20081155 Ver 5_Kellswater PCN 081619 Compiled_20190816

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

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

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

Revised 20150602
Kellswater
✔
PCN and JD Request for a residential development
MPV Properties
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC / WEPG
35.4665 N/-80.6658W - Kannapolis Pkwy, Kannapolis, NC
numerous parcels - please refer to attached parcel map.
Cabarrus
Kannapolis
Irish Buffalo Creek
03040105 - Rocky
✔
✔29
✔
SAW-2008-02224
Permit Application Permit Application
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no. _____________
DWQ project no. _______________
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: Section 404 Permit Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? Yes No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
401 Water Quality Certification – Regular Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
401 Water Quality Certification – Express Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
Yes No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
Yes No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in-lieu fee program.
Yes No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC’s twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h
below. Yes No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? Yes No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
2b. County:
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Kellswater
Cabarrus
Kannapolis
MPV Properties
Ken Chapman
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
704-561-5238
[e-mail]
29
Page 2 of 10
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: Agent Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Daniel Kuefler
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC - Wetlands & Environmental Planning Group
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
Charlotte, NC 28227
336-554-2728
[e-mail]
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: Longitude:
1c. Property size: acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
2c. River basin:
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes No Unknown
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past? Yes No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to “help file” instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
Please refer to attached parcel map.
-80.6658
18.9
Irish Buffalo Creek
C
03040105 - Rocky
The topography consists of gently sloped upland graded into moderate slopes draining NW towards an unnamed tributary to Irish Buffalo Creek. The
site is in primary succession dominated by field weeds and has been maintained by grading and clearing for development. General land use in the
vicinity is a mixture undeveloped land and residential/ commercial developments.
0.16
The project consists of one road crossing, grading, fill & sewer installation for a residential development.
Excavation and grading of the site will use standard equipment - excavator, dump trucks, track hoe, etc.
WEPG
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination was approved by Steven Lund (USACE) on 8/21/2008 (SAW-2008-02224). A pre-application site meeting
was conducted on 5/15/2019 during which the site was field-verified by Catherine Janiczak (USACE).
A PCN for the site was approved by Steve Lund (USACE) on 8/21/2008. All permitted activities were completed prior to the expiration of that permit.
35.4665
252
See comment below
Nic Nelson
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams – tributaries Buffers Open Waters Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
2g.Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Fill Riverine Swamp Forest No Corps 0.16
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
Yes/No -
0.16
Wetland A is a pool that has inundated behind a blocked culvert and has naturalized over time. The impact to this wetland is unavoidable to
a residential roadway connection to a pre-existing road stub that is being required by the City of Kannapolis.
Culvert Stream C PER DWQ 5 31
31
Temporary impacts to Stream C are required for the installation of a sanitary sewer crossing to serve the proposed residential development. The
stream will be restored to pre-existing conditions per the attached bank stabilization exhibit.
P
-
-
-
-
-
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
T
-
-
-
-
-
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
-
-
-
DWQ
DWQ
-
-
-
Page 5 of 10
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
O1
O2
O3
O4
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1
P2
5f.Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.Project is in which protected basin? Neuse Tar-Pamlico Catawba Randleman Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number –
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
6h.Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Choose one Choose
Choose one
Yes/No
-
-
-
-
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Choose
Choose
Choose
Choose one
-
-
-
-
-
-
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
)
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): DWQ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
Mitigation bank
Payment to in-lieu fee program
Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
Type:
Type:
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Due to the location of the on site streams and wetland, opportunities to avoid these areas were limited. Impacts to site surface waters associated with
the proposed development were limited through site selection, location, design, & location/orientation of the proposed lots and access routes. The
impact to the onsite naturalized wetland feature is unavoidable to a residential roadway connection to a pre-existing road stub that is being requiredby
the City of Kannapolis.
Construction techniques will implement approved erosion control methods to avoid/minimize impacts to onsite/adjacent offsite receiving conveyances.
Choose one
0.16
A 1 :1 ratio is proposed for the wetland impacts. Please refer to the attached NCWAM form and cover letter for details.
Choose one
Choose one
Choose one
Page 7 of 10
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) – required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? Yes No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f.Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Yes No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? Yes No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:

2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government’s jurisdiction is this project?
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
Phase II
NSW
USMP
Water Supply Watershed
Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
Coastal counties
HQW
ORW
Session Law 2006-246
Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
Yes No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? Yes No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? Yes No
39.6
Storm water on the site will be handled by facilities shown on the attached plans. The stormwater plan has not yet been submitted to the City of
Kannapolis but will be designed to meet their criteria.
City of Kannapolis
City of Kannapolis
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form – Version 1.4 January 2009
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land? Yes No
1b. If you answered “yes” to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Yes No
1c. If you answered “yes” to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
Yes No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
Yes No
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes No
2c. If you answered “yes” to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes No
3b. If you answered “yes” to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered “no,” provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater generated on the site will be transported to the nearest treatment facility via sewer lines.
Page 10 of 10
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts? Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Yes No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
_______________________________
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)

Date
A threatened/Endangered species assessment was conducted in which no species were identified. Habitat does exist for the Northern Long Eared Bat
but the project is exempt as noted in the included T&E report.
No essential fish habitat in this region.
SHPO's website: http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
N
https://gis.cabarruscounty.us/mycabarrusgis; www.fema.gov
-
Daniel Kuefler 08-16-2019
Daniel
Kuefler
Digitally signed by Daniel Kuefler
DN: cn=Daniel Kuefler, o=WEPG,
ou,
email=daniel.kuefler@wetlands-
epg.com, c=US
Date: 2019.08.16 00:27:05 -04'00'
Ken Chapman
MPV Properties
2400 South Blvd, Charlotte, NC, 28203
704-561-5238
[e-mail]
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretory
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Ken Chapman
MPV Properties
2400 South Blvd, Ste 300
Charlotte, NC 28203
Project: Kellswater
NORTH CAROLINA
Envkonmentaf Quaffty
August 14, 2019
Expiration of Acceptance: 2/14/2020
County: Cabarrus
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 I Impact Location Impact Type Impact Quantity
8 -di it HUC
Yadkin 03040105
Riparian Wetland
0.16
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].
cc: Daniel Kuefler, agent
Sincerely, —
Jae . B Stanfill
Ass Management Supervisor
e:!! 1 5
d SJ�
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of tvritigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 116V Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

Maps/Plans Maps/Plans
FIGURE NO.
1
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC
͑
͑

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

8/15/19
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
APPROXIMATE PROJECT
BOUNDARY STUDY
LIMITS
SITE
FIGURE NO.
2
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC
͑
͑

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

8/15/19
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
APPROXIMATE PROJECT
BOUNDARY STUDY
LIMITS
FIGURE NO.
3
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC
͑
͑

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

8/15/19
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
APPROXIMATE PROJECT
BOUNDARY STUDY
LIMITS
LOCATION
Lat: 35.4665 ºN
Long: -80.6658 ºW
HUC: 03040105 (Rocky)
USGS QUAD
Kannapolis,
NC
SCALE
1:24,000
ACRES
18.5
Irish Buffalo Creek
FIGURE NO.
4
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC
͑
͑

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

8/15/19
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
APPROXIMATE PROJECT
BOUNDARY STUDY
LIMITS
FIGURE NO.
5
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC
͑
͑

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

8/15/19
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
PROJECT BOUNDARY
STUDY LIMITS
Parcel: 56023885560000
MPV Kellswater LLC
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
Parcel: 56024930710000
MPV Kellswater LLC
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
Parcel: 56023865510000
MPV Kellswater LLC
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
Parcel: 56023935940000
MPV Kellswater LLC
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
Parcel: 56024913940000
MPV Kellswater LLC
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
Parcel: 56023982060000
MPV Kellswater LLC
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
Drawn By: Reviewed By:DCK LSR DATE: 8/15/19 FIGURE NO. 6 KELLSWATER Cabarrus Co., NC PROJECT AREA OVERVIEW SUBJECT TO NCDEQ / USACE VERIFACTION Previous Limits Permitted Under SAW-2008-02224 (Dashed Line) PROJECT BOUNDARY (Solid line) Existing Townhomes
PRELIMINARY - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION, RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALESFILE PATH:M:\Projects\MPV Properties\2019020700CL - Kellswater Commons Wetlands Permitting\CADD\Plan Set\Townhomes Only Wetland Permitting\2019020700_C_EX CONDITIONS & DEMO - WETLAND.dwg, ELANDEROS, 8/8/2019 5:44:53 PM616 COLONNADE DRCHARLOTTE, NC 28205(t)[phone](f)[phone]WWW.WKDICKSON.COMNC LICENSE NO.F-0374WGBETSESLJUNE 201920190207.00.CLKELLSWATER COMMONSFOR MPV PROPERTIESIN KANNAPOLIS, NCWETLANDS EXHIBIT - EXISTING CONDITIONSG1.0WKD PROJ. NO.:DRAWING NUMBER:PROJ. DATE:PROJ. MGR.:DESIGN BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT NAME:DRAWING TITLE:COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS ORDELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIESFROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.community infrastructure consultants250'0 500'RSOD BUFFER (TYP.)WETLAND A/AAAPPROX. 0.16 AC.(6,897 SQFT.)PERENNIAL STREAM CAPPROX. 252 LFPROPERTYBOUNDARY (TYP.)APPROXIMATE LOCATION OFEXISTING STORMWATER BMPAPPROX. 2.18 AC.(95,175 SQFT.)EXISTING UTILITYSTRUCTURE (TYP.)Figure 7
PRELIMINARY - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION, RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALESFILE PATH:M:\Projects\MPV Properties\2019020700CL - Kellswater Commons Wetlands Permitting\CADD\Plan Set\Townhomes Only Wetland Permitting\2019020700_C_GRADING OVERALL - WETLAND.dwg, ELANDEROS, 8/8/2019 5:44:55 PM616 COLONNADE DRCHARLOTTE, NC 28205(t)[phone](f)[phone]WWW.WKDICKSON.COMNC LICENSE NO.F-0374KELLSWATER COMMONSFOR MPV PROPERTIESIN KANNAPOLIS, NCWETLANDS EXHIBIT - OVERALL SITEPLANWKD PROJ. NO.:DRAWING NUMBER:PROJ. DATE:PROJ. MGR.:DESIGN BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT NAME:DRAWING TITLE:COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS ORDELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIESFROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.community infrastructure consultantsWGBETSESLJUNE 201920190207.00.CLG2.0250'0 500'RSOD BUFFER (TYP.)WETLAND A/AAAPPROX. 0.16 AC.(6,897 SQFT.)PERENNIAL STREAM CAPPROX. 252 LFPROPERTYBOUNDARY (TYP.)APPROXIMATE LOCATION OFEXISTING STORMWATER BMPAPPROX. 2.18 AC.(95,175 SQFT.)EXISTING UTILITYSTRUCTURE (TYP.)PROP. CITY REQUIREDROAD CONNECTION TOFUTURE COMMERCIAL SITEAPPROX. LOCATIONOF PROP. SANITARYSEWER (TYP.)APPROX. LOCATION OF PROP.STORMWATER DRAINAGE OUTFALL(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)APPROX. LOCATION OF PROP.STORMWATER OUTFALL CHANNEL(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSEDOPEN CUT FOR SEWER INSTALLATION(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)Figure 8
PRELIMINARY - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION, RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALESFILE PATH:M:\Projects\MPV Properties\2019020700CL - Kellswater Commons Wetlands Permitting\CADD\Plan Set\Townhomes Only Wetland Permitting\2019020700_C_GRADING OVERALL - WETLAND.dwg, ELANDEROS, 8/8/2019 5:44:56 PM616 COLONNADE DRCHARLOTTE, NC 28205(t)[phone](f)[phone]WWW.WKDICKSON.COMNC LICENSE NO.F-0374WKD PROJ. NO.:DRAWING NUMBER:PROJ. DATE:PROJ. MGR.:DESIGN BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT NAME:DRAWING TITLE:COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS ORDELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIESFROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.community infrastructure consultants500 100SCALE: 1" = 50'IMPACT AWETLANDS A/AAAPPROX. 0.16 AC.DISTURBANCE(6,897 SQ.FT.)KELLSWATER COMMONSFOR MPV PROPERTIESIN KANNAPOLIS, NCWETLANDS EXHIBIT - IMPACT AWGBETSESLJUNE 201920190207.00.CLG3.0PROPERTYBOUNDARY (TYP.)Figure 9
PRELIMINARY - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION, RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALESFILE PATH:M:\Projects\MPV Properties\2019020700CL - Kellswater Commons Wetlands Permitting\CADD\Plan Set\Townhomes Only Wetland Permitting\2019020700_C_GRADING OVERALL - WETLAND.dwg, ELANDEROS, 8/8/2019 5:44:57 PM616 COLONNADE DRCHARLOTTE, NC 28205(t)[phone](f)[phone]WWW.WKDICKSON.COMNC LICENSE NO.F-0374WKD PROJ. NO.:DRAWING NUMBER:PROJ. DATE:PROJ. MGR.:DESIGN BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT NAME:DRAWING TITLE:COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS ORDELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIESFROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.community infrastructure consultants500 100SCALE: 1" = 50'KELLSWATER COMMONSFOR MPV PROPERTIESIN KANNAPOLIS, NCWETLANDS EXHIBIT - TEMPORARY IMPACT BWGBETSESLJUNE 201920190207.00.CLG3.1PROPERTYBOUNDARY (TYP.)APPROX. LOCATION OFPROPOSED CONNECTION TOEXISTING SANITARY SEWER.TEMPORARY IMPACT BAPPROX. 31 LF STREAMDISTURBANCEAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OFPROPOSED SANITARY SEWER (TYP.)(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)RSOD BUFFER (TYP.)PROPOSED OPEN CUT FORSEWER INSTALLATION(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)PERENNIAL STREAM CAPPROX. 252 LFEX. SANITARYSEWER (TYP.)EX. SANITARY SEWEREASEMENT (TYP.)30'30'Figure 10
PRELIMINARY - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION, RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALESFILE PATH:M:\Projects\MPV Properties\2019020700CL - Kellswater Commons Wetlands Permitting\CADD\Plan Set\Townhomes Only Wetland Permitting\2019020700_C_GRADING OVERALL - WETLAND.dwg, ELANDEROS, 8/8/2019 5:44:57 PM616 COLONNADE DRCHARLOTTE, NC 28205(t)[phone](f)[phone]WWW.WKDICKSON.COMNC LICENSE NO.F-0374WKD PROJ. NO.:DRAWING NUMBER:PROJ. DATE:PROJ. MGR.:DESIGN BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT NAME:DRAWING TITLE:COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS ORDELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIESFROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.community infrastructure consultants500 100SCALE: 1" = 50'KELLSWATER COMMONSFOR MPV PROPERTIESIN KANNAPOLIS, NCWGBETSESLJUNE 201920190207.00.CLWETLANDS EXHIBIT - STORMWATER OUTFALLG3.2PROPERTYBOUNDARY (TYP.)APPROXIMATE LOCATION OFEXISTING STORMWATER BMPAPPROX. 2.18 AC.(95,175 SQFT.)RSOD BUFFER (TYP.)PROP. STORMWATEROUTFALL (TYP.)APPROX. LOCATION OF PROP.STORMWATER DRAINAGE OUTFALL(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)APPROX. LOCATION OF PROP.PERMANENT STORMWATEROUTFALL CHANNEL (LOCATIONSUBJECT TO CHANGE)PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT'S STORMWATER WILLBE CONVEYED THROUGH STORM DRAINAGE ANDDISCHARGED INTO EX. STORMWATER POND VIAPROPOSED STORMWATER OUTFALL.APPROXIMATE LOCATION OFPROPOSED SANITARY SEWER (TYP.)(LOCATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE)Figure 11
PRELIMINARY - NOT RELEASED FOR CONSTRUCTION, RECORDATION, CONVEYANCES, OR SALESFILE PATH:M:\Projects\MPV Properties\2019020700CL - Kellswater Commons Wetlands Permitting\CADD\Plan Set\Townhomes Only Wetland Permitting\2019020700_C_GRADING OVERALL - WETLAND.dwg, ELANDEROS, 8/8/2019 5:44:58 PM616 COLONNADE DRCHARLOTTE, NC 28205(t)[phone](f)[phone]WWW.WKDICKSON.COMNC LICENSE NO.F-0374WKD PROJ. NO.:DRAWING NUMBER:PROJ. DATE:PROJ. MGR.:DESIGN BY:DRAWN BY:PROJECT NAME:DRAWING TITLE:COPYRIGHT ©, W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION OR USE OF THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT; ADDITIONS ORDELETIONS TO THIS DOCUMENT, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT OF W.K. DICKSON & CO., INC., IS PROHIBITED. ONLY COPIESFROM THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT, MARKED WITH AN ORIGINAL SIGNATURE AND SEAL SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE VALID, TRUE COPIES.community infrastructure consultants500 100SCALE: 1" = 50' HKELLSWATER COMMONSFOR MPV PROPERTIESIN KANNAPOLIS, NCWETLANDS EXHIBIT - TEMPORARY IMPACT BCROSS-SECTIONWGBETSESLJUNE 201920190207.00.CLG4.0PROPOSED OPEN CUT FORSEWER INSTALLATIONINV IN: 682.05INV OUT: 681.85EXISTING GRADE (TYP.)10020SCALE: 1" = 10' V8" PVCAPPROX. 79 LF @ 0.60%APPROX. STREAMCENTERLINE (TYP.)INV IN: 687.85INV OUT: 682.52Figure 12
FIGURE NO.

Cabarrus Co., NC

STREAM BANK STABILIZATION DETAIL
TYPICAL DETAIL – N.T.S.

DATE:

//1
Drawn By:
LSR DCK
Reviewed By:
13
Jurisdictional Determination Jurisdictional
Determination Information
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 1

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.army.mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator.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
FIELDOFFICES
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue,Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina28801-5006
GeneralNumber: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGHREGULATORYFIELDOFFICE
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina27587
GeneralNumber: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTONREGULATORYFIELDOFFICE
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina27889
GeneralNumber: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTONREGULATORYFIELDOFFICE
US ArmyCorps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
GeneralNumber:910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
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: Propertyowner 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.
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 2
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: _______________________________________________
City, State: _______________________________________________
County:
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN):
B. REQUESTORINFORMATION
Name:
Mailing Address:
_________________________________________
Telephone Number: _________________________________________
Electronic Mail Address: ________________________________________
Select one:
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
1
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain. ________________________________________
__________________________________________________________
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
2
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1 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).
Kannapolis Pkwy /Rogers Lake Drive
Kannapolis, NC
Cabarrus
please see attached parcel map
Leonard S. Rindner,PLLC,WEPG
10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550
Charlotte NC 28277
336-554-2728
[e-mail]
MPV Properties
2400 South Blvd
Charlotte, NC, 28203
704-561-5238
[e-mail]
✔
Ken Chapman
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 4

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 acres.
The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
18.9
✔
✔
✔
✔
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 5

H. REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: ______________________
Longitude: ______________________
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/Regulatory-Permit-
Program/Jurisdiction/
35.4665
-80.6658
✔
✔
✔
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Version: May 2017
Page 6

Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
PJDs,please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form7 and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form
8
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
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
Other Assessment Forms
_____________________________________________________________________________
7 www.saw.usace.army.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL_08-02_App_A_Prelim_JD_Form_fillable.pdf
8 Please see http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Permit-Program/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose:The information thatyouprovide will beusedinevaluating your requestto determine
whether thereareany aquatic resources within the project areasubjecttofederaljurisdictionunder the regulatory
authorities referencedabove.
RoutineUses:Thisinformation maybeshared with the Departmentof Justice andotherfederal, state,and local
government agencies, and the public,andmaybe made available aspartof a public notice as required byfederal
law. Your nameandproperty location wherefederal jurisdiction is to bedetermined will beincluded in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD),which will bemade available tothe public on the District's website
andontheHeadquartersUSAGEwebsite.
Disclosure:Submission ofrequested information is voluntary; however, ifinformation is notprovided, the
requestforanAJD cannot beevaluatednorcananAJD be issued.
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A.REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD:
B.NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD:
C.DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D.PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: County/parish/borough: City:
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.:Long.:
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody:
E.REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH “MAY BE”SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non-wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource “may be”
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
Wetland A / AA 35.4671 -80.6649 0.16 ac wetland 404
Per Stream C 35.4695 -80.6672 252 lf
non-wetland waters 404
Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC, WEPG 10612-D Providence Road, PMB 550 Charlotte NC 28277
CHARLOTTE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
NC Cabarrus Kannapolis
35.4665 -80.6658
WGS84
Irish Buffalo Creek
1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring “pre-
construction notification” (PCN), or requests verification for a non-reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant’s acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit)or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there “may be” waters of the U.S. and/or that there “may be”navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map: ________________.
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale: _______.
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: _________.
Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: __________.
National wetlands inventory map(s).Cite name:________.
State/local wetland inventory map(s): ____________.
FEMA/FIRM maps: ________________.
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: ____.(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: Aerial (Name &Date):______.
or Other (Name & Date): ______.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:__________.
Other information (please specify): ______________.
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member person requesting PJD
completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)
1
1 Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.
1:2400 Lake Kannapolis, NC Quadrangle
Daniel Kuefler Digitally signed by Daniel Kuefler
DN: cn=Daniel Kuefler, o=WEPG, ou,
email=[e-mail], c=US
Date: 2019.08.15 23:46:06 -04'00'
Drawn By: Reviewed By:DCK LSR DATE: 8/15/19 FIGURE NO. 14 KELLSWATER Cabarrus Co., NC PRELIMINARY MAP -DRAFT SUBJECT TO NCDEQ / USACE VERIFACTION PERENNIAL STREAM C -252 lf Wetland A/AA -0.16 ac 2 1 4 3 APPROXIMATE PROJECT BOUNDARY STUDY LIMITS USACE WETLAND FORM A/AA USACE UPLAND FORM DP1 NCDEQ STREAM FORM C *** USACE Verification 5/15/19 ***
Kellswater Site
Cabarrus Co., NC – 3/22/19

NATURALIZED FEATURE – PHOTO 1
NATURALIZED FEATURE – PHOTO 2
Wetland A/AA- PHOTO 1
Wetland A/AA- PHOTO 2
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC – 3/22/19

Stormwater ditch draining into large BMP/SCM – PHOTO 4
Stormwater ditch below wetland A/AA draining into large BMP / SCM - PHOTO 3
Kellswater
Cabarrus Co., NC – 2/5/19

Perennial Stream C – PHOTO 4
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
XNo
XNo X
XNo
X
X
X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
24
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
City/County:Kellswater Cabarrus
Wetland A
5/15/19
MPV NC
No
Section, Township, Range:Daniel Kuefler, WEPG
2-8nonegentle slope
Datum: WGS84-80.664935.4671LRR P, MLRA 136
noneNWI classification:Cullen clay loam
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland? Yes
Wetland is a naturalized ponded feature that has formed behind a historically clogged culvert along a stormwater channel.
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
0
0
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals: (B)
5.
6.
7.
8.X
9.X
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:Yes X
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland Area is largely open water with fringe of wetland vegetation including several realtively large willows, however canopy coverage is minimal.
)5
=Total Cover
Yes
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
5230
Yes OBL
0
30
0
Multiply by:
0
1.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
0
0
(A)
(B)
(A)
6
25
15
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
30
Yes
Yes
10
10
Juncus sp.
10Typha latifolia OBL
Cyperus sp.10
10
Salix nigra
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
Salix nigra
30 )
10
Indicator
Status
10
Dominant
Species?
Yes OBL
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
60.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.0 1
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
Wetland A
3
5
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
30
0
30
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
X
X
X
Depth (inches):X
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Loc2
Mucky Loam/Clay80 C
Color (moist)
Matrix
10YR 4/1 2.5YR 4/80-20
Wetland ASOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
%
Prominent redox concentrations
Texture
20 M
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Project/Site:Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner:State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
No X
No X X
No X
Yes X
Yes X
Yes X X X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
NoYes
0
No
No
Water Table Present?
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Upland datapoint taken 30' upslope (North) of Wetland A.
HYDROLOGY
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (B5)
City/County:Kellswater Cabarrus
Upland DP1
5/15/19
MPV NC
No
Section, Township, Range:Daniel Kuefler, WEPG
2-8nonegentle slope
Datum: WGS84-80.664935.4671LRR P, MLRA 136
noneNWI classification:Cullen clay loam
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
Yes NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? (If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed?
naturally problematic?
Are “Normal Circumstances” present?
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Remarks:

Is the Sampled AreaYes
Yes
Yes
Hydric Soil Present?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Nowithin a Wetland? Yes
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Remarks:
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
0
0
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
No
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Surface Water Present?
Field Observations:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
(Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.(A/B)
7.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: x 1 =
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:x 2 =
1.x 3 =
2.x 4 =
3.x 5 =
4.Column Totals: (B)
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:Yes X
=Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland Area is largely open water with fringe of wetland vegetation including several realtively large willows, however canopy coverage is minimal.
)5
=Total Cover
Yes
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
VEGETATION (Four Strata)– Use scientific names of plants.
10 4 0
Yes
Yes
FACU
0
0
80
Multiply by:
0
4.00Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
0
20
(A)
(B)
(A)
1640
15
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Woody Vine – All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
=Total Cover
Herb – All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
30 )
80
Yes
No
20Rubus sp.
10Phytolacca americana FACU
Solidago sp.50
Tree Stratum
)
=Total Cover
Prunus sp.
Juniperus virginiana
30 )
20
Indicator
Status
10
10
Dominant
Species?
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
Sapling/Shrub – Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
(1 m) tall.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute
% Cover
0.0%
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
3 - Prevalence Index is 3.0 1
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
No
Upland DP1
0
4
FACU species
UPL species
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
0
80
0
20
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0
Depth (inches):X
Sampling Point:
Yes
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present?
Type:
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Loc2
Loamy/Clayey100
Color (moist)
Matrix
10YR 4/30-20
Upland DP1SOIL
Type1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches) Color (moist)Remarks
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
%
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
% Texture
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)MLRA 136)
Dark Surface (S7)unless disturbed or problematic.Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
No
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

Form #PCO39

1

Stream Reach Evaluation Form

Date: ͷȀͳͷȀͳͻ Evaluator: ƒ‹‡Ž—‡ˆŽ‡”Ǧ
Easting: ǦͺͲǤ͸͸͹ʹ
Project: ‡ŽŽ•™ƒ–‡”Ǧ‡”‡‹ƒŽ–”‡ƒ Northing: ͵ͷǤͶ͸ͻͷ
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or perennial if > 30*
(right-click the purple number and left-click Update Field to summarize points)
30.0

A. Geomorphology Absent Weak Moderate Strong SCORE
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3 ʹ
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3 ʹ
3. In-channel structure: riffle- / step- pool sequence 0 1 2 3 ʹ
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3 ͵
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3 ͳ
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3 ͳ
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3 ͳ
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3 ʹ
9. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5 ͳ
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5 ͳǤͷ
11. Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3 Ͳ
Geomorphology Subtotal 16.5
a Man-made ditches are not rated: see discussion in NCDWQ Manual
B. Hydrology
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3 ͵
13. Iron Oxidizing Bacteria 0 1 2 3 ʹ
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0 ͳ
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5 ͳǤͷ
16. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5 ͳ
17. Soil-based Evidence of high water table? No = 0 Yes = 3 ͵
Hydrology Subtotal 11.5
C. Biology
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0 ͳ
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0 ͳ
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3 Ͳ
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3 Ͳ
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5 Ͳ
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5 Ͳ
24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5 Ͳ
25. Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5 Ͳ
26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW= 0.75, OBL= 1.5, Other= 0 Ͳ
Biology Subtotal 2.0
* perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See page 35 of NCDWQ manual.
Notes: 

I certify that this evaluation conforms to the latest version of
the NCDWQ document entitled Methodology for Identification
of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their Origins.

ƒ‹‡Ž—‡ˆŽ‡”Ǧ

____________________________________
Signature of Certified Evaluator
(version 4.11)
NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT RESULTS
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
USACE AID # NCDWR#
Project Name Kellswater Date of Evaluation 5/15/19
Applicant/Owner Name MPV Wetland Site Name Wetland A
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Daniel Kuefler / WEPG
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Irish Buffalo Creek
River Basin Yadkin-PeeDee USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03040105
County Cabarrus NCDWR Region Mooresville
Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 35.4671, -80.6649
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No

Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No
Is the assessment area’s surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? Yes No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in the
assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the assessment
area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing, less
diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and duration (Sub).
Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. A ditch ≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot
deep is expected to affect both surface and sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation change)
(examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3. Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
4. Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c. A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub). Examples
of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6. Land Use – opportunity metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (5M),
and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS 5M 2M
A A A > 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
C C C ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.

Well Loosely
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats

13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear-cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,
select option ”C.”
A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or clearing.
It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or exotic species are dominant in at
least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).
17. Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.

17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation

17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent

A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent

A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent

A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19. Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21. Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D

22. Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands and Salt/Brackish Marsh only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion,
man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Canopy Mid-Story Shrub Herb
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name Wetland A Date of Assessment 5/15/19
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name/Organization Daniel Kuefler / WEPG

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Soluble Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition LOW
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating LOW

Threatened & Endangered Species Report Threatened & Endangered Species
Report
Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species
Evaluation
For:Kellswater
Cabarrus County, North Carolina
By: Lisa R. Gaffney
August 15, 2019
Kellswater - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
222
GENERAL LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION:
The Kellswater site (+/- 18.5 acres) is located just east of Kannapolis Parkway;
and just south of Rogers Lake Road; in Cabarrus County, North Carolina. It can
be found on the Kannapolis, NC USGS Topographic Quadrangle Maps; latitude
is 35.4665 N, longitude is -80.6658 W. The topography is gently to moderately
sloped. The elevation ranges from 690 to 770 ft. (Figure 1). The site is in
various stages of primary succession from major disturbance in the recent past.
A large overhead power line traverses the perimeter of the northeast boundary,
and a smaller power line parallels the roadside corridor along Kannapolis
Parkway.
Figure 1:
Kellswater - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
3333
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
Cabarrus County, North Carolina, the results of which are listed below (Table 1).
Maps and aerial photographs were assembled, and the site was investigated
during the week of August 11, 2019.
Table 1: Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species listed for
Cabarrus County, NC
County: Cabarrus, NC
*Source: US Fish & Wildlife Service
**Data search on August 12, 2019
Group Name
Federal
Status Record Status
Vascular
Plants
Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
schweinitzii)
Endangered Current
Vertebrate Northern Long-Eared Bat (Myotis
septentrionalis)
Threatened Probable/Potential
Vertebrate Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)Protected Current
Invertebrate Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata)Endangered Historic
Kellswater - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
444
SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS:
One plant species with federal protection was included in the survey efforts:
Schweinitz’s Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), listed as Federally
Endangered, is typically found in open habitats which historically have
been maintained by wildfires and grazing bison and elk herds. Now most
occurrences are limited to roadsides, woodland and field edges, and utility
rights-of-way (ROW).
A total of three animal species with federal protection are listed as potentially
occurring in Cabarrus 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.
RESULTS:
The site is in a highly disturbed state from past timbering and rough grading. It is
in various stages of primary succession. A large overhead power line traverses
the perimeter of the northeast boundary, and a smaller power line parallels the
roadside corridor along Kannapolis Parkway.
The flatter uplands are covered primarily with herbaceous vegetation, including
typical grasses and pea family species used for soil stabilization on disturbed
land. The dominant species overall is Sericea Lespedeza (Lespedeza cuneata),
with Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), Goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Broomsedge
(Andropogon virginicus), Splitbeard (A. ternarius), Groundsel (Senicio sp.),
Thoroughwort (Eupatorium sp.), St. John’s Wort (Hypericum punctatum), and
Dogbane (Apocynum cannabinum).
Kellswater - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
5555
The remainder of the site is covered with a sucessional scrub/shrub community
composed of pine and hardwood saplings and young trees, and blackberry and
woody vine thickets. Dominant species present include Winged Elm, (Ulmus
alata), Red Maple (Acer rubrum), Honey Locust (Gleditsia triacanthhos),
Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), Shortleaf Pine (Pinus echinata), Virginia
Pine (Pinus virginiana), Red Cedar (Juniperus virginiana), Black Cherry (Prunus
serotina), Persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica),
Blackberry (Rubus sp.), Russian Olive (Elaeagnus umbellata), Smooth Sumac
(Rhus glabra), Groundsel (Baccharis halimifolia), Japanese Honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), Catbrier (Smilax sp.), and Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans).
At the time of the site evaluation the power line rights-of-way had been sprayed
with herbicide with most of the vegetation dead or dying; and the roadside along
Kannapolis Highway had been recently mowed.
Threatened & Endangered/Protected Species Results
All potential habitats for Schweinitz’s Sunflower along the roadside, power
lines and edges were examined, and the species was not found.
No suitable nesting 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.
Kellswater - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
6666
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
August 15, 2019
Kellswater - Threatened / Endangered / Protected Species Evaluation
7777
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 50,000 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.
Supporting Documents Supporting
Documents
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FILE COPY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID. SAW -2008-2224 County: Cabarrus USGS Quad: Kannapolis
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner / Authorized Agent: Merrifield Partners, Inc., Attn: Mr. Edwin Thomas
Address: 125 Scalevbark Road
Charlotte, NC 28209
Telephone No.: 704-716-1000
Size and location of property (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): Approximate 88 -acre commercial and
multi -family residential development site (Kellswater Commons) at the intersection of Kannapolis Parkway and
Rogers Lake Road Extension adiacent to an unnamed tributary of Irish Buffalo Creek near of Kannapolis.
Description of projects area and activity: Pipe and fill 180 linear feet of perennial stream channel, 524 linear feet of
unimportant intermittent stream channel and 0.16 acres of wetland for general site development. SPECIAL
CONDITION: In order to compensate for impacts to 180 linear feet of stream with important aquatic function,
the permittee sball make payment to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) in the
amount determined by the NCEEP, sufficient to perform the restoration of 180 linear feet of warm water stream
channel in the Yadkin River Basin, Cataloging Unit 03040105. Construction within jurisdictional areas on the
Property shall be0u oniv after the Permittee has made full payment to the NCEEP and provided a cowy of the
payment documentation to the Corps.
Applicable Law: X 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: 39
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached
conditions and your submitted plans. 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.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA),
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 Steven Lund at telephone [phone].
Corps Regulatory Official: Steven Lund Date: August 21, 2008 Expiration Date of Verification: August 21, 2010
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 attached customer Satisfaction Survey or visit http://www.saw.usace.anny.mil/WETLANDS/index.htmi to
complete the survey online.

FILE COPY
Determination of Jurisdiction:
❑ 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).
❑ 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.
X 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.
❑ 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: _Streams are intermittent and perennial (RPWs) tlowine to Irish Buffalo Creek, a
perennial tributary to the Rocky River, a traditionally navieable water (TNM.
Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations.)
Attached to this verification is an approved jurisdictional determination. If you are not in agreement with that approved jurisdictional
determination, you can make an administrative appeal under 33 CFR 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process
(NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA
form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn: Steven W. Lund, Project Manager
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
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 District 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 by 1/2/2008.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: Steven Lund
Date: Aueust 21.2008
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
Copy Furnished: Mr. Len Rindner, Environmental Planning Consultant, 3714 Spokeshave Lane, Matthews, NC 28105