20150727 Ver 1_401 Application_20150715

WEEQ___ ......
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S Rindner, PLLC
July 20, 2015 2 0 1 5 0 7 2 7
Mr Alan Johnson
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources C� ® M
610 East Center Street, Suite 3.0411 k p 0 V
Mooresville, NC 28115 � D
JUL 2 2 2015
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDENR
DENR -WATER RESOURCES
Division of Water Resources 401 8 BUFFER PERMITTING
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Isolated Wetland Permit Request: Whitehall -Sandy Porter Multifamily Project
Dear Ms. Higgins and Mr. Johnson,
Enclosed is a Pre - Construction Notification for an isolated wetlands permit for 0.935 acres of a
small -basin wetland in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina Mr. William Elliott of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory Field Office (Corps) visited the site on
February 25, 2015 and determined that the wetland was isolated Mr Alan Johnson of NCDWR-
Mooresville also concurred with this determination during a pre - application meeting on June 17,
2015. As indicated in the attached documentation, the wetland has been classified as a small -
basin wetland according to the North Carolina Wetlands Assessment Methodology by a certified
assessor (Mr. Heath Caldwell and Ms. Amanda Jones of WEPG). We have submitted a request
for final jurisdictional determination to the Corps documenting the wetland's isolated status,
however due to a backlog /increased work load, we have not yet received written confirmation of
the jurisdictional status but will forward once received.
Regarding avoidance /minimization efforts, due to the location of the wetlands in an upland
landscape position which is typical of this wetland type and its location along the road frontage
of both Sandy Porter and Brown Grier Road, it was not possible to avoid impacts to the entire
wetland and still be able to develop the property as proposed. Also, entrances to the development
are dictated by required safety distances from the Sandy Porter /Brown Grier intersection which
severely limits avoidance efforts along with the required connection to the existing Arco
Corporation Drive across from Sandy Porter Road. Due to this entrance across from Arco
Corporation Drive being required as the main entrance off Sandy Porter Road, this road will
bisect the wetland. The remaining wetland area will be filled for parking and multifamily
residential buildings that would need to be accessed off the main entrance road. If these areas
could not be filled, then two residential buildings and substantial parking /road infrastructure
Charlotte Office www wetlands -epg com Asheville Office
10612 -D Providence Rd 1070 Tunnel Rd. Bldg I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
(704) 904 -2277 (828) 708 -7059
len rind ner @wetlands -epg corn 1 amanda loner @wetlands -epg corn

WEEQ
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard 5 Rmdner, PLLC
would be lost which would not be practicable given the small size of the property and the overall
purpose of a multifamily residential development.
Also, based on our understanding of the recently enacted session law that modifies the previous
isolated wetlands rule 15A NCAC 02H 1305, no mitigation would be required for impacts to
less than 10 acre of isolated wetlands. As such, we are not proposing any compensatory
mitigation for the 0.935 acre impact requested in the enclosed application.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide this information and please contact us if you have any
questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
Amanda Jones, PWS
Regulatory Specialist
Len Rindner, PWS
rj r
Principal
ire. ". ELM U.d`yu..:w.. i.ux.� rxn�,A i 9,4aNykt r.. . ...... ', . -d �.l lMawu.....� r...rvy�.. tik'1' /e.. wr,. +nl4 =✓�kwwµ+y.+.0 .Me Yw.Y,4 r.e..x.n.wlvb.. .xlVOuaa 5�f'anu,....1.. v.9ia^s,aw.tel v .. W:4..u�msy.
Charlotte Office www wetlands -epg com Asheville Office
10612 -D Providence Rd 1070 Tunnel Rd. Bldg I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
(704) 904 -2277 (828) 708 -7059
len rindner @wetlands -epg corn 2 amanda tones @wetlands -epg com

OF W A TF9
.0 Office Use Only
rCorps action ID no
i , e i o -r DWQ project no
Form Version 1 4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
Street address
1a
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps I ❑ Section 404 Permit
❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number or General Permit (GP)
number
1 c
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑ No
1d
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply)
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian
Buffer Authorization
le
Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ
For the record only for Corps Permit
because written approval is not required? 401 Certification
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑ No
1f
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
❑ Yes ❑X No
or in -lieu fee program
1g
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties If yes, answer 1 h
❑ Yes ❑X No
below
1h
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a
Name of project Whitehall - Sandy Porter
2b
County Mecklenburg
2c
Nearest municipality / town Charlotte
2d
Subdivision name N/A
2e NCDOT only, T I P or state project no
3. Owner Information
3a Name(s) on Recorded Deed Multiple owners - please see attached parcel map, property is under contract
3b Deed Book and Page No
3c
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable)
3d
Street address
3e
City, state, zip
3f
Telephone no
3g
Fax no
3h
Email address
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a Applicant is ❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify Buyer
4b Name Mr Wesley G Taubel, Managing Partner
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
4d
Street address
4e
City, state, zip
4f
Telephone no
4g
Fax no
4h
Email address
TWO Capital Partners, LLC
3445 Peachtree Rd NE, Ste 465
Atlanta, GA 30326
404 262 2661
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a Name Len Rindner
5b Business name Leonard S Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group (WEPG)
(if applicable)
5c Street address 10612 -D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d City, state, zip
5e Telephone no
5f Fax no
5g Email address
Charlotte, NC 28277
704 904 2277
len rindner @wetlands -epg com
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
1 b Site coordinates (in decimal degrees) I Latitude 35 1512
1c Property size
2. Surface Waters
20147103, -104, -105, -302, -304, -305, 20147306
Longitude -80 9546
197 acres
2a Name of nearest body of water to proposed project Steele Creek
2b Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water Class C
2c River basin Lower Catawba Watershed -- 03050103
3. Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application
The site is currently undeveloped and predominately wooded General land use in the vicinity consists of low density residential and commercial
developments
3b List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property 0 935
3c List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property 0
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
The purpose of the project is for development of multifamily residential structures and access
3e Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used
Isolated Wetland A/B will be filled for multi - family residential Grading /construction methods will use standard equipment - excavator, trackhoe, etc
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the ❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? Comments
4b If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type ❑ Preliminary Final
of determination was made?
4c If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency /Consultant Company
Name (if known) Other WEPG
4d If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
William Elliott of USACE visited the site on February 25, 2015 and determined the wetland isolated A final jurisdictional determination request has
been submitted but not yet issued Alan Johson (NCDWR) also visited the site on June 17, 2015 and agreed with the Corps isolated determination
5. Project History
5a Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for El Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions
6. Future Project Plans
6a Is this a phased project?
6b If yes, explain
❑ Yes ❑X No
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1 4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
If there are perennial or intermittent stream
1. Impacts Summary
question for all stream sites impacted
3a 3b
1 a Which sections were completed below for your
project (check all that
apply)
Stream impact
Type of impact
❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams — tributaries
❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters
❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
length
Permanent (P) or
width
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland
area impacted
2a 2b 2c
feet)
2d
2e
2f
Wetland impact Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
Choose one
I -
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary (T)
Sg
Choose one
W1 P Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
Yes I
other /isolated
0 935
W2 Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W3 Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
W4 - Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
W5 - Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
Wg Choose one
Choose one
Yes /No
-
2g Total
Wetland Impacts:
0 935
2h Comments
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream
impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted
3a 3b
3c 3d 3e 3f
3g
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name Perennial (PER) or Type of Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)? jurisdiction stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1
Choose one
S2
Choose one
S3
Choose one
I -
S4 -
Choose one
S5 -
Choose one
Sg
Choose one
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
31 Comments
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1 4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries,
sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U S then individually list all open water impacts below
impacts
4a 4b 4c
4d 4e
Open water Name of waterbody
6a Project is in which protected basin >
impact number (if applicable)
Type of impact Waterbody Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
type
Temporary (T)
01
Choose one Choose
O2 -
Choose one Choose
O3
Choose one Choose
104
Choose one Choose
impact
4f Total open water impacts
4g Comments
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below
5a 5b 5c 5d 5e
Pond ID number Proposed use or Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
purpose of pond (acres)
P1
P2
5g Comments
Choose one
Choose one
5f Total:
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required? ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
5j Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer
impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a Project is in which protected basin >
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
❑ Other
6b 6c
6d 6e 6f
6g
Buffer Impact Reason for impact
Stream name Buffer
Zone 1
Zone 2
number —
mitigation
impact
impact
Permanent (P) or
required?
(square
(square
Temporary (T)
feet)
feet)
B1
Yes /No
B2
Yes /No
B3 -
Yes /No
B4 -
I Yes /No
B5 - I
I
Yes /No
B6 -
I Yes /No
6h Total Buffer Impacts:
61 Comments
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
The property is located at the corner intersection of Sand Porter and Brown Grier Road Existing entrances /connections are required by CDOT to the
existing Arco Corporation Drive which severely limits avoidance of the wetland impact Due to this entrance being required as the main entrance off
Sandy Porter Road, this road will bisect the wetland Also due to the location of the wetland (road frontage and in an upland landscape position),
impacts could not be avoided while still being able to develop the property See attached cover letter for more details
1 b Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
Storm water on the site will be directly to an adequately sized /approved detention /treatment basin in the southwest corner of the property
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ❑ Yes ❑X No
Impacts to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State?
2b If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply) ❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this ❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
project
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank
Type Choose one Quantity
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Choose one Quantity
Type Choose one Quantity
3c Comments
1 4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑ Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature
Choose one
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only)
square feet
4e Riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4f Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
acres
4h Comments
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1 4 January 2009

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

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
lb If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
2b Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
2c If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑ No
53%
❑X Yes ❑ No
2d If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan
The site includes one stormwater BMP treatment facility in the southwest corner of the site The stormwater plan has not been approved yet since
Mecklenburg County requires copy of the 401 certification /state isolated permit before they will approve the stormwater plan However, the plan as
proposed meets their current guidelines and is expected to be approved once the state isolated permits are received
2e Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
3b Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply)
3c Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply)
4b Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
S. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
5b Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
Mecklenburg County
Mecklenburg County
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
❑ORW
[]Session Law 2006 -246
[-]Other
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1 4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the ❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal /state) land?
lb If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ❑ Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0200)?
2b Is this an after - the -fact permit application? ❑Yes ❑X No
2c If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in I ❑Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality
3b If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
No cumulative effects are anticipated from the project There are no additional properties to be developed that are associated with this project so all
the impacts have been accounted for
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via installation of sewer lines
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ❑ Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ❑ Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted -
5d What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? I ❑ Yes ❑ No
6b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ❑ Yes ❑ No
status (e g , National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a Will this project occur in a FEMA - designated 100 -year floodplain?
8b If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements
8c What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Amanda Jones for WEPG
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
❑ Yes
Amanda DN .g ugne, Ey Am.nE. PG
DN <n =A g— Jolla p=WEPG
.0 =Le.nard 5 Rind,, PLLC Wa0 — &
Envaonmenml Planning Group
Jones —1= .mane, j— ,6ereg,ndO pg <pm
=Ds
Dam 2015 07 20 11 25 50-06 00
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided )
Page 10 of 10
❑ No
07 -20 -2015
Date

YVEN1.1-111 1111-1-1-, ­' ­,,,
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S Rmdner, PLLC
Agent Authorization Letter
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream /wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project /Site Name: Brown —Grier Road Site near Whitehall
Property Address: 14200 Brown — Grier Road, Charlotte, NC
Parcel Identification Number (PIN)• 20147306
Select one: I am the interested buyer
Name: Mr Wesley G Taubel, Managing Partner
Company: TWO Capital Partners, LLC
Mailing Address: 3445 Peachtree Road NE, Ste 465
Telephone Number: 404 - 262 -2661
Elect
Prope
ronic M '1 A ss:
2
rty Ow tereste yer * / Other
120.4..
Dat-
1 I.-W
15 0�
* The Interested Buyer /Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory
Charlotte Office www wetlands- epg.com Asheville Office
10612 -D Providence Rd 1070 Tunnel Rd, Bldg I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
(704) 904 -2277 (828) 708 -7059
len nndner @wetlands -epg corn 2 amanda (ones @wetlands -epg com

3
-v
LA
MapSIPlans

)7 -Grier Rd
iarti Dr
i Dr
larWon G
d�
A
Will anls GW M Rd o
Renaissance
a
School
V
Steele Creek Elementary School Primrose '
.41P. School of Lake Wylie
v
V
Charlotte - Mecklenburg University of
Schools Phoenix
V
ruing v
ExpA ,fence Retirement
Clearinghouse Llc
SITE �
r
�a
tv Hickory Ln
�i
' Ad o
Cry' M��� A
r
1,Aad`�
Ch.ltin,L rto4e\p
r
0
14C
%It Rd
a
shopton Rd
SITE
c o �h�use Blvd
C_ S� O 2015 M" `I corporation
dbinlgdf sve 10 2015 Nokia
Z O 2015 Mirmso?t Corp=tion •2015 N
WHITEHALL —SANDY PORTER
Mecklenburg Co., NC
VICINITY MAP —WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
2/11/15

WHITEHALL —SANDY PORTER Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Mecklenburg Co., INC NRN LSR
DATE:
AERIAL MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 2/11/15
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

FIGURE NO.
3
Citarie Kdtny
R _ Mon
4224 B n Grier R
Charlott KC 28273
Pti . 47304,
ti.
WHITEHALL — SANDY PORTER
Mecklenburg Co., NC
PARCEL MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE: /
2/11/15

• 0 �t
V1
,jj
_ 65
I i
SITE
� I
�`"�,� • SCALE Lai, 36.151
r 4,0
+ k1G5`OUAI,rtt UCi
5
CharlotO W6sti,NC # .11.1' 1 r a
FIGURE NO. WHITEHALL —SANDY PORTER Drawn By: Reviewed By:
q Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
Wetlands. and Environmental Planning GFoup DATE:
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC USGS MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 2/11/15
904-2277 SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

� r •l,
�. l:.
WHITEHALL —SANDY PORTER Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
DATE:
SOILS MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 2/11/15
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

Map Unit Legend
Map Unk 8yrobol
IrA
IrEl
MeB
WkD
Totals for Area of Interest
Mecklenburg county, North Carolina (MCI 19)
Map Unk Name Acres in AOI
Pa am of AOI
Iredell fine sandy loam, 0 to 1
6.9
21.3%
percent slopes
Iredell fine sandy loam, 1 to 8
7.2
22.2%
percent slopes
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 2
18.1
56.2%
to 8 percent slopes
Wilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent
0.1
0.3%
slopes
32.3
100.0%
FIGURE NO.
6
ro�
WHITEHALL —SANDY PORTER
Mecklenburg Co., NC
SOILS MAP 2 - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
2/11/15

/ There are no jurisdictional wetlands on the property. The
/ Wetland A/B feature identified below is considered isolated
and therefore not jurisdictional to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act as verified by the USACE on 02/25/15
r
NON-
JURISDICTIONAL
WETLAND A/B y
0.94 acres
•
-. ego—•
-
f �
.`,, -..
1
' ,•n •...,
'�� a
11
`
+
w
•ms's
.'
UPLAND DATA
+
FORM (PHOTO
'
a
LOCATION 3)
- Verified by USACE 2125115-
° -- •--- -• -• -- ° '
t
Sheet: Page: I
igure No.
WHITEHALL —SANDY PORTER
/
7 Wetlands
and Environmental
Planning Group
Mecklenburg Co., N('
Drawn Reviewed
Leonard
S- Rindner. PLLC.
by: NRN by: LSR
DELINEATION MAP
Date:
904-
•Approximate Boundary
Updated
Subject to USACE Verification
3/18/15

1% Aa..�8
4 design resource group
1A landscape architecture
civil engineering
owriii _ _ urban design
VICINITY MAP 610 • '�R Op r Q •land planning
NOT 3D gpyF R v / O traffic engineering
I transportation planning
l.._ { -/ W 2459 Wilkinson boulevard, suite 200
charlotte, nc 28208
I 0 p 704.343.0808 f 704.358.3093
C A PROPOSED P CEILS a wwwA grp.aa
• I D
1
TNAA(Dres
n W� W�
c ~
PROPOSED UPLAND =
LLI 0-
O 3
PARCEL POCKET "UA" ? ?+
�.a ARCO Q F a
_ V UPLAND = o a i
POCKET "UB■ ,\ f j CORPORA T10N = Z
�\ " +i Q 0 m
WETLAND I
� I �
�. POCKET "A/B"
30' PCCO ` 41,816 SO. FT.
�. I
BUFFER \ (0.960 ACRES) I 0 75 ls0 •
t' UPLAND 11 SCALE: r" lso
POCKET "C" I -1 PROJECT *: 507.004
U I`
DRAWN 8Y: 1L
(� �'}•. ) PROPOSED I / CHECKED 8Y: SK
PARCEL � i � c
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
JUNE 30, 201 S
REMONS:
Copyright O 201 S Design Resource 0ro•p. PA This plan or drawing and any - -;,anyhg do,-- or cakulahom are the property of Design Resource Group. PA: am are intended solely for the use of the mopknt rroted. No third parry uu or modification is pe--d wnhout written authon—mr. •

1ER 3gNA61
- ILwaELBO�oti m d
DuolNrarlDGaR2Anr
mom" 1
we . OIL
r
d
—A .4%elp resource group
AD 20147102
-NOW OR ZOARD
CHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG RG SGRDa EDUCATION
DO 04966/633 AD _ — landscape architecture
n- USE: CHOOL 1 .� e>✓� OWN GR1ER RO .�,,, 1, civil engineering
;IS 9612320 -x5s �I
8R .-r �' L.';1 5�n - • urban design
ND.20147103
T. in 09 1 3A4S5 ZONED INST(CD) , • land planning
N' LOF1.m,W,7 WTZ.00351n 0361 ACRES
— r\' TRACrI ;10111.2 BCexM4T06 BID 7M47104 -NON OR .l � • traffic engineering
OT2.14r4i �L Bo i6EwxR 9 9
E°o. n�RI34 % 1 _ �E® zomm 67Eem1B fammERly-
Ar��_�_ _ ZONED INSTCW i •IDRIQBOM�IY.
a3E6ACas wuwESw n LrMFICIENAU transportation planning
zomearcm
0.403
-NOR ACRES 'a Y" �O I' ORICE rARK
-3 ! N OR -NORM wgElgBlsD e U AMEYUOrMENr 2459 wilkinson boulevard, suite 200
fORN-1- - CORICAN ASSET
fDRReuEY' CNARIESIQNRY .�, cawoNa n coam —o's charlotte, nc 28208
CN'�u�Y gOBIN50N 6 - gATASp40 062895 131 p 704.343.0608 f 704.358.3093
T A06WOMR ROMNSON _ Gg10ON D�dE ZON-1-1 COl
j T �- Y'IY JAN USE COMMERC4ll WWW.drgrp,EOMn
T1/1n
No. 2010,1101 CAPILAI PARTNERS
$$$ H11TH R FORMERLY_
CANNON K HOTEL I LLC
_ CANNONK %IPESIb
MAU293 SNIFFS
S zoleoeSircDl
USE: COMMERCIAL
11 i \ f111BNW6E
12 PW. M47=92D14730T AID L D
FASWG ��^ I 0 ?

eeeeee
.000 ,
amp-00 OW
1111111111k" HE
Mal
REQUIRED
= PUBLIC STREET
TO BE
ALIGNED WITH
i EXISTING
ARCO
CORPORATION
o DRIVE
ARCO
CORPORATION
DRIVE
— WETLAND
(41,816 SQ.FT.)
:opyright 0 2015 Design Resource Croup, PA This plan or drawing and any accompanying documents ar ulculanans are the property of Design Resource Group, PA'. aM are Intended sdety fw the use of the r,dp, -1 noted. No Mid party use or mpdihcation is yermined w hour wnnen authpdxatwn.
43
w-
11design resource group
• landscape architecture
• civil engineering
• urban design
• land planning
• traffic engineering
• transportation planning
2459 Wilkinson boulevard, suite 200
charlotte, nc 28208
p 704.343.0608 f 701.358.3093
WyWy.drgrp.com
Rc. Anr,
0 75 150
SCALE: 1' - 150'
PROJECT #: 507 -004
DRAWN BY JL
CHECKED BY SK
PROPOSED
SITE PLAN
JUNE 30, 2015
REVISIONS:
OC
to
J
W z
w-
Q
I — J
Z
=
p
a cl
°tea
w
ce
z
J u
�
� � I-
ay5
u
�ZJ
°a
U
� M
Lon
0 75 150
SCALE: 1' - 150'
PROJECT #: 507 -004
DRAWN BY JL
CHECKED BY SK
PROPOSED
SITE PLAN
JUNE 30, 2015
REVISIONS:

r�
7
LLui
0
ri.
V
C
n
0
1
L
n
u
4
n
J
J
�.7
J
a
�n4 --�
■
�.S
1 1
I I �
1 I
1 ii65 25
1 I—
1 (�
V-
�C)
---64 .................... �
IOZ�
T G
�I
-70�
J
G8 �
IcD 1
UY
1
I
0J ��
fy
I I'
I -
A��l<
IWA
Lw
��������� •1111♦ ♦����.
I
II Q
i O
cC
1 �
w
1 Oa
1 }I
I
IZ
i.n
dwign resource group
• landscape architecture
• civil engineering
• urban design
• land planning
• traffic engineering
• transportation planning
2459 Wilkinson boulevard, suite 200
charlotte, nc 28208
P 704.343.0601 f 704.358.3093
w Argrp.com
TNA .ens
Cie
JW
In
W-
J
Q ce
_ ~
a "m
0
LLJ d 0
3
:F
d
<
U
ILA
60�SCALE: I • _ 60'
PROJECT #F: 507.004
DRAWN BY: 1L
CHECKED BY: SK
IMPACT AREA
JUNE 30, 201 S
REVISIONS:
{`JI
N

0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 3+95
680 - 680
_4
BLDG #12- design resource group
4-
landscape architecture
civil engineering
urban design
4 4W�
A
J
LOG
land planning
670 670 traffic engineering
transportation planning
2459 wilkinson boulevard, suite 200
p 704harlotte, nc 28209
343.0608 f 704.3 5 8.3093
—.drg,p.,—
660 660 cNAA n..s
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 3+95
LUz EAST/WEST ALIGNMENT <z
1% U
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 5+59 m: 0 '
LU ce -j t
680 o
680
m 10 U -
BLDG I BLDG 2 z cc 0 �
w
U
#12
670
670 0----AL-80
SCALE: 1— 80, HORIZONTAL
1. - 8. VERTICAL
000 PROJECT 507-004
DRAWN Bye JIL
CHECKED BY SK
CROSS
4 -J
SECTIONS
J L A.
660 660
0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 5+59 I JUNE 30, 2015
REVISIONS:
NORTH/SOUTH ALIGNMENT
Coo,ght 0 201 S Dnlgl Itm— Croup. PA ThIs PI w d,....g and any --p-p.g d--, or atkulo— are the property of Design R.I.— C—P, PA. and — I.r,,d,d sa *Iv for the use of the recipient wed. No third P" — or mo Iftxi- Is pel.imd —h-1 —­ ­h.­j­ ■

Photo Log
65
Ol
O
J
O
O
s
a

Photo 1— Wetland A/B — Facing South From Wetland
Photo 2 — Wetland A/B — Facing Southwest From Wetland
Wadsnds and Emly= ntW Plawft QVW
Whitehall — Sandy Porter
Mecklenburg Co., NC — 2/11/15
Leowd S. Rkmkw, PLLC.

" , rt?
th
u�
Photo 3 — Upland Data Point — Facing West
Whitehall — Sandy Porter
Mecklenburg Co., NC — 2/11/15
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.

E
Q
Data forms

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site Sandy Porter - Brown Grier City /County Charlotte /Mecklenburg Sampling Date 2/11/15
Applicant/Owner TWO Capital Partners, LLC State NC Sampling Point Wetland A,B
Investigator(s) NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ) Plateau Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 0 - 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat 35 1512 N Long 80 9546 W Datum
Soil Map Unit Name IrA Iredell fine sandy loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation N Sod N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes= No=
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No = within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No =
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required. check all that aoaly)
E�Surface Sod Cracks (136)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
E::Isparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
=High Water Table (A2)
=Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
=Drainage Patterns (610)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Trim Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (61)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (62)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (63)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
[Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (64)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (65)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aguitard (D3)
=Water - Stained Leaves (69)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (613)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches) 4"
Water Table Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches)
Saturation Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point Wetland A,B
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Quercus phellos
45
Y FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 7 (A)
2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica
25
Y FACW
Total Number of Dominant
3
Species Across All Strata 7 (B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 100% (A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
70
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of Multiply by
SaDlino Stratum (Plot size
)
OBL species x 1 =
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica
15
Y FACW
FACW species x 2 =
2 Quercus phellos
10
Y FAC
FAC species x 3 =
3 Jumperus wrginmana
5
N FACU
FACU species x 4=
4
UPL species x 5 =
5
Column Totals (A) (B)
6
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7
30
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
= Total Cover
01 Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size
)
-
1 Ilex deadua
15
Y FACW
F7 12 - Dominance Test is >50%
2
Q3 - Prevalence Index is 153 0'
3
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
4
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
=Problematic
5
Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
6
'Indicators of hydric sod and wetland hydrology must
7
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
15
=
Total Cover
Definitions of Frye Vegetation Strata
Herb Stratum (Plot size )
1 Juncus effusus
15
Y FACW
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
3
4
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
6
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
8
9
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
11
ft (1 m) in height
12
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height
15
= Total Cover
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size
)
1 Campsis radicans
20
Y FAC
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5
Present? Yes= No=
20
= Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on
a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point Wetland A,B
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
0-12 10YR 5/1 75 10YR 6/8 25 RM PL Clay
'Type C=C once ntration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Hydnc Sod Indicators
=Histosol (Al)
=Dark Surface (S7)
Indicators for Problematic Hydnc Sods'
=2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
02 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Matrix (173)
= Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Depleted Dark Surface (177)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2) = Redox Depressions (F8)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, =Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) =Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
=Sandy Redox (S5) =Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
=Stripped Matrix (S6) =Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches) Hydnc Sod Present? Yes ✓1 No 0
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site Sandy Porter - Brown Grier City /County Charlotte /Mecklenburg Sampling Date 2/11/15
Applicant/Owner TWO Capital Partners, LLC State NC Sampling Point Upland
Investigator(s) NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc ) Plateau Local relief (concave, convex, none) concave Slope ( %) 0 - 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat 35 1512 N Long 80 9546 W Datum
Soil Map Unit Name IrA Iredell fine sandy loam NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks )
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes F No =
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Sod Present? Yes= No= within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No 0✓
Remarks
Data point was taken approximately 30' West of wetland A/B
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reaured)
Pnmary Indicators (minimum of one is reouired. check all that aooly)
[�Surface Soil Cracks (136)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Elparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
=High Water Table (A2)
=Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
=Drainage Patterns (B10)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Tri m Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (61)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Sods (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (B3)
=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 (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial
Imagery (67)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water - Stained Leaves (69)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
=FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations
Surface Water Present?
Yes= No= Depth (inches)
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
Yes= No= Depth (inches)
Yes= No= Depth (inches) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes = No �✓
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants Sampling Point Upland
6
7
Shrub Stratum (Plot size
1 Ligustrum sinense
2
3
4
5
6
7
Herb Stratum (Plot size
1 Vinca minor
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Prevalence Index = B/A =
35 Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
=
01 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
10 Y FACU 02 - Dominance Test is >50%
Q3 - Prevalence Index is <_3 0'
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
10 = Total Cover
� Definitions of Frye Vegetation Strata
45 Y FACU Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height
45 = Total Cover
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1 Hedera helix 20 Y FACU
2
3
4
5
20 = Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Juniperus virgininana
30
Y
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
0
(A)
2 Ulmus alata
25
Y
FACU
3 Quercus falcata
15
Y
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
7
Species Across All Strata
(B)
4
Percent of Dominant Species
5
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
0%
(A/B)
6
7
Prevalence Index worksheet
70
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of
Multioly by
Saolina Stratum (Plot size )
OBL species
x 1 =
1 Ulmus alata
15
Y
FACU
FACW species
x 2 =
2 Juniperus virgininana
10
Y
FACU
FAC species
x 3 =
3 Quercus falcata
10
Y
FACU
FACU species
x 4 =
4
UPL species
x 5 =
5
Column Totals
(A)
(B)
6
7
Shrub Stratum (Plot size
1 Ligustrum sinense
2
3
4
5
6
7
Herb Stratum (Plot size
1 Vinca minor
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Prevalence Index = B/A =
35 Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators
=
01 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
10 Y FACU 02 - Dominance Test is >50%
Q3 - Prevalence Index is <_3 0'
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
10 = Total Cover
� Definitions of Frye Vegetation Strata
45 Y FACU Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height
45 = Total Cover
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size )
1 Hedera helix 20 Y FACU
2
3
4
5
20 = Total Cover
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point Upland
Profile Description (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Toe' Locz Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 4/4 100 Sandy Loam
4-12 10RY 6/8 100 Clsy
'Type C= Concentration, D= Depletion,
Hydric Sod Indicators
=Histosol (Al)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains
2Location PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrx
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sods'
=Dark Surface (S7)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
=Piedmont Floodplain Sods (1719)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
= Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
= Redox Depressions (F8)
=Iron- Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
=Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
=Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
=Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Sod Present? Yes= No =✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 41
Wetland Site Name Whitehall -Sandy Porter - Isolated Wetland A/B
Wetland Type Basin Wetland
Level III Ecoregionj Piedmont
River Basmj Catawba
r" Yes r-",No Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Date 2/11/2015
Assessor Name /Organization H Caldwell/WEPG
Nearest Named Water Body Steele Creek
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03050103
Latitude /Longitude (deci- degrees) 35 1512N, -80 9546W
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately 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 r No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
i Anadromous fish
f Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
(� NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
f Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
f Publicly owned property
F N C Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
r_ a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
r- 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) r, Lunar F, Wind F", Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? r, Yes F ; No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes F, No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ";Yes ro''No
Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual) If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect
GS VS
A ,A Not severely altered
B , B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub) Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils 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 ditch
sub - surface water Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable
Surf Sub
�A r�"A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered
B r 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)
Water Storage /Surface Relief - assessment area /wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT)
AA WT
3a rA rq,A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
r, B r. B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
re;;C �;C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D r, 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

Sod Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three sod property groups below Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature Make sod observations within the 12 inches Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators
4a r'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 Sod ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon z 1 inch
4c ;A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc
Surf Sub
A'A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
�C ,C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
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), vothin 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) Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion
WS 5M 2M
F_ ro A (✓ A z 10% impervious surfaces
F r 6 F B < 10% impervious surfaces
r— C r C f— C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
17— D r— D r— D a 20% coverage of pasture
r— E F_ r— E Z 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
i✓ F r— r— F a 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
F G F G r G ? 20% coverage of clear -cut land
f✓ H r H r✓ H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
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 the 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 wettand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer
A ? 50 feet
E ; 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
s 15 -feet wide r", > 15 -feet wide r, Other open water (no tributary present)
7d Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes r_" No
7e Is tributary 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
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC) See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries
WT
WC
A
A
? 100 feet
B
; B
From 80 to < 100 feet
r,C
�;C
From 50 to < 80 feet
�D
D
From 40 to < 50 feet
E ; E
; E
From 30 to < 40 feet
F^,
F
From 15 to < 30 feet
G
G
From 5 to < 15 feet
H
H
< 5 feet

9 Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform
A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
FC 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
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)
CA CA CA ? 500 acres
CB CB CB From 100 to < 500 acres
cc cc cc From 50 to < 100 acres
CD ED CD From 25 to < 50 acres
CE E [:E From 10 to < 25 acres
P, F F CF From 5 to < 10 acres
CG CG MG From 1 to < 5 acres
.EH EH EH From 0 5 to < 1 acre
CI CI Cl From 01 to <05acre
CJ CJ CJ From 0 01 to < 0 1 acre
CK CK CK < 0 01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12 Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosms only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (z 90 %) of its natural landscape size
B Pocosin 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
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric 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, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide
Well Loosely
'qA �"A z 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
�C C From 50 to < 100 acres
J D D From 10 to < 50 acres
�E E < 10 acres
JF :F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b Evaluate for marshes only
CYes CNo 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)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges Artificial edges include
non - forested areas a 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts
Consider the eight main points of the compass
CA No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
CB No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
.iC An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15 Vegetative Composition —assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
CA 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
EB 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 Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species) 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
CC Vegetation is dominated by exotic species ( >50% cover of exotics)

17 Vegetative Structure —assessment area /wetland type condition metric
17a Is vegetation present?
Yes C 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
z 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
EL
CA
A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
ci
C
PB
B
C
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
Canopy sparse or absent
o
CA
CA
Dense mid- story/sapling layer
CB
CB
Moderate density mid- story/sapling layer
Ec
.Ec
Mid- story/sapling layer sparse or absent
a
CA
CA
Dense shrub layer
L
CB
CB
Moderate density shrub layer
cO
r,C
or, C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
CA
CA
Dense herb layer
E
.EB
Moderate density herb layer
CC
CC
Herb layer sparse or absent
18 Snags —wetland type condition metric
R 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
CA Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH), many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present
on BB Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 -inch DBH
CC Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees
20 Large Woody Debris —wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris
CA Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability)
:B Not
21 Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water
CA CB CC CD
-� }Altd
r ,�
k S
22 Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands 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
CA Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area
CB Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area
CC Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area
CD Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area
Notes
Wetland A/B is an approximate 0 95ac, isolated, forested wetland, topographically located at or near the top of its watershed Hydrology mainly
provided through precipitation and sheet flow Surrounded by forested area extending to adjacent residential and commercial areas

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4 1
Rating Calculator Version 4 1
Wetland Site Name Whitehall -Sandy Porter - Isolated Wetland A/B Date 2/11/2015
Wetland Type Basm Wetland Assessor Name /Organization H Caldwell/WEPG
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N)
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function Sub - function
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Sub - Surface Storage and Retention
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Particulate Change
Soluble Change
Physical Change
Pollution Change
Habitat
Physical Structure
Landscape Patch Structure
Vegetation Composition
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics /Notes
Hydrology
Condition
Water Quality
Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Habitat
Conditon
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM
Metrics
Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Condition
Condition /Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y /N)
Condition
Condition
Condition
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
Rating
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HIGH
HIGH
NO
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
Rating
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
NO
MEDIUM