20240601 Ver 1_Parview Drive PCN_20240422

NINDMINTRIMIDS
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, NC 28262
S&ME, Inc.
2016 Ayrsley Town Blvd. Suite 2A
Charlotte, NC 28273
April 22, 2024

April 22, 2024
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Attention: Sam Dailey
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources, Mooresville Regional Office
610 E. Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115
Attention: Beth Plummer
Reference: Pre -Construction Notification/Regional General Permit 163
and General Water Quality Certification 4508
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 24350004D
Dear Ms. Daily and Ms. Plummer:
On behalf of City of Charlotte (City) and Charlotte Storm Water Services (CSWS), S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) is pleased to
submit this application for Department of the Army verification of impacts to Waters of the U.S. in accordance
with Regional General Permit (RGP) No. 163 and a request for Individual 401 North Carolina Water Quality
Certification (WQC) as the project does not meet the conditions of General Certification (GC) 4508. CSWS will be
considered the applicant, and Donna Hood of CSWS will act as the signatory on the electronic Pre -Construction
Notification (PCN) for this project.
In addition to the brief project summary provided herein, please find the following enclosed:
Project Figures
Appendix I: 95% Design Plans
Appendix II: Jurisdictional Determination Package / Site Photographs
Appendix III: Protected Species Documentation
Appendix IV: Cultural Resources Documentation
S&ME, Inc. 12016 Ayrsley Town Blvd. Ste. 2-A I Charlotte, INC 28273

Pre -Construction Notification/Regional General Permit 163
Parview Drive South Minor Project
I I Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
s
S&ME Project No. 23350081C
If you need additional information or have questions, please contact Dave Homans at 704-900-9394 or
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
S&ME, Inc.
�r f
D. David Homans
Project Scientist
[e-mail]
Senior Review by Sarah Rowe, PWS
Layla Tallent
Natural Resources Staff Scientist
LaylaTallent@smei nc.com
April 22, 2024

Pre -Construction Notification/Regional General Permit 163
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina III
S&ME Project No. 24350004D S
Table of Contents
1.0 Project Information and Description............................................................................1
2.0 Purpose and Need.............................................................................................................1
3.0 Existing Jurisdictional Waters on Site..........................................................................1
4.0 Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters..................................................................2
5.0 Avoidance and Minimization / Mitigation..................................................................2
6.0 Protected Species and Historical and Cultural Resources........................................3
7.0 Additional Regulatory Considerations........................................................................3
Figures
Appendices
Appendix I —100% Design Plans
Appendix II —Jurisdictional Determination Package, Including Site Photographs
Appendix III — Protected Species Documentation
Appendix IV — Cultural Resources Documentation
April 22, 2024 iii

Pre -Construction Notification/Regional General Permit 163
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina III
S&ME Project No. 24350004D S
1.0 Project Information and Description
The proposed project involves the replacement of two failing culverts under Parview Drive South with an
interconnected pipe system that will require encapsulating a portion of an open intermittent jurisdictional
channel.
Additional information regarding this project is contained in the body of the electronic Pre -construction
Notification (PCN) application. Refer to Figure 1 (Vicinity Map), Figure 2 (U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS)
Topographic Map / Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zones), Figure 3 (Site Map / Potential
Waters of the U.S. Map) and Figure 4 (Project Impacts) as well as Appendix 1 (100% Design Plans) and Appendix
II (Jurisdictional Determination Package / Site Photographs) for additional site and project design information.
Impacts associated with this project fall within the thresholds established by RGP 163 and GC 4508, though the
proposed pipe system created by this project will not be buried in accordance with the general aquatic life
passage requirements set forth in RGP 163 and GC 4508. Based on communications between Ms. Kristen O'Reilly
(CSWS) and Ms. Sam Daily (USACE), as the proposed project is generating a new interconnected pipe system, the
pipe burial and aquatic life passage requirements are not required under RGP 163, and therefore, submittal of this
PCN to the USACE is considered for the record only. Based on communications between Ms. O'Reilly and Ms. Sue
Homewood and Ms. Beth Plummer of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ), the
terms of GC 4508 do not allow for variances from aquatic life passage requirements in association with
connections to new or existing pipe systems. Therefore, submittal of an Individual Water Quality Certification
(WQC) is required for the construction of this project as designed.
2.0 Purpose and Need
The project is located in a densely populated neighborhood of single-family houses adjacent to a golf course. Two
undersized corrugated metal culvert crossings under Parview Drive South are in need of replacement. Erosion
around the downstream culvert has led to significant embankment erosion that has caused unsafe conditions
where the road surface has begun to fail and fall into the stream. Because of adjacent topography and the culvert
invert elevations, CSWS determined that replacement of both of these failed culverts with a new combined pipe
system was necessary to prevent further damage to the embankments and to avoid potential washouts of the
street.
3.0 Existing Jurisdictional Waters on Site
The project site was delineated by Ms. Donna Hood (CSWS) on November 22, 2023, and field checked by Mr.
David Homans (S&ME) on March 27, 2024. A request forjurisdictional determination (JD) and site photographs
are included in Appendix II of this PCN. One jurisdictional feature was identified on -site. Stream S1 flows on -site
for approximately 98 feet and was identified as intermittent. The North Carolina Stream Assessment Method
(SAM) form completed for Stream S1 indicated it was of "Low" overall functional value. A preliminary JD request,
including stream assessment forms and site photographs, is included in Appendix II of this PCN.
April 22, 2024

Pre -Construction Notification/Regional General Permit 163
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 24350004D
s
0
s
III Ar. 7V
Note that, at the time of the site visits, residential construction was occurring at the parcel downstream of the
project area at 5335 Parview Drive South. As a part of this construction, Stream S1 had been piped along most of
the length of the property using a corrugated plastic pipe (CPP) which terminated at the upstream end
approximately six feet downstream for the existing culvert outlet. The area surrounding the inlet of the new pipe
and the outlet of the pipe in the project area had been filled with riprap. As these impacts occurred following
initial project design, and it was unclear if this CPP was permitted through the 401/404 process and if its
installation was intended to be permanent, CSWS has prepared this PCN with the assumption that this piping will
be removed prior to construction of this project.
4.0 Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
The proposed project will require impacts to Stream S1. Project impacts are shown on Figure 4 and in the attached
100% Design Drawings in Appendix I. Impact 1 includes approximately 47 linear feet of permanent impacts
and loss of channel bed to Stream S1. This impact involves the loss of stream bed between the two existing
culverts associated with connecting the two road crossings as a part of a single new pipe system. Impact 2
includes approximately 20 linear feet of permanent impacts and loss of channel bed at the downstream end of
Stream S1. Impact 2 involves the installation of a riprap outfall below the proposed new pipe system. Impact 3
includes approximately 15 linear feet of temporary impacts to the upstream portion of Stream S1. This impact
involves the installation of the temporary pump around and general temporary construction disturbance
immediately upstream of the new pipe system.
5.0 Avoidance and Minimization / Mitigation
The project was designed to reduce flood and erosion risk while minimizing the disturbance to adjacent areas.
Culverting of open channel was limited to only one small area of channel with minimal functional habitat value.
Construction of a pipe system that involved fill of this section of channel was only considered once it was
determined that replacing the existing culverts individually in a manner that protects the roadway would require
the construction of an extensive retaining wall and headwall that would be cost prohibitive and still result in
significant impacts to this small portion of channel. The riprap dissipator apron was limited to the minimum
extent necessary to meet design standards and is located in an area that is already impacted by riprap and recent
fill from the downstream landowner. Culverting of open channel was limited to only one small area of riprap filled
channel with little to no functional habitat value.
During construction, appropriate sediment and erosion control practices equaling those outlined in the most
recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual" will be used to
minimize impacts to the stream. Temporary coffer dams and a pump around will be used so that work will occur
"in -the -dry", and the pump around has been designed to minimize impact to adjacent areas. Tree protection will
be used to avoid impacts to trees that are not required to be cut within the project area.
The proposed project results in less than 150 feet of permanent loss of stream, the threshold of impact typically
requiring mitigation. No wetland impacts are proposed. As such, no compensatory mitigation should be required
for this project.
April 22, 2024

Pre -Construction Notification/Regional General Permit 163
Parview Drive South Minor Project s
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina I I
S&ME Project No. 24350004D
6.0 Protected Species and Historical and Cultural Resources
To comply with applicable sections of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531-1543), S&ME performed
a North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Database review to identify species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project within a one -mile
radius of the project boundary. Additionally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning
and Consultation (IPaC) online service was used to generate a list of federally protected threatened or endangered
species which may be present in the project area.
The NCNHP review indicated that no extant populations of federally protected species were present within a one -
mile radius of the project.
The USFWS IPaC review identified the following species with current federal protections that may be in the project
a rea:
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii), Endangered.
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), Endangered.
Smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), Threatened.
Typical habitat for these species includes disturbed habitats such as highway rights -of -way, utility easements, or
on the edges of artificially maintained clearings. No suitable habitat and no individual sumac, sunflower, or
coneflower species were observed within the project area. Habitat present within the project area primarily
consists of maintained road areas bordered by partially maintained open wooded areas dominated by invasive
species and planted ornamental species. As such the project will have no effect on these listed species.
In order to determine consistency with the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, a one -mile radius
around the project site was reviewed for known historic properties using the NC State Historic Preservation Office
(NC SHPO) HPOWEB online mapping tool (See Appendix IV). No sites listed in the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP) were identified within this radius.
7.0 Additional Regulatory Considerations
As shown on Figure 2, the proposed project work areas are located outside of FEMA regulated floodplains and
will not result in impacts to regulated floodplains. The jurisdictional feature impacted by this project is classified as
low functional value by NC SAM metrics. No aspect of this project involves construction of culverts for the
purpose of creating high ground at the request of a property owner. None of the proposed impacts associated
with the project occur in special designated waters or unique wetlands, or waters protected by state buffer
regulations.
Because of topographic grades and conflicting underground infrastructure, the proposed resulting pipe system
will not be buried in accordance with the guidance set forth in GC 4508. As this project is generating an extensive
pipe system, compliance with downstream culvert burial and aquatic life passage is not required as a part of RGP
163. Currently, due to the presence of recent significant piping of the channel downstream of the project area,
minimal aquatic life passage is likely occurring though the existing culverts.
April 22, 2024

Project Figures:
Figure 1 —Vicinity Map
Figure 2 — USGS Topographic Map / FEMA Flood Zones
Figure 3 — Site Map / Potential Waters of the U.S. Map
Figures 4 — Project Impacts

fF o
a.� m o
11 w
t z
N V
2 O H N Z O
CD
LU orn
* / r v f QLU
d
4 S n J d
f O 1- r J zEA 0
—
fEAV
n �J v V' V Q w Q
z oc
✓ u z Q 0
LU R ° � — a
,#'w E oC w X N w
fi �'� a w O a
II
LL � • 4 �1.1
N ,s
uj
v 3 O
o £ f of r oC =
m H z z
o
O .. �+/ ti O
J •� (� H �`� i7tf ty di l I1 O C) �V1''�
NT
O sa N J ,y r ..., w OC
C- F.�•`,5�� . (mot O 0 Q z
Z 0. Q -�+rM1.. r e
w d w
ri
•--U �I V
vo
l... -
r f W
z O
N ,•. LL zQw V oC
U> Q
of S
y� w •.�� W
f(CwYy Ci fir- �} ry J O
L~j,J \ Q p
o N
w
r ► �°
o u Hr LL
o ozm
Z w
N
♦„ Ey`: W W [C Q of
o
Q Z
o
of
v � LU III=
��Q0O
LL N
LU

Appendix I - 95% Design Plans

soot oZOL08 :1Q0II SISiIIN osaotSHQMS
o I dSVHd z
aoais ayyo oy� iI VMS j'ossOtl$3,iC� ' Z Z w = d II302Id "8 Id o
yGaaa,ys 4m ySaa 009 � WHOIS�� J
� p SZJd2I t0d 2IONILV SMSLVJ I _
w z
a p HIAOS HAMI MMAdW -
U
g�g000���
_��
a
i
r
z
O
-
E
z
6 � A
.6
g 2 ti
O
rc
i
oe eca�m�°s e
o e,�
psi sz•zss`-
i
a
E-mmil
ON
Will
I-Illm-
Igo
ane3oo� �� \os:
W6A ai„8$x8
Jro g3 0:
iP�_ A`�AAVr
Soi & `�
k
Mia ;',add os
ratio ����d

SON OZOL08 :1Q0II SISiIIN OS801SAIMS
oPo4O
ZOZ8Z�N 'a 009
yaalyS 41b is°3 � WHQIS'�
> o
z
1
i dSvHd
SZiV,LHQ l�VZd
z
SID'AfO Id HONIW SMSWD�zw
p
,z
V�
w
p
LL V
HI AOS HAMI MMAIdW
WVVLn
L gy5
W
S
cn
O U
O
Q
�
d
O
Z
�
f6
y
Z
�
Q
W
d
0
W
m
d
W
W
T m
W U
�
J
W Q
�e3$
�-
III=11—O w
II1II_ a
o
W
wFz
wm m -
o m
_
I— — - -
II III
III II
z
_— —
o
I—
PIN
z r3n ryow �a .�,..aaao
_ P
I
0
-
w" G o=�g _°fie-t
oo rv�aeM.
J
-
(n
Z
a
of O
o
CL
ffi, ¢�°
om a3
- oG m
z
=-04�8
Z:
�<
sAl
uS4
. n¢ ^on„ . " m m w _ _?°:
`
•�I
•�I
8

soot OZOCOR :Aa03 SINIf1W OSSOLSAU2"S
G ¢
r�����jj�:�� o VISVH H31V313SJHO I—S
Z0Z8Z ON��e
- VWL9'Ai nonoH va!o.a 3,e �
'aRo4O ` -�zB i�eo� ore 2 O j Jo
yaa�1541b 1se3008+ i71U7I1L� e�ze a�o�i goo pooW�oj�sovas 1 0
6ugeafWwa040 Od'�ONIU33NION3 iU33WVI QJUVO � z 2 S.L:)31'ONd NO NIW S:MSW;J T-S
a O H130S 3AH{Q.M3IA2Nd i
HS
b
oil
il
x Z.G oG -
O
-
���oGz� ����� zGoo_oo.00d8si
�pGi�ao�s_Goio��Fi'o GiGx na ��o `zoGwo��
�a.�z�wazaG��1o:G$�o�ma�»-�g�aoG
05
w5
`06 J�w
06 /
GI\\� _
In
J
m Q
w W
Z cl
Zo P� o ll Qo �o
�N LL
~ Z
C) d w —
a
wQ Oa
rA
m Go Go
iG
S m
U�
� I I z� ---- z�
WN 2_ Ow Ow
p a � ON C a
- Gw
�o
o

Appendix II - Jurisdictional Determination Package, Including Site
Photographs

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Form Approved -
REQUEST FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD)
OMB No. 0710-0024
For use of this form, see Sec 404 CWA, Sec 10 RHA, Sec 103 MPRSA; the proponent agency is CECW-COR.
Expires 2024-04-30
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
Authority Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act, Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320-332.
Principal Purpose The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine whether there are any aquatic resources
within the review area that are or that may be subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies, and the
public, and may be made available as part of a public notice or FOIA request as required by federal law. Your name and property
location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in any approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will
be made available to the public on the District's website and on the Headquarters USACE website.
Disclosure Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if the information is not provided there may be some delay in
processing your request. Failure to provide this information will not result in an adverse action.
System of Record Notice (SORN): The information received is entered into our permit tracking database and a SORN has been
completed (SORN #A1145b) and may be accessed at the following website:
http://dpcid.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNsi ndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article-View/Article/570115/al 145b-ce.aspx
The Agency Disclosure Notice (ADN)
The Public reporting burden for this collection of information, 0710-0024, is estimated to average 10 minutes per response, including time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, at
[e-mail]. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
1. To (District Name): Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
2. I am requesting a JD on property located at (Street Address): 4910 Parview Drive South
City/Township/Parish: Charlotte County: Mecklenburg State: North Carolina
Acreage of Parcel/Review Area for JD: 0.25
Section: Township: Charlotte Range: Piedmont
Latitude (decimal degrees): 35.099054 Longitude (decimal degrees):-80.812051
(For linear projects, please include the center point of the proposed alignment.)
3. Please attach a survey/plat map and vicinity map identifying location and review area for the JD.
4. ❑ I currently own this property. ❑ I plan to purchase this property.
❑X I am an agent/consultant acting on behalf of the requester.
❑ Other (please explain):
ENG FORM 6247, NOV 2023 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 2

5. Reason for request: (check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources
under Corps authority.
❑I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would
be used to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting process.
❑X I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may require authorization from the Corps; this request is
accompanied by my permit application and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list
and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order to obtain my local/state authorization.
❑I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the
aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
6. Type of determination being requested:
❑ 1 am requesting an approved JD.
I am requesting a preliminary JD.
❑ I am requesting a "no permit required" letter as I believe my proposed activity is not regulated.
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information to inform my decision.
7. Typed or Printed Name: Layla Tallent
Company Name: S&ME
Address: 2016 Ayrsley Town Blvd., Suite 2-A
Charlotte, NC 28273
Daytime Phone No.: [phone]
Email Address: [e-mail]
By signing below, you are indicating that you have the authority, or are acting as the duly authorized agent of a person or entity with such authority, to
and do hereby grant Corps personnel right of entry to legally access the site if needed to perform the JD. Your signature shall be an affirmation that
you possess the requisite property rights to request a JD on the subject property.
Signature:
Date:
ENG FORM 6247, NOV 2023 Page 2 of 2

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 4/1 2/2024
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Dave HomanS
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Charlotte/ParvleW Road
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC county/parish/borough: Mecklenburg city: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.099054 Long.:-80.812051
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD 83
Name of nearest waterbody: McAlpine Creek
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
■❑ Field Determination. Date(s): 11 /22/2023
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
S 1
35.099037
-80.812004
98 linear feet
non -wetland waters
Section 404

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
■❑ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Vicinity Map, USGS Topographic Map, WOTUS Map, Soil Survey.
0 Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
■❑ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
■❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: SSURGO / Web Soil Survey.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
■❑ Photographs: ■❑ Aerial (Name & Date): NC OneMap 2023
or ■❑ Other (Name & Date): Site Photographs 3/27/2024
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

Site Photographs
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 24350004D
i�� s:
"e
ropT. 1R a
Y�i Ss` � }
'_;L.... &-a
K "b '"•*. R". 'YAy� 4°hT'.y [ivy:.
y4,-Z'�t+,i� fi 1Z.�it
¢S�
if �,�y;._ � �
� 'vim+" 4.4 b �. '
•
Location Orientation
•
a
Location Orientation
•
. _ South.

Site Photographs
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 24350004D

Site Photographs
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 24350004D

Site Photographs
Parview Drive South Minor Project
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 24350004D

NC Division of Water Quality -Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and
Perennial Streams and Their Origins v. 4.11
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:11/22/2023
Project/Site: ParVIeW Dr.
Latitude:35.099037
Evaluator: Donna Hood
County: Mecklenburg
Longitude:-80.812004
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 23.5
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Weddington
if>_ 19 orperennial if>_ 30'
Intermittent
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 11 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1 0
2 0
30
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1 0
2 •
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0 0
1 0
2 0
30
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0 0
1 0
2 0
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0 0
1
2 0
30
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1 •
2 n
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1 •
2 0
3
8. Headcuts
0 •
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0 0
0.5 •
1 0
1.50
10. Natural valley
0 0
1 0.5 •
1 0
1 1.50
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0 •
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 6.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
00
10
20
30
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 •
10
20
3
14. Leaf litter
1.
1 Q
0.50
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5 •
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 •
0.5
1 U
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3 •
C. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3 •
2
in
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3 •
2
10
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0 •
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0 •
10
2
3
22. Fish
0 •
0.50
in
1.5
23. Crayfish
0 •
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0 •
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0 •
0.5 U
10
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75e0BL = 1.500ther = 00
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: Downstream developer has piped in 220 feet of stream almost to pond
41

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
user rvianuai version d.,i
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Parview Rd South 4910 2. Date of evaluation: 11/22/2023
3. Applicant/owner name: CSWS 4. Assessor name/organization: D. Hood
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5-minute quad: McAlpine Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.099037,-80.812004
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): 1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 100
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2.5 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? ❑Yes ❑No
14. Feature type: ❑Perennial flow ®Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mil) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mil) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mil)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑l ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ®303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ®No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
®A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
❑A < 10% of channel unstable
®B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction — streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
®B ❑B
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area, leaky
or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
❑C ®C
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision, disruption
of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
❑A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
❑B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
❑D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
❑E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in "Notes/Sketch"
section.
❑F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
❑G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
❑H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
❑I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
®J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather — watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a drought.
®A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
❑C No drought conditions
9. Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
❑Yes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. ❑Yes ®No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
❑A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses F, W ❑F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) 2 E ❑G Submerged aquatic vegetation
®B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o w ❑H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation Y U)C ❑I Sand bottom
❑C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r ❑J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
❑D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots ❑K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
❑E Little or no habitat
*********************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate —assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. ❑Yes ®No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
❑A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
❑B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
®C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffle sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged. Check
at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) = absent, Rare
(R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative percentages
should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Bedrock/saprolite
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Sand (.062 — 2 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Detritus
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. ❑Yes ❑No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

12
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ❑Yes ®No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
❑ ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑ Sala manders/tad poles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
®B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ®C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®C ®C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
❑D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
❑E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
®C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
❑A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
®B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
®C ❑C ®C ❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ®E ❑E ®E < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Mature forest
❑B ❑B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D Maintained shrubs
❑E ®E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ❑A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ®C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
❑A ❑A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
®B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ®C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
®B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
❑C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. ❑No Water ®Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 ❑B 46 to < 67 ❑C 67 to < 79 ❑D 79 to < 230 ❑E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Draft NIC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Parview Rd South 4910 Date of Assessment 11/22/2023
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization D. Hood
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
OMITTED
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
NA
Overall
LOW
LOW

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp:1113012024
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT.•
See ERDC/EL TR-12-9; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: Parview Road City/County: Charlotte/Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 3/27/2024
Applicant/Owner: Charlotte Storm Water Services / City of Charlotte State: NC Sampling Point: Upland
Investigator(s): David Homans Section, Township, Range: Charlotte
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Intermittent stream floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.099039 Long:-80.812036 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wilkes loam NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Wetter than normal; data was collected after recent rains
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
—Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Liquidambar styraciflua
2. Ulmus alata
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species?
Status
30
Yes
FAC
30
Yes
FACU
60 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30
)
1. Nandina domestica
15
Yes
2. Cercis canadensis
10
Yes
3. Cornus florida
10
Yes
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
35
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
18
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1. Vinca minor
70
Yes
2. Lamium purpureum
10
No
3. Allium canadense
5
No
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
UPL
FACU
FACU
7
UPL
UPL
FACU
85 =Total Cover
50% of total cover: 43 20% of total cover: 17
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
6
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
16.7%
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species 0
x 1 =
0
FACW species 0
x 2 =
0
FAC species 30
x 3 =
90
FACU species 55
x 4 =
220
UPL species 95
x 5 =
475
Column Totals: 180 (A)
785
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A
=
4.36
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Upland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 2/2 100 Loamy/Clayey
3-14 10YR 3/4 100 Loamy/Clayey
Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
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)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
—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 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

V
Ol
�
M t0
�
N
Q
d
N
O
Z
t6
N
d
N
O
N
L
m
N
rl
O
L
C
0
� N
7 0
N
M
N
M
N
�
R
i
0
C
O
U
T �
�p N
O
O
O
C
Z
O
N
N
C
N
QN
Q O
C
m
rl
r
�
01
N
r
rl
r0
h
i
C
Cl
9
L �
�p N
� O
N
r-I
T
rl
N
� N
O
_
01
N
ul
a
ri
h
Ol
M
N
N
0
M
�
LT
r
l0
r
c N
� O
C
O
O
O �
W
�
N
�
0
N
N
N
O
m
0
m
N
0
n o
m
^
C
NN
6
O
OJ
N
NN
N
> M
m
fl
N
N
O
m
_
m
V N
00
V
� ❑ C � l6
a ° �
o x m
o >y a C
U w _
N �
ai
1 N O O
O
❑ v
C O O O O O
N
N
u
Q
T
(6
O
E CP M m
O O
Z ~
T
Q h t0 CO O O
ul C1
v � o o� m
� ul rl N m
s
a)
Q n N N m r
C M m m O
O m Cl m O Cl
N
w
N 01 r c7 O
UJ
N O N m l0
C
m a a m m
a, rn m rn s
V M u1 M h O
N
W
VI ul t0 Ot rl �l1
Ul r '-I rl tD r
C O T O O O
07 . W
O
U
O O O Ot Ol
u u v a a
M m M M M
N 7] W Z a
z w Q z
z r O
U o
Y Q
n LL U C7 O} Z
Q W J Z
J
L H _
aj Y
O
K
al O
'� O N
u
Y1
C
Wg
. �_ I
W
0
m t0 7 N O
(S@gDUI) 112JU112d

Appendix III — Protected Species Documentation

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street, Suite B
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
Project Code: 2024-0068831
Project Name: Parview Drive South Storm Water Project
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The enclosed species list
fulfills the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Please note that new species information can change your official species list. Under 50 CFR
402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the Act, the accuracy of this species list
should be verified after 90 days. The Service recommends you visit the ECOS-IPaC website at
regular intervals during project planning and implementation to ensure your species list is
accurate or obtain an updated species list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A biological assessment (BA) or biological evaluation (BE) should be completed for your
project. A BA is required for major construction activities (or other undertakings having similar
physical impacts) considered to be Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c))
(NEPA). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a BE be
prepared to determine effects of the action and whether those effects may affect listed species
and/or designated critical habitat. Effects of the action are all consequences to listed species or
critical habitat that are caused by the proposed action, including the consequences of other

Project code: 2024-0068831 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
activities that are caused by the proposed action. A consequence is caused by the proposed action
if it is reasonably certain to occur and would not occur "but for" the proposed action..
Recommended contents of a BA/BE are described at 50 CFR 402.12. More information and
resources about project review and preparing a BA/BE can be found at the following web link:
https://www.fws. gov/office/asheville-ecological-services/asheville-field-office-online-review-
process-overview.
If a Federal agency determines listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected
by the proposed project, the agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR
402. The Service is not required to concur with "no effect" determinations from Federal action
agencies. If consultation is required, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed
species, proposed critical habitat, and at -risk species be addressed within the consultation. More
information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of
permit or licensed applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook"
at the following web link: https://www.fws.gov/media/endangered-species-consultation-
handbook.
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Act, there are additional responsibilities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) to protect native birds from project -
related impacts. Any activity, intentional or unintentional, resulting in take of migratory birds,
including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by the Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12
and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). More information about MBTA and BGEPA can be found at the
following web link: https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds.
We appreciate your consideration of Federally listed species. The Service encourages Federal
agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species in their project planning
to further the purposes of the Act. Please contact our staff at 828-258-3939, if you have any
questions. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference the
Consultation Code which can be found in the header of this letter.
Attachment(s):
• Official Species List
• USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries
• Bald & Golden Eagles
• Migratory Birds
• Wetlands
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
2of12

Project code: 2024-0068831
03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Asheville Ecological Services Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street, Suite B
Asheville, NC 28801-1082
[phone]
3of12

Project code: 2024-0068831
03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2024-0068831
Project Name: Parview Drive South Storm Water Project
Project Type: Culvert Repair/Replacement/Maintenance
Project Description: Improvements to storm drainage infrastructure including culvert upgrades
and completion of a pipe system through burying a small portion of
exposed channel.
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www. google.com/maps/(a)35.099052900000004,-80.81206163525265,14z
NNe. L. V
e
wn
i fif
Counties: Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
em
4of12

Project code: 2024-0068831 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheriesi, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
5of12

Project code: 2024-0068831 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
FLOWERING PLANTS
NAME
STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii
Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata
Threatened
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL
ABOVE LISTED SPECIES.
USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS
AND FISH HATCHERIES
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA.
6of12

Project code: 2024-0068831 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
BALD & GOLDEN EAGLES
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Actl and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or
golden eagles, or their habitats3, should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
2. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald
eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
1►/Juhl
BREEDING SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain
types of development or activities.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
7ot12

Project code: 2024-0068831 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
■ probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEyPyy yyOCII TII NOV DEC
Bald Eagle I I I I I I 11 1 1 T++ �TTT TTT� Non -BCC
Vulnerable
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
• Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/suDDlemental-information-mip-ratorv-birds-and-bald-and-p-olden-eap-les-mav-occur-
project-action
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Acti and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below. Specifically,
please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treat. Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
8of12

Project code: 2024-0068831
03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
BREEDING
NAME
SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention
Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Black -billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus
Breeds May 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
t0 Oct 10
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica
Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
t0 Aug 25
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9406
Chuck-will's-widowAntrostomus carolinensis
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
t0 Jul 10
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/960
Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus voci ferns
Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
t0 Aug 20
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10678
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
Breeds Apr 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
Jul 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9439
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
t0 Sep 10
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9398
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus
Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions
elsewhere
(BCRs) in the continental USA
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9478
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA
to Aug 31
and Alaska.
https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9431
9of12

Project code: 2024-0068831
03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper
Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret
this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Green bars; the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during that week of the year.
Breeding Season( )
Yellow bars; liberal estimate of the timeframe inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines; the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s)
your project area overlaps.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY
Bald Eagle l 1001 Non -BCC
Vulnerable
Black -billed Cuckoo
++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
Cuckoo
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
-++ ++++ ++++ +00 *+++ +*$I
■MM mmmm
-++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++
Chimney Swift
BCC Rangewde ++++
(CON)
Chuck-will's-widow ++�
BCC -BCR I I++++ +� I �I I I 1 I 1 1 11 11 I I 1 1 I+++ ++ I I I I I I I I I+
Eastern Whip -Poor -
will ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ I I I I ++ ++++ ++++ +♦++ ++++ ++++ ++++ BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Prothonotary Warbler++++ ++++ +++T IN iiii ""'+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
10 of 12

Project code: 2024-0068831 03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
BCC Rangewide
(CON) yy yy y
Red-headed Woodpecker T 11 T�++ +TT T+Tl 7777 ++++ ++++
T TT T I
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Rusty Blackbird BCC -BCR 1000 IM +T+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
T
Wood Thrush
+++ +++ 011 ININIIII BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-mi rator.
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
• Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/
media/supplemental-information-mi ratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden-ea les-may-occur-
project-action
WETLANDS
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to
update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine
the actual extent of wetlands on site.
RIVERINE
• RSUBH
11 of 12

Project code: 2024-0068831
03/27/2024 15:19:24 UTC
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency:
Charlotte city
Name:
David Homans
Address:
2016 Ayrsley Town Blvd. Suite 2-A
City:
Charlotte
State:
NC
Zip:
28273
Email
[e-mail]
Phone:
7049009394
LEAD AGENCY CONTACT INFORMATION
Lead Agency: Army Corps of Engineers
12 of 12

Roy Cooper, Governor
■ ■■■
r ■■ ■ INC DEPARTMENT OF
■■,■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■■
March 27. 2024
Dave Homans
S&ME, Inc.
2016 Ayrsley Town Blvd Suite 2A
Charlotte, NC 28273
RE: Parview Drive South Drainage Improvement Project
Dear Dave Homans:
❑. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director, Natural Heritage Program
NCNHDE-25450
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httr)s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally -
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact the NCNHP at natural.heritage�dncr.nc.gov.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPAR7HEN7 OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1691 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27609
OFC 919.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

CO
\
\
\
\
\
/
CO
2
�
-
/
/
\
E
e
\
CO
/
\
\
/
CO
E
2
CO
CO
E
D-
3
�I
CO
4
\
�
/
\
\
2
»
E
}
O
CO
2
\
\
\
E
/
/
CO
\
\
\
\
Z
/
/ \ \
/ > >
/ \ \
j / /
■ rolmolro,
4
/
\
§
\
c

a--'
U
N
O
^L
o
E
O
E
^
W
�0�(
lrV
L
L
�0
v/�
!
�L
N
L
LL
DLO
1V^
y J
N
W
i■
O
c�
G
Raintree Lr.
o �
0
ou
°m
a
LO
tcaNberry
Ln o
LO
N
pC�ln P1
Cn (n
b
PH ea2f
M
i.i x o
T
oa
p
0
-o
E Y
tj �6
v
a
T
Y
d
d
�
�
d
c_
�
Y
7
P wJpJ
F
Green Read
maker Cq
�a
Ryder Ave
z
3 6,
�m
; U
U �
E0
Pz
E
�2d
M
O
M
N
CD
00
a

Appendix IV - Cultural Resources Documentation

tl•ez Rd
C
0
o uall
r
'�lub
O
f/1
r7
v
%Z G*
'ten For s
o e 1 ar
N
dge ` t
E ~ G9
o v�
o vK
J
e Matthews Rd
b
z °c
z B an" `ng
oa
a riaq a
Or
&ail Wo°p.
�a
a �
efiQ Qr McP�p�c
IN
C
_ 'crony
en
y'trr
♦
N
�u b
lea
Of
�afr) r
4
MrC��
Rq
B� fte-a
Cedafwood
`
'n ;
Country
�.
C�
Club
Chaflotte
Country ♦♦� ��� S�yd
Day Middle �-� • _ - , p1{tClille Malta
x South
Charbtte
O
1k rVi ddb
°idle 4 William
, WW d R. Davie
O ° eCeL (_l� F4?gx1na1Park
Q
y� O
z LEGEND
U
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATION
N NR INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES & CENTERPOINTS
o 0 NR INDIVIDUAL LISTING
Ul 0 NR LISTING, GONE
NRHD CENTER POINT
0
NR DISTRICTS & BOUNDARIES
N
NATIONAL REGISTER BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY OF DESTROYED/REMOVED NR LISTING
N
SL INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES & CENTERPOINTS
O
s ■ SL INDIVIDUAL ENTRY
1 SL AND DOE ENTRY
R STUDY LIST ENTRY, GONE
F 1 SL AND DOE, GONE
* SLHD CENTER POINT 0
is SLDOEHD CENTER POINT
SL DISTRICTS & BOUNDARIES
STUDY LIST BOUNDARY
BOTH SL AND DETERMINED ELIGIBLE BOUNDARY
DOE INDIVIDUAL RESOURCES & CENTERPOINTS
1. DETERMINED ELIGIBLE
1 DOE, GONE
1. SL AND DOE
1 SL AND DOE, GONE
DOEHD CENTER POINT
SLDOEHD CENTER POINT
DOE DISTRICTS & BOUNDARIES
DETERMINED ELIGIBLE BOUNDARY
BOTH DOE AND STUDY LIST BOUNDARY
0.5 1
Miles
_ NC STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
HPOWEB MAPPING
III E CSWS PARVIEW DRIVE SOUTH MINOR PROJECT
4910 PARVIEW DRIVE SOUTH
CHARLOTTE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
■
REFERENCE: NORTH CAROLINA
HPOWEB 2.0 DATASET
BASE DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE.
ALL FEATURE LOCATIONS
DISPLAYED ARE APPROXIMATED.
THEY ARE NOT BASED ON CIVIL
SURVEY INFORMATION, UNLESS
STATED OTHERWISE.
SCALE: FIGURE NO.
1 " = 0.5 miles
DATE:
3-27-24
PROJECT NUMBER
24350004D