20191298 Ver 1_00_PCN_COMPLETE_reduced_20190926

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- 2019-01407 Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM ❑
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Springbrook Apartment Homes
2. Work Type: 17Private ❑Institutional ❑Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description/ Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Pedcor Investments, LLC proposes to construct a future multi -family development on an approximately 18 -acre, undeveloped property
between Scott Futrell Drive and Allegheny Street, in Charlotte, NC (Figure 1).
4. Property Owner/ Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A41: Pedcor Investments, LLC
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]:
7. Project Location —Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form B lb]:
The project is located between Scott Futrell Drive, Alleghany Street, and US -85 in Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, NC. Project Coordinates (decimal degrees): 35.238157 N, -80.90536 W
8. Project Location —Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 06114104
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Mecklenburg
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Charlotte
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Taggart Creek
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: Lower Catawba (03050103)
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
❑ Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 12 & 14
Regional General Permit #
❑ Jurisdictional Determination Request
Section 10 and 404 ❑
::]Pre -Application Request
::]Unauthorized Activity
❑ Compliance
❑No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Kimley»>Horn
September 26, 2019
Mr. David Shaeffer
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre -Construction Notification (NWP 12 & 14)
Springbrook Apartment Homes (SAW -2019-01407)
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, NC
Dear Mr. Shaeffer and Ms. Higgins:
On behalf of our client, Pedcor Investments, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the enclosed joint
Section 404/401 Pre -Construction Notification for the above -referenced project for your review
pursuant to Nationwide Permits 12 and 14 and General 401 Water Quality Certification numbers
4133 and 4135. The subject property is located at 2299 Scott Futrell Dr, which is situated between
Scott Futrell Drive and Alleghany Street, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. The center of the project
area is located at 35.238157°N, -80.90536°W. The following information is included as part of this
application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Agent Authorization
• Pre -Construction Notification Form
• Project Site Figures
■ Figure 1— Vicinity
■ Figure 2 — USGS 7.5' Topo (Charlotte West Quadrangle)
■ Figure 3 — Meck. Co. SSURGO Soils (2019 Meck. Co. Aerial)
■ Figure 4 — Proposed Conditions (2019 Meck. Co. Aerial)
■ Figure 4a — Proposed Conditions (2019 Meck. Co. Aerial)
■ Figure 4b — Proposed Conditions (2019 Meck. Co. Aerial)
• Permit Drawings
• Agency Correspondence
0 Habitat Assessment Forms

Kimley»>Horn
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Development of the approximately 18 -acre residential parcel will include 11 separate multi -story
buildings consisting of individual units, a clubhouse, pool area, playground/courtyard, associated
parking lots, and site access. Access into the site includes two private driveways; one connecting the
development to Scott Futrell Drive and one connecting the development to Alleghany Street.
Prior to parcel subdivision, a delineation of potential waters of the U.S. was conducted in January
2018 on the overall 35 -acre property by ECS Southeast, LLP for Adams Outdoor Advertising and
provided to the USACE requesting a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD). The USACE
performed an on-site verification of delineated features in March 2018 which included modifications
to the delineation. ECS Southeast modified the delineation based on USACE comments, however, a
revised Preliminary JD Field Sketch was not provided to the USACE; therefore, the PJD was not
processed. A re-verification/pre-application meeting between KH and the USACE was conducted on
Sept 6, 2019, to review the proposed impact areas and discuss the appropriate permit approach.
PROJECT HISTORY
In August 2017, Pedcor approached Adams Outdoor Advertising (Adams Outdoor) regarding the
large parcel they owned between Scott Futrell Drive and Alleghany Street. Pedcor was unaware that
Adams Outdoor had begun planning for the construction of a new headquarters off Scott Futrell
Drive. The proposed Adams Outdoor headquarters site plan did not require the use of the overall
35 -acre parcel, nor did they have future plans for the remaining areas; therefore, Adams Outdoor
agreed to subdivide an 18 -acre area, south of the on-site stream channel.
The determination of property lines and the development of a preliminary site plan was created and
approved by the City, utilizing their current subdivision ordinances, which included platted Right -of -
Way (R/W), in order for the site to be rezoned to the appropriate residential use. During the
rezoning process, Pedcor discovered that the property did not front Alleghany St. which forced a
connection to the north onto Scott Futrell Drive. It was anticipated that R/W would eventually be
obtained through the frontage parcel owned by Charlotte -Mecklenburg Board of Education to the
south and connect to Alleghany St. Through the City's planning process the new north/south R/W
was determined to be best suited along the western property line, plus required buffers. The
connection points to both Scott Futrell Dr. and the eventual connection onto Alleghany St. were
determined by the City's spacing requirements and/or drive alignments, primarily, as well as
considerations to the development on the Adams Outdoor headquarters property.
All City requirements were met and the rezoning was approved in April 2018, locking in the site plan.
The final purchase of the property occurred on March 2019. Adams Outdoor provided authorization
for Pedcor to proceed in the rezoning process while the parcel was still under their ownership;
however, Adams Outdoor was not involved during preliminary site planning or the rezoning process.
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
Cultural Resources
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS

Kimley»>Horn
service on August 8, 2018, and found no sites of architectural, historic, or archaeological
significance within or near the project boundary.
Protected Species
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on August 8, 2018, did
not indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary.
Additionally, pedestrian surveys conducted by Kimley-Horn in August 2018 did not identify any
occurrences of protected species within the property boundary. (See attached NCNHP Letter). A
correspondence letter from USFWS dated February 12, 2018, indicates that no known occurrences
exist within the site.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
The proposed project seeks to install a 114 -If, 60 -inch circular reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) along
Stream A and an offset 54 -inch circular RCP to convey flows exceeding bank -full. The main base -
flow culvert will be installed 1 -foot below the elevation of the existing stream bed to promote and
maintain aquatic passage of fish and other aquatic organisms as well as to maintain passage during
low -flow conditions. Rip -rap dissipation is proposed at the outlet of the pipe to reduce discharge
velocity and meet non-erosive design criteria. Outlet dissipation will be constructed using natural
channel design techniques that include ensuring that the rip -rap is properly installed into the
channel bed and placed in a fashion to ensure aquatic passage. 208 If of permanent impacts to non -
wetland WoUS are necessary to facilitate the culvert installation and outlet protection on Stream A.
Installation of the culvert requires 40 If of temporary stream impacts to install a pumped -diversion
system necessary to perform the work in dry conditions.
Construction of a retaining wall and associated grading fill slopes necessary to facilitate construction
of the access road on the northwestern portion of the property will result in 0.22 -ac of permanent
impacts to Wetland A. Additionally, 0.05 -ac of temporary wetland impacts to Wetland A are
necessary to facilitate the construction of the retaining wall. Mud mats will be utilized within
temporary impact areas to prevent wetland soil disturbance and will be removed immediately
following construction.
The development also proposes to tie into the existing public sanitary sewer system. The work
includes the installation of a lateral 8 -inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) to an existing 8 -inch DIP mainline.
The installation will consist of open -cut and backfill through Stream A and Wetland C. Since
Wetland C is situated within the existing maintained sanitary sewer easement, the work will
predominately result in only temporary wetland impacts; however, a 0.001 -ac forested wetland area
will be permanently converted to a freshwater emergent wetland as a result of the proposed 15 -ft
maintained sanitary sewer easement. 0.01 -ac of temporary impact to Wetland Cis necessary to
perform the pipe installation. Mud mats will be utilized within the temporary impact area to
prevent wetland soil disturbance and will be removed immediately following construction. 20 If of
temporary impact to Stream A is necessary to install a pumped diversion system in order to work in
dry conditions while the open cut, pipe installation, and backfill activities are conducted. The

Kimley»>Horn
stream and all disturbed areas will be restored to pre -construction conditions following completion
of the activity.
In total, the proposed project seeks permanent impacts to 208 If of potential non -wetland WoUS
and 0.22 -ac of potential wetland-WoUS. A total of 60 If of temporary potential non -wetland
WoUS impacts and 0.06 -ac potential wetland-WoUS impacts are needed for construction activities
necessary to install the new culvert and sanitary sewer in order to perform the activities in dry
conditions and to prevent wetland soil disturbance. All temporary impacts will be restored to pre -
construction conditions following completion of the activities.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
As previously mentioned, property lines and road locations were determined primarily by the effort
necessary to meet City requirements during the rezoning process. Additionally, the selected site for
the Adams Outdoor headquarters facility as well as the natural topography of the site limited road
options for the connection to Scott Futrell Drive to the western portion of the property. Following
the determination of the road location, avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented
during development planning and design to the greatest extent practicable in order to reduce the
overall impacts on the aquatic environment while staying within nationwide permit thresholds.
Retaining walls are proposed throughout the northwestern portion of the site to eliminate fill slopes
which would result in additional stream and wetland impacts. Initial site layout and grading plans
proposed over 300 If of stream impacts and nearly 0.5 -acre of wetland impacts. Through multiple
iterations of siting and the implementation of retaining walls, the final plan demonstrates maximum
minimization efforts by reducing the proposed stream and wetland impacts to 208 If and 0.22 -ac,
respectively. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include the following:
Stream A — Impact 1 & Wetland A — Impact 3: In order to meet the needs of the proposed
development, access to the northern portion of the property, which is currently
inaccessible, is required. Both impacts are necessary to construct the public access road,
as the parcel is constrained by a property to the west and to the east owned by Adams
Outdoor, neither of which can be relocated or impacted.
There are no feasible alternatives that would avoid impacts to Stream A or Wetland A.
Removing the access to Scott Futrell Dr. creates a life safety issue, in the event Alleghany
St. is not accessible for emergency vehicles or residents for any reason. The proposed
layout minimizes impacts to Stream A and Wetland A by implementing 15 -ft retaining
walls along the future street right-of-way to limit impacts to only what is necessary to
build the road. Pedcor and KH coordinated with City planning and the Charlotte DOT to
remove parallel parking spaces on the future street, which are generally required by the
City. By removing the parking spaces, the overall street section was reduced which
resulted in a minimization of wetland impacts.
To prevent downstream sedimentation, construction will be conducted in dry conditions through
the use of an impervious dike and pumped diversions. Temporary erosion and sediment control
measures placed in waters will be removed and the original grade restored upon completion of the

Kimley»>Horn
project. Coir fiber matting will be installed, and a temporary seed mix will be applied immediately
following construction to provide initial stabilization.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of
Mitigation Services (NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 208 If of stream impacts will be mitigated through
the purchase of stream mitigation credits. Based on an NCSAM assessment of intermittent Stream
A, mitigation is proposed at a 1.5:1 ratio. Since the project is located within the Lower Catawba
watershed (HUC 03050103), credits will be purchased at a 3:1 ratio; therefore, 624 SMUs will be
purchased from NCDMS for impacts associated with the new roadway. 0.22 -ac of wetland impacts
will be mitigated through the purchase of wetland mitigation credits. Based on an NCWAM
assessment of Wetland A, mitigation is proposed at a 2:1 ratio. Wetland mitigation credits will be
purchased at 4:1 based on the location of the project within the Lower Catawba watershed,
therefore, 0.88 wetland credits will be purchased from NCDMS for wetland impacts.
in total, 624 stream credits and 0.88 wetland credits will be purchased from NCDMS to provide
the appropriate compensatory mitigation for this project.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional
information is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
Attachments
Cc: Alan Johnson
Division of Water Resources
610 East Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115

Kimley>>) Horn
Project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Spring Brook Apartment Homes
Applicant Name and Address: Pedcor Investments, LLC
POC: Kara Strickland
770 Third Avenue, S.W.
Carmel, IN 46032
Telephone Number: [phone]
Type of Request: ® Nationwide PCN (NWP # 12 & 14) ❑ Individual Permit Application
❑ Jurisdictional Determination ❑ Other:
Included Attachments: ® Project Plans ® USGS Map ® NRCS Soil Survey
® Agent Authorization ® Delineation Sketch ❑ Delineation Survey
❑ Data Forms (Up & Wet) ❑ NCDWR Stream Forms ❑ USACE Stream Forms
❑ NCEEP Confirmation ® Aerial Photo ® Site Photos
® Agency Correspondence ❑ Other: ❑ Other:
Check if applicable: ❑ CAMA County ❑ Trout County ❑ Isolated Waters
❑ Section 7, ESA ❑ Section 106, NHPA ❑ EFH
❑ Mitigation Proposed (❑ NC EEP ❑ On -Site ❑ Off -Site ❑ Other)
County: Mecklenburg Nearest City/Town: Charlotte
Waterway: Taggart Creek
H.U.C.: 03050103
Property Size (acres): 18 acres
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.239057 °N
River Basin: Catawba
USGS Quad Name: Charlotte West, NC
Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 1.2 ac
-80.904894 °W
Project Location: The proposed project site is located on an undeveloped parcel between Scott Futrell Drive and Alleghany
Street in Charlotte, NC.
Site Description: The project area is currently undeveloped forest land. Existing land use in the vicinity of the project
includes, commercial development, residential development, and undeveloped forested/maintained properties.
Impact Summary (if applicable): The proposed project seeks to install two 1141f RCPs resulting in 2081f of permanent stream
impacts. Installation of the culvert reauires 401f of tenmorary stream impacts to install a pumped -diversion system necessary to
perform the work in dry conditions. Additionally, 0.22 -ac of permanent wetland impacts will result from the construction of
retaining walls and site grading. 0.05 -ac of temporary wetland impacts are necessary for construction of retaining walls and
temporary construction access. 201f of temporM impact to Stream A is necessary to install a pumped diversion system in order
to work in dry conditions while the open cut, pipe installation, and backfill activities are conducted. 0.001 -ac forested wetland
area will be permanently converted to a freshwater emergent wetland as a result of the proposed 15 -ft maintained sanitary sewer
easement. 0.01 -ac of temporM impact to Wetland Cis necessM to perform the pipe installation.
NWP
#
Open Water
(acres)
Wetland
(acres)
Stream Channel
Intermittent and/or Unimportant Perennial and/or Important
Aquatic Function Aquatic Function
Temp. Perm.
Temp. Perm.
Tem Perm. Tem Perm.
if ac if ac if ac if
Ac
12
0.01 0.001
20 0.003
14
0.05 0.22
40 0.005 208 0.03
Total
0.06 0.22
60 0.008 208 0.03
Total Permanent Impact to Waters of the U.S. OVacres) 208 if (0.22 ac)
Total Temporary Impact to Waters of the U.S. Of/acres) 60 if (0.06 ac)
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS Direct Number: [phone]
Email: chris.tinklenberg�ic kimley-horn.com

j� AGENT AaUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: ''°1C1�RCZ �✓ ljt{(�p1J
�j
Address: I �(� � � i � � , -5 , GAJ , , CQ (7� Ij � '116-o32-
�
/?, 248-�-7�9-
n4b../C-0 eP: -> i coo h e t
Project Name/Description: Snringbrook Apartment Homes — Pedcor Investments. LLC
Date:
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attention: David Shaeffer
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
Pedcor Investments. LLC hereby designates and authorizes Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to
act in their behalf as their agent solely for the purpose of processing Jurisdictional Determinations,
Section 404 permits/Section 401 Water Quality Certifications applications, and to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward until
successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by Pedcor Investments. LLC.
n Nb -/ ��i�
Authorized this the ✓�" day of J `{
Authorized Representative
(Print Name)
Cc: Karen Higgins
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
,V
Authorized Represen tive
(Signature)

M
7 l LJIiJIJL' r
nliii�-c
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre -Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 12 & 14 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 1 h
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:
Springbrook Apartment Homes
2b.
County:
Mecklenburg
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Charlotte
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
PEDCOR INVESTMENTS 2017 CLXV LP
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
33387 and 471
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Michael S. Byron
3d.
Street address:
2299 Scott Futrell Drive
3e.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC, 28202
3f.
Telephone no.:
317-218-2702
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
® Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
Kara Strickland
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Pedcor Investments
4d.
Street address:
770 Third Avenue
4e.
City, state, zip:
Carmel, IN 46032
4f.
Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Kimley-Horn and Associates
5c.
Street address:
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
5d.
City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
5e.
Telephone no.:
704-409-1802
5f.
Fax no.:
5g.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
06114104
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.239057 Longitude: - 80.904894
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c.
Property size:
17.67 acres (Project Boundary)
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project:
Taggart Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
Taggart Creek - Class "C
2c.
River basin:
Lower Catawba, HUC 03050103
Page 3 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The subject property is located at 2155 Scott Futrell Dr, which is situated between Scott Futrell Drive and Alleghany
Street, in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County. The project area is currently undeveloped forest land. Existing land use in the
vicinity of the project includes, commercial development, residential development, and undeveloped forested/maintained
properties.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.06 ac
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
The total length of all on-site streams is approximately 1,350 linear feet.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to construct a multi -family residential development on the subject property.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Development of the approximately 18 -acre residential parcel will include 11 separate multi -story buildings consisting of
individual units, a clubhouse, pool area, playground/courtyard, associated parking lots, and site access. Access into the site
includes two private driveways; one connecting the development to Scott Futrell Drive and one connecting the development to
Alleghany Street.
The proposed project seeks to install a 114 -If, 60 -inch circular reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) along Stream A and an offset
54 -inch circular RCP to convey flows exceeding bank -full. The main base -flow culvert will be installed 1 -foot below the
elevation of the existing stream bed to promote and maintain aquatic passage of fish and other aquatic organisms as well as
to maintain passage during low -flow conditions. Rip -rap dissipation is proposed at the outlet of the proposed pipe to reduce
discharge velocity and meet non-erosive design criteria. Outlet dissipation will be constructed using natural channel design
techniques that include ensuring that the rip -rap is properly installed into the channel bed and placed in a fashion to ensure
aquatic passage. 208 If of permanent impacts to non -wetland WoUS are necessary to facilitate the culvert installation and
outlet protection on Stream A. Installation of the culvert requires 40 If of temporary stream impacts to install a pumped -
diversion system necessary to perform the work in dry conditions.
Construction of a retaining wall and associated grading fill slopes necessary to facilitate construction of the access road on
the northwestern portion of the property will result in 0.22 -ac of permanent impacts to Wetland A. Additionally, 0.05 -ac of
temporary wetland impacts to Wetland A are necessary to facilitate the construction of the retaining wall. Mud mats will be
utilized within temporary impact areas to prevent wetland soil disturbance and will be removed immediately following
construction.
The development also proposes to tie into the existing public sanitary sewer system. The work includes the installation of a
lateral 8 -inch ductile iron pipe (DIP) to an existing 8 -inch DIP mainline. The installation will consist of open -cut and backfill
through Stream A and Wetland C. Since Wetland C is situated within the existing maintained sanitary sewer easement, the
work will predominately result in only temporary wetland impacts; however, a 0.001 -ac forested wetland area will be
permanently converted to a freshwater emergent wetland as a result of the proposed 15 -ft maintained sanitary sewer
easement. 0.01 -ac of temporary impact to Wetland Cis necessary to perform the pipe installation. Mud mats will be utilized
within the temporary impact area to prevent wetland soil disturbance and will be removed immediately following construction.
20 If of temporary impact to Stream A is necessary to install a pumped diversion system in order to work in dry conditions
while the open cut, pipe installation, and backfill activities are conducted. The stream and all disturbed areas will be restored
to pre -construction conditions following completion of the activity.
General construction equipment, such as; bulldozers, back hoes, front end loaders, etc. will be used for construction
purposes.
Page 4 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
®Yes E] No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: SAW -2018-00395
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
®Preliminary El Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: ECS Southeast, LLP
Name (if known): Unknown
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Prior to parcel subdivision, a delineation of potential waters of the U.S. was conducted in January 2018 on the overall 35 -
acre property by ECS Southeast, LLP for Adams Outdoor Advertising and provided to the USACE requesting a
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD). The USACE performed an on-site verification of delineated features in
March 2018 which included modifications to the delineation. ECS Southeast modified the delineation based on USACE
comments, however, a revised Preliminary JD Field Sketch was not provided to the USACE; therefore, the PJD was not
processed. A re-verification/pre-application meeting between KH and the USACE was conducted on Sept 6, 2019, to
review the proposed impact areas and discuss the appropriate permit approach.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ®No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
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.
Page 5of13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. 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.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P)
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
or Temporary
T
WA — Impact 1
® Yes
® Corps
®P❑T
Grading Fill
Riparian
E] No
®DWQ
0.22
WA — Impact 2
Construction of
Riparian
® Yes
® Corps
0.05
El ® T
Retaining Wall
E] No
® DWQ
WC — Impact 6
® P E] T
Conversion
Riparian
® Yes
E] No
® Corps
® DWQ
0.001
WC — Impact 7
Open Cut/Backfill
Riparian
® Yes
® Corps
0.01
E]P ® T
DIP Installation
E] No
® DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.28
2h. Comments: 0.22 -ac of permanent impacts to Wetland A are necessary for construction of the retaining wall and associated
fill slopes. 0.05 -ac of temporary wetland impacts are necessary to facilitate construction of the retaining wall within Wetland A.
Wetland C, 0.001 -ac forested wetland area will be permanently converted to a freshwater emergent wetland as a result of the
proposed 15 -ft maintained sanitary sewer easement. 0.01 -ac of temporary impact to Wetland C is necessary to perform the
pipe installation. Mud mats will be utilized in temporary wetland impact areas to provide temporary construction access and
prevent wetland soil disturbance. In total, 0.22 -ac of permanent wetland impacts, and 0.06 -ac of temporary wetland
impacts are proposed.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P)
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
or Temporary
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
(T)
SA — Impact 3
Installation of RCPs and
UT to Taggart
❑ PER
® Corps
5
208
® P E]T
Rip -Rap
Creek
® INT
® DWQ
SA — Impact 4
Impervious Dike and
UT to Taggart
❑ PER
® Corps
5
40
El ® T
Pumped Diversion
Creek
® INT
® DWQ
SA — Impact 5
DIP Installation and
UT to Taggart
❑ PER
® Corps
5
20
E]P ® T
Pumped Diversion
Creek
® INT
® DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
304
3i. Comments: The proposed project seeks to install a 114 -If, 60 -inch circular reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) along Stream A
and an offset 54 -inch circular RCP to convey flows exceeding bank -full. The main base -flow culvert will be installed 1 -foot
below the elevation of the existing stream bed to promote and maintain aquatic passage of fish and other aquatic organisms
as well as to maintain passage during low -flow conditions. Rip -rap dissipation is proposed at the outlet of the proposed pipe
to reduce discharge velocity and meet non-erosive design criteria. Outlet dissipation will be constructed using natural channel
design techniques that include ensuring that the rip -rap is properly installed into the channel bed and placed in a fashion to
ensure aquatic passage. 208 If of permanent impacts to non -wetland WoUS are necessary to facilitate the culvert installation
and outlet protection on Stream A. Installation of the culvert requires 40 If of temporary stream impacts to install a pumped -
diversion system necessary to perform the work in dry conditions. 20 If of temporary impact to Stream A is necessary to install
a pumped diversions stem in order to work in dry conditions while the open cut, pipe installation, and backfill activities are
Page 6of13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

conducted. The stream and all disturbed areas will be restored to pre -construction conditions following completion of the
activity. Coir fiber matting will be installed, and a temporary seed mix will be applied immediately following construction to
provide initial stabilization. In total, the proposed project seeks 208 If of permanent stream impacts and 60 If of
temporary stream impacts.
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.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
number —
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
T
01 ❑P❑T
02 ❑P❑T
03 ❑P❑T
04 ❑P❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then com Tete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
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:
Page 7of13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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.
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
® Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
impact
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
T
131 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Property lines and road locations were determined primarily by the effort necessary to meet City requirements during the
rezoning process. Additionally, the selected site for the Adams Outdoor headquarters facility as well as the natural
topography of the site limited road options for the connection to Scott Futrell Drive to the western portion of the property.
Following the determination of the road location, avoidance and minimization efforts were implemented during development
planning and design to the greatest extent practicable in order to reduce the overall impacts on the aquatic environment while
staying within nationwide permit thresholds. Retaining walls are proposed throughout the northwestern portion of the site to
eliminate fill slopes which would result in additional stream and wetland impacts. Initial site layout and grading plans proposed
over 300 If of stream impacts and nearly 0.5 -acre of wetland impacts. Through multiple iterations of siting and the
implementation of retaining walls, the final plan demonstrates maximum minimization efforts by reducing the proposed stream
and wetland impacts to 208 If and 0.22 -ac, respectively. The rationale to support avoidance and minimization efforts include
the following:
• Stream A — Impact 1 & Wetland A — Impact 3: In order to meet the needs of the proposed development, access to
the northern portion of the property, which is currently inaccessible, is required. Both impacts are necessary to
construct the public access road, as the parcel is constrained by a property to the west and to the east owned by
Adams Outdoor, neither of which can be relocated or impacted.
• There are no feasible alternatives that would avoid impacts to Stream A or Wetland A. Removing the access to
Scott Futrell Dr. creates a life safety issue, in the event Alleghany St. is not accessible for emergency vehicles or
residents for any reason. The proposed layout minimizes impacts to Stream A and Wetland A by implementing 15 -ft
retaining walls along the future street right-of-way to limit impacts to only what is necessary to build the road.
Pedcor and KH coordinated with City planning and the Charlotte DOT to remove parallel parking spaces on the
future street, which are generally required by the City. By removing the parking spaces, the overall street section
was reduced which resulted in a minimization of wetland impacts.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
To prevent downstream sedimentation, construction will be conducted in dry conditions through the use of an impervious dike
and pumped diversions. Temporary erosion and sediment control measures placed in waters will be removed and the original
grade restored upon completion of the project. Coir fiber matting will be installed, and a temporary seed mix will be applied
immediately following construction to provide initial stabilization. Temporary wetland impacts associated with construction of
the retaining walls were limited to the areas necessary for the contractor to conduct the construction activity.
Page 8of13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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
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:
624 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
® warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.88 acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 208 If of stream impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of stream mitigation credits.
Based on an NCSAM assessment of intermittent Stream A, mitigation is proposed at a 1.5:1 ratio. Since the project is located
within the Lower Catawba watershed (HUC 03050103), credits will be purchased at a 3:1 ratio; therefore, 624 SMUs will be
purchased from NCDMS for impacts associated with the new roadway. 0.22 -ac of wetland impacts will be mitigated through
the purchase of wetland mitigation credits. Based on an NCWAM assessment of Wetland A, mitigation is proposed at a 2:1
ratio. Wetland mitigation credits will be purchased at 4:1 based on the location of the project within the Lower Catawba
watershed, therefore, 0.88 wetland credits will be purchased from NCDMS for wetland impacts.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 9of13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c.
6d.
6e.
Zone
Reason for impact
Total impact
Multiplier
Required mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: The project is not subject to the NC Riparian Protection Rules; however,
❑ Yes ® No
the project meets the City of Charlotte 30 -FT Post Construction Buffer & City of
Charlotte 100 -FT Post Construction Buffer requirements.
Page 10 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
45%
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:
Per the City of Charlotte Post -Construction Stormwater Ordinance Standards for the Central Catawba District, stormwater
volume control for the one-year, 24-hour storm and stormwater peak control for the 10 -year & 25 -year, 6 -hour storm is
required for high density development. Volume control for the site is provided through an underground detention system. The
underground detention system is designed to discharge the Channel Protection Volume with 50% of the volume remaining at
36 hours and a portion of the volume remaining at 60 hours.
The underground detention system has been designed to provide peak attenuation for the 10 -year and 25 -year, 6 -hour storm
events. The outlet control structure is designed to provide a minimum of 6 inches of freeboard during the 50 -year, 6 -hour
storm event.
The site is located within the Business Corridor Revitalization Geography and is therefore exempt from PCSO water quality
requirements.
The Stormwater Management Plan approval is contingent upon 404/401 authorizations. Please provide a special condition
within the 401 certification requiring copies of SMP approval and we will provide the approval once it is obtained.
® Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Charlotte
® Phase II
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No - City plan
approval is contingent on 404/401
attached?
authorizations
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
® Other: City of Charlotte
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
Page 11 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
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.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes
® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)?
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
❑ Yes
® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Not Applicable
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 is directed to a public sewer main adjacent to the property. Flows have been accepted through
the Charlotte
Water Capacity Assurance program
Page 12 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a.
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b.
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
F-1 Raleigh
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
® Asheville
5d.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A data review was conducted using North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) Data Explorer on March 25,
2019, to determine the presence of any federally -listed, candidate endangered, threatened species, or critical habitat
located within the project area. Based on the NCNHP review, there are no records of federally -protected species within
the project limits or within a mile of the project site. A copy of the data review report is attached.
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?
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
7.
Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a.
Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
SHPO online GIS service was consulted on March 25, 2019, and found no sites of architectural, historic, or
archaeological significance within the project corridor.
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? FEMA FIRM PANEL 4534
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
9/26/2019
Signature
Applicant/Agent's Printed NameApplicant/Agent's
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
Date
is provided.)
Page 13 of 13
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

µpyres C1+aPv1 Rd agar[de[ `" m �tp1` nu
QP p L ^I
�b
r°
$, 1 ar Had Rd
c,
Ra[rri LSmgh
V
SLS y'
�+ $Ivd
Re9bnal F'ak
a F-_[
Jn
C
tf
1FI ti
I• %
�
� e
q
�
�
Rpckt�
cc
m
p e
�Nsr+
l@ J9
vJ•
C a•
C` �
CK'O Me Do ogles
Inf IArPOF1
SoWh",[
b °�
2
t95Vd
RFs A+wtu[ipn '�°e
Ci•
Comm[ 4
�a
.i
; q
C ftn 6
,Lcka;4�e
Park
..
�JS�{�
cxayee4°r Rc
0
1 �L•�kJ
¢
.. .f,
1
R
al �
6
:m.ryF
0 4,000 8,000
R
wpn
Tye
e
'roe
LD
s��aaF
Li Ra
Vow
5b.
Stals Si
tante•
r.wdo,n
-
FiaM n9
Shepp r,q
W+IkiRa
_
ir­er.ir, Hgh
P[am
a
c
2
t
%
Drover
Po
4
m �y
4v'
E
4Fp
GartYta6r
d �°
arN by qRC
_
i
Afar lowr Are
o/001
a
�[
Legend
Kimley>>) Horn Project Boundary
Mecklenburg County
Figure 1
Vicinity
Pedcor Investments
Springbrook Apartment Homes Site
Mecklenburg County, NC
SLS y'
�+ $Ivd
4 �N e1
-
A.rya,, 1�
------ � -:: y�ylkl+lson 9wd:• �'p
cc
p e
�Nsr+
l@ J9
vJ•
C a•
C` �
CK'O Me Do ogles
Inf IArPOF1
SoWh",[
b °�
2
t95Vd
RFs A+wtu[ipn '�°e
Ci•
Comm[ 4
�a
.i
; q
C ftn 6
Park
�
�JS�{�
a A, FO
sir
�esl l}lYd
1 �L•�kJ
¢
Y
J a
CE fMn Fa..,IN!ri
s CO-mly Pak -•or• .-.• . 4q
al �
Feet
0 4,000 8,000
C�mmw:fy
�[
Legend
Kimley>>) Horn Project Boundary
Mecklenburg County
Figure 1
Vicinity
Pedcor Investments
Springbrook Apartment Homes Site
Mecklenburg County, NC

■
A
N.
'r O-K�
- . e\�N
PP
s � KdiH •� r , + a � � f .
p
-- �t +!DC7
Legend = '. ''
Feet
Project Boundary 0 1,000 2,000
.�L
Figure 2
USGS Topo (Charlotte West)
Kimley>>>Horn Pedcor Investments
Springbrook Apartment Homes Site
Mecklenburg County, NC

N
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina {NC 119} i 1 41��
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina a r
t J+_
(NC119)
Map Acres percent
Unit Map Unit Name in
,
Symbol A01 of AOI ". - •_..��' ".... �- �
CeB2 Cecil sandy clay 11.1 59.211I° 'r ,,Jf•• jJ
Ioarn, 2 to 8 ,
percent slopes,
moderakely eroded
CeU2 Cecil sandy clay 7.3 38.6%n
loam, 8 to 15 T �� �•:
percent slopes,r �:; 'e N'►
moderately eroded �► , �:h �
'$' End Enon sandy loam, 8 0.3 1,811/0
1 to 15 percent"
slopes
Ur Urban land O.1 0.4°Io
Totals for Area of 18.8 100.00/0 rA
Interest
t� s
8
Legend
- ; •+� � ° _ �.
Project Boundary
NWI Wetlands
r SSURGO Soils
Hydric Rating
Feet
' Not Hydric (0110) + 4 0 300 600
Figure 3
SSURGO Soils and NWI
Kimley> Horn Pedcor Investments
Springbrook Apartment Homes
Mecklenburg County, NC

MeOC �
v g5
,.
{
Figure 5b
NRL
d
�Y.
I.�
N
A
Legend c>:;
jProject Boundary Proposed Retaining Wall
Limits of Disturbance O Proposed 54" RCPs
.� Streams (Potential Non -Wetland WoUS) Q Proposed Riprap Apron
Wetlands (Potential Wetland WoUS) Proposed Grading; J 'y 9
Proposed Stream Impacts Proposed Sanitary Sewer�
C4 Proposed Wetland Impacts (Permanent) Existing Sanitary Sewer Easement Feet
i
SS Proposed Wetland Impacts (Temporary) �, � +�, 0 2-550 -5500
Kimley>>>Horn
Figure 4
Proposed Conditions
Pedcor Investments
Springbrook Apartment Homes
Mecklenburg County, NC

a ■■N Roy Cooper. Governor
00 i NC DEPARTMENT OF Susi Hamilton, Secretary
notan NATUPAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
E sow Walter Clark, Director, Land and Mater Stewardship
NCNH DE -8552
March 25. 2019
Addie Lasitter
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
RE. Springbrook Site
Dear Addie Lasitter:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database, indicates
that there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence, the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water Management Trust Fund
easement, or Federally -listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rodnev.butlerWncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
1:1 W. JONES STREET, PALE01_ P<_ 27603 - 16S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 276"
OFC !J19 747.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Springbrook Site
March 25, 2019
NCNHDE-8552
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific NameCommon Name Last � Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group servation Occurrence Status tatRank Rank
M , Date Rank
Vascular Plant 13743 Delphinium exaltatum Tall Larkspur 1800s Hi? 5 -Very --- Endangered G3 S2
Low
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name =Owner Owner Type
Mecklenburg County Open Space Mecklenburg County Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httr)s://ncnhde.natureserve.ora/content/hely). Data query generated on March 25, 2019; source: NCNHP, Q1 Jan 2019.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-8552: Springbrook Site
r ocg.wca' yds '� e••' Sit Jb
Lkw
' .�•� fir. WgNtsuk d
our Pr S��r,, �•�V t0 ..., a - -.-_ Cefay $
V' old . �°
cP 'p ,y '�•.
f r 4
v r'^�ema ❑�
d
o _ S yuan Q �r4� n
i_.•x��bc Ro n s F`b Frwrram
wo End y Park
C tr,
� r.•s5 n�•a^sl C B.rry Aced. irry �Wy
Ar k, hVNrr ofTer nm Sr ;fin r5�
R� �oprrq �t W*l Al P"F'
PY:a Gnftr Fr�.dum Yf.
F p1
0 FrNdem i• � i
oF4rnti•an E S
-T , k M
14gnq PpN 'f•
IJny�re rr dpr Ppm cJ, 9.
F 5 D—
� s � on. �.
Mwb.ryr ¢ weslerlr ��N,a"` �'`�a, v a
A0,, S``C
E1rmP.r nr,rr
Qp`t� :ti, y A y 6 E~ 3 mmxnlr 9 F.°
- 4'e P :.i,lr ll' g 9 kclel.T yr .9 N,
r+$1 �w �h3r ; �r'A4r, Ian ❑ ,�
� y 1e'rco,rn �9�Sp
@M1. C•.sv6 A,r F1.k•sx,r�j
ori
LI c Nik lr Wr4n
�e
Rrty A-
w E
S
March 25, 2019
❑ Project Boundary
❑ Suffered Project Boundary
J Managed Area (MAREA)
Page 3 of 3
1:22,942
0 0.175 0-35 0.7 mi
0 0.3 0.6 1.2 km
Sources: Esn. HERE, Garmn. Inlernnap, increment P Corp., GE6CO, USGS.
FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoSase. IGN, Hadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan.
METI. Em China Hong Kpr 5 5slapp, ® ppenSlree[Map ppntnbvlors. and
Ae GIS user community

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Kara Strickland
Pedcor Investments, LLC
770 Third Avenue
Carmel, IN 46032
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
September 20, 2019
Project: Springbrook Apartment Homes Site
Expiration of Acceptance: 3/20/2020
County: Mecklenburg
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin
Impact Location
(8 -digit HUC)
Impact Type
Impact Quantity
Catawba
03050103
Warm Stream
208
Catawba
03050103
Riparian Wetland
0.22
*DMS proposes to utilize the Catawba 03 Expanded Service Area to meet the mitigation requirement.
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and
15A NCAC 02B .0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
cc: Chris Tinklenberg, agent
Sincerely,
AWWLZL
James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
e�_,—
NORTH CAROLINA Q��
Oepn,hnanf of EnrYanmental Quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 W. Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976

Accompanies User Manual Version 2
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5 -minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT/ SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): Springbrook Apartment Homes Site 2. Date of evaluation: July 9, 2019
3. Applicant/owner name: Pedcor Investments, LLC 4. Assessor name/organization: C. Tinklenberg/Kimley-Horn
5. County: Mecklenburg 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Catawba on USGS 7.5 -minute quad: Taggart Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach): 35.2381570N, -80.90536°W
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): Stream 1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): -150'
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 1 r Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 3' 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? r Yes r No
14. Feature type: r Perennial flaw • Intermittent flow Q Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: r Mountains (M) r Piedmont (P) Q Inner Coastal Plain (1) r Outer Coastal Plain (0)
16. Estimated geomorphic i
valley shape (skip for r a C` b
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope) (less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip r Size 1 (< 0.1 mit) r Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 mit) r Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 mit) C` Size 4 (1-5 mit)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? C•` Yes C" No If Yes, check all that appyto the assessment area.
r Section 10 water r Classified Trout Waters r Water Supply Watershed ( r I r II r III r IV r v)
F Essential Fish Habitat F Primary Nursery Area r High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
F Publicly owned property r NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect r Nutrient Sensitive Waters
F Anadromous fish r 303(d) List r CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
r Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
r Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplemer
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
(•` A Water throughout assessment reach.
(" B No flow, water in pools only.
{` C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
(` A
At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
GB
NotA
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
{' A
A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
G B
Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
(•` A
Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
C B
Not
5. Signs
of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider
only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active
bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
C• A
< 10% of channel unstable
{'B
10 to 25% of channel unstable
{' C
> 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside
Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider
for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB
RS
(" A
(' A Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
(•` B
C•" B Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
(` C
[' C Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplainfintertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplainAntertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplainfintertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a
man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water
Quality Stressors -assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check
all that apply.
F A
Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
r B
Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
17 C
Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
F D
Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
F E Current published a collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
F F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
r G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
r H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
F I Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F J Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather- watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
(` A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
{" B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C• C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream - assessment reach metric
C Yes 6- N Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).

10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types - assessment reach metric
10a. r Yes r No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
101b. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
r A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses r F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) F d r G Submerged aquatic vegetation
fJ B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent o r H Lav -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation t o r Sand bottom
r C Multiple snags and logs (including lap trees) r J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
F D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots U r K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
F E Little or no habitat
*************************** -* REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS **********************---
11. Bedform and Substrate - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Ila. r Yes r No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
F A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11c)
F B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
F C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach -whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) _
absent, Rare (R) = present but <- 10%, Common (C) _ > 10-40%, Abundant (A) _ > 40-70%, Predominant (P) _ > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP R C A P
r r f r r Bedrock/saprolite
r r r r C Boulder (256 - 4096 mm)
r r r r r Cobble (64 - 256 mm)
r C` C` r C Gravel (2 - 64 mm)
r r r r r Sand (.062 - 2 mm)
r r r r C Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
r C` C` r C Detritus
G C C i C Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11 d. r Yes r No Are pods filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Aquatic Life - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. r Yes r No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. r No Water r Other:
121b. r Yes r No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
F r Adult frogs
r r Aquatic reptiles
r r Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
F, r Beetles (including water pennies)
F r Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
F r Asian clam (Corbicula)
r r Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
r r Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
r r Dipterans (true flies)
r r Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
F r Megaloptera (alderfly, fishily, dobsonfly larvae)
F r Midges/mosquito larvae
F r Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
r r Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
r r Other fish
r r Salamanders/tadpoles
F r Snails
F r Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
F rTipulid larvae
r r WormsAeeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition - streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacitywith regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RS
{` A [' A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
(` B [' B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C [' C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage - streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
{' A [' A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water >: 6 inches deep
C B [' B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
{' C [' C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence -streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
r Y C• Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
(- N (' N
16. Baseflow Contributors -assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
F A Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
F B Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
r C Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
r D Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
F E Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
F F None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors -assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
F A Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
r B Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
PC Urban stream (124% impervious surface forwatershed)
fJ D Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach

F E Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
r F None of the above
18. Shading —assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
C• A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
{' B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RS) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
G A [' A (- A C` A >: 100 -feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
Q B [' B r B r B From 50 to < 100 -feet wide
Q C 0- C r C {•' C From 30 to < 50 -feet wide
C` D r D r D r D From 10 to < 30 -feet wide
C` E r E r E C E < 10 -feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RS) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
LB RS
C A C" A Mature forest
C•` B C•` B Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
C C C" C Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
{' D {' D Maintained shrubs
C`E C`E Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RS). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).
If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22: r
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
C` A C` A r A r A r A r A Row crops
C` B r B r B C B r B C B Maintainedturf
r C r C r C r C r C C C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
C` D r D r D C D r D C D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RS) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RS
C• A C• A Medium to high stem density
{' B {' B Lav stem density
{' C {' C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10 -feet wide.
LB RS
C•` A (•` A The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
C` B C` B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
C` C C` C The total length of buffer breaks is> 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition —First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RS
{' A {' A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
C• B C B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
C` C C` C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. C" Yes (: Nc Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. Q No Water C Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
C A <46 Ci B 46 to < 67 Q C 67 to < 79 r D 79 to < 230 C E >- 230
Notes/Sketch:

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 1
Rating Calculator Version 1
Stream Site Name Springbrook Apartment Homes Site
Stream Category Pb2
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Date of Evaluation July 9, 2019
Assessor Name/Organization C. Tinklenberg/Kimley-Horr
NO
NO
VP
USACE/
NCDWR
Function Class Rating Summary
All Streams
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
NA
NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
NA
NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
NA
NA
(1) Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
MEDIUM
(3) Substrate
LOW
LOW
(3) Stream Stability
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) In -stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
HIGH
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(3) Flow Restriction
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
NA
NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
NA
NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
NA
NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM
MEDIUM

NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
RNLIIla VNIUU NLNI ala W11 Y. 1
Wetland Site Name Springbrook Apartment Homes Site Date 07/09/2019
WetlanclTypel Headw ater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Chris Tinklenberg / Kimley-Horn
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Taggart Creek
River Basin Catawba USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit 03050103
',Yes !'*".No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately 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 (select all that apply to the assessment area)
F_ Anadromous fish
F Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
F NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
F Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
r— Publicly owned property
F N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
F_ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
F Designated NCNHP reference community
T_ 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)
F' Blackwater
4 J
F
4 J.' Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ]Lunar r ]WindBoth
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? rYes '+]No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? rYes M No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? 4 ;'Yes F:,1No
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 of an effect.
GS VS
r' ]A r' ]A Not severely altered
r.]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. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. 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 ditch
sub -surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
]A rA Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
M B M 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 (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a. '�A rA Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
'�B r,B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
MC MC Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
r]D "D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. L"A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
L"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
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 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
FjD Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
nE Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. rjjA Soil ribbon < 1 inch
MB Soil ribbon>_ 1 inch
4c. NA 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
F,A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
rB 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)
G. Land Use - opportunity metric
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). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
F-1 A FO A v A >_ 10% impervious surfaces
r B r- B f B < 10% impervious surfaces
r C C r C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
r D r D r D >_ 20% coverage of pasture
F E f E f E >_ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
r- F r- F r- F >_ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F G r- G F G >_ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
Fl H 1`71 H Fl H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer - assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
]Yes Lo] 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 the 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 weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
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.
F-,<- 15 -feet wide r ] > 15 -feet wide r ' Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes r ' No
7e. Is tributary 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 metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box
in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (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
rE
From 30 to < 40 feet
F
,F
From 15 to < 30 feet
G
,G
From 5 to < 15 feet
H
E -,H
<5feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
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
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
r]A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
EJB 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 'W for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
EA L:A EA >_ 500 acres
L:B L:B EB From 100 to<500acres
•C L:C EC From 50 to < 100 acres
•D L:D ED From 25 to < 50 acres
•E L:E EE From 10 to < 25 acres
L:F L:F EF From 5 to < 10 acres
EG L:G EG From 1 to < 5 acres
H H E;H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
L:I L:I E I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
L:J L:J EJ From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
EK L:K EK < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
L:A Pocosin is the full extent (>_ 90°x) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin 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
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric 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, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
A Z]A >_ 500 acres
L"B r:B From 100 to < 500 acres
L"C r:C From 50 to < 100 acres
L"D r:D From 10 to < 50 acres
L"E r:E < 10 acres
E;F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
L]Yes r'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)
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.
L:A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
L.:C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear-cut
16. 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.
FSB 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. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non -
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
L: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.
L]C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
F}� 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
�7B
< 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
L:A
' °'A
Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
mB
B
Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U
L:C
'C
Canopy sparse or absent
o
L:A
'A
Dense mid-story/sapling layer
L:B
B
Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
L*]C
ZC
Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
L'A
'A
Dense shrub layer
.'B
B
Moderate density shrub layer
0
L:C
L:C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
L:A
L:A
Dense herb layer
L'B
L'B
Moderate density herb layer
_
L.'C
EC
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
r"A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 -inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
rZB Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
.'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.
L'C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man -placed natural debris.
r"A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
rZB Not
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.
r1A r'qB L]C r'qD
4 G,
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands 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.
.'A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L'C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
L' D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name Springbrook Apartment Homes Site Date 07/09/2019
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization -is Tinklenberg / Kimley-H
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) NO
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
HIGH
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Conditon
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Conditon
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH