20230763 Ver 1_MecklenburgCounty_StatesvilleStumptownRdRedev_NWP_JD_20230525

NRE PO Box#401
Fort Mill,SC 29716
ENVIRONMENTAL 803-681-0484
Ms. Meagan Jolly May 25, 2023
Charlotte Regulatory Satellite Office
U.S.Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
[e-mail]
NCDWR,401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury St., 9th Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
RE: Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29 and PJD
Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment (± 19.7 acres)
Huntersville, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Dear Ms.Jolly:
RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC has authorized NRE Environmental, LLC(NRE)to provide Clean Water
Act Section 404/401 permitting services and request for preliminary jurisdictional determination for the
approximately 19.7-acre Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment site(Project) located on the east side
of Statesville Rd., north-northwest of its intersection with Stumptown Rd. in the Town of Huntersville,
Mecklenburg County, NC(Attachment 1).An executed Agent Authorization Form is attached (Attachment
9).
NRE is submitting a Pre-Construction Notification pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water
Quality General Certification No. 4139 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and to the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Quality(NCDEQ)for proposed permanent impacts to the jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. associated with developing a residential housing development on the Project. The
property was delineated by NRE on April 13, 2022 and March 27, 2023 and a preliminary jurisdictional
determination is also requested with this application; Attachment 7).
The impacts from this project will exceed the mitigation threshold under a NWP 29, therefore, payment
for 227 linear feet of permanent stream impact and 0.17 acre of permanent wetland impact will be made
to the in-lieu fee program (see attached conditional response letter from Division of Mitigation Services;
Attachment 13).
A copy of the PCN application is also submitted to the NCDEQ with anticipated fee of $570 for the 401
Water Quality Certification minor water quality application fee. The NCDEQ DWR Pre-filing meeting
Request notification is attached (Attachment 16).

NRE NWP Request
Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment
ENVIRONMENTAL May 25,2023
ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED:
NO. DESCRIPTION
1 Site Location Map
2 Aerial Imagery
3 2019 Cornelius NC 1:24k USGS Quad Sheet
4 USDA-NRCS Current Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County
5 National Wetland Inventory
6 FEMA Floodplain Map 3710464100K
7 Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form w Aquatic Resource Table
8 Wetlands And Other Waters Preliminary Jurisdictional Boundaries Map
9 Agent Authorization Form
10 Property Owner Deed Information
11 Permit Drawings
12 WOUS Data Forms; Stream Information Forms; NCSAM and NCWAM forms
13 NCDMS Conditional Acceptance Letter
14 Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat Assessment Report
15 NCHPO Clearance Letter
16 NCDEQ DWR Pre-filing meeting Request email
17 Site Photographs (Photos 1-8)
18 Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
I trust that this information is sufficient. Please contact me (570-406-1182) if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
NRE Environmental, LLC.
e-4UY--/-
Christine A. Geist, PWS, CE
President
Cc Kyle Whitaker; RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC
Encs.
2

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 1 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 1
Site Location Map

u
' ORI IUS Greenpona Ln �
6
Arledge Ln
_ m Of
Vixen Ln
-
S� VIA
?3. \ E u
Site a SiRlk Lasaro Way c
ti
7 U
_ Bevm Ct
1 r S°nCq,�µS cenneuact North
O Ma kL nbarg
HIntersv i�� —1 4egean Co
�rykd Huntersville ct
` Rioksted CL mmumry Park
I� water
Sources: Esri, HERE,Garmin;, t°n cry
T T
USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT
c}, °'a ; R NRCan,Esri Japan,M,ETI, = St Batts Ln�
�' P6 Esri China(Hong Kong),.Esri
2 I E d
P O`
O
to 4, Not Van Straiten Ct ^ 0a'la yO.Or
4a.
N Pr IS Su ell St
F12
O Ln IS Qtess tJeS
Ia �a
p` `a Holly Springs Dr Q `
4 m Quaint Aly v
£
t c ~
Ot
© kstde Pottfie/tl 0, Or y Arrs Aly
\A Kansma AIY a < 7
s�1 Qa\ee` a\650c�S� ^ 1'Vater front Dr Ti Iles AlY C,,I,y Aly Fe
0
o O� aP�i rn Morehouse St 1.
5
%6i Qo�ao Nsp Copley Square Or
i0e�p Shinner Or a
N �rbA Aiken
Oa o
61, t J StumPtown Rdw
0 4 O ca�e 1 S
°F 9
O o SJ c.
N P c G
s
0A N µd s
` Stomp`o`Nn
n
St Mark ~
Catholic
µrf o
to a tli
Wn
St°mP a4
i Chris n-,n Canadice Rd m y
G blunt«=inn c G
2
V
o
a n Rd
2 = a
0
E 44ror
'1o114n T o` DOgwI'd Ter
4
A� 21
Ln
c�yJ ohelle Rd A m Hunters Jy(,a
ace°
� Laur v a -t v
'= m Legend
o
atle r u ID
C
a $ \\\e
A 3Sk or ;sV °gy m Project Area-19.7 Ac
0 2 y G HUC
-
G ^ n ldetParkDt 0 510 1,020
Feet
Sources: Esri, HERE,Garmin, USGS.Qlntermap, INCREMENT,P;NRCan,Esri
Japan,METI,Esri CNNA"(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), NGCC,(c)
CipenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community
Date
Vicinity March 27, 2023
NREo.Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment Project N 22 07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 2 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 2
Aerial Imagery

_ / ��� ., -�' •' �� � Al
F
R
„O
f
410
400,
J40
,/
OF �=
Legend
• � o �o��o �lllO '1' o�ll o, DOY�IYiT-�
Date
2021 Maxar Vivid Advanced Aerial Photo March 27, 2023
REProject •
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
North •

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 3 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 3
USGS Map

LAj
Ln
LLJ
io Sc
141
It
BAYA f SPRUELL
_ o SIDS DRdR
ATERFRpNr DR.
V
f i 1 yy �•r� i �. � 7
a , . r ,
RD r
J�� 1 � CANADICE R_D_ , -
r� - _J
LU
� -
rM
Nit
sT Jr I`, I 1 Cf Legend
Project Area-19.7 Ac 'C r
HA.
l 0 500 1,000
Date
2019 Cornelius, NC USGS Topo March 27, 2023
NRE Project No.
Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment 22-07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 4 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 4
Soil Survey Map

CeD2
MeD
CeB2
CeB2
CeD2
WkE
MO
MeB
EnD
MeD
Ce13
PaE EnB
EnD
EnB
MeB
CeD2
r
CeB2
a
En
Soil Series Name Symbol Map Unit Hydric N
Cecil sandy clay loam,2 to 8 percent slopes,moderately eroded Ce62 No Legend
Enon sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes EnB No
Enon sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes EnD No ProjectArea-19.7 Ac D
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes MeB No
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes MeD No 0 240 480
Wilkes loam,15 to 25 percent slopes WkE No Feet
,,,, � � Source: E—s i, Maxar,GeoEye, E—arthsta Geographies,C•NES/Airbus DS,USDA,
.. �, USES,AeroGRID,IGN,and the GIS User Community
Date
USDA Soils March 27, 2023
NRE Project No.
Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment 22-07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page S of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 5
National Wetland Inventory Map

All
ILNO
Eq
let
db
Alt
t ` \ ' •*� JP
1p It
47
Legend
..; 'fib„'a .. �'�'��-r �- � •` r{ �
.
Wetland Type
` .1:J .►�
♦� `, ' �► Freshwater Forested/Shrub
Freshwater Pond
Riverine
1 I
• 500 1,000
—— .'ti .+ pf
• ail �' � .• 1�— � .._�
•� ' ° �mm Now,O&E E@
0 ID °@WLft' C�q COMM* emu'
National • Inventory
ProjectNRE Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment 22-07
•
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
North •

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 6 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 6
FEMA Flood Map

Legend
ProjectArea-19.7 Ac
ZONE_SUBTY
X
1 PCT FUTURE CONDITIONS
1 PCT FUTURE IN STRUCTURE,FLOODWAY
AREA OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD(X)
COMMUNITY ENCROACHMENT
FLOODWAY
STATE ENCROACHMENT AREA (rt
7�
_.-A
I
I
- I
I
I
NI
0 500 1,000
Feet
Source: Esri, Maxar,G'e©Eye, EarGhstar Geo'graphics,C•NES/Airbus DS,USDA,
USGS,AeroGRID, IGN,and the_GI,S User Community
FEMA Date
Panel 3710464100K March 27, 2023
NRE Project No.
Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment 22-07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 7 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 7
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form w Aquatic Resource Table

Jurisdictional Determination Request
FE11
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination(JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District(Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http://www.saw.usace.LM.mil/Missions/Re ug latoiyPermitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator.aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE&CHARLOTTE REGULATORY WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
FIELD OFFICES US Army Corps of Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers 2407 West Fifth Street
151 Patton Avenue,Room 208 Washington,North Carolina 27889
Asheville,North Carolina 28801-5006 General Number:[phone]
General Number:[phone] Fax Number:[phone]
Fax Number:[phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE US Army Corps of Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers 69 Darlington Avenue
3331 Heritage Trade Drive,Suite 105 Wilmington,North Carolina 28403
Wake Forest,North Carolina 27587 General Number:910-251-4633
General Number:[phone] Fax Number:[phone]
Fax Number:[phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D—PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D -NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
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 also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service,prior to starting work.
Version:May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 15520, 15432, 15400, and 15210/15236 Statesville Rd.
City, State: Huntersville, NC
County: Mecklenburg
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 00910104, 00910103, 00910124, 00910109
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Christine Geist, PWS; NRE Environmental, LLC
Mailing Address: PO Box ##401
Fort Mill, SC 29716
Telephone Number: [phone]
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
I am the curretit property owner.
✓❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other,please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC
Mailing Address: C/O Ravin Partners LLC (attn. Kyle Whitaker)
558 E. Brooklyn Village Ave., Ste 120, Charlotte NC 28202
Telephone Number: 919.354.3692
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request(copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version:May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION'4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC
Print Name
Capacity: ❑✓ Owner ❑Authorized Agents
SAT/2-3
Date/0
Sign ure
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
rocess.
V I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
1 believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
Other:
-H
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols,skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties,please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization form/Ictter signed by owncr(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD)TYPE (Select One)
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination(PJD)provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States"or"navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed(33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary"in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination(AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States"or"navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner,permit applicant, or other"affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2)who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
'❑ Size of Property or Review Area 19.7 aC acres.
✓❑ The property boundary(or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version:May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 35.4257
Longitude: -80.8601
✓� A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than I Ix17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non-wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non-Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water,pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non-
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non-Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or"Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Wetland and non-wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non-wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
❑ Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled"Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations"to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards.http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ug latory-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version:May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs,please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form'and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs,please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
❑ Vicinity Map
aAerial Photograph
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan,previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
✓❑ Landscape Photos (if taken)
❑ NCWAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
❑ NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
❑ Other Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatoM/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02_App_A_Prelim JD Form fillable.pdf
' Please see hqp://www.saw.usace.army.miIA4issions/Re ug latory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose:The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses:This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal,state,and local
government agencies,and the public,and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law.Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination(AJD),which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure:Submission of requested information is voluntary;however,if information is not provided,the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version:May 2017 Page 6

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: March 31 , 2023
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Ms. Christine Geist, PWS, Po Box 401, Fort Mill, SC, 29716
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District-Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Mecklenburg city: Huntersville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.4257 Long.: -80.8601
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17N
Name of nearest waterbody: Torrence Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site Latitude Longitude Estimated amount Type of aquatic Geographic authority
number (decimal (decimal of aquatic resource resource (i.e.,wetland to which the aquatic
degrees) degrees) in review area vs. non-wetland resource "may be"
(acreage and linear waters) subject(i.e., Section
feet, if applicable) 404 or Section 10/404)
SA 35.425513 -80.859678 0.047 ac; 660 If Non-Wetland Water Section 404
A 35.425371 -80.859376 0. 169 ac Wetland Water Section 404
B 35.425626 -80.860092 0.033 ac Wetland Water Section 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 AJD 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 AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit)or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be"navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
❑■ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Wetlands and Other Waters Jurisdictional Boundaries Map
❑■ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ 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: Cornelius NC (2019)
❑m Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Soil Survey of Mecklenburg county,Nc.vz.,zozz
❑■ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: USFWS NWI, 10/01/2022
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑■ FEMA/FIRM maps: Map 3710464100K; effective on 09/02/2015
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
❑■ Photographs: ❑■ Aerial (Name & Date): Vivid Advanced 04/28/2022
or 0 Other (Name & Date): Photolog March 31, 2023
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
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.
04�-
05/25/23
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 8 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 8
Wetlands And Other Waters Preliminary Jurisdictional Boundaries Map

0-4*
ion"
..• • 1A
►'s ��• •
• ' ' ���4A FA
.
. w��� yaw ��CL�'•� �r
IM .. PAP
MEN
��;� ��r1�i►F�•1
101111 ,
v �1Legendi
Project
Potential Wetland Water of the US
A Data Point
A Stream Information Form
Well
. . . ;
hftps://www.nconemap.gov/ USDA Soils
cNotes:Wetlands and Other Waters of the US were field reviewe
sub-meter GPS by NRE. The jurisdictional apped using Trimbil
features are pendin
Wetlandsverification by the USACE.
and Other - Date
Jurisdictional Boundaries
Project No.
NRE Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment 22-07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn
North •

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 9 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 9
Agent Authorization Form

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Applicant: RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC
C/O Ravin Partners LLC
Point of Contact Name: (attn. Kyle Whitaker)
558 East Brooklyn Village Ave
Mailing Address: Ste 120
Charlotte NC 28202
Phone Number: 919.354.3692
Email Address: [e-mail]
Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment
Property- (Parcel #00910104, 00910103, 00910124, and
00910109)
I, Kyle Whitaker representing RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC ,
(Print Name) (Applicant Name)
do hereby authorize Christine Geist, PWS , of NRE Environmental, LLC
(Contractor/Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance
of this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached for the
Project known herein as Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment (Parcel #00910104,
00910103 00910124, and 00910109) located in Mecklenburg County, NC.
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to
the best of our knowledge.
RP Huntersville Propert Own r LLC NRE Environmental, LLC
Authoriz d Signature Agent's Signature
Date: 'T�S�23 Date: 03/25/23

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 10 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 10
Property Owner Deed Information

MECKLENBURG COUNTY, North Carolina
POLARIS 3G PARCEL OWNERSHIP AND GIS SUMMARY
Date Printed: 04/25/2023
Identity Ownership
Parcel ID GIS ID Owner Name Mailing Address
00910104 100910104 RP HUNTERSVILLE 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Property Characteristics PROPERTY OWNER LLC VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Legal desc NA CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Land Area 3.63 AC ATTN DAVID RAVIN 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Fire District HUNTERSVILLE VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Special District FIRE SERVICE D CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Account Type NC CORP Deed Reference(s)and Sale Price
Municipality HUNTERSVILLE Deed Sale Date Sale Price
Property Use SINGLE FAMILY 37649-653 09/16/2022
RESIDENTIAL-ACREAGE 37649-647 09/16/2022 $1,261,500.00
Zoning 06457-067 01/29/1991
Contact appropriate Planning Department or see Map. Site Location
Water Quality Buffer ETJ Area Huntersville
Parcel Inside Water Quality Buffer INo Charlotte Historic District No
Charlotte 6/30/2011 Annexation Area No
FEMA and Community Floodplain Census Tract# 63.03
FEMA Panel# 3710464100J
FEMA Panel Date 03/02/2009 Post Construction District
FEMA Flood Zone OUT:VIEW FEMA FLOODPLAIN TO Jurisdiction Huntersville
VERIFY District Huntersville
Community Flood OUT:VIEW COMMUNITY FLOODPLAIN Stream Watershed Districts
Zone TO VERIFY Stream Watershed Name McDOWELL
Situs Addresses Tied to Parcel
15210 STATESVILLE RD HUNTERSVILLE
This map or report is prepared for the inventory of real property within Mecklenburg County and is compiled from recorded deeds,plats, tax maps,
surveys,planimetric maps, and other public records and data. Users of this map or report are hereby notified that the aforementioned public primary
information sources should be consulted for verification.Mecklenburg County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the
information contained herein.
Page 1/1

MECKLENBURG COUNTY, North Carolina
POLARIS 3G PARCEL OWNERSHIP AND GIS SUMMARY
Date Printed: 04/25/2023
Identity Ownership
Parcel ID GIS ID Owner Name Mailing Address
00910103 100910103 RP HUNTERSVILLE 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Property Characteristics PROPERTY OWNER LLC VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Legal desc NA CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Land Area 6.5 AC C/O RAVIN PARTNERS LLC 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Fire District HUNTERSVILLE VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Special District FIRE SERVICE D CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Account Type NON-NC CORP Deed Reference(s)and Sale Price
Municipality HUNTERSVILLE Deed Sale Date Sale Price
Property Use SINGLE FAMILY 37649-701 09/16/2022 $1,300,000.00
RESIDENTIAL-ACREAGE 26086-678 11/24/2010 $0.00
Zoning 01821-274 01/01/1975 $0.00
Contact appropriate Planning Department or see Map. Site Location
Water Quality Buffer ETJ Area Huntersville
Parcel Inside Water Quality Buffer IYes Charlotte Historic District No
Charlotte 6/30/2011 Annexation Area No
FEMA and Community Floodplain Census Tract# 63.03
FEMA Panel# 3710464100J
FEMA Panel Date 03/02/2009 Post Construction District
FEMA Flood Zone OUT:VIEW FEMA FLOODPLAIN TO Jurisdiction Huntersville
VERIFY District Huntersville
Community Flood OUT:VIEW COMMUNITY FLOODPLAIN Stream Watershed Districts
Zone TO VERIFY Stream Watershed Name McDOWELL
Situs Addresses Tied to Parcel
15400 STATESVILLE RD HUNTERSVILLE
This map or report is prepared for the inventory of real property within Mecklenburg County and is compiled from recorded deeds,plats, tax maps,
surveys,planimetric maps, and other public records and data. Users of this map or report are hereby notified that the aforementioned public primary
information sources should be consulted for verification.Mecklenburg County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the
information contained herein.
Page 1/1

MECKLENBURG COUNTY, North Carolina
POLARIS 3G PARCEL OWNERSHIP AND GIS SUMMARY
Date Printed: 04/25/2023
Identity Ownership
Parcel ID GIS ID Owner Name Mailing Address
00910124 100910124 C/O RAVIN PARTNERS LLC 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Property Characteristics VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Legal desc N/A CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Land Area 5.7 AC RP HUNTERSVILLE 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Fire District HUNTERSVILLE PROPERTY OWNER LLC VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Special District FIRE SERVICE D CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Account Type NON-NC CORP Deed Reference(s)and Sale Price
Municipality HUNTERSVILLE Deed Sale Date Sale Price
Property Use SINGLE FAMILY 37649-698 09/16/2022
RESIDENTIAL-ACREAGE 37649-695 09/16/2022 $1,691,000.00
Zoning 05617-337 10/12/1987 $0.00
Contact appropriate Planning Department or see Map. Site Location
Water Quality Buffer ETJ Area Huntersville
Parcel Inside Water Quality Buffer IYes Charlotte Historic District No
Charlotte 6/30/2011 Annexation Area No
FEMA and Community Floodplain Census Tract# 63.03
FEMA Panel# 3710464100J
FEMA Panel Date 03/02/2009 Post Construction District
FEMA Flood Zone OUT:VIEW FEMA FLOODPLAIN TO Jurisdiction Huntersville
VERIFY District Huntersville
Community Flood OUT:VIEW COMMUNITY FLOODPLAIN Stream Watershed Districts
Zone TO VERIFY Stream Watershed Name McDOWELL
Situs Addresses Tied to Parcel
15432 STATESVILLE RD HUNTERSVILLE
This map or report is prepared for the inventory of real property within Mecklenburg County and is compiled from recorded deeds,plats, tax maps,
surveys,planimetric maps, and other public records and data. Users of this map or report are hereby notified that the aforementioned public primary
information sources should be consulted for verification.Mecklenburg County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the
information contained herein.
Page 1/1

MECKLENBURG COUNTY, North Carolina
POLARIS 3G PARCEL OWNERSHIP AND GIS SUMMARY
Date Printed: 04/25/2023
Identity Ownership
Parcel ID GIS ID Owner Name Mailing Address
00910109 100910109 C/O RAVIN PARTNERS LLC 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Property Characteristics VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Legal desc NA CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Land Area 4.26 AC RP HUNTERSVILLE 558 EAST BROOKLYN
Fire District HUNTERSVILLE PROPERTY OWNER LLC VILLAGE AVE STE 120
Special District FIRE SERVICE D CHARLOTTE NC 28202
Account Type NON-NC CORP Deed Reference(s)and Sale Price
Municipality HUNTERSVILLE Deed Sale Date Sale Price
Property Use SINGLE FAMILY 37649-692 09/16/2022
RESIDENTIAL-ACREAGE 37649-686 09/16/2022 $2,448,000.00
Zoning 26240-978 01/25/2011 $0.00
Contact appropriate Planning Department or see Map. 03246-037 02/25/1971 $0.00
Water Quality Buffer Site Location
Parcel Inside Water Quality Buffer INo ETJ Area Huntersville
Charlotte Historic District No
FEMA and Community Floodplain Charlotte 6/30/2011 Annexation Area No
FEMA Panel# 3710464100J Census Tract# 63.03
FEMA Panel Date 03/02/2009
FEMA Flood Zone OUT:VIEW FEMA FLOODPLAIN TO Post Construction District
VERIFY Jurisdiction Huntersville
Community Flood OUT:VIEW COMMUNITY FLOODPLAIN District Huntersville
Zone TO VERIFY Stream Watershed Districts
Situs Addresses Tied to Parcel Stream Watershed Name McDOWELL
15520 STATESVILLE RD HUNTERSVILLE
This map or report is prepared for the inventory of real property within Mecklenburg County and is compiled from recorded deeds,plats, tax maps,
surveys,planimetric maps, and other public records and data. Users of this map or report are hereby notified that the aforementioned public primary
information sources should be consulted for verification.Mecklenburg County and its mapping contractors assume no legal responsibility for the
information contained herein.
Page 1/1

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 11 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 11
Permit Drawings

GENERAL NOTES: RIPRAP APRON FOR 18" RCP
1. PROJECT CONSISTS OF 105 SINGLE
FAMILY UNITS AND 45 MULTIFAMILY 30' PCCO BUFFER,TYP.
UNITS 30' FROM TOP OF ,/ \
2. PARKING WILL CONSISTS OF ON AND
BANK EACH SIDE �
OFF STREET PARKING EXISTING STREAM
�/
3. ACCESS TO THE SITE OFF OF \\ ci-
_ \
STATESVILLE ROAD }l'\
EXISTING WETLAND
4. SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED PRIOR
TO CONSTRUCTION TO PROTECT
WETLAND AREA ±237 LF(0.018 AC)
OHWM , ,' I !/ 1 `� \��OF STREAM IMPACT
±7,560 SF(0.17 AC)
OF WETLAND
PROPERTY LINE / `/ ° r/ ` r'11�1' DISTURBANCE
rL\� y .- Stream Impact S3
II, /1 �, f' \ /� .,\ \\ \, Ir • Wetland Impact W1
Permanent im act 71 LF
li�/7 °\\\, �> \\ r ;� \ Permanent Impact 0.17 AC ili 7 I \ ,�'� p
\I r
f r ri \ )f�; \`-\ Stream Impact S4 111 1 r f` I Stream Impact S1
Temporary Impact 30 LF , % 1` 1\\\ I\ t } Permanent impact 156 LF
Stream Impact S2 1
Permanent Impact 10 LF J )
vy 'r(no loss of waters'
€ \ ✓fl \— —
lull
Illld \ Ob
Ill�
\l)111 l k \ Bwwro y \ enp = eas 1
. 1�}I z`•l \1`� nzna n �� W r'aao — _ :20' \\ ` —
r
/ E§ffWATESMWB RD
US HIGHWAY 21 � —
•1�`-_-1�\\14��i�`�s �y\ �% _s�� ��iJ��l � \`J \} I 11 TOP OF BANK,TYP.
}ttl'\ 1\L r lrl/11
r�_( Sr l+�/�)t )//I ) 1 I \�\ \`\ �I1 I, 1 �� �` \ ♦ l (� / ' i �^ \° \�� r\ Ll
— fl�
//r
\II � / i / o
\�Q \,X
THIS EXHIBIT IS SCHEMATIC IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO VARIATION.
0 200 400
STATESVILLE STUMPTOWN RESIDENTIAL HORZ.
SCALE FEET
STREAM IMPACT EXHIBIT
AIA Colelenest&Stone HUNTERSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
/ 1 BOLTON&MENK,INC. 05/22/2023

±237 LF(0.018 AC)OF STREAM IMPACT \
\ ±7,560 SF(0.17 AC)OF WETLAND DISTURBANCE
I
/
I � I
— — SDEx— — — — —
Wetland Impact W1 Stream Impact S3 SDEx—
Permanent
Permanent Impact 71 LF —
Permanent Impact 0.17 AC 1 p
/ — — — SDEx— — — — — SDEx— —
RESLOPE A/ ND GRADE BANK AROUND WETLAND
AT A MINIMUM 3:1 SLOPES
I �
I I
— — Stream Impact S1
Permanent impact 156 LF
i
Stream Impact S2 � I
Permanent Impact 10
Stream Impact S4 / LF(no loss of waters)
Temporary Impact 30 LF
THIS EXHIBIT IS SCHEMATIC IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO VARIATION.
0 30 60
STATESVILLE STUMPTOWN RESIDENTIAL HORZ,
SCALE FEET
STREAM IMPACT EXHIBIT
AIA Colelenest&Stone HUNTERSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
/ 1 BOLTON&MENK,INC. 05/22/2023

765 765
EXISTING GRADE AT • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ST-103 • • • • • •
CENTERLINE • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • RIM:756 4
76O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IN.V(IN): .52.94 • 760
INV
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ST:104 . . . . . . . . . . T-106 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PROPOSED GRADE. . . . . . RIM:.75 .9.6. . . • • . IM:753.27
AT CENTERLINE. . . . INV(IN):749.58• I�V(IN):750 06.
. 9. . .
I V(OUT):7 96
755 . . . . . . . . . INV(00 );749.48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 755
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . � .
- - - - -
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . —.—. .
/, /\ ff.
75 — — 9 '-18"RCP 2.s 00 o. 0 0 75
. . . . . . . . . 7 / .
- - - - -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Struc-(1) y ".RCP . . . . . . . . . . . ./—. .
RIM:746.27• / l . . . . . :50% . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
INV(IN):744.48. , . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .745 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745
. . . . . . . . �. . . . .�. . . .
� . . �. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
740 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
N O Ln N m 00
. . . . . . . �. O. . . . . . .LA .M M. O. .M .^ Ln. .14 .d,
ov . . . . . . . mom. 4. . . . . . .� .N si. . . .� uc. Ln .
735 r, ^ 735
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+25
THIS EXHIBIT IS SCHEMATIC IN NATURE AND IS SUBJECT TO VARIATION.
0 40 80
STATESVILLE STUMPTOWN RESIDENTIAL HORZ.
SCALE FEET
STREAM IMPACT CROSS SECTIONAL AREA
AIA Colelenest&Stone HUNTERSVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
/ 1 BOLTON&MENK,INC. 05/22/2023

5/25/23, 12:15 PM M it-Christine G dst-0 Wook
1 } 2205 LF(0.016 AC)
OF STREAM IMPACT
±1,725 SF(0.04 AC I
gy I OF WETLAND
DISTURBANCE
fl.
Alternative Site Plan Location
https://outlook.office.com kn al/inbox/id/AAQ kADQ CAM m5NDg3LThIZDYtNDU2O(D5M DUOLW NIN2M 4NzVINW U5M g4Q PG 0f2%2By1 M 0m bm E7Xm 3...1 /1

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 12 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 12
WOUS Data Forms; Stream Information Form;
NCSAM and NCWAM forms

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network
Daily Total
30-Day Rolling Total
7 0 30 Year Normal Range
6 2023-01-26
v
Ln 5
� nn
� 4 MI vV
U 2023 02-25
2023-03-27
'M 3 ry
V
2
1
0
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
2022 2022 2022 2022 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023 2023
Coordinates 35.4252, -80.8597 30 Days Ending 301" %ile (in) 701" %ile (in) Observed (in) Wetness Condition Condition Value Month Weight Product
Observation Date 2023-03-27 2023-03-27 3.037008 4.302362 2.838583 Dry 1 3 3
Elevation (ft) 753.099 2023-02-25 2.309843 4.030709 3.051181 Normal 2 2 4
Drought Index (PDSI) Moderate drought (2023-02) 2023-01-26 2.944488 4.511417 5.535433 Wet 3 1 3
WebWIMP H2O Balance Wet Season Result Normal Conditions - 10
Weather Station Name Coordinates Elevation (ft) Distance (mi) Elevation A Weighted A Days Normal Days Antecedent
Figure and tables made by the MT HOLLY 4 NE 35.3339, -80.9867 609.908 9.538 143.191 5.658 10840 76
• Antecedent Precipitation Tool MOUNT HOLLY 4.4 ENE 35.3302, -80.96 729.003 1.527 119.095 0.869 356 0
Version 1.0
MOUNT HOLLY 4.8 E 35.3073, -80.9469 674.869 2.9 64.961 1.493 82 6
STANLEY 4.8 E 35.3678, -81.013 750.984 2.772 141.076 1.638 1 0
PAW CREEK 1.2 N 35.2951, -80.9332 722.113 4.035 112.205 2.268 2 8
MC ADENVILLE 35.2625, -81.0778 609.908 7.122 0.0 3.205 19 0
BELMONT 0.4 E 35.249, -81.0335 673.885 6.432 63.977 3.306 13 0
Written by Jason Deters
CHARLOTTE 9.2 WNW j 35.2264, -80.993 1 600.066 j 7.436 j 9.842 j 3.419 j 3 j 0
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CHARLOTTE DOUGLAS AP 1 35.2225, -80.9544 1 729.987 1 7.91 1 120.079 1 4.509 1 37 1 0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.,
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 04/13/2022
Applicant/Owner: Northwood Ravin Development State: NC Sampling Point: DP-AUP
Investigator(s): C.Geist, PWS, NRE Environmental, LLC Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): valley Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope(%): 2
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P,MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4253 Long:-80.8594 Datum: NAD 83 SP
Soil Map Unit Name: Enon sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) —Surface Soil Cracks(136)
—Surface Water(Al) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) —Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
_High Water Table(A2) —Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) —Drainage Patterns(1310)
_Saturation(A3) _Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(1316)
—Water Marks(61) —Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(132) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(133) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) —Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust(134) _Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(135) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) —Shallow Aquitard(D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(1313) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. sampling Point: DP-AUP
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1 Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4. Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 50.0% (A/B)
7. Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ) FACW species 3 x 2= 6
1. FAC species 58 x 3= 174
2. FACU species 102 x 4= 408
3. UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Column Totals: 163 (A) 588 (B)
5. Prevalence Index =B/A= 3.61
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. 3-Prevalence Index is 153.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) -Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Festuca rubra 75 Yes FACU 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2. Juncus effusus 1 No FACW be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Cyperus esculentus 2 No FACW Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Rumex crispus 3 No FAC Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
5. Taraxacum officinale 25 No FACU more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6. Plantago major 1 No FACU height.
7. Ranunculus repens 40 Yes FAC Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. Veronica serpyllifolia 15 No FAC than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9. Trifolium repens 1 No FACU (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
163 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 82 20%of total cover: 33 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5 Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP-AUP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 3/3 100 Loamy/Clayey
2-18 5YR 4/6 90 Loamy/Clayey Mixed Matrix
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(Al) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
—Black Histic(A3) —Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147,148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
—Stratified Layers(A5) _Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
_2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) —Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147,148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) —Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, —Other(Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix(S6) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
2-18:Mixed 10YR 3/3 10%
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.,
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 04/13/2022
Applicant/Owner: Northwood Ravin Development State: NC Sampling Point: DP-A
Investigator(s): C.Geist, PWS, NRE Environmental, LLC Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): valley Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope(%): 2
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P,MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4252 Long:-80.8591 Datum: NAD 83 SP
Soil Map Unit Name: Enon sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) —Surface Soil Cracks(136)
—Surface Water(Al) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) —Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
X High Water Table(A2) —Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) —Drainage Patterns(1310)
X Saturation(A3) X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(1316)
—Water Marks(61) —Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(132) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(133) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) —Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust(134) _Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(135) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) —Shallow Aquitard(D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(1313) X FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 8
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 0 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DP-A
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1 Number of Dominant Species
2. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 1 (A)
3. Total Number of Dominant
4. Species Across All Strata: 1 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7. Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: OBL species 125 x 1 = 125
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ) FACW species 30 x 2= 60
1. FAC species 0 x 3= 0
2. FACU species 0 x 4= 0
3. UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Column Totals: 155 (A) 185 (B)
5. Prevalence Index =B/A= 1.19
6. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. X 3-Prevalence Index is 153.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) -Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Leersia oryzoides 100 Yes OBL 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2. Juncus effusus 5 No FACW be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Cyperus esculentus 25 No FACW Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Carex crinita 25 No OBL Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
5. more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6 height.
7. Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9 (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
155 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 78 20%of total cover: 31 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5 Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP-A
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 7.5YR 4/2 78 7.5YR 4/6 20 C PL Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
7.5YR 4/1 2 D M
6-8 7.5YR 3/1 100 Loamy/Clayey organics
8-18 7.5YR 3/1 85 7.5YR 4/6 15 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(Al) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
—Black Histic(A3) —Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147,148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
_Stratified Layers(A5) X Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
_2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) X Redox Dark Surface(F6) —Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147,148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) —Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, —Other(Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix(S6) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control#:0710-xxxx,Exp:Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.,
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority:AR 335-15,paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 03/27/2023
Applicant/Owner: Northwood Ravin Development State: NC Sampling Point: DP-3
Investigator(s): C.Geist, PWS, NRE Environmental, LLC Section,Township,Range:
Landform(hillside,terrace,etc.): hillside Local relief(concave,convex,none): concave Slope(%): 2
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR P,MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4272 Long:-80.8614 Datum: NAD 83 SP
Soil Map Unit Name: Mecklenburg fine sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators(minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators(minimum of one is required:check all that apply) —Surface Soil Cracks(136)
—Surface Water(Al) _True Aquatic Plants(1314) —Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
_High Water Table(A2) —Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(C1) —Drainage Patterns(1310)
_Saturation(A3) _Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) _Moss Trim Lines(1316)
—Water Marks(61) —Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
_Sediment Deposits(132) _Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) _Crayfish Burrows(C8)
_Drift Deposits(133) _Thin Muck Surface(C7) —Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust(134) _Other(Explain in Remarks) _Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)
_Iron Deposits(135) _Geomorphic Position(D2)
_Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) —Shallow Aquitard(D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves(139) _Microtopographic Relief(D4)
Aquatic Fauna(1313) FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DP-3
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) %Cover Species? Status Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Liriodendron tulipifera 95 Yes FACU Number of Dominant Species
2. Quercus falcata 15 No FACU That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 2 (A)
3. Juniperus virginiana 2 No FACU Total Number of Dominant
4. Pinus taeda 5 No FAC Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
5. Percent of Dominant Species
6. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 28.6% (A/B)
7. Prevalence Index worksheet:
117 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 59 20%of total cover: 24 OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 ) FACW species 2 x 2= 4
1. Liquidambar styraciflua 15 Yes FAC FAC species 22 x 3= 66
2. Cercis canadensis 10 Yes FACU FACU species 151 x 4= 604
3. Prunus serotina 2 No FACU UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4. Liriodendron tulipifera 7 No FACU Column Totals: 175 (A) 674 (B)
5. Fraxinus pennsylvanica 2 No FACW Prevalence Index =B/A= 3.85
6. Lespedeza capitata 10 Yes FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9. 3-Prevalence Index is 153.0'
46 =Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations'(Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 23 20%of total cover: 10 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 ) -Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Liquidambar styraciflua 2 Yes FAC 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2. Cornus florida 1 No FACU be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
3. Ulmus alata 1 No FACU Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4. Ligustrum sinense 3 Yes FACU Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
5. more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
6 height.
7. Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
8. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9 (1 m)tall.
10. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
11. of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
7 =Total Cover Woody Vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50%of total cover: 4 20%of total cover: 2 height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Lonicera japonica 5 Yes FACU
2.
3.
4.
5 Hydrophytic
5 =Total Cover Vegetation
50%of total cover: 3 20%of total cover: 1 Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP-3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-3 7.5YR 3/4 97 7.5YR 4/6 3 C M Loamy/Clayey Distinct redox concentrations
3-12 5YR 4/4 95 5YR 3/2 5 D M Loamy/Clayey
12-20 5YR 4/6 100 Loamy/Clayey
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_Histosol(Al) _Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) _2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon(A2) _Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) _Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
—Black Histic(A3) —Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(MLRA 136) (MLRA 147,148)
_Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
—Stratified Layers(A5) _Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
_2 cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) _Redox Dark Surface(F6) —Red Parent Material(F21)
_Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) _Depleted Dark Surface(F7) (outside MLRA 127,147,148)
_Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _Redox Depressions(F8) —Very Shallow Dark Surface(F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1) _Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N, —Other(Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox(S5) _Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 122,136) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix(S6) —Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface(S7) Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127,147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG,JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 04/13/2022 Project/Site: Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Latitude: 35.4251
Redevelopment
Evaluator: C. Geist, PWS; NRE County: Mecklenburg Longitude: -80.8587
Environmental, LLC
Total Points: Stream Determination (circle one) Other:
Stream is at least intermittent 30 e.g. Quad
>_ 19 or perennial if 2!30` Ephemeral Intermitte Perenni SIF-SA
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =12 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1..Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 2 3
3. In-channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 2 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 1 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 3
8. Headcuts 0 2 3
9. Grade control 0 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =9.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No= 0
C. Biology (Subtotal =8.5 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 1 2 3
22. Fish 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 09 0.5 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW =0.75; OBL= 1 Other=0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
USACE AID# NCDWR#
Project Name Statesvill/Stumptown Rd. Date of Evaluation 03/27/2023
Redevelopment
Applicant/Owner Name R C untersville Property Owner Wetland Site Name Wetland A
Wetland Type Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh Assessor Name/Organization C.Geist, PWS, NRE
Environmental, LLC
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Torrence Creek
River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03050103
County Mecklenburg NCDWR Region Mooresville
❑ Yes ® No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude deci-de rees 35.4257,-80.8601
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
1. 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)
2. 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
5. 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
OF ❑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
El El ❑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
T
o❑A ❑A Canopy closed,or nearly closed,with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
o❑A ❑A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
u.) ❑B ❑B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
❑C ❑C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense shrub layer
1=_ ❑B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-o❑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 A
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 A
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 Date of Assessment 03/27/2023
C. Geist, PWS, NRE
Wetland Type Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh Assessor Name/Organization Environmental, LLC
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
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 Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition NA
Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition NA
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Particulate Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Soluble Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Physical Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) YES
Habitat Condition MEDIUM
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID#: NCDWR#:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the"Notes/Sketch"section if 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/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name(if any): Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment 2. Date of evaluation: 03/27/23
3.Applicant/owner name: RP Huntersville Property Owner LLC 4.Assessor name/organization: C.Geist, PWS, NRE Environmental, LLC
5.County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Torrence Creek
8.Site coordinates(decimal degrees,at lower end of assessment reach): 35.4257, -80.8601
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9.Site number(show on attached map): SA 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated(feet): 150
11.Channel depth from bed(in riffle, if present)to top of bank(feet): F Unable to assess channel depth.
12.Channel width at top of bank(feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? Yes ;No
14. Feature type: Co Perennial flow ;Intermittent flow C,Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ;Mountains(M) Co Piedmont(P) Inner Coastal Plain(1) ;Outer Coastal Plain(0)
\N.--
16. Estimated geomorphic \ _/
valley shape(skip for a b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream,flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream,steeper valley slope)
17.Watershed size: (skip E Size 1 (<0.1 mi`) []Size 2 (0.1 to<0.5 mi`) Size 3(0.5 to<5 mi`) Size 4(>-5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18.Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Ce Yes ;No If Yes,check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed ( U.I ;II ;III []IV ;V)
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 F Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish F 303(d)List F CAMA Area of Environmental Concern(AEC)
FV Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species: See Attachment 14
F Designated Critical Habitat(list species):
19.Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in"Notes/Sketch"section or attached? s Yes 'No
1. Channel Water-assessment reach metric(skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow,water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction-assessment reach metric
A At least 10%of assessment reach in-stream habitat or riffle-pool sequence is 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).
Us,B Not
3. Feature Pattern-assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern(examples:straightening, modification above or below culvert).
U;B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile-assessment reach metric
A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile(examples:channel down-cutting,existing damming,
over widening,active aggradation,dredging,and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
Us,B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability-assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability,not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure,active channel down-cutting(head-cut),active widening,and artificial hardening(such as concrete,gabion, rip-rap).
A < 10%of channel unstable
B 10 to 25%of channel unstable
C >25%of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction-streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank(LB)and the Right Bank(RB).
LB RB
A �;A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B U;B Moderate evidence of conditions(examples:berms, levees,down-cutting,aggradation,dredging)that adversely affect
reference interaction(examples:limited streamside area access,disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads,causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching[including mosquito ditching])

C �;C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction(little to no flood plain/i ntertidal 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
7. Water Quality Stressors-assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
F 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)
r C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor(not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the"Notes/Sketch"
section.
r F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone(removal, burning,regular mowing,destruction,etc.)
F I Other: (explain in"Notes/Sketch"section)
FV 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
U;Yes �;No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes,skip to Metric 13(Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In-stream Habitat Types-assessment reach metric
10a. U;Yes C No Degraded in-stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach(examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining,excavation,in-stream hardening[for example, rip-rap],recent dredging,and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only,then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur(occurs if>5%coverage of assessment reach)(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
FV A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses w r F 5%oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens,and algal mats) F- m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
FV B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o in F H Low-tide refugia(pools)
vegetation 0 F I Sand bottom
C Multiple snags and logs(including lap trees) m F J 5%vertical bank along the marsh
D 5%undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots U 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 �;No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream?(skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
FV A Riffle-run section(evaluate 11c)
7 B Pool-glide section(evaluate 11d)
F C Natural bedform absent(skip to Metric 12,Aquatic Life)
11 c. 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
Co �; �; �; �; Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder(256-4096 mm)
�; �; �; Cobble(64-256 mm)
Co C C Gravel(2-64 mm)
C C Sand(.062-2 mm)
Co �; Silt/clay(<0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial(rip-rap,concrete,etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment?(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life-assessment reach metric(skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Co Yes �;No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No,select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. �;No Water �;Other:
12b. Co Yes U;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 FV Adult frogs

r F Aquatic reptiles
r F Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses(include liverworts,lichens,and algal mats)
F F Beetles(including water pennies)
F F Caddisfly larvae(Trichoptera[T])
r F_ Asian clam(Corbicula)
r F Crustacean(isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F F Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F F Dipterans(true flies)
r F Mayfly larvae(Ephemeroptera[E])
r F Megaloptera(alderfly,fishfly,dobsonfly larvae)
r F Midges/mosquito larvae
r F_ Mosquito fish(Gambusia)or mud minnows(Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams(not Corbicula)
r F Other fish
F R Salamanders/tadpoles
F F Snails
r F Stonefly larvae(Plecoptera[P])
r F 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
C ;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.
FV A Streams and/or springs(jurisdictional 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)
FV D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating(iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
FV 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)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach(ex: watertight dam,sediment deposit)
C Urban stream(>>24%impervious surface for watershed)
FV 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.
U;A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category(may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded(example:scattered trees)
C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width-streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider"vegetated buffer"and"wooded buffer"separately for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB)starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
A A ;A ;A >-100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B ;B ;B From 50 to< 100-feet wide
C C ;C ;C From 30 to<50-feet wide
D D ;D ;D From 10 to<30-feet wide
E E ;E ;E < 10-feet wide or no trees

20. Buffer Structure-streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB)for Metric 19("Vegetated"Buffer Width).
LB RB
A U,A Mature forest
B ;B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C ;C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees< 10 feet wide
D ;D Maintained shrubs
E ;E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors-streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts),does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream(<30 feet),or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank,check here and skip to Metric 22: F
Abuts <30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
;A ;A ;A ;A CA CA Row crops
B B B B Co B Co B Maintained turf
U;C CC U,C U,C CC CC Pasture(no livestock)/commercial horticulture
U,D C D �;D U,D �;D �;D Pasture(active livestock use)
22. Stem Density-streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank(LB)and right bank(RB)for Metric 19("Wooded"Buffer Width).
LB RB
U,A �L.A Medium to high stem density
B B Low stem density
C ;C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer-streamside area metric(skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation>10-feet wide.
LB RB
A ;A The total length of buffer breaks is<25 percent.
B ;B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C ;C The total length of buffer breaks is>50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition-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
A ;A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species,with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
B ;B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present,but not dominant,over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C ;C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity-assessment reach metric(skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. �;Yes Co No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No,select one of the following reasons. �;No Water Co Other: Not assessed
251b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement(units of microsiemens per centimeter).
C A <46 B 46 to<67 C 67 to<79 C D 79 to<230 C E >- 230
Notes/Sketch:

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment Date of Evaluation 03/27/23
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization 3t, PWS, NRE Environment
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations(Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included(Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type(perennial, intermittent,Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary All Streams Intermittent
(1)Hydrology HIGH
(2)Baseflow MEDIUM
(2)Flood Flow HIGH
(3)Streamside Area Attenuation HIGH
(4)Floodplain Access HIGH
(4)Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4)Microtopography NA
(3)Stream Stability MEDIUM
(4)Channel Stability HIGH
(4)Sediment Transport LOW
(4)Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2)Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2)Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2)Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3)Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1)Water Quality MEDIUM
(2)Baseflow MEDIUM
(2)Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3)Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3)Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2)Indicators of Stressors NO
(2)Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW
(2)Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1)Habitat LOW
(2)In-stream Habitat LOW
(3)Baseflow MEDIUM

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 13 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 13
NCDMS Conditional Acceptance Letter

mt STATE
R.z=•n
ROY COOPER �y
Governor _
ELIZABETH S.BISER
Secretary, f+,
MARC RECKTENWALD NORTH CAROLINA
Director Environmental Quality
May 23, 2023
Kyle Whitaker
RP Huntersville Property Owner, LLC
558 E. Brooklyn Village Ave., Suite 120
Charlotte, NC 28202 Expiration of Acceptance: 11/23/2023
Project: Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in-
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s)an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in-lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location Impact Type Impact Quantity
8-di it HUC
Catawba 03050103 Riparian Wetland 0.20
Catawba 03050103 Warm Stream 237
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement.
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In-Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in-lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Sincerely,
FOR James. B Stanfill
Deputy Director
cc: Christine Geist, agent
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh,North Carolina 27699-1652
, ,: i o.��„„•iai nai V 919.707.8976

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 14 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 14
Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat Assessment Report

Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment
(± 19.7 acres)
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
NRE Project#22.07
April 7, 2023
Prepared For:
Northwood Ravin Development
3015 Carrington Mill Blvd, Suite 460
Morrisville, NC 27560
Prepared By:
NRE
ENVIRONMENTAL
PO Box#401
Fort Mill, SC 29716
www.NREenvironmental.com

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
1 INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes a Threatened and Endangered Species Habitat Assessment performed by NRE
Environmental, LLC (NRE) for ± 19.7-acre study area on the proposed Statesville/Stumptown Rd.
Redevelopment site (Project) located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (Attachment 11.The report
was commissioned to provide information related to the occurrence of federally protected species (T&E)
on or within the vicinity of the proposed Project. The site assessment methodology consisted of reviewing
available wildlife habitat databases and published natural resource information systems, including the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
online databases, and performing a field reconnaissance and habitat mapping.
2 METHODS
2.1 Information Review
Publicly available databases of ecological resources and classification systems were reviewed for federally
protected species of concern and their habitat information, as well as, protected and/or precluded lands
information for Mecklenburg County in the state of North Carolina and within the Project area. The
NCNHP Data Explorer and the USFWS Information for Planning and Conservation(IPaC)records for species
of concern and their habitat within or near the Project area was compiled (Attachment 2).
Digital data, including United States Geological Survey (USGS) US Topo quadrangle topographic maps
(Attachment 3), aerial imagery, a Web Soil Survey report from the US Department of Agriculture, Natural
Resource Conservation Service (NRCS; Attachment 4), and the National Wetland Inventory (NWI), were
reviewed for the Project and surrounding area. Delineated waters of the US were reviewed for habitat
suitability (NRE 2023).
References used for rare,threatened and endangered species and natural communities included,"Manual
of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas" (Radford et al. 1968), "Guide to the Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina" (Schafale 2012), and "Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States"
(Weakley 2015).
2.2 Field Reconnaissance
Following the review of digital data, NRE Biologists conducted a field investigation, which consisted of
conducting wide transecting to identify habitat types in the study area and identify plant species and
ecological conditions that are present within those habitats. Habitat types that appeared suitable for any
of the potential listed species that could occur on the study area (which can vary for each species) were
carefully documented and the approximate areas sketched on a map. Areas identified with aerials that
appeared to contain unsuitable habitat were spot checked to be certain no potential habitat was present.
During the reconnaissance, the biologists evaluated existing vegetation and used prepared maps to 1)
ground truth the amount and locations of the landcover and physical features within the Project, 2)
describe the common habitats, 3) identify less common habitats not shown on the maps, and 4) confirm
2

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
the presence or absence of suitable habitat for species of concern. Photographs were also taken to
document site conditions.
NRE biologists did not conduct a detailed rare species search during the reconnaissance; however, it was
expected that the location of any T&E or similar species that might be encountered during the field
investigation would be documented and their location noted. A detailed search would be needed in
identified suitable habitat area to search thoroughly for any listed plant or animal species that could
potentially be present during the appropriate time of year (as determined by the USFWS) if the suitable
areas were too large to completely document the area. Small areas of potential habitat that could be
reviewed 100% were searched for listed or similar species if specimens could be identified to species
and/or survey was within the appropriate time of year.
2.3 Habitat Mapping
After the Project field reconnaissance was completed, detailed habitat mapping for all federally listed
threatened and endangered species with potentially suitable habitat present on the Project was
performed in GIS. This process included sketching approximate extents of potential habitat in GIS and
exporting a pdf map depicting the locations (if present; Attachment 4).
3 RESULTS
3.1 Reference Data
Available reference data information is presented below and in the referenced Appendices:
a. Federally Listed Species of Concern and Their Habitat: According to the IPaC and the NCNHP
databases (March 24, 2023 and 27, 2023, respectively), 2 federally endangered species, 1
federally threatened species, 1 proposed federally endangered, and 1 federal candidate species
have the potential to occur in the Project,including 1 mammal, 1 insect,and 3 plant species(Table
1). Potential habitat for the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), a federally protected species
through the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, has also been listed.
Table 1. Federally listed species with potential to occur in the Project
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Habitat Notes
Status
Suitable summer roost and foraging
Proposed habitat includes deciduous forest and
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavis Endangered wetlands.
Hibernacula includes caves,mines,rock
piles,etc.
Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate Grasslands and prairies
Meadows,open woodlands,the
Smooth coneflower Echinacea laevigata Threatened ecotonal regions,cedar barrens,dry
limestone bluffs,clear cuts,and
roadside and utility rights-of-way
3

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Habitat Notes
Status
Roadside rights-of-way,maintained
power lines and other utility rights-of-
way,edges of thickets and old pastures,
Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered clearings and edges of upland oak-pine-
hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf
pine forests,and other sunny or semi-
sunny disturbed habitats
Sandy or rocky,open,upland woods on
Michaux's sumac Rhus michouxii Endangered acidic or circumneutral,well-drained
sands or sandy loam soils with low
cation exchange capacities
b. U.S.G.S. Map: The 2019 Cornelius, NC US Topo Map indicates the site is at an elevation of 736-
772 feet (Attachment 3). General surface water drainage is to the northwest toward an unnamed
tributary to Torrence Creek. The Project is located in the Lower Catawba River Basin (HUC8
03050103.
c. Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina: The site is located on the Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina 1. The site contains the following soil series (Attachment 4,
Table 2):
Table 2. Soil Series Mapped within the Project
Soil Series Name Map Unit Hydric
Symbol
Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately
eroded Ce132 No
Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes EnB No
Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes EnD No
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes MeB No
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes MeD No
Wilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes WkE No
Cecil: The Cecil series consists of very deep, well drained moderately permeable soils on ridges
and side slopes of the Piedmont uplands.The parent material is residuum weathered from felsic,
igneous and high-grade metamorphic rocks. The depth to water table is greater than 80 inches.
Slope ranges from 2 to 15 percent.
Enon: The Enon series consists of very deep, well drained, slowly permeable soils on ridgetops
and side slopes in the Piedmont. The parent material is residuum weathered from mafic or
intermediate igneous and high-grade metamorphic rocks such as diorite, gabbro, diabase, or
hornblende gneiss or schist.The depth to water table is greater than 80 inches. Slope ranges from
2 to 45 percent.
1 Soil Survey Staff,Natural Resources Conservation Service,United States Department of Agriculture.Web Soil Survey.Available
online.Accessed[August/1/2022]
4

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
Mecklenburg:The Mecklenburg series consists of very deep,well drained,slowly permeable soils.
The parent material formed in residuum weathered from intermediate and mafic crystalline rocks
of the Piedmont uplands.The depth to water table is greater than 80 inches. Slope ranges from 2
to 8 percent.
Wilkes:The Wilkes series consists of shallow, well drained, moderately slow to slowly permeable
soils. The parent material formed in residuum weathered from intermediate and mafic crystalline
rocks.The depth to water table is greater than 80 inches. Slope ranges from 4 to 15 percent.
d. Jurisdictional Waters of the US Delineation: Palustrine emergent wetlands (PEM) and one
unnamed perennial tributary were delineated on the site by NRE Environmental on April 13, 2022
and March 27, 2023 (subject to USACE concurrence; NRE 2023). The GPS mapped location of
delineated wetlands and other waters are indicated on Attachment 4.
e. Photographs: Photographs of the Project area depict the site landcover and or potential habitat,
as shown in Attachment 5.
3.2 Potential Habitat and Suitability2
A field visit was conducted by Principal Scientist, Christine Geist, PWS,within the Project area on
March 27, 2023. Potential habitat was reviewed within open fields, residential areas, wetlands
and streams, and woodlots within the Project (Attachment 4). These areas were assessed to
determine if they could provide suitable habitat if appropriate soils/conditions were present.
Open field is present in the southern portion of the Project (Photo 1). The field is dominated by
fescue (Festuca rubra), broom sedge (Andropogon virgincus), sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum
odoratum), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), and field wood rush (Luzula campestris). The
field appears to be regularly mown.Along the edges of the maintained field and residential areas,
a moderately dense shrub and herb layer is present, including Eastern red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana), privet(Ligustrum spp.),olive(Elaeagnus umbellate), pin cherry(Prunus pensylvanica),
blackberry (Rubus argutus), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) and
dense honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) (Photo 2).
Residential areas with maintained lawn and ornamental trees dominate the central portion of the
Project area,with species including pecan (Carya illinoinsis),American holly(Ilex opaca),and black
cherry(Prunus serotina) (Photos 3 and 4).
A mixed hardwood-evergreen woodlot is present in the northern portion of the Project, with
smaller pockets in the residential areas (Photo 5). The dominant species are tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera),sweetgum (Liquidambarstyraciflua),southern red oak(Quercus falcate),
redbud (Cercis canadensis), eastern red cedar, and Virginia pine (Pinus taeda) in the canopy, with
z Protected Species biological information from Protected Species Survey Windows and Habitat Descriptions_NCDOT.pdf.
Available at:
https://con nect.ncdot.gov/resources/Environmental/EAU/ECAP/Docu ments/Protected%20Species%2OSu rvey%2OW i ndows%20
and%20Habitat%2ODescriptions.pdf
5

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
small saplings and honeysuckle in the understory. The woodlot edges were dominated by privet
and honeysuckle.
One small, modified tributary is also located on the site, which was reviewed for suitable habitat
for listed bats and freshwater species (Photo 6).
3.3 Listed Species and their Potential for Occurrence within the Project3
The following species were reviewed for their potential to occur within the Project.
a. Tricolored bat(Perimyotis subflavis)4
Habitat: In North Carolina, the tricolored bat (TCB) occurs throughout the state. They typically
spend winter hibernating in caves and mines,with recent survey data indicating the bats use gold
mine portals in the Piedmont. During the summer, TCB often roost singly underneath bark, in
cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. This bat also been found to roost in structures
like barns and sheds, under eaves of buildings, behind window shutters, in bridges, and in bat
houses. Foraging occurs on forested hillsides and ridges, and occasionally over forest clearings,
over water, and along tree-lined corridors. Trees and human structures are important maternity
roosts.
Biological conclusion: No effect*
Artificial structures(residential structures and sheds)and trees with loose bark that could be used
as roost habitat are present within the Project area,and suitable foraging habitat is limited to the
onsite stream for this fragmented suburbanized location (Photos 3 to 5). A review of NCNHP
records on March 27, 2023, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
*On September 13,2022,the USFWS proposed to list the tricolored bat as an endangered species.
This proposed listing is under a public comment period. Removal of suitable roost locations or
foraging habitat may require further review upon a change to the federal listing status of the
species. Because the species has not yet been formally placed on the endangered species list, it
has been determined that this project will not affect this species.
b. Monarch butterfly(Danaus plexippus)
Habitat:According to the USFWS,the monarch butterfly was proposed as a Candidate species on
December 17, 2020 (85 FIR 81813 81822). It was determined that listing the Monarch under the
Endangered Species Act is warranted but precluded at this time by higher priority listing actions
and will be reviewed annually until a proposal to list the species is developed.
Biological conclusion: No effect
s Protected Species biological information from Protected Species Survey Windows and Habitat Descriptions_NCDOT.pdf.
Available at:
https://con nect.ncdot.gov/resources/Environmental/EAU/ECAP/Docu ments/Protected%20Species%2OSu rvey%2OW i ndows%20
and%20Habitat%2ODescriptions.pdf
4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.2021.Species Status Assessment Report for the Tricolored Bat(Perimyotis subflavus),Version
1.1.December 2021.Hadley,MA.
6

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
No habitat is present within the Project area, nor has the monarch butterfly been formally placed
on the endangered species list;therefore, it has been determined that this project will not affect
this species.
c. Smooth coneflower(Echinacea laevigata)
Habitat: Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open woodlands,
the ecotonal regions between meadows and woodlands,cedar barrens,dry limestone bluffs,clear
cuts, and roadside and utility rights-of-way. In North Carolina, the species normally grows in
magnesium- and calcium- rich soils associated with gabbro and diabase parent material, and
typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is
abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g.,
regular fire regime, well-timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of shade-
producing woody shrubs and trees. On sites where woody succession is held in check, it is
characterized by a number of species with prairie affinities.
Biological conclusion: No effect
There is no habitat within the Project area (Photos 1 to 4). The project area does not have the
appropriate soil, the open field is too regularly maintained, and the field edges had a dense
herbaceous/invasive vine layer,which are not suitable areas for smooth coneflower. A review of
NHP records on March 27, 2023,also indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study
area. Due to the lack of habitat and lack of known occurrences, it has been determined that this
project will not affect this species.
d. Schweinitz's sunflower(Helianthus schweinitzii)
Habitat:Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont of North and South Carolina.The few
sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation are found in
Xeric Hardpan Forests.The species is also found along roadside rights-of-way, maintained power
lines and other utility rights-of-way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of
upland oak-pine-hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi-
sunny habitats where disturbances(e.g., mowing,clearing,grazing, blow downs,storms,frequent
fire)help create open or partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive
competition from other vegetation. Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series,
including Badin,Cecil,Cid, Enon,Gaston,Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer,Secrest,
Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion, among others. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils
with high gravel content; shallow, poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those
derived from mafic rocks.
Biological conclusion: No effect
There is no habitat within the Project area (Photos 1 to 4). While the project area does have the
appropriate soils, the open field is too regularly maintained and the field edges had a dense
herbaceous/invasive vine layer,which are not suitable areas for Schweinitz's sunflower. A review
of NHP records on March 27, 2023, also indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the
study area. Due to the lack of habitat and lack of known occurrences, it has been determined that
this project will not affect this species.
7

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
e. Michaux's sumac(Rhus michauxii)
Habitat: Michaux's sumac,endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont,grows in sandy
or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well-drained sands or sandy loam soils
with low cation exchange capacities.The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales
and depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina
bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights-of way; areas where forest
canopies have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots;
abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies;
and in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In
the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade
intolerant and,therefore,grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing,grazing, periodic
fire) maintains its open habitat.
Biological conclusion: No effect
The Project area was inspected and reviewed for suitability, but was determine to be too
overgrown and shaded for the Michaux's sumac (Photos 1 and 5). A review of NHP records on
March 27, 2023, also indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to
the lack of habitat and lack of known occurrences, it has been determined that this project will
not affect this species.
f. Bald eagle(Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
Habitat:The bald eagle is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act,and enforced
by the USFWS. Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forests in proximity to large
bodies of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically
within 1.0 mile of open water.
Biological conclusion: No effect
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.0-mile radius
of the project limits,was performed on March 27,2023 using Google Earth color aerials. No water
bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding sources were
identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a survey of the project
study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not conducted. Additionally, a
review of the NHP database on March 27, 2023 revealed no known occurrences of this species
within 1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of habitat, known occurrences, and
minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect
this species.
4 CONCLUSION
A field review of the Project area was conducted by NRE biologists on March 27, 2023. NRE biologists
did not observe any suitable habitat for listed species within the Project area; therefore, the Project
will have no effect on any federally listed this species (Table 3). Roost and foraging habitat for the
tricolored bat may be present within the Project; however, the species has not yet been formally
listed.Therefore, it has been determined that this project will not affect this species. In addition,the
Project will have no effect on the monarch butterfly, as no suitable habitat was observed and listing
8

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
of this species is warranted but precluded at this time by higher priority listing actions; therefore, it
has been determined that this project will not affect this species.
Table 3. Federally listed species with potential to occur in the Project
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status* Habitat Biological
Present Conclusion
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavis Proposed Yes No effect**
Endangered
Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate No No effect
Smooth coneflower Echinacea laevigata Threatened No No effect
Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered No No effect
Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered No No effect
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BGPA No No effect
* BGPA—Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
** Note that a future anticipated listing of this species may require Section 7 consultation with federal agencies in the
event a federal action is requested for the Project.
5 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS
NRE Environmental, LLC has performed the Services with the standard of care normally exercised by
professional consultants performing comparable services under similar conditions at the time the Services
were rendered. NRE Environmental, LLC has performed the Services with recognized prudent professional
standards applicable in the industry, and in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations, standards
and codes.
6 REFERENCES
NRE Environmental, LLC. 2023. Wetlands and Other Waters Delineation Report; Statesville/Stumptown
Rd. Redevelopment; March 31, 2023. 39 pp.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Univ. North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Schafale, Michael. P. 2012. Guide to the Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (4th
Approximation). North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, Department
of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC. 217 pp.
Weakley, Alan S. 2015 Flora of the Southern and Mid-Atlantic States: Working Draft of 21 May 2015.
University of North Carolina Herbarium (NCU), North Carolina Botanical Garden, Chapel Hill, NC. 1320 pp.
Also accessible at http://www.herbarium.unc.edu/flora.htm.
9

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
ATTACHMENT 1
Vicinity Map
10

u
' ORI IUS Greenpona Ln �
6
Arledge Ln
_ m Of
Vixen Ln
-
S� VIA
?3. \ E u
Site a SiRlk Lasaro Way c
ti
7 U
_ Bevm Ct
1 r S°nCq,�µS cenneuact North
O Ma kL nbarg
HIntersv i�� —1 4egean Co
�rykd Huntersville ct
` Rioksted CL mmumry Park
I� water
Sources: Esri, HERE,Garmin;, t°n cry
T T
USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT
c}, °'a ; R NRCan,Esri Japan,M,ETI, = St Batts Ln�
�' P6 Esri China(Hong Kong),.Esri
2 I E d
P O`
O
to 4, Not Van Straiten Ct ^ 0a'la yO.Or
4a.
N Pr IS Su ell St
F12
O Ln IS Qtess tJeS
Ia �a
p` `a Holly Springs Dr Q `
4 m Quaint Aly v
£
t c ~
Ot
© kstde Pottfie/tl 0, Or y Arrs Aly
\A Kansma AIY a < 7
s�1 Qa\ee` a\650c�S� ^ 1'Vater front Dr Ti Iles AlY C,,I,y Aly Fe
0
o O� aP�i rn Morehouse St 1.
5
%6i Qo�ao Nsp Copley Square Or
i0e�p Shinner Or a
N �rbA Aiken
Oa o
61, t J StumPtown Rdw
0 4 O ca�e 1 S
°F 9
O o SJ c.
N P c G
s
0A N µd s
` Stomp`o`Nn
n
St Mark ~
Catholic
µrf o
to a tli
Wn
St°mP a4
i Chris n-,n Canadice Rd m y
G blunt«=inn c G
2
V
o
a n Rd
2 = a
0
E 44ror
'1o114n T o` DOgwI'd Ter
4
A� 21
Ln
c�yJ ohelle Rd A m Hunters Jy(,a
ace°
� Laur v a -t v
'= m Legend
o
atle r u ID
C
a $ \\\e
A 3Sk or ;sV °gy m Project Area-19.7 Ac
0 2 y G HUC
-
G ^ n ldetParkDt 0 510 1,020
Feet
Sources: Esri, HERE,Garmin, USGS.Qlntermap, INCREMENT,P;NRCan,Esri
Japan,METI,Esri CNNA"(Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), NGCC,(c)
CipenStreetMap contributors,and the GIS User Community
Date
Vicinity March 27, 2023
NREo.Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment Project N 22 07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7, 2023
ATTACHMENT 2
Agency Coordination
USFWS IPAC Report and NCNHP Resource Letter
11

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical
habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
(USFWS)jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced
below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but
that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area.
However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust
resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species
surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the
USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to
each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI
Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that
section.
Location
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
H
e K:
n
Local office
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
1�. [phone]
JEJ [phone]
160 Zillicoa Street
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 1 /12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC:Explore Location resources
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
10
-0
0
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QHG W 17HZ7KY/resources 2 /12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis
of project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each
species. Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes
areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in
that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at
the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow
downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this
list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any
potential effects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific information is often
required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the
Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be
present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted,
funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list
which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from
either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field
office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC
website and request an official species list by doing the following:
1 . Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed speciesl and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown
on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1 . Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also
shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for
more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 3 112

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office
of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Mammals
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
Insects
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
Wherever found \N\O
�
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. r�'►
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
X10
Flowering Plants 0
STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered
Wherever found % �.* %6-J
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata Threatened
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QF-G W F7HZ7KY/resources 4 /12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the
endangered species themselves.
There are no critical habitats at this location.
Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Acts.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and
consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1 . The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
V%%I% 1%
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/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-
migratory-birds
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-
measures.pdf
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how
this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this
location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see
exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around
your project area, visit the 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.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 5 112

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization
measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF
PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be
present and breeding in your project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to Jul 31
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area,
but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential
susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of
development or activities.
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 25
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Eastern Whip-poor-will Antrostomus vociferus Breeds May 1 to Aug 20
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska. Vol,
Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus R� Breeds Apr 20 to Aug 20
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Breeds May 1 to Jul 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10 to Sep 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC)throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds elsewhere
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular
Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 6 112

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC)throughout its
range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely
to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your
project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and
understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before
using or attempting to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-
week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey
effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One
can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also
high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1 . The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events
for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted
Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in
week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of
presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence
at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of
presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Breeding Season ( )
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)
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 7 /12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of
surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The
number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are
based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort —no data
SPECIES JAN 11 FEB MAR APR
AlPyR 11 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle ++ I I IITI TITI ITI I ++ I IIIIIIIIIIIIII-ME, I -I I rI I III I
Non-BCC
Vulnerable 11 1 ll I Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewide +TT I IIT11 I ++T+ 111 11 1 I I I IIII I II 111111111t +++t + I I I
(CON)Eastern Whip- I + + 10
+ + + +
poolw I I It +T11 1111 ++l+ i 1-cr BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Kentucky I I I II � 1 1 I���� ���
Warbler ++++ T I I I I I I III 1 + ++s+ ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC Rangewide
(CON) I I 1 I 1111 1 Prairie Warbler I ++ +*+ +++t y+ii q III III I I TT+� �T+T +*++ TTTT ++++
BCC Rangewide r TTTT TTTT T TT
(CON)
Prothonotary
Warbler ++++ ++++ +++-I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i ++++ ++++ ++++ +4 1 I-I-I-I
BCC Rangewide
(CON)Red-headed TTTT ++ +TT ++++ +*t 44 44 *11111110 1111111100 *11111110 +TT
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON) I I
Rusty Blackbird I I I I I I I I I I I ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +++T11 ++T11 yy+ T+,I I
BCC- BCR
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QF-G W F7HZ7KY/resources 8 /12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all
birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds
are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the
locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure.
To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of
Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity
you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified
location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other
species that may warrant special attention in your project location. O-w t-4
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 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:
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QHG W F7HZ7KY/resources 9 /12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
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 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
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 1 0/12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
more about conservation measures,visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement
to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources
page.
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must
undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the
individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.
There are no refuge lands at this location.
Fish hatcheries
There are no fish hatcheries at this location.
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
( NWI )
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Wetland information is not available at this time
This can happen when the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map service is unavailable, or
for very large projects that intersect many wetland areas. Try again, or visit the NWI map to
view wetlands at this location.
Data limitations
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 1 1/12

3/24/23, 1:08 PM I PaC: Explore Location resources
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level
information on the location, type and size of these resources.The maps are prepared from the analysis of
high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A
margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular
site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image
analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work
conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any
mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work.There
may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted
on the map and the actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of
aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or
submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and
nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also
been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial
imagery.
Data precautions �� 4
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe
wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or
products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local
government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies.
Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should
seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory
programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/OTOYPTZDSN F4BA2QFG W F7HZ7KY/resources 1 2/12

Roy Cooper,Governor
■■ ■ NC DEPARTMENT OF D_Reid Wilson,Secretary
■■■■m NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■■ Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director,Natural Heritage Program
NCNHDE-21387
March 27, 2023
Christine Geist
NRE Environmental, LLC
Po Box #401
Fort Mill, SC 29716
RE: Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment; 22.07
Dear Christine Geist:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one-mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally-
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod nev.butler(a)ncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Qv 121 W.JONES STREET.RALEIGH.NC 27603 • 1651 MAIL SERVICE CENTER.RALEIGH.NC 27699
& OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment
Project No. 22.07
March 27, 2023
NCNHDE-21387
No Element Occurrences are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Mecklenburg County Open Space - North Mecklenburg County Local Government
Mecklenburg Park
Mecklenburg County Open Space - Torrence Creek Mecklenburg County Local Government
Greenway
Mecklenburg County Open Space - Torrence Creek Mecklenburg County Local Government
Tributary
Town of Huntersville Open Space Town of Huntersville Local Government
Town of Huntersville Open Space Town of Huntersville Local Government
Town of Huntersville Open Space Town of Huntersville Local Government
Town of Huntersville Open Space Town of Huntersville Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.orq/help. Data query generated on March 27,2023;source: NCNHP,Q4,Winter(January)
2023. Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-21387: Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment
73
oath o 0
m° Ss
B�tkaa E M c c o r a
Birkdale Golf
Club
w
813 ft
Nagers Ra
2
d
, P
13
Stumptown Rd
� van Rd
StumPto
ook Regional St Mark
Park Catholic
a
w
77 an
c In
Hunter o,Co
svill
L�
_ c�C
N s
W N_.� 311ea Rd }
02S-IunterOsgyIe 1.1 Mileg"9c>p
S Rosedale
March 27,2023
Managed Area (MAREA)
Q Buffered Project Boundary
Pro ect Bounda Sources:Esri,Airbus DS,USGS,NGA,NASA,CGIAR,N Robinson,NCEAS,
ry NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat. GSA, Geoland, FEMA,
Intemiap and the GIS user community
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap
contributors,and the GIS User Community
Page 3 of 3

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7,2023
ATTACHMENT 3
USGS Map
12

LAj
Ln
LLJ
io Sc
141
It
BAYA f SPRUELL
_ o SIDS DRdR
ATERFRpNr DR.
V
f i 1 yy �•r� i �. � 7
a , . r ,
RD r
J�� 1 � CANADICE R_D_ , -
r� - _J
LU
� -
rM
Nit
sT Jr I`, I 1 Cf Legend
Project Area-19.7 Ac 'C r
HA.
l 0 500 1,000
Date
2019 Cornelius, NC USGS Topo March 27, 2023
NRE Project No.
Statesville/Stumptown Road Redevelopment 22-07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7, 2023
ATTACHMENT 4
Protected Species Potential Habitat
13

P Reference;Background layers from NC OneMap;https://www.nconemap.gov/
♦O� �e ejl A Protected Species habitat assessment was conducted by NRE on March 28,
� Q�t 2023. No protected species were observed within the Project and the Project
;./`Oar WkE does not have suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower, Smooth coneflower, or
Michaux's sumac. The Project area may contain suitable roosting and foraging
habit in woodlots and along streams for the tri-colored bat, and may require
�k further review upon a change to the federal listing status of the species.
' Data Source: Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United
States Department of Agriculture.Web Soil Survey.Available online.
SR NRE Wetlands and Other Waters Delineation Report, Statesville/Stumptown Rd.
Redevelopment, March 31,2023.
Photo 5
Soil Series Name Map Unit
Symbol Hydric
F •, b Cecil sandy clay loam,2 to 8 percent slopes,moderately eroded CeB2 No
Enon sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes EnB No
Enon sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes EnD No
` PhOt+oy,4t Mecklenburg fine sandy loam,2 to 8 percent slopes MeB No
' Mecklenburg fine sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes MeD No
Wilkes loam,15 to 25 percent slopes WkE No
IV
JF
\ EnD Photo 6 Lti
� III o t
ootpl SJt`
►� 01�11 �
• EnB
EnD r
MeB
PaE
Photo 2 � ` A
III III 111 f Legend N
G
Project Area-19.7 Ac
Perennial Stream
CeB2 fi ® Emergent Wetland
' CeD2 R USDA Soils� a
0 140 280
Feet
Source: E--Sri, M:axar,GeoEye, E:arthstar Geographies, a,@_'1FS1U!,�Sjn
N,and the GISommunity, NCD© it
Date
Protected Species Habitat Assessment April 7, 2023
NR Project No.
Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment 22-07
ENVIRONMENTAL Mecklenburg County Drawn By:
Huntersville, North Carolina CAG

NRE Threatened and Endangered Species
Habitat Assessment Report
ENVIRONMENTAL NRE Project#22.07
April 7, 2023
ATTACHMENT 5
Site Photographs
14

Date&?ime tdon.rr 27.2023 J141,
Posit16n i035 42 08085 it7
AltAulte 7eh� 26 2
Datum WGS-84
Azimuth/Bearing 154 S26E 2738mi1s True i.13 i
Elevation Grade-006
Horizon Grade -000
`
vk',�r„ ',,, jr .-1 .y. ""' a.1'• .i••�,fi t S �• :S�.t'
Po�t� •�Y : �I• ,
.frr:-POW 11
AzTmutfi/Bearing-143�`
xy
a, vd�ion�ira�e:tol s.•'''�,�di �ti .
izon Grade,0)01%-*a? ' �•� i K
j�♦ .,�1 q- a--j f
.. -�w 9iC��.r 7pJr ��5,•
~yl

y• ' �
q �, .i =• .,a fig:.y.
-" Nt
L d�'��w_►'J• tea.;.1.,.'�,,
VRA
•�r:i C � J•:t ���� r.
m. or,
.;of
'�7ye• .'.ti+1 r �i "';-�ti •+"^'�5 r. •ry`` /�'t "�'�j�i'\.c '.7��,yl•�,�f ���1.,, A^,•.
�14%r?
/h. �y f•'� y a N� ;�j�xf �i„y F•7Yr'
�`� ,vy r ;,+3��1< •'I;ld �.r •t h� ' �y�.r" {. y+f ��r '` i'4� •
'' _.tom �,���jai.• ♦ r6•?`g '!�• /!. � h f�+�¢tK�< ,�1�,j+',�,`,•7}..''��'*"1+i +��:
;t -. r+i. tt v, ..f'1 -,,.,r, \ .o�yrEya� ,"`\..',�C• 'i I `,••a 16 Kea ,•-a
� .nyy. ',•1�� .,#- ,�1, �* �'.c '_I�, okJ7 �1','� r,� ►"�•FY,'•ll',t_ 5T �

08 8 6
Po Iffonon 219 B. 1, 2 (-131 4
f for'for'd,'
W S44,
4z eating US, E 2 its True(I
,018-E(*ev on' Grade
k I 1, -.1) tt
lH'N.',Z o4,1,ado -0 3
1 (,
Zoom b'5 x
55.
Mar 043 DT
No I .0fil
:t;A.
lurik
True
,.F v
nz A,
Zoo Alk
Add&—
vi
JL

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 15 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 15
NCHPO Clearance Letter

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.
May 12, 2023
Christine A. Geist, PWS cgeist&nreenviro.com
NRE Environmental
PO Box#401
Fort Mill, SC 29716
Re: Develop subdivision, intersection of Statesville Road and Sumptown Road, Huntersville,
Mecklenburg County, ER 23-0994
Dear Ms. Geist:
Thank you for your letter of April 18, 2023, regarding the above-referenced undertaking. We have
reviewed the submittal and offer the following comments.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or environmental.review(cncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project,please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Location:109 East Jones Street,Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address:4617 Mail Service Center,Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax:[phone]-6898

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 16 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 16
NCDEQ DWR Pre-filing meeting Request Email

5/18/23,3:04 PM M it-Christine G est-0 Ulook
401/Buffer Pre-filing Meeting Request
Christine Geist <[e-mail] >
Tue 3/28/2023 8:41 PM
To:[e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Please fill out the following inform anion:
Project Nam a Statesville/Stum ptown Road Redevelopm Ent
County: Mecklenburg
Applicant Nam eRP Huntersville Property Owner LLC
Applicant Email: kwhitaker@ nwravin.com
**Please note that m Utiple projects m a/be subm iced within the sam eem al by supplying all the above
inform @don for each project.
***In the event your em al is not allowing auto-responses, please save a copy of your sent em al for your records
and if necessary use that copy in application/form subm ttal.
Sent from Mail for Windows
https://outlook.office.comkn al/id/AAQKDQ vJvlz;5NDg3LThIZDYtNDU200J5MDU0LWNIN2M4NzVINWU5Mg4QPEgoJfHLvBIFtcWeyd4fY%2BY%3D 1 /1

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 17 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 17
Site Photographs (Photos 1-8)

NRE Wetlands and Other Waters Delineation
Statesville/stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
ENVIRONMENTAL March 31,2023
Page 18 of 22
14
1-
Yet •r�'a�'�,`-`, � - �,1, i
Photo 1: Looking southeast at Data Point A, which characterizes emergent Wetlands A and B in
the central portion of the Project.
art-
a •i r�i 7i!
Photo 2: Looking northwest at Wetlands B and A in the center of the Project along either side of
Stream SA.

Dat ed.Apr :lf EO' 1
Pos o 25537' 13.5.
Altitude• 36.5fl1, t.?f
Datum.lk ; . . r
Azimuth g:277° s 241
Eleiop r -027; �
0ral S31�r-i,
Horizon l;rade<+002%
•tri_ '>f -.�•I ��ls: -,�i•� ..� t. 1 ;iiyiy,._k ,-)r .L__ i%>r
A
.•. •• '• • • • •' • dim•• • • •
-Date g TiFn ed. gyF
Pdt:itZdA'' 6257 $ Ic �'��i!•- j
�FAltlu (t9.8
-84
l ae d :
Al—
. _mil• _ ,� � � �!1 —
VA
�T
- 1Y
e f

NRE Wetlands and Other Waters Delineation
Statesville/stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
ENVIRONMENTAL March 31,2023
Page 20 of 22
•t' -�i
Photo 5: Looking south-southeast at upland field in the southern portion of the Project.
a
r
Photo 6: Looking downslope at non-wetland forested area in the southeastern portion of the
Project.

r r r r 1 r I• •r •
r r r 'r •r• •r
! r
•rr• •
56:06
'� 1
Po ,tron .a�3S :Zy9 808 (s131i�
A',!l,de'Z I
59fT it 8,?f �. �
Datum' WGS-8
A unush'BPerint i25 p 'is True(
Elev' v ion Grade -018
, -Oq R
Hq: og Grade 3 �' !
Zo;m 05X'1 7l
s�S � .f1j �{ ��11 vSS : 1. I .J i�• ,r�i, � �: it "( k � I�
10,
oll
�. � r i.f`1V �'. tl'•R�1�.M.�
1 1 uthl8e Ir
g 2 1
0 5X 4 `•� ` 1► i y` `p y y
�T
t• _
r r `�-Tf•�fir ;. .. •�
�,�°s'1���4 fix, Alt• ,r�,��.
z 1
i Y
• • of 0 0 '• ' 0 0 - 0 • ••- 0

N R E Statesville/Stumptown Rd.Redevelopment
Page 18 of 18
ENVIRONMENTAL
ATTACHMENT 18
Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID#: SAW- Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Statesville/Stumptown Rd. Redevelopment
2. Work Type: '❑Private ❑Institutional ❑Government ❑Commercial
3. Project Description/Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
The project proposes a single-family residential development on±20 acres in the town of Huntersville,North Carolina.The proposed
development will consist of approximately 150 residential units and associated roads,utilities,parking,amenity areas and other
elements typical of a modern residential development.The development will include both detached homes and multi-family dwelling
units to satisfy the growing demand for residential housing in the greater Charlotte metropolitan area.
4. Property Owner/Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: RP HUNTERSVILLE PROPERTY OWNER LLC
5. Agent/Consultant [PNC Form A5 —or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
NRE Environmental, LLC c/o Christine Geist, PWS, PO Box#401, Fort Mill, SC 29716
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7. Project Location—Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
Latitude 35.4257
Longitude -80.8601
8. Project Location—Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 00910104, 00910103, 00910124, 00910109
9. Project Location—County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location—Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Huntersville
11. Project Information—Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Torrence Creek
12. Watershed/ 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: HUC8 03050103
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ✓❑ Section 10 and 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit ❑Pre-Application Request
Nationwide Permit# ❑Unauthorized Activity
Regional General Permit# ❑Compliance
Jurisdictional Determination Request ❑No Permit Required
Revised 20150602