20050416 Ver 1_Complete File_20040304

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 9, 2005
DW Q # 05-0416
Mecklenburg County
WAIVER of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Darin Peine ??Q?? D
City of Charlotte, Stgrmwater Services p R i!
600 East Fourth St.
Charlotte, NC 28202 MAY i Z0?5
Subject: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Project DENR ?sj TSB
*WM Dear Mr. Peine:
Your application for a 401 Water Quality Certification for the subject project in Mecklenburg
County was received in the Division of Water Quality's Central Office on March 7, 2005. According to
the Environmental Management Commission rules [15A NCAC 2H .0507 (A)], if DWQ does not take
final action (approval/denial) or has not objected in writing to the project within 60 days of receipt of
the application, the Certification is waived. Therefore, because 60 days has elapsed since receipt of
the application, the requirement for a 401 Water Quality Certification for your plans to impact waters
as described in you March 7, 2005 application materials has been waived.
If your development plans change or additional impact occurs that are not included in the original
application, this waiver is no longer valid and a 401 Water Quality Certification is required.
If you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Alan Johnson in the Mooresville Regional Office
at 704-663-1699 or Ms. Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,
i
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville
Cyndi Karoly, Wetlands Unit
David Caldwell, Mecklenburg County
Greg Antemann
Central Files
i Noy` Carolina
Ntara!!y
i
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Ave., Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet h2o.enr.state.nc.us FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
i
i
Date: 3/10/05
DWQ#: 05-0416
County: Mecklenburg
To:
From:
Triage Check List
Project Name: City of Charlotte/Hubbard Rd Sidewalk
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer?Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond n11
Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check 'drawings for accuracy
Alan Johnson, Mooresville Regional Office
60-day Processing Time: 3/7/05 to5/5/05
FIL
Cyndi Karoly Telephone : [phone]
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
consistent with pre-application meetings?
impact concern

Is the
Comments: As per our discussion regarding revision of the triage and delegation processes,
please review the attached file. Note that you are the first reviewer, so this file will need to be
reviewed for administrative as well as technical details. If you elect to place this project on hold,
please ask the applicant to provide your requested information to both the Central Office in
Raleigh as well as the Asheville Regional Office. As we discussed, this is an experimental, interim
procedure as we slowly transition to electronic applications. Please apprise me of any
complications you encounter, whether related to workload, processing times, or lack of a "second
reviewer" as the triage process in Central had previously provided. Also, if you think of ways to
improve this process, especially so that we can plan for the electronic applications, let me know.
Thanks!
550 EAST WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE, NC 28273
• OFFICE: 704-527-1177
O ' 04 16-
Ca .Qiina Wetland Services FAX: [phone]
¦- V. 4,11W. C6NS-INC. NET
Mr. R
North
Wetla
23211
Subj
March 1, 2005
Dorney
irolina Division of Water Quality
x/401 Unit 1
?f
ibtree Blvd., Suite 250
NC 27604
Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to
Nationwide Permit No. 14 L -
City of Charlotte ?
h1 R $;
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
Dear
Dorney:

The City of Charlotte is submitting a Pre-Construction Notification pursuant to
Water Quality Certification No. 3404. The Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement
Project located in Charlotte, North Carolina, along Hubbard Road between Mallard
Creek Road and Sugar Creek Road (Attachment A - Figures 1 and 2). The purpose
of this project is to install new sidewalks along this section of Hubbard Road as well
as widen sections of the road throughout the project corridor in order to provide safer
vehicular and pedestrian traffic traveling between Sugar Creek Road and Mallard
Creek Road. Total permanent impacts will equal approximately 37 linear feet of
Perennial stream channel (Stream C), 236 linear feet of Important Intermittent stream
channel (Stream A), 0.007 acre of Unimportant Intermittent channel (Streams A and
C), and 0.047 acre of open water (Pond A). On behalf of the City of Charlotte, CWS
is submitting a Pre-Construction Notification application with attachments in
accordance with Water Quality Certification No. 3404 (Attachment B). We are
sending iyou seven copies of this submittal in accordance with the notification
requirements for Water Quality Certification No. 3404, effective March 18, 2002.
If you have any questions concerning this project, please contact Darrin Peine at
[e-mail] or [phone]. Thank you for your attention to this
matter.
Sincerely,
Gregg C. Ante
w
Principal Biologist
Ctl?i NT ? I .. ?
J /??s? Iti.. H
CI IARI:O'I _F, 1NC 9 CI IAPI%I. 1111J., NC • COLUMBIA. SC
550 EAST WESTINGHOUSE BLVD.
CHARLOTTE. NC 23273
OFFICE: 704-527-1177
FAX. [phone] 050416
VV=.. CWS-INC. NET Pre-Construction Notification Pursuant to
Nationwide Permit No. 14
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
Carolina Wetland Services Project No. 2004-0859
March 1, 2005
Prepared For:
The City of Charlotte Storm Water Services
600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
[phone]
Prepared By:
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28273
[phone]
CIIAIZI,0'I"I1:,\C • CIIAPFL Illta., NC • COLUMBIA. SC
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005
Nationwide Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0859

Table of C?ntents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 1
Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 2
Current Land Use ............................................................................................................................... 2
Jurisdictional Delineation .................................................................................................................. 2
Agency Correspondence ........................................................................................................................ 4
Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................................. 4
' Protected Species .............. .............................................................................................................. 4
Purpose an Need for the Project .......................................................................................................... 5
Avoidance and Minimization ................................................................................................................. 5
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters ............................................................................................ 5
Compensatory Mitigation ...................................................................................................................... 5
List of
Attachment !A - Figure 1. USGS Site Location Map
Attachment?A - Figure 2. NRCS Soil Survey
AttachmentA - Figure 3. USGS 2002 Color Aerial Photograph
AttachmentIA - Figure 4. Wetland Boundary Survey
Attachment!B - Pre-Construction Notification Application - Nationwide Permit No. 14
Attachment IC - Routine On-Site Data Forms
Attachment?D - Stream Classification Forms
AttachmentiE - Request for Jurisdictional Determination Form
Attachment,F - Agency Correspondence
Attachment G - Representative Photographs
Attachment ;H - Figures 5a and 5b. Proposed Impacts
i
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005
Nationwide Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0559
Executi ve Summary
'

' The Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project is located in Charlotte, North Carolina, along
Hubbard Road between Mallard Creek Road and Sugar Creek Road (Attachment A - Figure 1).
The purpose! of this project is to install new sidewalks along Hubbard Road. Charlotte Storm
Water Servi?es (CSWS) has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide
404/401 permitting services for this project.
' The results f the on-site field investigation indicate that there are four jurisdictional stream
channels (Steams A, B, C, and D), one jurisdictional wetland (Wetland AA) and one
jurisdictional open water area (Pond A) located within the project corridor
(Attachment A -Figure 4). CSWS is requesting written verification of the jurisdictional
determination of the on-site jurisdictional features. Unavoidable impacts to Important
Intermittent ? trealn A total approximately 236 linear feet (no single crossing exceeds 1501f) and
impacts to Pend A total approximately 0.047 acre. Unavoidable impacts to Perennial Stream C
' total approximately 37 linear feet. These impacts are a result of new rip rap and culvert
placement a d fill activities (Attachment H - Figures 5a and 5b). On behalf of CSWS, CWS is
submitting a Pre-Construction Notification application with attachments in accordance with
' Nationwide Permit General Condition No. 13, pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 14, and Water
Quality Cert I ification No. 3404 (Attachment B).
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005
Nationwide Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0859

Existing Conditions
' The Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project is located in Charlotte, North Carolina, along
Hubbard Rgad between Mallard Creek Road and Sugar Creek Road (Attachment A - Figure 1).
The purpos? of this project is to install new sidewalks along Hubbard Road. Charlotte Storm
Water Services (CSWS) has contracted Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide
' 404/401 pezlnitting services for this project. The following sections describe the existing
conditions of the project area.
r rrent and Use
C
u
The current land use for the project area is residential and is comprised of maintained lawns,
driveways, and adjacent wooded areas. Dominant vegetation within the project area consists of
Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), winged elm
' (Ulmus alata), and common blackberry (Rubus argutus). According to the Soil Survey of
Mecklenburg County l, on-site soils consist of Monacan soils (MO). Monacan soils are typically
found in flood plain areas, are poorly drained and exhibit high water capacity.

' I
Jurisdictional Delineation
On December 7 and 13, 2004, CWS's Ron Johnson, WPIT and Matt Jenkins investigated on-site
jurisdictional waters of the U.S 2 using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) - Routine On-
site Determination Method. This method is defined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineatio Manual 3 There was one jurisdictional wetland area (Wetland AA) identified within
the project corridor. Routine On-Site Data Forms representative of Wetland AA as well as on-site
I
non jurisdictional upland areas have been enclosed (Attachment C). Jurisdictional waters of the
' U.S. were classified according to recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)4 and
I
USACE guidance. NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms and USACE Stream Quality Assessment
' Worksheets for Streams A - D have been enclosed. The USGS aerial photograph
(Attachment A - Figure 3) taken in January, 2002, depicts field conditions generally consistent with
' the December 2004 site visit.
I United State Department of Agriculture, 1980. Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
2 "Jurisdictional waters of the U.S." includes essentially all surface waters such as: all navigable waters and their tributaries, all
interstate wate}s and their tributaries, all wetlands adjacent to these waters, and all impoundments of these waters.
3 Environmental Laboratory. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
4 North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1999. Stream Classification Method. Version 2.0.
'• I 2
I
' Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005
Nationwide! Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0859
The results,of the on-site field investigation indicate that there are four jurisdictional stream
channels (Streams A, B, C, and D), one jurisdictional wetland (Wetland AA) and one jurisdictional
open water area (Pond A) located within the project corridor (Attachment A - Figure 4). The on-
site jurisdi tional stream channels include Doby Creek and two unnamed tributaries to Doby Creek.
' Doby Creep is part of the Yadkin River basin (HU# 03040105)5 and is classified as "Class C"
waters by the NCDWQ. CSWS is requesting written verification of the jurisdictional determination
of the on-site jurisdictional features (Attachment E).
Stream A ws parallel to Hubbard Road until its confluence with Doby Creek
(Attachment A - Figure 4). Stream A was evaluated to be Important Intermittent and exhibited a
continuous bed and bank, moderate sinuosity, and substrate consisting of fine sand to small pebbles.
This reach had moderate, persistent flow with an average bankfull width of four to six feet.
' Biological sampling within Stream A resulted in a weak presence of filamentous algae
(Attachment D - SCP 1). Important Intermittent Stream A scored 26.5 out of a possible 71 points on
the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form and 43 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream
Quality Assessment Worksheet. A photograph of Stream A has been provided
(Attachment G - Photograph A).
Stream B converges with Important Intermittent Stream A south of Farlow Road. Stream B was
evaluated t?I be Unimportant Intermittent and showed weak riffle-pool sequences and a moderate
bed and bank (Attachment D - SCP4). Unimportant Intermittent Stream B scored a 15 out of a
possible 71 points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form and 30 out of a possible 100 points
' on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet.
Stream C (Ii oby Creek) flows perpendicular to Hubbard Road until its off-site convergence with
' Mallard Creek (Attachment A - Figure 4). Stream C was evaluated to be Perennial and displayed a
strong continuous bed and bank, weak sinuosity, and substrate consisting of silt to fine sand. This
' reach exhibited strong, persistent flow with an average bankfull width of fifteen feet. Biological
sampling within Stream C resulted in a weak presence of crayfish and filamentous algae
' (Attachment D - SCP3). Perennial Stream C scored 29.5 out of a possible 71 points on the
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form and 47 out of a possible 100 points on the USACE Stream
' Quality Assessment Worksheet. A photograph of Stream C has been enclosed
(Attachmelt G - Photograph B).
s "Hur is the Hydrologic Unit Code. U.S. Geological Survey, 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map, State of North Carolina.
3
i
i
' Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005
Nationwide Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0859
Stream D 's located south of Farlow Road between Haybridge Road and Morsey Court. Stream D
was evaluIted to be Perennial and exhibited a strong continuous bed and bank, moderate flow, and
' moderate riffle-pool sequences. Biological sampling resulted in a weak presence of macrobenthic
invertebrates and a moderate amount of amphibians (Attachment D - SCP5). Perennial Stream D
' scored 33 II ut of a possible 71 points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form and 43 out of a
possible 1Q0 points on the USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet. Due to the existence of
r sidewalks already at this crossing, Stream D will not be included in construction activities.
Wetland AA is contiguous with Perennial Stream A and is approximately 0.066 acre in size
I
(Attachment A - Figure 4). Dominant vegetation includes soft stem rush (Juncus effusus), black
willow (S'alix nigra), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), and seed box
e
(Ludwigia I l lternifolia). This area exhibited low chroma, Monacan soils (2.5YR 4/1), with mottles
' (7.5YR 4/6drainage patterns, and soil saturation within the upper 12 inches of the soil surface
(AttachmelIt C - DP 1). Photographs of Wetland AA have been enclosed as Photographs C and D
' (Attachment G).
' Pond A is located adjacent to Stream A and Hubbard Road and is approximately 0.135 acre in size.
Pond A is j risdictional due to its surface water connections to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. In
addition, it appears that Pond A was created by damming Stream A.
' Agency Correspondence
Cultural Resources
A letter wa i forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on December 9, 2004 to
determine t? a presence of any areas of architectural, historic, of archaeological significance that
would be affected by the project. In a letter dated December 22, 2004 the SHPO stated that they
are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by the project" (Attachment F).
Protected Species
A letter was forwarded to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on
' December 9,I 2004 to determine the presence of any federally-listed, candidate endangered,
threatened species or critical habitat located within the project area. In a letter dated December
I
13, 2004 the NCNHP stated that they have "no record of rare species, significant natural
communities) or priority natural areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area"
i
(Attachment ?).
4
M
h
5
arc
1, 200
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Nationwide Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0859

Purpose and Need for the Project
?
The purpose of this project is to install new sidewalks along this section of Hubbard Road as
well as wid n sections of the road throughout the project corridor. This project will provide
1

' lar and pedestrian traffic traveling between Sugar Creek Road and Mallard Creek
safer vehic
Road. This area has a large number of apartments which is creating the need for these traffic
improveme L due to the higher density of residents in the area.
Avoida
I nce and Minimization
Impacts to n-site jurisdictional waters of the U.S. have been reduced to the maximum extent
practicable. The project design has also limited the length of culvert placement to the minimum
length neces sary and according to current City design standards. Proper sediment and erosion
' control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
I
Propos d Impacts to jurisdictional Waters
Unavoidable impacts to Important Intermittent Stream A will total approximately 236 linear feet.
' 178 linear feet of these impacts involve new culvert placement and 10 linear feet of rip rap
placement for two stream crossings at the Wade E Morgan Road - Hubbard Road intersection.
Approximately 48 linear feet of Stream A will also be impacted as a result of fill activities adjacent
I
to Pond A. Approximately 111 linear feet (0.005 acre) of Unimportant Intermittent Stream A will
' be impacted due to fill. Unavoidable impacts to Unimportant Intermittent Stream B will total
approximately 20 linear feet (0.002 acre) due to a culvert extension and associated rip rap apron.
' Impacts to Peerennial Stream C north of the Wade E Morgan Road intersection will total
approximate ly 37 linear feet due to a culvert extension and associated rip rap apron at the outfall.
Open water impacts to Pond A will total approximately 0.047 acre due to fill activities
(Attachment H - Figures 5a and 5b). On behalf of CSWS, CWS is submitting a Pre-Construction
' Notification application with attachments in accordance with Nationwide Permit General Condition
No. 13, and pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 14 (Attachment B).
Compe nsatory Mitigation
' Constructio of this project will limit the amount of stream impacts to less than 150 linear feet of
perennial st ream per crossing and limit open water impacts to less than 0.10 acre, therefore no
I
' mitigation i
currently being proposed.
s,

Approximate Scale 1" = 2000'
Reference: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map Series, Derita Quadrangle, North Carolina, dated 1996.
Carolina Wetland. Services
5000 Nations Crossing Road, Suite 230
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Figure 1. USGS Site Location Map
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2004-0859
PREPARED BY?? I DATE 12/ C/'Oi4 I CC. I?IKcA- 1 llAZ . '! ?D I

lv
En ..? ,?
CeB2 CeD2 _ P.E
M WkB En8 -VJkEj
e6
?., w ! -. 1, :r MeD 4 ?.._. WkB
Ent)
Me
o, k CeB2 cPp? r ep1 WkD F? fi; ?? 0
e
- ?OQ MeQ
Q3 Hee a K?. Q9 W
Ce62 ' ?Enp) Ce-- _ a
Me6 "
t Griffith Lakfs
?l? / CeDT 1?
CeD2 CeB2 i..
iy and f / HeB j/_ / ?` De ` g WkE t
Pa6 -L cj- EnB PaE ?, v ? ?; f? f ?ti1
W 7 CPD2
k c © _NeB ???
E - /?' CeB2 , En
`4 kB"O Ce82 "-,?
EnB V n' ?: ?" V
Wk6
z ^? O' lye -. \V a8
Jard
HeB' 2e ?a4
k \ t Ce 2, e
ceo2
Ce82' i j? 3 :?_ ?aGt k
i CeD2
CeD2 f?
\ k4•//? ?.
J„
? /f \V ? ?, /% ? ? •?: m ! HeB c, G -A....
r - ?.?' _ ro erg - & •.:?/ ?, m Wk
f- Ce va ?VkB ?? ?r?"? CUB 2. _
CeB2, o nj
?- \ CeB2,
i{ V VaB
:
r'
a;?-
i "
HeB
CeD2
PaE Ep0 S CeD2 ??. CeD2 - HeB - ' CeB
J/
DB EBB CuB / ' t cy I 'J'
ry.
CeB2
CeB2
g ..
Ce 2 `ua CeB2 t
r
Approximate Scale 1'j = 2000'
Reference: NRCS Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, Sheet No. 4, dated 1980.
Carolina Wetland Services Figure 2. NRCS Soil Survey
CWS 51,000 Nations Crossing Road, Suite 230 Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
'
c e harlotte, North Carolina 28217 Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2004-0859
PREPARED ?G. I I DATE ? ' 9 o? I CHECKED? G a I DATE
06 (( • Q? I
Approximate Scale l ',I = 2000'
Reference: Aerial Photograph Provided by Mecklenburg County Land Use and Environmental Services, Dated 2002
Carolina Wetland Services Figure 3. Aerial Photograph of Project Vicinity
CWS $000 Nations Crossing Road, Suite 230 Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217 Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2004-0859
PREPARED BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE
/UIc.?' I 12-?-04 'e? 4A , . I',.oc-
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL; WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED AND SURVEYED WITH GPS
BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON DECEMBER 7 AND 13, 2004.
JURISDICTIONAL FEATU SHAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.

Perenl iol Stream C
A._
ob Cr ?

1

1 5CP2
1
Pond A - 0.135 ocre

' Im
? or ant Intermitten
I eon

Q Q

, L J
?Wetlon AA 0.0 c e
Rd
Q
E.bliq ,?
I
Nt
0 0
0
0
o.
0
oC?
1
l,S
G
6
a
0
A
a

C
b
o?
`I
i
C
PFM
B
e a.a
O Un'?QQ,ortant Intermittent
' Str?arr? A
LEGEND
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
1 JURISD CTIONAL WETLAND AREA
-©-1 PHOTO LOCATION AND DIRECTION
APPROXIMATE SCALE: I"= 200'
I

LrJ
Carolina Wetland Services
I ? ms
J S 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
REFERENCE: GIS LAYERS PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY LAND USE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, DATED 2002.
Figure 4. Wetland Boundary Survey
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2004-0859
PREPARED B DATE C CKED DATE
Mc- 2.2.OS ua. z-l4 •ar^
Hubb d Road Sidewalk Improvement Project } March 1, 2005
Nation vide Permit No. 14 Project No. 2004-0359
1
i
Attachment B - Pre-Construction Notification Application
Nationwide Permit No. 14
j
t
z
t
I
r
i
Office Use Only:
USAGE Action
If any particular i
leaving the space
1.
II.
No.
DWO No.
Form Version April 2001
is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Se tion 404 Permit
? Se?hon 10 Permit
® 40? Water Quality Certification
? Ri iparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
i
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
Nationwide Permit No. 14
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
i
Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: City of Charlotte Storm Water Services. Contact: Mr. Damn M. Peine
Mailing Address: 600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Telepone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: dpeine(a,ci.charlotte.nc.us
2. Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:,
Mailing Address:
Tele hone Number:
E-mail 1 Address:
i
I
Page 1 of 7
Fax Number:
IIf. Project nformation
i 1. Name of project: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A (linear tract)
4. Location
County: Mecklenburg Nearest Town: Charlotte
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From Charlotte, travel north on I-
77 and take the I-85 exit (exit 13A). Travel 3 miles and take the Sugar Creek Road exit (exit
41). Turn left onto Sugar Creek Road and travel approximately 1.5 miles to Mallard Creek
Road. ! Turn right onto Mallard Creek Road, travel 1 mile and turn left onto Hubbard Road
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N35° 19' 22" W80° 47' 52"
(Note F If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Descri be the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
The existing land use of the project area is residential with adjacent wooded areas.
7. Property size (acres): N/A linear tract
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Mallard Creek
9. River Basin: Yadkin River
(Note this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River B
asin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/admin/maps/.)
I
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of this project is to install new
sidewalks along this section of Hubbard Road as well as widen sections of the road
throughout the project corridor. This project will provide safer vehicular and pedestrian
trattic traveling between Sugar Creek Road and Mallard Creek Road. This area has a large
numbe of apartments which is creating the need for these traffic improvements due to the
area.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: A trackhoe and typical
excavation equipment will be used for this project.
i
12. Descr
mainl
the land use in the vicinity of this project: The land use surrounding theproject is
sidential with adjacent wooded areas.
Page 2 of 7
i
IV. Prior Project History
There is no prior histor
V. Future Pro iect Plans
no future
site.
this site.
VI. Propose Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
1. Wetland Impacts
I
Wetland Impact Located within
Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Area of Impact
(acres) 100-year
Floodplain** Nearest Stream Type of Wetland***
indicate on ma
( p) (yes/no) (linear feet)
N/A
i.tst eaca impact Teparateiy ana taennry temporary impacts. impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://"w.fema.gov.•
** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0.066 acre
Total area of wetland impact proposed: N/A
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name" of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on map) (linear feet) Before Impact (please specify)

Stream A Culvert Placement 178 if UT to Doby Creek 3-5' Important
Intermittent
Stream A Rip Rap 10 if UT to Doby Creek 3-5' Important
Intermittent
Stream A Fill 48 if UT to Doby Creek 3-5' Important
Intermittent
Stream A Fill 111 if UT to Doby Creek 3-5' Unimportant
Intermittent
Stream B Culvert Placement 10 if UT to Doby Creek 1-2' Unimportant
Intermittent
Stream B Rip Rap 10 if UT to Doby Creek 1-2' Unimportant
Intermittent
Page 3 of 7

Stream C (Culvert Placement 23 if Doby Creek 15' Perennial
Stream C Rip Rap 141f Doby Creek 15' Perennial
List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can t be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream name li stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 404 linear feet
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S. N/A
Open Water Impact
Site Number I
(indicate on ma) i
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
i
Pond A Fill 0.047 N/A Pond
List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
includ?d above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
DescnTe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw- own valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local s iormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A
Expected pond surface area: N/A
' VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Im
dictional water:
to the maximum exten
practicable. The project desigm has also limited the length of culvert placement to the
minimum len!th necessary and according to current City design standards. Proper sediment
and erosion control measures will be used to minimize disturbances to downstream waters.
Page 4 of 7
I
VIII. Mitigation
Consltruction of this project will limit the amount of stream impacts to less than 150 linear
feet per stream crossing and limit open water impacts to less than 0.10 acre therefore no
mitigation is currently being proposed.
1. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
' will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htin. If
use o the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the f blowing information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Ainount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, d?es the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
' requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: Ifr you are not sure .whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No
i
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
' It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whe her or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Page 5 of 7

Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will th,, project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse) 115A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Sppply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify: )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
' Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipli rs. N/A

Zones (squEnpct are feet) Multiplier
Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
j Total
/.one 1 extenas out su reet perpenafcular from near bank of channel; Gone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or.0260.
N/A I
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe ;impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss Stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Sources of nearby impervious cover include roads. driveways. and rooftops. This project will
cause a slight increase in the impervious coverage of the nroiect area.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewateiF generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Page 6 of 7
II. Viointionzs (DWQ Only)
Is this site in ;violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffet' Rules?
Yes No
' Is this an after-the-fats permit application?
Yes ( j7 No I?
M1. ®tlae Circumstances (Optional):
' It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
cons ction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choos to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work cbedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Consti

Applicaat/,A.gc
(Agent's signa
1
1
1
1
1
s Signature Date
e is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 7 of 7
Hubbard toad Sidewalk Improvement Project
A
Attachment C - Routine Can-Site Data Forms

March 1. 2005

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project Date: 12/13/04
Applicant/Owne : Charlotte Storm Water Services County: Mecklenberg
Investigator(s): Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins State: NC
Do Normal Circu mstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID: Wetland
Is the site signifi cantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a pot ential Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: DPI
If needed explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S e ies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus effusus herb FACW+ 9.
2. Carex sp. herb - 10.
3. Alms serrulata j shrub FACW 11.
4. Carpinus caroli niana tree FAC 12.
5. Salix nigra tree OBL 13.
6. Ludwigia alternifolia herb OBL 14.
7. Cypenrs sp. herb 15.
8. Salixsericea tree OBL 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
100%
Remarks:
All of the domigant
i
plant species are FAC or wetter.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data1(Describe in remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Ae?ial Photographs Primary Indicators:
X Inundated
Other Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
i
X No Recorded Data Available
Water Marks
_X_
_
Drift Lines
Field Observations: _
Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
?- Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surfa ce Water: 0-3 (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) _
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Satu{ ated Soil: <12 (in.) _
FAC-Neutral Test
_
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of we tland h drolo6 are resent.

Routine On-Site Data ?orm
Page 1 of 2
3/1/2005

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Monacan soils Drainage Class poorly-drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup : thermic Fluvaq uentic EntrOChrepts Confirm Mapped Type? Ye No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Ho rizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 2.5YR4/1 7.5YR4/6 few/distinct silt/loam

I

I

Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor _
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime _ Listed on. Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing ,Conditions
Gleyed or ow-Chroma Colors _
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Indicators of hvdric soils are present.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No (Circle
Wetland Hydrology Prel ent? Ye No
(Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
i
Data point is repr
esentative of a jurisdictional wetland area.

Approved by HQUSACE 2192
I
r-,UUL1IIC U11-city Uata Fv :il
1 USL L V1 L
3/1/2005

DATA PORNI
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project Date: 12/13/04
Applicant/Owner Charlotte Storm Water Services County: Mecklenberg
Investigator(s): Ron Johnson and Matt Jenkins State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No
l Community ID: upland
Is the site signific
antly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No Transect ID:
Is the area a pot ntial Problem Area? Yes No Plot ID: DP2
If needed, lex lain on reverse.
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Rubus arguius ! shurb FAC Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9.
2. Solidago sp. herb 10.
3. Carex spp. herb 11.
4. Lonicera japonica vine FAC- 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
50%
Remarks:
50° of the dominant lant species are FAC or wetter.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in remarks):
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits (on leaves)
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
I _
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
_
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indicators of wetland hydrology are p resent.
Routine On-Site Data Fcrm
I
Page 1 of 2
311/2005
SOILS
Map Unit Name
1
(Series and Phase): Monacan soils Drainage Class poorly-drained
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): thermic Flnva gnentiC l utrOChreptS Confirm Mapped Type? Ye No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 B 7.5YR5/6
I N/A N/A silt/loam
I
Histosol Concretions
Histic EpipeI don _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odo r Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moist re Regime _ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List (Inclusions)
Reducing Cp
l nditions _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or L
p w-Chroma Colors _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indicators of hydric soils are present.
I
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes XNo Circle
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (Circle)
Hydric Soils Present? ! Yes Is thi s Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Approved by HQUSACE 2/92
Routine On-Site Data Form Page 2 of 2 3/1/2005
March 1, 2005
I

SCPI - Important Intermittent Stream A
orovement River Basin: Yadkin County: Vlecklenbur2
Named Stream: Doby Creek
rita, NC Longitude: W80o 47' 48" Latitude: N35° 19' 12"
Evaluator(s): RGJ & MLJ
Signature(s): /t;6
'PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner I gree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary. Also, if in the beat professional judgement of the evaluator, the
feature is a man-made ditch and not a modifie natural stream--this rating system should not be used'
Primarv Field Indicators: (Circle . neNumber Per Line)
' 1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence?
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different Fmm Smrrnmdina Teem?
' 4) is The Channel Sinuous'?
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodnlain Present?
8) Is There A Bankfill Bench Present? ® 1 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present?I 0 I ® 3
(*NOTE: IfBed & Bank Caused By Ditchine And WITHOUT Sinuosity Then Score=0*)
10) Is A 2' Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
' On Tooo Man And/Or In Field) P went? Yes=3 Nof
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: 8
1) Is There A Groundwater
' Flow/Discharee Present?
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOI{ POINTS-2_

1 Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 'leak moaerare atrong
2 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 2 1 0
3 Is Perih ton Present? 1 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? 1 2 3
r1U,y111Al' tSlVL UOI !lYUt t.H 1VtC Cut/V t J: o
SeeondarvField Indicators: (CircleOti N11112ber Per Line)
1. Geomornholow
3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Dminaee Way? 0 0.5 0 1.5
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYI NDICA TOR POINTS: 2.5
II. Hvdrolou I Absent Weak Moderate StronZ
I) Is This Year's (Or Last's) LeaElitter 1
Present In Streambed? 1.5 1 0© 0
2) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Debris) Present? 0 0 ] 15
3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 1 0 0.5 i n
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. S` e 0 0.5 QI L5
Last Known Rain? (*NOTE: 11'Ditch hrq'icated lit #9.4bove Skin This Step And #5 Below*)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dt 0 0©. I 1.5
Conditions Or In Growing Season)?
' SECONDARYHYDROLOGY
III Bioloav
POINTS. 5.5

1 Are Fish Present? "euk
0.5 mouerate atrone
1 1.5
2) Are Amphibians Present? 1 OS t 1.5
3) Are AquaticTurtles Present? I 0.5 1 1.5
4) Are Crayfish Present? ® 0.5 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? I 0 U 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? I SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FAC W Mostly FAC Mostly FACU
(* NOTE: If Total Absence Ol'Ail Platjts In Streambed 2 1 0.75 0.5 0
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 2.5
TOTAL POINTS (Primary +Seconda "5 (If Greater 77tan Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least Intermittent)
Mostly UPL
0
Project Name: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Im
DWQProject Number: Nearest
Date: 12/7/04 USGS QUAD: De
Location/Directions: From Charlotte. travel

NCDWO Stream Classification Form SCP2 -Important Intermittent Stream A
Project Name: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement River Basin: Yadkin County: Mecklenburg Evaluator(s): RGJ & MLJ
DWQ Project Number.______L Nearest Named Stream: Dobv Creek Signature(s): /,Jj.-S7-
' Date: 12/7/04 USGS PUAD: Derita, NC Longitude: W80'47' 51" Latitude: N35' 19' 20"
Location/Directions: From Chatlotte, travel north on 1-77 and take the I-85 exit (exit 13A). Travel 3 miles and take the Suoar Creek Road exit (exit
41). Turn left onto Sugar Creekl Road and travel a roximatel 1.5 miles to Mallard Creek Road. Turn right onto Mallard Creek Road travel 1 mile
and turn left onto Hubbard Road.
'PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a ratan-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary. Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the
feature is a man-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this rating system should not be used'
Primarv Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
' 1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Si
2) Is The USDA Texture In
411: alGl JalaVU]:
5) Is Thecret.llAniaActive (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present?
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 2
(*NOTE. It'Bed & Bank Caused By DitchinQAnd WITHOUTSinuosity Then Score=0*)
10) Is A 2id Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Topo Map And/Or In Field) Present? Ye5=3 No:
PRIYIARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 9

11. Hvdrolo2
Absent
Weak
Moderate o
Stron
1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Discharge Present? 0 1 ® 3
' PRI IARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 2
III. Biology I Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? 2 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 2 1 0
' 3) Is Periphyton Present? 0 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? © 1 2 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 7
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle ne Number Per Line)
L Geomorphologv Absent Weak Moderate Strong
' 3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Way? 0 0.5 1.5
SECO,VDARYGEOiVIORPHOLOGYINDICATORPOIVTS: ?S
' 1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
Present In Streambed?
1\ i- l',..I:».....r n- m,...... /rl- n..t,. - T
' 4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs.
Last Known Rain? ('NOTE: IIDitch
0.5
1.5
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 10-1 1 1.5
Conditions Or In Growing Season)? 1
6) Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes 1. N0=0
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS.- 5.5
I
III. Biology Absent Weak Moderate Strong
' 71 Is 1'namentous Algae t'resent. u 10.1 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW ;Mostly FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPL
(*NOTE.- IJ'Total Absence Of All P/atlts In Streambed 2 1 0.75 OS 0 0
As Noted Above Skin This SIeD UNLESS SA VPresent*).
SECONDARYBIOLOGYIVDICATOR POINTS. 0.5
TOTAL POINTS (Primary +Secondary)= 23.5 (If Greater Than Or Etlual To 19 Points The Strewn Is At Least Intermittent)

' NCDWO Stream Classification Form SCP3 - Perennial Stream C
Project Name: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement River Basin: Yadkin County: Mecklenburg Evaluator(s): RGJ & MLJ
DWQ Project Number.. 1 Nearest Named Stream: Mallard Creek Signature(s): AJL,-S
' Date: 12/7/04 USGS UAD: Derita, NC Longitude: W80°47' 52" Latitude: N35° 19' 22"
Location/Direcdo-ns: From Cha lotte, travel north on I-77 and take the I-85 exit (exit 13A). Travel 3 miles and take the Sugar Creek Road exit (exit
11) T- 1A4 -f 6,nor (`r«U P-i -1 r -.] ? ...............,rol.. 1 c ,-;1- r.. NJf 11-A l?ooL D-4 -r- ,:,,1-,..,r,. NXr It....a o,...a .,.,,.,,a , .,.:1,.
' 'PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landol ner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary. Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the
feature is a man-made ditch and not a nodifted natural stream-this rating system should not be used*
Primarv Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
' 1) Is There A Riffle-Pool S:
2) Is The USDA Texture In
a 11 1he Channel Jtnuous'! U 1 2 3
' 5) Is Tltere An Active (Or Relic)
I
Floodolain Present? 0 1 ® 3
6) Is The Channel Braided? ®- 1 2 3
7) Are Recent Alluvial Deposits Present? 0 1 ® 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 0 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 2
/*NnTF• t{'R-4 R. R-Z, /'....oo.t R„ J...t 1VFTrrrlr1T C :...,,...: n. TL.,.. C,.,, ?..-a#1
10) Is A 2" Order Or Greater Channe? (As Indicated
?? ..
PRLVARYGEOMORPHOLOGYINi ICATORPOINTS: 13,
II. Hvdrolozv

1) Is There A Groundwater
Flow/Dischame Present? 0 1 ® 3
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICA TOR POINTS: 2

1 Are Fibrous Roots Present In Streambed? n gun
2 i muerue
1 arrun
0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Streambed? 2 1 0
3 Is Peri 11 ton Present? I 1 2 3
4) Are Bivalves Present? 1 2 3
FALVARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS. 6
Secondarv Field Indicators: (Circle Qne ASunber Per Lute)
I
1) Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitter
4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 0.5
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 0.5 U 1.5
Conditions Or In Growing Season
6) Are Hydric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Yes 1. 1V0=0
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYLVDICATOR POINTS: S
' 7) Is Filamentous Algae Present? 1 0 10.1 1 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPI,
(*.VOTE. I *Total Absence Of All Plants In Streambed 2 1 0.75 0.5 0 0
As Noted Above Skip This Steo UNLESS SAV Present*).
SECONDARY BIOLOGY LVDIC. t TOR POINTS: 1
I TOTAL POINTS Primary +Seconda = 29.5 If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least Intermittent)
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 25

ICP4 - Unimportant Intermittent Stream B
wovement River Basin: Yadkin County: Mecklenburg Evaluator(s): RGJ & MLJ
Named Stream: Mallard Creek Signature(s): /Jj.T
rita. NC Longitude: W80'47'52" Latitude: N35° 19'22"
' Irimarv PLEASE NOTE: Ijevaluator and landownrr agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary. Also, if in the best profession! judgement of 1he evaluator, the
ature is a num-made ditch and not a m nlifledaturaI stream-this rating system should not be used*
Field Indicators: (Circle . e Number Per Line)
' 1)Is?There A Riffle-Pool Sequence?
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed

5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
3) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? 1 ® 1 2 3
'
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 ® 3
'NOTE: 1 Bed & Bank Cartsed B Ditc ineAnd WITHOUTSinuosity Then Score=O*)
10) Is A 2' Order Or Greater Channel ( Indicated
On Topo Map And/Or In Field) Present? Yes=3 NoLM
'
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:
I S
II. Hvdrolo y Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
I
Flow/Discharge Present? 0 n 2 3
PRUTARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOJPOINTS 1
PKINIARY ,UI UL UGY INDI" I UR PUINTS: d
1
Secondarv Field Indicators: (Circle 01I e Muniber Per Line)
1. Geomornhologv
' 3) Does Topogmphy Indicate A
Natural Drainage Way? I ® 0.5 1 15
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOL 0 G Y IrICATOR POINTS. I
' 11. s This Hydrology _ Absent Weak Moderate Strono
l) Is This Years (Or Last's) Leaflitter I
Present In Streambed? 1.5 n 0.5 0
' 4) Is Water In Channel And >43 Hrs. Since 0 0.5 QI 1.5
Last Known Rain? (*NOTE: IfDitch Indicated fit #9 Above Skio This Step And #S Below*)
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 0.5 QI 1.5
Conditions Or In Growing Season)?
' SECONDABYHYDROLOGY
III Biology
' 3) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(* NOTE: IJ'Total Absence OJ'All A
As Noted Above Skin This Step UNL.
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICAI
POINTS: 4

1 Are Fish Present? -.oseur vveah
0.5 -vroaerare orronL
1 1.5
2 Are Amphibians Present? 0.5 1 1.5
3) Are AquaticTunles Present? 0.5 1 1.5
4 Are Crayfish Present? 0.5 1 1.5
5 Are Macrobenthos Present? 0.5 1 1.5
6 Are Iron Oxidizing Bacteria/Fungus Present? 0.5 1 1.5
7) Is Filamentous Algae Present'? 0.5 1 1.5
SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPI,
In Streambed 2 1 0.75 0.5 0 0
SAV Present*).
POINTS: 0
IS (If Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least Intermittent)
DWQProject Number. Nearest
Date: 12/7/04 USGS QUAD: De

L

n Form SCPS - Perennial Stream D
Sidewalk Improvement River Basin: Yadkin County: Mecklenburg Evaluator(s): MLJ & RGJ
_ Nearest Named Stream: Mallard Creek Signature(s): /ice
QUAD: Derita. NC Longitude: W80" 47' 52" Latitude: N35" 19' 22"
-PLEASE .VOTE: if evaluator and Ian ofwner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary. Also, if in the best pnifessionai judgement of the evatuator, the
feature is a man-made ditch and trot a ut ddited natural stream-this rating system should not be used-
Primarv Field Indicators: (Ci cle One Number Per Line)
' I. Geomorpholow Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Riffle-Pool Sequence?i 0 1 ® 3
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Different From Surrounding Terniin? 0 1 ® 3
3) Are Natural Levees Present? ® 1 2 3
4) Is The Channel Sinuous? 0 ®] 2 3
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
Floodplain Present? 0 2 3
8) Is There A Bankfull Bench Present? © 1 2 3
9) Is A Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 I 2
(*NOTE: If Bed & Bank Caused By Ditchine And WITHOUT Sinuositv Then Score=0*)
10) Is A 2 d Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Topo Mao And/Or In Field) Present? Yes No=0
' PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGY)NDICA TOR POINTS. 13
II. Hvdrologv Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1) Is There A Groundwater
F1owiDischarge Present?
0
1
3
PR1,11ARYHYDROLOGYLVDICAr POINTS., 2
111. Biolo2v
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Stron,2
1) Are Fibrous, Roots Present In Strearnbed9 2 1 0
2) Are Rooted Plants Present In Strenribed? 2 1 0

4) Are Bivalves Present? 1 ® 1 2 3

' PRIMARY BIOLOGY INDICA TOR POINTS: 7
Secondarv Field Indicators: (Circle'One Munber Per Line)
1. Geomorpholow

Absent

Weak

Moderate

Strong
1) Is There A Head Cut Present In Channel? 0 0.5 R 1.5
2 Is There A Grade Control Point In Channel? 0 0.5 1 1._
' 3) Does Topography Indicate A
Natural Drainage Wav?
0
0.5
?l
1.5
SECONDARY GEOAIORPHOLOG? INDICATOR POINTS:
IL
low 3.5
absent
Weak
Moderate
rong
S
' This
1) Is Is This Year's (Or Last's) Leaflitte;
Present In Streambed?
1.5
n
0.5 t
0
's n'__._ •^ L__, , ____.
' 4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs.
Last Known Rain? (*NOTE. If Ditch
5) Is There Water In Channel During
0 0.5 0 1.5
This Step And #5 Below)
0 (off 1 1.5
' SECONDARYHYDROLOGY
III. Biulow
' 7) is Filamentous Algae Present?
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed?
(*.VOTE. IfTotal Absence Oj'All P)
As ;Voted Above Skip This Step UNL.
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICA I
TOTAL POINTS (Primary +Secona
POINTS: 5
SAV Mostly OBI, Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPI,
In Streambed 2 1 0.75 0.5 0 0
S.dV Present*).
POINTS: 25
1= 33 (If Greater Than Or Equal To I9 Points The Stream Is At Least Intermittent)
Project Name: Hubbard Road
DWQ Project Number. I
Date: 12/7/04 USGS;
OFFICE USE ONL USACE AID# DWQ
SCPI - Important Intermittent Stream A
1? H
1. Applicant's Name:
3. Date of Evaluation
5. Name of

2. Evaluator's Name: Matt Jenkins & Ron Johnson
4. Time of Evaluation: 10:45 am
6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 5 acres 8. Stream Order: first
' 9. Length of Reach Eva?uated: 50 linear feet 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach u der evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte, travel north on I-77 and take the I-85
exit (exit 13A). Trave 3 miles and take the Sugar Creek Road exit (exit 41). Turn left onto Sugar Creek Road and travel
' annroximately 1.5 mile to Mallard Creek Road. Turn risht onto Mallard Creek Road, travel 1 mile and turn left onto Hubbard Road._
' 12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 19' 12" W80°47' 48"
1
13. Proposed Channel work (if any): culvert and rip rap placement
14. Recent Weather Conditi
15. Site conditions at time of visit: cloudy, 60 degrees
16. Identify any special i aterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 90 % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
10 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged % Other (Institutional )
21. Bankfull Width: 3%
22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
23. Channel slope down!center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X _Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the saine ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
of 100 representing a strew of the highest quality.
Total Score (from revel se): 50 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature- Date 3" 1 0-?,
This channel evaluation form is inter ed to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data re wired by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05103. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET '
SCPI - tmDortant Intermittent Stream A
ECOREGIO`?( POR T RANGE
SCORE
CHARACTERISTICS
Coastal Piedmont Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0
5

0-4

0 - 5 ,
1
-
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow - max points)
Evidence of past human alteration

0-6
5
0 -

0-5
3
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-? 3
(no buffer = 0; contiguous. wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
05
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive discharges= 0; no discharges = max point,)
5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0-4 0-4 2
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps. wetlands.. etc. = max points)
V ' 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
?
L
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)

y Entrenchment / floodplain access
0 - 5
0-4
0-2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)

8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
no wetlands = 0, large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9 Channel sinuosity 0-5 0-4 0-3 2
(extensive charmelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
j 10 Sediment input 0_5 0-4 0-4 3
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
t l Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0-4 0-5 2
(Line, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes =max. points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
t,
0
5
0-4
0-5
3
;. 1 ` (deeply incised 0; stable bed & banks = max points) -

.
1? Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
7 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = mix points)

1 C
14 Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0'-4
0-5
3
, (no visible roots= 0; dense roots throui>hout= max points)
s
s Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0
5
0-4
0-5
4
l
. (substantial impact =0; no evidence - max points) -
Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0
3 0_5 0-6 3
16 (no riffles/ apples or pools = 0, well-developed =max points) -
d 17 Habitat complexity 0- 6 0- 6 0- 6 2
(little or no habitat= 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
21,
IS Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
(no shading vegetation =' 0, continuous canopy - max points)

19 Substrate embeddedness
?`?
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = O; loose structure = max)

20 Presence of stream invertebrates°
?
0-4
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =max points)

21 Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
Q (no evidence= 0; common, numerous types = max points)
22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
_ (no evidence = 0, common, numerous types - max points)

23 Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-?
0-S
2
(no evidence - 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 50
These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
OFFICE USE ONLY: USACE AID# DWQ #
e SCP2 - ".nportant Intermittent Stream A VIA]
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Charlotte Storm Water Services 2. Evaluator's Name: Matt Jenkins & Ron Johnson
3. Date of Evaluation: 12/7/04 4. Time of Evaluation: 10:15 am
5. Name of Stream: UTI to Doby Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainagl Area: 5 acres S. Stream Order: first
9. Length of Reach Eval ated: 100 linear feet 1.0. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte, travel north on I-77 and take the I-85
exit exit 13A). Travel, 3 miles and take the Sugar Creek Road exit exit 41 . Turn left onto Sugar Creek Road and travel
approximately 1.5 miles to Mallard Creek Road. Turn right onto Mallard Creek Road, travel 1 mile and turn left onto Hubbard Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 19' 20" W80° 47' 51"
13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): new culvert placement
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within past 24 hours
' 15. Site conditions at tune of visit: cloudy, 60 degrees
16. Identify any special aterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 0.135 acre
18. Does channel appear,on USGS quad map? YE NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
e 20. Estimated Watershed) Land Use: 90 % Residential % Commercial _% Industrial °'o Agricultural
10 % Forested % Cleared / Logged % Other (Institutional )
' 21. Bankfull Width: 5,-]' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 2'-3'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight -Occasional Bends X Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous Braided Channel
' Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetatiocl, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the ILge shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
' worksheet. Scores should deflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 n the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (f.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate f rm used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
' of 100 representing a strean{ of the highest quality.
I
Total Score (from reverse): 43 Comments:
Evaluator's Signatur
This channel evaluat
gathering the data r
stream quality. The
particular mitigation
? _,-Os`
form is intendefi4-o be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
ired by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
I score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
lo or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05103. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET '
SCP2 - Perennial Stream A
E COREGION POIN T RANGE
SCORE
CHARACTERISTICS Coastal Piedmont Mountain

1 Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
2
(no flow or saturation= 0; strong flow = max points)
Evidence of past human alteration 0-6 0-5 0-; 2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5 2
(no buffer= 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-d
0-4
0-4
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)

5 Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
2

D (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps. wetlands, etc. = max points)
u

? i

I 6
Presence of adjacent floodplain

0-4

0-4

0-,, _

1
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain.- max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access 0-5 0-4 0-2 2
(deeply entrenched = 0: frequent tlooding = max points)
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0-6 0-4 0-2 0
(no wetlands - o; large adjacent wetlands = inax points)
9 Channet suuiosity 0- 0-4 0- 3 3
(extensive chatmelization = 0: natural meander = max points)

10 Sediment input
0-5 ?
0-4
0-4
1
(extensive deposition=- 0: little or no sediment= max points)

tl Size& diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0-5
1
(fine, homogenous large, diverse sizes=max points)

12 Evidence of channel incision or Nvidening
0-5
0-4
0_-
2
?. (deeply incised= 0: stable bed & banks = max points)

13 Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0 -

3
(severe erosion = 0; no. erosion, stable banks= max points) _
ank
o

.^
14 Ro
t depth and density on b
s
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
_ (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout= max points)
c[
15 Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0;-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0-3 0-5 0-6 3
(no riffles ripples or pools - 0, well developed = max points)

17 Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
3
(little or no habitat= 0; frequent. varied habitats= max points)

1 Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0 -
2
(no shading v e-etation =0; continuous canopy= max points)
~

19 Substrate entbeddedness
N A'
0 - 4
0 - 4
2
(deeply embedded = o; loose structure = max)

20 Presence of stream invertebrates
0 - 4
0 - J
0 - 5
0
i' (no evidence = 0; coiniuon, numerous types - max points)
71 Presence of amphibians 0-4 0-4 0-4 0
(no evidence= 0: common. numerous types = max points)
r ?n Presence or fish
0 -4
0 - 4
0 - 4
0
=
M (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types=max points)
?3 Evidence of wildlife use ` 0 -6 0 -5 0 -5 2
- (iio evidence = 0: abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 43
.F These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
OFFICE USE ONL i
SCP3 - Perennial Strum C
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
1. Applicant's Name: Charlotte Storm Water Services 2. Evaluator's Name: Matt Jenkins & Ron Johnson
3. Date of
5. Name of Stream:
' 7. Approximate Drain
9. Length of Reach E,
11. Location of reach
' exit (exit I3A). Travel 13 miles and take the Sugar Creek Road exit (exit 41). Turn left onto Sugar Creek Road and travel
approximately 1.5 miles to Mallard Creek Road. Turn right onto Mallard Creek Road, travel 1 mile and turn left onto Hubbard Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 19'22 "W80° 47' 52"
' 13. Proposed Channel Wprk (if any): new culvert placement
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within past 24 hours
15. Site conditions at tim of visit: cloudy, 60 degrees
16. Identify any special rI at ay classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
' -Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? ?9) NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 9.5 total acre
18. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YE NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
' 20. Estimated Watershed iLand Use: 50 % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
1 50 % Forested % Cleared / Logged % Other (Institutional )
DWQk_
Area: 360 acres
USACE AID#
100 linear feet
4. Time of Evaluation: 11:45 am
6. River Basin: Yadkin
8. Stream Order: second
10. County: Mecklenburg
evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte, travel north on I-77 and take the I-85
' 21. Bankfull Width: 15' 1 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 6'-8'
23. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%) -Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 101/0) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous _Braided Channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetationP stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
' worksheet. Scores should rFflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the strewn flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate foim used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
' of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reveri e): 47 Comments:
0

valuator's Signature U Date
E
"?Z
This channel evaluation I form is intende o be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05103. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
SCP3 - Perennial Stream C
EGOREGION POIN T RANGE
SCORE
CHARACTERISTICS
Coastal Piedmont Mountain

l Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream

0-5

0-4

0-5

4
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
Evidence of past humanalteration
0-6
0-5
0->
3
(extensive alteration =0: no alteration = max points)
3 Riparian zone 0-6 0-4 0-5 3
(nobuffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer= max points)

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-?
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive discharges = 0: no discharges - max points)

^.. Groundwater dischar-e
b
0-?
0-4
0-4
2
! Q l (no discharge - 0: springs. seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)

6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-_
2
(no toodplain = 0; extensive ioodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 1
(deeply entrenched - 0; frequent flooding - max points)
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - }
0-2
1
(no wetlands = 0: large adjacent wetlands = max points) ,
9 Channel sinuosity- 0-5 0-4 0-3 2
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander - max points)
10 Sediment input 0_5 0-4 0_4 1
(extensive deposition= 0, little or no sediment = max points)
1 I Size & diversity, of channel bed substrate Nil'"' 0-4 0_5 1
(fine. homogenous = 0; large. diverse sizes - max points)
1 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0-5 0--4 0-5 3
(deeply incised = 0, stable bed & banks = max points)

13 Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
-- (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)

14 Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0-4
0--5
2
(no visible roots = 0, dense roots throughout - max points)

is lmpact by agriculture or livestock' production
0-5
0-4
0-5
4
(substantial impact =0, no evidence = max points)

16 Presence of riffle.-poollripple-pool complexes
-
0-3
0-?
0-6
2
(no riffles/rippics or pools - 0; well-developed`= max points)
17 Habitat complexity 0-6
0- 6
0- 6
3
(little or no habitat - 0: frequent, varied'habitats-_max points)

?`
1S Canopy coverage over streambea
0-J
0-J
0-J
2
(no shadui« vw,?etation - 0. continuous canopy = max points)

19 Substrate c?nbeddedness
4A*
0 - +
0 - 4
3
(deeply embedded = 0: loose structure = anal)

20 Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0-? 0-5
1
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types max points)
u 1 Presence of amphibians 0_ 4 0_} 0- 4 0
Q (no evidence - 0: common, numerous types = max points)

Q
22 Presence of fish
0-4
0-4 0-4
0
M (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max pouits)

23 Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-?
0-5
2
(rio evidence - 0: abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible too 100 I 100
i
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 47
These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
OFFICE USE ONLY USACE AID# DWQ #
_.
SCP4 - Unimportant Intermittent Stream B ? ..
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET 3)
1. Applicant's Name: Charlotte Storm Water Services 2. Evaluator's Name: Matt Jenkins & Ron Johnson
3. Date of Evaluation: 12/7/04 4. Time of Evaluation: 11:45 am
5. Name of Stream: Dobiv Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
7. Approximate Drainage Area: 5 acres 8. Stream Order: first
' 9. Length of Reach EvalLted: 25 linear feet 10. County: Mecklenburg
11. Location of reach under evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte, travel north on I-77 and take the I-85
' exit (exit 13A). Travel 13 miles and take the Sugar Creek Road exit (exit 41). Turn left onto Sugar Creek Road and travel
anoroximately 1.5 miles to Mallard Creek Road. Turn right onto Mallard Creek Road. travel 1 mile and turn left onto Hubbard Road.
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 19' 22" W80° 47' 52"
13. Proposed Channel W II rk (if any): rip rap placement
14. Recent Weather Conditions: rain within past 24 hours
' 15. Site conditions at tim i of visit: cloudy, 60 degrees
16. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area:
18. Does channel appear ?n USGS quad map? YE(N) 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES(NO)
20. Estimated Watershed Land Use: 90 % Residential _% Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
10 % Forested % Cleared /Logged % Other (Institutional )
I
' 21. Bankfull Width: 1-2'1 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 6"-1'
23. Channel slope down cIenter of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%) _Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: _X _Straight -Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
' Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the ran e shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
' worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
' of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from revert e): 30 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature /?%'/%/ "'?' Date
This channel evaluationlform is intended to be u only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05103. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WOPMCSHEET ,
,St'P4 - Unimnortant Intermittent Stream B
ECOREOION POINT R1A-NOE
i CI1AIZ ?CTEIZISTICS SCORE
Coastal Piedmont Mountain

? Presence of flow l persistent pools in stream
0-5
0-4
0-5
3
(no flow or saturation = 0: strong flow- = max points)
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0- 5
1
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)

3 Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0 - ?
0
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
5
0
4
0 -

0 -
4

1
4 (extensive discharges = 0: no discharges = max points) -
Groundwater discharge 0-3 0-4 0-4 2

' (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
U
?.
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 4
0-2
0
(no floodplain = 0: extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
(deeply entrenched = 0, frequent flooding - max points)

g Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
Channel sinuosity 0- 0-4 0-3 1
(extensive cltannelization = 0: natural meander - max points)

10 Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
(extensive deposition= 0: little or no sediment = max points)

11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
A
?
0-4
0-
2
(fine. hoino?genous - 0; large, diverse sizes-=max. points)
Evidence of channel 'incision or widening 0 - 0-4 0-5 1
(deeply incised = 0: stable bed & banks =maxpoints)

13
major bank failures
Presence of

0-5

d
0-

d
0-

3
(severe erosion = 0: no erosion, stable banks = max points)

14 Root depth and density on hanks
0-3
0-4
0-5
2
? (no visible roots 0; dense roots throughout= max points)
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0
5
0 - 4
5
0 -
4
(substantial impact =0: no evidence = mar points) -
10 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0-3 0- 0-6 1
(no riffles'ripplcs or pools = o; well-developed= max points)

1 ' Habitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
(little or no habitat = 0: frequent. varied habitats = max points)

is Canopy coverage over streambed
0-d
0-d
0-5
1
?
., (no shadin<- ve(-,etation = 0: continuous canopy = max points)
Ft9 Substrate embeddedness
NA'?
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)

20 Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0 -
0-5
0
r (no evidence = 0: common. numerous types = max points)
^
??

?l
Presence of amphibians

0-4

0-}

0-4

0
O (no evidence = 0: common. numerous types = max points)

; 22 Presence of fish 0-4 0-4 0-4 0
rn (no evidence 0; common, numerous types = max points)
3 Evidence of wildlife use 0-6 0-; 0- 5 0
(no evidence = 0: abundant evidence - max points)

Total Points Possible
100
100 i
100
TOTAL SCORE (also, enter on first page) 30
" These characteristics are not assessed m coastal streams.

OFFICE USE ONLY:
JJ
1. Applicant's Name
3. Date of Evaluatiot
5. Name of
7. Approximate Drain
9. Length of Reach E,
11. Location of reach
13A). Travel
USACE AID# DWQ
SCP5 - Perennial Stream D
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORK.SHEET
iarlotte Storm Water Services 2. Evaluator's Name: Matt Jenkins & Ron Johnson
2/7/04 4. Time of Evaluation: 12:00 ym
? Creek 6. River Basin: Yadkin
Area: 211 acres 8. Stream Order: first
ated: 100 linear feet 10. County: Mecklenburg
ter evaluation (include nearby roads and landmarks): From Charlotte travel north on I-77 and take the I-85
3 miles and take the Suaar Creek Road exit (exit 41). Turn left onto Sugar Creek Road and travel
1.5 miles to Mallard Creek
12. Site Coordinates (if known): N35° 19'22", W80° 47'52"
' 13. Proposed Channel Work (if any): none
14. Recent Weather Conditions: no rain within past 48 hours
' 15. Site conditions at timo of visit: cloudy, 60 degrees
16. Identify any special Iaterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters Qutstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
17. Is there a pond or lakI located upstream of the evaluation point? YES (T) If yes, estimate the water surface area: 9.5 total acre
18. Does channel appear qn USGS quad map? YE NO 19. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
' 20. Estimated Watershed (Land Use: 100 % Residential _% Commercial % Industrial °'o Agricultural
% Forested _% Cleared / Logged % Other (Institutional )
' 21. Bankfull Width: 4-6' 22. Bank Height (from bed to top of bank): 3-6'
23. Channel slope down c nter of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 101/6) -Steep (>10%)
24. Channel Sinuosity: Straight X Occasional Bends -Frequent Meander -Very Sinuous -Braided Channel
' Instructions for comple ion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation. stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each
characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the
' worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or
weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character
of a stream under review (e?g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more
continuity, and a separate tort used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a strewn reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score
' of 100 representing a stream 'of the highest quality.
Total Score (from revere): 43 Comments:
i
Evaluator's Signature Date ?Q S
This channel evaluation 'form is intend to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in order to make a preliminary assessment of
stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 05/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
5r'P5 - P.-rennial Stream
ECORE GION PO N N GE
T RA
I SCORE

w
it CII_?I2 CTEI2IS iCS
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1 Presence of flow % persistent pools: in stream 0-5 0-4 0-5 3
(no flow or saturation - 0; strong flow ='max points)
F2 Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
(extensive alteration = 0: no alteration = max points)
Riparian zone 0-6 0- 0-5 1
(no buffer = 0: contiguous, wide buffer - max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0
- 5

0--4

0 }

2
(extensive discharges - 0: no discharges = max points)
,,a Groundwater discharge 0-3 0-4 0-4 2
5 (no discharge = 0: springs, seeps, wetlands, etc_ = max points)
`
6 Presence of adjacent.floodplain 0-4 0-4 0-2 1
(no floodplain = 0, extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-?
2
(deeply entrenched = 0: frequent flooding = max points)
Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0 0
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)

9 Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
2
j (extensive channelization = 0: natural meander - max points)
10 Sediment input 0-5 0-4 0-4 3
(extensive deposition= 0, little or no sediment = max points)
L1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA? 0-4 0-5 2
(fine, homo<-enous = 0 lar-e, diverse sizes = max points)
? Evidence of channel incision or widening 0-5 0-4 0 5 2
?. l (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks max points)
Presence of major bank.failures
0-5
0-5
0-5
2
(severe erosion= 0. no erosion. stable banks .= max points)
r 14 Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0--4
0 - 5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout= max points) '
Impact by agriculture or livestock production
0-S
0-4
0-5
4
15 (substantial impact =0; no evidence= maxpoints)
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
3
(no riffles'ripplcs or pools = 0: well- developed = max points)
17 Habitat complexity
0 - 6
0 - Ci
0 - 6 3
- (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
l g Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
1
?-
(no shadin * vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)

19 Substrate embeddedness
0 4
0 4
(deeply embedded = 0, loose structure = max)
-?0 Presence of stream invertebrates
0-4
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0: common, numerous types = max points)
i'

l
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
2
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types =mat points)
- Presence of fish:
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
(no evidence - 0; common, numerous types - max points)

?; Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0: abundant evidence =max points)
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first pale) 43
These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2
Road Sidewalk Improvement Project . March 1, 2005
REQUEST FOR JJIUSDICr ONAL DEiZILMI vATION
DATE: Mamh 1.2005
COUNTf
PROJECT NAME
PROPL%TY
NAME OF
TOTAL ACREAGE OF TRACT linear Droiect
applicablcl Hubbard Road Sidewalk 7morovemetat Proicct
r (name, address and phone):
Cl a 1gae Storm Water Services
POC: Mr. Darrin M. Peine. at [phone]
600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte. North Carolina 28202-2844
ENGINEER, DEVELOPER (if applicable):
' STATUS OF PROJECT (check one):
( ) On-going site work for development purposes
' (X) Project in planning stages
(Type of project: sidewalk construction)
( ) No sp Icific development planned at present
( ) Projec l already completed
( e ofproject:
ADDITIONAL INF RMATION REQUIRED:
Check items submitted - forward as much information as is available. At a minimum, the following first two items must be
forwarded
(X ) USG SSite Location Map (Figure 1)
(X) NRCS,Soil Survey (Figure 2)
(X) Aerial Photograph of Project Vicinity (Figure 3)
(X) 'W'etlar}d Boundary Survey (Figure 4)
(X) Pre-C.9astrncdon Notification Application - Nationwide Permit No.
(X) Routine On-Site Data Forms
(X) Stream Classification Forms
(X) Agency Correspondenca
(X) Representative Photographs
(X) Proposed Impacts (Figures 5a and 5b)
14
Y°l
Signature of Property Owner or
Authorizcd Arent
Mr. Darrin M. Pcinc
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
Nationwide Permit No. 14
March 1, 2005
Project No. 2004-0859

i
North
Michael F. Easley,
December 13, 2004
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Mr. Matt Jenkins
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
5000 Nations Crossing Road, Suite 230
Charlotte, NC 28217
Subject: Hubbl d Road Sidewalk Improvement Project; Charlotte, Mecklenburg County
CWS Project No. 2004-0859
Dear Mr. Jenkiins:
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority naturaII areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. Although our maps do not
show records ?f such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not necessarily mean
that they are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. The use of
Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if
the project area contains suitable habitat for rare species, significant natural communities, or
priority natural areas.
You may
natural comrr
contact me at
' Sincerely,
v ; 4? f
' Harry E. LeG
Natural Herit
HEL/hel
=5 7AA
A LA
WCDENK
rolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at
s.net/nhp/search.html> for a listing of rare plants and animals and significant
nities in the county and on the topographic quad map. Please do not hesitate to
19-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
z"b/L,4,
rand, Jr., Zoologist
rge Program
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 NOnI'e1?1CarOhna
Vtlf????_'
Phone: [phone] • FAX [phone] • Internet: www.enrstate.nc.us /'V
An Equal Opportunity *,'Affirmative Action Employer- 50 % Recycled • 10% Post Consumer Paper Y y
t,r 5TA7£ a
4C
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, G
Lisbeth C. Evans, Se
Jeffrey J. Crow, Dept
December 22,
Matt L. Jenkins
Staff Biologist
Carolina Wetlal
5000 Nations C
Suite 230
Charlotte, NC
:mor Office of Archives and History
:ary Division of Historical Resources
Secretary David Brook, Director
Services
ssing Road
7
Re: Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project, Charlotte, CWS Project No. 2004-0859,
1llecklenburg County, ER 04-3162
Dear Mr. Jenkins:
Thank you for ypur letter of December 9, 2004, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the proposed undertaking and are aware of no historic resources which would
be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the undertaking as proposed.
The above comrilents are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Counc on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
ter B. Sandbec
V
ADMINISTRATION
RESTORATION
SURVEY & PLANNING

Location Mailing Address - L elepnone/ r ax
507 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 MA Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (9191733-4763/733-8653
515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4017 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC '_7699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005
Nationwi a Permit No. 14 Project 'No. 2004-0359
f
r S
r
r x
t
r ;
i
r
t
r
4
Attachment G - Representative
Photographs

Hubbard Road
Nationwide Pei

1
Improvement Project
March 1, 2005
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project March 1, 2005

Photograph C. View of Wetland AA, adjacent to Perennial Stream C.
Photograph D. View of Wetland AA from Hubbard Road.
Hubbard oad Sidewalk Improvement Project
Nationwi a Permit No. 14
1 11

March 1, 2005
M IIIIIIIIIIIN = M M M M w M MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII M M M M M M
Impo
In term it ten t,,?tream A LEGEND
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
0 1" STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS
OPEN WATER IMPACTS
APPROXIMATE SCALE: I"= 100"
SCP1
UniTportant Intermittent
Stream B - 0.002 acre impacted
Breckpoint
Unimpo?ta?t Intermittent /1'0 I'f- Rip Rap & 10 If Culvert placeM-en't
I jilt
111 If Fill sh,
Carolina Wedand Services
1?j CWS1 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
L
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
REFERENCE: PROJECT PLAN PROVIDED BY CHARLOTTE STORM WATER SERVICES, DATED
2004,
Figure 5a. Proposed Impacts
---?? ? Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED AND SURVEYED WITH GPS Charlotte, North Carolina
BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON DECEMBER 7 AND 13, 2004. CWS Project No. 2004-0859
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
PREPARED BY DATE Cf2CKED DATE
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED AND SURVEYED WITH GPS
BY CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC. (CWS) ON DECEMBER 7 AND 13, 2004.
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES HAVE NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE USACE.
Perennior;,?t(eam C
SCP3 .`
r 1-4-T Rip Rapes-23 1f
Culvert placement i 2
,
,
s
Wetland
e
c \`
,
W"
Culvert placement
52 if ?j
t' SCP2
?l
s <?
Important _
In term itten-t- -Stream- -A
i`
,
5
AA - 0.066 acre
Ri{ Rap Apron-'1
/10?'If
Existing culvert Culvert placement
126 If
1
LEGEND
Existing culvert
ti
,
,
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM CHANNEL
STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND AREA
® OPEN WATER IMPACTS
PHOTO LOCATION AND DIRECTION
APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1" = 100'
-- r " Carolina Wetland Services

WS 550 East Westinghouse Blvd.
C
Ft
?.w...b?
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217

REFERENCE: PROJECT PLAN PROVIDED BY CHARLOTTE STORM WATER SERVICES, DATED
2004.

Figure 5b. Proposed Impacts
Hubbard Road Sidewalk Improvement Project
s ,, Ic \ Charlotte, North Carolina
CWS Project No. 2004-0859
PREPARED BY DA CHECKED DATE
/'?GS 1-?? tl U? *'? •(•a"