20011511 Ver 3_401 Application_20161228

Montalvo, Sheri A
From: Montalvo, Sheri A
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 9:50 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Beltway Business Park
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Chris,
As per your phone conversation with Ms. Burdette a request for additional information is needed:
On December 22, 2016 the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application requesting a 401 Water
Quality Certification from the Division for the subject project. The Division has determined that your application is
incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on -hold until all of the following information is received:
No Check Included
A check for a $240 permitting fee is required to process this application. Please remit a check to DEQ-
DWR, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617.
Completed PCN
A completed PCN is required with NW number applying for, owners name and listed impacts, etc. (4
copies)
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e) the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested information for the
proper consideration of the application. If all of the requested information is not received in writing at the address below
within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter, the Division will be unable to process the application and it will be
returned. The return of this project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete
application package and the appropriate fee.
Please be aware that you have no authorization under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act for this activity and
any work done within waters of the state may be a violation of North Carolina General Statutes and
Administrative Code.
Please contact Sheri Montalvo at 919-807-6303 or Sheri.montalvokncdenr.gov if you have any questions or
concerns.
shert MowtaLvo
Administrative Assistant
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
Division of Water Resources
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
919-807-6303 (office)
919 807-6494 (fax)

sheri.montalvonncdenr. gov
Physical: 512 N. Salisbury St., Ste 942-D, Raleigh, NC 27604
Mailing: 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

December 20, 2016
Ms. Jennifer Burdette
401 & Buffer Permitting
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Reference: Beltway Business Park, Charlotte NC, HUC #03050101
Dear Ms. Burdette,
D
Uis 28 2016
DEQ -WATER RESOURCES
BUFFER PERMITTING
I have attached a PCN with supporting documentation for the referenced project site. This project
site was originally assessed and partially permitted in 2002 and 2006. At that time the only impacts
were stream impacts for 2 road crossings. Mitigation for those impacts were paid through the in -
lieu fee program. To date the project was developed beyond the extent of the road right of way.
The owner now wishes to develop the project site as it was originally envisioned. The site will be
developed in 2 phases. In the included plans, Building A and B represent Phase 1 and Buildings C, D
and E represent Phase 2. Phase 1 has been completely designed and engineered to the original
layout for which the existing road and utility infrastructure were constructed. Phase 2 will be
developed once the infrastructure has been planned and developed. The project was designed to
avoid surface waters to the maximum extent feasible using retaining walls and minimum width road
crossings.
Stormwater measures were designed per the local authority and are shown on the plans for phase 1
just south of building A.
Phase 1 proposed impacts total 0.358 acres of wetlands. Proposed impacts for Phase 2 total 0.14
acres. At this time we are only requesting NWP verification and 401 certification for Phase 1.
Thanks
Sincerely,
Christopher J. Estes, PLA
President
• P.O. Box 79133 Charlotte, N.C. 28271 • Phone [phone] •

D
4C 2 8 2016
DEO-WATER RESOURCES
401 & BUFFER PERMITTING
Beltway Business Park
Charlotte
Mecklenburg County
North Carolina
Pre -construction Notification Form and Supporting Documentation for
Nationwide Permits that Require Notification to the
U.S. Corps of Engineers & That Require Section 401
Certification
Prepared for:
Beltway Properties, LLC
9450 W. Byrn Mawr Suite 150
Rosemont Illinois 60018
Prepared by:
Estes Uestaft4m
env"W"oW ca t u coq
PO Box 79133 Charlotte, NC 28271 *O%W
704-841-1779
www.EstesDesign.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS
"click to go to page"
Preliminary endangered species and cultural resources report
PCN application
Property owner Certification
Prior 404 Verification
Map Exhibits
Stream Quality Assessment Worksheets
Wetland Data Forms
USFWS Scoping Response Letter
SHPO Scoping Response Letter
NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services In -Lieu Fee Acceptance Letter
Development and Impact Plans

is
ECS CAROLINAS, LLP "Seffing the Standard for Service"
Geotechnical a Construction Materials • Environmental • Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F-1078
NC Registered Geologists Firm C-406
SC Registered Engineering Firm 3239
November 21, 2016
Mr. Dan Heath
Foundry Commercial
121 West Trade Street, Suite 503
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Reference: Limited NEPA Resort
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project Nos: 49: 3387 & 3387A
Dear Mr. Heath,
ECS Carolinas, LLP (ECS) is pleased to provide our results of the Limited National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Database Review conducted for the above -referenced site.
Our services were provided in accordance with ECS Proposal Numbers: 49: 2804 & 3432
Revised.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The subject site is located at the end of the cul -da -sac of Beltway Boulevard in Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The site is a reported 106.55 acres in size and according to
the Mecklenburg County Online GIS Database website the Parcel Identification Numbers (PINs)
are 05320102, 05320118, 05320124, 05320126, 05320128, 05320129, and 05320130. The site
consists of undeveloped, wooded land. Surrounding properties consist of single-family residences,
commercial and light industrial business. Based on the United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Topographic Map, two unnamed tributaries to the Catawba River are depicted on the central and
eastern portions of the site.
ECS was contracted to conduct a preliminary threatened and endangered species, and
preliminary cultural and archaeological resources determination for the site. ECS personnel
conducted the field reconnaissance on November 13, 2016.
PRELIMINARY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES DETERMINATION
Congress passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973. The purpose of the ESA is to
protect and recover imperiled species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. It is
administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Commerce Department's
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The USFWS has primary responsibility for terrestrial
and freshwater organisms, while the responsibilities of NMFS are mainly marine wildlife.
Under the ESA, species may be listed as either endangered or threatened. "Endangered"
means a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
"Threatened" means a species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. All
ECS Capitol Services, PLLC • ECS Carolinas, LLP • ECS Central, PLLC • ECS Florida, LLC • ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC • ECS Midwest, LLC • ECS Southeast, LLC • ECS Texas, LLP
mmecslimited.com

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
species of plants and animals, except pest insects, are eligible for listing as endangered or
threatened. For the purposes of the ESA, Congress defined species to include subspecies,
varieties, and, for vertebrates, distinct population segments.
ECS reviewed the USFWS Endangered Species Database to identify federally protected
threatened and endangered species in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The following
federally protected threatened and endangered species were identified on the list of
occurrences for Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
Vertebrate
Bald Eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
BGPA
Current
Northern Long -Eared Bat
Myotis sepientrionalis
T
Probable/Potential
Invertebrate
Carolina Heelsplitter
Alasmidonta heterodon
E
Current
Vascular Plant
Michaux's Sumac
Rhus michauxii
E
Current
Schweinitz's Sunflower
Helianthus schweinitzii
E
Current
Smooth Coneflower
Echinacea laevigata
E
Current
BGPA = Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act E = Endangered
T= Threatened
Species/Habitat Description
Bald Eagle
Description: Distinguished by a white head and white tail feathers, bald eagles are powerful,
brown birds that may weigh 14 pounds and have a wingspan of 8 feet. Male eagles are smaller,
weighing as much as 10 pounds and have a wingspan of 6 feet. Sometimes confused with
Golden Eagles, Bald Eagles are mostly dark brown until they are four to five years old and
acquire their characteristic coloring.
Habitat: Bald eagles live near rivers, lakes, and marshes where they can find fish, their staple
food. Bald eagles will also feed on waterfowl, turtles, rabbits, snakes, and other small animals
and carrion. Bald eagles require a good food base, perching areas, and nesting sites. Their
habitat includes estuaries, large lakes, reservoirs, rivers, and some seacoasts. In winter, the
birds congregate near open water in tall trees for spotting prey and night roosts for sheltering.
Conclusions: The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of
mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately
dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small potential
surface waters were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the site. No

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
large surface waters are located on or within 660 feet of the site. Additionally, Bald Eagles were
not observed during the site reconnaissance.
Based on our knowledge and site observations, suitable habitat for the Bald Eagle is not present
on the site.
Northern Lona -Eared Bat
Description: The northern long-eared bat is a medium-sized bat about 3 to 3.7 inches in length
but with a wingspan of 9 to 10 inches. As its name suggests, this bat is distinguished by its long
ears, particularly as compared to other bats in its genus, Myotis, which are actually bats noted
for their small ears (Myotis means mouse -eared). The northern long-eared bat is found across
much of the eastern and north central United States and all Canadian provinces from the
Atlantic coast west to the southern Northwest Territories and eastern British Columbia. The
species' range includes 39 states.
Habitat: During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies underneath bark,
in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non -reproductive females may
also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. This bat seems opportunistic in selecting
roosts, using tree species based on suitability to retain bark or provide cavities or crevices. It
has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. Northern long-eared
bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula. They typically use large
caves or mines with large passages and entrances; constant temperatures; and high humidity
with no air currents. Specific areas where they hibernate have very high humidity, so much so
that droplets of water are often seen on their fur. Within hibernacula, surveyors find them in
small crevices or cracks, often with only the nose and ears visible.Bald eagles live near rivers,
lakes, and marshes where they can find fish, their staple food. Bald eagles will also feed on
waterfowl, turtles, rabbits, snakes, and other small animals and carrion. Bald eagles require a
good food base, perching areas, and nesting sites. Their habitat includes estuaries, large lakes,
reservoirs, rivers, and some seacoasts. In winter, the birds congregate near open water in tall
trees for spotting prey and night roosts for sheltering.
Conclusions: The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of
mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately
dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small potential
surface waters were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the site and
appear well maintained due to routine clearing and mowing operations. No known hibernation
sites are on or within % mile to the project site. According to the USFWS website
https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project_review/NLEB_in_WNC.html, Mecklenburg County is
is not listed as a county containing confirmed hibernation and maternity sites for this species;
therefore, the project meets the 4(d) rule, and any associated exempt take. The project should
have no effect on the NLEB.
Carolina Heelsplitter
Description: The Carolina Heelsplitter was first described in 1852. It has an ovate, trapezoid -
shaped shell. The outer surface of the shell varies from greenish brown to dark brown in color,
and shells from younger specimens have faint greenish brown or black rays. The nacre (inside
surface) is often pearly white to bluish white, grading to orange in the deepest part of the shell.

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
However, in older specimens the entire nacre may be a mottled pale orange. The shell of the
largest known specimen of the species measures 4.6 inches in length. Like other freshwater
mussels, the Carolina Heelsplitter feeds by siphoning and filtering food particles from the water
column.
The reproductive cycle of the species is similar to other native mussels. Males release sperm
into the water, and the eggs are fertilized when the sperm are taken in by the females through
their siphons during feeding and respiration. Females retain the fertilized eggs in their gills until
the larvae (glochidia) fully develop. The glochidia are released into the water and must attach to
the gills or fins of the appropriate fish species. They remain attached to their "fish host" for
several weeks, drawing nourishment from the fish while they develop into juvenile mussels.
They do not hurt their "fish host." The juvenile mussels then detach from the fish host and drop
to the bottom of the stream where they continue to develop, provided they land in a suitable
place with good water conditions. This dependence on a certain species of fish increases the
mussels' vulnerability to habitat disturbances. If the fish host is driven off or eliminated because
of habitat or water quality problems, the mussels can't reproduce and will eventually die out.
Habitat: The Carolina Heelsplitter requires cool, clean, well -oxygenated water. Stable, silt -free
stream bottoms appear to be critical to the species. Typically stable areas occur where the
stream banks are well -vegetated with trees and shrubs.
Conclusion: The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of
mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately
dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small surface waters
were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the site.
No clear oxygenated streams were identified onsite. Based on our knowledge and site
observations, suitable habitat for the Carolina Heelsplitter is not present on the site. ECS does
not recommend additional assessment.
Michaux's Sumac
Description: Michaux's Sumac is a rhizomatous, densely hairy shrub, with erect stems from 1 -
3 feet (ft) (30.5 — 91 centimeters, cm) in height. The compound leaves contain evenly serrated,
oblong to lanceolate, acuminate leaflets. Most plants are unisexual; however, more recent
observations have revealed plants with both male and female flowers on one plant. The flowers
are small, borne in a terminal, erect, dense cluster, and colored greenish yellow to white.
Flowering usually occurs from June to July; while the fruit, a red drupe, is produced through the
months of August to October.
Habitat: Michaux's Sumac grows in sandy or rocky open woods in association with basic soils.
Apparently, this plant survives best in areas where some form of disturbance has provided an
open area. Several populations in North Carolina are on highway rights -of way, roadsides, or on
the edges of artificially maintained clearings. Two other populations are in areas with periodic
fires, and two populations exist on sites undergoing natural succession. One population is
situated in a natural opening on the rim of a Carolina bay.
Conclusion: The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of
mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small potential
surface waters were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the site.
Carolina Bays and areas with periodic fires are not located on site. Roadsides and artificial
clearings appear to be well maintained. Michaux's sumac was not observed during the site
reconnaissance.
Based on our knowledge and site observations, suitable habitat for the Michaux's Sumac is not
present on the site.
Schweinitz's Sunflower
Description: Schweinitz's Sunflower is a perennial that regularly grows approximately 6.5 feet
(ft) (2.0 meters; m) tall (though it can be shorter if young or injured) and can occasionally reach
heights of 16 ft (4.8 m). It has thickened roots that are used by the plant to store starch. The
stem is purplish in color, and the upper third bears secondary branches at 45 -degree angles.
The leaves are arranged in pairs on the lower part of the stem but usually occur singly (or
alternate) on the upper parts. Leaves are attached to the stem at right angles, and the tips of the
leaves tend to droop. The leaves are thick and stiff, with a rough upper surface. The upper leaf
surfaces have broad spiny hairs that are directed toward the tip and soft white hairs cover the
underside. The plant produces small yellow flowers from late August until frost. This species is
able to colonize through the dispersal of seeds that readily germinate without a dormant period.
Habitat: Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in full to partial sun and is found in areas with poor soils,
such as thin clays that vary from wet to dry. It is believed that this species once occurred in
natural forest openings or grasslands. Many of the remaining populations occur along
roadsides.
Conclusion: The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of
mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately
dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small potential
surface waters were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the site and
appear well maintained due to routine clearing and mowing.
Based on our knowledge and site observations, potentially suitable habitat for the Schweinitz's
Sunflower is not present on the site. Additionally, no individuals were identified during the site
reconnaissance.
Smooth Coneflower
Description: Smooth Coneflower is a perennial herb in the Aster family (Asteraceae) that
grows up to 3.3 feet (ft) (1 meter; m) tall from a vertical root stock. The large elliptical to broadly
lanceolate basal leaves may reach 8 inches (in) (20 centimeters; cm) in length and 3.0 in (7.5
cm) in width and taper into long petioles toward the base. They are smooth to slightly rough in
texture. The stems are smooth, with few leaves. The mid -stem leaves are smaller than the basal
leaves and have shorter petioles. Flower heads are usually solitary. The rays of the flowers
(petal -like structures) are light pink to purplish in color, usually drooping, and 2 — 3.2 in (5 - 8
cm) long. Flowering occurs from late May through mid-July and fruits develop from late June to

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
September. The fruiting structures often persist through the fall. Reproduction is accomplished
both sexually (by seed) and asexually (by rhizome).
Habitat: Smooth coneflower is typically found in open woods, glades, cedar barrens, roadsides,
clearcuts, dry limestone bluffs, and power line rights-of-way, usually on magnesium and calcium
rich soils associated with amphibolite, dolomite or limestone (in Virginia), gabbro (in North
Carolina and Virginia), diabase (in North Carolina and South Carolina), and marble (in South
Carolina and Georgia). Smooth coneflower occurs in plant communities that have been
described as xeric hardpan forests, diabase glades or dolomite woodlands. Optimal sites are
characterized by abundant sunlight and little competition in the herbaceous layer. Natural fires,
as well as large herbivores, historically influenced the vegetation in this species' range. Many of
the herbs associated with Smooth coneflower are also sun -loving species that depend on
periodic disturbances to reduce the shade and competition of woody plants.
Conclusion: The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of
mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately
dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small potential
surface waters were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the site and
appear well maintained due to routine clearing and mowing.
Based on our knowledge and site observations, suitable habitat for the Smooth Coneflower is
not present on the site. Additionally, no individuals were identified during the site
reconnaissance.
PRELIMINARY HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES REVIEW
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was created by the United States government in
1966 under Section 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The purposes of
SHPO include surveying and recognizing historic properties, reviewing nominations for
properties to be included in the National Register of Historic Places, reviewing undertakings for
the impact on the properties as well as supporting federal organizations, state and local
governments, and the private sector.
ECS was contracted to conduct a preliminary historic and archaeological resources review. The
scope of work included a field reconnaissance to identify potential historic structures, a review of
the SHPO Online GIS mapping, and a review of other available databases.
The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land consists of mature and
immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to moderately dense understory
vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Dirt access roads are located throughout
the site and appear well maintained due to routine clearing and mowing operations. No large
surface waters are located on or within 660 feet of the site. Surrounding properties consist of
undeveloped, wooded land, single-family residences, and commercial businesses.
During our review of the NCSHPO On -Line GIS Database, ECS noted that no recorded
historical sites are located on the subject site or within 1,000 feet of the site. ECS is not aware
of proposed sales, transfers, or leases of historic properties on the site or within the general
vicinity of the site.

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
ECS composed letter requests addressed to the Natural Heritage Program (NHP), the USFWS,
and NCSHPO dated November 11, 2016, to determine if the subject site is located in the
immediate vicinity of registered sightings or habitats for endangered species.
ECS will issue an updated letter once correspondence is received from the agencies listed
above.
CONCLUSIONS
ECS has conducted a preliminary threatened and endangered species determination and a
preliminary historic and archaeological resources review for the site. Please note that our
services did not include detailed studies for threatened and endangered species or historic and
archaeological resources. The site consists of undeveloped, wooded land. The wooded land
consists of mature and immature pine and hardwood species aged 10-40 years. Dense to
moderately dense understory vegetation was observed throughout the wooded land. Small
potential surface waters were identified on site. Dirt access roads are located throughout the
site. Surrounding properties consist of undeveloped, wooded land, single-family residences, and
commercial businesses.
In order to protect aquatic resources, erosion and sedimentation controls should be installed
and maintained between the construction site and any nearby downgradient surface waters. In
addition, ECS recommends maintaining natural, vegetative buffers on streams and surface
waters on site and adjacent to the project area.
ECS is has submitted letters to Federal and State agencies on November 11, 2016. ECS will
provide an updated NEPA letter once correspondence is received from the agencies.

Limited NEPA Database Review
Beltway Business Park
Beltway Boulevard
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
ECS Project No: 49: 3387
CLOSING
ECS appreciates the opportunity to provide our services to you. Please contact us at (919) 861-
9910 if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
ECS Carolinas, LLP
G�-
Cory . Darnell, PWS
Environmental Project Manager
[e-mail]
919-861-9859
Attachments: Figure 1 — Site Location Map
Figure 2 — Topographic Map
Figure 3 — Aerial Site Map
Photographs
Brandon Fulton, LS PSC, PWS
Environmental Principa
[e-mail]
704-525-5152

rA0G
10;
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
© 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ❑X No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Beltway Business Park
2b. County:
Mecklenburg
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d. Subdivision name:
Beltway Business Park
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Beltway Properties, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
20812/387
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Robert McCormick
3d. Street address:
9450 W. Byrn Mawr Suite 150
3e. City, state, zip:
Rosemont Illinois 60018
3f. Telephone no.:
847-447-5020
3g. Fax no.:
847-671-0740
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑X Agent ❑ Other, specify:
P fY:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Chris Estes
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Estes Design Inc.
5c. Street address:
Box 79133 Providence Rd.
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte NC 28271
5e. Telephone no.:
704-841-1779
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): 053
0112, 05320128, 053201.29, 05320118, 05320102, 05320124
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.26103 Longitude: -80.98465
1 c. Property size:
103.35 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Lake Wylie
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
PA
2c. River basin:
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:
Forest surrounded by mix of commercial & residential. Property is zoned Commercial.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 3 AC
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,500
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Large Commercial Buildings
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed project consists of mass grading for accomadation of large commercial buildings and parking.
Types of equipment used will be bulldozer& excavators
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
roject includin all rior hases in the ast?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: done in 2002. Steve Chapin was the corps rep.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
E] Preliminary ❑X Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Estes Design Inc.
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
2002
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑x Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Phase 1 of this project was initially designed in 2002 and never completed. At that time the associated land area was 86 acres and
280 linear feet of stream impacts were mitigated through in -lieu fee payment. In 2006 additional property was added to the project site
bring the current land area to just over 103 acress. In 2007 the permit was renewed and permitted for the same wetlands impacts
being requested currently. Due to the economy the prooect was never developed,
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
The future phase includes 3 commercial buildings and associated parking. This phase does not have current infrastructure designed and permitted.
The conceptual plan and anticipated future impacts are described in the attached plans.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. pacts Summary
1a. Whic sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
X❑ W nds ❑ Streams -tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impis
If there are wetland i acts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
2b.2c.
Ty of impact
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.063
W2 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.066
W3 P
Fill
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
Yes
Corps
0.229
W4
Choose one
Choose ne
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.358
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impac 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. 3f. 3g.
Type of Average Impact
jur iction stream length
width (linear
(feet) feet)
S1
Choose one
S2
Choose one
-
S3 -
Choose one
S4
Choose one
S5
Choose one
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

Open Water Impacts
�4.ere are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Op water
impact umber
Permanen P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction ro osed, t n 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)
Flo ed
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 DWO)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If y, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this for
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
B er
mitiga ' n
require
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
131
Yes/No
132 -
Yes/No
133 -
Yes/No
134 -
Yes/No
65 -
Yes/No
66 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5of10

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 current phase of this project was initially designed in 2002 and never completed beyond the road and associated infrastructure. At that time the
associated land area was 86 acres. The design utilized a minimum width access road. To protect the existing intermittent stream, buffers are to be
preserved which includes utilizing retaining walls where necessary. Considerable investment in infrastructure and mitigation in -lieu fees have been
expended for the current phase.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
During grading operations a minimum area will be disturbed and stabilized prior to disturbing the next phase. Construction techniques will utilize buffer
protection methods and adhear to the highest quality erosion control practices per the Charlotte -Mecklenburg county standards throughout the
construction sequencing.
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 ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑X Corps
2c If yes, project? which mitigation option will be used for this
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Pro ram
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.X❑
Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
none linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one W AM
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.358 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. uffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the�ec5tult in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requiresYes
buffer
❑X No
6b. If yes, then identify th quare feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation requ
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
uare feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation quired:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e. . ayment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lie a fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified'
X❑ Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
All runoff will be treated by wet ponds as required by Charlotte Mecklenburg Stormwater ordinance.
❑Yes ❑X No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
51.85%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
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:
City of Charlotte Stormwater regs apply. Wet Ponds are proposed to treat all runoff associated with the developed impervious area. Phase 1 will
utilize 2 wet ponds for complete treatment. Phase 2 will also be required to utilize wet ponds and will be incorporated into the future design.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Charlotte
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject? Charlotte- Mecklenburg
0 Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply):
❑ USMP
❑X Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
[]Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
E] Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑X Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?X❑
Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ 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.
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.
Charlotte Mecklenburg Water authority. Municiple sewer.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

S. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ YesX❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
Yes❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Natural Heritage Program Data Base
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?
NA
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
❑ YesX❑ 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?
NC State Historic Preservation Office
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?
Mecklenburg County Floodplain map
Christopher Estes
i
12-20-2016
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applica Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION'S
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigations
and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
�-0fjCilT /(�//CCOiMn/ GK.
L&r— 2re/ (o
Propeq Owner (please print) Date
PrAlperty Owner Signature
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
MI am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
This request does include a delineation.
Xx I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
This request does NOT include a delineation.
I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS5 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation.
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).
4 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
s Waters of the United States
Version: December 2013 Page 4

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID. SAW -2006-41762-361 County: Mecklenburg USGS Quad: Mountain Island Lake
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner / Authorized Agent: Beltway Properties, LLC
Address: 9450 W. Burn Mawr. Suite 150
Rosemont, Illinois 60018
Telephone No.:
Size and location of property (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): Beltway Business Park
located on an 86.3 acre tract - Performance Place Road, near Charlotte
Description of projects area and activity: Install a 90 LF culverted.Crossine on an unnamed,
Intermittent tributary to the Catawba River. Previously, under Action ID. 200230067, two of three
oro>Dosed, culye>rted.�crossing$ were.installed which hnpactett 190 LF of unnamed. tributary. The
pei . , hat'authorized those crossings has since expired. Mitigation to offset loss of stream
channel was alreadW accomplished through nayment into the State Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (receipt dated 4/11/02).
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
❑ Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
Nationwide Permit Number: 39
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the
attached Nationwide conditions, and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation
from your submitted plans may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate
legal action.
This verification is valid until the NWP is modified, reissued, or revoked. All of the existing NWPs are
scheduled to be modified, reissued, or revoked prior to March 18, 2007. It is incumbent upon you to remain
informed of changes to the NWPs. We will issue a public notice when the NWPs are reissued. Furthermore, if you
commence or are under contract to commence this activity before the date that the relevant nationwide permit is
modified or revoked, you will have twelve (12) months from the date of the modification or revocation of the NWP
to complete the activity under the present terms and conditions of this nationwide permit. If prior to the expiration
date identified below, the nationwide permit authorization is reissued and/or modified, this verification will remain
valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all new and/or modified terms and
"conditibns. The District Engineer may, at any time, exercise his discretionary authority to modify, suspend, or
revoke a case specific activity's authorization under and NWP.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality
Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine
Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA), prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other
required Federal; State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any.questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Perrnit, or the Corps of
Engineers regulatory program, please contact Steve Chapin at 828-271-7980 x224.
Corps Regulatory Official Steve Cha in Date: December 14, 2006
Expiration Date of Verification: March 18, 2007
Copy Furnished: Estes Design, Inc., P.O. Box 79133, Charlotte, NC 28271-7050

Estes Desian Inc.
��vicanm�r,tal Q�sign � Cact�ultd�g
PO Box 79133, Charlotte NC 28271 1%L
Beltway Project Site
Mecklenburg County NC
Location Map Exhibit 1

Beltway Business Park, Charlotte, North Carolina
Identify Results
Longitude: 801 59' 04" West
Latitude: 35° 15'21" North
Metropolitan Areas
Hydrologic Units (Watersheds) Name: Charlotte -Gastonia -Rock l4ill,NC-SC
Region Name: South AtlanticA,fulf Region Roads
Region Number: 03
Subregion Name: Edisw-Santee Name: Interstate Route 85
Subregion Number. 0305 Name: Us Route 29, Us Route 74
Accounting Unit Name: Santee
Accounting Unit Number: 030501 Counties
Cataloging Unit Name: Upper Catawba. North Carolina, South Carolina.
Cataloging unit Number: 03050101 . Surf Your Watershed (NPA) or
Science in Your Watershed (USGS) County Name: Mecklenburg County
E�1te, IlInn .�l-
ErlviPotutluntal 0@sigtt & Qcutsuttittg
PO Box 79133. Charlotte NC 28271
Beltway Project Site
Mecklenburg County NC
USGS Map Exhibit 4
iW 00' 32" OW
59' 28"
OW 58' 25"
OW 57' 22"
99, 20 0.0 00.80
0.0
02,400.0
504.000.0
35N 16'45"
35N 16'45"
3,9 04, 000.0
3.904.000.0
35N 15' 53"
35N 15' 53"
3,9 02, 400.0
3,902,400.0
Proiect Site
35N 15' O 1"
5N 15'01"
3,9 00, 800.0
'900,800.0
1W 00' 32" OW
59' 20"
0 W 58' 25"
OW 57' 22"
99.200.0 00.800.0
1502.400.0
04.000.0
Identify Results
Longitude: 801 59' 04" West
Latitude: 35° 15'21" North
Metropolitan Areas
Hydrologic Units (Watersheds) Name: Charlotte -Gastonia -Rock l4ill,NC-SC
Region Name: South AtlanticA,fulf Region Roads
Region Number: 03
Subregion Name: Edisw-Santee Name: Interstate Route 85
Subregion Number. 0305 Name: Us Route 29, Us Route 74
Accounting Unit Name: Santee
Accounting Unit Number: 030501 Counties
Cataloging Unit Name: Upper Catawba. North Carolina, South Carolina.
Cataloging unit Number: 03050101 . Surf Your Watershed (NPA) or
Science in Your Watershed (USGS) County Name: Mecklenburg County
E�1te, IlInn .�l-
ErlviPotutluntal 0@sigtt & Qcutsuttittg
PO Box 79133. Charlotte NC 28271
Beltway Project Site
Mecklenburg County NC
USGS Map Exhibit 4

This soil survey was compiled In 1976 by
the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service and cooperating
agencies.
�a
lE1%VkW~tW cow" &CWAWung"Ofta
PO Box 79133, Charlotte NC 28271
Beltway Project Site
Mecklenburg County NC
Soils Map Exhibit 5

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Wetlands Inventory
Beltway Blvd.
November 21, 2016
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife
Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
0 Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Other
base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should
be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the
®
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
0 Freshwater Pond
Riverine
Wetlands Mapper web site.
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
0 Lake
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This page was produced by the NWI mapper

' 11/16/2016
Tutorials Quick Tips Report Issues GIS Data Store
Search Results Layers/Labels
Property Report Zoom To
Property Key
16.712 AC
Parcel ID
GIS ID
05320128
05320128
Address located on Property
Nc Corp
11245 MOORES CHAPEL RD CHARLOTTE NC 28214
Owner Name
Mailing Address
100 S. WACKER DR SUITE
BELTWAY PROPERTIES LLC
850
Industrial
CHICAGO IL 60606
100 S. WACKER DR SUITE
C/O VERUS PROPERTIES LLC
850
Tax Bill Information
CHICAGO IL 60606
Deed Reference(s) and Sales Price
Unselect Property
Link To
20812-387
Google Street View
Link To
Birdseye View maintained by
Mecklenburg County
Associated Information
Legal Desc
L5 M51-502
Land Area
16.712 AC
Fire District
West Mecklenburg
Special District
Fire Service A
Account Type
Nc Corp
Mecklenburg County -
Municipality
unincorporated
Land Use
Industrial
Tax Information
Link To
Tax Values & Building Information
Tax Bill Information
Deed Reference(s) and Sales Price
Deed
Sale Date Sale Price
20812-387
07/28/2006 $0.00
Link To
Recorded Deeds and Maps (03/01/1990 to Current)
Recorded Deeds and Maps (02/28/1.990 and Prior)
Polaris 3G
httpi//pol aris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/#mat=16370&pi d=05320128&gisid= 05320128 1/1

Figure 1 Looking from top of culdesac
Figure 2 Stream Crossing F
Estes inn mn Beltway Business Park, Charlotte
EVOWUMIWIDGWO Mecklenburg County North Carolina
POB 79133 Charlotte NC, 29271
Office 704.841.1779 Fax [phone]

-{ it
- I"V! al•4 � - -ri - T y -� � —
I r
A I
�� sem; ��`:.� � _ r ,'-.°' '' �` ♦�. � 4, a � iA
;'' tom. �,' '�`�� �� '���a �` ' �� �?' .- b•
! �k. �+. `1�rd� '�N C/z.-";''-.•--� �'';v�`A' ' M' '1: ,x ',r'rYi' ,- ++�♦ 1\ �;"f ii —c ► ,: ',\ L V . t{i. r.��l r♦ �'
. FIN 71 !1
;:3s a � .., � ., �'-.:.. ``tel} t' � �� }•, i;
.lam= ti�.,r .,��r.'h� .iA :� - 'n �`,.. , _.L f5 � •1 ' _
t�

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # E (indicate on attached map)
01 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Beltway, LLC 2. Evaluator's name: Chris Estes
3. Date of evaluation: 10.30.2016 4. Time of evaluation: 11:30a
5. Name of stream: unnamed tributary fo 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: 114 ac 8. Stream order: 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 2250 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.259279
12. Subdivision name (if
Longitude (ex. -77.556611):
-80.986267
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Take performance Rd. to Beltway Blvd. The first culvert crossing under Beltway Blvd. is stream reach F.
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: 1/2 inch rain within 72 hrs
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
Undisturbed
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters X Water Supply Watershed F (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential
90 % Forested
22. Bankfull width: 2
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
_% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
% Cleared / Logged _% Other
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2-3
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) _Gentle (2 to 4%) __I_Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight _Occasional bends X Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 49 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
r
#
._.._ n �
CHARACTERISTICS
J
..
Coastal
Piedmont
t
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
0
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
..
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
(extensive alteration = 0. no alteration = max points)
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0—;
0-4
0-4
1
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 4
0-2
3
>,,
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
a
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 — 4
0 2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
Channel sinuosity
0— 5
0— 4
0 3
2
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive deposition= 0. little or no sediment = max points)
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
1
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0 — 5
0-4
0-5
1
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
F"
1
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 — 4
0-5
3
E ,
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
(substantial impact =0. no evidence = max points)
3
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0 - 6
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0, well-developed = max points)
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
d
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy =max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0 — 4
2
(deeply embedded = 0, loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
7
1
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
*4
O
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
O S
0-5
4
(no evidence= 0: abundant evidence — max points)
tal Points Possible 100 100 100
sm r on first page)
49
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # E (indicate on attached map)
9; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Beltway, LLC 2. Evaluator's name: Chris Estes
3. Date of evaluation: 10.30.2016 4. Time of evaluation: 11:30a
5. Name of stream: unnamed tributary to 6. River basin: Catawba
7. Approximate drainage area: 114 ac 8. Stream order: 1 st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 2250 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.259279
12. Subdivision name (if any):
Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -80.986267
Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Take performance Rd. to Beltway Blvd. The first culvert crossing under Beltway Blvd. is stream reach F.
14. Proposed channel work (if
15. Recent weather conditions: 1/2 inch rain within 72 hrs
16. Site conditions at time of visit:
Undisturbed
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat
_Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters X Water Supply Watershed P (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 110 % Residential % Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
90 % Forested % Cleared / Logged % Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 2 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 24
24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) _Gentle (2 to 4%) X Moderate (4 to 10%) _Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight _Occasional bends X Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 49 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
SCORE
0
3
3
3
1
3
2
3
2
2
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
4
2
0
1
0
4
49
#
CHARACTERISTICS
J
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0 - 5
0 -4
0-5
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. - max points)
U
,..
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0 5
0-4
0-2
P'
p*
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - 4
0 - 2
(no wetlands _,., 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
(extensive channelization = 0: natural meander - max points)
10
Sediment input
0- 5
0-4
0-4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment - m_ax paints)
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrateNA*
0-4
0-5
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0-4
0-5
>1
(deeply incised = 0: stable bed & banks = max points)
F"
a
l;
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks =max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-4
0 -5
Ey
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout0-3 = max points)
15
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
(substantial impact =0; no evidence - max points)
16
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0 - ,
0-5
0-6
(no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed - max points)
dHabitat
17
complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
�
(little or no habitat = 0; fi•equent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over stream bed
0-5
0-5
0-5
x
(no shading vegetation = 0: continuous canopy =max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
(deeply embedded = 0, loose structure = max)
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0-5
0-5
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
1
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
O
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0 6
0 -- 5
0- 5
(no evidence - 0: abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
IL TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
SCORE
0
3
3
3
1
3
2
3
2
2
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
4
2
0
1
0
4
49

IL
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/ Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 1 AR
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): _
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
<1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes _X_ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks: seep
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
X Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
X Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
X Iron Deposits (B5)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: NA
Remarks:
Site was delineated in previous years during non -drought conditions and indicated surface water, saturated condition
and high water table
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
30x30
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Species? Status
1. Acer rubrum
25
X FAC
2. Acer negundo
25
X FACW
3 Fraxinus pennsylvanica
20
FACW
4 Ulmus americana
10
FACW
—8�
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 40 20% of total cover: 16
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 20x20
1. Acer negundo 25 X FACW
Acer rubrum 20 X FAC
4.
45 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 22.5 20% of total cover: 9
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
5.
6.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15x15 )
1. Juncus effusus 20 FACW
2. Andropogon virginicus 10 FACU
s Paspalum laeve 30 X FAC
5.
6.
7.
9.
11.
60 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15x15 )
1. Smilax 20 UP
2 Lonicera japonica FAC
3.
4.
5.
-+U = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20 20% of total cover: 8
numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Sampling Point:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
3
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
100
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multioly by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
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 Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb – All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 5Y 5/1 RM M clay loam
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 5/1
RM M clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (At 0) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
X Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
X Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Crayfish chimneys present with gleyed low chroma matrix exposed.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Pro .ect/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 2 AB
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
sample taken in an upland
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 (614)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ 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 (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ 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: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in upland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Acer rubrum
2.
Acer negundo
3.
Quercus rubrum
4
Fraxinus americanus
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
20
X FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6 (A)
15
FACW
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
30
X FAC
Total Number of Dominant
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Andropogon virginicus
2 FACU
Species Across All Strata:
8 (B)
20
FACU
4
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
75
6
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
85 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 42.5 20% of total cover: 17 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Acer negundo 5 FACW FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x4=
3.
UPL species X5=
4. Column Totals: (A) (B)
6. 1 Prevalence Index = B/A =
5 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Elaeagnus pungens 30 X UP _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 553.0'
2. _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6•
30
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 15
20% of total cover: 6
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Juncus effusus
1 FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Andropogon virginicus
2 FACU
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3 Paspalum laeve
1 FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb — All herbaceousnon-wood
( y) plants, including
g
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
4 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp. 30
2.
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
30 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 15 20% of total cover: 6 Present? Yes X No
(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type' Loc
Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6
none
sandy loam
7-14 10YR 4/3
5Y 5/5 RM M
sandy clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
sample taken in adjacent upland
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 1 C
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? NO Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks: seep
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)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (131)
X Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
X Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
X Drift Deposits (63)
_ 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)
X Geomorphic Position (132)
_ 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
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in wetland. Sample was taken during drought conditions.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
1. Acer rubrum
2.
Platanus occidentalis
3
Quercus falcata
q
Liquidambar styriciflua
5.
Ulmaus americana
6.
4
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Sampling Point: Stream Flag E6
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover
Species?
cies?
Staattus Number
St
of Dominant Species
25
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 1
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
4
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
20
X
FEW
FACW species
20FACU
X
FAC
Total Number of Dominant 7
x 3 =
Ilex opeca
FACU
Species Across All Strata: (B)
10
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
FAC
15
15
4
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species 5700
5.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
50% of total cover: 45
90 = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 18
rrevaience inaex worKsneet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
30 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 1
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1. Acer negundo
30 X FACW
FACW species
x 2 =
2. Acer rubrum
FAC
FAC species
x 3 =
Ilex opeca
FACU
FACU species
x4=
5.
6.
50% of total cover: 15
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Elaeagnus pungens
2. Ligustrum sinense
3 Ilex opeca
4.
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
30 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
20% of total cover:
6
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
10
UPL
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
25 X
FACU
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
20 X
FACU
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Microstegium sp.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
6.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
55 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover: 27.5 20% of total cover: 11
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Carex sp.
15 FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Microstegium sp.
30 X FAC
F�
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3 Paspalum laeve
15
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb — All herbaceousnon-wood
( y) plants, including
8,
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
9
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
11.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
50% of total cover: 30
V" = Total Cover
20% of total cover: 12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp. 10 UP
2 Lonicera japonica 30 X FAC
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
40 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20 20% of total cover: 8 Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

a
SOIL
Sampling Point:
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) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 5Y 5/1 RM M clay loam streaking
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 5/2 RM M clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (At 0) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
XDepleted
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(A5)
Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
X Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks
sample taken in wetland during drought conditions
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 2 C
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks: sample taken up slope
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 (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1)
_ 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 (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
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: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in upland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Acer rubrum
2. Acer negundo
3 Quercus falcata
4 Liquidambar styraciflua
6
Sampling Point: Up from flag E6
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
5
20
X
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
15
x 2 =
FACW
15 X FACW
20
X
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
7
2'
FACU species
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
20
X
FAC
x 5 =
4.
Column Totals:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
71% (A/B)
5
6
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Elaeagnus pungens
2. Liaustrum sinense
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
5.
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a sepa
Prevalence Index = B/A =
15 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
15 UPL _ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
25 X FACU _ 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.
35 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover: Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
20 FAC Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
10 FAC approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
= i otai t;over
20% of total cover:
5 UPL
15 X FAC
Hydrophytic
16 = Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
75 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 1
FACW species
x 2 =
1. Acer negundo
15 X FACW
Ilex opeca
10 FACU
FAC species
x 3 =
2'
FACU species
x4=
3.
UPL species
x 5 =
4.
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
5
6
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Elaeagnus pungens
2. Liaustrum sinense
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
5.
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a sepa
Prevalence Index = B/A =
15 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
15 UPL _ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
25 X FACU _ 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.
35 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover: Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
20 FAC Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
10 FAC approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
= i otai t;over
20% of total cover:
5 UPL
15 X FAC
Hydrophytic
16 = Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 none sandy loam
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 5/5 RM M sandy clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
sample taken in adjacent upland
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 1 D
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks: Depression
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Water Marks (131)
X Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
X Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
X Drift Deposits (133)
X 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)
X 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 X No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in wetland. Sample was taken during drought conditions.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
1.
Acer rubrum
2.
Platanus occidentalis
3.
Quercus falcata
4
Liquidambar styriciflua
s_
Ulmus americana
Sampling Point: above culvert
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
15
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
10
X
FACW
OBL species
10
X
FACU
Total Number of Dominant 10
x2=
1.Acer negundo
10 X FACW
Species Across All Strata: (B)
10
Acer rubrum
2'
FAC
FAC species
15
Ilex opera
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species 70%
x4=
3
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
5.
6.
23 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Elaeagnus pungens 5 X UPL
2. Ligustrum sinense 5 X FACU
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Carex sp.
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
4.
5.
7.
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sq.
2 Lonicera japonica
4.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
Total Cover
- - - -- -- - -
--
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
30 X FAC
FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
15
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species
x2=
1.Acer negundo
10 X FACW
Acer rubrum
2'
10 X FAC
FAC species
x3=
Ilex opera
3 FACU
FACU species
x4=
3
UPL species
x 5 =
4'
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
5.
6.
23 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1 Elaeagnus pungens 5 X UPL
2. Ligustrum sinense 5 X FACU
4.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Carex sp.
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
4.
5.
7.
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sq.
2 Lonicera japonica
4.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is <-3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
75 = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
3 UP
5 X FAC
Hydrophytic
8 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
10 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
30 X FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
30 X FAC
FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
15
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
75 = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
3 UP
5 X FAC
Hydrophytic
8 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Present?
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 5Y 5/1 RM M clay loam crusting
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 5/2 RM M clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
X Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF 12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
X Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
sample taken in wetland during drought conditions
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 2 D
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks: sample taken up slope
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ 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: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in upland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Acer rubrum
2.
Acer negundo
3.
Quercus falcata
4
Liquidambar styraciflua
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
50% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Acer negundo
2 Ilex opeca
3.
4.
50% of total cover:
Sampling Point: Up from flag E6
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species 5
20
X
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
15
FACW
20
X
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
7
Species Across All Strata: (B)
20
X
FAC
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71% (A/B)
75 = Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
20% of total cover:
— OBL species x 1 =
15 X FACW FACW species x 2 =
10 FACU FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x4=
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
15 = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Elaeagnus pungens 15
2. Liqustrum sinense 25
3.
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
4.
5.
6.
7.
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
3.
4.
UPL
X FACU
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
_ 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.
35 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover:
Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
20 �— FAC Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
10 FAC approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
4 = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
5 UPL
15 X FAC
Hydrophytic
16 = Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: I Present? Yes X No
rs here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type'Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 none sandy loam
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 4/5 RM M sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
educed Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Redox Depressions (178)
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.
sample taken in adjacent upland
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
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)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (178)
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.
sample taken in adjacent upland
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc./ Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 1 G
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): _
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
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? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? No (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
<1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Headwater wetland. surveyed during drought conditions
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
X Water Marks (131)
X Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
X Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X 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 (65)
C Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ 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 X No
Depth (inches): 18"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: NA
Remarks:
toe of slope. Beavers are active in adjacent stream.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Acer rubrum
2. Liquidambar styriciflua
3. Ulmus americana
4.
Sampling Point:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
30
X FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
20
X FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
15
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
9
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
Species Across All Strata: (B)
FACW species
x 2 =
Percent of Dominant Species 78%
10 x FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6. Prevalence Index = B/A =
22 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Elaeagnus pungens 5 FACU _ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2 Ligustrum sinense 30 x FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1, Carex sp
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
4 Fern sp.
5.
17
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
3.
1 5.
50% of total cover:
rs here or on a ser
US Army Corps of Engineers
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
00 = Total Cover
- - - -- -- - -
--
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
5 x FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5 x FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
FACW species
x 2 =
1, Acer negundo
10 x FACW
2. Liquidambar styriciflua
10 x ��
FAC species
x3=
Sambucus canadensis
2 FAC
FACU species
x4=
3.
UPL species
x5=
4.
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
6. Prevalence Index = B/A =
22 = Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Elaeagnus pungens 5 FACU _ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2 Ligustrum sinense 30 x FACU _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
6.
50% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1, Carex sp
2. Microstegium sp.
3 Paspalum laeve
4 Fern sp.
5.
17
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
3.
1 5.
50% of total cover:
rs here or on a ser
US Army Corps of Engineers
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
— = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
5 UPL
10 x FAC
Hydrophytic
15
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
35 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
3 FACW
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
5 x FAC
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5 x FAC
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
5 x FACU
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
— = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
5 UPL
10 x FAC
Hydrophytic
15
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
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) % Tvt)e Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/5 5Y 5/2 RM M sandy loam
7-14 10YR 4/2 5Y 5/1 RM M sandy clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
X Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM=Reduced Matrix. MS=Masked Sand Grains.
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)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TIF 12)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (1712) (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.
Abundant crayfish chimneys.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: INC Sampling Point: 2 G
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? NO Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ 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: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in upland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
30x30 Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. Acer rubrum 30 x FAC
2. Quercus rubrum 15 FACU
3. Fraxinus americana 15 FACU
6.
Sampling Point:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50% (A/B)
4.
5.
6.
60 = Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
= Total Cover
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
30x30
CBL species
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
5
FACU
1. Acer negundo
5 FACW
FACW species
x2=
2. Liquidambar styriciflua
6 X FAC
FAC species
x 3 =
3 Ilex opeca
4 FACU
FACU species
x 4 =
4.
5.
6.
15
= Total Cover
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
30x30 )
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
1 Elaeagnus pungens
5
FACU
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.01
2. Ligustrum sinense
30
X FACU
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
3.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4.
5.
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
6•
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
35
= Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
15x15
Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum Plot size:
(
)
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Paspalum laeve
5
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2 Rubus L.
10
X FACU
Sapling —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5. Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6 approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7. Herb —All herbaceousnon-wood
( y) plants, including
g herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9. It (1 m) in height.
10.
11.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
15 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp. 4 FACU
2. Lonicera japonica 10 x FAC
4.
5.
14Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 none sandy loam
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 5/5 RM M sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
sample taken in adjacent upland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Design Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: NC Sampling Point: 1 GA
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? NO Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Culvert seperates GA from G
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 (614)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
X Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (1316)
X Water Marks (131)
C Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
X Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
X 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 (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 12„
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in depression under drought conditions.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
1.
Acer rubrum
2
Platanus occidentalis
3.
Liquidambar styriciflua
4
Liriodendron tulipifera L.
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6.
30
50% of total cover:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
1.
2.
3.
5
6
50% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30x30
1 Elaeagnus pungens
2. Ligustrum sinense
3. Ilex opeca
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
15x15
Sampling Point: stream flag f38/f37
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Microstegium sp.
% Cover
Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
4
15
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
30
X FACW
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
20
X—
Total Number of Dominant
5
5.
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
10
FACU
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb –All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
Percent of Dominant Species
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
80% (A/B)
75 = Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet:
20% of total cover: 17 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x2=
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
3 FACU
35 X FACU
2 FACU
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.01
_ 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.
40 = Total Cover
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover:
Tree –Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
)
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1. Microstegium sp.
35 X FAC
__f(
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2 Carex sp.
FACW
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3 Rubus L.
5 FACU
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4
5.
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7.
Herb –All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
8
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9.
ft (1 m) in height.
10.
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
50 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Smilax sp. 5 FACU
2. Lonicera japonica 30 x FAC
3.
Hydrophytic
35
= Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: I Present? Yes X No
numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point:
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) % Tvi)e Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 5Y 5/2 RM M clay loam
7-14 1nYR Ari by bbl
RM M sandy clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. `Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (At 0) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
X Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
X Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

4
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Beltway Business Park City/County: Charlotte Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 10/30/2016
Applicant/Owner: Estes Desiqn Inc. / Verus Partners, LLC State: INC Sampling Point: 2GA
Investigator(s): Chris Estes Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): toe of slope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): <1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): MLRA 136 of LRR P Lat: 35.26103 Long: -80.984657 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Mountain Island Lake NWI classification: PSS
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No X (If no, explain in Remarks.) surveyed during drought
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? No Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? 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 X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
upland sample
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two requiredl
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ 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 (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ 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: NA
Remarks:
Sample taken in upland
US Army Corps of Engineers
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: up from F38
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80% (A/B)
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
1. Acer rubrum
20 X
FAC
2. Liquidambar styriciflua
30 X
FAC
3. Liriodendron tulipifera L.
10
FACV
4 Quercus rubra
5
FAC
Sampling Point: up from F38
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80% (A/B)
6.
18 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
1 Elaeagnus pungens 5 FACU
2. Ligustrum sinense 25 X FACU
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
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.
30 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover:
15x15 Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1 Paspalum laeve 10 FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Schedonorus arundinaceus 5 FACU
14.
17
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15x15 )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
3. Campsis radicans
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
15 = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
4 FACU
25 X FAC
5 FAC
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
60 = Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species
x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
FACW species
x 2 =
1. Liquidambar styriciflua
5 FAC
Acer rubrum
10 X FAC
FAC species
x 3 =
2
lex opaca
3 FACU
FACU species
x4=
3
UPL species
x 5 =
4.
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
6.
18 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30x30 )
1 Elaeagnus pungens 5 FACU
2. Ligustrum sinense 25 X FACU
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
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.
30 = Total Cover Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
20% of total cover:
15x15 Tree —Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1 Paspalum laeve 10 FAC (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Schedonorus arundinaceus 5 FACU
14.
17
50% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15x15 )
1. Smilax sp.
2. Lonicera japonica
3. Campsis radicans
4.
5.
50% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate
Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb —All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height.
15 = Total Cover
20% of total cover:
4 FACU
25 X FAC
5 FAC
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover Vegetation
20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
or
Sampling Point:
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type'Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 4/6 none sandy loam
7-14 10YR 4/3 5Y 5/5 RM M sandy clay loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
X Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
X Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (1713) (MLRA 136, 122)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No X
sample taken in adjacent upland
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
December 16, 2016
Mr. Christopher Estes
Estes Design, Inc.
P.O. Box 79133
Charlotte, North Carolina 28271-7050
Dear Mr. Estes:
Subject: Beltway Business Park Project; Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-07-361
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence dated November 17, 2016 (received November 22, 2016) wherein you request
our comments regarding potential impacts to federally protected species. We submit the
following comments in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321
et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, you are preparing a permit application (likely NWP 39)
for unavoidable impacts to Waters of the U.S. associated with a proposed commercial
development near Belmont, North Carolina. You indicated that the majority of this project was
previously scoped, and permitted in 2002, then again in 2007, but the project was never
completed. According to the information provided, the project area consists of four contiguous
lots totaling approximately 101 acres. The parcels are predominately wooded with some
developed open space. No specific information regarding proposed impacts to jurisdictional
streams or wetlands were included in your recent correspondence. However, a previous
correspondence from this office dated October 10, 2007 (attached), indicates that jurisdictional
features are present at the site.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to Service records, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the project
area for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat. However, the final 4(d) rule (effective
as of February 16, 2016), exempts incidental take of northern long-eared bat associated with
activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a known hibernation site, and greater than 150
feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup season (June I — July 31). Based on
the information provided, the project (which may require tree clearing) would occur at a location
where any incidental take that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule.

Our correspondence dated October 10, 2007, requests additional information regarding the
presence of the federally endangered Schweintiz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
Specifically, we indicated that suitable habitat exists within the project area and we requested
that surveys for the species be conducted during the optimal flowering season (August —
October) by a qualified biologist. Please provide survey results to this office.
The Service has record of no other federally protected species or suitable habitat for those
species in the project area. In accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate
federal agency or its designated representative to review its activities or programs and to identify
any such activities or programs that may affect endangered or threatened species or their
habitats. If it is determined that the proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally
listed as endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated.
Our October 10, 2007, correspondence provided several recommendations in the interest of
protecting fish and wildlife resources. We wish to reiterate those comments.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 225, if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-07-361.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet A. Mizzi
Field Supervisor
e.c. Mr. David Schaeffer, USACE

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Pat McCrory Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susan Kluttz Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
December 15, 2016
Christopher Estes
Estes Design, Inc.
PO Box 79133
Charlotte, NC 28271-7050
Re: Develop Beltway Business Park, Performance Road, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, ER 16-2165
Dear Mr. Estes:
Thank you for your letter for November 17, 2016, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewg_ncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Mitigation Services
ENVI RONM ENTAL QUALITY
Robert McCormick
Verus Partners, LLC
100 South Wacker Drive Suite 850
Chicago, IL 60606
Project: Beltway Business Park
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Searlmr
December 20, 2016
Expiration of Acceptance: June 20, 2017
County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the
table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation
program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility
of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will be approved. You must
also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated with
the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this
acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS
receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and
payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an
applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts that may require
compensatory mitigation are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned
to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the impact amounts shown below.
Impact
River
Basin
CU Location
(8 -digit HUC)
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres) Buffer I Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft_)
Cold
Cool
1 Warm
F Ri arian Non -Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Catawba
03050101
1 0
0
1 00.358
0
0 0 1 0
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation
will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and 15A NCAC
02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any
questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
cc: Chris Estes, agent
Sincerely,
gs.B Stanfill
anagement Supervisor
State of North Carolina i Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 1 217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000
919 707 8976 T

1 JURISDICTIONAL WETU " 7fi 1 F�0,063 AC. NA EWAY"1 LF zW i
PER BURTON ENGINEERING PEA BURTOY ENGINEERING
WETLAND 'A'8'B•1 PREL WETLAND DELINEATION PRE. WETLAND DELINEATION ZW¢a�
SEE SHEET NUMBER 3 DATE: 17/14116 DATE: 12114116 OZi
F
IMPACT TYPE: PROPOSED Z5(.)O
- CAN
BUILDING AND PARKING LOT T - - -I - -1 F- 7 -F r I 7 T F -T T T- 7 F � 7 T T F T I� � mwa
I TZ
I I I I I I I I I I I \ g
�zisn xuazif
rs rs SEE SHEET NUMBER2No
R
is w'tr IMPACT TYPE:FILL
A
BLDG"A" PI DSEDBUILDING
JURISDICTIONAL
xvi
'
• • 25 (0.58BAC.)
PER BURTON EN I.V
GIN ING Q N Z
T
- - - \ PREL WETLAND DELINEATION AA
DATE: 17114116 Q B.L J
o
L--------- ---J \ Q N Z
W
Q- z Q
—ws b �_ 2e6Ta5roossAc.) \ z < Q
WATERSHED BUFFER �f PER BURTON ENGINEERING PER BURTON ENGINEERING
s2 � PREL WETLAND DELINEATION PRELWETANDDELNEATIDN ...„..m \ d U
q 9. DATE 17114118 Lu DI TI \ Q
.4OPV DATE 1L14116 t 4054791-SF(1.115AC.) \ U.1
J
p� PER BURTON ENGINEERING > =
��,1•• M PREL WETLAND DELINEATION \ WO
y�rwma u� DATE:17114116 - \ W Q QCC
W
Tn I- >O
w
,J [I]
PER BURTON ENGINEERING tau(�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ; yr 2 \\ Yi
PREL WETLAND DELINEATION 41 U
DATE: 17114116 \
mucosEoeuarn�9E
A beer )
�` emizaE
ti.'_ a inx
slur \ APP. TRACKING#
15A7329(0.355 AC.) I \ SALIN-_—
yf PER BURTON ENGINEERING
PREL WETLAND DELINEATION I g f w`a?ay_ u MIN /
DATE: 12114116
JUN I
0.3B43.56(1.007AC.) IMPA T R
�- - T - - - ��\\�\ I I 0.14 ACRES /
PER BURTON ENGINEERING I / SCALE: 1' =200'
PRELWERANDDE LINEATION 111 I
DATE: 12114116 L - - -
' I i
16
i
0
F4
U #
W W 1
�s N w y TNN

FA
t
II I I I� I I I� I \ � \\ \\ \ � \ 1 .�; .•
/ I 11\
.. SRI � I 1 1 � �� \ �.1•� •�
./ � l �l l �l I III � I I / (/ 'l �•
I I I I 3
(• •,l: / /, �l .��/rte, �_-� �
0
l\�•;:.y: �� �✓/ � 111 I / -�
.t N /
DATE: 12.16.2016 K SITE DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE FOR BURTON
SCALE: ENGINEERING
1' = 40'
PROJECT #629.006 BELTWAY BUSINESS PARK. ASSOCIATES
SHEET# x-r�'ur0 H-sE
BELTWAY BLVD. --CHARLOTTE, NC -- 28273
Ch
-.N-10 Z EMO FSYNFn fl6.9Ww 1M•eMve. HC M210
2 of 3 : WETLAND "C" IMPACTS - PLAN d)5959M,.Fu O,EEOEMO
FYm Lbrew F,66)

DATE: 12.12.2016
SCALE: 1'=40'
PROJECT #629.006
p
K n'
f
SITE DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE FOR
BELTWAY BUSINESS PARK.
BURTON
ENGINEERING
® ASSOCIATES
SHEET A.
S
xcrv►ENONFERB
BELTWAY BLVD. --CHARLOTTE, NC -- 28273
OBEO F.WMiI flt• 9YIY,00•COOeM, NC R",0
3 of 3
WETLAND "A&B" IMPACTS - PLAN
�.,.,•Fd�a>^�^^