20080245 Ver 2_Individual_20080711

CVS @ Long Creek
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County
North Carolina
Joint Application Form and Supporting Documentation for
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE NOTIFICATION
TO CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND NCDENR
Prepared For
Mr. Mark Ball
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, NC 28208
Prepared By:
Leonard S. Rindner, PWS
Environmental Planning Consultant
3714 Spokeshave Lane
Matthews, NC 28105
[phone]
July 9, 2008
0 LS� LS 11W9i
JUL i 1 2008
DENR • WATER LUAU fr
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Page 1 of 14

June 27, 2008
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Attn: Ken Jolly, Chief Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina, 28402-i890
-and-
NC Division of Water Quality, Wetlands Unit
Attn: Cyndi Karoly
2321 Crabtree Blvd.
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27604-2260
The current landowner of the property identified below, hereby authorizes Leonard S. Rindner, PWS. to
act on our behalf as my agent during the determination of regulated limits of waters and wetlands and
processing of permits to impact Wetlands and Waters of the US that are regulated by the Clean Water
Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act.
Federal and State agents are authorized to be on said property when accompanied by Leonard S. Rindner,
PWS, or a member of his staff.
Leonard S. Rindner, PWS is authorized to provide supplemental information needed for permit processing
at the request of the US Army Corps of Engineers, or the North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources,
Property Owner 1 Applicant
Contact Name:
Street Address / PO Box:
City, State, Zip Code:
Phone / Fax Number:
Project Name:
Property Street Address:
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC
Mark A. Ball
3735 Beam Rd., Ste. B
Charlotte, NC 28217
(704) 496-71651(704) 357-0018
Long Creek Village
8108 Mt. Holly-Huntersville Road, Charlotte, NC
Owners / Applicant Signature:�'����/
Date:
June 27, 2008

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name CVS at Long Creek
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: Beatties Ford Retail Invest
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Leonard S. Rindner
s. LLC
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s):
5. Site Address: Intersection of Beatties Ford Road and Mt. Holly Huntersville
6. Subdivision Name: Long Creek Village
7. City: Charlotte
8. County: Mecklenburg
9. Lat: 80.8877 Long: 35.3476 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle XT Mountain Island Lake
11.. Waterway: Long Creek
12. Watershed. Catawba
13. Requested Action:
x Nationwide Permit # 3 9
General Permit #
x Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM
a[EVNINIEUT
JUL 1 1 2008
DENR - WATER UUAU i V
yyE"DS AND STORMWATER BRANCE►
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:
Begin Date

Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Appiicame" or "Niti .)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
X Section 404 Permit ❑ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
❑ Section 10 Permit ❑ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
X 401 Water Quality Certification ❑ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide Permit #39
If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ❑
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: NCEEP- ILF wetland mitigation is not currently available.
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ❑
II. Applicant Information [� n
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Mr. Mark Ball JUL 1 1 2008
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC V
3735 Beam Road, Suite B WE�ppS0pSTOgmW RBR��H
Charlotte, NC 28208
Telephone Number: 704 496 7165 Fax Number: 704 357 0018
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Leonard S. Rindner, PWS
Company Affiliation: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
Mailing Address: Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
3714 Spokeshave Lane
Matthews, NC 28105
Telephone Number: 704 904 2277 Fax Number: 704 847 0185
E-mail Address: len.rindner.pwsggmail.com
Page 2 of 14

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17 -inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: CVS at Long Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town: Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): Intersection of Beatties
Ford Road and Mount Holly Huntersville Road - see attached location map
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 80.88770N 35.3476 °W
6. Property size (acres): +/- 2.25 Acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Long Creek
8. River Basin: Catawba
(Note — this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:_ Former disturbed agricultural land and RV storage and sales
center; developing commercial and residential areas.
Page 3 of 14

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
proposed project is a CVS Pharmacy at the major intersection of Beatty's Ford Road and
Mount Holly Huntersville Road.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Create a development pad for the CVS store.
Major alignment and widening changes are expected to this intersection with development of
I-485.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. A wetland and stream delineation was conducted for the site and verified
by the USACE in 2003 (Tim Smith) The delineation was re-evaluated in 2008 to verify if there
have any significant changes It was determined that the delineation is essentially the same. A
meeting was held with Steve Chapin of the USACE on May 29 2008 and with Alan Johnson on
June 13 to review proposed plans and potential mitigation is the floodplain area for wetland
impacts The site is subject to local and NCDENR stormwater management requirements.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
Additional permits are not anticipated If additional impacts are required, a PCN will be
submitted as required Based on a review with Steve Chapin of the USACE on May 29, 2008 this
parcel can be considered a separate project from Long Creek Village and eligible to utilize a
Nationwide Permit 39.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 4 of 14

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts to Phase 1 are limited
to a single road crossing to provide access from Beatties Ford Road.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
sennrntely list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact
Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.)
Located within
100 -year
Floodplain
(yes/no)
Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet)
Area of
Impact
(acres)
1
NWT #39
PEM I C (disturbed pasture)
Yes
+/-2001
.37 ac
Total Wetland Impact (acres)
0.37 ac
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: Approx.369 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip -rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on map)
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial o�
Intermittent.
Average
Stream Width
Before Impact
Impact
Length
(linear feet)
Area of
Impact
(acres)
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage)
No stream impacts are proposed.
Page 5 of 14

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill Pyonvatinn drP.rluinu_ flooding_ drainage. bulkheads. etc.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
Type of Impact
Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.)
Area of
Impact
(acres)
0.00 ac.
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres)
0.37 ac.
Total Stream Impact (linear feet):
O if
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the roject:
Stream Impact (acres):
R�.A�ac.
Wetland Impact (acres):
7
Open Water Impact (acres):
0.00 ac.
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres)
0.37 ac.
Total Stream Impact (linear feet):
O if
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ❑ Yes X No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ❑ uplands ❑ stream ❑ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw -down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): Off — line stormwater management facilities are
proposed
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower -impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
Page 6 of 14

were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The wetland area is within a currently mowed and maintained utility easement and mowed
pasture area The intersection of Mt Holly Huntersville Road will be widened and realigned
based on the additional traffic expected in the area In order to develop the site and meet
engineering requirements and design criteria the elevation of the site must be elevated to allow
access and egress from the site The driveway distance is the minimum distance from the
intersection as required by the City of Charlotte Department of Transportation based on expected
traffic demands The stormwater from this site will be treated by an approved extended
stormwater wetland.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE — In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/newetlands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Page 7 of 14

Summary of Wetland Creation/Restoration Measures
The objective is to create a minimum 0.37 acres of periodically saturated and occasionally flooded herbaceous
wetlands that can eventually succeed into scrub shrub and forested wetlands in the Long Creek floodplain. The
mitigation site will be developed in an area that is currently a disturbed pasture. No forested buffers will be
impacted to created this wetland area. Hydrology will be supported by excavation into a seasonally high water
table; subdrainage from an existing spring; discharge from a extended stormwater wetland; occasional flooding;
and captured rainfall. Long Creek is listed on the 303d list of impaired waters in North Carolina.
These wetlands adjacent to surface waters will help to improve water quality by filtering runoff, trapping
sediment, absorbing nutrients, and providing wildlife habitat and a food source for aquatic organisms,
herpetofauna, birds, fish and other wildlife.
The following hydrological zones are expected to occur within the wetland mitigation areas:
Semi -permanently to permanently: area is inundated or saturated from 75% to 100% of the growing
season.
- Regularly: area is inundated or saturated from 25% to 75% of the growing season.
- Seasonally: area is inundated or saturated from 12.5% to 25% of the growing season.
- Irregularly: area is inundated or saturated from 5% to 12.5% of the growing season.
- Vegetation - The majority of the species utilized will include Obligate (OBL) and Facultative Wet
(FACW) vegetation. Vegetation species that provide benefits to wildlife habitat will be incorporated into the mix
of species utilized.
Approach
The creation of wetlands will include approximately 0.60 acres to 0.75 acres of excavated area in the floodplain in
order to assure that a minimum of .37 acres of wetlands is created. It is likely that more than 0.37 acres of
wetlands will be created. Areas that will be created will be graded by excavation to finish grades with suitable
topsoil/hydric soil and stabilized as necessary to create the hydrological planting zones and drainage patterns.
Under normal conditions for the area, the soils are expected to be inundated and/or saturated during the winter
months and early spring for a period of at least 5 to 12.5% of the growing season. Topsoil from floodplain areas
as well as the hydric soil from the proposed impact areas will be temporarily stripped and stored for use in lining
the wetland site. The soils that occur in the area include Helena, Monacan and/or Iredell Series, which are known
to have dense clay subsoil's. Using these existing soils in the proposed mitigation sites may hasten the
development of hydric soil conditions in the created wetland site. It is expected that herbaceous and aquatic
materials will also volunteer due to use of existing wetland soils and due to the natural seed source of the
floodplain.
The discharge structures into the wetlands will be stone filter weir structures or berms with gravel filters or coir
fiber logs. This will allow flexibility to make adjustments and detention of or the removal of excess water until a
stable level is observed. The flow will be diffused in a sheet flow fashion. Sheet flow will disperse over the
wetland mitigation area before following swales, which will distribute flows at a low velocity. The bottom grades
of the proposed wetland will be at a flat gradient of 0 to less than 0.5% slopes. Small drainage ways and
hummocks will be designed to disperse and direct flow and to create the various hydrological zones for
vegetation. Excess water will be discharged out of the area in a controlled manner. If the water depth is greater or
less than anticipated than the outfall can be adjusted slightly to allow a greater or lesser volume to be stored.
Page 8 414

Percolation rates are not expected to be rapid due to the dense subsoil's. Small obstructions will be strategically
placed to make minor adjustments to drainage flow in order to increase or decrease duration of flooding or
saturation. Since the wetland area will be excavated in the existing pasture, the high seasonal water table
groundwater sources are also likely.
Wetland Creation - Construction Methodology
Stormwater runoff, overland flow, flooding, captured rainfall, and a seasonal high water table will support the
hydrology of these potential wetland areas. To allow a saturated soil development, Coir fiber (coconut) logs will
be used to help impound water and can be installed by hand. They will be lived staked to create a more natural
hummock. The density of the log can be modified, thereby holding or allowing varying amounts of water to be
impounded. These microtopographic features will create the various hydrological zones.
Prior to any construction activity, the proposed wetland mitigation site will be clearly marked in the field.
Sedimentation and erosion control measures and other Best Management Practices shall be in
place. The wetland areas that are to be created will be graded as required.
- After excavation the wetland areas will be backfilled to finish grades with suitable topsoil and stabilized
as necessary to create the various hydrological planting zones and drainage pattern.
Soils shall be topsoil or stockpiled suitable wetland soil and have a minimum of 40% organic content.
Soils shall be spread and compacted to 90%. Eighteen inches to two feet of topsoil and shall be spread and
adequately compacted as a planting medium throughout the mitigation cell. Note that grading in the proposed
wetland areas should be below finish grade prior to placement of topsoil. Before placement of the topsoil, the
subgrade and hydrological conditions must be assessed. Manipulation of soil depth will be required to create
micro -topography within mitigation cell. Field modifications may be required based on actual site conditions.
- The wetland mitigation areas shall be stabilized with grasses or other herbaceous materials for at least one
growing season to observe hydrological, soil development and vegetation which is volunteering. Adjustments
may then be made as required to the water control structures, spillways, and grading as required. Installation of
the wetland materials should not take place until the site's hydrology has stabilized and discharge structures have
been adjusted as necessary.
- The entire mitigation cell shall be completely impounded to fully saturate soils prior to adjusting
discharge structures and establishing hydrological zones.
Watering to maintain moist soils throughout all elevations may be necessary during the first growing
season.
Use of Existing Hydric Soil, if available
Soil from the existing wetland areas that have permitted for impacts will be stripped and stored as feasible for
utilization in lining the proposed wetland site. Other topsoil adjacent to the wetlands may also be suitable. Using
these existing soils should hasten the development of vegetated cover and hydric soil conditions. This is also an
excellent use of an important natural resource.
Many of the recommended planted species currently exist in the vicinity of the area to be utilized for this
function. The majority of the species in the wetlands include Obligate (OBL) and Facultative Wet (FACW)
vegetation. Herbaceous plant species present include Softrush (Juncus effusus), sedge (Carex spp.), Duck potato
(Sagitaria latifolia, Arrow arum (Peltandra virginia), Common Three -Square (Scirpus pungens), Touch-me-not
Page 9 of 14

(Impatiens capensis), Smartweed (Polygonum spp.), and others. Supplemental plantings will be selected from
Table 11.2 in the Storm water Best Management Practices, NCDENR, April, 1999 based on actual field
conditions, if required. Being that the site is in the vicinity of other wetlands and floodplain areas it is expected
that the area will benefit from the natural seed sources available. It is expected that herbaceous and scrub/shrub
wetland species will rapidly volunteer in the area.
Herbaceous Zone Planting
Zone 1 - Wetland areas in temporarily saturated soils or subject to occasional and brief inundation
Agrostis alba (Red Top) Polygonum spp.(Smartweed)
Juncus effusus (Soft Rush) Eleocharis spp.(Spikerush)
Zone 2 - Wetland areas prone to persistent flooding orponding
Moist to I Foot of Water
Three Square Bulrush
Sedge species
Shallow Water Plants
Sweet Flag
Pickerel Weed
Creeping Spike Rush
Lizard Tail
Arrow -Arum
Others
Carex species (Sedge)
Others as specified
Soft Rush
Others
Duck Potato
Temporary Seeding Specification for Herbaceous and Cover Crop in Wetland Mitigation Sites
Zone 1 - Wetland areas in temporarily saturated soils or subiect to occasional and brief inundation
Dates Types Rate
April 1 - Jul. 15 Red Top Grass 7 lbs/acre
Smartweed 20 lbs /acre
Jul. 16 - Sept. 1 Temporary Crop
Jap. Millet or Sorghum 20 lbs /acre
(to be followed by permanent mixture)
Sept. 2 - Nov. 1 Smartweed 20 lbs /acre
Red Top Grass 7 lbs/acre
Nov. 1 - March 31 Temporary Crop 40 lbs /acre
Wheat or Winter Rye
(to be followed by permanent mixture)
Seeding Instructions
1) Seed in the dry period
2) use of a filler, such as sand to dilute the seed to ensure uniform ground coverage when broadcasting
3) tree and shrub planting should be completed first before seeding
4) Pure live seed shall be specified and approved prior to planting.
No fescue will be used in wetland areas. Annual grasses shall be utilized for stabilization on surrounding slopes
within Mitigation Area rather than perennials to allow natural succession. If a perennial is required for erosion
control than a mixture shall be selected that allows natural volunteering to occur.
Page 10 of 14

Monitoring
Monitoring of the wetland area will be performed to evaluate the wetland relative to the success criteria for 5
years to verify success of the mitigation site. A report will be prepared which summarizes the data collected in the
field and to note trends. Photographs at fixed stations will be taken to document the trends and changes occurring
at the sites. These reports will be furnished to the appropriate regulatory agencies. The creation site will be
monitored bi-annually during March/April and again in August/September to measure survival rate, species
diversity, and growth as well as to identify any problems such as upland or invasive wetland species. Invasive
species removal will be as needed and will include the removal of such plants as honeysuckle, poison ivy,
blackberry, rose, kudzu and privet, etc.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Vegetation success shall be based on 75% aerial coverage within the five year monitoring period. Areas
succeeding to scrub/shrub or forested wetland will be considered successful. A monitoring program will be
conducted for the bottomland hardwood, scrub/shrub, and herbaceous communities or until the success criteria is
met.
Hydrology Success Criteria
Saturation or inundation for at least 5% to 12.5% of the growing season at lower landscape positions during
average climatic conditions is the target hydrological characteristic. The success criteria are as follows:
• Observed or recorded evidence of soil saturation within 12" of the surface for a minimum of
5% of the growing season.
Contingency Plan
These vegetative, soil and hydrological characteristics must be met to determine the success of the wetland
restoration. If the restoration is determined to be unsuccessful, one or more of the following contingency plans
will be implemented.
• Selected reinstallation of vegetation or other maintenance (thinning or removal).
• Extended monitoring periods.
• Hydrological modifications or manipulation, and/or
• Off-site mitigation sites, and/or
• an acceptable alternative form of mitigation.
Report Submittal
An "as -built" plan drawing of the area, including initial species compositions by community type and sample plot
locations will be provided after the completion of planting. A review of the actual design, densities, and
quantities will also be included. These will be provided within 60 days of the completion of the planting. The
report will document sample plot locations along with representative photographs illustrating site conditions. A
Final As Built Report will be provided for review and discussion regarding compliance of the project to determine
if further monitoring or modifications are required. The As Built Report will be submitted within 60 days of the
restoration site completion and serves as official notice of completion.
Page 11 of 14

Protection From Future Development
The created and restored wetlands are expected to be jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and North Carolina, subject
to federal and state regulations. Because they will be in the Long Creek floodplain the created wetlands would
require an Individual Permit to impacts them. In addition, restrictive covenants will be developed to protect the
wetlands from future impacts.
Schedule
The proposed wetland mitigation site can begin immediately after approval of a sedimentation erosion control
permits. It is recommended that planting occur during the spring and summer of 2009 through the dormant season
of 2010 to allow the establishment of the various hydrological conditions and the potential volunteering of native
species. Being that the site is in the vicinity of other wetlands and floodplain areas it is expected that the area will
benefit from the natural seed sources available.
Conclusion
The goal of the proposed mitigation measures is to help balance the environmental consequences of this
development by creating beneficial surface water and wetland habitat. The buffers and wetlands will have
important pollutant, water storage, bank stabilization, and aquatic habitat values.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): Not Available/NCEEP
Amount of Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ❑ No X
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ❑ No ❑
Page 12 of 14

3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ❑ No ❑
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 213 .0259 (Tar -Pamlico), 15A NCAC 0213 .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ❑ No ❑
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone*
Impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
Required
Mitigation
1
3 (2 for Catawba)
2
1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level.
A stormwater management plan has been submitted for the adjacent Long Creek Village project. This
plan included the potential runoff from this project and has been approved by NCDENR — see attached
approval letter.
Page 13 of 14

XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
Municipal facilities - CMUD
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ❑ No X
Is this an after -the -fact permit application? Yes ❑ No X
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ❑ No X
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
The project is developing to provide services to residential and commercial developments in the
area in the vicinity of I-485 The project site is subject to stormwater management requirements
from the City of Charlotte and NCDENR as a result of the 401 WQC required for the project.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw -down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
7�r vs
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 14 of 14

0� W A l E9
Michael F. Easley, Governor
o�
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
`p
tjj r
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
=.1
(`olcen }i Sullins, Director
Q Y
Division of Water Quality
May 8, 2008
DWQ Project # 08-0245
Mecklenburg County
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Mark Ball
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
Subject Property: Long Creek Village, Phase I
Long Creek [I 1-120-(2.5)]
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN APPROVAL
Dear Mr. Ball:
On March 6, 2008, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) issued a 401 Water Quality
Certification to fill 0.46 acre of wetland in order to construct the subject development in
Mecklenburg County. In order to meet Condition 5 of the 401 Certification for this project, a
stormwater management plan, dated March 7, 2008, was received by the DWQ on March 11,
2008. Additional stormwater information, dated May 2, 2008, was received by the DWQ on May
5, 2008_ This revised stormwater management plan has been reviewed and satisfies the
stormwater management conditions of the 401 Water Quality Certification.
The structural stormwater practices as approved by DWQ as well as drainage patterns must be
maintained in perpetuity. No changes to the structural stormwater practices shall be made
without written authorization from the DWQ- Stormwater easements shall be recorded for a
distance of at least ten feet on each side of all storm water conveyances on all lots containing
these structures including future access for maintenance. The stormwater easements shall allow
for the ability to maintain the structures, perform corrective actions as described above and shall
provide protection of the structures from potential alternations by future property owners.
This letter completes the review of the DWQ under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you
have any questions, please contact me at 919-715-3425.
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail service Center. Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh. North Carolina 27604
Phonc. 919-733-1766 / FAX [phone] / Internet: h# H r2n cnr slate nc us/nc- iands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Empinycr - 50% Rccycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
Noy" hCarolina
IvaturallY

AML/aml
Cc: Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville
DWQ, MRO
Central Files
File Copy
Len Ridner
08-0245 Village at Long Creek
May 8, 2008
Page 2 of 2
Sincerely,
Annette Lucas, Environmental Engineer Ili
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
Hicnamc: 080245 V if IageutLongCrcek(Mecklcnburg)_S W_Approve

LOCATION
CVS rr■rr;r�er
. LONG
CREEK
�.
ENGINEERING
ASSOCIATES
■'ri ��rrr'r
JOB No.: 487-003
�airruuru PLANNERS

IP:\
999
a
C \Wetlands\Wetlands Pe itting-2.dwg, Existing Conditions, 6/lV/2008 8, 4
1 �
®
-nm
00
r —
00 /
III ,III I®
z Z n c
mAz �►
A1,
cow �O r
wo 0
40
ZZ
II�V�I��II���
E
416 /
EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP
CVS @ LONG CREEK
JOB No.: 487-003
DRAWN BY: J RD
DATE:06/18/08
eraeau�
Room■ r2
NI 4■
•
■r.�r' iia■
an
■v u�u�■
No
5950 Faltview Rd. - Suite 100-Chadotte, NC 28210

P:\DW 9 ll -0 olly-Hunt Ctr Wetlhcrs\Wetlan ng-2.dwg, Site Plan, 6/ / 008 8:47:48
0
wow
_ 1
coos& /
woo& VL
O�
0Z
/i1
n � j
m
OVERALL SITE PLAN BURTON
CVS LONG CREEKENGINEERINGLAND PLANNERS
ASSOCIATES
JOB No.: 487-003 CIVIL ENGINEERS
DRAWN BY: J RD 5950 Fairview Rd. • Suite 100• Charlotte, NC 28210
DATE:06/18/08 [phone] • Fax [phone]

P: \D 4 7 gJ'jMt oPly-AUnt Ctr Wetl n s 'tting- dwg, WeIt dl4it oII -&49 200 7:53 AM Mi end
1 \
®\�' \
I Illipl dl 1 V \
I II�IIII�III� � caII
I l Irilllij lilll � I � e '� � i �`� ���� � � e ® `•� � �>
III I I Illlll'', lljll I�\ .�. /
IIII II 1 Il�lj�ti�� I i r-n
,
0-m
IIII I� I o �i
III III;III;I o I ` i =v
I I11 I I 11 e I 1 i •w
Illlil 1 III I il� e m \ I
ell
11,9 e e e
IIII 'I lil ' I III�% �
Illllllllllle• � I, II I �. �,,� �®I'
I�Illlu ► II � � � � '( .� I'
�`�
I►I II � �� I e
�, I I dlli� / /'•�
.. _ I�� 1► 1111 I o � •�
l4, 1 � ' j,� - �`/ 16 V,I
CO
WETLANDS MITIGATION BURTON
CVS Cb LONG CREEK ENGINEERING
Q ASSOCIATES
JOB No.: 487-003 CIVIL ENGINEERS
LAND PLANNERS
DRAWN BY: J RD 5950 Fairview Rd. • Suite 100- Charlotte, NC 28210
DATE:06/18/08 [phone] • Fax [phone]

P:\DWG\487-003 Mt Holly -Hunt Ctr\Wends\Wetlands PEV!4itjing-2.dwg, Wetlands, 6/1 Millen
—j
ZX_rn_ m
055��
T-z�-*0�0
�\ n0� > >
♦ �\ ��� 2 Z ;aG)n ;0
0
r
m
0
STORMWATER TREATMENT
CVS (g LONG CREEK
JOB No.: 487-003
DRAWN BY: JRD
DATE:06/18/08
UNM
a�
Aa'■e■,v •�■
5950 Fairview Rd. • Suite 100. Charlotte, NC 28210
[phone] • Fax [phone]

0988-£99W/)XEd • 1989-699 (170L)
0lZ8Z ON'ealoue40.00G e11nS •'pu Meltiigd 0969
SH3NMdld GNVI
Sa33NIJN3 "IIAIO
S31V100SS`d
JNIU33NIJN3
Noiun9
j
Ar. !� P
/tel k
8018 L/90:31b'4
Q21f :.19 NMH2ia
E00-L9ti :'oN 90f
N33�]O ONO -1 iP SAO
NOI1` OLLIW SdMd-113M
it \N� � \ y� II I �I I\ I o
TJ WJ
� ®® °® I ® 111 ��Ili � � II�►I
I
�� �I► ; IIII►I
� � ► h I�I�I
I
a� ' . ' • � I � � I I iI i Illillllihl
•lilt► III
,�
I II II � ' 111;1111
i .. � r SII ill�l � 111111
i /� • I ' II' illi lillll
' � d � ' Ilhlll�illll 1,j III
J*� I �Illiil ; 11;111
Z 11�► i fill
I
��`�i_._.�� ���� ����. � �. � � � '• �� ;lillll � II i� I
�i ���? +.fi �•. Illill illl I I Ill
NIL
` ' . III lilllial
olliillll'ill I
`�\ `�® � \ � .�i �,__ • � • + III lillll I I I
A ® ` ► ! I►1111;1
1 I II
\ � \� ^`��\ � � ®� ®�►�``' � � -'`� • �. I ' � I llil .Illi ,
aP I ►I II
�`a ;pP KV 69:L 00Z 6Z%'�°. 1?I�IIP �aM btnp-buz���iuz� 9 u Team zea �un�-dT�° �Yill�� L b a\ -d

s.
,
r,
:
n
ef
IrT
•
Aw
Is
fS
,J
r,
t � ' ��� !� } 1+ Y,_d�m `t� 1 r _ 9 : Y4 ��T Q p• � C.. • 1 Y+ :. � �� '
YL �.
r r j6
A`
LT
i '... .. ..�Y 4, �,A `�. p �4L •1 PrP
w
,1
Y'.. r • ! '
T r
Itf�( E s. ! f �j'1� ��6M't i�Ye},6� �•P tl(' f
,
Y

TerraServer Image Courtesy of the USGS
Page I of 1
Send To Printer Back To TerraServer Change to 11x17 Print Size Show Grid Lines Change to Landscape
MUSIX Charlotte, North Carolina, United States 01 Jul 1996 j {l
r�� -1„�� �''• i',.� it �� ,� y
50
+
,�'s
,r
i
IRTI e
W/
'A -"
0' 'zoom 0' 200yd
Image courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey
© 2004 Microsoft Corporation. Terms of Use Privacy Statement
MITIGATION SITE LOCATION
http://terraserver-usa.com/PrintImage.aspx?T=2&5=11 M.

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Applicant:
Mr. Mark Ball
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, NC 28208
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: CVS @ Long Creek
State:NC County/parish/borough: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.3454° it Long. 80.88560
Universal Transverse Mercator: UTM 17 510396E 391135IN (NAD83/WGS84)
Name of nearest waterbody: Long Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Long Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Lower Catawba Watershed -- 03050103
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): 1-7-08
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There ® "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain: .
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There IN"waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent watersZ (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).

b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.369 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: MEN.
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.I.; otherwise, see Section 111.13 below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination: L.
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapaoos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
.(�). General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 1370 '
Drainage area: 50
MM
Average annual rainfall: 44 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are river miles from RPW.
Project waters areaerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are FM'
aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW-: Wetland area "A" into a RPW (off site) and then directly into Long Creek.
Tributary stream order, if known:
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 4 feet
Average depth: 4 feet
Average side slopes:
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ® Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ® Vegetation. Type/% cover: Wetland A is completely covered with a dense strub layer.
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: The banks appear to be eroding slightly,
however the dense vegetation is stabilizing them.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: None observed.
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 5 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for:
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime: The wetland "A" contributes ground water and surface water to the RPW. In addition, there is
an old abandoned well and well house (off site) located at the top of wetland "A" (see map for location).
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: . Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑ shelving
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑ sediment deposition
❑ water staining
❑
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
® High Tide Line indicated by: E Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: The water color is perfectly clear coming out of the well house, however it picks up sediment and taninns along
the way before exiting into Long Creek.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: Sedimentation (minor) and other pollutants characteristic of waters near roads.
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): Scrubby vegetation completely covers the RPW.
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Crayfish and frogs were noted while onsite.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: 1.3 acres
Wetland type. Explain:Broad wetland within the Long Creek floodplain.
Wetland quality. Explain:While the wetland has been mowed and cleared historically, it still supports obligate plants
like Cephalanthus occidentalis and Salix nigra. It was noted that there was an abundance of birds utilizing the wetland for feeding and
shelter.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationshi with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Explain: The RPW that exits from the wetland "A" is continually supported by the ground and
surface waters contained therein.
Surface flow is:.
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: � Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are river miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial strai ht miles from TNW.
Flow is from:
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: The water clarity in the wetland is good.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: None know specifically, however the wetland is adjacent to two major roads.
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:The wetland is completely covered in shrub -height vegetation, with the
exception of some Salix nigra, which has passed the sapling stage..
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain f►ndings:Crayfish and frogs were noted while onsite.
Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if an)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: I
Approximately ( 0.369 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Wetland "A" 0.369
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: The wetland "A" serves as a habitat for
many birds, amphibians and other small animals. It contributes surface and groundwater to the RPW (off site) to which it directly
abuts. The wetland serves as a pollution reduction mechanism from the two roads adjacent to it..
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
El Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: The wetland "A" is physically conneted to the RPW by way of a linear wetland.
M Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED ]INTERSTATE OR INTRA -STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
❑' which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
EJ Other factors. Explain:
Nee Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA I IQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
El Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
udgment (check all that apply):
Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non -jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:USGS Mountain Island Lake (NC) Quadrangle; 1:48,000 scale.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov.
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):Mecklenburg County GIS 2007.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

1 �f
a ,
r
t- x
( Imo_ f ' � i7 I _ � '�!«� � f a•'' '•
r +
ka,
Vm
Al — 47: WETLAND AREA
(CONTINUES OFF SITE)
MOW
4 y v
x� rF. ,'S, •�+.: Y" J
i,;v
{ 1
.r1'" �'' ¢'�." ''rte +1 � ��t�•. '��I �~ +
f 1 �r 1
_ r
.... \ f
_ a v
1.u � '
•LONG CREEK (RPW)
rL
:

APPROXIMATE MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S
*FOR SURVEY AND STUDY PURPOSES ONLY
SUBJECT TO U.S.A.C.E. VERIFICATION
CVS @ LONG CREEK
JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S.
1-7-08

topozone
COW01 1990,= Mp a IN cab im
Creek
St t.
NJ
Q
(to
4.
SCALE = 1:48,000
HUC = LOWER CATAWBA
WATERSHED -- 03050103
r
B
I'
4�
v
A.
JiLl
CVS @ LONG CREEK
4
APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
0.6 ().9 1.2 1.5
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Trii
35.3454ON : 80.8856-W (NAD83/WGS84)
USGS Mountain Island Lake (NC) Quadrangle
Projection is UTM Zone 17 NAD83 Datum

Soil Map—Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
(JDH Capital)
N Meters
A 0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 1/17/2008
i Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3

d
Z
oU)
N O
Q
d
Z >
N
'o a
N o
a 0
d
c
O
Z
°41
a
C_
cmi p
�
N iK
O Q
>
U O
D
3 c
U d
C
p
O C_
°`
N
a)
.O
C E
Z
n>m g
U
v
"�
rn
.NDo
-0ME
>
=V -
��
w0
L_r
m E
N
m
Z p
E :,30
Q
C N N
C 7
Q
N�O
d
LC
CGNLL
3 p
Gy
j�N
I-
O >,
N
N
yOZ
p N Q°
'CyO
N�ma
L U
at
°Olt
L
U m
43
G0 a
'
i N
C
a-
g
>£0
z
0md3
N N
aN
o oN
CL
ao
y
.0 0-
L" a
11L
:E�
Yd
m p N
dQ
m«C
E O
laJ
° d
N
a)
TL >
3
N
OL ',0
>0'-o
Z] E
yLO
C
O]
°.tj O
O
Z E
(D
of
m m
E
H d M
m� N
H�
Q M
m
'0
0
H0am �mm
�o
y d
omr
of -d
c�cE
°'oc
ocn'v
o-
ZQ
m
N
Ld��
o- m
'or3•�a
�a o
nasi
N>
cin aa)
= Z
2
d E m E
O> `o E
ton�U
t°ncn
HE
H 0 0
oa
N
c
m
U
N
m
r
m
m
(�
C
N
N "O
y
NN
m0
7
N
N
N
N m
c
N d
N
m0
W LL
�.
j
C
g zL
y
'.m—.
m m
� Y1 ppm
N Q2
C m N (n
c
Y
la
U
J
Lz
V
C
J
(A V
.i'
A
U
U (0
d' 7
!n
V
IL CL
z
E3
u
o
El
CL
LU
WCL
o
®
c OM
+
C9
d
3
w
W
J
CL
o
a
p
Q
o
a
a
cn
N
D
N
c
d
o m a
`mo o
d
0
d
CY
m m 5
o
a o
m
LL o
3
o
m
> N
d
>
t
> 7 m W
c
m U al U
d>
c
0
>
g a) c0
a
m
v
m
m c >
c N
C
ffi
r°n c
m
c�
J J m
2 2 a" ao
U)
U)
U)
9) U) in U) U)
c
IL
�
n N
®
X •
kS
c� �J >
+
::
ISI
a ex �t tii o
a❑
d
Z
oU)
N O
Q
d
Z >
N
'o a
N o
a 0
d
c
O
Z
°41

Soil Map—Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
JDH Capital
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina (NC119)
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
CeB2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8
17.3
19.5%
percent slopes, eroded
4.5
5.1%
EnB
Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent
slopes
EnD
Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15
21.1
23.7%
percent slopes
2.1
2.3%
MeB
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 2
to 8 percent slopes
42.7
0.2
48.0%
0.2%
MO
Monacan loam
PaE
Pacolet sandy loam, 15 to 25
percent slopes
WkE
Wilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent
1.0
slopes
Totals for Area of Interest (AOI)
88.9
100.0%
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 1/17/2008
21111111111 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Mr. Mark Hall
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, NC 28208
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: CVS @ Long Creek
Date: 1-7-08
Applicant/Owner: See above
County, Mecklenburg
Investigator: Todd Warren and Nick Nelson
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the site? ✓ Yes No
Community ID : Upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No ✓
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No ✓
Plot ID:
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
Shrub
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
Shrub
FAC
9.
2. Platanus occidentalis
Tree
FACW-
10.
3. Ligustrum vulgare
Shrub
NI
11.
4. Rosa multiflora
Shrub
UPL
12.
5.
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.)
Local Soil Survey Data
13.
6.
Depth to Saturated Soil: N/A (in.)
_
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-).
2.3
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
✓ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
✓ Aerial Photographs
Inundated
Other
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ No Recorded Data Available
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations:
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.)
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Water -Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.)
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC -Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: N/A (in.)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): CeB2, Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded Drainage Class: Moderately drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Confirm Mapped Type? iYes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Calor
Mottle Colors
Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell_Moist)
(Munsell Moist)
Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-5 A 10YR 4/2
N/A
N/A Sandy Clay Loam
5-15 B MR 6/6
N/A
N/A Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosoi
_
Concretions
_
_ Histic Epipedon
_
High Organic Content in Surfa ce Layer Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor
_
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_
Aquic Moisture Regime
_
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions
_
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
_
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 4 Yes No (Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No ✓ I Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Annrrwed by

Mr. Mark Ball
Beatties Ford Retail Investors, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, NC 28208
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: CVS @ Long Creek
Date: 1-7-08
Applicant/Owner: see above
County: Mecklenburg
Investigator: Todd Warren and Nick Nelson
State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the site? ✓ Yes No
Community ID : Wetland A
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No ✓
Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No ✓
Plot ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
Shrub
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Salix nigra
Shrub/tree
OBL
g
2. Plateaus occidentalis
Tree
FACW-
10.
3. Cephalanthus occidentalis
Shrub
OBL
11.
4 Hibiscus moscheutos
Shrub
OBL
12.
5 Rosa palustris
Shrub
OBL
13-
&
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-).
1.00%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
✓ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
✓ Aerial Photographs
y/ Inundated
Other
y( Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ No Recorded Data Available
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Field Observations:
✓ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0-5 (in.)
✓ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Water -Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC -Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Mo, Monacan loam
Drainage Class: Undralned
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Confirm Mapped Type? /Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell_ Moist)
(Munsell_ Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0-5 0 Organic
N/A N/A Organic layer
5-8 A 10YR 3/1
10YR 6/8 10% Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Concretions
_
_ Histic Epipedon
_ High Organic Content in Surfa ce Layer Sandy Soils
_ Sufdic Odor
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime
_ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Reducing Conditions
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
— Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? VYes No (Circle) (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? ✓ Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? /Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? (Yes No
Remarks:
HOUSACE 3/92