20150735 Ver 1_401 Application_20150715

WEE!
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Mr. David Brown
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
July 20, 2015
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
2 o' 5 0 !3 5
uu JUL 2 4 2015 'OP
OENR • WATER RESOURCE,;
401$ SUFFER PERMITTING
Subject: Pre - Construction Notification for Villages at Sherrills Ford, Catawba County, NC
Dear Ms. Higgins and Mr. Messrs. Brown and Johnson,
Enclosed is a request for a Nationwide Permit #29 for a project known as the Villages at Sherrills
Ford, in Catawba County, North Carolina. Proposed impacts total 105 linear feet of permanent
impacts to an intermittent/seasonal stream channel for a road crossing, 15 linear feet of
temporary impacts to a perennial stream channel for a sewer line crossing, and 0.45 acres of a
man -made open water pond for the construction of three residential lots, a road crossing and
adjacent storm water BMP.
Due to the configuration of the property boundaries and location of streams /ponds that transect
the site, the applicant was unable to completely avoid these impacts while still being able to
access upland portions of the site for development. However, the applicant was able to minimize
impacts to streams /ponds on the site. The stream channel proposed for impact is at the upper
extent /reach and is considered the start of the jurisdictional stream feature. Only 105 linear feet
of this 1,040 linear feet of stream channel will be impacted. The pond located on the property is
man -made and totals approximately 0.68 acres in size. The dam for the pond is located off -
property and in the Piedmont North Railway Right of Way which eliminated the option of
draining the pond and potentially being able to reduce the amount of jurisdictional impacts on
the site. In order to construct the lots /road crossing in this area, the pond will be pumped down to
work in the dry. In order to compensate for the minor impacts associated with this permit
request, the applicant is proposing to preserve the remaining stream channels on site with an
Charlotte Office- www.wetlands - epg.com Asheville Office:
10612 -D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg, I
PMB 5S0 Suite 10, PM 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
(704) 904 -2277 (828) 708 -7059
len.rindner @wetlands- epg.com 1 amanda loner @wetlands - epg.com

WER
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
average of 50-buffers as depicted on the attached plans through restrictive covenants. The
covenants will be platted/recorded as condition/required in the 404/401 permit approvals.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide this information and please contact us if you have any
questions
Sincerely,
Amanda Jones, PWS
Regulatory Specialist
Len Rindner, PWS
Principal
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
[phone] [phone]
len [e-mail] 2 amanda lones@vvetlands-epg com

G
0
.Z�
V
i
a
Lin
Per�'�t

OF WAT�c9
Office Use Only
Corps action ID no
®, o I� ■� < DWQ project no
Form Version 1 4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps ❑X Section 404 Permit
❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number 29 or General Permit (GP) number
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corpse I ❑ Yes ❑X No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply)
9 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express
❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ
because written approval is not required? 401 Certification
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program
1 g Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project Villages at Sherrills Ford
2b. County. Catawba
2c. Nearest municipality / town Sherrills Ford
2d. Subdivision name. Villages at Sherrills Ford
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed The Villages at Sherrills Ford, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No. 3268/0965
3c Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable)
3d Street address 1 3893 Slanting Bridge Road
3e. City, state, zip. I Sherrills Ford, NC 28673
3f Telephone no.
3g. Fax no.
3h. Email address
For the record only for Corps Permit
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ Yes ❑X No
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 Interested buyer with contract
4b. Name David Hughes
4c Business name DR Horton
(if applicable)
4d. Street address- 8001 Arrowridge Boulevard
4e. City, state, zip. I Charlotte, NC 28273
4f. Telephone no. 1 704 - 787 -5622
4g. Fax no.
4h. Email address
5. Agent/Consultant Information
(if applicable)
5a Name
Len Rindner
5b. Business name
(if applicable) -
Leonard S Rindner, PLLC / Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
5c. Street address
10612 -D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d City, state, zip
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e. Telephone no.
704- 904 -2277
5f. Fax no.
5g. Email address-
len.rindner @wetlands - epg.com
0
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 35.5866
1 c. Property size
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project
2b Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
2c River basin
1460716841504
Longitude - 80.9888
57 acres
Catawba River /Lake Norman
I
Catawba 03050101
3. Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application
Site is wooded with surrounding low- density residential housing
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property 0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (Intermittent and perennial) on the property 1,109
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project-
Construction of a residential development known as Villages of Sherrills Ford
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used -
Typical grading equipment to be used backhoes, excavators, dump trucks to install fill /culvert in stream channel and open water pond
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the ❑ Yes ❑X 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 -
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ❑ 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? I ❑X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Potential future phases that have not yet been planned Preliminary wetland /stream determinations have been conducted and it is likely that potential
future phases will be developed without any additional impacts to WOUS since additional phases consists primarily of uplands
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
If there are perennial or Intermittent stream Impacts (Including temporary Impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites Impacted.
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)
3a. 3b.
3c. 3d 3e 3f
❑ Wetlands ❑X Streams — tributaries
❑ Buffers ❑X
Open Waters
❑ Pond Construction
number
2. Wetland Impacts
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then
complete this question for each wetland
area impacted.
S1 P Fill
2a. 2b 2c.
105
2d.
2e
2f.
Wetland Impact Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
S5 - Choose one
Corps (404,10) or
Impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary (T)
W1 I Choose one
Choose one I
Yes /No
-
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 - I Choose one
Choose one I
Yes /No
-
2g. Total
Wetland Impacts:
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 P Fill
Stream Al INT Corps 3
105
S2 T I Excavation
Stream C1 PER Corps I 4
15
S3 - I Choose one
S4 - I Choose one
S5 - Choose one
Sg - Choose one
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
120
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.
If protect will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list
4a. 4b 4c
4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number (if applicable)
Type of impact Waterbody Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
type
Temporary (T)
01 P I Pond E
Fill Pond I 038
O2 P I Pond E
Fill I Pond I 007
03
Zone 1
Choose one I Choose
04 I
Choose one I Choose
impact
4f. Total open water impacts I 045
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)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1 Choose one
P2 I Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required ❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51. Expected pond surface area (acres)
5t. Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k. Method of construction
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If protect 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. Protect 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)
61 I I
I Yes /No
B2 I I
I Yes /No
B3 I I
Yes /No
B4 I (
I Yes /No
B5 I I
I Yes /No
B6 -
I Yes /No
1 61. Comments
Page 5 of 10
6h Total Buffer Impacts:

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed Impacts in designing project.
Due to the layout of the property boundaries and the location of existing stream channels /pond, the applicant has avoided /minimized impacts while still
being able to access upland portions of the property See attached narrative in cover letter for more details
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Impacts to stream channels and ponds on site will be minimized through installation of appropriate sediment/erosion control devices The pond will be
drained by pumping the water down to minimize any downstream sedimentation concerns /issues
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply)
❑ Yes ❑X No
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
El 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
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) I square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested I acres
4f. Non - nparian wetland mitigation requested I acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested I 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 protect result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires I Yes No
buffer mitigations
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
1a. Does the protect include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ❑ Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 33%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? N Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan
The stormwater plan consists of the construction of two storm water BMPs as shown on the attached plans (Sheet 3 and 5) The final storm water plan
has not yet been submitted /approved by Catawba County
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?
5. 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?
Catawba County
Catawba County
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
❑ORW
❑Session Law 2006 -246
❑Other
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the ❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. 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 El Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. 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, El Yes 0 No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application? El Yes ❑X No
2c. If you answered `yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in El Yes ❑X No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered `yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
Potential future phases may occur however preliminary wetland /stream determinations have been conducted in these areas and it is likely that
potential future phases will be developed without any additional impacts to WOUS since additional phases consists primarily of uplands
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 on the site will be transported and treated at nearest approved facility
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, Indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. -
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would Impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Professional knowledge of the species listed for this area and their habitat requirements Site has been recently timbered so any potential habitat for
listed species known to occur in this area is not present on the site
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. WIII this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
Professional knowledge, No Essential Fish Habitat located in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur In or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant In
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Verified that no resources exist according to the SHPO's website http / /gis ncdcr.gov /hpoweb/
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?
Based on information supplied by Catawba County GIS and engineer
Amanda Jones for WEPG
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
❑ Yes
Amanda Digit — lly signed by Amanda Jones
DN c onard Sda Janes PLLC,
ou= Leonard 5 Rindner, PLLC,
Wetlands & Environmental Planning
a tlands-
Jones Date 201507 21 22 00 15 - 044'OO
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided )
Page 10 of 10
❑X No
07 -21 -2015
Date

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Groin .. _...,. a ..... ....... .....u.,, 4..., Lecir)ard S Rmdner , PLLC ... r.,..
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- Villages at Sherrills Ford
Property Address 3893 Slanting Bndge Road, Sherrills Ford, NC 28673
Parcel Identification Number (PIN). 460716841504
Select one' I am an interested buyer /seller
Name: David Hughes
Company: DR Horton
Mailing Address: 8001 Arrowridge Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone Number: 704- 787 -5622
Electronic Mail Address:
ate... -�
/1')/�
Property Owner /"Interested Buyer* / Other' Date
* 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 WCtlands -CPR eons
10612 -D Providence Rd
PMB S50
Charlotte. NC 28277
[phone]
len r mdner( DY.,ednnd- -eps coat Z
Asheville Office
1070 'runnel Rd . Bldg I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805
(828) 708 -7059
amanda Iones(, -weetlands -epg com

sv'e1dlsd
°o

lq �
�h
.J
r
d
/rte
J r
f / t
/ 1
i
X11
i
Q 11
1
�1
�1
l
4 hing
J`~ Amtwater
[')
�a
VICINITY MAP
a
�a McOonald Df
0
Sa/j�
0
triet Ln
PROJECT
BOUNDARY
f �S
Sysol Bob
'r
r r�
S
o--d'
xi
bwq
S St
VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD
Catawba County, NC
VICINITY LOCATION MAP
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
'%
fP
`Tt
.d
F
400
Mkmodt C" !an n ® 4 Nokia
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
JAL /PJK LSR
DATE:
06/29/15

FIGURE NO. VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD Drawn By: Reviewed By:
kA/E!rlf% 2 Catawba County, NC 1AL/PJK LSR
DATE:
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
APPROXIMATE LOCATION 06/29/15

gSTTA sA Geospatial Real Estate Search
Information Services
w .N 1 in =600ft
w +
S
Parcel: 460716841504, 3893 SLANTING BRIDGE RD SHERRILLS FORD, 28673
Owners: THE VILLAGE AT SHERRILLS FORD LLC,
Owner Address: 617 N MAIN ST
Values - Building(s): $136,500, Land: $961,600, Total: $1,098,100
This map/report product was prepared from the Catawba County, NC Geospatial nfommabon Services. Catawba Canty has made substantial etrats
to ensue the accuracy of location and labeling nfnrmetion contained on this map or data on this report Catawba County promotes and recommends
the ndependent venficetion of airy date oonteirtad on this m1901repOrf product by the user The County of Catawba, its employees, agail and
arse hom this mep/report product or >f by �aE dart r «as s or Yadhty, whethter direct, ndred or consequential wtrrh arises or may
Copyrght 2014 Catewbe County NC
07/1512015
VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD
Catawba County, NC
Tax Parcel Map
http://gis.catawbacountync.gov/parcel/
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
PJ K LSR
DATE:
07/15/15

TN�vaitlawba River
(Lake Norman)
/ X/.
800 �I
USGS 7.5 Minute Quadrangle
u
n
SCALE
1000 500 0 3000(Feet) — —
VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD
Catawba County, NC
��.' ifs• ;
r
eool-
I I
ri
C
LOCATION:
Q LATITUDE LONGITUDE
35.5866 N 80.9888 W
�[ NUC:03050101
�.� Upper Catawba
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
1AL/PJK LSR
DATE:
USGS LOCATION MAP
LAKE NORMAN NORTH (NC) QUADRANGLE 06/29/15
1993
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)

1 I. n .
PeE r
Ucc
PeE . k•
CaB
CaD
C,
• W
PeE
N PaE3
CaB\ CaC
\ h`
V PeE CaD
CaC AB
eE
Pe E\
CaC \ \
` w�
CeC2.. ��
CaC
PeE CeC2- '
W CaB CateE�
Ob AW���
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.
len. ri ndner ,'a)wetlaruls- epg.LOrr r
(704) 904 -2277
www.watlands- epg.com
.r CaC
y =�
} f ' CaB
A
VVdE
Ill
'N Ch
CaC
CaC Cab
a
�V
CaC
U
_WdE
7AsC
i CaB
CaC
PeE
W CaD
,CaC
CaB CaB

NRCS SOIL MAP
Sal Map — Catawba County, North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Catawba County, North Carolina (NC035)
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
AsC
Appling sandy loam, 6 to 10
5.4
0.9%
percent slopes
CaB
Cecil sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent
166.0
27.2%
slopes
CaC
Cecil sandy loam, 6 to 10
194.8
31.9%
percent slopes
CaD
Cecil sandy loam, 10 to 15
40.4
6.6%
percent slopes
CeC2
Cecil clay loam, 6 to 10 percent
4.4
0.7%
slopes, moderately eroded
ChA
Chewacla loam. 0 to 2 percent
12.5
2.0%
slopes. frequently flooded
LcC
Lloyd loam, 6 to 10 percent
4.1
0.7%
slopes
PaE3
Pacolet clay loam, 10 to 25
6.4
1.0%
percent slopes, severely
eroded
PeE
Pacolet soils, 10 to 25 percent
116.8
19.1%
slopes
Ud
I Udorthents, loamy and clayey I
4.61
0.8%
W
I Water I
28.61
4.7%
WdE
Wedowee sandy loam, 10 to 25
26.7
4.4%
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
I
610.71
100.0%
FIGURE NO. VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD Drawn By: Reviewed By:
6 - Catawba County, NC JAL/PJK LSR
DATE:
NRCS SOIL MAP
C I
06/29/15
APPROXIMATE LOCATION

SHERRILL'S FORD PHA NO. BY DATE I REVISION
■
WISP DRAWN 2WSP DRAWN : PC
128 Talbert Road, Suite D.R. Horton LLC Existing Conditions
Mooresville, NC 28117 TITLE: C)
(704)662 -0100 /�
www.wspgroup.com/usa SAW — — — _ -- SHEET NO.: 1 of
6 NORTH
400 0 200 400 800
SCALE IN FEET 1" = 400'
3 OF 4_
FAMNO
SLR �
�'i) r.��,lli. 4�'•' ,r r I/ 405.73 LF.•A1 \�
i 30' STREAM BU 0.035 ACRE
' _ VARIABLE WIDTH II c \
' STREAM BUFFER J
-
- rr \p
I t JURISDICTIONAL
4 z + PERENNIAL RPW
=�_+ TRIBUTARY 'C1'��
Ir i 623.44 LF ��; /� ' •�
f
0.0* ACRE `
ZJ` Ni
VARIABLE E 0 Ar L STREAM BUFFER,, ��� x a¢t a as e
\ A T fi E R Z �_ l
E ws
I p�Nr IHOTM N R A / -`�.y i t44 r 50' STREAM BUF`
Neg6 ape 7INygp [, W A Y
-�< r t r
\ b =CEL C 0
I j. 1.. TRIBUTARY D
'
6254
-� 6254 LF. $^ �
�T0002 ACRE 6'
yy c
3 \ an #198

WSP
128 Talbert Road, Suite A
Mooresville, NC 28117
(704)682 -0100
www.wspgroup.corrdusa
\ � Y
0
II
P _
SHERRILL'S FORD PHA
CATAWBA COUNTY, NC
D.R. Horton, LLC
SAW — - - - -- — - - -- —
NO. I BY I DATE 1xx
REVISION >« >« �
DATE: 7 -2 -15
DRAWN: MP DRAWN:PC
TITLE: SITE PLAN
SHEET NO.: 2 OF 6 NORTH
400 0 200 400 800
SCALE IN FEET 1"= 400'

tw
�'.WSP
128 Talbert Road, Suite A
Mooresville, NC 28117
(704)862 -0100
ww mmr wspproup.corrduss
SHERRILL'S FORD PHA
CATAWBA COUNTY, NC
D.R. Horton, LLC
SAW- - - - - ---
NO. I BY I DATE REVISION
roc I xx I xx In
DATE: 7 -2 -15
DRAM: WSP DRAM : PC
TRIBUTARY 'B1" IMPACT
TITLE:
SHEET NO.: 3 OF 6
'0
NORTH
I ENrX !
044
IE
i� if
1 i I

'03,0"
ISi,
11 Ns
0
Z
, lox:
02 w
LA.
LIL
z D
X
0 Z.-j I
LL :D
COJ m
W U 0
&f11 CO --
Am
0) C4 8
Z9
0

SH E R R I L L' S FORD PH. 1 NO. I BY I DAXXTE JXX REVISION �
WSPCATAWBA COUNTY, NC DR WN :WSP DRAWN: PC
128 Talbert Road, Suite D.R. Horton, LLC TITLE:
POND "E1" IMPACT
Mooresvifb, NC 28117
(704)e62 -0100 SAW-- - - - - -- — NORTH
www.wspyroup.00mlusa — — — — - - - -- SHEET NO.: 5 O F 6
100
F�iZgFsS► DEVELOPMENT r, i r /a
, NAGE (TYP)
t
_ STORM ape`
r
r e
L )
tpgiE
UAL1TY
� . -, �M i`�'��� TERM_ - t � , � � � � "+ \ }•• I- r "
f�. c REI�UIR
r
r
a
a
0
3

.w5 P
128 Talbert Road, Suite A
Mooresville, NC 28117
(704)662 -0100
www.wspgr0up.00mtusa
SHERRILL'S FORD PHA NO. I BY I DATE I REVISION \
CATAWBA COUNTY, NC DRAWN?WSP DRAWN Pc
� lr
D.R. Horton, LLC TITLE: TRIBUTARY "D1
SAW ------- __— SHEETNO 6 OF 6 NORTH
ru
5o 100 200
V = 100`

C
N�
d
n'
n
o�
O �
� a
w �
0 M
3
w
o'
Jurisdictional Determination

RPW downslope of dam
- Determined by survey
to be offsite
APPROXIMATE MAP — WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD
Catawba County, NC
APPROXIMATE MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
FOR STUDY PURPOSES ONLY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
Parcel ID: 460716841504
LRK/REID: 803691
3893 SLANTING BRIDGE RD
SHERRILLS FORD, 28673
THE VILLAGE AT SHERRILLS
FORD LLC
SCALE
700 950 0 700(Frcn

Navigational Flow Path to TNW Map
Flow Path: Jurisdictional features on the site %
flow into one or more culverts, then flow
directly into the Catawba River (TNW) at Lake
Norman.
,/
PROJECT.
TNW Catawba River •� ` ^f' `� � _ � - ._,_
(Lake Norman) J -T
7 to i L 1 1-41
Culvert or Bridge -- .
ReN
•
t.I1S1lt 11 11 'er lsFord
It Fire and ✓
kes_ueHeadquart.:r° � -•� ,� r -,• 1�'
/.,
f
t
' 41
77,
Jf .�
LOCATION:
r
LATITUDE LONGITUDE
�^ 35.5866 N - 80.9688 w
HUC:03050101
Upper Catawba
VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Catawba County, NC JAL/PJK LSR
DATE:
Navigation Pathway Map
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION) 07/14/15

REPRESENTATIVE LANSCAPE PHOTOS
PHOTO 1. Jurisdictional Pond E
PHOTO 2. Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW A
PHOTO 3. Jurisdictional Perennial RPW C
PHOTO 4. Non — Jurisdictional gully or swale (typical)
VILLAGES AT SHERRILLS FORD
Catawba County, NC
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
LANDSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHS
Photographs taken on 08120115
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
PJK LSR
DATE:
06/29/15

Villages at Sherrilis Ford
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AND STREW DIMENSIONS
JURISDICTIONAL OPEN
WATER Sa Ft Acres JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUTARIES Acres LF NOTES
Jurisdictional Pond E 29664 0.681 Seasonal RPW Tributary Al 0.035 405.73 Table 1 WOUS
Seasonal RPW Tributary 131 0.001 12.82 Summary Table
Perennial RPW Tributary C1 0.035 628.7
Total Jurisdictional Ponds 29664 0.681 Total Jurisdictional Tributaries 0.071 1047.25
TOTAL SITE ACREAGE 57
TOTAL WATERS OF THE US ACREAGE 0.752
TOTAL UPLAND ACRES 56.248
f`
.: n ,. ,. ,". �7W��, d��! w," �* i�. 4' k�� '•`Syr,Po�.reN�dmia� &iAM1a�'w��fe �?�+;• ymcuy�e+ amsrA°° i�". rrW."' nxkz, ur�,w �.xk,lkcy,y3,d�ia�"aa��*dM?4` Eta' yl$' �ra aj, p. �; 4�?:! "c,�,a�'A�gki,W"�r'm,,""S .'N� �.'�,a�u..q
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner,
/

NC Division of Water Quality - Methodology for ,ldentification of Intermittent and
Perennial, Streams and Their Origins v. 4.11
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: January 9, 2015 Project/Site: Villages at Shernlls Ford Latitude: 35 58833 N
Perennial RPW,C
Evaluator :, PJK, JAL County: Catawba County, NC Longitude: - 80 99082 W
Total Points: ° Stream Determination (cir ' e Other Lake Norman.North (NC)
Stream is at feast intermittent 33 Ephemeral Intermitte Perennaa e g Quad Name: HUC 03050101
if >_ 19 or perennial it z 30 `
,A.'Geomorphology (Subtotal= 17.5.
Absent
Weak
is Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2.'Sinuosity,of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
Z. In- channel structure: ex. rtftte -pool, step -pool,
0
1
3
o ripple- pool.sequence
3
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
YesU
&.Depositional bars or benches
0
1
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
C
8. Headcuts,
IWO
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
11., Second or greater order channel
1.5
No = 0
artifiaal ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1:5
Otherq 0:)
-B. °Hyd'rology (Subtotal = 8 )
'perenrnal streams may,also be idenfified using other methods See p 35 of manual'
12. °Presence of Baseflow
0
I 1
Crayfish and salamanders observed.
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
14. (Leaf litter
1.5
1
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1-6. Organic debris lines or plies
0
05)
17.. Soil-based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
C., Biology (Subtotal.= 7.5
Moderate
Strong
2
3
U
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
2
3
Q)
1:5
.1 1
1:5
YesU
1
0 3
2 3
0.5 0
1 1.5
1° a 1.5
Yes t�
18.` Fibrous roots 4n streambed
3
V
1
0
19. Rooted upland,plants in streambed
%_01/
2
1
0
20. iMabrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
c 1 )
2
3
21. Aquabc,Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
10.5
1
1.5
X23. Crayfish.
0
Q5
1
1.5
1.24:, Amphibians
0
(102.2
1.5
25. Algae °
0
0.5
1
1.5
-26. Wetland plants In streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1:5
Otherq 0:)
'perenrnal streams may,also be idenfified using other methods See p 35 of manual'
Notes: ( +/ -)3' - 4'.wide chan. Sand, gravel, cobble. Few boulders at perennial origin.
Crayfish and salamanders observed.
Sketch:

NC Division of Water Quality - Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and
Perennial Streams and Their Origins v. 4.11
NC: DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: January 9, 2015 Project/Slte: Villages at Shernlls Ford Latitude: 35.58794 N
Seasonal RPW A
Evaluator: PJK, JAL County: Catawba County, NC Longitude: - 80 99010 W
Total Points: Stream Dete n circle one) Other Lake Norman North (NC)
Stream is at least intermittent 28 Ephemera me Itte Perennial e g Quad Name: HUC 03050101
if ? 19 or perennial !f > 30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 14 )
Absent
1a Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool.
0
ripple -pool sequence
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
5. Active /relict lwdplain
U0
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
7. Recent alluviandeposits
0
8. Headcuts
0
9. Grade control
0
10. iNatural valley
0 _
11. Second or greater order channel
NoU0
8 artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
0.5
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7 )
1.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
17. Soil- based' evidence of high water table?
No = 0
C., Biology, (Subtotal ,= 7 )
18. Fibrous roots ih streambed 3
,I. 19. °Rooted upland. plants in streambed U
o20:,Macrobenthos (note dive" and abundance) 0
21. Aouatic Mollusks 0
22.°Flsh 0
23. Crayfish, 0
24. Amphibians 0
25. Algae 0
26. Wetland plants In streambed
*perennial streams may also be identified usang other methods See p. 35 of manual
Notes: (+/-)3'- 4' wide chan Sand, gravel, few cobble.
Sketch:
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1
2
3
U
2
3
1
O 1
3
i
�
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
1
1.5
Yes =3
1Q' 2
2
0.5
0.5 1
Yes 3t3
0 1
2 1
t;1 ) 2
°1 2
0.5 1
0.5 1
0.5 1
0.5 1
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other
3
3,
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET 1 r
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name. 2. Evaluator's name: WEPG: (PJK, JAL)
3. Date of evaluation. 01/09/15 4. Tmie of evaluation: +/- 1:00 PM
5. Name of stream: Perennial RPW C 6. River basm: Upper Catawba (HUC 03050101)
7. Approximate drainage area: +/- 15 acres 8. Stream order: 1 st
9. Length of reach evaluated- +/- 100' 10. County: Catawba
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35 58833 N Longitude (ex. —77 556611): - 80 99082 W
Method location detemtined (circle): GPS <Z2 Sheet.i Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
3893 Slanting Bridge Rd., Sherrills Ford, 28673. See attached vicinity map.
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, dry.
16. Site conditions at time of visit. Undisturbed
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -I4)
'18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water .surface rface area:
19. Does'chatuuel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does chaimel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
60 % Forested 40 % Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: +/-8-10' 23 Bank height (from bed to top of bank): +/- 3'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) _Gentle (2 to 4 %) X Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity Straight _Occasional bends X Frequent meander _Very smuuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by deteriuining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location. terrain, vegetation. stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site ou weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment. section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream tinder review (e.g.. the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest). the stream may' be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100. with a score of 100 representing °a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 54 Comments:
Evaluatoa•'s'Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only.as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in`
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03 To Comment. please call 919 -876 -8441 x 26.
I

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
pRPW C
�CaV 1° 1 \LU'1'1VV .��H Pi �QiN MO °J
-
• °rPresence of oflow,/ persisfentgpools"in,sheeam =° ° ° ` °
-?l;°
�, °1° °° d °-•�� ° g ,_. bq. paw ° ° •0�:5, °° as Or D0; 5°
° (no-ilow or_sa'tiration = 0;'strongoflow=
2
° a , ° ° o aEVM—edce of;pasffiu ari'alteration °° ° e° °
° ° 0 6 ° ° , • ° _ °S , ° ° ' °° 0�- 5 ° °
°
(egtensi� etalteration �0 noialteration�= 'Max po_ints)�° + a
°
4
° °• o
o buffer: °0"contiuous`, wiabuffer =max ubinfs)
° • ° e (n ; ° • ° , ° °
a °a °
3
'° ° }E<tdence *oi nuti°lent or chemical discharge "s °3° •
=
eextensive, discharges = °0: nw -i iscitarge'r' rtiax;poinis� ° • ° ° • ° • _ ' ° • ° ° °
(_ ° ° ° ° ° °
4
,r;toundwafer^dischArger ° °' ° ' ° ° °' • °
°a _ a. ° ° Oa- 3' °° 0-
°__ (nadischarge;=_0 :_springs,.eeps :`wetlands. = eta -emaxRpoint ° •
°°° ° °,
66
°i ( 110 =floodplain °`Q: atenSiFe;flUOdplallt >max= points }� ° ° ' ° __•
°
+° ° ° ^° �.En renctiment /5ilood'plain`access ° ` ° ° ° ° ° - __ _.. °° 7°
w °OV °•
,n A� _
10,;.-4
9 ° •fZ 9 ° ° �((°��.
Tv�d V +4
,(deeply, ddtrdd edr =,0: fregiient'floodidg = niax points) _ ° a
I° •° °
0
Preseuce�of,edjacent Wetlands,
08` ° F •• • ° e4M1 • °O -06• ° `Qrt_`.
*e-
° °b >e ;2
0
-A ° ° (norwetlands =v0:aaradjacent.wetlands = _msx'points) ° ° • , °
°°
°
e Channel sinuo9
> =5
3
n Ott poats) •(extensi< ve g0 °
chAneliiaho'� ;,nauiil'meandei" =,max °
Sediment =input /fig
. ° , ° a
,9 ° 4, 9 °p Q - Y °, 4
V °
3
_( 9 • e+51 ° ° °
extens`ivedeposition= _O:,lit`tle oi?no?sediment?max_points_° - - °�_ � • • -_ _ °I
_ 7Size ; &d5verstvuof�e>;anueiitied *substrate` _�.�:' -
° _(find' tioii ogenous .0; laige „diverse siie`sk points)_'
°_
3
° ;Evidence�of°channel &fiisioh,,b tv�idenin'
od2° ° - g6� °
v
0 - SO ° 0� - °4'
3
% e(deeOfy .incised, ='O:fstatile;bed °& liaiiks = smax'Qointsj °
,0.x=5
'
° iPresence?of major.'b'ank faildfO'sr•° ° ° ° ° ° ° °
a_(sevefe'
° `
° ' - ° •
°_
- ,sion—i a no: etosio_n, °stable baziks, . max• points)
° ' rRoot)depthuanddsto,tonbnl= ts °
. . P
ns .
0��`51,4
a a°
a x
oitno visiblelroots =:0 dense.fooYhoikhoVtmns
t
°
Impactin4 agriculture; `livestock;' ° or', fimbec �prodgctiona
Ole . Sp° vo _• v +° O° 5 ° °I
3
(siibstantial�iiripact: ;,no evidence max- points)
_ _ _
Presence oBrifIIeioUripp�eApool ,compleiesr ° ° ° ° q
,lie, °° ;o= °
° ° ° Y
© =$s�° =6 °•
3
(no;fiffli! 7 lbsT& p'o ",o9 well = developed`
•0
�,
,Hiibita'tcbiity ° ° �� ° ° •;
a ° *ftP ° °° 4.I
° �°
°•, °p`a(>1° , ,t °° ,Q b6 °�°
3
(little`o ;- no,hatritat =.0; fiegdent, veiled habitats = max�poiuts);'-
a - °b+
° ° ° °ICariopecoverae `outer "srreambed;°
4
`s18v ° ° •° ° ° a•° e g • ° ° °
°
•0 °- $ ° p ° ,^° "-aq°
4
(no o;liAin�e,vegetation =`O:Fcontinuous canopy,
V °;Sub°stri*4ni6eildedness
ai9° _ s, e,. Win_ s °> s -. •- °- °2. °
.0
°° ° °a ° °
* -� °
°
3
_
fte'sence:.ofis'fream,lu ertetirates�( see page 4) + ° °° , °. ° e ' °° • ° °
°• 4 °0 ° a -- °° °
s °,..r �' °'
,common,mumerous t9Pes = .sliiax,poiiifs�Ea 1'. _. _ °° .� °�' .•�'° 4° ���.< .v° ,���, :
°` °' `Presence of'aipphibians ° °'° ° ' ° ° . °`• °
,.m
. -
p0,_ q' .
"°
(' ,0,__4 ° 0'e.4
_(sioevidence =',OA common :•nuineious_typesi'max;points)L L.
^, - °
<,Presence iorl sif
? Tuo;evideuce =,0:,'c 4 numerous ,types °= uiarc points); ° ;I
°._ . O9e • l _ _ ° Ia
4° °I
°_ r
0
Eommon.
= `viilence.oi',�vitdlife�use
°° e. ° ^�- r y_ — "' w d,.. ,✓.�m.�,t�,..°G a ° .. y., .
.= 0 °
=:.
•�t J� °
.: °"
2
d�°ti -
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET dZ
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: 2. Evaluator's name: WEPG: (PJK, JAL)
3. Date of evaluation: 01/09/15 4. Tune of evaluation: +/- 3:00 PM
5. Nance of stream: Seasonal RPW A 6. River basm. Upper Catawba (HUC 03050101)
7. Approximate drainage area: +1-5 - 10 acres 8. Stream order• 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: +/- 100' lo. County- Catawba
11. Site coordinates (if known)- prefer m decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ea. 34 872312): 35.58794 N Longitude (ex. —77 556611): - 80 99010 W
Method location determined (circle): GPS �� � Chtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach tinder evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
3893 Slanting Bridge Rd., Sherrills Ford, 28673. See attached vicinity map.
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, dry.
16. Site conditions at time of visit. Undisturbed
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat °
_Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -Iti)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes. estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial % Induustrial % Agricultural °.
60 % Forested
22. Bankfull width: +/-8-10'
24. Channel.slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends
40 % Cleared /, Logged % Other ( ` ° )
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): +/-3'
_Gentle (2 to 4 %) X Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
_Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located'on page 2): Begin by detennining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location: terrain. vegetation. stream classification. etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site `or weather conditions. enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in'the
cominent °section Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e g.. the stream flows from- a' pasture
into a forest). the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity. and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100. with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 49 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment ,of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject °to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03, To Connnent. please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Reach Al
i ffiJ
ECG»GIUiv r
EW 6
oa
Piesence�of tlowr / "persis nt',ppols in;stream`.:n p ° ' a d • ° ° �` ' ; ° ° _A
' (no_flow or satui tion �To:
' ° ° Eviii'ence,ofpastP�,unisu- alteration ° ' ; �^ • � � ° '4� ° ° , , ° • °• S ° ' �` 4 ,
=�(extensive�aite`r'ation� e30;;no`alt� ration'`= maic- :points }A. , _ •� - , _., � _ •�o ,
�, ° • 3tipai p 5 °
03 ° •, ° ° a(rio¢tinffer ='Q =c`dntigiious wide livffer ='max points) ° . 0';§6 e ; t O,
e;E�jdenc NO nutrient ors ehe'mrcal °di §cLaigds =. A
- ° (extensive discharges =i0rrno &d chargesa=
° °•° °° ° ° °° ° Groandwaferdisc6arge,; ° ° °° ° • ° ° • ° q ° ;4` °` •0 0,4 2
g, . « =- P O�g3° �0°-
;(no dischar --'d' sprmgs•,•,seeps wetlands, etc:-= max
° , ° Presence ofvadjacent�tloodplairi = k ° ° ° ° °° a ° °° _
s � (no�iloodplai ' ='0; extensive flooitPlain=,max:poinfsj
EnireuclimeCF1,floodplsfn. Of
access °a c ,
veo.5° 'y 0° ° O
( deeply," entrenche" d=: 0`:, frequeiit�flooding ,= ".max'paiirts }. �
e ° °� . ° • e ° ° Pies _euc e =° of•adjace5t�wetlandst ° e ° °°° ° ° I, ' v 00_,° 6 . '` a I ° ° °0;�
0: argcenn = ax =pa 2 ° 0 (uo wetnds ltmints)
°l
9a •,l, e e ° ° o ° ° , °• Gfiannel slnttositY e. °• ° • ° d0'- _5•° • • ° ` ° ° °� °
4exAnsive- channelization'= •O :;natt lmeander:= imaxpoints) i
° a e ° � ° ° e . ,�Seiiiment�;• °. e ° : ° e -• « ° •� :° P° °.e, e °_
3
°size &MV ersitv, 'ofrc>i uBe' l(i'stibstrafe" 2
°eel° h;Eom�io d eennsoiis = U;alaipe „div_egr.s_ e
s" r h es<° i° n ts)°
ain owdenngw
pi 5° : p _ 4 "_:S 3
p
�• °a( deeply iacis = O:tstatile- bed -ii a&s =;inax points)
�• ” °' ' - - �P,resence�of�major tia���ailai�es� °e � •, :e.. - °' �, ; ��' � �Y'
a °d >(sevefe,erosion °9 no„ eros s„ uiax
° ° �A�tepth��and�density ion 'banks . ° °°
a, . °.max -, �.� T� Y I° °0 •3° ;� ° O e4 °,•• ° '0 5, •,l 2
(no visibleois = -0 dense.roots tliroi out =max points) ° I
m
Ipact i;.agiicuituce,..livesfocIt�:or timtier 9groduction ° ° ° • °
ti�s4• -
a l ° _("siibsfantialinipaef;4no e�i$ence Amax` oints)
�Piesencc ,gf:riffleppoVrfppl"!,par cosgpleaes' ° ° °°
e nU=6
X1 6 -
F ' (moo rIfE12's /fipples_ orpool5,0;'w ell developedx -� nlalC pOlntS): « ° a . ° 9 0° " . ,� ° w °' a. ".
(li °r a ° °„ ° • aty HbbitAt cn*ei 'm ^ az : pe o i nts, ) O d ab{ s° a e °
iaigfj= : ut,ahtat- -te'o° n6'1
mm • ° °° ` pvecoverage oygItrlsfivambed `
418 •. • ° - � ° °. �� -_ q ° , , ° e Po ° 4) I • ' tj�`5 • ° ` �h , ° 0; =`5 ` ° le ° 0 °— 5 - ° °,I 4
(n Aadiug vegetation =�O:,cantrnuous ='max4 rots
°'' ° - °- ° °- Substra'tepemtieddedness- .: <: "° o °I °NA:� I ° °' - 0 }:�': °6 •I' Y °0�.�'4` ° °'el 2
-- ,; ��° �• �_° �' �dee,' �In�eaaed'' �=;© aloo` eystruchue._°�riias)r�F°�a °,x.° W,� ° «° .,...� ,�° � -°
kin
gPa Csence qb "s_ flail tin ei teiii ales (see,page„4) - °} ° '. • = a � = u , - - ° `;-
=�(no°eyidence; di. comaiori .;num66ia,tXpes�'=:niaR;Ponifs)
`P,resence- f aui ians R
°. t3'P ° ° ° Po °° )` 'I° 0�° ° Or -:4
eidence(1 �comnion. ndrserous' es 'max; rots _ w
d22 ° ":: ; er . ° °,; a ;... e.Pi esence, °of -Sh. �: • e ; IT
F' , v t,_ Y• 0d:4 ° °�0`= °r �° ° ° O��a4`d a O
l ° •P(n0 „evidence = b 'connnon� •nttnlerous iypeS °= 7lla7i',poirltS),, ° „I ° _ °.e, °,il _ • A _ l
tYi "�(]° _ ° • - ° ° ; ° - ” Evidence,of "1' . .. ` (� � c �� • . '° � � = ° °(� '
l° dL3 °iIR ° W ° b.: - 3Y... 3.:, L.. S' 'a'.Y� �.W .. °O _.x •Yui -: 4 ° ° a°/� 6- ° °�l, - f'V��2Je°� ° P °° O��v+l '° ~,) 2
°�(no_evid�nce_= O:�abundant�evrdence �+nlazQpomts) 'V` ° ° "�
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION `DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site- Villages at Sherrills Ford City /County Catawba County Sampling Date, 01109115
Applicant/Owner. D R Horten LLC State NC Sampling Point DP1 Upland
Investigator(s) WEPG JAL, PJK Section, Township, Range
Landform' (hdlslope, terrace, etc ) Valley Local relief (concave, convex, none) Concave Slope ( %) 3 - 6%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) MLRA 136 Lat 35 58872 N Long- 80 99069 W Datum: WGS84
Soil Map Unit Name: PeE Pacolet Soils NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Y No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation N , Soil N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation N Sod 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 X
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland?
;Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks. Normal conditions at time of survey
HYDROLOGY
Metland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is rea0ed: check all that aaaly)
Surface Water (All)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Water Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron' Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Water =Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
Field Observations:
Yes No X
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required).
Surface Soil Cracks (36)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BS)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (01)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
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,
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) – Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DP1. Upland
5.
�6
Shrub Stratum (Plot size
1 Faqus grandlfolla
2,1lex opaca
3,.
4
5
6
Prevalence Index = B/A =
25 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover 12 5 20% of total cover 5 — 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
30' ) _ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
10 Y FACU — 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10 Y FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 PoNstichum acrosticholdes
2
.3
4
5.
6 °
8
I
9°
10
11-
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetiand hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
20 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
10 20% of total cover 4 Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vanes,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
20 Y FACU (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
cv = i otai cover
50% of total cover. 10 20% of total cover. 4
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica 20 Y FAC _
2 Toxicodendron radicans 15 Y FAC
3
4
5. Hydrophytic
35 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 175 20% of total cover 7 Present?
Remarks (include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers
Yes No X
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30, )
% Cover Species
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Quercus alba
20
Y
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 2
(A)
2. Faaus prandlfolla
10
Y
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
3 Linodendron tuliDifera
_ 0
Y
FACU
Species Across All Strata 10
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5 _ °
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC. 20%
(A/B)
6,
40
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of- MuftiDlv'bv:
50% of total cover
20 20% of
total cover
8
OBL species x 1 =
"
SaDlino Stratum (Plot size. 30' t
,1, Fagus grandlfolla
15
Y
FACU
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
1,2 Oxvdendrum arboreum
10
Y
UPL
FACU species x 4 =
3
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals (A)
(B)
5.
�6
Shrub Stratum (Plot size
1 Faqus grandlfolla
2,1lex opaca
3,.
4
5
6
Prevalence Index = B/A =
25 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover 12 5 20% of total cover 5 — 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
30' ) _ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
10 Y FACU — 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
10 Y FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
50% of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 PoNstichum acrosticholdes
2
.3
4
5.
6 °
8
I
9°
10
11-
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetiand hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
20 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
10 20% of total cover 4 Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vanes,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
20 Y FACU (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
cv = i otai cover
50% of total cover. 10 20% of total cover. 4
Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica 20 Y FAC _
2 Toxicodendron radicans 15 Y FAC
3
4
5. Hydrophytic
35 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover 175 20% of total cover 7 Present?
Remarks (include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers
Yes No X
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

SOIL Sampling Point: DPI •UDland
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
0-10 7.5 YR 4/4 . 100 'Sandy Clay Loam
10-20 7 5 YR 5/6 90 7 4 YR 4/4 10 C M Sandy Clay
'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 Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic 03)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
aHydrogen. 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)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 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
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbnc Surface (F13) (MLRA 136„122)
Piedmont Floodplain Sods (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic
Depth (inches) Hydric Soil Present? Yes
Remarks,
Hydric soil Indicators were not observed
No X
C
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 -5006
APPLICANT:
D.R.Horton LLC
C. PROJECT LOCATION -AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Villages at Sherrills Ford
State.NC County/parish/borough: Catawba County City. Sherrills Ford
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format). Lat 35.5866 ° N, Long. -80 9888 ° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator
Name of nearest waterbody• Lake Norman (Catawaba River)
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows. Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050101 Upper Catawba
® Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request
[] Check if other sites (e g , offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
3 Office (Desk) Determination Date-
E] Field Determination Date(s)
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ar no ,navigable waters of the U S " within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) Jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
® Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
Q Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U S" within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
El TNWs, including territorial seas
R Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waterS2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
E] Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
[] Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify, (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters I I09.761inear feet +/- 3 - 6 width (ft) and/or 0.073 acres
Wetlands. 0.681 acres
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Estiiblished'by OHWM i
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e g, typically 3 months)

Elevation of established OHWM (if known).
Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):'
® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain: Areas of the site with contour crenulations were assessed in the field and determined not to contain all three
parameters of a jurisdictional wetland or jurisdictional RPW indicators, based on field determinations applying the
1987 Wetland Delineation Manual, Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Regional Supplement, OHWM, and stream
determination data forms.
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III F

SECTION IIi: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IILB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination*
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent"
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT iS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 ,
months). A'wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to °Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IIi.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size. 2363.8 (entire watershed) squaremiles
Drainage area- < 10 acre`s
Average annual rainfall: 42 inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW
® Tributary flows directly into TNW
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW
Project waters are 1 (or0les) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1:(o- 'less) river miles from RPW
Project waters are 1 (or'les's)' aerial (straight) miles from TNW
Project waters are 1" -, (or<less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain
Identify flow route to TNW'. Jurisdictional sRPW Tributary Al and Jurisdictional sRPW Tributary B1, which originate
onsite, flow into Jurisdictional pRPW Tributary Cl, which flows directly into the Catawba River (TNW) at Lake
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West
' Flow route can be described by identifying, e g, tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW

Norman Jurisdictional sRPW Tributary Dl, which originate onsite, flows directly into the Catawba River (TNW) at Lake
Norman
Tributary stream order, if known 1
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that aoolv)-
Tributary is ® Natural ,
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width. 3 -6 feet
Average depth 1 -2 feet
Average side slopes: 2f.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
® Cobbles 'E Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain -generally stable
Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain. few present.
'Tributary geometry. Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope)- 1 -2 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: $easonal�#low
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 141 2
Describe flow regime Seasonal flows with input from storm events
Other information on duration`and volume:
Surface flow is: D scce a $nd copfned. Characteristics
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
E] Dye (or other) test performed
Tributary has (check all that apply)
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
® changes in the character of soil
® shelving
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition
® water staining
❑
❑ other (list).
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
[� High Tide Line indicated by: 12
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell,or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list)-
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow,events
abrupt change in plant community
me lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply) -
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum;
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film, watevquality; general watershed characteristics, etc ).
Explain: Water was clear. Watershed was generally undisturbed at time of survey.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e g, where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices) Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow °
regime (e g, flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert); the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
'Ibid

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width). forested, > 100'.
❑ Wetland fringe Characteristics
❑ Habitat for•
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings.
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings.
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics.
Properties-
Wetland size. acres
Wetland type Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries Explain
(b) General Flow Relationshm with Non -TNW•
Flow is Pick List Explain:
Surface flow is: Pic k List
Characteristics
Subsurface flow. Pic L . Explain findings•
❑ Dye (or other) test performed.
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting .
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain.
❑ Ecological connection Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) . Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are PrckiList river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick:L',ist aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: P c� k)es .��
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e g, water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface, water quality, general watershed
characteristics, etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer Characteristics (type, average width)
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover Explain.
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts) (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in °the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• -Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW9
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D
Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III D
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D.
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area
Q TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres
El Wetlands adjacent to TNWs acres
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial. Jurisdictional Perennial RPW C1 has geomorphology, hydrology, and biology consistent with perennial
streams. The channel had OHWM, multiple observed flows, and macro invertebrates See Stream Reach Evaluation Forms.
® Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally. Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary AI , Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary B1, and Jurisdictional
Seasonal RPW Tributary Dl have the geomorphology, hydrology, and biology consistent with intermittent and seasonal

streams. The channels had clear bed and banks, scour, and substrate sorting . See Stream Reach Evaluation Forms for
Tributary Al (Typical)
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply).
® Tributary waters: 1109.76 linear feet3 - 6width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters- acres
Identify type(s) of waters-
Non -RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply)
Q Tributary waters linear feet width (ft).
Other non - wetland waters acres
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year - round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW.
[� Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally " Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW-
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area- acres
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Q Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.0
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters .9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional
® Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Q Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA - STATE[ WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
"See Footnote # 3
To complete the analysis refer to the key in'Section III D 6 of the Instructional Guidebook
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
0 Interstate isolated waters Explain-
Other factors. Explain
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply)
Q Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
E] Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters
E3 Wetlands acres.
NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
ED ` If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements
ED Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR)
0 Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for, jurisdiction Explain-
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (I e , rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes /ponds: acres
E] Other non - wetland waters- acres. List type of aquatic resource
Wetlands- acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
F1 Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams) linear feet, width (ft).
ED Lakes/ponds- acres
❑°° Other non - wetland waters. acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Q Wetlands acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below).
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report
ED Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Q Corps navigable waters' study.
zs' U S Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas.
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit RUC maps.
® U.S Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name- 124K - USGS _Lake Norman North NC Quadrangle
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation.Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL: http //websoilsurvey nres usda gov.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name.
State/Local wetland inventory map(s)
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is- (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):Villages at Sherrills Ford _Aerial photograph_ 062915
or ® Other (Name & Date):Villages at Sherrills Ford _Landscape photos_062915
ED Previous determination(s). File no and date of response letter:
Q Applicable /supporting case law•
Q Applicable /supporting scientific literature-
E] Other information (please specify).

B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: