20230547 Ver 1_2022-0119_DawnaliaDrive_NWP_4.17.23_20230417

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
To: Ms. Meagan Jolly
Charlotte Regulatory Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Andrew Pitner
NCDWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury St., 9th Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
Date: March 31, 2023
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29 an WQC No. 4256
Dawnalia Drive (SAW-2023-00367)
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Dear Ms. Jolly and Mr. Pitner,
The Dawnalia Drive site (Mecklenburg County Tax Parcel Nos. 148308117, 14308121, 1438123; 14308125; 14308126;
14308127; 14308129; 14308131; 14308132, and 14308133) is approximately 13 acres in extent and is located southeast
of the Billy Graham Parkway and West Boulevard intersection in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Figures 1 and 2,
Attachment A). Lucern Capital Partners, has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide Section
404/401 permitting services for this project. An executed Agent Authorization Form is attached (Attachment B).
On behalf of Lucern Capital Partners, CWS is submitting a Pre -Construction Notification pursuant to Nationwide Permit
No. 29 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Water Quality Certification No. 4256 for the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) for proposed impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. associated with the
development of townhomes.
A copy of the PCN application is being provided to the North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) with a
credit card payment of $570 for the Water Quality Certification approval fee.
ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED:
DESCRIPTION
Attachment A - Figures 1-8
Attachment B - Agent Authorization Form
Attachment C - Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination SAW-2023-00367
Attachment D - Impact Drawings
Attachment E - Photo a e (Photographs 1-4
Attachment F - Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report and IPaC Report
Attachment G - SHPO Letter
Attachment H - NCSAM Forms 1 & 2
Please do not hesitate to contact Megan Bollero at 757-576-6433 or [e-mail] should you have
any questions or comments regarding this request.
Sincerely,
Megan Bollero, WPIT
Project Scientist
Aliisa Harjun/iiemi, PWS
Senior Project Manager

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment A:
Figures (1-8)

Kentucky
Tennessee
South Carolina
Georgia
,e Paw V1eek
V ®a1 Extent
te ` ----
a
Virginia
4
F 0 �Q
O
F
r�
1
y
Alleghany s, I<?
1
..sue r
_ 6
oot eh
— WfIkim-ton Blvd-- -- - ,
,k — -
�- oc
CO
u �
10
s o
O 10ii 5
00
i 21 ', y.
oc
Clan ro ���
We»tHlvd C/
o �s
werdam Cre I1'-"-� 4 Jf
'rpa Aa
A
d y`
o O/0
Q
S
r f3
m ao�avrn Rd E woouI
ShoPtnn,I, r�
t O
oc5 V) R
yt�3 Ty ova Rw
J4
. w
0
0
0
2
_1-) Legend
,own -Gr�pr Rd
g Project Limits (13 ac.)
4
O
w
51000 2,500 0 5,000 Feet
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND VICINITY MAP PROVIDED BY ESRI, 2019. ©•
SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 5,000 feet 3/10/2022 Vicinity Map
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2022-0119 ALH Dawnalia Drive
�+
COORDINATES: CHECKED BY: c A R O L I N A Mecklenburg County
35.205296,-80.917128 AVH WETLAND SERVICES Charlotte, North Carolina
Charlotte
Douglas Int'
Ai rpo rt
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland Investigation\ArcGIS\Figurel_Vicinity.mxd

a
ice= d
ram,
o c '
r D
IIII
`z
c
-
SP9
Central Piedmont
Co mmunityColl
i Harris Campus C
itw
y
1 I �
r $
\
A
Y ti fy F. v9Es J �.
vL�F
II a ✓ !
F
Rid -
p�O I I I p05', RC? ct Park Acad /
I I �
4-1
II I 1 SErvIRY `f�f�.q cF
r �
' 0
v F
WEST BLVD1.
1 0
lnvin Creek
044-
i icP
-� mil_: - _•
E . 1 VgNS A—1i � Tr _ VIGH
a
00
-
y,ulif
� z Legend
OF `
lP' The lArt
v°�V I` "' """e`" Project Limits (13 ac.)
Charotte-
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 Feet
REFERENCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE(S): CHARLOTTE WEST, NC (2019). - -
SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 2,000 feet 3/10/2022 USGS Topographic Map
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2022-0119 ALH Dawnalia Drive
�+
COORDINATES: CHECKED BY: c A R O L I N A Mecklenburg County 2
35.205296,-80.917128 AVH WETLAND SERVICES Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland Investigation\ArcGIS\Figure2_USGS.mxd

G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Prel imi nary Wetland InvestigationWrcGIS\Figure3_Aerial.mxd

IIIE
MeB
1 V\IkB UL
CeB2 4
MeD
co a MeD �'�
i�5�`e
MeD
Me
J
Q
dot
Q`� Flk��
W
Q)
Va Mont P
Q
MeD
_ EnB MID
By
a t
c
'
Q
o
MeD Fordwood Dr
E
MeB
�
MeB
Ur EnB
�y
U
e ��
e D
�
o rn
:oc
a_arkMont Dr
Ora
Shley Cr
G%
'V
s
a
ur
UL eD
$
03
CDC
CUB
�3 �ni
1
EnB
MeD
CuB
W
4�9ess
nD
MO
o WkD
a
CD
MeD
OC
'Q
EnB
CD 4byl
B kB
/\
Q
o� e(9
Gd?
Me
WkD
WkD
a
MO
m
eB
Fp
e�qG �� CeB2
CeB2CuB
Reb
EnB
eo�q` EnB
MeB
EnB
MeD
Me
I
MO
1
EnB WkD MeD
W e
- MeD
eD WkB
EnB
MeB
Me
MeD
O
MeB
MeB EnB
nD
y
En6
o;
o;
�
e
MeD
UL
CeD2
CeD2
MeB
Legend
Soil Unit Name and Description
dric Coverage (% )
CuB Cecil -Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes No
11.1
eD2 B2 Q Project
Limits (13 ac.)
EnB Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
No
23.3
MO Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Yes
16
Roads
WkD Wilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
No
49.6
2
Total Coverage
e
1,000 500 0
1,000 Feet
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS WEB SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC, DATED
2021.
CeeD2 MeB —
C B2
SCALE:
DATE:
USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey
FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 1,000 feet
3/10/2022
of Mecklenburg County
CWS PROJECT NO:
2022-0119
DRAWN BY:
ALH
Dawnalia Drive
4
COORDINATES:
CHECKED
BY:
�+
y A R O L I N A
Mecklenburg County
35.205296,-80.917128
AVH
WETLAND SERVICES
Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland Investigation\ArcGIS\Figure4_Current.mxd

L Z paF � MO C'uo
CeB2 Cr.g2 CuB MeO �U PaE
n Ur CuD '�
:ate
( etlp CUB CuD CC, 5
GzgY
0,02
C01)2
E;sS CEO?
MeB
\ a Ur MeB eD / CLE2 Ur h \ f
Ce82 1 U '�y Med f,u6 � :: uB
Ge�'L MeB
M
e02 � k� WkB � 8 r. � C":B
!rA Fr Mil NC MeB F f fJ Ce$2
MeB y M w C
MeD 11
(.lr �$ e� Cep=
C;cO'C
MOB ��O Ccc6
U� -Ilt� feB2
Ur �;�'� MeB ,1yy4: fr MQ
F� µf t @ Jr Cep2 CeV2
Douglas�u�l�s Mutlrcii,�tl Arr}7art En8 � cr,r3 Wk€ f:
w tig•� ,J3kE � M;-Li � rr,g2 PaE
Jye' yAeC)
%uEs
Ur
C. West Blvd ' cer CuB
Ui
`kU M 0 EhC w
C u(3 Cue
Mk8 Fn6 Me'D
MeB MO
En ? WAD W k GeD2 Cut3
C, uD
1y� MO Ce8.2 i
?9 ' En13 MeB EnB
lJ
Yorkmont Road L WkC3 MeU Er, ti \ CeB2 FJI 0E"B c '0 I MeB
MeQ MeB
� MeB •.`�, v - -
H.B oz t Me (West Tyvola Road
V MkB
MeB CeB:, EnB n
GeD2
MeD � G� MGMeS
l lr
rz G CE13
E p7 EnD Ur
CeD2 MeB MeD Ge Mel) 03 rh
r, A2 Ges2 !u Mel' 1[„a
BL PaK
Ce02
ti
y& Gia J rF.B P1E �� MeB MILS MOB
` I PaE MeB
0
w Fs, - �.. W k E Ur
£ MeB
Soil Unit Name and Description
Hydric
CuB
Cecil -Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes
No
EnB
Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
No
MO
Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded
Yes
WkD
Wilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
No
eID C"D)? Ce82 ` CeB .
eh
\N�r v�V10 rots Legend
afi v� Q y�0 Q Project Limits (13 ac.)
wkr
c 2,000 1,000 0 2,000 Feet
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS PUBLISHED SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC, SHEET 6, DATED 1980. H1
U
SCALE: DATE: USDA-NRCS Published Soil Survey FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 2,000 feet 3/10/2022 Y
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY: of Mecklenburg County
2022-0119 ALH Dawnalia Drive
�+
COORDINATES: CHECKED BY: e A R O L I N A Mecklenburg County 5
35.205296,-80.917128 AVH WETLAND SERVICES Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland Investigation\ArcGIS\Figure5_Historic.mxd

0
Q o
co a
Q
i
By
f--7�
Air�e st
O'
e Pv
BovC\ett
do 0
s r b
m
N�y
im
a Soya / o`
c
m
Win
Flk
O` Mont P/ o Q
L > 0
J Y ¢ a HenlPhill St
For�Dr iv
U
:nview Ln
wont Dr O
Cr
Q � oss e4�
o m�m� 4b�7
e sr
od
so
dae o
� o
y°rs° Legend
°° Q Project Limits (13 ac.)
O Roads
CD
o- National Wetland Inventory
0
z ® Freshwater Emergent Wetland
O
F
Piper Ln - Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
O '���:�::
�a Freshwater Pond
Riverine
co ,o
REFERENCE: NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY DATA PROVIDED BY UNITED STATES FISH AND 1,000 500 0 1,000 Feet
WILDLIFE SERVICE FOR NORTH CAROLINA, ACCESSED 2021.
BACKGROUND LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2021.
SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 1,000 feet 3/10/2022 National Wetland Inventory
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2022-0119 ALH Dawnalia Drive
�+
COORDINATES: CHECKED BY: e A R O L I N A Mecklenburg County 6
35.205296,-80.917128 AVH WETLAND SERVICES Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland InvestigationWrcGIS\Figure6_NWl.mxd

♦ • • • �� .� • �f,Y s..r
sue'• .*,��gJ ` � �. � • � ._
SOX
44
♦ � P.`� I � f A I A
Q A y-
�
PANEL
l/ ' M � r �„ �► -may
0 W
1 PCT FUTURE - ''
CONDITIONS I ��
Legend
Zone AE Project Limits (13 ac.)
Roads
Zone AE Flood Hazard Zones
Zone Type
STATE 1 % Annual Chance Flood Hazard
EN(CR; WA P-
Adr Regulatory Floodway
1 PCT FUTURE %^ Special Floodway
CONDITIONS PANEL Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard
Zone X 3710452.300K 0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard
�, ' eff. 9/Per?met`er Pointe PY
W1 Future Conditions 1 %Annual Chance Flood Hazard
'rW.Area with Reduced Risk Due to Levee
1 p Area with Risk Due to Levee
t Y
J
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY ESRI, ACCESSED 2021. c 300 150 0 300 Feet
BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT,
DATED 2021. FEMA NATIONAL FLOOD HAZARD LAYER PROVIDED BY FEMA, DATED 2015.�`
ow
SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 300 feet 3/20/2022 FEMA National Flood Hazard Map
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2022-0119 ALH Dawnalia Drive
�+
COORDINATES: CHECKED BY: c A R O L I N A Mecklenburg County 7
35.205296,-80.917128 AVH WETLAND SERVICES Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Prel imi nary Wetland InvestigationWrcGIS\Figure7_Fema.mxd

/I/
A \
\� /
vllll�llr
\\ I
v
Legend
1
Q Project Limits (13 ac.)
— — - Intermittent Stream
I Perennial Stream B Perennial Stream
744 1f Roads
/
Tax Parcels
ODP Data Point
I
A SCP Stream Classification Point
< Indicates Flow
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG
Photo Location and Direction
COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2021.
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED
IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND MAPPED USING ASUB-FOOT CAPABLE GPS
200 100 0 200 Feet
UNIT BY CWS, INC., ON MARCH 15, 2022. JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT
BEEN VERIFIED BYTHE USACE.
SCALE:
1 inch = 200 feet
DATE:
3/15/2022
�+
y A R O L I N A
Jurisdictional Boundaries
FIGURE NO.
8
CWS PROJECT NO:
2022-0119
DRAWN BY:
ALH
Dawnalia Drive
Mecklenburg County
COORDINATES:
CHECKED BY:
35.205296,-80.917128
AVH
WETLAND SERVICES
Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland InvestigationWrcGIS\Figure8_JD.mxd

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment B:
Agent Authorization Form

DocuSign Envelope ID: 7E4FDD81-DOBA-4DO5-A814-E2D56031EACA
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — Wilmington District - Regulatory Division
AGENT AUTHORIZATION
I. PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION
Site Name: Dawnalia Drive
Property Identification Number(s): 148308117, 14308121, 1438123, 14308125, 14308126, 14308127, 14308129,
14308131,14308132,14308133
I, the undersigned, Frank Forte ,hereby authorize Meean Bollero , to act on
my behalf in all manners relating to all dealings with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the project and
properties listed above, including taking all necessary actions for the application, processing, issuance, and/or
acceptance of a Clean Water Act and/or Rivers and Rivers Act delineations, determinations, and/or permits. Any
and all acts carried out by Meean Bollero on my behalf as it relates to this project and properties
shall have the same effect as acts of my own.
pocuSigned 6y:
Siyna ure
Date
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area
subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies, and the public, and may be made
available as part of a public notice as required by federal law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the approved
jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website and on the Headquarters USACE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the request for ajurisdictional determination cannot be evaluated nor
can a jurisdictional determination be issued.
January 2020

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment C:
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
(SAW-2023-00367)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2023-00367 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Charlotte West
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor:
Lucern Capital Partners
Mr. Frank Forte
Address:
218 Broad Street
Red Bank, NJ 07702
Telephone Number:
732-515-3586
E-mail:
frank.forte(&lucerncapital.com
Size (acres) 13 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Taggart Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050103 Coordinates Latitude: 35.205296
Longitude:-80.917128
Location description: The project is located along Dawnalia Drive, south of the intersection of Dawnalia Drive and West
Boulevard, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC. Refer to Figure No. 3, Aerial Map, dated 03-10-2022.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The waters have been
delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. The approximate boundaries
of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated 3/15/2022. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of
impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a
preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they
are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable
action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the waters
have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be used in the permit evaluation process.
Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA
jurisdiction over all of the waters at the project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable
permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able
to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can
be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waterson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish
this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by
the Corps.
❑ The waters on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. The
approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly suggest you have
this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey

SAW-2023-00367
will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in
the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory Official
identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Meagan Jo llv at [phone] or
K.M.Jollvnus ace. army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 02/24/2023.
D. Remarks: None
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
PHILIP.A. SHANNINgUSACE.ARMY.MIL
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: _
Date of JD: 02/24/2023 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable

SAW-2023-00367
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
Copy furnished:
Agent: Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
Ms. Megan Bollero
Address: 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone Nmnber: 757-576-6433
E-mail: megan()cws-inc.net

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Lucern Capital Partners, Mr. Frank Forte File Number: SAW-2023-00367
Date: 02/24/2023
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
❑X
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx
oil& Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL olkLECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
MR. PHILIP A. SHANNIN
Attn: Meagan Jolly
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
Charlotte Regulatory Office
CESAD-PDS-O
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST, FLOOR M9
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8803
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
PHONE: [phone]; FAX [phone]
EMAIL: PHILIP.A.SHANNIN(a USACE.ARMY.MIL
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15-day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunit to participate in all site invest] ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Meagan Jolly, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Philip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 02/24/2023
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Lucern Capital Partners, Mr. Frank Forte,
218 Broad Street, Red Bank, NJ 07702
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Dawnalia Drive, SAW-2023-
00367
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project is located along
Dawnalia Drive, south of the intersection of Dawnalia Drive and West Boulevard, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, NC. Refer to Figure No. 3, Aerial Map, dated 03-10-2022.
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES
AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.205296 Longitude:-80.917128
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Taggart Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
®Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 02-23-2023
® Field Determination. Date(s):02-24-2023
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION
Site Number
Latitude
Longitude
Estimated
Type of aquatic
Geographic authority to
(decimal
(decimal
amount of
resources (i.e.,
which the aquatic
degrees)
degrees)
aquatic
wetland vs.
resource "may be"
resources in
non -wetland
subject (i.e., Section 404
review area
waters)
or Section 10/404)
(acreage and
linear feet, if
applicable
Stream A
35.20536900
-80.91635000
502
Non -wetland
404
Stream B
35.20455200
-80.91698200
744
Non -wetland
404
1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the
review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request
and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after
having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when
they may be appropriate.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide
General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction
notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general
permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AID for the activity, the permit
applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit
authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of

jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before
accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit
authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being
required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an
individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other
general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and
thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including
whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5)
undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without
requesting an AID constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6)
accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking
any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD
constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by
that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction
in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative
appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or
a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit
denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an
administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether
geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an
official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that
there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S.
on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could
be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items are included in the administrative
record and are appropriately cited:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Figure 8, Jurisdictional Boundaries 1"=200' (03-15-2022)
N Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. Datasheets: DP1 (03-15-2022)
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑Corps navigable waters' study:
❑U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data:
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit RUC maps:
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Figure 2, Topographic Map Charlotte West, NC
(2019) 1"=2000' (03-10-2022)

®Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Figure 4, USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County 1"=1000' (03-10-2022); Figure 5, USDA-NRCS Published Soil Survey of Mecklenburg
County, Sheet 6, dated 1980, 1"=2000' (03-10-2022)
® National wetlands inventory map(s). Citename: Figure 6, National Wetland Inventory 1"=1000' (03-10-
2022
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
® FEMAIFIRM maps: Figure 7, FEMA National Flood Hazard Man, 1"=300' (03-20-2022)
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Figure 1, Vicinity Man 1"--MOO' (03-10-2022); Figure 3, Aerial Man
1"=200' (03-10-2022)
or ® Other (Name & Date): Attachment C, Consultant -provided photovage (03-21-2022)
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
® Other information (please specify): NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 SCPl/Stream A;
SCP2/Stream B, SCP3/Toyograyhic Crenulation (03-15-2022)
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps
and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
t-�
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
02/24/2023
Signature and date of person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
impracticable)1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established
time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action.

/I/
A \
\� /
vllll�llr
\\ I
v
Legend
1
Q Project Limits (13 ac.)
— — - Intermittent Stream
I Perennial Stream B Perennial Stream
744 1f Roads
/
Tax Parcels
ODP Data Point
I
A SCP Stream Classification Point
< Indicates Flow
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG
Photo Location and Direction
COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2021.
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED
IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND MAPPED USING ASUB-FOOT CAPABLE GPS
200 100 0 200 Feet
UNIT BY CWS, INC., ON MARCH 15, 2022. JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT
BEEN VERIFIED BYTHE USACE.
SCALE:
1 inch = 200 feet
DATE:
3/15/2022
�+
y A R O L I N A
Jurisdictional Boundaries
FIGURE NO.
8
CWS PROJECT NO:
2022-0119
DRAWN BY:
ALH
Dawnalia Drive
Mecklenburg County
COORDINATES:
CHECKED BY:
35.205296,-80.917128
AVH
WETLAND SERVICES
Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland InvestigationWrcGIS\Figure8_JD.mxd

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment D:
Impact Drawings

0
Z
Z -
p 3A n —
r _
O X
C
T Z m
r
m
v
m
z
v

r
' D
t11 11
oil NEW�
r
m
G)
m
z
v

v
CA) _0 N rt
o O
m Z D N -.A.� W�
O `/ al W
0 rt
o O D o
rt /
z O 0) 0)rt /
CD
PROPERTYLINE
o z
�M
Z D m
n p _0 v v D /
N
z (D �. n
p f?o �
° /
N 2 v (D /
mol
/�O
o / °
T_
m p
� � m
D
Z
/ D O
I r �
TpB
i v /
\ TQ
TpA
® � � rpe
U v U) U)
W 0 N CD ;um
roe
rn N N W a
O OO
rn N
Z _0 _0D
V CD CD CD
> I r
w r_
O m
CD CD
n � �
3 3 A
m 0
m _0 _0z 3
m m n o 0
a o 0 0 ,--r n n z m
c m m z ^ ^ ^ m\m
a g m T z m Q x
m m CD -0 \ m p
z m m C m p
p (CD
o �
nu
$ •� x ii C)
55 =

mm
O
oz�
�yCcp m
Oz�
00O
D
g
zmODD
Om
Z
Noz��
3�
z
O
D
NO
Z
O
O O
O0
m Cd
D
Z
0
D
O
a
z
m
D
Nm' D
m
O,
m
0
aim
N Cd o
O Nv
N m
co I
m c
O
co
m
Z
1a
70m0
2
Z
O
m
O
D�
��
z
o � 0
O Dm
�I+zN
m N z m
g aOO�
O _ o D Z
O D
2< m
D O
O O
D
r
a N
0 0

o�
z p
?! N D
N w D
m w � Z
r
0 0 D
m
z
c
W O
r z 'D
Z D
D
0
� N
z
m X
m
O
r
'mA
V+
m
m
m
CA
O
a)
D
' D
O
z
z
O
z
O
z
o
Z
z
z
o
O
C A
N
D
Z
o�
N
O
O
z
o
MO
c
z z
G C
m
D
O
(�
a
m
x
N
r
a
o
r
C
0
C,
I�
I
N
O
JO
N
-
T
r
m N 0
O
" Z N
�
o0
MO
O
m
C�
pp
N
z N
o N
N
O
W
O
IX
_ 0
z
0,
O
m0
D m
0
Om
o
O
z
>>
D
z
GV0-rT.-
D
zm
� m
N C
Z
D
m o
m
o
D
r�
r D
N
O
Q
(�
y
@
L
D
r
r
�

O
V ��o
m«vgA
�'
V
m*m
�oc�°°
00
�°
ym..
KO
Ov�O,
II # A N
AAD
0 0
0m
0
N
>>
66;o
�zNNO�7
II II m -00
OD
Am
Omz
I+ NN
min^ 0
�0
z
In
ym
O OC
�an� 0 cc
Norm rti
O
mm
z0
NN
mm
ao �
m c
m

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment E:
Photopage (Photographs 1-4)

Dawnalia Drive
Attachment C: Photopage
March 21, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
4
�* � �`"� °d t a a��� - 1 may, 'yiQ• „w �� ��� , ;�
� ram" , •� � ��, y � � ���[�, .� �''i
Photograph 1. View of intermittent Stream A, facing upstream (SCP1).
Photograph 2. View of perennial Stream B, facing downstream (SCP2).
Photopage 1 of 2

NO
1gR,WV'� S i
r
'.0
s, rah
.,.� r��—yam
n
' L
f��l� 7�f��( 5 ?.r,�,.r��y�tid. z��axts�" .' _ �'t��?. • �a� w..�� 9FA � �45�� I � \ y_�.
� -
_ y .

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment F:
Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report and IPaC
Report

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
October 27, 2022
Cassidy Michaux
DPR Design
919 Berryhill Road; Ste 101
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Subject: Protected Species Habitat Assessment Report
Dawnalia Drive
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Dear Ms. Michaux,
DPR Design has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide a protected
species habitat assessment for the Dawnalia Drive project. The Dawnalia Drive project is
approximately 13 acres in extent and is located southeast of the Billy Graham Parkway and
West Blvd. intersection in Charlotte, North Carolina (Figure 1, attached).
Methods
In -office Desktop Review
To determine which protected species are listed as occurring or potentially occurring within the
project vicinity and prior to conducting the on -site field investigation, CWS consulted the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered and Threatened Species and Species of
Concern by County for North Carolina online database for Mecklenburg County'. In addition,
CWS performed a data review using the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
Data Explorer2 and Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC) database' on October 5,
2022 to determine if any record occurrences of federally -listed, candidate endangered,
threatened species, or critical habitat are located within the project limits.
Typical habitat requirements for listed species was discerned from multiple USFWS' and
NCNHP' online resources including, but not limited to, specific USFWS species profiles,
recovery plans, NCNHP's Guide to Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species of
North Carolina, and List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. United States Department
of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA-NRCS) Web Soil Survey of
' United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Field Office. Accessed October 5, 2022. Endangered and Threatened Species
and Species of Concern by County for North Carolina. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/mecklenburg.html
2 North Carolina Natural Heritage Data Explorer. Accessed October 5, 2022. https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/
3 Information for Planning and Consultation (IPAC). https://ecos.fws.gov/ipact
° U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. Optimal Survey Windows for North Carolina's Federally Threatened and Endangered Plant
Species. https://www.fws.gov/southeasttpdf/fact-sheet/north-carolina-optimal-survey-windows-for-at-risk-and-listed-plants.pdf
Accessed October 5, 2022.
5 Buchanan, M.F. and J.T. Finnegan. 2010. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. NC Natural
Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC. Accessed from https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylisttnc_counties.htmi
NORTH CAROLINA - SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS-INC.NET
Page 1 of 6

Dawnalia Drive
Protected Species Assessment Report
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Mecklenburg County6 and aerial imagery were also reviewed for potential habitat of listed
species within the project vicinity (Figures 2 and 3).
Field Survey
CWS scientists Megan Bollero, WPIT7 and June Blankenship, Natural Resource Technician,
conducted a pedestrian habitat assessment of the project area on October 5, 2022. Potential
habitats for potentially occurring federally -protected species that were identified during the
desktop review were assessed in the field for the quality of physical and/or biological features
essential to the conservation of the applicable species. Additionally, during the pedestrian
habitat assessment, areas were reviewed for applicable federally protected species.
Identification references for natural communities include the National Land Cover Database
(2011)8.
Results
Based on the NCNHP data explorer review, there are no current occurrences of federally
protected species within a one -mile radius of the project limits (Attachment A). The USFWS
lists five federally protected species for Mecklenburg County (Table 1). An official species list
has not been obtained from the USFWS Asheville Field Office.
Table 1. Unofficial List of Federally -Protected Species Potentially Occurring within the
Dawnalia Drive site, Mecklenburg County, NC.
Major Group
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status*
Record Status
Plant
Helianthus
Schweinitz's
E
Current
schweinitzii
sunflower
Plant
Echinacea
Smooth coneflower
E
Current
laevigata
Plant
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
E
Current
Perimyotis
Animal
subflavus
Tricolored bat
PE
Proposed
Animal
Haliaeetus
Bald eagle
BGPA
Current
leucocephalus
* E - Endangered, PE - Proposed Endangered, BGPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Six terrestrial community types were identified within the project area during the field survey.
These community types consist of deciduous forest, mixed forest, open herbaceous areas, a
sewer line right-of-way, and maintained grassy areas (Figure 3). Of the identified on -site
community types, the forested areas, herbaceous areas, and sewer line right-of-way are
considered potential habitat for federally threatened or endangered species that could
potentially occur within the project limits. A brief description of each species habitat
requirements and determination of effect findings are listed below by species.
a United States Department of Agriculture, 2021. Web Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. Accessed
October 5, 2022. Source: https://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
Wetland Professional in Training, The Society of Wetland Scientists Professional Certification
8 MLRC. National Land Cover Database, 2011. https://www.mrlc.gov/nlcdll_leg.php
Page 2 of 6

Dawnalia Drive
Protected Species Assessment Report
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii
Habitat Description:
Schweinitz's sunflower is a perennial herb with yellow rays and yellow centers. They
can reach heights of five feet. Populations are limited to the piedmont of North and
South Carolina. It has been listed as an Endangered species under the ESA since
1991.1 The typical habitat for this plant includes roadsides, old pastures, transmission
line right-of-ways, open areas, either natural or human -maintained habitats, or edges of
upland woods. Major characteristics of soils associated with suitable Schweinitz's
sunflower habitat include thin soils, soils on upland interstream flats or gentle slopes,
soils that are clay like in both composition and texture (and often with substantial rock
fragments), soils that have a high shrinkage swell capacity, and those which vary over
the course of the year from very wet to very dry.
Biological Analysis:
A NCNHP data record review revealed that there are no current occurrences for this
species within a one -mile radius of the project. A desktop review of the site was
conducted on October 5, 2022, and determined that the soil series that have known
Schweinitz's sunflower populations cover a small portion of the project limits, however,
these areas are maintained lawns, which are not suitable habitats (Photographs 1-4).
The forested areas within the project limits do not provide adequate sunlight to support
Schweinitz's sunflower (Photograph 5). Additionally, CWS visited a reference population
on August 16 and October 11, 2022. Based on the reference population, the plant was
approximately six feet tall and all the plant parts were readily identifiable (Photograph 6).
No individuals of Schwenitz's sunflower were observed during the site visit on October 5,
2022. Since no individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed within the
project limits while above -ground plant parts were identifiable, and suitable
habitat is not present, CWS concludes that the project will have no effect on
Schwenitz's sunflower.
Smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata)
Habitat Description:
Smooth coneflower is a tall, perennial herbaceous plant found in areas with abundant
sunlight where competition in the herbaceous layer is minimal. It has been federally
listed as Endangered under the ESA since 1992.10 Typical habitat for this plant includes
meadows, open woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and woodlands,
cedar barrens, dry limestone bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility rights -of -way. In
North Carolina, the species normally grows in magnesium- and calcium- rich soils
associated with gabbro and diabase parent material, and typically occurs in Iredell,
Misenheimer, and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is abundant sunlight,
little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g., regular fire
regime, well-timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of
s United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1991. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Helianthus schweinitzii
(Schweinitz's sunflower) Determined to be Endangered. hftp://ecos.fws.gov/docs/f`ederal_register/frl852.pdf.
10 United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1992. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Echinacea laevigata (Smooth
Coneflower) Determined to be Endangered. http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_register/fr2l40.pdf.
Page 3 of 6

Dawnalia Drive
Protected Species Assessment Report
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
shade -producing woody shrubs and trees. On sites where woody succession is held in
check, it is characterized by a number of species with prairie affinities.
Biological Analysis:
A NCNHP data record review revealed that there are no current occurrences for this
species within the project limits, or within a one -mile radius of the project (Attachment A).
The forested areas within the project limits do not provide the abundant sunlight the
smooth coneflower requires. In addition, Iredell, Misenheimer and Picture soil series
commonly associated with the smooth coneflower are not found within the project limits"
. Due to the lack of suitable habitat and known occurrences, CWS concludes this
project will have no effect on the smooth coneflower.
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxi�)
Habitat Description:
Michaux's sumac is a rhizomatous shrub. It is densely hairy with compound leaves
exhibiting evenly -serrated leaflets. Flowers are small, greenish to white, in terminal
clusters. Fruits are red drupes produced from August to October. It has been listed as
an Endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) since 1989.12 It is
found on the coastal plains of Virginia to Florida, with most populations occurring in
North Carolina. It prefers sandy or rocky open woods with basic soils, as well as,
highway right-of-ways, roadsides, or edges of artificially -maintained clearings.
Biological Analysis:
A NCNHP data record review revealed that there are no current occurrences for this
species within the project limits (Attachment A). Disturbed open areas conducive to
early -successional species are not present in the project area. The on -site soil series
are slightly acidic which is not suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac. Additionally, there
are no current records of this species within Mecklenburg County13. Due to the lack of
habitat and known occurrences, CWS concludes that this project will have no effect
on Michaux's sumac.
Tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus)
On September 14, 2022, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) published a proposal in
the Federal Register to list the tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) as endangered under the
Act. 14 The Service has up to 12-months from the date the proposal published to make a final
determination, either to list the tricolored bat under the Act or to withdraw the proposal. The
Service determined the bat faces extinction primarily due to the range -wide impacts of
white -nose syndrome (WNS), a deadly fungal disease affecting cave -dwelling bats across North
America. Because tricolored bat populations have been greatly reduced due to WNS, surviving
bat populations are now more vulnerable to other stressors such as human disturbance and
habitat loss. Species proposed for listing are not afforded protection under the Act; however, as
United States Department of Agriculture, 2021. Web Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. Accessed 09/30/2022
Source: https://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
12 United States Fish and Wildlife Services. 1989. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered
Status for Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac). http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/federal_ register/fr1601.pdf.
13 USFWS Michaux's Sumac Recovery Plan; https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/930430.pdf
14 https://www.govinf6.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-09-14/pdf/2022-18852.pdf#page=13
Page 4 of 6

Dawnalia Drive
Protected Species Assessment Report
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
soon as a listing becomes effective (typically 30 days after publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register), the prohibitions against jeopardizing its continued existence and "take" will
apply. Therefore, if a future or existing project may affect tricolored bats after the potential new
listing goes into effect, USFWS recommends analyzing possible effects of the project on
tricolored bats and their habitat to determine whether consultation under section 7 of the Act is
necessary. Conferencing procedures can be followed prior to listing to ensure the project does
not jeopardize the existence of a species or adversely modify critical habitat. Projects with an
existing section 7 biological opinion may require reinitiation of consultation to provide
uninterrupted authorization for covered activities.
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act,15 enacted in 1940, prohibits anyone without a permit
issued, from "taking" bald eagles, including their parts, nests, or eggs. Habitat for the bald
eagle includes cliffs and forested areas typically within 1.0 mile of estuaries, large lakes,
reservoirs, rivers, seacoast, and as they become more abundant, stands of undisturbed forest.
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as, the area within a 1 mile radius
of the project limits, was performed on October 5, 2022, using 2021 color aerials. There are no
water bodies located within 1 mile of the Dawnalia Drive project that are potentially large
enough or sufficiently open to be considered a potential feeding source. According to the
NCNHP database, there are no current occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the project
study area. Additionally, no bald eagles or bald eagle nests were observed within the study
area at the time of the site visit. Due to the lack of optimal habitat within the project limits and
lack of observations, CWS concludes that this project will have no effect on this species.
Summary
Based on the literature search and the results of the on -site assessment for suitable habitat of
federally -protected endangered, and threatened species, suitable habitat was not observed
within the project limits for Schweinitz's sunflower, smooth coneflower, Michaux's sumac, or bald
eagle. CWS has concluded that activities within the project area will not directly or indirectly
jeopardize the continued existence of Schweinitz's sunflower, smooth coneflower, Michaux's
sumac, or bald eagle.
While section 7 of the Endangered Species Act review is not required now for the tricolored bat,
it would be required after a final effective date of listing if one occurs.
Biological determinations requirements for federally protected species are summarized in Table
2.
15 https://www.fws.gov/midwest/MidwestBird/eaglepermits/bagepa.html
Page 5 of 6

Dawnalia Drive
Protected Species Assessment Report
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Table 2. Biological Determination Requirements Summary Table for Federally Protected Species
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status*
Effect on Listed
Species
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's sunflower
E
No Effect
Echinacea laevigata
Smooth coneflower
E
No Effect
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
E
No Effect
Perimyotis subflavus
Tricolored bat
PE
TBD***
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Bald eagle
BGPA
No Effect
* E - Endangered, PE - Proposed Endangered, BGPA - Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
A biological assessment was not conducted for this project. All biological determinations of
effect represent the best professional opinion of CWS and are not official determinations of
effect. It is the responsibility of the lead federal agency to render an official determination of
effect.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services on this important project. Please do not
hesitate to contact Megan Bollero at 757-576-6433 or [e-mail] should you have any
questions or comments regarding this report.
Sincerely,
IT&�
Megan Bollero, WPIT
Project Scientist
Aliisa Harjuniemi, PWS
Senior Project Manager
Attachments: Figure 1: USGS Topographic Map
Figure 2: USDA-NRCS Web Soil Map of Mecklenburg County
Figure 3: Aerial Map
Attachment A: NCNHP Data Review Report
Attachment B: Representative Photographs (1-6)
Page 6 of 6

l 4
/try
Ll
O�
vZ
,not
i-
350
R FV % -
5
I Central Piedmont
Co mmuniTy Coll
fHarris Campus
PAYN
WIN
a ; ,
n
9sti m F9 f ;.
T I II r Rti - ct - Reid
RY Pp5 "P��F Park Acad
'EN
r/
�!
4-1
n J
WEST BLVD
CC l J� lJ F fit==
Il1 : D
ps�l Hr tvANs ai
O
3a� L \� I 'yqM
c I1 PY�Yy
` � z
Legend
F
lP' The Art i
000" Institute Chlotte _ Project Limits (13 ac.)
Charl_ _ _ _ - -
2,000 1,000 0 2,000 Feet ---
REFERENCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE(S): CHARLOTTE WEST, NC (2019). - -
SCALE: DATE: FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 2,000 feet 3/10/2022 USGS Topographic Map
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2022-0119 ALH
Dawnalia Drive
COORDINATES: CHECKED BY: Cj A R O L I N A Mecklenburg County
35.205296,-80.917128 AVH WETLAND SERVICES Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland Investigation\ArcGIS\Figure2_USGS.mxd

IIIE
MeB
1 V\IkB UL
CeB2 4
MeD
co a MeD �'�
i�5�`e
MeD
Me
J
Q
dot
Q`� Flk��
W
Q)
Va Mont P
Q
MeD
_ EnB MID
By
a t
c
'
Q
o
MeD Fordwood Dr
E
MeB
�
MeB
Ur EnB
�y
U
e ��
e D
�
o rn
:oc
a_arkMont Dr
Ora
Shley Cr
G%
'V
s
a
ur
UL eD
$
03
CDC
CUB
�3 �ni
1
EnB
MeD
CuB
W
4�9ess
nD
MO
o WkD
a
CD
MeD
OC
'Q
EnB
CD 4byl
B kB
/\
Q
o� e(9
Gd?
Me
WkD
WkD
a
MO
m
eB
Fp
e�qG �� CeB2
CeB2CuB
Reb
EnB
eo�q` EnB
MeB
EnB
MeD
Me
I
MO
1
EnB WkD MeD
W e
- MeD
eD WkB
EnB
MeB
Me
MeD
O
MeB
MeB EnB
nD
y
En6
o;
o;
�
e
MeD
UL
CeD2
CeD2
MeB
Legend
Soil Unit Name and Description
dric Coverage (% )
CuB Cecil -Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent slopes No
11.1
eD2 B2 Q Project
Limits (13 ac.)
EnB Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes
No
23.3
MO Monacan loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded Yes
16
Roads
WkD Wilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
No
49.6
2
Total Coverage
e
1,000 500 0
1,000 Feet
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS WEB SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC, DATED
2021.
CeeD2 MeB —
C B2
SCALE:
DATE:
USDA-NRCS Web Soil Survey
FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 1,000 feet
3/10/2022
of Mecklenburg County
CWS PROJECT NO:
DRAWN
BY:
2022-0119
ALH
Dawnalia Drive
2
COORDINATES:
CHECKED
BY:
�+
y A R O L I N A
Mecklenburg County
35.205296,-80.917128
AVH
WETLAND SERVICES
Charlotte, North Carolina
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0041 Dawnalia Drive\Preliminary Wetland Investigation\ArcGIS\Figure4_Current.mxd

G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2022\2022 Consulting Projects\2022-0119 Dawnalia\PETS\Figures\Figure3_Aerial.mxd

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment A:
NCNHP

Ray Cooper, Governor
■■son NC DEPARTMENT OF
■■�■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■
October 5, 2022
Megan Bollero
Carolina Wetland Services
550 East Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
RE: Dawnalia Drive; 2022-0119
Dear Megan Bollero:
D_ Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage Program
NCNHDE-19536
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/Di rectory/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 rod ney.butler(a)ncdcr.gov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Q 121 W. JONES STREET, RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1651 MAIL SERVICF CENTER, RALEIGH. NC 27699
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

0 S
M
�a
(10
(10(10
�v
_o�
C�
ra
0
Q
�
0
�
0
0
U
N
N
@ +
N
O7
N
O7
)
'O
i
}, r6
4-
�
C
r6
_0
C
r6
M
0
n
C
_
C
0
w
w
o
0
0
w
2
@
0
0
0
0 4-
O7
ro
a
-0 ra
(a)+-
W
C
ro
C
ro
O
—
w
c
w
4- 4- 4- 4-4-J4-J 41
c c c c c c C
41
C
4-1 4-1 41
C C C
,
E E E E E E E
E
E E E
�
U
7
7
i
N i i i i i i i
i
i i i
O
@
:3
0
>, > > > > > > >
>
> > >
ro
U
N
N
> J
0 0 0 0 0 0 O
O
O O O
C
U
i UUUUUUUUUUU
Q
M
M
N-FoC l6
l6
l6 N
U U U U U@-
U U U U U U@ U
O O O O O O 4 O
U
O
u@
U U U@
O O O a-+
O
O J J J J J J (n J
J
J J J (n
c C
C'
N
N
Cx
x
(t
_
Q
U
r
m O0N
W U
O
rya > N 0 �
C Q N M
C
>,
ro ro N Ld 1 LLJ
0
0
0
0
U
@ 0 p
@
ro
CU a
a
0
@
N
C Z_
l6 i
r6
Q
@
N
C
@@ U O Z
Q
vOi
Q
U
N
O OZ
�o
E
Q
U
O
+'
rp
a
Q0-Q
O
.0
Q
C
C
C C C O
@
a
a
41
p
a�a�a�a�a�a�0>
O
>
O
>>>�
O O O
N
p
p
41 41 41 41�}
�t CU
U
UUU.p
41
-
t
-
0000000
i i E
Ln+,
2) 2) C
2
r6
Z
0
O
a
N
ro ro rcl ro ro ro
L L L L L L
,>
E
wZ
l6
UUUUUU QC
C
C C C(n o
U
_
_
a
U)0
w w w w w w 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0 0 a
o@
C
ro
a
0
r6
C
r6
C
-Y
r6
a
0
U)
>, >, >, >, >, >, U
+� +1 +1 +� +� +� U 0
U
0
U U U C
0 0 0 U ro
N
ro
J
N
:3
U U U U U U Z Y
y
Y Y Y Z Y
U
p
E
o
0O—
ro
ro
ro
ro
p
�U
U
U
a
ra-Y
�
O
E
O
E
E
a
�a
N
r6
1
@
r6
i N
E
O
C
ro
p
ro
p
@
+�
ra
c
0
C
>,
U
M>
a- ro
W
�
U
U
U
r6
L
Q
r6
C
c,
O7
@
N
NQ
a'(n� 41U
z
ro
ro
E
C
@
O
O
0c
7
�
N N
N
N N N p
_N
w
'Z
C
U ra
ra
i
ra ra ra a
U
J
J
O
�
m m m m m m oo c
C
c c c o
�
0
(%
p
C
a a a a a a+ N
0
o o o>
ro
z
n
0
0
E
(n (n (n (n (n (n U a
c c c c c cCC) 0
a
O
a a a:3
O O O m
LO �
U
O a a a a a a 0>
O
M
M
M
C)�
��
°
ro
@OOOOOO
z0000004 0
�
O
D D Dc D
0000)0
+-
0
ro
ra pU
U
UUUU
O
0 0 0 0 0 0
p
roU
�
�
�0C �0C �0CN
�U
��UUUUUUpp
�-C-C���U
@>
C
N
O
C Q
l6
O707�
C
NN
O O O O O O
0C
@
�E
0 D
X O
�
mo �mo
O
w
zC
i�Q
E U
U
0-Y-Y
0 0 0 0
M
> N .>
ro
ro 1 ++ 4--ro
ap
N
N N N N
Ua
�CDWmWm>
z
��UUUUUUWyayoyyyzyCN

V)
ro
n
N
N
O
N
>T
7
N
a
Z
U
Z
N
U
7
O
V)
N
N
O
N
L
N �
Q
O 9
U
Oo
C d
07
-O Z
(1)U
o Z
Q
C
>1
O) O
i
T �
O N
44-44-44-44-44-44-44-41
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
41
N
41
N N
-0
j m
41
l6
a-+
l6
a--+
l6
a-+
l6
a--+
l6
a-+
l6
a--+
l6
a-+
l6
a--+
l6
a-+
6 -O
rD ro
O cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
6 21
0 u
Z,
ci c
N
O
U
cy U
'
(10
c
> O
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
U
C
C
O
Ln
E
i
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
0)
(6
C
cm
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
N
@ W
N
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
c
Q O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
c m
c
+1 c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
O
Ln c
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
c>
c>
c>
c>
c
c>
C:
C:
c.>_
c
>
5
,�.,
� vS�vS�vS�vS�vS�vS�vS�vS�vS�O
.�
�o
a
0)0-
0)0-
0)a
0) a_
0) a_
0) a_
0)0-
0)0-
0)w
o Q
o cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
cp
U
2 U
ro U
ro U
ro U
ro U
ro U
ro U
ru U
ro U
9
ZYZYZYZYZYZYZYZYZYZ
O
rco9
@
U
N
6 Q
O
O ro
E
41
C:
C
ro N
C
0
N
c N
O c
@
N
N
O
ro
i
C N
i
N
i
N
i
N
i
N
i
N
i
N
i
N
i
N
ro
LL
O
-E c)Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
°1
7' O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
_0 7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
>
row
}, O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C >,
>,
>,
>t
>t
>t
>t
>t
>t
O G
E m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
.O
o
c>1
c
>1 c
>1 c
>1 c
>1 c
>1 c
>1 c
>1 c
ro
fu
0
UO E}
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0)
�o
}
}}},+_+_,'
.cm
o
p@ ro
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)O
D ro
0)o
D
xE
�Z.0)O
(O (O �'
U +-+
U a-+
U +-+
U a-+
U +-+
U z
U z
U Z
U
c O
N N
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O)
O) O
c
Q Q
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7 �
ro
ro
o
N N N
C N
N@
C N
N@
C N
N@
C N
N@
C N
N@
C N
N@
C N
N@
C N
N@
C
N>
c +�
O
l6
9
C C
ru ru U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
U
O U
2:2: Z2:
Z2:
Z2:
Z2:
Z
y Z
y Z
y Z
y Z
y Z
0
O
M
N
CD
a

m
c � � d
m � W
paned Ross Rd
0
L �
a V
pro '
m
aA
of '011+Nuay
M
V.
co
mpnk
�
�Ye
S�z
a
"Yo
Q�
lrpfl`c Sfsd�
J
x + m
O
N
CD
a

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment B:
Photopage (Photographs 1-6)

Dawnalia Drive
Attachment B: Photopage
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Photograph 1. View of unsuitable habitat for any terrestrial species, facing southwest.
Mp
Photograph 2. View of unsuitable habitat for any terrestrial species, facing northwest.
Photopage 1 of 3

Dawnalia Drive
Attachment B: Photopage
October 27, 2022
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
:� ;. ....
ZW
:$r u.� ,^i-':':. �i�;�y'. .'rY,;:.�:.3 �.'y,-eY..i' i y�.`••`^..',�}',` }' ,2'i,� :.i[[�. Jy �:��. �•
Photograph 3. View of unsuitable habitat for any terrestrial species, facing southwest.
Photograph 4. View of unsuitable habitat for any terrestrial species, facing southeast.
Photopage 2 of 3

;;��:. ••R: jF:�;.,. � . �'-�d ':`.,�; x':�T;';Z.' J4ty�'� .. ::7',I pl;�r.•. •- -- +L:-.. - y
IV
3 .Vk � •�.4� Li " y � V �� S r• �
It

10/7/22, 11:55 AM 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 t❑ the trust resources addressed in that
section. �►,
Location
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
0 04i*
i
7•
Local office
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
L [phone]
[phone]
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 1/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
O00,1\0
Foy
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 2/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM 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 ❑btained 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 ❑EFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (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).
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 3/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
2. , 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:
Mammals
NAME
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecplspecies/ 10515
Insects
NAME
STATUS
Proposed Endangered
114
STATUS \0
Monarch Butterfly ❑anaus plexippus Candidate
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https:/lecas.fws.govlecplspecies19743
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecplspecies/5217
X%%,4Nw
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata Threatened
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
Critical habitats
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 4/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
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.
Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act- and the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act=.
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.
-r
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 https://www.fws.got/programlmigratory-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/l i bra ry/col lecti ons/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-ta ke-
migratory-birds
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/defa u It/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conse rvati on-
measures.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 (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.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQO5FXM/resources 5/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
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
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/ecplspecies/1626
Black -billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https.-//ecos.fws.gov/ecplspecies/9399
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
BREEDING SEASON
Breeds Sep 1 to jul 31
Breeds May 15 to Oct 10
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25
range in the continental USA and Alaska. e"N" raw)
Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus vociferus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
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.
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
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 May 1 to Aug 20
Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 20
Breeds May 1 to Jul 31
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
Breeds May 10 to Sep 10
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 6/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
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
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
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 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( )
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 7/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
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 ( )
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.
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.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG V46 OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle +III IIII I I I 1 1 l
Non -BCC ,
Vulnerable '
I I -- — — — —
-- --« --
Black-billed { IIII III{ l I�-1 f I {..{..{-I..1..1..1..1..1..{. I..E. ,. 1 11 1 1 .1..1. I..I.A .{ .I I l
Cuckoo
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Chimney Swift i-+ I l + I I{ 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 Jill 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1' ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 fill if l
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Eastern Whip- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Jill ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 fill fill
poor -will
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Kentucky
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Prairie Warbler I I I IIII IIII I l l l
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Prothonotary 1 IIII 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Jill III
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 8/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
Red-headed IIII 1111 1111 Jill IIII IIII
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Rusty Blackbird I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIII I i l l' I I I 1111 1111 I I I
BCC - BCR
Wood Thrush IIII IIII Jill 'III 1111 1111 IIII
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
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 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 list of migratory birds that potentially occur 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 1 Okm 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.
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 in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially
occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by
the . This data is derived from a growing collection of
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 or migrating in my area?
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 9/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
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 query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps
provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. 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. "Nan -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).
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 or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating
the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
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
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 10/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
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.
Coastal Barrier Resources System 40 \O�
Projects within the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) may be subject
to the restrictions on federal expenditures and financial assistance and the consultation
requirements of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) (15 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). For more
information, please contact the local Ecological Services Field Office or visit the CBRA
Consultations website. The CBRA website provides tools such as a flow chart to help
determine whether consultation is required and a template to facilitate the consultation
process.
There are no known coastal barriers at this location.
Data limitations
The CBRS boundaries used in IPaC are representations of the controlling boundaries, which are depicted
on the official CBRS maps. The boundaries depicted in this layer are not to be considered authoritative for
in/out determinations close to a CBRS boundary (i.e., within the "CBRS Buffer Zone" that appears as a
hatched area on either side of the boundary). For projects that are very close to a CBRS boundary but do
not clearly intersect a unit, you may contact the Service for an official determination by following the
instructions here: https://www.fws.gov/service/coastal-barrier-resources-system-property-documentation
Data exclusions
CBRS units extend seaward out to either the 20- or 30-foot bathymetric contour (depending on the location
of the unit). The true seaward extent of the units is not shown in the CBRS data, therefore projects in the
offshore areas of units (e.g., dredging, breakwaters, offshore wind energy or oil and gas projects) may be
subject to CBRA even if they do not intersect the CBRS data. For additional information, please contact
[e-mail].
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 11/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the
undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge
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.
system must
Please contact the
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI)
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.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to
determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.
This location overlaps the following wetlands:
FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
Palustrine
A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 12/13

10/7/22, 11:55 AM
IPaC: Explore Location resources
NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on -site delineation to determine whether
wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below.
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 subtidaI zones of estuaries and
nearshore coastal waters. 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 lc� 0\
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.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/ANUJ4UKVLFER7JRW3DMAQ05FXM/resources 13/13

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment G:
SHPO Letter

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary D. Reid Wilson
April 14, 2023
Megan Bollero, WPIT
Carolina Wetland Services Inc.
550 East Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.
me an e,cws-inc.net
RE: Construct apartment complex, Dawalia Drive, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, ER 23-0445
Dear Ms. Bollero:
Thank you for your letter of February 7, 2023, 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
environmental.review(2ncdcr.gov. 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

Dawnalia Drive
Attachments
April 17, 2023
CWS Project No. 2022-0119
Attachment H:
NCSAM Forms (1 &2)

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Dawnalia Drive
3. Applicant/owner name: Lucern Capital Partners
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 03/15/22
4. Assessor name/organization:
6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
CWS, Inc.
art Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.205369,-80.916350
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream A 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 502
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A� J El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑A Water throughout assessment reach.
®B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
®A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
W
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
E
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o w
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
Y r
❑I
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r12
M
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
0 :5
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1 la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
❑A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
®B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ®Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ®B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity —assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Checkthe box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Dawnalia Drive Date of Assessment 03/15/22
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization CWS, Inc.
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Dawnalia Drive
3. Applicant/owner name: Lucern Capital Partners
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 03/15/22
4. Assessor name/organization:
6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad:
CWS, Inc.
art Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.204552,-80.916962
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream B 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 744
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 8 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ®A� J El
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ❑Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ®Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
❑A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
®B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
❑A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
®B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
®A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
❑B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ®B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ❑C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
®A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
❑J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
❑A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
®C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ❑No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach)
(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
W
❑F
5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
E
❑G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o w
❑H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
Y r
❑I
Sand bottom
❑C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
r12
M
❑J
5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D
5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
0 :5
❑K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E
Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
1 la. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
®A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
®B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
❑C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ®No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ®Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ®Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑Salamanders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ®B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
❑D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
®A ®A ®A ®A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E ❑E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ❑E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ®B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ❑C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity —assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ❑Other:
25b. Checkthe box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft INC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Dawnalia Drive Date of Assessment 03/15/22
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization CWS, Inc.
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW