20161253 Ver 1_401 Application_20161216

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
December 15, 2016
Mr. David L. Shaeffer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Off
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
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
9101 61Co
�a�wo
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Subject: Request for Pre -Construction Notification for NWPs #13 and 29 and Final
Approved Jurisdictional Determination for the Dunbury Site, Huntersville, Mecklenburg
County, NC
Ms. Higgins and Messrs. Shaeffer, Johnson, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permits # 13 and 29, and a Final Approved Jurisdictional
Determination associated with the proposed residential site (Dunbury) in Huntersville,
Mecklenburg County, NC. On January 12, 2016 USACE representatives (Mr. William Elliott
and Mr. David Schaeffer) and WEPG staff conducted a site visit to review and confirm the site
delineation. As detailed in the attached Delineation Map, the site consists of two perennial
streams (Waters of the US Perennial RPWs A, B and C) and an open water pond (Pond D). In
total, it was determined that there were approximately 1,113 linear feet of perennial streams and
Charlotte Office: www.wetiands-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]

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
no onsite wetlands. The onsite pond was determined to have been excavated in uplands and not
jurisdictional. Please refer to accompanying Jurisdictional Determination section for additional
information on site surface waters.
Because the onsite perennial streams bisected the site, complete avoidance of impacts was not
practicable. Impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were
limited through site selection location and design location/orientation of the proposed lots, access
routes, and existing/proposed utilities. Permanent impacts associated with the proposed
residential development total approximately 149 linear feet of Perennial RPW C. Specifically,
the proposed permanent impacts are associated with the installation of culverts at two roadway
crossings.
Temporary impacts total 79 linear feet and are associated with excavation for a proposed sewer
line crossing and temporary fill for stabilization of the streambanks following the removal of a
culvert. Temporary impacts proposed for the sewer line crossing are approximately 22 linear
feet. Construction methods for each sewer line crossing were to implement boring techniques;
however, boring at this location was not feasible due to the depth requirement from the bottom of
stream to the top of pipe. Temporary impacts anticipated from the removal of the existing culvert
are approximately 57 linear feet. Matting and temporary stabilization will be installed to limit
erosion and reestablish vegetation along the banks. A Conceptual Restoration Plan is attached
and provides details for the stabilization of stream banks at the culvert removal location. Due to
the minimal impacts anticipated with the proposed project, no compensatory mitigation is being
proposed for the anticipated permanent impacts.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site in which
no listed species were identified within the project area. The site is wooded which may be
considered summer roosting habitat for the listed Northern Long Eared Bat. However, we have
consulted with the latest guidance associated with the Final 4(d) ruling and there are no known
hibernation and/or roosts sites within a 45 -mile radius of the project area. Based on this
information we believe that the project meets the exemption criteria for the 4(d) rule and formal
USFWS concurrence is not required.
Thank you for your consideration and please contact me if you have any questions, (828) 708-
7059 or email at amanda.jones2wetlands-ep>; com.
Sincerely,
Olt -0 --
Amanda Jones Heath Caldwell
Regulatory Specialist 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]
len. rind ner a wetlands-epg.com 2 arnanda.jones)wetlands-epg.corn

Permit Application

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: 13 and 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 d.
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:
❑X Yes ❑ 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.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Dunbury
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name.-
ame:2e.
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Multiple parcels owners - see attached map
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Interested Buyer
4b. Name:
Clay McCullough
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
JBH, Development, LLC
4d. Street address:
229 E. Kingston Avenue
4e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28203
4f. Telephone no.:
704-805-4802
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
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, Building 1, Suite 10 PMB 283
5d. City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28803
5e. Telephone no.:
704-904-2277
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 parcels - see attached map
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
I Latitude: 35.3876 Longitude: -80.9049
1 c. Property size:
80.4 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
McDowell
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-IV
2c. River basin:
03050101 Catawba
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:
A majority of the site is composed of forested areas having residential use/maintained areas along the northern portions of the site. General land use
in the vicinity consists of residential development.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,113
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Installation of culverts for access, bank stabilization at culvert removal and excavation for sewer line crossing.
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 (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑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): N. Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Field determination made by the USACE on 1/12/2016. Final Approved Jurisdictional Determination request is attached.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ 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.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream C
PER
Corps
12
62
S2 P
Culvert
Stream C
PER
Corps
12
87
S3 T
Excavation
Stream C
PER
Corps
12
22
S4 T
Stabilization
Stream C
PER
Corps
12
57
S5 -
Choose one
_
S6 -
Choose one
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
228
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then 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
O2 -
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. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) 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 mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
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
B1
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.
The site plan was designed to avoid onsite surface water features to the maximum extent practicable while still incorporating necessary site
development and viable access. Due to the location/extent of jurisdictional surface water features on the site, complete avoidance was not practicable.
Impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited through site location, plan design and location/orientation of
lots, access routes and proposed and existing infrastructure/utilities.
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?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑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.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
26.4%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑x Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater on the site will be handled/treated by the BMPs as shown on the attached exhibits. The stormwater plan has not been approved yet since
Mecklenburg County requires a copy of the 401 certification before they will approve the stormwater plan. However, the plan as proposed meets their
current guidelines and is expected to be approved once the 404/401 permits are received.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Mecklenburg County
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Mecklenburg County
0 Phase II
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
FICoastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
El Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ 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
❑ Yes
❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes
❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
El Yes
❑X No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ 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 other phases associated with this development anticipated.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater
generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater on the site will be carried to nearest WWTP for treatment via proposed and existing utility line infrastructure.
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 in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but is exempt as noted in cover letter. Report is included.
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)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
http://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Heath Digitally signed by Heath Caldwell
ON: cn=Heath Caldwell, o=WEPG,
Heath Caldwell
ou, email=heath.wldwell(t�wetlands
Caldwell
12-15-2016
Date: 21016.12.11509:19:44-05'00'
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

