20170733 Ver 1_401 Application_20170617

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 2015 - 02481 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder F-1 Assign Action ID Number in ORM FI
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Harrisburg Village
2. Work Type: PrivateInstitutional Government Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
The purpose of this project is to build a residential development.
4. Property Owner/ Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: Eastwood Homes; POC: Pat Quinn
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: Gregg Antemann, PWS
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: SAW -2015-02481
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
Southeast of the Harrisburg Drive and Roberta Road intersection in Harrisburg, North
Carolina: 35.329911N, -80.642257W
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]: Multiple, please see the cover letter and PCN
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Cabarrus
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Harrisburg
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 62a]: Rocky River
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 F-1 Section 404 FE -1 Section 10 & 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
0 Compliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
June 12, 2017
Mr. Jason Randolph
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Charlotte Satellite Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 N. Salisbury St., 9th Floor
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certification No. 4092
Harrisburg Village (SAW -2015-02481)
Harrisburg, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Dear Mr. Randolph and Ms. Higgins,
The Harrisburg Village site is approximately 51 acres in extent and is located southeast of the
Harrisburg Drive and Roberta Road intersection in Harrisburg, North Carolina (Figures 1 and 2,
attached). The purpose of this project is to develop the property into a residential development.
Eastwood Homes has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide Section
404/401 permitting services for this project. An executed Agent Authorization Form is attached
(Attachment A). CWS is submitting a Pre -Construction Notification pursuant to a Nationwide
Permit No. 29 (Attachment B) for proposed impacts to approximately 0. 15 acres of wetland
impacts and 64 linear feet of stream impacts. No fill in the FEMA -100 year floodplain is proposed.
Applicant Name: Eastwood Homes; POC: Mr. Pat Quinn
Mailing Address: 2857 Westport Road, Charlotte, NC 28208
Street Address of Project: southeast of the Harrisburg Drive and Roberta Road intersection in
Harrisburg, North Carolina
Waterway: UTs to Rocky River
Basin: Yadkin (HUC' 03040105)
City: Harrisburg
County: Cabarrus
Tax Parcel No(s): 55079984420000, 55170961880000, 55170836530000, 55170766360000,
and 01010000400
Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: 35.3299110, -80.6422571
USGS Quadrangle Name: Harrisburg, NC (1996)
"HUC" is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina.
NORTH CAROLINA - SOUTH CAROLINA
WWW.CWS-INC.NET
Page 1 of 7

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092 CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Current Land Use
The project area consists of a forested area with a few open unmaintained and maintained areas
(Figure 3, attached). Typical on-site vegetation includes eastern redbud (Cercis canadensis),
hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), winged elm (Ulmus alata),
green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), Chinese privet (Ligustrum
sinense), Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). There is evidence that
site has been burned in the past 10 years (burn marks in trees).
Jurisdictional Determination
The Harrisburg Village site was delineated by CWS scientists on October 29, 2015. The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued a Preliminary Determination (SAW -2015-02481) on
December 21, 2016 (Attachment C). Figure 4 depicts the potentially jurisdictional features within
the Harrisburg Village project limits. On -Site potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S. are
summarized in Table 1. Photographs 1-10 are representative of the on-site jurisdictional features
(Attachment D).
Table 1. Summary of On -Site Potentially Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S., including Wetlands
Jurisdictional
Stream
Jurisdiction
NCDEQ Stream
Classification
Score
Photograph(s)
Linear Feet
I
(fl
Acreage
( ac.)
USACE/EPA Rapanos
Classification'
Stream A
RPW
43
1,2
2,282
0.31
Stream
RPW
39.5
3
416
0.05
B
Seasonal RPW
27.5
4
1,056
0.08
Stream C
Seasonal RPW
27.5
5
74
0.01
Stream Total:
3,828 If
0.45 ac.
Jurisdictional
Wetland
Jurisdiction
USACE/EPA Rapanos Classification
Photograph(s)
Linear Feet
I
(fl
Acreage
ac.
( )
Wetland AA
Adjacent to RPW
6
N/A
0.16
Wetland BB
Directly abutting to RPW
7
N/A
0.01
Wetland CC
Directly abutting to RPW
8
N/A
0.05
Wetland DD
Directly abutting to RPW
9
N/A
0.04
Wetland EE
Directly abutting to RPW
10
N/A
0.06
Wetland Total:
N/A
0.32 ac.
Total Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.:
3,828 If
0.77 ac.
2 Classifications of streams include Traditionally Navigable Waters (TNWs), Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs), and
Non -Relatively Permanent Waters (Non-RPWs). Subcategories of RPWs include perennial streams that typically have
year-round flow, and seasonal streams that have continuous flow at least seasonally. Two classifications of jurisdictional wetlands
are used to describe proximity and connection to TNWs. These classifications include either adjacent or directly abutting.
Adjacent wetlands are defined as wetlands within floodplains or in close proximity to a TNW but without a direct visible connection.
Abutting wetlands have a direct surface water connection traceable to a TNW.
Page 2 of 7

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092 CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on May
31, 2017 to determine the presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological
significance that would be affected by the project. CWS also consulted the SHPO online GIS
service' and found no historical structures, buildings, sites, or districts within the project limits
(SHPO Map, Attachment E). As of the date of submittal, no response has been received from the
SHPO.
Protected Species
CWS scientists performed a data review using North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) Data Explorer' on May 25, 2017 to determine the presence of any federally -listed,
endangered species, threatened species, or critical habitat located within the project area. Based
on the NCNHP review, there are no records of federally -protected species within the project limits
or within a mile of the project area. A copy of the NCNHP report is attached (Attachment F).
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS), Raleigh Field Office, North Carolina
Distribution Records of Endangered, Threatened, and Species of Concern list for Cabarrus
County5 was reviewed. The USFWS database lists the Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii), Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), and bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) as potentially occurring in Cabarrus County. Additionally, the project area is within
Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) range.'
Prior to the field work, CWS scientists visited a known population of Helianthus schweinitzii on
May 22, 2017 to determine the condition of its stem, leaves, and flowers. Based on the site visit,
the aboveground plant parts are identifiable but flowers were present. On May 25, 2017, CWS
scientists conducted a pedestrian survey of the project area for federally -protected species.
Transects were completed within identified areas of supportive habitat, as applicable, for
potentially occurring federally -protected species.
Based on the literature search and the results of the on-site assessment for federally -protected
endangered and threatened species, it has been determined that habitat was observed for the
Schweinitz's sunflower, Carolina heelsplitter, and northern long-eared bat (NLEB). However, any
incidental take on NLEB that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule.
As a potential habitat was present but no individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed
within the project limits, this project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect this species. As
no individuals of Carolina heelsplitter were observed within the project limits,the observed habitat
was marginal, and there are no known populations within the Rocky River watershed, where the
project is located, this project will have no effect on this species. As no nesting habitat was
observed for the bald eagle, this project will have no effect on this species.
s North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/. Accessed May 25, 2017.
4 North Carolina Natural Heritage Data Explorer, https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/. Accessed April 6, 2017.
s United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Field Office. Accessed March 16, 2017. Endangered and Threatened Species
and Species of Concern by County for North Carolina. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html.
6 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2016. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/WNSZone.pdf
Page 3 of 7

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092 CWS Project No. 2015-3637
A letter requesting concurrence was sent to the (USFWS on June 5, 2017. As of the submittal
date, no response has been received from the USFWS.
Purpose and Need for the Project
The purpose of this project is to develop approximately 40 acres of the 51 acres property into a
multi -family residential development. This project will provide residential housing within
Harrisburg, North Carolina to meet the growth and demand of an area of Cabarrus County that is
experiencing significant population growth due to its proximity to Charlotte, North Carolina.
This project is a phased project as depicted in Sheet C-1 (Attachment G), but all the wetland and
stream impacts associated with this project will be included in this permit application. All adjoining
subdivisions are owned by individuals and/or companies not associated with this subdivision. The
client is not aware of any Section 404 permits on adjoining properties.
Avoidance and Minimization
Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable while meeting the project goals. In order to avoid and minimize the impacts to the
jurisdictional waters of the U.S., the Harrisburg Village site was delineated prior to developing the
site plan and the proposed site plan was designed around the delineation results. Proper
sediment and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream
waters. Construction activities and impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will comply
with all conditions of Nationwide Permit 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092. All work will
be constructed in the dry.
No Build Alternative
In an attempt to minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters while meeting the goals of the project, a
"No Build" alternative was considered. The property is being purchased for the purpose of
providing residential housing to meet the growth and demand of an area in Cabarrus County
experiencing significant population growth. A "No Build" option would not meet the project goals
of providing necessary housing to meet the current demand. Therefore, the No Build Alternative
was eliminated from further consideration.
Proposed Design Plan
The Proposed Design Plan has been thoughtfully designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. wherever practicable. Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and stream consist of
fill for the lots and road crossing, and one temporary sewerline stream crossing. The three on-site
linear wetlands (Wetland CC, DD, and EE) bisect the site and divide the property into several
portions. Therefore, alternative designs for the proposed subdivision, while avoiding impacts to
jurisdictional streams and wetlands, are limited.
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands, were taken into consideration in the planning
phase. The following design aspects demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of adverse
impacts to the jurisdictional waters of the U.S.: 1) The proposed roadway (Victoria Way) is placed
as close to the property line as possible to impact only a small portion of stream (Sheet C-1,
Attachment G). The Victoria Way is curved to impact minimal portions of the stream before
running parallel to the streamline to avoid additional impact. The streams and buffers are avoided
Page 4 of 7

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092 CWS Project No. 2015-3637
in all other areas. 2) Individual lots and structures were terminated at the cul-de-sac of
Maplewood Avenue to avoid stream and buffer impacts (Sheet C-1, Attachment G). 3) The
extents of grading will be outside of the FEMA floodplain.
We believe that the current site plan is the best possible plan that meets the project goals while
avoiding impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. to the greatest extent practicable.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
Under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 29, unavoidable permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters
associated with this project are limited to a total of 0.15 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 34 If of
jurisdictional stream channel. The proposed permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters of the
U.S. consist of fill for the construction of lots and roads. Sheets C-2.0-2.5 include the construction
plan sheets (Attachment G).
Temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters associated with this project are limited to a total of 30
linear feet of temporary stream impacts. This temporary impact consists of a temporary stream
crossing for a sewerline installation via open cut trench.
Proposed permanent and temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including
wetlands, are summarized in Table 2 (below).
Table 2. Proposed Impacts to On -Site Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S., including Wetlands
Jurisdictional
Impact
NWP
Type of Impact
Temporary/
Sheet #
Impact
Impact
Feature
No.
No.
Permanent
(If)
ac
S1
29
Fill
Permanent
C-2.1
34
0.01
Stream B
Sewerline crossing via
S2
29
open trench
Temporary
C-2.2
30
0.01
Total Stream Impacts
64 If
0.002 ac.
Jurisdictional
Impact
NWP
Forested/
Type of
Temporary/
Sheet #
Impact
Impact
Feature
No.
No.
Herbaceous
Impact
Permanent
(If)
(ac)
Wetland CC
W1
29
Forested
Fill
Permanent
C-2.2,
C-2.3,
-
0.05
Wetland DD
W2
29
Forested
Fill
Permanent
-
0.06
Wetland EE
W3
29
Forested
Fill
Permanent
C-2.4
-
0.04
Total Permanent Wetland Impacts:
-
0.15 ac.
Total Temporary Stream Impacts:
341f
0.01 ac.
Total Permanent Stream Impacts:
30 If
0.01 ac.
Total Loss of jurisdictional Waters of U.S.:
30 If
0.16 ac
Fill for Lots and Roads
The proposed fill for units and roads are unavoidable in order to meet the project goals. The
associated fill for units and roads will result in a total of 34 linear feet of permanent impacts to
Seasonal RPW Stream B and 0.15 acres of permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
(Attachment G). The stormwater drainage currently flowing to these jurisdictional features will be
Page 5 of 7

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092 CWS Project No. 2015-3637
captured via the pipe system depicted in the construction plan sheets C-2.1 - C-2.5 and then
redirected to the stormwater control measures located in northeastern portion of the property.
The proposed impacts associated with the fill for the roads and units are listed below:
S1: Fill for a road will result in 34 linear feet of permanent impacts (S1) to Seasonal RPW Stream
B. The plan view is depicted as Sheet C-2.0.
W1 -W3: Fill for units and the roads will result in 0.15 acres of permanent impacts to Wetlands
CC, DD, and EE. This impact from fill is essential to create more usable area on the 51 -acre
property that is divided into four sections by several linear stream and wetland features by bringing
the existing grade up to the proper elevation for development. The proposed soft path (unpaved
train) will cause minimal permanent disturbance (<0.01 acre) in the northern portion of Wetlands
CC and EE. The plan view is depicted as Sheet C-2.0 and sheets C-2.3, 2.2, and 2.3 provide
zoomed in views (Attachment G).
Temporary Crossing for Sewerline
S2: The proposed construction easement associated with the sewer crossing is located in the
north -central portion of the property and will result in 30 linear feet of temporary impact to
Seasonal RPW Stream B (Sheets C-2.0 and C- 2.2: Attachment G). No permanent impacts are
associated with the sewer installation.
The proposed sewerline will cross Seasonal RPW Stream B at a perpendicular angle. The
disturbance includes approximately 46 cubic yards of cut and backfill. The total width of the
proposed temporary construction easement is 30 feet. There will be a temporary pit and pump
over during sewer construction. The temporary structures will be removed after the sewer stream
crossing construction is complete.
Disturbed stream banks will be restored to original pre -construction contours, stabilized with
biodegradable coir fiber matting or other coconut fiber matting, and seeded with a native riparian
seed mix.
Compensatory Mitigation
Permanent loss of waters of the U.S. is limited to 34 linear feet of jurisdictional stream channel
and 0.15 acres of wetlands.
As the 0.15 acres of proposed permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands exceed the mitigation
threshold, compensatory mitigation is required. Proposed impacts requiring mitigation total 0.15 of
medium quality wetland. Eastwood Homes proposes to mitigate for the permanent wetland
impacts through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits from the NC Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS). The credit acceptance letter is attached (Attachment H).
CWS would like to propose mitigation ratio for the proposed impacts. The North Carolina Wetland
Assessment Methodology (NC WAM) form was completed for the wetlands to obtain an estimate
of the quality of the linear wetlands (NC WAM 1, Attachment 1). The wetlands proposed to be
impacted exhibited similar characteristics , therefore only one NC WAM form was completed for
Page 6 of 7

Harrisburg Village
Nationwide Permit No. 29 and Water Quality Certificate No. 4092
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
these wetlands. This wetland represented a moderately degraded condition and departure from
its reference conditions (Headwater Forest) due to high density development up gradient and
south from the project area. The wetland proposed to be impacted scored Medium as assessed
with NC WAM. As the proposed wetland impacts have been limited to 0.15 acres and DMS will
round up the required mitigation amount to the nearest quarter acre, CWS proposes a 1:1 ratio
for the impacted wetland, totaling 0.25 acres of mitigation credits.
On behalf of Eastwood Homes, CWS is submitting a Pre -Construction Notification Application
with attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition No. 32, and pursuant
to Nationwide Permit No. 29 and WQC No. 4092.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these services on this important project. Please do not
hesitate to contact Gregg Antemann at 704-408-1683 or [e-mail] should you have any
questions or comments regarding this report.
Sincerely,
Gregg Antemann, PWS
Principal Scientist
Attachments: Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: USGS Site Location
Figure 3: Aerial Imagery
Figure 4: Jurisdictional Boundaries
Attachment A - Agent Authorization Form
Aliisa Harjuniemi, WPIT
Project Scientist
Attachment B - Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide
Permit No. 29
Attachment C - Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (SAW -2015-02481)
Attachment D - Photopage (Photographs 1-10)
Attachment E - SHPO Map
Attachment F - NCNHP Data Review Report
Attachment G - Construction Plan Sheets: Proposed Impacts S1, S2, and W1 -W3
Attachment H - DMS Acceptance Letter
Attachment I - NC WAM Form
Page 7 of 7

C:\Users\AliisaHarjuniemi\Desktop\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\1. Vicinity.mxd

C:\Users\AliisaHaduniemi\Desktop\Hardsburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\2. USGS.mxd

0
Q
O
...�`��..
Owat.
4., ► �s � , a ,I
NST sem= ,y D = aw'i" r e,•'4'
i,°tF�,
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY INC ONEMAP, DATED 2015. �G -
BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY CABARRUS COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2016.
SCALE: DATE: 5�31�2017 FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 400 feet Aerial Imagery
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2015-3637 AVH Harrisburg Village
C:\Users\AliisaHaouniemi\Desktop\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\3. Aerial.mxd
S°
.�
\1 1 4 ♦ ._!
r
•
PHYSICIANS BLVD
C3
-•;
-_ .
Legend
�
t4
r, Project Limits (51 ac.)
`
HAGLER;ST r
_
.I •••
I
Streets
Tax Parcels
:Mr's
A
Gn y"
400 200 0 400 Fed
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY INC ONEMAP, DATED 2015. �G -
BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY CABARRUS COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2016.
SCALE: DATE: 5�31�2017 FIGURE NO.
1 inch = 400 feet Aerial Imagery
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2015-3637 AVH Harrisburg Village
C:\Users\AliisaHaouniemi\Desktop\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\3. Aerial.mxd

C:\Users\AliisaHarjuniemi\Desktop\Harrisburg Village\ArcGIS Maps\4. JD_NEW.mxd

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT A:
Agent Authorization Form
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

AKIF NT C IHRTIFICATI ON OF AUlHOR12 AIT1O1N
11, the undersigned, a dull aull a nizad amiwi (I second of the proparlyjlpiiopentiaE identifnad
herein, da autl ariza napnesenlalive of the Wilmington District, U.S. Aluiry Gorps of
Fingineens (Cort s', 10 ander i pa n the proper y herein dascnibed fan the purpa se of
conducling on-sile investigation,, and issuing a determination associated wish Wateais of
the U.S. subject to Hedenal jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Alater Act andtlou
Sac lie n ] 0 a the Hiders and Harbors Aat a 11899.
11, Mn. Bat C uinn, representing Eastwood Ha mas, liaraby certify that I have aulhorizad
Clna 8 8 Anil err ann a l Carolina Wla l la nd Service!, Inc. lo act on rniy behalf and l alae all
actions nes assar 1l to 1he processing, is9uance, and acceptanae of thisi nequasil fan wetlands
c le 1 e: inn ination it pe zimil I in E and any and all srl a ndai d and iB a tial condil ions attached.
Ae herald centif,l that the above inlonmalion submitted in lhisi application is true and
a ccural a to the be st of a t n knowledge.
V `DIM V IMI ►"
Applicant's s igna tune
Agent's si81na ture
6-7-2017
Dale
Compli ti( i of thin form vi ill allow tha agenl to dgn all fulutia application i c rna flat dance.

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT B:
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide
Permit No. 29

o1;;R�,r
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
N Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes N No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
N 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 N No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes N 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.
N Yes ❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes N
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes N No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Harrisburg Village
2b.
County:
Cabarrus
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Harrisburg
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
JACKSON INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
12302-0196
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
1209 Oak Crest Trail
3e. City, state, zip:
Belmont, NC 28012
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent Other, specify: Client
4b. Name:
Mr. Pat Quinn
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Eastwood Homes
4d. Street address:
2857 Westport Road
4e. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28208
4f. Telephone no.:
704-942-0248
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Gregg Antemann, PWS
5b. Business name
(if applicable).-
pplicable):5c.
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
5c.Street address:
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28273
5e. Telephone no.:
704-408-1683
5f. Fax no.:
704-527-1133
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
55079984420000, 55170961880000, 55170836530000,
55170766360000, and 01010000400
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.329911' Longitude: -80.642257°
1 c. Property size:
51 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
UT to Rocky River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c. River basin:
Yadkin (HUC 03040105)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project area consists of a forested area with a few open unmaintained and maintained areas (Figure 3, attached). Typical
on-site vegetation includes eastern redbud (Cercis canadensis), hackberry (Celtis occidentalis), sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), winged elm (Ulmus alata), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), Nepalese browntop (Microstegium vimineum), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans), and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). There is evidence that site has been burned in the past 10 years
(burn marks in trees).
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.45 acre of jurisdictional wetland area
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 2.698 linear feet of
perennial stream, 1,130 linear feet of intermittent stream.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to develop approximately 40 acres of the 51 acres property into a multi -family residential
development. This project will provide residential housing within Harrisburg, North Carolina to meet the growth and demand of
an area of Cabarrus County that is experiencing significant population growth due to its proximity to Charlotte, North Carolina.
This project is a phased project as depicted in Sheet C-1 (Attachment G), but all the wetland and stream impacts associated
with this project will be included in this permit application. All adjoining subdivisions are owned by individuals and/or companies
not associated with this subdivision. The client is not aware of any Section 404 permits on adjoining developments.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: (see next page)
Page 3 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

3e
Under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 29, unavoidable permanent impacts to jurisdictional waters associated with this project
are limited to a total of 0.15 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 34 If of jurisdictional stream channel. The proposed permanent
impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. consist of fill for the construction of lots and roads. Sheets C-2.0-2.5 include the
construction plan sheets (Attachment G).
Temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters associated with this project are limited to a total of 30 linear feet of temporary strea
impacts. This temporary impact consists of a temporary stream crossing for a sewerline installation via open cut trench.
Fill for Lots and Roads
The proposed fill for units and roads are unavoidable in order to meet the project goals. The associated fill for units and roads
will result in a total of 34 linear feet of permanent impacts to Seasonal RPW Stream B and 0.15 acres of permanent impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands (Attachment G). The stormwater drainage currently flowing to these jurisdictional features will be
captured via the pipe system depicted in the construction plan sheets C-2.1 - C-2.5 and then redirected to the stormwater
control measures located in northeastern portion of the property. The proposed impacts associated with the fill for the roads
and units are listed below:
S1: Fill for a road will result in 34 linear feet of permanent impacts (S1) to Seasonal RPW Stream B. The plan view is
depicted as Sheet C-2.0.
W1 -W3: Fill for units and the roads will result in 0.15 acres of permanent impacts to Wetlands CC, DD, and EE. This impact
from fill is essential to create more usable area on the 51 -acre property that is divided into four sections by several linear
stream and wetland features by bringing the existing grade up to the proper elevation for development. The proposed soft
path (unpaved train) will cause minimal permanent disturbance (<0.01 acre) in the northern portion of Wetlands CC and EE.
The plan view is depicted as Sheet C-2.0 and sheets C-2.3, 2.2, and 2.3 provide zoomed in views (Attachment G).
Temporary Crossing for Sewerline
S2: The proposed construction easement associated with the sewer crossing is located in the north -central portion of the
property and will result in 30 linear feet of temporary impact to Seasonal RPW Stream B (Sheets C-2.0 and C- 2.2: Attachment
G). No permanent impacts are associated with the sewer installation.
The proposed sewerline will cross Seasonal RPW Stream B at a perpendicular angle. The disturbance includes approximately
46 cubic yards of cut and backfill. The total width of the proposed temporary construction easement is 30 feet. There will be a
temporary pit and pump over during sewer construction. The temporary structures will be removed after the sewer stream
crossing construction is complete.
Disturbed stream banks will be restored to original pre -construction contours, stabilized with biodegradable coir fiber matting or
other coconut fiber matting, and seeded with a native riparian seed mix.
Typical construction equipment such as tract hoe will be used.
Page 4 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
❑x Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project including all prior phases in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
® PreliminaryEl Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): CWS
Other: CWS
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The Harrisburg Village site was delineated by CWS scientists on October 29, 2015. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) issued a Preliminary Determination (SAW -2015-02481) on December 21, 2016 (Attachment C). Figure 4 depicts the
potentially jurisdictional features within the Harrisburg Village project limits. On -Site potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S.
are summarized in Table 1. Photographs 1-10 are representative of the on-site jurisdictional features (Attachment D).
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ❑x No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
This project is a phased project as depicted in Sheet C-1 (Attachment G), but all the wetland and stream impacts associated
with this project will be included in this permit application.
Page 5 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands © Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f. Area
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Tempora T
W1
p
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.05
W2
p
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.06
W3
p
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0.04
W4
W5
W6
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.15 ac.
2h. Comments:
Permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands total 0.15 acre.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1
P
Fill
Stream B
INT
Corps
3
34
S2
P
Sewerline crossing via
Stream B
INT
Corps
3
30
open trench
S3
S4
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
64
Page 6 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

3i. Comments: Permanent impacts to streams total 34 linear feet.
Page 7 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Tempora T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
_
Choose One
Choose
02
_
Choose One
Choose
03
_
Choose One
Choose
04
_
Choose One
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose One
P2
Choose One
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number-
Permanent (P) or
Tempora T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
_
Yes/No
B2
_
Yes/No
B3
_
Yes/No
B4
_
Yes/No
B5
_
Yes/No
B6
_
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 8 of 16
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent practicable while meeting the
project goals. In order to avoid and minimize the impacts to the jurisdictional waters of the U.S., the Harrisburg Village site was
delineated prior to developing the site plan and the proposed site plan was designed around the delineation results. Proper
sediment and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters. Construction activities an
impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will comply with all conditions of Nationwide Permit 29 and Water Quality
Certificate No. 4092. All work will be constructed in the dry.
In an attempt to minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters while meeting the goals of the project, a "No Build" alternative was
considered. The property is being purchased for the purpose of providing residential housing to meet the growth and demand of
an area in Cabarrus County experiencing significant population growth. A "No Build" option would not meet the project goals of
providing necessary housing to meet the current demand. Therefore, the No Build Alternative was eliminated from further
consideration.
The Proposed Design Plan has been thoughtfully designed to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. wherever
practicable. Impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and stream consist of fill for the lots and road crossing, and one temporary
sewerline stream crossing. The three on-site linear wetlands (Wetland CC, DD, and EE) bisect the site and divide the property
into several portions. Therefore, alternative designs for the proposed subdivision, while avoiding impacts to jurisdictional
streams and wetlands, are limited.
Jurisdictional waters of the U.S., including wetlands, were taken into consideration in the planning phase. The following design
aspects demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of adverse impacts to the jurisdictional waters of the U.S.: 1) The
proposed roadway (Victoria Way) is placed as close to the property line as possible to impact only a small portion of stream
(Sheet C-1, Attachment G). The Victoria Way is curved to impact minimal portions of the stream before running parallel to the
streamline to avoid additional impact. The streams and buffers are avoided in all other areas. 2) Individual lots and structures
were terminated at the cul-de-sac of Maplewood Avenue to avoid stream and buffer impacts (Sheet C-1, Attachment G). 3) The
extents of grading will be outside of the FEMA floodplain.
believe that the current site plan is the best possible plan that meets the project goals while avoiding impacts to jurisdictional
;rs of the U.S. to the greatest extent practicable.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Impacts to on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent practicable. Proper sediment and
erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters. Construction activities and impacts to
on-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. will comply with all conditions of Nationwide Permits 29 and Water Quality Certificate
No. 4092. All work will be constructed in the dry.
Page 9 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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?
N Yes ❑ No
2b.
If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ N Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
N Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose One
Type: Choose One
Type: Choose One
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c.
Comments:
4.
Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
N Yes
4b.
Stream mitigation requested:
4c.
If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose One
4d.
Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e.
Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.15 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.
6.
Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) —required by DWQ
6a.
Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes N No
6b.
If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Page 10 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 11 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes N 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.
This project is associated with a stormwater infrastructure maintenance project and
❑ Yes C] No
does not require a SMP.
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
>24 %
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
N 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:
The plan is currently being reviewed by the Town of Harrisburg.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
own of Harrisburg
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
own of Harrisburg
N Phase II
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply):
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes N No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
El HOWEl
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 12 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
p' Yes M 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 II 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 M No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® 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 ® 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.
The project will not result in additional future development.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
Page 13 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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.
The proposed sewers will tie into the exiting sewer infrastructure off site at the northeast corner of the property.
Page 14 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑x Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑x 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?
CWS scientists performed a data review using North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer on May
25, 2017 to determine the presence of any federally -listed, endangered species, threatened species, or critical habitat
located within the project area. Based on the NCNHP review, there are no records of federally -protected species within the
project limits or within a mile of the project area. A copy of the NCNHP report is attached (Attachment F).
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS), Raleigh Field Office, North Carolina Distribution Records of
Endangered, Threatened, and Species of Concern list for Cabarrus County was reviewed. The USFWS database lists the
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), and bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) as potentially occurring in Cabarrus County. Additionally, the project area is within Northern long-eared bat
(Myotis septentrionalis) range.
Prior to the field work, CWS scientists visited a known population of Helianthus schweinitzii on May 22, 2017 to determine
the condition of its stem, leaves, and flowers. Based on the site visit, the aboveground plant parts are identifiable but
flowers were present. On May 25, 2017, CWS scientists conducted a pedestrian survey of the project area for federally -
protected species. Transects were completed within identified areas of supportive habitat, as applicable, for potentially
occurring federally -protected species.
Based on the literature search and the results of the on-site assessment for federally -protected endangered and
threatened species, it has been determined that habitat was observed for the Schweinitz's sunflower, Carolina heelsplitter,
and northern long-eared bat (NLEB). However, any incidental take on NLEB that may result from associated activities is
exempt under the 4(d) rule. As a potential habitat was present but no individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed
within the project limits, this project may affect but is not likely to adversely affect this species. As no individuals of
Carolina heelsplitter were observed within the project limits,the observed habitat was marginal, and there are no known
populations within the Rocky River watershed, where the project is located, this project will have no effect on this species.
As no nesting habitat was observed for the bald eagle, this project will have no effect on this species.
A letter requesting concurrence was sent to the (USFWS on June 5, 2017. As of the submittal date, no response has been
received from the USFWS.
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?
NOAA Fisheries: http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/habitatmapper.htmi
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corns Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑x No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Page 15 of 16
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on May 31, 2017 to determine the
presence of any areas of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance that would be affected by the project. CWS
also consulted the SHPO online GIS service and found no historical structures, buildings, sites, or districts within the project
limits (SHPO Map, Attachment E). As of the date of submittal, no response has been received from the SHPO.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ Yes © No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
There will be no fill in the FEMA floodplain. Additionally, the extents of grading will be outside of the FEMA floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA FIRM No. 3710550700J and 3710551700J
ZT-�-
6.12.17
Mr. Gregg Antemann
Applicant/Agent's Signature (Agent's
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
signature is valid only if an authorization letter
Date
from the applicant is provided.)
Page 16 of 16
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT C:
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
(SAW -2015-02481)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMMGTON DISTRICT
Action I.D.: SAW -2015-02481 County: Cabarrus U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -HARRISBURG
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner/Agent: Mike Kemp, Eastwood Construction, LLC
Address: 2857 Westport Road Charlotte, North Carolina 28208
Telephone No.: 704 421 6541
Property description:
Size (acres): 51 acres
Nearest Waterway: Rocky River
Coordinates: 35.329911, -80.642257
Nearest Town. Harrisburg
River Basin: Upper Pee Dee
Hydrologic Unit Code: 03040105
Location Description: The site is located at Harrisburg Town Center, Southeast of Harrisburg Drive -Roberta Road
intersection, in Cabarrus County, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following App1 :
A. Preliminary Determination
X_ Based on preliminary information, there may be waters and wetlands on the above described property. We strongly
suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction, Tobe
considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an
appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331). ). If you
wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction.
Also, you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
D. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
_ There are waters and wetlands on the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the waters and wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property
and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a
more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by
the Corps.
X_ The waters and wetlands on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps.
We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by
the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your
property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to
exceed five years.
The waters and wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344), Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.

Action Id.: SAW -2015-02481
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact William Elliott at 828-271-7980.
C. Basis For Determination
The site contains wetlands as determined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Interim
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual Eastern Mountain and Piedmont Region. These
wetlands are adjacent to stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The
stream channel on the property is an unnamed tributary to Rocky River which flows into the Upper Pee Dee River. Yadkin
River joins the Uwharrie River to form the Pee -Dee River. Pee Dee River enters the Atlantic Ocean through
Winyah Bay in South Carolina. So drainages in Iredell, Rowan, and Wilkes drain to Yadkin River (before it's
confluence with Uwharrie River). Drainages in Cabarrus, Mecklenburg, Stanley, and Union drain to Pee -Dee River.
D. Remarks. Jurisdictional "Waters of the US" have been identified on this property as depicted
by submitted Jurisdictional Request Package on file.
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act ju isdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The del ineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved ,jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination, If you are not in agreement with that approved
jurisdictional determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a request for
appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following
address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 33 1.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address within 60 days of the issue date below.
"It is not necessary to submit an RFA Form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.
Corps Regulatory Official; William Elliott
Issue Date: December 21,201_6 Expiration Date: December 20, 2021
2

The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at hgp://per2.nwp.usace.amiy.inii/survey.htmI
to complete the survey online.
CF: Gregg Antemann,PWS, 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28273
3

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Mike Kemp, Eastwood Construction,
File Number: SAW-2015- Date: December 21,
LLC
02481 2016
Attached is: See Section. below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
X PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision. Additional information may be found at
http://www.usace.artny.mil/CECW/Pages/reg_materials.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the pen-nit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer,
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)
modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the pennit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having detennined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered pen-nit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terns and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit,
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined pen-nit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section IT of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a pen-nit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by cornpleting Section IT of this form and sending the fonn to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section lI of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,

E: PRELIMINARY JI7RISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
SECTION 11- REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial proffered perinit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However,
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record,
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
process you may contact:
also contact:
William Elliott, Project Manager
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
USAGE, Asheville Regulatory Field Office
CESAD-PDO
151 Patton Ave
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
RM 208
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Asheville, NC 28801
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
828-271-7980
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations,
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: William Elliott, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington,
North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

ATTACHMENT A
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDI TIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD). November2, 2015 '
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Eastwood construction, LLC; POC; Mike Kemp
2857 Westport Road Charlotte, NO 28208
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Sow_/�/t /
Wilmington District 4 ,S k/— ! Vp? T,!
,X 11 ST we bQ CW,vSTI bt c
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Located southeast of the Harrisburg Drive -Roberta Road intersection in Harrisburg, North Carolina
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUM5NT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES AT DIFFERENT
SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Cabarrus City: Ilarrisburg
Center coordinates of site (]at/long in degree decimal format):
Lat. 95.329911 ON; Long. -80.642257 QW.
Universal Transverse Mercator: NAD83
Name of nearest waterbody: Rocky River
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Nan -wetland waters:
3,828 linear feet: 2-6 width (ft) and/or 0.45 acres.
Cowardin Class: R51,1e2, R41JI32
Stream Flow: 2,698 If perennial, 1,130 If seasonal
Wetlands: 0-52 acres.
Cowardin Class: PI=01
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal:
Non Tidal:
1

E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): October 29, 2015
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary .1D
(check all that apply - checked items should be included lin case file and,
where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
0 Maps, plans, plots. or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
0 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:
11 USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps
❑✓ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: l,24.00o,Harrisburg,NO1098.
121
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: Cabarrus County Soil Survey
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:,
11
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 1 00 -year Floodplain Elevation is:
(National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: l y I Aerial (Name & Date): Fsri, accessed 2015 or
Other (Name & Date):Sllephologmphsofslrearns (May andOrtober2c15).
❑ Previous determination (s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
2

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2, In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre -construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
CY R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.

This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later "urisdictional determinations.
} 11/52015
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
;12 OQ
4
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

a t
I ,4 ti �aJ J�, f{ t ���J f
I I
Perennial Stream
Seasonal Stream C -416 if
r ' - Seasonal Stream B « `� ~ 74 If
1,056 If } I
1
S.
VWetland DD =s _ �- 1 '•�
�m 0.09 ac.
,a
Wetland CC ,
a
0.11 ac. f f
�Y
Wetland EE-
3_-
0.15 ac. � • �r _ _ .�
Wetland AA `
�- 0.16 ac. -
L Legend
Wetland BB_ r ® Project Limits
1 0.01 ac. f N Perennial RPW
f
- r
...... Seasonal RPW r`
_ Wetlands
•`� � Perennial Stream A I' ,
'ANS pLV 2,282 If • DP Data Point
�PHYSIo1 1
SSCP Stream Classification Point i
�j Photo Location & Direction
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIs LAYERS PROVIDED BY CABARRUS COUNTY, NC, DATED 2015. r° '' ; `+• IX vI ' THE ONSITE FEATURES WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND \ -
SURVEYED WITH SUBFOOTTRIMBLF GPS BY CNS, INC. ON OCTOBER 29, 2015. 400 200 0 400 Feet
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USAGE.
SCALF: 1„ 0 400' - -
DACP_- 11-3-2015 - -
r- A R OSERVICES I A
Approximate Jurisdictional
Boundary Ma
FIGURE NO.
6
WS PROJECT NO:
2015-3637
DRAWN BY:
KJM
Harrisburg Torun Center Site
Harrisburg, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
PPLPCANT NO:
CHECKED BY; KMT

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
ATTACHMENT D:
Photopage (Photographs 1-10)

7' F
r. �'r f �'iA• � ' " �. •,• _ •��? � d4at PC AL.
F^?
:'a�1 yyu( r� ,� V aR►y f# ,fir yr N'.
J.
a
:A 1. vim- 4' v
_ r

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
to
`
Photograph 3. View of Perennial RPW B, facing downstream (May 2015).
Ar
rr `-. i:'° CL+•L'v {fit `� rt- _ a -� r.'�'r; re„1' �" w'1
er 3
.-r.
i
X46+ +
-
i
Photograph 4. View of Seasonal RPW B, facing downstream (October 2015).
m

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
3k
-.. r `" ��t - -
F � ', +K..
.. • _ ,rY
tw
s-,� �' r -
Photograph 5. View of Seasonal RPW C, facing downstream (October 2015).
i
u
n
Photograph 6. View of Wetland AA, facing southeast (October 2015).
U

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
1V

Harrisburg Village June 12, 2017
Attachment D — Representative Photographs CWS Project No. 2015-3637
,�
t � • s ,��\ h , , � � .-;. a
g�.'
1
- A-4
�MT4.,r. � ` � '�� �'`�. *. • moi'! § �-'T-- 'Ic4`+}�.�r -y t�Y"__ �L�� �� _.•e.
— .t.M `" ,' .Y `."` .Cre/wS-�\.� -�•��� �.,��� '�'r jam; � i�y� ,�
�
Photograph 9. View of Wetland DD, facing southwest (October 2015).
Photograph 10. View of Wetland EE, facing northeast (October 2015).

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT E:
SHPO Map
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

m
I Tjt QL,aTy Rd
ME�IKILENBURG
lk
Q', A, e
May 25, 2017
NIR Points
NR Individual Listing
NR Listing, Gone
GIA
Fe
titidsi- cd` tj LW n
4111
vy h c Lit Or SW
l-'fn6
I.
RfFV R.1
CAA3581 Matthew Ifiank lin
Q CABARRUS
Teeter House 1,1193
Ah,jqjmCK Rd
91 o
f�'T;Aja; Dr
I'1 dtl 4.1 ' ra
110
CA059D Wads'w,urth House
4--A-D463 Jackson Linkeff
Ferre
GA04,92 hal cKinley-Quay
KDUSE- 1921 -CA0424 SarnuelWashington
Harris House
V,
RrYB'
�aY�lnnatl Jed
At
'Irk
6
1:48,215
0 0.4 0.8 1.6 mi
0 0.5 1 2 km
Sources: Esn HERE, DeLorme, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan
Esri Japan, MET, Esd China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand),
Mapmylndia, NGCC, Q OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT F:
NCNHP Data Review Report
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

NorthCarolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Governor Roy Cooper Secretary Susi H_ Hamilton
May 24, 2017
Aliisa Harjuniemi
Carolina Wetland Services
550 E Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
RE: Harrisburg Village; 2015-3637
Dear Aliisa Harjuniemi:
NCNHDE-3577
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information
about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are
no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation/managed areas
within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural
heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have
been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists.
In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may
update our records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been
documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that
these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is
included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed area within a one -mile radius of the
project area, if any, are also included in this report.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project
review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions.
Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the
NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP
data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature
Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) easement,
or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please
contact Rodney A. Butler at rodney.butler o_ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
MAILING ADDRESS: Telephone: [phone] LOCATION.
1651 MaII Service Center a *w.ncnhp.org 121 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 Raleigh, NC 276133

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Harrisburg Village
Project No. 2015-3637
May 24, 2017
NCNHDE-3577
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name
Last
Element
Group
9
1
Observation
Occurrence
Date
Rank
Freshwater
14825 Villosa vaughaniana Carolina Creekshell
1993-04-22
E
Bivalve
Vascular Plant
2809 Acmispon helleri Carolina Birdfoot-trefoil
1992-08-06
C
Vascular Plant 34035 Hexalectris spicata Crested Coralroot 2014-09-10 D
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Accuracy Federal State Global State
Status Status Rank Rank
3 -Medium Species of Endangered
Concern
2 -High --- Special
Concern
Vulnerable
2 -High --- Significantly
Rare Peripheral
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
Catawba Lands Conservancy Preserve Catawba Lands Conservancy Private
Cabarrus County Open Space Cabarrus County: multiple local government Local Government
G2 S3
G5T3 S3
G5 S2
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/content/help. Data query generated on May 24, 2017; source: NCNHP, Q2 April 2017. Please resubmit your
information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-3577: Harrisburg Village
N
WL
S
May 24, 2017
❑ Project Boundary
❑ Buffered Project Boundary
LI Managed Area (MAREA)
Page 3 of 3
tr)t,trr Mull
1:24„756
0 0.2 4.4 0.8 mi
0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km
Sources: Ssri, HERE, OeLomie, Int.—p,incremeM P Cary., GP SCO, USGS,
FAO, NPS, NRCAN, Geot3ase, IGN, Kadaster NL,, Ordnance Survey, Ewi Japan,
METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swl tvpv, Mapmylndia, @ OpenStreelMap
contributors, and the GIS user Community

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT G:
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637
Construction Plan Sheets: Proposed Impacts S1, S2, and
W1 -W3

1. The proposed
roadway is placed
as close to the
property line as
possible to avoid
the impacts to the
stream channel to
the maximum
extent practicaple.
2. Individual lots
and structures were
terminated at the
cul-de-sac of
Maplewood Avenue
to avoid stream and
buffer impacts.
3) The extents of
grading will be
outside of the
FEMA floodplain.
10' WIDE PAVED INTERNAL
PEDESTRIAN TRAIL SYSTEM (TYP.)
'PHASE 4
.:. PHASE 3
�r��►ti��1r°i�►'.�Y' .�. �` .►fir `�
0
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY.
3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
INN
DISTURBED WETLAND
UNDISTURBED WETLAND
PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
DISTURBED STREAMLINE
UNDISTURBED STREAMLINE
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 125 250' 500
( IN FEET )
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 250 ft.
m
a o
LL
o
LU W
LU o
o 0 =
Z
H QLU
m
0
d Q U K
Z
J
0
U
0
z
0
Of
co
Of
Q
Z
O
LI., �
J
Cl)
z
CO
O
E U
(Y
Q Q
LUU
2

TEMPORARY IMPACT FOR SEWER CROSSING. 30 LINEAR FEET ACROSS EASEMENT WITH
APPROXIMATELY 46 CUBIC FEET OF CUT AND BACKFILL TO EXISTING GRADE.
�II I J
DISTURBED WETLAND
UNDISTURBED WETLAND
PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
DISTURBED STREAMLINE
UNDISTURBED STREAMLINE
�t>.uisati4� a Inrr�rr�rU
tits,<�t\A CAP,p '�=ff
[CAii
17582
rrfrry�trr r . gRti� �E'`�,s
I I
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY.
3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P. OR AS AMENDED.
C-2.1
S 1 - Stream B
Impact Length: 341f
35' UNDISTURBED Impact Type: Fill for road
BUFFER (TYP) Permanent: Yes
O ,z
r/
C-2.3
L
I
PROFESSIONAL BLVD
(60' PUBLIC R/W)
W3- Wetland DD
Impact Area: 0.04 ac.
Impact Type: Fill for lots and road
Permanent: Yes
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 125' 250' 500'
( IN FEET )
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 250 ft.
10' (PAVED
L
BMP
CARL PARMER DRIVE
S2 - Stream B
T Impact Length: 301f
CEN ERLI E Impact Type: Sewerline 5' TOTAL
crossing via open trench UFFER (TYP)
C-2.2 Permanent: No (Disturbed
stream banks will be restored to
C3
pre -construction contours) Ir
BMP 1 / BMP 3rYA
C-2.4
C-2.5
W 1 - Wetland CC
Impact Area: 0.05 ac.
Impact Type: Fill for lots and road.
Minimal disturbance for soft path
Permanent: Yes
ALL R/W TO BE 50'
PUBLIC R/W UNLESS
NOTED OTHERWISE. PR PC
0
ED 30' GREENWAY
EASEMENT (TYP)
TIES TO -EXISTING
MANHOLE OFFSITE
100 -YR
FLOODPLAIN
(TYP)
W2 - Wetland EE
Impact Area: 0.06 ac.
Impact Type: Fill for lots and road.
Minimal disturbance for soft path
Permanent: Yes
FOOT qRIDGE
BY OT ERS
LU
LL
Lu LU
Lu o
o =
M N Z U
z
Z
LU Lij�
Q U K
EL 0 U) 0
Z
0
U
OfH
0
z
CD
m
'I
w
LU
J
(D Cj)
m J
LU
O
U)
2
0
0
O
O
COH
LU
0
0
rr
C-2.0LUOf

coW
o
LU
LL
LU o 0 = ca
Z
U o ¢LU Z
m
¢�¢
� Q U K
LL n O
Q
Z
J
Q
U
0
O
Z
0
Of
co
07
Of
Q
2
W
J <J \�
> J
cD n
ry
EDW
ED
CO
Q
C/)
0
0
w
C-2.1
a
LU
d

I
TEMPORARY IMPACT FOR
SEWER CROSSING. 30 LINEAR
FEET ACROSS EASEMENT WITH
APPROXIMATELY 46 CUBIC
FEET OF CUT AND BACKFILL TO
EXISTING GRADE.
S2 - Stream B
Impact Length: 301f
Impact Type: Sewerline crossing via open trench
Permanent: No (Disturbed stream banks will be
restored to original pre -construction contours,
stabilized with biodegradable coir fiber matting or
other coconut fiber matting, and seeded with a native
riparian seed mix.)
60 SQ FT (0.00 AC)
OF STREAM / F TBRIDGE
LOCATED INSIDE \ (BY OTHERS)
PROPOSED SEWER \ (�Jp I 'act )
EASEMENT. /
N J
U�
W
IL
Cn
DISTURBED W_/ /
WETLAND FOR U)
SOFT PATH; 31 SQ w
FT (0.00 AC) _ 4.1111!
U
/ _ / 72 73 7
DISTURBED / 70 71
WETLAND FOR ` 69
SOFT PATH; 33 SQ
FT (0.00 AC) / 68
66 67
64 65
UNDISTURBED
WETLAND (TYP) — / 63 \
DISTURBED
WETLAND (0.05 AC)
DISTURBED
WETLAND (0.06 AC)
`�4�itt11111111IIlIlId1111�j
�\A CAP
L
J�1582
AA/�1rGsjlGtfi•1i�~�
B
Ilii' !!!B1' 11110
6 z r 7
DISTURBED WETLAND
UNDISTURBED WETLAND
PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
DISTURBED STREAMLINE
UNDISTURBED STREAMLINE
10
I25
27
E
4
• \ y L m � o
I I
I I
3
I I
7�\/
MATCHLINE: SEE SHEET C-2.4
/ 100 -YR \
FLOODPLAIN
\(TYP)
IFIL
m
a o
U_
0
Uj o m
°° o 0 =
0
z
w w
Cr o Uig o
a
Z
0
O
0
U
X
0
Z
c�
M
M
co
rr
Elfa
x
q
m w
U
Q
11 IF 71
I I W
GRAPHIC SCALE mi
0
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING =
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
0 50' 100' 200' O
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. O
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY. w
( IN FEET ) 3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE 0
LL
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA p
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
HORIZONTAL I inch = IOO ft. 4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS C -Z■ 2
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED. a

E
40.
MATCHLINE: SEE SHEET C-2.1 o o
U
o�� \ 53 54 56 57
\ / DISTURBED / 258
J WETLAND (0.04 AC) / 257
256 208 210
� 207 �255 09 183
211 212 I 184 186 p
CLQ �[ , o w
p
2 C. j ; 206 .33OAC. , OS p }
/— i 253 .31 AC. 18 Y
239
240 m
�' — 205 213 182 z z
v, "' a m
242 244 246 248 204 214 N Uo Z
251 203 181 I 191 U o a a
A- 241 243 245 247 250 202 I ( 216 215 180 I LU a o Uig o
V 237 249 201 179 193 U) z
217 178 LU o
U
I 236 — — a
ILL 0
235 z
I J K
= O
I I 234 / — Q z
233 231 229 227 225
221219
232 230 228 226 224 OS 200 198 197 195
a
` 222 220 218 0. C. 199 196 177 175 174 =
Lu
J Q
> J
IIoIII 1= - -
- a.
� W
m
Q �
C-2.1 C-2.2
�4�1't1;141111111I1fdrr���� / '� ,
y
�\, CARP
C-2.3
t
GRA]PHIC SCALE o1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTA T
C INGCDISTURBED WETLAND '�i^uP APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE �'� I' 0 50' 100' 200 p
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. 0
�17582 = UNDISTURBED WETLAND
�`,• • -� PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS C-2.5 �.; j/ 2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING CO
' FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY. w
•
��.' ` DISTURBED STREAMLINE J.
'•t A`GIN �`.�` ( IN FEET � 3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE O
r''•,..v
pr�,,`L �l REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA p
L7f� �� UNDISTURBED STREAMLINE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES. w
�l
trrr �ti1s HORIZONTAL I inch = 100 ft. //�� 2.3
/� a
++ 4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS ■ � / ■ � a
Z ( PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED. v

DISTURBED
WETLAND (0.05 AC)
DISTURBED
WETLAND (0.06 AC)
A.Y�i756z
B���
S''tS11j1j11
f
'is low
MATCHLINE: SEE SHEET C-2.2
DISTURBED WETLAND
UNDISTURBED WETLAND
PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
DISTURBED STREAMLINE
UNDISTURBED STREAMLINE
UNDISTURBED
WETLAND
FOOT BRIDGE
BY OTHERS
( W I rrpact )
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 50' 100' 200'
( IN FEET )
HORIZONTAL I inch = 100 ft.
U)
Lu
O
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
=
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION.
O
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
�
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY.
w
ic-.2.4=1
3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
O
w
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
p
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.
w
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
w
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
a

�NGKa..
612-11-7
DISTURBED WETLAND
UNDISTURBED WETLAND
PROPOSED GRADING LIMITS
DISTURBED STREAMLINE
UNDISTURBED STREAMLINE
W�CHeSEE SHEET CC/ 2 4 1 ����
FOOT BRIDGE
BY OTHERS
(No I rrp B C
UNDISTURBED
WETLAND
100 -YR
FLOODPLAIN
(TYP)
I .
Lu
u-
p
� p m
OWO r H Y
O O =
� N z U
Z M Q m
O
Z
W W J
a o U)i o
I �
I
p\ @� U)
GRAPHIC SCALELu
0
1) CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING =
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES ARE
0 50' 100' 200' LOCATED PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. O
2) CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING �
FLAG MEN, ETC., AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY. w
d
IN F'EE'T � 3) ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE 0
W
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA p
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES. W
HORIZONTAL 1 inch = 100 ft. C a
4) SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDSC-2.5
J W
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED. • a

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT H:
DMS Acceptance Letter
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 8, 2017
Pat Quinn
Eastwood Homes
2857 Westport Road
Charlotte, NC 28208
Project: Harrisburg Village
ROY COOPER
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Expiration of Acceptance: December 8, 2017
County: Cabarrus
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the
table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation
program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility
of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will be approved. You must
also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated with
the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 CertificationiCAMA 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 on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit 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.
River
Basin
CU Location
(8 -digit HUC)
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres) Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold Cool
Warm
Riparian
Non -Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Impact Yadkin
03040105
0 1 0
0
0.15
1 0
1 0 0
0
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation
will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 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: Gregg Antemann, agent
Sincerely,
Ja s. Stanfill
Asse anagement Supervisor
State of North Carolina Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 l 217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000
919 707 8976 T

Harrisburg Village
Attachments
ATTACHMENT I:
NC WAM Form
June 12, 2017
CWS Project No. 2015-3637

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
®B ®B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
Accompanies user rvianuai version om
USACE AID #
NCDWR#
Project Name
Harrisburg Village
Date of Evaluation
5.25.17
Applicant/Owner Name
Eastwood homes
Wetland Site Name
NC WAM 1
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name/Organization
CWS
Level III Ecoregion
Piedmont
Nearest Named Water Body
Rocky River
River Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03040105
County
Cabarrus
NCDWR Region
Asheville
® Yes ❑ No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude/Longitude (deci-deqrees)
35.329835, -80.645034
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub -surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear -cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d) -listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d) -listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
® Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub -Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub -surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
®B ®B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture/Structure — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
®B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon >_ 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub -surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub -surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use — opportunity metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
®A
®A
®A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
R
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑C
❑C
❑C
>_ 20% coverage of pasture
❑D
❑D
❑D
>_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
®E
®E
®E
>_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
❑F
❑F
❑F
>_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
❑G
❑G
❑G
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
®A >_ 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
®s 15 -feet wide ❑> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
El Exposed — adjacent open water with width >_ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
❑A ❑A >_ 100 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
®H ®H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
®A Evidence of short -duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long -duration inundation or very long -duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition - assessment area condition metric (skip for non -riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size -wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT
WC
FW (if applicable)
❑A
❑A
❑A
>: 500 acres
❑B
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
❑D
From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
❑E
From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F
❑F
❑F
From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G
❑G
❑G
From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H
❑H
❑H
From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I
❑I
❑1
From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
®J
®J
®J
From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K
❑K
R
< 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness - wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (>- 90%) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas - landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A
❑A
>- 500 acres
®B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
7
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect - wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non -forested areas >- 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option "C."
❑A 0
®B 1 to 4
❑C 5to8
15. Vegetative Composition - assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity - assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
®A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A >_ 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
TAA WT
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
m ❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
S
g ❑A ❑A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
❑B ❑B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
®C ®C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense shrub layer
_�E ❑B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
U) ®C ®C Shrub layer sparse or absent
-0 ❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
_ ❑B ❑B Moderate density herb layer
®C ®C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion — wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
(7,
- f
"1y
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
®C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Directly abutting tributary flowing to Rocky River that is 303(d) listed stream. Evidence that the area has been burned in the past (black marks in
the trees). Overland flow altered by the development at the higher gradient with significanly high percentage of impervious surface.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name NC WAM 1 Date of Assessment 5.25.17
Condition
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization CWS
Hydrology
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
NO
Sub -function Rating Summary
Condition
Function Sub -function Metrics
Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
MEDIUM
Sub -surface Storage and
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Retention Condition
HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Hydrology
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Habitat
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM