20240436 Ver 1__20240314_Kairoi University_NWP 29 & PJD_20240314

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW -
Prepare file folder ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Kairoi University
Begin Date (Date Received):
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
2. Work Type: VPrivate ❑Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Kairoi Properties, LLC is seeking authorization under NWP 29 to permanently impact 230 LF/0.037 acre of streams, 0.26 acre of
wetlands, and 0.004 acre of open waters necessary to construct a residential development on an approximately 33-acre property located
along John Adams Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: Kairoi Properties, LLC (POC: Tyler Sibley )
[e-mail] ; 711 Navarro Street, Suite 400, San Antonio, Texas 78205; 210-817-0024
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Taylor Kiker, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]
7. Project Location — Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
The project is situated between 1-85 and John Adams Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC.
Project Coordinates (decimal degrees): 35.336324,-80.741134
8. Project Location —Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B 1 a] : 029-02-211, 029-02-212, 029-02-213, 029-02-214,
029-02-207, 029-02-208, 029-02-209, 029-02-210,
029-02-203, 029-02-205, 029-02-277, 029-02-206
9. Project Location —County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location —Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: UT to Stony Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Yadkin Pee Dee 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑✓
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
❑✓ Nationwide Permit #29
FRegional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
::]Pre -Application Request
::]Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Kimley»>Horn
March 14, 2024
Jennifer Lawrence
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District, Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, NC 28262
Stephanie Gross
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre -Construction Notification (NWP #29 and Individual 401 Water Quality Certification)
Kairoi University
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Dear Ms. Lawrence and Ms. Gross:
On behalf of our client, Kairoi Properties, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the enclosed joint Section 404/401
Pre -construction Notification and Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) for the above -referenced project
for your review pursuant to Nationwide Permit #29 and Individual 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC). The
proposed project seeks to construct multi -family residences, totaling ±330 units, including access roads, utilities,
and stormwater management facilities. The center of the project area is located at 35.336324°,-80.741134°. The
following information is included as part of this application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Pre -Construction Notification Form
• Agent Authorization
• Project Site Figures
■ Figure 1 — Vicinity Map
■ Figure 2 — USGS 7.5' Topo (Harrisburg) Map
■ Figure 3 — Meck. Co. SSURGO Soils and NWI Map (2023 Mecklenburg County Aerial)
■ Figure 4 — Existing Conditions Map (2023 Mecklenburg County Aerial)
■ Figure 5 — Photo Locations and Data Forms (2023 Mecklenburg County LiDAR)
• Permit Drawings
• Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
• Agency Correspondence
• Compensatory Mitigation
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The proposed Kairoi University project is a residential development situated on a 33.1-acre tract located in
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC. The proposed project seeks the development of ±330 multi -family units, as
well as associated development infrastructure appurtenances including, on -site roadway, utilities, and stormwater
facilities.

Kimley>>Horn
Page 2
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on
February 7, 2024. No documented architectural or historical sites of significance within the project boundary were
identified.
PROTECTED SPECIES
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on February 7, 2024, did not indicate
known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Potentially suitable habitat
for threatened and endangered plant species on -site was surveyed. A concurrence request was submitted to
USFWS on February 16, 2024. At the time of this submittal, a response from USFWS has not been received. A
copy of the USFWS request is attached.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for stream impacts associated with grading and
pipe installation. The proposed project will result in a total of 230 linear feet (LF)/0.033 acre of permanent stream
impacts.
• Stream 2 (S2)
o Impact 1: 172 LF/0.025 ac of permanent impacts to S2 results from grading activities necessary to
construct the residences.
o Impact 2: 21 LF of 60-in Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) will be installed at Stream 2. The RCP
results in 30 LF/0.005 acre of permanent impacts to S2. The RCP will be buried 1-ft to promote
the passage of aquatic organisms.
o Impact 3: The relocation of an existing pipe and installation of a new headwall will result in 18 LF/
0.002-ac of permanent impacts to S2.
o Impact 4: The relocation of an existing pipe and installation of a new headwall will result in 10 LF/
0.001-ac of permanent impacts to S2.
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for wetland impacts associated with grading
necessary to construct the residences. The proposed project will result in a total of 0.26 acre of permanent impacts
to wetlands.
• Impact 5: 0.19 acre to Wetland 2
• Impact 6: 0.07 acre to Wetland 3
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for open water impacts associated with grading
activities necessary to construct a stormwater management facility. The proposed project will result in a total of
0.004 acre of permanent impacts to open waters.
• Impact 7: 0.004 acre to Open Water 1
Overall, impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 230 LF/0.037 acre of permanent
stream impacts, 0.26 acre of permanent wetland impacts, and 0.004 acres of permanent open water impacts.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest
extent practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide
permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by reducing the
proposed stream impacts. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
• Avoidance of the remaining 1,927 LF of streams on -site.
• Avoidance of the remaining 0.13 acre of wetlands on -site.

Kimley»>Horn
Pale 3
Erosion control measures implemented during the construction of the site will be removed immediately
following the activities and any disturbance will be returned to pre -construction conditions.
The proposed future ROW is to be dedicated/reserved based on coordination with Charlotte DOT. Future
build -out is not associated with this proposed subdivision and no impacts will be made at this time.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through two private banks: the Upper Rocky
Umbrella Mitigation Bank and the RES Yadkin 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. Based on an NCSAM assessment of
Low for perennial stream S2, mitigation is proposed at a 1:1 ratio for impacts to this feature, or 230 stream mitigation
credits. Based on an NCWAM assessment of Low for wetlands W2 and W3, mitigation is proposed at a 1:1 ratio for
impacts to these features, or 0.26 wetland mitigation credits. In total, 230 stream mitigation credits and 0.26 wetland
mitigation credits will be purchased to offset impacts associated with this project. Quality assessment results and
Statement of Availability are included.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
'J It, � ��_
Taylor Kiker, PWS
Environmental Scientist

Kimley _>> Horn
Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Kairoi
Applicant Name and Address: Kairoi Properties, LLC (POC: Tyler Sibley)
711 Navarro Street, Suite 400, San Antonio, Texas
Telephone Number:[phone]
Type of Request: ® Nationwide PCN (NWP #29) ❑ Individual Permit Application
® Jurisdictional Determination ❑ Other:
Included Attachments:
® Project Plans
® USGS Map
® NRCS Soil Survey
® Agent Authorization
® Delineation Sketch
® Delineation Survey
® Data Forms (Up & Wet)
® NCDWR Stream Forms
❑ USACE Stream Forms
❑ NCDMS Confirmation
® Aerial Photo
® Site Photos
® Agency Correspondence
❑ Other:
❑ Other:
Check if applicable:
❑ CAMA County
❑ Trout County
❑ Isolated Waters
❑ Section 7, ESA
❑ Section 106, NHPA
❑ EFH
❑ Mitigation Proposed (❑
NC EEP ❑ On -Site ❑ Off -Site ❑ Other)
County: Mecklenburg
Nearest City/Town: Charlotte
Waterway: UT to Stony
Creek
River Basin: Yadkin Pee Dee
H.U.C.: 03040105
USGS Quad Name: Harrisburg
Property Size (acres): 33 acres Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres):2,157 LF & 0.39 ac
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.336324°N-80.741134°W
Project Location: The project is located along John Adams Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC.
Site Description: The subject property evaluated for the proposed development is an approximately 33-acre tract,
comprised of undeveloped forested land, open areas, and single-family residences.
Impact Summary (if applicable): Impacts associated with the proposed development will result in 230 LF/0.037 acre of
permanent stream impacts, 0.26 acre of permanent wetland impacts, and 0.004 acres of permanent open water impacts.
Stream Channel
Open Water
Wetland
Intermittent and/or Unimportant
Perennial and/or Important
NWP
(acres)
(acres)
#
A uatic Function
Aquatic Function
Tem .
Perm.
Tem .
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
if
ac
if
ac
if
ac
if
Ac
29
-
0.004
-
0.26
-
-
-
-
-
-
230
0.033
Total
-
0.004
-
0.26
-
-
-
-
-
-
230
0.033
230 LF/ 0.033 ac &
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Non -Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.004 ac
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Wetland Waters of the U.S.
0.26 ac
Kimley-Horn Contact: Taylor Kiker, PWS Direct Number: (980)-296-0810
Email: taylor.kiker(a�kimley-horn.com

3�.M,>
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
Water Resources
Office Use Only
Corps Action ID no. [Click to enter.]
DWR project no. lick enter.]
Site Coordinates:
Date received: [Click to enter.]
Date received: [Click to enter.]
Latitude (DD.DDDDDD): 35.336324
Longitude (DD.DDDDDD): 80.741134
Form Version 4.3, 1210412023
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
(Ver. 4.2, 1210412023)
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits and corresponding Water Quality Certifications
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk are required. The form is not considered complete until all
mandatory questions are answered.
The PCN help document may be found at this link:
https://edocs.deq. nc.qov/WaterResources/DocView.aspx?dbid =0&id=2196924&cr=1
Page 1 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

A. Processing Information
County (counties) where project is located: *
Mecklenburg Additional (if needed).
Is this an ARPA project? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, ARPA project number:
* The project number can be found on the "Letter of Intent to Fund"
(LOIF) or "Offer and Acceptance Letter". If you are unable to locate
Click or tap here to enter text.
your DWI ARPA Funding Project Number, please contact Corey
Basinger at core y.basinger(cDncdenr.gov for further assistance.
Is this a NCDMS project? *
(Click yes only if NCDMS is the applicant or co-
❑ Yes ❑x No
applicant)
Is this a public transportation project?
(Publicly funded municipal, state, or federal road, rail,
❑ Yes ❑x No
or airport project)
Is this a NCDOT project? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, NCDOT TIP or state project number:
Click to enter.
If yes, NCDOT WBS number: *
Click to enter.
❑x Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams, waters,
Clean Water Act)
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: *
❑ Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal
waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
Please provide the date of the previous submission. *
Click to enter a date
❑x Nationwide Permit (NWP)
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek
*
El Regional General Permit (RGP)
authorization?
❑ Standard (IP)
This form may be used to initiate the standard/ individual permit
process with the USACE. Please contact your Corps
representative concerning submittals for standard permits. All required items can be included as attachments and
submitted with this form.
1 C. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? *
® Yes ❑ No
NWP number(s) (list all numbers ):
29
RGP number(s) (list all numbers ):
Click to enter.
Are you a federal applicant?
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, please provide a statement concerning compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act
Click to enter text.
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from DWR (check all that apply):
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification— Express
❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
❑x Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
Is this a courtesy copy notification
❑ Yes ❑x No
Page 2 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required? *
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification: *
❑ Yes
❑x No
For the record only for Corps Permit: *
❑ Yes
❑x No
1 f.
Is this an after -the -fact permit/certification application? *
❑ Yes
❑x No
1 g.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts?
® Yes
❑ No
If yes, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program.
1 h.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties? *
❑ Yes
❑x No
1 i.
Is the project located within an NC DCM Area of Environmental
Concern (AEC)? *
❑ Yes
❑x No ❑ Unknown
1j.
Is the project located in a designated trout watershed? *
❑ Yes
❑x No
If yes, you must attach a copy of the approval letter from the appropriate Wildlife Resource Commission Office.
Trout information may be found at this link: http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-
Program/Agency-Coordination/Trout.aspx
Page 3 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

