20220685 Ver 1_More Info Received_20220913

Strickland, Bev
From: Daniel Kuefler <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 12:02 PM
To: Perez, Douglas J
Cc: Amschler, Crystal C CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Subject: Re: [External] Research Park Phase II -Elan University City project SAW-2021-01204
Attachments: SAW-2021-01204 Responses to Reviewer Comments.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Crystal / Doug,
Thanks again for your patience with this - it turns out that there were some unexpected staffing changes
within the engineering firm handling the project design aspects and this resulted in internal confusion, but we
got things worked out and have also coordinated with FEMA and CDOT to make sure these updates are
aligned with their requirements as well.
I have attached here a packet of materials that addresses all of the comments. Please let me know if you have
any questions or require any further information to complete your reviews, respectively. Feel free to call me
anytime to discuss any details if that is more convenient.
Thanks again,
Daniel
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 9:33 AM Daniel Kuefler <[e-mail]> wrote:
Doug,
The engineers reached out to me earlier this week to request some extra documentation that FEMA was
asking for - the project is still moving forward and I understand the engineers are trying to resolve the
disparity between the DEQ/USACE comments and FEMA requirements. I'll push harder and do what I can to
spur this along.
Daniel
On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 9:18 AM Perez, Douglas J <[e-mail]> wrote:
Hey Daniel,
1

What's the status on this project? It's been awhile since I've heard anything on this. Do we need to withdraw it?
Let me know,
Doug
From: Amschler, Crystal C CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 2:04 PM
To: Daniel Kuefler <[e-mail]>
Cc: Perez, Douglas J <[e-mail]>
Subject: [External] Research Park Phase II -Elan University City project SAW-2021-01204
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Daniel,
I've reviewed the information submitted for this project and have the following questions/request for additional
information:
1.At the stream crossing, double 8.5' wide culverts are proposed, buried to 1' below the stream bed with both
culverts open for the passage of the base flow stream channel. The PCN and plan show the stream channel to
be 8' wide. As such, it seems more appropriate that only one culvert should be used to pass stream base flow
and the other should be used to pass high flows (See NWP-14 Regional conditions 2 for Aquatic Life
Movements and 9 for Culvert Placement). Please revise the plans accordingly.
2.PIan review:
a.lt appears as though impacts to wetlands could be greatly minimized by re -aligning the proposed road to
cross the wetlands where they are more narrow and at a more perpendicular angle to the stream
thereby further minimizing impacts to waters of the US. Attached is a copy of the plans and I've
identified on page 3 of the PDF the location where it looks like the crossing could be constructed with
potentially less impact to waters. Please address why the proposed crossing can't be re -aligned to this
area to minimize impacts.
b. Page 1 of the PDF shows some sort of feature that starts at the bottom of the BMP, crosses the stream
and wetland and ends at the project boundary. Please identify what this feature is and if it would
impact waters of the US.
c.The plans show an impact to wetlands resulting from jack and bore fore the proposed sewer line,
however this impact is not shown on the PCN impact table. Please revise the table to include all
impacts for the entire site to include impacts from utilities. Additionally, it appears that the sewer line
2

would go through the wetland and the jack and bore would be to place the sewer line below the
stream bed without open cutting the stream correct? Would there be any open cutting for the sewer
line within the wetlands?
3.Threatened and endangered species: The package included information regarding evaluation for threatened
and endangered species. The information indicates that the areas along roadsides and forest edges were
evaluated for the presence of Schweinitz's Sunflower. Was the existing sewer line corridor that transects the
property evaluated for the sunflower? If so what time of year were these evaluations completed?
Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this request for additional information.
Sincerely,
Crystal C. Amschler
Project Manager
Crystal Amschler
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
(828)-271-7980 Ext 4231
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at:
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/f?p=136:4:0
Daniel Kuefler
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
www.wetlands-epg.com
336.554.2728
3

Daniel Kuefler
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
www.wetlands-epg.com
336.554.2728
4

Crystal / Doug,
Thank you for providing detailed and thoughtful comments on our PCN submittal for the Elan
University City Phase II Project (SAW-2021-01204). In cooperation with the project engineers,
we have worked to update the PCN in accordance with your comments.
Please refer to the itemized responses to your letter comments below, as well as the attached
updated plans, PCN impacts table, and FWS concurrence letter for further details. Please let us
know if you have any questions or need any further information to process this request. Thank
you in advance for your timely consideration of these materials.
Daniel
Response to Comment '1':
The project engineers have updated the culvert design to incorporate baffles that will confine
baseflow to a single culvert and maintain appropriate stream width at base flow, while meeting
CDOT and FEMA requirements. Please refer to the updated drawings and memo provided by
the project engineers for further details.
Response to Comment '2a':
The project engineers have evaluated the alternative alignment and have determined that it
would not meet CDOT requirements for safety and design criteria. The grading required would
result in only a nominal decrease in wetlands impacts and would be impracticable to implement
as the tie-in location from Phase 1 is already well under construction.
Response to Comment '2b':
The linework in question was an artifact of a previous footpath design that is no longer being
considered. The updated plans attach show that linework has been removed.
Response to Comment '2c':
We have updated the impact tables (attached) to include the minor temporary impact for the
bore. No additional temporary impacts for open cuts are required/proposed for the utility
installation.
Response to Comment '3':
We have evaluated the site in it's entirety for T&E species and have obtain a concurrence letter
from USFWS (attached).

LandDes�gn.
CREATING PLACES
THAT MATTER.
September 9, 2022
Comment: At the stream crossing, double 8.5' wide culverts are proposed, buried to 1' below the
stream bed with both culverts open for the passage of the base flow stream channel. The PCN and
plan show the stream channel to be B' wide. As such, it seems more appropriate that only one culvert
should be used to pass stream base flow and the other should be used to pass high flows (See NWP-
14 Regional conditions 2 for Aquatic Life Movements and 9 for Culvert Placement). Please revise the
plans accordingly -
LID Response: Per the City of Charlotte, we were directed to not decrease the flow area downstream
of the upstream culvert, therefore dictating the size of the downstream culvert. The downstream
culvert will accommodate the base flow of the stream in the western side of the culvert which would
not over widen the existing stream; and the eastern culvert will have a concrete sill which will be
activated during high flow rain events.
2. Comment: Plan review:
a. It appears as though impacts to wetlands could be greatly minimized by re -aligning the proposed
road to cross the wetlands where they are more narrow and at a more perpendicular angle to the
stream thereby further minimizing impacts to waters of the US. Attached is a copy of the plans
and I've identified on page 3 of the PDF the location where it looks like the crossing could be
constructed with potentially less impact to waters. Please address why the proposed crossing
can't be re -aligned to this area to minimize impacts.
LD Response: We have included an exhibit in our package that shows the potential crossing that
was redlined on the previous submittal on page 3 We have determined that the redlined crossing
would not meet the CDOT requirements for radius' and tangents between radius'_ We have also
determined in order to meet all CDOT requirements there would be little to no significant decrease
in impacts to the stream and wetlands. The proposed connection we are showing in our plan and
exhibits is tying into a previously approved road in Phase 1 of the project; the project is currently in
construction.
Sincerely,
rank McMahan, PE
Managing Partner for LandDesign, Inc.
LANDDESIGN.COM

- —
®, � 7Y'IvliylL_
t_ftW
andilinsoMN —
],I
,..7:
12
It
l
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC - 2 PHASE OVERALL VIEW
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
{
0 150' 300 450' 750' LandD .

/ / �/ `/`� ICI � ,✓ (IrI /J I ����-, ," � �.\� `� r����s� � � \\ �\�\\\ \\ \� _-- //// �\ \\��% / I I I /
\ I I / ;��tiIyIIIIIIIII�I I
It
IIII PERENNIAL STREAM A
ION -SITE LENGTH = 2418'
(0.522AC)
PROJECT�� /
,BOUNDARI(�
�,,EXISTING
5CULVERT'�//
I��IIf"
PERENNIAL STREAM B
\ON -SITE LENGTH = 253'
/ (0.011 AC)
//� �\ ` _` ❑ � �,�' � � �-=� � J� fig -- ti .-- f� � _ � �. � \ \\ \\ \ � _ F p � 8S \ \ � - - \\ \ \ I /
� II 1J 1 1 (r /�%❑� /�~-.� "�� � � � .,� 1�(1 l T -,, �-��\ \\�� � i%/�%� s-�` `� \\ _ \� � \� � � � /C "Qn/
l
W_EfiZAND FW/F`NW-
(7.26AC)
^\- \ �/ �/' 1 I � t � -�. � /J` /^ ``" -ill "� J �� \\�" \ I / �' ~ � �� � \ \< � � �✓ ✓ �\\ � \\\ \ \ — — — / — — —\ \
71
/EXISTING � �, J �F ��-i-�\�— _- .L�_-� \ `( �-� II �\ �--.�-,- �_•✓ S ,? � \\
(/rSEWER LINE __If
\�
EXISTING 40 , 1'� \ z� ` �1��
-EWER-E�,r
Ti� , �\k7
o
7 CD
C � \� �-ti — ✓ r J��� /7�-"� ii 1 -� /yr � � I � \ � _ J'� `� - - ice, `7 �� � -�q � \ � \\\\\\ ( i // // �
C `_���'-t -�z'�1 `- �� ��_ G `v�� --� �/ Z �T �° ✓ SS
❑11 \� 1 ti �' t� L\� f
I�///// ..
\ \ 111 //�� ti
/ \
-
- ERENNIAL STREAM C /
\ - _ / LEGEND
PHASE ON SITE LENGTH 557' /
UNDER CONSTRUCTION 1���(/ i / //� - _ - - _ ❑ ��(0.026 AC) / -
Ilj AREA OF IMPACT
a N O I M PA T �� / / /// \ \ \ \ \ /III / / / 1 ��: ❑
\\\ \\ 11✓ii IIII _ \\\�Jh,� ' lid- /1 , // .\
/�/ % �1\ h / // (I / / _ TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
/
/
-// / -\ I \ 1 / // / \ 1 \ ❑
\
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 • CHARLOTTE, NC • OVERALL EXISTING STREAM EXHIBIT PH 2
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
SCALE: 1 "=200'
0 10 0' 3 •
500,
LandD�®

PERENNIAL STREAM N
142 LF OF IMPACT
1214 SQFT (0.027 AC) '
_U
� J
W
� ^ /
un�
.IN
TLA
A_
V,
- %
I
CONNECTION TOZXIS
I I
TING ROAD
PHA E 1 I
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
NOIMPACT
/ I I
I
I I
I I
r
4/(96
C Rr
BMP OUTFALL
WETLAND FW/FWW \ R
L ' TO BE FILLED
2554 SQFT (0.059 AC) OF IMPACT
-AT ANY LOCATION WHERE
SS,�- -THE PROP. PATH CROSSES =
AT ANY LOCATION WHERE
THE PROP. PATH CROSSES
INTO THE WETLAND
BOARDWALK WILL BE USED
TO AVOID IMPACT.
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 • CHARLOTTE, NC - OVERALL STREAM IMPACT EXHIBIT PH 2
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
THE EXISTING STREAM, A
PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE WILL BE
ADDED RESULTING IN NO
IMPACT.
r
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT 171
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
0 100' 200' 300' 500' La 1dD.

1 !�
'�yI PROP. SEWER
CONNECTION
PROJECT
BOUNDARY
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC - OVERALL PH 2 UTILITY EXHIBIT
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
WATERLINE \
BMP OUTFALL
BMP
`!PROP. STORM \
DRAINAGE
PROP.
SEWER LINE
' SS A— S's
TEMP. JACK &— f
BORE IMPACT
0.01 AC /
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT - 1:71
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
0 100' 200' 300' 500' La 1dD.

PROP.\
SIDEWALK
RETAINING WALL
WETLAND FW/FWW
TO BE FILLED
14507 •
OFIMPACT
15 FT TC E &
DEWATERING
AREA (0.011 AC)
1 +42�
PCC�
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
CULVERT TYPE
ECESSARY TO
MATCH EX.
CULVERT
ROP. CULVERT
(CULVERT IS TO BE
INTERGRATED INTO s
WALL. TO BE DESIGNED
BY OTHERS)
EX. SEWER LINE
PERENNIAL STREAM A.
142 LF OF IMPACT
1215 SQFT (0.027 AC) \ s
15 FT TCE &
DEWATERING
AREA (0.011 AC)--
•�-___ram �♦ \
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 - CHARLOTTE, NC - PERENNIAL STREAM A & WETLAND FW/FWW A EXHIBIT
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
J
0 20' 40' 60' 100, LandDesign,

BASE FLOW TO
THROUGH WEST
OF DOUBLE BOX
PROP. 12" CONCRETE SILL TO BE
INSTALLED IN WESTERN BOX AT
THE UPSTREAM AND DOWN
STREAM END OF THE CULVERT
CULVERT CROSS SECTION AT ROAD CENTERLINE
(SCALE: 1 "=80' (H) 1 "=8' (V))
iiiiiiiiiii�■■�
iii
iii'■'■iiiiiii
iiiiii�'�'��i�iiiiiii
UPS
Ono
■\\■■■■■■■■rFlithiu,'m—li
■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■
Y■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■►■■■■■■111■i■III■■■11■■■■■■■■■■�
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
Oj THE CULVERT'
■■■���i��■■1111111111I111d'lIII11�iC11����■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■
.
• •
. •
•
• - • - • •
MEN
•
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■
- ■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■II■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
- ■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■I
1■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■
• • ■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■11■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■
• ■■■
.
.
. . .
. .
. .
. .
.
1 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 1
THE PRESERVE AT FOREST CREEK - WAXHAW, NC - PERENNIAL STREAM A & WETLAND CROSS —SECTIONS EXHIBIT
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR

CULVERT CROSS SECTION AT ROAD CENTERLINE
WESTERN BOX
(SCALE: 111=80' (H) 1 "=8' (V))
ST
CUL
REA
725
725
720
720
PR
P.
RADE
715
715
710
710
705
705
PROP.
DOUBLE
12' X 8.5
BOX CULVERT
165 LF)
700
700
695
Zm
695
7777
142.27 LF of Double 12' X
8.5' Concrete
Box Culvert @ 0.04%
EX. GRADE
INV.:890.03
690
Elm690
VEF
T INV.: 889.
STREAM
INV.: 689.96
CU
VERT INV.: 688.96
685
685
P OP.
1
" C
NCRETE SILL
680
680
0
o
rn
rn
o
0
0
m
0
m
0)
w
0)
w
o
m
0
m
c0
c0
c0
c0
c0
c0
0+00
0+50
1+00
1+50
CULVERT CROSS SECTION AT ROAD CENTERLINE
EASTERN BOX
(SCALE: 111=80' (H) 1 "=8' (V))
STR
CUL
VE
725
725
720
720
PR P. RADE
715
715
710
710
705
705
PR OP. DOUBLE 12' X 8.5
BOX CULVERT 165 LF)
)
700
700
695EFS/
/IffE
695
142.27 LF of Double 12' X 8.5' Concrete
Box Culvert @ 0.04%
EX. GRADE
EAIJ
INV.:890.03
690
OEMmaimmm690
T INV.: 889.
3
T REAM INV.: 689.96
CU VERT INV.: 688.96
685
685
PROP. 4" C NCRETE SILL
680
680
0 o
m rn
0') 0
0 0
0) 0')
0) 0)
co co
o 0
0) m
co c0
c0 c0
c0 co
0+00
0+50
1+00
1+50
THE PRESERVE AT FOREST CREEK - WAXHAW, NC - PERENNIAL STREAM A & WESTERN/EASTERN CROSS -SECTIONS EXHIBIT La1ldDes�ign®
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR

[J
�
�
C71•� .. - n
.CAME`
N!
v�
WIN
r— 11��'
' — �
•,_,■�
a ;�
o� nunml
1►111
wallsisE
__
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT 77
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
�I
0+00
At
11 of IN,
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 • CHARLOTTE, NC - WETLAND FW/FWW B EXHIBIT
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
I
Ira? n �.!In�i■._ �_ ■ irtia
PROP.•
���°
�IIIII 1111111111
NETWOR
111111111 � a
�t711.'�I!� 1�■I
IIIIIIII
IMPACT IS NECESSARY AS
716
7,3 THIS PORTION OF ROADWAY
IS NEEDED TO MEET FIRE
706
- -ACCESS REQUIREMENTS ,
►
ti
WETLAND FW/FWW
TO BE FILLED
2554 SQFT (0.059)
O F I M PACT
RETAINING WALL
. i/ --� i .
0 20' 40' 60' 100, LandDesign.

WETLAND CROSS SECTION AT ROAD CENTERLINE
(SCALE: 111=80' (H) 1 "=8' (V))
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
MEMO
MMEME
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
�
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NONE
■■■■■
�
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■NONE
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■EEG■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■M�lC:rN■■■■■■■■■
OMEN■■■■■■■■MEMO■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Erg■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
ON
mom
�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■E�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
mom
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■NEE■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
1c�i�\\�
■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Em■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
ME���O��EM
�MENIMMEMISM������EmommomMONSOv��011������
�
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�
■■■INEE■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■IJ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■OEM■G�■■■■■■■■■mom■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■!�►J■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■rI'■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■,I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�J■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■lI■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NONE
■■■■■■►M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
,
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■1I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■w■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■AE■■■■■■■■II
mom
■■■■■■■■■■■■�N����i�■■■■■■■
.-
■EN■■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■�!�Gi■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NOON■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■N■MEN
I■■■■�I■■■■■■■M■■■■■■I�iI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■Ew■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■E■N���i■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■��MENFOUO2
\■�I■■■���ii��■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�■■■■■imm
■M■�I■■■■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
MEN
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
MEN
■■■■■■
MEMO■■■■■■■■MEMO■■■■■■■�I■■■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■■II■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NONE
■
moommosommoom������MENNEN
MENNEN��������������������
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■iI■■■■MMMMMM■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NOON■\■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
,
■■■■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■iI■■■r■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■►i■■■■■■■■■■■■■■MI■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■w■■■■■■■■■■�■■■�I■■w■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■lE■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■r�■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■NE■■■■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ww■■■■■
■■■■IIwE■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
mom
■mom
■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■E.EMI■EEE�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
mmmmmmmm
mom
• .
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
•
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■�I■■■■iI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
MEMO
�I■■■■iI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■NI■■■■�I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■NI■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
THE PRESERVE AT FOREST CREEK - WAXHAW, NC - WETLAND CROSS -SECTIONS EXHIBIT LandDes�gn.
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR

/ CONNECTION T�
/ EXISTING ROAD
(CURRENTLY UNDER I
CONSTRUCTION)
� J
C Rid)
m
NOTE:
MIN. REQUIRED RADIUS = 150'
MIN. REQUIRED TANGENT
BETWEEN CURVES = 50'
*OVERALL THE ALIGNMENT IN RED WOULD
NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF CDOT AND
WOULD NOT HAVE ANY SIGNIFICANT, IF ANY,
DECREASE IN IMPACT DUE TO THE NECESSARY
GRADING.
_ I
JO TANGENT IS ABLE TO _ ---
BE ACHIEVED BETWEEN
SS' SS ---- SS_ S
S
C RVES , -- --- - - -
R150,00' !�� ---
100.00 -
I 5
50.00
XV/4;�01 1 Al
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
i NOIMPACT
I I
I I
_ I I
RESEARCH PARK PHASE 2 • CHARLOTTE, NC - ALTERNATE ROAD FAILURE
PN1021404 1 02.07.2022 1 GREYSTAR
LEGEND
AREA OF IMPACT - 1:71
TOTAL DEVELOPED AREA: 25.71 AC
0 100' 200' 300' 500' LandDesign.

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑X Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.333
W2 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.059
W3 T
Bore Pit
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.01
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.402
2h. Comments:
NWP 18 to be applied to Wetland FW impacts
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream A
PER
Corps
8
142
S2 T
Dewatering
Stream A
PER
Corps
8
15
S3 T
Dewatering
Stream A
PER
Corps
8
15
S4 -
Choose one
S5 -
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
172
3i. Comments:
S1- 0.027 AC
S2- 0.011 AC Dewatering
S3- 0.011 AC Dewatering
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

ua
United States Department of the InteriorSERVIUE
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa StreetFl
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
March 24, 2022
Lisa Gaffney
WEPG
10612-D Providence Road
PMB 550
Charlotte, North Carolina 28277
lisa.gaffney(a,wetlands-epg com
Subject: Elan University Residential Development; Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Lisa Gaffney:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence dated February 22, 2022, 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).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the Applicant proposes to construct a residential
development and appurtenances on approximately 68 forested acres in Charlotte, North Carolina.
The information provided suggests that the proposed project will require authorization from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for unavoidable impacts to Waters of the United States. No
project design plans or a description of impacts to onsite habitats have been prepared or provided
at this time.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to Service records, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the action area
(50CFR 402.02) for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis).
However, the final 4(d) rule, (effective as of February 16, 2016) exempts incidental take of
northern long-eared bat associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a
known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during
the pup season (June 1 — July 31). Based on the information provided, the project would occur at
a location where any incidental take that may result from associated activities is exempt under
the 4(d) rule for this species. Although not required, we encourage the Applicant to avoid
associated tree clearing activities during this animal's maternity roosting season from May 15 —
August 15. If adhered to, this impact minimization measure would support our
concurrence with a "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determination from the
action agency.

Your correspondence indicates that suitable habitat is present onsite for the federally endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata) and
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). However, targeted botanical surveys conducted during the
appropriate timeframe (August 2, 2021) 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 "may affect, not likely
to adversely affect" determinations from the action agency for these species. 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%20listed%20plant
s%202020.pdf
Based on the information provided, 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.
Impervious Surfaces and Low -Impact Development
Increased storm -water runoff also degrades aquatic and riparian habitat, causing stream -bank and
stream -channel scouring. Impervious surfaces reduce groundwater recharge, resulting in even
lower than expected stream flows during drought periods, which can induce potentially
catastrophic effects for fish, mussels, and other aquatic life. Accordingly, we recommend that all
new development, regardless of the percentage of impervious surface area they will create,
implement storm -water -retention and -treatment measures designed to replicate and maintain the
hydrograph at the preconstruction condition to avoid any additional impacts to habitat quality
within the watershed.
We recommend the use of low -impact -development techniques, such as reduced road widths,
grassed swales in place of curb and gutter, rain gardens, and wetland retention areas, for
retaining and treating storm -water runoff rather than the more traditional measures, such as large
retention ponds, etc. These designs often cost less to install and significantly reduce
environmental impacts from residential development.
Where detention ponds are used, storm -water outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior
to reaching any natural stream or wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow
2

for the slow discharge of storm water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm -water
surges; thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Also, because the
purpose of storm -water -control measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no
storm -water -control measures or best management practices should be installed within any
stream (perennial or intermittent) or wetland.
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 4-2-22-489.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor