20180393 Ver 1_401 Application_20180318

DWR
Division of water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
January 31, 2018 Ver 2.3
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all mandatory questions are answered.
Also, if at any point you wish to print a copy of the E -PCN, all you need to do is right -click on the document and you can print a copy of the form.
Below is a link to the online help file.
https://edocs.deq.nc.govMaterResources/0/edocl6247041PCN%20Help%20File%202018-1-30.pdf
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:*
Mecklenburg
Is this project a public transportation project?*(?)
f Yes f• No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:*
V Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?*
r% Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 39 - Commercial/Institutional Developments
NWP Number Other:
List all NW numbers you are applying for not on the drop dow n list.
1c. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:*
check all that apply
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular r 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
F Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit r Riparian Buffer Authorization
*
1d. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
C Yes O No
O Yes O No
1e. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
It so, attach the acceptance letter from r igation bank or in -lieu fee program
G Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment

Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docunent
01—Project Quattro CLT Land DMS Response Letter.pdf 77.16KB
RLE TYPE MJST BE FDF
1f. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?*
f Yes r No
1h. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?*
f Yes r No
Link to trout information: http://wAw.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-ProgranVAgency-Coordination/Trout.aspx
B. Applicant Information
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Daniel Roberts
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
(XXX)XXX-XXXX
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
r- Owner V Applicant (other than owner) rJ Agent/Consultant
(Check all that apply)
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
City of Charlotte
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Responsible party:
(for Corporations)
Stuart Hair
2d. Address
Street Address
600 E. Fourth Street
Address Line 2
City
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28202
2e. Telephone Number:
2f. Fax Number:
()(xx)xxx-xxxx
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
..... .... ........
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Applicant is:
State/ Province/ Fbgion
NC
Country
USA

O Agent
f• Other Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc.
If other please specify.
3b. Name:
Joseph Scarborough
3c. Business Name:
(if applicable)
Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc.
State / Province / Fbgion
3d. Address
NC
Street Address
Country
3333 Rivervwod Parkway, Suite 200
USA
Address Line 2
qty
State / Province / Fbgion
Atlanta
GA
Fbstal / Zip Code
Country
30339
USA
3e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
(XXX)XXX-XXXX
Fax Number:
(XXX)XXX-XXXX
3g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Daniel Roberts
4b. Business Name:
(if applicable)
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
4c. Address
Street Address
550 E. Westinghouse Boulevard
Address Line 2
qty
State / Province / Fbgion
Charlotte
NC
Fbstal / Zip Code
Country
28273
USA
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4e. Fax Number:
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
Please provide the Agent Authorization Letter if you are subrritting this docurrent.
02_Quattro Agent Authorization_Seefried and CLT.pdf 37.71 KB
PlLETYPEMJsrBEFDF

C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1a. Name of project:*
Project Quattro/CLT Land
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:*
Charlotte
1d. Driving directions*
If it is a new project and can not easily be found in a CPS rrapping system Rease provide directions.
Located north of the Charlotte Douglas International Airport along Tuckaseegee Road to the southeast of the 1-485 and 1-85 intersection in
Charlotte, North Carolina.
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
(tax RN or parcel ID)
See Attached Table 1
2b. Property size:
(in acres)
158 acres
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
aty
R)stal / Zip Code
State / Province / Fbgion
Country
2d. Site coordinates in decimal degrees
Please collect site coordinates in decimal degrees. Use between 4-6 digits (unless you are using a survey -grade GPS device) after the decimal place as
appropriate, based on how the location was determined. (For example, most mobile phones with GPS provide locational precision in decimal degrees to
map coordinates to 5 or 6 digits after the decimal place.)
Latitude:* Longitude:*
35.243977 -80.964377
ex: 34.208504 -77.796371
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Paw Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C
Surface Water Lookup
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Catawba
River Basin Lookup

4. Project Description
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The project area consists of mixed forest, deciduous forest, herbaceous land, pasture, low intensity developed
areas, and actively maintained road side right-of-ways. Previous land -use within the low intensity developed areas
found off of Tuckaseegee Road was a historic mobile home park. The site is located along Tuckaseegee Road
north of the Charlotte Douglas International Airport at the southeast intersection of 1-85 and 1-485. The site is
currently 90% unused Charlotte Douglas International Airport (CLT) land.
4b. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for
DWR)
aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
03_Figure 2_USGS.pdf
Rle type rrust be pdt
689.76KB
4c. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site.
(for DWR)
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docun ent
04_Figure 5_ HistoricSoils.pdf 2.76MB
File type crust be pdb
4d. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.69
4e. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
(intemittent and perennial)
1849
4f. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the project is to construct a commercial distribution center to service the Charlotte area for the
2018 fiscal year. Seefried Industrial Properties' tenant absolutely has to be operational (Certificate of Occupancy
in hand) by late summer in order to be functioning at full capacity by their peak season which roughly runs from
November through the end of the year. This peak is driven by the natural spike in e-commerce/online retail sales
around the holidays and can require the facility to more than double its natural output during other times of the
year to keep up with sales velocity.
The tenant conducted capacity, transportation, and labor studies to determine a prime location for a new fulfillment
center. The proposed project area was chosen based on its close proximity to the City of Charlotte, Charlotte
Douglas International Airport, and Interstates 85, 77, and 485. Its proximity to the City of Charlotte satisfies the the
tenant's labor requirements and its proximity to the airport and interstates make the location ideal from a
transportation logistics standpoint.
Seefried, the tenant, and the City of Charlotte have negotiated the sale/lease of the currently unused City owned
land for this project. Due to the economic value of the tenant operating at a high capacity volume in Charlotte and
the sale/lease of unused City owned land, the City has been working with Seefried to expedite this facility
becoming operational. Parcels within the proposed project area are being rezoned to satisfy the need of this
development. Transportation studies are being conducted so the project can satisfy DOT and City traffic and
safety requirements.
4g. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect imapacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The project proposes to construct a four story (three elevated levels and one ground surface) 855,000 square
foot commercial distribution center to service the Charlotte area by 2018 peak season (November -December).
This will be a single and complete project. Construction activities will consist of clearing, grading, and constructing
the distribution center and all associated infrastructure, including parking, stormwater, utilities, and the relocation
of Tuckaseegee Road, the addition of the proposed Industrial Drive, and the addition of a turn lane on Wilkinson
Boulevard. The proposed road infrastructure is due to City and DOT traffic and safety requirements that are
based on anticipated traffic increase after the successful completion of this project.
Site specific constraints include interstate setback zones associated with both 1-85 and 1-485 along the north and
west project limits, structural height limitations from the airport, and the timeline to make the building operational in
2018. Impacts to waters of the U.S. associated with this permit are limited to fill in a headwater intermittent stream
and adjacent pond. All work will be constructed in the dry during no flow events. Proper sediment and erosion
control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters in accordance with Water Quality
General Certification (WQC) #4139 and NWP #39. Typical inspected and regularly maintained mechanized
equipment will be used for construction activities in jurisdictional waters.
4h. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.

aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
1.22MB
05_Exhibit 1 - Site Plan.pdf
762.61 KB
05_Exhibit 2 - Utility Plan.pdf
1.64MB
05_Exribit 3 - Grading Plan.pdf
2.49MB
05_Exhibit 4 - Retaining Wall Profile.pdf
156.17KB
05_STRUCTURE EMIBIT.PDF
71.91 KB
ImpactMap.pdf
3.24MB
File type rrust be pdt
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the propertyor proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
Comments:
On-site jurisdictional features were re -flagged in January 2018 by Carolina
Wetland Services.
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Unknown
Corps AID Number:
t3carrple: SAM2017-99999
SAW -2013-02255
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
Rebekah Newton
r N/A
ClearWater Environmental Consultants Inc
5d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Issued November 21, 2013. Site was re -delineated by Daniel Roberts of CWS in January 2018. Site was visited by Alan Johnson of DWR on
January 24, 2018 and by David Schaeffer of USACE on March 2, 2018.
5dl. Jurisdictional determination upload
aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docurrent
06_SAW-2013-02255 Figure.pdf
1.22MB
O6_SAW-2013-02255.pdf
417.44KB
06_SAW-2013-0225550060041.pdf
596.26KB
06 SAW-2013-0225580670482.PDF
8.08MB
File type rrust be FDF
6. Project History
6a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
7. Future Project Plans
7a. Is this a phased project?*
O Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the
proposed project or related activity? This includes other separate and distant crossing for linear projects that require Department of the
Army authorization but don't require pre -construction notification.
No.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory

1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
F Wetlands rJ Streams -tributaries r7 Buffers
rJ Open Waters r- Pond Construction
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. Reason for impact*3b.lmpact 3c. Type of impact *3d. Stream name * 3e. Stream 3f. Type of 3g. Stream 3h. Impact s
type* Type* Jurisdiction* width* length*
S1 S1 P Fill Stream C Intermittent Corps 3 560 1
W label (e.g. Farad Crossing 1) Fernenent (F� or Pbrennial (PBR) or Average (feet) (linear feet)
Temporary (T) intermttent (INT)
"" All Perennial or Intermittent streams must be verified by DWR or delegated local government.
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
560
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
0
3i. Total stream and tributary impacts:
560
3j. Comments:
The applicant requests a waiver of the 300 If limit on impacts to intermittent streams based on the minimal adverse
environmental effects of the proposed activity.
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of the U.S. then individually list
all open water impacts below.
4a. Site # - Reason for
4b. Impact type * 4c. Name of waterbody*
impact*
P1
P Pond A
Nhp label (e.g. Finad Crossing 1)
Pbrrrenent (F' or (if applicable)
Tenporary (T)
4g. Total temporary open water Impacts:
0.00
4g. Total permanent open water impacts:
0.13
4g. Total open water impacts:
0.13
4h. Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
4d. Activity type* 4e. Waterbody type *4f. Impact
area
Fill Pond 0.13
(acres)
0

1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:*

The currently proposed site plan was developed as a result of the alternatives analysis and avoidance and
minimization process. In order to avoid and minimize the impacts to the jurisdictional waters of the U.S., the Project
Quattro/CLT Land site was delineated prior to developing the site plan, and the proposed site plan was designed
to avoid the jurisdictional features to the maximum extent practicable. On-site waters of the U.S. were delineated
and an Approved Jurisdictional Determination was issued in 2013. An evaluation of these waters in 2018 reveals
that Stream C is significantly more degraded than any other on-site feature as it scored an NCSAM rating of "Low'
(NCSAM Worksheets, attached).
The configuration and density of the project has been reduced and realigned multiple times to minimize and avoid
waters of the U.S. to the greatest extent practicable while still meeting project needs. We believe that the current
site plan is the best possible plan that meets the project goals while avoiding impacts to jurisdictional waters of the
U.S. to the greatest extent practicable.
No Build Alternative
In an attempt to minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters while still meeting the goals of the project, a "No Build"
alternative was considered. The property is being purchased/leased from the City for the purpose of distributing
goods to the greater Charlotte area in order to facilitate short and long term economic growth of Charlotte. A "No
Build" option would not meet any of the project goals therefore, the "No Build Alternative" was eliminated from
further consideration.
Alternative Design 1
The first several design considerations condensed the distribution center to a five story (four elevated levels),
640,000 square foot building (Alternative Designs 1A-1 D, attached). This is a new design for the tenant that is
being built for the first time in other locations around the country. The 640,000 sqft design is replacing an 855,000
sqft version of the facility that serves the same role in their order fulfillment network. Multiple 640,000 sq ft building
designs were considered for this project. This design minimized the ground footprint required for the building pad
and operates more efficiently based on the manner that their product storage and material handling systems
inside the facility have evolved. However, building and construction regulations limit the height of structures and
equipment near the airport. Additionally, once the re -zoning, permitting, and construction schedules were
assessed for the 640,000 sq ft footprint at this location, it was discovered that the building would not be delivered
in time for use in the 2018 peak season. Due to the construction timeline not meeting the project goals, and
building and equipment height restrictions at this proximity to the airport, the 640,000 sq ft building was ultimately
rejected.
Alternative Design 2
The second design was for a four story (three elevated levels and one ground surface) 855,000 square foot
building. The orientation of this alignment would have resulted in permanent impacts to over 1,000 linear feet of
intermittent streams and 0.13 acres of open water, as well as, permanent impacts to both SWIM and PCO riparian
buffers. Based on comments from CWS on Alternative Design 1, the initial alignment of the distribution center tried
to avoid Stream A, however, grading would have impacted the stream, and the alignment did not allow room for
effective stormwater treatment, tree save areas, or appropriate traffic patterns on Tuckaseegee Road (Alternative
Design 2, attached). As alternative designs resulting in less valuable impacts to jurisdictional waters were
available, this site design was rejected.
Alternative Design 3
The third design realigned the distribution center to allow room for effective stormwater treatment, tree save areas,
maximize traffic patterns around the distribution center, and avoid all impacts to Stream A. This design reduces
Stream C impacts from over 1,000 If to 560 If, however impacts to Stream D and Ticer Branch are increased to
over 400 If (Alternative Design 3, attached). As alternative designs resulting in less impacts to jurisdictional waters
were available, this site design was rejected.
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters
Unavoidable permanent impacts to on-site jurisdictional features are limited to 560 If of Stream C and 0.13 acres
of open water. This design was chosen because it meets the project goals, minimizes permanent impacts to the
maximum extent practicable by configuring the layout to impact low quality water resources over higher quality
water resources while reducing total unavoidable impacts (Exhibits 1-4, attached).
In order to meet the project goals and timeline, the proposed distribution center and the proposed road
realignments have to be operational at the same time. Additionally, as Tuckaseegee Road is a public road that is
being realigned through private funds, DOT and the City will not allow the road to be closed during the
construction of the distribution center. Because of the amount of time it takes to build a facility of this size, the
alignment of the proposed distribution center can not overlay the existing Tuckaseegee Road as it would result in
road closures (Road Alignment Exhibit, attached).
The proposed alignment moves Tuckaseegee Road east and the proposed Industrial Drive north. This
realignment allows the project to completely avoid Stream D, the pond it discharges into, and minimize impacts to
Ticer Branch. Impacts to Ticer Branch are being avoided and minimized in two ways. The alignment has been
moved so that the additional turn lane on Wilkinson Boulevard will not impact Ticer Branch, and Tuckaseegee
Road will cross Ticer Branch at a single perpendicular crossing with no impacts.

1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:*
The project proposes to fill Pond A (0.13 ac) and 560 If of Stream C for the construction of commercial building
foundations, pads, and attendant features that are necessary for the use and maintenance of the proposed
distribution center. In order to further minimize and avoid designed impacts, a bridge will be used to completely
avoid impacts to Ticer Branch and its FEMA floodplain (Exhibits 1-4, attached). Retaining walls will be utilized to
completely avoid impacts to Stream A and Stream D. For sewerline installation jack -and -bore or similar method will
be used and no additional impacts will occur. Typical inspected and regularly maintained mechanized equipment
will be used for construction activities in jurisdictional waters. Proper sediment and erosion control measures will
be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters. Design, installation, operation, and maintenance of all
sediment and erosion control measures shall be equal to or exceed the requirements specified in the North
Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual.
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?
f• Yes f No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
jJ DWR W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
r- Mitigation bank V Payment to in -lieu fee program r- Permittee Responsible Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
W Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet)
280
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR 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
Mitigation is being requested at a 0.5:1 ratio.
6. Buffer mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWR
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer mitigation? If yes, you must fill out this entire
form - please contact DWR for more information.
f Yes C No
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
— Recent changes to the stormwater rules have required updates to this section .""
1. Diffuse Flow Plan

1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection
Rules?
r Yes r No
For a list of options to meet the diffuse flow requirements, click here.
If no, explain why:
The site is outside of NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules areas.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
f Yes f• No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?*
f Yes
r No
To look up low density requirement click here 15A NCAC 02H.1003(2).
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -
approved local government stormwater program?*
r Yes
r No
Hint: projects that have vested rights, exemptions, or grandfathering from state or locally implemented stormwater programs or projects that satisfy state or locally-implenented stormwater programs
through use of com mnity in -lieu programs should answer no to this question.
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply (check all that apply):*
rJ Local Government
F State
Local Government Stormwater Programs*
rJ Phase II
r- NSW
F USMP
F- Water Supply
Please identify which local government stormwater program you are using.*
City of Charlotte PCCO Ordinance
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
f Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or
DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
r Yes r No
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional development, which could impact
nearby downstream water quality?*
f Yes r No

3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
This is a single and complete project that has minimized impacts to all downstream waters.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the
proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
All wastewater generated from the proposed project will tie into existing sewer lines and be treated off-site at the
Irwin Creek WWTP.
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
f Yes r No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?*
f Yes r No
5f. Will you cut anytrees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?*
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?*
r Yes r No
Link to the NLEB SLOPES document: http://saw-reg.usace.army.mil/NLEB/1-30-17-signed_NLEB-SLOPES&apps.pdf
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?**
r Yes r No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers,
mechanized pile drivers, etc.?*
f Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?*
United States Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) Endangered and Threatened Species and Species of Concern
by County for North Carolina online database for Mecklenburg County and the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?
https://w,&w.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/neWnv/index.html
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
Link to the State Historic Preservation Office Historic Properties Map (does not include archaeological data: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
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 status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in North Carolina history and archaeology)?*

f Yes
r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
An additional letter was sent to the SHPO office for the expanded area on March 12, 2018. As of the submittal of
this permit, no response for the additional area has been received. The response indicating no known historic
resources for half the project site is attached.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docunent
07_2017-0565_Project QuattroSHPOletter_3.9.2018 Signed.pdf
07_SHPO Response Letter 1 ER 18-0214.pdf
File mist be FDF
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
Link to the FEMA Floodplain Maps: https:Hmsc.fema.gov/portal/search
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?*
O Yes
r No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
No fill or impacts will occur in the on-site FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search
Miscellaneous
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
aick the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach docunent
2017-0565_Project Quattro Extended PL_PETS_3.15.18.pdf
Alt 1a_640K.pdf
Alt 1b_640K.pdf
Alt 1c_ 640K.pdf
Alt ld_640K.pdf
Alt 2_855K.PDF
Alt 3_855k.pdf
Misc 1_Figures 1 to 6.pdf
Owner Table.pdf
Quattro_ Sunflower Species Report_2.27.18.pdf
Road Alignment Exhibit.pdf
Stream A_Quattro NCSAM.pdf
Stream C_Quattro NCSAM.pdf
Stream D_Quattro NCSAM.pdf
File rrust be FDF or 19VZ
Signature
jJ By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
3.83MB
63.83KB
7.99MB
864.6KB
257.43KB
253.48KB
386.56KB
690.74KB
1008.41 KB
2.57MB
28.6KB
3.1 MB
805.51 KB
95.87KB
95.72KB
95.83KB
■ I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
■ I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act');
■ I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act');
■ I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
■ I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:*

Jonathan Daniel Roberts
Signature
Initial Review
Is this project a public transportation project? * (?
r Yes r No
Change only ff needed.
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
f No
BIMS # Assigned*
20180393
Version#*
Reviewing Office*
Mooresville Regional Office - [phone]
Select Project Reviewer*
Alan Johnson:eads\adjohnson1
Is a payment required for this project?*
f No payment required
f Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
What amout is owed?*
f $240.00
r $570.00

29
74
85
485
29
74
85
485
20'' SETBACK
FROM FUT. ROW
PROPERTY LINE
±92.10 AC
30' POST
CONSTRUCTION
BUFFER (PER GIS)
PROPOSED RETAINING
WALL
SEE GRADING EXHIBIT
66 TRAILER
PARKING SPACES
@ 12'
175' FUT. ROW FROM CENTERLINE
(PER CITY THROROUGHFARE PLAN)
20' SETBACK FROM FUT. ROW
TUCKASEEGEE RD
(3) 12' LANES
2.5' C&G
8' BUFFERED BIKE LANES
8' PLANTING STRIPS
6' SIDEWALKS
PROPOSED WING WALLS
(TYP.)
SEE GRADING EXHIBIT
NO IMPACT TO
FLOODWAY
100'
PROPOSED
BRIDGE
±371'
JURISDICTIONAL
STREAM
TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
100'
ROW
2439 TOTAL AUTO
PARKING SPACES
SHOWN
(TYP. 10' X 20' 75°)
PROPOSED RETAINING
WALL
SEE GRADING EXHIBIT
PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL DRIVE
(3) 12' LANES
2.5' C&G
8' BUFFERED BIKE LANES
8' PLANTING STRIPS
6' SIDEWALKS
SEE OFF-SITE ROADWAY
DESIGN/DRAWINGS (TYP.)
INTERMEIDATE STREAM
41 TRAILER
PARKING SPACES
106 TRAILER
PARKING SPACES
57 TRAILER
PARKING
SPACES
PROPOSED
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PREPAREDFORKnow what's
R 1©SEEFRIEDDEVELOPMENTMANAGEMENT,INC3333RIVERWOODPARKWAY,SUITE200ATLANTA,GA30339PROJECTQUATTROCHARLOTTE,NORTHCAROLINAPRELIMINARYNOTFORCONSTRUCTIONSITEPLANEX-01
NORTH
29
74
85
485
29
74
85
485
20' SETBACK
FROM FUT. ROW
PROPERTY LINE
±92.10 AC
20' SETBACK FROM FUT. ROW
±371'
JURISDICTIONAL
STREAM
TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
NO IMPACT TO
FLOODWAY
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER LINE
INTERMITTENT STREAM
560 LF OF STREAM IMPACTS
INTERMEIDATE STREAM
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER LINE
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER LINE
EXISTING SANITARY
SEWER LINE
EXISTING SANITARY
SEWER LINE
PROPOSED SANITARY
SEWER LINE
PREPAREDFORKnow what's
R 1©SEEFRIEDDEVELOPMENTMANAGEMENT,INC3333RIVERWOODPARKWAY,SUITE200ATLANTA,GA30339PROJECTQUATTROCHARLOTTE,NORTHCAROLINAPRELIMINARYNOTFORCONSTRUCTIONUTILITYPLANEX-02
NORTH
29
74
85
485
29
74
85
485
INTERMITTENT STREAM
INTERMEIDATE STREAM
560 LF OF STREAM IMPACTS
PREPAREDFORKnow what's
R 1©SEEFRIEDDEVELOPMENTMANAGEMENT,INC3333RIVERWOODPARKWAY,SUITE200ATLANTA,GA30339PROJECTQUATTROCHARLOTTE,NORTHCAROLINAPRELIMINARYNOTFORCONSTRUCTIONGRADINGPLANEX-03
NORTH
DATE: 03-12-2018
0 100'SCALE: 1" = 100'50'NORTHEX-04
RETAINING WALL PROFILE
DATE: 03-16-2018 0 40'
SCALE: 1" = 20'
20'60'NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE [phone]
C 2018 QUATTRO - TUCKASEEGEE ROAD
STRUCTURE DETAIL
DATE: 03-06-2018
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE [phone]
C 2018
EXHIBIT 1
NORTH
QUATTRO 855K
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN EXHIBIT
SITE DEVELOPMENT DATA
SITE ACREAGE:±92.10 ACRES (APPROX.)
PARKING
REQUIRED:250 (TRAILER); 2,439 (AUTO)
PROVIDED:355 (TRAILER); 2,439 (AUTO)
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
USGS Topographic Map 2of7
I
2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Proje ct L imits (1 58 ac.)
QuatroMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
Wilkinson Boulevard
3/8/20181 in ch = 2,000 feet
G:\My Drive\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\JD\ArcGIS\Figure 2_USGS.mxd
REFERENCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE(S): MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE, NC AND CHARLOTTE WEST, NC (2017).
35.24 3977, -80.964377
Tuckaseegee Road
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
USDA-NRCS Historic SoilSurvey of Mecklenburg County 5of7
I
2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Proje ct L imits (1 58 ac.)
Roads
QuatroMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
Wilkinson Boulevard
I-85
3/8/20181 in ch = 2,000 feet
G:\My Drive\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\JD\ArcGIS\Figure 5_HistoricSoils.mxd
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS HISTORIC SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC, SHEET 6, DATED 1976.
35.24 3977, -80.964377
Hydric Coverage (%)CeB2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 29.2CeD2Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 9.6EnBEnon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes No 11.5EnDEnon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 7.1WkBWilkes loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes No 10.7WkDWilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 13.5WkEWilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes No 9.1WkFWilkes loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes No 9.2100%
Soil Unit Name and Description
Total Coverage:
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
Vicinity Map 1
of
7
I
5,000 0 5,0002,500 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Project Limits (89 ac.)
Quatro
Mecklenburg County
Charlotte, NC
1/10/20181 inch = 5,000 feet
C:\Users\erinbradshaw\Google Drive\2017\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\JD\ArcGIS\Figure 1_Vicinity.mxd
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND VICINITY MAP PROVIDED BY ESRI, 2017.
35.243977, -80.964377
^_
Georgia
South
Carolina
West Virginia
Kentucky
North
Carolina
Tennessee
Virginia
State Location Extent
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
USGS Topographic Map 2
of
7
I
2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Project Limits (89 ac.)
Quatro
Mecklenburg County
Charlotte, NC
Wilkinson Boulevard
1/10/20181 inch = 2,000 feet
C:\Users\erinbradshaw\Google Drive\2017\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\JD\ArcGIS\Figure 2_USGS.mxd
REFERENCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE(S): MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE, NC
AND CHARLOTTE WEST, NC (2017).
35.243977, -80.964377
Tuckaseegee Road
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
N I-
8
5

H
y
S I-8
5

H
y
Todd
R
d
Tuckaseegee RdN I-485 Inner HyWilkinson
B
v
Exit
1
0
a

I
-
8
5

N

R
a
Exit 10 I-85 RaS I-485 Outer HyExit

3
0
b N
o
r
t
h

H
u
n
t
e
r
s
v
i
l
l
e

R
aExit 10b South Gastonia RaClark

P
l
a
c
e

D
r
Aerial Map 3
of
7
I
500 0 500250 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Project Limits (89 ac.)
Roads
Parcels
Quatro
Mecklenburg County
Charlotte, NC
1/10/20181 inch = 500 feet
C:\Users\erinbradshaw\Google Drive\2017\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\JD\ArcGIS\Figure 3_AerialMap.mxd
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY ESRI, ACCESSED 2017.
BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2017.
35.243977, -80.964377
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DAT E:
DRAW N BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
S I-85 Hy
N I-85 Hy
Wilkinson BvN I-485 Inner HyS I-485 Outer HyT uckaseegee R dI-485 RaStarnes RdTodd Rd
Exit 10 I-85 RaWesterwood DrSears RdExit 10a I-85 N Ra
Exit 10b South Gastonia Ra Exi
t 30b North Huntersvi
l
l
e RaJ oyel a nd C r
Kerrybrook Cr
Exit 9 Wilkinson Bv RaSouth Outer Columbia RaExit 30 I-485 Ra
S I-85 Ra
Exit 30a South Pineville RaPerimeter West DrWesterwood Village DrPlacid Lake DrExi
t
10a
I
-85 N RaI-485 RaI-485 RaI
-
4
8
5 RaExit 9 Wilkinson Bv RaMO
EnB
CeB2
CeD2
MO
WkE
WkB
PaF
EnB
CeD2
MeB
Ur
WkF
CeB2
WkB
WkE
CeB2
CeB2
PaE
HeB
CeB2
CuB
PaE
MkB
PaE
MkB
HeB
WkF
Pa F
CeD2
UL
PaF
EnB
CeB2
Pa F
WkD
WkB
Pa F
Ur
PaE
WkF
WkD
WkE
CeD2
EnD
W
WkE
CeD2
WkF
WkD
PaE
PaF
PaF
MeD EnD
WkE
CeB2
W
MeB
WkF
WkB
MeD
WkD
CeB2
PaE
CeD2
WkD
MO
WkB
PaE
EnBPaF
WkE
PaE
EnD
PaE
CeB2
CuB
MeD
CeD2
WkD
WkD
CeD2
CeD2
CeB2CeB2
CeB2
CeD2
CeB2
WkE
WkB
WkB
Pa F
EnB
PaE
CeD2
CuB
CeD2
CeD2
PaE
WuD
CeD2
CeD2
W
EnD
W
W
CeB2
CeB2
CeD2
WkB
WkD
CeB2
CeB2
CeD2
W
W
CeB2
CeB2
EnB
MO
CeD2
WkD WkD
USDA-NRCS Soil S urveyof Mecklenburg County 4of7
I
1,000 0 1,000500 Feet
CAG
2017-056 5 JDR
Le gend
Project Limits (89 ac.)
QuatroMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
1/10/2 0181 inch = 1,000 feet
C:\Users\erinb rad shaw\Google Drive\2017\2 017 Consulting\20 17 Proje cts\2017-056 5 P rojectQuattro\J D\ArcGIS\F igure 4_Current Soils.mxd
REFERENCE: USDA -NRCS SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC, DATED 2017.
35.243977, -80.964377
Hydric Coverage (%)CeB2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 29.2CeD2Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 9.6EnBEnon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes No 11.5EnDEnon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 7.1WkBWilkes loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes No 10.7WkDWilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 13.5WkEWilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes No 9.1WkFWilkes loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes No 9.2100%
Soil Unit Name and Description
Total Coverage:
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
USDA-NRCS Historic Soil
Survey of Mecklenburg County 5
of
7
I
2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Project Limits (89 ac.)
Quatro
Mecklenburg County
Charlotte, NC
Wilkinson Boulevard
I-85
1/10/20181 inch = 2,000 feet
C:\Users\erinbradshaw\Google Drive\2017\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\JD\ArcGIS\Figure 5_HistoricSoils.mxd
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS HISTORIC SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NC, SHEET 6, DATED 1976.
35.243977, -80.964377
Hydric Coverage (%)
CeB2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 29.2
CeD2 Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately eroded No 9.6
EnB Enon sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes No 11.5
EnD Enon sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 7.1
WkB Wilkes loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes No 10.7
WkD Wilkes loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes No 13.5
WkE Wilkes loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes No 9.1
WkF Wilkes loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes No 9.2
100%
Soil Unit Name and Description
Total Coverage:
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DAT E:
DRAW N BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
PFO1A
PUBHh
PFO1A
PUBHh
PFO1C
PUBHh
PUBHh
PUBHh
PUBHh
PUBHh
PUBHh
PUBHh
PFO1A
PUBHh
S I-85 Hy
N I-85 Hy
Wilkinson BvN I-485 Inner HyS I-485 Outer HyT uckaseegee R dI-485 RaStarnes RdTodd Rd
Exit 10 I-85 RaWesterwood DrSears RdExit 10a I-85 N Ra
Exit 10b South Gastonia Ra Exi
t 30b North Huntersvi
l
l
e RaJ oyel a nd C r
Kerrybrook Cr
Exit 9 Wilkinson Bv RaSouth Outer Columbia RaExit 30 I-485 Ra
S I-85 Ra
Exit 30a South Pineville RaWesterwood Village DrPlacid Lake DrExi
t
10a
I
-85 N RaI-485 RaI-485 RaI
-
4
8
5 RaExit 9 Wilkinson Bv RaNational Wetland Inventory 6of7
I
1,000 0 1,000500 Feet
CAG
2017-056 5 JDR
Le gend
Pro ject L imits (89 a c.)
Roads
Natio nal Wetland Inven tory
Freshwate r Fore sted/Sh rub Wetla nd
Freshwate r Pond
QuatroMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
1/10/2 0181 inch = 1,000 feet
C:\Users\erinb rad shaw\Google Drive\2017\2 017 Consulting\20 17 Proje cts\2017-056 5 P rojectQuattro\J D\ArcGIS\F igure 6_NWI.mx d
REFERENCE: NATIONAL W ETLA ND INVENTORY DATA PROIVDED BY UNITED STATES FIS H ANDWILDLIFE SERVICE FOR NORTH CAROLINA, A CCESSED 2017 . BACKGROUND LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATE D 2017.
35.243977, -80.964377
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
T uckase egee R dClark Place Dr
N I-85 Hy Westerwood DrWilkinson BvExit 9 Wilkinson BvS I-85 Hy
Exit 30b North
Huntersville RaExit 10bSouthGastonia RaSears RdExit 10 I-85 RaExit 10a I-85 N Ra
Exit 10a I-85 N RaExit 9 Wilkinson Bv RaN I-485 Inner HyTodd Rd
2013 AJD Feature Impacts 1of1
I
500 0 500250 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 JDR
Legend
Quattro Extended Permit PL
Perennial Stream
Intermittent Stream
NWI Open Water
Roads
Parcels
Project Quattro/ CLT LandMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
Lowest Impact Limit35.24301, -80.967019
3/16/20181 inch = 500 feet
G:\My Drive\2017\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\Permit (NWP# or IP)\ArcGIS\ImpactMap.mxd
35.243977, -80.964377
Stream A
Stream C
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURGCOUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2017.
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGEDIN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND MAPPED USING A SUB-FOOT CAPABLE GPSUNIT BY CWS, INC., ON JANUARY 2, 2018. JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES ARE BASED ON ACTIVE AJD SAW-2013-02255
Pond A - 0.13 ac.
Stream D
Ticer Branch
290 lf - Stream CPermanent Impacts
Pond B - 0.56 ac.

March 9, 2018

Ramona Bartos
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4617

Subject:Request for Records Search
Quattro Site
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2017-0565

Dear Ms. Bartos:

Our company, Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc., is hereby contacting the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office regarding the presence of any historic properties or cultural resources within the
referenced project area. The Quattro site is approximately 63 acres in extent and is located north of the
Charlotte Douglas International Airport along Tuckaseegee Road to the southeast of the I-485 and I-85
intersection in Charlotte, North Carolina (Figure 1 and 2). The project area includes multiple
Mecklenburg County Tax Parcels (attached as Table 1). The center coordinates for the project are
35.241035°, -80.962894°. Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) is the acting environmental
consultant for this project and has prepared the following documentation and they will be included in all
correspondences.

The property is a proposed commercial development. Based on a review of the State Historic
Preservation Office’s online GIS application and GIS layer, there are no historic properties listed within
the project limits (Figure 3, attached). There are three “Surveyed Gone” properties within the project 1
limits (MK 2434, MK 2437, and MK 3200) that are not listed on the national register (Figure 3,
attached). Field reconnaissance and aerial imagery indicate that these structures no longer exist
(Photographs 1 and 2 and Figure 3, attached).

1 HPOWEB: NCHPO GIS Service. <http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/> Accessed March 8, 2018.
1 of 2

Quattro Site March 9, 2018
Request for Records Search CWS Project No. 2017-0565

Please provide a written response concerning your determination regarding the presence of any historic
properties or cultural resources within the project area. Please do not hesitate to contact Daniel
Roberts at 704-527-1177 ex. 707 or [e-mail] or Joe Scarborough at [phone] should
you have any questions or comments regarding this request. Thank you for your attention to this
matter.

Sincerely,

Joe Scarborough
Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc.
3333 Riverwood Parkway
Suite 200
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
864-612-8104

Attachments: Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. USGS Site Location Map
Figure 3. SHPO Map
Table 1: Mecklenburg Tax Parcel Numbers
Photopage (Photographs 1 and 2)

cc: Daniel Roberts, Project Scientist
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 ex. 707 (office)
2 of 2

FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
Viscinity Map 1of3
I
5,000 0 5,0002,500 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 DJZ
Legend
Proje ct L imits (6 3 ac.)
Quattro SiteMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
3/8/20181 in ch = 5,000 feet
G:\My Drive\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\Cultural Resources\ArcGIS\Figure1_Viscinity.mxd
35.24 1037, -80.962894
Virginia
North Carolina
Georgia South Carolina
Kentucky
Tennessee
West VirginiaState Location Extent
REFERENCE: BAKGROUND VICINITY MAP PROVIDED BY ESRI, 2017.
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
USGS Topographic Map 2of3
I
2,000 0 2,0001,000 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 DJZ
Legend
Proje ct L imits (6 3 ac.)
Quattro SiteMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
3/8/20181 in ch = 2,000 feet
G:\My Drive\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\Cultural Resources\ArcGIS\Figure2_USGS.mxd
35.24 1037, -80.962894
REFERENCE: USGS 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE(S): MOUNTAIN ISLAND LAKE, NC,AND CHARLOTTE WEST, NC (2017).
Wilkinson Boulevard
Tuckaseegee Road
FIGURE NO.SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
SCALE:
CWS PROJECT NO:
COORDINATES:
$$
$$$
$$
$$$
$$$
MK2436 House
MK2435 Todd House MK2434 House (Gone)
MK3200 House (Gone)
MK2437 House (Gone)
MK1873 Asbury House
NC SHPO Map 3of3
I
500 0 500250 Feet
CAG
2017-0565 DJZ
Legend
Proje ct L imits (6 3 ac.)
!Í Photo Location an d Direction
NC SHPO
$$Surveyed Only
$$$Surveyed, Gone
Quattro SiteMecklenburg CountyCharlotte, NC
3/9/20181 in ch = 500 feet
G:\My Drive\2017 Consulting\2017 Projects\2017-0565 ProjectQuattro\Cultural Resources\ArcGIS\Figure3_SHPOMapUPDATEDPL.mxdÅ1
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY ESRI, ACCESSED 2017. BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT AND NC SHPO GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2017.
35.24 1037, -80.962894Å2

Table 1: Mecklenburg Tax Parcel Numbers
Parcel Number Owner Address
05537120 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537114 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537115 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537116 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537118 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537112 Randall and Freddy Crain 75 Santa Rose Ave, Pacifica,
CA 94044
05537111 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537110 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537109 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537107 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537104 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537105 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537103 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537102 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street
05537101 City of Charlotte 600 E Fourth Street

Quattro Site March 9, 2018
Attachment A: SHPO Photopage CWS Project No. 2017-0565

Photograph 1. View of area where MK 2434, and MK 2437 are indicated on NCSHPO Map .

Photograph 2. View of area where MK 3200 is indicated on NCSHPO Map .

Photopage 1 of 1

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

February 13, 2018

Joe Scarborough
Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc.
3333 Riverwood parkway, Suite 200
Atlanta, GA 30339

Re: Commercial Development, Quattro Site, Tuckaseegee Road, Charlotte, CWS 2017-0565,
Mecklenburg County, ER 18-0214

Dear Mr. Scarborough:
Thank you for your letter of January 12, 2018, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
[e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,

Ramona M. Bartos

DATE:01-17-2018NCLICENSE#F-0102200SOUTHTRYONSTREET,SUITE200CHARLOTTE,NORTHCAROLINA28202PHONE[phone]C2018QUATTRO640KEXHIBIT2NORTH
T U C K A S E E G E E R D .
I85
I485 GOVERNOR JAMES G MARTIN FWYPROPOSED RD.19 DOCK DOORS31 TRAI
LER PARKI
NG SPACES @ 12'
P R O P O S E D D I S T R I B U T I O N C E N T E R
M U I L T I S T O R Y
A R S O R T F C
6 4 0 K G +3
O F F I C E A R E A
M O N U M E N T S I G N
1 ,8 1 3 T O T A L A U T O P A R K I N G S P A C E S S H O W N
1 9 5 ' T R U C K C O U R T
6 0 '-0 " C O N C R E T E A P R O N15'-0 " C O N C R E T E D O L L Y P A D
1 9 4 T R A I L E R P A R K I N G S P A C E S @ 1 2 '
1 2 " H I G H C O N C R E T E C U R B
D R O P O F F S H E L T E R
M O T O R C Y C L E P A R K I N G
4 6 D O C K D O O R S
9 8 T R A I L E R P A R K I N G S P A C E S @ 1 2 '
SITE DATA TABLE:
PARCEL ZONING:
EXISTING ZONING INDUSTRIAL
PROPOSED USE S-1 WAREHOUSE FULFILLMENT CENTER
BUILDING INFORMATION:
USE GROUP S-1
CONSTRUCTION TYPE TYPE IA
BUILDING AREA
GROUND FLOOR 639,478
RSP LEVEL 1 639,478
RSP LEVEL 2 639,478
RSP LEVEL 3 639,478
OFFICE 30,000
TOTAL 2,587,912
BUILDING HEIGHT 66'-0", FOUR STORY
PARKING REQUIREMENTS:
PARKING & LOADING SURFACE MATERIAL: CONCRETE / ASPHALT
TOTAL AUTO PARKING PROVIDED: 1,813 SPACES
HANDICAP PARKING REQUIRED: 36 SPACES
AUTO PARKING STALL: 9' X 18' 75 DEGREE
MOTORCYCLE PARKING PROVIDED: 8 SPACE (9' X 5')
TRUCK COURT:
DEPTH 195' MINIMUM DEPTH
SHIPPING DOORS 44 DOORS: 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOOR
RECEIVING DOORS 19 DOORS: 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOOR
DRIVE-IN DOORS 2 DOORS: 14' X 16' OVERHEAD DOOR
TRAILER PARKING 323 SPACES (12' X 55')
CONCRETE APRON 60' AT DOCK WALL
COMPACTOR 1 DEDICATED - 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOORS
FACILITY POWER 12,000 AMPS (4 SERVICE ENTRIES)
SITE LIGHTING:
POLE MOUNTED FIXTURES - 40' HIGH LED FIXTURES
WALL PACKS - 35' AFF LED FIXTURES
PEDESTRIAN LIGHT POLES - ALONG SIDE WALK AT MAIN ENTRY - 8' TALL
2727 Paces Ferry Road SE
Building Two, Suite 1400
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
770-432-9400 PROJECT NUMBER:
SCALE:As indicated
A-102
01/03/18
OPTION #1 PROTOTYPICAL SITE PLAN
CLT - QUATTRO
4120-006
MULTI STORY
AR SORT FC
640K G+3 TRUE NORTHGRAPHIC SCALE
80 3200 160
T U C K A S E E G E E R D .
I85
I485 GOVERNOR JAMES G MARTIN FWYPROPOSED RD.19 DOCK DOORS31 TRAI
LER PARKI
NG SPACES @ 12'
P R O P O S E D D I S T R I B U T I O N C E N T E R
M U I L T I S T O R Y
A R S O R T F C
6 4 0 K G +3
O F F I C E A R E A
M O N U M E N T S I G N
1 ,8 1 3 T O T A L A U T O P A R K I N G S P A C E S S H O W N
1 9 5 ' T R U C K C O U R T
6 0 '-0 " C O N C R E T E A P R O N15'-0 " C O N C R E T E D O L L Y P A D
1 9 4 T R A I L E R P A R K I N G S P A C E S @ 1 2 '
1 2 " H I G H C O N C R E T E C U R B
D R O P O F F S H E L T E R
M O T O R C Y C L E P A R K I N G
4 6 D O C K D O O R S
8 7 T R A I L E R P A R K I N G S P A C E S @ 1 2 '
SITE DATA TABLE:
PARCEL ZONING:
EXISTING ZONING INDUSTRIAL
PROPOSED USE S-1 WAREHOUSE FULFILLMENT CENTER
BUILDING INFORMATION:
USE GROUP S-1
CONSTRUCTION TYPE TYPE IA
BUILDING AREA
GROUND FLOOR 639,478
RSP LEVEL 1 639,478
RSP LEVEL 2 639,478
RSP LEVEL 3 639,478
OFFICE 30,000
TOTAL 2,587,912
BUILDING HEIGHT 66'-0", FOUR STORY
PARKING REQUIREMENTS:
PARKING & LOADING SURFACE MATERIAL: CONCRETE / ASPHALT
TOTAL AUTO PARKING PROVIDED: 1,813 SPACES
HANDICAP PARKING REQUIRED: 36 SPACES
AUTO PARKING STALL: 9' X 18' 75 DEGREE
MOTORCYCLE PARKING PROVIDED: 8 SPACE (9' X 5')
TRUCK COURT:
DEPTH 195' MINIMUM DEPTH
SHIPPING DOORS 44 DOORS: 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOOR
RECEIVING DOORS 19 DOORS: 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOOR
DRIVE-IN DOORS 2 DOORS: 14' X 16' OVERHEAD DOOR
TRAILER PARKING 312 SPACES (12' X 55')
CONCRETE APRON 60' AT DOCK WALL
COMPACTOR 1 DEDICATED - 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOORS
FACILITY POWER 12,000 AMPS (4 SERVICE ENTRIES)
SITE LIGHTING:
POLE MOUNTED FIXTURES - 40' HIGH LED FIXTURES
WALL PACKS - 35' AFF LED FIXTURES
PEDESTRIAN LIGHT POLES - ALONG SIDE WALK AT MAIN ENTRY - 8' TALL
2727 Paces Ferry Road SE
Building Two, Suite 1400
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
770-432-9400 PROJECT NUMBER:
SCALE:As indicated
A-102
01/03/18
OPTION #1 PROTOTYPICAL SITE PLAN
CLT - QUATTRO
4120-006
MULTI STORY
AR SORT FC
640K G+3 TRUE NORTHGRAPHIC SCALE
80 3200 160
DATE: 01-29-2018
NC LICENSE #F-0102
200 SOUTH TRYON STREET, SUITE 200
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA 28202
PHONE [phone]
C 2018
EXHIBIT 1
NORTH
QUATTRO 640K
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN EXHIBIT
T U C K A S E E G E E R D .
I85
I485 GOVERNOR JAMES G MARTIN FWYPROPOSED RD.19 DOCK DOORS25 TRAI
LER PARKI
NG SPACES @ 12'
M O N U M E N T S I G N
2 ,2 1 6 T O T A L A U T O P A R K I N G S P A C E S S H O W N
1 9 5 ' T R U C K C O U R T
6 0 '-0 " C O N C R E T E A P R O N15'-0 " C O N C R E T E D O L L Y P A D
1 9 4 T R A I L E R P A R K I N G S P A C E S @ 1 2 '
1 2 " H I G H C O N C R E T E C U R B
D R O P O F F S H E L T E R
M O T O R C Y C L E P A R K I N G
8 7 T R A I L E R P A R K I N G S P A C E S @ 1 2 '
P R O P O S E D D I S T R I B U T I O N C E N T E R
M U L T I S T O R Y
A R S O R T F C
8 5 5 K G +3
SITE DATA TABLE:
PARCEL ZONING:
EXISTING ZONING INDUSTRIAL
PROPOSED USE S-1 WAREHOUSE FULFILLMENT CENTER
BUILDING INFORMATION:
USE GROUP S-1
CONSTRUCTION TYPE TYPE IA
BUILDING AREA
GROUND FLOOR 857,426
PROCESS MEZZ 264,768
RSP 1,193,417
TOTAL 2,315,888
BUILDING HEIGHT 51'-0", TWO STORY
PARKING REQUIREMENTS:
PARKING & LOADING SURFACE MATERIAL: CONCRETE / ASPHALT
TOTAL AUTO PARKING PROVIDED: 2,216 SPACES
HANDICAP PARKING REQUIRED: 36 SPACES
AUTO PARKING STALL: 9' X 18' 75 DEGREE
MOTORCYCLE PARKING PROVIDED: 8 SPACE (9' X 5')
TRUCK COURT:
DEPTH 195' MINIMUM DEPTH
SHIPPING DOORS 44 DOORS: 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOOR
RECEIVING DOORS 19 DOORS: 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOOR
DRIVE-IN DOORS 2 DOORS: 14' X 16' OVERHEAD DOOR
TRAILER PARKING 306 SPACES (12' X 55')
CONCRETE APRON 60' AT DOCK WALL
COMPACTOR 1 DEDICATED - 9' X 10' OVERHEAD DOORS
FACILITY POWER 12,000 AMPS (4 SERVICE ENTRIES)
SITE LIGHTING:
POLE MOUNTED FIXTURES - 40' HIGH LED FIXTURES
WALL PACKS - 35' AFF LED FIXTURES
PEDESTRIAN LIGHT POLES - ALONG SIDE WALK AT MAIN ENTRY - 8' TALL
2727 Paces Ferry Road SE
Building Two, Suite 1400
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
770-432-9400 PROJECT NUMBER:
SCALE:As indicated
A-102
01/03/18
OPTION #1 PROTOTYPICAL SITE PLAN
CLT - QUATTRO
4120-006
MULTI STORY
AR SORT FC
855K G+3 TRUE NORTHGRAPHIC SCALE
80 3200 160
Table 1: Owner Information and Mecklenburg Tax Parcel Numbers
Parcel number Owner Address
5537112 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538114 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538114 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537105 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538108 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5553101 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538213 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538118 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538214 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538211 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538201 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538202 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538203 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538204 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538205 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538206 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538207 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538208 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538209 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538210 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538115 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538116 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538135 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538133 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538134 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538113 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538132 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538146 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538144 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538130 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538153 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538111 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538110 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538109 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538125 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538105 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538104 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538147 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538103 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538126 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5538101 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537113 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537120 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537114 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537115 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537111 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537110 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537109 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537116 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537107 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537104 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537118 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537103 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537102 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
5537101 City of Charlotte 600 E 4th Street, Charlotte, NC 28202
NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
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 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 Quattro/CLT Land 2. Date of evaluation: 01/02/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: City of Charlotte 4. Assessor name/organization: Daniel Roberts, CWS
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Paw Creek 7. River basin: Catawba
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.246127, -80.963615
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream A 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 640
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0-1 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic
19 valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached? Yes No

1. Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C 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 severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
B Not A
3. Feature Pattern – assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metric
A 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).
B Not A
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).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B 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] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch”
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section)
J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
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.
A Drought 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
Yes 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. Yes 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)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
vegetation
C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
G Submerged aquatic vegetation
H Low-tide refugia (pools)
I Sand bottom
J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
K 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. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle 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 < 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/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256 mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check for Tidal Marsh Streams Only
12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Yes 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. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No 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.
Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles
Caddisfly larvae (T)
Asian clam (Corbicula)
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans
Mayfly larvae (E)
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (P)
Tipulid larvae
Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B 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
A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 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
A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. 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 Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir)
D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C 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
A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
E E E E < 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 A Mature forest
B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D D Maintained shrubs
E E 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 (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 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to high stem density
B B 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 A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition – 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
A 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.
B 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 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 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 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 No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230

Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Project Quattro/CLT Land Date of Assessment 01/02/2018
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization Daniel Roberts, CWS

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA NA
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM MEDIUM
(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 HIGH HIGH
(2) In-stream Habitat HIGH HIGH
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat HIGH HIGH
(2) Stream-side Habitat HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(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 NA NA
Overall MEDIUM MEDIUM

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
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 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 Quattro 2. Date of evaluation: 01/02/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: City of Charlotte 4. Assessor name/organization: Daniel Roberts, CWS
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Paw Creek 7. River basin: Catawba
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.243977, -80.964377
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream C 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 960
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 0-1 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic
19 valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached? Yes No

1. Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C 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 severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
B Not A
3. Feature Pattern – assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metric
A 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).
B Not A
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).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B 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] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch”
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section)
J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
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.
A Drought 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
Yes 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. Yes 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)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
vegetation
C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
G Submerged aquatic vegetation
H Low-tide refugia (pools)
I Sand bottom
J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
K 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. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle 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 < 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/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256 mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check for Tidal Marsh Streams Only
12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Yes 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. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No 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.
Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles
Caddisfly larvae (T)
Asian clam (Corbicula)
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans
Mayfly larvae (E)
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (P)
Tipulid larvae
Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B 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
A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 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
A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. 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 Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir)
D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C 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
A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
E E E E < 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 A Mature forest
B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D D Maintained shrubs
E E 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 (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 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to high stem density
B B 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 A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition – 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
A 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.
B 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 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 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 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 No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230

Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Project Quattro Date of Assessment 01/02/2018
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization Daniel Roberts, CWS

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA NA
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW LOW
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM MEDIUM
(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 LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance OMITTED NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(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 NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
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 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 Quattro 2. Date of evaluation: 01/02/2018
3. Applicant/owner name: City of Chatlotte 4. Assessor name/organization: Daniel Roberts, CWS
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Ticer Branch 7. River basin: Catawba
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.241404. -80.963354
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream D 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 385
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? Yes No
14. Feature type: Perennial flow Intermittent flow Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: Mountains (M) Piedmont (P) Inner Coastal Plain (I) Outer Coastal Plain (O)
16. Estimated geomorphic
19 valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream):
A B
(more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip Size 1 (< 0.1 mi2) Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mi2) Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mi2) Size 4 (≥ 5 mi2)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Section 10 water Classified Trout Waters Water Supply Watershed (I II III IV V)
Essential Fish Habitat Primary Nursery Area High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
Publicly owned property NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Anadromous fish 303(d) List CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in “Notes/Sketch” section or attached? Yes No

1. Channel Water – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
A Water throughout assessment reach.
B No flow, water in pools only.
C 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 severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
B Not A
3. Feature Pattern – assessment reach metric
A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile – assessment reach metric
A 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).
B Not A
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).
A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
C > 25% of channel unstable

6. Streamside Area Interaction – streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB RB
A A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
B 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] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples: impoundments, intensive
mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a man-made feature on an
interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors – assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in “Notes/Sketch”
section.
F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc)
I Other: (explain in “Notes/Sketch” section)
J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather – watershed metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
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.
A Drought 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
Yes 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. Yes 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)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent
vegetation
C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees)
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
G Submerged aquatic vegetation
H Low-tide refugia (pools)
I Sand bottom
J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
K 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. Yes No Is assessment reach in a natural sand-bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
A Riffle-run section (evaluate 11c)
B Pool-glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffle 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 < 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/saprolite
Boulder (256 – 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 – 256 mm)
Gravel (2 – 64 mm)
Sand (.062 – 2 mm)
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip-rap, concrete, etc.)
11d. Yes No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check for Tidal Marsh Streams Only
12. Aquatic Life – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. Yes 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. No Water Other:
12b. Yes No 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.
Adult frogs
Aquatic reptiles
Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
Beetles
Caddisfly larvae (T)
Asian clam (Corbicula)
Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
Dipterans
Mayfly larvae (E)
Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
Midges/mosquito larvae
Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
Other fish
Salamanders/tadpoles
Snails
Stonefly larvae (P)
Tipulid larvae
Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B 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
A A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
B B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage – streamside area metric (skip for Size 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
A A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water ≥ 6 inches deep
B B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
C C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. 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 Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
N N
16. Baseflow Contributors – assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
C Obstruction passing flow during low-flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom-release dam, weir)
D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors – assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
B Obstruction not passing flow during low-flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
C Urban stream (≥ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
F None of the above
18. Shading – assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider “leaf-on” condition.
A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C 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
A A A A ≥ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B B B B From 50 to < 100 feet wide
C C C C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
D D D D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
E E E E < 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 A Mature forest
B B Non-mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
D D Maintained shrubs
E E 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 (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 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
A A A A A A Row crops
B B B B B B Maintained turf
C C C C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
D D D D D D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density – streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 (“Wooded” Buffer Width).
LB RB
A A Medium to high stem density
B B 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 A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
B B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition – 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
A 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.
B 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 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 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 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 No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. No Water Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
A < 46 B 46 to < 67 C 67 to < 79 D 79 to < 230 E ≥ 230

Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Project Quattro Date of Assessment 01/02/2018
Stream Category Pb1 Assessor Name/Organization Daniel Roberts, CWS

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) NO
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH HIGH
(4) Microtopography NA NA
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability LOW LOW
(4) Sediment Transport HIGH HIGH
(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 HIGH HIGH
(2) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Habitat HIGH HIGH
(3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM
(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 NA NA
Overall MEDIUM MEDIUM