B. Applicant Information
1 a.
Who is the primary contact? *
Taylor Kiker, PWS
1 b.
Primary Contact Email: *
[e-mail]
1 c.
Primary Contact Phone: * (###)###-#1###
[phone]
1 d.
Who is applying for the permit/certification? * (check
all that apply)
❑ Owner ❑x Applicant (other than owner)
1 e.
Is there an agent/consultant for this project?*
® Yes ❑ No
2.
Landowner Information
2a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed: *
Multiple
2b.
Deed Book and Page No.:
Click to enter.
2c.
Contact Person (for corporations):
Click to enter.
2d.
Address *
Street Address:
Click to enter.
Address line 2:
Click to enter.
City:
Click to enter.
State/ Province/ Region:
Click to enter.
Postal/ Zip Code:
Click to enter.
Country:
Click to enter.
2e.
Telephone Number: * (###)###-#1###
N/A
2f.
Fax Number: (###)###-#1###
Click to enter.
2g.
Email Address: *
N/A
3.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a.
Name: *
Tyler Sibley
3b.
Business Name (if applicable):
Kairoi Properties, LLC
3c.
Address: *
Street Address:
711 Navarro Street
Address line 2:
Suite 400
City:
San Antonio
State/ Province/ Region:
Texas
Postal/ Zip Code:
78205
Country
USA
3d.
Telephone Number: * (###)###-#1###
[phone]
3e
Fax Number: (###)###-#1###
lick to enter.
3f.
Email Address: *
[e-mail]
Page 4 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

4.
Agent/ Consultant (if applicable)
4a.
Name: *
Taylor Kiker, PWS
4b.
Business Name:
Kimley-Horn
4c.
Address: *
Street Address:
200 South Tryon St
Address line 2:
Suite 200
City:
Charlotte
State/ Province/ Region:
NC
Postal/ Zip Code:
28202
Country:
USA
4d.
Telephone Number: * (###)###-#1###
[phone]
4e
Fax Number: (###)###-#1###
Click to ente
4f.
Email Address: *
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter:*
Attach a completed/signed agent authorization form or letter. A sample form may be found at this link:
https://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Permits/2017-Nationwide-Permits/Pre-
construction-Notification/
Page 5 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1 a. Name of project: *
Kairoi University
1 b. Subdivision name (if appropriate):
Click to enter.
1 c. Nearest municipality/town: *
Charlotte
2.
Project Identification
2a.
Property identification number (tax PIN or parcel ID):
029-02-211, 029-02-212, 029-02-213, 029-02-214, 029-
02-207, 029-02-208, 029-02-209, 029-02-210, 029-02-
203, 029-02-205, 029-02-277, 029-02-206
2b.
Property size (in acres):
33.1
2c.
Project Address:
Street Address:
John Adams Road
Address line 2:
Click to enter.
City:
Charlotte
State/ Province/ Region:
NC
Postal/ Zip Code:
28262
Country:
USA
2d.
Site coordinates in decimal degrees (using 4-6 digits
after the decimal point): *
Latitude (DD.DDDDDD): * 35.336324
Longitude (-DD.DDDDDD): *-80.741134
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project: *
UT to Stony Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving
C
water: *
The Surface Water Classification map may be found at this link:
htti)s://ncdenr.mai)s.arcgis.com/apes/webappviewer/index.html?id=6el 25ad7628f494694e259c80dd64265
Yadkin-PeeDee
3c. In what river basin(s) is your project located?
Choose additional (if needed)
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is
030401050103
located:
The Find Your HUC map may be found at this link:
https://ncdenr.maps.arcqis.com/apes/Publiclnformation/index.html?appid=ad3a85aOc6d644aOb97cdO69db238ac3
Page 6 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

4. Project Description and History
4a. 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 proposed project is a 33-acre tract comprised of undeveloped forested land, open areas, and single-family
residences. The subject property is bound by Galloway Road and undeveloped forested land to the north, John
Adams Road and multi -family residences to the east, undeveloped forested land and W Mallard Creek Church
Road to the south, and 1-85 to the west.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past? *
If yes, please give the DWR Certification number and/or Corps
[Click to enter.]
Action ID (ex. SAW-0000-00000):
jClick to enter.]
Attach any pertinent project history documentation
4b2. Is any portion of the work already complete? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, describe the completed work.
Click to enter text.
4c. List of other certifications or approvals/denials received from other federal, state or local agencies for work
described in this application not related to the 404 or 401.
Click to enter text
4d. Attach an 8'h x 11" excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of
the project site.
4e. Attach an 8'h x 11" excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map
depicting the project site.
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the
0.39 acres
property:
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent
2,157 linear feet
and perennial) on the property:
4g1. List the total estimated acreage of all existing open waters on the
0.004 acres
property:
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to construct a multi -family development for the growing local community.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: *
The proposed project seeks the development of ±330 multi -family units, as well as associated development
infrastructure appurtenances including, on -site roadway, utilities, and stormwater facilities.
General construction equipment including bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, etc. will be used for
construction purposes.
4j. Attach project drawings/site diagrams/depictions of impact areas for the proposed project.
4k. Will this activity involve dredging in wetlands or waters? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, describe the type of dredging, the composition of the dredged material, and the locations of disposal area.
Page 7 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

5.
Jurisdictional Determinations
5a.
Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on
the property or in
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
proposed impact areas?
Comments:
Kimley-Horn delineated the site on March 22, 2022. The PJD request is included in this permit.
5b.
If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination,
❑ Preliminary ❑ Approved ❑ Emailed concurrence
what type of determination was made? *
❑x Not Verified ❑ Unknown ❑ n/a
Corps AID number (ex. SAW-0000-00000):
Click to enter
Name (if known): Taylor Kiker, PWS
5c.
If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn
areas?
Other: Click to enter
5d.
List the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determination or State determination if a determination was made by
either agency.
Click to enter.
5d1.
Attach jurisdictional determinations.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑x No
6b. If yes, explain.
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s) used, or intended to be used, to
authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity? This includes other separate and distant crossings
for linear projects that require Department of the Army authorization but don't require pre -construction
notification.
Click to enter.
7. Addresses of adjoining property owners, lessees, etc. whose property adjoins the waterbody (if more than can be
entered here, please attach a supplemental list)
Click to enter.
8. Scheduling of activity:
Click to enter.
Page 8 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
❑x Wetlands
1 a. Where are the impacts associated with your project ❑ Buffers
(check all that apply):
❑ Pond Construction
❑x Streams - tributaries
❑x Open Waters
2.
Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on
the site, complete this table for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2a1.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
2g.
Site #*
Impact
Impact
Wetland
Wetland Name*
Forested?*
Jurisdiction
Impact Area
Reason/Type*
Duration*
Type*
Type*
(ac)*
Impact
5 -
Grading
Permanent
Headwater
W2
Yes
Both
0.19
W2
Forest
Impact
6 -
Grading
Permanent
Headwater
W3
Yes
Both
0.07
W3
Forest
2g1.
Total temporary wetland impacts
Click to enter ac
2g2.
Total permanent wetland impacts
0.26 ac
2g3.
Total wetland impacts
0.26 ac
2h.
Type(s) of material being discharged and
the amount of each type in cubic yards:
Click to enter text.
2i.
Comments:
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for wetland impacts associated with grading
necessary to construct the residences. The proposed project will result in a total of 0.26 acre of permanent
impacts to wetlands.
-Impact 5: 0.19 acre to Wetland 2
-Impact 6: 0.07 acre to Wetland 3
Page 9 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

3.
Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream/ tributary impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site,
complete this table for all stream/ tributary sites impacted.
** All Perennial or Intermittent streams must be verified by DWR or delegated local government
3a
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
3h.
Site #*
Impact
Impact
Impact Type*
Stream Name*
Stream
Jurisdiction
Stream Width
Impact length
Reason*
Duration*
Type*
Type*
(avg ft) *
(linear ft)
S2
Impact 1
Permanent
Fill (Incl.
S2
Perennial
Both
6
172
Riprap)
S2
Impact 2
Permanent
Other
S2
Perennial
Both
5
30
S2
Impact 3
Permanent
Other
S2
Perennial
Both
4
18
S2
Impact 4
Permanent
Other
S2
Perennial
Both
4
10
3i1.
Total jurisdictional ditch
Click to ente, linear ft
impact:
3i2.
Total permanent stream
230 linear ft
impacts:
M.
Total temporary stream
Click to enter. linear ft
impacts:
3i4.
Total stream and ditch
230 linear ft
impacts:
3j.
Comments:
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for stream impacts associated with grading and
pipe installation. The proposed project will result in a total of 230 linear feet (LF)/0.033 acre of permanent stream
impacts.
-Stream 2 (S2)
o Impact 1: 172 LF/0.025 ac of permanent impacts to S2 results from grading activities necessary to construct
the residences.
o Impact 2: 21 LF of 60-in Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) will be installed at Stream 2. The RCP results in 30
LF/0.005 acre of permanent impacts to S2. The RCP will be buried 1-ft to promote the passage of aquatic
organisms.
o Impact 3: The relocation of an existing pipe and installation of a new headwall will result in 18 LF/ 0.002-ac of
permanent impacts to S2.
o Impact 4: The relocation of an existing pipe and installation of a new headwall will result in 10 LF/ 0.001-ac of
permanent impacts to S2.
Page 10 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

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., individually list all open water impacts in the table below.
4a.
4a1.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
4f.
Site #*
Impact Reason
Impact
Waterbody Name*
Activity Type*
Waterbody
Impact area
Duration*
Type*
(ac)*
01
Impact 7
Permanent
OW1
Fill
Pond
0.004
4g.
Total temporary open water impacts
Click to entei ac
4g.
Total permanent open water impacts
0.004 ac
4g.
Total open water impacts
0.004 ac
4h.
Comments:
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 29 for open water impacts associated with grading
activities necessary to construct a stormwater management facility. The proposed project will result in a total of
0.004 acre of permanent impacts to open waters.
-Impact 7: 0.004 acre to Open Water 1
5.
Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction is proposed, complete the table below. (*This
does NOT include offline stormwater
management ponds.)
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Pond ID
Proposed use or
Wetland Impacts (ac)
Stream
Impacts (ft)
Upland
#
purpose of pond
Impacts (ac)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
Clic
Clic,
Click to
Click t(
Click to
Click to
Click to
ent(
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
5f.
Total
Clic
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click to
Click t-
ent
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
enter.
5g.
Comments:
5h.
Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No
If yes, permit ID no.:
Click to enter.
5i.
Expected pond surface area (acres):
Click to enter.
5j.
Size of pond watershed (acres):
Click to enter.
5k.
Method of construction:
Click to enter.
Page 11 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

6.
Buffer Impacts (DWR requirement)
If project will impact a protected riparian
buffer, then complete the chart below.
Individually list all buffer impacts.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico
❑ Catawba
6a.
Project is in which protected basin(s)?
❑ Jordan ❑ Goose Creek
❑ Randleman
* (Check all that apply.)
❑ Other: ;lick to enter
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Site #*
Impact Type*
Impact Duration*
Stream Name*
Buffer
Zone 1 Impact*
Zone 2 Impact*
Mitigation
(sq ft)
(sq ft)
Required?*
B1
Choose on
Temp/ Perm
,lick to enter.
nter.
U
6h.
Total temporary impacts:
Zone 1: Click to enter. sq ft
Zone 2: Click to enter. sq ft
6h.
Total permanent impacts:
Zone 1: Click to enter. sq ft
Zone 2: Click to enter. sq ft
6h.
Total combined buffer impacts:
Zone 1: Click to enter. sq ft
Zone 2: Click to enter. sq ft
6i.
Comments:
Click to enter.
Please attach supporting documentation (impact maps, plan sheets, etc.) for the proposed project.
Page 12 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through project design:
Avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development planning and design to the greatest
extent practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within
nationwide permit thresholds. The final plan demonstrates maximum avoidance and minimization efforts by
reducing the proposed stream impacts. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the
following:
-Avoidance of the remaining 1,927 LF of streams on -site.
-Avoidance of the remaining 0.13 acre of wetlands on -site.
-Erosion control measures implemented during the construction of the site will be removed immediately following
the activities and any disturbance will be returned to pre -construction conditions.
-The proposed future ROW is to be dedicated/reserved based on coordination with Charlotte DOT. Future build -
out is not associated with this proposed subdivision and no impacts will be made at this time.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Stormwater facilities are sized and positioned to minimize impacts to the greatest extents practicable. Temporary
erosion control measures, including but not limited to skimmer basins and silt fence, will be implemented to
minimize sediment laden runoff from exiting the site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S., Waters of the State, or Riparian Buffers
2a. If compensatory mitigation is required, by whom is it required? * ❑x DWR ❑x Corps
(check all that apply)
2b. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this ® Mitigation Bank
project? * (check all that apply) ❑ In Lieu Fee Program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if using a Mitigation Bank (Must satisfy NC General Statute143-214.11 (d1).)
3a. Name of mitigation bank:
Upper Rocky Umbrella Mitigation Bank and RES Yadkin 05
Umbrella Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits purchased/requested:
Type: Stream
Quantity 230
Type: Riparian Wetland
Quantity 0.26
Type:
Quantity
Attach receipt and/or approval letter.
3c. Comments:
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through two private banks: the Upper Rocky
Umbrella Mitigation Bank and the RES Yadkin 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. Based on an NCSAM assessment
of Low for perennial stream S2, mitigation is proposed at a 1:1 ratio for impacts to this feature, or 230 stream
mitigation credits. Based on an NCWAM assessment of Low for wetlands W2 and W3, mitigation is proposed at
a 1:1 ratio for impacts to these features, or 0.26 wetland mitigation credits. In total, 230 stream mitigation credits
and 0.26 wetland mitigation credits will be purchased to offset impacts associated with this project. Quality
assessment results and Statement of Availability are included.
Page 13 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

4.
Complete if Using an In Lieu Fee Program
4a.
Attach approval letter from in lieu fee program.
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
Click to enter linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
Choose one
NC Stream Temperature Classification Maps can be found under the Mitigation Concepts tab on the Wilmington
District's RIBITS website: (Please use the filter and select Wilmington district)
https://ribits.usace.army.mil/ribits apex/f?p=107:27:2734709611497::NO:RP:P27 BUTTON KEY:O
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
Click to enter square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
Click to enter. acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
Click to enter. acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
Click to enter. acres
4h.
Comments:
Click to enter.
5. Complete if Providing a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If proposing a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan,
including mitigation credits generated.
Click to enter.
5b. Attach mitigation plan/documentation.
6.
Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — DWR requirement
6a.
Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer
❑ Yes ❑ No
that requires buffer mitigation?
If yes, please complete this entire section — please contact DWR for more information.
6b.
If yes, identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires
mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required in the table below.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
Click to enter.
Click to enter.
Choose one
Click to enter.
Zone 2
Click to enter.
Click to enter.
Choose one
Click to enter.
6f. Total buffer mitigation required
Click to enter.
6g.
If buffer mitigation is required, is payment to a mitigation bank or
❑Yes El No
NC Division of Mitigation Services proposed?
6h.
If yes, attach the acceptance letter from the mitigation bank or NC Division of Mitigation Services.
6i.
Comments:
Click to enter.
Page 14 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (DWR requirement)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers
❑ Yes ❑x No
identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. All buffer impacts and high ground impacts require diffuse flow or other form of stormwater treatment. If the
project is subject to a state implemented riparian buffer protection program, include a plan that fully documents
how diffuse/dispersed flow will be maintained.
All Stormwater Control Measures (SCM) must be designed in accordance with the NC Stormwater Design
Manual (https://deg.nc..qov/about/divisions/energv-mineral-land-resources/energv-mineral-land-permit-
guidance/stormwater-bmp-manual).
Associated supplement forms and other documentation must be provided.
❑ Level Spreader
What Type of SCM are you
❑ Vegetated Conveyance (lower seasonal high water table- SHWT)
providing?
❑ Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
(Check all that apply)
❑ Other SCM that removes minimum 30% nitrogen
❑ Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the
buffer
For a list of options to meet the diffuse flow requirements, click here.
Attach diffuse flow documentation.
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
Is this an NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's
Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
2b.
Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as
defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)? *
El Yes ❑x No
To look up low density requirements, click here:
htty//reports.oah. state. nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-%20environmental%20guality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20h/15a%20ncac%2002h%20.1003.pdf
2c.
Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP)
❑ Yes ❑x No
reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -
approved local government stormwater program? *
❑ n/a — project disturbs < 1 acre
Note: Projects that have vested rights, exemptions, or grandfathering from state or locally implemented
stormwater programs or projects that satisfy state or locally -implemented stormwater programs through use of
community in -lieu programs should answer "no" to this question.
2d.
Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply?
❑x Local Government
(Check all that apply.)*
❑ State
If you have local government approval, please include the SMP on their overall impact map.
❑x Phase II ❑ USMP
Local Government Stormwater Programs *
❑ NSW ❑ Water Supply
Page 15 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.
City of Charlotte
State Stormwater Programs * ❑ Phase II ❑ HQW or ORW
❑ Coastal Counties ❑ Other
Comments:
The SMP is currently under review with the City of Charlotte.
Page 16 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local)
❑ Yes ❑x No
funds or the 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 (North Carolina) Environmental
El Yes El No
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
❑ Yes ❑ No
NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A
NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300),
Federally Non -Jurisdictional Wetlands /Classified Surface Waters
❑ Yes ❑x No
(15A NCAC 2H. 1400) DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. If you answered "yes" to the above question, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future
impacts) result in additional development, which could impact nearby
❑ Yes ❑x No
downstream water quality? *
3b. If you answered "no", provide a short narrative description:
No additional or cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
3c. If yes, provide a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the most recent DWR
policy. (Attach .pdf)
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project? * ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
Page 17 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

4b. If yes, describe in detail the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater
generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a treatment plant, list the capacity
available at that plant.
Wastewater generated from each lot will be collected and routed to the onsite gravity sewer system that consists
of 6" PVC piping and 4' manholes. The onsite gravity sewer systems tie into an existing sanitary sewer system
on John Adams Road that then runs parallel to the existing stream. The wastewater will be treated at the Mallard
Creek Wastewater Treatment Plan (NDPES Permit #NC0030210).
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected
❑ Yes ❑x No
species or habitat? (IPAC weblink: https://www.fws.gov/ipac/ ffws.govl)
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species
® Yes ❑ No
Act impacts? *
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another federal agency involved? *
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
If yes, which federal agency?
Click to enter.
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Divisions 1-8? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the
U.S.? *
®Yes El No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
5g1. If yes, have you inspected the bridge for signs of bat use such as
staining, guano, bats, etc.? Representative photos of signs of bat use
❑ Yes ❑ No
can be found in the NLEB SLOPES, Appendix F, pages 3-7.
Representative photos of signs of bat use can be found in the NLEB SLOPES, Appendix F, pages 3-7. Link to
NLEB SLOPES document: htti)://saw-reci.usace.army.mil/NLEB/1-30-17-signed NLEB-SLOPES&apps.i)df
If you answered yes to 5g1, did you discover any signs of bat use? *
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
If yes, please show the location of the bridge on the permit drawings/ project plans
5h. Does this project involve the construction/ installation of a wind
turbine(s)? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
If yes, please show the location of the wind turbine(s) on the permit drawings/ project plans (attach .pdf)
5i. Does this project involve blasting and /or other percussive activities
that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers,
ElYes ❑x No
mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
If yes, please provide details to include type of percussive activity, purpose, duration, and specific location of this
activity on the property (attach .pdf)
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated
Critical Habitat? *
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on February 7, 2024, did not
indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Potentially
suitable habitat for threatened and endangered plant species on -site was surveyed. A concurrence request was
submitted to USFWS on February 16, 2024. At the time of this submittal, a response from USFWS has not been
received. A copy of the USFWS request is attached.
Page 18 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

Attach consultation documentation.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as
an Essential Fish Habitat? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
Is there submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) around
the project vicinity? *
El Yes ❑x No El Unknown
Will this project affect submerged aquatic vegetation? *
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
Explain:
6b. What data source(s) did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
Link to the State Historic Preservation Office Historic Properties Map (does not include archaeological data):
http://,qis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
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 status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or
❑ Yes ❑x No
properties significant in North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data source(s) did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological
resources? *
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on
February 7, 2024. No documented architectural or historical sites of significance within the project boundary were
identified.
7c. Attach historic or prehistoric documentation.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
Link to the FEMA Floodplain Maps: htti)s://msc.fema.ciov/portal/search
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? *
❑ Yes ❑x No
8b. If yes, explain how the project meets FEMA requirements.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FIRM Panel 3710458800K
H. Miscellaneous
Comments:
Attach pertinent documentation or attachments not previously requested
Page 19 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

I. Signature *
❑x By checking the box and signing below, I, as the project proponent, certify to the following:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete, to
the best of my knowledge and belief;
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time;
• The project proponent hereby agrees that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter
66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• The project proponent hereby agrees to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66,
Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• The project proponent hereby understands that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be
enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• As the project proponent, I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN/online form.
Full Name: * Taylor Kiker
Signature: J Ik
Date: * 3/14/2024
Page 20 of 20 PCN Form Version 4.3- December 4, 2023

AGENT AUTHORIZATION

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: �
Address: 711 Navarro Street, Suite 400, San Antonio, TX 78205
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Project Name/Description: Kairoi University
Date: 2/20/2024
Attention: The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
Tyler Sibley on behalf of Kairoi Properties, LLC hereby designates and authorizes Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
to act in my/our behalf as my/our agent solely for the purpose of processing Jurisdictional
Determinations, Section 404 permits/Section 401 Water Quality Certifications applications and
to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day
forward until successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by the owner.
In addition, I, the undersigned, under contract to purchase the property/properties identified
herein, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site
investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899.
Authorized this the 20th
Tyler Sibley
Authorized Representative
(Print Name)
day of February 2024
uthorized Representative
(Signature)

FIGURES

0
0 LL
q
F--
LL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.1
E
CL
M Z
-E
D
11Z 11
LL ccN
Gw
J1,
ky
u IT 'aD.��y,¢arw 3owWa
a a"N�
jr
ftM
tz

Z �
�
e,
OLL
O
00
Z
F
m
'
N
LL
v
OJ
Cl
4n�rn.L)zCD
CL a U
Z O
m cu
w Y �
'O C
U N
Y
O
0
D N
U O
N —
� e}
ro

PERMIT DRAWINGS

z O
U
go
Galla470)
iom
4
--------------
re� a
0
0
w
ti
L°
.Vf
------------------------
m/
of
:`pJ
/1J
Z
a
J
a
N
z
o
O
U
0
Z
P
N
W

co g
0 U oo
E
7
mot,
_rem
Jl
gq 0
,P6
P
N
jE-
E 0 (D 0
N
H
Ri
W IsaA4
U)
z
0
F-
3
z
0
u
0
z
r—
U)
x
LU

17 IVIIN3
NVId 30VNIV80 G NV �J�MN IOHIVN
v (13UVd3Ud
v ONIOVUD N31SVW SNOWWOO
UJOH<((Aalwl)l I I IIQN=IAINn
r- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --
HM
fD

IVIIN3alS3H lou
t
Nld 3ENIa UOJ(3UVd3UdVSNOWWOOUJOH<<(A@Iwl)i
aNV ONlaVIM I I IIQ)4=IAINn
7
6 col,

Nolsln3a � wwra3 �N 3110121tlH.1
8 V3NV IVIIN3aIS3H IOHIVN m M
NV
1d 3�JVNIbRi4 UOJ33ave3ae o
UJOH <<(A@I JIB aNV ONIMID sNowwoa �
• a°°' "° AIISN3AINn
N
a No TH
l�zf
o I9�
b 0—H53353M1 H]1VN
7 / ,77 —
P
e
_ I
\ P
e
— —
a
„• _ .o � y 11
11\�• � ;�� �� \��� 1� ° � III � � ', �� - ' �'
/
� dll
a�.
a e U
-
3
I
I ➢
!V. _
I �
ZOb�133H53353NI1 H.1tlW -
1,14
lit
-
IN4f,

3 V3NV IVIIN3aIS3N IOUIV)4
UOJ 03UVd3Ud
NV-1d 30VN(l NIV
SNOW WOO
V UJOH*�AaRINMezozS
aNV ONIaVNE)
AIISN3AINn
N,
A
r
-----------
L

.uMn��v
n
.n
v
o ----.
1
n
r
I�
I !a
!
1
1
I�
r
r
I
—
/
---_ of--
1\
!. 3
n
a
h
-I
a
�
.•
o
----. h
zn o9s
E93s
ca �m
z�nn
en
Nolsln3a � wwra3 �N 3110\21vH.�
V /� /�^ IVIIN3OIS3N IOHIVN
�w s3im�ossvar+ nwwe.u..® +puss, a�. S1213/\�I IJ MOd 03UVd3Md —
U.IOH<KAaIlUl)I sNowwoO
a°°' "° AIISN3AINn
\;-]
Im
V\�
FV

PJD

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Form Approved -
REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)
OMB No.0710-0024
For use of this form, see Sec 404 CWA, Sec 10 RHA, Sec 103 MPRSA; the proponent agency is CECW-COR.
Expires 2024-04-30
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
Authority Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act, Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320-332.
Principal Purpose The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine whether there are any aquatic resources
within the review area that are or that may be subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies, and the
public, and may be made available as part of a public notice or FOIA request as required by federal law. Your name and property
location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in any approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will
be made available to the public on the District's website and on the Headquarters USACE website.
Disclosure Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if the information is not provided there may be some delay in
processing your request. Failure to provide this information will not result in an adverse action.
System of Record Notice (SORN): The information received is entered into our permit tracking database and a SORN has been
completed (SORN #A1145b) and may be accessed at the following website:
htt p://d pcid.defense.ciov/Privacy/SO RNsi ndex/DO D-wide-SORN-Article-View/Article/570115/al l45 b-ce.as pxx
The Agency Disclosure Notice (ADN)
The Public reporting burden for this collection of information, 0710-0024, is estimated to average 10 minutes per response, including time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, at
whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collectionse.mail.mil. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. To (District Name): Wilmington District
2. I am requesting a JD on property located at (Street Address): John Adams Road
City/Township/Parish: Charlotte County: Mecklenburg State: North Carolina
Acreage of Parcel/Review Area for JD: 3 3. 1
Section: Township: Range:
Latitude (decimal degrees): 35.336324 Longitude (decimal degrees):-80.741134
(For linear projects, please include the center point of the proposed alignment.)
3. Please attach a survey/plat map and vicinity map identifying location and review area for the JD.
4. ❑ I currently own this property. I plan to purchase this property.
❑X I am an agent/consultant acting on behalf of the requester.
1-1 Other (please explain):
ENG FORM 6247, NOV 2023 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 2

5. Reason for request: (check as many as applicable)
❑ 1 intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources
❑ under Corps authority.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would
❑ be used to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting process.
�/ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may require authorization from the Corps; this request is
❑/� accompanied by my permit application and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list
❑ and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order to obtain my local/state authorization.
I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the
❑ aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ 1 believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
6. Type of determination being requested:
❑ 1 am requesting an approved JD.
❑X I am requesting a preliminary JD.
❑ I am requesting a "no permit required" letter as I believe my proposed activity is not regulated.
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information to inform my decision.
7. Typed or Printed Name: Taylor Kiker, PWS Daytime Phone No.: 980-296-0810
Company Name: Kimley-Horn and Associates
Address: 200 S Tryon St, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Email Address: [e-mail]
By signing below, you are indicating that you have the authority, or are acting as the duly authorized agent of a person or entity with such authority, to
and do hereby grant Corps personnel right of entry to legally access the site if needed to perform the JD. Your signature shall be an affirmation that
you possess the requisite property rights to request a JD on the subject property.
Signature: Tnvlor Klker, PWS Digitally signed by Taylor Kiker, PWS Date: 2024-02-21
Date: 2024.02.21 09:30:14-05'00'
ENG FORM 6247, NOV 2023 Page 2 of 2

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Form Approved -
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD)
OMB No.0710-0024
For use of this form, see Sec 404 CWA, Sec 10 RHA, Sec 103 MPRSA; the proponent agency is CECW-COR.
Expires 2024-04-30
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
Authority Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act, Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Final Rule for 33 CFR
Parts 320-332.
Principal Purpose The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine whether there are any aquatic resources
within the review area that may be subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies, and the
public, and may be made available as part of a public notice or FOIA request as required by federal law. Your name and property
location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in any resulting jurisdictional determination (JD), which
may be made available to the public on the District's website and/or on the Headquarters USACE website.
Disclosure Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the request for a JD cannot be evaluated
nor can a PJD be issued.
The Agency Disclosure Notice (ADN)
The public reporting burden for this collection of information, 0710-0024, is estimated to average 25 minutes per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters
Services, at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collectionsQmail.mil. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of
law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control
number.
SECTION I - BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD:
Taylor Kiker, PWS
200 S Tryon St, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
Wilmington District, Charlotte Regulatory Office
D. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: North Carolina County/Parish/Borough: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.336324 o Longitude:-80.741 13 o
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17
Name of nearest waterbody: Stoney Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECKALL THATAPPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination
Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY JURISDICTION.
Site
Latitude (decimal
Longitude
Estimated amount of
Type of aquatic resource
Geographic authority to which the
Number
degrees)
(decimal degrees)
aquatic resource in review
(i.e., wetland vs. non-
aquatic resource "may be"
area (acreage and linear
wetland waters)
subject (i.e., Section 404 or
feet, if applicable)
Section 101404)
S1
35.3379789
-80.7400293
1,029
non -wetland
Section 404
ENG FORM 6249, NOV 2023 Page 1 of 3

Site
Latitude (decimal
Longitude
Estimated amount of
Type of aquatic resource
Geographic authority to which the
Number
degrees)
(decimal degrees)
aquatic resource in review
(i.e., wetland vs. non-
aquatic resource "may be"
area (acreage and linear
wetland waters)
subject (i.e., Section 404 or
feet, if applicable)
Section 101404)
S2
35.3368054
-80.7391498
1,128
non -wetland
Section 404
W1
35.3373015
-80.7388705
0.13
wetland
Section 404
W2
35.3356245
-80.7415415
0.19
wetland
Section 404
W3
35.3357235
-80.7404557
0.07
wetland
Section 404
OW1
35.3359584
-80.7402125
0.004
non -wetland
Section 404
1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby
advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed
the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit
verification requiring "preconstruction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit
applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD or no JD whatsoever, which do not make an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic
resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing
a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit
authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit,
including whatever mitigation requirements the USACE has determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD or reliance on no JD whatsoever;
(6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of USACE permit
authorization based on a PJD or no JD whatsoever constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that
activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be
processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make
an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of
jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the USACE will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD
finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all
aquatic features in the review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
F. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items:
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
1-1 Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
1-1 Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Rationale:
1-1 Data sheets prepared by the USACE:
ENG FORM 6249, NOV 2023 Page 2 of 3

Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
USGS NHD data.
USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
❑x U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
1:12K, Harrisburg
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: Mecklenburg County SSURGO
National Wetlands Inventory map(s).
Cite Name: Wetland Mapper
State/Local Wetland Inventory map(s):
1-1 FEMA/FIRM maps:
1-1 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
FPhotographs: ❑1 Aerial (Name & Date): Mecklenburg County 2023 Aerial
or ] Other (Name & Date): Site Photographs (3/22/2022 and 3/28/2022)
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the USACE and should not be relied upon
for later jurisdictional determinations.
Name of Regulatory Staff Member Completing PJD
Date
Signature of Regulatory Staff Member Completing PJD
Name of Person Requesting PJD
Date
Signatureof Person Requesting PJD (REQUIRED, unless
obtaining the Signature is Impracticable
Taylor Klker, PWS
2024-02-21
Taylor Kiker, p yy S IgitallysignedbyTaylor Kiker,PWS
Date: 2024.02.21 09:31:54-05'00'
Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established time frame, the
district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action.
ENG FORM 6249, NOV 2023 Page 3 of 3

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 3/22/2022
Project/ S1- Kairoi University
Site:
Latitude: 35.3379789
Evaluator: TK & GB
County: Mecklenburg
Longitude:-80.07400293
Total Points: 33.5
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other: Harrisburg
Stream is at least intermittent if >_
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
19 or perennial if >_ 30
e.g. Quad name
A. Geomorphology Subtotal: 17.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
poolsequence
0
1
2
3
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9. Grade control
0
1
2
3
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal: 9.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
12. Presence of baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal: 6.5 Absent Weak Moderate Strong Score
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
S1 originates off -site and flows for 1,029 LF on -site. S1 is a USGS mapped solid blue line stream. Several fish
observed.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 3/22/2022
Project/ S2 - Kairoi University
Site:
Latitude: 35.3368054
Evaluator: TK & GB
County: Mecklenburg
Longitude:-80.7391498
Total Points: 30
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other: Harrisburg
Stream is at least intermittent if >_
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial
19 or perennial if >_ 30
e.g. Quad name
A. Geomorphology Subtotal: 13.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
poolsequence
0
1
2
3
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9. Grade control
0
1
2
3
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal: 9.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
12. Presence of baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal: 7 Absent Weak Moderate Strong Score
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
S2 originates off -site and flows for 1,128 LF on -site and slows into S1. S2 is a USGS mapped dashed blue line
stream. Several frogs observed.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Kairoi University City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 2022-03-22
Applicant/Owner: Kairoi Development, LLC State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W1-Wet
Investigator(s):TK & GB Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136 Lat: 35.3373359 Long: -80.7387986 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: WkD NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes `� No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No -
- Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes V No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �/ No
Remarks:
W1-Wet sampling point was taken between a stormwater control pond and a stream. It appears that the
stormwater pond is overflowing into W1 and a culvert outlet into W1 was observed. According to the APT, the
delineation was conducted during "normal conditions."
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
✓ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
✓ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 10
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Standing water observed in other
areas of wetland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W1-wet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
2. Carpinus caroliniana
3.
4.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: 17.50
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1 Carpinus caroliniana
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
i Cornus amomum
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover: 25.00
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1 Carex divulsa
2. Cardamine pensylvanica
3. Juncus effusus
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 17.50
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1 Lonicera japonica
2.
5.
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
25
✓ FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7
(A)
10
✓ FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 87•50
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
35 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
20% of total cover: 7.00
OBL species
10
x 1 =
10
_
FACW species
15
x 2 =
30
20 ✓ FAC
FAC species
95
x 3 =
285
20 ✓ FAC
FACU species
10
x 4 =
40
10 ✓ FACW
UPL species
0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals:
130
(A)
365 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.80
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
✓ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
50 = Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
20%of total cover: 10.00
-
-
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
20 ✓ FAC
- Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
10 ✓ OBL
5 FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
35 = Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20% of total cover: 7.00
-
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
10 ✓ FACU
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5.00 20% of total cover: 2.00
numpers nere or on a sepa
Hydrophytic vegetation observed.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W1-wet
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
0-4 10Y 5/2 85
7.5YR 4/6 15 C M
Clay Some organic material
4 -12 10Y 5/2 50
Sandy Clay
4 -12 7.5YR 4/6 50
Sandy Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
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 (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)
✓ 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 (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (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):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Depleted matrix observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Kairoi University City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 2022-03-22
Applicant/Owner: Kairoi Development State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W2-Wet
Investigator(s):TK & GB Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Hill Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136 Lat: 35.3357373 Long: -80.7420941 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Wke NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes `� No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes `� No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No -
- Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes V No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �/ No
Remarks:
W2-Wet sampling point was taken along a hillslope. W2 hydrology is influenced by surface water runoff from
adjacent highway and toe of slope groundwater seepage. According to the APT, the delineation was
conducted during "normal conditions."
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
✓ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
✓ Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 14
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 14
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Surface water observed in other
areas of wetland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W2-Wet
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
25
✓ FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2. Quercus michauxii
15
✓ FACW
3. Quercus falcata
5
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
7
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.42 (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
45
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
22.50 20% of total cover: 9.00
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 25 x 2 = 50
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
20
✓ FAC
FAC species 55 x 3 = 165
2. Carya ovata
5
✓ FACU
FACU species 25 x 4 = 100
3
UPL species 0 x 5= 0
4
Column Totals: 105 (A) 315 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.00
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
✓ 2 -Dominance Test is >50°k
9.
✓ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
25
= Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
12.50 20% of
total cover: 5.00
-
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Juncus effusus
10
✓ FACW
-
2.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 5.00
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1 Lonicera japonica
2 Smilax rotundifolia
5.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
10 = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20% of total cover: 2.00
- Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
15 ✓ FACU
10 ✓ FAC
25 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 12.50 20% of total cover: 5.00
numpers nere or on a sepa
Hydrophytic vegetation observed.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W2-Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-2 2.5Y 3/2 100
Silty Clay More clay
2-6 2.5Y 5/2 70
5YR 3/4 30 C M
Silty Clay
6 -14 5Y 5/2 75
5YR 4/6 25 C M
Silty Clay
14 - 20 5Y 5/2 80
5YR 3/4 15 C M
Silty Clay Manganese 5%
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
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 (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)
✓ 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 (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (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):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Depleted matrix observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Kairoi University City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 2022-03-22
Applicant/Owner: Kairoi Development State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W3-Wet
Investigator(s):TK & GB Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136 Lat: 35.3357834 Long: -80.740394 Datum. WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: WkE NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes `� No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes `� No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No -
- Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
within a Wetland? Yes V No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �/ No
Remarks:
Sampling point W3-Wet is situated in a topographic low area. The wetland is surrounded by uplands and situated within a fenced area.
Hydrology of W3 is primarily influenced by groundwater seepage and precipitation. W3 appears to drain to a culvert and the underground
piped network on -site. According to the APT, the delineation was conducted during "normal conditions."
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
✓ Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 8
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 8
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes ✓ No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Hydrology indicators observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W3-wet
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
50% of total cover: _
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. Ranunculus sardous
2. Juncus effusus
3. Cardamine pensylvanica
4. Poa annua
5 Trifolium repens
6 Anthoxanthum odoratum
7. Rumex pulcher
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 36.00
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
2.
5.
50% of total cover:
numpers nere or on a sepa
Hydrophytic vegetation observed.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Testworksheet:
% Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60.00 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply
by:
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
OBL species 10
x 1 =
10
FACW species 17
x 2 =
34
FAC species 20
x 3 =
60
FACU species 25
x 4 =
100
UPL species 0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 72
(A)
204 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.83
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
✓ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
= Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
20%of total cover:
-
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
20 ✓ FAC
- Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
15 ✓ FACW
FACOBIL
10 ✓
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10 ✓ FACU
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
10 ✓ FACU
5 FACU
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
2 FACW
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
72 = Total Cover
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20% of total cover: 14.40
-
Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
= Total Cover Present?
20% of total cover:
Yes ✓ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W3-wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-2 10YR 3/2 100
Clay Loam Lots of roots
2 -14 5Y 5/2 70
5YR 4/6 30 C M
Clay Lots of roots
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
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 (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)
✓ 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 (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (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):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Depleted matrix observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Kairoi University City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 2022-03-22
Applicant/Owner: Kairoi Development State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W1-Up
Investigator(s):TK & GB Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Flat Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136 Lat: 35.3370612 Long: -80.7394284 Datum: WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: MO NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes ✓ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes — No V
H dric Soil Present? Yes No ✓ Is the Sampled Area
y — — within a Wetland? Yes No V
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Sampling point W1-Up is a representative upland point for the site. W1-Up was taken adjacent to S1 and S2 on
flat landscape. According to the APT, the delineation was conducted during "normal" conditions.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al) _
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3) _
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) _
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 14
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No
Depth (inches): 14
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes No ✓
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Water table and saturation too low.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W1-Up
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size. 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
20
✓
FAC
2. Quercus falcata
20
✓
FACU
3. Carpinus caroliniana
10
✓
FAC
4.
6.
7.
50 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 25.00 20% of total cover: 10.00
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1 Cercis canadensis 10 ✓ FACU
9 Liauidambar stvraciflua 10 ✓ FAC
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
20 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10.00 20% of total cover: 4.00
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1.
3.
4.
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1 Lonicera japonica 20 ✓ FACU
2 Allium cernuum 5 ✓ FACU
5.
25 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 12.50 20% of total cover: 5.00
numpers nere or on a sepa
Hydrophytic vegetation not observed.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 42.85 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
0
x 1 =
0
FACW species
0
x 2 =
0
FAC species
40
x 3 =
120
FACU species
55
x 4 =
220
UPL species
0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals:
95
(A)
340 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.57
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
_ 4 - 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.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W1-Up
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
0-4
10YR 3/2
100
Clay Loam
4-8
7.5YR 4/6
100
Clay
8 -12
7.5YR 4/6
50
Silty Clay
8 -12
7.5YR 2.5/1
50
Clay Loam
12 -16
7.5YR 4/6
100
Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
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 (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) _
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 (A11) _
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al 2) _
Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, _
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) _
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (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):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
Hydric soil not observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

Photo Page 1
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
KairoiLLC Properties, Date Project Number KirnIey>)) Horn
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022 1 017524003

Photo Page 2
Photo 3 — S 1 — Perennial stream
Photo 4 — Stream 2 (S2) — Perennial stream
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Kairoi Properties, 1/ im l ey o H o r n
LLC Date Project Number I�
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022 017524003

Photo Page 4
+j
WAV
s _Asa'
„. -... '. •i
l �
MI
74
Photo 7 — Wetland 1 (W 1)
4f,
r
I!
a-
01
Raft
MOM, iff,
Photo 8 —
WI
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project
Kairoi University
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Prepared By
Kairoi Properties,
Kimle.YO Horn
LLC
Date
Project Number
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022
017524003

Photo Page 5
iJ ti
L� - ter.4a+td, gyp}
'3•�i1'xxAl
°�yi afA
" sir
T � t
s
19 My,
Photo 9 — Representative vegetation community of W1-Wet
s
Photo 10 — Representative soil profile of W 1-Wet
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project
Kairoi University
Prepared By
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Kairoi Properties,
Ki mley))) H orn
LLC
Date
Project Number
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022
017524003

Photo Page 6
r
y g t
�; `.' ''.s •. �xs�`'�s''e. ,�,� 'fit`" c ' i
��;..
Photo 11 - Wetland 2 (W2)
} ^}
t�.
Photo 12 - W2
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project
Kairoi University
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Prepared By
Kairoi Properties,
1/ im l ey o H o r n
I�
LLC
Date
Project Number
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022
017524003

Photo Page 7
of W2-Wet
IAM
Photo 14 — Representative soil profile of W2-Wet
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Kairoi Properties, 1/ im l ey o H o r n
LLC Date Project Number I�
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022 1 017524003

Photo Page 8
c( ,
4 .r�
4.
- rt
Photo 15 — Representative vegetation community of W 3-Wet
r` ^.tip-r � A My��.� �'�� ..el{ . �•.
:^S
�� w�l�t '►��ry, b ?ir' ` �r�
l y F•
tile-' a
-
1 � 4M %� { iP'� A eY k ■ ' R
4f
41.
Photo 16 — Representative soil profile of W3-Wet
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project
Kairoi University
Prepared By
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Kairoi Properties,
1/ im l ey o H o r n
I�
LLC
Date
Project Number
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022
017524003

Photo Page 9
L,.,
� m
o
•
s
31
]r y,.
Photo 17 — Representative vegetation community of W 1-Up
r 5
A
* " `�wyArw;b
ti
IL
•
r
y
44 r ii
Photo 18 — Representative soil profile of W 1-Up
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project
Kairoi University
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Prepared By
Kairoi Properties,
KimIelyo) Horn
LLC
Date
Project Number
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022
017524003

Photo Page 10
Photo 20 - No feature observed. Piped, per survey.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Kairoi Properties, Kid
� � e ��� � o r n
LLC Date Project Number I�
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022 017524003

Photo Page 11
EI
Title
Prepared For
Kairoi Properties,
LLC
This space left intentionally blank.
Photo Pages
Project Kairoi University
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Date Project Number
3/22/2022 & 3/28/2022 1 017524003
Prepared By
Kirnley>>>Horn

Y
1..1�
L
O
z\\
}^}��
V,
O
O
J
ro
V_
L
O
(n
N
L
o
N
(6
N
Q
N
O
N
N
r
N
O
w
F m
�
O AS
C)
z
C E
o
N
s z
N
N
O
To }
❑ m m
^Q
W
L
O
z
O
4-J
m
Q
U
L
a-J
O
W
W
U
Q�
a
cl
C N
O
N
>. N
,6 N
z O
u
N N
al �
al
u
10
Q
❑
E m
O ~
z ~
N
❑
a u1 O I�
V N O 01
L u1 O N
ip rl M
ai
w
N O
m O r-I
u
V �
i
❑
C W M
4� m m
w
Lu
N
y m w ui
� l0 l!1 l0
C o O O
° O m co
00
O �
� ui ui
lfl M M
m
al ❑ W
K z
� Q W
Z U o7
o O ❑
U K
Q
n OU U
Z Z
ai O O
U U
O N
Z �
m N u C
M N vl � O �
O
DO ON (6 Itl 7A
u N N a rx
00 m ° U O O
M ..O d cu
O w Q
CA C cn
aN LL a
N N
L N
w a
V7 V
❑ C d C
o �
o x m
o c y 7 O
U ? W C 2
aj a
ON 9 tT
Qo O o
N ❑ �
h t0 ul C m N ri O
(SDgDUI) Ilpjuipb

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

Kimley>»Horn
February 16, 2024
Asheville Field Office
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Re: Kairoi University
Project Code: 2024-0046476
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Project Review Certification Letter
Dear USFWS Asheville Field Office,
On behalf of our client, Kairoi Development, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting this letter requesting concurrence
regarding the above -referenced project in accordance with the methodologies recommended by USFWS.
Background Information
The project area is 34.8 acres and is located along John Adams Road in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC. The evaluated
area consists of forested riparian corridors, maintained residential lawns, maintained right-of-ways, and single-family
residences. The vegetation observed on -site consists of sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum),
ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), southern red oak (Quercus faicata), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), annual grass (Poa annua),
goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), and blackberry (Rubus argutus).
Our client proposes residential development in the project area which may require future authorization from the US Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE); therefore, our client contracted with KH to identify areas of potentially suitable habitat on the
subject property to identify and document occurrences of federally listed threatened and/or endangered species.
Methodology and Findings
As of February 7, 2024, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three (3) federally protected species for
Mecklenburg County (Table 1). A brief description of each species' habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological
Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the subject property.
Table 1: Federally protected listed species for Mecklenburg Countv
Biological
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status
Habitat Present
Conclusion
Consultation Not
Perimyotissubflavus
Tricolored bat
PE
Unknown
Required
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
E
No
No Effect
Helianthus
Schweinitz's
E
No
No Effect
schweinitzii
sunflower
Echinacea laevigata
Smooth coneflower
T
No
No Effect
*PE = Proposed Endangered, E = Endangered, T = Threatened

Ki mley o Hvrn Page 2
Tricolored Bat
USFWS Recommended Survey Window: June 1—August 15
Habitat Description: The tricolored bat (Perimyotis subfiavus - TCB) is one of the smallest bats native to North America.
The once common species is wide-ranging across the eastern and central United States and portions of southern
Canada, Mexico, and Central America. During the winter, tricolored bats are found in caves and mines, although in
the southern United States, where caves are sparse, tricolored bats are often found roosting in road -associated
culverts. During the spring, summer, and fall, tricolored bats are found in forested habitats where they roost in trees,
primarily among leaves. Tricolored bats exhibit high site fidelity with many individuals returning year after year to the
same hibernaculum. Tricolored bats emerge early in the evening and forage at treetop level or above but may forage
closer to the ground later in the evening.
Biological Conclusion: Consultation Not Required
On September 14, 2022, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced a proposal to list the TCB as endangered under
the Endangered Species Act. USFWS has not provided an official effective listing date, but is expected to provide
habitat descriptions and an area of influence/distribution range for TCB in the future. When this information is
provided, the client will be able to make informed determinations on habitat that could be impacted by the project's
proposed actions.
Schweinitz's sunflower
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: late August -October
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont of North and South Carolina. The few sites where
this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation are found in Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species
is also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power lines and other utility rights -of -way, edges of thickets
and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -pine -hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other
sunny or semi -sunny habitats where disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire)
help create open or partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other
vegetation. Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series, including Badin, Cecil, Cid, Enon, Gaston,
Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer, Secrest, Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion, among others. It is generally
found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow, poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils,
especially those derived from mafic rocks.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is not present in the project boundary. The majority of the
project is dominated by forested riparian corridors, maintained lawns, and maintained right-of-ways. Two open areas
are present on -site; however, these open areas have a dense herb layer and exhibit high competition. Rubus argutus
in the open area along John Adams Road has grown to shrub size and is shading the herb layer. In addition, the open
area along Mallard Oaks Drive is highly disturbed due to staging of construction equipment. A review of the NCNHP
report, updated January 29, 2024, indicates known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the project area. Although there
are known occurrences within 1.0 mile, the absence of potentially suitable habitat in the project area results in a
biological conclusion of "no effect" for this species.
Michaux's sumac
USFWS optimal survey window: May -October
Habitat Description: Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows in sandy or rocky,
open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam soils with low cation exchange
capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhills

Kimley>»Horn
Page 3
region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility
rights -of -way; areas where forest canopies have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife
food plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and
along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs
on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance
(e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its open habitat.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac is not present in the project boundary. The majority of the project is
dominated by forested riparian corridors, maintained lawns, and maintained right-of-ways. Two open areas are
present on -site; however, these open areas have a dense herb layer and exhibit high competition. Rubus argutus in
the open area along John Adams Road has grown to shrub size and is shading the herb layer. In addition, the open
area along Mallard Oaks Drive is highly disturbed due to staging of construction equipment. A review of the NCNHP
report, updated January 29, 2024, indicates known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the project area. Although there
are known occurrences within 1.0 mile, the absence of potentially suitable habitat in the project area results in a
biological conclusion of "no effect" for this species.
Smooth coneflower
USFWS optimal survey window: late May -October
Habitat Description: Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open woodlands, the ecotonal
regions between meadows and woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility
rights -of -way. In North Carolina, the species normally grows in magnesium- and calcium -rich soils associated with
gabbro and diabase parent material, and typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and Picture soil series. It grows best
where there is abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g., regular
fire regime, well-timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of shade -producing woody shrubs and
trees on site where woody succession is held in check, it is characterized by a number of species with prairie affinities.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for smooth coneflower is not present in the project boundary. The majority of the project
is dominated by forested riparian corridors, maintained lawns, and maintained right-of-ways. Two open areas are
present on -site; however, these open areas have a dense herb layer and exhibit high competition. Rubus argutus in
the open area along John Adams Road has grown to shrub size and is shading the herb layer. In addition, the open
area along Mallard Oaks Drive is highly disturbed due to staging of construction equipment. A review of the NCNHP
report, updated January 29, 2024, indicates known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the project area. Although there
are known occurrences within 1.0 mile, the absence of potentially suitable habitat in the project area results in a
biological conclusion of "no effect" for this species..
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
USFWS optimal survey window: November through March
Habitat Description: Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open
water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. A
desktop GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet)
of the project limits, was performed on February 10, 2024, using 2023 color aerials. No large bodies of open water
were identified in the 1.13-mile radius. In addition, a review of the NCNHP database, updated on January 29, 2024,
revealed no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the lack of known occurrences, and the lack
of observed individuals or nests, it has been determined that the proposed project will not affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Kimley>»Horn
Statement of Qualifications:
Page 4
Investigator: Taylor Kiker, PWS
Education: B.S. Environmental Technology and Management, 2015; M.S. Earth Sciences — Hydrology, 2018
Experience: Environmental Scientist, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2018-Present
Responsibilities: Natural communities assessments, threatened and endangered species habitat assessments and
surveys, wetland and stream delineations, GPS, GIS, document preparation, tree surveys, QC reports
Please provide concurrence regarding the survey results and biological conclusions as well as any other possible issues that
might emerge with respect to protected species as a result of the proposed project. Thank you in advance for your timely
response and cooperation. Please email ([e-mail]) a copy of your reply to my attention and/or
send an original copy by mail. Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional
information is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
'J Ik
Taylor Kiker, PWS
Environmental Scientist

i hti�l h. ! lL1'LVi4'I
'I
United United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street, Suite B
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To:
Project Code: 2024-0046476
Project Name: Kairoi University
February 07, 2024
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The enclosed species list
fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Please note that new species information can change your official species list. Under 50 CFR
402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list
should be verified after 90 days. The Service recommends you visit the ECOS-IPaC website at
regular intervals during project planning and implementation to ensure your species list is
accurate or obtain an updated species list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A biological assessment (BA) or biological evaluation (BE) should be completed for your
project. A BA is required for major construction activities (or other undertakings having similar
physical impacts) considered to be Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c))
(NEPA). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a BE be
prepared to determine effects of the action and whether those effects may affect listed species
and/or designated critical habitat. Effects of the action are all consequences to listed species or
critical habitat that are caused by the proposed action, including the consequences of other

Project code: 2024-0046476 02/07/2024
activities that are caused by the proposed action. A consequence is caused by the proposed action
if it is reasonably certain to occur and would not occur "but for" the proposed action..
Recommended contents of a BABE are described at 50 CFR 402.12. More information and
resources about project review and preparing a BABE can be found at the following web link:
https://www.fws. gov/office/asheville-ecological-services/asheville-field-office-online-review-
process-overview.
If a Federal agency determines listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected
by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR
402. The Service is not required to concur with "no effect" determinations from Federal action
agencies. If consultation is required, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed
species, proposed critical habitat, and at -risk species be addressed within the consultation. More
information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of
permit or licensed applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook"
at the following web link: https://www.fws.gov/media/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Act, there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project -
related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds,
including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12
and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). More information about MBTA and BGEPA can be found at the
following web link: https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds.
We appreciate your consideration of Federally listed species. The Service encourages Federal
agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species in their project planning
to further the purposes of the Act. Please contact our staff at 828-258-3939, if you have any
questions. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference the
Consultation Code which can be found in the header of this letter.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Bald & Golden Eagles
• Migratory Birds
• Wetlands
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether

Project code: 2024-0046476
02/07/2024
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street, Suite B
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]
3of12

Project code: 2024-0046476
02/07/2024
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2024-0046476
Project Name: Kairoi University
Project Type: Residential Construction
Project Description: Proposed residential
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https:
www. google.com/maps/(a)35.33574335,-80.74118022062655,14z
ra'rL
Counties: Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
4of12

Project code: 2024-0046476 02/07/2024
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesl, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
FLOWERING PLANTS
NAME
STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
5of12

Project code: 2024-0046476 02/07/2024
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Acti and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats3, should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
There are bald and/or golden eagles in your project area.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
6of12

Project code: 2024-0046476 02/07/2024
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
probability of presence breeding season 1 survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG1 SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle Non -BCC
Vulnerable
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/librq�r/
rator.
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
• Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/sunnlemental-information-mip-ratorv-birds-and-bald-and-p-olden-eap-les-mav-occur-
project-action
7of12

Project code: 2024-0046476 02/07/2024
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Actz.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Black -billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus
Breeds May 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Oct 10
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399
Cerulean Warbler Dendroica cerulea
Breeds Apr 28
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Jul 20
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2974
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Aug 25
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus
Breeds Apr 20
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Aug 20
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9443
8of12

Project code: 2024-0046476
02/07/2024
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Jul 31
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9513
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
Jul 31
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9439
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Sep 10
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9398
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus
Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
elsewhere
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Aug 31
and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (�)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
9of12

Project code: 2024-0046476 02/07/2024
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle Non -BCC
Vulnerable
Black-billed
Cuckoo III I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I _t tttt t tt-}
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Cerulean Warbler ���� ��
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Chimney Swift ++++ I t +++
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Kentucky Warbler I I I I I TI I+ BCC Rangewide TTTT TT
(CON)
Prairie Warbler
++++ ++++ ++++ ++
BCC Rangewide
TTTT
(CON)
Prothonotary
++++ ++++ ++++
Warbler
TTT
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Red-headed I I
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
i i 1001 mill mill o+++++ ++++
T+++ ++++ ++++ ++++
++++ ++++ 111111111+++ ++++ ++++
14I I -It* ++++ ++++ ++++
Rusty Blackbird BCC -BCR +++* ++++ ++++ ++++ +0++ +++11*010011
Wood Thrush BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ ++++ +001 II0 0011 ISM+1 ++++ 1+*+ ++++ ++++
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoidinv--and-minimizinv--incidental-take-mip-ratorv-birds
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
10 of 12

Project code: 2024-0046476
02/07/2024
• Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-eagles-may-occur-
project-action
WETLANDS
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
RIVERINE
• R4SBC
• RSUBH
FRESHWATER POND
• PUBHh
11of12

Project code: 2024-0046476
02/07/2024
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency:
Kimley-Horn and Associates
Name:
Taylor Kiker
Address:
200 S Tryon St
Address Line 2:
Suite 200
City:
Charlotte
State:
NC
Zip:
28202
Email
[e-mail]
Phone:
9802960810
12 of 12

Roy Cooper, Governor
Ss MEN
■■ t INC DEPARTMENT OF
■■a ■ NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■�;■■
February 7, 2024
Taylor Kiker
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon St
Charlotte, NC 28202
RE: Kairoi University
Dear Taylor Kiker:
D. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy director, Natural Heritage Program
041011 iU�1WZ0i�yA
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally -
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact the NCNHP at natural.heritage�dncr.nc.gov.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
), 1N 1%- J0NF1 1;TRF'F T RALFK-4-i 1v(,, . 1G.ral MAIL sr':rvlCi.= CF`.Iv'rF.R. RALEIGH.. Nil. 27G�.)9

N
0
N
T
CO
+� CO
(n
(n
(n
(n N
E
Ln
O ro
Ln
m
CJ
<J M
CO
T
z
c
c
c
O
+ CC3
(f)
CO
CO
CO
CO CO
0
N N
O�
O
co
CO
CO
N
W
CO
z
z
N
W
+
c
+
c
+
c
+
c
+
c
+
c
°
O
E
E
E
E
E
E
°°
o
o_-iO
��
CO
7
J
a
>
>
OOO
>
>
>
O
>
O
>
O
j
C
U
N
MN
Q
M
U
aJo
co
co
co
co
co
co
O
O M
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
COa
+
a
u
U UI
J
J
J
J
J
J
(�
CO
a
r
O
u
N
E co
U
U I
N
Q
a U FY
�
c
°
>, N
H O
O
U
E
O CC)
a
o
CO N
CO N
O
N
N
� .�
.> I�
C W
}'
CO
CC) 0O
to
0
0
co U)
CO CC3
O
O
0
7
CO
CoCO
O z
J aJ Q
Q
CO
�
N CC)
.0)
a
CO
o
0
O Ln
0
CC3W
a O
N
N
>,
>,
>,
>,
>,
>,
O
CO
CC3
Q
c
c
c
c
c
c
°
O
O
N
U
U
U
U
U
U
}
O
O
O
>
°
a
CO
z
llll`
O
0
O}
CO �
a
co
a
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
z
ch
w
o
O
C
-0
CO
CD
CD
O
(�
O
ak
CO
CO
O
Q"
O
O
O
O
O
O
U
N
c
c_
i
O�
Ln
U
U
O
E O
U
U
U
CC3
O (D O
n I
io
co
CO
-0
N
a
N
C
—
a
a
W
N
N
a
>
O T
U
a)
O
D
°
E
E
U
U
U
CO
�
O
CO
+
C
(D
E
i
T
a
a
W
a
a
o
D
O
O
W
°
°
T
T
E
o
0
E
a
a
aJ
CO
O
c
OCOCO
i
m
_CO
o
(�CO
°cn'
c o
z
E
cn �
co
a
W
+°
Ili\
a O
c
O
c
O
°+
LEw
a
a
a
a
a
in
a
Cl
ClC
O
n
COcn
CO
CO
CO
CO
U
a)
E.o)
E
Ln
E
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
OL
i
a
o
D
a--+
O (n
Q
Q
I
O
C
aJ
C
aJ
C
aJ
C
aJ
C
aJ
=
Co
O
O O
CO z
C
C
I
o
c�oO
o
E
n
O
O
CNO
00
O
C
C
C
C
C
C�
f6 O
N O
QO
M
QO
CO
0
z'
}
4
C
co
O
co U
O
U
O
U
O
U
O
U
O
U
T
c T
U
C
C
C
C C
a
O
._
U
000CO
CO CO
�o
QEU
M �
�
M�
�
M���
o
I\�
CO
CO
CO
CO CO
COco -0
0
0
0 a
0
a
a
a
a
a
>_
c
o
a C Qom..,.. ,
E O D "ti^k
7
O
7
O
7
O
7 7
O O
z 000CO
C
C
E
E
�
E
E
a
X O
cn
CO
in
CO
in
CO
in in
CO CO,D:0-
+
(D —
O
O
O
O
O
O
Lij
>
>
>
>>
z(f)
���C��0-�(
2
�
W z
oa
y
!M
N
a

a- °°
�9
'T'-�,
�!
�
f!
jj
/ ]
�
»�
H
/\
>
/ /
) j
2 y t z
ƒ \ \ :
_ { 0
{
! { .
/ §
) 0 FJ 0 P
s
5
s
\
/

Photo Page 1
..fir ,-
ae^�sc
Photo I — Maintained •
M
Photo 2 — Maintained residential area.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Project Kairoi University Prepared By
Kairoi Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Development, Date Project Number KIf1'1{E?jloHorn
LLC 3/22/2022 & 2/15/2024 017524003

Photo Page 2
Photo 4 — Open area along Mallard Oaks Drive.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project
Kairoi Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Development, Date Project Number Klmley>>)ft n
LLC 3/22/2022 & 2/15/2024 017524003

Photo Page 3
Photo 5 — Open area along Mallard Oaks Drive.
a
r m x z
„ �
Photo 6 — Open area along Mallard Oaks Drive.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project
Kairoi Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Development, Date Project Number Kirnley)>) Horn
LLC 3/22/2022 & 2/15/2024 017524003

Photo Page 4
14
k
r '�
J s�� � �• e ar MMP
�
ri r S:
�.w ey f..
i
1
Photo 7 — Open area along Mallard Oaks Drive.
V1
l A
OWL
JW
57
Jt..+► !s' t'".. ,.✓v'6
�F .Wrw�r�''`� ee
..'�F�I�F' T1�T
,�.:.: $� �7'
�+s r'ro:�'`
���•� tF"l^�" t•.F,A' �f�� �
.7rp R
Photo 8 — Maintained ROW along John Adams Road.
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
Project
Kairoi University
Prepared By
Kairoi
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Development,
Kirnley)>) Horn
Date
Project Number
LLC
3/22/2022 & 2/15/2024
017524003

Photo Page 5
Photo 9 — Open area along John Adams Road.
Photo 10 — Maintained ROW along John Adams Road.
Title Photo Pages
Prepared For Kairoi University Prepared By
Project
Kairoi Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Development, Date Project Number Kirnley o Horn
LLC 3/22/2022 & 2/15/2024 017524003

COMPENSATORY
MITIGATION

4
WATER & LAND
SOLUTIONS
Upper Rocky Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Statement of Availability March 14, 2024
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Kimberly Browning
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Center, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re Project: Kairoi University
This document confirms that Kairoi Development, LLC (Applicant) for the Kairoi University (Project)
has expressed an interest to utilize 0.26 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits from the Water & Land
Solutions, LLC sponsored Upper Rocky Umbrella Mitigation Bank, specifically 0.26 riparian wetland
credits from the Upper Rocky Site, in the Yadkin HUC 03040105. As the official Bank Sponsor, Water &
Land Solutions, LLC, attests to the fact that mitigation is available for reservation at this time.
These mitigation credits are not considered secured, and consequently are eligible to be used for alternate
purposes by the Bank Sponsor, until payment in full is received from the Applicant resulting in the
issuance of a Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate by the bank acknowledging that the Applicant has
fully secured credits from the bank and the Banker has accepted full responsibility for the mitigation
obligation requiring the credits/units.
The Banker will issue the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate within three (3) days of receipt of the
purchase price. Banker shall provide to Applicant a copy of the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate and
a documented copy of the debit of credits from the Bank Official Credit Ledger(s), indicating the permit
number and the resource type secured by the applicant. A copy of the Mitigation Credit Transfer
Certificate, with an updated Official Credit Ledger will also be sent to regulatory agencies showing the
proper documentation. This Reservation Sales Agreement shall terminate on June 7, 2024, unless
extended by written agreement between the Seller and Buyer, and all reserved credits will no longer be
held for the project.
If any questions need to be answered, please contact me at 239-322-7276.
Best Regards,
Riane Welbourne
Water & Land Solutions, LLC
7721 Six Forks Road, Suite 130
Raleigh, NC 27615

RES Aster, LLC Stream Mitigation Bank
Statement of Availability March 14, 2024
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Jennifer Lawrence
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Re Project: Kairoi University
This document confirms that the Kairoi Properties, LLC (Applicant) for the Kairoi University (Project) has
expressed an interest to utilize 230.00 Stream Mitigation Credits from the RES Aster sponsored RES
Yadkin 05 Umbrella Mitigation Bank, specifically 230.00 Stream credits from the Cardinal site, in the Yadkin
HUC 03040105. As the official Bank Sponsor, RES Aster, LLC, attests to the fact that mitigation is available
for reservation at this time.
These mitigation credits are not considered secured, and consequently are eligible to be used for alternate
purposes by the Bank Sponsor, until payment in full is received from the Applicant resulting in the issuance
of a Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate by the bank acknowledging that the Applicant has fully secured
credits from the bank and the Banker has accepted full responsibility for the mitigation obligation requiring
the credits/units.
The Banker will issue the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate within three (3) days of receipt of the purchase
price. Banker shall provide to Applicant a copy of the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate and a
documented copy of the debit of credits from the Bank Official Credit Ledger(s), indicating the permit
number and the resource type secured by the applicant. A copy of the Mitigation Credit Transfer Certificate,
with an updated Official Credit Ledger will also be sent to regulatory agencies showing the proper
documentation.
Please contact me at 919-209-1055 or [e-mail] if you have any questions.
Best Regards,
Amy Staley
Credit Sales Manager
Bank Sponsor— RES Aster, LLC

INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Kairoi University 2. Date of evaluation: 3/22/2022
3. Applicant/owner name: Kairoi 4. Assessor name/organization: Taylor Kiker, PWS KH
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Stoney Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S2 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 150
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 7 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? r Yes r No
14. Feature type: C*` Perennial flow Intermittent flow i Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: r Mountains (M) f: Piedmont (P) r Inner Coastal Plain (1) r Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic \ /
valley shape (skip for r a ���- [: b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip (: Size 1 (< 0.1 mi') r Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) r Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) r Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? f Yes C*` No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water F_ Classified Trout Waters i- Water Supply Watershed ( f- I f II f III ( IV V)
r- Essential Fish Habitat r- Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property F NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F_ fish F_ 303(d) List f CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
F_ Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? f Yes f*` No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
C*` A Waterthroughout assessment reach.
f B No flow, water in pools only.
f C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
C*` A At least 10 % of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
f B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
C*` A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
f B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
C*` A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
{' A < 10% of channel unstable
C*` B 10 to 25 % of channel unstable
{' C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
f A f A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
C*` B C` B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
f C {' C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reach/intertidal zone metric

Check all that apply.
F A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
i✓ B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
i! C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
F_ Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
r- F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
i G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F_ H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought, for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
C` A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
l B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream- assessment reach metric
Yes (Z No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. t Yes (` No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5 % coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
F A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses o W f F 5 % oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) F m r- G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o r- H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation r 0 IF Sand bottom
i- C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r i- J 5 % vertical bank along the marsh
f- D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots O r- K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F_ E Little or no habitat
*"'********..********************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS**************** ---
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11 a. (- Yes (: No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F_ B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
Fe C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100 % for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
r C C C C Bedrock/saprolite
r r r r r Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
r r r r r Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
r r r r r Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
r r r (` r Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
r r- t- r Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
i r t ( r Detritus
1' r ( (" r Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. r Yes r No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. r- Yes (' No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. (' No Water r Other:
12b. ( Yes (' No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
FV I -' Adult frogs
f- F_ Aquatic reptiles
r f Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F r Beetles (including water pennies)
f- r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F [- Asian clam (Corbicula )
F_ r Crustacean (isopod/am ph ipod/crayfish/sh rim p)
F_ I- Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
F 7 Dipterans (true flies)
F i- Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F_ i- Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
f 7 Midges/mosquito larvae
F_ j- Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
F_ r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula )

F 7_ Other fish
F_ 7_ Salamanders/tadpoles
F f Snails
F 7_ Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F_ 7_ Tipulid larvae
f r Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
r A r A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
r B r B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
f C f C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
f A {' A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water_ 6 inches deep
r B r B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
r C r C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the stream side area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
f: Y r Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
r N f: N
16. Baseflow Contributors - assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
i A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
r- B Ponds (include wet detention basins, do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
f D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
71 E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
r- F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors - assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F_ Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r- B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F_ C Urban stream (>_ 24 % impervious surface for watershed)
f7 D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r- F None of the above
18. Shading - assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
r A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
C*` B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
r C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
r A r A r A r A >- 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
r B r- B r B r B From 50 to < 100-feet wide
f: C r C r- C f: C From 30 to < 50-feet wide
r D r D r D r D From 10 to < 30-feet wide
r E r E r E (- E < 10-feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
" A i A Mature forest
[: B [: B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
f C f C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
( D r D Maintained shrubs
( E "-" E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: f7
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
{' A C` A i` A C` A C` A C` A Row crops
( B ( B ( B ( B ( B ( B Maintained turf
( C ( C ( C ( C ( C ( C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
( D ( D ( D ( D ( D ( D Pasture (active livestock use)

22. Stem Density— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
(: A (: A Medium to high stem density
( B ( B Low stem density
r C r C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10-feet wide.
LB RB
(.` A (" A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
r B (: B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
r C r C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
r A r A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
(: B (: B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
' C r C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity— assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. (" Yes (.` No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. r No Water r Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
r A <46 r B 46 to < 67 ('' C 67 to < 79 r D 79 to < 230 ('' E >_ 230

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Kairoi University
Stream Category Pb1
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 3/22/2022
Assessor Name/Organization Taylor Kiker, PWS KH
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat NA
Overall LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Kairoi University Date of Evaluation 3/22/2022
Applicant/Owner Name Kairoi Development Wetland Site Name W2
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Taylor Kiker, PWS KH
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Stoney Creek
River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03040105
County Mecklenburg NCDWR Region Mooresville
f+ Yes r No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
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? r Yes (+` No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? + Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F NCDWR 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)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F 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)
r Blackwater
(+` Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) t Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes + No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? r Yes (: No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? r Yes r No
1. Ground Surface ConditionNegetation 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)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
(` A i' A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
(+` B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. (` A r A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
( B r B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
r C r C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
(: D (: D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. #" A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
i' B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
i" C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. r A Sandy soil
f B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
(` D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
(` E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. (` A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
*` B Soil ribbon > 1 inch
4c. f A No peat or muck presence
f B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland - opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
( A C A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
(+` B 6- B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
( C C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use - opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). 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 A P_' A F✓ A > 10% impervious surfaces
r B r B r B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C f C > 20% coverage of pasture
r D r D r D > 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F E r E F E > 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
r F r F r F > 20% coverage of clear-cut land
F G r G F G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
(*` Yes C No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
(: A > 50 feet
r B From 30 to < 50 feet
r C From 15 to < 30 feet
r D From 5 to < 15 feet
r E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
(+ <- 15-feet wide 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?
r Yes (: No
7e. Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
(. Sheltered - adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
r Exposed - adjacent open water with width > 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area - wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
(` A {'' A > 100 feet
t" B B From 80 to < 100 feet
( C_ C From 50 to < 80 feet
t" D C- D From 40 to < 50 feet
t" E f E From 30 to < 40 feet
i F 4 F From 15 to < 30 feet
i" G C- G From 5 to < 15 feet
(" H (- H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
(` A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
f B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
(: C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition -assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
(+` A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
(` B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
( C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.

11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
t A' A t o >_ 500 acres
r B C' B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
r C C ' C r C From 50 to < 100 acres
i D C ' D 4- D From 25 to < 50 acres
i E C' E i E From 10 to < 25 acres
i F C' F i F From 5 to < 10 acres
i G C' G i G From 1 to < 5 acres
i H i+' H G' H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I C I r, I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J (- J r J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
{ K (` K t" K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
(' A Pocosin is the full extent (> 90%) of its natural landscape size.
r 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
(" A r A > 500 acres
f— B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
f- C r C From 50 to < 100 acres
I— D (: D From 10 to < 50 acres
(. E r E < 10 acres
(' F (' F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
r Yes r No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas > 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
(` A 0
(: B 1 to 4
CC 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
( A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
(+ B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
( C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
i' A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
i B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
i C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
(? Yes r No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
( A > 25% coverage of vegetation
C 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
A
A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
m
. B
. B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
C
( C
Canopy sparse or absent
oA
: A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
�
. B
B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C
( C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
n A r A Dense shrub layer
t. B
(? B
Moderate density shrub layer
C
r C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
A
r A
Dense herb layer
d . B
(+ B
Moderate density herb layer
= C
r C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
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 (skip for all marshes)
+ A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
C' B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
(- C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
(" A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
(+ B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
C A rB ("'C rD
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
r A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
r B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
(: C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
r D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name W2
Date
3/22/2022
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Taylor Kiker, PWS KH
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5
USACE AID#: NCDWR #:
Project Name Kairoi University Date of Evaluation 3/22/2022
Applicant/Owner Name Kairoi Development Wetland Site Name W3
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Taylor Kiker, PWS KH
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Stoney Creek
River Basin Catawba USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03040105
County Mecklenburg NCDWR Region Mooresville
(+ Yes r No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
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? r Yes (+` No
Regulatory Considerations -Were regulatory considerations evaluated? + Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
F Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F NCDWR 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)
F Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HOW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
F 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)
r Blackwater
(+` Brownwater
F Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) t Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes + No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? r Yes (: No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? r Yes (: No
1. Ground Surface ConditionNegetation 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)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration - assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <- 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only,
while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
(` A i' A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
(` B { B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief - assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. (` A r A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
( B r B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
r C r C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
(: D (: D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. (` A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
C B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
(-- C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a. r A Sandy soil
f B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
(` D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
(` E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. (` A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
*` B Soil ribbon > 1 inch
4c. f A No peat or muck presence
f B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
(+` A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
(` B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
( C { C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). 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 A P_' A F✓ A > 10% impervious surfaces
r B r B r B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
F C F C f C > 20% coverage of pasture
r D r D r D > 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r E r E F E > 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
r F F-1 F r F > 20% coverage of clear-cut land
r G r G F G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent dainage and/or overbank flow from affectio the
assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer — assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
(*` Yes C No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
( A > 50 feet
( B From 30 to < 50 feet
{+` C From 15 to < 30 feet
( D From 5 to < 15 feet
( E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
(' <- 15-feet wide (" > 15-feet wide {: Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
(-Yes (: No
7e. Is 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.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes
and Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp
Forest only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and the wetland complex at the
assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
(` A {'' A > 100 feet
t" B B From 80 to < 100 feet
( C_ C From 50 to < 80 feet
t" D G" D From 40 to < 50 feet
t" E { E From 30 to < 40 feet
i F { F From 15 to < 30 feet
i" G (` G From 5 to < 15 feet
(" H { H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
(` A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
( C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition —assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
(+` A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
(` B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
( C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.

11. Wetland Size — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
t A' A t o >_ 500 acres
r B C' B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
r C C ' C r C From 50 to < 100 acres
i D C ' D 4- D From 25 to < 50 acres
i E C' E i E From 10 to < 25 acres
i F C' F i F From 5 to < 10 acres
i G C' G i G From 1 to < 5 acres
i H C' H t" H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I C I (" I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
. J J" J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
{ K (` K (+ K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
(- A Pocosin is the full extent (> 90%) of its natural landscape size.
r 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
r A r A > 500 acres
r B r B From 100 to < 500 acres
r C (+` C From 50 to < 100 acres
(+` D r D From 10 to < 50 acres
r E r E < 10 acres
r F r F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
r Yes r No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas > 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directiions? If the assessment area is clear-cut,
select option "C."
(" A 0
rB 1to4
(+ C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
( A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
t" B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
(+ A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
r B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
r C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Yes r No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
( A > 25% coverage of vegetation
C 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
A
C" A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
m
B
r B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
. C
(. C
Canopy sparse or absent
0
A
r A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B
r B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
+ C
IT. C
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
n A r A Dense shrub layer
tB
r B
Moderate density shrub layer
+ C
IT. C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
. A
(. A
Dense herb layer
d B
r B
Moderate density herb layer
= C
r C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
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 (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
C' B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
f+ C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
{" A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
{+ B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
C A rB rC t. D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
r A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
r B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
( C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
t* D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual
Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name W3
Date
3/22/2022
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
Taylor Kiker, PWS KH
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open
water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Function Sub -function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology Condition
LOW
Water Quality Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Habitat Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW