20190421 Ver 1_PCN Form Submission_20190402

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
March 22, 2019
Mr. David Shaeffer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Asheville,
NC 28801-5006
Mr. Alan Johnson
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Street, Suite 301,
Moorseville, NC 28115
Ms. Karen Higgins
NCDEQ
Division of Water Resources
Wetlands & Storm Water Branch
512 North Salisbury Street, Raleigh,
NC 27604
Mr. Byron Hamstead
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street, Asheville,
NC 28801
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Subject: SAW -2019-00117; Pre -Construction Notification for NWP 29 for the Heron Creek
site, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC.
Ms. Higgins and Messrs. Shaeffer, Johnson, and Hamstead,
Enclosed is a request for a Nationwide Permit # 29 for the approximate 45.3 -acre site known as
The Heron Creek site located northwest of the intersection of Lebanon Road and Walter Nelson
Road in Charlotte, NC. The site is a proposed residential development and consists of seven
streams and four wetlands. A preliminary jurisdictional determination was submitted on January
16, 2019 (SAW -2019-00117) and was field -verified by David Shaeffer on March 15, 2019.
Please refer to the Jurisdictional Determination section for updated information on onsite surface
waters.
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
len. [e-mail]
www.wetiands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PM 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include impacts to one stream
(Stream B) for a road crossing and two small wetland areas (Wetlands J & K) for fill associated
with a required road connector and installation of a stormwater bypass. Wetland J is located
along a low area where the Town is requiring a connection to the existing Twilight Drive. The
roadway elevation will require over 12 feet of fill resulting in an unavoidable impact to Wetland
J. Wetland K is located just up gradient of Wetland J. Up -gradient stormwater run-on is required
to be bypassed from the internal storm drainage system. Grading and installation of the bypass
stormwater system will require an unavoidable impact to Wetland K.
Overall impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited
through site selection location, design, location/orientation of the proposed lots and access
routes. Due to the location of Stream B which bisects the site, opportunities to completely avoid
this feature were limited. The overall density of the project is low (<22% impervious) and a large
portion of the site (16.1 ac = 36% of the site area) will be dedicated to undeveloped green space,
much of which will be protected under restrictive covenants according to USACE guidelines.
The site is in compliance with stormwater detention and treatment requirements and utilities
were located to avoid additional temporary impacts. The total permanent impacts proposed are
limited to 0.057 acres of wetland (Wetlands J & K) and 86 linear feet of stream (Stream B). Of
these, 10 linear feet of impact will be due to stabilizing riprap installed at existing bed elevations
and will not contribute to a Loss -of -Waters of the U.S.
Efforts of impact minimization were implemented during the design to preserve the existing
channel hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite natural habitat. A large box
culvert is proposed with constructed sills/baffles to create meanders. This additional voluntary
construction detail will help reduce stream velocity, improve aquatic habitat function and
maintain connectivity through the impacted reach. Large headwalls will be used and sidewalks
have been pulled in to the maximum extent in order to keep the crossing as narrow as possible.
The culvert will be constructed in a way that will not require additional temporary impacts for
access. The applicant has demonstrated substantial avoidance and minimization efforts in which
98.1 % of the 3,735 linear feet of stream channel onsite will be avoided on the project.
Due to its somewhat limited habitat functionality and ability to retain water in the floodplain due
to being moderately incised, Perennial Stream B scored as a `Medium' in the vicinity of the
proposed crossing. Wetland J likewise scored as a "Medium" partially due to its location directly
adjacent to a powerline corridor and downslope of residential lots, and discontinuity with the
stream downslope. Please refer to the to the NCSAM/WAM forms included in the Jurisdictional
Determination section.
Based on discussions with the USACE during the 3/15/19 PJD site meeting, the applicant is
proposing payment into NCDMS at a 1.75:1 ratio for impacts to 76 linear feet of perennial warm
water stream and 0.057 acres of riparian wetland. This ratio takes into consideration that the
applicant is proposing to preserve approximately 13.0 acres in perpetuity through Restrictive
Covenants in accordance with USACE guidelines. The Restrictive Covenants would be put in
place before any impacts would be made and will be submitted as an addendum to the permit
application within 90 days of conditional permit approval.
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
len.rindner at?wetlands-epg.com
www.wetlands-epg.com
2
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PMB 283
Asheville, NC 28805

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site. No listed
species were identified within the project area and we believe that there will be no effect on
listed species or their critical habitat as designated under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act. Please refer to the Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation Section for additional
details on the terrestrial species evaluation. Thank you for your consideration and please contact
me if you have any questions, [phone] or email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Daniel Kuefler
Environmental Scientist
Charlotte Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28277
[phone]
len. [e-mail]
www.wetiands-epg.com
3
Len Rindner, PWS
Principal
Asheville Office:
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
Suite 10, PM 283
Asheville, NC 28805

DXR -,,
pbblen of wafer Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
September 29, 2018 Ver 3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance into the review process?*
r, Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes O No
Change only, if needed.
BIMS # Assigned*
Version#*
20190421
1
Is a payment required for this project?
C No payment required
What amout is owed?*
r Fee received
r $240.00
6 Fee needed - send electronic notification
r $570.00
Reviewing Office* Select Project Reviewer*
Mooresville Regional Office - [phone] Alan Johnson:eads\adjohnson1
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Heron Creek
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Daniel Kuefler
1 b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
4/2/2019
Nearest Body of Water
Irving Creek
Basin
Catawba
Water Classification
C
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.1581
Longitude:
-80.6938
tc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
A. Processing Information W
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Mecklenburg
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes G 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)
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
P Nationwide Permit (MNP)
r- Regional General Permit (RGP)
r- Standard (IP)

1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
C Yes G No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
m 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ Individual Permit
29 - Residential Developments
1e. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record onlyfor DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification - EVress
❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
C Yes G No
Ig. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
G Yes 6 No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
C Yes C No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
5.1 Heron Creek DMS CAT03ESA Acceptance.pdf 89.45KB
1h. lathe project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
C Yes G No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
C Yes G No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
❑ Owner ® Applicant (other than owner)
1e. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
O Yes C No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Ann Nelson Eisenhauer at al.
2b. Deed book and page no.:
32086-242
2c. Responsible party:
2d. Address
Street Address
114 S Oak point Drive
Address Line 2
atY
Seneca
Fbstal / Zip Code
29672
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
dan iel. kuefier@v,etla nds-e pg. com
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Brett Manery, VP of Land
State / Rmvm / Fbgion
SC
0—"
USA
2f. Fax Number:
C Yes G No
4 Yes G No

3b. Business Name:
Meritage Homes of the Carolinas, Inc.
3c.Address
Street Address
13925 Ballantyne Corporate Place
Address Line 2
Suite 300
CKY
Charlotte
Postal / Zip Code
28277
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
3e. Fax Number:
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(6 appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/town:
Charlotte
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
2c. Project Address
Street Address
Address Line 2
cty
Postal / Zip QDde
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Irving Creek
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Catawba
3d. Please provide the 12 -digit HUC in which the project is located.
030501030104
4. Project Description and History
2b. Property size:
45.3
Slate / Province / Figien
Country
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 site is mostly covered with a secondary growth, disturbed mixed pine/hardwood forest with small scattered clearings. General land use in the
vicinity is a mixture undeveloped land and residential developments.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
O Yes rt No O Unknown
4d. Attach an 81/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
Heron Creek USGS.pdf
157.29KB
4e. Attach an 81/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
Heron Creek Soil Manu.pdf 376.06KB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.095
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
3735

4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project,*
The project consists of one road crossing, grading, fill & BMPs for a residential development.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
Excavation and grading of the site will use standard equipment - excavator, dump trucks, track hoe, etc.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
8. Heron Creek Stream Crossing 6diibits - 3-14-19.pdf 2.39MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?
O Yes 0 No 0 Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
O Preliminary 0 Approved 0 Not Verified 0 Unknown 0 WA
Corps AID Number:
SAW -2019-00117
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Nic Nelson
Agency/Consultant Company: WEPG
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination request was submitted on 01/16/19 (SAW -2019-00117) and was field -verified by David Shaeffer (USACE) on 03/15/19.
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
10. Del Map DKedits 111218.pdf 445.5KB
12. Walter Nelson Photo Log.pdf 4.48MB
13. NCSAM NCWAM.pdf 98.56KB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
0 Yes 0 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 projector related activity?
No
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory U
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
m Wetlands ® Streams -tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
2a1 Reason(?) 2b. Impact type * (?) 2c. Type of W. 2d. W. name * 2e. Forested* 2f. Type of 2g. Impact
Jurisdicition*(?) area*
W1 fill P Bottomland Hardwood Forest Wetland K � Corps 0.004
(acres)
W2 fill P Bott
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000 0.057
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.057
2h. Comments:
Wetland J is located along a low area at a proposed roadway that the Town is requiring a connection to e>asting Twilight Drive. The roadway elevation
is over 12 feet of fill which causes an unavoidable impact to Wetland J. Wetland K is located just up gradient of Wetland J. Up gradient stormwater
runon
is required to be bypassed from the internal storm drainage system.
omland Hardwood Forest
Wetland J
Yes
Corps
0.053
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000 0.057
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.057
2h. Comments:
Wetland J is located along a low area at a proposed roadway that the Town is requiring a connection to e>asting Twilight Drive. The roadway elevation
is over 12 feet of fill which causes an unavoidable impact to Wetland J. Wetland K is located just up gradient of Wetland J. Up gradient stormwater
runon
is required to be bypassed from the internal storm drainage system.

3. Stream Impacts
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
86
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
86
3j. Comments:
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
Of the impacts required for the single road crossing on site, 10 If will be due to rip rap installed at existing elevations and will not contribute to a Loss-
of -
Waters of the U.S.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation u
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Due to the location of the on site streams and wetland, opportunities to avoid these areas were limited. Impacts to site surface waters associated with
the proposed development were limited through site selection location, design, location/orientation of the proposed lots and access routes. A large
portion of the site (13.0 ac = 30% of site area) will be dedicated to undeveloped green space protected under restrictive covenants in accordance with
USACE guidance. Utilities were located to avoid any additional temporary impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
A large box culvert is proposed with constructed baffles to provide aquatic habitat function and maintain connectivity through the impacted reach.
Large headwalls are used and the side walks were pulled in to the maAmum possible extent in order to keep the crossing as narrow as possible, and
the culvert will be constructed in a way the will not require additional temporary impacts for access.
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?
O Yes
4 No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWR
® Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
❑ Mitigation bank ® Payment to in -lieu fee ❑ Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
O Yes d No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet)
76
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.057
4h. Comments
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
Based on discussions with USACE during the 3/15/19 site visit, a 1.75:1 ratio is proposed.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
3a. Reason for impact (?)
type *
3c. Type of impact *
3d. S. name *
3e. Stream Type *
3f. Type of
3g. S. width *
3h. Impact
F
713b.lmpact
(?)
Jurisdiction*
length*
S1
Road CrossingPermanent
Culvert
Stream B
Perennial
DWR
5
71
Average (feet)
(Ingfeet)
S2
Road CrossingPermanent
Bank Stabilization
Stream B
Perennial
DWR
5
5
Average (feet)
(lir>�rfeet)
S3
Road Crossing
g
Permanent
Rip Ra Fill
p p
Stream B
Perennial
DWR
5
10
Aver�e(feet)
(lir>ear feet)
31. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
31. Total permanent stream impacts:
86
31. Total stream and ditch impacts:
86
3j. Comments:
31. Total temporary stream impacts:
Of the impacts required for the single road crossing on site, 10 If will be due to rip rap installed at existing elevations and will not contribute to a Loss-
of -
Waters of the U.S.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation u
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Due to the location of the on site streams and wetland, opportunities to avoid these areas were limited. Impacts to site surface waters associated with
the proposed development were limited through site selection location, design, location/orientation of the proposed lots and access routes. A large
portion of the site (13.0 ac = 30% of site area) will be dedicated to undeveloped green space protected under restrictive covenants in accordance with
USACE guidance. Utilities were located to avoid any additional temporary impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
A large box culvert is proposed with constructed baffles to provide aquatic habitat function and maintain connectivity through the impacted reach.
Large headwalls are used and the side walks were pulled in to the maAmum possible extent in order to keep the crossing as narrow as possible, and
the culvert will be constructed in a way the will not require additional temporary impacts for access.
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?
O Yes
4 No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWR
® Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
❑ Mitigation bank ® Payment to in -lieu fee ❑ Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
O Yes d No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(linear feet)
76
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
0.057
4h. Comments
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
warm
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
Based on discussions with USACE during the 3/15/19 site visit, a 1.75:1 ratio is proposed.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)

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
If no, explain why:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?
rYes rNo
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r, Yes rNo
Comments:
The project overall imperviousness is 21.8% Storm water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to
Mecklenburg
County but will be designed to meet their criteria.
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?*
r 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
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes O No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
rYesrNor,wA
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.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
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 M No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes M, No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes G No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
C Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes O No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
51. 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.?

r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
A threatened/Endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does epst for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but the project is exempt as noted in the included T&E report.
Consultation Documentation Upload
16. Heron Creek (Walter Nelson) T&E JULY 2018.pdf 231.27KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
O Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
No essential fish habitat in this region.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpovoeb/
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?*
O Yes r No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
http://polaris3g.mecldenburgcountync.gov ; www.fema.gov
Miscellaneous
Comments

Enclosed is a request for a Nationwide Permit # 29 for the approximate 45.3 -acre site known as
The Heron Creek site located northwest of the intersection of Lebanon Road and Walter Nelson
Road in Charlotte, NC. The site is a proposed residential development and consists of seven
streams and four wetlands. A preliminary jurisdictional determination was submitted on January
16, 2019 (SAW -2019-00117) and was field -verified by David Shaeffer on March 15, 2019.
Please refer to the Jurisdictional Determination section for updated information on onsite surface
waters.
As shown on the attached exhibits, the proposed project will include impacts to one stream
(Stream B) for a road crossing and two small wetland areas (Wetlands J & K) for fill associated
with a required road connector and installation of a stormwater bypass. Wetland J is located
along a low area where the Town is requiring a connection to the existing Twilight Drive. The
roadway elevation will require over 12 feet of fill resulting in an unavoidable impact to Wetland
J. Wetland K is located just up gradient of Wetland J. Up -gradient stormwater run-on is required
to be bypassed from the internal storm drainage system. Grading and installation of the bypass
stormwater system will require an unavoidable impact to Wetland K.
Overall impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited
through site selection location, design, location/orientation of the proposed lots and access
routes. Due to the location of Stream B which bisects the site, opportunities to completely avoid
this feature were limited. The overall density of the project is low (<22% impervious) and a large
portion of the site (16.1 ac = 36% of the site area) will be dedicated to undeveloped green space,
much of which will be protected under restrictive covenants according to USACE guidelines.
The site is in compliance with stormwater detention and treatment requirements and utilities
were located to avoid additional temporary impacts. The total permanent impacts proposed are
limited to 0.057 acres of wetland (Wetlands J & K) and 86 linear feet of stream (Stream B). Of
these, 10 linear feet of impact will be due to stabilizing riprap installed at existing bed elevations
and will not contribute to a Loss -of -Waters of the U.S.
Efforts of impact minimization were implemented during the design to preserve the existing
channel hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite natural habitat. A large box
culvert is proposed with constructed sills/baffles to create meanders. This additional voluntary
construction detail will help reduce stream velocity, improve aquatic habitat function and
maintain connectivity through the impacted reach. Large headwalls will be used and sidewalks
have been pulled in to the maximum extent in order to keep the crossing as narrow as possible.
The culvert will be constructed in a way that will not require additional temporary impacts for
access. The applicant has demonstrated substantial avoidance and minimization efforts in which
98.1 % of the 3,735 linear feet of stream channel onsite will be avoided on the project.
Due to its somewhat limited habitat functionality and ability to retain water in the floodplain due
to being moderately incised, Perennial Stream B scored as a'Medium' in the vicinity of the
proposed crossing. Wetland J likewise scored as a "Medium" partially due to its location directly
adjacent to a powerline corridor and downslope of residential lots, and discontinuity with the
stream downslope. Please refer to the to the NCSAM/WAM forms included in the Jurisdictional
Determination section.
Based on discussions with the USACE during the 3/15/19 PJD site meeting, the applicant is
proposing payment into NCDMS at a 1.75:1 ratio for impacts to 76 linear feet of perennial warm
water stream and 0.057 acres of riparian wetland. This ratio takes into consideration that the
applicant is proposing to preserve approximately 13.0 acres in perpetuity through Restrictive
Covenants in accordance with USACE guidelines. The Restrictive Covenants would be put in
place before any impacts would be made and will be submitted as an addendum to the permit
application within 90 days of conditional permit approval.
Also enclosed is a copy of our Threatened/Endangered Species Evaluation for the site. No listed
species were identified within the project area and we believe that there will be no effect on
listed species or their critical habitat as designated under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act. Please refer to the Threatened and Endangered Species Evaluation Section for additional
details on the terrestrial species evaluation. Thank you for your consideration and please contact
me if you have any questions, [phone] or email at [e-mail].
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
7. Typical Maps.pdf
18. Wilmington District Guidance restrictive_covenants8-03.pdf
Heron Creek Cover Letter.pdf
Signature
m By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
1.47MB
78.32KB
108.35KB
. 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:
Daniel Kuefler
Signature

Date
4/2/2019

Wetlands and Environriental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Agent Authorization Letter
The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic
resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The
undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due
diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable
permit(s) and/or certification(s).
Project/Site Name: Heron Creek site
Property Address: 3799 Walter Nelson Road, Charlotte, NC, 28227
Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 1353120
Select one: I am an interested buyer/seller
Name: Brett Manery, VP of Land
Company: Meritage Homes of the Carolinas, Inc.
Mailing Address: 13925 Ballantyne Corporate Place, Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28277
Telephone Number: 704.944.8987
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Owner n erested Buyer /Other` Date
* The Interested Buyer/Other acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase and/or conduct
due diligence activities exists between the current property owner and the signatory of this authorization in cases
where the property is not owned by the signatory,
Charlotte Office: www.wetlands-epg.com Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd. 1070 Tunnel Rd.,Bldg. I
PMB 550 Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277 Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
[e-mail]

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER.
Dfrerlor
Brett Manery
Meritage Homes of the Carolinas
13925 Ballantyne Corporate Place
Charlotte, NC 28277
Project: Heron Creek
NORTH CAROLINA
Envftwu Cental Quality
March 4, 2019
Expiration of Acceptance: 9/4/2019
County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Lacation Impact Type Impact Quantity
8 -di it HUC
Catawba 03050103* Warm Stream 100
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement.
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely,
James. B Stanfill
Assr4zp Management Supervisor
cc: Daniel Kuefler, agent
Q EQ;N.0ow
Not th Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.1078976

C G,
t Highic-
's
5choa� q
4
m
4
k,
kaie
Mk3t H&
le 1;
Schouu
FIGURE NO. 1
m
fr
r�
3��� sr�Lrr�r
�4L1RSH31isDG'Kt TAs
Morning Sta
y3" ,
Matthews P
Pine Lake
Coimtry Club
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS r,411 t'
1t''lp
0 rd
WALTER NELSON
Mecklenburg Co., INC
Mint Hill
" J Hei
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
VICINITY MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S.
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY 2/22/18
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION

LTD:4 ; IL
Wetlands and Envlronnnrentd Planning Group
Leonard $. Pjrkd'ner, PLLC-
len.rindner@w,etlands-epg.com
,[phone]
www. we#lands-epg.rQm

Be 4L `*ter
ia . ■ is jJti *+
* I L 1h1 a
rk •• _ �• <ti :y • „ F 1 a. it r � �._ m
77
Ae
dh
q.
1 i
4 yp
.
Rr
iY�. 1 ++ 4 ■ °9 1° -.4 �+``y 5�-�7 l
NG 7
�ti I CREEK , qS
_y5
I 1 ' �• " � IT � I 'i
APPROXIMATE I
_ ti .q ■tom-4' PROPERTY BOUNDARY r ■ ffff �_
STUDY LIMITS `'
pp
. �.. �. iP� �� �'. 5,h ; _ .^` A. ~ �.�A y �, ��.... '� � , •.ill
fx
d.
qL
IL
, A 0 ( ,
It
P ti.
LOCATION
SCALE Lat: 35.1581 °N
Long: -80.6938 °W
USGS QUAD ACRES HUC: 03050103
Mint Hill, NC
46.5 SUGAR CREEK
Ln
FIGURE NO.3 WALTER NELSON Drawn By: Reviewed By:
CA /C [) f'" Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
USGS MAP DATE:
- WATERS OF THE U.S. - 2/22/18
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION

f
IN
e
M. 0
FIGURE NO. 4
WALTER NELSON
Mecklenburg Co., NC
NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO NCDEQ VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
2/22/18 /
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
CeK
Cecil sandy clay loarn, 214 8
22.4
44.8%
percent slopes, mcderelel y
eroded
Ce D2
Cecil sandy clay [spam, 8 to 15
15.5
31.1 %
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
MD
Monacan loam, B to 2 percent
6.8
13.0%
stapes, frequently flooded
pap
Pacolat sandy loam. 15 to 25
5.1
10.1 %
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
50_0
1100_0fib
FIGURE NO. 4
WALTER NELSON
Mecklenburg Co., NC
NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO NCDEQ VERIFICATION
Drawn By: Reviewed By:
NRN LSR
DATE:
2/22/18 /

�7~ • ..4 Lr ,� si. r - '-ate -a '' ��/i
.�.. r s � .... fir' '� ���• . �, i�+ �r
4w 0 AO
Owl -
.y '`'" `_� � .�` t- �-�•+''p r _ ��" ' - ,fir. -Y�c `' '" - -
iS
Y (J i�L• tJl�1 1 f
6 Y, Mr
-
2 * jig r.• �.k i `,�,. }tk.a �'' {

{� .,,¢ ..��h�tK, : it -i F >S. � ✓� �, 1.
a eAil
y r w
IN
i
A.1
7:;�Ar4

NON -JURISDICTIONAL - PHOTO 5
NON -JURISDICTIONAL SWALE - PHOTO 6
Walter Nelson
111IE PG Mecklenburg Co., NC -2/22/18
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard 5_ Rindner. PLLC.

NCSAM / NCWAM
Assessments

I i._ INTERMITTENT'
STREAM Dr]Y
NCDEQ
* ,'•p : f -125 If STREAM -
t,_1: FORM D
. ° wr° •°• ',pro_,
PROJECT BOUNDARY �L
,. STUDY LIMITS
_ 2
NCDEQ STREAM
__— 46.5 (+/-) acres
. FORM B
r'
i
J INTERMITTENT
r� W STREAM E
* -30 1f
INTERMITTENT
STREAM H
-20 1f _
INTERMITTENT • -�
STREAM C
375 If
PERENNIAL
STREAM B
400 If -
INTERMITTENT
STREAM F ,
-125 If 4 PERENNIAL STREAM A
Ox Bowr ,
_f. 4 5
3
USACE tt�r ' PERENNIAL--
q LEGEND
Project boundary study limits
TAND STREAM A^
5751f /"V Stream
r'
• Welland
i 5 WETLAND G PIPE . , 7-\. Vti Landscape photoldirection
-0.1 ac
USACE
UPLAND
EXISTING SCM
FORM DPI NCDEQ VERIFICATION 3/22/18 WIT! 0 `
Offsite
FIGURE NO. WALTER NELSON Drawn By: Reviewed
Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
• DATE.
DELINEATION MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.- 9/26/18
Updated 11/12/1
- EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION

Be 4L `*ter
ia . ■ is jJti *+
* I L 1h1 a
rk •• _ �• <ti :y • „ F 1 a. it r � �._ m
77
Ae
dh
q.
1 i
4 yp
.
Rr
iY�. 1 ++ 4 ■ °9 1° -.4 �+``y 5�-�7 l
NG 7
�ti I CREEK , qS
_y5
I 1 ' �• " � IT � I 'i
APPROXIMATE I
_ ti .q ■tom-4' PROPERTY BOUNDARY r ■ ffff �_
STUDY LIMITS `'
pp
. �.. �. iP� �� �'. 5,h ; _ .^` A. ~ �.�A y �, ��.... '� � , •.ill
fx
d.
qL
IL
, A 0 ( ,
It
P ti.
LOCATION
SCALE Lat: 35.1581 °N
Long: -80.6938 °W
USGS QUAD ACRES HUC: 03050103
Mint Hill, NC
46.5 SUGAR CREEK
Ln
FIGURE NO.3 WALTER NELSON Drawn By: Reviewed By:
CA /C [) f'" Mecklenburg Co., NC NRN LSR
USGS MAP DATE:
- WATERS OF THE U.S. - 2/22/18
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acros in A01 Percent of ACI
C9B2
Cecil sandy clay toam, 2 to B
__
44.8%
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
CeD2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 8 to i5
15.6
31.1°#
percent slopes, moderately
eroded
M0
Monacan loam, a to 2 percent
6.8
13.9°#
slopes, frequerrdy Ilno,ded
pap
Pacolet sandy loam, 166 to 25
b
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
54.4
104.4°.
FIGURE NO.4 1 1 WALTER NELSON I Drawn By: Reviewed By:
Mecklenburg Co., NC I NRN I LSR
DATE:
NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.- 2/22/18
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO NCDEQ VERIFICATION

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT GUIDANCE
August, 2003
Often, developers of residential or commercial subdivisions subject the property on
which the subdivision is built to restrictive covenants, that include provisions such as
setbacks, types of homes/buildings that can be built, etc. If the District has determined
that restrictive covenants are acceptable as a means of preserving mitigation property, the
following language can be added to those restrictive covenants:
"The areas shown on the recorded plat (identify the plat by title, date, and
recording data) as conservation areas shall be maintained in perpetuity in their
natural or mitigated condition. No person or entity shall perform any of the
following activities on such conservation area:
a. fill, grade, excavate or perform any other land disturbing activities
b. cut, mow, burn, remove, or harm any vegetation
c. construct or place any roads, trails, walkways, buildings, mobile
homes, signs, utility poles or towers, or any other permanent or temporary
structures
d. drain or otherwise disrupt or alter the hydrology or drainage ways of
the conservation area
e. dump or store soil, trash, or other waste
£ graze or water animals, or use for any agricultural or horticultural
purpose
This covenant is intended to ensure continued compliance with the mitigation
condition of a Clean Water Act authorization issued by the United States of
America, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, Action ID
, and therefore may be enforced by the United States of America. This covenant
is to run with the land, and shall be binding on the Owner, and all parties claiming
under it."
Usually, restrictive covenants have a provision that the property owners (either all of
them or some percentage of them) can amend or modify the restrictive covenants. If that
is the case, that provision needs to provide that our required paragraph (usually identified
by paragraph number) cannot be amended without the express written consent of the U.
S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District.
The permit condition should state that the permittee will record restrictive covenants,
acceptable to the Corps of Engineers, for the purpose of maintaining the mitigation areas
in their natural state in perpetuity, prior to the sale or conveyance of any lots or other
property within the subdivision. It is important that the restrictions be recorded prior to
the sale of any property within the subdivision (or phase, if it is being developed by
phase). If they are not, then any property sold prior to the recording of the restrictive
covenant are not subject to those covenants. Suggest the following:

"Permittee shall execute and cause to be recorded in the County
Register of Deeds restrictive covenants acceptable to the Corps of Engineers for
the purpose of maintaining the conservation areas, as shown on the recorded
plat* (identify by title, date, and recording data), in their natural state in
perpetuity, prior to the sale or conveyance of any lots or other property within the
subdivision. The permittee shall enforce the terms of the restrictive covenants
and, prior to conveyance of the property, shall take no action on the property
described in the covenants inconsistent with the terms thereof. The permittee
shall provide a copy of the recorded restrictive covenants to the Corps of
Engineers within 15 days of recording."
* It is possible and acceptable that the plat may not be recorded at the time of the
issuance of the permit. If that is the case, delete the word "recorded" and be sure you
have a copy of a plat showing the conservation areas in the file, and identify it in the
permit condition by title and date. The plat, however, must be recorded at the time the
restrictive covenants are recorded, and prior to the sale of any lots in the subdivision.
2

Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For Heron Creek
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
July 23, 2018
Charlotte Office: www.wetiands-epg.com
Asheville Office:
10612-D Providence Rd.
1070 Tunnel Rd., Bldg. I
PMB 550
Suite 10, PMB 283
Charlotte, NC 28277
Asheville, NC 28805
[phone]
I en. ri nd ner@wet Ian ds -epg. co m

Heron Creek - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Heron Creek site (46.5 acres) is located just west/northwest of Walter
Nelson Road, west of Lebanon Road, and south of Irvins Creek in Charlotte,
North Carolina. It can be found on the Mint Hill, NC USGS Topographic
Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.1581 N, longitude is -80.6938 W. The topography
consists of upland flat grading into gentle slopes, with the elevation ranging from
650 to 710 ft. (Figure 1). The site is covered with a secondary growth, disturbed
mixed pine/hardwood forest.
Figure 1:
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Heron Creek - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service website http://www.fws.gov/endangered/ was
referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and
Protected species for Mecklenburg County North Carolina, the results of which
are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and
the site was investigated on July 20, 2018.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on July 19, 2018
Group Name Status Record Status
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmipona Endangered Current
decorata
Invertebrate Rusty -patched Bumble Bee Endangered Historic
(Bombus affinis)
Vascular Plants Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea Endangered
laevi ata
Vascular Plants Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus Endangered
schweinitzh)
Vascular Plants Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii) Endangered
Vertebrate Northern Long -Eared Bat (Mvotis
sententrionalisl
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Ha/iaeetus
leucoce,ohalus)
Threatened
Current
Current
Current
Probable/Potential
Protected under the Bald Current
and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Heron Creek - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Three plant species with federal protection were included in the survey efforts:
• Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzit), listed as Federally
Endangered, is typically found in open habitats which historically have
been maintained by wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most
occurrences are limited to roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility
rights-of-way (ROW).
• Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), listed as Federally
Endangered, is typically found in open woods, cedar barrens, roadsides,
clear cuts, dry limestone bluffs and power line rights-of-way, requiring
abundant sunlight and little competition from other plant species.
• Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxit), listed as Federally Endangered,
requires habitat of sandy forests and woodland edges. This species
requires periodic fire as a part of its ecology.
A total of four animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially
occurring in Mecklenburg County:
• Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and Golden
Eagle Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large bodies of
open water such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers, where there are
suitable fish populations and tall trees for nesting and roosting.
• Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally
Endangered, is restricted to cool, clean, well -oxygenated water. Stable,
silt- free stream beds are required for this species. Typically stable areas
occur where the stream banks are well -vegetated with trees and shrubs.
• Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), listed as Federally
Threatened. During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in
colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead
trees. Males and non -reproductive females may also roost in cooler
places, like caves and mines. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in
structures like barns and sheds. Northern long-eared bats spend winter
hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula.
• Rusty -patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis), listed as Federally
Endangered, live in colonies that include a single queen and female
workers. Rusty -patched Bumble Bees historically occupied grasslands
and tallgrass prairies. Bumble bees need areas that provide nectar and
pollen from flowers, nesting sites (underground and abandoned rodent
cavities or clumps of grasses), and overwintering sites for hibernating
queens (undisturbed soil).
' L
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Heron Creek - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
RESULTS:
The site is covered with a secondary growth, disturbed mixed pine/hardwood
forest. The forest cover is dominated by pines on the uplands, and grades into
dry-mesic mixed hardwoods on the lower slopes. Canopy species include
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Short -leaf Pine (P. echinata), Virginia Pine (P.
virginianus), White Oak (Q. alba), Southern Red Oak (Q. falcata), Post Oak (Q.
stellata), Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and Red Maple (Acerrubra).
Understory species includes Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), Sourwood
(Oxydendrum arboreum), Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), Flowering Dogwood
(Cornus florida), and American Holly (Ilex opaca). The shrub layer includes
Russian Olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense),
Spicebush (Lindera benzoin), and Blueberry (Vaccinium spp.). Vines observed
were Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia),
Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus
quinquefolia), and Catbrier (Smilax sp.). The herb layer is sparse and includes
Christmas Fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), Spotted Wintergreen (Chimaphila
maculata), Japanese Stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), River Oats
(Chasmanthium latifolium), False Nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), and Knotweed
(Polygonum sp.).
There are two small overhead power line right's -of -way near the northern
boundary of the site. These narrow open corridors have been sprayed with
herbicide to kill woody species and are dominated by common herbaceous
species including Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), Ragwort (Packers
sp.), Indian Hemp (Apocynum cannabinum), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Ragweed
(Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), Rabbit Tobacco
(Gnapthalium obtusifolium), Beggars Ticks (Desmodium sp.), and Dogfennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
• All potential habitats for Schweinitz's Sunflower, Michaux's Sumac and
Smooth Coneflower along the power line rights-of-way and woods edges
were examined and none of these species were present.
• No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings
nor were any nesting sites observed.
• The on-site streams do not have the habitat characteristics required to
support populations of the Carolina Heelsplitter. Based on existing
documentation, Carolina Heelsplitter populations have not been previously
identified within this basin. No individuals were observed during the survey
nor would any be expected on-site.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Heron Creek - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office's website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/promect review/NLEB in WNC.html) it
appears that the site meets the "exempt" criteria which requires no further
action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the Northern
Long-eared Bat.
• Comparing this site location to the USFWS Range Map for Rusty -patched
Bumble Bee
(https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap. html )
Mecklenburg County is in its Historic Range, and as such, Section 7
consultation is not needed. WEPG concludes that Rusty -patched Bumble
Bee is not present.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not
identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further
investigation of the presence of protected species on this site is recommended at
this time.
Respectfully submitted,
044z, # 1*e�l
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
July 23, 2018
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.

Heron Creek - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist / Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained Botanist and has conducted field work and
investigative studies covering thousands of cumulative acres in both North and South
Carolina since 1996, including:
• Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 1997-1998. Organized,
directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 2000-2001. Organized, directed,
and worked in field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
• Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities
Evaluation for over 45,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 - present.
• Located and identified at least six previously unreported populations of Federally
Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzh).
• Located and identified four previously unreported populations of
Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora).
• Located a previously unknown population of Federally Endangered Schweinitz's
Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC. This discovery led (in part) to
the purchase of the site by the State of North Carolina Plant Conservation
Program, now called Redlair Preserve. This population has become a Recovery
Site for the species.
• Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in Mecklenburg,
Union, Cabarrus and Gaston Counties, North Carolina.
Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC.