20150045 Ver 1_401 Application_20150115

0
FAQ®
201 50045 o-
Q
CL
Permit Application
RECEIVED
JAN 13 2015
DENR -LAND QU. /ALITY
STORMWATER PERMI -I TING

o�o� wAr�gQ�
Office Use Only
Corps action ID no
DWQ project no
Form Version 1 4 January 2009
j1LJRIVIVVr -.-.
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A
Applicant Information
1
Processing
la
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
lb
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number 18 & 29 or General Permit (GP) number
1c
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply)
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program
❑X Yes ❑ No
1g
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties If yes, answer 1 h
below
❑ Yes ❑X No
1h
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a
Name of project
Sanctuary at Southgate
2b
County
Union
2c
Nearest municipality / town
Indian Trail
2d
Subdivision name
Sanctuary at Southgate
2e
NCDOT only, T I P or state project no
3
Owner Information JAR 10 LU1J
3a
Name(s) on Recorded Deed
Walton Development & Management (USA), Inc DENR -LAND QUALITY
3b
Deed Book and Page No
I ITMWATER PERMITTING
3c
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable)
Andy Rathke
3d
Street address
11535 Carmel Commons Blvd, Suite 102
3e
City, state, zip
Charlotte, NC 28226 FN
3f
Telephone no
704- 879 -2475 IAN 1 i 7d15
3g
Fax no
3h
Email address
arathke @walton com DENR -LA ��L'
-GI i l -i _ "dG
j1LJRIVIVVr -.-.
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

4
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify
4b
Name
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
4d
Street address
4e
City, state, zip
4f
Telephone no
4g
Fax no
4h
Email address
5
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Len Rindner
5b
Business name
(if applicable)
Leonard S Rindner, PLLC /Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group (WEPG)
5c
Street address
10612 -D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d
City, state, zip
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e
Telephone no
704- 904 -2277
5f
Fax no
5g
Email address
len rindner @wetlands -epg corn
Page 2 of 10

B
Project Information and Prior Project History
1
Property Identification
1a
Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
multiple parcels - see attached parcel map
1 b
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees)
Latitude 35 08531 Longitude -80 59529
1c
Property size
1404 acres
2
Surface Waters
2a
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project
North Fork Crooked Creek
2b
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
C
2c
River basin
Rocky (03040105)
3
Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application
Site is a mix of open pasture and woodland surrounded by low- density residential housing
3b
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property 2 011
3c
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (Intermittent and perennial) on the property 1,933
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
To construct a road crossing and stormwater management BMP to service a proposed residential housing development
3e Describe the overall project In detail, Including the type of equipment to be used
A road crossing /stormwater BMP will be constructed through wetlands Typical equipment will be used like backhoes, excavators, dump trucks
4
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments
4b
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known) Pat Kealy /Jeff Levi
Agency /Consultant Company WEPG
Other
4d If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
Site was visited by Steve Kichefski on 05/01/13 to verify delineation The jurisdictional determination was not finalized which is being requested now
5
Project History
5a
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (Including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b
If yes, explain In detail according to "help file" Instructions
6
Future Project Plans
6a
Is this a phased project?
❑X Yes ❑ No
6b If yes, explain
This permit request is associated with Phase 1 of the residential development There are additional phases proposed but no impacts are anticipated
and jurisdictional features on the property will be avoided (see attached delineation map for Seasonal RPW SJ which will be avoided)
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

C Proposed Impacts Inventory
1 Impacts Summary
1a Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)
❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2 Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland Impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area Impacted
2a
Wetland Impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b
Type of Impact
2c
Type of wetland
2d
Forested
2e
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f
Area of
Impact
(acres)
W1 P
Culvert
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0 079
W2 P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0 065
W3 P
Culvert
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0 023
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
0 167
2h Comments
3 Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or Intermittent stream Impacts (Including temporary Impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites Impacted
3a
Stream Impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b
Type of Impact
3c
Stream name
3d
Perennial (PER) or
Intermittent (INT)?
3e
Type of
jurisdiction
3f
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
Choose one
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
31 Comments
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

4 Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U S then indiv ually list all open water impacts below
4a
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c
Type of impact
4d
Waterbody
type
4e
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
O2
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f Total open water impacts
4g Comments
5 Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below
5a
Pond ID number
5b
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f Total
5g Comments
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
5j Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
6 Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other
6b
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
6c
Reason for impact
6d
Stream name
6e
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet )
6g
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
Yes /No
B2
Yes /No
B3
Yes /No
B4
Yes /No
B5
Yes /No
B6
Yes /No
6h Total Buffer Impacts
61 Comments
Page 5 of 10

D Impact Justification and Mitigation
1 Avoidance and Minimization
1a Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed Impacts in designing project
The protect area is 140 acres in size in which a portion is bisected by streams /wetlands therefore a road crossing (Impact W1) is needed to access
uplands on the site in the southwest corner of the property Another small wetland also bisects the site near the main entrance in which a road
crossing and BMP will need to be constructed (Impact W2 and W3) Total impacts proposed are to 0 102 for road crossings under NWP #29 and 0 065
acres for fill for a storm water BMP under NWP#18 for a total of 0 167 acres
lb Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed Impacts through construction techniques
The road crossings have been constructed the minimum width necessary to provide safe access and traffic flow Bridges and bottomless arch culverts
were not proposed due to substantially increased costs for these type of structures The impact associated with the BMP could not be avoided due to
the location of the wetland and the needed location for the BMP to treat storm water from the site If this area was avoided, the project would have to
be re- designed and many lots would have to removed which would make the project as proposed infeasible
2 Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State
2a Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply)
❑ DWQ ❑X Corps
2c If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3 Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type Choose one
Type Choose one
Type Choose one
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
3c Comments
4 Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑X Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
0 linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature
Choose one
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only)
0 square feet
4e Riparian wetland mitigation requested
0 167 acres
4f Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
acres
4h Comments Applicant is proposing mitigation at 1 1 ratio for 0 167 acre of impacts Acceptance letter from NCEEP enclosed
5 Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

6 Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
0 Yes OX No
6b If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
Zone
6c
Reason for impact
6d
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1 5
6f Total buffer mitigation required
6g If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e g , payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund)
6h Comments
Page 7 of 10

E
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers Identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b
If yes, then Is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
❑ Yes ❑ No
2
Stormwater Management Plan
2a
What Is the overall percent Imperviousness of this project?
48
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
2d
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative
description of the plan
Phase 1 Storm water will be treated on the site by construction of a Wet Pond BMP and a Sand Filter BMP Future Phase 2 storm water will be treated
with a Wet Pond BMP All treatment facilities designed in accordance per Indian Trail standards
2e
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Town of Indian Trail / Union County
3
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a
In which local government's jurisdiction Is this project?
Town of Indian Trail / Union County
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
3b
Which of the following locally - Implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply)
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
3c
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
4
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a
Which of the following state - Implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply)
❑Session Law 2006 -246
❑Other
4b
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

F
Supplementary Information
1
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la
Does the project Involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes
❑X No
use of public (federal /state) land?
lb
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
❑ Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA /SEPA)?
1c
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes
❑ No
letter )
Comments
2
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a
Is the site In violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
El Yes
❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0200)?
2b
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑Yes
❑X No
2c
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
El Yes
❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative Impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
Future phases of the development will be required to treat all storm water generated by the development No impacts to wetlands /stream channels will
result from development of future phases
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
All waste water on the site will be transported by existing sewer infrastructure to the nearest waste water treatment facility
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

5 Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted
-
5d What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Professional knowledge of threatened /endangered resources in the area No habitat for potential species exists on the site
6 Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No Essential Fish Habitat in this region
7 Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e g , National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
http / /gis ncdcr gov /hpoweb/
8 Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a Will this project occur in a FEMA - designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements
8c What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Information provided by Engineer Development has 100 -year floodplain located on property but proposed impacts are not located with the 100 -year
floodplain
CL,", �` t S
c 1 I ��/ _
01 -08 -2015
Applican gent�7pnnted Name
lT
Date
Applican gent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided
Page 10 of 10

ENGINGE LNG
April 24, 2013
Ms. Jennifer Rabon
Walton Development & Management (USA), Inc.
11535 Carmel Commons Blvd., Ste 102
Charlotte NC 28226
Re: Southgate, Indian Trail, Union County, NC
Dear Ms. Rabon:
In order to Interface with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources we will need your authorization. Please sign
the following statement.
This letter authorizes Eagle Engineering or their consultant Leonard S. Rindner,
PLLC to represent the property owners in matters related to Waters of the U.S. and
Waters of North Carolina for the referenced project site; provided, however, that such
representation shall not include the authority to bind the owners. This includes
interfacing with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources.
See attached signature page
Signature
Date
Please contact me if you have any questions or require additional explanation. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
EAGLE ENGINEERING, INC.
C]Jo H. Ross, P.E.
cipal
Atlanta
2610 Bethany Creek Court
Alpharetta, GA 30004
Ph 704 893 1255
Fax [phone]
www easleonline nct
Charlotte
2013 Van Buren Avenue, Suite A
Indian Trail, NC 28079
Ph 704 882 4222
Fax [phone]

E GINGERLNG
Signature
Walton North Carolina, LLC,
a North Carolina limited liability company,
as operator or manager, as applicable, for and on behalf of the owners
By-
By
Name.
Title
By
Name-
Title.
Walton International Group, Inc
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
Southgate — Wetland Authorization Form
(418.13)

MCDEN
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Michael Ellison, Director John E Skvarla, III
Governor Ecosystem Enhancement Program Secretary
December 16, 2014
Andy Ratlike
Walton Development and Management (USA)
11535 Carmel Commons Blvd Suite 103
Charlotte NC 28236 Expiration of Acceptance June 16 2015
Project: Southgate County: Union
1 he purpose of this letter is to notif} you that the North Carolina Lcosystem L-nhancement Program (NC LIP) is %%illing to accept
pad merit 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 NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine it par ment to the NCEEP %alit be
approved You must also comply with all other state federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated
with the proposed activity mcluding SL 2009 -337 An Act to Promote the Use of Comoensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S L 2011-343
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable If we ha-.e not receixed a cop) of the
issued 404 Permit /401 Certification /CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance iti Ill expire It is the applicant s
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP Once NCEEP receives a copy of the pernut(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the author rLed woi k 1 he amount of the In-
Lieu Pee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at "WW nceep net
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that ma} require compensatory mitigation
are summarized in the following table The amount of mitigation required and assigned to NCEEP for this impact is determined by
permitting agencies and may e \cced the impact amounts shown below
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will tale responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation fhe mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -1 feu Fee
Instrument dated July 28 2010
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Kell% Williams at
(919) 707 -8915
�- �;. sal
' B Stanfill
Management Supervisor
cc Karen Higgins NCDWR Wetlands /401 Unit
William Elliott, USACE- Asheville
Len Ruidnet agent
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
Phone 919 - 707 -89761 Internet www ncdenr gov
An Equal Opportunity l Affirmative Action Employer - Made in part by recycled paper
Kiver
CLJ
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Butler I
Buffer 11
Basin
Location
(Sq Ft)
(Sq Ft )
Cold
Cool
Warrn
Riparian
Non -Rr ai ian
Coastal Marsh
0
_
0
Impact
Yadkin
03040105
0
0
0
0 21
0
0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will tale responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation fhe mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -1 feu Fee
Instrument dated July 28 2010
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP If you have any questions or need additional information please contact Kell% Williams at
(919) 707 -8915
�- �;. sal
' B Stanfill
Management Supervisor
cc Karen Higgins NCDWR Wetlands /401 Unit
William Elliott, USACE- Asheville
Len Ruidnet agent
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
Phone 919 - 707 -89761 Internet www ncdenr gov
An Equal Opportunity l Affirmative Action Employer - Made in part by recycled paper

V)
C
cd
IOL
cd
►7
Maps /Plans

j.
po�i`�Ra � -- -
h
i
r
J
1'A`IAl
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC=.
len.rindner(ii)w¢tlands -epg. cam
(704) 904 -2277
www.wetlands -epg. com
a
v`
a
a
.
U
V
O
w
J
1'A`IAl
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC=.
len.rindner(ii)w¢tlands -epg. cam
(704) 904 -2277
www.wetlands -epg. com

47.30" 535"0E 536 537 35' $39, niroc tNO,
O S J 6 1�✓.� L'rtek'ews}�js'O� , i
/� 'Pb l
(g C�NI HiILMNt
. S f
.vs r. '1 app � - ••�:�.� �' .� � l � -. lY0
• P '. .' um-Grp,. h
J Rik
..tiro 1 -�.e�� / y.r-, }, 5 saf •er
1 Y J� •/ 5:5
s • � �• �. ,.., � ,v,} �� �' ,C�,J+ J Y� 1st •, g
Project Area
,� --
Z �, •.
/ ` • • �• ', Ills \�. ��y r��-� • ,
/ - • .Jy ¢� • IZ"
D �� —� .,. ' ' .. • / �' - O LOCATION"
1f1
SCALE �) , ' `t�.�'+4n!°' �� \ LATITUDE LONGITUDE
2400 1200 0 2400(Feet) 35.08531 N 80.59529 W
HUC. 03040105
ROCKY
FIGURE N0. Sanctuary at Southgate SHEET:
4 Indian Trail, Union County, NC D e WN FJK REVIEWED LSR BY
USGS LOCATION MAP DATE: PAGE:
02/11/13
BAKERS INC) QUADRANGLE Revised
+ 904-2277 10103113
1971 Photo revised 1987

FIGURE N0.
5
Sanctuary at Southgate
Indian Trail, Union County, NC
SOILS MAP
*Approximate Boundary
SHEET. 1 OF 2
D B WN NRN IREVIIEWED LSR By
DATE: PAGE.
02/11/13
Rewsed
10/03/13

r
' a
EXISTING STREAM EXISTING STREAM
EXISTING STREAM
GRAPHIC SCALE
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE o 500, 1200
ALL PHASES D1 FKICT
PROPERTY LINE EXHIBIT 1 inch ew n
Shoot
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC. OVERALL
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150 EXISTING
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262 CONDITIONS
lw
-�
' a
EXISTING STREAM EXISTING STREAM
EXISTING STREAM
GRAPHIC SCALE
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE o 500, 1200
ALL PHASES D1 FKICT
PROPERTY LINE EXHIBIT 1 inch ew n
Shoot
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC. OVERALL
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150 EXISTING
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262 CONDITIONS

_U
WETLANDS
1 1 _ FEMA
FLOODPLAIN
\ / BMP WET POND
/ r
BMP SAND FILTER
7
� F
WETLANDS --�—�/
FEMA
FLOODPLAIN
WETLAND
CROSSING
WETLANDS
J
WET POND BMP DESIGNED+
PER NPDES PHASE 11
pt
a Eli
SITE OF FUTURE SAND
o FILTER BMP DESIGNED PQ
IWO& INDIAN TRAIL STANDARDS
F" 4� ,�'�/
O%
SITE OF POND
-. PER INDIAN
EXISTING STREAM EXISTING STREAM
I: ([31I►[ei Rt l:7:F-11kvil
THIS PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO NPDES PHASE II REGULATIONS.
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE
ALL PHASES
PROPOSED CONDITIONS EXHIBIT
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC.
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 600' 1200'
lncb - aoo n.
Sham
OVERALL
PROPOSED
CONDITIONS

W W
W W W
\ r W W W W
FEMA FLOODPLAIN
ADOPTED 2008 W W W W W
ROPO;ED W W W W W W
PHASE 1
/ W EXISTING
/ W WETLANDS W
/ , • ? W W W W W W .yam = _ / �(_`
/ EMBANKMENT W W W W 3,456 SQ.FT.
WETLANDS
SLOPES ARE 2:1 W W
W IMPACTED
W W
•I W I '�
W X
CONTECH ALBC #33 - 15' SPAN
X 3.5' RISE ALUMINUM BOX W W w W
CULVERT. FLOW AREA= 46.8 W W All
SQ FT (OR APPROVED EQUAL y EXISTING ROPOSED
/ WETLANDS ' PHASE 1
C W
WETLANDS IMPACTED
ROAD CROSSING
3,456 SQ.FT.
IN BMP FOOTPRINT
2,820 SQ.FT.
NOT INBMP FOOTPRINT
1,005 SQ.FT.
TOTAL = 7,281 SQ.FT. OR
0.167 AC,
GRAPHIC SCALE
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE 0 50,
PHASE I (IN ,m
WETLAND CROSSING EXHIBIT ' WCn - 50 n.
Shoot
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC. PROPOSED
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150 CROSSING
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262 CONDITIONS

631
J- 40 1
61(
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE
WETLAND ROAD CROSSING
w
IV
uu 1U
+W 11
+W 11
+W
PROPOSED GRADE
EXISTING
WETLAND
S
EXISTING GRADE
CONTECH ALBC #33 - 15' SPAN X
3.5' RISE ALUMINUM BOX CULVERT.
FLOW AREA = 46.8 SQ FT
(OR APPROVED EQUAL)
19400
20-00
21-00
22-00
Station
WE
c
10
GRAPHIC SCALE
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE 0 50
PHASE 1 ( Di rm )
WETLAND CROSSING EXHIBIT 1 Inch - 5o n
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC. PROPOSED
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150 CROSSING
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262 CONDITIONS

FEMA
FLOODPLAIN
/ x
/ 1
55
2,820 SQ.FT. WETLANDS
/ IMPACTED IN FOOTPRINT
/ OF BMP WET POND
WET POND BMP
I
1
PROPOSED
PHASE 1
1� ,
�IIII�D \ \11 \1,
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE
PHASE 1
WETLANDS BMP IMPACT EXHIBIT
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC.
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262
Frifil
4 'v%
Ell
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 50 ioo
c IN FM
i inch - 5o n.
IMPACT
DETAIL

COO" x �r
1,005 SQ.FT. WETLANDS
IMPACTED OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT' x OF BMP WET POND f
X
� X��'X_�
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE
PHASE 1
WETLANDS IMPACT EXHIBIT
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC.
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 50' 100'
IN FM
I inch - 50 It
ShW
IMPACT
DETAIL
pi
COO" x �r
1,005 SQ.FT. WETLANDS
IMPACTED OUTSIDE FOOTPRINT' x OF BMP WET POND f
X
� X��'X_�
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE
PHASE 1
WETLANDS IMPACT EXHIBIT
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC.
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 50' 100'
IN FM
I inch - 50 It
ShW
IMPACT
DETAIL

-
\ ss
PROPERTY LINE
SS.
- s
� s\
•:
i
0p
E
DELINEATED WETLANDS
�s
Sq
Fi�TFReM ,
P
SANCTUARY AT SOUTHGATE
PHASE I
WETLANDS IMPACT EXHIBIT
WALTON DEVELOPMENT & MANAGEMENT (USA), INC.
10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR., STE 150
CHARLOTTE, NC 28262
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 100' 2W
c Di FM
1 Inch - ioo R
Shod
IMPACT
DETAIL

C
O
cd
C
L
.N
W
0
fz
C
O
V
�L
Jurisdictional Determination
Information

Total Site Acreage = 140.4 acres
....... Non - Jurisdictional swales /gullies
Data Forms Provided
If]
JAN 13 2011
DENR -LAND QUALITY
STM"ATER PERIM11 T)Nd
FIGURE N0.
7
Sanctuary at Southgate
Indian Trail, Union County, NC
WETLAND DELINEATION MAP
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
SUBJECT TO USACE /NCDENR VERIFICATION
SHEET
DRAWN JAV (REVIEWED LSR
BY NRN BY:
DATE PAGE:
Revised
05/13/13
0//08/13 /
10/03/13

TNW Flow Pathway: Tributaries on the site drains tc
the North Fork Crooked Creek before entering the
Rocky River (TNW).
f
Project Site
C
FIGURE NO.
8
Nbdll�pip'M! �
f. A !. \ .
SI-
11 i
V•�Cr � "`f ` ! 1
V -A - v
�r
Sanctuary at Southgate
Indian Trail, Union County, NC
TNW Pathways Map
Source: USGS National Map
http: / /viewer.nationalmap.gov /viewer/
r-
y ye
Rocky River
L. r
e
i�
Drawn By:
AJ
DATE:
12/16/14
i
Reviewed By:
LSR

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Perennial RPW SI
Date
02/15/13 1 Evaluator T PJK, JAL
Easting
80 59210 W
Pro ect
Southgate Perennial RPW SI
Northing
35 08847 N
Total Points:
2
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30*
330
(right-click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
0
A. Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3 In- channel structure riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5 Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
2
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8 Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9 Grade controls
0
05
1
1 5
1
10 Natural valley
0
05
1 1
1 5
1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
1 Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology Subtotal
155
a Man -made ditches are not rated see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
2
13 Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14 Leaf litter
1 5
1
05
0
5
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
1 5
1
16 Organic debris lines or piles rack lines
0
05
1
1 5
1
17 Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
Hydrology Subtotal
85
C. Biology
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
2
21 Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22 Fish
0
05
1
1 5
0
23 Crayfish
0
05
1
1 5
05
24 Amphibians
0
05
1
1 5
1
25 Algae
0
05
1
1 5
05
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0 75, OBL= 1 5, Other= 0
0
Biology Subtotal
90
perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See page 35 of NCDWQ manual
Notes
4 — 6' wide channel
Clear bed and bank
Sand gravel, substrate
Adapted from NCDWQ Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
(version 4 11)
Ongms

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Seasonal RPW SB
Date
02/15/13 Evaluator I PJK, JAL
Easting
80 59648 W
Project
Southgate Seasonal RPW SB
Northing
35 08366 N
Total Points:
2
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30*
245
(right-click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points
0
A. Geornorphology Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3 In- channel structure riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1
4 Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5 Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
2
6 Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7 Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8 Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9 Grade controls
0
05
1
1 5
5
10 Natural valley
0
1 05
1 1
1 5
1 5
11 Second or greater order channel
No = 0
1 Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology Subtotal
110
a Man -made ditches are not rated see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12 Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
1
13 Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14 Leaf litter
1 5
1
05
0
5
15 Sediment on plants or debris
0
05
1
1 5
1 5
16 Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
05
1
1 5
1
17 Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
Hydrology Subtotal
80
C. Biology
18 Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
19 Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
2
20 Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21 Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22 Fish
0
05
1
1 5
0
23 Crayfish
0
05
1
1 5
0
24 Amphibians
0
05
1
1 5
1
25 Algae
0
05
1
1 5
05
26 Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0 75, OBL= 1 5, Other= 0
0
Biology Subtotal
55
perennial streams may also be identified usinq other methods See page 35 of NCDWQ manual
Notes
2 - 4" wide channel
Clear bed and bank
Adapted from NCDWQ Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
(version 4 11)
Ongins

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site Southgate City /County Indian Trail /Union Cty Sampling Date 04/15/13
Applicant/Owner State NC Sampling Point UPLAND
Investigators) LSR /JAUPJK Section Township, Ranqe
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc ) valley Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 0 -5%
Subreqion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat 34 0853 N Long 80 5953 W Datum WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name CmB - Cld channery silt loam, 1 -5% slopes NWI classification
Are climatic I hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes �✓ No ❑ (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil ❑ or Hydrology ❑ significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ or Hydrology ❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes ❑ NoT77 within a Wetland? Yes = No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No ✓�
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Surface Water (Al) ❑ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑ High Water Table (A2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
❑ Saturation (A3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
❑ Water Marks (131) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (133) ❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134) [] Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Shallow Agwtard (D3)
❑ Water - Stained Leaves (69)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No F-7-1 Depth (inches)
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No �Q Depth (inches)
n
Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No � - � Depth (inches)
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants
Sampling Point UPLAND
12
13
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
50% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 Parthenoclssus qulnquefolla 10
2 Toxlcodendron radlcans 10
3 _
4
5
= Total Cover
20% of total cover
Y FACU
Y FAC
20 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 10 20% of total cover 4
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub — Woody plants excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb — All herbaceous (non woody) plants including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size and woody
plants except woody vines, less than approximately 3
it (1 m) in height
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation ✓
Presents Yes n Non
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30
)
% Cover 1;12ecies9 Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Quercus phellos
25 Y FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant 7
Species Across All Strata (B)
2 Ulmus amencana 15 Y FACW
Ca rya ovata 15 Y FACU
3 ry
4
5
Percent of Dominant Species
43%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (AFB)
6
Prevalence Index worksheet
55 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 27 $
20% of total cover 1 1
Total %Cover of. Multiply by,
30'
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Ulmus alata
20 Y FACU
FAC species x 3 =
2
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4
Column Totals (A) (B)
5
6
Prevalence Index = B/A =
20 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
50% of total cover 10
20% of total cover 4
❑ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size 30'
)
❑ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Rubus argutus
10 Y FACU
Ej 3 Prevalence Index is :53 0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
2
3
❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4
5
' Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6
be present unless disturbed or problematic
10 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata
50% of total cover 5
20% of total cover 2
Stratum 30
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb (Plot size
)
approximately 20 it (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
1
(7 6 cm) or larqer in diameter at breast height (DBH)
12
13
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
50% of total cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 Parthenoclssus qulnquefolla 10
2 Toxlcodendron radlcans 10
3 _
4
5
= Total Cover
20% of total cover
Y FACU
Y FAC
20 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 10 20% of total cover 4
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub — Woody plants excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb — All herbaceous (non woody) plants including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size and woody
plants except woody vines, less than approximately 3
it (1 m) in height
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation ✓
Presents Yes n Non
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL
Sampling Point UPLAND
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators )
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Typer Loc7 Texture Remarks
0 - 6 2 5Y 6/4 100 Sandy Clay Loam
6-16 2 5Y 6/4 95 10 5YR 5/8 5 C PL Sandy Clay Loam
G
Hydnc Soil Indicators
_❑ Histosol (Al)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
D Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S 5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
;duced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lininq, M =Matrix
❑ Redox Depressions (178)
❑ Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Sod Present? Yes ❑ No ❑✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Soi
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
El 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19)
❑ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Redox Depressions (178)
❑ Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Sod Present? Yes ❑ No ❑✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site Southgate City /County Indian Trail/Union Cty Sampling Date 04/30/13
Applicant/Owner State NC Sampling Point Mid SD/SE/SF
Investigators) LSR /JAUPJK Section, Township, Ranqe
Landform (hilislope, terrace, etc ) floodplain Local relief (concave convex none) concave Slope ( %) 0 -$%
Subreqion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat 34 0853 N Long 80 5953 W Datum WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name ScA - Secrest -Cld complex, 0 -3% slopes NWI classification
Are climatic 1 hydrolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes =✓ No F7 (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology D significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 0 No
Are Vegetation Q Soil Q or Hydrology 0 naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes �0 No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes I v I No= within a Wetland? Yes 0 No 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes = No
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that a)[)ly)
❑ Surface Sod Cracks (136)
❑✓ Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
❑✓ High Water Table (A2)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑✓ Drainage Patterns (810)
❑✓ Saturation (A3)
❑✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
❑ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
❑ Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
❑ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
❑ Drift Deposits (133)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imaqery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
Q Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Shallow Aqutard (D3)
JZ Water - Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes 0
No = Depth (inches) 0 - 4
Water Table Present? Yes Q
f
No ❑ Depth (inches) 0
❑ 0 +
n
Saturation Present? Yes - 1
No Depth (inches)
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants
2
3
4 _
5
6 _
1G
50% of total cover 5
Herb Stratum (Plot size 30' )
= Total Cover
20% of total cover 2
Tree — Woody plants excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
FACW 1 (7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sampling Point Wtld SD /SE /SF
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 8 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata 11 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 73%
That Are 013L, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
% Cover
%2ecies?
Status
1 Fra)anus pennsylvanlca
25
Y
FACW
2 Ulmus americana
25
Y
FACW
3 Carya ovata
15
Y
FACU
4 Quercus phellos
5
N
FAC
5 Acer rubrum
5
N
FAC
6
2
3
4 _
5
6 _
1G
50% of total cover 5
Herb Stratum (Plot size 30' )
= Total Cover
20% of total cover 2
Tree — Woody plants excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
FACW 1 (7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sampling Point Wtld SD /SE /SF
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 8 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata 11 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 73%
That Are 013L, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
75 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 37 5
20% of total cover 15
Sapling Stratum (Plot size 30' )
x 1 =
1 Fraxlnus pennsylvanlca
20 Y FACW
2 Acer rubrum
15 Y FAC
3 Ulmus alata
15 Y FACU
4
x 5 =
5
(A) (B)
6
50 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 25
20% of total cover 10
Shrub Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 Rubus argutus
10 Y FACU
2
3
4 _
5
6 _
1G
50% of total cover 5
Herb Stratum (Plot size 30' )
= Total Cover
20% of total cover 2
Tree — Woody plants excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
FACW 1 (7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sampling Point Wtld SD /SE /SF
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 8 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata 11 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 73%
That Are 013L, FACW, or FAC (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of.
Multiply by,
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_❑ 3 Prevalence Index is 53 0'
❑ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata
1 Juncus effusus 10 Y
2
3 _
4
5 _
6
7 _
8 _
9 _
10 _
11 _
20 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 10 20% of total cover 4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 Lonlcera japonlca 20 Y FAC
2 Campsls radlcans 20 Y FAC
3 Toxlcodendron radlcans 20 Y FAC
4
5
60 = Total Cover
50% of total cover 30 20% of total cover 12
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Sapling - Woody plants excluding woody vines
approximately 20 it (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub - Woody plants excluding woody vines
approximately 3 to 20 it (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants except woody vines less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Presents Yes F_v_1 No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL
Sampling Point wtid sDisE/sF
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0 - 3 2 5Y 6/3 95 10 5YR 5/8 5 C PL Sandy clay Loam
3-16 2 5Y 6/2 85 10 5YR 5/8 15 C PL Sandy Clay Loam
RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains
Hydnc Soil Indicators
_❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
D Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
2Location PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Sc
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
❑✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑✓ Iron Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present
❑ Red Parent Material (1721) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes 2 No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0