20220685 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20220516

Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
April 13, 2022 Ver 4.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
OO Yes
O No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
OYes 0No
Change only if needed.
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on:
4/18/2022
BIMS # Assigned*
20220685
Is a payment required for this project?*
O No payment required
O Fee received
O Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
Version#*
What amout is owed?*
0 $240.00
O $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Doug Perez:eads\djperez
la. Name of project:
Research Park Phase 2
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Daniel Kuefler
lb. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
5/16/2022
Nearest Body of Water
Doby Creek
Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.2905
A. Processing Information
Longitude:
-80.7743
lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Mecklenburg
Is this a NCDMS Project
0Yes ONo
Is this project a public transportation project?*
0Yes ONo

la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
21 Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
❑ Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
0 Yes
O No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
O Nationwide Permit (NWP)
0 Regional General Permit (RGP)
0 Standard (IP)
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
0Yes ®No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
Id. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
O 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
0 Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
0 Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
14 - Linear transportation
18 - Minor Discharges
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:
tf. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
O Yes O No
O 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
O Riparian Buffer Authorization
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
O Yes O No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
O Yes O No
lh. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
O Yes O No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
OYes )No
B. Applicant Information
OYes 0No
OYes 0No
Id. Who is applying for the permit?
yI Owner Applicant (other than owner)
1 e. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
• Yes J No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Elan University City c/o Greystar
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
Josh Glover
2d. Address
Street Address
521 E Morehead Street
Address Line 2
Suite 400
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28202
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2f. Fax Number:
2g. Email Address: *
jg [e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Daniel Kuefler
4b. Business Name:
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
4c. Address
Street Address
10612-D Providence Road
Address Line 2
PMB 550
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28277
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
a mber.li psky@wetlands-epg. com
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
State/ Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
1. Project Information
lb. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
04708214, 04739110
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
City
Postal / Zip Code
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: *
Doby Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water: *
C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Yadkin-PeeDee
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030401050103
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
68.78
State I Province / Region
Country
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application: *
The Elan University City site is located just south of University City Boulevard, and just west of Interstate Hwy 85, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The topography
consists of moderate slopes and stream corridor with the elevation ranging from 700 to 780 ft. (Figure 1). This site is in a semi -urbanized setting. It is surrounded by residential
neighborhoods and features disturbed, mixed hardwood covered slopes and drainages.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
0 Yes O No O Unknown

4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
7.35
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
3600
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The proposed development will include impacts associated with road crossings for connectivity and associated grading.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
Fill and grading of the site will use standard equipment, excavator, dump truck, track hoe, etc.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas? *
JYes ONo
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made? *
O Preliminary O Approved 0 Not Verified 0 Unknown 0 N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2021-01204
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
Nic Nelson
WEPG
0 Unknown
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
The site was field verified by the USACE in June 2021 and by NCDEQ in August 2021 and a PJD was issued in June 2021. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the
Jurisdictional Determination Information section.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
O Yes O No
6b. If yes, explain.
Phase 1 had no impacts to aquatic resources. Remaining phases and proposed impacts are included in this application.
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?
NA
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
e Wetlands
0 Open Waters
2. Wetland Impacts
Streams -tributaries
0 Pond Construction
0 Buffers
2a. Site #* (?)
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type* (?)
2c. Type of W.*
2d. W. name
2e. Forested*
2f. Type of Jurisdicition*
(?)
2g. Impact
area*
W1
BMP
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland FW
Yes
Corps
0.333
(acres)
W2
BMP
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland FW
Yes
Corps
0.059
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.392
2i. Comments:
NWP 18 to be applied to Wetland FW impacts
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.392
3. Stream Impacts

3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.Impact type*
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
(?)
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
length*
Si
Road Crossing
Permanent
Culvert
Stream A
Perennial
Corps
8
Average (feet)
142
(linear feet)
S2
Road Crossing
Temporary
Dewatering
Stream A
Perennial
Corps
8
Average (feet)
15
(linear feet)
S3
Road Crossing
Temporary
Dewatering
Stream A
Perennial
Corps
8
Average (feet)
15
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
142
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
172
3j. Comments:
S1- 0.027 AC
S2- 0.011 AC
S3- 0.011 AC
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
30
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design, and location/orientation of the proposed lots and access
routes. Impact minimization was implemented during the design to preserve existing site hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite natural
habitat. The culverts have been designed with headwalls as close to the sidewalks as possible.The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and
minimization efforts by dedicating 42.5% of the Phase 2 area to open space and avoiding 95% of onsite streams and 94.6% of onsite wetlands.
lb. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
Where possible, 2:1 slopes and the maximum allowable headwalls will be used to minimize crossing impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
▪ Yes O No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
DWR Fv2: Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
O Mitigation bank O Payment to in -lieu fee program C! Permittee Responsible Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
OYes 0No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet)
142
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.392
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested: 4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres) (acres)
4h. Comments
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No

If no, explain why:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
GYes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)7
0Yes ®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
CJ 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:
Storm water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to City of Charlotte but will be designed to meet their
criteria.
G. Supplementary Information (,)
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
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.
No additional phases are proposed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
0 Yes 0 No 0 N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a
treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
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
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
• No Unknown
Yes • No

5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S
® Yes 0 No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
0 Yes ® No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
0 Yes ® No
5i. 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.?
0 Yes ® No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
A threatened and endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat may occur for the Northern long-eared
bat but the project is except as described in the attached T&E report. The report has been submitted to FWS for concurrence.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
O Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
No essential habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status? *
O Yes O No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
SHPO's website: https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/
Report from R.S. Webb & Associates
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Any fill within the floodplain proposed as a part of this project will be designed to meet any requirements of a floodplain development permit as
determined by the City of Charlotte and/or FEMA.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or dreg and drop files here to attach document
Research Park Phase 2 PCN.pdf 10.26MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
A complete PCN package is attached.
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:
Daniel Kuefler
Signature
Oaireie

Date
5/16/2022

WEPG
Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 2021 - 01204
Prepare file folder n
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Assign Action ID Number in ORM pi
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Research Park Phase 2
2. Work Type: Private pi Institutional ri
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
PCN request for residential development
Government n Commercial
EI
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Greystar (Josh Glover)
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: WEPG, PLLC c/o Daniel Kuefler
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Bib]:
35.2905, -80.7743
University City Blvd and 1-85
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]: 04708214, 04739110
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 B2a]: Doby Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]:Rocky/ 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 n Section 404 n Section 10 & 404 n
Regulatory Action Type:
pind m StaNationwide Permit # , 18
n RegionaldarGeneralPerit Permit 14#
n Jurisdictional Determination Request
H
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
n Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Pre -Filing Meeting Request- University City
1 message
Amber Lipsky <[e-mail]>
To: "Perez, Douglas J" <[e-mail]>
Cc: Daniel Kuefler <[e-mail]>
Please see below/attached for our Pre -Filing information.
Amber Lipsky <[e-mail]>
Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 3:17 PM
Contact Name: Daniel Kuefler
Contact Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Owner: Greystar
Project Name: Elan University City -Phase 2
Project County: Mecklenburg
Owner Address: 521 E Morehead Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202
Transportation Project: No
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR: 401 Water Quality Certification (Regular)
Does this project have an existing project ID#?: No
Do you know the name of the staff member you would like to request a meeting with?: Doug Perez
Please give a brief project description below and include location information.: The Elan University City site is located just south of University City Boulevard,
and just west of Interstate Hwy 85, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The topography consists of moderate slopes and stream corridor with the
elevation ranging from 700 to 780 ft. (Figure 1). This site is in a semi -urbanized setting. It is surrounded by residential neighborhoods and features disturbed, mixed
hardwood covered slopes and drainages. One stream crossing is proposed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need more information!
Best,
Amber
Amber Lipsky
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
www.wetlands-epg.com
401.339.4292
7. Elan University Blvd_Typical Maps_120720.pdf
2843K

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
May 16, 2022
Assigned Project Manager
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
Mr. Douglas Perez
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Mr. Paul Wojoski
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa St.
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: SAW-2021-01204; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP #14 and #18 for the
Research Park Phase 2 site in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
USACE Assigned Project Manager, Messrs. Perez, Wojoski, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit #14 & #18 for the Research Park Phase 2 site on
68.78 acres located at the corner of University City Boulevard and the I-85 interchange in
Charlotte, NC. The site is a proposed residential development and consists of three streams and
two wetlands. The site was field verified by the USACE in June 2021 and by NCDEQ in August
2021 and a PJD was issued in June 2021. Please refer to the Jurisdictional Determination
Information section for information on onsite surface waters.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include permanent impacts to one
stream and one wetland for a road crossing, grading, and maintaining connectivity requirements.
Total permanent impacts proposed include 142 linear feet (0.027 AC) of stream impact to Stream
Charlotte Office:
106 12-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
www.wetlands-epg.com
1
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite I D, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
A and 0.392 acres of wetland impacts (Wetland FW). These access crossings were necessary due
to City connectivity requirements, including fire access. These impacts were unavoidable due to
roadway access and connectivity requirements.
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design,
and location/orientation of the proposed lots and access routes. Efforts of minimization were
implemented during the design to preserve existing site hydrology and limit adverse effects to
existing, onsite natural habitat. The culverts have been designed with headwalls as close to the
sidewalks as possible. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and minimization efforts by
dedicating 42.5% of the Phase 2 area to open space and avoiding 95% of onsite streams and
94.6% of onsite wetlands.
To compensate for the anticipated permanent impacts to onsite wetlands, the applicant is
proposing payment to the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Program at
a 2:1 ratio.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site. No listed
species were identified within the project area and we believe that there will be no effect on
listed species, or their critical habitat as designated under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act. This report has been submitted to Fish & Wildlife Services for concurrence. Please refer to
the Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation Section for additional details on the
terrestrial species evaluation. Thank you for your consideration and please contact me if you
have any questions, [phone] or email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Daniel Kuefler, PWS
Environmental Scientist
Len Rindner, PWS
Principal
Charlotte Office:
106 12-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
www.wetlands-epg.com
2
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite I D, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Permit Application
Permit Application

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑ Section 10 Permit
X Section 404 Permit
lb. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14, 18 or General Permit (GP) number:
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes X No
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from
the DWQ (check all that apply):
— Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
— Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
X 401 Water Quality Certification
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes X No
❑ 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
lg. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer lh
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:
Research Park Phase 2
2b. County:
Mecklenburg
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Elan University City c/o Greystar
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Josh Glover
3d. Street address:
521 E Morehead Street, Suite 400
3e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
3f. Telephone no.:
[phone]
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Daniel Kuefler
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group, PLLC
5c. Street address:
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e. Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
daniel.kuefler©wetlands-epg.com
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
04708214, 04739110
lb. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.2905 Longitude: -80.7743
lc. Property size:
68.78 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Doby Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
Rocky/03040105
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 Elan University City site is located just south of University City Boulevard, and just west of Interstate Hwy 85, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County,
North Carolina. The topography consists of moderate slopes and stream corridor with the elevation ranging from 700 to 780 ft. (Figure 1). This site is in
a semi -urbanized setting. It is surrounded by residential neighborhoods and features disturbed, mixed hardwood covered slopes and drainages.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 7.35
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,600
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed development will include impacts associated with road crossings for connectivity and associated grading.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Fill and grading of the site will use standard equipment, excavator, dump truck, track hoe, etc.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: SAW-2021-01204
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
X Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Nic Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The site was field verified by the USAGE in June 2021 and by NCDEQ in August 2021 and a PJD was issued in June 2021. A copy of the signed JD
approval is included in the Jurisdictional Determination Information section.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes X No ❑Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Phase 1 had no impacts to aquatic resources. Remaining phases and proposed impacts are included in this application.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Which sections were completed below
for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
X Wetlands X Streams — tributaries
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.333
W2 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.059
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:
0.392
2h. Comments:
NWP 18 to be applied to Wetland FW impacts
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream A
PER
Corps
8
142
S2 T
Dewatering
Stream A
PER
Corps
8
15
S3 T
Dewatering
Stream A
PER
Corps
8
15
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
172
3i. Comments:
S1- 0.027 AC
S2- 0.011 AC
S3- 0.011 AC
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection, design, and location/orientation of the proposed lots and
access routes. Impact minimization was implemented during the design to preserve existing site hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite
natural habitat. The culverts have been designed with headwalls as close to the sidewalks as possible.The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and
minimization efforts by dedicating 42.5% of the Phase 2 area to open space and avoiding 95% of onsite streams and 94.6% of onsite wetlands.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
Where possible, 2:1 slopes and the maximum allowable headwalls will be used to minimize crossing impacts.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
No
X Yes ❑
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
fee program
Mitigation
X Payment to in lieu
❑ Permittee Responsible
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:
142 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.392 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
❑ Yes X No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
cyo
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
X Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Storm water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to City of Charlotte
but will be designed to meet their criteria.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Charlotte
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Charlotte
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
X Phase II
NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑Yes X No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
Coastal counties
❑HQW
❑ORW
❑Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes X No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land?
❑ Yes X No
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
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
❑Yes ❑ No
lc. 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
letter.)
Comments:
❑ Yes ❑ No
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,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
❑Yes X No
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑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
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
Yes X No
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional phases are proposed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat?
❑ Yes
X No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts?
❑ No
X Yes
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A threatened and endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat may occur for the Northern long-eared
bat but the project is except as described in the attached T&E report. The report has been submitted to FWS for concurrence.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes
X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
❑ Yes
X No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO's website: https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/
Report from R.S. Webb & Associates
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ No
X Yes
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Any fill within the floodplain proposed as a part of this project will be designed to meet any requirements of a floodplain development permit as
determined by the City of Charlotte and/or FEMA.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Daniel Kuefler
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
I
05-16-2022
Date
7-Applicant/Agent Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Agent Authorization Letter
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: Elan University City Phase 2
Property Address:
University City Blvd
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 04708214, 04739110
Select one: I am the current property owner
Name:
Josh Glover
Company: Elan University City Phase 2 LLC c/o Greystar
Mailing Address: 521 E Morehead Street, Suite 400, Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
2/21/22
rty ler / Interested Buyer* / Other* Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office:
061 2-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg.
Suite I0, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

ROY COOPER
Governor
ELIZABETH S, BISER
Secretary
MARC RECKTENWALD
NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
May 2, 2022
Josh Glover
Greystar
521 E. Morehead Street, Suite 400
Charlotte, NC 28202
Expiration of Acceptance: 11/2/2022
Project: Research Park Phase 2 County: Mecklenburg
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
Yadkin
03040105
Warm Stream
175
Yadkin
03040105
Riparian Wetland
0.50
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
cc: Amber Lipsky, agent
1:tEC)5
M) TH CARCII iNn
oea IOfENiVORManbl qUaltf.NS
Sincerely,
AttlyitAtt,47),
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

Maps/Plans

Luvve:,viive
FIGURE
1
Acres:
+/- 67.88
12/07/20
Huntersvdlle
Indian Trail
MINERAL
SPRINGS /
RUMBL OAD
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
VICINITY MAP
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Prepared for:
Graystar
Drawn By:
ALL
Reviewed By:
DCK
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
len. [e-mail]
[phone]
www. w et l an ds -e pg. co m

J
Nottliside
Academy
t
FIGURE
2
Acres:
+/- 67.88
12/07/20
■
is Hunter. Woods Nursing #�
rand Rehabilitalion ente.r�
-10
Governor's Village •
TE I A rad e rny •
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
AERIAL MAP
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
PHASE 2
BOUNDARY
Belgate
hoer AthIet
Aerial Imagery Provided by
Google Earth 2020
_-
Prepared for:
Graystar
Drawn By:
ALL
Reviewed By:
DCK
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com

LOCATION
Lat: 35.2905 N
Long: -80.7743 W
H UC: 03040105
ROCKY
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
Prepared for:
Graysta r
USGS QUAD
Derita, NC
1993
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
DOBY CREEK
USGS MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
B LK
Reviewed By:
ALL
•ryS•
FIGURE
3
11/30/20

p.IF
_ D Wk
1 + rki I.>,D C
CP
T C`1' fj
1.• C .P 7 ri . e
-4)
C
/{##
tI, MO; J
, Wit1j
..
I
f
01111
y
v�
ti ttll}2 ,- Ho
a�t� i
`
r !f En© V4kC7
r
fnE
V41kD
ce&}
tl fRftA
•i
PROPERTY BOUNDARY,
STUDY LIMITS
Ent) En0
4
Fil•B
Ce82
' f . li J ,fi
# � � �PHASE 2
'
P. * BOUNDARY
c0:' C. np f
;40
W4C.
. aEi
-�
HeElff
L.- k
cta,
Ihxi1■i a
tiE,rrn
II
:87j
•• MO _
•
• l9 f-nr7
Ark(
e
NeB Leir:'
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres In AOI
Percent of AOI
/
CeB2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8
percent scopes, moderately
eroded
23.8
34.5°A
,: e$7
CeD2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
23.0
33.2°/
E ,7B
/ilt°
37
EnD
Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15
percent scopes
0.8
1.1
He6 ...�� v,ka
/CO; \
MO
Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, frequently flooded
19,1
27.6°/
Ceti /
w4+. G
/ �'
PaE
Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25
2.5
3.6%
f,,. f'
percent slopes
NRCS Soil Survey Manuscript
Totals for Area of Interest
69.2
100.0°4
Mecklenburg County 1976
"`" t V J
It •
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Prepared for:
Graystar
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
ALL
FIGURE
4
SOIL MANUSCRIPT MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
11/30/20

Atit jr.V 46;lik
trwi fr.
PARCEL: 04739110
ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY OWNER, LLC
• 521 E MOREHEAD ST STE 400
CHARLOTTE, NC 28202
�h-. 41Arpitii
jttstipits.� arlotte\
14100. . i.,
w littiiiiits47 wiF44; .:-.'
z4 Aviiii 41kr
I'Ilir
A
IP
BOUNDARY
dzp
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
ihba- I;
PARCEL: 04708214
ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY
PHASE 2, LLC 521 E
MOREHEAD ST STE 400
CHARLOTTE, NC 28202
—-
__•"I__),
Parcel Information Obtained
from Mecklenburg County GIS 2020
FIGURE
5
Acres:
+/- 67.88
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
Prepared for:
Graystar
12/07/20
PARCEL MAP
Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
ALL
Reviewed By:
■
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
len. [e-mail]
[phone]
www. w et l an ds -e pg. co m
DCK

ifiltjair
SIPROPERTY BOUNDARY
tes � STUDY LIMITS
FEMA FLOODPLAIN AS PER
CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG
POLARIS 3G MAPS
Wetlands and Environmental Planning G
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wedands-epg.com
Prepared for:
Graystar
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
POLARIS 3G FLOODPLAIN MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
ALL
FIGURE
6
11/30/20

\ l�"i, '► �'1111���e'klli``_���_.n11111�111�,
\ \y'
\ PHASE 1
_
\� UNDER CONSTRUCTION
\ � .�'�' NO IMPACT
\ \ -- . -:-___ raj
-_
\ ---- _- ---
iviants w4tA
mamma Tria
„II I /tilt II
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
1
AS 2
SITE
zar
BMP
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 • CHARLOTTE, NC • 2 PHASE OVERALL VIEW
P N 1020223 102.07.2022 I L E N N AR
SCALE: 1 "=300
0 150' 300 450' 750' LandDesign.

\ ) / \
/ / / \
J / / / \
// / /��\
�/ /�\ \`/ I)
\ \\ //if
/I��l
\ \ / N,_,_/ _ s /1��111411((�;
1 // ,��\I�Ndi�C
\ / / / / 111�11vi���
\ / / / / \
/ / /n
V / ////v// AiIg'�'
1
\/ ///7 /- `// / �
//l( // 111 11. PERENNIAL STREAM A
) /) ION -SITE LENGTH = 2418'
—'///(0.522AC)
/ f
�/PRO
—%
II�
— ,BOUNDARY
/ EXISTING
/ /' ; CULVERT �I
/
—
\/i — —PEREI YIY III 4
/�/ / // / ON -SITE LENGTH = 253'
(0.011 AC) r /=
411.
/� \
!�
\
\\ I
_ �\ �i
�\�1/
_ - \ \
- - - \\ 4/1
1
N
L
\� r✓�_^� �� _lam S N �J� J/ ���, ��
ti v /.f��.,
PHASE 1
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
NO IMPACT
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC • OVERALL EXISTING STREAM EXHIBIT PH 2
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
,;_,N.\� �\ \—� / \ / �. / ./ �—
\ _ \_-\_�\ —� / N \ _ / /� ' /� (/ /i//� /
�� \ \��—'�\ = \\- J7// \ // /%/%/ / / // /
\� —
// //
N\-__-_� \\-/ I
����\\� \ \ //
\ ` —\\� \ \ //
\ N\ - \\ N \1 ) / /
\ \\ —__
\ N //
\
> > r \A�\�F
r
ERENNIAI A RAMC
\ON -SITE LENGTH = 557'
SCALE: 1 "=200'
\\ - /
- - / //
/
\\\ x
N\\
0 100' 200' 300' 500' LandDesign®

WETLAND FW/FWW
TO BE FILLED ,
14507 SQFT (0.333) OF IMPACT,
PERENNIAL STREAM A
142 LF OF IMPACT '
1214 SQFT (0.027 AC) '
...,
``,O / 1 PHA ./E 1 II I
`m ;`/ UNDER ,/
UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1
U UI=
/ NO IMPACT
1�
1
Wo l/l �vI 1
I
I
1
PERENNIAL STREAM & WETLAND`''
FW/FWW A EXHIBITS A
MN MN\
l \
BMP OUTFALL
TO BE FILLED
2554 SQFT (0.059 AC) OF IMPACT
AT ANY LOCATION WHERE
THE PROP. PATH CROSSES
THE EXISTING STREAM, A
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE WILL BE
ADDED RESULTING IN NO
IMPACT.
AT ANY LOCATION WHERE
THE PROP. PATH CROSSES
INTO THE WETLAND
OARDWALK WILL BE USED
TO AVOID IMPACT.
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC • OVERALL STREAM IMPACT EXHIBIT PH 2
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
SCALE: 1 "=200
0 100' 200' 300' 500' LandDesign®

WATERLINE
CONNECTION
WATERLINE
EXT. FROM
PHASE 1
10-11
PROP.
CULVERT
PROP. SEWER
CONNECTION
PROJECT
BOUNDARY,
MINIM
WATERLI E
SS
TEMP. JACK &-
BORE IMPACT
(0.01 AC)
BMP OUTFALL
SS SS SS
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC • OVERALL PH 2 UTILITY EXHIBIT
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
SCALE: 1 "=200
0 100' 200' 300' 500' LandDesign®

RETAINING WALL
WETLAND FW/FWW
TO BE FILLED
14507 SQFT (0.333)
OF IMPACT
r
'.... ...
f,.
15FTTOE &
DEWATERING
AREA (0.011 AC)
i
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
PROP. SEWER
NETWORK
PROP. TORM
NETWORK
PROP. CULVERT \
(CULVERT IS TO BE
INTERGRATED INTO
WALL. TO BE DESIGNED F
BY OTHERS) •.,,
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC • PERENNIAL STREAM A & WETLAND FW/FWW A EXHIBIT
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
EX. SEWER LINE
SCALE: 1 "=40
0 20' 40' 60' 100' LandDesign®

CULVERT CROSS SECTION AT ROAD CENTERLINE
(SCALE: 1 "=80' (H) 1 "=8' (V))
725
720
715
710
705
700
695
690
685
680
PROP. GRADE
WET
A
ND
,/
w
ET
EX.
LAN
GRA
DE
-PROP. DOUBLE 12' X 8.5
- BOX CULVERT (142 LF)
1
J
1 I
I I I
CULVERT INVERT TO BE
PLACED 1' BELOW STREAM
INVERT (CONTRACTOR TO
VER FY CULVERT NVERTS
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCT ON)
I� N
O
CC
N Lf)
O 1.0
- -
CD CD
co co
Lf) N
1.0 CO
M
6)
h
N
0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50
725
720
715
710
705
700
695
690
685
680
STREA
CULVE
725 725
720
720
PROP.
GRADE
715
715
710
710
705
705
PROP.
DOUBLE
12'
X 8.5
/
BOX
CULVERT
(165
LF)
700
/
700
//
695
695
142.27
LF of
Double
12' X
8 5'
Concrete
Box Culvert
i i i
@ 0.06%-
� EX. GRADE
M INV.: 889.96
/
//
690
_
690
T INV.: 888.96
STREAM
INV.: 689.86
CULVERT
INV.: 688.86
685
685
P
OP.
1'
APPROVED
FILL MATERIAL
680
co
0)
6)
co
689.93
689.96
689.96
689.91
6)
6)
co
680
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
THE PRESERVE AT FOREST CREEK • WAXHAW, NC • PERENNIAL STREAM A & WETLAND CROSS —SECTIONS EXHIBIT
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
LandDesign.

PROP.
SIDEWALK
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC • WETLAND FW/FWW B EXHIBIT
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
PROP. S •'
NETWORK
MPACT IS NECESSARY AS
THIS PORTION OF ROADWAY
S NEEDED TO MEET FIRE
-ACCESS REQUIREMENTS • /
•
WETLAND FW/FWW
TO BE FILLED
2554 SQFT (0.059)
OF IMPACT
RETAINING WALL
SCALE: 1 "=40
0 20' 40' 60' 100' LandDesign•

WETLAND CROSS SECTION AT ROAD CENTERLINE
(SCALE: 1"=80' (H) 1"=8' (V))
745
740
735
730
725
720
715
710
705
700
695
690
WETLAND
WETLAND
EX
GRAD
E
PROP. GRADE
0)
O
0)
0) O
O O
0) N
O 0)
O O
0)
O
N
O
O
M M
N1.0
OO OO
O
N N
M
co 0)
OD 0)
- O
0) N
0) OD
0) 0)
O I
C (0
N N
h
(0
co
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00
745
740
735
730
725
720
715
710
705
700
695
690
THE PRESERVE AT FOREST CREEK • WAXHAW, NC • WETLAND CROSS —SECTIONS EXHIBIT
PN1020223 102.07.2022 I LENNAR
LandDesign.

Jurisdictional
Determination Information

r
NON -WETLAND WATERS B
-625 LF
0 0.037 51.075 .1 0.15
7i70_L i 60
-750
NON -WETLAND WATERS C
-557 LF
NCDEQ STREAM FORM A
NON -WETLAND WATERS A
-2,418LF
WETLAND D
-0.09 AC
CULVERT
r
rs)
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
-68.78 AC
USACE UPLAND FORM DP1
WETLAND FW/FWW
-7.26 AC
77 D
750
.1:
r-e 770
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Prepared for:
Greystar
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2
Mecklenburg Co., NC
DELINEATION MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to NCDEQ/USACE Verification
Drawn By:
NRN
Reviewed By:
ALL
FIGURE
7
12/11/20
UPDATED
4/24/22

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2021-01204 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S.Quad:NC-Derita
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Grevstar
Zach Spencer
Address: 521 E Morehead Street,Suite 400
Charlotte,NC 28202
Telephone Number: [phone]
E-mail: zach.spencer(a,2reystar.com
Size(acres) 67.88 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Dobv Creek River Basin Upper Pee Dee
USGS HUC 03040105 Coordinates Latitude:35.2905
Longitude:-80.7743
Location description:The review area is located on the south side of University City Boulevard; approximately 0.1 miles west of
the intersection of University City Boulevard and I-85.PINs:04739110,04708214,and 04708213.Reference review area
description shown in the Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled"Figure 1,Vicinity Map"and dated 12/07/20.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
e There appear to be waters,including wetlands on the above described project area/property,that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act(CWA)(33 USC § 1344)and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)(33 USC§403).The
waters,including wetlands have been delineated,and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable.The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 12/11/2020.Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process,including determining compensatory
mitigation.For purposes of computation of impacts,compensatory mitigation requirements,and other resource protection
measures,a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S.This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process(Reference 33 CFR Part 331).However,you may
request an approved JD,which is an appealable action,by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters,including wetlands on the above described project area/property,that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act(CWA)(33 USC § 1344)and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)(33 USC§403).
However,since the waters,including wetlands have not been properly delineated,this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation,this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters,including wetlands at the project area,which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision.We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated.As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner,you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)(33 USC §403)and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations,this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters,including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act(CWA)(33 USC§ 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations,this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑We recommend you have the waters,including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner,you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.
❑The waters,including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps.The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE.We strongly

SAW-2021-01204
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion,this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified,this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which,provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations,may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑The waters,including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE.Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations,this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S.,to include wetlands,present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act(33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations,this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act(CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City,NC,at(252)808-2808 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-revnolds(a,u sace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 06/08/2021.
D. Remarks: None.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps'Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants,or anticipate participation in USDA programs,you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service,prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination,you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process(NAP)fact sheet and request for appeal(RFA)form. If you request to appeal this determination you
must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Philip Shannin,Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW,Room 10M15
Atlanta,Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps,the Corps must determine that it is complete,that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5,and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form,it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Bryan Roden-Reynolds
Corps Regulatory Official: 2021.06.08 08:31:53-04'00'
Date of JD:06/08/2021 Expiration Date of JD:Not applicable

SAW-2021-01204
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/cmapex/f?p=136:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Daniel Kuefler
Address: 10612-D Providence Road
Charlotte,NC 28277
Telephone Number: 336-554-2728
E-mail: daniel.kuefler(a,wetlands-ep2.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Grevstar,Zach Spencer File Number: SAW-2021-01204 Date: 06/08/2021
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.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
• 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 fmal
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 fmal
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 Shannin,Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn:Bryan Roden-Reynolds CESAD-PDO
Charlotte Regulatory Office U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
U.S Army Corps of Engineers 60 Forsyth Street,Room 10M15
8430 University Executive Park Drive,Suite 615 Atlanta,Georgia 30303-8801
Charlotte,North Carolina 28262 Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel,and any government
consultants,to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15-day
notice of any site investigation,and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date: Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer,Wilmington Regulatory Division,Attn: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 10M15,Atlanta,Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 06/08/2021
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Greystar,Zach Spencer, 521 E Morehead
Street, Suite 400,Charlotte,NC 28202
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME,AND NUMBER: Wilmington District,Elan University City, SAW-
2021-01204
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the
south side of University City Boulevard;approximately 0.1 miles west of the intersection of University City
Boulevard and I-85. PINs: 04739110, 04708214,and 04708213. Reference review area description shown in
the Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled"Figure 1,Vicinity Map"and dated 12/07/20.
(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: 35.2905 Longitude:-80.7743
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Doby Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Z Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 06/08/21
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.non- resource"may be"
resources in wetland waters) subject(i.e.,Section 404
review area or Section 10/404)
(acreage and
linear feet,if
applicable
Non-Wetland 35.2881 -80.7749 2210 feet Non-Wetland 404
Waters A
Non-Wetland 35.2919 -80.7756 625 feet Non-Wetland 404
Waters B
Non-Wetland 35.2894 -80.7749 300 feet Non-Wetland 404
Waters C
Wetland D 35.2920 -80.7760 0.9 acre Wetland 404
Wetland FW 35.2914 -80.7733 9.5 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 AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6)
accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking
any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD
constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by
that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction
in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative
appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or
a PJD,the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered
individual permit (and all 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 1-7
®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 3,USGS Map (7.5-minute quadrangle
Derita,NC)
®Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Figure 4,Soil Manuscript Map (Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County Dated 1976)
❑National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑State/local wetland inventory map(s):
®FEMA/FIRMmaps: Figure 6, Polaris 3G Floodplain (National Flood Hazard Laver)
❑100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
®Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):Figure 1,Vicinity Map(Dated 12/07/20)and Figure 2,Aerial Map
(Goo2le Earth Dated 2020)
or Z Other(Name&Date): Photos 1-4(Dated 12/11/20)
❑Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
MOther information(please specify): Figure 5,Parcel Map (Dated 06/03/21),Figure 7,Delineation Map
(Dated 12/11/20) and Stream Reach Evaluation Form(Dated 12/11/20)

IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps
and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
_ Bryan Roden-Reynolds
--- 2021.06.08 08:31:33
04'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory Signature and date of person requesting PJD
staff member completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
06/08/2021 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.

a--+
L
O
Q
C)
ce
v)
C)
.0
a)
Q
cn
a)
a)
01
c
ccs
c
w
ces
a)
c
a)
4J
c�
a)
Threatened & Endangered Species 1—
Report
i

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S.Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For: Elan University City
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
Field investigation conducted December 11, 2020 & August 2, 2021
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-cpg.corn Asheville Office:
I06I2-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd.,Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
l en.ri nd ner@wet Ian ds-epg.ca m

Elan University City - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Elan University City site (+/- 67.88 acres) is located just south of University
City Boulevard, and just west of Interstate Hwy 85, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. It can be found on the Derita, NC USGS Topographic
Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.2905 N, longitude is -80.7743 W. The topography
consists of moderate slopes and stream corridor with the elevation ranging from
700 to 780 ft. (Figure 1). This site is in a semi -urbanized setting. It is
surrounded by residential neighborhoods and adjacent to the University City
Boulevard and Interstate Hwy 85 corridors. The site features disturbed, mixed
hardwood covered slopes and drainages.
Figure 1:
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
Athletic.
Feld
WCATTON
Lat:35.2905 N SCALE
Long: -80.7743 W 1:24,000
HUC:03040105 ACRES
I f ?IROCKY I 67.88
) -I
wnnnes and Enmmnunnl Planning Group
Le .rd S. Fbneree, FUG.
ha..aea v,.,-Ly,e.-wg'..'^
{794i 904.2 77
rww.wetlerrda-epR,coni
WE P G #00841
Prepared for:
Greystar
USGS QUAD
Derita, NC
1993
ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY
Mecklenburg Co., NC
DORY CREEK
USGS MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to US4CE/NCDER ver5flardan
• ;
Epv;-' Lsrie
Drawn By:
8LK
Reviewed 8y'
DCK
FIGURE 1
11/30/20
2
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Elan University City- Threatened/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website
https://ecos.fws.ciov/ipac/location/47YBQUTADBCBZG6FYH25LGUGZQ/resourc
es was referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and
Protected species for Mecklenburg County North Carolina, the results of which
are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and
the site was investigated during the weeks of December 11, 2020, and August 2,
2021.
Table 1 : Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish &Wildlife Service
**Data search on December 11, 2020 ***Updated August 2, 2021
Group Name Status Record Status
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter(Lasmigona Endangered Current
decorata)
Vascular Plants Smooth Coneflower(Echinacea Endangered Current
laevigata)
Vascular Plants Schweinitz's Sunflower(Helianthus Endangered Current
schweinitzii)
Vascular Plants Michaux's Sumac(Rhus michauxii) Endangered Current
Vertebrate Northern Lonq-Eared Bat(Mvotis Threatened Probable/Potential
septentrionalis)
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Protected under the Bald Current
leucocephalus) and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
■
■ #00841 3
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Elan University City- Threatened/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS:
Three plant species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Mecklenburg County:
• Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally Endangered,
is typically found in open habitats which historically have been maintained by
wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most occurrences are limited to
roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility rights-of-way (ROW).
• Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), listed as Federally Endangered, is
typically found in open woods, cedar barrens, roadsides, clear cuts, dry
limestone bluffs and power line rights-of-way, requiring abundant sunlight and
little competition from other plant species.
• Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii), listed as Federally Endangered, requires
habitat of sandy forests and woodland edges. This species requires periodic fire
as a part of its ecology.
Four animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in
Mecklenburg County:
• Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large bodies of open water
such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers, where there are suitable fish
populations and tall trees for nesting and roosting.
• Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally Endangered, is
restricted to cool, clean, well-oxygenated water. Stable, silt- free stream beds
are required for this species. Typically, stable areas occur where the stream
banks are well-vegetated with trees and shrubs.
• Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), listed as Federally Threatened.
During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies underneath
bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non-
reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. It
has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. Northern
long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula.
WE P G 400841 4
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Elan University City- Threatened/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
This site is in a semi-urbanized setting. It is surrounded by residential
neighborhoods and adjacent to the University City Boulevard and Interstate 85
corridors. It features disturbed, mixed hardwood covered slopes and drainages
with Doby Creek flowing northward through the site.
The entire site is covered in a mixed hardwood dominated forest with mature
trees. Canopy tree species include American Elm (Ulmus americana), Willow
Oak (Quercus phellos), White Oak (Q. a/ba), Sweet Gum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), Short-leaf Pine (Pinus
echinata), Virginia Pine (P. virginiana), Cottonwood (Populus deltoides), and
Red Maple (Acer rubra). Sub-canopy species include American Beech (Fagus
grandifolia), Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora), Sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum), Flowering Dogwood (Corpus florida), and American Holly (Ilex
opaca). Shrub species present are Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense), Russian
Olive (E/aeagnus umbellata), Sacred Bamboo (Nandina sp.), Multiflora Rose
(Rosa mu/tiflora), and Red Tips (Photinia sp.). Vines observed were Japanese
Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Poison Ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), and Catbrier (Smilax sp.). Herbs present include
Christmas Fern (Po/ystichum acrostichoides), Ebony Spleenwort (Asp/enium
p/atyneuron), Panic Grass (Panicum sp.), False Nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica),
Jumpseed (Tovara virginiana), Japanese Stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum),
and Knotweed (Polygonum sp.).
The boundaries along the roadside corridors are planted in Fescue (Festuca sp.)
turf grass and the thin transitional areas are dominated by common weedy
species such as Johnson Grass (Sorghum ha/epense), Dog Fennel (Eupatorium
capilifolium), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia),
Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium obtusifolium), and Pokeweed (Phyto/acca
americana).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower along the roadsides and
woods edges were examined, and the species was not observed. WEPG
concludes Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) does not occur
on the site.
• All potential habitats for Smooth Coneflower along the roadsides and
woods edges were examined, and the species was not observed. WEPG
concludes Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea /aevigata) does not occur on
the site.
VIE P G 400841 5
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Elan University City- Threatened/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
• All potential habitats for Michaux's Sumac along the roadsides and woods
edges were examined, and the species was not observed. WEPG
concludes Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) does not occur on the site.
• No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings
nor were any nesting sites observed. WEPG concludes Bald Eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) does not occur on the site.
• The stream on site does not have the habitat characteristics required to
support populations of the Carolina Heelsplitter. Based on existing
documentation, Carolina Heelsplitter populations have not been previously
identified within this basin. WEPG concludes Carolina Heelsplitter
(Lasmigona decorata) does not occur on the site.
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office's website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html) it
appears that the site meets the "exempt" criteria which requires no further
action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the Northern
Long-eared Bat.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not
identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further
investigation of the presence of protected species on this site is recommended at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
January 8, 2021
*Updated August 4, 2021
WEPG 400841 6
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group

Elan University City- Threatened/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist/Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and natural resource biologist and
has conducted field work and investigative studies covering thousands of
cumulative acres in both North and South Carolina since 1996, including:
• Discovered Schweinitz's Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC.
which led to the purchase of the site by the State of North Carolina Plant
Conservation Program, now called Redlair Preserve. This population has
become a Recovery Site for the species.
• Located and identified numerous previously unreported populations of
Federally Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
• Located and identified numerous previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora).
• Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory. Organized, directed,
and conducted field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory. Organized, directed, and
conducted field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities
Evaluation for over 55,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 -
present.
• Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in both
North and South Carolina.
WE P G 400841 7
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Elan University City- Threatened/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 2: VICINITY MAP
Hunteisvilie Concord /
14-9
w3 { y�4
Harrisburg d
f
Mt Holly
0
SITE z�, 2634
ecln-innt tij Charlotte
Fain
.Vylie Matthews
Pineville U
Indian Trailtart
University City Blvd MINERAL Hobby Lot
SPRI GS Z
RUMBL : ' DAD ;,,.
rIE. I KEp
tz 'r
Moe r y `Rit,�
PROJECT BOUNDARY
)U Lion STUDY LIMITS +
AMARILLO P IRK
o
43
f
� 1-85 Canrret
Acres: ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY Prepared for: A
■
{ Grastar 67'gg Mecklenburg Co.,NC Y Wwlands and E,M,onmcnrc3 Planni mg,Group
FIGURE Leonard S.wndnrr•PLLC.
2 VICINITY MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
12/07/20 ALL b�.r�n.incr(WwcL:nd.-. .gem
Subject to USACEMCDEQ verification DCK 1.70-4:9'04-76z77
www.werlands.ape.Cam
VVEPG #00841 8
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Elan University City - Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 3: USGS MAP
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
LOCATION
Lat: 35.2905 N SCALE
Long:-80.7743 W ' 1124,000
HUC.03040105 ACRES
ROCKY { 67.88
USGS QUAD
Derita, NC
1993
DOBYCREEK
La/lama
iCb I
17Tj_.r�,
e I
£Dwortrr�Lane
wedads aid Enrrornem.l Mamma Group
Lc n t Rlndnrr. PU.C.
luvnndnoirriNe tnes.eg-con.
(71:419P4.2777
www.wcdmds.cm.cam
Prepared For:
Greystar
VVEPG400841
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY
Mecklenburg Co., NC
USGS MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to US4CE/N0DER vew7rMaHon
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE 3
11/30/20
9
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

-Wm TTnivorcin, ('its' - T1 r'atini 1/Endangered/Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 4: AERIAL MAP
pipe
�. g , el, Governor's Villa ge4
'i "\ r- - a�.pvd r. , STEM Academy
v•_--
11 ,
•• hbh"..„
Qj
'� .a
o
•. Derita Mineral Unto
a _
' , Spring _ L !.iiii e'
•
1...4i,
r M 4z+a• •... ix S ';. ' • Reigate.
7,...
• 1
L .. AMARI LLO PARK ��; ,'
�r . • •�
..'404 at ,
k
1' , '116 �y. Cheer IetICS
Northside:.� • • , ,/ ff!/
1
Academy. ., .. .. / . �`�►.
PROJECT BOUNDARY 1_.�i. - _r
STUDY LIMITS _
• .s " to �' '- Orchard Trace •
'-' - - i • . •;: ; . Condominiums
.,• - I .81 Suite' s
.� -
$ Hunter Woods Nursing, -' I
+� ' Aerial Imagery Provided by
iii _
• " rand Rehabilitation.Center1� Google Earth 202O
�4t, i emir` i 7r Mint
Acres: ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY Prepared for: ► 11
+/-67.88 Mecklenburg Co.,NC raystar wcrlan6s and En�ironme xi!Pfa iiie
FIGURE Leonard R.wndner,PLLC
4 AERIAL MAP Drawn By: Reviewed By:
12/07/20 ir„nndnerwraar,ds-cPa
Subject to USACE/NCDEOverification ALL DCK t704.i9pH.2277
VAN.'werinnds epgcnrn
VYE P G #00841 10
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Elan University City - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 5: NRCS PUBLISHED SOIL MAP
1/ Li) r-..o 1 Z ‘."8.J i / \\ \ ` cif // ! I o^
r,
Map Unit Symbol
Hem—
Mop Unit He
Acros in AOl
Porcontof ACE.
,w
Ce42
Cool ea'dy clay :cam. 2 to 8
percera slopes. mode.stdy
eroded
23.8
'e8.'
Ce P7
Geed Weey cloy loam, 810 15
laCr[CnI slcpea. Medmomry
eroded
23.o
332
[nD
Falon sandy loam. 8m 75
pHarX WOOS
0.6
114,
'
MO
Monacan loan0 to 3 percent
copes, I.eque.rtly flooded
58.1
r.\
27 G'
.•PaE
Peaks! sandy loam. 151o25
portant scopes
2.5
369'
r
3
Made for Ana et Memel 82.2
100.0%
Werleoda and En em-anal Manoryf C+rmp
Leaurd S. Radler- PLLC
rcn..lndrw.y wedenib-epa.cem
payaa+2277
wrret.eadvxh-.egcom
Prepared for:
Greystar
WE P G 400841
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
ELAN UNIVERSITY CITY
Mecklenburg Co., NC
SOIL MANUSCRIPT MAP
Foi study purposes only -Subje t to USA CEM DE4 verifrcatron
Drawn By:
SLK
Reviewed Ey: I
DCK
FIGURE 5
11/30/2"
11
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

L
O
Q
C)
oC
v)
C)
u
0
v)
C)
oC
c�
T2
.6_,
U
Cultural Resources
Report
i

R.S. Webb & Associates
Cultural Resource Management Consultants
2800 Holly Springs Parkway, Suite 200•P.O. Drawer 1319
Holly Springs, Georgia 30142
Phone: [phone]•Fax: [phone]
May 16, 2022
Ms. Amber Lipsky
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
3714 Spokeshave Lane
Matthews,North Carolina 28105
Subject: Findings-Limited Cultural Resources Literature Review/Field Reconnaissance
Research Park Phase 2 Development Tract
Charlotte-Derita, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
R.S.Webb & Associates No. 21-649-133
Dear Ms. Lipsky:
BACKGROUND
During 2021, R.S. Webb & Associates (RSWA) conducted a limited cultural resources literature
review and field reconnaissance for the proposed Research Park Phase 2 development tract located
near the Charlotte-area Derita community,in Mecklenburg County,North Carolina(Figure 1). The
project area includes approximately 18.6 hectares (46 acres) located astride Doby Creek and
southwest of the intersection of University City Boulevard (north) and Interstate 85 (east), in
northeast Mecklenburg County.
For this literature review, a"cultural resource" is defined as a discrete area of human activity that
is more than 50 years old. Cultural resources include, but are not limited to, archeological sites,
historic structures, military earthworks, mines/mining features, historic cemeteries, and historic
landscape features. The purpose of the current study was to determine if previously recorded cultural
resources are located within the project area.
METHODOLOGY
Literature and Records Search:Through the State Historic Preservation Office's(SHPO)HPOWEB
database, information regarding National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties,
Mecklenburg County surveyed-only historic resources,other surveyed properties or resources,state
Study List sites, and/or historic resources that have been given a determination of eligibility(DOE)
was reviewed and collected. The North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) provided
RSWA with information via email/electronic link regarding archeological sites located within 1.6
kilometers(km)of the project area. This information included site forms,location maps and partial
or full reports. Historic county maps were viewed online through North Carolina Maps, a
collaboration of the University of North Carolina, the State Archives of North Carolina, and the
Outer Banks History Center. Historic aerial photography and additional historic maps were accessed
through Historicaerials.com, Earthexplorer.usgs.gov, Legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/, and
Alab amamaps.ua.edu.

Findings-Limited Cultural Resources Literature Review/Field Reconnaissance,Research Park Phase 2 Tract Page 2
May 16,2022
The following primary sources were found to be useful in searching for historic resources within and
adjacent to the project area:
• 1910 USDA Mecklenburg County Soil Map
• 1911 Spratt and Spratt Map of Mecklenburg County
• 1912 Post Office Depai ltiient Map of Mecklenburg County
• 1938 and 1953 State Highway and Public Works Commission Maps of Mecklenburg County
• 1952 and 1973 USGS Derita,North Carolina 7.5-minute quadrangle map
• 1955 and 1978 aerial photographs of Mecklenburg County
• 1983 Official Military Atlas of the Civil War(Davis et al. 1983)
• 1993-2021 Google Earth aerial photography
Reconnaissance Field Survey: The field reconnaissance was designed to sample areas with a high
probability of containing prehistoric and/or historic resources and to record current project area
conditions. The Project Archeologist walked transects across the project area landforms as shown
in Figure 2. A combination of landscape scanning, surface inspection and screened shovel testing
was used to search for cultural resources on selected high-probability landforms. As these landforms
were walked,exposed surfaces were inspected for artifacts and other evidence of cultural resources.
Exposed surfaces include, but are not limited to, clearings, road cuts, unpaved roads/trails and
eroding banks. Shovel testing, typically at 30 meter (m) intervals, was used on selected high-
probability landforms to monitor soil conditions and search for cultural deposits. Shovel testing
involved the excavation of 30-by-30-centimeter(cm)units. Soils were screened through 0.64-cm
hardware cloth and the retained material scanned for artifacts. Each test was taken to sterile subsoil/
substrate and the profile cleaned and examined. Soil colors, textures and depths of deposit were
recorded in an all-weather journal. Data collected during the field reconnaissance were used to
generally assess the NRHP eligibility status (i.e., probably ineligible or potentially eligible) of
observed cultural resources. Current land use patterns and levels of disturbance were also noted.
RESULTS
Limited Literature Review
Previous Archeological Investigations: According to the records provided by OSA, there has been
at least four cultural resources management projects performed within 1.6 km of the project area,the
closest of which took place immediately north of the current study tract (Figure 1). In 1996, the
North Carolina Depaitiuent of Transportation conducted an archeological study for the Graham
Street Extension (now University City Boulevard) (Glover 1996). The survey report indicates no
findings within the proposed road corridor,but it states that two sites west of the current project area,
Derita Mineral Spring and archeological site 31MK162, were explored at the behest of OSA.
Previous Architectural Investigations:According to SHPO personnel,the North Carolina HPOWEB
database is the definitive source of all architectural survey information for Gaston County.
National Register of Historic Places: According to the HPOWEB and NPS databases,there are no
NRHP-listed historic properties located within 1.6 km of the current study tract.
Mecklenburg County Historic Resources:The HPOWEB database identifies no state study-list sites,
local landmarks, or properties determined eligible for the NRHP within 1.6 km of the study tract.
The database shows two Surveyed-Only historic resources within 1.6 km of the project area, the

Findings-Limited Cultural Resources Literature Review/Field Reconnaissance,Research Park Phase 2 Tract Page 3
May 16,2022
closest of which is the Andrew Alexander House (MK1527), situated west of Neal Road,
approximately 750 m west of the study tract(Figure 1).
Recorded Archeological Sites:According to OSA-provided archeological site records,there are six
recorded archeological sites located within 1.6 km of the project area. Site 31MK162 (not mapped
by OSA) is a prehistoric artifact scatter site recorded in 1975 with an unknown NRHP eligbility
status. This site is/was located just south of University City Boulevard about 280 m west-northwest
of the current project area(Figure 1). No evidence of this site was relocated during Glover's 1996
survey for the corridor survey of this road extension. No other known archeological sites are located
within 800 m of the project area.
Historic Cemeteries: Historic maps and aerial photographs reviewed show no cemeteries located
closer than 800 m of the project area.
Structures on Historic Maps and Aerial Photographs: Maps produced during the first quarter of the
20th century show the courses of Mineral Springs Road at the south project area boundary, Doby
Creek through the west part of the study tract and a road passing southeast to northwest via the
project area. These roadways appear to have been sparsely populated,but buildings appeared to the
northwest, southwest and southeast of the study tract (Figure 1). County highway maps produced
in 1938 and 1953 indicate a similar distribution of buildings,but the road through the study tract are
not depicted. The USGS and county highway maps from 1952 to 1973 show no buildings within
or adjacent to the project area during this time span.
Aerial photographs from 1955 and 1968 show the project area to be entirely wooded, with no
obvious structure/building signatures present. The Google Earth sequence of aerials shows the
project area to have been wooded from 1993 into 2021.
Field Reconnaissance
Land Use:Topographically, the project area is mostly a series of gentle side slopes,ridge ends and
ridge spurs along Doby Creek(Figures 1 and 2). The physical nature of the project area is illustrated
in Photos 1-3. Field observations confirmed that the study tract has been subjected to harsh land use
practices related to initial clearing/logging,exhaustive farming,and erosion from the late 18th century
into the 20th century,and by middle/late 20th to early 21st century road construction. Shovel test data
from the field reconnaissance confirmed highly to moderately eroded A-horizon soils across the
project area uplands. Upland soil profiles displayed 5 to 20 cm of sandy loam, sandy clay loam or
clay loam plowzone over clay,sandy clay,silty clay or rocky sandy clay subsoil. Where shovel tests
were excavated in dry portions of the floodplain along Doby Creek,profiles exhibited silt, silty clay
and/or sand typical of hydric or formerly hydric settings. No archeological features,midden deposits
or other cultural manifestations were noted during shovel testing.
Archeological and Historic Resources:No archeological or historic resources were recorded during
the current field reconnaissance.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Limited Literature Review:No recorded archeological sites are located within or near the study tract.
The closest known archeological resource,31 MK162,is or was located about 280 m west-northwest

Findings-Limited Cultural Resources Literature Review/Field Reconnaissance,Research Park Phase 2 Tract Page 4
May 16,2022
of the project area. The nearest recorded historic resource, Resource No. MK1527, is a historic
dwelling located approximately 750 m west of the study tract. Twentieth to 21st century maps and
aerial photographs indicate no obvious structure/building signatures within the project area.
Field Reconnaissance:No archeological or historic resources were recorded during the current field
reconnaissance.
CLOSING COMMENTS
Ms. Lipsky, we appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any
questions or comments, please contact me at 770-345-0706.
Sincerely,
R.S. WEBB &ASSOCIATES
ki-4/7'1 //17
Robert S. (Steve)Webb
President and Senior Principal Archeologist
Attachment: Figures 1 and 2; Photos 1-3
REFERENCES
Davis, G.B., L. J. Perry and J. W. Kirkley, compiled by C. D. Cowles
1983 Atlas to Accompany the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies.
Reprint of the 1891-1895 edition. The Fairfax Press,New York.
Glover, G.F.
1996 Archaeological Study: Graham Street Extension, Mecklenburg County. North
Carolina Department of Transportation. Raleigh,North Carolina.

Possible -
i Location of
311V1K162
r
♦ Structure on Historic Maps
❑ Recorded Historic Resource
• Recorded Archeological Site
Map Reference: 7.5-Minute USGS Quadrangle
Derita (1993), NC
— Previous Cultural Resource Project
--- Road on Historic Maps
Scale
0 610 meters
0 2000 feet
Figure 1 Project Area, Previous Project and Cultural Resources Location Map

urvey i ransect:,„. -
Map Reference: 7.5-Minute USGS Quadrangle
Derita (1993), NC
Figure 2 Survey Coverage Map
Scale
0 152 meters
0 500 feet

-, �17F r• -1_.
to
' .
—1t I
J
i - •i .
Photo 1 -Transect 2,Facing Northwest
ib{.:i Sak KY..k. -
,...,,_,,. '4,:r. '''' '
te r -ra .41,7-- s.414 ,
wi
5 ti �7 j r•
s
Photo 2-Transect 7,Facing East

i „..-.1 . f..,,... ' .k.1 1.....", .•," ' , . ' .. , „ . • ',
I % ... ' '-‘111 ,.' .4 1.. '''• ' , .. -, - " '
.1 0
....., • w r ,. • •ro. t ' •.
. ... - •
. . .•- .-
, .
'14-
-4111°1., 7,- '•.---4 - --.7.4 . 1-41.: ,7., ,-
111
..17-7-1. 'Y '••:'..--' .' • .1'1.
.•
J • •
1
fr
.1,
. . .s.
ei •
'i• ''''''• 1 0. . 7:. 41 .
, .
4 C.,Ili lo At
- -—
-- _
lib 4 a
f' -__=._., - , . • -" ','.."`-"%, . ,.-,,•• -1.. "::-7.
• - .
—-:. -4-• _,-,, -. '''';-1.--,----w .. ...-itl'i•,•1,0`.,• 't. ,-A_'. -_-,, •
-' —.."It-----— - •; ' .-.-----..;_iliMt- Ogi.‘04'a '-•s. ..! =k_*--.1.-04.,,L'ir-4\-:.-.... .41•-;-•''‘`,-- ' -.. '-• ,.-•----7--•
-.".''--" -•'-' './.;-•-''. ;-1-4 .... ,,,..,i.,7i,_-1 .7„:14-",1131p,4,1,N.r.414 ''''....-"-.4,:-.4.:.--r-:L'IP-.-.-:4:-.L., , . •P'-,--
• '''".:. .--.:—---•--,' ..,. .....-4,---0/0,7-,..t•e" -0!afri,t1...--.,..,t.14.7%.•,11. N-,,,,I L4::14,-.Z",'.1j,?t,-7,...,4;5..."... '4% - '7.41.
- .--..` "-• • ' - '• 'fl"'"-- V 7WItire.-.. -r. - ”?'",r"4:7,-.`7,..--t!:-..4/P."1":*.''. 7, ' -w.
' z 0.-''. • -• '- . - •-. ' 4-4-ii...... ' .•'•.t".0,''lit l'u-P.'11F-7i.l.k -,.- ••••9...1.,-s,.'
It,-..- - .'' •" ., ,...-_14t'..#454,!...C1. -.1',,.4-_-•*,--'.',. • ''''•,,,., ,zr-•"-...“.1i-v.
. ... ,..„,,,,si- ‘...".,11.:.-. . {a.. _ . •. !„...1 -.. f. •-ae,...417._ Ir ih,... `4. -.-
---' ' .'4'r.' - . • 7 ' , ,, . - -"•-•" * 76'. .- •-d4....i--2 _
t - .
Photo 3-Transect 8,Facing Southeast