20220869 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20220624

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:
4/19/2022
BIMS # Assigned*
20220869
Is a payment required for this project?*
0 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?*
O $240.00
0 $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Doug Perez:eads\djperez
la. Name of project:
Sedona Farms
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Heath Caldwell
lb. Primary Contact Email:*
heath .caldwel [e-mail]
Date Submitted
6/24/2022
Nearest Body of Water
West Branch Rocky River
Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.4613
A. Processing Information
Longitude:
-80.7898
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:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
EO 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
0 Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
0 Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
14 - Linear transportation
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:
If. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
O Yes O No
0 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
0 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 0No
B. Applicant Information
0Yes ONo
OYes 0No
Id. Who is applying for the permit?
O Owner O Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
OYes 0No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Bi-Part Development
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
Jake Palillo
2d. Address
Street Address
18611 Starcreek Road
Address Line 2
City
Cornelius
Postal / Zip Code
28031
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2f. Fax Number:
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Heath Caldwell
4b. Business Name:
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
4c. Address
Street Address
10612-D Providence Road
Address Line 2
PMB 550
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28277
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
1. Project Information
lb. Subdivision name:
Of appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality / town:
Davidson
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
00721112
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: *
West Branch Rocky River
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.
030401050102
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
10.29
State / 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 Sedona Farms site (+/- 10.29 acre) is located just north of June Washam Road and southwest of West Branch Rocky River in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The elevation is
approximately 680-720 ft. The site is comprised of farmland with shed and outbuildings, wooded slopes, and a small portion of field.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
0 Yes O No 0 Unknown

4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.0866
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
450
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The proposed development includes impacts associated with a road crossing and associated grading for access to an existing residential property.
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? *
!� Yes O No
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made? *
_l Preliminary - Approved J Not Verified - Unknown J N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2022-00123
Sc. 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
This site was verified by B. Roden -Reynolds (USACE) on 1/14/22. 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?*
0 Yes O No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
i1 Wetlands OO Streams -tributaries
J Open Waters 0 Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
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
Road Crossing
P
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Wetland B
Yes
Corps
0.000
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.000
2i. Comments:
0.00046 AC of impact (would not fit in table)
3. Stream Impacts
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.lmpact type*
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
(?)
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
length*

S1
Road Crossing
Permanent
Culvert
Stream A
Intermittent
Corps
4
Average (feet)
95
(linear feet)
S2
Road Crossing
Permanent
Stabilization
Stream A
Intermittent
Corps
4
Average (feet)
22
(linear feet)
S3
Road Crossing
Permanent
Stabilization
Stream A
Intermittent
Corps
4
Average (feet)
25
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
142
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
142
3j. Comments:
S1- 0.0087 AC
S2- No loss impact; Rip rap to be installed at existing stream bed elevations. 0.002 AC
S3- No loss impact; Rip rap to be installed at existing stream bed elevations. 0.0023
Total acrage- 0.013 AC
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
0
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 design and location/orientation of the access route. Impacts could not be
avoided as to the only feasible driveway connection would be off of the common drive as shown. The property does have frontage to the west but it is it
is within a sharp horizontal curve that would not meet NCDOT sight distance requirements. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and minimization
efforts by keeping the majority of the site undeveloped and avoiding 68% of onsite streams and 99% 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?
O Yes * No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
Due to limited site impacts, no mitigation is proposed.
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?
0 Yes O 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?*
0 Yes @ No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
O Yes No
Comments:
Stormwater treatment is not required for the site. Built up area is under the threshold.
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 O 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)7*
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 proposed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
® 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 a No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes 7 No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
OYes 0No
• No Unknown
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
O Yes 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.?
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.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes • No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
Yes • 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 and Associates
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes • No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/

Miscellaneous U
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Sedona Farms PCN.pdf
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
A complete PCN package is attached.
Signature
5.84MB
ill By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Heath Caldwell
Signature
Date
6/24/2022

WEPG
Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 2022 - 00123
Prepare file folder n
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Sedona Farms
2. Work Type: Private pi Institutional ri
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
NWP 14
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Assign Action ID Number in ORM pi
Government n Commercial
EI
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Jake Palillo, Bi-Part Development
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: WEPG, PLLC c/o Heath Caldwell
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B1b]:
35.4613, -80.7898
15229 JUNE WASHAM RD DAVIDSON NC 28036
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]: 00721112
9. Project Location —County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Davidson
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]: West Branch Rocker River
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]:03040105
Authorization: Section 10 n Section 404 n Section 10 & 404 n
Regulatory Action Type:
pind m StaNationwide Permit # 4
n RegionaldarGeneralPerit Perm1it #
n Jurisdictional Determination Request
H
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
n Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Pre -Filing Meeting Request-Sedona Farms
Amber Lipsky <[e-mail]>
To: "Perez, Douglas J" <[e-mail]>
Cc: Heath Caldwell <[e-mail]>
Please see below/attached for our Pre -Filing information.
Amber Lipsky <[e-mail]>
Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 9:59 AM
Contact Name: Heath Caldwell
Contact Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Owner: Bi-Part Development, LLC
Project Name: Sedona Farms
Project County: Mecklenburg
Owner Address: 18611 Starcreek Drive, Cornelius, NC 28031
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 site is located on 10.29 acres just north of June Washam Road and just
south of West Branch Rocky River in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The topography consists of flat and gently sloped upland grading into moderate slopes,
with the elevation ranging from 650 to 730 ft.
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
Sedona Farms_Context Maps.pdf
1826K

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
June 24, 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-2022-00123; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP #14 for the Sedona
Farms site in Davidson, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
USACE Assigned Project Manager, Messrs. Perez, Wojoski, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit #14 for the Sedona Farms site on 10.29 acres
located along June Washam Road in Davidson, NC. The site is a proposed driveway to an
existing residence and consists of two streams and two wetlands. A Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination Request for the site was authorized in January 2022. 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 and associated grading requirements. Total
permanent impacts proposed include 142 linear feet (0.013 AC) of stream impact to Stream A
and 0.00046 acres of wetland impacts (Wetland B).
Charlotte Office:
I0612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
www.wetlands-epg.com
1
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. 1
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Impacts associated with the proposed development were limited through design and
location/orientation of the access routes. The impacts could not be avoided as the only feasible
driveway connection would be off of the common drive, as shown. The property does have
frontage on June Washam Road to the west but it is it is within a sharp horizontal curve that
would not meet NCDOT sight distance requirements. Efforts of minimization were implemented
during the design to preserve existing site hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite
natural habitat. The culvert has been designed with retaining walls and 2:1 slopes to further limit
impacts. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and minimization efforts by keeping the
majority of the site undeveloped and avoiding 68% of onsite streams and 99% of onsite
wetlands. Due to limited site impacts, no mitigation is proposed.
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. 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,
Heath Caldwell, 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. 1
Suite 10, 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
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 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
if. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes X 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:
Sedona Farms
2b. County:
Mecklenburg
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Bi-Part Development
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Jake Palillo
3d. Street address:
18611 Starcreek Road
3e. City, state, zip:
Cornelius, NC 28031
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:
Heath Caldwell
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group, PLLC
5c. Street address:
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e. Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
00721112
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.4613 Longitude: -80.7898
1 c. Property size:
10.29 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
West Branch Rocky River
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 Sedona Farms site (+/- 10.29 acre) is located just north of June Washam Road and southwest of West Branch Rocky River in Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. The elevation is approximately 680-720 ft. The site is comprised of farmland with shed and outbuildings, wooded slopes, and
a small portion of field.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 450
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 0.0866
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed development includes impacts associated with a road crossing and associated grading for access to an existing residential property.
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-2022-00123
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
X Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Nic Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
This site was verified by B. Roden -Reynolds (USACE) on 1/14/22. A copy of the signed JD approval is included in the Jurisdictional Determination
Information section.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes X No ❑Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes X No
6b. If yes, explain.
No future phases proposed.
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
0.00046
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.00046
2h. Comments:
Wetland B
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
INT
Corps
4
95
S2 P
Stabilization
Stream A
INT
Corps
4
22
S3 P
Stabilization
Stream A
INT
Corps
4
25
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
142
3i. Comments:
S1- 0.0087 AC
S2- No loss impact; Rip rap to be installed at existing stream bed elevations. 0.002 AC
S3- No loss impact; Rip rap to be installed at existing stream bed elevations. 0.0023
Total acrage- 0.013 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 design and location/orientation of the access route. Impacts could not be
avoided as to the only feasible driveway connection would be off of the common drive as shown. The property does have frontage to the west but it is
it is within a sharp horizontal curve that would not meet NCDOT sight distance requirements. The applicant has demonstrated avoidance and
minimization efforts by keeping the majority of the site undeveloped and avoiding 68% of onsite streams and 99% 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
❑ Yes X
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
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?
oho
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes X No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
Stormwater treatment is not required for the site. Built up area is under the threshold.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
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)
la. 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 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?
❑ Yes
X No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
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.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes
X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
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 and Associates
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes
X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
www.fema.gov
https://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Heath Caldwell
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
(662 r la
06-24-2022
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

wrymemeseretrwmisrwmprzepowtoes
WetJands and Env:ron+nental 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: Sedona Farms
Property Address: 15229 DUNE WASHAM RD
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 00721112
Select one: I am an interested buyer/seller
Name: Jacob Palillo
Company: Bi-Part Development LLC
Mailing Address:
18611 Starcreek Dr Cornelius, NC 28031
Telephone Number: 704-363-7902
Electronic Mail Address: JPalillog,aol.com
Pt•o erty Owner / nterested Buyer* / Other*
(bi)
�r
Date
The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or form& contract to purchase and/or conduct
ctne 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.
Chas•lo:te Office:
I0612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlo,te, NC 28277
1,704)904-2277
.1Ln.rnadoe4i)\wtlands.•epg..7o n
www weciards-epg.com
2
Asheville Office;
070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. i
Suite 10. PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
[e-mail]

Maps/Plans

2416
73
Carolina el
Renaissance Festival
Picture Me Grganized9
4%0
N
1.1
'0
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 +/- AC
C"fre Ct Dr
Rallingdwe
Hoyd C!
June Wd
Saddle m`�1
R.
a Pa
r
7 n Stacks
0, ':- 1� tr leas
a
so
i
9,0
a
a
c
a.
a
12418
Dembrt flt
West Branch Rockyg
River Greenway at...
1 24181
West Branch Natures
Preserve North Trailhead
■
Wetlands and Environmental Planning G
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wedands-epg.com
Prepared for:
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
VICINITY MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE
1
12/22/21

PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 +/- AC
-4
60
y5�
N,
/
Par
cel Information Provided by
Charlotte-Meck Polaris 3G
PARCEL: 00721112
BI-PARTDEVELOPMENT
18611 STARCREEK RD
CORNELIUS, NC 28031
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Gro
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Prepared for:
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
PARCEL MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE
2
12/22/21

Aerial Imagery Provided by
Charlotte-Meck Polaris 3G
Wetlands and Environmental Plannin
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Prepared for:
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
r �
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 +/- AC
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
AERIAL MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE
3
12/22/21

LOCATION
Lat: 35.4613 2N
Long: 80.7898 2W
H UC: 03040105
■
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Grou
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wedands-epg.com
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 +/- AC
USGS QUAD
Cornelius, NC
1993
Prepared for:
SCALE
1:24,000
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
WEST BRANCH
ROCKY RIVER
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
USGS MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE
4
12/22/21

r
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 +/- AC
NRCS Soil Survey Manuscript
Mecklenburg County 1980
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres In AOI
Percent of AOI
CeB2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
1.4
13.2%
CeD2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
0.5
4.5%
EnB
non sandy loam, 2 to 8
percent slopes
0.5
5.0%
EnD
Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15
percent slopes
1.8
16.9%
WkE
Wilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes
6.4
60.4%
Totals for Area of Interest
10.6
100.0%
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Gro
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Prepared for:
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
SOIL SURVEY MANUSCRIPT MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE
5
12/22/21

No FEMA Floodplain as per
Charlotte — Meck Polaris 3G
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Gro
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Prepared for:
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
SOIL SURVEY MANUSCRIPT MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USACE/NCDEQ verification
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
DCK
so
12/22/21

OR JO C KS Y
B 3 LeT
L•T
B :9,
WETLANDS D
±3,600 SF (0.0826 AC)
EX. SHED (TO BE REMOVED)
SETBACKS (TYP.)
c'o:
007-211- • 8
WAYNE H. BLA "D
DB 1387, P11:
MB36,P 44
• 422
NE WA:HAMR AD
60' PLBLIC R/
'DB 2302, PG 5)
*SEE NOTE # 0
START/END OF STREAM
A&Ccz78,-44110
5
s/H�\/ i ( � � T e�
WETLANDS B
±174 SF (0.004 AC)
\'cS\
D
•07-.11-s6
DA D •R
LAURK••&N
28792, ° 883
KAR D(. G7a
.48,•9A SQ. F
16.2:7 ACRE
2.5' CHANNEL
IF ANY CONFLICTS, DISCREPANCIES, OR OTHER
UNSATISFACTORY CONDITIONS ARE DISCOVERED, EITHER
ON THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS OR THE FIELD
CONDITIONS, THE CONTRACTOR MUST NOTIFY HENSON
FOLEY, INC IMMEDIATELY, AND SHALL NOT COMMENCE
OPERATION UNTIL THE CONFLICTS, DISCREPANCIES,
OR OTHER UNSATISFACTORY CONDITIONS ARE RESOLVED.
THIS SURVEY WAS PROVIDED BY OTHERS
AND IS INCLUDED AS REFERENCE ONLY
SURVEY BY:
PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY
SURVEYORS INC.
FIRM LICENSE: C-3666
18355 OLD STATESVILLE RD. SUITE A
CORNELIUS, NC 28031
[phone]
NOTE: PLANS WERE CREATED USING A COMBINATION OF
SURVEYED TOPO AND GIS TOPO. IF GRADING CONFLICTS
ARISE, CONTACT ENGINEER
r STREAM C (PERENNIAL)
± 60 LF
\\\\��T //
STREAM A (INTERMITTENT)
± 390 LF
EX. COMMON DRIVE
/
007-
W FWAM D
DB3 77(
\Joco
720'
_ i
107.
i
w
NORTH ARROW
E
0 50 100
1 " = 100 ft.
GRAPHIC SCALE
co
0
J
)
L.L
Z
0
0
LLI
V)
No
C`')
O
CO
C\I
Z
Z
0
0
0
0
uo
Z
o�
C\I
C\I
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Dare: 6/2/2022
Drawn by: KI W
He name:
Project no.: 222003
Revisions:
EX01
CO2 - EXISTING CONDITIONS.DWG - PLOT: Kennedy - THU. 6-2-2022 3:25 PM

007-211-11
KURIAN KOSITYJR
JOYCE KOSHY
DB 36700, PG 600
LOT 3
MB 569, PG 137/
i
`yo
007-211-05
Lu
x
H-
O
N
2
0
H
m
Lu
S.R. 2422
JUNE WASHAM ROAD
60' PUBLIC R/W
(DB 2302, PG 505)
*SEE NOTE #10
705
710
007-211-08
WAYNE H. BALLARD
DB 1387, PG 118
MB 36, PG 447
\`
\
\ `
\\
\\\''s- \\
Aft. 4A
alp
\ •N4 A 1
\* 0 ‘ It \ i
.7OIIF
11 r\:::
elf f
!\:11!0%:,'.44‘41S:::‘0, e:,: N ' N ff'7,;;,i k
\k
_A \ \*\ * N6 41
co
SHED
007-211-06
DAVID KORAN
LAURA KORAN
DB 28792, PG 883
KAR D(. al°
soCO
00
LOT 4
#007-211-12
448,094 SQ. FT.
10.287 ACRES
ll
2.5' CHANNEL
007.211-07 ^'
L7
0
695
700
i
LOT 5
#007-211-13
442,145 SQ. FT.
10.150 ACRES
705
•
St
007-
WILLIAM D
DB 367(
L(
MB 56!
775,
oco
720'
%O
i
i
w
NORTH ARROW
E
0 50 100
1 " = 100 ft.
GRAPHIC SCALE
co
0
J
)
^L/
I..L
Z
0
0
V)
O
CO
C\I
Z
Z
0
0
0
0
w
Z
o�
C\I
CV
LO
OVERALL IMPACTS PLAN
Dare: 6/2/2022
Drawn by: KIW
File name:
Project no.: 222003
Revisions:
EX02
C06 - GRADING.DWG - PLOT: Kennedy - THU. 6-2-2022 3:26 PM

•
,.t/:.7
10‘_
t4
t"b k
34.2 LF OF 36" CMP © 3.0% SLOPE
soo
±48 LF OF IMPACT FROM NEW CULVERT (0.0044 AC)
/ STREAM
STREAM IMPACT 1
±95 LF OF DISTURBANCE
±0.0087 AC OF IMPACT
RIP -RAP UP TO WETLANDS
© PERMANENT DITCH OUTFALL
5/
b1
WETLAND IMPACT 1
±20 SF (0.00046 AC) DISTURBANCE
EXISTING WETLANDS B
RIP -RAP APRON FOR 36" CMP © EX. STREAM ELEVATION 664.90
(SEE DETAIL SHEET C10 FOR SIZING)
±25 LF OF IMPACT FROM APRON (0.0023 AC)
(c
i
END/ START OF STREAM'S A AND C
L/// // /// //
///
RIP -RAP APRON FOR 36 CMP © EX. STREAM ELEVATION 664.20
(SEE DETAIL SHEET C10 FOR SIZING)
±22 LF OF IMPACT FROM APRON (0.002 AC)
01-HDW
INV IN:663.32 (02-HDW)
DISTURBED LIMITS
LINE (TYP.)
rv�n�
RIP -RAP BANK AT PERMANENT DITCH OUTFALL
PROP. RETAINING WALLS
(DESIGNED BY OTHERS)
1;1 stif
1 I
RIP -RAP BANK AT PERMANENT DITCH OUTFALL
END OF IMPACT
STREAM
680
w
NORTH ARROW
E
0 10 20
1"=20ft.
GRAPHIC SCALE
co
0
)
^L/
I..L
Z
0
0
w
V)
O
CO
C\I
Z
Z
0
0
0
0
w
Z
o
C\I
C\I
Date: 6/2/2022
Draw by: KIW
File name:
Project no.: 222003
Revisions:
EX03
C06 - GRADING.DWG - PLOT: Kennedy - THU. 6-2-2022 3:26 PM

680
680
GRADE
675
PROP.
675
fPROP.
RETAINING
WALL
HEADWALL
670
PROP.
RETAINING
HEADWALL
WALL
670
\
EX.
GRADE
665
1
665
PROP.
© EX. STREAM
RIP
-RAP
ELEVATION
APRON
PROP RIP -RAP APRON
© EX. STREAM ELEVATION
34.2
LF OF
36'
CMP
©
3.0%
SLOPE
660
(BURIED
8")
660
,0
o
`�
L up
°
`..0
00
•
`..0o
`..0
�o
o
`..0o
�o
0+00
0+50
STREAM PROFILE
1"=40'
1+00
690
PVI STA: 4+52.87
PVI ELEV: 668.69
K: 10.47
LVC: 233.71
690
c
0
LOW PT. STA: 4+50.58
LOW PT ELEV. 675.21
N
co
+
M
685
675
70
665
36" CMP
I
60
i
EX. GRADE
BURIED 8" BELOW EX. STREAM
ELEVATION AT INVERTS
85
675
670
665
660
680.04
680.042
676.43
676.433
675.21
675.211
676.38
676.377
679.93
0,
N.
,0
3+50
4+00
4+50
5+00
5+50
LOT 4 DRIVEWAY PROFILE
1"=60'
w
NORTH ARROW
E
co
0
J
V)
^/
Z
0
0
w
v)
CN
CN
O
0
J
LL
U
CY
0_
Z
0
O
CO
CN
Z
Z
0
0
0
0
uo
uJ
Z
o�
CN
CN
V)
LLJ
J
LL
0
0
Date: 6/2/2022
Drawn by: KIW
Filename: w
Project no.: 222003
Revisions:
EX04
C06 - GRADING.DWG - PLOT: Kennedy - THU. 6-2-2022 3:26 PM

Jurisdictional
Determination Information

USACE
/ !
WETAND
.
i
FORM D
.li
1
WETLAND D
,
` ',
� ��
----___„„de
0.0826 AC ,
//�
USACE
UPLAND DP1
f l
//
NCDEQ STREAM
FORM C
` --- �-
���\ '`5
PERENNIAL STREAM C
\
\ 1
,
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
0
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 AC +/-
'.
`_�
WETLAND B
-
-0.004 AC
;�—`
v__
> ,
', J
,.
INTERMITTENT STREAM A
_
-390 LF
LEGEND
\ J
El Project boundary study limits
1! Stream
/21 Wetland
# Landscape photo direction
NCDEQ STREAM
FORM A
0 75 150 300
�,
;
-
Feet
,ry
A •
Wetlands and Environmental PlanningGro .
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wet la nds - e p g. c o m
I Prepared for:
BI-PART DEVELOPMENT
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
Drawn By:
NRN
Reviewed By:
DCK
FIGURE
7
DELINEATION MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to NCDEQ/USACE Verification
12/16/21

SAW-2022-00123
Requestor:
Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail:
Size (acres)
Nearest Waterway
USGS HUC
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2022-00123 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Cornelius
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Bi-Part Development, LLC
Jake Palillo
18611 Starcreek Drive
Cornelius, NC 28031
704-363-7902
ipalillo(a aol.com
—10 Nearest Town Davidson
Rocky River River Basin Upper Pee Dee
03040105 Coordinates Latitude: 35.4613
Longitude: -80.7898
Location description: The review area is located on the north side of June Washam Road; approximately 0.8 miles north of the
intersection of June Washam Road and Shearer Road. PIN: 00721112. Reference review area description shown in the
Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled "Figure 1, Vicinity Map" and dated 12/22/21.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 12/16/2021. Therefore
this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be 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.

SAW-2022-00123
❑ 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
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact 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 01/14/2022.
D. Remarks: None
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
[e-mail]
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA fnrm to the fivicion Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Corps Regulatory Official: 2022.01.14 12:29:09-05'00'

SAW-2022-00123
Date of JD: 01/14/2022 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
https://regulatory.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/.
Copy Fumished:
Agent: Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Heath Caldwell
Address: 10612-D Providence Road
Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: 704-999-5279
E-mail: heath.caldwell(awetlands-epg.com

PROCESS AND
NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Bi-Part Development, LLC Jake Palillo File Number: SAW-2022-00123 Date: 01/14/2022
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
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
x
SECTION
Additional
ctrAg
I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal
information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
of the above decision.
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
•
signature
rights
•
this
PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional
permit.
APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal
it to the district engineer for fmal
your work is authorized. Your
in its entirety, and waive all
determinations associated with the
certain terms and conditions therein,
Process by completing Section II of
the division engineer within 60 days
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
Administrative Appeal Process by
must be received by the division
D: APPROVED
information.
•
•
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the
ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all
APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form
approved JD or provide new
the Corps within 60 days of the
rights to appeal the approved JD.
the Corps of Engineers
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
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the
review of the administrative record,
information that the review
Corps may add new information
the location of information that
the Corps memorandum for the
officer has determined is needed to
or analyses to the record.
is already in the administrative
However, you may provide additional information to clarify
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
appeal process you may contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn: Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
MR. PHILIP A. SHANNIN
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
CESAD-PDS-O
60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST, FLOOR M9
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8803
PHONE: [phone]; FAX [phone]
EMAIL: [e-mail]
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: 01/14/2022
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Bi-Part Development, LLC, Jake Palillo,
18611 Starcreek Drive, Cornelius, NC 28031
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Sedona Farms, SAW-2022-
00123
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the
north side of June Washam Road; approximately 0.8 miles north of the intersection of June Washam Road
and Shearer Road. PIN: 00721112. Reference review area description shown in the Jurisdictional
Determination Request package entitled "Figure 1, Vicinity Map" and dated 12/22/21.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES
AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Mecklenburg City: Davidson
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.4613 Longitude: -80.7898
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Rocky River
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Z Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 01/14/22
Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION
Feature
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated
amount of
aquatic
resources in
review area
(acreage and
linear feet, if
applicable
Type of aquatic
resources (i.e.,
wetland vs. non-
wetland waters)
Geographic authority to
which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section 404
or Section 10/404)
Stream A
35.46030000
-80.78840000
368 linear feet
Non -wetland
404
Wetland B
35.46100000
-80.78880000
0.002 acre
Wetland
404
Stream C
35.46120000
-80.78850000
60 linear feet
Non -wetland
404
Wetland D
35.46260000
-80.78940000
0.04 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-
® 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 4, USGS Map (7.5-minute quadrangle
Cornelius, NC)
® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Figure 5, Soil Survey Manuscript (Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County Dated 1980) and Figure 6, Soil Survey Manuscript Map (Web Soil Survey of Mecklenburg
County)
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name-
▪ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Figure 1, Vicinity Map (Dated 12/22/21), Figure 3, Aerial Map (Dated
12/22/21), and Figure 7, Delineation Map (Dated 12/16/21)
or Z Other (Name & Date): Photographs 1-4
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
® Otherinformation(pleasespecify): Figure 2, Parcel Map (Dated 12/22/21) and Stream Reach Evaluation
Forms (Dated 12/16/21)

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
2022.01.14 12:28:45-05'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory Signature and date of person requesting PJD
staff member completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
01/14/2022 impracticable)'
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.

Threatened & Endangered Species
Report
a--+
L
O
Q
cc
v)
a)
u
a)
Q
cn
75
aV
s_
aV
01
C
(11
75
C
w
06
75
aV
C
aV
"ICES'
s_
H

WEPG
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
Charlotte Office:
106 12-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
[e-mail]
For: Sedona Farms
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney, Biologist
Field investigation May 2, 2022
www.wetlands-epg.co r i
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Sedona Farms — Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Sedona Farms site (+/- 10.29 acre) is located just north of June Washam
Road and southwest of West Branch Rocky River in Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina. The site can be found on the Cornelius USGS Topographic Quadrangle
Map; latitude is 35.4613 °N, longitude is -80.7898 °W. The elevation is
approximately 680-720 ft. The site is comprised of farmland with shed and
outbuildings, wooded slopes, and a small portion of field. (Figures 1-4).
Figure 1: USGS MAP
LOCATION
Lat: 35.4613 °N
Long: 80.7898 °W
H U C: 03040105
ROCKY
Werlands and Ernirnnmenta3 Planni,lq Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
len, rindn er5 wedands-¢pg.coda
C704) 904-2277
www.wetlands-r pg,corn
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29+1- AC
USGS QUAD
Cornelius, NC ' SCALE
1993 1:24,000
Prepared for:
JAKE PALILLO
\A/ E PG For: Jake Pallillo
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
WEST BRANCH
ROCKY RIVER
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
USGS MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to USAGE/MCD EQ verl»cation
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
FIGURE
1
12/22/21
2
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Sedona Farms — Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 2: VICINITY MAP
Pt�
Picture Me Organized 9
t
4.
nC. Hp
4
4.
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29+/-AC
D
Dta
Der.ahwz'vr
June W S �
1,0
West Branch Rocky r,
Riser Greenway at..
FEED
West Branch Nature©
Preserve North Trailhead
FEWTO
Wedards and Emircmnemal pennIrdLnnup
Leo. d S. RIN.b., PELL
M,..,na *.wr .mm
Odd) 904.7277
Mwwavedanda-encen,
Prepared for:
JAKE PALILLO
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
VICINITY MAP
For study purposes only - Sobbed to USACF/HcDEQ ver7ffcadon
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
FIGURE
2
12/22/21
\A/ E PG For: Jake Pallillo 3
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Sedona Farms — Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 3: AERIAL MAP
Aerial Imagery Provided by
Charlotte -Meek Polaris 3G
week e, end &iwian ae Fukttin Group
Leonard 5. Partner. PLLC.
Ien nndne.G wires-epg <an
(70+11901-2777
ww....w.rtrds-ap,can
I;rcporod
TARE PALILLO
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
10.29+,-AC j
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
AERIAL MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to US4CEINCOE4 venfiratfon
Drawn By
E L<
Reviewed By:
FIGURE
3
12/22/21
\A/ E PG For: Jake Pallillo 4
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Sedona Farms — Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 4: NRCS SOIL MAP
PROPERTY BOUNGAR
STUDY LIMITS
10.29 ♦/- AC
NRCS Soil Survey Manuscript
Mecklenburg County 1980
Men 17ni1 Symbol
Map Una Neme
Acne In A01
Percent of Aa
Ce62
Case card, lay loam 21o6
pnnenr CJDpe:. bpdel1Nly
craaee
1A
ceO2
Cad bandy 005100M 4 In 15
percent Nopos, rwtleramly
around
GS
e ..-4.:
En6
EnOnppn5r loam. 2 n a
percent doss
PS
5C.,
Eno
Enee Sandi MM. a 1p 16
meant elopes
1.a
WI&
roses fnr Arne of lnlernel
Mean Ism 1s1e25peron1
Lopes
64
10 6
674-•
1534,4
nds and En.wrnend Penning Gr111510
Leonard 11 3:r4r.a , PLLC
Feenndnbo wadenea-oven,+
(lad 96a-1177
anew wel6nds.eaa.ccrn
Prepared for:
JAKE PALILLO
SEDONA FARMS
Mecklenburg Co., NC
SOIL SURVEY MANUSCRIPT MAP
For study purposes only - Subject to LISACEINCOE4 verijia7fran
Drawn By:
BLK
Reviewed By:
FIGURE
4
12/22.f21
\A/ E PG For: Jake Pallillo 5
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Sedona Farms — Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/SOT515VQ3FFMTLUCF6P2BBN7RQ/res
ources was referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered
and Protected species for the Sedona Farms site in Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina, the results of which are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial
photographs were assembled, and the site was investigated on May 2, 2022
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
the Sedona Farms site in Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on May 2, 2022
Group
Vas
Vas
Vas
Ver
Name Status
cular Plants Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus Endangered
schweinitzii)
cular Plants Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea Endangered
laevigata)
cular Plants Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) Endangered
tebrate
Northern Long -Eared Bat (Mvotis Threatened
septentrionalis)
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona
decorata)
Endangered
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus Protected under the Bald
leucocephalus) and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
#01051 For: Jake Pallillo 6
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

.Sedona Farms 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.
Three 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.
VYEPG For: Jake Pallillo 7
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

.Sedona Farms' Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
The site is comprised of farmland with shed and outbuildings, wooded slopes,
and a small portion of field.
The disturbed wooded slopes on the site are covered with a mature mixed
hardwood community. Canopy trees are White Oak (Quercus alba), Red Oak
(Q. rubra), Willow Oak (Q. phellos), Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa),
Shagbark Hickory (Carya ovata), American Beech (Fagus grandifolia),
American Elm (Ulmus americana), White Ash (Fraxinus americana), Sweet gum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), Sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), and Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata). The subcanopy is
composed of Red Maple (Acer rubrum), Ironwood (Celtis laevigata), Flowering
Dogwood (Corpus florida), Red Mulberry (Morus rubra), American Holly (Ilex
opaca), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina), Redbud (Cercis canadensis), Paw Paw
(Asimina triloba), and Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum). The shrub layer
includes Blueberry (Vaccinium sp.), Strawberry Bush (Euonymus americanus),
Sweet Shrub (Calycanthus floridus), Spicebush (Lindera benzoin), Russian Olive
(Elaeagnus umbellata), and Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense). The herb layer
is dominated by Japanese Stilt -grass (Microstegium vimineum), with Christmas
Fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), Chickweed (Stellaria media), Bedstraw
(Galium sp.), and Ebony Spleenwort (Asplenium platyneuron) also occurring.
Vines present are Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Virginia Creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Crossvine
(Bignonia capreolata), Catbrier (Smilax sp.), and Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans).
The assemblage of plants growing in the transitional edges of the field, woods
edges, and mowed roadside includes Fescue (Festuca sp.), Rye Grass (Elymus
sp.), Barnyard Grass (Echinochloa crusgalli), Broomsedge (Andropogon
virginicus), Panic Grass (Panicum sp.), Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza
cuneata), Buttercup (Ranunculus sp.), Shepherd's Purse (Capsella bursa-
pastoris), Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus carota), Bull Thistle (Carduus pumilus),
Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium obtusifolium), St. John's Wort (Hypericum
punctatum), Venus' Looking Glass (Specularia perfoliata), Poke Weed
(Phytolacca americana), Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Trumpet
Creeper (Campsis radicans), Blackberry (Rubus sp.), Red Cedar (Juniperus
virginiana), and Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense).
VYEPG For: Jake Pallillo 8
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

.Sedona Farms' Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower along the roadsides, field,
and woods edges were examined, however, these areas are frequently
mowed creating marginally suitable habitat, 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, field,
and woods edges were examined, however, these areas are frequently
mowed creating marginally suitable habitat, and the species was not
observed. WEPG concludes Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata)
does not occur on the site.
• All potential habitats for Michaux's Sumac along the roadsides, field, and
woods edges were examined, however, these areas are frequently mowed
creating marginally suitable habitat, and the species was not observed.
WEPG concludes Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) does not occur on
the site.
• No suitable habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles. WEPG concludes
Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) does not occur on the site.
• Based on existing documentation, Carolina Heelsplitter populations have
not been 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)
WEPG concludes 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.
#01051 For: Jake Pallillo 9
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Sedona Farms — Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not
identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further
investigation of the presence of protected species on the site is recommended at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
May 2, 2022
WEPG O1O51 For: Jake Pallillo 10
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

.Seclona Farms Threatened / Endangered / Protected Specie.s' 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.
VYEPG For: Jake Pallillo 11
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Cultural Resources
Report

R.S. Webb & Associates
Cultural Resource Management Consultants
2800 Holly Springs Parkway, Suite 200 • P.O. Drawer 1319
Holly Springs, Georgia 30142
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
June 17, 2022
Ms. Amber Lipsky
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
3714 Spokeshave Lane
Matthews, North Carolina 28105
Subject: Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review
Sedona Farms Development Tract
Hopewell, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
R.S. Webb & Associates No. 22-649-183
Dear Ms. Lipsky:
BACKGROUND
During May and June 2022, R.S. Webb & Associates (RSWA) conducted a cultural resources
literature review for the Sedona Farms development tract in the Hopewell area of Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina. The project area covers approximately 10.3 acres and is located north of
June Washam Road and west of West Branch Rocky River in northeastern Mecklenburg County
(Figure 1).
For this study, a cultural resource is defined as a discrete area of human activity that is at least 50
years old. Cultural resources include, but are not limited to, archeological sites, historic structures,
military earthworks, mines/mining features, historic cemeteries, historic landscape features and
similar human -made features. The purpose of the current study was to determine if previously
recorded cultural resources are located within the project area.
METHODOLOGY
Through the State Historic Preservation Office's (SHPO) HPOWEB database, information was
reviewed regarding National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties, Mecklenburg County
surveyed -only historic resources, local landmarks, state study -list sites and historic resources
determined by the SHPO to be eligible for the NRHP. The North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology (OSA) provided RSWA with information via email regarding archeological sites within
1.6 kilometers (km) (1.0 mile) of the project area. This information included site forms, location
maps and partial or full reports. Historic county maps were examined online through North Carolina
Maps, a collaboration of the University ofNorth Carolina, the State Archives ofNorth Carolina, and
the Outer Banks History Center. Historic aerial photography and additional historic maps were
accessed through Historicaerials.com, Earthexplorer.usgs.gov, Legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/ and/or
Alab amamaps .ua. edu.
The following primary sources were found to be useful in searching for historic resources within and
adjacent to the project area:

Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review, Sedona Farms Development Tract, Mecklenburg, NC Page 2
June 17, 2022
.
.
.
1910 USDA Soil Map of Mecklenburg County
1911 County Commissioner's Map of Mecklenburg County
1912 Rural Delivery Map of Mecklenburg County
1938 and 1969 State Highway and Public Works Commission Map of Mecklenburg County
1956, 1965, 1978, and 1983 aerial photographs of Mecklenburg County
1970 USGS Cornelius, NC 7.5-Minute quadrangle
1993-2018 Google Earth aerial photography.
RESULTS
Previous Archeological Investigations: According to records provided to RSWA by OSA, there have
been at least five professional cultural resources survey projects within 1.0 km of the study tract, four
of which took place within 350 m of current study tract boundaries (Figure 1); the record also
includes avocational reporting on archeological resources near the project area. Three professional
projects took place within 100 to 350 m of current study tract boundaries (Abbott 1991;
Lautzenheiser and Holm 2001; Millis et al. 2003), and one professional study included the northern
portion of the current study tract area (Abbott 1992).
Previous Architectural Investigations: According to SHPO personnel, the North Carolina HPOWEB
database is the definitive source of architectural survey information for Mecklenburg County.
National Register of Historic Places: There are no NRHP-listed historic properties located within
1.0 km of the current study tract.
Mecklenburg County Historic Resources: The HPOWEB database identifies no state study -list sites,
local landmarks or properties determined eligible for the NRHP within 1.0 km of the study tract.
The database shows two surveyed -only historic properties located within 1.0 km of the study tract
(Figure 1). The resources are MK2279/Caldwell Tenant House and MK2447/House; these
properties are located north of Davidson Concord Road, 850 m and 950 m respectively southwest
of the project area (Figure 1).
Recorded Archeological Sites: According to records provided to RSWA by OSA, there are 10
recorded archeological sites within 1.0 km of the study tract, two of which are within 200 m of the
project area (Figure 1; 31MK568 and 31MK1121). Site 31MK1121 is an historic cemetery located
south of June Washam Road, approximately 100 m west of the study tract; this property was
identified and delineated as part of an unknown cultural resources project in 2016. Site 31MK568
is a prehistoric artifact scatter reported by an avocational archeologist in 1991 to be located about
230 m north ofthe project area; the site form mentions that a road cut through the site and "destroyed
it all".
Revolutionary War Actions/Features: There were at least five reported Revolutionary War military
engagements in Mecklenburg County, one such event in Iredell County to the north, and no such
events in Cabarrus County to the east. The closest military action took place on February 1, 1781
at Tarrant's Tavern near Mount Mourne (Iredell County), approximately 10 km northwest of the
project area (Lewis 2021).
Civil War Actions/Features: Review of the official military atlas for the Civil War (Davis et al.
1983) revealed that no significant Civil War military activity occurred in present-day Mecklenburg

Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review, Sedona Farms Development Tract, Mecklenburg, NC Page 3
June 17, 2022
County. Union General William T. Sherman, following the capture of Columbia, South Carolina
on February 17, 1865, moved north to the vicinity of Kershaw, Lancaster County, South Carolina
(80 km south), His armies were then turned to the northeast toward Laurel Hill and Fayetteville,
North Carolina, thus bypassing the project region (Davis et al. 1983).
Historic Cemeteries: The USGS topographic maps reviewed show no mapped cemeteries within 1.0
km of the project area. The closest such mapped feature is Berryhill Cemetery, 1.8 km southeast of
the study tract. Above -referenced archeological site 31 MK1121 is an unmapped historic cemetery
located south ofJune Washam Road and approximately 100 m west of the study tract. This site was
identified and delineated as part of an unknown cultural resources study in 2016.
Structures on Historic Maps and Aerial Photographs: Maps from the first quarter of the 20th century
show June Washam Road and its distinctive bends south and west of the study tract with a building
(Mrs. A. Christenbery [sic]) located adjacent to the western project area boundary (Figure 1).
County highway maps from 1938 and 1969 also show June Washam Road with buildings along its
course, but the scale of these maps leave the precise location of buildings uncertain. USGS
topographic maps from 1970 show two buildings on the north side ofJune Washam Road, just east
of the project area; the 1993 version of the map shows two new buildings located in the northwestern
part of the study tract (Figure 1).
Aerial photographs from the period for 1956 to 1978 show a house just beyond the western study
tract boundary (probably not the Christianbery home place) and what appear to be agricultural
outbuildings to its north (in the project area) after 1961. The southwestern part of the study tract was
open throughout the middle to late -middle 20th century with a transition from cultivation to pasture
perhaps by 1965. The remainder of the study tract was wooded from 1956 to 2018.
CONCLUSIONS
There are no NRHP-listed properties, determined -eligible properties, study -listed resources,
designated local landmarks, cemeteries or otherwise recorded historic resources located within the
study tract. The closest recorded cultural resource is a historic cemetery (archeological site
31MK1121) located approximately 100 m west of the study tract. Historic maps and aerial
photographs indicate occupation throughout the 20th century of places adjacent to the western project
area boundary, with associated buildings and historic agricultural use perhaps located within the
study tract.
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. WEBlr ASSO pES
art S. ( eve eb
President and Senior Principal Archeologist
Attachments: Figure 1

Findings - Cultural Resources Literature Review, Sedona Farms Development Tract, Mecklenburg, NC Page 4
June 17, 2022
REFERENCES
Abbott, L.E.
1991 Management Summary: Archeological Consulting Services/Intensive Sample Survey:
NCDOT Project R-2632: Davidson -Cornelius Bypass Environmental Assessment,
Mecklenburg and Iredell Counties, North Carolina. New South Associates, Inc. Stone
Mountain, Georgia.
1992 Archeological Intensive Sample Survey: Davidson -Cornelius Bypass, NCDOT TIP No.
R-2632, Mecklenburg and Iredell Counties, North Carolina. New South Associates, Inc.
Stone Mountain, Georgia.
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.
Lautzenheiser, L. and M.A. Holm
2001 Archaeological assessment and survey of a portion of South Prong, Rocky River,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. Coastal Carolina Research, Inc. Tarboro, North
Carolina.
Lewis, J.D.
2021 The American Revolution in North Carolina. Internet -Online. Found at:
http://www.carolana.com /NC/Revolution/home.html. Accessed February 2022.
Millis, H., D. Ruggiero, and P.A. Webb
2003 Archaeological Survey and Testing for the Sandhills Pipeline Project, Iredell,
Cabarrus, Mecklenburg, Stanley, Union, Anson, and Richmond Counties, North Carolina.
TRC Garrow Associates, Inc. Durham, North Carolina.

QUADRANGLE LOCATION
Millis -et al.
(2003)
Abbott
(1092)
Resource
No..MK227
(Caldwell` ..
� .Tenant House)
une Washam
Road
Resource
9 No. MK2447
Lautzenheiser_
'ands I3olm''
(2200. --
$44
7Abbott
Q�(1991)
A Structure on Historic Maps and Aerials
Recorded Historic Resource
Map Reference: 7.5-Minute USGS Quadrangle
Cornelius, North Carolina (1993)
O Recorded Archeological Site
Previous Cultural Resource Project
Scale
0 610 meters
0 2000 feet
Figure 1 Project Area, Previous Projects and Recorded Cultural Resources