20190464 Ver 1_PCN 041119_20190411

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW – 201 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder Assign Action ID Number in ORM
1.Project Name [PCN Fm A2a]:
2.Work Type: Private Institutional Government Commercial
3.Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
4.Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
5.Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 – or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
6.Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7.Project Location - Coordinates [PCN Form B1b]:

8.Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]:
9.Project Location – County [PCN Form A2b]:
10.Project Location – Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]:
11.Project Information – Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]:

Authorization: Section 10 Section 404 Section 10 & 404
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit #
Regional General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre-Application Request
Unauthorized
Compliance

Revised 20150602
The Estates at Arlington Woods
✔
PCN for a residential development
Lennar Carolinas, LLC
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC / WEPG
35.1941 N/-80.0304105 W - Brief Road, Charlotte, NC 28227
13946104, 13927197, 13930206
Mecklenburg
Charlotte
Clear Creek
03040105 - Rocky
✔
✔12
SAW-2006-30836

1

April 11, 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

Subject: SAW-2006-30836; Pre-Construction Notification for NWP 12 for the Estates at
Arlington Woods site, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC.

Ms. Higgins and Messrs. Shaeffer, Johnson, and Hamstead,

Enclosed is a request for Nationwide Permit # 12 for the approximate 118.2 -acre site known as
the Estates at Arlington Woods site located northeast of the intersection of Brief Road and
Arlington Church Road in Charlotte, NC. The site is a proposed residential development and
consists of four streams and five wetlands. A preliminary jurisdictional determination was
submitted on November 21, 2018 (SAW-2006-30826) and was field-verified by David Shaeffer
on January 17, 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 two wetlands
(Wetlands OS and OW) for the installation of a waterline utility to serve the proposed residential
development. 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. The overall density of the project is low (14.4 % impervious overall) and is
designed with relatively large lots serviced by individual septic systems. The total temporary

2
impacts proposed are limited to 0.033 acres of wetlands (Wetlands OS and OW). No permanent
impacts to any of the onsite streams or wetlands are proposed.

Efforts of impact minimization were implemented during the design to preserve the existing
channel hydrology and limit adverse effects to existing, onsite natural habitat. The waterline
utility requires connection to existing infrastructure near Bartlett road via an extension that will
run parallel to Arlington Church Road within the NC DOT right-of-way. The two temporary
wetland impacts are required due to the close proximity of these features to Arlington Church
Road. The temporary wetland crossings will be restored to pre-construction conditions as
described on the attached plans. All of the other required crossings will use directional boring to
avoid any additional impacts. The applicant has demonstrated substantial avoidance and
minimization efforts in which all of the 4,273 linear feet of stream channel and 92 % of the 0.41
acres of wetlands onsite will be avoided on the project.

Due to limited temporary impacts associated with this project, no compensatory mitigation is
proposed.

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 Len Rindner, PWS
Environmental Scientist Principal
Permit Application Permit Application
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no. _____________
DWQ project no. _______________
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? Yes No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification – Regular Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
401 Water Quality Certification – Express Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
Yes No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
Yes No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in-lieu fee program.
Yes No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC’s twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below. Yes No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? Yes No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
2b. County:
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg
Charlotte
Lennar Carolinas LLC
20100-212, 20100-202, 20100-208
Evan Mooney
111230 Carmel Commons Blv
Charlotte, NC 28226
828-768-4012
[e-mail]
12
Page 2 of 10
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: Agent Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Evan Mooney
Lennar Carolinas LLC
6701 Carmel Road, Suite 425
Charlotte NC 28228
828-768-4012
[e-mail]
Daniel Kuefler
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC - Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28227
336-554-2728
[e-mail]
Developer
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: Longitude:
1c. Property size: acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
2c. River basin:
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes No Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? Yes No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to “help file” instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
13946104, 13927197, 13930206
-80.6037
118.16
Clear Creek
C
03040105
The site is primarily covered with successional woods; open pasture land; numerous dirt roads and trails; and is disturbed throughout. The topography
is gently to moderately sloped grading into flat floodplain of Clear Creek. General land use in the vicinity is a mixture undeveloped land and residential
developments.
0.41
The project consists of installation of waterline for a residential development.
Excavation and grading of the site will use standard equipment - excavator, dump trucks, track hoe, etc.
WEPG
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination request was submitted on 11/21/18 (SAW-2006-30836) and was field-verified by David Shaeffer (USACE)
on 1/17/19.
35.1941
4,273
PJD Request submitted 11/21/18 (SAW-2006-30836)
Nic Nelson
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams – tributaries Buffers Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
2g.Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Excavation Bottomland Hardwood Forest Yes Corps 0.009
No Corps 0.024
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
0.033
Temporary impacts to wetlands are needed for a waterline installation to service the residential development. No permanent impacts are proposed.
Choose one - -
T
T
-
-
-
-
Excavation
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Small-Basin Wetland
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
-
-
-
-
-
-
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Page 5 of 10
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
O1
O2
O3
O4
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1
P2
5f.Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.Project is in which protected basin? Neuse Tar-Pamlico Catawba Randleman Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
6h.Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Choose one Choose
Choose one
Yes/No
-
-
-
-
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose
Choose
Choose
Choose one
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
)
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
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?
Yes No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): DWQ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
Mitigation bank
Payment to in-lieu fee program
Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
Type:
Type:
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Due to the location of the on site streams and wetlands, opportunities to completely 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. Due to their proximity to Arlington Church Rd, two temporary open-cut wetland crossings are required in order to install a waterline utility
connection to service the proposed residential development - all other crossings will use directional boring. No permanent impacts are proposed.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
Directional boring and anti-seep collars will be used for waterline utilities instead of aerial crossings. This is a low-density development with septic
throughout so no sewer crossings are required. Large buffers will be applied to all stream features on site. The temporary wetland crossings will be
restored to pre-construction conditions as described on the attached plans.
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Page 7 of 10
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) – required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? Yes No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f.Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
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?
Yes No
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Yes No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? Yes No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:

2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government’s jurisdiction is this project?
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
Phase II
NSW
USMP
Water Supply Watershed
Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
Coastal counties
HQW
ORW
Session Law 2006-246
Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? Yes No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? Yes No
14.4
Storm water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. A stormwater system will be implemeted to capture road drainage,
run-off, and future on-site development of lots. A BMP will be constructed to treat the area of high density. The stormwater plan has been submitted to
Mecklenburg County for review and has been designed to meet their criteria.
Mecklenburg County
Mecklenburg County
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land? Yes No
1b. If you answered “yes” to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Yes No
1c. If you answered “yes” to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
Yes No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
Yes No
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes No
2c. If you answered “yes” to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes No
3b. If you answered “yes” to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered “no,” provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
This project is designed as a low-density subdivision with large lots with independent septic systems.
Page 10 of 10
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? Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
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 (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
_______________________________
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)

Date
A threatened/Endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but the project is exempt as noted in the included T&E report.
No essential fish habitat in this region.
SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
The waterline installation will cross the floodplain of Clear Creek. No change in base flood elevations are proposed.
http://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov ; www.fema.gov
-
Daniel Kuefler 04-05-2019
Daniel
Kuefler
Digitally signed by Daniel Kuefler
DN: cn=Daniel Kuefler, o=WEPG,
ou,
email=daniel.kuefler@wetlands-
epg.com, c=US
Date: 2019.04.05 16:19:48 -04'00'
Maps/Plans Maps/Plans
FIGURE NO.
1
The Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg Co., NC
͑
͑

VICINITY MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION
͑
͑
DATE:

11/14/18
Drawn By:
LSR LRG
Reviewed By:
SITE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
FIGURE NO.
2
The Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg Co., NC
͑
͑

AERIAL MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION
͑
͑
DATE:

11/14/18
Drawn By:
LSR LRG
Reviewed By:
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
FIGURE NO.
3
The Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg Co., NC
͑
͑

USGS MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION
͑
͑
DATE:

11/14/18
Drawn By:
LSR LRG
Reviewed By:
LOCATION
Lat: 35.1941 ºN
Long: -80.6037 ºW
HUC: 03040105
MIDDLE ROCKY RIVER
SCALE
1:24,000
ACRES
118.16
USGS QUAD
Midland, NC
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
CLEAR
CREEK
FIGURE NO.
4
The Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg Co., NC
͑
͑

NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO NCDEQ VERIFICATION
͑
͑
DATE:

11/14/18
Drawn By:
LSR LRG
Reviewed By:
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
FIGURE NO.
5
The Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg Co., NC
͑
͑

NRCS WEB SOILS MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO NCDEQ VERIFICATION
͑
͑
DATE:

11/14/18
Drawn By:
LSR LRG
Reviewed By:
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS

FIGURE NO.
6
The Estates at Arlington Woods
Mecklenburg Co., NC

TAX PARCEL MAP
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION

DATE:

8/8/18
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
BARTLETT ROAD
ARLINGTON CHURCH
ROAD
Parcel: 13946104
Lennar Carolinas LLC
11230 Carmel Commons Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28226
Parcel: 13927197
Lennar Carolinas LLC
11230 Carmel Commons Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28226
Parcel: 13930206
Lennar Carolinas LLC
11230 Carmel Commons Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28226
NC DOT R-O-W
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
(Approximate)
MERRICK
Scale: NTS
Figure 7
LF
LF
MERRICK
200 4000
Scale: 1" = 400'
Figure 88
MERRICK
Scale: NTS
Figure 9
MERRICK
Wetland OS
(Surveyed)
Clear Creek
CL15' CLT Water
Easement
Prop. 12"
Waterline
Ex. Overhead
Electric
Ex. Guard
Rail
15 300
Scale: 1" = 30'
TOB
Temporary access corridor to be
reestablished with native species.
Permanent maintenance easement to be
reseeded with native stabilization mix.
Proposed anti-seep collar to be installed
at the downstream and upstream side of
the wetland crossing. Collars shall be
installed per state standards.
Remove 6"-12" of top soil in
disturbed area. Top soil to
be placed on fabric and
replaced upon completion.
Figure 10
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTWCLTW10+0011+0010+0011+00MERRICK
12" Waterline to be
installed under storm pipe
Ex. 24" CMP
Ex. 3.5"
Gas Main
Ex. Overhead
Electric
Prop. 15' CLT
Water Easement
20 400
Scale: 1" = 20'
Wetland OW
(Surveyed)
Remove 6"-12" of top soil in
disturbed area. Top soil to
be placed on fabric and
replaced upon completion.
Proposed anti-seep collar to be installed
at the downstream and upstream side of
the wetland crossing. Collars shall be
installed per state standards.
Temporary access to corridor to be
reestablished with native species.
Permanent maintenance easement to be
reseeded with native stabilization mix.
Roadside
Ditch
Figure 11
585
590
595
600
605
610
615
620
625
585
590
595
600
605
610
615
620
625
L50 L40 L30 L20 L10 0 R10 R20 R30 R40 R50
7.8'
9' (Width Varies)
Temporary Access Corridor
580
585
590
595
600
605
610
580
585
590
595
600
605
610
23+7524+00 25+00 26+00 27+0027+25
Top of Bank
(STA: 26+28)
Top of Bank
(STA: 25+97)
55 LF 20" Steel Encasement Pipe
ASTM A139 Grade B, 0.25" thickness
Vertical 45° RJ DIP Bend
STA: 25+73
Vertical 45° RJ DIP Bend
STA: 25+82
Vertical 45° RJ DIP Bend
STA: 26+45
Vertical 45° RJ DIP Bend
STA: 26+56
Bore Pit
47'x30'x15'
Receiving Pit
41'x26'x13'
Existing Grade
27+00 27+5023+75 24+00
136' Temporary Access
3'
MERRICK
Proposed 8" PVC Waterline
INV @ Sta. 24+50 = 601.34
Existing Grade
Temporary access corridor to be reestablished with
native species. Permanent maintenance easement
to be reseeded with native stabilization mix.
Clear Creek Profile
STA: 24+00 TO 27+50
Proposed anti-seep collar to be
installed at the downstream
and upstream side of the
wetland crossing. Collars shall
be installed per state standards
Prop 12"
Waterline
Clear Creek Section
STA: 24+50
Figure 12
625
630
635
640
625
630
635
640
9+7510+00 10+509+75 10+00
3'
47'
Temporary Access
L50 L40 L30 L20 L10 0 R10 R20 R30 R40 R50
615
620
625
630
635
640
645
650
615
620
625
630
635
640
645
650
3.9'
10' (Width Varies)
Temporary Access Corridor
MERRICK
Wetland OW Profile
STA: 9+75 TO 10+50
Proposed anti-seep collar to be installed
at the downstream and upstream side
of the wetland crossing. Collars shall be
installed per state standards
Existing GradeProp 12"
Waterline
Proposed 8" PVC Waterline
INV @ Sta. 10+50 = 629.95
Existing Grade
Temporary access corridor to be reestablished with
native species. Permanent maintenance easement
to be reseeded with native stabilization mix.
Wetland OW Section
STA: 10+25
Figure 13
5
0
5
0
5
0
5
0
600
605
610
615
620
625
630
635
600
605
610
615
620
625
630
635
4+00 5+00 6+00 7+00 8+00
Top of Bank
(STA: 5+42)
Vertical 22.5° RJ DIP Bend
STA: 5+57
Vertically Deflect
as Needed
Vertical 22.5° RJ DIP Bend
STA: 5+20
35'x20'x10'
Bore Pit
30 LF 16" Steel Encasement Pipe
ASTM A139 Grade B, 0.25" thickness
Proposed GradeExisting Grade
8" WM
(5' Minimum Cover)
(STA: 5+02)
Begin RJDIP
(STA: 7+91)
Begin RJDIP
-
1
0
.
0
0%
6.32
%
3.66%
Top of Bank
(STA: 5+30)
Vertically Deflect
as Needed (STA: 5+75)
End RJDIP
35'x20'x10'
Receiving Pit
MERRICK
Access Rd Profile
STA: 4+00 TO 8+00
Figure 14
Jurisdictional Determination Jurisdictional
Determination Information
Drawn By: Reviewed By:NRN LSR DATE: 7/12/18 Updated 1/17/19 FIGURE NO. BRIEF ROAD Mecklenburg Co., NC DELINEATION MAP – WATERS OF THE U.S. EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION WETLAND C -0.105 ac PERENNIAL STREAM B -1,176 lf CLEAR CREEK -2,114 lf PROPERTY BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS 1 2 3 4 6 7 5 8 9 10 11-12 USACE WETAND FORM C USACE UPLAND FORM DP1 NCDEQ STREAM FORM B NCDEQ STREAM FORM D NCDEQ STREAM FORM A ***NCDEQ VERIFICATION 8/28/18*** ***USACE VERIFICATION 1/17/19*** INTERMITTENT STREAM D/DD -459 lf WETLAND MW -0.029 ac INTERMITTENT STREAM A -271 lf FP WETLAND -0.021 AC 15
FIGURE NO.
16
BRIEF ROAD
Mecklenburg Co., NC
͑
͑

DELINEATION MAP
Proposed Utility Corridor
-WATERS OF THE U.S.-
EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY
SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION
͑
DATE:

10/23/18
Updated 1/17/19
Drawn By:
LSR NRN
Reviewed By:
APPROXIMATE
PROJECT BOUNDARY
CULVERT
WETLAND OS
-0.246 ac
Clear Creek
-253 lf
***NCDEQ VERIFICATION 8/28/18***
APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF
PROPOSED UTILITY CORRIDOR
WETLAND OW
0.009 ac
***USACE VERIFICATION 1/17/19***
13
14
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18
NON-JURISDICTIONAL GULLY – PHOTO 1
NON-JURISDICTIONAL GULLY – PHOTO 2
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18
NON-JURISDICTIONAL SWALE – PHOTO 3
NON-JURISDICTIONAL SWALE – PHOTO 4
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18
NON-JURISDICTIONAL SWALE – PHOTO 5
NON-JURISDICTIONAL SWALE – PHOTO 6
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18
MARGINAL INTERMITTENT STREAM D –
PHOTO 7
INTERMITTENT STREAM A – PHOTO 8
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18
PERENNIAL STREAM B – PHOTO 9
CLEAR CREEK – PHOTO 10
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18
WETLAND C – PHOTO 11
WETLAND C – PHOTO 12
Brief Road
Mecklenburg Co., NC – 7/12/18

WETLAND OS – PHOTO 13
WETLAND OW – PHOTO 14
Threatened & Endangered Species Report Threatened & Endangered Species
Report
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For Brief Road Property – Arlington Church Road
Corridor
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
November 7, 2018
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
222
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Brief Road Property (11 .2 acres) is located just north of Brief Road and
just east of Arlington Church Road in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. It
can be found on the Midland USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map; latitude is
35.1941 N, longitude is 81.6037 W. The site is primarily covered with
successional woods; open pasture land; numerous dirt roads and trails; and is
disturbed throughout. The topography is gently to moderately sloped grading
into flat floodplain of Clear Creek. The elevation ranges from 600 to 730 ft. Also
included in the study is the Arlington Church Road corridor as indicated on the
maps in Figures 1-6. The area considered was approximately 50 feet on either
side of the roadway from the site tie in extending northwest to Bartlett Road.
(Figure 1).
Figure 1:
118.2
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
3333
METHODOLOGY:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/mecklenburg.html 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
during the week of August 6, 2018
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Mecklenburg County
County: Mecklenburg, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on August 6, 2018
Group Name Status Record Status
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona
decorata)
Endangered Current
Invertebrate Rusty-patched Bumble Bee
(Bombus affinis)
Endangered Historic
Vascular Plants Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea
laevigata)
Endangered Current
Vascular Plants Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii)
Endangered Current
Vascular Plants Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii)Endangered Current
Vertebrate Northern Long-Eared Bat (Myotis
septentrionalis)
Threatened Probable/Potential
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus)
Protected under the Bald
and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
Current
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
444
Three plant species with federal protection were included in the survey efforts:
Schweinitz’s Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally
Endangered, is typically found in open habitats which historically have
been maintained by wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most
occurrences are limited to roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility
rights-of-way (ROW).
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 michauxii), 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).
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
5555
RESULTS:
The site is primarily covered with successional woods; open crop field near Clear
Creek; numerous dirt roads and trails; and is disturbed throughout. The
topography is gently to moderately sloped grading into flat floodplain of Clear
Creek. The elevation ranges from 600 to 730 ft. Also included in the study is the
Arlington Church Road corridor as indicated on the maps in Figures 1-6. The
area considered was approximately 50 feet on either side of the roadway from
the site tie in extending northwest to Bartlett Road. There is a small overhead
power line along the Arlington Church Road corridor, and also along the property
edge on Brief Road. Much of the roadside habitat is maintained by mowing.
Much of the site is covered with a successional forest that is composed of mixed
pines and hardwoods on the uplands grading into a bottomland forest on the
floodplain of Clear Creek. Some of the largest trees are over 2 ft. in diameter,
with the average diameter at breast height (DBH) at 12”. Canopy trees include
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda), Shortleaf Pine (P. echinata), Virginia Pine (P.
virginiana ), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), American Ash (Fraxinus
americana), White Oak (Quercus alba), Northern Red Oak (Q. rubra), Southern
Red Oak (Q. falcata), Black Oak (Q. velutina), Willow Oak (Q. phellos), Post Oak
(Q. stellata), Shagbark Hickory (Carya ovata), Mockernut Hickory (C. tomentosa),
Pignut Hickory (C. glabra), Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Cottonwood
(Populus deltoides), and Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). The subcanopy
contains Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), American Beech (Fagus
grandifolia), Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), American Holly (Ilex opaca), Red
Maple (Acer rubrum), Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), Flowering
Dogwood (Cornus florida), Hackberry (Celtis laevigata), Redbud (Cercis
canadensis), Red Mulberry (Morus rubra), Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica), Winged
Elm (Ulmus alata), and Black Cherry (Prunus serotina). The shrub layer is
dominated by Autumn Olive (Elaeagnus umbellata).Additional shrub species
present include Spicebush (Lindera benzoin), Blueberry (Vaccinium sp.), Paw
Paw (Asimina triloba) and Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense). Vines present are
Catbrier (Smilax spp.), Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Crossvine
(Bignoinia capreolata), Trumpet Creeper (Campsis radicans), Virginia Creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), and Poison Ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans). The herb layer is sparse on the drier uplands and
slopes, becoming denser on the lower slopes and drainages, and includes
Christmas Fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), Crane-fly Orchid (Tipularia
discolor), Spotted Wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata), Dayflower (Commelina
sp.), and Grapefern (Botrychium sp.). Additional herbs observed in the more
mesic area near Clear Creek includes River Cane (Arundinaria gigantea),
Japanese Stilt Grass (Microstegium vimineum), River Oats (Chasmanthium
latifolium), False Nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), and Knotweed (Polygonum sp.).
The disturbed, open roadsides and transitional areas along the tree lines, and
farm road edges are dominated by planted Fescue (Festuca sp.) with mixed
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
6666
shrubs, vines and herbs that typically occur in this habitat. At the time of the site
evaluation the small power line right-of-way along Arlington Church Road had
been partially sprayed with herbicide. Woody species present are small tree
saplings of Pines, Sweet-gum and Tulip Poplar, and shrubs of Blackberry (Rubus
sp.), Russian Olive, Chinese Privet, Smooth Sumac (Rhus glabra), Winged
Sumac (Rhus copallina), and Groundsel Tree (Baccharis halimifolia). Herbs
present are Johnson Grass (Sorghum halepense), Plume Grass (Erianthus
contortus), Broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), Love Grass (Eragrostis sp.),
Dog Fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata),
St. John’s Wort (Hypericum sp.), Queen Anne’s Lace (Daucus carota), Wingstem
(Verbesina alternifolia), Pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), Common Milkweed
(Asclepias tuberosus), Rabbit Tobacco (Gnapthalium obtusifolium), Tickseed
(Coreopsis major), Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.),
Beggars Ticks (Desmodium sp.), and Thoroughwort (Eupatorium sp.).
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
All potential habitats for Schweinitz’s Sunflower, Michaux’s Sumac and
Smooth Coneflower along the roadsides and woods edges were examined
and none of these species were present.
There is no Bald Eagle habitat on the site. No Bald Eagles were observed
during the site review.
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 identified
within this basin. No individuals were observed during the survey nor
would any be expected on-site.
Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office’s website
(http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/project_review/NLEB_in_WNC.html) it
appears that the site meets the “exempt” criteria which requires no further
action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the Northern
Long-eared Bat.
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 it’s Historic Range, and as such, Section 7
consultation is not needed. WEPG concludes that Rusty-patched Bumble
Bee is not present.
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
7777
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,
_________________
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist
November 7, 2018
Brief Road Property / Arlington Church Road Corridor
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
8888
Curriculum Vitae for:
Lisa R. Gaffney
Biologist / Botanist
B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and natural resource biologist, and has
conducted field work and investigative studies covering thousands of cumulative acres in
both North and South Carolina since 1996, including:
Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 1997-1998. Organized,
directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
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 schweinitzii).
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.