20151295 Ver 1_401 Application_20151215

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Mr. William Elliott
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDENR
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa St.
Asheville, NC 28801
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
December 7, 2015
I 2015128$
o RGCabC�D
FEC 5 2015 Di
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification for NWP#14 Summers Walk Phase 5 and NWP #29
for Phase 6, Cabarrus and Mecklenburg Counties, NC.
Dear Ms. Higgins and Messrs. Elliott, Johnson and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for permits associated with the construction of Phase 5 and Phase 6 of the
existing Summers Walk residential development located at 16008 Davidson -Concord Road, near
Davidson, in Cabarrus and Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina.
For Phase 5, the jurisdictional features on the site were delineated and verified by the USACE
(William Elliott and Steve Kichefski) on November 5, 2013 and a jurisdictional determination
request is enclosed for final approval. Proposed permanent impacts associated with this phase of
the project total approximately 142 linear feet of stream impacts and 0.09 acres of forested
wetland impacts. The impacts being proposed under NWP #14 are associated with the
construction of two road crossings to access Phase 5 of the existing Summers Walk residential
development and to facilitate connectivity to the surrounding areas as being required by the City
of Kannapolis. Phase 5 of the development will consist of two road crossings to access/service
Ch arlotte,Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 1 [e-mail]

proposed residential lots but also connect to adjacent road infrastructure to facilitate connectivity
from Davidson -Concord Road to Shiloh Church Road through the Summers Walk development
as shown on the enclosed Figure 7. This connection is being required by the City of Kannapolis
and will result in 142 linear feet of stream impact (Stream Impact A) in addition to the 0.09 acre
of wetland impact associated with the road crossing to access the interior of the Phase 5
(Wetland Impact A) which is being requested under a Nationwide Permit #14.
For Phase 6, the jurisdictional features on this site were delineated by WEPG in August 2015 and
a jurisdictional determination request is enclosed for review/approval. Proposed impacts
associated with this phase total 0.001 acre of wetland for the construction of a retaining
wall/embankment for lot fill and temporary impacts to 15 linear feet of stream channel for the
construction of a sewer line crossing as being requested under a Nationwide Permit #29.
Table 1: Summary of Proposed Impacts/Permits
Phase 5 WP #14
Wetland acre
Stream (linear feet)
Road Crossing
0.09
----
Road Crossing
----
142
Phase 6 WP #29
Lot Fill
0.001
----
Sewer tem
----
15 (temp)
Total Impacts
0.091 acre
157 linear feet
As noted in Figure 7, existing/previous phases of the development have occurred. Previous
impacts were authorized for Phases 1-4 under AIDS: 200331084, 200532043, and 20532044 for
NWPs 12, 14, and 39. Total impacts authorized were temporary impacts to 1.94 acre of wetlands
and 120 linear feet for a sewer line; and 290 linear feet of permanent impacts to stream channels
and 0.49 acres of wetlands for lot fill and road construction. However, plans changed and not all
of the permitted impacts were conducted. To date, current permanent impacts on the site total
0.03 acre of wetlands and 145 linear feet of stream channel along with the temporary impacts
associated with the sewer line installation.
The current site plan was designed to avoid jurisdictional features to the maximum extent
practicable while still incorporating necessary site development and viable access/connectivity.
Due to the location/extent of jurisdictional features on the site, complete avoidance was not
practicable as the location of the streams and wetland traverse the entirety of the project
boundaries. Bottomless culverts/spans were not considered practicable due to substantial
additional costs. Also due to the site constraints of connecting to existing road infrastructure, the
location of the crossings on the stream and wetlands were limited as well which reduced
minimization opportunities. Ultimately, the road crossings were designed the minimum width
necessary to safely facilitate traffic flow and are considered minimal impacts. In order to
compensate for the proposed impacts, the applicant is proposing payment into N.C. Division
Mitigation Services (NCDMS) at a 2:1 ratio for 142 linear feet of warm water stream channel
and 0.091 acres of riparian wetlands. Enclosed is the acceptance letter from NCDMS.
Charlotte Office:��- www.wetlands-epg.com ���- TrMT�Ashevilleffi
Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 2 [e-mail]

and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluations for both phases.
Based upon known occurrences for federally listed species in Cabarrus/Mecklenburg County and
their habitat requirements, the proposed impact locations include potential habitat for the
recently listed Northern Long Eared Bat (NLEB) as these locations are composed of partially
wooded/forested vegetation. However, due the project location (which is at least 45 miles away
from a known occurrence) and minimal tree clearing (less than 1 acre) anticipated within the
permitted areas, we believe this project is not likely to adversely affect the Northern Long Eared
Bat and cause no effect to any other listed species.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide this information and please contact us if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
Amanda Jones, PWS
Amanda Jones
Regulatory Specialist
Heath Caldwell, PWS
664&w
Heath Caldwell
Environmental Scientist
­-
Charlotte Office: �����-� �www.wetlands-epg.com�-� ���- ��������� Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 3 [e-mail]

Permit Application

o�o� W AT 4 9:
T.
n <
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 and 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Summers Walk Phase 5 and 6
2b.
County:
Cabarrus (Phase 5) and Mecklenburg (Phase 6)
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Davidson
2d.
Subdivision name:
Summers Walk
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Thomas Clement
3d.
Street address:
13860 Ballantyne Corporate Place, Suite 130
3e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
3f.
Telephone no.:
301-363-3476
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no..-
o.:4g.
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Amanda Jones
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC - Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
5c.
Street address:
1070 Tunnel Road, Bldg. 1
5d.
City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28805
5e.
Telephone no.:
828-708-7059
5f.
Fax no.:
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
multiple PINS - see attached map
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.4548 Longitude: -80.7688
1 c.
Property size:
81 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Rocky River
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c.
River basin:
Rocky
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is currently vacant and is composed of forested areas and utility right-of-way easements. General land use in the vicinity consists of
residential and commercial developments.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.336
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,775
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Construction of residential development to include road crossings, lot fill, and sewer line.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Excavation and grading of the site will use standard equipment - excavator, trackhoe, dump trucks, etc.
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project(including all priorphases) in thepast?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Site visit was conducted'by William Elliott and Steve Kichefski on 11/5/2013 to confirm WEPG's delineation in which findings/determination is included
for final determination for Phase 5. Phase 6 delineationfjurisdictional request is also included which has not been field verified by the Corps.
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Previous permits issued for development under AIDs 20331084, 200532043, and 200532044 for NWPs 12, 14, and 39. See attached cover letter.
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
Q Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
The proposed impacts are associated with the final phases of the Summers Walk residential development. No additional phases are proposed.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands ❑X Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number .
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 P
Culvert
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.09
W2 P
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.001
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.091
2h. Comments:
Wetland Impact A (W1) is associated with a road crossing under NWP #14 for Phase 5 and Wetland Impact B (W2) is associated with lot fill proposed
under NWP #29 for Phase 6.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream A
PER
Corps
6
142
S2 T
Excavation
Stream B
INT
Corps
4
15
S3
Choose one
_
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
_
S6 -
Choose one
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
157
3i. Comments:
Stream Impact A (S1) is associated with a road crossing for Phase 5 under NWP #14. Stream Impact B (S2) is associated with lot fill for Phase 6 under
NWP #29.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivii ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require miti ation, then vou MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
61
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D.
Impact Justification and Mitigation
1.
Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Due to the location of the wetlands and streams on the site, opportunities to avoid these areas were limited. The impacted wetland and stream.areas
span the location of both access areas for the site. Plan design for the residential lots and roadway access was oriented and located to limit additional
fill to onsite wetlands and streams while maintaining required development lots and site access/egress requirements.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑X DWQ ❑ Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a.
Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑X Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
142 linear feet
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.091 acres
4f.
Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g.
Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h.
Comments: Applicant is proposing payment into NCDMS at 2:1 ratio for stream/wetland impacts.
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ❑X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A threatened/endangered species assessment was conducted on the site in which no Federally protected species were identified (report enclosed).
Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat but no adverse effects are anticipated (see attached cover letter).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
—F—
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No grading/fill will occur/be placed within the floodplain as part of this project. Subsequently, no change in base flood elevations will occur as part of
this project.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
http://gis.cabarruscounty.us/mycabarrusgis/
Amanda °� Dig- signed by Amanda Jones
DN: cn=Amanda Jones, o=WEPG,
Amanda Jones for WEPG
ou=Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC,
Wetlands
p; 8 Environmental Planning
� Grouemail=amanda.jones(dJwetlands-
Jones `epg.com, c=US
12-01-2015
Date: 2015.11.26 22:43:44 -05'00'
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Agent Authorization Letter
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: Summers Walk Phase S & 6
Property Address: 16008 Davidson -Concord Road, Davidson, NC 28036
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): multiple PINS see attached map
Select one: 1 am the current property owner
Name: Thomas M. Clement
Company: MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
Mailing Address: 13860 Ballantyne Corporate Place, Suite 130, Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: 301-363-3476
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
,-%-71-
10/19/2015
Prvperty Owger Jnterested Brayer* /Other' Date
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB S50 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 2 [e-mail]

Environmental
Quality
November 3, 2015
Jeremy Horton
Cole Jenest and Stone
200 South Tryon St. Suite 1400
Charlotte, NC 28202
Project: Summers Walk Phase V
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
Expiration of Acceptance: May 3, 2016
County: Cabarrus
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table
below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program will be
approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to
contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will be approved. You must also comply with all other
state, federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated with the proposed activity including
G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a
copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. I
'is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy of the permit(s) an
invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the
authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and
policies listed at hftp://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts that may require compensatory
mitigation are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned to DMS for this impact
is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the impact amounts shown below.
Impact
River
Basin
CU Location
(8 -digit HUC)
Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.)
Yadkin
03040105
Cold
0
Cool Warm Ri arian Non -Riparian Coastal Marsh
0 150 0.10 0 0 0 0
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be
performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
cc: William Elliott, USACE-Asheville
Len Rindner, agent
Sincerely, Q
Jame Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
- 'Nothing Compares.
State of Noith Carolina I Enviionmenlal Quality
1601 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
919-707-8600

N
C
cd
CL
N
d
c�
`7
Maps/Plans

Canelws 6
2s i
Site
NC 73
15 Nc 73
73
25
.. 54
Hunlernr lie + $°
+�.
177 i
19610�16- I4es �9
in'6� 1
cc
V.no*
Community
11-.
G'4ylryJOh C
onfola .
Rb
a
I
r
D
� Q•
t
u
t
U
1 C
1
4
A�
A\6
GIU
G\�
A �
Y 1
Sources: Esri. HERE, DeL Scale: 1:10,000 N
NRCAN, Esri Japan, METI Feet n
TomTom. Mapmylndia. © /V
Community 0 1,000
FIGURE NO. SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 & 6 Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
1 LAM Qr I Cabarrus/Mecklenburg Co., NC SF LSR
VICINITY MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
DATE:
11/26/15

FIGURE NO. SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 & 6 Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
2 A IC Dr"' I Cabarrus/Mecklenburg Co., NC SF LSR
DATE:
AERIAL MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 11/26/15
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
13860 Ballantyne Corporate Place
Charlotte, NC 28277
PID: 46723522890000 (Cabarrus)
MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
13860 Ballantyne Corporate Place
Charlotte, NC 28277
PID: 00747199 (Mecklenburg)
MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
13860 Ballantyne Corporate Place
Charlotte, NC 28277
PID: 00747101 (Mecklenburg)
FIGURE NO.
MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
13860 Ballantyne Corporate Place
Charlotte, NC 28277
PID: 46724437100000(Cabarrus)
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 & 6
Cabarrus/Mecklenburg Co., NC
Scale: 1:10,000 N
Feet n
0 1,000 A
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
SF LSR
DATE:
PARCEL MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 11/26/15
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

/VF—PG Summers waIK Hrnasing neap
/etlands and Environmental Planning Group The locations of phase boundaries and connector road are approximate.
eonard S. Pindner, PLLC.
f
n
•
y
Phase 5 Existing
r
:y
Existin
oadco nee 6
1
Ow
.�
rroaLaw it.d
Previously
ermi
..i
00 ;.
J
wit {
Phase 6
W.
`.
Scale: 1:8,000 N
Feet
0 1,000

M
SITE
LTh Ak
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com
Q,
to
i�
I�
_-icy •

WETLANDS 0
12,820± SF
0.294± AC.
WETLANDS Q
8,968± SF
0.206± AC.
-�-7D
y-�
1
WETLANDS L` 1\ \\��
17.828± SF � \�
0.409 ± AC.ZY
{ ` SCALE: 1 "=300'
✓",r� / 11r''\ 1\ `_�� /\ A ALAN 1,1%At
Shaping the Environment
Realizing the Possibilities
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
WETLANDS P
6,331± SF
0.145± AC.
STREAM A
±580 LF
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Project No. 4437 Sheet 1 OF 9
Issued 10107115
Application Tracking Number —
Land Planning
200South Tryon Street
V
Sui[c 1400
Landscape Architecture
Charlotte, North Carolina
Cole.w_
YV CYC Ra{�
Civil Engineering
8202
z+ 70
p� 104 376 1555
r+ 704 376 7851
St/�p
om
Urban Design
url. www.colcie_lstoa,
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
WETLANDS P
6,331± SF
0.145± AC.
STREAM A
±580 LF
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Project No. 4437 Sheet 1 OF 9
Issued 10107115
Application Tracking Number —

.r EXISTING WASACC
100' UTILITY
EASEMENT
Bw of
PROPOSED
SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
70' COLONIAL
— _ PIPELINE R/W
STREAM IMPACT A
141± LF DISTURBANCE
2 60" RCP WITH
WETLAND IMPACT A \� ��\\ \ I - ?+ l HEADWALLS
3,823± SF (0.09 AC.)
DISTURBANCE
SCALE: 1"=300' "
0 150' 300' 600'
Realizing
ggth Possibilnt
ities
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 OVERALL SITE PLAN
Realizin the Possibilities
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
Land—pc Architecture Charlotte. NorthCarolir, KANNAPOLIS NORTH CAROLINA
2a202 Project No. 4437 Sheet 2 OF 9
ColeJenest CwilEnginecring p+7043761555 Issued 10107/15
8s Stone UrbanDnign f+704 76785nesls[onemm MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Application Tracking Number —

K4
K5;` \
�1-33
\
\ o K�\
i L32 1\L23
`
EXISTING PROPERTY
U
K8'L31LINE
d
C�TY LINE
WETLAND IMPAC A`�303,823±
K9 \
SF (0.09 AC.)
y '��• L29DISTURBANCE
20' WETLAND BUFFER
K16'EXISTING
PROPERTY
—61NE`
%C22
\�
K18�.�
\ K19 •
/
,'L21
3:1 SLOPE
_
K l
�I
'L2
K
C
G ..100,
l
all
RAW
..
CULVERT
IL
HEADWALL
!,-♦
SCALE:♦
Shaping the Environment
�I
Realizing the Possibilities SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 WETLAND IMPACT A
Suite 1400
I �ndscam Architect— Charlotte, North Carolina
• NORTH CAROLINA
,
•
f- 704 316 71851 MFSUMME
& Stone Urban Design nentstonexorn RS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC Application Tracking Number

G.al
655
650
645
640
635
PROPOSED
GRADE AT CE
TERLINE
GRADE AT CENTERLINE
EXISTING
PROP
SED 60" RCP
CULVERT
INV.= 641.50
AT CL
0
O
O
N
O
.
N
M
W
to
06
cD
655
650
645
640
SCALE: 111=5' V
63
0 2.5' 5' 10'
17+50 18+00 18+50 19+00 19+50 20+00 20+50 SCALE: 111=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
Realing zing
the
Environment SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 WETLAND IMPACT A -
Realizing the Possibilities '�
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street CROSS-SECTION
Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture Charlotte. North Carolina KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA+ 28202 Project No. 4437 Sheet 40F9
Co�eJelnest CivilEnginee ng 704 376 1555 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS LLC Issues 10i07115
f+ 78
f. 704 376 51
Stone Urban Design url+ www mlcirnrvstnnrcom Application Tracking Number —

.:•
675
670
665
L�7
655
Shaping the Environment
Realizing the Possibilities
*and Planning
V
Landscape Architecture
GOIe len ?St
Civil Engineering
& Stone
Urban Design
PROPOSED
GRADE
PROPOSED
HEADWALL
2 — 90± IF
60' RCP
® 2.329'.±
SLOPE
`
(BURIED 1'
EXISTING GRADE
N
c0
c0
O
c0
0)
M
r':
Ln
rt`
to
MLO
n
(O
t0
(O
to
(0
CO
tD
(O
(0(0
(D
(O
Shaping the Environment
Realizing the Possibilities
200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
Charlotte, North Carolina
28202
p+704 376 1555
f+ 704 376 7851
url+ www col ejeneststone.com
SCALE: 1 "=5'V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
.:S
675
670
665
n 655
M
0)
LO
t0
SCALE: 1"=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
WETLAND IMPACT A - PROFILE
Project No. 4437 Sheet 5 OF 9
Issued 10107115
Application Tracking Number —
*and Planning
V
Landscape Architecture
GOIe len ?St
Civil Engineering
& Stone
Urban Design
200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
Charlotte, North Carolina
28202
p+704 376 1555
f+ 704 376 7851
url+ www col ejeneststone.com
SCALE: 1 "=5'V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
.:S
675
670
665
n 655
M
0)
LO
t0
SCALE: 1"=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
WETLAND IMPACT A - PROFILE
Project No. 4437 Sheet 5 OF 9
Issued 10107115
Application Tracking Number —

—!rte!
_ //
r -�, �j �// / /� /1l (! , . " /� - STREAM ,4MP,ACT Af '-/ _J 1s" cMP
14I2f kF DISTIIRBANL�
I \ 48.80'
r u,
pp 51 FG 109
�.;=... r� - -, ` ,. ..- -" `� /r � l ��'; � % '� / / / / /////�•/ 115hlloh Vlllagell
p._2-,4 ref
rm
\ \ ! )ire ✓ev-lr✓:Z 1'� ('/ I'- Lot /
O'1'35.�" ` "'� _ i 5h V .II-���"'/ / pl3 51 FG 109
FG 21 �' 1����•s� - Shiloh Villagell
N 65'05'2"Wl
6.72'
1612""'0000
ONIA M 6pOWN
CITY OF KANNAPOLIS0RSOD BUFFER- \ \ \ ��`FIN
p0 I
EXISTING PROPERTY
`LINE\
3: —SLOPE 50y -
SEGMENTAL BLOCK— ,� \ `� \ \ \ \ 83p / /
HEADWALL \ \\ \\\ \\ k /
V\ \ �/
2 — 106t LF 60" RCP` \\ \\\ \ \ \\ \ \ \\\ \ / //%� v'/ /� i N /
CULVERT 6�IR \ \ \ \ �� \ �1\ i� + ' / / f '/( p 6539-
Retalnincg Wall 15 We t of the W Q-13
property line 1 1 .4' t this point..02J /
EXISTING TOP OF�1������ WONY1"PMY
BANK `� i'l Itlll��tll �� 1 ,`� - G 09
N;461244440900 O �2
SCALE: 1••=
EXISTING SHILOH
VILLAGE SUBDIVISION Q 25 A0 100,
Realizing
ng the ngthePvironment
e5 SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5 STREAM IMPACT A
Realizing the Possibilities
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture Charlotte, North Carolina KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA Project No.4437 Sheet 6 of 9
r/�28202
,o1WeneM Civil Engineering p+704 3761555 Issued 10107/15
f+7043767851 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS LLC
Stone Urban Design url+_.colejeneststone.com Application Tracking Number —

MN
675
670
665
['1:101
655
19+00
Shaping the Environment
PROPOSED
GRADE AT
Realizing the Possibilities
ROAD CENTERLINE
Land Planning
200 South Tryon Street
+
Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture
Charlotte, North Carolina
ColeJeneSt
Civil Engineering
28202
p+7043761555
EXISTING
GRADE AT
tt 704 376 7851
ROAD CENTERLINE
url+w w.mlejeneststone.mm
in
PROPOSED 6)"
RCP CULVER
INV.
658.00± AT C
cLf')0
NCC)
n
0
N
00
c0
P_
Lo
to
to
tr
to
to
19+00
::I
675
670
A&M
Me]
0655
LO
06
19+50 20+00 20+50 21+00
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
SCALE: 1111=6V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
SCALE: 1"=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
STREAM IMPACT A -
CROSS-SECTION
Project No. 4437 Sheet 7 OF 9
Issued 10107115
Application Tracking Number —
Shaping the Environment
Realizing the Possibilities
Land Planning
200 South Tryon Street
+
Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture
Charlotte, North Carolina
ColeJeneSt
Civil Engineering
28202
p+7043761555
& Stone
tt 704 376 7851
Urban Design
url+w w.mlejeneststone.mm
::I
675
670
A&M
Me]
0655
LO
06
19+50 20+00 20+50 21+00
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
SCALE: 1111=6V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
SCALE: 1"=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
STREAM IMPACT A -
CROSS-SECTION
Project No. 4437 Sheet 7 OF 9
Issued 10107115
Application Tracking Number —

MM
655
650
645
640
635
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00
SCALE: 111=5V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
Shaping the Environment SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
Realizing the Possibilities
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
+ Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture Charlotte, North Carolina KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
CiOle.lenest Civil Engineering p8 704 376 7851 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
& Stone ur 704 376 7857
Urban Design url+www.colejeneststone.com
im
655
650
645
640
635
O
O)
3+50 4+00
SCALE: 111=50'1-1
0 25' 50' 100'
STREAM IMPACT A - PROFILE
Project No. 4437 Sheet 8 OF 9
Issued 10107/15
Application Tracking Number —
PROPOSED
GRADE
PROPOSED
HEADWALL
2 — 105t
LF 60' RCP
® 0.94t SLOPE
(BURIED 1'
EXISTING GRADE
a0
N
N
N
00r-
Ln
LO
cD
cD
r`
n
d
(0
01
O)
Ln
V)
�
LOL
LQ
00
O
LO
cD
CO
cD
cD
tD
cD
(DLo
(D
tp
cD
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00
SCALE: 111=5V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
Shaping the Environment SUMMERS WALK PHASE 5
Realizing the Possibilities
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
+ Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture Charlotte, North Carolina KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
CiOle.lenest Civil Engineering p8 704 376 7851 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
& Stone ur 704 376 7857
Urban Design url+www.colejeneststone.com
im
655
650
645
640
635
O
O)
3+50 4+00
SCALE: 111=50'1-1
0 25' 50' 100'
STREAM IMPACT A - PROFILE
Project No. 4437 Sheet 8 OF 9
Issued 10107/15
Application Tracking Number —

A�

SEASONAL RPW WETLANDS A
TRIBUTARY B 899± SF
405± LF, 4± 0.021± AC.
WIDTH (0.037 AC.)
WETLANDS D WETLANDS C
431± SF 157± SF K+
0.010± AC. 0.004± AC.
r
SEASONAL RPW
TRIBUTARY E �- 1
475± LF, 4±
WIDTH (0.044 AC.)
SEASONAL RPW�`j�\��
TRIBUTARY F
190 LF, 4± WIDTHall
(0.017 AC.)
(ONSITE)
TV—
,
r, /r c/li //
If
�IS� �14.i1�( !1\1� t i I I j t !�/ //l1 T/ Ili �l�l
EXISTING
TU / SANITARY SEWER
7,$ EASEMENT0.
i
GALE: 1 "=200'
0 100- 200'
400
Shaping the Environment
Realizing the Possibilities SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
landscape Anhltecture Charlotte, North Carolina DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA Project No. 4289 Sheet 1 OF 6
ColWenest 28202
Civil Engineering p*7043761555 Issued 1124115
Q 4 704 376 7851 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Stone Urban Design url+--ejenestst—.— Application Tracking Number

�0 ,
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT B WETLAND IMPACT B °°'1
15f LF DISTURBANCE 25t SF (0.001 AC.)
DISTURBANCE
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER EASEMENT
EXISTING SANITARY
SEWER EASEMENT "�f r `� / ✓ }�
roy
-20
it
51
L L'T Jr./ L�q ,vein *o
Q i
a Louise„ w
�� �� a •,a. I -�
"°,„. �,":a.a�'.;.°`•o Hwa, r„ �,. it
r� M
,
L~�
"=200'
�-�-SCALE: 1
l
0 100'
200' 400'
'
ing theingth Environment
Realizing
Realizing the Possibilities
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
OVERALL SITE PLAN
land Planning
200 South Tryon Street
Landscape Architecture
Suite 1400
Charlotte, North Carolina
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No. 4289 Sheet 2OF6
/��
\/VleJeneSt
Civil Engineering
28202
P+7043761555
f+7043767851
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Issued 11124115
& .Stone
Urban Design
url+w w.colejeneststoneeom
Application Tracking Number —

l
s'o Co .
WETLAND IMPACT
25t SF (0.001 AC.)
DISTURBANCE
SEGMENTAL BLOCK
WALL
I
LINETING PROPERTY/13
I- I
1001,
�/
11 /// // // , //�/ ��
✓,_ —� �
/
/i
Jl
Possibilnt
ities
Realizing the Possibilities
Realizinng g the
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
WETLAND IMPACT B
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture Chadotte, North Carolina
28202
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No. 4289 Sheet
3OF6
C/�_ w ,
oleJenest Civil Engineering P+7043761555
f+7043767851
& Stone urban
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Issued 11/24/15
Application Tracking Number —
Design url+ wwwmle eneststone rom

UC
�o�-"os 3
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT B
15t LF DISTURBANCE. STREAM
CHANNEL TO BE RESTORED TO
PRE—CONSTRUCTION
CONTOURS.
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
836.10' x"'
i
//
spm
r y
PR6P0 ESD SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
411
Olt
/f /
lo y
�/ ol
— /„�ii .,r,•/r/moi / / / / i-
Shaping the
Realizing the Possibilities SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6 TEMPORARY STREAM
Re
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street I M PACT B
+ Suitt 1400
Landscape Architecture Charlotte. North Carolina DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA Project No. 4289 Sheet 4OF6
ColeJenest CNilEngineering p+7043761555 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS LLC Issues tvz4N5
+ url+wwf+ 704 767851 Application Tracking Number —
� Stone Urban Design url+ www.mlejeneststone.mm � pp ' g

705
700
695
.••
685
STREAM CHANN
L TO BE
ingthEPossibment
Realizing
Realizing the Possibilities
es
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
RESTORED
TO
Suite 1600
Landscape Architecture Ch -do n
CCivil Engineering e. Nonh Carolina
oleJenest 28202
p+706 3761555
A��p T+43767851
st .moi Urban Design url+70_ role jeneststone-
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
C
NTOURS.
TOP OF BAN
STREAM CENTERLINE
z a
Q
J
U
6" DIP SANITARY
SEWER
n�
PIPE AT
1.00%t
1n
00
N
N
t7
r
N
01
Qt
0)
r)
Qi
Qi
O
O
O
O
-1+00 -0+50 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT B
ing the
ingthEPossibment
Realizing
Realizing the Possibilities
es
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1600
Landscape Architecture Ch -do n
CCivil Engineering e. Nonh Carolina
oleJenest 28202
p+706 3761555
A��p T+43767851
st .moi Urban Design url+70_ role jeneststone-
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
705
695
.•R
685
2+00
SCALE: 1 "=5'V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
SCALE: 1"=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
TEMPORARY STREAM
IMPACT B - CROSS SECTION
Project No. 4289 Sheet 5 OF 6
Issued 11/24115
Application Tracking Number —

Mul W"i
Ow. I

jurisdictional
Determination Information
C
O
.;
ro
E
L-
(3)
4
(L)
wil

FIGURE NO.
SUMMERSWALK PHASE V Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Cabarrus/Mecklenburg Co., NC I HAC -SR
DATE:
DELINEATION MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 11/4/15
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

FIGURE NO.I SUMMERS WALK PHASE VI I Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
10 �Al[:Dfm` Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
DELINEATION MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
DATE:
9/1/15

SUMMERS WALK PHASE V AND VI
APPROXIMATE JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AND STREAM DIMENSIONS
JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
Sq Ft
Acres
JURISDICTIONAL RPWs
LF
Acres
Jurisdictional Wetland A
899
0.021
Jurisdictional Perennial RPW Tributary A
580
0.107
Jurisdictional Wetland C
157
0.004
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary B
405
0.037
Jurisdictional Wetland D
431
0.01
Jurisdictional Perennial RPW Tributary E
475
0.044
Jurisdictional Wetland G
7211
0.166
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary F
190
0.017
Jurisdictional Wetland L
17828
0.49
Rocky River
2125
0.732
Jurisdictional Wetland O
12820
0.294
Jurisdictional Wetland P
6331
0.145
Jurisdictional Wetland Q
8968
0.206
Total Jurisdictional Wetlands 54645 1.336 Total Jurisdictional RPWs 3775 0.936
TOTAL SITE ACREAGE
TOTAL WATERS OF THE US ACREAGE
TOTAL UPLAND ACRES
86
2.272
83.728
NOTES
Table 1: WOUS
Summary Table
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Aml■

ITJai

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date:
7/26/13 I Evaluator: I NRN, LSR
Eastin :
-80.7688 W
Project:
I Summers Walk Phase V: Perennial Stream A,
Northing:
35.4548-N
Total Points:
_ :,
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30"
34.0
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
2
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
"Strong -,SCORE
3
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1 -
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
_,0
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
-1.5
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0,
Geomorphology
Subtotal
`1'5.0
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14.
Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1'.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
11-
17.
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
0
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
.1;1.0-
C. Biology
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
1
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.51
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5 1
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology
Subtotal
8.0
" perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See Daae 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Ori ins.
(version 4.11)

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Summers Walk Phase V City/County. Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Applicant/Owner: MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC State- NC
Investigator(s)- NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none)- concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat. 35.4548 N Long: -80.7688 W
Soil Map Unit Name: VaD: Vance Sandy Loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology ' significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Sampling Date- 7/26/13
_ Sampling Point: Wetland L
- Slope (%) 8-15
Datum:
NWI classification -
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No =
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No = within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No =
Remarks:
Representative Wetland Data Point for Wetlands O, P and Q.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
✓=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
=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 (B1)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (B3)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
=FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches) 0 - 211
Water Table Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches) Q -
Saturation Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches): 0 _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes a] No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicato
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 35 Y FACW
2 Salix nigra 25 Y OBL
3 Carpinus caroliniana 15 Y FAC
6.
7. _
75
Sapling Stratum (Plot size. 30' ) —
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 20
2 Carpinus caroliniana 15
Salix nigra 10
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
01 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size 30'
1 Alnus serrulata
_
45
)
30
2 Sambucus nigra
15
3.
04 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
4.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
7.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Carex crinata
_
45
45
2 Pontederia cordata
20
3 Juncus effusus
20
q Boeheria cylindrica
15
5
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
7.
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
8
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
9.
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
10
Herb –All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
11.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
12
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size. 30'
1 Smilax rotundifolia
_
100
)
20
2.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
3.
4
5.
_
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Sampling Point: Wetland L
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 12 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 12 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by-
OBL species x 1 =
Y FACW FACW species x 2 =
Y FAC FAC species x 3 =
Y OBL FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals- (A) (B)
= I otal cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Total Cover
01 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Y OBL
[Z]2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Y FAC
03 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
04 - 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.
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Y OBL
Tree – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Y OBL
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Y FACW
N FACW
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb –All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
= Total Cover
Y FAC
= I otal cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Wetland L
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) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 5B 4/1 80 7.5YR 4/1 20 RM M Sandy Clay
'Type. C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=
Hydric Soil Indicators:
=Histosol (Al)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches) -
teduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
=Dark Surface (S7)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
=Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
=Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
=Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
=Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓m No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Summers Walk Phase V City/County Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Applicant/Owner MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
State: NC
Investigator(s)- NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc )• valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat. 35.4455 N Long: -80 7740 W
Soil Map Unit Name. VaD: Vance Sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil - or Hydrology - significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation 'Soil - or Hydrology - naturally problematic?
Sampling Date: 7/26/13
- Sampling Point. Upland DP1
- Slope (%): 8-15
Datum.
NWI classification:
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes=✓ No [
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No 0
Remarks:
Upland data point taken approximately 30'W of Wetland L. Representative Upland Data Point for
Wetlands O, P and Q.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (Al) =True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
=High Water Table (A2) =Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
E::]Drainage Patterns (1310)
=Saturation (A3) =Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Trim Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (B1) =Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2) =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 (B7)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (69)
[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)- -
Saturation Present? Yes= No= Depth
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes = No ✓�
(inches). _
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks -
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland DP1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Quercus alba
25
Y FACU
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y FACU
3 Ulmus alata
15
Y FACU
Total Number of Dominant
10
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 10% (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
60
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by.
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
OBL species x 1 =
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y FACU
FACW species x 2 =
2 Ulmus alata
15
Y FACU
FAC species x 3 =
3 Quercus alba
10
Y FACU
FACU species x 4 =
4
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals- (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
45
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
=Total Cover
=1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 Elaeagnus angustifolia
45
Y FACU
02 - Dominance Test is >50%
2 Rosa multiflora
15
Y FACU
03 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
3
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
4.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
6
7.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
60
=
Total Cover)
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
1 Polystichum acrostichoides
35
Y FACU
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
q
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5.
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH.
6.
7
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
g
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10•
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
11
ft (1 m) in height
12
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
35
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica
20
Y FAC
2.
3.
4
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
0
5.
Present? Yes= No
20
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL
(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Sampling Point: Upland DP1
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvge Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 7.5YR 6/8 100 - - - - Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
=Histosol (Al)
=Dark Surface (S7)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
=2 Muck 147)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
cm (A10) (MLRA
=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 (Al2)
=Redox Depressions (F8)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
=Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
=Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators 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):
Remarks.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No =
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

a
�,F
1X*1
nml
7W' ti� : � P s S Sx`�'-� �, �-„ ; raN t j `, ° f .,•� r ) F 5 :r S r � �k.... � i I t j ,{t � f' f-11"'` Y a`.. d s �, . �, t r { `'� !,�.
'7MM
Tf I
4i V,
45
il't-'A. A V,
, . If, t
. tz,
A;Itl
, .!:W,� t+•'!
N7,
Atf iRV -;`,*�k_
A
0 �--4,
AR,
61 Mium -,
21
p
Im
INN
ON:
cg. -otc�, ;A L7
RAI_ N
4,
NA
bij Am
,V $-�tu�j 6.
"W
'80 �1 X111"RIF111
wlpl i
Aw r
MPC
Y4 I ZI
'11W ON'
'Mow
­J�

Div

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date:
9/1/1.5 1 Evaluator: NRN,:LSR
Eastin :
-80.7740 W
Project:
Summers Walk Phase VI: Seasonal RPW.Tributa B
Northing:
35:4455 N .
Total Points:
1
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30*
-23;5
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)`
2.
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak ,
Mode'rate
Strong
SCORE
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
0
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
0
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
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
1.215„
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
0
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 Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
No = 0
0
Yes = 3
3
1.5
1
24.
Amphibians
Hydrology
Subtotal
6.0,-
C. Biology
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
0
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
1
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
G -
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology Subtotal
5.0:
* perennial streams may also be identified usinq other methods. See page 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Origins.
I (version 4.11)

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date:
9/1/15 1 Evaluator: I NRN, LSR
I Eastin
-80.7740 W
Project:
I Summers. Walk Phase Vl: Perennial RPW Tributary E
I Northing:
35.4455 N
Total Points:
1
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30*
34.0
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
2.
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
'Strong
.SCORE
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2,
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1 .
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5 ,
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
14.5-
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
2_
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 Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
1
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
11.5
C. Biology
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
1
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
1 0.5
1
1 1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology
Subtotal.-'
" perennial streams may also be identified usino other methods. See oaae 35 of NCDWO manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Origins.
(version 4.11)

SEASONAL RPW WETLANDS A
TRIBUTARY B 899± SF
405± LF, 4± 0.021± AC.
WIDTH (0.037 AC.)
WETLANDS D WETLANDS C
431± SF 157± SF K+
0.010± AC. 0.004± AC.
r
SEASONAL RPW
TRIBUTARY E �- 1
475± LF, 4±
WIDTH (0.044 AC.)
SEASONAL RPW�`j�\��
TRIBUTARY F
190 LF, 4± WIDTHall
(0.017 AC.)
(ONSITE)
TV—
,
r, /r c/li //
If
�IS� �14.i1�( !1\1� t i I I j t !�/ //l1 T/ Ili �l�l
EXISTING
TU / SANITARY SEWER
7,$ EASEMENT0.
i
GALE: 1 "=200'
0 100- 200'
400
Shaping the Environment
Realizing the Possibilities SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
landscape Anhltecture Charlotte, North Carolina DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA Project No. 4289 Sheet 1 OF 6
ColWenest 28202
Civil Engineering p*7043761555 Issued 1124115
Q 4 704 376 7851 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Stone Urban Design url+--ejenestst—.— Application Tracking Number

�0 ,
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT B WETLAND IMPACT B °°'1
15f LF DISTURBANCE 25t SF (0.001 AC.)
DISTURBANCE
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER EASEMENT
EXISTING SANITARY
SEWER EASEMENT "�f r `� / ✓ }�
roy
-20
it
51
L L'T Jr./ L�q ,vein *o
Q i
a Louise„ w
�� �� a •,a. I -�
"°,„. �,":a.a�'.;.°`•o Hwa, r„ �,. it
r� M
,
L~�
"=200'
�-�-SCALE: 1
l
0 100'
200' 400'
'
ing theingth Environment
Realizing
Realizing the Possibilities
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
OVERALL SITE PLAN
land Planning
200 South Tryon Street
Landscape Architecture
Suite 1400
Charlotte, North Carolina
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No. 4289 Sheet 2OF6
/��
\/VleJeneSt
Civil Engineering
28202
P+7043761555
f+7043767851
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Issued 11124115
& .Stone
Urban Design
url+w w.colejeneststoneeom
Application Tracking Number —

l
s'o Co .
WETLAND IMPACT
25t SF (0.001 AC.)
DISTURBANCE
SEGMENTAL BLOCK
WALL
I
LINETING PROPERTY/13
I- I
1001,
�/
11 /// // // , //�/ ��
✓,_ —� �
/
/i
Jl
Possibilnt
ities
Realizing the Possibilities
Realizinng g the
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
WETLAND IMPACT B
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1400
Landscape Architecture Chadotte, North Carolina
28202
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No. 4289 Sheet
3OF6
C/�_ w ,
oleJenest Civil Engineering P+7043761555
f+7043767851
& Stone urban
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
Issued 11/24/15
Application Tracking Number —
Design url+ wwwmle eneststone rom

UC
�o�-"os 3
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT B
15t LF DISTURBANCE. STREAM
CHANNEL TO BE RESTORED TO
PRE—CONSTRUCTION
CONTOURS.
EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
836.10' x"'
i
//
spm
r y
PR6P0 ESD SANITARY SEWER
EASEMENT
411
Olt
/f /
lo y
�/ ol
— /„�ii .,r,•/r/moi / / / / i-
Shaping the
Realizing the Possibilities SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6 TEMPORARY STREAM
Re
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street I M PACT B
+ Suitt 1400
Landscape Architecture Charlotte. North Carolina DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA Project No. 4289 Sheet 4OF6
ColeJenest CNilEngineering p+7043761555 MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS LLC Issues tvz4N5
+ url+wwf+ 704 767851 Application Tracking Number —
� Stone Urban Design url+ www.mlejeneststone.mm � pp ' g

705
700
695
.••
685
STREAM CHANN
L TO BE
ingthEPossibment
Realizing
Realizing the Possibilities
es
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
RESTORED
TO
Suite 1600
Landscape Architecture Ch -do n
CCivil Engineering e. Nonh Carolina
oleJenest 28202
p+706 3761555
A��p T+43767851
st .moi Urban Design url+70_ role jeneststone-
C
NTOURS.
TOP OF BAN
STREAM CENTERLINE
z a
Q
J
U
6" DIP SANITARY
SEWER
n�
PIPE AT
1.00%t
1n
00
N
N
t7
r
N
01
Qt
0)
r)
Qi
Qi
O
O
O
O
-1+00 -0+50 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT B
ing the
ingthEPossibment
Realizing
Realizing the Possibilities
es
SUMMERS WALK PHASE 6
Land Planning 200 South Tryon Street
Suite 1600
Landscape Architecture Ch -do n
CCivil Engineering e. Nonh Carolina
oleJenest 28202
p+706 3761555
A��p T+43767851
st .moi Urban Design url+70_ role jeneststone-
DAVIDSON, NORTH CAROLINA
MF SUMMERS WALK INVESTMENTS, LLC
705
695
.•R
685
2+00
SCALE: 1 "=5'V
0 2.5' 5' 10'
SCALE: 1"=50'H
0 25' 50' 100'
TEMPORARY STREAM
IMPACT B - CROSS SECTION
Project No. 4289 Sheet 5 OF 6
Issued 11/24115
Application Tracking Number —

Mul W"i
Ow. I

jurisdictional
Determination Information
C
O
.;
ro
E
L-
(3)
4
(L)
wil

FIGURE NO.
SUMMERSWALK PHASE V Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Cabarrus/Mecklenburg Co., NC I HAC -SR
DATE:
DELINEATION MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 11/4/15
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

FIGURE NO.I SUMMERS WALK PHASE VI I Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
10 �Al[:Dfm` Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
DELINEATION MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
DATE:
9/1/15

SUMMERS WALK PHASE V AND VI
APPROXIMATE JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AND STREAM DIMENSIONS
JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
Sq Ft
Acres
JURISDICTIONAL RPWs
LF
Acres
Jurisdictional Wetland A
899
0.021
Jurisdictional Perennial RPW Tributary A
580
0.107
Jurisdictional Wetland C
157
0.004
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary B
405
0.037
Jurisdictional Wetland D
431
0.01
Jurisdictional Perennial RPW Tributary E
475
0.044
Jurisdictional Wetland G
7211
0.166
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW Tributary F
190
0.017
Jurisdictional Wetland L
17828
0.49
Rocky River
2125
0.732
Jurisdictional Wetland O
12820
0.294
Jurisdictional Wetland P
6331
0.145
Jurisdictional Wetland Q
8968
0.206
Total Jurisdictional Wetlands 54645 1.336 Total Jurisdictional RPWs 3775 0.936
TOTAL SITE ACREAGE
TOTAL WATERS OF THE US ACREAGE
TOTAL UPLAND ACRES
86
2.272
83.728
NOTES
Table 1: WOUS
Summary Table
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Aml■

ITJai

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date:
7/26/13 I Evaluator: I NRN, LSR
Eastin :
-80.7688 W
Project:
I Summers Walk Phase V: Perennial Stream A,
Northing:
35.4548-N
Total Points:
_ :,
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30"
34.0
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
2
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
"Strong -,SCORE
3
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1 -
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
_,0
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
-1.5
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0,
Geomorphology
Subtotal
`1'5.0
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14.
Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1'.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
11-
17.
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
0
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
.1;1.0-
C. Biology
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
1
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.51
1
1.5
1
25.
Algae
0
0.5 1
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology
Subtotal
8.0
" perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See Daae 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Ori ins.
(version 4.11)

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Summers Walk Phase V City/County. Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Applicant/Owner: MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC State- NC
Investigator(s)- NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc ): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none)- concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat. 35.4548 N Long: -80.7688 W
Soil Map Unit Name: VaD: Vance Sandy Loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology ' significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Sampling Date- 7/26/13
_ Sampling Point: Wetland L
- Slope (%) 8-15
Datum:
NWI classification -
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No =
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No = within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No =
Remarks:
Representative Wetland Data Point for Wetlands O, P and Q.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
✓=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
=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 (B1)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (B3)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (134)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
=FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches) 0 - 211
Water Table Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches) Q -
Saturation Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches): 0 _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes a] No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicato
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 35 Y FACW
2 Salix nigra 25 Y OBL
3 Carpinus caroliniana 15 Y FAC
6.
7. _
75
Sapling Stratum (Plot size. 30' ) —
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 20
2 Carpinus caroliniana 15
Salix nigra 10
5
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
01 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size 30'
1 Alnus serrulata
_
45
)
30
2 Sambucus nigra
15
3.
04 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
4.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
❑Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
7.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Carex crinata
_
45
45
2 Pontederia cordata
20
3 Juncus effusus
20
q Boeheria cylindrica
15
5
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
7.
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
8
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
9.
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
10
Herb –All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
11.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
12
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size. 30'
1 Smilax rotundifolia
_
100
)
20
2.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
3.
4
5.
_
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
Sampling Point: Wetland L
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 12 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 12 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
= Total Cover Total % Cover of: Multiply by-
OBL species x 1 =
Y FACW FACW species x 2 =
Y FAC FAC species x 3 =
Y OBL FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals- (A) (B)
= I otal cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
= Total Cover
01 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Y OBL
[Z]2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Y FAC
03 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
04 - 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.
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Y OBL
Tree – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Y OBL
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Y FACW
N FACW
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb –All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
= Total Cover
Y FAC
= I otal cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No=
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Wetland L
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) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 5B 4/1 80 7.5YR 4/1 20 RM M Sandy Clay
'Type. C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=
Hydric Soil Indicators:
=Histosol (Al)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches) -
teduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils'
=Dark Surface (S7)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
=Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
=Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
=Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
=Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓m No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Summers Walk Phase V City/County Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Applicant/Owner MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
State: NC
Investigator(s)- NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc )• valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat. 35.4455 N Long: -80 7740 W
Soil Map Unit Name. VaD: Vance Sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil - or Hydrology - significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation 'Soil - or Hydrology - naturally problematic?
Sampling Date: 7/26/13
- Sampling Point. Upland DP1
- Slope (%): 8-15
Datum.
NWI classification:
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes=✓ No [
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks )
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No 0
Remarks:
Upland data point taken approximately 30'W of Wetland L. Representative Upland Data Point for
Wetlands O, P and Q.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (Al) =True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
=High Water Table (A2) =Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
E::]Drainage Patterns (1310)
=Saturation (A3) =Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Trim Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (B1) =Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2) =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 (B7)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (69)
[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)- -
Saturation Present? Yes= No= Depth
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes = No ✓�
(inches). _
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks -
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland DP1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1. Quercus alba
25
Y FACU
1
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y FACU
3 Ulmus alata
15
Y FACU
Total Number of Dominant
10
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 10% (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
60
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by.
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
OBL species x 1 =
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y FACU
FACW species x 2 =
2 Ulmus alata
15
Y FACU
FAC species x 3 =
3 Quercus alba
10
Y FACU
FACU species x 4 =
4
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals- (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
45
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
=Total Cover
=1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 Elaeagnus angustifolia
45
Y FACU
02 - Dominance Test is >50%
2 Rosa multiflora
15
Y FACU
03 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
3
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
4.
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
6
7.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
60
=
Total Cover)
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
1 Polystichum acrostichoides
35
Y FACU
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
q
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5.
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH.
6.
7
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
g
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10•
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
11
ft (1 m) in height
12
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
35
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica
20
Y FAC
2.
3.
4
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
0
5.
Present? Yes= No
20
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL
(Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Sampling Point: Upland DP1
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvge Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 7.5YR 6/8 100 - - - - Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
=Histosol (Al)
=Dark Surface (S7)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
=2 Muck 147)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
cm (A10) (MLRA
=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 (Al2)
=Redox Depressions (F8)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
=Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
=Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators 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):
Remarks.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No =
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

1 4F".

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
I Date: 19/1/15 1 Evaluator: I NRN, LSR I Easting: 1-80.7740 W
Proiect: I Summers Walk Phase VI: Seasonal RPW Tributary B I Northing: 1 35.4455 N
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30'
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
0
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
0
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
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
0
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 Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
No = 0
1
Yes = 3
3
23.
Crayfish
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
1.5
C. Biology
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
0
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
1
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
Biology
Subtotal
perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See paqe 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes.-
otes:Adapted
Adaptedfrom NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Origins.
(version 4.11)

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date: 19/1/15 1 Evaluator: I NRN, LSR I Easting: -80.7740 W
Project: I Summers Walk Phase VI: Perennial RPW Tributary E I Northinq: 35.4455 N
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30`
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarize points)
A.
Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
2
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 Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
1
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
1.5
C. Biology
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
1
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
Biology Subtotal
perennial streams may also be identified usinq other methods. See nage 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Ongins.
I (version 4.11)

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Summers Walk Phase VI City/County: Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Applicant/Owner: MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC State: NC
Investigator(s): NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4455 N Long: -80.7740 W
Soil Map Unit Name: WkD: Wilkes loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation ' , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Sampling Date: 9/1 /15
_ Sampling Point: Wetland G
- Slope (%): 8-15
Datum:
NWI classification:
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? YesF No =
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes= No 0 Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No = within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No =
Remarks:
Representative Wetland Data Form for Wetlands A, C and D
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
=]Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (Al)
=True Aquatic Plants (B14)
=�parsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
=High Water Table (A2)
=Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
F-71Drainage Patterns (B10)
=Saturation (A3)
=Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) =Moss Trim Lines (B16)
=Water Marks (B1)
=Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
=Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
=Sediment Deposits (B2)
=Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
=Crayfish Burrows (C8)
=Drift Deposits (B3)
=Thin Muck Surface (C7)
=Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
=Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
ther (Explain in Remarks)
=Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (B5)
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic Fauna (B13)
=FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches). -
Water Table Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches): 6" -
Saturation Present? Yes=
No= Depth (inches): 2"-
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring
well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Wetland G
17
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Sambucus nigra 15
2.
17
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Carex crinata
2 Pontederia cordata
3 Juncus effusus
q Boeheria cylindrica
5.
6.
7.
10
11
12
= Total Cover
Y FAC
= Total Cover
45
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Y
OBL
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
FACW
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica
35
Y
FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
g
(A)
2 Carpinus caroliniana
25
Y
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
g Salix nigra
10
N
OBL
Species Across All Strata:
g
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
70
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
OBL species
x 1 =
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica
20
Y
FACW
FACW species
x 2 =
2 Carpinus caroliniana
15
Y
FAC
FAC species
x 3 =
3.
FACU species
x 4 =
4.
UPL species
x 5 =
5.
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
17
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Sambucus nigra 15
2.
17
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Carex crinata
2 Pontederia cordata
3 Juncus effusus
q Boeheria cylindrica
5.
6.
7.
10
11
12
= Total Cover
Y FAC
= Total Cover
45
Y
OBL
20
Y
OBL
20
Y
FACW
15
N
FACW
100 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica 10 Y FAC
3.
10 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Prevalence Index = B/A = I
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Q 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
=2 - Dominance Test is >50%
03 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
Q4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes= No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Wetland G
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) % Tyoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 5B 4/1 80 7.5YR 4/1 20 RM M Sandy Clay
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
=2
=Histosol (Al)
=Dark Surface (S7)
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)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
=Redox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
= Redox Depressions (F8)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
=Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
=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):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓= No =
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/SiW Summers Walk Phase VI City/County: Charlotte/Mecklenburg
Applicant/Owner: MF Summers Walk Investments. LLC State: NC
Investigator(s): NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4455 N Long: -80.7740 W
Soil Map Unit Name: WkD: Wilkes loam NWI classification:
Sampling Date: 9/1 /15
- Sampling Point: Upland DPG
Slope (%): 8-15
Datum:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? YesE ZNo =
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 No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No 0
Remarks:
Upland data point taken approximately 30' SW of Wetland G. Representative Upland Data Form for
Wetlands A, C and D.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
urface Soil Cracks (B6)
=Surface Water (A1) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
E::kparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
=High Water Table (A2) =Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
EDDrainage Patterns (810)
=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 (B4) =Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
=Iron Deposits (135) u
=Geomorphic Position (D2)
=Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
=Shallow Aquitard (D3)
=Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
=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): -
Saturation Present? Yes= No= Depth (inches): _
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes = No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland DPG
9 Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10. plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
11. It (1 m) in height.
12. Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
35 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica 20 Y FAC
2.
3.
4 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5. Present? Yes= No
20 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
01 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1 Quercus alba
25
Y
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1
(A)
2 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y
FACU
3
4
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5
Total Number of Dominant
6.
3. Ulmus alata
15
Y
FACU
Species Across All Strata:
10
(B)
4.
30'
60 =Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Polystichum acrostichoides
35 Y FACU
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2
Percent of Dominant Species
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
5.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
10%
(A/B)
6.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5.
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
60
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
OBL species
x 1 =
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
20
Y
FACU
FACW species
x 2 =
2 Ulmus alata
15
Y
FACU
FAC species
x 3 =
3 Quercus alba
10
Y
FACU
FACU species
x 4 =
4.
UPL species
x 5 =
5.
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
6.
9 Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10. plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
11. It (1 m) in height.
12. Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
35 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica 20 Y FAC
2.
3.
4 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5. Present? Yes= No
20 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
45Total
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
30'
= Cover
01 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1 Elaeagnus angustifolia
45 Y FACU
02 - Dominance Test is >50%
2 Rosa multiflora
15 Y FACU
O3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
=4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3
4
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5
6.
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
7.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
30'
60 =Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Polystichum acrostichoides
35 Y FACU
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
3.
4
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5.
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
6.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
7
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
8.
9 Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
10. plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
11. It (1 m) in height.
12. Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
35 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica 20 Y FAC
2.
3.
4 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5. Present? Yes= No
20 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Upland DPG
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' Loci Texture Remarks
0-12 7.5YR 6/8 100 - - - - Clay
Soil Indicators:
"Histosol (Al)
=Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
=Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining M=Matrix.
=Dark Surface (S7)
=Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
=Depleted Matrix (F3)
=Redox Dark Surface (F6)
=Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
=Redox Depressions (F8)
=Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
=Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
=Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
=2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
=Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
=Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
=Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes= No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
Applicant: MF Summers Walk Investments, LLC
Site: Summers Walk Phase V and VI
Form for: Jurisdictional Perennial Tributary A (Perennial RPW A), Jurisdictional Wetland L, Jurisdictional Wetland O,
Jurisdictional Wetland P, and Jurisdictional Wetland Q (Phase V) and Wetland G, Wetland C, Wetland D, Wetland A,
Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW F, Jurisidictional Perennial RPW E, and Jurisdictional Seasonal RPW B (Phase VI).
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County/parish/borough: Cabarrus/Mecklenburg City: Davidson
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal formal): Lat. 35.4548° b). Long. -80.7688° $V.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Rocky River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Rocky River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03040105
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
❑ Check if other sites (e.g.. offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites. etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 11/05/13 for Phase V
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Kre no "navigable waters of the U.S.ithin Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review arca. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
o Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
I here Are "waters q/'the US." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
"aters of the U.S.
:m. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
® TNWs, including territorial seas
® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent watersz (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 3775 linear feet: 6 width (ft) and/or 0.08 acres.
Wetlands: 1.336 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by OHWM.
Elevation of established OI 1 W M (if known):
Boxes checked below shall he supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least -seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).

Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.I and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW: Rocky River.
Summarize rationale supporting determination: Rocky River is considered a Traditional Navigable Water due to its size and current
history/opportunity of supporting recreational boating/canoeing in the area.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g.. typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
I. Characteristics of non-TNV1's that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions
Watershed size: 1430square miles
Drainage area: 96 acres
Average annual rainfall: 44 inches
Average annual snowfall: 0 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationshipwith'INW:
® Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through tributaries before entering I Nk% .
Project waters are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are river miles from RPW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identifv flow route to TNW`: On-site jurisdictional features flow into Rocky River (TNW).
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales. ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area. to flow into tributary b. " hich then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order. if known: 1.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 6 feet
Average depth: +/-3 feet
Average side slopes: it.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
® Cobbles ® Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/°/a cover:
❑ Other. Explain: .
Tributary condition/stability e.g.. highly eroding. sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riflle'pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Relatively strallot
Tributary gradient (approximate a\ crage slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: & moal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: IM
Describe flow regime: Flow of RPW A is perennial. See attached stream evaluation forms.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear. natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
® changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
® shelving
®
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down. bent. or absent
®
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
® sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ DiscontinuousOHWM.1 Explain:
If factors other than the OH W M were used to determine lateral extent of C WA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 13 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum:
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings:
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g.. water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality: general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water color is clear - no signs of pollutants.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
"A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OH WM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g.. where the stream temporarily flows underground. or where
the 0I1WM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culven), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type. average width): 10-20m.
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics: .
® Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: likely amphibians present.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.645 acres
Wetland type. Explain:Forested/open water.
Wetland quality. ExplainTair to Good.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is:°`'
. dew. Explain:
Surface flow is:1►
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow:.lM. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency Determination with Non-TNW:
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by herm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to I NW
Project wetlands are I (or less) river miles from TNW.
Project waters are I (or leas) acrial i�traight) miles from'I'NW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters.
Estimate approvinatc location of \\ ctland as %\ ithin the 1409M floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface: water quality: general watershed
characteristics: etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type. average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
® Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:typica[ wetland species - amphibians, etc.
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: j
Approximately ( 1.336 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N)
Size (in acres)
Wetland L (Y)
0.409
Wetland O (N)
0.294
Wetland P(N)
0.145
Wetland Q (N)
0.206
Directly abuts? (Y/N
Size (in acres)
Wetland A (Y)
0.021
Wetland C (Y)
0.004
Wetland D (Y)
0.01
Wetland G (Y)
0.166
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: Onsite wetlands and jurisdictional rpw's
provide habitat for herpetofauna and macroinvertebrates. These wetlands have the capacity to provide nutrients and organic carbon
to downstream foodwebs. Wetlands provide flood storage during rain events and ground water recharge during dry periods. The
wetlands also trap and filter pollutants before reaching downstream Perennial RPWs and Rocky River (TNW).
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the now
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNV1', as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary. in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs. or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding. nesting, spawning. or rearing young for species that are present in the 'ITN W?
• Does the tributarv. in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
I. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence ol'significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings ofprescnce or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributan in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IIID:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below. based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
I. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
I'NWs: 2125 linear feet 10 width (fl). Or. acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Perennial Tributary A (Perennial RPW A) and Perennial RPW Tributary E exhibits geomorphology,
hydrology, and biological indicators consistent with perennial flowing streams in the piedmont ecoregion as documented by
the attached NCDWQ Stream Identification Assessment Forms

Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g.. typically three months each year) are.
® Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally' (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: Seasonal RPW F and Seasonal RPW B exhibits geomorphology, hydrology, and biological indicators consistent
with seasonally/intermittent flowing streams in the piedmont ecoregion as documented by the attached NCDWQ Stream
Identification Assessment Forms.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 1650 linear feet 6 width (ft).
® Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters: .
3. Non-RPWs" that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
ED Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW. but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW. and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
CM Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2. above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetland G and Wetland L are directly adjacent/abutting perennial streams with no
break in jurisdiction.
® Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: Wetlands A. C. and D directly abuts seasonal/intermittent tributaries with no break in jurisdiction.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.691 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands. have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.645 acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.." or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
0 Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
"See Footnote # 3.
To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.

E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE1 WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLV):10
❑ \\ hich are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could betaken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ \k hich are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: linear feet width (11).
® Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SlV4NCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard. where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑
Other: (explain. if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area. where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e.. presence of migratory birds. presence of endangered species. use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
❑ Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers. streams): linear feet width (fl).
❑ Lakes/ponds: acres.
❑ Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested. appropriately reference sources below):
Maps. plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts %ill elevate the action to ( orps and EPA liO for
review consistent "it h the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CRA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapano+.

❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):
or ® Other (Name & Date):9/1/2015.
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case law:
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: