee
Bombus affinis
E
Schweinitz's sunflower
Helianthus schweinitzii
E
Smooth coneflower
Echinacea laevigata
E
'E = endangered and T= threatened.
The review request states that no suitable habitat is present for Carolina heelsplitter. Based on the
information provided, we agree with the assessment that no suitable habitat is present for Carolina
heelsplitter. As such, section 7 consultation is not required for this species.

Mr. Cappleman — H&H 2
The review request states that suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac, Schweinitz's sunflower, and smooth
coneflower is present on site; however, the species were not observed during surveys. Based on negative
results of visual surveys conducted on August 27, 2021, we would concur with "may affect, not likely to
adversely affect" determinations from the lead federal action agency for these species.
Based on the information provided, suitable summer roosting habitat for northern long-eared bat (NLEB)
may be present on the site. However, the final 4(d) rule (effective as of February 16, 2016), exempts
incidental take of NLEB associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known
hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season
(June 1— July 31). The proposed development would occur at a location where any incidental take that
may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required, we encourage
the project proponent to avoid any associated tree clearing activities during the NLEB active season from
April 1 — October 15.
We appreciate the project proponent Is consideration of rusty -patched bumble bee when evaluating the
action area for impacts to federally listed species and their habitats. Rusty -patched bumble bee is
historically known from Mecklenburg County and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service)
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office, generally, does not require section 7 consultation for species
only known historically from a county. Therefore, section 7 consultation is not required for this species.
The proposed project is in a county that has potential or known occurrence records of at -risk species
(ARS) and candidate species (CAN). Below is a list of these species known from Mecklenburg County
and for which we have concerns.
Status'
-Species
Little brown bat
M otis luct u us
ARS
Monarch butterfly
Danaus plexippus
CAN
Tricolored bat
Perim otis sub avus
ARS
'ARS = at -risk species and CAN = candidate species.
Little brown bat and tricolored bat are ARS, and monarch butterfly is a CAN. ARS and CAN are not
legally protected under the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including section 7, unless
they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or threatened. While lead federal agencies are not
prohibited from jeopardizing the continued existence of an ARS, CAN, or proposed species until the
species becomes listed, the prohibition against jeopardy and taking a listed species under section 9 of the
Act applies as soon as the listing becomes effective, regardless of the stage of completion of the proposed
action. We are including these species in our response to give you advance notification and request your
assistance in protecting them. Although not required, we recommend that the presence/absence of these
species be addressed in future biological assessments and biological evaluations prepared for similar
projects. Additionally, we encourage you to coordinate projects with the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission on behalf of these species.
We believe the requirements under section 7 of the Act are fulfilled for the federally listed species
discussed above. However, obligations under section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if. (1) new
information reveals impacts of the identified action may affect listed species or critical habitat in a
manner not previously considered, (2) the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that was
not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be
affected by the identified action.

Mr. Cappleman — H&H
Fish and Wildlife Resource Recommendations
We are also concerned about the potential effects the proposed project could have on other natural
resources. We offer the following general recommendations for the benefit of fish and wildlife resources:
Erosion and Sedimentation Control. Construction activities near aquatic resources, streams,
and wetlands have the potential to cause bank destabilization, water pollution, and water quality
degradation if measures to control site runoff are not properly installed and maintained. In order
to effectively reduce erosion and sedimentation impacts, best management practices specific to
the extent and type of construction should be designed and installed prior to land -disturbing
activities and should be maintained throughout construction. Natural fiber matting (coir) should
be used for erosion control as synthetic netting can trap animals and persists in the environment
beyond its intended purpose. Land disturbance should be limited to what can be stabilized
quickly, preferably by the end of the workday. Once construction is complete, disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native riparian grass and tree species as soon as possible. For
maximum benefits to water quality and bank stabilization, riparian areas should be forested;
however, if the areas are maintained in grass, they should not be mowed. The Service can
provide information on potential sources of plant material upon request.
A complete design manual that is consistent with the requirements of the North Carolina
Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act and Administrative Rules, can be found at the following
website: https:lldeq.nc.govlabout/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources.
Impervious Surfaces/Stormwater/Low Impact Development (LID). Increased development
contributes to the increased quantity and decreased quality of stormwater entering project area
waterways. Additionally, increased development outside the floodplain increases stormwater
flows already caused by the lack of or loss of riparian buffers and floodplain development.
Recent studies' have shown that areas of 10 percent to 20 percent impervious surface (such as
roofs, roads, and parking lots) double the amount of stormwater runoff compared to natural cover
and decrease deep infiltration (groundwater recharge) by 16 percent. At 35 — 50 percent
impervious surface, runoff triples, and deep infiltration is decreased by 40 percent. Above 75
percent impervious surface, runoff is 5.5 times higher than natural cover, and deep infiltration is
decreased by 80 percent. Additionally, the adequate treatment of stormwater at project sites is
essential for the protection of water quality and aquatic habitat. Impervious surfaces also collect
pathogens, metals, sediment, and chemical pollutants and quickly transmit them (via stormwater
runoff) to receiving waters. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, this
nonpoint-source pollution is one of the major threats to water quality in the United States, posing
one of the greatest threats to aquatic life, and is also linked to chronic and acute illnesses in
human populations from exposure through drinking water and contact recreational.
Increased stormwater runoff also directly damages aquatic and riparian habitat, causing
streambank and stream channel scouring. Additionally, impervious surfaces reduce groundwater
recharge, resulting in even lower than expected stream flows during drought periods, which can
induce potentially catastrophic effects for fish, mussels, and other aquatic life. To avoid any
additional impacts to habitat quality within the watershed, we recommend that all new
developments, regardless of the percentage of impervious surface area created, implement
stormwater retention and treatment measures designed to replicate and maintain the hydrograph at
the preconstruction condition.
'Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (15 federal agencies of the United States Government).
Published October 1998, Revised August 2001. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices.
GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2:EN 3/PT.653. ISBN-0-934213-59-3.

Mr. Cappleman — H&H 4
We recommend the use of low impact development techniques,2 such as reduced road widths,
grassed swales in place of curb and gutter, rain gardens, and wetland retention areas, for retaining
and treating stormwater runoff rather than the more traditional measures, such as large retention
ponds, etc. These designs often cost less to install and significantly reduce environmental
impacts from development.
Where detention ponds are used, stormwater outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior to
reaching any natural stream or wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow for
the slow discharge of stormwater, attenuating the potential adverse effects of stormwater surges;
thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Also, because the purpose of
stormwater control measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no stormwater control measures
or best management practices should be installed within any stream (perennial or intermittent) or
wetland.
We also recommend that consideration be given to the use of pervious materials (i.e., pervious
concrete, interlocking/open paving blocks, etc.) for the construction of roads, driveways,
sidewalks, etc. Pervious surfaces minimize changes to the hydrology of the watershed and can be
used to facilitate groundwater recharge. Pervious materials are also less likely to absorb and store
heat and allow the cooler soil below to cool the pavement. Additionally, pervious concrete
requires less maintenance and is less susceptible to freeze/thaw cracking due to large voids within
the concrete.
Use of any of the proposed stormwater collection devices described above will dramatically
decrease the quantity and increase the quality of stormwater runoff.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Ms. Rebekah Reid of
our staff at rebekah [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future correspondence concerning
this project, please reference Log Number 4-2-22-332
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
'We recommend visiting the Environmental Protection Agency's Web site (ht62://www.fga.goy/polluted-runoff-
nonpoint-source pollution/urban-runoff--low-impact-development) for additional information and fact sheets
regarding the implementation of low -impact -development techniques.

9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Cameron Ingram, Executive Director
05 November 2021
Mr. Dan McCauley
Hart & Hickman PC
3921 Sunset Ridge Rd, Suite 301
Raleigh, NC 27607
Subject: Request for Environmental Review
229-253 Yeoman Road
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. McCauley,
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC) received your email on 08
October 2021. Biologists with NCWRC have reviewed the subject information. Comments are provided
in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667e) and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
Hart & Hickman, PC (H&H) is requesting information on the potential impacts to threatened and
endangered species and critical habitats at or near the proposed development project to be located at 229-
253 Yeoman Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The 0.855-acre site is in an
industrial area that has a residence and automotive service garage.
The site drains to an unnamed tributary of Irwin Creek in the Catawba River basin. According to H&H,
one wetland is present on the western portion of the site. We have no known current records of federal or
state rare, threatened, or endangered species within or adjacent to the site. H&H surveyed the site for
federally protected species and their suitable habitat in August 2021, and no individuals or their habitat
were observed during the field survey.
We offer the following preliminary recommendations to minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife resources.
1. We recommend the proposed development avoid impacting the wetland.
Maintain a minimum 100-foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer along perennial streams, and a
minimum 50-foot buffer along intermittent streams and wetlands. Maintaining undisturbed,
forested buffers along these areas will minimize impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife
resources, water quality, and aquatic habitat both within and downstream of the project area.
Also, wide riparian buffers are helpful in maintaining stability of stream banks and for treatment
of pollutants associated with urban stormwater.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 2
05 November 2021
229-253 Yeoman Road
Mecklenburg County
3. Disturbed areas should be re -seeded with native seed mixtures. Avoid fescue -based mixtures and
lespedeza because fescue is invasive and/or non-native. Native, annual small grains appropriate
for the season are preferred and recommended. Consider planting native, wildflower seed mixes
and plants that will create pollinator habitat within the site. Avoid using invasive, non-native
plants in seed mixtures or landscaping plants
(http://www.ncwildflower.org/plant_galleries/invasives_list).
4. We recommend using green construction techniques to improve water, waste, and energy
efficiency, such as environmental -friendly building techniques, construction waste management,
and energy efficient building materials.
5. Use non-invasive native species and Low Impact Development (LID) technology in landscaping.
Using LID technology in landscaping will not only help maintain the predevelopment hydrologic
regime, but also enhance the aesthetic and habitat value of the site. LID techniques include
permeable pavement and bioretention areas that can collect stormwater from driveways and
parking areas. Additional alternatives include narrower roads, swales versus curbs/gutters and
permeable surfaces such as turf stone, brick, and cobblestone. Compared to conventional
developments, implementing appropriate LID techniques can be more cost-effective, increase
property values, provide space -saving advantages, reduce runoff, and protect water quality
(hips:Howl.cwp.org/mdocs-posts/roseen-et-al-2011-forging-the-link. Also, additional
information on LID can be found at the NC State University LID guide:
http://www.onsiteconsortium.org/npsdeal/NC_LID_Guidebook.pdf.
NCWRC's Green Growth Toolbox provides information on nature -friendly planning
(http://www.ncwildlife.org/Conservin /g Programs/GreenGrowthToolbox.aspx).
At this time, the information provided is not sufficient for our staff to make definitive recommendations
or conclusions concerning this project. If I can be of additional assistance, please call [phone] or
email olivia.munzer&ncwildlife.oM.
Sincerely,
C�1_
Olivia Munzer
Western Piedmont Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

Appendix E
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination

SAW-2021-02075
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2021-02075 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Charlotte West
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION
Requestor: Revolve Residential
Tim McCollum
Address: 920 Pecan Avenue, Suite 100
Charlotte, NC 28205
Telephone Number: 704-965-2535
E-mail: tim( )revolveresidential.com
Size (acres) 0.86 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Irwin Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.182946
Longitude:-80.883737
Location description: The review area is located on the west side of Yeoman Road; approximately 0.3 miles south of the
intersection of Yeoman Road and Yancey Road. PINS: 14904347,14904331, 14904332, and 14904333. Reference review area
descrintion shown in the Jurisdictional Determination Request nackage entitled "Figure 1, USGS Ouadran0e Man (Dated
06/08/21).
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be 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 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 6/8/2021. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of
impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a
preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they
are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable
action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be 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
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 wetlands at the project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable
permit decision. We recommend that you have the wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish
this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by
the Corps.

SAW-2021-02075
❑ The wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. The
approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly suggest you have
this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey
will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in
the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory
Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Bryan Roden -Reynolds at 704-510-1440 or
brvan.roden-reynolds(&u sace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 10/05/2021.
D. Remarks: None
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
PHILIP.A. SHANNINgUSACE.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 Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA fnrm to the nivicion Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Corps Regulatory Official: 9091 11529 13.48-09 -(4'00'

SAW-2021-02075
Date of JD: 10/05/2021 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable
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
https://re ug lator,�.ops.usace.army.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.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Hart and Hickman, PC
Danielle Clark
Address: 2923 South Tryon Street, Suite 130
Charlotte, NC 28203
Telephone Number: 704-586-0007
E-mail: dclark(&harthickman.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Revolve Residential. Tim McCollum File Number: SAW-2021-02075
Date: 10/05/2021
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
❑X
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.miUMissions/CivilWorks/ReaulatoryProgramandPenuits.asi)
OZI& Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

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

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 10/05/2021
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Revolve Residential, Tim McCollum, 920
Pecan Avenue, Suite 100, Charlotte, NC 28205
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Yeoman Road Residential,
SAW-2021-02075
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the
west side of Yeoman Road; approximately 0.3 miles south of the intersection of Yeoman Road and Yancey
Road. PINS: 14904347, 14904331, 14904332, and 14904333. Reference review area description shown in the
Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled "Figure 1, USGS Quadrangle Map (Dated 06/08/21).
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES
AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.182946 Longitude:-80.883737
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Irwin Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
®Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 10/05/21
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION
Feature
Latitude
Longitude
Estimated
Type of aquatic
Geographic authority to
(decimal
(decimal
amount of
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic
degrees)
degrees)
aquatic
wetland vs.
resource "may be"
resources in
non -wetland
subject (i.e., Section 404
review area
waters)
or Section 10/404)
(acreage and
linear feet, if
applicable
Wetland WAA
35.182853
-80.883914
0.06 acre
Wetland
404
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the
review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request
and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after
having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when
they may be appropriate.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide
General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction
notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general
permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit
applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit
authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of

jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before
accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being
required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an
individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other
general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and
thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including
whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without
requesting an AID constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6)
accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking
any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD
constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by
that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction
in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative
appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or
a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit
denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an
administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether
geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an
official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that
there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S.
on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could
be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items are included in the administrative
record and are appropriately cited:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Figures 1-2 and numerous unnumbered figures
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. Datasheets:
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑USGS NHD data:
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps:
®U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Figure 1, USGS Quadrangle Map (7.5-minute
quadrangle Charlotte East and Charlotte West, NC)
®Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Hvdric Rating by Map Unit (Web Soil Survev of
Mecklenburg County)
® National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Wetlands (USFWS NWI Mapper)
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Figure 2, Preliminary Wetland Delineation Mau (Dated 06/08/21)
or ® Other (Name & Date): Photographs 1-5
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps
and should not be relied upon for later iurisdictional determinations.
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
2021.10.05 13:47:35-04'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
10/05/2021
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable)1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established
time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to fmalizing an action.

pxw-Z I ~ S

Appendix F
DEQ DMS In -Lieu Fee Program Acceptance Letter

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S. BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
Director
Tim McCollum
Revolve Residential LLC
920 Pecan Avenue, Suite 100
Charlotte, NC 28205
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
January 21, 2022
Expiration of Acceptance: 7/21/2022
Project: Yeoman Road Residential Development County: Mecklenburg
This is a conditional acceptance letter.
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
(8-digit HUC)
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Catawba
03050103
Non -Riparian Wetland
0.06
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement. *Non -
riparian wetland credit is not available in this service area. In accordance with the directive from the
February 8, 2011 IRT meeting, non -riparian wetland impacts located in the mountain and piedmont
areas of North Carolina can be accepted as requested, but mitigated utilizing riparian wetland
mitigation credits. Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory
mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated
July 28, 2010. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any
questions or need additional information, please contact KeIIy.Williams()ncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
//_Vdu(_grYk-aa
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Danielle Clark, agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
h(h�TH :.AROI iRA IV
o �nmmmenni w�a 919,707,8976

Appendix G
NC WAM Form

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
Project Name Yeoman Road Residential Development
Applicant/Owner Name Revolve Residential LLC
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont
River Basin Catawba
Date of Evaluation 6/1/2021
Wetland Site Name Wetland Area 'A' (WAA)
Assessor Name/Organization DCC - H&H
Nearest Named Water Body Irwin Creek
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050103
County Mecklenburg NCDWR Region Mooresville
r; Yes T'6 No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.182946,-80.883737
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? T - Yes Jo No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? 4 Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F0 Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
F Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? i ` Yes 4 No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? C- Yes i No
Does the assessment area experience overbank floodin
normal rainfall conditions? r-- Yes i;i No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS VS
i A A Not severely altered
-_ B `: B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
`. B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C : C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. C' A f A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
C' B f B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
(— D C D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. (— A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
f ' B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
`: C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. 1 A Sandy soil
14 B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
1 D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
i E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon >- 1 inch
4c. fi A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A - A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
`s B `: B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
FV A F,01 A F0 A >- 10% impervious surfaces
F B F B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F D F D F D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
+7 E +' E F7 E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
+' F +' F F7 F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G F G F G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes `: No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A >- 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
r D From 5 to < 15 feet
P'- E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
P - <- 15-feet wide P'- > 15-feet wide P - Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
f Yes f-- No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
f Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
C-- Exposed - adjacent open water with width >- 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
t A A >- 100 feet
f B ( B From 80 to < 100 feet
t- C f C From 50 to < 80 feet
(- D f D From 40 to < 50 feet
t- E f E From 30 to < 40 feet
(- F C F From 15 to < 30 feet
Ci G `: G From 5 to < 15 feet
CH T -H <5feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
C A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
C: B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
r- C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
C: A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
(— B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
t C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A C- A z-- A >_ 500 acres
%- B C B ( B From 100 to < 500 acres
%- C f" C f C From 50 to < 100 acres
- D (` D (` D From 25 to < 50 acres
- E E f E From 10 to < 25 acres
F f F C F From 5 to < 10 acres
C G C G f G From 1 to < 5 acres
C H (` H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
( I C` I (` I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
f:J 4J f:J From 0.01 to<0.1 acre
C K - K C K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
i A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
t A C- A >_ 500 acres
B - B From 100 to < 500 acres
C f-- C From 50 to < 100 acres
D C D From 10 to < 50 acres
r` E (: E < 10 acres
ri F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
r-- Yes C— No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
-_ A 0
r:- B 1 to 4
• C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
C A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
(i B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
f C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
4 Yes : No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
f - A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
(- B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o(~ A ( A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m
(a B (i B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U C C f - C Canopy sparse or absent
T
o (i A i A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
t— B (' B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
(i A (i A Dense shrub layer
B (` B Moderate density shrub layer
C C C - C Shrub layer sparse or absent
(` A ( A Dense herb layer
(e B I B Moderate density herb layer
C - C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
f: B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
%- A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A :` B C D
L '
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
C A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
(- B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
t — C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
WAA is located within a highly urbanized area of the City of Charlotte. WAA is also located adjacent to a residence with a maintained lawn and a
commercial automotive mechanic business. The drainage and hydrology of WAA appears to be significantly disturbed; there is a stormwater
management area located to the south-southeast of WAA and a stormwater drainage pipe located to the northwest of WAA.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland Area'A' (WAA)
Date
6/1/2021
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
DCC - H&H
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions
(Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW