20221072 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20220809

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:
7/7/2022
BIMS # Assigned *
20221072
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?*
0 $240.00
O $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Doug Perez:eads\djperez
la. Name of project:
Villages at Rocky River EAST
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Ian Crowley
lb. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
8/9/2022
Nearest Body of Water
Bearskin Creek
Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
34.990095
A. Processing Information
Longitude:
-80.610982
lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Union
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:
EI Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
O 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?
OYes 0No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
O 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
O Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
2 Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
29 - Residential Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
If. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
O Yes O No
O 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?
0 Owner OO Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
0 Yes 0 No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
HARRIS TEETER PROPERTIES LLC A NORTH CAROLINA LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
Ian Crowley
2d. Address
Street Address
701 CRESTDALE RD
Address Line 2
City
Matthews
Postal / Zip Code
28105
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
Mecklenburg

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2f. Fax Number:
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Ian Crowley
3b. Business Name:
Mandrake Capital Partners
3c. Address
Street Address
40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420
Address Line 2
City
New York
Postal / Zip Code
10019
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
4b. Business Name:
Kimley-Horn and Associates
4c. Address
Street Address
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Address Line 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28202
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
State / Province / Region
NY
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
1. Project Information
lb. Subdivision name:
Of appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Monroe
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
09348013A,0934801313
2b. Property size:
57.75
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Monroe NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
28110 USA

3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: *
Bearskin Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water: *
C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Yadkin-PeeDee
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030401050501
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application: *
The site is located at the intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe, Union County, North Carolina. The site is comprised of two parcels and consists of
undeveloped forested land. The site is bound by Weddington Road to the south, N Rocky River Road to the west, undeveloped forested land and agricultural land to the east, and Rocky
River Elementary School to the north.
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:
1.7
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
955
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The purpose of this project is to construct single-family residences and the associated infrastructure necessary to service the residential development.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The overall project consists of the construction of one hundred and eighty-four (184) single-family residential buildings with associated parking lots, sidewalks, utilities, and stormwater
drainage infrastructure.
General construction equipment includes, but is not limited to, bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, etc. will be used
for construction purposes.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas? *
OYes No
Comments:
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) was obtained on October 28, 2020; however, the
AJD decision was based on the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). Since the USACE no
longer relies upon AJDs issued under NWPR, the applicant seeks to rely solely on the verified
delineation limits and assumes that all features on the project site are jurisdictional.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
0 Preliminary O Approved O Not Verified O Unknown 0 N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2020-015016
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Kimley-Horn and Associates
0 Unknown
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
08/12/2020
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
O 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):
O Wetlands
O Open Waters
2. Wetland Impacts
Streams -tributaries
O Pond Construction
O Buffers
2a. Site #* (?)
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type* (?)
2c. Type of W.*
2d. W. name
2e. Forested*
2f. Type of Jurisdicition*
(?)
2g. Impact
area*
Impact 1
Grading/Fill
P
Pine Flat
Wetland 1
Yes
Both
0.119
(acres)
Impact 2
Grading/Fill
P
Pine Flat
Wetland 1
Yes
Both
0.036
(acres)
Impact 3
Grading/Fill
P
Pine Flat
Wetland 3
Yes
Both
0.119
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.274
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.274
2i. Comments:
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for wetland impacts associated with the grading activities necessary to construct the
residential lots. The proposed project will result in 0.119-acre of permanent impacts to Wetland 1, 0.036-acre of seperate impacts to Wetland 1, and
0.119-acre of impacts to Wetland 3. One (1) 59 LF 15-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be installed at the crossing of Wetland 1. The proposed
project will result in a total of 0.27-acre of permanent impacts to wetlands.
3. Stream Impacts
3a. Reason for impact (9)
3b.lmpact type*
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
(?)
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
length*
s1
Impact 3
Permanent
Culvert
S1
Intermittent
Both
2
Average (feet)
128
(linear feet)
S2
Impact4
Temporary
Other
S1
Intermittent
Both
2
Average (feet)
30
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
128
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
158
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
30
3j. Comments:
The proposed project seeks to seeks authorization under NWP 29 to install a culvert crossing at Stream 1. One (1) 71 LF 48-inch reinforced concrete
pipe (RCP) will be installed at the crossing of Stream 1. The proposed project will result in 128 LF/0.006-acre of permanent impacts and 30 LF/ 0.001-
acre of temporary impacts due to a pump -around operation to Stream 1.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest extent practicable in order to reduce the
overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and
minimization efforts by reducing the proposed stream impacts. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 827 LF of stream on -site.
• Stream 1 - Impact 3
o The RCP will be buried 10 inches to promote the passage of aquatic organisms. 4-ft headwalls with a rip -rap apron will be installed to reduce grading
fill slopes, reduce discharge velocities, and to minimize impacts.
• Avoidance of the remaining 1.4 ac of wetlands on -site
• Wetland 1 - Impact 1
o The RCP will be buried 3 inches to promote the passage of aquatic organisms. An 8-ft retaining wall will be installed to reduce grading fill slopes and
minimize further impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Stormwater facilities are sized and positioned to minimize impacts to the greatest extents practicable. Temporary erosion control measures, including but
not limited to skimmer basins and silt fence, will be implemented to minimize sediment laden runoff from exiting the site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State

2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
• Yes O No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
L71 DWR O Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
o) Mitigation bank 1 Payment to in -lieu fee program O Permittee Responsible Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
•) Yes No
4b. Stream mitigation requested: 4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
(linear feet)
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.54
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested: 4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres) (acres)
4h. Comments
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. Mitigation is
proposed at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to the wetlands on site, or 0.54 wetland mitigation credits. The purchase of stream mitigation credits is not proposed
since the total stream impact is less than 0.02-ac.
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation'? If yes, you must fill out this entire form - please contact DWR for more information.
O Yes Lf No
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 '•( No
If no, explain why:
The proposed project will not impact protected riparian buffers within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
Yes (ri No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
) ) Yes ONo
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater program?
O Yes No
O N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
3. Stormwater Requirements
3a. Select whether a completed stormwater management plan (SMP) is included for review and approval or if calculations are provided to document the project will not cause degradation of
downstream surface waters.*
O Stormwater Management Plan 0 Antidegradation Calculations
Comments:
The Stormwater Management Plan is currently in design. The design and approval will be provided once it is received.
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?*
O 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)?*
O Yes rJ No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
O Yes O No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional or cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
OYes 0No0N/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 generate on -site will be conveyed via a private sanitary sewer main that discharges to an existing public sanitary mean owned by the City of
Monroe. The wastewater will be treated by the City of Monroe's Wastewater Treatment Plant.
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?*
O Yes O No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
O Yes O No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
0 Yes
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
0 Yes ® No
O No O Unknown
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
OYes 0No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
OYes 0No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
OYes 0No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
0 Yes ® No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on December 13, 2021, did not indicate known occurrences of threatened
or endangered species within the project boundary. Potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species on -site was surveyed. A
concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS on December 13, 2021. Since the project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant
species, but no occurrences were detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect"
(MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS. A concurrence response letter from USFWS was received on December 28, 2021, indicating that the USFWS
was in agreeance with a MANLAA biological conclusion. A copy of the request and a copy of USFWS' response is attached.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
O Yes U No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
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? *
0 Yes U No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on May 19, 2022. No historical,
archeological, or cultural resources were identified within the site boundary. A request letter was submitted to SHPO to determine the presence of
archeological, cultural, or historic resources on May 19, 2022. SHPO responded on July 12, 2022, with no comment on the proposed project. A copy of
the request and SHPO's response is attached.

8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
O Yes s; No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FIRM Panel 3710541500J
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
_20220808_VRR_PCN_Final.pdf 20.63MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Chris Tinklenberg
Signature
Date
8/9/2022

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- 2020-01516
Prepare file folder ❑
Begin Date (Date Received):
Assign Action ID Number in ORM
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Villages at Rocky River EAST
2. Work Type:
Private Institutional
Government
Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
Mandrake Capital Partners is seeking authorization under NWP 29 to impact 128 linear feet / 0.006-acre of stream and 0.27-acre of
wetland from grading necessary to construct a single-family development on an approximately 57.75-acre property located at the
intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe, Union County, North Carolina.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Mandrake Capital Partners (POC: Ian Crowley)
40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420, New York, NY 10019 ; [phone] ; [e-mail]
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7. Project Location — Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
This property is located at the intersection of N Rocky River Rd and Weddington Rd (Hwy 84) in
Monroe, Union County, NC. Project Coordinates (decimal degrees): 34.990095, -80.610982
8. Project Location — Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 09348013A & 09348013B
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Union
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Monroe
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]: Bearskin Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]: Yadkin Pee Dee (03040105)
Authorization: Section 10 fl Section 404 Section 10 and 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
0 Nationwide Permit #29
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
n Unauthorized Activity
F7 Compliance
FINo Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Kimley>»Horn
August 9, 2022
Mr. Steven Kichefski
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District, Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
Mr. Paul Wojoski
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre -Construction Notification (NWP #29 and Individual 401 Water Quality Certification)
Villages at Rocky River EAST (SAW-2020-01516)
Monroe, Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Steven Kichefski and Mr. Wojoski:
On behalf of our client, Mandrake Capital Partners, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the enclosed Section 404/401
Pre -construction Notification for the above -referenced project for your review pursuant to Nationwide Permit #29
and Individual 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC). The proposed project seeks to construct 57.75-acres of
residential development including 184 single-family residences with associated parking lots, sidewalks, utilities, and
stormwater drainage infrastructure. Authorization is requested under NWP 29 to permanently impact 128 LF/
0.006-acre of streams and 0.27-acre of wetlands necessary for site development. The center of the project area is
located at 34.990095°,-80.610982°. The following information is included as part of this application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Pre -Construction Notification Form
• Agent Authorization
• Project Site Figures
• Figure 1 — Vicinity
• Figure 2 — USGS 7.5' Topo (Monroe Quadrangle)
• Figure 3 — Union Co. SSURGO Soils and NWI Map (2022 Nearmap Aerial)
• Figure 4 — Existing Conditions (2022 Nearmap Aerial)
• Permit Drawings
• Agency Correspondence
• Compensatory Mitigation
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The site is located at the intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe, Union
County, North Carolina. The site is comprised of two parcels and consists of undeveloped forested land. The site
is bound by Weddington Road to the south, N Rocky River Road to the west, undeveloped forested land and
agricultural land to the east, and Rocky River Elementary School to the north. An Approved Jurisdictional
Determination (AJD) was obtained on October 28, 2020; however, the AJD decision was based on the Navigable
Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). Since the USACE no longer relies upon AJDs issued under NWPR, the applicant
seeks to rely solely on the verified delineation limits and assumes that all features on the project site are
jurisdictional.
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Page 2
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on May
19, 2022. No historical, archeological, or cultural resources were identified within the site boundary. A request letter
was submitted to SHPO to determine the presence of archeological, cultural, or historic resources on May 19, 2022.
SHPO responded on July 12, 2022, with no comment on the proposed project. A copy of the request and SHPO's
response is attached.
PROTECTED SPECIES
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on December 13, 2021, did not
indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Potentially suitable
habitat for threatened and endangered species on -site was surveyed. A concurrence request letter was submitted
to the USFWS on December 13, 2021. Since the project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species,
but no occurrences were detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS. A concurrence response letter from USFWS
was received on December 28, 2021, indicating that the USFWS was in agreeance with a MANLAA biological
conclusion. A copy of the request and a copy of USFWS' response is attached.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for wetland impacts associated with the grading
activities necessary to construct the residential lots. The proposed project will result in 0.119-acre of permanent
impacts to Wetland 1, 0.036-acre of separate impacts to Wetland 1, and 0.119-acre of impacts to Wetland 3. One
(1) 59 LF 15-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be installed at the crossing of Wetland 1. The proposed project
will result in a total of 0.27-acre of permanent impacts to wetlands.
The proposed project seeks to install a culvert crossing at Stream 1. One (1) 71 LF 48-inch reinforced concrete pipe
(RCP) will be installed at the crossing of Stream 1. The proposed project will result in 128 LF/0.006-acre of
permanent impacts and 30 LF/0.001-acre of temporary impacts due to a pump -around operation to Stream 1.
Overall, impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 0.27-acre of permanent impacts
to wetland waters of the US and 128 LF/0.006-acre of permanent impacts to non -wetland waters of the US.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest
extent practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide
permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by reducing the
proposed stream impacts. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 827 LF of stream on -site.
• Stream 1 — Impact 3
o The RCP will be buried 10 inches to promote the passage of aquatic organisms. 4-ft headwalls
with a rip -rap apron will be installed to reduce grading fill slopes, reduce discharge velocities, and
to minimize impacts.
• Avoidance of the remaining 1.4 ac of wetlands on -site
• Wetland 1 — Impact 1
o The RCP will be buried 3 inches to promote the passage of aquatic organisms. An 8-ft retaining
wall will be installed to reduce grading fill slopes and minimize further impacts.
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Page 3
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. Mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to the wetlands on site, or 0.54
wetland mitigation credits. The purchase of stream mitigation credits is not proposed since the total stream impact
is less than 0.02-ac.
In total, 0.54 wetland mitigation credits will be purchased to offset impacts associated with this project.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley>>>Horn
Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Villages at Rocky River EAST
Applicant Name and Address: Mandrake Capital Partners, LLC (POC: Ian Crowley)
40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420 New York, NY 10019
Telephone Number: [phone]
Type of Request:
Included Attachments:
® Nationwide PCN (NWP #29) ❑ Individual Permit Application
❑ Jurisdictional Determination ❑ Other:
® Project Plans
® Agent Authorization
❑ Data Forms (Up & Wet)
❑ NCDMS Confirmation
® Agency Correspondence
® USGS Map
❑ Delineation Sketch
❑ NCDWR Stream Forms
® Aerial Photo
❑ Other:
® NRCS Soil Survey
® Delineation Survey
❑ USACE Stream Forms
❑ Site Photos
❑ Other:
Check if applicable: ❑ CAMA County ❑ Trout County ❑ Isolated Waters
❑ Section 7, ESA ❑ Section 106, NHPA ❑ EFH
❑ Mitigation Proposed (❑ NC EEP ❑ On -Site ❑ Off -Site ❑ Other)
County: Union Nearest City/Town: Monroe
Waterway: Bearskin Creek River Basin: Yadkin Pee Dee
H.U.C.: 03040105 USGS Quad Name: Monroe
Property Size (acres): 57.75 acres Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 1.74 ac
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 34.990095 °N-80.610982 °W
Project Location: The site is located at the intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe,
Union County, North Carolina. The site is comprised of two parcels and consists of undeveloped forested land. The site is
bound by Weddington Road to the south, N Rocky River Road to the west, undeveloped forested land and agricultural land
to the east, and Rocky River Elementary School to the north.
Site Description: Mandrake Capital Partners is seeking authorization under NWP 29 to impact 128 linear feet / 0.006-acre
of stream and 0.27-acre of wetland from grading necessary to construct a single-family development on an approximately
57.75-acre property located at the intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe, Union
County, North Carolina.
Impact Summary (if applicable): Impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 0.27-acre of permanent
impacts to wetland waters of the US and 128 LF/ 0.006-acre of permanent impacts to non -wetland waters of the US.
NWP
#
Open Water
(acres)
Wetland
(acres)
Stream Channel
Intermittent and/or Unimportant
Aquatic Function
Perennial and/or Important
Aquatic Function
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
if
ac
if
ac
if
ac
if
Ac
29
0.27
30
0.001
128
0.006
Total
0.27
30
0.001
128
0.006
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.27
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Non -Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.006
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS Direct Number: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
kimley-hom.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
10 Permit
0 Section 404 Permit ❑ Section
lb. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
0 Yes ❑ No
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from
the DWQ (check all that apply):
— Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
— Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
0 401 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 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter
fee program.
program proposed for mitigation
from mitigation bank or in -lieu
0 Yes ❑ No
lg. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties? If yes, answer
lh below.
❑ Yes 0 No
lh. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes 0 No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Villages at Rocky River EAST
2b. County:
Union
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Monroe
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
N/A
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
HARRIS TEETER PROPERTIES LLC A NORTH CAROLINA LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
701 CRESTDALE RD
3e. City, state, zip:
Matthews, NC 28105
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent
0
Other, specify: Land purchaser
4b. Name:
POC: Ian Crowley
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Mandrake Capital Partners
4d. Street address:
40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420
4e. City, state, zip:
New York, NY, 10019
4f. Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Kimley-Horn and Associates
5c. Street address:
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
5e. Telephone no.:
704-409-1802
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
09348013A & 09348013B
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 34.990095 Longitude: 80.610982
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
lc. Property size:
57.75 acres (Project Boundary)
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to proposed
project:
Bearskin Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
Yadkin Pee -Dee (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 site is located at the intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe, Union County, North
Carolina. The site is comprised of two parcels and consists of undeveloped forested land. The site is bound by Weddington
Road to the south, N Rocky River Road to the west, undeveloped forested land and agricultural land to the east, and Rocky
River Elementary School to the north.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.7 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
955 linear feet
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to construct single-family residences and the associated infrastructure necessary to service
the residential development.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The overall project consists of the construction of one hundred and eighty-four (184) single-family residential buildings with
associated parking lots, sidewalks, utilities, and stormwater drainage infrastructure.
General construction equipment includes, but is not limited to, bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, etc. will be used
for construction purposes.
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?
Comments: SAW-2020-015016
a Yes ❑ No Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type of
determination was made?
a Approved Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
08/12/2020
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form— Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes
Unknown
// No
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes
0 No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Which sections were completed below for
your project (check all that apply):
❑ Buffers
0 Wetlands 0 Streams - tributaries
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number -
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
(if known)
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of
jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ - non-
404, other)
2f.
Area of impact (acres)
Impact 1 - W1
Grading/Fill
PFO
Y
0 Corps
0.119
0 P ❑ T
0 DWQ
Impact 2 - W1
Grading/Fill
PFO
Y
0 Corps
0.036
0 P ❑ T
0 DWQ
Impact 2 - W3
Grading/Fill
PFO
Y
0 Corps
0.119
0 P ❑ T
0 DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.274
2h. Comments:
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for wetland impacts associated with the grading activities
necessary to construct the residential lots. The proposed project will result in 0.119-acre of permanent impacts to Wetland 1,
0.036-acre of seperate impacts to Wetland 1, and 0.119-acre of impacts to Wetland 3. One (1) 59 LF 15-inch reinforced concrete
pipe (RCP) will be installed at the crossing of Wetland 1. The proposed project will result in a total of 0.27-acre of permanent
impacts to wetlands
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
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ - non-
404, other)
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
Impact 3 - S1
Culvert
S1
❑ PER
0 Corps
2
128
0 P ❑ T
ii INT
0 DWQ
Impact 4 - S1
Pump -around
S1
❑ PER
0 Corps
2
30
P0T
//INT
0DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
The proposed project seeks to seeks authorization under NWP 29 to install a culvert crossing at Stream 1. One (1) 71 LF 48-
inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) will be installed at the crossing of Stream 1. The proposed project will result in 128 LF/0.006-
acre of permanent impacts and 30 LF/0.001-acre of temporary impacts due to a pump -around operation to Stream 1.
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form- Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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)
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
p and
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Exeavat
Flooded
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 ❑ Other:
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
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)
❑P❑T
Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The proposed project will not impact protected riparian buffers.
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form- Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest extent
practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide permit thresholds.
The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by reducing the proposed stream impacts. The
rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 827 LF of stream on -site.
• Stream 1 — Impact 3
o The RCP will be buried 10 inches to promote the passage of aquatic organisms. 4-ft headwalls with a rip -rap
apron will be installed to reduce grading fill slopes, reduce discharge velocities, and to minimize impacts.
• Avoidance of the remaining 1.4 ac of wetlands on -site
• Wetland 1 — Impact 1
o The RCP will be buried 3 inches to promote the passage of aquatic organisms. An 8-ft retaining wall will be
installed to reduce grading fill slopes and minimize further impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Stormwater facilities are sized and positioned to minimize impacts to the greatest extents practicable. Temporary erosion control
measures, including but not limited to skimmer basins and silt fence, will be implemented to minimize sediment laden runoff
from exiting the site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
// Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
// DWQ 0 Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
❑ Mitigation bank
fee program
Mitigation
// Payment to in -lieu
❑ Permittee Responsible
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
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:
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.33 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) in -lieu
fee program. Mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to the wetlands on site, or 0.54 wetland mitigation credits.
In total, 0.66 wetland mitigation credits will be purchased to offset impacts associated with this project
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form— Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
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 0 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)
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 8 of 12
PCN Form— Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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 // No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
The proposed project will not impact protected riparian buffers within one of the NC
Riparian Buffer Protection Rules.
❑ Yes 0 No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
62.31%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: N/A
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The Stormwater Management Plan is currently in design. The design and approval will be provided once it is received.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Certified Local Government
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
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):
0 Phase II
NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes 0 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 0 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 9 of 12
PCN Form— Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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 // 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 0 No
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes 0 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 // 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 or cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
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 generate on -site will be conveyed via a private sanitary sewer main that discharges to an existing public sanitary
mean owned by the City of Monroe. The wastewater will be treated by the City of Monroe's Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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?
❑ No
0 Yes
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts?
❑ No
0 Yes
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Raleigh
0 Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on December 13, 2021, did not indicate known
occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Potentially suitable habitat for threatened
and endangered species on -site was surveyed. A concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS on December
13, 2021. Since the project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were detected
during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was
recommended to USFWS. A concurrence response letter from USFWS was received on December 28, 2021, indicating
that the USFWS was in agreeance with a MANLAA biological conclusion. A copy of the request and a copy of USFWS'
response is attached.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes
0 No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
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 //
No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on May 19,
2022. No historical, archeological, or cultural resources were identified within the site boundary. A request letter was
submitted to SHPO to determine the presence of archeological, cultural, or historic resources on May 19, 2022. SHPO
responded on July 12, 2022, with no comment on the proposed project. A copy of the request and SHPO's response is
attached.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes 0 No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FIRM Panel 3710541500J
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
8/9/2022
1-•� /r _------7-
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

AGENT AUTHORIZATION

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: Edward A. Brnich - Mandrake Capital Partners - Vice -President Development
Address: 40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420, New York, NY 10019
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Project Name/Description: Villages at Rocky River East
Date: August 4, 2022
The Depailment of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
Attention: Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
MCP RR East LP , hereby designates and authorizes Kimley-Horn and Associates,
Inc. to act in my/our behalf as my/our agent solely for the purpose of processing Jurisdictional
Determinations, Section 404 permits/Section 401 Water Quality Certifications applications and
to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day
forward until successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by the owner.
In addition, I, the undersigned, under contract to purchase the property/properties identified
herein, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site
investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899.
Authorized this the 4th day of August 2022 ,
Edward A. Brnich
Authorized Representative
(Print Name)
Vice -President - Development
MCP RR East LP
40 West 57th Street
Suite 1420
New York, NY 10019
P 'War".
Brnictt-on behalf of MCP" Ea"" - - - "-
Authorized Representative
(Signature)

FIGURES

eI
4
n
Willouynb, Ra
Monroe
Airport
Goidmrne Rd
Qeertrack Ln
Weddington Rd
cNt oµa 01'
75
Q°'
chAa
ose pr
Palling
Hills
_ounny Club K
NA
O��a r�lon,o
soo Crossing
der
OO
W
WF
44tinSt=
W Ta
m
Union
County
Kimley >> Horn
Legend
Project Boundary
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Villages at Rocky River EAST (SAW-2020-015016)
Monroe, Union County, NC
August 2022

Kimley >>Horn
Figure 2
USGS Topographic (Monroe) Map
Villages at Rocky River EAST (SAW-2020-015016)
Monroe, Union County, NC
August 2022

-cii
1. g 'Ir ,,ra j ,,,P,;,,,, r , t 3 3 N
Legend �►�; t --y J2 r 4 �r: t �,,ta'"'ti� :fit a ,. ya�"
y, ar Cdq + 'T y
,„., EJ Project Boundary m,Y �� #, k 3 �r .'�, 'h
r1 NWI Wetlands ', '; J. •-, - , „,. ; A #1
. ���, ,< k� x. r {
44VW. , `�,,„ . , " x ,�.y •
4 Wolfe M111 ' at ," . *e t •4; ir , ,'. - ": xi-.t `` d r� h, ta„�i
SSURGO Soils *� .4 r
Hydric Rating r4.4.k...1.a I y �', ' ; , 4.' y r "•
Not Hydric (0%) _ .71 / ,. 7 a� ,'- 1, ,Y,• �r
ti
,�;��Y *d • �' '° �', 'x, .+ 7,- ,....,--
` 7Fx era- i' `y. 'it k ti lo,,
� . � .I��y '
"uc •„ ,. y,, • _.e,'i l' -:t,. t� - ' • ,. ,l M liyS7 , a� w � `- rA-
,,,.s t. - * ti ' t!" '['�' n4 t '.. -,,-'6N'7,�4,i.. e '` �,i :. Red . '
{�?*y +R r c as ,,.qv`.IVYr �, Y ►' '{,.:,' .5. ,'�y a rt q" -._", ,�` M-`�/P I2".�D e. �.
y _ , '.- ` - �,. r )`',, i x 4 Mf C i�.t�3 4• ,n 3 t �`,; sr?µ
IN§s , lit i. ail,• qP '�tt V' 4.\f yet; rJ
S.� ? - * tiS5 '' *; : 4' "tA'\'' '4"'� yF r t .�t*� ,#r eft ,"+y �'r<'" f ; �', n, St :1'?514
• •
4 AP,.�"°t, t "`- apt`
��rr ��?' , ii TbB2 x l t''k, ^rh,1_,V/A V Ze.,t`' t• s . ,.,r4 t -, r' % "
Y•A' ' Iltfi. r' �'_ -q1 1-T..`".''',.,;;'
-T...`; ,. 5 1-:`,, y. Yt 11,:, ib t ;'. F1�As,r S �, % '1� t�. t�A.
?1 ` Sr Ot 10, tt tas4 ', ielfi N;4.''. ' ,,-,,,A.., ' � t. t ii, A4 °c �7
Nt4t
,n. �`t"!y k t ,� k,4...._',oatirt ‘, is to •
`a:;qr^ .a �/ , w q,; ,x. ! 'ttk, y
�t� s e -�-�:.:r� - vl , �'• � L� 4'' F..� ��•z y4. b �.R t �,`+V i' a. � r it „'{ �
` , a Y .,•p 1,'` r c5 Ct, t 4,4 '�'"i� •:'4 tie 34 J "`° " •�i ,t V #.. r !;r l v .\, { �V,a
3� , .;- ` iti,.T�` .`i V ' Yj !,:'d": r °t.' t'',,' gripp,i'�w t +CN��,td.r,nytas1i.l' JI. • A+ i� • 4ks -,�
jq .I d 4�� 4 t „• ;x 4, +TM q5�w .#'N\,,,e t .4,0 rk k' :14.k A 4`a ti• --4w • '4 t+- +M" ` a . ti `�y
•
� as., 44 - ",_ ,y .M ".re?' \ t.�,. ."R:tvpk ',.,"!, , .<.,, 9 •, \"aRy ' • {':
. .. y # ;.,,' , `!fi � �4t o , tp 4 k. t t,i -.* w,4. $,:<, rrl< - ., ' ,''• \ `►„1'v 18 44•�'t ''?1. ),.-.A. .,,,,' x•' "4 �`r 1 ` ' • ,rr.g, -.`� '�.� '�
':� 1� a it �t f'¢ r ' \± l fit`.cy .LIkt ,tt ar /' Vv-1 1!1ky,.., �' �'3' -r. .� .3. t`. ''' 4
7 ' a i' 4, 4..A"} s-'2e s 1or t'*tl'i•! . ' $"1 '- .;: x :, •:.
4 fr r r V ' q x { b y a� A "4:t
� t �t, � � tt "t,a-` .�,�.a��ti•+i;tit�t" S x � r- t 6
P q a .t. ;5Pay+C t - " '!;t tr'--.3.4 y ;.', *�±b t rt'3 1 4'In. �y V0.'+"s L 4�', 41 t a ' "q+-
•
'2!' $. .,, Y s. ^*X '.:" ., T,' yy pp�� •.�y.'' 'Mi`� 0. # Uit rr :'f r!.s�" 'S
t.. ,4-'.-A t ,4 14 i'; AA4i1 fir ',- f fit' .,t' p 0 •7'�s
p y f , ♦♦♦ 'xt1` ` 'p, . , t Vty ' 1 r r , ?', y'
Y•'Y f r xr , a sJl� a.� %' • .,- k- 'l } 1 j :.4..,1 ;il �"`I e '� '' `` _ i .4'4t C 4a ,`,'' t
li
, ` +1 b - 4 r
� t1 Y/, Y . x a p L i � ! , ,, "9? ,V1, ! tin S Y � ��st } r. YYYfififi $
s
1'0' A _ 444 :y�N �.J} , ,t l tY * 1rl '.� T �
l r - r 5y ft,
t
2.
ik-
Ait :c 4 ,*tt'' - -"= •,,;(,,1,144/0 .",;$,,' "':'-' ''',.. .."'',('
�jilr�A,r , e n� a { jam. Y � r R L .
^.' m' 5" M .ffit`:^''\Y _ 1:F • ak ,t 4 5--
'. 4,
-2x'? 1f`" ,.
,t>51k` 't ; 1il ;::LJ
T'._ y .y iJ• w�. -} t }° ('1,�„ t 1kY.ytl�+t,.. 1
-.. e= F'. V�5':1 �. a �`i� i �\* J...-'17 C `S".,I- w t h J '• A•y7t S;4
•
aik, t \iLl* d' :k N 3 s t '�, 4" .! ';.r t,* ' 13' - ,-- ,--,-sue,_"
\' � 1t4‘.
` ,.p t om..'., ad r �; : _ • ,,V < s -v,""1� ' ,, „4 *, tq ' " .s'• �r Q " r; E
47
^,r, 7 -" 6 3� S t 44 J-' `r lyt ,y ' t s,iF ' 4 k;.,
is ,
'' .a �ff//Y .,.Ek 1 f.—.a� SSA i >, * e•
•t
d : �i i.4. {., �.�...J `. •4 Mx .4 ",ems{ �5-1.,'�a�?.F' c rT P ,,,,.,
su mary•Y'aP,m mon ,u ' a il,na 9) „ it ` �idle , -, !Th`•r .� ? yf
Summary by Map Un t Union County North Carol na(NCT79) 1 K ♦ L_ l '49' � Map un[symbol Map um[name ung �' � �s �L'- a�' '�
,t Cm8 charmer),silt loam T to s percent slopes B •c ` Feet �
GSB Goldston Badr complex 2 to 8 percent slopes 0 C 1
4, T682 Ta rrus gravelly silty clay loam,_'to 8 percent slopes,moderately eroded 0 '� 0 500 1,000�IR�
ru} - • 4. A' sC{� 1 .,�.aim`TAORyi1LLl�1t ".... $a '} Thy
Figure 3
SSURGO Soils and NWI Map
Villages at Rocky River EAST (SAW-2020-015016)
Kim ley >> Horn Monroe, Union County, NC
August 2022

�r I, •.[.. • �� 1 ell,-
'ice �'#i Ni'•
to
Legend .. 0. `i p , N
e a} LP
Project Boundary t''''X't
.
1 3
`Streams •� m Wetland 1 (0.78 ac)i � ,
NC �'
t
\r— Intermittent ;� :•, } ,. Y .It''tiI !•x rf `�'`z
Wetlands _ ' +„ <' .....;1 1,,;
1 .. ,
P 9 - 4, i` r„E 4. ,/'4'�,,1'. r hti' 7 `; %,g 5,y! r
- s t
.„/ i
`,, tc ,pry , 1 � �. F 5
401C
r� V i .i . _ ..'M° q,, s 3 !*. Via'
r i . r ,' it NIA 4. 'A ,AlA. r +
„1 -#.7 , ', .' �Y,• ••••,�riYJ,,.; +fi t t N, ',
' • z
, t J " a a ° c ., , cTypyY>, 0 ,4 y ''' •'y" n v 7 T p ,*to ! , .- ,
1.
•
Iv tip,
r , ( a —, Wetland 2(0.64 ac) ..rb
tl
_ M h +14+� try+y �R F`
W � �
'/IftS
�, .rr r Stream 1 (955 LF) *' A 'Ilti/Vt eit.oLt* ''.1,,) $ '5,- 3C4C+9 ,. ' ' 1x �
ye , /,
�F
A
.a I.
f s 1 ., ., .1-,
n J A.
a` ‘., , %
F. i ` '"max,., .. " - + e r\"`tee
,,. ,
L 1 ' ' e-Y .-,
t • ,
,..„- F f
Wetland 3(0.27 )ttks
� � TM + �,
x ;, SAS"
;,,,, ., , - ' $#':tk,i* t.".
8 { h r 5
'- • r -
k
tp
It
- 4., '�. . t, r . , ', 1`,' on'T ft.` w el* .t Feet
" r' .. s .1: , m ,4 `1 0 r35p0 u ` 700�
Figure 4
Existing Conditions Map
Kim ley >> Horn Villages at Rocky River EAST (SAW-2020-015016)
Monroe, Union County, NC
August 2022

PERMIT DRAWINGS

PROPOSED BMP
SAND FILTER SF-1
PROPOSED BMP
SAND FILTER SF-2
WETLANDS "A"
33,892 SF/0.778 AC
(6,745 SF/0.155 AC. TOTAL IMPACT
NOTE: FOR CULVERT SECTIONS SEE
SHEET C-1.0 AND FOR STREAM
ROSSING DETAILS SEE SHEET C-2.0.
mummin
10
Irk �
WETLANDS "A"
5,173 SF/0.119 AC. PERMANENT IMPACT #1
WETLAND "A" IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH ROAD CROSSING
COPYRIGHT © 2022, AMICUS PARTNERS, PLLC.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS
OF THIS DOCUMENT, OR ADDRIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS
DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT
OF AMICUS PARTNERS, IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. ONLY
COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, AS APPROVED BY
THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
WEE
WETLANDS "C"
28,002 SF/0.643 AC.
NO IMPACT
1,572 SF/0.036 AC. PERMANENT IMPACT #2
WETLAND "A" IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH LOT GRADING
PROPOSED BMP
WET DETENTION BASIN WDB-3
WETLANDS "B"
5,176 SF/0.119 AC. PERMANENT IMPACT #1
WETLAND "B" IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH ROAD CROSSING
WETLAD.§ " B"
/ / ji ,602 SF/ 266 AC.
,176 SF/0. 19AC. TOTAL IMPACTS)
128 L.F. PERMANENT IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH ROAD CROSSING
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 INCH = 250 FEET
250 0 125 250
500
AMICUS PARTNERS,
PLLC P-1191
2925 Senna Drive, Suite 202
Matthews, NC 28105
704.573.1621
Wetlands Disturbance
Overall Exhibit Map
Village at Rocky River
Project Number:
Date:
Drawn By:
17- 1 7 230
07.27.2022
JLM
Checked By: NRP
Revisions:
Seal:
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
OR
RECORDATION
EXHIBIT
MAP ONLY
c-o.o

WETLANDS "A"
5,173 SF/0.119 AC. PERMANENT IMPACT #1
WETLAND "A" IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH ROAD CROSSING
1
DOUBLE ROW HIGH
HAZARD SILT FENCE (TYP.)
COPYRIGHT © 2022, AMICUS PARTNERS, PLLC.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS
OF THIS DOCUMENT, OR ADDRIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS
DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT
OF AMICUS PARTNERS, IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. ONLY
COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, AS APPROVED BY
THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
PROPOSED BMP
SAND FILTER SF-2
WETLANDS "A"
1,572 SF/0.036 AC. PERMANENT IMPACT #2
WETLAND "A" IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH LOT GRADING
70
WETLANDS "A"
33,892 SF/0.778 AC.
(6,745 SF/0.155 AC. TOTAL IMPACTS)
40
NOTE: FOR CULVERT SECTIONS SEE
SHEET C-1.0 AND FOR STREAM
CROSSING DETAILS SEE SHEET C-2.0.
4
rE
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 INCH = 40 FEET
0 20 40
80
AMICUS PARTNERS,
PLLC P-1191
2925 Senna Drive, Suite 202
Matthews, NC 28105
704.573.1621
Wetlands "A" Disturbance
Exhibit Map
Village at Rocky River
Project Number: 17- 17-230
Date: 07.27.2022
Drawn By: JLM
Checked By: NRP
Revisions:
Seal:
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
OR
RECORDATION
EXHIBIT
MAP ONLY
Sheet
c-o.1

WETLANDS "B"
5,176 SF/0.119 AC. PERMANENT IMPACT #1
WETLAND "B" IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH ROAD CROSSING
DOUBLE ROW HIGH
HAZARD SILT FENCE (TYP.)
COPYRIGHT © 2022, AMICUS PARTNERS, PLLC.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS
OF THIS DOCUMENT, OR ADDRIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS
DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT
OF AMICUS PARTNERS, IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. ONLY
COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, AS APPROVED BY
THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
WETLANDS "B"
11,602 SF/0.266 AC.
(5,176 SF/0.119 AC. TOTAL IMPACTS)
PROPOSED BMP
WET DETENTION BASIN WDB-3
S.4
NTERMITTENT
955 TOTAL L.F.
128 L.F. PERMANENT IMPACT DUE TO
FILL ASSOCIATED WITH ROAD CROSSING
40
NOTE: FOR CULVERT SECTIONS SEE
SHEET C-1.0 AND FOR STREAM
CROSSING DETAILS SEE SHEET C-2.0.
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 INCH = 40 FEET
0 20 40
80
AMICUS PARTNERS,
PLLC P-1191
2925 Senna Drive, Suite 202
Matthews, NC 28105
704.573.1621
Wetlands "B" Disturbance
Exhibit Map
Village at Rocky River
Project Number:
Date:
Drawn By:
17- 1 7 230
07.27.2022
JLM
Checked By: NRP
Revisions:
Seal:
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
OR
RECORDATION
EXHIBIT
MAP ONLY
C-O.2

EXISTING GRADE
EXIS
AND
HEA
8" W
PROPOSED GRADE
30" CLASS IV RCP
INVERT ELEV. = 649.30 FT
(WETLAND "A")
15" CLASS Ib
INLET INVERT
OUTLET INVEF
LENGTH = 5!
655 SLOPE = o.e
655
WHEATLEY
PLACE
TER MAIN
HEADWALL
HEAD'
DATUM ETV
DATUM ET,FV
645 0+00
PROPOSED GRADE
0+25 0+50
Wheatley Place Culvert Cross Section
645
48" CLASS IV RCP
INLET INVERT ELEV. = 635.47 FT
OUTLET INVERT ELEV. = 635.02 FT
LENGTH = 70.42 FT Gin
RCP
ELEV. = 646.63 FT
T ELEV. = 646.31 FT
�.65 FT
5%
ALL
"-,"
SLOPE = 0.64%
"�"
HE
TING STREAM
WETLAND "B"
BOSWELL STREET
40
8"
DATUM ELEV
)WALL
DATUM ELEV
\
630 0+00
0+25 0+50
Boswell Street Culvert Cross Section
COPYRIGHT © 2022 AMICUS PARTNERS, PLLC.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS
OF THIS DOCUMENT, OR ADDRIONS OR DELETIONS TO THIS
DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT
OF AMICUS PARTNERS. IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. ONLY
COPIES FROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, AS APPROVED BY
THE ENGINEER SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE
1 INCH = 10 FEET
10 0 5 10
20
630
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE
1 INCH = 10 FEET
10 0 5 10
DWALL
ATER MAIN
20
AMICUS PARTNERS,
PLLC P-1191
2925 Senna Drive, Suite 202
Matthews, NC 28105
704.573.1621
Wetlands "A&C"
Disturbance
Cross Sections
Village at Rocky River
Project Number: 17- 17-230
Date: 07.27.2022
Drawn By: JLM
Checked By: NRP
Revisions:
Seal:
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
OR
RECORDATION
EXHIBIT
MAP ONLY
Sheet
c-1.o

FI<<ER
MATI1NC
".Nz7HOR5 ON
I. ENTERS
!.7-1Ft EAv BED
2ACKFILL
1®D ,T
FLOCDFLAI N/EXISTING
GROUND
ANCHORS ON 1'
CENTERS IN TRENCH
MATTING SHALL BE PLACED IN
TRENCH AND BACKFILLED
EXTEND MATTING BELOW TOE
OF SLOPE AND KEY INTO
STHEAMBE':: MIN. 1.0'
TYPICAL CROSS SECTION
MATTING IN
TRENCH
DIRECTION
OF FLOW
Coir Matting for Stream Banks
Scale: N.T.S.
ANCHOR TRENCH
ON 11 CENTERS
ANCHOR OVERLAP
ON 1 CENTERS
6" OVERLAY (MIN)
PLAN VIEV)
ANCHORS ON 3R CENTERS
ANCHORS (TYP
ANCHORS INTO STREAM BED ON 1.0` CENTERS
GEOTEKTILE DEWATERING
DIRT BAG IMTH
STABILIZED OVTLEF
BY—PASS PUMP CUTLET
ALIN WITH ENERGY
BSSIPATON TYP.
®IMPERVTW.IOUS
DIRE
DEWATERING PUMP
FOR SEDIMENT LAOEN
LATER RATHER WORK AREA
PROPOSE 'CULVERTS
TEMPORARY FLEXIBLE PUMP HOSE, TYP.
DRY WORK AREA
BYPASS PUMP
FUR GLEAN UPSTREAM
CHANNE_ BASE FLOW
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR CULVERT
.14M 9Y IXEI ENGIx� PRKP io N T LL* Ol or �mfxTlE Dfw+TmND DBr
DDNRa, oBBA,o+INP PWP ro =f .,„Drop aEFER s ro!SOL.TE THE WARN .REA. 11E.1
BRASS PUYVII. FOR STREAM RUMP ARPIN° WOK.
S. PLACE SDM5TEAr NPERWOUS MNE FM ST.E. PUMP ARO.. OPERA,. BEGIN DEWAT..
THE IsawTm MVER AREA. MCA TO Ef OEw.TEREO aln, BE Eww TD ENE DAYS WORN.
40RTti1T DALYLR, IR AGGMDAREF MIX THE PLANS.
T PEW. BR7 B.
A SEEDER. 01 .CX. a CAPTURE° 5EDNEN, ARO ENT BAD STABUBE
DISTURB
IMPERVIOUS
DIKE, TM.
EXISDND STREAMCHANNEL
}K',m
EXAMPLE OF PUMP -AROUND OPERATION
Pump -Around Operation
Scale: N.T.S.
AMICUS PARTNERS,
PLLC P-1191
2925 Senna Drive, Suite 202
Matthews, NC 28105
704.573.1621
Stream Crossing
Details
Village at Rocky River
Project Number: 17- 17-230
Date: 07.27.2022
Drawn By: JLM
Checked By: NRP
Revisions:
Seal:
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
OR
RECORDATION
EXHIBIT
MAP ONLY
Sheet
C-2.O

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
December 28, 2021
Chris Tinklenberg
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
[e-mail]
f us. 1
FISH &WILDLIFE
SERVICE
Subject: Villages at Rocky River Residential Development; Union County, North Carolina
Dear Chris Tinklenberg:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence dated December 13, 2021, wherein you solicit our comments regarding project -
mediated impacts to federally protected species. We submit the following comments in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Proj ect Description
According to the information provided, the Applicant proposes to construct a residential
development and appurtenances on approximately 58 forested acres in Monroe, North Carolina.
The information provided suggests that the proposed project will require authorization from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for impacts to Waters of the United States. No project design
plans or a description of impacts to onsite habitats have been prepared or provided to our office
at this time.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Your correspondence indicates that suitable habitat is present onsite for the federally endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii).
However, targeted botanical surveys conducted during the appropriate timeframe (August 20,
2020) did not detect evidence for these species at that time. Based on the information provided,
we believe that the probability for inadvertent loss of these plant species is insignificant and
discountable and we would concur with a "may affect, not likely to adversely affect"
determination from the action agency. Botanical survey results are valid for two years for the
purposes of consultation under the Act:
https://www.fws. gov/asheville/pdfs/Optimal%20Survey%20Windows%20for%201i sted%20plant
s%202020.pdf
We believe that suitable habitats do not occur onsite for any other federally protected species,
and we require no further information at this time. Please be aware that obligations under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals

impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not
previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may
be affected by the identified action.
Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground -disturbing
activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing native vegetation
should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native vegetation as soon as the project is completed. Ground
disturbance should be limited to what will be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of the
workday. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as synthetic
netting can trap animals and persist in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at [e-mail] if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-22-457.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
2

Kimley>»Horn
December 13, 2021
Asheville Field Office
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Re: Villages at Rocky River
Monroe, Union County, North Carolina
Project Review Certification Letter
Dear USFWS Asheville Field Office,
On behalf of our client, Green Street Land Co., Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting this letter requesting
concurrence regarding the results of the pedestrian survey performed for the above -referenced project in
accordance with the methodologies recommended by USFWS. The pedestrian survey was conducted by KH
staff Chris Tinklenberg and Taylor Kiker on August 20, 2020.
Background Information
The project area is located at the intersection of Rocky River Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe,
Union County, NC. The area evaluated for the approximately 57.9-acre project site consists of planted pine
timberland. The property is bound by single-family residential neighborhoods and undeveloped forested areas.
Green Street Land Co. intends to construct/develop a project on the subject property which may require future
authorization from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE); therefore, Green Street Land Co. contracted with
KH to perform the pedestrian survey within areas of potentially suitable habitat on the subject property to
identify and document occurrences of federally listed threatened and/or endangered species.
Methodology and Findings
As of December 13, 2021, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three (3) federally protected
species for Union County (Table 1). A brief description of each species' habitat requirements follows, along
with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area.
Table 1: Federally protected listed species for Union County
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status
Habitat Present
Biological
Conclusion
Lasmigona
decorate
Carolina
Heelsplitter
E
No
No Effect
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's Sumac
E
Potential
MANLAA
Helianthus
schweinitzii
Schweinitz's
Sunflower
E
Potential
MANLAA
*E = Endangered
kimley-hor
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley>»Horn
Carolina Heelsplitter
USFWS optimal survey window: Year Round
Page 2
Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several locations within the Catawba
and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River systems, and
possibly the Saluda River system in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species is now known only
from a handful of streams in the Pee Dee and Catawba River systems. The species exists in very low
abundances, usually within 6 feet of shorelines, throughout its known range. The general habitat
requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in large rivers to small streams, often
burrowed into clay banks between the root systems of trees, or in runs along steep banks with
moderate current. The more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is in
sections of streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and gravel, and
with wide riparian buffers.
Biological conclusion: No Effect
Known populations for the Carolina heelsplitter in Mecklenburg and Union County occur only in the
Goose Creek and Duck Creek Watersheds within the Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin, and the Sixmile Creek
and Waxhaw Creek Watersheds within the Lower Catawba River Basin. This project is within the
Richardson Creek Watershed in the Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin; there are no known populations of
the Carolina heelsplitter within this watershed. In addition, the stream on -site does not support
extensive root systems. No mussels, of any species, were observed during the habitat assessment.
Therefore, no suitable habitat for Carolina heelsplitter is present within the study area. Additionally,
according to the NCNHP data report, there are no known occurrences of the Carolina heelsplitter
within a one -mile radius of the project limits. Therefore, the biological conclusion "No Effect" has been
rendered for Carolina heelsplitter for this project.
Michaux's sumac
USFWS optimal survey window: May -October
Habitat Description: Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows in sandy
or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam soils with
low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales and
depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays;
maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights -of -way; areas where forest canopies have
been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned building
sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges of
other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs
on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where
disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its open habitat.
Biological Conclusion: May affect, not likely to adversely affect (MANLAA)
Potentially suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac is present on the subject property along the along the
powerline easements and maintained roadside. However, many of the areas of potentially suitable
habitat are maintained by occasional mowing and offer only marginally suitable habitat. A review of
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley>»Horn
Page 3
the NCNHP records, updated October 18, 2021, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the
study area. Pedestrian surveys were conducted by Kimley-Horn biologists throughout areas of
potentially suitable habitat on August 20, 2020, and no individuals of Michaux's sumac were observed.
Although no individuals were observed, the presence of potentially suitable habitat in the project
corridor results in a "May affect, not likely to adversely affect (MANLAA)."
Schweinitz's Sunflower
USFWS optimal survey window: late August -October
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont of North and South Carolina. The few
sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation are found in Xeric
Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power lines and
other utility rights -of -way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -pine -
hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi -sunny habitats where
disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or
partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other
vegetation.
Biological Conclusion: MANLAA
Potentially suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is present on the subject property along the
powerline easements and maintained roadside; however, many areas of potentially suitable habitat
are maintained by frequent mowing or the application of herbicides. These areas present only
marginally suitable habitat. A review of the NCNHP records, updated October 18, 2021, indicates
known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the subject property. Kimley-Horn staff conducted a survey for
Schweinitz's sunflower throughout areas of potentially suitable habitat during the optimal survey
window on August 20, 2020. Due to the recorded occurrences of Schweinitz's sunflower within 1.0
mile of the subject property but only marginally suitable habitat present on the subject property, the
biological conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" has been rendered for
Schweinitz's sunflower for this project.
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
USFWS optimal survey window: November through March
Habitat Description: Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies
of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile
of open water. A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-
mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on September 1, 2020 using
2019 color aerials. Bodies of water large enough or sufficiently open to be considered a potential
feeding source were not identified. A review of the NCNHP database, updated on October 18, 2021,
revealed no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the lack of known
occurrences, and the lack of observed individuals or nests, it has been determined that the proposed
project will not affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley>»Horn
Statement of Qualifications:
Page 4
Investigator: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Education: B.A. Geography, 2007; Certificate in Geographic Information Systems, 2007
Experience: Environmental Scientist, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2007-Present; Identified and confirmed
Schweinitz's sunflower community, York County, SC, October 2016; Performed numerous (40+) protected
species habitat assessments and/or surveys for protected species on various public and private projects.
Responsibilities: Natural communities assessments, threatened and endangered species habitat assessments
and surveys, wetland and stream delineations, GPS, GIS, stream and wetland functional assessments, tree
surveys
Investigator: Taylor Kiker
Education: B.S. Environmental Technology and Management, 2015; M.S. Earth Sciences — Hydrology, 2018
Experience: Environmental Analyst, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2018-Present
Responsibilities: Natural communities assessments, threatened and endangered species habitat assessments
and surveys, wetland and stream delineations, GPS, GIS, document preparation, tree surveys
Please provide concurrence regarding the survey results and biological conclusions as well as any other possible
issues that might emerge with respect to protected species as a result of the proposed project. Thank you in
advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please email ([e-mail]) a copy
of your reply to my attention and/or send an original copy by mail. Please feel free to contact me at (704) 409-
1802 if you have any questions or if additional information is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
IPaC
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat
(collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS)
jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list
may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially
be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the
likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering
additional site -specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project -specific (e.g., magnitude and
timing of proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the
USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each
section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for
additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.
Union County, North Carolina
CjO
IF4111.
}
Location
Local office
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
k. [phone]
fi [phone]
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/es/countyfr.html
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 1 /11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of
project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of
the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a
dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly
impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move,
and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near
the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site -specific and
project -specific information is often required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary
information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area
of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any
Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can
only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in
IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website
and request an official species list by doing the following:
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Login (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this
list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also
shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more
information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Clams
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 2/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
NAME
STATUS
Carolina Heelsplitter Lasmigona decorata
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3534
Insects
Endangered
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Flowering Plants
NAME
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
li
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweiniii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov c species/384
Critical habitats
Candidate
•\13‘4
ST
dan red
Endangered
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered
species themselves.
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.
Vigratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Acts.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory
birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing
appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 3/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds
of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn
more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ
below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird
on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the
general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping
tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur
off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance
of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds,
and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret
and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to
reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
1011
BREEDING SEASON (IF A
BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED
FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE
BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR
PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN
THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED,
WHICH IS A VERY LIBERAL
ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE
WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS
ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE.
"BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES
THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY
BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 4/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but
warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential
susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development
or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Sep 1 to Jul 31
Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 20
Breeds May 1 to Jul 31
,‘4
Breeds May 10 to Sep 10
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds elsewhere
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
mustelina
Woo
d Thrush Hylocichla
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to
interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.)
A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be
used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in
the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the
week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 5/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was
found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence
is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence
across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted
Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any
week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it
is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of
presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Breeding Season ( ) -
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across its
entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.
Survey Effort (I) rilis
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Ilk 74
No Data()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
o
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort no data
SPECIES IL JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle
Non -BCC
Vulnerable (This is
not a Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) in
this area, but
warrants attention
because of the
Eagle Act or for
potential
susceptibilities in
offshore areas
from certain types
of development or
activities.)
ilIl 1111 1111 1111 III- -III Illf ---1111 1111 1111 1111
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 6/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Kentucky Warbler +—+— ++— +-11111111111111 III— --
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
+-+- -+
Rusty Blackbird '—+— --++
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) o
in particular Bird
Conservation
Igions (BCRs) i
the continental
USA)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska)
_ .__1 1111 1111 1111 ---1
+-+- -I- -I- -+�
+'
+--
—'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIyk���O'v
G(P\
IA 1111 1111 1111
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at
any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to
occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 7/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to
occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or
bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species
that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network
(AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is
queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project
intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that
area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore
activities or development. y
1111116
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not
representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present your
( 4‘ II ‘r
project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially
occurring in my specified location?
'Ili tie -
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the
Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen
science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To
learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the
Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or
year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide,
or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds
. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur
in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range
anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because
of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from
certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 8/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to
avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For
more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird
impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of
bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The
Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project
review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA
NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the
Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year,
including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on
marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel oil
Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to o a pel' it avoid violating the
Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird ReportSI
\
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority
concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be
in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring
in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10
km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a
red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of
presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a
lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a
starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to
look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about
conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize
impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 9/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.
Fish hatcheries
THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Invento
-0‘4
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. i
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local. Army Corps of
1511)
Engineers District.
WETLAND INFORMATION IS NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME
This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or for
very large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to view
wetlands at this location.
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level
information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high
altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error
is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on -the -ground inspection of any particular site may result in
revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts,
the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted.
Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be
occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and
the actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial
imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged
aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 10/11

12/13/21, 3:05 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.
These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a
different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this
inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish
the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in
activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate
federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that
may affect such activities.
,c1):5,0
00‘As
c)c)
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/PWUTJSNACFHJXDISTEYTJYASQM/resources 11 /11

■ ■
NH NC DEPARTMENT OF
AN —EN NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■Ai■■
December 13, 2021
Taylor Kiker
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
RE: Green Street - VRR
Dear Taylor Kiker:
Roy Cooper, Governor
D. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage Program
N CN H D E-16553
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally -
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
® 121 W. JOIJES STREET_ RALEIGH_ NC 27603 • 16S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27699
OFC 919.707.9120 + FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Green Street - VRR
December 13, 2021
NCNHDE-16553
No Element Occurrences are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Nam'gNIIINIF5wner
Union County Open Space Union County
Owner Type
Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.ora/help. Data query generated on December 13, 2021; source: NCNHP, Q3 October 2021.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

December 13, 2021
▪ Project Boundary
▪ Buffered Project Boundary
Managed Area (MAREA)
NCNHDE-16553: Green Street - VRR
1:24,675
O 0.2 flA 0.8 mi
1 f i S 1 1 5 '
O 0.325 0.65 1.3 km
Sources: Esri. HERE, Gamin. Intermap, increment P Corp.. GEBCO, USGS,
FAO. NPS, NRCAN. GeoBase, tGN, fradaster NI_ Ordnance Survey, Ferri Japan,
NETT, Earl China [Hong Konga, (cj OpenStreetMap contributors. and the GIS
User Community
Page 3 of 3

rsl
Phi
qrk" Rn
WrIfouggb .
4a
e+�
•?•
yr�
41.
4�tas C1r
�orporase �
htnroe
Agod
Gok4n4n a Rd
re
0
4
L
N
by
r
a �
77r DI
W eddr noon Rd : ai
u
Corrnih Church Rd
Ch Ra
+cvor
f
0
NA
At,
�-0 Mrtncw
1
Cy
rCb44,rle $ r
rS
Wt
N
4.
Union
County
Kimley>>)Horn
Legend
nProject Boundary
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Villages at Rocky River
Monroe, Union County, NC
December 2021

Legend
Project Boundary
Lis-
�f r
. 5. is3
le
Kimley>»Horn
Figure 2
USGS Topographic (Monroe) Map
Villages at Rocky River
Monroe, Union County, NC
December 2021

Legend ;. .;r; ' 1,10-
iPrectrr �Boundary ; �y ''•
it ...,,....,,....
...
Potential T/E Species Habitat • l ,"
Harriri - o'- ,.4 A .
'let• "67•*•p • 1 ' r•''•.',''''''.'il
_ +�A. �}ems ., ,t { 1- i111! y IJ.
L '.
dEq, I q4' ap
5.,'..... ..- N''A. . 41 .• , ' . •<4: •I. „...,..,4„„i.,441,14kr• -4.,11/4,..g.,„.i.t. . • -A. #4r4''4- r . 1:4. 6, 146. '
.e.,. ••"• 1 , ,e, . . it g P iini: ?1.•0,.i't i.124. 0 44,V,• vkerA,544- 7... _ tr. 'L.!' ''1'' '' '. I
-_liiit
7,.
* �� I �.' '!y D;. f �.'f*' 'I fir' 9.i ri•. "'Y'. •0
'1
•'•.._O-'-,.,:r--:
•
it.
.i;,V4r,4°•i
v,,,..,,,._,,...,„,,,,. t 4; 4. ..Irtic45:0 Ipi...rolti INKsireri_a•i•litotico, .1-tt:2 1,
1.
l 1' k.. J.'�r�-}1,7G fr :;Iail
Ir.
.>4.1,44•114...r.„"ip...7.,'.4,„ . . , .1‘ ' 15.•:41..37'
•' .ri• 1 ••t •
o A + .. A•, y1' 7 !f ''. '.
4.
' "'. I, ' II .:,* .4411-.4 *. ' •At:.1.7;4'.11‘4,_•444.,:i. fli::;;;,:ir 441'. , '''.. .._ •rf .' e•r4t• • ' '-' ', •; -•''
, ). - 4 .".4. lflog$.•...1,4 la' •:. 1/. . , . .... ...:,:, ,,,,..1.,„,:,-; ,' ' L ,L _1,44 f,dzi.
•X
it ft# .. •• ,iq,„0•464..k„ • -,11,,..„ .
'•.' ••••••• ••••• .•"r , . IL•Ladv r*
.c:•. •r.' • J, V !I, ' ' 1141,14.Y.‘iki, '''‘Zf'1,1r,itAip.. e ' j:114r : - .7**-,5,_ •
• A.4.2. .. . , .
... . -,,. „.. , _ .. ?)_... . ' . Ire 6 6 '71' ' - , ' .. 'io. . :I', ''.4.;'''' "'',V',?,' .,hi;
..4'**01; ' '44 ' .3 .irOite,ye 4'.1)1. IV i:.v't I i. .' '' .• . - I '
'.' '- - ' '- . _ Y .f.•••,:tt--.. - :, $54* •..444,,e., • .t4,,,...= .•. ,
•
•
''x fir`. sN -.. r •.�,. 1' 't I$
'. g ,.. ..„.., ' :,:..:,-..:..,:f ,',. f kr.# ,,,,44.111,4v4)._,. , to ' ...4'' / ' •re• •• '
k _ _ !.'y�yy. r$ ram .'• .-A' .
CS C r ,-^ i. •J,. f '� _ : p ,, ` .
gyp. .'�Y��a s
1 .e� •' ''ri•'
t. l ri-co, .
•
,� �� '.. '� ' ,,r _ '-6 •":fir: ;-.
or.
t6 r tg, , V ,k 41e, . ,
�\-' v:. uo
r w it it, +'° >a y � III • r' Aix ti:.',' s ••h
r V7 '^ •f:: .� -F tea ry. � .A�:r:. ej-
9-• ....I-'4: . :**. .'$.4', '4)7', lir':
44i.
17
. +� 1r ,n�. b ' 'k L Feet -
L N. _ 0 400 800 la
..vv Rt '.. 4�' r 1 4. • L.
.
�� -tier Y�' 1 ._I.. a 1 or'� sS. .IR.! n3rr�IN WNW-
Figure 3
Potential T/E Species Habitat
Villages at Rocky River
Kim ey>>) Horn Monroe, Union County, NC
December 2021

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary D. Reid Wilson Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.
July 12, 2022
Taylor Kiker
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28202
[e-mail]
Re: Construct Villages at Rocky River residential subdivision, Rocky River Road and Weddington
Road, Monroe, Union County, ER 22-1499
Dear Ms. Kiker:
Thank you for your email of May 19, 2022, regarding the above -referenced undertaking. We have reviewed
the submittal and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or [e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898

Kimley»>Horn
May 19, 2022
Ms. Renee Gledhill -Earley
Environmental Review Coordinator
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4617
Re: Villages at Rocky River — Proposed Residential Development
Monroe, Union County, NC
Dear Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
Kimley-Horn is writing this letter on behalf of our client, Mandrake Capital Partners, LLC, to
request a review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to
cultural resource issues associated with the proposed project in Monroe, NC.
The proposed project site is a 57.75-acre parcel located at the intersection of Rocky River
Road and Weddington Road (Hwy 84) in Monroe, Union County, North Carolina (Figures
1-3). The proposed project seeks to construct a multi -family residential development. No
historic properties were identified within the project site on HPOWeb.
We request that you review the site based on the attached information to determine the
presence of any archeological, cultural, or historic resources. If a response has not been
received within 30 days, we will assume that you have reviewed the project area and that
there are no issues to address at the present time.
Thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please email
([e-mail]) a copy of your reply and/or send an original copy by mail.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please feel free to contact me at
[phone].
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Taylor Kiker
Environmental Scientist
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28203
704 333 5131

zr ^'
0
,,,R,,y,P R.„,ng rn
Monroe6 Hills
Airport drRh _ounuyaut,to
GePtec Dr
Corporate
Ll.V
Ora \\
° d �fL or .a
01
bl'irl j
4 Ra G 'z
R
f .\
o
S
°„ro "saO - hers
°le T a,9 n Os
i
VP 'P
P a
Rd Work Rd �iii\''sK{ ° 2 COra� ;r
+ H. „P
ryPa 3 °rttr Dr Ch Ra
y,. "se Or 2
'gro Quick It n J cr�� cP
a� C . .
p�
a Q ¢P9
Willoughby, 89�
Ra lc cmo.,ee st
F
t W edclin2
Son Rd Ad!
W
°' - _.-.r WF
--
�4finSt=
W Ta
Deertrack Ln _ - ' ut
m
N
NPw
To Nay o
rn Wr,Rd Q' ar°P° +,Dark s/O s.
0 0` +'t Yea
p N 66
a
a S u
m
o C > 0e
N 0 c �Z`el
r "6c
New Town Rd cc m en
°�a Kg� N y
3
19'On or Corinth Church Rd -.
��' Feet
4+ '°h
o ae
o°
0 4,000 8,000
�P
Ra
4014 1174 I b.11111 rfl I I I r1114711181ii
010*1 til I I klifiglari 4V,RITSTP W1
1 t
�' IIUnion
��i��� County
Figure 1
Legend Vicinity Map
Kimley >>Horn Villages at Rocky River
Project Boundary Monroe, Union County, NC
May 2022

Kimley >>Horn
Figure 2
USGS Topographic (Monroe) Map
Villages at Rocky River
Monroe, Union County, NC
May 2022

•
..'" ,. 4 1 �.t *;c,, ., 4 , ♦ ,`��C fi b '.v y, t ,z o\ ,7 t t 'i.1�.`M yy:�4
Legend r``,: �. �i . aL�`\;' Jt. x 1+ \` �} t N
t Project Boundary ..., .,,:X,, t, .:.!--71-A ,, ,` ,,. , ., A '
° .0 1 y- �� , N."y's'; ,,y,,,N,.,......,)1•%': M` sa a (v x 1.
2114
u x � t r
▪ • vri.� i1.wJ a ! \ ..
K i �._. ,\o '� TI 'MHaringn �tl., -Quick Rd *lk - '
�'t,S' • ` � y ` ., F. slerx:.ei.' 'f -)t, h", ,:'.. -fig' ra ;-v --Red-Ma ,...
v q,.
s \" • P � +"e m ay ' f '4 s}r+ ` ..'` h' pie ..
- ar ° ► c a�x � Sb• 2 '4t « x r• SR 25
, ,,., ,,,,,,, ... ' �i e� a F :A? e a.3 �aT w .'f ,� . i �S 1! �4�
ia
s, i% . .4 ,.,'. . . .. - ' . ,i, - ,,- -
4
, We VI
',0
yu azY z kj X a! � .-k. y 4 � ,�x M71t @t ¢ r G �'# ,,
. ,, i ., .:' t; y 0 < Asa 0,
FEE• ,, .I . ``, ,.,..y/4 EY i .41 " ? '• �k }', ,..A t+.'(i\rF.pry,` s.., , kd. A.
1.1� � \:
•
# t . , r yr +'w.- w�.'., w r,� \d{Z i • i y ' ,:,.,ix.• k ., a, .i w 4+ , o-, e%, tet• ,�'.'�'t < "i'k--A,'
• lLo • * , ,' t •1.T _.:4A .AA,,, '4'°n W• ,. ': f , `«, S � " ,.\ art r'A., x'1i>. ,,,,• #`,,t,v, �-
r: :. ��1"- , ar �I A+,.{, „"vY\�' ! it4,..tt py `s' .keir 'q�.•"B'Y�'Fi<7S j.q.e4,l' ,. •hy6y'�` i,�9+,,,i. :+.1tAi
W)
,j., 1 , r 1 ;e`�,.,{r� i r, y 'tj' , ,A R •4 V, yrt wii ." !' j1'$ ,,,!) ',.:, \[,w,;:\,f i. f,>,5+ W". .'S.,`i .a . n
t� �� P} 06:41.‘.
-� , -. k ' ?.:4 ., r ^A`, qh'tt - ,,`:: ';.j R W SY .y, + i l i` Yar ir/
�^ a 'hr 4, �2 s ,°r !�' t ...±' 4. w kq,y,,�4 °a - x 4P\ y.,-4. s s �*
iiii
i �, + �6� .'! I` ! v. `� Jm �( .ak •\a�:y -q`A °,{h. 'ti}, w ` %
4tr
, ,. ..,, . ,‘,.' , ,,,` , = ,n-
w f +' ' M'` G ...w ' . 4 s.' ,0 i! .• :' "Kt\a q1 r'Kt a, h°'k.,i
v v *a h_:� x f k A •i l a \
i N r' 4• * rP : 7F '.,4t �'K', f �, w i t"eft 'g 4a -Y
E., x ys � .,.- 4 ! �. �� • ''� y � Y "� < w't�i In,f.
7 A:
3,4 St
c t • r# '• s`Sw .€ as t et
p 'N &a " ' {'. � `'a±� {§§
` „! , ,.,..., , Op^,-,-- '-„Au.
�. '. 11 ,
7 i'c4 `s Itiv5+ §" d ,++ E i ,i` i *i',El,?!:".
'—� `7 - _�\� I+.;V t r)4 '''V 1 y`'' .y i
t�5�r sk4 �,ya "/yi r�r ,.1' �f �T y ,� � w mil__• ' `` %�.' C1��� .. ''\ ttt,� � ; f ,.Itl:.
uii-
-� , a, ,, 8'F/..~- ilk 'u+ ;•, ,. - R `c0-.s,,, !},4_ C i. . �'. .,,y' s., X. �..{° N iit
`r.
L . ,
:� 4>wt {. � a y h* r s. .yfit . _ .Y ; \ Ebya fk r ` J ' � is , i . 4`
,04,Vt,
1 y,4„_,,,,.,,,,A
L ' ., .:,yam, 1 ,* c' , y ;:1
_ M1,, "F. ' ?�y* /E ' ' - i '` tJb ,/, .? +�i�..i i'�, , 'rL ,d1".X. i. #' 3i.' V '1
. E Feet
Iv
•';� , N : .° p 0 500 1000
.. s, /�M 1- ,, '} - V t%Il EJ,y S z.F-„ s r,,a 3 _ .,Y wS'' i, Y. "kkc r '�, T
Figure 3
Aerial Map
Villages at Rocky River
Kim ley >> Horn Monroe, Union County, NC
May 2022

COMPENSATORY
MITIGATION

t sTA7r
-? :, ,ply;
ROY COOPER j �
Governor t
ELIZABETH S.BISER 4•.*
Secretary *�amxv *'
MARC RECKTENWALD NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
August 8, 2022
Ian Crowley
Mandrake Capital Partners
40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420
New York, NY 10019 Expiration of Acceptance: 2/8/2023
Project: Villages at Rocky River County: Union
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in-
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in-lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location Impact Type Impact Quantity
(8-digit HUG)
Yadkin 03040105 Riparian Wetland 0.33
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In-Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in-lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Sincerely,
At1/7Ajd-Ltta
FOR James. B Stanfill
Deputy Director
cc: Chris Tinklenberg, agent
D
—5 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
nr.-.T• -nn:,�rt„� 217 West Janes Street I1652 Mail Service Center Rleih,North Carolina 276941652
o-:ervhem memsronmarwi wet 919.707.8976

DMS ILF Mitigation Request Statement of Compliance with §143-214.11 & 143-214.20
(link to G.S. 143-214.111
Prior to accessing the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS), state law requires applicants to
demonstrate compliance with G.S. § 143-214.11 and 143-214.20. All requests MUST include this form
signed and dated by the permit applicant or an authorized agent.
Compliance Statement:
I have read and understand G.S. § 143-214.11 and 214.20 and have, to the best of my
knowledge, complied with the requirements. I understand that participation in the DMS is
voluntary and subject to approval by permitting agencies.
Please check all that apply:
❑ Applicant is a Federal or State Government Entity or a unit of local government
meeting the requirements set forth in G.S. 143-214.11 and is not required to
purchase credits from a mitigation bank.
There are no listed mitigation banks with the credit type I need located in the
hydrologic unit where this impact will take place (link to DWR Usti
Mitigation bank(s) in the hydrologic unit where the impacts will occur have been
contacted and credits are not currently available.
The DWR or the Corps of Engineers did not approve of the use of a mitigation
bank for the required compensatory mitigation for this project.
This is a renewal request and the permit application is under review. Bank
credits were not available at the time the application was submitted.
Enter date permit application was submitted for review:
Note: It is the applicant's responsibility to document any inquiries made to private mitigation
banks regarding credit availability.
CMT
initial here
I have read and understand the DMS refund policies (attached)
Chris Tinklenberg
Signature of Applicant or Agent Printed Name
08/04/2022
Date
Villages at Rocky River Union County, NC
Project Name Location
Clear Form
=orm

DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES (DMS)
IN -LIEU FEE REQUEST FORM Revised 6/30/2019
Complete requested information, sign and date, email to [e-mail] . Attachments are acceptable for clarification
purposes (location map, address or lat long is required). Information submitted is subject to NC Public Records Law and may
be requested by third parties.
Save Form
CONTACT INFORMATION
APPLICANT'S AGENT
APPLICANT
1. Business/Company Name
Kimley-Horn
Mandrake Capital Partners
2. Contact Person
Chris Tinklenberg
Ian Crowley
3. Mailing address
200 South Tryon Street, STE 200
40 West 57th Street, Suite 1420
4. City, State, Zip
Charlotte, NC 28202
New York, NY 10019
5. Telephone Number
704-409-1802
[phone]
6. E-Mail Address
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
PROJECT INFORMATION
7. Project Name
Villages at Rocky River
8. Project Location (nearest town, city)
Monroe, NC
9. Lat-Long Coordinates or attach a map
Latitude: 34.990095 , Longitude: -80.610982
10. County
Union
11. River Basin & 8-digit HUC (link to Map)
Yadkin Pee Dee (HUC 03040105)
12. Project Type
nGovernment
Private
Project Type: other
13. Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.) (e.g., 0.13)
0.33
14. Non -Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.)
NA
15. Coastal Marsh Impact (ac.)
NA
16. Stream Impact (ft.) (e.g. 1,234)
Warm
Cool
Cold
NA
NA
NA
17. Riparian Buffer Impact (sq. ft.)
n/a basin/huc above in #11
Zone 1:
NA
Zone 2:
NA
18. Regulatory Agency Staff Contacts
USACE: Steven Kichefski
NCDWR: Paul Wojoski
Other:
0
Check (�) below if this request is for a:
revision to a current acceptance
renewal of an expired acceptance
extension of unexpired acceptance
By signing below, the applicant is confirming they have
read and understand the DMS refund policy posted at
nceep.net and attached to this form.
Signature of Applicant or Authorized Agent:
Date: 08/08/2022
Direct questions to Kelly Williams at 919-707-8915 or [e-mail] or to the front desk at 919-707-8976

Refund Policy for Fees Paid to DMS In -Lieu Fee Programs (9/21/2009)
Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to make clear the circumstances and process under which a
permittee can obtain a refund while simultaneously balancing customer service and responsible
business practices. This policy applies to all refund requests made on or after the publication date of
this policy.
Policy Statement: The policy of DMS is to allow for refunds under certain conditions.
1. All refund requests must be made in writing to the DMS In -Lieu Fee Program Coordinator at
kelly.williamsnncdenr.gov.
2. All refund requests are subject to fund availability. DMS does not guarantee fund availability for
any request.
3. The request must either come from the entity that made the payment or from an authorized agent.
Third parties requesting refunds must provide written authorization from the entity that made the
payment specifying the name and address of the authorized refund recipient.
4. Refund requests related to unintended overpayments, typographical errors or incorrect invoices
should be brought the attention of the In -Lieu Fee Program Coordinator as soon as possible. Such
requests are typically approved without delay.
5. Payments made under an incremental payment arrangement are not eligible for refunds.
6. Refund requests made within nine months of payment to DMS will only be considered for requests
associated with projects that have been terminated or modified where the permittee's mitigation
requirements have been reduced. Such requests must be accompanied by written verification from the
permitting agency that the project has been canceled, the permits have been rescinded or have been
modified, or the mitigation requirements have been reduced.
7. Refund requests made more than nine months from the payment date will only be considered for
permits that were terminated or modified to not require any mitigation. Such requests must be
accompanied by written verification from the permitting agency that the project has been canceled, the
permits have been rescinded and/or mitigation is no longer required.
8. Refund requests not meeting the criteria specified above are not eligible for a refund.
9. Refund requests that meet the criteria above will be elevated to DMS Senior Management for
review. The following considerations apply to all refund requests:
a. availability of funds after consideration of all existing project and regulatory obligations
b. the date the payment was made
c. the likelihood DMS can use the mitigation procured using the payment to meet other
mitigation requirements
10. Once a refund has been approved, the refund recipient must provide a completed W-9 form to the
DMS In -Lieu fee Program Coordinator within two weeks in order to process the refund though the
State Controller's Office.
11. All decisions shall be final.