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Agent Authorization Letter
Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.
The purpose of this form is to authorize our fine 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: Mcllwaine Road Property
Property Address: 7531 Mcllwaine Rd., Huntersville, NC 28078
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 015-131-08,-09,-13,-20,-21,-22,-24,-26,-27,-30
Select one: I am an interested buyer/seller
Name: Clay McCullough
Company: JBH Development, LLC
Mailing Address: 229 E. Kingston Ave., Charlotte, NC 28203
Telephone Number: 704-8054802
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Property Owner
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory.
Charlotte Office:
www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd.. Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10. PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville. NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 2 [e-mail]

pq
Maps/Plans

it
Pet Sittinq O
A!
4
1,TA,T/4l
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
len.rindner @wetlands-epg.com
[phone]
www.wetiands-epg.com
Shaw' s'Petiima a
Horses 'T »
Google

f
a y
71
y
j a SITtz
E s ;
m
�' � � �� 'fit`' i, �f� 7 �"•v,,,� �•
or
CZ
p --y _ t
x _ _
`` -.... USGS QUAD..^ i t .
>x f
LOCATION Lake Norman i.
Lat: 35.3876 °N South, NC
Lo ig: 80.9049 °W Acres w�` . „ 2W4'.
F UC: 03050101 80.4. y
FIGU RE NO. DUNBURY Drawn By: Reviewed By:
3 Mecklenburg Co., NC HAC LSR
DATE:
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC. USGS MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
len. rind \ _ EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 01/05/16
.. ... SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION

,. .•mow
I
i�B
/y
"�•�''` . C e B 2 `
CeD2
a6�
CeD2
CeD2
PaE
`r (. CeB2
CeD2
�.Pro*ect Pro - Boundary
80.4 Acres
0
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
len.rindner([e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetlands-epg.com

Lori Millsap
7442 Mcllwaine Road
Huntersville, NC 28078
PIN# 01513198
Bryant McGee
7531 Mcllwaine Road,
Huntersville, NC 28078
PIN# 01513113
Ray Durham
199 Lake Road
Stanley, NC 28164
PIN# 01513109
PIN# 01513122
PIN# 01513124
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
[e-mail]
[phone]
www.wetiands-epg.com
PIN# 01513127
David Williams
P 1429 Herrin Avenue
A Charlotte. NC 28205
PIN# 01513126
PIN# 01513120 r PIN# 01513108
ONeal Williams
5902 Greyfield Drive
Monroe, NC 28110
PIN# 01513130
John Beard
1673 Forest Ridge Drive
Stanley, NC 28164
PIN# 01513107

Flow Path: Onsite Jurisdictional Feature flows into an D�J 'i
unnamed tributary to McDowell Creek, then to '' - ` 'l`,
McDowell Creek, then to Mountain Island Lake (TNW).
Ilkr
#r �
% a
1 X
a-
s-�`
- r -
�; 1
S ,
s ✓ � r�rCi �� ( �C
1 �
Project Boundary Legend
Study Area `Flow Path
80.4 Acres QProtect Boundary
,}
0 1.000 2000 4000 6.000
Feet
FIGURE NO. DUNBURY Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Mecklenburg Co., NC FigC LSR
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.7 Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Navigation Pathway Map DATE:
\ ,. 90. *Approximate boundary 12/9/16 /

FIGURE N0. DUNBURY
I kA/PPr.
Mecklenburg Co., NC
DELINEATION MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
01/13/16

VICINITY MAP - NTS
:
an wor s VICINITY MAP UA I tDEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
Design Group, P.A. D U N B U RY 15034
1621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC SHEET WL -COVER
Charlotte, NC 28211 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
FL 104-841-1604 fax. [phone] NOT TO SCALE

-A EXISTING
Z STONEGATE FARMS
mN:.A SUBDIVI ON
$�
Q \dAV °, oP° o o
Q\-72
O �
720-E]-
TT
zof]
\Z� 4z
U)f o�
p� o > DUNBURY _ -_ co
w m L\ o� / PROPERTY y�
Q ¢ / I / BOUNDARY
w Q A /' 69
` _EXST. PERENNIAL
io / 6 30 STREAM
EXST. 48" CMP _
— _ EXST. NON -JURISDICTIONAL 120>� A
/ / OPEN WATER POND o \
EXST. 48" CMP: / />3
0
o �0
A
ca
oq�OMV ' 1 _ / ,,c _
HOTglQ� / ` o
E EXISTING R�cTFp)
NORMAN PARK l
SUBDIVISION DUNBURY
PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
U
a
m
r 0' 200' 400' 800'
d
Z5 N
Z5 SCALE: 1"=400'
DATE:
Landworks EXISTING CONDITIONS DEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
Design Group, P.A. DUNBURY 15034
° 7621 little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC SHEET #
Charlotte, NC 28271 WL -1
y 704-841-1604 fax: [phone] TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
i 1 "=400'

A
5,
N
bpO�<m CD
Q
x1s we on '�0 \dcj C
STONEGATEFARMS
SUBDIVISION\
Q a d OPO
�- 1 c3 0� ► , ►-
owl
PROPOSED—
m� SAND FILTER #1
F1
_ _ L PROPOSED 1
SAND FILTER #6
PROPOSED ROAD
CROSSING IMPACT #2-- ---
jj SEWER 11
a EXTENSION t+Jll
PIPE REMOVAL -
'- STREAM
a STABILIZATION
TEMPORARY
IMPACT #4
Y -/�
EXST.
PERENNIAL
STREAM /
0
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER CROSSING
(BORE - NO IMPACT)
EXST.
NON-JURIDICTIONAL
OPEN WATER POND I
t0.1$AC�/
SANDFIL PROPOSED 401
#� ��
Rp ,
EXISTING
T N R/V i
F
NORMAN PARK ! �
SUBDIVISION
STREAM IMPACT SUMMARY
F
f Z
u
::
ROAD CROSSING #2 - PERENNIAL STREAM C:
87 LF
w�
'QM3 �J
22 LF
TEMPORARY STREAM STABILIZATION IMPACT #4:
J
to Y
w i
- ....
a
79 LF
jj SEWER 11
a EXTENSION t+Jll
PIPE REMOVAL -
'- STREAM
a STABILIZATION
TEMPORARY
IMPACT #4
Y -/�
EXST.
PERENNIAL
STREAM /
0
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER CROSSING
(BORE - NO IMPACT)
EXST.
NON-JURIDICTIONAL
OPEN WATER POND I
t0.1$AC�/
SANDFIL PROPOSED 401
#� ��
Rp ,
EXISTING
T N R/V i
F
NORMAN PARK ! �
SUBDIVISION
STREAM IMPACT SUMMARY
ROAD CROSSING #1 - PERENNIAL STREAM C:
62 LF
ROAD CROSSING #2 - PERENNIAL STREAM C:
87 LF
TEMPORARY SANITARY SEWER IMPACT #3:
22 LF
TEMPORARY STREAM STABILIZATION IMPACT #4:
57 LF
PERMANENT IMPACT TOTAL:
149 LF
TEMPORARY IMPACT TOTAL:
79 LF
PROPOSED ROAD
1
CROSSING IMPACT #1
/ PROPOSED TEMPORARY
SANITARY SEWER IMPACT #3
P
STj=�
` PROPOSED
SAND FILTER #2
i
I
PROPOSED
SAND FILTER #3
a
❑
I
ILII N
i
PROPOSED ' 1
SAND FILTER #4
0' 200' 400' 800'
SCALE: 1"=400'
DATE:
an wor s SITE PLAN FOR STREAM IMPACTS DEC. 12, 2016
oDesign Group, P.A.
D U N B U RY PROJECT NO: 15034
SHEET #
1621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC WL -2
Charlotte, NC 26211 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
y LL 104-841-1604 fax, 704-8414604 1 "=400'
i

