The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20191053 Ver 1_USACE PCN 080619 _Compiled_20190806Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions SAW – 201 BEGIN DATE [Received Date]: Prepare file folder Assign Action ID Number in ORM 1.Project Name [PCN Fm A2a]: 2.Work Type: Private Institutional Government Commercial 3.Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]: 4.Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: 5.Agent / Consultant [PCN Form A5 – or ORM Consultant ID Number]: 6.Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]: 7.Project Location - Coordinates [PCN Form B1b]: 8.Project Location - Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form B1a]: 9.Project Location – County [PCN Form A2b]: 10.Project Location – Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: 11.Project Information – Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]: Authorization: Section 10 Section 404 Section 10 & 404 Regulatory Action Type: Standard Permit Nationwide Permit # Regional General Permit # Jurisdictional Determination Request Pre-Application Request Unauthorized Compliance ✔ ✔ ✔ Permit Application Permit Application 29 Developer D. Shaeffer C. Proposed Impacts Inventory 1. Impacts Summary 1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply): ❑X Wetlands ❑ Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction 2. Wetland Impacts If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted. 2a. Wetland impact number Permanent (P) or Temporary T 2b. Type of impact 2c. Type of wetland 2d. Forested 2e. Type of jurisdiction Corps (404,10) or DWQ (401, other) 2f. Area of impact (acres) W1 P Fill Bottomland Hardwood Forest Yes Corps 0.09 W2 T Excavation Bottomland Hardwood Forest Yes Corps 0.03 W3 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No - W4 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No - W5 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No - W6 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No - 2g. Total Wetland Impacts: 0.12 2h. Comments: 3. Stream Impacts If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this question for all stream sites impacted. 3a. Stream impact number Permanent (P) or Temporary (T) 3b. Type of impact 3c. Stream name 3d. Perennial (PER) or intermittent (INT)? 3e. Type of jurisdiction 3f. Average stream width (feet) 3g. Impact length (linear feet) S1 - Choose one - S2 - Choose one - S3 - Choose one - S4 - Choose one - - S5 - Choose one - S6 - Choose one - 3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 3i. Comments: 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. Due to the location of the on site streams and wetlands, opportunities to completely avoid these areas were limited. Impacts to site surface waters associated with the proposed development were limited through site selection location, design, location/orientation of the proposed lots and access routes. The design incorporates a large retaining wall located adjacent the wetland side of the proposed roadway to limit grading encroachment, further limiting impacts. 3:1 and 2:1 slopes are used where feasible. Wetland hydrology will be maintained through use of culvert bypass under road. 1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques. Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances. 2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State 2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ❑ Yes ❑X No 2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ❑ DWQ ❑ Corps 2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project? ❑ Mitigation bank El 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. ❑ Yes 4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet 4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: Choose one 4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet 4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres 4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres 4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres 4h. Comments: 5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan 5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan. 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? 19.8% 2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ❑X Yes ❑ No 2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: 2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan: Stormwater on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has been submitted to Mecklenburg County for review and has been designed to meet their criteria. 2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? Mecklenburg County 3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review 3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject? Mecklenburg County ❑X 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 ❑X 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. facility Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment via sewer lines. 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 ❑ Yes ❑X No habitat? 5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ❑ Yes ❑X No impacts? 5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. - 5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat? A threatened/Endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat but the project is exempt as noted in the included T&E report. 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? No essential fish habitat in this region. 7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement) 7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ❑ 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? SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/ 8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement) 8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain? ❑ Yes ❑X No 8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: 8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? http://polaris3g.mecklenburgcountync.gov ; www.fema.gov Digitally signed by Heath Caldwell N: cn=Heah Caldwell, Heath Caldwell email=heathtcaldwell@wetland.- ou, Heath Caldwell epg Date m,2019c=l15.08.01 15:01:42 -04'00' D 08-02-2019 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 Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group Agent Authorization Letter Leonard S. Rindner. PLLC. The purpose of this form is to authorize our firm to act on your behalf in matters related to aquatic resource (i.e. stream/wetlands) identification/mapping and regulatory permitting. The undersigned, who are either registered property owners or legally authorized to conduct due diligence activities on the property as identified below, do hereby authorize associates of Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, Wetlands and Environmental Planning Group (WEPG) to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance, and acceptance of applicable permit(s) and/or certification(s). Project/Site Name: Sutton Farms Phase II & III Property Address: Pleasant Grove Road, Charlotte, NC Parcel Identification Number (PIN): 03518222, 03518229, 03518116 Select one: I am an interested buyerlseller Name: Dan Rossi Company: D.R. Horton Mailing Address: 8001 Arrowridge Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28273 Telephone Number: 704-685-2091 Electronic Mail Address: DJRossi@DRHorton.com Owner Date x The1 terested Suyerl0ther acknowledges that an agreement and/or formal contract to purchase andlor condacct due dila ence activities exists between the current property owner and the sign atory of this authorization in cases where t e property is not owned by the signatory. Charlotte Offic 10612-b Provi PMB 550 Charlotte, NC (704) 904-22T Rd. www.weLl,inds-epg.co m Asheville Office: 1070 Tunnel Rd.. Bldg. I Suite 10, PMB 283 Asheville, NC 28605 Maps/Plans Maps/Plans FIGURE NO. 1 SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC ͑ ͑ VICINITY MAP -WATERS OF THE U.S.- EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION ͑ ͑ DATE: 11/13/18 Drawn By: LSR NRN Reviewed By: SITE PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS Drawn By: Reviewed By:NRN LSR DATE: 11/13/18 FIGURE NO. 2 SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC AERIAL MAP – WATERS OF THE U.S. EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATION PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS FIGURE NO. 3 SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC ͑ ͑ USGS MAP - WATERS OF THE U.S. - EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION ͑ ͑ DATE: 11/13/18 Drawn By: LSR NRN Reviewed By: PROPERTY BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS LOCATION Lat: 35.3079 ºN Long: -80.9193 ºW HUC: 03050101 CATAWBA SCALE 1:24,000 ACRES 37.6 USGS QUAD Mt Island Lake, NC GUM BRANCH FIGURE NO. 4 SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC ͑ ͑ NRCS PUBLISHED SOILS MAP -WATERS OF THE U.S.- EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION ͑ ͑ DATE: 11/13/18 Drawn By: LSR NRN Reviewed By: PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS FIGURE NO. 5 SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC ͑ ͑ NRCS WEB SOILS MAP -WATERS OF THE U.S.- EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION ͑ ͑ DATE: 2/20/19 Drawn By: LSR DCK Reviewed By: PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS FIGURE NO. 6 SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC TAX PARCEL MAP -WATERS OF THE U.S.- EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE/NCDEQ VERIFICATION DATE: 2/20/19 Drawn By: LSR DCK Reviewed By: PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS Parcels: 03518222 & 03518229 Dorothy Keistler 302 Dakota Street Charlotte NC 28216 Parcels: 03518116 & 03518131 Pleasant Grove Presbyterian Church 6701 Pleasant Grove Road Charlotte NC 28216 MERRICK 100 2000 Wetland H/HH ±5150 SF (0.12 AC) Wetland Complex A ±42,300 SF (0.97 AC)Clinton RoadElliot RoadScale: 1" = 200'Perennial Stream E ±634 LF Ex. San. Sewer with 15' Esmt Perennial Stream D ±706 LF Intermittent Stream C ±271 LF Intermittent Stream B ±76 LF Intermittent Stream F ±56 LF Intermittent Stream G ±15 LF Culvert D u k e E n e r g y 1 3 1 ' R / W D e e d : 3 7 6 3 - 9 6 4 D u k e E n e r g y 6 8 ' R /W D e e d : 6 1 8 - 5 8 7 Figure 7 Perennial Stream E ±634 LF No Impact MERRICK Wetland Complex A ±42,300 SF (0.97 AC) Temporary and Permanent ImpactClinton RoadElliot RoadRock Haven Dri v e Pennyroyal WayL a rm o r e A v e Duddle s D r i v e Sutton Farms Phase 1 Ex. San. Sewer with 15' Esmt Wetlands A 0.09 AC Permanent Impact see details sheet 5 & 6 Wetlands A 0.03 AC Temporary Impact see details sheet 3 & 4 Wetland H/HH ±5150 SF (0.12 AC) No impact Perennial Stream D ±706 LF No impact Intermittent Stream C ±271 LF No impact Intermittent Stream B ±76 LF No impact Intermittent Stream F ±56 LF Intermittent Stream G ±15 LF No impact BMP BMP 19.8% impervious for project Culvert 100 2000 Scale: 1" = 200' D u k e E n e r g y 1 3 1 ' R / W D e e d : 3 7 6 3 - 9 6 4 D u k e E n e r g y 6 8 ' R /W D e e d : 6 1 8 - 5 8 7 All area South of Duke Energy easement is deeded treesave area Figure 8 MERRICK 15 300 Scale: 1" = 30' 35' PCCO Buffer Ex. San. Sewer Ex. 15' San. Sewer Esmt Prop. 8" San. Sewer Prop. 20' San. Sewer Esmt Wetland Complex A ±1490 SF (0.03 AC) Temporary Impact Temporary access corridor to be reestablished with native species. Permanent maintenance easement to be reseeded with native stabilization mix Remove 6"-12" of top soil in disturbed area. Top soil to be placed on fabric and replaced upon completion Se e S h e e t 4 Proposed anti-seep collar to be installed at the downstream and upstream side of the wetland crossing. Collars shall be installed per state standards Intermittent Stream C ±271 LF Intermittent Stream B ±76 LF Figure 9 690 695 700 705 710 690 695 700 705 710 10+00 11+00 11+50 Wetland Complex A Sewer Profile STA: 10+00.00 TO 11+50.00 MERRICK Ver: 1" = 4' 2 40 Hor: 1" = 40' 74.0' Temporary Impact Existing Grade Prop. 8" San. Sewer 20 400 Proposed anti-seep collar to be installed at the downstream and upstream side of the wetland crossing. Collars shall be installed per state standards Figure 10 MERRICK 15 300 Scale: 1" = 30' Wetlands Complex A ±3940 SF (0.09 AC) Permanent Impact Prop. Retaining Wall Rock Haven Drive Ex. San. SewerSee Sheet 6Figure 11 8'5'1'11'1' 708.02 710.00 712.00 712.66712.50 712.66BOCPlanting Strip Sidewalk Retaining Wall Wetlands Permanent Impact Varies (0' to 29')10' (typ) 703.82 Wetland Complex A Wall Profile MERRICK Not to Scale Figure 12 MERRICKMERRICK 100 2000 Scale: 1" = 200' Sutton Farms Phase 1 Project Boundary Pen n yr o y al W a yTrayno r Road Ex. San. Sewer with 15' Esmt Sutton Farms Phase 1 100 2000 Treesave Area Figure 13 Jurisdictional Determination Jurisdictional Determination Information 11/20/18Updated 5/29/19Drawn By:Reviewed By:NRNLSRDATE:FIGURE NO. 7SUTTON FARMS PHASES II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC DELINEATION MAP – WATERS OF THE U.S.EXISTING CONDITIONS STUDY SUBJECT TO USACE VERIFICATIONPROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS (Phase II) PERENNIAL STREAM D - lf INTERMITTENT STREAM B - lf WETLAND A -0.9 ac CULVERT INTERMITTENT STREAM C - lf PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS (Phase III) INTERMITTENT STREAM G - lf WETLAND H /HH -0. ac INTERMITTENT STREAM F -5 lf PERENNIAL STREAM E (Gum Branch) - lf NCDEQ STREAM FORM E USACE WETAND FORM A USACE WETAND FORM UPLAND DPF 123414 Code HGM_Code Local—Waterway Wetland A NORTH CAROLINA RP Area 0.97 ACRE DELINEATE 35.30760000 -80.91850000 Gum Branch Intermittent Stream B NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 76 FOOT DELINEATE 35.30730000 -80.91890000 Gum Branch Intermittent Stream C NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 271 FOOT DELINEATE 35.30690000 -80.91860000 Gum Branch Perennial Stream D NORTH CAROLINA R5 Area 706 ACRE DELINEATE 35.30540000 -80.91890000 Gum Branch Perennial Stream E (Gum Branch) NORTH CAROLINA R5 Area 634 ACRE DELINEATE 35.30500000 -80.91890000 Gum Branch Intermittent Stream F NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 56 FOOT DELINEATE 35.30610000 -80.91860000 Gum Branch Intermittent Stream G NORTH CAROLINA R4 Linear 15 FOOT DELINEATE 35.30610000 -80.91890000 Gum Branch Wetland H/HH NORTH CAROLINA RP Area 0.12 ACRE DELINEATE 35.30620000 -80.91870000 Gum Branch Sutton Farms Phases II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC – 2/8/19 WETLAND A – PHOTO 1 WETLAND D – PHOTO 2 Sutton Farms Phases II & III Mecklenburg Co., NC – 2/8/19 STREAM B – PHOTO 3 STREAM C – PHOTO 4 Threatened & Endangered Species Report Threatened & Endangered Species Report Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation For:Sutton Farms Phase 2 & 3 Mecklenburg County, North Carolina By: Lisa R. Gaffney March 24, 2019 Sutton Farms Phase 2&3 - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation 22 GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION: The Sutton Farms Site (+/- 36.55 acres) is located just south of Pleasant Grove Road and just east of Clinton Road in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. It can be found on the Mountain Island Lake NC USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map; latitude is 35.3079 N, longitude is -80.9193 W. The topography is flat to moderately sloped. The elevation ranges from 690 to 730 ft. (Figure 1). The site is primarily covered with successional mixed pine and hardwood forest, with slopes and drainages flowing into Gum Branch. A large power transmission line bisects part of the site. Another portion of the site is currently utilized as a sports field. Figure 1: Sutton Farms Phase 2&3 - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation 33 METHODOLOGY: The US Fish and Wildlife Service website https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/nc_counties.html was referenced to determine the occurrence of Threatened, Endangered and Protected species for Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, the results of which are listed below (Table 1). Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and the site was investigated during the week of March 18, 2019 Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for Mecklenburg County County: Mecklenburg, NC *Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service **Data search on March 18, 2019 Group Name Status Record Status Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) Endangered Current Invertebrate Rusty-patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis) Endangered Historic Vascular Plants Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata) Endangered Current Vascular Plants Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) Endangered Current Vascular Plants Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii)Endangered Current Vertebrate Northern Long-Eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis) Threatened Probable/Potential Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Current Sutton Farms Phase 2&3 - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation 44 A total of three plant species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in Mecklenburg County: Schweinitz’s Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally Endangered, is typically found in open habitats which historically have been maintained by wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most occurrences are limited to roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility rights-of-way (ROW). Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), listed as Federally Endangered, is typically found in open woods, cedar barrens, roadsides, clear cuts, dry limestone bluffs and power line rights-of-way, requiring abundant sunlight and little competition from other plant species. Michaux’s Sumac (Rhus michauxii), listed as Federally Endangered, requires habitat of sandy forests and woodland edges. This species requires periodic fire as a part of its ecology. A total of four animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially occurring in Mecklenburg County: Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, typically inhabits forested areas near large bodies of open water such as lakes, marshes, seacoasts and rivers, where there are suitable fish populations and tall trees for nesting and roosting. Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), listed as Federally Endangered, is restricted to cool, clean, well-oxygenated water. Stable, silt- free stream beds are required for this species. Typically stable areas occur where the stream banks are well-vegetated with trees and shrubs. Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis septentrionalis), listed as Federally Threatened. During summer, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies underneath bark, in cavities, or in crevices of both live and dead trees. Males and non-reproductive females may also roost in cooler places, like caves and mines. It has also been found, rarely, roosting in structures like barns and sheds. Northern long-eared bats spend winter hibernating in caves and mines, called hibernacula. Rusty-patched Bumble Bee (Bombus affinis), listed as Federally Endangered, live in colonies that include a single queen and female workers. Rusty-patched Bumble Bees historically occupied grasslands and tallgrass prairies. Bumble bees need areas that provide nectar and pollen from flowers, nesting sites (underground and abandoned rodent cavities or clumps of grasses), and overwintering sites for hibernating queens (undisturbed soil). Sutton Farms Phase 2&3 - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation 55 RESULTS: The portion of the site east of Clinton Road is primarily covered with successional mixed pine and hardwood forest, with slopes and drainages flowing into Gum Branch. A large power transmission line bisects part of the site. Another portion of the site off Pleasant Grove Road has been used as a sports field. The forest on the slopes and drainages has an average diameter at breast height (dbh) for the canopy trees of 12 inches, with larger trees present. Canopy trees include Virginia Pine (Pinus virginiana), Shortleaf Pine (P.echinata), Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), Willow Oak (Q. phellos), White Oak (Quercus alba), Post Oak (Q. stellata), Red Oak (Q. rubra), Southern Red Oak (Q. falcata), Mockernut Hickory (Carya tomentosa), Hackberry (Celtis laevigata), American Elm (Ulmus americana), Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), and White Ash (Fraxinus americana). The subcanopy is composed of American Holly (Ilex opaca), Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina), Mulberry (Morus rubra), Eastern Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), Redbud (Cercis canadensis), and Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica). The shrub layer includes Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense), Black Haw (Viburnum prunifolium), Strawberry Bush (Euonymus americanus), Blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), and Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). Vines present are Japanese Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), Catbrier (Smilax sp.), and Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans). The herb layer includes Christmas Fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), Ebony Spleenwort (Asplenium platyneuron), Spotted Wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata), Running Pine (Lycopodium flabelliforme), Downy Rattlesnake Plantain (Goodyera pubescens), and Japanese Stilt Grass (Microstegium vimineum). The assemblage of plants growing in the transitional areas around the property boundaries and on the power line right of way includes scrub/shrub habitat with small saplings of Red Cedar and Pine with shrubs of Groundsel Tree (Baccharis halimnifolia), Smooth Sumac (Rhus glabra), and Blackberry (Rubus spp.). Herbs include Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), Johnson Grass (Sorghum halepense), Splitbeard (A. ternarius), Beggars Ticks (Desmodium sp.), Thoroughwort (Eupatorium sp.), St. John’s Wort (Hypericum punctatum), and Henbit (Lamium amplexicaule). Sutton Farms Phase 2&3 - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation 66 Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results All potential habitats for Schweinitz’s Sunflower, Michaux’s Sumac and Smooth Coneflower along the roadsides, transitional areas and woods edges were examined and none of these species were present. No habitat exists on the site for Bald Eagles, and there were no sightings nor were any nesting sites observed. The on-site streams do not have the habitat characteristics required to support populations of the Carolina Heelsplitter. Based on existing documentation, Carolina Heelsplitter populations have not been previously identified within this basin. No individuals were observed during the survey nor would any be expected on-site. Comparing this site location to the USFWS Asheville office’s website (http://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmls/project_review/NLEB_in_WNC.html) it appears that the site meets the “exempt” criteria which requires no further action under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for the Northern Long-eared Bat. Comparing this site location to the USFWS Range Map for Rusty-patched Bumble Bee (https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/insects/rpbb/rpbbmap.html ) Mecklenburg County is in it’s Historic Range, and as such, Section 7 consultation is not needed. WEPG concludes that Rusty-patched Bumble Bee is not present. RECOMMENDATIONS: Based on the site investigation and the review of available data, WEPG did not identify any protected species occurring on the subject property. No further investigation of the presence of protected species on this site is recommended at this time. Respectfully submitted, _________________ Lisa R. Gaffney Biologist March 24, 2019 Sutton Farms Phase 2&3 - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation 77 Curriculum Vitae for: Lisa R. Gaffney Biologist / Botanist B.S. Biology, University of North Carolina at Charlotte Ms. Gaffney is a classically trained botanist and natural resource biologist and has conducted field work and investigative studies covering thousands of cumulative acres in both North and South Carolina since 1996, including: Cabarrus County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 1997-1998. Organized, directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Cabarrus County for the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Lincoln County NC Natural Heritage Inventory 2000-2001. Organized, directed, and worked in field survey of natural areas in Lincoln County for the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Threatened and Endangered Species Surveys and Natural Communities Evaluation for over 45,000 acres in North and South Carolina, 1996 - present. Located and identified at least six previously unreported populations of Federally Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). Located and identified four previously unreported populations of Threatened Dwarf Heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora). Located a previously unknown population of Federally Endangered Schweinitz's Sunflower at Redlair Farm in Gaston County, NC. This discovery led (in part) to the purchase of the site by the State of North Carolina Plant Conservation Program, now called Redlair Preserve. This population has become a Recovery Site for the species. Participated in numerous Piedmont Prairie restoration projects in Mecklenburg, Union, Cabarrus and Gaston Counties, North Carolina.