20190995 Ver 1_401 Application_20190725

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
To: Ms. Karen Higgins Date: July 18, 2019
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29
Preston Park NWP 29
Charlotte, North Carolina
(SAW -2018-00862)
CWS Project No. 2018-0441
V
Dear Ms. Higgins,
1
The Preston Park site (Mecklenburg County Tax Parcel No. 20508102, 20508109, 20502387, 20507119,
20502118) is approximately 134.8 acres in extent and is located at 2601 Belmeade Drive in Charlotte, North
Carolina (Figures 1 and 2, Attachment 1). Cranford Drive Single Family Lots, LLC has contracted Carolina
Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting services for this project.
On behalf Cranford Drive Single Family Lots, LLC Carolina Wetland Services is submitting a
Pre -Construction Notification pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for
proposed impacts to one jurisdictional stream channel and four isolated, non -404 jurisdictional wetlands.
These impacts include the filling of wetlands and one road crossing over a stream. The proposed impacts are
associated with developing the subdivision into a single-family development. An executed Agent
Authorization Form is attached (Attachment F).
A preliminary JD has been requested for this property (SAW -2018-00862), however based on the Jun
2018 field assessment with David Shaeffer, documentation for an Approved JD is being submitted, alW
a PCN pursuant to NWP 29. We request the PJD be officially withdrawn. A copy of this application an
application fee will be mailed to NCDEQ.
Please do not hesitate to contact Dan Zurlo at 717-460-3466 or [e-mail] should you have any
questions or comments regarding this request.
Sincerely,
Dan Zurlo
Project Scientist
L�f 2
O
Christine Geist, PWS, CE
Principal Scientist

CAROLINA WETLAND SERVICES, INC.
550 E. Westinghouse Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28273
704-527-1177 (office)
704-527-1133 (fax)
To: Ms. Karen Higgins Date: July 18, 2019
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29
Preston Park NWP 29
Charlotte, North Carolina
(SAW -2018-00862)
CWS Project No. 2018-0441
Dear Ms. Higgins,
The Preston Park site (Mecklenburg County Tax Parcel No. 20508102, 20508109, 20502387, 20507119,
20502118) is approximately 134.8 acres in extent and is located at 2601 Belmeade Drive in Charlotte, North
Carolina (Figures 1 and 2, Attachment 1). Cranford Drive Single Family Lots, LLC has contracted Carolina
Wetland Services, Inc. (CWS) to provide Section 404/401 permitting services for this project.
On behalf Cranford Drive Single Family Lots, LLC Carolina Wetland Services is submitting a
Pre -Construction Notification pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for
proposed impacts to one jurisdictional stream channel and four isolated, non -404 jurisdictional wetlands.
These impacts include the filling of wetlands and one road crossing over a stream. The proposed impacts are
associated with developing the subdivision into a single-family development. An executed Agent
Authorization Form is attached (Attachment F).
A preliminary JD has been requested for this property (SAW -2018-00862), however based on the June 15,
2018 field assessment with David Shaeffer, documentation for an Approved JD is being submitted, along with
a PCN pursuant to NWP 29. We request the PJD be officially withdrawn. A copy of this application and
application fee will be mailed to NCDEQ.
Please do not hesitate to contact Dan Zurlo at 717-460-3466 or [e-mail] should you have any
questions or comments regarding this request.
Sincerely,
_; 7- �_ I -
Dan Zurlo
Project Scientist
Christine Geist, PWS, CE
Principal Scientist

ATTACHMENTS INCLUDED:
DESCRIPTION
Attachment A - ORM
Attachment B - AJD Request
Attachment C - Pre -Construction Notification Pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 29
Attachment D - Additional Sheets
Attachment E - 2014 AJD and Permit Authorization
Attachment F - Agent Authorization
Attachment G - Figures 1-7
Attachment H - Impact Figures
Attachment I - NC SAM Form
Attachment J - NCSAM Assessment Reach
Attachment K - NC DMS Mitigation Acceptance Letter
Attachment L - USFWS Correspondence
Attachment M - NC SHPO Correspondence
Attachment N - Photopage
Page 2 of 3

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment A:
Preliminary ORM
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 201 -
BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]:
2. Work Type: Private ❑V/ Institutional ❑ Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Residential Development
4. Property Owner/ Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Cranford Drive Single Family Lots, LLC; POC: Susan Rosenblatt
5. Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]: CWS; POC: Mr. Dan Zurlo
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: SAW -2018-00862
7. Project Location - Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form 131b]:
Northwest of the NC -51 and N. Polk Street intersection
8. Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 131a]: 20508102, 20508109, 20502387, 20507119, 20502118
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Pineville
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Sugar Creek
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: 03050103
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑� Section 10 & 404
Regulatory Action Type:
❑✓
Standard Permit
Nationwide Permit # 29
❑ Regional General Permit #
✓❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑Pre -Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
0 Compliance
❑ No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment B:
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
Approved Jurisdictional Determination
Request

urisdictional Determination Reauest
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Mmington district
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http: //www. saw.usace. aM.mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram/Contact/CounlyLocator. aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOTTE REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: (82 8) 281-8120
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: (919) 5 54-48 84
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Pagc 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 298-270 Cranford Drive
City, State:
Pineville, North Carolina
County: Mecklenburg
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 20508102, 20508109, 20502387, 20507119, 20502118
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: CWS Inc.; POC: Mr. Daniel Zurlo
Mailing Address: 550 E. Westinghouse Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28273
Telephone Number: 828-719-1320
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
❑ 1 am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑ Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name: Cranford Single Family Lots, POC: Susan Rosenblatt
Mailing Address: 136 Main St
Pineville, NC 28134
Telephone Number: 704-363-1368
Electronic Mail Address: [e-mail]
' Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION' 4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Dan Zurlo
Print Name
Capacity: ❑ Owner ❑✓ Authorized Agents
7.15.19
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
✓❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a projector perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
❑ A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
❑ I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
❑ I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization form/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
❑ I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
❑ I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
✓❑ Size of Property or Review Area 134.8 acres.
❑ The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
❑✓ Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude:
Longitude
35.093044
-80.893479
❑7 A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
■ North Arrow
■ Graphical Scale
■ Boundary of Review Area
■ Date
■ Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
■ Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
■ Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
■ Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Determinations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re _ug latoEy-Permit-
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
✓❑ Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
W1 Vicinity Map
z Aerial Photograph
FA USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
NC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
FOther Assessment Forms
' www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/re _ug lator.y/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02 App_ A_ Prelim_ JD_ Form_fillable.pdf
' Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Re ug latory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's website
and on the Headquarters USAGE website.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

Waters—Name
M wCowardin_Code
HGM_Code
Stream A
NORTH CAROLINA
R3
RIVERINE
Stream B
INORTH CAROLINA
R3
RIVERINE
Wetland AA
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Wetland BB
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Wetland CC
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
RIVERINE
Wetland DD
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
RIVERINE
Weltand EE
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Wetland FF
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS
Wetland GG
NORTH CAROLINA
PFO
DEPRESS

Meas—Type
Amount
Units
Waters—Type
Latitude
Longitude
Linear
1,483
FOOT
A2O
35.09546100
-80.90027700
Linear
1,854
FOOT
A2O
35.09257100
-80.89371300
Area
0.04
ACRE
OTHERABF
35.09492200
-80.89095900
Area
0.06
ACRE
OTHERABF
35.09467400
-80.89119600
Area
0.04
ACRE
A2B
35.09247000
-80.89444000
Area
0.54
ACRE
A2B
35.09204400
-80.89615800
Area
0.35
ACRE
OTHERABF
35.08929000
-80.88947400
Area
0.84
ACRE
OTHERABF
35.09076900
-80.88972900
Area
0.04
ACRE
OTHERABF
35.08878900
-80.89023600

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Mecklenburg City: Pineville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.093044" N, Long. -80.893479" W.
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17S
Name of nearest waterbody: Sugar Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 3050103
Z, Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
® Field Determination. Date(s): David Shaeffer of the USACE conducted a field assessment on 6-15-18 and determined certain on-
site wetlands to be isolated, non jurisdictional waters.
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Pick List "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
0 Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): r
El TNWs, including territorial seas
El Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
El Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Z. Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: linear feet: 3,337 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 1.87 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain: Several isolated wetlands exist on-site that do not have biological, hydrological, or chemical nexus to
downstream waters.
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION HI: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section HI.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections HI.A.1 and 2
and Section IH.D.L; otherwise, see Section IH.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IH.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section HI.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: square miles'
Drainage area: 0.14 `sic ware miles
Average annual rainfall: 41.6 inches
Average annual snowfall: 4.3 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are �0-1$ river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 40-1$ aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: RPW flows to Sugar Creek which flows to the Catawba River.
a Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

Tributary stream order, if known: First.
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ® Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
agricultural.
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 3 feet
Average depth: 1 feet
Average side slopes: 3:1!.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ® Sands ❑ Concrete
® Cobbles ® Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Eroding banks as most of watershed is
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: Weak run/riffle/pool sequence.
Tributary geometry: Relatively straight
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 5 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 2-5
Describe flow regime: perennial.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Confined'. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
® changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
® shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
®
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
® sediment deposition
®
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
El High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects ❑ survey to available datum;
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ❑ physical markings;
❑ physical markings/characteristics ❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: Tributary is altered as most, of its watershed.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): forested, 10-15 ft.
® Wetland fringe. Characteristics: Some forested wetland .
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.58 acres
Wetland type. Explain: Bottomland hardwood.
Wetland quality. Explain: medium.. impacted by through agricultural use.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Intermittent flow. Explain: Wetland surface water releases at higher rain events. Wetlands flow into the
tributary during flood events.
Surface flow is: Overland sheetflow,
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Ad'ai cency Determination with Non-TNW:
® Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 10-15 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-1 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetland to navigable waters,.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 2 -year or less floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: Watershed is impacted due to agricultural and urban impacts.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): 10-20 ft of forested cover, agricultural throughout the rest of the
watershed.
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:Forested/ 10% cover, agriculture 90%.
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 2
Approximately ( 0.58 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Y 0.04
Y
0.54
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: Habitat for aquatic species, filtering of
harmful chemicals and flood control by catchnig or stopping stormwater and flood flows.
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section IIID:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
El Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: See attached NCDEQ stream flow classification forms.
El Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
E Tributary waters: 3337 linear feet width (ft).
_ Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Non-RPWs'that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands CC and DD have direct hyrdrological connection to Stream B.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.58 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Fj Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA -STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
Fj which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
El Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and PPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
El Wetlands:
acres.
NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
El Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: Several isolated
wetlands exist on-site that do not have biological, hydrological, or chemical nexus to downstream waters. This assessment
was agreed to by David Shaeffer on the 6-15-18 field assessment.
El Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
El Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
El Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: Figure 7.
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
El U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:Charlotte East and Charlotte West, NC 2017.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:USDA-NRCS Soil Survey of Meek County, Sheets 11 and
12, 1980.
0 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:USFWS NWI for North Carolina, 2018.
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ❑ Aerial (Name & Date): .
or ® Other (Name & Date): Site photographs June 2017.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
El Applicable/supporting case law:
El Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
El Other information (please specify): .

B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

NC DW® Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 3/172
Project/Site: RT)CV1,11CS) _
Latitude: 3- 0 ?A50?
Evaluator: I
County: (Af* !1 t
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 3 Jr
Stream Determination (circle one
Ephemeral Intermittent erennia
OtherS'
e.g. Quad Name:�
if _> 19 or perennial if z 30* /
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
.J 6 Cy
n t~
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = { 7 �)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
QD
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
0
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
CID
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
60 = 0
Yes = 3
Sketch: r/✓ �,,cl,
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal= 10 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0 1
2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0 1
2 3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0 0.5
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0 0.5
3
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
yes= 3
C. Biolociv (Subtotal = (I-
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
(02
0.5
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 9Slie� �6--
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.
See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch: r/✓ �,,cl,