\ \ ABERDEEN PARK — ; — � //.-
o
`m
\LOTS / / �1-
\ ■ i STREAM BANK
STABILIZATION
I / RIP RAP ARMOR,
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER LINE PROPOSED TYP•
(20' MIN. FROM TOP OF BANK) SAND FILTER #6
NO IMPACT TO STREAM
LOTS
;PIPE REMOVAL - STREAM
—_STABILIZATION TEMPORARY
-IMPACT #4. SEE CONCEPTUAL
PLAN PROVIDED BY WEPG - �-
EXST. SEWER
MANHOLE FOR STABILIZATION PLAN
�
p /
rn
O
\ EXST. PERENNIAL--— p
\ STREAM
EXST. OPEN SPACE -PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER,
ABERDEEN PARK — ` CROSSING (BORE - NO
HOMEOWNERS IMPACT) m ,
ASSOCIATION
\ \ \ ZONE X (FUTURE)
EXST. SEWER ESMT. /
�
EXST. NON-JURISDICTIONAL m o �`
OPEN WATER POND t0.18 AC. n
ID \ 0
PROPOSED
o SAND FILTER #5
U
O
N
d
v
m
0
m
0' 100' 200' 400'
3
SCALE: 1" = 100'
Landworks DATE:
OFF-SITE SEWER -EXISTING &PROPOSED DEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
Design Group, P.A. DUNBURY 15034
SHEET#
7621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC WL-3
Charlotte,0 28211 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
y 104 8411604 faz:104 841-1604 1" = 100'
i

r
--
-_ \
_I
\ SAND ILTF ER 1
50' SWIM BUFFER - _
TEMPORARY SANITARY SEWER
IMPACT #3 (22 LF). STREAM TO BE
RESTORED TO PRE -CONSTRUCTION_
CONDITIONS. SEE SHEET WL -8 FOR
SEWER PROFILE AT STREAM
i
I 1 STREAM BANK STABILIZATION
RIP RAP ARMOR TYP.
RIP RAP TO BE PLACED ON THE
CHANNEL BANKS t12" ABOVE THE
TYPICAL WATER ELEVATION; NOT
WITHIN THE STREAM
UPLAND ZONE -
MANAGED USE ZONE
No STREAM SIDE ZONE
-50' SWIM BUFFER��
6901,
\ PROPOSED IMPACT —
�\ 6,P
TO STREAM C FOR "_ r _ SF1tiFR
ROAD CROSSING #1 :62 LF
PERENNIAL STREAM C
i
SEE SHEETS WL -6 8 WL -8
FOR CULVERT #1 PROFILE,
ELEVATION AND DETAIL
PROP STORM PIPE, --
-
IPE
\ \ 1' TO W.Q. BASIN _ - 04-
n
D
Y 0' 200' 400' 800'
a. N
3
SCALE: 1" = 60'
DATE:
landworks DEC. 12, 2016
= STREAM IMPACT FOR STREAM CROSSING #1 PROJECT NO:
Design Group, P.A. DUNBURY 15034
1621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 SHEET a
Charlotte, NC 28211 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE: WL -4
y 104-8414604 fax.[phone] "=60'
i

�\�� to
-o. p i (P N
pv (P' �O z ' a `z
th
N N �NO�
ff r O�� vi pN�
/ PROPOSED IMPACT m - �� _ / �,- M -/ 'S20
/ 08� TO STREAM C FOR m °'" - N - �pMsJO
f ROAD CROSSING #2: 87 LF
C
( "'-�
( SAND FILTER 6
O�
fEADWALLS //
,'"/---
EXST. 4- STREAM C
SEE SHEETS WL -7 & WL -8
FOR CULVERT #1 PROFILE,
ELEVATION AND DETAIL
STREAM BANK STABILIZATION
RIP RAP ARMOR TYP. _
RIP RAP TO BE PLACED ON THE _-
``CHANNEL BANKS t12" ABOVE THE�-
•r,\TYPICAL WATER ELEVATION; NOT =
F g / WITHIN THE STREAM _ =
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
n��
co �� CROSSING (BORE). SEE SHEET WL-8rn JFOR SEWER PROFILE AT STREAM
CROSSING
E /
�\ \ PIPE REMOVAL - / , m
\ STREAM STABILIZATION
TEMPORARY IMPACT
I#4. SEE CONCEPTUAL
PLAN PROVIDED BY
E WEPG FOR / / / / / / 696
13
STABILIZATION PLAN
c /
IEXST. NON-JURISDI TIO AL/
OPEN WATER POND
i ±0.18AC. . . . . .
n
0
m
0
Y 0' 200' 400' 800'
c N
m
3 SCALE: 1"= 60'
U
DATE:
landworks STREAM IMPACT FOR STREAM CROSSING #2 DEC. 12, 2016
o Design Group, P.A.
D U N B U RY PROJECT NO: 15034
SHEET #
° 7621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC
WL -5
Charlotte, NC 28271 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
y 704-841-1604 fax: [phone]"=60'
i

PROPOSED
TOP OF WALL
ELEV. =±692.077
TOP OF WALL
PROPOSED -- -- -
STORM DRAIN - ELEV. =±692.2
- -0_ -
1 SLOPED
-- - -- _.. ------ _ -- --
- -- - ED WINGWALL
TOP OF BANK - - --- -- - - (BEYOND)
BURY IN PIPE
- PER CDENR401
PERMIT REQD.
EXISTING GRA
--- - ----- `- `--- --- --------STABILIZATION
AT PERENNI
- - __ -___ - _ - - ----RIP RAP ARMOR TYP.
STREAM
— RIP RAP TO BE PLACED
ON THE CHANNEL
PROPOSED----
-- -- -- - -- -----BANKS ±12" ABOVE THE
SANITARY
SEWER
_ - — I --- ------TYPICAL WATER
tBf�� ,�--.----ELEVATION;NOTWITHIN
60 LF CULVERT IMPACT
(MEASURED AT EXISTING STREAM
STREAM C/L C/L GRADE
PROFILE - ROAD CULVERT CROSSING #1
SCALE H: 1"=40'V: 1"=10'
ROAD CULVERT #1 ELEVATION AT HEADWALL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
'E
12" BELOW FIN. GRADE
(MIN.)
Landworks °"'t
CULVERT PROFILES &ELEVATIONS DEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
y Design Group, P.A. D U N B U RY 15034
n SHEET#
1621 Little Avenue, Suite fl1 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC WL -6
Charlotte, NC 28211 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
y 104-841-1604 fax:[phone] AS SHOWN
i

TOP OF WALL
ROPOSEDTOP
OF WALL
ELEV. = t689.
-- _--- - I - GRADE
ELEV:
=±690.0
LU
690
_J
---- - - 0
SLOPE
WINGWALL
)
(BEYON
PROPOSEDHEADWALL-------
EADWALL
--
-680
80
TOP OF BANK`---_-
- - -
-- - -
- -
+
RY IN PIPE
ENR 401
_
-PERMIT-
EXISTING GRADE
120" CA� P -- -
EM
-
AT PERENNIAL
STREAML
70
-- -- - REAM BANK
- - - STABILIZATION
LVE RCT --RIP RAP ARMOR TYP.
-- A - t RIP RAP TO BE PLACED
(
- ! - STR - --{ - ON THE CHANNEL
- -- - - - --- ---_ BANKS ±12" ABOVE THE
- - - - - -- TYPICAL WATER
---
�ELEVATION; NOT WITHIN
SLS Iq
Ll
----- '-C THE STREAM
60
EXISTING STREAM
PROFILE - ROAD CULVERT CROSSING #2 C/L GRADE
SCALE H: 1"=40'V: 1"=10'
o�
12" BELOW FIN. GRADE
(MIN.)
Y ROAD CULVERT #2 ELEVATION AT HEADWALL
` SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
3
U
Landworks CULVERT PROFILES & ELEVATIONS
Design Group, P.A. D U N B U RY
7621 little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC
Charlotte,NC 28211
104-841-16004 faz:104-841-1604 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
y
L
DEC. 12, 2016
JECT NO:
15034
ET #
WL -7
LE:
AS SHOWN

CONCRETE
HEADWALL-
CONCRETE
EADWALL
CONCRETE
WINGWALL-
CONCRETE - -T-------
FOOTING
ENLARGED CULVERT & HEADWALL DETAIL
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
PROP. ROAD
CROSSING
— PROP.
STRM. SWR.
'PROP. SAN. SEWER
MH, TYP.
GENERALNOTES
1. TEMPORARY OPEN CUT SANITARY SEWER IMPACT
2. STREAM TO BE RESTORED TO PRE -CONSTRUCTION
CONDITIONS
3. BORING UNDER STREAM FOR SEWER NOT FEASIBLE DUE
TO DEPTH REQUIREMENT FROM BOTTOM OF STREAM TO
TOP OF PIPE
TEMPORARY SEWER IMPACT #3
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
W>
Ng i
W W
d W
d W
i \
12" EARTH FILL
IN PIPE BOTTOM (TYP.)
—EXISTING STREAM
BOTTOM ELEVATION
IPE INVERT
PROR ROAD]
CROSSING i
PROP. SAN. SEWER j
MH, TYP.
GENERAL NOTES
1. PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER TO BE BORED BENEATH
EXISTING STREAM CHANNEL
SANITARY SEWER BORE AT ROAD
CROSSING #2 - NO IMPACT
SCALE: NOT TO SCALE
Landworks �A'E:
� CULVERT &HEADWALL DETAIL DEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
N Design Group, P.A. DUNBURY 15034
1621 Little Avenue, Suite 111 HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC SHEET#
o WL -8
Chadatte, NC 28211 TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE:
a
104-8414604 fax,104-8414604 NOT TO SCALE

EXISTING
STONEGATEFARMS
al _
�-0 'Z PROPOSED
[z o SAND FILTER #1
PROPOSED ROAD
CROSSING IMPACT#2 - --
XPERENNIAL
-�TREAM
ml
PROPOSED ROAD
CROSSING IMPACT#1
PROPOSED TEMPORARY SANITARY
SEWER IMPACT #3
P
STREAM B
PROPOSED
SAND FILTER #2
—PIPE REMOVAL\ STREAM \ `�
STABILIZATION TEMPORARY I
\ IMPACT #4. SEE CONCEPTUAL PLAN\1
PROVIDED BY WEPG FOR
--RTARII 17ATIOKJ PI AN
SAND FILTER #vnq,,?o
EXISTING
NORMAN PARK
SUBDIVISION /
_I
WATER QUALITY NOTES:
1. WATER QUALITY BMP'S SHALL BE INSTALLED I I I
IN ACCORDANCE WITH TOWN OF PROPOSED — _
HUNTERSVILLE POST CONSTRUCTION SAND FILTER #4 �� N
CONTROLS ORDINANCE (PCCO), AND THE
MECKLENBURG COUNTY BMP DESIGN MANUAL.
2. BMP DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE 0' 200' 400' 800'
APPROVED BY THE MECKLENBURG COUNTY
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SCALE: 1"=400'
WATER QUALITY MASTER PLAN
DUNBURY
HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC
TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
15034
SHEET #
WL -9
k
Landworks
n
o
Design Group, P.A.
7621 Little Avenue, Suite 111
2
Chadette, NC 28271
y
704-8414604 fax: [phone]
i
WATER QUALITY MASTER PLAN
DUNBURY
HOPPER COMMUNITIES, INC
TOWN OF HUNTERSVILLE, MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
DEC. 12, 2016
PROJECT NO:
15034
SHEET #
WL -9
k

C
O
.4-J
m
IL
O
V)
v
0C
Is
Conceptual
Restoration Plan

CENTER LINE #1-
�� SEED & STRAW
I NATIVE SEED MIX AND
2:1 SLOPE REPLANT TREES IN
DISTURBED AREAS
I LIVE STAKES/
CONTAINER
2
li' COIR V
FRIER LOG
I
' DISTURBED AREA TO BE
SEEDED (NATIVE MIX),
MATTED & PLANTED IY ON
• CENTER - FROM TOP OF
TOE OF SLOPE SLOPE TO TOE OF SLOPE)
OVERALL PROJECT GOALS
(1) STABILIZE ERODING AREAS W/COIR FIBER BLANKET
(2) INSTALL COIR FIBER LOGS AT TOE OF SLOPE
(3) RE-ESTABLISH NATIVE VEGETATION W/SEED & LIVE
STAKE/CONTAINERIZED MATERIAL (Nov'16-March'17)
Materials List:
1. Coir Fiber Logs: Diam. 12", Length 10'
2. Wooden Stakes: Length 3'
3. Erosion Fabric: Coir Fiber Matting - NO PLASTIC
4. Sod Pins: 1,000+
FIGURE NO.
1
�- � f 1
COIR FIBER LOGS
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
CROSSING (BORE - NO
IMPACT)
Live Stakes/Containerized Material (3' on center):
Cornus amomum (Silky Dogwood), Salix caroliniana (Carolina Willow), Salix sericea (Silky
Willow), Sambucus canadensis (Elderberry), Symphoricarpos orbiculatus (Coralberry)
(Native Stabilization Seed Mix (20-25 lbs. per acre):
Elymus virginicus (Virginia wild rye), Tripsacum dactyloides (Eastern gammagrass), Panicum
virgatum (Switchgrass), Agrostis scabra (Rough bentgrass), Carex vulpinoidea (Fox sedge),
Tridens flavus (Purple top), Schizachyrium scoparium (Little bluestem), Coreopsis lanceolata
(Lance leaf tickseed), Sorghastrum nutans (Indian grass), Elymus hystrix (Bottlebrush grass)
Festuca ovina var. duriuscala (Hard Fescue), Rudbeckia hirta (Blackeyed Susan)
DUNBURY
Mecklenburg Co., NC
ENHANCEMENT MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION
Drawn By:I Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
12/12/16
1
SEED, MAT &
=PIPE REMOVAL - STREA
PLANT FROM TOP
-STABILIZATION TEMPORARY
OF BANK TO TOE
-IMPACT #4. SEE CONCEPTUAL
OF SLOPE
-'PLAN PROVIDED BY WEPG
FOR STABILIZATION PLAN
�- � f 1
COIR FIBER LOGS
PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER
CROSSING (BORE - NO
IMPACT)
Live Stakes/Containerized Material (3' on center):
Cornus amomum (Silky Dogwood), Salix caroliniana (Carolina Willow), Salix sericea (Silky
Willow), Sambucus canadensis (Elderberry), Symphoricarpos orbiculatus (Coralberry)
(Native Stabilization Seed Mix (20-25 lbs. per acre):
Elymus virginicus (Virginia wild rye), Tripsacum dactyloides (Eastern gammagrass), Panicum
virgatum (Switchgrass), Agrostis scabra (Rough bentgrass), Carex vulpinoidea (Fox sedge),
Tridens flavus (Purple top), Schizachyrium scoparium (Little bluestem), Coreopsis lanceolata
(Lance leaf tickseed), Sorghastrum nutans (Indian grass), Elymus hystrix (Bottlebrush grass)
Festuca ovina var. duriuscala (Hard Fescue), Rudbeckia hirta (Blackeyed Susan)
DUNBURY
Mecklenburg Co., NC
ENHANCEMENT MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION
Drawn By:I Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
12/12/16

C
O
c�
.E
4
Q)
w
.Jurisdictional
Determination Information

Jurisdictional Determination Request
M
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
to the appropriate Corps Field Office (or project manager, if known) via mail, electronic mail, or
facsimile. A current list of county assignments by Field Office and project manager can be
found on-line at: http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ulatoryPermitPro rg am.aspx , by
telephoning: 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]

Jurisdictional Determination Request
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E and F.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part G.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that all JD
requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the
determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary. This form must be
signed by the current property owner to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for JD
requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be
conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: Corps approved and preliminary JDs identify
the limits of CWA (and RHA, if applicable) jurisdiction for the particular site identified in your
request. The JD may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of
the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Property Information Dunbury
Address: 17531 Mcllwaine Road, Huntersville, NC 28078
County: Mecklenburg
Heading north from Charlotte on 1-77 Freeway, lake exit 19B for 1-485 Outer. Travel 0.8 miles to exit 21 for NC -24. Turn right onto WT Harris
Directions: Blvd. and travel 0.3 miles to Mt. Holly-Hunlersville Road. Turn left onto Mt. Holly-Huntersville Road and then turn right onto Kerns Road. Travel
2 miles and turn left onto Hambright, then right onto McCoy and then left onto Mcllwaine. Travel 1.6 miles and the site will be on the left.
Parcel Index Number (PIN): Multiple parcels -please see attached Parcel Map
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
W1Name: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC,
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group (WEPG)
Mailing Address: 10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550, Charlotte NC 28277
Telephone Number: 704-904-2277
Electronic Mail Address: len.rindnergwetlands-ep-
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
❑✓ Name: Clay McCullough, JBH Development, LLC
Mailing Address: 229 E. Kingston Avenue, Charlotte, NC 28203
Telephone Number: 704-805-4802
Electronic Mail Address 3: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant4
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
1 If available
I Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3 If available
4 Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3

jurisdictional Determination Request
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
❑✓ PIN#: Multiple parcels -please see attached Parcel Map
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address 5:
❑✓ Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record data)
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION'
I, the undersigned, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of
conducting on-site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of
the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Property Owner
(please print)
Property Owner Signature
5 If available
Date
4

jurisdictional Determination Request
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS6 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation. (proceed to F and G
below).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property/project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property/project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
F. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
7 Size of Property or Project: 80.4 acres
❑✓ I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
❑ Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form.
❑ Project Coordinates: Latitude Longitude
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
6 Waters of the United States
See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02, dated June 26, 2008
5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Aerial Photography of the project area
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
Wetland Data Sheets
Upland Data Sheets
Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries:
USACE Assessment Forms
Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of a Delineation:
0✓ Project Coordinates: 35.3876 N/-80.9049 W
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
Aerial Photography of the project area
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps)
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
Wetland Data Sheets
Upland Data Sheets
Tributaries:
USACE Assessment Forms
Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
$ Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
e Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland/community type.
6

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑✓ Landscape Photos, if taken
❑✓ Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
❑✓ Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard-
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 11"x17"
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than 11"x17", may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e-mail to the requestor.
Plats submitted for approval must:
❑ be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
be legible
❑ include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings/metes and
bounds/GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
7

Jurisdictional Determination Request
clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
❑ when wetlands are depicted:
*include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
*identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
when tributaries are depicted:
*include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
*include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using
approximate widths or surveyed OHWM)
*include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"
❑ all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
❑ include the location of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
❑ include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently subject to
the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands", "non jurisdictional
waters"). NOTE: An approved JD must be conducted in order to make an official
Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not jurisdictional.
❑ include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that transport
WoUS
CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundary is depicted:
8

Jurisdictional Determination Request
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
F] When uplands may be present within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
GPS SURVEYS

Jurisdictional Determination Request
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as:
❑ be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
include an accuracy verification:
One or more known points (property corner, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross-referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds).
❑ include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized.
10

FIGURE NO.
DUNBURY I Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
DATE:
DELINEATION MAP —WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 01/13/16
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION

MEW
Waters of the US Perennial RPW A NORTH CAROLINARIVERINE Linear 58 FOOT RPW 35.3878 80.9018 Catawba River
Waters of the US Perennial RPW B NORTH CAROLINA RIVERINE Linear 65 FOOT RPW 35.3877 -80.9017 Catawba River
Waters of the US Perennial RPW C NORTH CAROLINA RIVERINE Linear 990 FOOT RPW 35.3876 -80.9047 Catawba River

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Dunbury City/County: Huntersville/Mecklenburg
ADolicant/Owner: JBH Development, LLC
State: NC
Investigator(s): NRN, LSR Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hilislope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): none
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 Lat: 35.3876 N Long: -80.9049 W
Soil Map Unit Name: MO: Monacan 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: 10/23/15
- Sampling Point: Upland DP1
_ Slope (%): 0-2
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 0✓ within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes= No
Remarks:
Data point taken approximately 50' E of Open Water Pond B.
HYDROLOGY'
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
E=1surface Soil Cracks (136)
=1sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
=Surface
Water (Al) =True Aquatic Plants (1314)
=High
Water Table (A2) =Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
E=]Drainage Patterns (610)
=Saturation
(A3) =Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
=Moss Trim Lines (616)
=Water
Marks (61) =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 (64) =10ther (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 (69)
=Microtopographic Relief (D4)
=Aquatic
Fauna (613)
=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 IZI
includes capillary tinge)
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: Data Point 1
4 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5. Present? Yes= No
EZJ
30 = 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
1 Lihodendron tulipifera
35
Y FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
25
Y FAC
3. Ulmus alata
15
Y FACU
Total Number of Dominant 9
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4. Platanus occidentalis
5
N FACW
Percent Dominant cies
oOBL,
5•
That Are FACW, of r FAC:33% (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 Ulmus alata
15
Y FACU
FACW species x2=
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
5
Y FAC
FAC species x 3=
3.- Liriodendron tulipifera
5
Y FACU
FACU species x 4=
4•
UPL species x 5 =
5.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
25
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
30'
= Total Cover
01 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1 Liqustrum japonicum
35
Y UPL
02 - Dominance Test is >50%
Q3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2
04 - 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'
35
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Allium vineale
10
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
ft (1 m) in height.
12•
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
10
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Lonicera japonica
30
Y FAC
2.
4 Hydrophytic
Vegetation
5. Present? Yes= No
EZJ
30 = 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
Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
or
Sampling Point: Data Point 1
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvae Loc Texture Remarks
0-4 5YR 4/4 100 Loamy Clay
4-12 5YR 5/8 100
RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Soil Indicators:
UHistosol (Al)
❑Histic Epipedon (A2)
=Black Histic (A3)
=Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
=Stratified Layers (A5)
=2 cm Muck (Al 0) (LRR N)
=Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
=Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
=Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
=Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
=Sandy Redox (S5)
❑Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Clay
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
=Dark Surface (S7)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
=Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
=hin 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= No =
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date: 10/23/15 1 Evaluator: I NRN/LSR Eastin : -80.9049
Project: Dunbu : Perennial RPW A (DP2) Northing: 35.3876
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
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
3
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
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
0
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
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
1.5
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
0
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
0
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
1.5
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
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 oaoe 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Origins.
(version 4.11)

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
Applicant: JBH Development, LLC
Site: Dunbury
Form for: Waters of the US Perennial RPW A, Waters of the US RPW Perennial B and Waters of the US Perennial RPW C.
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:NC County/parish borough: Mecklenburg City: Huntersville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.3876° N, Long. -80.9049° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: McDowell Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050101
10 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:
0 Field Determination. Date(s): 1/12/2016
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
❑ TNWs, including territorial seas
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
NRelatively 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: 1113 linear feet: 12 width (fl) and/or 0.31 acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by OHWM.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:

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.I. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the 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.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 3285s "ftmiles
Drainage area: 391 getw,
Average annual rainfall: 44 inches
Average annual snowfall: 0 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
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 1 ii ) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW': Onsite Jurisdictional Feature flows into an unnamed tributary to McDowell Creek, then to
McDowell Creek, then to Mountain Island Lake (TNW).
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
' Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known: 2.
(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: 12 feet
Average depth: +/-5 feet
Average side slopes: 2:1.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands
® Cobbles ® Gravel
® Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Belgtively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: Flow of RPW A, B and C 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
® changes in the character of soil
❑
❑ shelving
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
ED
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: ❑ 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:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

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

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IIID:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IIID:
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: Waters of the US Adjacent Wetland E is 0.04 acres in size and is adjacent to but not abutting Waters of the US
RPW A. Surrounding characteristics such topography, observable overland flow and/or ephemeral conveyance indicate that water
from Wetland E flows downslope to Waters of the US RPW A.
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
El TNWs: linear feet width (fl), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Waters of the US RPWs A, B and C exhibit geomorphology, hydrology, and biological indicators
consistent with perennial flowing streams in the piedmont ecoregion
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:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 1113 linear feet 12 width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
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:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ 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: .
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:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.004 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ 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: acres.
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
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA -STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
® which 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 (ft).
❑ 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 "SWANCC," 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 (ft).
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: 0.18 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: See map.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: See map.
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): See map
or ❑ Other (Name & Date): .
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
0 Other information (please specify):

B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: