20170894 Ver 1_401 Application_20170720

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW -
Prepare file folder ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Project Hercules
T
'Environmental Planning Group
d,—, PLLC
Begin Date (Date Received):
Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
2. Work Type: Private ❑Institutional ❑Government ❑Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Request and Permit Application for a logistics center.
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: TPA Group
5. Agent/ Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC - Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
6. Related Action 1D Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
20, 70894
oc�c��ad�
-D
JUL 9. 0 2017
DEO-WATER RES U C S
BUFFER PERMITTING
7. Project Location —Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Bib]:
35.441 N/ -80.6872W
8. Project Location — Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B 1 a]: 46917957910000, 46927079800000, 4691894379%
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Cabarrus
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Kannapolis
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Coddle Creek
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03040105
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 39
Regional General Permit #
✓ Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
HCompliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
July 17, 2017
Mr. Jason Randolph
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification (NWP 39) and Preliminary Jurisdictional
Determination for Project Hercules, Kannapolis, Cabarrus County, NC
Ms. Higgins and Messrs. Randolph, Johnson and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit #39, and a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
associated with a 1.017 million square foot logistics center located on Macedonia Church Road
in Kannapolis, Cabarrus County, NC. Site visits were conducted to review and confirm WEPG's
delineation on May 19, 2017 by Alan Johnson of NCDEQ. As detailed in the attached
Delineation Map, the site consists of four unnamed tributaries to Coddle Creek and five
wetlands. Approximate total length of the onsite tributaries and area of wetland features are
2,138 linear feet and 0.393 acres, respectively. Please refer to accompanying Jurisdictional
Determination section for additional information on site surface waters.
Proposed permanent and temporary impacts to onsite tributaries for construction of the building
and appurtenant parking space total 290 and 20 linear feet, respectively. Due to the configuration
of the property boundaries, adjacent roadway rights-of-way, required size of the facility,
appurtenant parking/driveway space and the location of onsite tributaries/wetlands, complete
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10. PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 1 [e-mail]

Wetlands and Environmental Planning
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
avoidance was not practicable. Impacts to onsite tributaries associated with the proposed
development were limited through design and positioning of the building and associated parking
areas. The following is a discussion of avoidance and minimization efforts considered for the
design and construction of the proposed development.
Avoidance and Minimization Discussion:
The applicant is proposing the development of a large warehousing and distribution facility
which requires a one million plus square foot building with sufficient employee car parking and
truck docks/parking to house their employees and distribute their merchandise. In addition to the
building footprint, the site will require 1,000 car parking spaces, 110 truck docks, and 210 trailer
parking spaces. The applicant has strict grading guidelines (requires 1% slope on 60' concrete
truck apron, maximum of 3.5% slope in the truck court, and maximum of 5% slope on asphalt) to
make the facility function properly. The parking shoulder at the truck parking spaces is required
to prevent the trailers from backing into the fence and light poles, and also serves as a safety
precaution to prevent the trailer doors opening over a steep drop off. From the parking shoulder,
2:1 slopes (with 2.5:1 slopes at the detention pond) are proposed to reduce the impacts to the
onsite tributaries, while complying with state and local standards.
The proposed development also includes a public road relocation in order to accommodate a
facility of this size. The site has been re -configured several times, with this layout being optimal
for minimizing impacts to onsite tributaries and reducing rock excavation while satisfying tenant
requirements. In attempting to shift the building south towards NC Hwy 73 and avoid impacts to
Unnamed Tributary A, the truck court to the south would need to be removed. This would not
provide any additional minimization or avoidance because fire truck and truck access is still
required, and truck site access is limited to the driveway on NC Hwy 73, per City of Kannapolis
requirements. 2:1 slopes are proposed to shorten the slopes directly adjacent to the onsite
tributaries and a retaining wall is proposed on the southwest portion of the site to reduce impacts
to Unnamed Tributary D.
The proposed building has been shifted east as far as possible and rotated to be parallel to the
onsite tributaries to minimize impacts. Further shifting away to the east is not possible due to lot
setbacks, access requirements and circulation off of Barr Road. The proposed car parking lot to
the east of the proposed building cannot be reduced as it would remove necessary car parking
spaces, and any reduction in drive aisles would dramatically worsen vehicle circulation. The site
cannot be lowered further to reduce impacts to onsite tributaries as there is a very large area of
rock located at the northeast corner of the site.
Stormwater management is provided by two wet detention ponds located at the south of the site
and has been designed to maintain existing hydrology to onsite tributaries to the greatest extent
practicable. The west detention pond discharges to Unnamed Tributary D, while the east
detention pond discharges through an existing culvert under Hwy 73 towards Coddle Creek.
Additionally, there is a small sand filter at the north side of the site, which discharges to
Unnamed Tributary A. Approximately ten acres of drainage are collected in the north storm
drainage system. This drains to a splitter box which diverts the l -year and 10 -year storm to the
sand filter. Excess runoff from larger rainfall events bypasses the sand filter and will be
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 2 [e-mail]

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC.
controlled and released by the west detention pond. Pre-existing groundwater drainage is
collected beneath the pavement in spring boxes which will gravity discharge into the onsite
tributaries to maintain hydrology.
Proposed Mitigation:
To compensate for the anticipated permanent impacts to onsite tributaries, the applicant is
proposing payment into N.C. Division Mitigation Services (NCDMS) at a 2:1 ratio for 236 linear
feet of warm water stream channel. This proposed mitigation ratio is associated with the higher
quality tributary (Unnamed Tributary A). A majority of this channel is situated in a wooded
valley which limits the direct impacts from the adjacent logging and subsequent destabilizing
influences. For the remaining 54 linear feet of proposed impacts, the applicant is proposing
payment into NCDMS at a 1.5:1 ratio. The decrease in the mitigation ratio is due to the lower
functional capacity/quality of the tributary at this location (Unnamed Tributary D). This tributary
and its origins are located within the area which has been historically logged and shows
extensive evidence of bank erosion, sparse vegetation and limited potential for habitat
development. A NCSAM was performed for both reaches to quantify each tributary's functional
capacity and provide additional support regarding the differences in proposed mitigation ratios.
Please refer to the NCSAM Stream Assessment section for metrics scores and ratings summaries.
Enclosed is the conditional acceptance letter from NCDMS.
Proposed temporary impacts total 20 linear feet and are associated with temporary construction
access downstream from each permanent impact location (Temporary Impact 1 and 2). The
temporary impacts will be restored to preconstruction conditions and will utilize matting and
temporary stabilization to limit erosion and reestablish vegetation along the banks. A Conceptual
Restoration Plan is attached and provides details for the stabilization of stream banks at the
construction access locations.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site in which
no listed species were identified within the project area. The site is wooded which may be
considered summer roosting habitat for the listed Northern Long Eared Bat. However, we have
consulted with the latest guidance associated with the Final 4(d) ruling and there are no known
hibernation and/or roosts sites within a 45 -mile radius of the project area. Based on this
information we believe that the project meets the exemption criteria for the 4(d) rule and formal
USFWS concurrence is not required.
Thank you for your consideration and please contact me if you have any questions, (704) 999-
5279 or email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Heath Caldwell Len Rindner, PWS
Environmental Scientist Principal
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
[e-mail] 3 [e-mail]

Permit Application

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

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑X Other, specify: Buyer
4b. Name:
Joe McGorrey
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
TPA Group
4d. Street address:
3350 Riverwood Parkway, Suite 750
4e. City, state, zip:
Atlanta, GA 30339
4f. Telephone no.:
770-436-3400
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Heath Caldwell
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC - Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
5c. Street address:
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28277
5e. Telephone no.:
704-999-5279
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
46917957910000, 46927079800000, 46918943790000
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.441 Longitude: -80.6872
1 c. Property size:
119 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Coddle Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c. River basin:
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 site is composed of agricultural and residential use with forest along slopes and riparian areas. General land use in the vicinity consists of
residential, agricultural and commercial developments.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.393
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 2,138
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Construction of a 1.017 million square foot logistics center to include building pad, parking area, roadway and BMP construction.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Excavation and grading of the site will use standard equipment - excavator, trackhoe, dump trucks, etc.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases)in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
El Preliminary El Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): N. Nelson/H.Caldwell
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Site visit was conducted by Alan Johnson of NCDEQ on 5/19/2017 to confirm WEPG's delineation in which findings/determination are included
for preliminary determination.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ❑X Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Fill
Unnamed Tributary A
INT
Corps
5
236
S2 T
Stabilization
Unnamed Tributary A
INT
Corps
5
10
S3 P
Excavation
Unnamed Tributary D
PER
Corps
5
54
S4 T
Stabilization
Unnamed Tributary D
PER
Corps
5
10
S5
Choose one
-
S6
Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
310
3i. Comments:
Temporary impacts are associated with construction and will be restored to pre -construction conditions (please see temporary restoration plan detail).
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d. 5e.
Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded Filled Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
131
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Due to the location of the onsite streams and adjacent existing infrastructure, opportunities to avoid these areas were limited. The impacted tributaries
bisect the site and are situated near existing roadway right-of-ways . The proposed building has been rotated and shifted to minimize impacts.
Additionally, 2:1 slopes are proposed to decrease the size of the building footprint and a retaining wall is proposed on the southwest portion of the site
to reduce impacts to Unnamed Tributary D. Please refer to the cover letter for further explanation of avoidance and minimization efforts considered.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
Q DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
Q 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.
Q Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
290 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: Proposed ratios are 2:1 and 1.5:1 for impacts of 236LF (Unnamed Tributary A) and 54LF (Unnamed Tributary D), respectively.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
39.8%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑x Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Storm water on the site will be handled/treated by BMPs as shown on the attached plans. The stormwater
plan has not been submitted/approved by
the City of Kannapolis but has been designed to meet their criteria.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Kannapolis
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
City of Kannapolis
❑X Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑Yes ❑X No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
[]Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑X No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes ❑X No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered 'yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes ❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes ❑X No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes Q No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional phases are proposed.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
Yes OX No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes nX No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A threatened/endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but the project is exempt as noted in cover letter. Report is included
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes Q No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
http://polads3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov/
Heath Caldwell
Digaally signed by Heath Caldwell
Heath Caldwell emsheath—leath adrrel�tl�s-epg mm,
07-17-2017
Date: 2017A7.17 11:49:41 -04'00'
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Anent Authorization Letter
Leonard S. R ndner, PLLC.
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: Project Hercules
Property Address: 6501 Macedonia Church Road, Concord, NC 28027
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 46917957910000, 4692 70 79800000 and 46918943790000
Select one: 1 ant an interested buyer/seller
Name: Joe McGorrey
Company: TPA Group
Mailing Address: 3350 Riverwood Parkway Suite 750
Telephone Number: 770.436.3400
Electron
/
" Tha4meresled BuyeriOther acknowli
due diligence activities exists between I
where the property is not owned by the
rey a-grp.com4 (
3
110tAerlate
agreement aniTor formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
Charlotte Office. www. wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office.
10612-D Providence Rd 1070 Tunnel Rd.. Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10. PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville. NC 28805
[phone] [phone]
len rrndner:�:,wetlands-epg.conn 2 an anda.lonesCymetlands-epg corn

Mitigation Services
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 27, 2017
Joe McGorrey
TPA Group
3350 Riverwood Parkway Suite 750
Atlanta, GA 30339
Project: Hercules
ROY COOPFR
MICIIAEL S. REGAN
Expiration of Acceptance: December 27, 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 Ri arian
Non -Riparian I Coastal Marsh
Impact Yadkin 03040105
0
0 290 0
0 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: Heath Caldwell, agent
Sincerely,
Jam s.Stanfill
Asset nagement Supervisor
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 1 217 W. Janes Street, Suite 3000
919 707 8976 T

0�
Maps/Plans

r k
.... _.. - Kamapolii o, -"v e,
CL
IL
CRoyy, Y � -
R'.M ae 4 a�• Pa i n O
_ Rte• l '
urxr, ,Irt c =
H
� n•.r°...n n , w an a tlt
P
d«e .•iq4( N Z (J)
Q C
t
22 E
N O U
P°w. r.r.Re ..,.nw d•� � S U Q
sPrcrn� �' Z
concord ` w
rn.csro � A,b U .
r c O
� U �
:3
y.wY 5
r iN�Ynw, C PA�n.,
•,'�im • �( his« "
° SHEET 1 OF 21
Legend $• ""` "'"
q
r 0 0.75 1.5 3
O Project Boundary "'ve Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, US 'S, Interm May 12, 2017
..,. METI, Esri Chi4 (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailantl), Miles
contributors, and the GIS User Community

m
a
'44
ALI
Dr.

N
CL
\ l `� rte' C` • /.
* j l
�
Ms<Mwria
(
it
cc
CL
a.
p0'4fk ON Lf VEE .?� .Sla^6\ I
w.a1c+ �
Lp
t / `\ —73
>
2
t.\ I USGS QUAD a v
KANNAPOLIS, NC W
�$ APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
119 Acres
LOCATION
�— _'i • .. Jc i Lat: 35.441
-80.6872
HLIC: 03040105 -ROCKY SHEET a OF 21
Legend ^: {
1.000 2,000 4,000
Q Project Boundary l
'�� ��, r�'�� May 12, 2017
Feet

:D TRIBUTARY H
CODDLE CREEK /
51.7 LF ,S
r I UTAR A
OF CODDLE CREEK
(SEASONAL STREAM)
918 LF LONG`
5 LF WIDE AVG. BEGIN
•,. STREAM A
/ ---f-" "'-
1 BEGIN
STREAM C }
WETLAND F
707 SF
0.16 AC
WETLAND G
259 SF
0.006 AC
OF CODDLE CREEK
(PERENNIAL STREAM)
931 LF LONG
4.4 LF WIDE AVG.
!�I
+ clkiic�,
VICINITY MAPA\\
(NOT TO SCALE)
DAVIDSON �
(NC HWY 73)
J WETLAND B✓BB
( f
5,708 SF
(C �` 0.13 AC
WETLAND E
301 SF
0.007 AC
f.1 OF CODDLE CREEK
^ l (SEASONAL STREAM)
/ 237 LF LONG j
1 3 LF WIDE AVG. j
BEGIN
STREAM D
-1 j'/100� f
17
//'el
BURTO
0 450
m>«suwa
017b55=3
�— SCALE: 1"- 450'
omamn
WETLAND I
.SS\
cyGRL'y�,,
O
4,061 SF
0.09 AC
— — J
EX/STiNG ROAD TO
BE RELOCATED. ROW
C TO BE ABAND
PROJECT HERCULES
NC HIGHWAY 73
KANNAPOLIS. NORTH CAROLINA
STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBIT
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Shea 7 of 21
ONED
ONCE RELOCATED
Q
ROAD /S DEDICATED.
SEE MASS GRADING
QIP
PLANS.
PROJECT HERCULES
NC HIGHWAY 73
KANNAPOLIS. NORTH CAROLINA
STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBIT
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Shea 7 of 21

MINOR SITE ADJUSTMENTS MAY OCCUR
AS DICTATED BY LOCAL AND/OR STATE
REQUIREMENTS, BUT MODIFICATIONS
WILL NOT AFFECT STREAM IMPACTS.
STREAM IMPACT A
236 LF DISTURBANCE
ENLARGEMENT
/ STREAM IMPACT B
54 LF DISTURBANCE
ENLARGEMENT2
0
EXISTING
EASEMENT
00
I d b Q
CAR Q Q
PARKING a SS `
� b b
Q Q
\ O O
PROPOSED Q Q q CsgL' O
F
BUILDINGO�QCy .yj4
I I ata (\ \\
III � �5, \\• \
TRUCK I\\
COURT (EAST
NC HIGHWA y 73
I
/
I
NEW LOCATION OF RELOCATED
/ /
I
MACEDONIA CHURCH RD
I
ENLARGEMENT
+
f
WETLAND I
•
I
� NO IMPACT
B U R T O N
L---
`
NC M0
m yes suwi
DAVIDSON HWy
011.655003
(NC HWy 73)
T
SCALE: 1" = 450'
o h
01/41/201)
EXISTING
Q
Q p p d Q
Q
-- UTILITY
EASEMENT
00
I d b Q
CAR Q Q
PARKING a SS `
� b b
Q Q
\ O O
PROPOSED Q Q q CsgL' O
F
BUILDINGO�QCy .yj4
I I ata (\ \\
III � �5, \\• \
TRUCK I\\
COURT (EAST
NC HIGHWA y 73
PROJECT HERCULES
NC HIGHWAY 73
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBIT
OVERALL SITE PLAN
Sheet 8 of 21
D
M
CHUBNRp
+
�� Q�
•
VICINITY MAP
(NOT TO SCALE)
SITE
B U R T O N
0 450
NC M0
m yes suwi
DAVIDSON HWy
011.655003
(NC HWy 73)
SCALE: 1" = 450'
o h
01/41/201)
PROJECT HERCULES
NC HIGHWAY 73
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBIT
OVERALL SITE PLAN
Sheet 8 of 21

118.654 ACRES TOTAL AREA
47.18 ACRES IMPERVIOUS AREA
39.8% IMPERVIOUS
J
PROPOSED
SAND FILTER /
i
ENLARGEMENT4
SAND FILTER
OUTFALL (WITH
SPREADER SWALE
AS NECESSARY)
PROPOSED WET
DETENTION POND
WEST POND
OUTFALL
031
it D
HURQy R0 v
VICINITY MAP SITE
(NOT TO SCALE) \ k \
DAVIDSON H�
(NC HWY 73)
Fir
PROPOSED
BUILDING
NC HIGHWA y 73
�5
49 0
B U R T O N
1 0 450 s�6f-6�:n •
� miwssiaw�10
mojEc.
017,655,003
-- SCALE: 1" = 450' -
07114/2017
\ cy�Rcyo�%
\ 'QO
PROPOSED WET
DETENTION POND
4S
EAST POND
OUTFALL
PROJECT HERCULES
NC HIGHWAY 73
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBIT
STORMWATER PLAN
Sheet 9 of 21

' t
I
l
,
i
SPLITTER BOX
i
J
SAND FILTER OUTFALL
(WITH SPREADER
SWALE AS NECESSAR 1)
l ANALYSIS POINr
II
SAND FILTER DISCHARGE TABLE
STORM EVENT POST (CFS) PRE (CFS)
IYR-24HR 9.1 9.4 PROJECT HERCULES
IOYR-24HR 20.4 32.0
BURT 0 N NC HIGHWAY 73
F ' KANNAPOUS, NORTH CAROLINA
0 50
f1M lMVIlW !D fl[ Itl
SAND FILTER CONFIGURATION MAY BE*u I!
°"" "" STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBIT
ADJUSTED AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL FROJ l ..■
AND/OR STATE REQUIREMENTS o7ess.003 ENLARGEMENT 4
SCALE: 1"= 50' wn
.71-17 Sheet 10 of 21

PROPOSED STORM
DRAINAGE
00
BEGIN C7
STREAM A Z
D
O m
f L"� vi
0
O o
cr
IL
SPRING BOX &
PROPOSED
±200 LF OF RCP
i"
i
I
TRUCK COURT
HEADWALL
�xOO
STREAM IMPACT A
\ END OF PERMANENT
236 LF DISTURBANCE
IMPACT }
END OF TEMPORARY
IMPACT 1 (APPROX.
107 SEE DETAIL
PROPOSED
HEADWALL
DRIVEWAY
rn
0
0
r
EXISTING
TOP OF BANK
o
I tO
r
PARKING SHOULDER/
SAFETY ZONE
2:1 SLOPE
CAR
\
PARKING
1 I
.
Mk
PROJECT HERCULI
B U R T O N
NC HIGHWAY 73
/
KANNAPOLIS, NORTH CAROLINA
0 50
(T101.Sf]Mi
STREAM IMPACTS EXHIBI'
01).655003
ENLARGEMENT I - STREAM IMPAC
SCALE: 1" = 50'
DATE
wnu:on
Sheet I I of 21

BREAKLINE
10' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION IMPACT
- - - - RESTORE TO ORIGINAL CONDITION - - - - ---
- PROPOSED HEADWALL PROPOSED GRADE -
PER NCDOT STD 838.80 --- -- -------___- __
- -- - ----- RCP --- - - l - -
'' -
---- SPRING BOX PER -�-
- --
- NCDOT STD 840.41 - - -
WASHED STONE - - --
±57 LF OF 12" RCP ® 0.50%
-
_____- --- ---- -- ±143 LF OF 12" RCP G 0.50% --
_ (SEE ENLARGEMENT 1 (SHEET 11�
j____ll_
- -- - -- - -- ------ FOR TOTAL LENGTH OF IMPACT) -- -
- EXISTING SEASONAL
- STREAM TO BE FILLED
±16 CF RIP RAP
-- - -- -- - -----(DIMS: 4' x 4' x 1)
VERTICAL SCALE: 1" = 20'
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1"m 20' __-____----
PROPOSED -_
GRADE
10
SEE ENLARGEMENT 11
720.
710.
PROPOSED -_
GRADE
10
SEE ENLARGEMENT 11

i
0
r .
EXISTING
TOP OF BANK
WETLAND E
NO IMPACT
STREAM C
NO IMPACT
WETLAND F j 6ga
C NOIMPACT
/
G END OF TEMPORARY
/ IMPACT 2 (APPROX. 107
SEE DETAIL
END OF PERMANENT
/ STREAM D IMPACT
3M I
WETLAND G
NO IMPACT
I
PROPOSED STORM
DRAINAGE
STREAM IMPACT D
54 LF DISTURBANCE
BEGIN
STREAM D
SPRING BOX d
t45 LF OF RCP
PROPOSED
RETAINING WALL
PARKING SHOULDER/
SAFETYZONE
2:1 SLOPE
I
Ih

71
71
VERTICAL SCALE: 1"- 20'_ ---
HORIZONTAL SCALE 1" - 20 - - - -- -
PROPOSED- - -
690. RETAINING WALL
t16 CF RIP RAP .
680 (DIMS: 4' x 4' x 1') -
i
10' TEMPORARY - -
CONSTRUCTION IMPACT
RESTORE TO ORIGINAL --
67 CONDITION
PROPOSED -
GRADE _
- PROPOSED -
RCP -
---- SPRING BOX PER -
- _ --
NCD OT STD 840.41
EXISTING SEASONAL 670
STREAM TO BE FILLED - --- --
-- - --_ _-- --._ WASHED STONE
660
__----_-=:t45 LF OF 12" RCP 0 3.0% -
(SEE ENLARGEMENT 2 (SHEET 13F-- -
-- - - FOR TOTAL LENGTH OF IMPACT) - ---
- ----------
701
PROPOSED _.
■i-�T�i�ii'■��
PROPOSED
-RETAINING WALL
�W'
VERTICAL SCALE: I"= 20' SPRING
BOX EXISTING,_,
PER ..GRADE
HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1" = 20' STD 840.41
SEE ENLARGEMENT 21

'--\
\ _ EXISTING
PROPERTY LINE
73
WETLAND I
NO IMPACT \ \ \
WFTLAt DS
RELOCATED
` :: ; . E • / MACEDONIA
CHURCH RD
IN
� c
0 50 /
SCALE: 1" = 50' \\

CENTER LINE +/-
• • SEED & STRAW
I
IN
ATNE SEED MIX AND
2:1 SLOPE REPLANT TREES IN
DISTURBED AREAS
I LNE STAKES/
CONTAINER
2
i
COIR
FIBER LAG
DISTURBED AREA TO BE
SEEDED (NATIVE MIX(,
MATTED & PLANTED (S' ON
CENTER — FROM TOP OF
TOE OF SLOPE SLOPE TO TOE OF SLOPE(
OVERALL PROJECT GOALS
(1) STABILIZE ERODING AREAS W/COIR FIBER BLANKET
(2) INSTALL COIR FIBER LOGS AT TOE OF SLOPE
(3) RE-ESTABLISH NATIVE VEGETATION W/SEED & LIVE
STAKE/CONTAINERIZED MATERIAL (Nov'16-March'17)
Materials List:
1. Coir Fiber Logs: Diam. 12", Length 30'
2. Wooden Stakes: Length 3'
3. Erosion Fabric: Coir Fiber Matting — NO PLASTIC
4. Sod Pins: 1,000+
SHEET 16 OF 21
SEED, MAT & r`xOO
PLANT FROM TOP
OF BANK TO TOE
OF SLOPE
END OF PERMANENT
IMPACT
END OF TEMPORARY
IMPACTI(APPROX, 10)
SEE DETAIL
COIR FIBER LOGS Q I
x
EXISTING
TOP OF BANK
�l
Live Stakes/Containerized Material (3' on center): l
Cornus amomum (Silky Dogwood), Salix carohniana (Carolina Willow), Salix sericea (Silky
Willow), Sambucus canadensis (Elderberry), Symphoricarpos orbicuhwus (Coralberry)
L i
Native Stabilization Seed Mix (20-25 lbs. Der acre):
Elymus virginicus (Virginia wild rye), Tripsacum dactyloides (Eastem gammagrass), Panicum
virgatum (Switchgrass), Agrostis scabra (Rough bentgrass), Carex vulpinoidea (Fox sedge),
Tridens,Jlavus (Purple top), Sch(zachyrium scoparium (Little bluestem), Coreopsis lanceolata
(Lance leaf tickseed), Sorghastrum nutans (Indian grass), Elymus hysirix (Bottlebrush grass)
�6tuca ovina var. duriuscala (Hard Fescue), Rudbeckia hirta (Blackeyed Susan)
PROJECT HERCULES
Mecklenburg Co., NC
ENHANCEMENT MAP — WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE'NCDEQ VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
HA C LSR
DATE:
7/10/17

.Jurisdictional
Determination Information

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

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

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
7 Property Information Project Hercules
Address: 6501 Macedonia Church Road
County: Cabarrus
Heading north from Charlotte on 1-85 travel 5.6 miles to Kannapolis Parkway. Turn left onto Kannapolis Parkway and travel 1.5
Directions: miles to Macedonia Church Road. Turn left onto Macedonia Church Road and travel 0.6 miles. The site will be on the left feet.
Parcel Index Number (PIN): 46917957910000, 46927079800000, 46918943790000
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC,
Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group (WEPG)
Mailing Address: 10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550, Charlotte NC 28277
Telephone Number: 704-904-2277
Electronic Mail Address: len.rindnera,wetlands-epg com
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
❑✓ Name: Joe McGorrey, TPA Group
Mailing Address: 3350 Riverwood Parkway Suite 750
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address 3: [e-mail],
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
1 If available
Z Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
s If available
a Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
❑✓ PIN#:46917957910000 and 46927079800000
Name: I of (+ 11 � -6s+�ad�Gv C-• l"°'�`��``r�i i ri�lS{��, Tv��t �GO, ar� F(�t�l
MailingAddress:
6801 MACEDONIA CHURCH RD, CONCORD, NC 28027 � • nut 1
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address':
Zov5
❑✓ Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record data)
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of
conducting on-site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of
the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Property Owner Date
5 If available
4

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF CABARRUS
NOW COME the undersigned, Trustees of The Faggart Family Trust, dated May 10,
2005, and established by William A. Faggart and Dorothy C. Faggart, and hereby resign as
Trustees of said Trust pursuant to Article XIV of the Trust, said resignation to be effective as
of the date of this instrument. Pursuant to the terms of said Trust instrument, the Successor
Trustee named therein, David C. Faggart, shall hereafter serve as sole Trustee of the said
Trust.
This the day of September, 2011.
4-4�
William A. Faggart, Trustee
C. AQ
Dorothy C. Fa gart, Trustee
The above resignation of Trustees is hereby acknowledged by Ihe undersigned Trustors
and current beneficiaries of The Faggart Family Trust, this the day of September,
2011.
Z&9'*
William A. Faggart, Trus d Beneficiary
Dorothy C. F ggart, Trustor d Beneficiary
Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of September, 2011, by William A. Faggart
and Dorothy C. Faggart.
Notaeublico
My Commission expires: ��//

jurisdictional Determination Request
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
0 PIN#: 46918943790000, 46918897430000, 46918891360000 and 46918872640000
Name: T HALL ENTERPRISES II LLC
Mailing Address: 2701 COLTSGATE RD STE 300, CHARLOTTE, NC 28211
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address5:
0 Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/ParceUTax Record data)
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION4
1, the undersigned, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of
conducting on-site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of
the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
T Hall Enterprises II, LLC 5/31/2017
Property Owner Date
(please print)
Property
S If available
4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
✓❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property/project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS6 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation. (proceed to F and G
below).
❑ I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property/project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property/project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
F. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
Size of Property or Project: 119 acres
I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
❑✓ Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form.
❑✓ Project Coordinates: Latitude Longitude 35.441 N/ -80.6872W
Maps (no larger than l l xl 7) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑✓ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
6 Waters of the United States
See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02, dated June 26, 2008
5

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

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
Locations of wetland data points and/or tributary assessment reaches
Locations of photo stations
Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
❑ Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
❑ Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard-
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 1 I"x17"
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than 11"x17", may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e-mail to the requestor.
Plats submitted for approval must:
❑ be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
❑ be legible
include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
❑ include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings/metes and
bounds/GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
❑ clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries

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

Jurisdictional Determination Request
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action M No.:
When uplands may be present within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary:
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
GPS SURVEYS
4

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

SITE VERIFIED BY NCDEQ 5/19/17
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY A
OF CODDLE CREEK
918LF/0.11 Acres
NCSAM FORM UNNAMED TRIBUTARY A
OF CODDLE CREEK #1
WETLAND B/BB
DATA POINT 1
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY C
OF CODDLE CREEK
237LF/0.02 Acres
WETLAND F
0.16 Acres
WETLAND G
0.006 Acres
_7 UNNAMED TRIBUTARY H
OF CODDLE CREEK
52LF/0.005 Acres
10�WETLAND I
DATA POINT 3
q
1
9
8
N
�J
SHEET 17 OF 21
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY D
OF CODDLE CREEK
931LF/0.09 Acres
PROJECT HERCULES
Cabarrus Co., NC
UPLAND DATA
POINT 2
WETLAND I
0.09 Acres
UPLAND DATA
POINT"
WETLAND B/BB
0.13 Acres
WETLAND E
0.007 Acres
NCSAM FORM UNNAMED TRIBUTARY D
OF CODDLE CREEK #2 t
LEGEND
❑ Project Boundary Study Limits
Tributaries of Coddle Creek
4 Wetland
#}►Landscape photo/direction
Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DELINEATION MAP DATE:
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
NCDEQ Verification 6/14/17
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ 5/19/17
VERIFICATION /

n�a —.— that SNicdt� -:D. Plx'M: f.lwnwruttelr, R t. . E ��y u
N—tbn PI e
pu011NMm mg.n
Me rpulat�ona to e.tmmnatbn of S.ctlon 404 Mrieektlan m
p. Oanlgn.0 comOpl teNII this teetmm halm ulil:ina"Ihe appraprpboRe9lmd
I. the 1987 U.S. Army tape al Endneaa W.t— Da' It.
ww9tOrr oreda.
- 4�s1NG 4550
. f C-1157
� 1
BURTON 'm
.. IIDSTE 1a T DMv.PRDa TR MICVBI
OCIAIR.MN�TO�ef
` 01 aSSSEW�10 e[1RODIC[DW CPl0 uM0lMf WIN.ART.
sw�p�vOw. rt6NOT TOEE V1W Ox ANr OT1H waFcr
DB -71D B00
PLIT
PG = PACE eaH er $ 3j
C SURYEI' WO N
F-
CP` =CMI&.ED GRID FACTOR ET
SEE DETAIL "F' I — NONUUENTATON (SEE DESCRIPTION)
SHEET 3 ® NCGS MONUMENT 51
x1 xt
W-� r :MDT
TY uAP (xC 1m n)Al GALE)
~-� --�
12
g�,
Daronlr . E.c RT. REAssa,i. J vwspslo.l I«ax .x m.0
ielrsi� w c
Tt[ i.DDwtT Fear nasi. e. eMroN zNrmlNp .. p. W.. nwu AmE
DASFD 11E 10m DAY OF m 11AY• taSEE DETa1L 'E" j tem �(1�r115 satyr nAium Iwca)
—cow 4N1ASA1 k 469t70A8 SHEET 3 e Nrc.x cuwuTn e. cppRO.urt ¢O.c1N..
�n�e17z n� s'nZ,ro'm F; y ,
1aa 4• ( r ) / S r� "Kvirn In x ror . cmTEm Ro-.o.Rr rc as
1—.—
eaisoWcwims o
aviT""a: a �i B'al !+' rr=D.999wsei (SITE) m
i
PRELIMINARYPLAT
NOT FOIL RECORDATM,
SEE DETAIL Al" -
SHEET 2 SALES, OR CONVE AKE
x0 p RED T ALL FNTHMeSEs I. uc
NAD W/2011 5 `1I µqt u. arm. p .e barn mea
6]p;1W�r ` DD fi Y Po 1 t W rvl Im h m an aci vo�Ul� peat
Ae' �F.0...... 0es (sITEJ Z . ' V ibOF4Ji CAR wprwet=(aec) gneyMap eow a e _n epp.�(SfE_eLSllNat
AREN_ 1 �� �t� OC _ 1 Po9e
A 7 .w' mra ed<aat:a I.I.mr mm npi m.
.t 'C' 2 Of E55/ q °ropr.e �.naao.c. ..m Tn •. 1gy�m nlw •dp •oa
wETr.N tYn
F-
a Y a a 5urwyn9 In Norm Cprdnp (R1 x L 56.1600)Ke
SEAL inu�er ol_� A. D. �+ - `A
ME aliwA �� � L-3180 p
M�. ) A1`rRSTnTM z.r C y� SUR�� �5
� C O
I 'Et�w qRY BRO s...elor
AD.IXliava A
.n .alamptlm Nxmea
Y a SEE DETAIL "3-
SHEET
9SHEET 2.WEAs zaxE .- .S
n `0E EO:HEo a: ZoE�`AR`T:Ew: o`llslw�NNTI= INaR.NLE
IIIc o SI RasmO oT m o P em YEP �M`RN "17 o:awou :NO a N e°D
'. I"'I',,;,.;TM^: ;;Ir.`^ I V(1j �•PS`P SURVEY OF THE JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF PROACT NO
yn le CABARRUS COUNTY GIS PARCEL 4891795791 7.E55.m3
C .PACCAR'! AND DORORHY C. PAGGART. SC
_ _ _ J I� TRV9'fEE9 OF THE FAGGART FAIRLY TRUST. DA'EED ittE n..r. arm r.o

u , . 1aa « wv a aP 6v.,e>Y p
u"w m6
1 (z�r�
M pp' to ta°e 196)N0.5aArmY 1-. °I �EnV^..ra Y°P°ie0m°�Odat Dw.�i.°mron
F<qul°iwy OMeld:
usACE Acl1°. 10 Fo.
DCTAO.-.- ti_
iDSTU —)
�s'll.'].1
TA,
vu3'v1
a.u,1 `snr�3ra•w
DRIB
N
lN`-� ,C,j, e
SI
gt
„j u f '� McwTr uAP it«.°�.. ;3i
SEE DETAIL "C"
Aro'�4
° D z°m
s z�xe»H vF nMl a e°T.F, o <ao F6
7,L
•,.�!!/
SEE DETAIL 0.16_xtA , Let
— —
LIO y,.
(Syr
I xa'1 I iv -1C
r
�l \let I h
—
I
�� L,].! A� Eby?�j
sl3'3e0.� ✓? ps'v2
L]0 „11"%
`�,
aeD,F
s,eDY;e�1
Y
zTT�ta ux�.
orrA¢ 'c-
- ue yr � 1`9
Tszr
�'
a
Srobn Ji
'�
Eun
r N63p_]923e_e5', flax
1� `w — e4 Ln—�•
F/w - FIcxT war
DB - DEED BOON
B - Plni BOON
H],b'wJI
I
N'
JC l -
P
SU Y
CFPAGE
COMBIUEDCARd.NAC—DETC
OFUUENTT.
A— (— OESCPoPNON)
SF]t'3Tr
Y • `!y) V • `!m
®- uxC06 uONU T
\!ye
L
��,1.n
PRELIMINARY PLAT
NOT FOR RECORDATION,
SALES, OR CONVEYANCE.
sxe .'001
F„
'A w
,•. �s1nr'.Trw
51 s.re>�r u.s
ND�• i AwTAa 10
F nOCIE 91v p
O
It
L,Op 1
i
C-115)
1H CARp/
t.3.:G
- '(b„
SURVEY OF THE JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF PRo.LCT NO
CABARRUS COUNTY GIS PARCEL 4891795791 0,).655.003
. o`�' FESS, v
ti
u ,
w owNLB: wwuu A. nOGAWr Arm DOBOTIIr c. scALE-. N/A
TRUSTLOS OF TIIE FAGGART FAIDLY TBUSi, DATLO Tf6 DATE: ] 0) 1)
--
B U RTO N SEAL
!
- (;,,
'� 1��
�-um tDCAfID w xvrxsen F6 AFD /. DeAwa ar: Tc
'F CABAL—S COUNTY. NOM CAB011N.3 CFECNED Bvv C.
I L-3180
.. eWTa+r c!'�sNc y0 J�'
«. Cb'
CLIENT: DATE a SUF�,Er.
sua ore
to c�i,w®oM
�R,
s', III
-°c -1NLY�n
E..°" a�"N TPA GROUP 1
a.ssie. Arx oTwa Py B110
'e a6 AFrw.®
Li), E
3350 RIVERWOOD PARKWAY, SUITE 750 Y+E)Twuis�e.°
wMa`"
.eWs%'D
()E„ ATLANTA, GA 30339 SHEET 190E 31

Ana artmr alar YY. mp a as DYt ®..ter eyaa u. ew.my a
u. preYDx a sawn ra. a a. ax. wv xt x aa.rneYa er u.
pxenr ,.y.an., Yn abmY.Dx a calx ar yaxem n.y e.
,.i1 upn b s pwbJ M to nn..e M 6) rx,. •an tN. aaa 1e.
erw
n.ya>r Drnw:
LEM
ole -
acus . YDITa WIDINI QDOEIID SUMLY
6 a]YBem DYD iAClgt
. Y01eAl°iTATYM (TEE DE3pePTM)
® MCaf Yp111YFMT
PRELIMINARY PLAT
NOT FOR RECORMTION,
SALES, OR CONVEYANCE.
i
i U •0 N
.�.eeo:Ha
?`Le1MC 4% L
i
C-1157
t1 CAROB
�0 2°? �, 7
a SEAL
r L-3180.74
p
q y� SUR" y
°
.+nsToi�..rev��
.�-. ■awn r
. JtA ltp - f¢ req _
r eta
+' 1x YerT'x'Y sesr _ _ -----
U
S.. _____________ ftnefe^I e.
r nis
454
.1m DD�a19r
nmT rATur,
CLIENT: oma" a Tae0 e s
TPA GROUP
3350 RNERROOD PARKWAY. SUITE 750 tclwozex
ATLANTA, CA 30338 SHEET 20 01:21

•mi, ..nin.. t- - I,— ,I ma &I, ,.,9.,e.ir 4w t. m. cwm,o m"UNNAMED TRIBUTARY C "UNNAMED TRIBUTARY D
m. P-.- ,I s -x,..04 a - cI- wm.. A.L .. aa.-- 6Y m• WETLAND "B/BB" OF CODDLE CREEK" OF CODDLE CREEK" WETLAND "G" ,
..a«.a..6 .. 1m, - U.-01
aWl- ..9.1,u,.., m. .�na1.1 S-11- o.LNn�wi- mr.r e. I0.
I,-- m I. Ka 6K �s� r,a. I,,,,, u„ d -,m. u�. P u�. L.�wu
M.nua. 1981 V.S. A—y CCa .1 FnOnae.. Nbtlm�E.10.1`9
1. - nMun `osT ] N
Re9ubbry Officid: .1 3'064 ] .11.'.11 w
51]SP.1' S1
TD..L23 S2159 -NI 1 x52.11I
313
SIT
S57- 1
Dole S-)- ]211-35 -3 IVE 311
.'10 1 3333Y 1
']6T z5' 41-E xs6i'M'— 1111-
USAGE A.- 1D x,. 4'zo-E z WETLAND "H" 1-T, xAR ixwl`,: 111
L27 S43-42 03-E 2591 L67 Sl - 11-1 22 (10r 70 SCALE)
L68 S-9-29-1 148
x83'.]'fiW'E M
u./
ze oz'• Szee.2117rorz6•w z,
PRELIMINARYP�LyA►�T, "-
Lll 11- 12'. 111 13 43 37-E 1677 I'll 1130
NOT FORRECOR�,41'N•E e'16E ]z WETLAND .E" W6 I- SS
L114 S 11'
SALES, /1R /�A�II/CVI�I/'•C. -]9'l" 1. x56'So- I 5s S711122-1 ' 165
L125 121-3-E 711 (nE) xeero:'xi� xi WETLAND "I"
140 1-7 M� 21.11 4
!xi•E z5.r�.]T
- 113145 WE S ro.•
11-11-Es5-E 20 W
L41 1- L105 N2119 -E 13 -
WETLAND "F" I. E
09"C
—T.1
na 1 ] -26.11-E
0 1954 1 (TE)
L. LSS �'
'D
E 1 5�2 12 14 111 S72 1145 1—
L164 S33191-
3 3T
LI65 roe i9T ?
fERtNG .SSD
W c-1151 SURVEY OF 171E JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF RRo.ecr xo.
CARO CABARRUS COUNTY GIS PARCEL 469179579/
, 5O
Fl6—OI.BAPRANWTRUSTDAiALDGTNNL. .—
x/
.
D
BURTON a� v
Are: 7/07/17
I . n 1 1 . e ES 3A 80 O cAB1RP119 COIF. NORiH CA�IWA CNECxED BVP CGB
{ 1 r nrwNAnox DALE a SURVEx:
I
CLIENT:
- . • 'eu�iror. e.ciai c�AaoRe ie '20 �.,, e: w, a-aes.. ns xcise/. 9 ze ,6 nu+u 6/15/17
a`6o ""� M®« c spa r ^*^; 'amu �. TPA GROUP -RI`7
c o rsspDoaaAx,-
m>...suarl 6Eus®oNANr orxa qRY BR3350 RI
O .u�.. (m4j ]6re�1� VERWOOD PARKWAY, SUITE 750
�r.'D 96 uruvo ATLANTA, GA 30339 SHEET 210E 21

Welland ElBB
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Area
0.13 ACRE
RPWWD
35.4404
-80.6887 Coddle Creek
Welland E
NORTH CAROLINA
PSS
DEPRESS
Area
0.007 FOOT
RPW WD
35.4392
-80.6876 Coddle Creek
Wetland F
NORTH CAROLINA
PSS
DEPRESS
Area
0.16 FOOT
RPW WD
35.4386
-80.6879 Coddle Creek
Wetland G
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Area
0.006 ACRE
RPW WD
35.4385
-80.6881 Coddle Creek
Welland I
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Area
0.09 FOOT
RPW WN
35.4441
-806839 Coddle Creek
Unnamed Tributary A
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
RIVERINE
Linear
918 FOOT
RPW
35.4421
-80.6875 Coddle Creek
Unnamed TnbutaryC
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
RIVERINE
Linear
237 ACRE
RPW
35.4392
-80.6877 Coddle Creek
Unnamed TributaryD
NORTH CAROLINA
R3
RIVERINE
Linear
931 FOOT
RPW
35.4382
-80.6884 Coddle Creek
Unnamed Tributary H
NORTH CAROLINA
R4
RIVERINE
Linear
52 FOOT
RPW
35.4455
-80.6876 Coddle Creek

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Project Hercules City/County: Kannapolis/Cabarrus Sampling Date: 5/26/2017
Applicant/Owner: TPA Group State: NC Sampling Point: Weband MBDP,
Investigator(s): H. Caldwell Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (°k): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4404 Long: -80.6887 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: PoF: Poindexter Loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Wetland adjacent to area that was recently logged. Wetland likely created from adjacent activity. Representative Data Form for similar wetland type -
Wetlands E, F and G.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
x Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
x High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (C1)
x Drainage Patterns (610)
x Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (B1) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
x Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
—Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (64) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
x Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 1
Water Table Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3.
4.
2
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
7.
100.0%
(A/B)
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
1. Acer rubrum
15 Yes
2.
FACW species 85 x2=
3.
4.
45
5.
0
6.
UPL species 0 x 5 =
7.
8.
225
9.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2.05
15 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
8 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Juncus effusus
85 Yes
2. Mimulus ringens
5 No
3. Carex crinita
5 No
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
95 =Total Cover
50% of total cover:
48 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
FAC
3
FACW
OBL
OBL
19
Sampling Point: /etland B/BB DF
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
2
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
2
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100.0%
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 10 x 1 =
10
FACW species 85 x2=
170
FAC species 15 x 3 =
45
FACU species 0 x 4 =
0
UPL species 0 x 5 =
0
Column Totals: 110 (A)
225
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2.05
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
X 3- Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point::tland B/BB D
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture
Remarks
0-20 10YR 4/1 65
7.5YR 4/4 35 D M Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
_Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil
Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Project Hercules City/County: Kannapolis/Cabarrus Sampling Date: 5/26/2017
Applicant/Owner: TPA Group State: NC Sampling Point: Upland DP2
Investigator(s): H. Caldwell Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4404 Long: -80.6886 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: PoF: Poindexter Loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Upland Data Point for Wetland B/BB taken approximately 30ft east of Wetland B/BB data point
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (614)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (610)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (131) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (B3) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

vwr-i m i rvn truur ourdtdf - use suienunc ndrnes ur pidnts.
-jampiing voint:
upiana urz
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1
Number of Dominant Species
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
FACW species 0 x2= 0
4.
Rubus argutus
Species Across All Strata:
6 (B)
5.
FAC species 75 x 3 = 225
Percent of Dominant Species
Liquidambar styracrffua
6.
Yes
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
50.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 0 x2= 0
1.
Rubus argutus
25
Yes
FACU
FAC species 75 x 3 = 225
2.
Liquidambar styracrffua
20
Yes
FAC
FACU species 80 x4= 320
3.
Acer rubrum
15
Yes
FAC
UPL species 0 X5= 0
4.
Rosa multiflora
10
No
FACU
Column Totals: 155 (A) 545 (B)
5.
Lidodendron tulipifera
5
No
FACU
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.52
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
75
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
38 20% of total cover:
15
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Microstegium vimineum
40
Yes
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2.
Eupatonum capillifolium
15
Yes
FACU
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
55
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
28 20% of total cover:
11
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Lonicera japonica 25 Yes FACU
2.
3.
4.
5' Hydrophytic
25 =Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover: 13 20% of total cover: 5 Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: Upland DP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc
Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 4/3 100
Loamy/Clayey
10-20 10YR 4/1 85
7.5YR 4/4 15 D M
Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA
147, 148) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) —Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
—Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, _Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
_Sandy
_Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Project Hercules City/County: Kannapolis/Cabarrus Sampling Date: 5/26/2017
Applicant/Owner: TPA Group State: NC Sampling Point: Wetland I
Investigator(s): H. Caldwell Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4441 Long: -80.6838 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: EnB: Enon sandy loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation N Soil N or Hydrology N naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Depressional area in wooded area surrounded by agricultural fields
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that awls)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
x Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (614)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
x High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
x Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
—Moss Trim Lines (1316)
—Water Marks (61) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (62) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_!_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) _Other
(Explain in Remarks)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
x Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
_Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 2
Water Table Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes x No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Wetland I
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Betula nigra
75
Yes
FACW
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Liquidambar styraciflua
5
No
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
3.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5
No
FACW
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Quercus phellos
5
No
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
5
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 71.4% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
90
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
45
20% of total cover:
18
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
SaNina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 95 x 2 = 190
1.
Betula nigra
10
Yes
FACW
FAC species 25 x3= 75
2.
Juniperus virginiana
5
Yes
FACU
FACU species 10 x4= 40
3.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5
Yes
FACW
UPL species 0 x5= 0
4.
Quercus phellos
5
Yes
FAC
Column Totals: 130 (A) 305 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.35
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
25
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
13
20% of total cover:
5
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5,
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Campsis radicans
10
Yes
FAC
2.
Lonicera japonica
5
Yes
FACU
3.
4.
5'
Hydrophytic
15
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
3
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: Wetland I
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of Indicators.)
Depth Matrix
Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) %
Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-20 10YR 5/1 90
10YR 5/2 10 D M Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_2 cm Muck (All 0) (MLRA 147)
_Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_2 cm Muck (At 0) (LRR N)
_Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_Red Parent Material (F21)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (If observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Project Hercules City/County: Kannapolis/Cabarrus Sampling Date: 5/26/2017
ApplicanttOwner: TPA Group State: NC Sampling Point: Upland DP4
Investigator(s): H. Caldwell Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.4439 Long: -80.6838 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: EnB: Enon sandy loam NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation N , Soil N or Hydrology N significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation N—, Soil N or Hydrology N naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Upland Data Point taken approximately 30ft east of Wetland I data point
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that aooly)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (B14)
X Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (C1)
—Drainage Patterns (610)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (616)
—Water Marks (B1) —Presence
of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (B2) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (134) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_Iron Deposits (B5)
_Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: Upland DP4
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Quercus stellate
15
Yes
UPL
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Carya ovate
10
Yes
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Juniperus virginiana
10
Yes
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
10
Yes
FACW
Species Across All Strata: 10 (B)
5.
Quercus phellos
10
Yes
FAC
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 40.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
55
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
28 20% of total cover:
11
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
)
FACW species 15 x2= 30
1.
Quercus stellate
5
Yes
UPL
FAC species 15 x3= 45
2.
Betula nigra
5
Yes
FACW
FACU species 35 x4= 140
3.
Juniperus virginiane
5
Yes
FACU
UPL species 20 x5= 100
4.
Column Totals: 85 (A) 315 (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.71
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
15
=Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
8 20% of total cover:
3
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 it
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover:
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
10
Yes
FACU
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
5
Yes
FAC
3.
4.
5'
Hydrophytic
15
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
8 20% of total cover:
3
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

avrL. sampung vomt: upiana ur4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 4/3 100 Loamy/Clayey
12-20 10YR 4/1 85 7.5YR 4/4 15 D M Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (All)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (All 0) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (All 6)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (171) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
—Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
_Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (1713) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date:
6/1/17 Evaluator: I HA C
Eastin :
-80.6875
Project:
I Hercules Project: Unnamed Tributary A (DP5)
Northing:
35.4421
Total Points:
0
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30`
27.0
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarizepoints)
2
A.
Geornorphology Geomorphology
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
0
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
12
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
1
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14.
Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17.
Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
No = 0
0.5
Yes = 3
3
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
Hydrology
Subtotal
7
C. Biology
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
1
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW= 0.75, OBL=
1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology
Subtotal
8.0
perennial streams may also be identified usinq other methods. See paqe 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Ongins.
(version 4.11)

STREAM REACH EVALUATION FORM
Date: 6/1/17 1 Evaluator: I HAC Eastin : -80.6883
Project: Hercules Project: Unnamed TributaryD DP6 Northin : 35.4383
Total Points:
Weak
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30"
31.0
(right -click the purple number and left -click Update Field to summarizepoints)
1a.
A.
Geomorphology
Absent I
Weak
Moderate
Strong
SCORE
1a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3.
In -channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3 1
1
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
1
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9.
Grade controls
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
Geomorphology
Subtotal
16
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12.
Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
1
13.
Iron Oxidizing Bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14.
Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15.
Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16.
Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17. Soil -based Evidence of high water table?
No = 0
0
Yes = 3
3
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
Hydrology
Subtotal
7
C. Biology
18.
Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19.
Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20.
Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
1
21.
Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22.
Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23.
Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
24.
Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
25.
Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26.
Wetland plants in streambed
FACW=
0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0
0
Biology
Subtotal
8.0
" perennial streams may also be identified usinq other methods. See page 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes:
Adapted from NCDWQ: Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their
Origins.
(version 4.11)

LM
'lY' i
tat. � ��.• -ai... +� ��� 5. � �'.{Z"� �t?.. j. rt• �i� .�T�- �,�. �s!R
Al:� ..fit -•'j... _. 1� _ F• �_ il+��{'•i�� a1i.'' :j /,.
� �_" t'ri i` ' ••'++egg Vii$ � � > 'c'.�,i � � ,� "' ',�.
s.
y

y r.
a•� r . ami.., S`� ..
4
-.':ri'`, bar•... � .., .
�yu�ik7'. i

71 _77
...............� '}��. ,���t. ,� .-;'r.r.,�. ;5',,� -t�tl ' Ii '���: � _•
Ir
I klt
i
' ;4a� ,�.• '� f.� �. `� r �'� �� :: „gyp ; it �� [c ` . �: � � �� � �� _� ��� /®',w ,'
.
Sl
Va
Alp
40 ItSs*
ot
-•� J_ � s y
��. ` �-! �` •.t 1 it ,
1
0

Photo 6: View of Unnamed Tributary D to Coddle Creek (downstream/south).
r.? a.
I G
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Hercules Project
Cabarrus County, NC - Photos taken on 5/26/2017
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

vim, � �.�� - t • �' � .. r�" : v x r� _ , �j� ~
r
n �
d f
'ti. 1 sF ,l`., f f ;�..�� 1 .,•y �� k-�f!-:iY. �_�a;�'til
Oil
r�44
t �• �= is l 3 _�r� �`3 »
r `� � �.�_/� L, a ,: fie•.. �' ► ``S,. _ '!'�'�_ \ ,;� e'r

Photo 8: View of Wetland F (view northwest).
Hercules Project
W� Cabarrus County, NC - Photos taken on 5/26/2017
.ice __.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S Rindner. PLLC.

Photo 9: View of Wetland G (view south).
Hercules Project
`^,� P (� Cabarrus County, NC - Photos taken on 5/26/2017
I L l LJ r._ _ ---•wr
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard 5 fbndner, PLLC.

Photo 11: View of Unnamed Tributary H to Coddle Creek (downstream/west).
Hercules Project
`^/[ [� Cabarrus County, NC - Photos taken on 5/26/2017
Wetlandsandajnd Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

• � � !�: � i � F `' � a �?�, v � � � , It ��t ����
IF
' `•��IF- ="�' L; iii 4 f .$ T4lr •-..y.'�.'! �' , .:. Al
n
At
r � � !� ` � �� � : � r�. r • � I `. , `!/"'555%���� . '
Ica-411
P! ,`
414 i
77
or
It
rw
.*.., .,; ,��„ � ��:� •� +. ='mak-' ,moi �� J,
w,lai

N
4--+
E
N
N
aJ
N
N
Q
E
dJ
i
a--+
Q
A
FI
NCSAM Stream
Assessments

INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Hercules 2. Date of evaluation: 6/1/2017
3. Applicant/owner name: TPA Group 4. Assessor name/organization: H.CaldwelWVEPG
5. County: Cabarrus 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin•PeeDee on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Coddle Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.441, -80.6872
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width an be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Unnamed Trihutary A #1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feel): 200
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 6 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? CYes [; No
14. Feature type: []Perennial flow 1EIntermiftent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: r_ Mountains (M) KPiedmont (P) C Inner Coastal Plain (1) COuter Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic/
valley shape (skip for Ea`��r�
Cb
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope)
(less sinuous stream, sleeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip E Size 1 (< 0.1 me) r_ Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 me)
CSize 3 (0.510 < 5 me) CSize 4 (i 5 Me)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? EYes C No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
F Section 10 water f Classified Trout Waters F Water Supply Watershed (r_I CII r_III r_IV CV)
r Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property f NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect 17- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish I- 303(d) Ust r CAMA Area of Environmental Concent (AEC)
F_ Documented presence of a federal andlor state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
F Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are addltbnal stream infornationlsupplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? rYes M No
1. Channel Water -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
CA Water throughout assessment reach.
KB No flow, water in pools only.
CC No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction -assessment reach metric
A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gales).
B Not
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
CA A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
EB Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
CA Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
M:B Not
5. Signs of Active Instability -assessment reach metric
Consider only current Instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
CA < 10% of channel unstable
WB 10 to 25% of channel unstable
r7 C > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streemside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RS).
La RB
E'A CA Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
CB R B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggredation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching ]including mosquito ditching])
CC CC Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] 2r too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, Intensive mosquito ditching]) gr floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide

7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reachfinterticial zone metric
Check all that apply.
F A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
F Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
r- Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and musing a water quality problem
F- D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
r E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
F Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
F H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: some adjacent logging (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
r J. Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
ADrought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream -assessment reach metric
CYes FrNo Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamslde Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a.r3 Yes [3 No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors Include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses 4 m r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) � m r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent `N c
H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetationr I Sand bottom
1- C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) x m F J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
rs- D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots O r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
"""""""""" --.REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS-----
11.
TREAMS"""""'""'""'"""""-11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a.CYes CNo Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedforn evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F A Riffle -run section (evaluate 1 to)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11 d)
F C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Lae)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box In each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) =
present but 5 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C
A P
Bedrock/saprolhe
C
C Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
C Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
C
[,' [y Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
Sift/clay (< 0.062 mm)
C
C C Detritus
E C C
C C Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d.CYes CNo
Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Lite -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a.EYes CNo
Was an in -stream aquatic lite assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
if No, select one of
the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. CNo Water COther:
12b.Ce'Yes CNo
Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to 'Individuals' for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa' for size 3 and 4 streams.
PJ r Adult frogs
P I Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
I I Beetles (including water pennies)
r r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F r Asian clam (Corbicula)
Pr r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
F_ r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
f I Megaloptera (siderfy, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
r PJ Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaeal
F r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
F r Other fish
F_ r Salamandersttadpoles
F r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
r r Tipultd larvae
F r Worms/leeches

13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and 8 valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
EA CA Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
CB ® B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
CC CC Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14..Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Stu 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
CA CA Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water z 6 inches deep
RB CB Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C �e'C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
18. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
Y CY Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N EN
18. B'—fiow Contributors —assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of g(A draining to the assessment reach.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
(3 E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors —assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
1— A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
r— Urban stream (2 24% impervious surface for watershed)
F D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
r_ Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on' condition.
KA Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
CB Degraded (example: scattered trees)
CC Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
KA KA RA CA 2 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
PB CB CB r_B From 50 to <. 100 -feet wide
C C C FIC From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
D �'',D �,D CD From 10 to<30-feet wide
CE CE CE CE <10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A CA Mature forest
B !J B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C CC Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D CD Maintained shrubs
E CE Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (IRS). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
Is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
N none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:FO
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
CA CA CA CA CA CA Row crops
CB GB G'B CB CB CB Maintained turf
CC CC CC r—C CC CC Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
CD CD CD CD CD CD Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RS) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
[8A CA Medium to high stem density
CB P1 B Low stem density
CC CC No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground

23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10-feet wide.
LB RS
CA G'A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
[:"B JUB The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
CC CC The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamsitle area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
CA CA Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
Ce B CB Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear-cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
[;C CC Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non-characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a.❑ Yes (a] No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. CNo Water COther:
251b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
CA <46 r-B 46 to < 67 CC 67 to < 79 n D 79 to < 230 n E ? 230
Notes/Sketch:
Downstream end of assessed reach was highly disturbed by logging adjacent to the rightside stream bank. Alterations in flow,
substrate, vegetation and changes to streamsitle interaction are a result of the adjacent logging.

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Hercules Date of Evaluation
6/1/2017
Stream Category Pal Assessor Name/Organization
H.Caldwell/WEPG
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Intermittent
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
NO
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh in -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
HIGH

INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, Identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the'Notes/Skelch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (db not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT I SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Project Hercules 2. Date of evaluation: 8/1/2017
3. Applicant/owner name: TPA Group 4. Assessor name/organization: H. CaldwelVWEPG
5. County: Cabanus 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Yadkin-PeeDee on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Coddle Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.4389N/ -80.6877W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Unnamed Tributary D a210. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 200
11. Channel depth from bad (in rime, if present) to top of bank (feet): 6 r- Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 10 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? 0 Yes 0 No
14. Feature type: 0 Perennial flow Intermittent flow r3 Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: [3 Mountains (M) 0 Piedmont (P) 0 Inner Coastal Plain (1) [3 Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic L /
valley shape (skip for 0 a [3b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip 0 Sae 1 (< 0.1 mi') [] Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi') r3 Sae 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) [3 Size 4 (z 5 mi)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? MYes 13No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
I Section 10 water F Classified Trout Waters f Water Supply Watershed ([3 1 r3 II Q III E3 IV [3 V)
F_ Essential Fish Habitat r Primary Nursery Area r- High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
r Publicly owned property r- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
r- Anadromous fish r-. 303(d) List r- CAMA Area o1 Environmental Concent (AEC)
F Documented presence of a federal and/or slate listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r- Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
0A Water throughout assessment reach.
08 No flow, water in pools only.
C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction -assessment reach metric
OA At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction 21 fill to the
point of obstructing flow gLa channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water Q impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
0 B Not A
3. Feature Pattern -assessment reach metric
0A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A.
4. Future Longitudinal Profile - assessment mach metric
0A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggredelion, dredging. and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
B Not A
S. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current Instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gablon, rip -rap).
[3A < 10% of channel unstable
[3B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
0 C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamslde Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
10A DA Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B d B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
® C ® C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] 1 too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplainlntertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interslream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors - assessment reachflntertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
F_ B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
r- Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
I D Odor (not Including natural sulfide odors)
F_ E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F_ F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r- G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
r� I Other: Adjacent logging along both banks (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
r J Little to no stressors
S. Recent Weather -watershed metric
For Size 1. or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
QA Drought conditions gid no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
E38 Drought conditions Intl rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
WC No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream -assessment reach metric
QYes ®No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types -assessment reach metric
10a.[3 Yes ONO Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
10b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophyles and aquatic mosses v E r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
r B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent c r H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation =o r I Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) c m r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F_ D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots O r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
I+. E Little or no habitat
""""""""' __REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS""""`""""""" --
11. Bedform and Substrate -assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a.DYes ENO Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11 b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
W A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
r B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11 d)
F_ C Natural bedfonn absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c, In riffles sections, check all that Occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach - whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box In each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) =
absent, Rare (R) =
present buts 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C
A P
o o
Q Q Bedrock/saprolge
0 Q
0 rJ Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
0 ® 13
0 Q Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
Q O Q
Q Q Gravel (2 -64 mm)
0 0
® 0 Sand (.062 -2 mm)
0 0 W
r] D Silt/clay (<0.062 mm)
0 Q
O O Detntus
® O Q
a t3 Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
I Id, [3Yes C3No
Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)

Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and TIMI Marsh Streams)
12a.® Yes C No Was an in-stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. C No Water QOther.
12b.M Yes O No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in rimes, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals* for sae 1 and 2 streams and 'taxa' for sae 3 and 4 streams.
r7 r Adult hogs
F r Aquatic reptiles
F r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
f F Beetles (Including water pennies)
I I Caddisfly larvae (rrichoptere [T])
F r Asian clam (Corbicula )
F r Crustacean (isopodlamphipodlcrayfishlshrimp)
F r Damsemy and dragonfly larvae
F r Dipterans Prue flies)
F r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
I - r Megaloptere (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfy larvae)
F fJ Midgeslmosquko larvae
r r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
F r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
F r Other fish
F r Salamanders/tadpoles
F r Snails
F r Slonefly larvae (Plecoplera [P])
F r Tipulid larvae
F r Worms/leeches
13. Stresmside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Leh Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
CA CA Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
E3B C B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
WC ® C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Strsamside Area Water Storage — strumside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, TIMI Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
QA CA Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water z 6 inches deep
CB C B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 Inches deep
0 C ® C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
16. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank [RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RS
[3Y [3Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
pN pN
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for sae 4 streams and TIMI Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
I A Streams and/or springs Qurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
F C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
F D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
1-7 E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
r A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
F C Urban stream (i 24% Impervious surface for watershed)
17 D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage Into the assessment reach
r E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Strums)
Consider aspect. Consider 'leaf -on' condition.
13A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
0B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
® C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — stresmside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
MA Q A Q A CA k 100 -feet wide gt extends to the edge of the watershed
p B 08 13B Q B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
13C CC QC CC From 30 to<50-feet wide
CD CD CD CD From 10 to<30-feet wide
p E 0 E E E W E < 10-fest wide 2[ no trees
20. Buffer Structure — streamside area metric (skip for TIMI Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
CA QA Mature forest
a B [3B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
® C E C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
Q D Q D Maintained shrubs
0 E 13E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for loft bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate If listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feel of stream (30-50 feet).
ff none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 229+
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
CA a DA CA CA QA Row crops
CB d B [3 B Q B C B C B Maintained turf
QC QC QC QC CC QC Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
CD QD 00 0 00 CD Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for TIMI Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right tank (RS) for Metric 19 ('Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
A [3A Medium to high stem density
JOB [3 13 Low stem density
® C ® C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RB
® A W A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
a B [3B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C [3C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
CA a Vegetation is close to undisturbed In species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
0 O B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may Include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing 2L
communities with non-native Invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C M C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata Q communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a.DYes ONO Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. C No Water 0 other No meter
251b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
CA <46 C B 46 to < 67 CC 67 to < 79 Q D 79 to < 230 [3E >- 23D
Notes/Sketch:
Logging in recent past adjacent to both stream banks.

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name Project Hercules
Stream Category Pal
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation
Assessor Name/Organization
6/1/2017
H. Caldwell/WEPG
YES
NO
VFC
(1) Water Quality
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
LOW
(4) Floodplain Access
LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
(4) Microtopography
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(4) Channel Stability
LOW
(4) Sediment Transport
MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology
LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
LOW
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
Overall
LOW

Threatened & Endangered Species
Report

Wetlands and EmAronmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For Project Hercules
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
July 10, 2017
Chi waft oboe: www.wethndso-ep=.00m AdwAle ON=
10612.0 Providence Rd. 1070 runnel Rd, Bid& 1
PM M Sulo 10, PMB M
CIw1oltR NC M77 MherYe. NC 28605
4o4.,nn
pA mm4
IwLrindner@weelmd♦ep&=n .m.nde

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
Project Hercules (+/- 136 acres) is located just north of Hwy 73, and just west of
Macedonia Church Road in Cabarrus County, North Carolina. It can be found
on the Kannapolis NC USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.4410
N, longitude is 80.6872 W. The topography is gently sloped with the elevation
ranging from 650 to 720 ft. (Figure 1). The site is characterized by a mosaic of
open hay fields; abandoned and overgrown pasture land; fencerows; old farming
roads; wooded slopes and drainages; and a large expanse of recently timbered
area that is in early stage succession. Near Macedonia Church Road there is an
abandoned home site with lawn, scattered large trees, barn, sheds and
outbuildings typical of a small farm operation.
Figure 1:
-.
ns
`- '•••___ � � d� _V1 t , � . � � -;ate �-" �' � � 'i
l i
� \r
Legend
Project Boundary 1
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/cabarrus.html was referenced to
determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and Protected species for
Cabarrus County North Carolina, the results of which are listed below (Table 1).
Maps and aerial photographs were assembled and the site was investigated
during the week of June 26, 2017
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Cabarrus County
County: Cabarrus, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on June 26, 2017
Federal
Group Name Status Record Status
Vascular Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus Endangered Current
Plants schweinitzii)
Vertebrate Northern Long -Eared Bat (Myotis Threatened Probable/Potential
septentrionalis)
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Protected Current
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) Endangered Historic
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rlndner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
One plant species with federal protection was the focus of the survey efforts:
• Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally
Endangered, is typically found in open habitats which historically have
been maintained by wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most
occurrences are limited to roadsides, woodland and field edges, and
utility rights-of-way (ROW).
A total of three animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially
occurring in Cabarrus County:
• Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large
bodies of open water such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers,
where there are suitable fish populations and tall trees for nesting and
roosting.
• Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally
Endangered, is restricted to cool, clean, well -oxygenated water. Stable,
silt- free stream beds are required for this species. Typically stable areas
occur where the stream banks are well -vegetated with trees and shrubs.
Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), listed as Federally
Threatened. During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in
colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead
trees. Males and non -reproductive females may also roost in cooler
places, like caves and mines. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in
structures like barns and sheds. Northern long-eared bats spend winter
hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula.
RESULTS:
The site is characterized by a mosaic of open hay fields; abandoned and
overgrown pasture land; fencerows; old farming roads; wooded slopes and
drainages; and a large expanse of recently timbered area that is in early stage
succession. Adjacent to Macedonia Church Road there is an abandoned home
site with lawn, scattered large trees, barn, sheds and outbuildings typical of a
small farm operation. There are small overhead power lines running along Hwy
73, Macedonia Church Road, and Barr Road. These roadsides and rights-of-way
are dominated by Fescue turf (Festuca sp.) and are maintained by mowing.
Wedands and Err+lronmenral Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
The disturbed mixed pine/hardwoods forest on the slopes and drainages has an
average diameter at breast height (dbh) for the canopy trees of 12 inches, with
some larger trees up to 20 inches dbh present. Canopy trees present include
Virginia Pine (Pinus virginiana), Shortleaf Pine (P. echinata), Sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), Yellow Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), White Oak
(Quercus alba), Post Oak (Q. stellata), Red Oak (Q. rubra), Southern Red Oak
(Q. falcata), Willow Oak (Q. phellos), Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa),
Shagbark Hickory (C. ovata), Hackberry (Celtis laevigata), American Elm (Ulmus
americana), and White Ash (Fraxinus americana). The subcanopy is composed
of Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida), American Holly (Ilex opaca), Mulberry
(Morus rubra), Winged Elm (Ulmus alata), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina),
Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica).
The shrub layer includes Black Haw (Viburnum prunifolium), Chinese Privet
(Ligustrum sinense), Blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), and Russian Olive (Elaeagnus
angustifolia). Vines present are Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica),
Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia),
Catbrier (Smilax sp.), and Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). The herb layer is
sparse, and includes Bracken Fern (Pteridium aquilinum), Christmas Fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides), Spotted Wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata),
Running Pine (Lycopodium flabelliforme), Downy Rattlesnake Plantain
(Goodyera pubescens), Curlyheads (Clematis ochroleuca), Beardtongue
(Penstemon sp.), Solomon's Seal (Polygonatum biflorum) and Japanese Stilt
Grass (Microstegium vimineum).
The recently timbered area is highly disturbed and is covered with old logging
roads, large debris piles and stump sprouts, with extensive bramble thickets
dominated by Blackberry (Rubus sp.), Carolina Rose (Rosa carolina), and
Sumac (Rhus sp.).
There are several large, open hayfields dominated by Fescue (Festuca sp.),
Dallisgrass (Paspalum dilataum), Johnson Grass (Sorghum halepense), and
Orchardgrass (Dactylis sp.). These hayfields had been recently mowed and
baled at the time of the site evaluation, with short to medium stubble beginning to
re -grow.
There are several abandoned pastures on site as evidenced by barbed wire
fencerows. There are also two crop fields that have been abandoned. The most
recent crops grown were corn and soybeans. These old pastures and crop fields
are now overgrown by tall weeds and patches of shrub/scrub cover dominated by
Blackberry (Rubus sp.), Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), Japanese
Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and Catbrier (Smilax sp.). Also present are
Johnson Grass, Broomsedge (Andropogon virginianum), Pokeweed (Phytolacca
americana), Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium obtusifolium), Tickseed (Coreopsis
major), Passionflower (Passiflora lutea), Pigweed (Amaranthus sp.), Curly Dock
(Rumex crispus), and Foxtail (Setaria sp.). Kudzu (Pueraria lobata) is present
and overtaking the old soybean field.
Wetlands and ErMronmental Planning Group Lewwd S. Rindner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
The fencerows are dominated by Winged Elm and Eastern Red Cedar, with
Japanese Honeysuckle and Poison Ivy vines climbing the old posts and barbed
wire. Pokeweed and Indian Hemp (Apocynum cannabinum) also occur in this
context.
In addition there are some areas of transitional habitat along the roadside/ power
line corridors, woods and field edges. These areas are dominated by common
herbs and vines represented by Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Ragweed (Ambrosia
sp.), Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus carota), Dandelion (Taraxacum sp.), Plantain
(Plantago sp.), Sericea Lespedeza, Sneezeweed (Helenium sp.), Ragwort
(Packers sp.), Japanese Honeysuckle, and Panic Grass (Panicum sp.).
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower along the roadside/power
line corridors; open areas; fencerows; pasture and field edges; and woods
edges were closely examined and no plants were found.
• No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings
nor were any nesting sites observed.
• The streams on site do not have the habitat characteristics required to
support populations of the Carolina Heelsplitter. No mussels were
observed during the survey nor would any be expected on-site
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office's website
(httr)://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/project review/NLEB in WNC.html) it
appears that the site meets the "exempt" criteria which requires no further
action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the northern
long eared bat.
Wathnds and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
RECOMMENDATIONS:
No species of concern were found on this site. I recommend further consultation
with the project planners and engineers regarding coordination with USFWS and
other federal and state agencies as needed.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
July 10, 2017
and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Project Hercules -Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist / Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and natural resource biologist, and has
conducted field work and investigative studies covering thousands of cumulative acres in
both North and South Carolina since 1996, including:
• Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 1997-1998. Organized,
directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, collecting field data and writing reports.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 2000-2001. Organized, directed,
and worked in field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, collecting field data and writing reports.
• Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities
Evaluation for over 40,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 - present.
• Located and identified at least six previously unreported populations of Federally
Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzit).
• Located and identified four previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora).
• Located a previously unknown population of Federally Endangered Schweinitz's
Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC. This discovery led (in part) to
the purchase of the site by the State of North Carolina Plant Conservation
Program, now called Redlair Preserve. This population has become a Recovery
Site for the species.
• Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in Mecklenburg,
Union, Cabarrus and Gaston Counties, North Carolina.
Wedands and ErrAronmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rlndner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened /Endangered /Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 2: Vicinity Map
N
I
Glass
Fi IE FE o.w;,ACE ot, —I
DIM "-!El
SITE
ay
1� cr
Cox Mill
IDP 4
SITE
0
FIGURE NO. PROJECT HERCULES
Cabarrus Co., NC
Ji
VICINITY MAP— WATERS OF THE U.S. ll
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACEINCDENR VERIFICATION
plar Tent
IZ-0,
INTEJRNAT:ONAJ
SUVNESS PAW
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
URG LSR
DATE:
7/10/17
Wedsn& and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Pindner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 3: Aerial Map
FIGURE NO. PROJECT HERCULES
Drawn By: Reviewed By
1 LIEDt" I Cabarrus Co, NC I LRG I LSR
DATE
AERIAL MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 07/10/17
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDENR VERIFICATION
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S, Rlndner, PLLC.

Project Hercules —Threatened /Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Figure 4: NRCS Published Soil Map
FIGURE NO. PROJECT HERCULES SOILS Drawn By: I Reviewed By:
kA il` D Cabarrus Co., NC I LRG LSR
NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP DATE.
-WATERS OF THE U.S.- 07/10/17
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard $. Rindner. PLLC.