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Pineville Residential Site City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 6/23/17
Applicant/Owner: Timmons Group State: NC Sampling Point: DP1
Investigator(s): MMUDJZ Section, Township, Range: Pineville
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.091977 Long: -80.896272 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Monacan loam (0-2 percent slopes, frequently flooded [MO]) NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of jurisdictional wetland area CC and DD
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (614)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
X High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (64) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (65)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
X Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 3
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 4
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
100% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Ulmus rubra
60
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Liquidambar styraciflua
20
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 8 (A)
3•
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
80
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
40
20% of total cover:
16
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Acer negundo
20
Yes
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x4=
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
Prevalence Index is :53.01
20
=Total Cover
-3
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Microstegium vimineum
20
Yes
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
15
Yes
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Lemna minor 15 Yes OBL
4.
Saururus cernuus
15
Yes
OBL
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Juncus effusus
5
No
FACW
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6.
Ligustrum sinense
5
No
FACU
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
75
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
38
20% of total cover:
15
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
80
Yes
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
80
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
40
20% of total cover:
16
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
100% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-8 7.5YR 4/2 95 7.5YR 5/8 5 C PL Clay Loam
8-20 7.5YR 4/2 70 7.5YR 5/8 30 C PL Clay Loam
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
—2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Coast Prairie Redox (All 6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (All 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data form is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
Indicators of hydric soils are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Pineville Residential Site City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 6/23/17
Applicant/Owner: Timmons Group State: NC Sampling Point: DP2
Investigator(s): MMUDJZ Section, Township, Range: Pineville
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.094997 Long: -80.890960 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Iredell fine sandy loam (0-1 percent slopes [IrA]) NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of jurisdictional wetland area AA and BB
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (614)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
—High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
—Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (64) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 3
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP2
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
100% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Quercus phellos
10
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Ulmus rubra
10
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
3•
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
20
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Liquidambar styraciflua
20
Yes
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x4=
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
Prevalence Index is :53.01
20
=Total Cover
-3
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Juncus effusus
40
Yes
FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Carex lurida
40
Yes
OBL
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Lemna minor 10 No OBL
4.
Toxicodendron radicans
10
No
FAC
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5•
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
100
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
50
20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
50
Yes
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
50
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
25
20% of total cover:
10
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
100% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture
0-8 10YR 4/1 90 7.5YR 5/8 10 C PL Clay Loam
Clay
Clay
Remarks
8-12 10YR 4/1 55 7.5YR 5/8 45
12-20 7.5YR 5/8 70 10YR 4/1 30
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
—2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Coast Prairie Redox (All 6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (All 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data form is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
Indicators of hydric soils are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Pineville Residential Site City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 6/23/17
Applicant/Owner: Timmons Group State: NC Sampling Point: DP3-UPL
Investigator(s): MMUDJZ Section, Township, Range: Pineville
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.091865 Long: -80.896466 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Monacan loam (0-2 percent slopes, frequently flooded [MO]) NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Data point is representative of non -jurisdictional upland areas
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (614)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
—High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
—Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (131) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (132) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
—Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (64) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP3-UPL
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
42.9% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Quercus phellos
30
Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Carya carolinae-septentrionalis
20
Yes
UPL
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A)
3.
Celtis occidentalis
10
No
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 42.9% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
60
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
30
20% of total cover:
12
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Carya carolinae-septentrionalis
30
Yes
UPL
FAC species x 3 =
2.
FACU species x4=
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
Dominance Test is >50%
9.
-2
Prevalence Index is :53.01
30
=Total Cover
-3
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Ligustrum sinense
40
Yes
FACU
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Microstegium vimineum
30
Yes
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Festuca spp. 20 Yes
4.
Rubus argutus
10
No
FACU
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5,
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
100
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
50
20% of total cover:
20
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
20
Yes
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
20
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
10
20% of total cover:
4
Present? Yes No X
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
42.9% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP3-UPL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-10 5YR 4/4 100 Clay loam
10-20 10YR 4/3 100 Sandy Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_Thick Dark Surface (All 2)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
—Coast Prairie Redox (All 6)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
This data form is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
No indicators of hydric soils are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Pineville Residential City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 6/27/17
Applicant/Owner: Timmons Group State: NC Sampling Point: DP4
Investigator(s): DJZ Section, Township, Range: Pineville
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.089216 Long: -80.889621 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Iredell fine sandy loam, 1-8 % slopes (IrB) NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of jurisdictional wetland area EE
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
X Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (61) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (62) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
—Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (64) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
X Aquatic Fauna (613)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 3
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 0
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP4
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
100% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1. Ulmus rubra
85 Yes
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2. Quercus phellos
15 No
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B)
5•
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
100 =Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
50 20% of total cover:
20
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1. Ulmus rubra
60 Yes
FAC
FAC species x3=
2.
FACU species x4=
3.
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 Prevalence Index is 53.0'
60 =Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
30 20% of total cover:
12
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Acernegundo
5 Yes
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3.
4•
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5,
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
5 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
3 20% of total cover:
1
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Toxicodendron radicans
5 Yes
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
5 =Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
3 20% of total cover:
1
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
100% of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Depth
Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Redox Features
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture
Remarks
0-8
10YR 4/1
85
7.5YR 4/6 15 C PL
Silt Loam
8-14
7.5YR 5/8
65
10YR 4/1 35
Clay
14-20
7.5YR 5/8
90
10YR 4/1 10
Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
—2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Coast Prairie Redox (All 6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
—Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (All 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data form is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
Indicators of hydric soils are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Pineville Residential Site City/County: Mecklenburg Sampling Date: 7/5/17
Applicant/Owner: Timmons Group State: NC Sampling Point: DP5
Investigator(s): MML/AVH Section, Township, Range: Pineville
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.090612 Long: -80.889668 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Iredell fine sandy loam (1-8 percent slopes) NWI classification: N/A
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Data point is representative of jurisdictional wetland area FF, and GG
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
—Surface Water (Al) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
—Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Patterns (1310)
X Saturation (A3) —Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (61) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (62) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
—Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
—Algal Mat or Crust (64) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
—Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water -Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
X FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 4
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Indicators of wetland hydrology are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP5
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
78.6 % of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Quercus lyrata
30
Yes
OBL
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Ulmus rubra
20
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 11 (A)
3.
Carya laciniosa
20
Yes
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Quercus phellos
20
Yes
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 14 (B)
5.
Celtis laevigata
20
Yes
FACW
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
Juniperus virginiana
10
No
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 78.6% (A/B)
7.
Tilia americana
5
No
FACU
Prevalence Index worksheet:
125
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
63
20% of total cover:
25
OBL species x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species x 2 =
1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
10
Yes
FACW
FAC species x 3 =
2.
Celtis laevigata
10
Yes
FACW
FACU species x4=
3.
Viburnum prunifolium
5
No
FACU
UPL species x 5 =
4.
Juniperus virginiana
5
No
FACU
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 Prevalence Index is 53.0'
30
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10 )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Lonicera japonica
15
Yes
FACU
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5
Yes
FACW
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Celtis laevigata 5 Yes FACW
4.
Ligustrum sinense
5
Yes
FACU
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
5
Yes
FACU
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6.
Smilax rotundifolia
5
Yes
FAC
height.
7•
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8•
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
40
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
20
20% of total cover:
8
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
10
Yes
FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
10
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
5
20% of total cover:
2
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
78.6 % of dominant vegetation is FAC or wetter.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Types Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-2 2.5Y 4/2 100 Sandy Clay Loam
2-9 7.5YR 4/2 100 Clay Loam
9-20 10YR 5/1 70 10YR 6/6 30 C PL Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
—2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
—Coast Prairie Redox (All 6)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
—Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
—Thick Dark Surface (All 2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data form is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
Indicators of hydric soils are present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

W
Wetland Water
of the US
Wetland DD
0.54 acre
Non -wetland r
Water of the US
Perennial Stream B
289 If
Non -wetland
DWater of the US
Perennial Stream A (Sugar Creek)
JAV
\0.35
Isolated Non -404
7
m
SUN
00
w_
oz v
..
Z1 d
Jurisdictional Wetland
(�
c -0
m Z t�
o m
Isolated Non -404
aA Non -wetland y
Q Project Limits (134.8 ac.)
N
d"
> a`
rn
U
—Perennial Stream
Wetland AA
v a U
Stream B 1,854 If
0.84 acre
®Wetlands
y -p
0
0
(D
>
0.04 acre
O
Culvert
OL
1 inch = 200 feet PCulvert
Non -404
Jurisdictional Wetland
m
m
o
_
FEMA Existing 100yr Floodplain
Wetland GG V
Q 0.04 acre
O Geed
o
o
�
l
O
♦SCP Stream Classification Point
FIGURE NO.
e
H Photo Location and Direction
/
N
wr
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2018. ----
7
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND 950 475
i
00
...
DP2
m
0 �
m
s
p
I
oep
Isolated Non -404
d6sr
g
Jurisdictional Wetland
i eio
3
Wetland Water0.06
Wetland BB
acre
1 inch = 200 feet
Qm
of the US
S
Wetland CC
0.04 acre
_a
m
®0 d
Existing Crossing
LN 0
of Stream B (18.2 If)
g
o=
CP1
L
0 E
y E
r
FO
Isolated Non -404
`
-
Jurisdictional Wetland
•L 4)
? o
°
Wetland EE
acre
ca
c
P
7
m
SUN
w_
oz v
..
Z1 d
Legend
(�
c -0
m Z t�
o m
Isolated Non -404
aA Non -wetland y
Q Project Limits (134.8 ac.)
O y
i
d"
> a`
rn
Water of the US Jurisdictional Wetland
Wetland FF
—Perennial Stream
V '
v a U
Stream B 1,854 If
0.84 acre
®Wetlands
y -p
'5
'5
1
® Isolated Non -404 Jurisdictional Wetland
>
a
ODP3
Culvert
OL
1 inch = 200 feet PCulvert
Non -404
Jurisdictional Wetland
Openings
Isolated
CL
a
_
FEMA Existing 100yr Floodplain
Wetland GG V
Q 0.04 acre
O Geed
ODP Data Point
l
O
♦SCP Stream Classification Point
FIGURE NO.
aw°`
O Q o
H Photo Location and Direction
/
Indicates F
Flow
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND GIS LAYER(S) PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY GIS DEPARTMENT, DATED 2018. ----
7
NOTE: JURISDICTIONAL WATERS OF THE U.S. WERE DELINEATED (FLAGGED IN THE FIELD), CLASSIFIED, AND 950 475
0 950 Feet
MAPPED USING ASUB-FOOT GPS UNIT BY CWS, INC., ON JUNE 23 AND 27, 2017.

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
Attachment C
PCN Pursuant to NWP 29

C] Y
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A.
Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑X Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes NX No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes X❑ No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes NX No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
N Yes ❑X No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Preston Park
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Pineville
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Cranford Single Family Lots LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
32957-18
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Susan Rosenblatt
3d.
Street address:
136 Main Street
3e.
City, state, zip:
Pineville, NC 28134
3f.
Telephone no.:
704-363-1368
3g.
Fax no.:
N/A
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no.:
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Dan Zurlo
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Carolina Wetland Services
5c.
Street address:
550 E Westinghouse Blvd
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28273
5e.
Telephone no.:
717-460-3466
5f.
Fax no.:
N/A
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
20508102, 20508109, 20502387, 20507119, 20502118
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.093044 Longitude: -80.893479
1 c.
Property size:
134.8 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Sugar Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Class C
2c.
River basin:
Lower Catawba 03050103
3.
Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project area consists of agricultural land, deciduous forest, woody wetlands, and a maintained power line right-of-way. On-site elevations ranges
from 530-560 feet above mean sea level (Figure 2). Land cover within the project area consists of deciduous forest, agricultural land and woody
wetlands.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.87
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 3,337
3d.
The
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
purpose of the project is to construct a single-family residential subdivision.
3e.
See
Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
additional sheets (Attachment D)
4.
Jurisdictional Determinations
4a.
Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (includingall prior phases in the past?
0 Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: See response to 5b in this section
4b.
If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c.
If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Dan zurlo
Agency/Consultant Company: Carolina wetland Services
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The site was field verified by David Shaeffer of the USACE on June 15, 2018. A PJD was submitted for this site, however due the results of the field
verification we would like to withdraw the PJD application and re -submit an AJD application, Action ID: SAW -2018-00862 (Attachment B).
5.
Project History
5a.
Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
DYes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
See additional sheets (Attachment D)
6.
Future Project Plans
6a.
Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes 0 No
6b.
If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑X Wetlands Q Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Type of jurisdiction
Area of
number
Corps (404,10) or
impact
Permanent (P) or
DWQ (401, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
Yes
DWQ
0.04
W2 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
Yes
DWQ
0.06
W3 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
Yes
DWQ
0.15
W4 P
Fill
Small -Basin Wetland
Yes
DWQ
0.04
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.29
2h. Comments:
All wetland impacts will be to isolated, non -404 jurisdictional wetlands. Impacts fall below the NC DEQ IWGP 100000 notification threshold of 0.5 acre.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial (PER) or
Type of
Average
Impact
number
intermittent (INT)?
jurisdiction
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(feet)
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream B
PER
Corps
4
11
S2 P
Fill
Stream B
PER
Corps
4
80
S3 T
Rip Rap Armoring
Stream B
PER
Corps
4
27
S4 T
Dewatering
Stream B
PER
Corps
4
40
S5 T
Culvert
Stream B
PER
Corps
4
40
S6 -
Choose one
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
198
3i. Comments:
Permanent stream impacts will total 118 If. Loss of waters will total 91 If.
Rip rap armoring of the downstream outlet of the proposed culvert will result in 27 If of permanent impacts, however this is not considered a loss of
waters as the rip rap will be placed at grade within the stream.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
O2 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1 -
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See additional sheets (Attachment D).
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See additional sheets (Attachment D).
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑X Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑X Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑X Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑X Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
91 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
warm
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: Stream B scored a 'low' on NCSAM due to the primary use of the riparian area and watershed as agricultural (Attachment I and J).
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
424%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
The overall imperviousness of this project is <24%. Therefore, a stormwater management plan is not required.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b.
Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
El Yes ❑X No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
El Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a.
Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
F-1 Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009

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

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑X Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑x Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A field assessment of the on-site habitat was conducted, and a review by the USFWS-Asheville Field Office was requested. The Asheville Field Office
determined that endangered species habitat exists on-site and recommended a targeted species survey (Attachment L).
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ❑X No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
See NC SHPO concurrence (Attachment M)
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑X Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
A floodplain development permit will be obtained from the local FEMA administrator (CLOMR), however no fill in streams or wetlands within the FEMA
100 -year floodplain is proposed.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA FRIM No. 3710455100K
Dan Zurlo
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant isprovided.)
Page 10 of 10

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment D
Additional Sheets
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

Additional Supplemental Information
Preston Park
Pre -Construction Notification For Activities Affecting Waters of the United States of the
State of North Carolina
133e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used.
The Preston Park project involves grading and construction of a proposed single family
residential development, along with associated access roads. Proposed activities in waters of
the U.S. include one culverted stream crossing (S1 -S4). Proposed impacts include the
installation of three 45"x 29", elliptical, 39 -If reinforced concrete pipes (RCP) that will result in
91 -If to Stream B (S1-S2) and an additional 27 -If of rip rap (S3) to stabilize the inlet and outlet of
the pipes. 11 -If of Stream B will be piped, between the culvert outlet and currently existing
crossing (S1). The 80 -If of Stream B upstream of the existing crossing angles away from the
proposed culvert, and as a result will be filled (S2). Drainage in the area will be diverted to the
inlet of the proposed culvert. The proposed culvert cannot be angled to match the stream as
this would require a full re -design and grading on the adjacent parcel, not owned by the
applicant. Due to project time constraints, these options would be unfeasible.
The proposed culverted crossing will involve two additional pipes to handle bankfull flows. They
will have a steel plate baffle system installed at the bankfull height (Attachment H, Detail Sheet
2). An additional 40 -If of temporary impact will result from a pump around operation to dewater
the stream (S4). Permanent impacts to Stream B will total 118 -If, however only the impacts
associated with the pipe installation and fill will result in a loss of waters (91 -If), requiring
mitigation, as the rip rap stabilization will be keyed into the bed and of the stream and not alter
the original bed grade. One temporary crossing of Stream B will be constructed to support
construction equipment, resulting in 40 If of temporary impact (S5). (Attachment H, Preferred
Site Design and Detail Sheet 3).
A second crossing of Stream B is proposed, however it will be a bottomless, arched crossing
that will have no impact to the bed or bank of Stream B (Attachment H, Preferred Site Design,
Detail Sheet 2).
All on-site Jurisdictional wetlands will be avoided. The only permanent wetland impacts will be
to 0.29 acre of isolated, non -404 jurisdictional wetlands. These impacts fall below the NC IWGP
100000 notification threshold.
Equipment to be used includes a track hoe, dump truck, pumps, various hand tools, possibly a
crane to move construction material such as reinforced bars of steel, and concrete buckets to
place concrete. Typical heavy equipment will be used in the grading operations (bulldozers,
excavators, dump trucks, graders, etc.).

BSa. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this project (including
all prior phases) in the past?
Yes.
BSb. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Section 404 and AJD verification pursuant to NWP 12 was issued for site tax parcel 2050810 on
March 6, 2014 (SAW -2014-0393). The NWP 12 verification expired March 18, 2017, and the
AJD verification expired March 6, 2019 (Attachment E). A new AJD request will be submitted
with this permit application to verify the current wetland boundaries on the site.
131 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in
designing project.
To avoid and minimize impacts to waters of the U.S., the project limits were delineated for
streams and wetlands prior to site design. All on-site Jurisdictional wetlands will be avoided,
while the only wetlands to be impacted are classified as isolated, non -404 Waters of the State.
Permanent impacts to Stream B total 118 -If. 91 -If of impacts to Stream B are considered a loss
of waters and will require compensatory mitigation.
A "No Build" alternative was considered. Since the purpose of the project is to construct a
residential development, a "No Build" option would not meet any of the project goals.
Rejected Alternative Site Design 1:
The initial site design called for two permanent crossings of Stream B, which would have
resulted in 125 If of loss of waters due to construction of an on-site road. This design would
have resulted in unacceptable impacts to waters of the U.S. and excessive mitigation costs.
Additionally, due to overhead interference with the existing Duke Energy powerline right-of-way,
the on-site road providing access to Industrial Drive had to be realigned. Therefore, this design
was rejected (Attachment H, Rejected Alternative Site Design; Sheet 7).
Preferred Site Design 2:
The site was re -designed to minimize impacts to waters of the U.S. and to accommodate the
overhead clearance requirements for the existing Duke Energy powerline right-of-way. One of
the proposed crossings of Stream B was re -designed as bottomless archway. Therefore, this
crossing will result in no impacts to Stream B.
The second crossing (S1 -S4) of Stream B was re -designed and shortened, as the on-site
access road was realigned. The new crossing will be a culverted crossing resulting in just 91 -If
of loss of waters. Payment to the NC DMS in -lieu fee program will be made to mitigate this
impact. This crossing will consist of fill and three elliptical 45"x29" precast reinforced concrete

pipes. The pipe to be placed within the stream bed will be buried to 9" and will not change the
original grade or width of Stream B. The two additional pipes will handle only bankfull flows and
have a steel plate baffle system installed at the bankfull height to minimize impacts to Stream B
(Attachment H, Preferred Site Design; Detail Sheet 1). Placement of rip rap at the inlet and
outlet of the culvert will result in a further 27 -If of permanent impact to Stream B. However,
because the rip rap will be keyed into the bed of the stream, this impact will not result in a loss
of waters. The proposed culverted crossing will involve two additional pipes to handle bankfull
flows. They will have a steel plate baffle system installed at the bankfull height (Attachment H,
Detail Sheet 1). An additional 40 -If of temporary impact will result from a pump around
operation to dewater the stream (S4).
A second crossing of Stream B is proposed, however it will be a bottomless, arched crossing
that will have no impact to the bed or bank of Stream B (Attachment H, Preferred Site Design,
Detail Sheet 2).
One temporary crossing of Stream B will be constructed to support transportation of
construction equipment, resulting in 40 If of temporary impact (S5). This crossing will be
removed completion of construction. Substrate removed from the stream bed will be replaced
and the stream bank will be stabilized with coir fabric and native seed mix (Attachment H,
Preferred Site Design, Detail Sheet 3).
All on-site Jurisdictional wetlands will be avoided. The only permanent wetland impacts will be
to 0.29 acre of isolated, non -404 jurisdictional wetlands. These impacts fall below the NC IWGP
100000 notification threshold.
D1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts
through construction techniques.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be properly installed and inspected in
accordance with the latest NPDES permit. Erosion and sedimentation BMPs will be installed
prior to construction. Water will be diverted around the work area to prevent sedimentation of
downstream aquatic resources and all work will be conducted in the dry. Impacts will be
minimized by strict enforcement of Best Management Practices for the protection of surface
waters, restrictions against the staging of equipment in or adjacent to waters of the US. This
project will follow all conditions of NWP 29 and WGC 4139. All temporary impacts will be
removed, and channel bed and banks will be restored to pre-existing elevations. Equipment to
be used includes a track hoe, dump truck, pumps, various hand tools, possibly a crane to move
construction material such as reinforced bars of steel, and concrete buckets to place concrete.
Typical heavy equipment will be used in the grading operations (bulldozers, excavators, dump
trucks, graders, etc.).

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment E
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
Expried 2014 AJ D and NWP Authorization

PERMIT
ORM ID NUMBER: SAW -2014-0 () 3 F3
From Date: To Date:
Combined with: SAW -
Converted From: SAW -
Related to: SAW -
Remarks:

U.S. ARMY CURDS OF ENGINEERS FILE
WILMINGTON DISTRICT COPY
Action ID. SAW -2014-00393 County: Mecklenburg USGS Quad: SC -Fart Mill
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner/ Authorized Agent: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities Department ,Amy Vershel, PE
Address: 5100 Brookshire Blvd.
Charlotte, North Carolina 28216
Telephone No.: 704-391-5145
Size and location of property (water body, road natne/number, town, etc.): The project is located in
Charlotte and begins at the exisiting pumping station near the NW corner of the junction of Steele
Creek and Choate Circle. It extends to Carolina Place Pwy. Near Interstate 77, at coordinates
35.100052N, -80.916891 the sewer Gne crosses the South Carolina line for 3507 linear feet and
crosses back into North Carolina at 35.083585N, -80.916821W Coordinates: Start at 35.09797 N, -
50.95604W, ends 35.066891N, -80.83543W.
Description of projects area and activity: This permit authorizes excavation and placement of fill
material associated with sewer line replacement and installation to replace the existing Steele Creek
pumpingstation and 24 -inch diameter force main with a new 30 mgd pumping station and 35,500
feet of 364nch diameter force main to serve the Steele Creek sewer basin in southwestern in
Mecklenburg County. In addition two other elements will be constructed: 304nch diameter Steele
Creek gravity sewer and the Wetshall Pumping Station Elimination Project
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
❑ Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number.
Nationwide Permit Number: 12
Summary of Authorized Impacts and Required Mitigation
Impact ID #
NWP
GP #
Open Water (ac) Wetland (ac)
Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
Stream 1
Temporary Permanent
1
12
80
2
12
64
3
12
96
4
12
98
5
12
40
6
12
5o
7
12
83
8
12
47
9A
12
55
98
12
110
10
12
50
11
12
40
12
12
52
13
12
20
14
12
15
15
12
105
A
12
0.167 0.037
B
12
0 0
B -C
12
0 0
E
12
0.081 0
F
1 12
0.194 0

G
12
0 0
J
12
0.015 0.009
K
12
0.215 0.106
L
12
0.107 0.032
T
12
0.169 0.047
UN
12
0 0
W
12
0 0
A
12
0.017 0
Y
12
0 0
Z
12
0 0
CW
12
0 0
Westhall
12
.309 0.144
Impact Totals
12
1035 If
Total Loss of Waters of
the U.S. (ac)
0.375
Required Wetland Mitigation (ac)
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (If)
0.375
Required Stream Mitigation (If)
Additional Remarks and/or Special Permit Conditions
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the
attached conditions and your plans submitted on September 16, 2013. Any violation of the attached conditions or
deviation from your submitted plans may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or
appropriate legal action.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization
is modified, suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit
authorization is reissued and/or modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified
below, provided it complies with all requirements of the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit
authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the activity would no longer comply with
the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or
are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the activity
is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation,
unless discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the
authorization.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality
Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine
Section 401 requirements. You may also visit their website at: http://portal.ncdenr.orejweb/wg/sn/ws/webscage
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA), prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other
required Federal, State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of
Engineers regulatory program, please contact William Elliott at 828-271-7980.
Corps Regulatory Official William Elliott ��� Date: Mar 6, 2014
Expiration Date of Verification: March 18, 2017
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at
http://per2.nwp.usace.army.miUsurvey.html to complete the survey online.

Determination of Jurisdiction:
A. ❑ Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above
described project area. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory
Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
B. ❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the
permit requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a
period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
C. ® There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the
law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years
from the date of this notification.
D. ❑ The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action.
Please reference jurisdictional determination issued . Action ID
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination:
CHOOSE ONE THEN DELETE OTHERS:
The site contains wetlands as determined by the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the
Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Eastern Mountain and
Piedmont Region. These wetlands are adjacent to stream channels located on the property that exhibit indicators of
ordinary high water marks. The stream channel on the property is known as Steel Creek, Little Sugar Creek,
McCullough Branch which flows into the Lower Catawba, NC -SC 3050103 River.
This jurisdictional determination is valid for the impact areas only.
Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for
the particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland
conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or
anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Appeals Information: (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B and C above).
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object
to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
Enclosed you will find a request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must
submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the
criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of
the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address within 60
days from the Issue Date below.

**Jt is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: William Elliott
Issue Date: Mar 6, 2014 Expiration Date: Five years from Issue Date
Copy Furnished:
John B. (Jay) Fulmer, Jr., PE Supervising Engineer

Permit Number: SAW -2014-00393
Permit Type: NW 12
Name of County: Mecklenburg
Name of Permittee: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities Department ,Amy Vershel, PE
Date of Issuance: Mar 6, 2014
Project Manager: William Elliott
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit and any mitigation required by the
permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attention: CESAW-RG-A
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to
permit suspension, modification, or revocation.
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit, and required mitigation was
completed in accordance with the permit conditions.
Signature of Permittee
Date

im ..
N FICAaN® AD INISTRA t =APPEAL ®P Q AND ' ROC�+FS1S 1 r
Applicant: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities File Number: SAW -2014- Date: Mar 6, 2014
Department ,Amy Vershel, PE 00393
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION I4The following identifies `your rights`�and options,regarding an administrative appeal of the above
decision Additidnal`information may be found at
http %/www u ace army.mtl/CECW/Pages/reg, materials.as x or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer.
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)
modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit_
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the
date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However,
you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
If you have questions regarding this decision add/or the appeal
process you may contact:
William Elliott, Project Manager
USACE, Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Ave
RM 208
Asheville, NC 28801
828-271-7980
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-PDO
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
of appellant or
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
Telephone number:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: William Elliott, 69 Darlington Avenue,
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele,
Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-
8801. Phone: [phone]

CESAW-RG
Application No. SAW -2014-00393
MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD
SUBJECT: Department of the Army Memorandum Documenting Nationwide Permit/Regional
General Permit Verification
1. Applicant: Charlotte -Mecklenburg Utilities Department, Amy Vershel, PE
2. Project Location (Waterway, Section, Township, Range, City, County, State): The project is
located in Charlotte and begins at the exisiting pumping station near the NW corner of the junction of
Steele Creek and Choate Circle. It extends to Carolina Place Pwy. Near Interstate 77, at coordinates
35.100052N, -80.916891 the sewer line crosses the South Carolina line for 3507 linear feet and crosses
back into North Carolina at 35.083585N, -80.916821W Coordinates: Start at 35.09797 N, -80.95604W,
ends 35.066891N, -80.83543W.
3. Pre -Construction Notification Receipt Date: January 21, 2014
Complete? ®Yes [:]No
4. Additional Information Requested Date:
5. Pre -Construction Notification Complete Date: January 21, 2014
6. Waters of the US:
*Refer to Basis of Jurisdictional Determination section above dated: Mar 6, 2014
7. Authority: Section 404
8. Project Description (Describe activities in waters of the U.S. considered for verification):
This permit authorizes excavation and placement of fill material associated with sewer line replacement
and installation to replace the existing Steele Creek pumping station and 24 -inch diameter force main with
a new 30 mgd pumping station and 35,500 feet of 36 -inch diameter force main to serve the Steele Creek
sewer basin in southwestern in Mecklenburg County. In addition two other elements will be constructed:
30 -inch diameter Steele Creek gravity sewer and the Wetshall Pumping Station Elimination Project.
9. Type of Permit Requested: 12
10. Pre -construction Notification Required: ®Yes ❑No
12
11. Waiver required to begin work (see GC 27 (a)(2) as applied to appropriate NWPs):
❑Yes 2 No

a. Is compensatory mitigation required for unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional aquatic
resources to reduce the individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects to a minimal
level?
® yes ❑ no [If "no, " do not complete the rest of this .section and include an explanation of
why not here] - Minimal Impacts to aquatic resources associated with the project.
b. Is the impact in the service area of an approved mitigation bank? ❑ yes ® no
(1) Does the mitigation bank have appropriate number and resource type of credits
available? ❑ yes ❑ no
c. Is the impact in the service area of an approved in -lieu fee program? ® yes ❑no
(a) Does the in -lieu fee program have appropriate number and resource type of credits
available? ® yes ❑ no
d. Check the selected compensatory mitigation option(s):
❑ mitigation bank credits
® in -lieu fee program credits
❑ permittee -responsible mitigation under a watershed approach
❑ permittee -responsible mitigation, on-site and in-kind
❑ permittee -responsible mitigation, off-site and out -of -kind
e. If a selected compensatory mitigation option deviates from the order of the options
presented in §332.3(b)(2)-(6), explain why the selected compensatory mitigation option is
environmentally preferable. Address the criteria provided in §332.3(a)(1) (i.e., the likelihood for
ecological success and sustainability, the location of the compensation site relative to the impact
site and their significance within the watershed, and the costs of the compensatory mitigation
project):
Determination (Reference General Condition 27(e)):
The proposed activity, with proposed mitigation (if applicable) would result in no more than
minimal individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects and would not be contrary to
the public interest provided the special conditions and/or modifications identified in the above
sections are incorporated. This project complies with all terms and conditions of 12, including
any applicable regional conditions.
PREPARED BY:
Date: Mar 6, 2014

William Elliott
Regulatory Specialist/Project Manager
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): Mar 6, 2014
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:CESAW-RG-A, SAW -2014-00393, Charlotte -Mecklenburg
Utilities Department,Amy Vershel, PE
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project is located in Charlotte and begins
at the exisiting pumping station near the NW corner of the junction of Steele Creek and Choate Circle. It extends to
Carolina Place Pwy. Near Interstate 77, at coordinates 35.100052N, -80.916891 the sewer line crosses the South
Carolina line for 3507 linear feet and crosses back into North Carolina at 35.083585N, -80.916821W
State: NC County/parish/borough: Mecklenburg City: Charlotte
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude & Longitude in Decimal Degrees: 35.09797N, -
80.95604W, ends 35.066891N, -80.83543W
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest water body: Steel Creek, Little Sugar Creek, McCullough Branch
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows:
Name of watershed or I lydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Lower Catawba, NC -SC 3050103
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
El Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded
on a different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: March 5, 2014
El Field Determination. Datc(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Arenno' "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329)
in the review area [Required]
Q Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
El Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign
commerce. Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There A "waters ofthe U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area [Required]
Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): r
TNWs, including territorial seas
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
0 Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
E Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
a For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least
"seasonally" (e.g., typically 3 months).

Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non -wetland waters: 1035 linear feet: 2-30 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 1.649 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by_OHV1'�
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not
jurisdictional. Explain:
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW,
complete Section III.A.I and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete
Sections III.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and
it helps determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non -navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively
permanent waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally
(e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a
TNW, but has year-round (perennial) flow, skip to Section M.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly
abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps
districts and EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a
significant nexus between a relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any)
and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to
determine if the waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the
significant nexus evaluation must consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This
significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is
used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD
covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite
wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination
whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section HI.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.
" Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in
the and West.

apply):
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick]List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man -altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes:'Pic -List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary conditiontstability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: PiekEist
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: PickL_ ist
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
E]changes in the character of soil
❑ shelving
Elvegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑ sediment deposition
El
plant community
Elother (list):
ElDiscontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
❑ the presence of litter and debris
❑ destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ the presence of wrack line
❑ sediment sorting
❑ scour
❑ multiple observed or predicted flow events
water staining ❑ abrupt change in
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that
High Tide Line indicated by: 13Eloil or scum line along shore objects
El fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
[Iphysical markings/characteristics
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum:
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into
TNW_
'A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g_, where the stream temporarily flows
underground, or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices)_ Where there is a break in the OHWM that is
unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above
and below the break.
'[bid.

❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed
characteristics, etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a). General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is Pick[ f
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow:~Pick L%sf. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are PickFWkistist river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from P-eir-E,L�sf.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Prek�List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general
watershed characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally -sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick;LW
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:

Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? ( Size (in acres
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions
performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in
combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical,
physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not
limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and
the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant
nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between
a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely
determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos
Guidance and discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood
waters to TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions
for fish and other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and
organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical,
chemical, or biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be
documented below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself then go to
Section IIID:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or
indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in
combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section IIID: _
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK
ALL THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
El TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Q Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial: Feature shows on USGS topographic map as a blue line stream.
Professionals in the field observed flow levels and development of bed and bank structures in the
stream, indicative of perennial -
Elof TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year)
are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section II1.11 Provide rationale indicating that
tributary flows seasonally:

, Rationale:
12. Coordination with Agencies/Tribes Needed: []Yes ®No Date:
Resolution: o
13. Commenting Agencies: No comments received from any agencies below
a. US Fish and Wildlife Service
b. US Environmental Protection Agency
c. National Marine Fisheries Service
d. State Agency (list commenting state agencies) NCDENR : No significant negative impact
e. State Historic Preservation Office
f. Other:Habitat Assessment and Restoration Program,inc.
14. Substantive Issues Raised and Corps Resolution (Consideration of Comments):
15. Compliance with Other Federal Laws (If specific law is not applicable write N/A): -
a. Endangered Species Act:
(1) Name of species present: None Present
(2) Effects determination: No Effect
(3) Date of Service(s) concurrence:
(4) Basis for "no effect" determination: See attached map reflecting N.C. Natural Heritage
Program data on occurrences of Federally endangered/threatened species, state listed species, and
natural/rare communities. No listed species were located in/near project site and no suitable habitat exists
based upon information submitted to date.
(5) Additional information (optional):
b. Magnuson -Stevens Act (Essential Fish Habitat): N/A — not applicable to our work area
(1) Name of species present:
(2) Effects determination:
(3) Date of Service(s) concurrence: Basis for "no effect" determination:
(4) Additional information (optional):
c. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act:
(1) Known site present: ❑ yes ® no

(2) Survey required/conducted: ❑ yes ❑ no
(3) Effects determination: No Effect
(4) Rationale: See attached map reflecting locations/occurrences of historic structures and districts
as listed on the National Register of Historic Places (Register)_ No resources listed or eligible for listing
on the Register are located on/near the proiect site and information provided to date does not indicate that
further cultural resource investigations should be conducted.
(5) Date consultation complete (if necessary):
(6) Additional information (optional):
d. Section 401 Water Quality Certification:
(1) Individual certification required: ❑ yes ❑ no
(2) Individual Certification: ❑Issued -[:]Waived ❑Denied
e. Coastal Zone Management Act: N/A - not applicable to our work area
(1) Individual certification required: ❑ yes ❑ no
(2) Individual certification: ❑lssued ❑Waived ❑Denied
(3) Additional information (optional):
f. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act: No resources designated as such are located on/near the
project site.
(1) Project located on designated or "study" river: ❑ yes ❑no
(2) Managing Agency:
(3) Date written determination provided that the project will not adversely affect the Wild
and Scenic River designation or study status:
(4) Additional information (optional):
g. Other
16. Special Conditions Required (include rationale for each required con ditionlexplanation
for requiring no special conditions): ❑ yes ® no
a. The activity is conducted in accordance with the information submitted and meets the
conditions applicable to the NWP, as described at Part C of the NWP Program and the
Wilmington District NWP Regional Conditions.
17. Compensatory Mitigation Determination: The applicant has avoided and minimized
impacts to the maximum extent practicable.

Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
El If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Q Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based
solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule' (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Q Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the
M13R factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using
best professional judgment (check all that apply):
El Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
El Lakes/ponds: acres.
El Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
El Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard,
where such a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
El Non -wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
( Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non -wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
El Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and,
where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
® Office concurs with data shects/delineation report_
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:SC-Fort Mill.
El USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
El State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):UNK.
or ® Other (Name & Date):UNK
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
El Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
E Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Q Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Water body that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant
nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non -wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Q Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that
tributary is seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that
wetland is directly abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 1.649 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
El Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they
are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands. have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional.
Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are
adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional.
Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Q Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA -STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE,
INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
El which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
El from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
El which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
0 Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Q Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
El Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
El Other non -wetland waters: acres.
"See Footnote # 3.
' To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III. D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA
HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following
Rapanos.

Y
eMeht
.Ecoir system
PROGRAM
INVOICE #20934
March 18, 2014
Amy Vershcl, PE
Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility Dept.
5100 Brookshire Blvd.
Charlotte, NC 28216
Project: Steele Creek Pumping Station invoice expires: May 18, 2014
County: Mecklenburg
USACE4: 2014-00393
WQ permit#: 2014-0068
EEP #: 21173
Location: Catawba 03050103 Expanded Service Area
You have elected to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements of the Section 401/404/CAMA permit(s) issued for the above
referenced project through payment of a fee to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). In accordance with
15A NCAC 2R .0402(d), the amount due is based upon the 2013-2014 Fee Schedule and has been calculated as follows (Please note:
payment for wetlands is calculated in increments of 0.25 acres). If you have any questions concerning this payment, please call Kelly
Williams at [phone].
Habitat Type Invoiced Amount Fee Schedule Cost
Riparian Wetlands up to 0.50 acres x $ 68,502.00 = $34,251.00
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE if paid within 60 days $34,251.00
If payment is not received within 60 days of the date of this invoice, it will expire. Note that your permit(s) may require payment
before this date. Subsequentmvotce extensions will be based on the fee schedule in effecto_n the date they are issued. Extensions
may be requested by emailing the NCEEPIn-Lieu Fee Program Coordinator at [e-mail]. Please submit an
ePayment at http://portal.nedenr.orp/web/eep/epayment or send a check payable to NCEEP for the Total Amount Due to the address
-below and enclose a copy of this invoice.
US Mail: Physical Address (for other delivery services):
NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program NCDENR Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center 217 West Jones St., Suite 3000A
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 Raleigh, N.C. 27603
If the account name on the check is not the same as the permit holder's name, please include a signed statement by the permit holder
that the check is being written on behalf of, and with full knowledge and authorization of, the permit holder. Refunds of payments
made to NCEEP are only approved under certain conditions. All refund requests must be submitted in accordance with EEP's refund
policy at www.nceep.net_
YOU MUST BE IN POSSESSION OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT FROM NCEEP PRIOR TO COMMENCING THE ACTIVITIES
AUTHORIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ARMY 404 PERMIT, CAMA PERMIT AND/OR THE 401 WATER QUALITY
CERTIFICATION.
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWR Wetlands/401 Unit
William Elliot, USACE-Asheville; Tyler Crumbley, USACE-Raleigh
Alan Johnson, NCDWR- Mooresville
Karri Blackmon, agent
File
RP.Stdri,�t�... Prot" our Stag ®A
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-707-8976 /www.nceep.net

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Wilmington District
Compensatory Mitigation Responsibility Transfer Form
Permittee: Amy Versel; PE, Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility Department Action ID: SAW -2014-00393
Project Name: Steele Creek Pumping Station Expansion Project County: Mecklenburg
Instructions to Permittee: The Permittee must provide a copy of this form to the Mitigation Sponsor, either an approved
Mitigation Bank or the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), who will then sign the form to verify the
transfer of the mitigation responsibility. Once the Sponsor has signed this form, it is the Permittee's responsibility to
ensure that to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Project Manager identified on page two is in receipt of a signed
copy of this form before conducting authorized impacts, unless otherwise specified below. If more than one mitigation
Sponsor will be used to provide the mitigation associated with the permit, or if the impacts and/or the mitigation will occur
in more than one 8 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC), multiple forms will be attached to the permit, and the separate forms
for each Sponsor and/or HUC must be provided to the appropriate mitigation Sponsors_
Instructions to Sponsor: The Sponsor must verify that the mitigation requirements (credits) shown below are available at
the identified site. By signing below, the Sponsor is accepting full responsibility for the identified mitigation, regardless of
whether or not they have received payment from the Permittee. Once the form is signed, the Sponsor must update the
bank ledger and provide a copy of the signed form and the updated bank ledger to the Permittee, the USACE Project
Manager, and the Wilmington District Mitigation Office (see contact information on page 2). The Sponsor must also comply
with all reporting requirements established in their authorizing instrument.
Permitted Impacts and Compensatory Mitigation Requirements:
Permitted Impacts Requiring Mitigation* 8 -digit NUC and Basin: 03050103, Catawba River Basin
Stream Impacts (linear feet) Wetland Impacts (acres)
Warm
Cool
Cold Riparian Riverine Riparian Non-Riverine Non -Riparian
Coastal
Non -Riparian
Coastal
0.375
*If more than one mitigation sponsor will be used for the permit, only include impacts to be mitigated by this sponsor.
Compensatory Mitigation Requirements: 8 -digit HUC and Basin: 03050103, Catawba River Basin
Stream Mitigation (credits) Wetland Mitigation (credits)
Warm
Cool
Cold Riparian Riverine
Riparian Non-Riverine
Non -Riparian
Coastal
0.375
Mitigation Site Debited: NCEEP
(List the name of the bank to be debited. For umbrella banks, also list the specific site. For NCEEP, list NCEEP. If the NCEEP
acceptance letter identifies a specific site, also list the specific site to be debited).
Section to be completed by the Mitigation Sponsor
Statement of Mitigation Liability Acceptance: I, the undersigned, verify that I am authorized to approve mitigation
transactions for the Mitigation Sponsor shown below, and I certify that the Sponsor agrees to accept full responsibility for
providing the mitigation identified in this document (see the table above), associated with the USACE Permittee and Action
ID number shown. I also verify that released credits (and/or advance credits for NCEEP), as approved by the USACE, are
currently available at the mitigation site identified above. Further, I understand that if the Sponsor fails to provide the
required compensatory mitigation, the USACE Wilmington District Engineer may pursue measures against the Sponsor to
ensure compliance associated with the mitigation requirements.
Mitigation Sponsor Name:
Name of Sponsor's Authorized Representative:
Signature of Sponsor's Authorized Representative Date of Signature
Page 1 of 2 Form Updated 23 October, 2013

USACE Wilmington District
Compensatory Mitigation Responsibility Transfer Form, Page 2
Conditions for Transfer of Compensatory Mitigation Credit:
• Once this document has been signed by the Mitigation Sponsor and the USACE is in receipt of the signed form, the
Permittee is no longer responsible for providing the mitigation identified in this form, though the Permittee remains
responsible for any other mitigation requirements stated in the permit conditions.
• Construction within jurisdictional areas authorized by the permit identified on page one of this form can begin only
after the USACE is in receipt of a copy of this document signed by the Sponsor, confirming that the Sponsor has
accepted responsibility for providing the mitigation requirements listed herein. For authorized impacts conducted by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), construction within jurisdictional areas may proceed upon
permit issuance; however, a copy of this form signed by the Sponsor must be provided to the USACE within 30 days of
permit issuance. NCDOT remains fully responsible for the mitigation until the USACE has received this form, confirming
that the Sponsor has accepted responsibility for providing the mitigation requirements listed herein.
• Signed copies of this document must be retained by the Permittee, Mitigation Sponsor, and in the USACE
administrative records for both the permit and the Bank/ILF Instrument_ It is the Permittee's responsibility to ensure
that the USACE Project Manager (address below) is provided with a signed copy of this form.
• If changes are proposed to the type, amount, or location of mitigation after this form has been signed and returned to
the USACE, the Sponsor must obtain case-by-case approval from the USACE Project Manager and/or North Carolina
Interagency Review Team (NCIRT)_ If approved, higher mitigation ratios may be applied, as per current District
guidance and a new version of this form must be completed and included in the USACE administrative records for both
the permit and the Bank/ILF Instrument.
Comments/Additional Conditions:
This form is not valid unless signed below by the USACE Project Manager and by the Mitigation Sponsor on Page 1. Once
signed, the Sponsor should provide copies of this form along with an updated bank ledger to: 1) the Permittee, 2) the
USACE Project Manager at the address below, and 3) the Wilmington District Mitigation Office, Attn: Todd Tugwell,
11405 Falls of Neuse Road, Wake Forest, NC 27587 (email: todd. tugwell@usace. army. mil). Questions regarding this form
or any of the permit conditions may be directed to the USACE Project Manager below.
USACE Project Manager: William Elliott
USACE Field Office: Asheville Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Email: [e-mail]
ELLIOTT.WILLIAM.ANDigitally signed by
ELUOTT.W,LLUNIAMHOW.104%94604
DN: —US, —U.S. Government --D.0, —PKL
THONY.1048694604 o,- :0,n UMAMON".' 0486946045';,4S
USACE Project Manager Signature
March 6. 2014
Date of Signature
Current Wilmington District mitigation guidance, including information on mitigation ratios, functional assessments, and
mitigation bank location and availability, and credit classifications (including stream temperature and wetland groupings) is
available at htto://ribits.usace.armv.mil.
Page 2 of 2
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the
Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at http://regulatory.usacesurvey.com/ to complete the survey online.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Wilmington District
Compensatory Mitigation Responsibility Transfer Form
Permittee: Amy Versel, PE, Charlotte Mecklenburg Utility Department Action ID: SAW -2014-00393
Project Name: Steele Creek Pumping Station Expansion Project County: Mecklenburg
Instructions to Permittee: The Permittee must provide a copy of this form to the Mitigation Sponsor, either an approved
Mitigation Bank or the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP), who will then sign the form to verify the
transfer of the mitigation responsibility. Once the Sponsor has signed this form, it is the Permittee's responsibility to
ensure that to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Project Manager identified on page two is in receipt of a signed
copy of this form before conducting authorized impacts, unless otherwise specified below. If more than one mitigation
Sponsor will be used to provide the mitigation associated with the permit, or if the impacts and/or the mitigation will occur
in more than one 8 -digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC), multiple forms will be attached to the permit, and the separate forms
for each Sponsor and/or HUC must be provided to the appropriate mitigation Sponsors.
Instructions to Sponsor: The Sponsor must verify that the mitigation requirements (credits) shown below are available at
the identified site. By signing below, the Sponsor is accepting full responsibility for the identified mitigation, regardless of
whether or not they have received payment from the Permittee. Once the form is signed, the Sponsor must update the
bank ledger and provide a copy of the signed form and the updated bank ledger to the Permittee, the USACE Project
Manager, and the Wilmington District Mitigation Office (see contact information on page 2). The Sponsor must also comply
with all reporting requirements established in their authorizing instrument.
Permitted Impacts and Compensatory Mitigation Requirements:
Permitted Impacts Requiring Mitigation* . 8 -digit HUC and Basin: 03050103, Catawba River Basin
Stream Impacts (linear feet) Wetland Impacts (acres)
Warm
Cool
Cold Riparian Riverine
Riparian Non-Riverine Non Riparian
Coastal
0.375
*If more than one mitigation sponsor will be used for the permit, only include impacts to be mitigated by this sponsor.
Compensatory Mitigation Requirements: 8 -digit HUC and Basin: 03050103, Catawba River Basin
Stream Mitigation (credits) Wetland Mitigation (credits)
Warm Cool Cold Riparian Riverine
Riparian Non-Riverine Non -Riparian
Coastal
0.375
Mitigation Site Debited: NCEEP
(List the name of the bank to be debited. For umbrella banks, also list the specific site. For NCEEP, list NCEEP. If the NCEEP
acceptance letter identifies a specific site, also list the specific site to be debited).
Section to be completed by the Mitigation Sponsor
Statement of Mitigation Liability Acceptance: I, the undersigned, verify that I am authorized to approve mitigation
transactions for the Mitigation Sponsor shown below, and I certify that the Sponsor agrees to accept full responsibility for
providing the mitigation identified in this document (see the table above), associated with the USACE Permittee and Action
ID number shown. I also verify that released credits (and/or advance credits for NCEEP), as approved by the USACE, are
currently available at the mitigation site identified above. Further, I understand that if the Sponsor fails to provide the
required compensatory mitigation, the USACE Wilmington District Engineer may pursue measures against the Sponsor to
ensure compliance associated with the mitigation requirements.
Mitigation Sponsor N
Name of Sponsor's Authorized Representative:
Signature of Sponsor's Authorized Representative Date of Signature
Page 1 of 2 Form Updated 23 October, 2013

USACE Wilmington District
Compensatory Mitigation Responsibility Transfer Form, Page 2
Conditions for Transfer of Compensatory Mitigation Credit:
• Once this document has been signed by the Mitigation Sponsor and the USACE is in receipt of the signed form, the
Permittee is no longer responsible for providing the mitigation identified in this form, though the Permittee remains
responsible for any other mitigation requirements stated in the permit conditions.
• Construction within jurisdictional areas authorized by the permit identified on page one of this form can begin only
after the USACE is in receipt of a copy of this document signed by the Sponsor, confirming that the Sponsor has
accepted responsibility for providing the mitigation requirements listed herein_ For authorized impacts conducted by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), construction within jurisdictional areas may proceed upon
permit issuance; however, a copy of this form signed by the Sponsor must be provided to the USACE within 30 days of
permit issuance. NCDOT remains fully responsible for the mitigation until the USACE has received this form, confirming
that the Sponsor has accepted responsibility for providing the mitigation requirements listed herein.
• Signed copies of this document must be retained by the Permittee, Mitigation Sponsor, and in the USACE
administrative records for both the permit and the Bank/ILF Instrument. It is the Permittee's responsibility to ensure
that the USACE Project Manager (address below) is provided with a signed copy of this form.
• If changes are proposed to the type, amount, or location of mitigation after this form has been signed and returned to
the USACE, the Sponsor must obtain case-by-case approval from the USACE Project Manager and/or North Carolina
Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). If approved, higher mitigation ratios may be applied, as per current District
guidance and a new version of this form must be completed and included in the USACE administrative records for both
the permit and the Bank/ILF Instrument.
Comments/Additional Conditions:
This form is not valid unless signed below by the USACE Project Manager and by the Mitigation Sponsor on Page 1. Once
signed, the Sponsor should provide copies of this form along with an updated bank ledger to: 1) the Permittee, 2) the
USACE Project Manager at the address below, and 3) the Wilmington District Mitigation Office, Attn: Todd Tugwell,
11405 Falls of Neuse Road, Wake Forest, NC 27587 (email. [e-mail]). Questions regarding this form
or any of the permit conditions may be directed to the USACE Project Manager below.
USACE Project Manager: William Elliott
USACE Field Office: Asheville Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Email: [e-mail]
ELLIOTTRILLIAM.AN °Wm"�"WAM NTHONY.,0a86946Do
DMc=us, Government =DUD._P10,
THONY.1048694604 D e Zo -U.S.03 3 WNTH Y'° 94601
USACE Project Manager Signature
March 6, 2014
Date of Signature
Current Wilmington District mitigation guidance, including information on mitigation ratios, functional assessments, and
mitigation bank location and availability, and credit classifications (including stream temperature and wetland groupings) is
available at http://ribits.usace.army.mil.
Page 2 of 2
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete the
Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at http://regulatory.usacesurvey.coml to complete the survey online.

Elliott, William A SAW
From: Boos, Laura M SAC
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 4:40 PM
To: Elliott, William A SAW
Subject: RE: Steele Creek (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Nice to talk to you today. Below is the address you can send the NWP and drawings when you
are done. I will send those with the PCN to SCDHEC for the 401.
Thanks!
Laura M. Boos
1835 Assembly Street, Room 865 B-1
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
phone: [phone]
fax: [phone]
In order to assist us in improving our service to you, please complete the survey found at
http:J/per_2_.nwp.usace.arrny.mil/survey_.html
-----Original Message -----
From: Elliott, William A SAW
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 3:34 PM
To: Boos, Laura M SAC
Subject: Steele Creek (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Hi Laura, I am the person handling Steele Creek. I called and left you a msg. I'll try again
later.
William Elliott
Regulatory Specialist
US Army Corp of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Ave, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
Phone: [phone], ext 224
Fax: [phone]
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of public support.
Please vist our website at:
http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram.aspx
Please assist us in better serving you! Please complete the customer survey by clicking on
the following -.-link: http://per2.nwp.usace.army.mil/survey.html
1

-;Ecosystem _
YfiOGRAM '
December 16, 2013 (replaces December 9, 2013 letter)
Amy Vershel, PE
Charlotte Mecklenburg -Utility Department.
5100 Brookshire Blvd
Charlotte, NC 28216 Expiration of Acceptance: June 16, 2014
Project: Steele Creek Pumping Station Expansion Project County: Mecklenburg
This is a conditional acceptance. The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(NCEEP).is willing to accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the
perrnit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine
if payment to the NCEEP will be approved. You must also comply with.all other state: federal or local governmentpermit;,
re_ulations or authorizations associated with the nronosed activity includine SL 2009-337: An Act to Promote the Use of
Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L_ 2011-343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit/401 Certifleation/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP: Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In -
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that -may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned to NCEEP for this impact is determined by
permitting agencies and may exceed the impact amounts shown below.
River
Cu
Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I Buffer 11
Basin
Location
(Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.)
I ColdCool
--
LVarm 12i urian
Non -Riparian Coastal Marsh
f Impact Catawba
03050103*
0 0
0 0.375
0 I 0
0 I 0
*The Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area will be utilized for this impact. Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility
for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Prouram,In-Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28,2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. I f you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
[phone].
Sincerer
Jarnes. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc; Karen Higgins, NCDWR Wetlands,401 Unit
William Elliot_, USAGE -Asheville
Alan Johnson, NCDWR-Mooresville
.Karri, B lacknion, agent
File
Protect' ow -ft-A& © A
�• � NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-707-8976 1 www.nceep.net

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment F
Agent Authorization
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

AGENT CERTIFICATION OF AUTHORIZATION
I, Susan Rosenblatt , representing, Cranford Single Family Lots, LLC
hereby certify that I have authorized Dan Zurlo of Carolina Wetland Services, Inc. to act on my
behalf and take all actions necessary to the processing, issuance, and acceptance of this
request for wetlands determination / Clean Water Act Section 404/401 permitting and any and
all standard and special conditions attached.
We hereby certify that the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to
the best of our knowledge.
IvE07, Mmg
Applicant's signature
-7l51IoM
Agent's signature
Date Date
6/13/19
Completion of this form will allow the agent to sign
all future application correspondence.

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment G
Figures 1-7
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

GAShared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2018\2018 Consulting Projects\2018-0441 Cranford Drive (Preston Park)\Permit(NWP#29)\ArcGISTETS Figure l_Vicinity.mxd

-
n
a, r
t
��s+ �ovP eryd s;
r ply
_rJbSF Bi VA
` Ster4ier�i =-
,�:Elemsch
lM1
Industrial Drive
R
I <
INEYlItEglj\ a S1
ROCKrH ` I
- 51 - •\ - FS
ttrlvrF___
NC -51 PirtcwAle ti N. Polk Street
IN St
>r,
IV �F44$ Pmcnlle
d :Ekins \1
D r t
+Q •. � �. _ ,rte
"gyp(,4�
�r Legend
.� r, r. x�`•r� Project Limits (134.8 ac.)
;.
REFERENCE: 7.5 MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC USGS QUADRANGLE C. 2,000 1,000 0 2,000 Feet
FORT MILL NC -SC (2017)AND WEDDINGTON NC -SC (2017).
SCALE: DATE:
1 inch = 2,000 feet 6/28/2019 USGS Topographic Map FIGURE NO.
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2018-0441 DJZ Preston Park Site
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: CAROLINA Pineville, North Carolina 2
CAG WETLAND SERVICES CWS Project No. 2018-0441
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2018\2018 Consulting Projects\2018-0441 Cranford Drive (Preston Park)\Permit(NWP#29)\ArcGIS\Figure2_USGS.mxd

N
-low -y
Ifs %
d" top
-ftAOr 4
v.
N.
<)
cougg . e.
Ci
`i O
Legend
Project Limits (134.1
co
Roads
REFERENCE: BACKGROUND AERIAL IMAGERY PROVIDED BY ESRI, DATED 2019. 700 350 0 701i
BACKGROUND GIS LAYERS PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG GIS DEPARTMENT. DATED 2018.
A& *L-

k
I� ur b,5j' I}�, MeD
t v Mea mcm wr a Ccn� rr,D
ire pas ceD2 •
it Me8 Ce32 1t" r 44
Meg Mr.B PuE Dal I I fn
MeD r� vOti .kM CuE
Mk8 Mab Ir$ Md CeB2 CuB�
C„B CUD
Cal r • C
I ! hTeET _ 1 7Me$CIO
1 — MeD -�PaE ]]] /
DOB � WIs13 ��
w ;I da Ce82 --PaE Ce83j �
C1'I
eA2 WkD /•
Ur 1 CeB2 Da- \ M MD IrB 3
IrH Me on
CLM2 Cam I
Mee 1
Me8 r Ir8 � ;E Mab 1Nk8
Da0'C i
Meg DaB
k7t8 IrB M ITS
MeB paO re
MCI Ur �UL'
Me8 it6 IrA D. IrA Ir8 WkD MeD
MeB
MeB � CM+r6 luB I
WkD Me[
1 �ffg4 frB MeB MeD
Me8 r} Z f Jrq 0 I l rA EnD M0 Ce177 W2
r 7� >
ke i IrR Q t Or
Me •:LJ Ir13 _
D MeD J 'K Ce83 Ira
fr8 WkB y
Me8
� Met] � r,•e8:
5f MeBl
111HIr6
f��, J fir•
MO
7r4 lu8 En Eni} !1
�r� ir8 DaD 1rB I Ir Cela?
Mei3 [ u. = W W
Mew ? Wk— 51
Ce82 Mo _
DaB Ce32 MeB NO � MO f 103 Yil
a u6 si Ir9 : w
c
eg/ _ A D T�- `
PBline
3 % r �' {r$
/✓p CC6132 Mei3 i�' L7r t
o
�
'Y [�IrB 7 Ce82
+gyne L - WkD
, Mea � Pineville � "13"13,_�
N. Polk Street l
NC -51 MD Mks, MeD r -
MeB Mg
Wk MeD C I A WINS
Mf<s Pat luB WkD WkD Ir IrB .
L' Ce82 MrB WkE -
M IrB MeB
IrBWkO
Pa IrB WkD w µD tri _ -..
WkD WkD
POE MO D WkB
WkE
M r1J Ce9�� 4, p I WkD.
Legend
aE Ce82 �Q WkE r Project Limits (134.8 ac.)
Ge82 u
_ P-
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS HISTORIC SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY NC\ CO 2'000 ,000 O 2,000 Feet
SHEETS 11 AND 12, DATED 1976.'•'l
MO Ce Oil! 1111
1. CeB2 w w WkE F _ +♦�
FaE d PaF ���� r a WS r: hili
r.
SCALE:1 inch = 2,000 feet DATE. 6/28/2019 USDA-NRCS Historic Soil Survey FIGURE of Mecklenburg County NO.
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2018-0441 DJZ ^ Preston Park Site
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: CAROLINA Pineville, North Carolina 5
CAG WETLAN❑ SERVICES CWS Project No. 2018-0441
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2018\2018 Consulting Projects\2018-0441 Cranford Drive (Preston Park)\Permit(NWP#29)\ArcGIS\Figure5_HistoricSoils.mxd
Soil Unit Name and Description
Hydric
IrA
Iredell fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 % slopes
Yes
IrB
Iredell fine sandy loam, 1 to 8% slopes
Yes
MeB
Mecklenburg fine sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes
No
MO
Monocan loam
Yes
Ur
Urbanland
No
Legend
aE Ce82 �Q WkE r Project Limits (134.8 ac.)
Ge82 u
_ P-
REFERENCE: USDA-NRCS HISTORIC SOIL SURVEY OF MECKLENBURG COUNTY NC\ CO 2'000 ,000 O 2,000 Feet
SHEETS 11 AND 12, DATED 1976.'•'l
MO Ce Oil! 1111
1. CeB2 w w WkE F _ +♦�
FaE d PaF ���� r a WS r: hili
r.
SCALE:1 inch = 2,000 feet DATE. 6/28/2019 USDA-NRCS Historic Soil Survey FIGURE of Mecklenburg County NO.
CWS PROJECT NO: DRAWN BY:
2018-0441 DJZ ^ Preston Park Site
APPLICANT NO: CHECKED BY: CAROLINA Pineville, North Carolina 5
CAG WETLAN❑ SERVICES CWS Project No. 2018-0441
G:\Shared drives\Consulting Team Drive\2018\2018 Consulting Projects\2018-0441 Cranford Drive (Preston Park)\Permit(NWP#29)\ArcGIS\Figure5_HistoricSoils.mxd

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment H
Impact Figures
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

` ¢ +IIS Impacts Sheet; ; F=" N
�i p
OuR
;Q� Preferred Site DAD
esign
a
SHEET.
e_,mENRINDE.INEONLY
SEE SHEETS C 10 THAN c-110
0106 � PoROENIOLITION DETAILS. �+5
/� «lLAE
SHA.
CLA
EAR^LEDMA.�.
yam` 4 Co< 0.O4 ac. permanent impact due to fill to gad @p
/y �'"'� / _ o non 4O4jurisdictional, isolated wetland3939g og
AARRAAEA
WOE res ■ o
0 E as permanent impact due to fill toHU
i
non -I jurisdictional, isolate to gyMIRLALLEDm
SHEET,A. 10"IDDID
�d
1�x 1 3I
SHET 118�f of permanent impact due culvert X1
installation(51,15 4 g
REM Ui
"` �` �` C105 o< If) fill (S2, 70 If) and rip rap outlet stabilaation (S3, 27 If) I@ k
E`RR EZ 'EJs w�� �S4 y °has oa
��� axxrew �+ 4O 1f of temporary impact due to dewatering. �'R m*E
See detail sleet 1.
ET TE
.E
M HEI ED RE. AAMR E 01
C10 iALAREOREDLATER HAD
vA RL y4�G ^J ,.� 4 T
".MAR ;mo,... %' -1' I •�
23
Or
IL
dO
a SHR
'Ile ED / < 4w,
J
'RoMERA
.<xrcm€a°°EJ �h ..° .�..
m.� �� l tiRE e.....
—Si$HEFT ALARROAD.l �� ss .,.AE � "M 3 p
°� 5 107 4O lftemporary stream impact
ewo�iox xm[s t \ T� .. Croconstruction
sing i on crossing
RRULD
11 \ M���� ,Axt Crossing to be restored and stabilized I 9 J No
\ owE .. O fy
„�_RA _ A A "°" (See detail sheet 3) 5 o O $
HILO
A"L-a � d v / p�temporary
/� 1 U on restoration ofthe the `-
\ \\ crossing a bottomless, arched Tossing \ `- pe. �w ° 5EADARD
6
ULTMEATOODLEALLAR_° A ATER�^.E� "`UURR — -- is proposed. This will result in no HEE I� ,. o
E.E. .E.....A.A.Eo� / _ _ impact to the stream bed or bank m
rAa z3
ARED
LDLUAT.LL.�,..o�....Ae.,...,E.,A.M�E=.. x\ �,:�' 1 �RAL LAN'�E detail sheet 2]. 102 I I I 0 Z O
�..E.."E�.A.....EA.A....uA.,E v,�-- 4 - -�
~ a
EM -A, AMLTRN
a w..ARD D E w..Oo.A�E �.e.o o�.,,woD — o'� E� lam=
LOU �� ..r.��.�rA.A ....LL.�wA. Ar �. , .E
0 ELI
015 do permanent impact due to fill to O11 E
RAI�EPo�E�.e....uA...�,.a,um®wo.moF -� °°Y° �. _� ° �o E. non�O4jurisdictional, isolatM wetlantl � � sn
11 0
TOO
RILALeE...AAE.EAvnw THE RVI
L R"U`T RILS omoxo<,"nr. os.E..E.DE'..".wA. xuoaarv�.« °I W4 rc.enn @
12 E„,��o,°`"°""°°"`°"°`m"°°"`E'"°"'""'"_A.L'.AD.""""°°"°°` 0.O4 ac. permanent impact dueto finite///��� _
13 a.,A.m.E.A.A.AEAAE.U..E nonLO4junsdictional, isolated wetland /� � %a
.00...ED DETHErows unenx An REAL r !Ie
AU....w..Em.LIL . E.AU...EE.A.A,A....,,A... RATE SHEET .i _°.
R.
L AMI REA UT
C 10 1
; _A _..A._ 94a =
..a EA..E...E..A....,,AA...,,,E.RE.�.E... 0 /
AEIOAMLLA..E.,EAE P, C -goo

e, ,-
��-"¢ �- � { � n LEOENtlR'K cnm�
z� _ , See Impact Sheet for �o�.,
r 'r,�r— . " Lit `
s ��� ^, Mull impacts to waters K x..��� �1.�,
\'� AT—a See outlined note for - �" �rzmr
�® i x.� SHEET' r„ .a� �N,wR
���� description of the €
Q l \"A rt"n M EROSION CONTROL NOTES A•
"max / INSET SHEET C 09 �r � �T >.
�� removal and °® CLN EO RINUEXIN6 ONLY.
1 r �meermrsrox SEE SRE Ei5C L2 iR RJ [
R NS r, i/��/ C �� €mv xen SHEET rmrsorxsrvxenee C3INENR CLEAN NEiFILS.
....� - p,x, _____ xx.xwE.xe,
f stabilization of the . =
��i TA,�; I C309 temporary crossing ���,���""� °x A0 Ep
��Y i
YSI int �2z �aA'I r� a
3�
&ee ` -: + SHEET c
.a- As
-
Emu
�,
I - C306 €^
,i' I galas
_T' g'h' mfr
' .. i I vov=o,s
'r .y r �•---
r" — EH _
'. -� ../FE
�� Ell a
I �� ��" / m / — '( r�r xL �I I I •
EI e6d y s�rr
ALL
�/LURER
TIE E' H -T e�1`�� 4 y ,� I ��
i �" e s
TAlLAEETTElEAEAAAE`ani"T"E s i ���� _ /I L
IL
§ F� ro x® _ _ r 1 1,y1A ll
, J
I/
NAA
6gHEET�N
308 JUMl�
t _ /at
o g
At
/ �`: xr.E SHEET a� r_LJ p LU
LA
_JIT
i IT
P� ^� ��� .�� ys� �, H c z
�c+ SHEETc U U o
/l x yF 1C / Y—=` -- jA `tea" _ il/ / �___ �� 0 z,
.AT
I��" "�
9r "w —.
r.. _ / —
z
LL
AE Of
10,
` / 1 /'r' / . l/ MAIx 'Z w
�" I AT
i fir, / — ¢
" i„ r ';a _ z / l K - Fili - / ' z -` / ' q� o tem V
'�� ,,' �� d '";:;-_ /..� / w , i `_. - r�`SHEET
"l. ' '�- /
;- 0302 946

\ I
S, TISHEET
C207
f �
eIT
�
gym.. oma.IEEIVE`r
SHEE
C21 -4-
E.
29
.�
5HE
t298
0 A
L
_ �el
HEST
Ea
EE I-
uN
DE
PT
4�
`�A
Xu
J I
Elm
SEE SHEET C 201 FOR
n; see impact
for wetland and
i impacts
gi
4
-HE
�C203 "
SHEET
C202
L
SHEE
EE I-
uN
DE
PT
4�
J I
Elm
SEE SHEET C 201 FOR
Ra
SITE PLAN AND ZONING
I 'All
1. UllER
CODE NOTES
=X
s
�
�
SEE SHEETS L-im THAN
L- 1ID FOR STREET TREES
f
AC
— — — AND PLANTING PLAN
C 200 FOR INDEXING ONLY.m
�w
w�
II
SEE SHEE TS C 202 TH.
IL
C 211 FOR PLAN DETAILS.
W E
J
a
I
o�
J
-
D�
i
yA
3
J
4
-HE
�C203 "
SHEET
C202
L
SHEE
EE I-
.Vil
DE
PT
4�
J I
Elm
4
-HE
�C203 "
SHEET
C202
L
SHEE
.Vil
PT
4�
J I
Elm
I 'All
1. UllER
a
...o
s
�
�
AC
w�
II
IL
I
J
a
I
J
-
D�
o
J
IBJ
J I
Vwap>a
V
W;0
J
W o
z r
U
$
�"
r
1
O�
z
g
S
i
g
�
�
4 9
946
�__
—
C=200

--
m I
'?'
S ET ,eoom.oE
C41
--\—`SHEET
- X498
Rejected Alternative
Site Design; Sheet 4
SHEET
C407 MDVS DRW
. SEE SHEET C 4011 OR STOW
CHARTS AND GRADING AND
DRAINAGE NOTES
C 400 FOR INDEXING ONLY.
SEE SHEETSC 4G2 THRO.
-s - C 411 FOR PL AN DETAILS.
TNG I
�� SHEET
SHEET _ C4 4
C406 -�-
I % ..UllH
v
40
i
mow, ..
Akt9�- C405
.a
I
I
I
SHEET \
C403
(SHEET
C402 �•
1210, 018
I=
41946
C-400
IN
--
m I
'?'
S ET ,eoom.oE
C41
--\—`SHEET
- X498
Rejected Alternative
Site Design; Sheet 4
SHEET
C407 MDVS DRW
. SEE SHEET C 4011 OR STOW
CHARTS AND GRADING AND
DRAINAGE NOTES
C 400 FOR INDEXING ONLY.
SEE SHEETSC 4G2 THRO.
-s - C 411 FOR PL AN DETAILS.
TNG I
�� SHEET
SHEET _ C4 4
C406 -�-
I % ..UllH
v
40
i
mow, ..
Akt9�- C405
.a
I
I
I
SHEET \
C403
(SHEET
C402 �•
1210, 018
I=
41946
C-400

5
550
545
540
27 If of rip rap to be keyed
armor outlet.
535
555
550
545
540
535
2+50 2+T0 -1-00 0-00 1Too 2-00 2+50
EMMETT DRIVE PROFILE
CULVERT PROFILE - EMMETT DRIVE 1" = 40'
CULVERT CROSS
L
565
560
55
550
545
540
535
530
20FTO
HIGH WSTA=21-636
225'1
I POSED
BE
t
$$i
HIGH 101- ELEV=551 60
ev
ELLIPTICAL PIPE
0 ocs,xxeo
•
J. HORTON
PVI STA=21+5]5]
€
CHECKEDE
6
•
HASWELL
RE
—
PVI ELEV=55203
AD. -305%
SCALE
•
AS SHOWN
z
o".
a�.oaaEaxARD
I
STA =23+3638
S
nto bed to
U-32]9
IDD' VC
EVERY OTHER SEGMENT ALTERNATE SIDES
LOW POI GET
ELEV-54610
TOTAL NUMBER OF BAFFLES 10
1�
iL
i�
71i
i
J
555
550
545
540
535
2+50 2+T0 -1-00 0-00 1Too 2-00 2+50
EMMETT DRIVE PROFILE
CULVERT PROFILE - EMMETT DRIVE 1" = 40'
CULVERT CROSS
L
565
560
55
550
545
540
535
530
20FTO
T,-00 22+00 23+00
EMMETT DRIVE
565
650
555
550
545
540
535
BAFFLE
ri) 45'"?9" ELPTICAL RCP
HEPOWALL
C�/ �D D -N
PROFILE STEEL PLATE BAFFLE
NTS
STEEL PLATE BAFFLE
�ll�c�en
\/ ,m xxT lEx OR OPER
Po
b
CCESS OPOSEDA
ERREME_=
B0
—
;a
I
x
1 iy;'
z G
�OFFPART
,y
=40' CULVERT PLAN VIEW- EMMETT DRIVE
CA S
E 2o�Essro�y �,
Detail Sheet
NJ`;
yr OPHER ��
2.
u.
mtl
sE
qq 2a
6 N 0 2
p
PIT
$� 3
y
llu
HE
S's
HIGH WSTA=21-636
225'1
06/062019
$$i
HIGH 101- ELEV=551 60
ev
ELLIPTICAL PIPE
0 ocs,xxeo
•
J. HORTON
PVI STA=21+5]5]
€
CHECKEDE
•
A ILL
PVI ELEV=55203
AD. -305%
SCALE
•
AS SHOWN
z
LOW POINJI
STA =23+3638
S
U-32]9
IDD' VC
EVERY OTHER SEGMENT ALTERNATE SIDES
LOW POI GET
ELEV-54610
TOTAL NUMBER OF BAFFLES 10
POP STRE=23+]450
Jw
e
J
AM EL
58
IF
ry u
ADI,=345%
STREA. TO
BEREMOVED
12'VC
�PROPERIBDE
PROP'
BED GRADE
In
a
LL
„e\xFFER
u
�zos'•
o�_�
J
II —
oP5511Ti
Z
ES
JUP
xTTEa��o wa /
INV IN
k44.n �E 7
-_
C7
/ /�
-
z _
OUT
k4406 (E2
�TM•LiM'/�
_�_
1u�TA c/
a
a
--INV
I TO EEE e
Cos
z
Oo
O
o o
LL
REP
ALR
CDm ICUSED
TO BE B
--
u�
F
PC
JOB R
41946
No
T,-00 22+00 23+00
EMMETT DRIVE
565
650
555
550
545
540
535
BAFFLE
ri) 45'"?9" ELPTICAL RCP
HEPOWALL
C�/ �D D -N
PROFILE STEEL PLATE BAFFLE
NTS
STEEL PLATE BAFFLE
�ll�c�en
\/ ,m xxT lEx OR OPER
Po
b
CCESS OPOSEDA
ERREME_=
B0
—
;a
I
x
1 iy;'
z G
�OFFPART
,y
=40' CULVERT PLAN VIEW- EMMETT DRIVE
CA S
E 2o�Essro�y �,
Detail Sheet
NJ`;
yr OPHER ��
2.
u.
mtl
sE
qq 2a
6 N 0 2
p
PIT
$� 3
y
llu
HE
S's
FATE
225'1
06/062019
$$i
A. DACE
ev
ELLIPTICAL PIPE
0 ocs,xxeo
•
J. HORTON
STEEL PLATE BAFFLE
N�T.Si.
€
CHECKEDE
•
A ILL
SCALE
•
AS SHOWN
z
NOTE. BAFFLES TO BE INSTALLED 1FROM PIPE JOINT
S
EVERY OTHER SEGMENT ALTERNATE SIDES
TOTAL NUMBER OF BAFFLES 10
Jw
e
J
QZ a
NTS
IF
EPA
0
STREA. TO
BEREMOVED
�PROPERIBDE
Q
In
a
LL
„e\xFFER
u
Z
�/
J
W o0
Z
ES
JUP
xTTEa��o wa /
C7 A
-_
C7
/ /�
Q
a
z _
Z�ED
1u�TA c/
a
a
Lf) IT
v)d
I TO EEE e
Cos
z
Oo
O
o o
LL
--
u�
F
PC
JOB R
41946
No
1" = 40'
C-415

CULVERT PROFILE- ORSON OAKS LANE
CULVERT CROSS
L
560
555
550
545
540
535
530
b,
10+00
55
550
545
540
535
530
555
550
545
540
535
530
-1"50 -1400 0400 1400 1450
ORSON OAKS LANE PROFILE
HIGH PT STA=11,4608
HIGH POINT ELEV=54734
HEANHAL�L"FIRED
aq�Ec
PN STA -1114623
Detail Sheet 2
PVI ELEV=54] 55
INSTALLED
DETAILS ON S�E
N ST
C °
--�
AD
O Ewsn NG
HE D
ELEV=54520
K-2800
PVI STA=13"51 88
69 VC
PVIELEV=54456
TO
TO
AD -3
555
550
545
540
535
530
-1"50 -1400 0400 1400 1450
ORSON OAKS LANE PROFILE
11 FOO
ORSO
ORSON OAKS LANE
12+00 13+410
NOAKS LANE
560
555
550
545
540
535
530
TO
14,00 14"50
HIGH PT STA=11,4608
HIGH POINT ELEV=54734
PN STA -1114623
Detail Sheet 2
PVI ELEV=54] 55
LOW POINT STA =13+3350'
AD
ELEV=54520
K-2800
PVI STA=13"51 88
69 VC
PVIELEV=54456
m� `a
AD -3
K-4000
e Ee
138'VC
PROPOSED GRADE
�_To"
p £
w
_ _ 1.01Wo
.145"e
�$
ALL
.COve
STORMWATER
NLEL
$�
3
- —_ —
`\\
ED REP
� E""acP
1 `msrrn
PROPOSEP
IF
�qb
o
��
�TO
hTO
TOTH
11 FOO
ORSO
ORSON OAKS LANE
12+00 13+410
NOAKS LANE
560
555
550
545
540
535
530
TO
14,00 14"50
�-4ii / / OP �� G H Q
0. IF
7 DO
Go
i" ° 1 W SE
HIT
o 0
iT RUNe _ HE U Z
°°°o / ,� T � - z OF" -
GE
/ \\ raxyc rT / U U Z
/
�=
s BI w.
!nF�/
FALL, 0
LL U
TO'/LA
v / eTO m cC
LIE) R
/ A
'/.
y/
// merxaer•oueroxmx o I 1 y�1
E A Go
41946
SHEET NO
1" = 40' CULVERT PLAN VIEW - ORSON OAKS LANE 1" = 40' c-4is
CA
Detail Sheet 2
m�
sE
�a
qq
p £
�$
ALL
$�
3
y
IF
�qb
s
HATE
06/06/2019
PAREEN AT
oHEsEarvEHE.
A. DACE
•
J. HORTON
EIKEDBI
CCSTCODD
p
• •
•
Al sHowN
1" = 40'
• z
• "s
CL
J
Q
a
/ <>„
Go—
/ vP /
e
�\v
°A,
C o°vvv o°°v oR -cl .//
�-4ii / / OP �� G H Q
0. IF
7 DO
Go
i" ° 1 W SE
HIT
o 0
iT RUNe _ HE U Z
°°°o / ,� T � - z OF" -
GE
/ \\ raxyc rT / U U Z
/
�=
s BI w.
!nF�/
FALL, 0
LL U
TO'/LA
v / eTO m cC
LIE) R
/ A
'/.
y/
// merxaer•oueroxmx o I 1 y�1
E A Go
41946
SHEET NO
1" = 40' CULVERT PLAN VIEW - ORSON OAKS LANE 1" = 40' c-4is

Detail Sheet 3
IIUIILMIiw
I STREAM DIVERSION
/^Monrwas :rvoNs`rrn�a wTMXn of vuad-sm
w _4ovou a.., Nores
p .rsr.0 rram nuEwurl arcEN 4 -sen N.rnw u.
{ E9V4 M SRE4Y041X MRH SEFNNL i4 VNA£20
I LL F3£ .ION xwlwL S1NE.M I££L
= .YAW Fndvf. 6
I I I
gulp r�t4xceEnun.1� l I I" —i
Ia�i' _ M4 LX@� ECOSlPXES� _ I I I
S,RF/Y Bpi ELL�i. MM
TYPICAL STREAM BANK STABILIZATION
t. rERTu'CA TO K LK..l N 11 OF ECNra
STREAM
STABILW1WN nME�FR "
kms I
slna..vawrwx
s..a.a GN
T......a.. Fn ON6
VwY�1�JXn.MR6RM.MTa
5aays
Xom
MIpI�OYiIp'WNg1GNr ]aK
5aays
Nan•
SkpraYM,MnN
5days
�tlq�ao ltl wlMFYgWNw
aWp,MslNfaCy�eaW�l
BNa9M. PMIN
5days
5 daysb WVaP�snfTEllWFn
MlatlyiasvlAYq�bWrtlm41
5days
xm.. paMbwMl✓•e KNOW LYa
NTS STABILIZATION FRAMES
(ANFRAL Y�.`-nnew•.L as fx
row+ a rrtFnul:
UIO OE\ELCPYEXr SLWpAFOS
NTS EMBANWENTMATTING DETAIL
EVBANKMENT MAMNO DETAIL
rawN a avANu[
w• oemLreluv srunums
NTS I TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING
iONN a PWENU£
' l IAM OEN10'YENt 51.111pINp5
NTS SLOPE STABILITY
I uemm�w��o��e�Mm
BLOBE BIABIUN
TM a %NEYYIE cIXiSrNucnT MrrMIN CREFI( BANK
4W OELEIWNFXi SINwANS
(FM USE M1M ROAD CROSSINGS:
unuw CRos9NG5 m GIILKRr CONSRiI
NTS CONSTRUCTIONWITHIN CREEK BANK
rFMPgURr s1REAu cFOssmc 1 \\ u .,do TBC%IFHf SLNpIM$ mv
I IE�giMY sLLT o114H
N.1. \mo
NTS I TEMPORARY SILT DITCH
ip,
^"�N cARO 6
tppz °k n
" rozao.
gyyys
sg d�
�k
q
NTS
Sa� �rzaaWXo
cTom
• —
• e
J -
J s
� � k
O O F�
D
NTS IWU J z
�o LL u
W o Oz r
V J O 3
K
0 z==g°
Zu U) u s_
U (n U a
I
Z a£
K � V E
Oo K 0 .E
Z LL 0 03
LL
z
l vl
v e€
H
NTS C-705 _L

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment I
NCSAM Form
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
user manual version z.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle,
and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same property, identify and
number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User Manual for detailed descriptions
and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if supplementary measurements were performed. See the
NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Preston Park
3. Applicant/owner name:
5. County: Mecklenburg
7. River basin: Catawba
2. Date of evaluation: 1/21/19
4. Assessor name/organization: Carolina
Nearest named water body
on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Sugar Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.093146, -80.892910
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream B 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): 380
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 ❑Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 4 13. Is assessment reach a swamp steam? []Yes []No
14. Feature type: ®Perennial flow ❑Intermittent flow ❑Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM CATEGORY INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: ❑ Mountains (M) ® Piedmont (P) ❑ Inner Coastal Plain (1) ❑ Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic ❑A ®B
valley shape (skip for
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip ®Size 1 (< 0.1 mil) ❑Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mit) ❑Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) ❑Size 4 (>_ 5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
El Section 10 water ❑Classified Trout Waters ❑Water Supply Watershed (❑I ❑II ❑III ❑IV ❑V)
❑Essential Fish Habitat ❑Primary Nursery Area ❑ High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
❑Publicly owned property ❑NCDWR Riparian buffer rule in effect ❑Nutrient Sensitive Waters
❑Anadromous fish ❑303(d) List ❑CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
❑Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
❑Designated Critical Habitat (list species)
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? ❑Yes ❑No
1. Channel Water- assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
❑A Water throughout assessment reach.
❑B No flow, water in pools only.
❑C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
®A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is severely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impoundment on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates, debris jams,
beaver dams).
❑B Not A
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
®A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
❑B Not A
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile -assessment reach metric
❑A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming, over
widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of these
disturbances).
®B Not A
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
®A < 10% of channel unstable
❑B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
❑C > 25% of channel unstable

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

12
Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. ®Yes ❑No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. ❑No Water ❑Other:
12b. ®Yes ❑No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check all that
apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for Size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for Size 3 and 4 streams.
® ❑Adult frogs
❑ ❑Aquatic reptiles
❑ ❑Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
❑ ❑Beetles
❑ ❑Caddisfly larvae (T)
❑ ❑Asian clam (Corbicula)
❑ ❑Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
❑ ❑Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
❑ ❑Dipterans
❑ ❑Mayfly larvae (E)
❑ ❑Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
❑ ❑Midges/mosquito larvae
❑ ❑Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
❑ ❑Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
❑ ❑Other fish
❑ ❑ Sala manders/tadpoles
❑ ❑Snails
❑ ❑Stonefly larvae (P)
❑ ❑Tipulid larvae
❑ ❑Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and upland runoff.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑B ❑B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
❑C ❑C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples: ditches, fill, soil compaction,
livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >_ 6 inches deep
❑B ❑B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑C ❑C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the normal
wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
❑Y ❑Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
®N ®N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
®A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
❑B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
❑C Obstruction passing flow during low -flow periods within the assessment area (beaver dam, leaky dam, bottom -release dam, weir)
®D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron in water indicates seepage)
®E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
❑F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
❑A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
❑B Obstruction not passing flow during low -flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
❑C Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
®D Evidence that the streamside area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
❑E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
❑F None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
®A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
❑B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
❑C Stream shading is gone or largely absent

19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top of bank out
to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB
RB
®A ®A ❑A
❑A >_ 100 feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
❑B ❑B ❑B
n From 50 to < 100 feet wide
❑C ❑C ❑C
❑C From 30 to < 50 feet wide
❑D ❑D ®D
®D From 10 to < 30 feet wide
❑E ❑E ❑E
n < 10 feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure —
streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RB
❑A ❑A
Mature forest
®B ®B
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
❑C ❑C
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
❑D ❑D
Maintained shrubs
❑E n
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but is
within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: ❑
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
❑A ❑A ❑A ❑A ®A ®A Row crops
❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B ❑B Maintained turf
❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C ❑C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D ❑D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
®A ®A Medium to high stem density
❑B ❑B Low stem density
❑C ❑C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 feet wide.
LB RB
®A ®A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
❑B ❑B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
❑C ❑C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes to
assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
❑A ❑A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native species,
with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
❑B ❑B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
®C ®C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. ❑Yes ®No Was conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. []No Water []Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
❑A < 46 [_1B 46 to < 67 EIC 67 to < 79 ❑ D 79 to < 230 ❑ E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch

Stream Site Name Preston Park
Stream Category Pb1
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Date of Assessment 1/21/19
Assessor Name/Organization Carolina Wetland Services
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial
USACE/ NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(1) Water Quality
LOW
(2) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
LOW
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
(3) Baseflow
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
(3) In -stream Habitat
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
MEDIUM
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone
NA
Overall
LOW

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
Attachment J
NCSAM Assessment Reach

= !'.--
=*V-
. i -►
i •,. f
t j 9
r ro
41' VA
E
top
t
Legend
Project Limits (134.8 ac.)
Limits of Disturbance
NCSAM Evaluation Reach
Perennial Stream
� � f
"+T
r1A - Wetlands
a
yy Isolated • 4•4 Jurisdictional Wetland
Culvert
• i"' j ' '
PROVIDED BY MECKLENBURG COUNTY1 .

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment K
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
NC DMS Mitigation Acceptance Letter

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretcvy
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Susan Rosenblatt
Cranford Single Family Lots LLC
136 Main Street
Pineville, NC 28134
Project: Preston Park
NORTH CAROLINA
Envlroamentat Quality
July 1, 2019
Expiration of Acceptance: 1/1/2020
County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location
_ _(8 -digit HUC)
Catawba 03050103
Impact Type Impact Quantity
Warm Stream 91
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement.
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely,
Jmes B Stanfill
A et anagement Supervisor
cc: Dan Zurlo, agent
nrT.yrfl nna;.. WWI 1 %
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 1 1652 Mall Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
Attachment L
USFWS Correspondence

S.
FE
United States Department of the Interior �, SERVIC �.I
6! R ILD
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office g
160 Zillicoa Street'
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
April 23, 2019
Sean Martin
Carolina Wetland Services, Inc.
550 E. Westinghouse Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina, 28273
Dear Mr. Martin:
Subject: Preston Park Residential Development; Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-19-166
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence dated March 19, 2019. We submit the following comments in accordance with
the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project would consist of a residential
development on 154.8 acres in Charlotte, North Carolina. The proposed project area contains
successional wooded habitats, agricultural fields, maintained utility line corridors, and
transitional habitats. The site contains multiple tributary streams to Sugar Creek. However,
proposed project -mediated impacts to streams and wetlands, impact avoidance, impact
minimization, or impact mitigation measures were not disclosed in your correspondence.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
The information provided suggests that potential suitable habitat for the federally endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), and
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii) occurs onsite (e.g. transitional areas along forest edges,
fencerows, roadsides, utility rights-of-way, etc.). Targeted surveys for these species should be
conducted during the optimal survey window(s) where proposed project -mediated impacts
overlap suitable habitats for these species. Survey efforts between late August and October (first
frost) would span the optimal survey window for all of the species referenced above.
Please submit your survey results to this office when they become available to complete our
review.
The Service appreciates your coordination and the opportunity to provide these comments.
Please contact Mr. Byron Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 225, if you have any

questions. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log
Number 4-2-19-166.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402
Attachment M
NC SHPO Correspondence

btu. STATE,,
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton
February 11, 2019
Chris Todd
Timmons Group
Office of Archives and History
Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Re: Develop Preston Park Residential Development, Industrial Drive & Polk Street, Pineville,
Mecklenburg County, ER 19-0069
Dear Mr. Todd:
Thank you for your letter of January 9, 2019, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-807-6579 or
environmental.reviewnncdcr.gov. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
6$231 Ramona M. Bartos
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

Liberty Crossing
Attachment Sheet
Attachment N
Photopage
July 3, 2019
CWS Project No. 2018-0402

y
4 1 P Ly�yr
*
• e`er
.e
# �4 � .•sem �
_ r s Tom(

'� _ � � - k �. •OM1 '�,� �' • , �
�3t
•
r� r d �{ , �'. ` : • +�4:
.. y„y►�. f
�:� Uzi- i� �,;r �- �•��'
Photograph 3. View of Wetland AA, facing north.
'Y`� �'*f ..�-� � � �.� _ ���- ti' •,�'�t � Vie• r �, �%'` ` r�„.?S � "�r
S. S
�' `�.'�,_.� .oN�� x �,.,,rt• s:' .('mow. M1�j, .•'i �; �.'
� •.,; x��•r�. - �' iii
R •'Id. T'T -
,�1, v%

Pineville Residential
Attachment C: Photopage
July 5, 2017
CWS Project No. 2017-0350
Photograph 5. View of Wetland CC, facing northeast.
9_
%*Olt
'c j}
s'
' 4 u ...
�, s• ,
Photograph 6. View of Wetland DD, facing northeast.
Photopage 3 of 5

r „04� -
_� _ ,. _ J�t�"... •! I , '� � _ _. Fes. f • L
4 +.
_ � e
,
YL
_
47� X4¢4 _