20230604 Ver 1_RLS WQEP PCN Cover Letter and Supporting Docs_20230425

WILDLANDS
F N G I N F F R I N G
MEMORANDUM
TO: 401/404 Permit Reviewer
FROM: Ian Eckardt, Wildlands Engineering
DATE: April 25, 2023
RE: Pre -Construction Notification - Supporting Documentation
ROBERT L. SMITH PARK WATER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
Charlotte, NC
SAW-2022-01493
On behalf of Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (CMSWS), Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands)
is submitting a Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) for the Robert L. Smith Park Water Quality Enhancement
Project (WQEP) (formerly the Little Rock Pond WQEP) in western Mecklenburg County approximately seven
miles west of center city Charlotte, NC in the Catawba River Basin (HUC 03050101). CMSWS proposes to
reconstruct an existing in -line pond on a portion of the county owned Robert L. Smith Park. The existing pond
dam is compromised by an unstable, eroding outlet channel that has developed through the earthen dam
and lowered the pool elevation. CMSWS seeks to retain and enhance the pond which provides a public
benefit in the form of pollutant removal and flood control. The project will reconstruct the dam
embankment, install associated outlet components through the new embankment and install a forebay at
the upstream end of the pond. Project construction involves unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources and
seeks Regional General Permit (RGP) 201600163 (Charlotte Stormwater Services) and corresponding Water
Quality Certification 4508485. The following supporting documentation is provided with the PCN application:
Supporting Documentation Table of Contents
1 NCDWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request..........................................................................................................3
2 Figures (Vicinity, USGS, Existing Conditions, Soils, NWI, & Aquatic Resource Impact)....................5
3 Site Photographs............................................................................................................................12
4 Construction Plan Sheets...............................................................................................................16
5 Agent Authorization Form & Figure............................................................................................... 47
6 Agency Correspondence (NCSHPO & USFWS)...............................................................................50
7 Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination.......................................................................................86
8 NC SAM & WAM Assessment Forms.......................................................................................................96

Please do not hesitate to contact me at 704-332-7754 or at [e-mail] should you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
Ian Eckardt
Senior Environmental Scientist

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
NCDWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Email

Ian Eckardt
From: Ian Eckardt
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2023 3:20 PM
To: '401 [e-mail]'
Subject: 401/Buffer Pre -filing Meeting Request
Please fill out the following information:
Project Name: Robert L. Smith Park Water Quality Enhancement Project
County: Mecklenburg County
Applicant Name: Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Services (authorized agent Ian Eckardt, Wildlands Engineering)
Applicant Email: [e-mail]
**Please note that multiple projects may be submitted within the same email by supplying all the above information for
each project.
***In the event your email is not allowing auto -responses, please save a copy of your sent email for your records and if
necessary use that copy in application/form submittal.

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
Figures (Vicinity, USGS, Existing Conditions, Soils, NWI, &
Aquatic Resource Impact)

T6l
0501011
03050101,160040 f1
kit 'N•�II�► �!
+ I k
03050101170015
S'tn:ES.
r7f1
Pine Island
Country Club
u
ra
m
Ln
j US Naiivnal
v': Ii -.Y.i to r
0305010116005011
•
RP —,On LiNd
��-
�L
ii �0,
i' m
3erryhdl I P
Nature r1,�
'ra aar,,a 40
p aw Creek
�e
V
t, e0dam Cre
03050 1 el 17004 0
je CO.
x
0,7
A�
I r7� _
L11f4 ^`a
Mr C 03050101170020 �pr�
�l�Ily '¢
LEI
a
�yetrti riy"7 OsanGh
C:un� Gad`
Paw 0 eak
rt L Smah
nal Park In
010117 003i., �ec 5`an`h
r�
1
1
I
C harbtia
L Du7las Ine I
UL
Airport
f
iJ
�i
l
C he mw4a
�a
j
p
Aj Qr Ir
1
791 r.
.�.t'1�,a562gr�e Dal~
���en.Coty ��15'Fitt«�t'Gs�
i)r
S
AIV! ghany
3�
'F
•-
ong'Vd
l7 ��
03050103T02002&*
ti a�oLna
Club
L':—'-: County Boundary
i — ! Hydrologic Unit Code (14-Digit)
_ Project Parcels
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
W I L D L A N D S 0 0.5 1 Miles Robert L. Smith Park
E N G I N E E R I N G i i Water Quality Enhancement Project
Pre -Construction Notification
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Mecklenburg County, NC

Q Project Parcels
r I Assessment Area - Verified jSAW-2022-01493j
�- -
�� Additional Assessment Area - Unverified
Site Coordinates
az
a�I1C1:: 01 �j1
=1
OLJ
40
Project Location
Latitude:35.254212 �- r
Longitude:-80.959249
High
ii so
' V f
Mountain Island Lake & Charlotte West
s USG5 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangles
�. Z - y
14-1
Figure 2: USGS Topographic Map
W I L D L A N D S 0 350 700 Feet Robert L. Smith Park
E N G I N E E R I N C+ I I Water Quality Enhancement Project
Pre -Construction Notification
Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Mecklenburg County, NC

pw
DEM%aa
l�

IZ
-I a
zW
�Z
a0
AZ
i�

M7
w
CL
r�

J

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
Site Photographs

- 4-
ems, ` ' �{e � 7'�i[%^'. • �.' � � ,,..M,s, "` tl
Ael
tk
tj
L �
'Ptf� s
I lit
u r`
` ,�' �l� ems. '" "'�'�1•. .;:s�� '`L"�"}�� �:. �i � '
-
' s >r -ram �'a`� � ,� �_ j > � `iGF�r � �' � � :� � u w ,��`: t" t �F�i►

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
Construction Plans

!,
y
t
6—
�
^ Q e G _
9 9 e S y - - - 9 - 5 - - - - 9 9 $ = iy a 'e e e 'e
a•
_
N�
u
who
Gn
v� w
z
z
�N
z
Ito
64
V7
�
ry ry
Y
w i
❑ 8 a �
i
llVZVz�e!!j Z � V
0.
`a y.

SOW:)Wallo{1ogO hails 41V ISO] mg
MgMB
'UK%5 �
ss��
•
1 9 a ON asNa�n
bIZBZ ]N'aJ.IA'IiMU
an[aarvooa�ui occ9
71id "JNIN33 N[�JN3 NNOtl �'ISAV�
+' _,,,
-�� •,, ................
d1 m~dj�g'`;
�e ;N;
l
�Z 30 [ .L�3H5)
YG
Y
l naroxd mawaaNvxua
A LI Ivna Ha LVM
AHYd H.LIWS "I IH390H
Z
�xs
�
b
Ec
0
171
Pg `O6 sQ�o:,
_�gQEE
e3
$.
960yy.�
ivau`�e
jig
x
j V3
G
o
2
R.
.a<m.. .......000000wwwwww
ohm18 'a
N.
_ -
O
- €a <aryo�
_ _ _wz
oww�w z
- - `zJ - z.G
awo m _ "�o - - a
<� o�� _ ogw "a �� _
��
�mW=a"sox�a �rorc £ao w aer N o" N - U �' m�= zuwso� - -�
zoN£=E - - Z_pWWV Q - Z
P
_'z,
az p--Vp-
��
_
_- - - op3w _
a - Qazo Q 3=oQ000= w�U _ -
14 p - �
- - _ z�pa
o F o= w p z� �=e moapoo -- $_= w£ om= p _ €0 3 �36 =
Co-
__
vi Yid _ `a mao- --" _ -
���€�a�=� LL�r °�=��N qg _w K a= =S< -
'!_ ¢ a Q - In -o2woo�
„gym �£�` -N - p�p a€000p�m�w N pW`�p - sow
_ aa>
-�io`az��a�wws Z SUN S'
_ - Z W =-
O W N a�w3 z` oQoo - a N i Q -
r w �`- - - mz� - x
U €N� sV N serf J 6 p J _rc�oroo�o a 'a
. rc a Zo�aaarc rc a K rc- u=oa F u - -'ate o�wpowao a u� o X wpapo L o Q
�3—�k'o N z? �F-

ZOZBZ ON'a11DNDUOlaai1S U1615D3009
r,'``
�lY 'WHLVMWHOIS�/
•
bIZBZ ]N'aJ.IA'IiMU
an�aa rvooaaui xct9
71"Id "JNN3d N[�JK NLOtl �'I9AVa
•
b"•••••
�° ..".^'xrb`�
�<� b�:`c
we
� � �si�>
������.���.•�
'�� z ���Hs�
t rt U'�,Y�i�1la1
S�.LOu l�¢.11V5✓
�40
edaM
laaroaa cNaWa�utlsu�
Atltld H.LIWS "I ,LriBflOH
ixexs
a �,"",,
��
�„meiu„n,
�_.
", ..
I
� tli o 0
a mmg w�zo�E
9ioa
�g �� oo�apFQo
mx 3`F o 'seox
M .oC�m
A -
PH
-
b

' rrezan'via _ (Z30 T L33FIS)
�mwY wsatoN asys�r�
ZOLBZ JN'a1loNoyJ laaa154161so3 009 enisaN[�i`adeO rvoo�i�av °'ki""`• C�
..�swaN.aw Ae.m. TI"Id'�NNM-79P va 'W,"= S3,LO,1I IO`JJN
HIM
/ / YJams
„ h�
. vxu.�. ra
"K •.•...•^".'Alltld H.LIWS "I ,Lri890x '."10"
IS i Lk
e
iov°p
v °w c6v o cE
$ W6T4@oAQ mid „" oo die BSc 5-`-v m cb a8E A o�
4� i^ v
`� ac SE s-$9' ycC� oq p'a m °a3°o_ E as QA ga W
aio«S.
Eaos_ _;8�c2 w- uy ` cm�•"v„ B��
m�o
�«
Eu�o�2°F�E6psc 6§^gOLe3 e9 g"o EE EAv�
E, En-g 3� um�" End "no zy timm c'O� „
..°'eq, rc o c �o u �e°a
g qi p J?tr a'�° 215
°> s 3: o E.P°E
E Bg 3a"EEcu E3a WAo-`L-'�o`eu
�� 3 5 g •' w - ° - `c 3 S e � E - � _ � E � o w „r
S NI
y ry E `o341c91
E E3.;
_ - a S E � �
c E E£ vm 9aE
a
".ii E m� Elm u m m9 A c c mew ym �gd a -" B $ <
"E cw�,� E �' �E S,
_ c v
E _ '¢ ` E-n'� Sizr a' - Ea r x a�c`'p, dial F�
42
`eE0 N' av�
w E e
o C tg
a ��'•'° F y:' E ° a $ a „ a a a m v 3 _ a E''
so�° S��ORo m3a =�za�
E-:
�;_s2 9a __�AnE IOI
N
E c n o
%E$ N' o tc„; •a �' §E „ c°° �'-Y. d; O
e oF"�3't aw �av� iao 38=vrII
c L3' n aN ohm =N H� 09 u �a m E c_ - "o
v-O°° o" p q 3 ;a� -'fieN � ';q�v v _ter r-i
=Eg °°` �WiA tZ'fl an' pcAP'•�.Ei -Ev "w.c9= _
n - • z" i: 9 3 9 s� n a` w 8 'o o` a � o c�`'
E-t
�W
V
z
e
�
�Ey3yi L�
®�crL.^
3=v
oEiea'"'c�
`15 t;
'21E uo�LL-
a jig `rev
E
E
5o�gEa Ye,
3o c.E
c
gc - _
s 2
ppE_Hi�qEo,
u'�+e
z 'cry'=�3
zo
� c
ov
�am
�
��o.
°dgi
pZ mSc���
s
�
•�=
a.r
<v ��$
2�_
E E�_Ee n_
ainp
�
G
�
�
amp
� °i
g•• nm v �n
�F Ev baE
zm

ZOZBZ ON'a11DNDUOlaai1S U1615D3009
..•mw:naw..w.vr � /
'a VM
WHoys
1IZAZ �N'H.LLO'INYHJ-.
enlaa rvooaaxv i�Aty
s�3*•.......•d tom:
•
(ZgOZ.mms)
SA3.LIL`lO1'Ra10✓✓K
b£
W5
.a mea
JBfOid LN3W3JNHNa
L931.VM
31HYd HUBS "I 11139011
i.aaxs
- e
i
a
`e
e�� MUM
plgyy nhn
63�'3
neE� a�
in
b- E 1EE1 Tb U
a s eg d E ps
gn1 W
11W W
oz E m 3 •LL a WE E?«
c d v i .a vat a c Eo' 8
C aQco
IN
"w5A nv � E�EA c�
vmail� av_w=
AC`o
u
�d sit fill!
_
t° 'o� QEc � yc
__ ^ t _ ms
oZ $n.
�ry
m cr n I E r ill/V�
G p3E e�N �� EN d!i- o Pi 4i _i yes U
C �212 w E°n ;� y j 1q2; a a -a
wovwm aE-aE c °°EE �Y. a„ ewSIR
U
m .r
�m m ; e s n
�W Lip
g g S
ra
all 1!I
o yea
W a3i v E t
QaL $v as E f-i
g.aa ���9' v
lie a1A 'Eats
m
m
1 ; „ a if
s - m v °
E HIM m b^ 5 3 `° v
5 a A a >
A tl ^_
`m v` -' E a ' v
11 1 X R E S
o HIM
Millis
0`"3 .Eggs: c�s
H SLL:FEO rc kkgg �3 �o�gS,i§s�s��i$Qa V�6a
m8x39vy9�o�E�.��=
aS�d3`°E�uO
a� 2
�
�
WM8°gs�
mini NEE
5»
E u S a
��a£�$��
EBg2
g8g�
�
ges�
m
an
�.8'�f
�s�'W
•
ME
8 E�Bg®���
W'
S
�E
42€
g9
vE
y`a
c
�€���
a C3EbLa
%
�Ejaci
a��„v
a uiu Nd
ca8
_
�
s��r`E
88 S3 "zoo
$
i 'E 58LL
��s
aepga.g'a
gd.MOM
�P■�Eg:e
�i55
�s��
�$�
Al
-
n
_
$ 3s,°x�
$� � E
8� SOS
E�sd a
a.- 6��
a3 ��f��a
w
� a _ecco�°
n a
BEe��
�9Lp�s`
Ees tF
!°B SE•
c `" _ a 9 yEV
t.,
a^
o- �
a^
a
�FOJ
tFp
`S a trot°Ogb
d 8
�a3g=o88icMt
�y;gE�
$
$��8
Y �P S9.
5P �9�5

ZOLBZ JN 'allouo4J laalS 4J41%113009
_�
IHaIAl�1L��r
IS
Yn
1119(rd ON9SN3Jil
i1l8Z JN'd.LLOTtlYF1J
3ncaa rvooagxe oE�9
,,.••... •, .,.
€,3:-'�:""`''�+••,
- iJJJ a
•"..'.".":.'
Q Ao t 17IRS)
SNOI.LIQNO:)`.)KIZSIX3
�£
eo
JJBfONd ,1N3 W3JNtlHNB
Miltld HIIWS'l J11dE011
"` •'�
I I.
I
I I
/
\
00
00
I
— — V
r6r Wiz pp
z
w
I s
T
oS '
o2
�
a�°*gA
�€ m�S�d�i
J >w
"see
2m:
yo
e, R9
o
PIPS
uH€os
ORD
1 / \

� �°
+e
li�a
IMD ON9SN3JT1
w^"' ^".,.,,
Q 3Q z 1HARS)
ZOLBZ JN'allouo4aa� J llS 4141503 009
� +ew
uxrtl
J��•�.v3vAsmai� axm3nvo
.
Jm~�,
SmoliiQNO� DNU Lsrxa
Y L
io
HUM um
•
SS
,1J3fOad1N3W33WRN3
.� «,
W ��ZS /� /
Zv
a3ya
•
�^...��.o.�•
xmva H.LInb
a07j
13 �
1
11111111111VV\V0AVAA�AAAA
� f1�1A111VA1\11VA VAAvAA �Av\� � �� _�

�o �imi� auoTuv (z Jo [ .LaHNS) b£
ZOZe uouo a 41v_3co9 %Vito�� i� axminvo />` "" �. NV7d'IOHLLK03NOISO'dg IasVHd
ft
w=,?� ,LJBfONd ,LN8W3JNtlHN3
A.Ll']Vnb NBitlM 8
a� ^„ NHVd H.HWS "[ D1880H 3=Hs
Q B
//
/ / / // / 1 // ✓/ /✓ // // ' ✓/ �.08A
/// // / /f //// //! f// /�/ // !/r"$€ / /�✓ ���800�,✓r�/ // it Jii 1 g li / I I I II I/ �I I I
M.-M.
/ / / / / ! ! / / / ✓ / / / r/�?/ /_� �_ / / Gad / / /
/ / / / / / ✓ y ! / / / / / f / / sz9 /
/ / / / / / ✓f // // f/ f! /' // r/ / �r / l_x l l WSW // / / /
// / // // // / ! ✓ ✓ / / / r / f �r / + I/ ¢tn / I hoc / / � /
/✓ / / / // 1 / r / // ! /✓ /✓ g I / / / ✓ /
Big
Az Ile
" X//
65
i
f� // r/ /✓ a/✓/ f /'ri i'm8
=ZG
/ 2 0� /
✓/ ff ✓ i g / , / / / / / ✓� �e=o aim s_
// f✓ ✓f fog. �� , ✓ / / / / � /\ °� � ���€ �a���=� ��
✓ / / / / l /_ / l l / w d � r ,� 1

ZO K :)N '04Ouo40 P-4S qW P03 009
yWaim
ss"'..
•
.bWw
YI�Z10 aON SSMMn
JN'S.LLOltlYF1J
JTId'�JNSdSSNL9hIS N1fOU 179AY9
..
aYa-a+yW
i 4'%a':
inn eor
w / o o § a /ice �s'j lillIt
lll_
/A
Og N�zsc//
N r
p9O
g+ od
/
awa 1 i /
1/I !
I 15• 11/o
1
I I Gay h�� i�•`I�� / / a"
\ \ w$ \1 , ° a ; �9 V I I I I 1 I 1 / i I (s= � IA p' •JI
g
HM
I-
\\\ Iszl �� i� I g� ��c����l I I I I !��• �I� 1 1 1
(��
er
sH I 1 i mE
Al
��9
F W
VI
(ZdoZl33Hs
>vvridrioulNoa
rC
NOIS013 - T 3SV"H d
JBfONd IMM31 VEINA
Al17tlf1a'd3ltlM
b
NNtld H11WS' 1 J.H311021
`gga' a
u�

wwn rIMDMalyompJ NVId 1081NOD hL
ZOLSL DN'Oµoll IOa15 WoP03 W9 3nra0 rvooasxd oE�9 ?3i'oy "v'
801dtltl ��'Nlorr�ixoaxnv� N015083"Z3SVHd
iJdFOHd ,LNB W;�JNtlHN3
�ZS' A.L17tlf1a N3itlM 01
.ce ssva '""� \��+Il ••" """•'" NHVJ HIIWS'l J.H3110H
i
erg J l 1l l / / l� I / % o s o m
Wes`= ! 1 1 / / / / �i/ J/ / s e
/(1
r9¢€ I11/1/, 11 I II I I 1 1\ 1`
€0 5�189
I�`'$glfll I II 1'�l
Well 11 I I 1 1g!/
AN" \ y V\ V V A\ v v v v v
f II I1/Ill f / _ 1 \\ \-\ �� &sW \ \
jR
•, VV9
I 11111 I I / / o � 1\ �• � 11�� � ' I_ 1 1 1 \ V A \ � � . A \
z L l."Y;
ffifaa
�I
� AIvA11 li•,���?��� �r ���� � �1`: I1 1 I I I 1 v �'� A A v��1
HO -\ �\ 1
/e// / RII
spa
/. 1 l� 11 \ \��, \\�� \ � \ e,a �� -�a \ �
��`IIVAA
1 5
as

�WWw
1d a ON ssmm 1
t IZBZJN'd.LLONIRIJ
.,.
,w^ .. ,.,.
"".
Nv'1d 1OWN03
r�:
ZONZ JN 'allouo4J 1-4S qW F03 009
¢¢ane aav
�''�'tltle
anraa rvooagxd oE�e
�'1'IdONIV�J9Ni'.NI3 NNOU l'I9ANJ'/am
�' * .,.
w�_
NOISON3 - f 35VHd
ft�
IS` "=
133FOLd INM3HN3
JNtl
?IUVJ HIINS "I 1i1380I1
aaHs
IN
m'IRV A"
J I! l cps
I
1 1
W A 1��VAl IgVAA -
Ilzal��liri+l
gale€I llll 1 1P//
I I IIII +�gl JiII; /� 1 A\ � \ s e
I I I I I Ill sl /11, ri� vA \ V MW sv \ v v v v
\\
/ J����j Ill IllJ�" ///! A_�i��• A s� I ��� \ \� \ "vV
as A\ A v v
91 ��� \ \A A V A\ \\ V AV A� AV A A V A V V AV A \
you,
v
AHA
Alf
,j��//i/i' A,
lilt Al
�J -�•r �i l�� � 1� 1 � h � \ 2 � v A A A
l�J // gs g 0Z
3--0'
k II f
€I Ole 1 s 1 t I',',
I § 1 1 1 \ A \ \\
I I I \LIr�
III Illl
�_ _ } —�� �✓ �� J/ of I '�h �� � A A � � A I I ��
N_
Oliva
¢f All"/ /fj Rug
� /� I
441

ZOLN ' BZ Jallouo4aa� J llS 4141so3 009
-� �«owew
�gy
IOSXrd ON 9SN3JT1
C�ENiJN'd.LLONIRIJ
3nrAo rvouagxe oE�9
JTId "JN1V319Ni�NN0a�379AV'.]
..
,w,...,,,,,
"` �"*<`'•-
;�'� <? "+W: �`=
"*""'.°.^"'•,
Nv1a r[oxiNoD
NOISOM - 6 35VHd
mE
is
,u �•e
JJBfON,dMMKOWHN3
Aj. Ivnaaa.Evm
?IHVJ HlIWS "[ 1i1d802I
Zi
Ls
'""
11 � I IIIIII 1�1�1111
Illf 11//
�I
11�1� A\ - �
V I h�
II \1111�1��11111
J;a
���
II II Ifs
i11111
1
( f
'�
IIII II III IIIII�
II lydl j11I1 rilrl
I
Itj r
`�
�
,� � 1
l 1 1 !I
1 ll�
i
tlM
Ill flrllrll if f III i
fill lII
IIII ull ! RI 1
IIIr fillllll4l l I I 11g��
F9�s
l
Ilr Ifilll\ \
\
1 r �\VAVA\a 1
t�-

ZOZBZ JN'allouo4J 1-4S 41t, 4D9 009
-� «owew
H�y��'�
111 aoN 9sN n
zez�Nauo,mo
3'M.0-Bxe'W
7nd'��]xsaN�o Nxoax7snvo
�....�akk+<.'•
� , �W
�s�:� W" `' �
ilk
`,
.^",,•...
NV'1d'IO1f1NOJ
NO�3ON3' S 33VHd
b£
3
1e m"x
a
""
JJ3fOad, MMKONVHKA
AJ.17Vnaa'3J.VM
31HVd HIIWS 7 J IMON
�
�T5
All
I Y'l� 11 1�II1, Ili VVAA\������a
ASKII1I I
a V YtoII I \ \\ \ \
e � � I I II I'If I II�1lll I I/ l'
� I IIl I Ill l �l/ /_�
os � n �\ \ '_����;_
///
P
I I I N y pl
II IV III11111A\y�l�lll�llllll l! � // � s � vv �v\ \! I � �, 1�,;11 111 I y yl
ll K' I
/ a�'L
1
�--
•
�/ f ifs rll lI- SAU � w fo
gel wxTin
��
nj
ig
9� bg

ZOLBZ JN 'allouoit laa�lS 4141503009
-� �«owew
HUM�-ilk
C{ZBZJN i3.LL0'ItlYrIJ
anrAa rvoaagxe oE�9
'.
P3' """ak'e+d`+
��� W" "
,.,,.� o� zv
NV7d 708d,N0�
NOISOM 9'3SVIId
�E
io
JJ3fONd 1N3W3JNtlHNB
A117Vnaa81VM
Niltld HlIWS "[ 1i18802I
i�r+s
�'•'�.^",,•...
tint
> E5
wg R
l!l/l/l ✓ �� �'`'� ���� 1/ I! pi�/�z�ii��i/i�✓�i�
!� /✓///, 1�� / 91/�$�%%/l✓/l//l✓/ll Ir III I.
IIII IJ' e \ 1111� Afig VAA Vv \ v
�sgllllll� lot
s Iz�llll I fl I �\'1 \ \\ �\\\ \�\��4•,\
� � � I���IIII I I II��/!�//✓ / \ V1 �� \�AA��AAA\\�A`�,���v
III illl�f I Ilfllll\VAA\ 11'
1
I �I II I I IIl 11 \1 v\
III II l l�lllfl �/" I / vyVAA \�\� �s vv o `�$�
I I I III 1! 1l IIII III l! / / �\ y A s� \\
��i�/��, i�o��✓// /tF /. I III l _ l 1 yl�� �1 A \ V ' -
gq
i
/45,1
s
I I l k l p l�/ ✓ / ins _rt�8 1! \ -1� y+ `I y 1
IIIVIi yl 111 ✓ I roc / e� \ l 11 y rI� y��I�'iI I y I
II II1� 1 II 1 1��. ✓ �` a, � / y 1 y !1�I �I �
y
1
I II II II I I I I 1 y 1111 III 5 I I II II � I ✓ X � � / \ � ` \\ , 1 : �- 17IW I y �i y I
11 111 V�''I I Ill I 1 l 1 1 Vfaii l 'I l
v
it I
I ��.
�$—�-
ll l l _ 11111 ! Ys 1 1� 1._ Gil 6 y G g
�ga�
!r old
g
Tg
�ll II �✓��o I I A �I'' � _,I � l�v�l/ ll�fllf)� pl�ig� �� II I
QH
h�
E " Jay En e:
52
ce.65/
=zit

ZOLBZ JN 'aV1oI�w Iaa15 4161sD3 009
_- �tlM9 tit/
a/Wn
109(rd ON 95N3JT1
anraa rvooagxe oE�9"�a'e+d�,],�j•1lIN�•gl�3
]'I'Id"JN3V�J9lll'Jh13 NVOa IRSAYDa7
..,,,,,
4�i
Nt"Id NOI,Li'AVJXd
I��•Q
b£
r,1`l ��Z��w
�'1„ ��Zs � � ��
�
��.� W e- z W
merv�x eon
,1J8fOad 1N3W3JNt'HN3
All']vna aalvm
S
Aatld HlIWS' 1 J.ad&021
�`s
I I 1 (
I
_
Y
Ill
iW�v
�! v
>
/0II
o�gangst
�
fl-
�'� !
\\\\\
it
\�yG,
m

�NW� i1SBZJ.0a.VIwKJ
ZOLBZ JN 'auouo4J laa�lS 4141503009 7nrAa rvouasxe oEt9 'mays. AIV'Id `JAiI(IV2I`J �B a.LIS b4.
-� mwew 1em tl �'tld"JN3N�J9Ni'JN3 NNOAvgmV',l '/
H�y��'�`^`�"' - ,1J3fONd ,1N8W3JNtlHN3
MHOISOI., a1l'1vnaaa1vm 91
• 8 u o ,`�� ,............. xxvd 1111WS7la31108 -.
S
IF
u /// n �\ 1�Illrllrllllf I II Irfl y1yV1\\\\
rr
III
IIII�II IIIIIIIIIIIIII rIIIIi I%�!/��
IjIIIIIIIIIVIII�II� If!�i�lr//kl/! 1 yly ��`•'� ia� \�AAAAvAV�V������
�IIII�IIIII�II IaI ��I�llg/l v 44' �vwwv�vvvvvvv���.�� / i/ii,��%�i�/ii�/�///
/gii//� ji.
111 Il 11 y p y I !81 / / J ✓ �/ I �� r �f� 1!1 �° y\ I � y yl �I II 1� I �I � l
II ill�llllly�y�1�lll�+I� IIrrI II // // zo��v `� vv lvI i III li��l I��I� �.F� II y yy
YOU
1
1111
rrfl Illlllr
r rr rlr I I AVAVAvVA =d ` 8 I I
l� 1'1 l 11 I� � wool' V I
/ II
Jill
�lAl/���l�m
�g�i ���/

ZOLBZ DW-4DuD4o laa�lS 41415D3 009
'- o-*ftzw
• /
�dM^—��
�n
109(rd ON 95N3JT1
hFZBZJN'91LUTUYFIJ
anraa rvoaasxe oE�v
JTId'DNIN99NIDN9 NNOa l't9AYD
•
,,,.,,.
„, ,,,
� ak<;
=� a"dm zj&
2
z
'� N........
3'IIdQ2Id'9 Altl7d
AtlM771dS A2IVLVIlId
b£
..�
JJBfOLd LN8W3JNt}IN3
,�i[']vnaaaavM
Nxvd Hliws 'l ixaaoa
Li
p^ I e
OF'O[9=NI ryM1Ni
m
8
�
TFFF
9
D
N
O
0
0

wwe
uno-d aw ssrrsJn
61ZBZ JN 3LLOTMIJ
„.... ,.
`...0,
(Z do L IAahs)
P£
ZOLBL )W-UQNoU�
_-
�p�w
moos 4161sD3 009uajlvtA
an[na rvOaasxe oE�v
]Tld"JN3VJ9Ni'.�N3 NN0a>l't3AYD
"s
•�i d"ziG
'SK01�321S SSOLLJ.L.HNK)INVHL�A
0
Uri
WHOM
No
s;
J.JBfONd ,LN8W3JNt'HN3
A].17tlfla NSitlM
81
"
4HVJ HIIWS'I U1390H
,I
tag
O
fi
z
a
�
I
� a
'ail "I 1.
�--•
g
z
so
p
'yi
8
n Q
,01
2
I
L
8 =
8
— Y
-
Jill
m
/
_
g�
S
•8
Imp
8
i
W
R
Z
`
_
I
I
S

WUUtl9Ntl OEL9
P3(f�/`....M1°k�.....
NI �N':1 NNOa'3 RSAYD
�E3
a�:'N
<�
ZOLBZ �N 'alloNo4� 11a-�04{SS 41641-9 009
aW YLI1U�i
LL
•
Sl
ills
■
I
(z .Io z 133H5)
SNOIJ.33SSSOH3.LN3w)IvVuKA �£
A.Ll,lvflaaBi.vM I 61
?IHvd HIIWS "[ 1113110H I H$
n
°iS

wwe
tiN j as 95N9JT1
ZOLBZJN'a40PDLIJ laa�1S 41t, 4D9009
nmz�wv.uorwro
anraa rvoaagxe oc�v
ia*sy°C `.
7I4'-L'�Q �[E'M7'IIdS ANh'INRId
b£
-�
�+�.-.1-- .rows w_
=J'avnl9SwDD
N a 175nYo
HUM�''~'
�iioss�� ��
•
3`� _ ?
��� �•
JJBfOad LN3WaJNtlHN3
mrcwnMwrm �
-,'
�`"'.^",°
dll7tlfla ad.itlM
oz
wuaivan
Ae
ratldH.LIWS"IJ.ad9021
�ffi
I
at
s
/ €€g
z
3
I
—
S
�
I
I
I
\
III
3
2
\
8
e�� S
a
" E
8:
s \
HE
�a
e
I
Vie`
�o
—
---------
E
!
y
€
£
€
�
\�
1
1
in
a3
fli
3
�
i�
`
� 5
`
�
I
�z
m�
o
Es"3

ZOZN' BZ JaWPD4J 1-4s 41t, 4D9009
-� «owew
HUM �
�oys/ / /
IOSXrd ON HSfCiJTI
PiSNZJN'9J.1.0'HIYi1J
anrda rvoaasxe oE�9
ynd' txs_aNia�Hr ax'rgne�
•
,.,..,
.•,,."„
.sy.....,ey `-
_ "/ -,-s.'°
�Si- "...
vdJL3Q
ttV/tiiTIld5 xau�`�ii�wa
m£
M •e
- -
133fOHd lN3W3aMVHN3
A.L17Vfla H3iVM
TZ
n.o
"°°-ry",,,•
?IHVd 21WS"1 J.113E011
�a
—1
_
a
e3
~
z
o=
W� w
E
I xiw ei I
9
� $ B
y 9 �
gao
a
994
passes
3 a n e s n y
it
I
61
III
I�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
0

ZOLBL JN'040uoU31INN154167503 009
'� f4Nf �2
ZS� / /
iiSIR JN 3I.LOTMIJ
J'rld ".LNI1f�1N]O:N'.1 NNOaV MAVO
•
:= =Jtyl
4130I,L�HHS)
3W
STIVINGINJWAOHdI UNOd
b£
o
a
wivb
JJBfOad ,LN3W3JNt'HN8
N KtlJ HIINSHlIWS "[ N'3i8802I
1i1M
Zz
i.3a�s
�,.�. aor
I
a
•01
R
�85 ee
psp
N!
,e
p
ym`
c
O
CL
a
a
P
w
d
t—
K
S
O
iL
�
1
� ��
eoitru "
xxera xxn�Lis �r�oaaa � '
w � !
Him
6
0
�
t[
U
W
_
pl
L
y
J
O
a
a
nn =
ug
�8��I'd

wwe unvd oNas an (6 Jo Z 1:13us) VE
ZOL z DW9llouo43 laa 4s 4141503 009 9nrAa rvooasxa oci9 '�a`,�r� "
-� uew �'nH•�N]tf3�Nl�rr.I NNOax'rv3nvo "{. ° W:~" STiVER1 INAW3AOH.I II CWOJ �o
H�y�?�'�`^ Sid JJBfou.1 IN3W330WHN3
IAt y$�� �� �j..� nillvnaa3avm £Z
a.�� b.
3,nos '••.-.-.- Natld HIMS " f J.113E011
d
a3 g�
It
58 T q g93 p
�; J
III
z
III
- _
U
II
z
a€
p
2 S B
2 0 B
gg
d
J
3
�
e
r
a a
aga��
n
LA
g@ #q
kkF"
F' tl 2d
Jig
y
9a E
b� ds
�e '02
O
IN
d
d E
A of:'hg
G�Gie3
w
'lili° oa ow
a
�SBSn�CD
e�
•Mh
=B
S.
1
�
�
�3i�pa

ZOLBL �N'a11DUDU� WAIS Ul6 VD3 009
` 'I a•4Mf
�� �� /
WWn
If159rd'ON HSN3021
P1M DN'3J.IA =O
9n[MD rv00- oEz9
7f1H "J,`lIV39NISNI3 NYOU �V'I�FnY `�
„.„.,,..•„
fib �' •°°°°'°'�
�j�$' < r`'=�L.`_
::-od
-. �:.. ....., f
�� .�O �, J.��Hs�
SMVING •L1 NW'IAOHJKI (INOd.
`
Y E
10
JJ3fOHd JN3W3JNVHN3
AJ.17Vfla N3J°VM
)fNVd HIIWS •'I J.N39011
bz
w
E �
z
o
W
ol
�=
a
a
�
J
_
U
Y
Q
Z
W
z
_ _
6
J
Q
W
Cl
.�
-
J
ry
5
U
a�
ffb
o_
s
In
w
0
D,
a_
0
W
W
ro�
as
_
J
Q
F—
W
�8M
�
�`
eggcn
tl8
V1
L
Q
s
<
CD
s
�o
E�
�E
o
j§2
o2�m�J o$
p` o
s$p
k
3

's
ZOZ9Z DN 'a40PD4O 1—"s 4S q1t, 4D9 009
HaILVAPE
WHOIS
1— —
9.11
S-11VING 1N1:fW'4AOHJK1 (INOct
4XVJ HIINS7 J.H311011
s z
—Ls
--77—A --
HI
Hai
9H
-------------
F
ED
1 H a
hal
yams
HIM
j I
— ti
LYoia
27 (I
<
hum R
buy
4-
MU

■
|
%
�� §
m/��i
* f
$� �
� §
(
7§�
§ Qed
\ \!�
a� ©
-= .
@±
2i ���---.
| ,

�l
5
u� o
i l
■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
iiiiiiiiiiii■iiiii■■iuiiiiiiiiii
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
�GC3A■■■■■■■■■■
■■EMlT7■■manallooll
■■■■■■■■■
MENOMONEE
�■■■■■■■■■
i�■■■■■■■■■
■■IzE
sr�mmon■e■ee■e■
MEND■■■■■
MEN
■R
■■■■■■■■I
v■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■ME:'■■■■■■■■
L�■■■■■■■■■
t�■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■i■■11■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■�■■■■■■■■■■■
H■■■■■■■■■
.....■U■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■iEw■■■■■■■■■
.
�.......
■■■■■■■
A
O1yS
O
O
00
O
0
0 8�
QVI
o
°0
z
o
o
as
S
0
d
S
�y91 � RR�
O �8e¢-
3

®�yzz
sum«�aa
xx\/
:
a�
BJ4
�NVOI%
..
,
■«�
»wHII n'l I'd3 m.
:
�\
§
}|(
§■
��k
\� -!
g y
\] \
� m«»�.
■
|
��\//(■
|»
-
�\\
)!� �
§(| �
!�
!}
{;
«--
(7f� �\
EO 2� m
\ \I m \
pg2, mri
.
%«pace
Ti§
L-4 d§
HA 3j
z�
|}; §
!;! `

ZOZBZ JN 'allouo4J 1-4S 41t, 4D9 009
-� �«cwew
H�,L�dM^—��
�Y WHOIS
•
a/Wn
111 aON SSNnn
P[ZBZDW&uoN1RIJ
3nrAa rvoaaswi oE�v
�'nH".7N71795N1'JN3 NNOa lm3nVo
n
"'� """ '�'+�
t
�=
,.,,
S�dy�Q
�vxn.iJna.Ls
FC
YL
�.i
LJBFOLd 1N3W3JNtlHN3
A].17Vnb'dU .VM
?IUVJ H.LIW9'l J.xd&ON
9-S
1
1
1
1
1
p
✓✓O °6 O O O O §E
000 000
00 00 000 $n
O O O 00 coo
O 000 coo 0
00 00 00 00
coo 00 00 000
000 o00p00 000
00 000 00 000
O O O O O 0 0 0 O O
000 0 000 00
0 0 0 0 0 O�0 0 0 O o 0
O O O O co 0 0 0
00 000 00 000
00 000 000 0
���y o00 ood000
H21 000 00 00
000 cc
0 0 0 0
0000 .p'

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
Agent Authorization Form & Figure

DocuSign Envelope ID: D45D47D7-1AA5-4CO3-95B7-535DC526A7DF
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
The undersigned landowner or landowner representative identified below hereby authorize Wildlands
Engineering, Inc. to act as the agent in obtaining a preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (pJD) and/or
necessary permits/certifications (401/404) for the Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
on the identified property in Mecklenburg County, NC. As part of the authorization the landowner or
landowner representative authorizes access to Wildlands Engineering, Inc., the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality, and the US Army Corps of Engineers personnel for the evaluation
of the property as it relates to the project including stream and wetland determinations and
delineations.
Parcel ID:
Street Address:
Listed Owner:
Responsible Party:
Phone Number:
Signature:
Date:
05524108,05525415
N/A
Mecklenburg County
600 E. 4th Street- 11th Floor
Charlotte, NC 28202
Kate Goodman, CMSWS, Senior Engineer
Name & Title
980-293-1464
—DocuSignned by:
WG '6
EE560487C5D2417...
06/17/2022

l � �
L
a m
47 G7 G7 G7
� � I
r _
Of
Z:) 00
m O
ZZLLI
�
Y o LO
UUo
w
Lo
i
wZN
YoL('4 I 1
LO
UUO
w
� I
N
N
LL
O
O
O
O
Q�
LU
W
w
�z
Qz
LU

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
Agency Correspondence (NCSHPO & USFWS)

WILDLANDS
E N G IN E E R I N G
May 19, 2022
Renee Gledhill -Earley
State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Submitted via email: [e-mail]
Subject: Request for Review and Comment
Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
On behalf of Mecklenburg County Storm Water Service (CMSWS), Wildlands Engineering, Inc. requests review and
comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to fish and wildlife associated with the Little Rock
Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project. This project is located in Mecklenburg County, NC approximately seven
miles west of uptown Charlotte (latitude 35.254127, longitude-80.95927). Please refer to the attached figures for
a USGS Topographic Map and a Site Map illustrating the project area.
CMSWS is proposing to rehabilitate an existing pond on a portion of the county owned by the Robert L. Smith
District Park. The pond provides a public benefit in the form of pollutant reduction and possible flood control.
CMSWS seeks to retain and/or enhance the pond's benefits, however its long-term stability is compromised by an
unstable channel that has undermined and bypassed the existing pipe outlet, which could compromise the stability
of the pond if not stabilized. The proposed project would reconstruct the dam to adhere to current standards and
install a riser structure with a pipe outlet. This proposed project would also involve repairing an earthen dam on a
woodland pond and raising the water level.
The proposed project area is entirely forested, and the surrounding land use includes forests and residential
communities. Approximately 650 linear feet of stream, 0.4 acres of open water, and 0.3 acres of wetlands were
identified on site. The stream is an unnamed tributary that flows into Paw Creek. Construction of this project will
affect Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and require Section 404/401 permitting. Structures within or immediately
adjacent to the project area include sewer lines and manholes, powerlines, and residential homes.
One NC Natural Heritage Program Managed Area is located within the project area: Mecklenburg County Open
Space — Robert L. Smith Park. An additional four managed areas are located within 2,000 feet of the project area.
No architectural structures or archaeological artifacts were observed or noted within the proposed project limits
during preliminary surveys of the site. We ask that you review the site based on the attached information to
determine the presence of any historic properties.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with any
questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Kirsten Gimbert, Senior Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]
704.941.9093
Attachments:
Figure 1 Overview Site Map
Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
WildIan ds Engineering, Inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203

Figure 1 Vicinity Map
W I L D L A N D 5 0 150 300 Feet Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
%!WV E N G 1 N E E R I N G 1 1 I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Mecklenburg County, NC

At I
Mountain Island Lake & Charlotte West Area of Potential Effect
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangles - + 0 Proposed Project Boundary
r
1 ..
� 1
�- 4
MOW
ft
SL
or
t V-4;Afenburl
s �-
Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
W I L D L A N D 5 0 350 700 Feet Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
%4,W* E N G 1 N E E R I N G 1 1 I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Mecklenburg County, NC

6 � STAT£
r� Qunr-n •nog%'•
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary D. Reid Wilson
July 11, 2022
Kristen Gimbert
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.
kgimbertgwildlandseng com
Re: Little Rock pond water quality enhancement project, Pawtucket Circle, Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, ER 22-1498
Dear Ms. Gimbert:
Thank you for your email of May 19, 2022, 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.reviewkncdcr. og_v. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
�Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
{j 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

From: Kirsten Gimbert
To: "DCR - Environmental Review"
Cc: Ian Eckardt; Jeff Turner
Subject: RE: [External] Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 9:15:02 AM
Attachments: LittleRock SHPO Scooina Letter 05.19.2022.odf
ER-22-1498.odf
LittleRockPond Fiaure REV 10.2022.odf
Good morning,
The client we are representing has adjusted the limits of disturbance on the Little Rock Pond
Enhancement project located in Mecklenburg County that we previously corresponded with SHPO.
I've attached a copy of the original scoping letter, SHPO response letter, and a revised Site Map for
your review. Please let me know if you have any questions or additional comments regarding this
project.
Thanks,
Kirsten Gimbert I Senior Environmental Scientist
M : 704.941.9093
From: DCR - Environmental_ Review < Environmental. [e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2022 12:45 PM
To: Kirsten Gimbert <[e-mail]>
Cc: Sean Mayo <[e-mail]>; Ian Eckardt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [External] Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
Our response is attached. Thank you.
Best,
Devon L. Borgardt
Environmental Review Assistant
State Historic Preservation Office
109 E. Jones Street MSC 4603 Raleigh, NC 27699
E■MOM
■■■SE NC DEPARTMENT OF
"SEE
MESON NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
iSM■N
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

Please Note: Requests for project review or responses to our review comments should be sent to
the Environmental Review emailbox at [e-mail]. Otherwise, your
request will be returned and you will be asked to send it to the proper mailbox. This will cause
delays in your project. Information on email project submittal is at: NCHPO ER Project Review
Checklist
Facebook Twitter Instacr� am YouTube
From: Kirsten Gimbert <kgimbertna wildlandseng com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 1:38 PM
To: DCR - Environmental —Review <Environmental.Review(d)ncdcr.gov>
Cc: Sean Mayo <smayona gavel dorn.com>; Ian Eckardt <ieckardtna wildlandseng com>
Subject: [External] Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to Report Spam.
Please find attached to this email, a scoping letter for your review and comment in regard to the
Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project located in Mecklenburg county, NC. Please let me know if
you have any questions.
Thanks,
Kirsten Gimbert I Senior Environmental Scientist
M: 704.941.9093
Wildlands Engineering. Inc.
1430 S. Mint St, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203

CL
CL Ln c
v, = a 0
v � U
E c
� N
m m fi
w
W G
d
[9 �
a-+
(U tB
U
C
0
d
Y
LJ
0
cr
N
J
0
Vl L
A?
u'
z
l3J
6J ,Tu
1 L
040
Auj
W
a

Qu—
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary D. Reid Wilson Deputy Secretary, Darin J. Waters, Ph.D.
December 29, 2022
Kirsten Gimbert kgimbertgwildlandseng com
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Re: Little Rock Pond water quality enhancement project, Pawtucket Circle, Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, ER 22-1498
Dear Kirsten Gimbert:
Thank you for your letter of November 15, 2022, transmitting the updated area of potential effect. 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(cr�,ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
)bLkft
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
{j 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

WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
May 19, 2022
Byron Hamstead
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Submitted via email: [e-mail]
Subject: Request for Review and Comment
Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Hamstead,
On behalf of Mecklenburg County Storm Water Service (CMSWS), Wildlands Engineering, Inc. requests review and
comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to fish and wildlife associated with the Little Rock
Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project. This project is located in Mecklenburg County, NC approximately seven
miles west of uptown Charlotte (latitude 35.254127, longitude-80.95927). Please refer to the attached figures for
a USGS Topographic Map and a Site Map illustrating the project area.
CMSWS is proposing to rehabilitate an existing pond on a portion of the county owned by the Robert L. Smith
District Park. The pond provides a public benefit in the form of pollutant reduction and possible flood control.
CMSWS seeks to retain and/or enhance the pond's benefits, however its long-term stability is compromised by an
unstable channel that has undermined and bypassed the existing pipe outlet, which could compromise the stability
of the pond if not stabilized. The proposed project would reconstruct the dam to adhere to current standards and
install a riser structure with a pipe outlet. This proposed project would also involve repairing an earthen dam on a
woodland pond and raising the water level.
The proposed project area is entirely forested, and the surrounding land use includes forests and residential
communities. Approximately 650 linear feet of stream, 0.4 acres of open water, and 0.3 acres of wetlands were
identified on site. The stream is an unnamed tributary that flows into Paw Creek. Construction of this project will
affect Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and require Section 404/401 permitting. Structures within or immediately
adjacent to the project area include sewer lines and manholes, powerlines, and residential homes.
Based on a resource list generated from the US FWS IPAC website there are five (5) Federally Threatened or
Endangered Species that may be present in or near the proposed project boundary. They are the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis), the Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), the Michaux's sumac (Rhus
michauxii), the Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), and the smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata).
No critical habitat has been designated for the Northern long-eared Bat (NLEB), the Michaux's sumac, the
Schweinitz's sunflower, nor the smooth coneflower. Critical habitat has been designated for the Carolina
heelsplitter; however, the project resides outside of the critical habitat.
A pedestrian survey was conducted within the project boundary on May 6, 2022. Results of the survey found areas
of suitable roosting habitat for the NLEB and areas of suitable habitat for the Schweinitz's sunflower, the smooth
coneflower, and the Michaux's sumac. No suitable habitat was found to exist for the Carolina heelsplitter. Per the
NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) data explorer, there are documented occurrences of the Schweinitz's
sunflower and the Michaux's sumac within 3 and 5 miles of the project area, respectively. Forested habitats
containing trees at least 3-inch dbh, with exfoliating bark, crevices, and hollows in the project area provide suitable
habitat for NLEB. The project is located approximately 70 miles from a known NLEB 12-digit HUC and 43 miles from
a known occurrence as reported in the NCNHP data explorer. No individuals or populations of any of the above
referenced species were documented on -site.
WildIan ds Engineering, Inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203

WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Because the project is located within a WNS zone and will include the removal/clearing of trees, it is subject to the
final 4(d) ruling under the ESA that addresses the effects to the NLEB resulting from purposeful and incidental take
based on the occurrence of White Nose Syndrome (WNS). Therefore, the project is eligible to use the NLEB 4(d)
Rule Streamlined Consultation Form to meet regulatory requirements for section 7(a)(2) compliance 4(d)
consultation. The completed NLEB 4(d) Consultation Form is included with this scoping letter.
Please provide review and comment concerning the above referenced species, as well as any possible issues that
might emerge with respect to endangered species, migratory birds, or other trust resources from the proposed
project. If we have not heard from you in 30 days, we will assume that you do not have any comments regarding
associated laws or information relevant to this project at the current time.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact me with any
questions that you may have concerning the extent of site disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
&.Y
Kirsten Gimbert, Senior Environmental Scientist
kgimbertCcDwildlandseng.com
704.941.9093
Attachments:
USFWS NLEB 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form
Figure 1 Site Map
Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
WiIdIan ds Engineering, Inc. (P) 704.332.7754 • 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104 • Charlotte, NC 28203

Northern Long -Eared Bat 4(d) Rule Streamlined Consultation Form
Federal agencies should use this form for the optional streamlined consultation framework for the northern long-
eared bat (NLEB). This framework allows federal agencies to rely upon the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
(USFWS) January 5, 2016, intra-Service Programmatic Biological Opinion (BO) on the final 4(d) rule for the
NLEB for section 7(a) (2) compliance by: (1) notifying the USFWS that an action agency will use the streamlined
framework; (2) describing the project with sufficient detail to support the required determination; and (3) enabling
the USFWS to track effects and determine if reinitiation of consultation is required per 50 CFR 402.16.
This form is not necessary if an agency determines that a proposed action will have no effect to the NLEB or if
the USFWS has concurred in writing with an agency's determination that a proposed action may affect, but is not
likely to adversely affect the NLEB (i.e., the standard informal consultation process). Actions that may cause
prohibited incidental take require separate formal consultation. Providing this information does not address
section 7 (a) (2) compliance for any other listed species.
Information to Determine 4(d) Rule Compliance: YES NO
1. Does the project occur wholly outside of the WNS Zone'?
❑x
❑
2. Have you contacted the appropriate agency2 to determine if your project is near
❑x
❑
known hibernacula or maternity roost trees?
3. Could the project disturb hibernating NLEBs in a known hibernaculum?
❑
❑x
4. Could the project alter the entrance or interior environment of a known
❑
❑x
hibernaculum?
5. Does the project remove any trees within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum at
❑
❑x
any time of ear?
6. Would the project cut or destroy known occupied maternity roost trees, or any
❑
❑x
other trees within a 150-foot radius from the maternity roost tree from June 1
through July 31.
You are eligible to use this form if you have answered yes to question #1 or yes to question #2 and no to
questions 3, 4, 5 and 6. The remainder of the form will be used by the USFWS to track our assumptions in the
BO.
Agency and Applicant (Name, Email, Phone No.) : Wildlands Engineering on behalf of Charlotte Storm Water
Service
Project Name: Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
Project Location (include coordinates if known): latitude 35.254127, longitude-80.95927
Basic Project Description (provide narrative below or attach additional information):
The proposed project area is entirely forested, and the surrounding land use includes forests and residential
communities. Approximately 650 linear feet of stream, 0.4 acres of open water, and 0.3 acres of wetlands were
identified on site. The stream is an unnamed tributary that flows into Paw Creek. Construction of this project will
affect Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and require Section 404/401 permitting. Structures within or immediately
adjacent to the project area include sewer lines and manholes, powerlines, and residential homes.
1 http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdfAVNSZone.pdf
Z See http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/nhisites.html
3 If applicable - only needed for federal actions with applicants (e.g., for a permit, etc.) who are party to the consultation.

General Project Information
YES NO
Does the project occur within 0.25 miles of a known hibernaculum? (-70 miles)
❑
❑x
Does the project occur within 150 feet of a known maternity roost tree?
❑
❑x
Does the project include forest conversion'? (if yes, report acreage below)
❑x
❑
Estimated total acres of forest conversion
— 1.7 ac
If known, estimated acres' of forest conversion from April 1 to October 31
If known, estimated acres of forest conversion from June 1 to July 316
Does the project include timber harvest? (if yes, report acreage below)
❑
❑x
Estimated total acres of timber harvest
If known, estimated acres of timber harvest from April 1 to October 31
If known, estimated acres of timber harvest from June 1 to July 31
Does the project include prescribed fire? (if yes, report acreage below)
❑
❑x
Estimated total acres of prescribed fire
If known, estimated acres of prescribed fire from April 1 to October 31
If known, estimated acres of prescribed fire from June 1 to July 31
Does the project install new wind turbines? (if yes, report capacity in MW below)
❑
❑x
Estimated wind capacity (NM
Agency Determination:
By signing this form, the action agency determines that this project may affect the NLEB, but that any resulting
incidental take of the NLEB is not prohibited by the final 4 (d) rule.
If the USFWS does not respond within 30 days from submittal of this form, the action agency may presume that
its determination is informed by the best available information and that its project responsibilities under 7 (a) (2)
with respect to the NLEB are fulfilled through the USFWS January 5, 2016, Programmatic BO. The action
agency will update this determination annually for multi -year activities.
The action agency understands that the USFWS presumes that all activities are as described herein. The action
agency will promptly report any departures from the described activities to the appropriate USFWS Field Office.
The action agency will provide the appropriate USFWS Field Office with the results of any surveys conducted for
the NLEB. Involved parties will promptly notify the appropriate USFWS Field Office upon finding a dead,
injured, or sick "TT UD
Signature: Date Submitted: 05/19/2022
4 Any activity that temporarily or permanently removes suitable forested habitat, including, but not limited to, tree removal
from development, energy production and transmission, mining, agriculture, etc. (see page 48 of the BO).
5 If the project removes less than 10 trees and the acreage is unknown, report the acreage as less than 0.1 acre.
6 If the activity includes tree clearing in June and July, also include those acreage in April to October.

Figure 1 Vicinity Map
W I L D L A N D 5 0 150 300 Feet Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
%!WV E N G 1 N E E R I N G 1 1 I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Mecklenburg County, NC

Mountain Island Lake & Charlotte West
Q Proposed Project Boundary
USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Quadrangles -
� 1
_ f r466
tit
��� ■ r Wit INM Kftnbu
0.
lop
Figure 2 USGS Topographic Map
W I L D L A N D 5 0 350 700 Feet Little Rock Pond Water Quality Enhancement Project
%4,W* E N G 1 N E E R I N G I I Catawba River Basin (03050101)
Mecklenburg County, NC

From:
Hamstead, Byron A
To:
Kirsten Gimbert
cc:
Jeff Turner; Ian Eckardt
Subject:
Re: [EXTERNAL) RE: Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
Date:
Wednesday, November 16, 2022 9:19.53 AM
Thanks Kirsten,
Rased on the information provided, suitable habitat occurs within the action area (50CFR 402.02) for
the federally endangered Michaux's sumac (Rhas michauxii), smooth coneflowe r (Fchinaceo
laevigata), and Schweinitz's sunflower (Heliarrthus schweinitzii). However, targeted botanical
surveys conducted during these species' respective appropriate timeframes (April 28, and October
19, 2022), did not detect evidence for these plants at that time. Therefore, we believe the
probability for inadvertent loss of these species is insignificant and/or discountable and would
concur with a "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determination from the action agency.
These survey results are valid for 2 years for consultation
purposes: httpsm//www,fws.izov/storyJ2022-03/north-carolinas-federally-threatened-endangered-
and-risk- Ip ant-s ep ties
Based on the information provided, no other federally protected species, their suitable habitats, or
designated critical habitats occur within the action area. Therefore, we believe Chat consultation
requirements under the Endangered Species Act are fulfilled at this time and we require no further
information. Please be aware that further coordination and/or consultation may be required under
the Endangered Species Act {ESA} if: (1) information reveals impacts of this identified action which
may affect or may have affected listed species or critical habitat, (2) this action is subsequently
modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical
habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
Please reference our November 15, 2022, comments regarding consultation requirements for
northern -long eared #gat (consultation not required at this location), and tricolored bat (consultation
not required at this time). We encourage you to pass our concurrence along to the USACE or any
other federal agency that will authorize the proposed action and please let me know if you have any
questions.
Regards,
Byron
Byron Flamstead
(he/him/his)
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street

Asheville, North Carolina, 28801
This email correspondence and any attachments to and from this sender is subject to the Freedom of Information Act and may
he disclosed to third parties.
From: Kirsten Gimbert <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 9:07 AM
To: Hamstead, Byron A <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jeff Turner <[e-mail]>; Ian Eckardt <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, INC
Hi Byron,
No worries! I've attached the updated documents regarding the revised action area for the Little
Rock Pond Enhancement Site (Project Code: 2023-0005284).
1. Updated Assessment Figure
2. Updated species list for the site
3. Species conclusion table
Suitable habitat was identified in the new/old action area, but no species were identified during
either pedestrian survey (April and October 2022). Please let me know if you have any additional
question and whether USFWS concurs with our findings_ If we do not hear back from you within 30
days, we will assume you concur with the biological determinations in the attached species
conclusion table.
Thanks,
Kirsten Gimbert I Senior Environmental Scientist
M: 704,941.9093
From: Hamstead, Byron A <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, October 7, 2022 10:44 AM
To: Kirsten Gimbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] RE: Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
Sincere apologies for my for my delay Kirsten,
Yes. Please pass along an updated figure that delineates the action area (50CFR 402.02). We remind
you that if suitable habitat is present with In the action area for listed plant species, we highly
encourage that targeted botanical surveys be conducted within the appropriate timeframe to inform
a prudent effect determination from the action agency, You can find more consultation guidance
here: https:llwww.fws.gov/office/asheville-ecolog!cal-services/Aheville-field-office-online-review-
f0Ii6i011SVIPLA►I[�►i►�
Wood Thrush is not subiect to ESA requirements. It is a bird of conservation concern (BCC). We

would encourage impact avoidance of its suitable habitats during the timeframe when it may occur
within the action area. We also encourage a project design that conserves/preserves as much onsite
habitat as possible. You can find more info on BCC here: htt}�s://www.fws.goy/media/birds-
conservation-conce rn-2021 pdf.
Since your August email request, there have been several changes that may or may not affect
consultation for this project. Its been a bumpy ride... I provide a detailed summary below, but the
short of it is: please visit our IPaC website to generate an updated species list and project code for
the proposed action. Then, please forward your official species list and project code to
me. Attached is guidance if you are not familiar with generating official species lists from IPaC.
2019 ESA Section 7 Regulations Vacatur
On July 5, 2022, the U.S. District Court of the Northern District Court of California vacated
the 2019 regulations implementing section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA). On August 25, 2022, the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a memo
related to the July 5, 2022, court decision that remanded and vacated three sets of Endangered
Species Act (ESA) 2019 regulations (Center far Biological Diversity v. Haaland , No. 4:19-
cv-05206-JST, Doc. 168). Two of these regulations governing ESA Section 7 and Section 4
revised 50 CFR Parts 402 and 424, respectively.
On September 21, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted a request to stay the U.S.
District Court of Northern California's July 5, 2022, order that vacated the 2019 ESA
regulations. As a result, the 2019 regulations are again in effect, and the Service has relied
upon the 2019 regulations in rendering this biological opinion. However, because the outcome
of the legal challenges to 20I9 ESA Regulations is still unknown, we considered whether our
substantive analyses and conclusions in this consultation would have been different if the pre-
2019 regulations were applied. Our analysis included the prior definition of "effects of the
action," among other prior terms and provisions. We considered all the "direct and indirect
effects" and the "interrelated and interdependent activities" when determining the "effects of
the action." As a result, we determined the substantive analysis and conclusions would have
been the same, irrespective of which regulations applied.
Northern long-eared bat
On September 21, 2022, the consultation range for the federally threatened northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) was updated based on the best available scientific data. The
action area for this project is now outside of the species' consultation range. Therefore, we
would not object to a no effect determination from the action agency for this species. Our
concurrence with "no effect" determinations made by action agencies is not required.
Tricolored bat
Suitable habitat for tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus) may present at the site. On September
14, 2022, the Service published a proposal in the Federal Register to list the tricolored bat as
endangered under the Act. 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 WNS. 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 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 you suspect the future or existing
federal actions associated with this project may affect tricolored bats after the potential new
listing goes into effect, we recommend 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. Projects with an existing section 7 biological opinion
may require re -initiation of consultation to provide uninterrupted authorization for covered
activities. Please contact our office for additional guidance or assistance.
There is a lot here. Please let me know if you or your team have q's and we can set up a time
for a call.
F.
Byron Hamstead
(he/him/his)
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina, 28801
This email correspondence and any attachments to and from this sender is subject to the Freedom of Information Act and may
he disclosed to third parties.
From: Kirsten Gimbert 4ke0mbert @wJdlandseng.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 3:00 PM
To: Hamstead, Byron A <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
This email has been received from outside of DOI - Use caution before clicking on links, opening attachments,
or responding.
Hi Byron,
I wanted to follow up on the Little Rock Pond Enhancement scoping letter submitted for LISFWS
review back in May for two reasons noted below.
1. The impact area has slightly changed, but the new areas d❑ not contain suitable habitat for the
listed species. I assume an updated/revised figure would suffice for your records? and
2. 0 u r scientists heard a Wood Thrush within the territory and I wanted to confirm what the next
steps should be for us to advise our client under the M BTA.

I have attached the original scoping letter to this email. Please feel free to call me on my cell below if
needed to discuss further. I'm in the office this week from 8a-3p.
Thanks,
Kirsten Gimbert I Senior Environmental Scientist
M : 704.941.9093
From: Kirsten Gimbert
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 1:35 PM
To: Hamstead, Byron <Ibyron hamstead @fws.gov>
Cc: Sean Mayo <smavoCa7Raveldorn.corn ; Ian Eckardt <ieckardtCO)wildlandsene_com>
Subject: Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project, Mecklenburg County, NC
Hi Byron,
Please find attached to this email, a scoping letter for your review and comment in regard to the
Little Rock Pond Enhancement Project located in Mecklenburg county, NC. Please let me know if
you have any questions.
Thanks,
Kirsten Gimbert I Senior En vironmen tol Scientist
M : 704.941.9093
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 S. Mint St, Suite 104
Charlotte, INC 28203

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2023-0005284
Project Name: Little Rock Pond_v2
e x
hSai k 4YYFJiYJft
+cfln7i�
i�
October 17, 2022
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The enclosed species list
fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Please note that new species information can change your official species list. Under 50 CFR
402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list
should be verified after 90 days. The Service recommends you visit the ECOS-IPaC website at
regular intervals during project planning and implementation to ensure your species list is
accurate or obtain an updated species list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A biological assessment (BA) or biological evaluation (BE) should be completed for your
project. A BA is required for major construction activities (or other undertakings having similar
physical impacts) considered to be Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c))
(NEPA). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a BE be
prepared to determine effects of the action and whether those effects may affect listed species
and/or designated critical habitat. E?ects of the action are all consequences to listed species or
critical habitat that are caused by the proposed action, including the consequences of other

10/17/2022
activities that are caused by the proposed action. A consequence is caused by the proposed action
if it is reasonably certain to occur and would not occur "but for" the proposed action..
Recommended contents of a BA/BE are described at 50 CFR 402.12. More information and
resources about project review and preparing a BA/BE can be found at the following web link:
https://www.fws. gov/office/asheville-ecological-services/asheville-field-office-online-review-
process-overview.
If a Federal agency determines listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected
by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR
402. The Service is not required to concur with "no effect" determinations from Federal action
agencies. If consultation is required, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed
species, proposed critical habitat, and at -risk species be addressed within the consultation. More
information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of
permit or licensed applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook"
at the following web link: https://www.fws.gov/media/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Act, there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project -
related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds,
including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12
and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). More information about MBTA and BGEPA can be found at the
following web link: https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds.
We appreciate your consideration of Federally listed species. The Service encourages Federal
agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species in their project planning
to further the purposes of the Act. Please contact our staff at 828-258-3939, if you have any
questions. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference the
Consultation Code which can be found in the header of this letter.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Migratory Birds
• Wetlands

10/17/2022
Official Species List
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]

10/17/2022
Project Summary
Project Code: 2023-0005284
Project Name: Little Rock Pond_v2
Project Type: Restoration / Enhancement of Waterbody
Project Description: Pond repair/restoration project. Updated project boundary (10/2022)
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. google.com/maps/Q35.254092,-80.95970975986569,14z
�x
Pawli
X
r Starne31,0
• 3
Counties: Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

10/17/2022 3
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
Insects
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Flowering Plants
NAME
STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473

10/17/2022
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

10/17/2022
USFWS National Wildlife Refuge Lands And Fish
Hatcheries
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.

10/17/2022
Migratory Birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Actz.
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.
1. The Migratory Birds Treat. Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this
list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location,
nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact
locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project
area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species
on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing
the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to
additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your
migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be
found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 25
and Alaska.
Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus voci ferns Breeds May
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 20
and Alaska.

10/17/2022
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Jul 31
and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Sep 10
and Alaska.
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 31
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.
Breeding Season( )

10/17/2022
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 (1)
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.
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 SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle '� Non -BCC 11 h iiii iiii iiii +6■M�■��ILL +�+� � ill 11-±! w ..mil.
Vulnerable
Chimney Swift � ���� ■■� BCC Rangewide+++ + + l' '"+i —l+q Jill 1�pl+�+++ ++++ ++++
(CON)
Eastern Whip -poor- !r
Will ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ —+-4- �, „t——+++'+++ ++++ ++++
BCC Rangewide NONE ENNA
(CON)
Prairie Warbler ++++ ++++ ++++ +++0 lip, —+ +
II 16
BCC Rangewide +—+—+++ ++++ ++++ ++++
(CON)
Red-headed +++++ ++++ +
Woodpecker + 111 Jill Jill Jill [1-4- ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide ++++++++++++ III Jill Jill Jill —+++++++++++++++
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/librq�r/
rator.

10/17/2022 4
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
Migratory Birds FAQ
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
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding.
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
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 Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look

10/17/2022
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. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
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 birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be

10/17/2022 6
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.

10/17/2022
Wetlands
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.
RIVERINE
• Riverine
FRESHWATER POND
• Palustrine

10/17/2022
IPaC User Contact Information
Agency: North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resouces
Name: Jeff Turner
Address: 1430 S. Mint St.
Address Line 2: Suite 104
City:
Charlotte
State:
NC
Zip:
28203
Email
[e-mail]
Phone:
7043327754

CL
CL Ln c
v, = a 0
v � U
E c
� N
m m fi
w
W G
d
[9 �
a-+
(U tB
U
C
0
d
Y
LJ
0
cr
N
J
0
Vl L
A?
u'
z
l3J
6J ,Tu
1 L
040
Auj
W
a

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination

SAW-2022-01493
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2022-01493 County: Mecklenburg U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Mountain Island Lake
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION
Requestor: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water Services
Kate Goodman
Address: 600 East 4th Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone Number: 980-293-1464
E-mail: kate.goodman(&charlottenc.gov
Size (acres) 17 Nearest Town Charlotte
Nearest Waterway Paw Creek River Basin Santee
USGS HUC 03050101 Coordinates Latitude: 35.254212
Longitude:-80.959249
Location description: The review area is located on the western end of Robert L. Smith Regional Park. PINs: 05524108 and
05525415. Reference review area descrintion shown in the Jurisdictional Determination Request Dackage entitled "Figure 1.
Vicinity May".
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The
waters, including wetlands have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate
and reliable. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map undated. Therefore this
preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory
mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection
measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any
way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may
request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403).
However, since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination
may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is
merely an effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which
is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters,
including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland
delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for
a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are waters, including wetlandson the above described project area/property subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.

SAW-2022-01493
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by
the Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated DATE. We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once
verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided
there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the
Corps Regulatory Official identified below onDATE. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area/property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Bryan Roden -Reynolds at 704-510-1440 or
brvan.roden-reynolds(&u sace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 07/07/2022.
D. Remarks: None
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
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.**
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
Corps Regulatory Official: 2022.07.07 13:31:54-04'00'

SAW-2022-01493
Date of JD: 07/07/2022 Expiration Date of JD: Not applicable
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at
https://re ug lator�.ops.usace.army.mil/customer-service-survey/.
Copy furnished:
Agent: Wildlands Engineering
Ian Eckardt
Address: 1430 S. Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Telephone Number: 704-332-7754
E-mail: ieckardtna,wildlandseng.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
F97 REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water
File Number: SAW-2022-01493
Date: 07/07/2022
Services, Kate Goodman
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.miUMissions/CivilWorks/ReaulatoryProgramandPenuits.aspx
or the 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 or OBJECTIONS 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: Bryan Roden -Reynolds
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(aUSACE.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 opportum 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: Bryan Roden -Reynolds, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North
Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Philip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 07/07/2022
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Storm Water
Services, Kate Goodman, 600 East 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Little Rock Pond, SAW-
2022-01493
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The review area is located on the
western end of Robert L. Smith Regional Park. PINS: 05524108 and 05525415. Reference review area
description shown in the Jurisdictional Determination Request package entitled "Figure 1, Vicinity Map".
(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: 35.254212 Longitude:-80.959249
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Paw Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 07/07/22
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION
Aquatic Feature
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
Tributary 1
Non -wetland
404
(perennial)
35.25381226
-80.95708293
536 linear feet
Tributary 1
Non -wetland
404
intermittent
35.25367957
-80.95684830
110 linear feet
Wetland A
35.25430000
-80.95735000
0.139 acre
Wetland
404
Wetland B
35.25424704
-80.95763302
0.133 acre
Wetland
404
Pond A
35.25447137
-80.95765318
0.384 acre
Non -wetland
1 404
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 AID 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 AID to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that
there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S.
on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could
be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items are included in the administrative
record and are appropriately cited:
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: Figures 1-
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. Datasheets:
® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑USGS NHD data:
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps:
®U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: Figure 2, USGS Topographic Map (7.5-minute
quadrangle Mountain Island Lake and Charlotte West, NC)
®Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Figure 4, Soils Map (Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County)
® National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Figure 5, NWI Mal) (USFWS NWI Mapper)
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Figure 1, Vicinity Man (Undated) and Figure 3, Delineation Map
(Undated
or ® Other (Naive & Date): Photographs 1-16
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
® Other information (please specify): NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms, Version 4.11 (Dated 04/28/22)
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps
and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations.
Bryan Roden -Reynolds
2022.07.07 13:31:32-04'00'
Signature and date of Regulatory
staff member completing PJD
07/07/2022
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 fmalizing an action.

Nm
�m
R
� O
0
7-7--T-"
'✓ �/ ..,, fry _' �;`.afia.: _ --
�GI w
CL
a o z
C ° o
a o O U
C E
' N .
C
M m
s L v
LL U
v
(
N (6
4, U
C
O
a-
u
O
J
a
a�
LL.
O
Ln
N
Lr)
N
c-I
O
UO0
Qz
ul
�z
�4
QLU

Robert L. Smith Park
Water Quality Enhancement Project
NC SAM & NC WAM Assessment Forms

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 any 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 1 SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Robert L. Smith WQEP 2. Date of evaluation: 10/19/2022
3. Applicantlowner name: Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Service:4. Assessor name/organization: IE/JT (Wildlands Engineering)
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Paw Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.253812 /-80.957083
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT1 (Above pond) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 3 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 10 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? r_Yes r_ No
14. Feature type: CPerennial flow Clntermittentflow CTidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: CMountains (M) F: Piedmont (P) 0Inner Coastal Plain (1) COuter Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for r,, a ti d� �; b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip rSize 1 (< 0.1 miz) re Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miZ) rSize 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi) G'Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes CNo If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( E1 r_II F;III F_ IV
F Essential Fish Habitat F Primary Nursery Area F High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property F_ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect )- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F_ 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplemer
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
CA
At least 10 % of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
B
Not
3. Feature
Pattern - assessment reach metric
r;A
A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
EB
Not A.
4. Feature
Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
G'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).
EB
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).
G'A
< 10% of channel unstable
C B
10 to 25 % of channel unstable
C
> 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside
Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider
for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB
RB
CA
CA Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
C B
C 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])
EC
EC 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
No

Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
F B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
F C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
F_ E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F_ H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
]f J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather -watershed metric
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
CYes E: 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. CYes CNo 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)
r A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
m w
F- F
5 % oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
m
F G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
f� B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o
F H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
0
F I
Sand bottom
I— C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
B m
F_ J
5 % vertical bank along the marsh
D
5 % undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
O
F K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F- 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)
11 a. [;Yes ENo Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
RF B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffles 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 ENo Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. r_Yes r_- 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. r_- No Water r_Other:
12b. r;Yes r;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.
F F Adult frogs
F_ r— Aquatic reptiles
F F_ Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r Beetles (including water pennies)
r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F F_ Asian clam (Corbicu/a)
r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F F Dipterans (true flies)
r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
r r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicuia)
F r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F r Tipulid larvae
F F 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
L:C
L:C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: 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
Es Y re Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
EN EN
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.
F A Streams and/or springs Qurisdictional discharges)
F- B Ponds (include wet detention basins, do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
IF E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
CA Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
G'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
CA EA r_A EA >_ 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
r;B EB r;B EB From 50 to < 100-feet wide
r;C EC 2;C EC From 30 to < 50-feet wide
[;D ED [',D ED From 10 to < 30-feet wide
C;E EE CE EE < 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
EA EA Mature forest
EB E',B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
EC E',C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
ED [',D Maintained shrubs
nE r_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 r_A r_A EA EA P_A Row crops
G'B r_B G'B EB r_B P_B Maintained turf
G'C EC G'C EC G'C P_C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
G'D ED G'D ED G'D P_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 r-_A Medium to high stem density
UB G'B Low stem density
G'C G'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.
G'B G'B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
G'C G'C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of 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
G'A G'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.
CB CB 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. r;Yes E;No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. CNo Water COther:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
CA <46 r_ B 46 to < 67 CC 67 to < 79 C D 79 to < 230 0 E >> 230
Notes/Sketch:
Reach exhibited baseflow during delineation field work in April 2022 and scored perennial on the NCDWR Stream Identification Form.
Reach was dry during NCSAM assessment in October 2022. Evaluation reach is the perennial section of UT1 above the existing pond.
Approximately 10-25 % of the reach exhibits bank erosion. Bed material in the upper half is characterized by small boulders and angular cobble that
seem unnatural and may have been historically dumped in the channel. The lower portion of the evaluation reach is within the backwater of the pond
with limited bedform and is dominated by fines (sand & silt).

Stream Site Name Robert L. Smith WQEP
Stream Category Pb2
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Date of Evaluation 10/19/2022
Assessor Name/Organization /JT (WiIdlands Engineerin
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
YES
YES
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Flood Flow HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport HIGH
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH
(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 LOW
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow LOW
(3) Substrate HIGH
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat MEDIUM
(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 Habitat NA
Overall MEDIUM

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 any 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 1 SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Robert L. Smith WQEP 2. Date of evaluation: 10/19/2022
3. Applicantlowner name: Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water Service:4. Assessor name/organization: IE/JT (Wildlands Engineering)
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Paw Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.254766 /-80.9578351
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): UT1 (Below pond) 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 100
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 10 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 15 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? r_Yes r_ No
14. Feature type: CPerennial flow Clntermittentflow CTidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: CMountains (M) F: Piedmont (P) 0Inner Coastal Plain (1) COuter Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for r,, a ti d� �; b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip rSize 1 (< 0.1 miz) re Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miZ) rSize 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi) G'Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ;Yes CNo If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( E1 r_II F;III F_ IV
F Essential Fish Habitat F Primary Nursery Area F High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property F_ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect )- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F_ 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplemer
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
CA
At least 10 % of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
B
Not
3. Feature
Pattern - assessment reach metric
E;A
A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
r;B
Not A.
4. Feature
Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
r_o 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).
G'A
< 10% of channel unstable
C B
10 to 25 % of channel unstable
EC
> 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside
Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider
for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB
RB
G'A
G'A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
C B
C 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])
EC
EC 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
No

Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
F B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
F C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
F_ E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F_ H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
]f J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather -watershed metric
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
CYes E: 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. CYes CNo 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)
r A
Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
m w
F- F
5 % oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
m
F G
Submerged aquatic vegetation
f� B
Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
o
F H
Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation
0
F I
Sand bottom
F_ C
Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
B m
F_ J
5 % vertical bank along the marsh
F D
5 % undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
O
F K
Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F- 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)
11 a. [;Yes ENo Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
RF B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffles 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 ENo Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. r_Yes r_- 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. r_- No Water r_Other:
12b. r;Yes r;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.
F F Adult frogs
F_ r— Aquatic reptiles
F F_ Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
r Beetles (including water pennies)
r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F F_ Asian clam (Corbicu/a)
r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F F Dipterans (true flies)
r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
r r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicuia)
F r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
r r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F r Tipulid larvae
F F 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
L:C
L:C
Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: 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.
F A Streams and/or springs Qurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins, do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
IF E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
F B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
CA Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
G'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
CA EA E:A EA >_ 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
r;B EB r;B EB From 50 to < 100-feet wide
r;C EC r;C EC From 30 to < 50-feet wide
CD ED [',D ED From 10 to < 30-feet wide
CE EE CE EE < 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
EA EA Mature forest
EB CB Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
EC CC Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
ED CD Maintained shrubs
nE r_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 r_A r_A EA EA P_A Row crops
G'B r_B G'B EB r_B P_B Maintained turf
G'C EC G'C EC G'C P_C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
G'D ED G'D ED G'D P_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 r-_A Medium to high stem density
UB G'B Low stem density
G'C G'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.
G'B G'B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
G'C G'C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of 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
G'A G'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.
CB CB 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.
CC CC 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. r;Yes E;No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. CNo Water COther:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
CA <46 r_ B 46 to < 67 CC 67 to < 79 C D 79 to < 230 0 E >> 230
Notes/Sketch:
Reach exhibited baseflow during delineation field work in April 2022 and received a perennail score on the NCDWR Stream Identificaiton Form.
Stream was dry during October 2022 SAM assessment.

Stream Site Name Robert L. Smith WQEP
Stream Category Pb2
NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Date of Evaluation 10/19/2022
Assessor Name/Organization /JT (WiIdlands Engineerin
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
YES
YES
YES
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow LOW
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(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 LOW
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow LOW
(3) Substrate MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(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 Habitat NA
Overall LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies user Manual version b.0
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Robert L. Smith WQEP
Date of Evaluation
10/19/2022
Applicant/Owner Name
Charlotte Mecklenburg Storm Water
Wetland Site Name
Wetland A & B
Services
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
IE / JT (Wildlands
Engineering)
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Paw Creek
River Basin
Catawba
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
03050101
County
Mecklenburg
NCDWR Region
Mooresville
❑ Yes ® No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
35.254159 /-80.957486
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
® Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief —assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
®A ®A ®A > 10% impervious surfaces
❑B ❑B ❑B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑C ❑C ❑C >_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D ❑D ❑D >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
®E ®E ®E >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F ❑F ❑F >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G ❑G ❑G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
❑A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
®C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®<_ 15-feet wide ❑> 15-feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ®F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
®C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
®I ®I ®I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>_ 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
®C
®C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >_ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
®A 0
❑ B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
®B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
CU ®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
®B
®B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
❑C
❑C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
1E ❑B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ®A
®A
Dense herb layer
_ ❑B
❑B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name Wetland A & B Date of Assessment 10/19/2022
IE / JT (Wildlands
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Engineering)
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function Sub -function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW
Sub -surface Storage and
Retention Condition LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW