20140235 Ver 1_401 Application_20140314

�® Kimley -Horn
and Associates, Inc.
March 7, 2014
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive
Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Nationwide Permit 14 Application
TIP# U -5318 — Main Street Extension
Holly Springs, Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Higgins:
■
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636 -3068
On behalf of our client, the Town of Holly Springs, Kimley -Horn and Associates,
Inc. (KHA) is submitting the attached pre - construction notification application
(PCN) for authorization under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14 for the above
referenced project. This project area is located between NC 55 and Piney Grove -
Wilbon Road in Wake County.
The Town proposes to construct the Main Street Extension, which will connect
Main Street from a location just north of NC Highway 55 to Piney Grove - Wilbon
Road south of Brayton Park Place (Figure 1). The proposed project will realign
and extend SRI 114 (Ralph Stephens Road) through a currently forested and rural
residential area to a new intersection with Piney Grove - Wilbon Road. The length
of the proposed roadway extension will total approximately 1.69 miles. A
preliminary jurisdictional determination was issued for the area of the project
corridor located south of NC 55 on March 7, 2013 (Action ID: SAW -2013-
00066). Areas north of NC 55 were reviewed by the USACE on November 19,
2013, but a jurisdictional determination has not been issued for those areas. The
Town of Holly Springs is currently in the right -of -way acquisition phase of the
project, and anticipates completion within the next 45 days. Since property
acquisition has not been completed as of the date of this submittal, a preliminary
jurisdictional determination request for the entire project corridor has been
included as part of this permit application. rl�
MAR 1 0 2014
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]

The proposed alignment was selected and designed so that impacts to
jurisdictional features will be minimized to the extent practical. Existing
roadway corr idors have been utilized where feasible to further minimize impacts;
however two drainage systems will be impacted by the proposed construction.
As shown in the attached Permit Drawings, impact sites 1 and 2 will result in
0.45 acres of unavoidable riparian wetland impact, and 194 linear feet of
perennial stream impact. Sites 1 and 2 will require compensatory mitigation at a
2:1 ratio per our conversation on March 5, 2013. Impact site 3 will result in
unavoidable impacts to 0.20 acres of riparian wetland, and 101 linear feet of
perennial stream impacts, at a 1:1 mitigation ratio.
Attachments included in this submittal are as follows:
• PCN Application Form
• Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
• Figure 2 — USGS Topographic Map
• Figure 3 — 2010 Aerial Photograph and Jurisdictional Features Map
• Figure 4 — NRCS Soil Survey Map
• Figure 5 — Wake County Property Parcels Map
• Table of Affected Property Parcels (Town of Holly Springs is currently
in right -of -way Acquisition for these parcels)
• Compensatory Mitigation Documentation
• Signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination for Area South of NC55
• Signed NCDWR Buffer Determination Letter for Area South of NC55
• Plan Sheets
• Permit Drawings
• NCDWR 401 Application Fee of $570
If there is any additional information you need to assist in the processing of this
NWP application package, please do not hesitate to contact me at (919) 677-
2121.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chad Evenhouse
Enclosures
Cc: Kendra D. Parr ish, Town of Holly Spring

O�O� W A TF9OG
O 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 ,fd; 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes
® No
1 d.
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
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
TIP# U5318 -Main Street Extension
2b. County:
Wake County
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Holly Springs
2d.
Subdivision name:
n/a
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
TIP No. U -5318
3.
Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Town of Holly Springs (Currently in Right -of -Way Acquisition)
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
n/a
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Kendra D. Parrish, P.E.
3d.
Street address:
128 S. Main Street
3e.
City, state, zip:
Holly Springs, NC 27540
3f.
Telephone no.:
919 - 557 -3931
3g.
Fax no.:
n/a
3h.
Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December ,fd; 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
n/a
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
n/a
4d.
Street address:
n/a
4e. City, state, zip:
n/a
4f.
Telephone no.:
n/a
4g. Fax no.:
n/a
4h.
Email address:
n/a
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
n/a
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
n/a
5c.
Street address:
n/a
5d.
City, state, zip:
n/a
5e.
Telephone no.:
n/a
5f.
Fax no.:
n/a
5g.
Email address:
n/a
Page 2 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
(See attached Figure
5 for Parcel Locations)
648864611
648636907
648668224
648733974
648734724
648734846
648736842
648743394
648744047
648744198
648746746
648747374
648748623
648756554
648757081
648760374
648765713
648767039
648837957
648851962
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
648855332
648861583
648862150
648862276
648862939
648874081
648876157
648877460
648950812
648962587
648970436
648971651
648975317
648977767
648982510
648986977
648987588
648996062
648996151
648996167
658072812
Latitude: 35.635400
Longitude: - 78.836900
1b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
(DD.DDDDDD)
(- DD.DDDDDD)
1c.
Property size:
35.3 acres
Page 3 of 13
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Basal Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
B; NSW
2c. River basin:
Neuse River Basin
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Land use in the vicinity of the project area is primarily commercial developments and residential properties along pre-
existing roadway corridors, as well as a tract of forested land with a few rural residential houses present.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.16 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
541 feet
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to realign and extend SR1114 (Ralph Stephens Road) and SR 1101 (Piney Grove Wilbon
Road) to form a new intersection in order to improve local connectivity and reduce congestion in the area.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed roadway extension connects Main Street from a location just north of the intersection of Main Street and
NC Highway 55 to Piney Grove - Wilbon Road south of the intersection of Piney Grove - Wilbon road and Brayton Park
Place. The proposed alignment plan includes realigning and extending SR1114 (Ralph Stephens Road) through a
currently forested and rural residential area to a new intersection with Piney Grove - Wilbon Road. The length of the
proposed roadway extension will total approximately 1.69 miles of roadway construction. Typical roadway construction
equipment including cranes, track hoes, back hoes, graders, dump trucks, and bulldozers will be utilized in completing the
proposed construction.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE Raleigh Regional
Office verified jurisdictional features within the project
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
corridor south of NC -55 on December 29, 2012 and the
preliminary JD was signed on March 7, 2013. Areas north of
NC -55 were reviewed by Eric Alsmeyer on November 19,
2013. A request for a preliminary JD on the entire project
has been included with this application.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
® Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company: Kimley -Horn and
Associates, Inc.
Name (if known): Chad Evenhouse, PWS
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
n/a
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.
n/a
Page 4 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
n/a
Page 5 of 13
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
Site # 1
Fill
Riverine
® Yes
® Corps
0.42 acres
® P El
❑ No
❑ DWQ
permanent
Site # 2
Fill
Riverine
® Yes
® Corps
0.03 acres
® P ❑ T
❑ No
❑ DWQ
permanent
Site # 3
Fill
Riverine
® Yes
® Corps
0.20 acres
® P ❑ T
❑ No
❑ DWQ
permanent
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.65 acres
permanent
2h. Comments: All of the permanent wetland impacts resulting from construction of the roadway extension involve the
placement of fill material. Sites 1 and 2 are located on the same drainage, but Site 3 is a separate drainage system on the
north side of NC -55.
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 feet)
or Temporary
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
(T)
Site # 1
Temporary
UT to Basal
® PER
® Corps
6
62 LF
❑ P ® T
Construction Access
Creek
El INT
El DWQ
Site # 1
Culvert Installation
UT to Basal
® PER
® Corps
6
132 LF
® P ❑ T
Creek
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
Site # 2
Outlet Protection
UT to Basal
® PER
® Corps
6
12 LF
❑ P ® T
Creek
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
Site # 2
® P ❑ T
Culvert Extension
UT to Basal
Creek
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
6
62 LF
Site # 3
Temporary
UT to Basal
® PER
® Corps
3
54 LF
El ® T
Construction Access
Creek
El INT
El DWQ
Site # 3
Channel
Abandonment
UT to Basal
®PER
®Corps
3
101 LF
®P ❑ T
(Relocation)
Creek
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
128 LF
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
temporary,
295 LF
permanent
3i. Comments: Permanent stream impacts will result from the proposed construction due to installation of culverts beneath the
new roadway alignment, or extension of existing culverts. At Site 3, a small stream is located at the toe of the existing
roadway fill slope, and the proposed construction will relocate and stabilize the stream channel in a new location slightly west
of the existing stream bed. The existing stream bed will be filled by the proposed fill slope. Sites 1 and 2 are on the same
Page 6 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

drainage system within the interior of the project corridor, but Site 3 is on a separate system located north of NC 55.
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
4L Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: No open water impacts will result from the proposed construction.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments: No ponds or lakes will be constructed as part of the proposed project.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
n/a
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
n/a
5k. Method of construction:
n/a
Page 7 of 13
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 El Tar-Pamlico El 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
impact
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
(P) or
required?
Temporary
Site # 1
®P ❑ T
Roadway
Construction
UT to Basal Creek
El Yes
® No
7,703 SF permanent
5,097 SF permanent
Site # 2
® P El
Roadway
Construction
UT to Basal Creek
®Nos
5,902 SF permanent
4,137 SF permanent
Site # 3
Roadway
UT to Basal Creek
❑ Yes
2,340 SF
permanent, 4,228
11223 SF permanent,
®P ®T
Construction
® No
SF temporary
6,166 SF temporary
15,945 SF
10,457 SF permanent,
6h. Total buffer impacts
permanent, 4,228
6,166 SF temporary
SF temporary
6i. Comments: Unavoidable buffer impacts will result from construction of the Main Street Extension. Buffer mitigation is not
required for the proposed impacts as the linear footage of each impact is less than 150', and the total buffer impact is less
than 1/3`d of an acre.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The final roadway alignment was selected to avoid the major wetland systems throughout the corridor, and to utilize existing
roadway alignments wherever possible.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Impacts to streams and wetlands will be minimized wherever possible throughout the construction process by avoiding stream
and wetland features wherever possible. Where feasible, staging and construction access will be located in upland areas
throughout the corridor, and silt fencing will be installed around the permitted limits of disturbance to ensure all equipment is
located within the project corridor at all times near stream and wetland areas. Best Management Practices (BMP) and
measures will be used to reduce stormwater impacts to receiving waters and minimize runoff from the construction sites.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
® Yes ❑ No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
® Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
®Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
Page 8 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: Pancho Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank; Neu -Con: Westbrook Lowgrounds Mitigation
Bank
Type riparian
wetland ( Pancho),
Quantity 1.1 ac riparian wetland ( Pancho),
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
warm water
stream ( Pancho),
55 LF stream ( Pancho), 165 LF stream
warm water
(Neu -Con)
stream (Neu -Con)
3c. Comments: All available banks in the watershed were contacted, and all available stream credits were exhausted. The
remaining stream credits will be purchased through NCEEP.
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:
269 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
® warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
n/a square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
n/a acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
n/a acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
n/a acres
4h. Comments: Available credits from 3rd party mitigation banks were exhausted, and remaining compensatory mitigation is
accounted for by the ILF request of 269 linear feet of stream credits.
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.
n/a
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
❑ Yes ® No
requires 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).
n/a
6h. Comments: Buffer mitigation is not proposed for this project as permanent impacts to riparian buffers will be less than 150
LF and less than 1/3`d acre at each site. Per Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer Rules, buffer mitigation is not required by
this activity.
Page 9 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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: NOTE: Please see the attached Erosion Control Plans to see the most
® Yes ❑ No
detailed information of measures to handle the stormwater.
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
46%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: n/a
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The project is a linear transportation project, and all new conveyances will meet diffuse flow prior to discharge into a
buffer. See attached Erosion Control Plan Sheets and Permit Drawings for stormwater management features.
❑ 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?
❑ 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
attached?
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:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 10 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)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
® Yes ❑ No
Comments: A Categorical Exclusion was approved in February of 2013 for the
proposed project. The final approval and document is attached.
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): n/a
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.
This project is designed to reduce current traffic congestion within the sections of Piney Grove Wilbon Road and Ralph
Stevens Road and is not expected to lead towards further development within the vicinity of the proposed project.
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.
The proposed project will not generate wastewater.
Page 11 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?
El 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?
NC Natural Heritage Program Element Occurrence Database (Updated January 2014) indicates no known occurrences
within the project area or within one mile of the project area. Habitat is not present in the study area for dwarf
wedgemussel or red - cockaded woodpecker, but habitat is present for Michaux's sumac along roadsides and utility
corridors in the project area. KHA staff conducted pedestrian surveys throughout areas of suitable habitat on October 14
and 18, 2011. No individuals were observed. Due to a lack of known occurrences, and the lack of observed individuals
in the study area, the proposed project will have no effect on any federally listed threatened or endangered species.
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?
The NOAA Essential Fish Habitat Mapper was reviewed on Wednesday, March 5, 2014 and no essential fish habitat or
habitat areas of particular concern were found within the project area.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
❑ Yes ® No
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
The NCDENR State Historic Properties Office Map Viewer was reviewed on Wednesday, March 5, 2014, and no historic
resources occur within the project area. The NC Historic Property Office was also contacted on October 19, 2011 and
confirmed that no historic properties are known in the project area.
Page 12 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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: n/a
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA DFIRM Panel 3720064800J effective May 2, 2006, was reviewed and the entire project study area is outside of any
FEMA- Mapped flood hazard zone.
Chad Evenhouse, P.E.
3/7/2014
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 13 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

FIGURES

A �}
1
T N OF HOLLY SPRINGS
.Q
Q�
AV Q!T F
,roe'
�5
rte.
I Figure 1 1
HOLLY SPRINGS K Ralph Stephens Road
l
O l_ ,
m
N
i
aW �A
11Z ,
i0- 0 0.75 1.5
Mile
Virginia
) Wake County I
South Carolina
TM TOWMOF Legend Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Holly Project Study Area Holly Springs ETJ Main Street Extension
Asprings TIP Project No. U -5318
NORTH C A R O L I N A Holly Springs Town Limit Holly Springs, Wake County

N 71
r ,
v �1'
J#
i i� r r- i �'► r � �v � 3�
e
7K 7,
r
0 750 1,500
k, rr r Feet
Figure 2
THE To%vN of USGS Topographic Ma A ex Quadrangle, 1988)
Legend P( P 9
HollY Main Street Extension
Springs Project Study Area TIP Project No. U -5318
n o n r n r A K 0 L I .v n Li Holly Springs, Wake County

C
C G
x�
and
Y c
C
,I
N
M LO
00pp MN
N
N
N
a
00
LO
ID
M
n
N
loo.
Lo
t0
LD
Lo 00
O LD
l0
00
00
00
V1
M
M
Kepi
M
O
N
M
00 lD
d N
t,64
O
N
m
m
N
LT
O
m
O
001
6
^ �mQ
LR O
1m Yw
cr O
g
V�
N
Om0
6
n Om0
1� O
eVn1
-r Om0
O O
6
N
w
N
O
O$
-
o
N
q
Ln
n
LO .ia
n M
N
n M
O1
.-,
M M
Lo
M M
o
M o
vvv,n
m Ln
Ln Lo
N
u1
n.
a
Ln
ava00
N Ln
to Ln
n
N
n N
a
Ln N
N
Ln
M
M
"
M
n N
N
N a
000
n
N
N a
n
N
O C
00 00
n
N
a a
0000
n
N
V n
0000 N
N n
N
n n
N N
1
v
N N
U
M n
m N
n n
N N
n n
N N
N
U
N �..�
U
n
N O
n
N
n
N
m n
U
U Z
U
z LO
U
U
Z LD
U
6 LO
U
6 tD
U
6 U
U
z U
V U
a
z,
n u
n U
U U
Z
Z g
U�
U
U O
6
W
0
10
CD
z a
L Z
a
z n
2
Q
Z n
Z
w
n n
Z
n n
Z
2
n
Z
N
Z Z
N !n
00
O
a M
z O
M
N z
o tI1
Q z
Q H
Z Z
N to
a
Z
Q M
z O
M
Z 00
N O
Z
N
t7
Z Vt
N N
Q L
w
10
10
t7
Z Q
N
Q U
Z
N
Q V
U
N N
U U
l7
Z
N N
U U
z
N
V Z°
U z
Z
=
Z 2
z
a Q
1W
�"�
M Z
Z
Z z
Q
a Q
VV''
z z
Z
z
�"
z^
N
U
N "'�
U n
N
U
m >>
d
y1 Y
Z
Y 2
K>
d
tIl
z
Y x
x
F
y�
z z
2 2
K
d
Lo
z Z
2 2
w
d
Ln
z K
d
2 In
Q K
W d
Ln
w K
d d
N N
Z>
Q
r>
Q
F
m
J d
'i N
n
Z H
a a
Lo sn
>>
>>
Q
F
d-
d Q
N
o<
d
N
o: N
d
sn U
z
2
z N
2 U
z
x
y Q
J gas
J
Q l7
y
J
J
a t7
7 W
(1 J
m
Q
N
l7 l7
W W
J J
}
J
J
l7 l7
W W
J J
Y}
J
J
Ly J
J J
W >}
m J�
J
Y
J
J
C
a Z
O
U g
cc Y
L J
a J
O}
j- J
Z J
Y}
J J
J J
a
O
Q z
O
j J
c
}}
J
Z
J�
l7
J
l7 z
J�
l7
J
p LL]
QQ
O>
a
J
aa aa
O
Q
O
Q O
O O
O O
a
LL f-
0-000:55
F
O Q
00
Q
Q
Q
2
LL K
S
LL at
W
d K
2
D:
S
d' S
S
S 2
S
a�
x
m x
S S
w
LL a
x x
x
2
09
V
N
Z
N
N
Z
Q
Z
Q
o
°
w
'9 m
°
w
°
K 0:
° °
OC C
O °
LY
w
°
00
m
z
m
N
X w
W
O w
D
K
z
C
°
cr
Z
m
w
OC
0:
Lo
yZj
N
Y °
J Z
yZj
H
Z
H N
°
Z 2;
LA H
° O
Z Z
W
>
K
N
°
Z°
z
JO j
J
3
°
= w
Z
p
m H
z
W
W
> z
es;
O
W
Ln
Z
h
Z Q
N
Z
=
==�G
=�
W
= =�__
w
_ OG
p W>
z
2
l7 O
n;
W,
� W
�"'
° 2
WJ
0:
>
>0
°S=
a
m
z
�G
N J
= O�.I
3 l7
w S
N
x]
J t7
x
Q
p
l7 l7
2 x
H
C7 l7
S S
W
K
7o�
W
(7 Y
2 g
p Ln
G S
o
Q
l7 M
V
Z l7
d LL
X H
Q to
S
m to
V 2
W
m m
7� S
J
7
V Q
z Z
U
N
K
l7
J
N Q
2
m
m a
2 w
U.
S
J V
Y S
J
CJ 2
d
S 2
J
2 2
vL
Q
2 N
L�� J
�y a
W
m°
LL
>�
F J
y�j
1/
Q J
O
2 o
N m
W
N 6
U
U
U
z
90-09
U
z U
p OJ
m
Ou
U U
OJ OJ
qd
U U
OJ Op
W W
U
OJ
C Q
0 m
Z X
0
a0
0=
d
0
�++ Q
r ¢
Z
O
Ou
X
ZQ
Z
X Q
OJ
U a
OJ
OJ
g
a
mO1-�
°a
H
m
o
d m
Q
O
8
�o
z
a
m
QgY
m
O
d
m aC
O �'
N M
a n
N
a
M n
.�
N
a s
n n
Ln
a
n n
o
N
a O
n M
N<
Lo N
Ong
n d
rl
a
LY Ln
.�
a .�
n
M
a
a o
N
a
n
z
Z
Q
S
z
2
Y
J
J
W
w
x
J
m
Q
H
QQ
fJ
Z
3
Z
Y
J Y
lJ
}
N
F
G ac
=
r
p
a
K
Z
W Z
J
O
H
z
> J
H
a
6
W H
c
m a
c
N
H
as
d
0
r-
of S
C p
m z
ZQ
V1
F
WC
O
oc
m
w
K
J
V1
U
?
Z
z
Y VI
W
Y
H
J
W W
Z Z
Z Q
0 u
C
G
Q
F
y
!-
d
0:
Q
J
Q
Lo d'
z Q°
C
a
d
O y
of W
z
Z
H
y
m
Q
w
3
a
LL
z_
o
OC
Y 3
Q
Q
3
N z
m
m
W
w
Z
w
d
}
W
U
F'�
W°
W>
W
}
LL
O
W
p 0:
Z
W
LL U
W J
L7
O
Q
U
a~
3 K
W
W d~
W u
J
S J
x
ry
m
H U
0 J
W
d
w
N
{�
i-
W W
x
W W
W
Z
W
m
N
W
IL d.
J 2
h
Z
m
Q
J
J Y
V
2
m
W J
d
> J
Z
Ln O°
W
J
z
Q^
Q°
J
C
L
?
?
Q
W
U
z
Z
tJ
J
Y
H
W W
W
�o0czxn�scc
Y
a
Y
a
zz>
o 0
o o°
t7z0agS3oc
W
o
a0
~
w
U
�zFZLgi
V
zoz
g
>=pz
o
x
z
o z
o:zrz
Q
o
Q d
'Z
a d
m Z
J
W
d d
n z
Q
w
Z
4
W
°
2 W
z Q
Z d
N
J a
W J
Q Z
,Z z
a
z O
o Z
Z
Q
O N
Z
^}
D:
Z
o O
LX) W
O
J
N
W O
0
z Z¢
Z z
o
Z Z
J N
dJ'
;
W LL
Z
QC z
J
LL
d
0'. w
J
m_
W
z
O
z C
Z
w d
W
K
6
Q
d Q�Q
d'
a
O O~
OC C=
0 0
C G
OC
a
O
m
3 K
O a
'^ z
U
W
l7
Q
K
2
~ d
W dap
C
J z
O 5
p
O
w d
a ,
Z 0
UU Q
W
0
7
UC p.
0 a
w W
0
w
F.W..
d N
a m
m
r
t; m
S
m m�
m m
m
m
d m
c
Y
d
9 U
m a
J
F- >
N}
t;
C d
O
C V1
m
m=
CO
c
rl pp
% m
LO Ln
n .ti
m m
M o
.a
m~
o
O N
in
N
m
w
a a
m n
M 01
O
N
N
n LO
a a
o m
a
Ln
Ln
LD n
a LD
n r1
N N
M WO
M m
a n
N n
N O1
n
in
01
N .-L
LL) V1
O1 LO
m M
M m
a Lo
n n
m an
Ln
m m
M M
O 01
O
a
g
N M
n f,
N n
.i a
Lo n
N M
a
n
M
N n
LD LO
°
p n
n
O
a M
N N
n
m
01
i
aa n
N n
a
n
N
m to
N
M M
a M
N
aa m
p ro
Ln
o
m
a 01
o O
Ln Ln
m w
LO m
n
M
m N
Ln n
n LO
w
ID
N N
LO n
n N
LO LD
n
n
N Ln
LO LD
m n
a
p
LO
n
O1 n
m
w
M
w
a m
M a
>
LO m
m o1
n Ln
m n
m
a1 n
o
o
n m
m
w
� 1r,
n m
g
m m
Lo m
m
m m
m m
o1 m
n m
m
m m
m
m �
n
m LT
Lo
n n
n
Z
m
m
m
m
m m
m
m
m m
m m
m m
m m
m
m
m m
m
m
m
m m
m

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
DOCUMENTATION

Mitigation Credit Reservation Confirmation Letter
Statement of Availability
Pancho Stream & Wetland Mitigation Bank
March 6, 2014
Mr. Rob Ridings Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NC Division of Water Resources U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650 3331 Heritage Trade Center, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Reservation of Compensatory Riparian Wetland & Stream Mitigation Credits
Project: TIP# U -5318 — Main Street Extension, Town of Holly Springs
This document confirms that the Town of Holly Springs, NC (Applicant) has reserved for
purchase 1.1 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits and 55 Stream Mitigation Credits from the
Pancho Stream & Wetland Mitigation Bank.
Restoration Systems (RS) attests to the fact that 1.1 Riparian Wetland Mitigation Credits and 55
Stream Mitigation Credits are currently available for immediate transfer from its Official Bank
Credit Ledger to Applicant and that as of this date RS has placed 1.1 Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Credits and 55 Stream Mitigation Credits into "no- sale " - reservation status under the
name of the project referenced on this document (Project).
These credits will remain in reservation status until payment in full is received from the
Applicant, resulting in the issuance of a Transfer of Mitigation Responsibility form by RS
acknowledging that the applicant has fully secured credits from the bank and RS has accepted
full responsibility for the mitigation obligation requiring the credits. If RS does not receive
payment in full for the Mitigation Credits within thirty (30) prior to the initiation of Project
construction, RS has the right to terminate this Reservation Letter, in which case RS will have no
further obligation to provide mitigation credits to the Applicant.
TIP# U -5318 - Main St. Gxt, Town of Holly Springs -- Compensatory Mitigation- RS -Page I

RS will issue the Transfer Certificate within five (5) days of receipt of the Purchase Price. RS
shall provide to Applicant the Transfer form debiting credits from the Bank Official Credit
Ledger showing the permit number and the resource type secured by the applicant, and will
send an a copy of the Transfer Certificate with an updated Official Credit Ledger to regulatory
agencies showing the proper documentation.
If any questions need to be answered, please contact me at 919 - 334 -9119
Best regards,
74'm Ve4# AW'664
Tara Disy Allden
Regulatory Manager
Restoration Systems, LLC
TIP# U -5318 - Main St. Ext., Town of Holly Springs -- Compensatory Mitigation - RS -Page 2

Forrest Creek Stream Mitigation Bank
Forest Creek UT -2 Site
Neu -Con Stream Mitigation Bank
Statement of Availability- March 07, 2014
NC Division of Water Resources
Ms. Robe Ridings
401 Oversight /Express Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
Regulatory Project Manager
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Center, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re Project: "TIP# U -5318 — Main Street Extension"
This document confirms that Town of Holly Springs (NC) (Applicant) for the TIP# U -5318 — Main
Street Extension has expressed an interest to utilize 165 Linear Feet of Stream Mitigation Units
from a single site, or a combination of sites to include EBX Neu -Con Umbrella Mitigation Bank,
and /or the Forrest Creek Stream Mitigation Bank including the Forrest Creek UT -2 site, located
in Neuse HUC 03020201. As the Bank Sponsor for all banks and related sites, EBX attests to the
fact that mitigation is available for transfer upon permit issuance.
Banker will notify applicant if the 165 Stream Mitigation Units become considered "At Risk" of
not being available prior to permit issuance. Credits are not considered secured until payment
in full is received from the applicant resulting in the issuance of an Affidavit of Sale by the bank
acknowledging that the applicant has fully secured credits from the bank and the Banker has
accepted full responsibility for the mitigation obligation requiring the credits /units.
The Banker will issue the Affidavit of Sale within ten (10) days of receipt of the balance of the
Purchase Price. Banker shall provide to Applicant with a copy of the Affidavit of Sale and a
documented copy of the debit of credits from the Bank Official Credit Ledger(s) showing the
permit number and the resource type secured by the applicant. A copy of the Affidavit of Sale,
with an updated Official Credit Ledger will also be sent to regulatory agencies showing the
proper documentation.
If any questions need to be answered, please contact me at 239 - 872 -1678
Best Regards
/ A44 k;k-
Matthew R. Fisher
EBX
909 Capability Drive Suite 3100. Raleigh, NC 27606

r
PROGRAM
March 7, 2014
Kendra Parrish
Town of Holly Springs
PO Box 8
Holly Springs, NC 27540
Project: U -5318 Main Street Extension Holly Springs
Expiration of Acceptance: September 7, 2014
County: Wake
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table below. Please
note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be
approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local goverment permits, regulations or authorizations associated
with the proposed activity including SL 2009 -337: An Act to Promote the Use of Compensatory Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L. 2011 -343.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Permit /401 Certification /CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In-
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are
summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned to NCEEP for this impact is determined by
pe itting agencies and may exceed the impact amounts shown below.
Impact
River
CU
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
Buffer II
Basin
Location
(Sq. Ft.)
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
Non-Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Neuse
03020201
0
0
Up to
0
0
0
0
0
269
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed in
accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at
(919) 707 -8915.
A fill ment Supervisor
cc: Karen Higgins, NCDWR Wetlands /401 Unit
Eric Alsmeyer, USACE - Raleigh
Rob Ridings, NCDWR-
Chad Evenhouse, agent
File
xmtor' ... E ... Pro" our _mx& ROM
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 / 919 - 707 -8976 / www.nceep.net

SREAM AND WETLAND
DATA FORM

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 7/15/2013
Project/Site: TIP NO. U -5318 -
Stream SAA
Latitude: 35.6409 N
Evaluator: C. Evenhouse, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.8329 W
Total Points: 35
0
1
2
Stream Determination
Other
Apex Quadrangle
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermitt t Perennial
.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
3
3
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 21.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
,a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
-
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5. Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 8.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1 1
1 1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: The stream was evaluated from stream flag SAA -1.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: C. Evenhouse, KHA
3. Date of evaluation: 07/15/2013 4. Time of evaluation: 11:00 am
5. Name of stream: Stream SAA
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
35.640900 N
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order: First Order
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if any)
n/a
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.832900 W
Method location determined (circle): af`S ✓�[ opo Sheet rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Q ther GISDOther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SAA crosses beneath Main Street approximately 500' north of NC 55 bypass.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). NOAA recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 prior to field observation
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, mid 80s.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters FlEssentiat Fisheries Habitat
DTrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters ✓0 Nutrient Sensitive Waters DWater Supply Watershed (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 0.2 acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential 30 % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
40 % Forested 20 % Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 21
24. Channel slope down center of stream: ✓Flat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) E[Moderate (4 to 10 %) DSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: ElStraight 00ccasional bends W Frequent meander OVery sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 59 Comments:
Stream SAA IS a perennial channel draining through a forested corridor within a developed and expanding commercial area.
Evaluator's Signature CWE Date 07/15/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SAA
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0 - 5
0-4
0 - 5
3
no flow or saturation = 0• strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0 - 6
0-5
0 - 5
3
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
2
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0 -3
0 -4
0 -4
4
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, sees wetlands etc. = max points)
,..,
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0 - 5
0-4
0 - 2
3
a
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0 - 6
0-4
0 - 2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0 - 4
0-4
1
extensive deposition= 0• little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
2
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0--5
0 4
0-5
2
>
] 2
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
-
�
13
Presence of major bank failures
0 -5
0 -5
0 -5
3
a
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oints
14
Root depth and density on banks
0 3
0-4
0 - 5
3
H
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
co�
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0 4
0-5
3
15
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 5
0-6
4
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
1
Habitat complexity complexity
0 - 6
0-6
0 - 6
4
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0 5
0-5
0 - 5
3
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0--4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
-
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
*4
`2
Presence of fish
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
0
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max poi nts)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
59
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 7/15/2013
Project/Site: TIP NO. U -5318 -
Stream SBB
Latitude: 35.6407 N
Evaluator: C. Evenhouse, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.8330 W
Total Points: 40.5
0
1
2
Stream Determination
Other Apex Quadrangle
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermitt t Perennial
.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
3
1
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 22
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
-
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5. Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 10.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1
1.5
0.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: The stream experienced heavy recent rainfall 48 -72 hours prior to
the site visit. The month of June was the wettest on record. Many minnows
were observed in pools after the flood event. SBB continues beneath Main
Street and flows east towards wetland WBB.

USACE AID#
DWQ#
Site # (indicate on attached map)
073 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET _AW
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: C. Evenhouse, KHA
3. Date of evaluation. 07/15/2013 4. Time of evaluation: 11:45 am
5. Name of stream: Stream SBB 6. River basin: Neuse
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50,
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
35.640700 N
8. Stream order: First Order
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.833000 W
Method location determined (circle): ✓❑.,PS�opo Shee�rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓� ther GISDother
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SBB drains from a sediment basin north of NC 55 Bypass and confluences with SAA before crossing beneath Main Street.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). NOAA recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 prior to field observation
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, mid 80s.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: FISection 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
DTrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters ✓0 Nutrient Sensitive Waters DWater Supply Watershed (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 2 acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential 50 % Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
40 % Forested % Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: OFIat (0 to 2 %) _DGentle (2 to 4 %) OModerate (4 to 10 %) OSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: ElStraight Doccasional bends ✓Frequent meander OVery sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 55 Comments:
Stream SBB is a perennial channel draining a man -made sediment basin /pond. SBB drains through a forested area for a short
distance before a confluence with SAA at the culvert crossing beneath Main Street. SBB continues on the east side of Main
Evaluator's Signature CWE Date 07/15/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919 - 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SBB
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0 - 5
0-4
0 - 5
3
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
2
no buffer = 0• contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0 5
0-4
0 4
2
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0 -3
0 -4
0 -4
3
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, sees wetlands etc. = max points)
,..,
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
7
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
3
p'
(deeply entrenched = 0• frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
3
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
1
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0 - 4
0-4
3
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
1 l
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
2
fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
2
>
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
2
a
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
H
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0
0
0
3
15
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-5
-4
-5
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 5
0-6
4
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0• well-developed = max points)
-
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0-6
3
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
3
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = 0• loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
-
21
Presence of amphibians
0 -4
0 -4
0 -4
1
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
O
22
Presence of fish
0 -4
0 -4
0 -4
2
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
55
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 7/15/2013
Project/Site: TIP NO. U -5318 -
Stream SCC
Latitude: 35.6407 N
Evaluator. C. Evenhouse, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.8323 W
Total Points: 18
0
1
is least intermittent
ermination (circle one)
Other
Apex Quadrangle
Stream at
Ephemeral termittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name.
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
3
1
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 6
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
0
5. Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
0
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
#qo
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 11.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 0.5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
0
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: This is a roadside ditch that has naturalized in a wetland along the
toe of slope. The OHWM begins within the wetland boundary. The stream was
evaluated 48 hours after heavy rainfall. The month of June was also the wettest
on record. Upslope of the stream is a 18" RCP outlet.

USACE AID#
DWQ #.
Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: C. Evenhouse, KHA
3. Date of evaluation: 07/15/2013 4. Time of evaluation: 12:15 pm
5. Name of stream: Stream SCC 6. River basin: Neuse
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres 8. Stream order: First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50' 10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
35.640700 N
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.832300 W
Method location determined (circle): aPSQ✓ fopo Sheet❑✓ Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓�ther GIST 10ther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SCC is east of Main Street, located approximately 500' north of the NC 55 Bypass.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). NOAA recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 prior to field observation
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, mid 80s.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters FiEssential Fisheries Habitat
nTrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters 0 Nutrient Sensitive Waters nWater Supply Watershed (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 2 acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 20 % Residential 50 % Commercial % Industrial % Agricultural
30 % Forested % Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) ElModerate (4 to 10 %) nSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Doccasional bends Frequent meander OVery sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 45 Comments:
Stream SCC is a perennial channel beginning at a culvert outlet on the east side of Main Street- SCC .arri .s the drainage
from SAA and SBB.
Evaluator's Signature CWE Date 07/15/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SCC
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
4
(no flow or saturation = 0• strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
2
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
1
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
*4
5
Groundwater discharge
0U -3
0 - 4
0--4
3
(no discharge = 0• springs, see s, wetlands etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0 - 5
0 - 4
0-2
2
a
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0 -6
0-4
0 - 2
3
no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
1
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0 -4
0 -4
2
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA
0 - 4
0 5
2
fine, homo enous = 0; lar e diverse sizes = max oints
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
2
>
(deeply incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max points)
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
2
a
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
E„
(no visible roots = 0• dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0 4
0-5
3
I S
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-
Presence of riffle- pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0• well-developed = max points)
F
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0-6
3
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
1
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
2
(no shading vegetation = 0• continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
-
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
0
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
45
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 10/18/2011
Project/Site: TIP No. U -5318 -
Stream SD
Latitude: 35.632301 N
Evaluator: A. Reusche, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.839401 W
J. Hartshorn, KHA
0
1
Total Points: 39.5
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
Stream DeterminatCnt rc a on
then Apex Quadrangle
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermi eren nial
e . Quad Name
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
0
1
A. Geonnorphology Geomorphology Subtotal = 19.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
1
2
3
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5. Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 9.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. BioloqV Subtotal = 10.5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
2
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
23. Crayfish
0
1 0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 015; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes: Stream SD is a moderately straight channel with good baseflow. SD begins at
the outlet ofan offsite pond. SD has good floodplain access and is historically

USACE AID#
DWQ #.
Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: A Reusche, KHA, J Hartshorn, KHA
3. Date of evaluation. 10/18/2011
5. Name of stream: Stream SD
7. Approximate drainage area: 16.5 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 100'
4. Time of evaluation: 1:30 pm
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order: Second Order
10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.6332301 N Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.839401 W
Method location determined (circle): af`SI v u opo Sheet rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓�ther GISE3Dther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SD is located within the central portion of the project area. It is downstream of the confluence of SC and SE, east of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). No precipitation within last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, 70 degrees (F), cold front moving into area, but no precipitation falling as of time of observation.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: FISection 10 Tidal Waters FlEssential Fisheries Habitat
DTrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters 0 Nutrient Sensitive Waters DWater Supply Watershed. (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 8,000 sgft
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: % Residential % Commercial % Industrial _% Agricultural
90 % Forested 10 % Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 60 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: OFlat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) ElModerate (4 to 10 %) DSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight 00ccasional bends ,frequent meander OVery sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 655 Comments:
Stream SD is a perennial stream that d ssapates into a large wetland system. Historically the upstream system was impounded
but the dam has failed and the system is now only partially impounded. Stream SD begins at the breach in the relic dam.
Evaluator's Signature AKR,JRH Date 10/18/2011
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SD
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
2
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0- 5
0-5
1
extensive alteration = 0• no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0 - 4
0 - 5
4
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0 -5
0 -4
0 -4
4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
„a
S
Groundwater discharge
0 -3
0 -4
0 -4
4
Q
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
4
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
4
0.4
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
4
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max p oints)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
2
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0 5
0-4
0 - 4
2
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 -5
4
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
12
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0 5
0-4
0 - 5
4
>+
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max po ints
0-0
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
5
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
4
F„
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0 4
0-5
2
15
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-
Presence of riffle- pool/ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0• well-developed = max points)
F
d
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0 6
2
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
d
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 5
0--5
3
x
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
-
19
7— Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
1
(deeply embedded = 0• loose structure = max
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
2
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
-
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
3
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints
O
22
Presence of fish
0 - -4
0 -4
0 -4
1
(no evidence = 0• common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
1
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
65
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 10/18/2011
Project/Site: TIP e am SE uSE
j Stream
Latitude: 35.635201 N
Evaluator: A. Reusche, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.838898 W
J. Hartshorn, KHA
0
1
Total Points: 30
Stream Determinarnt c e o
ther
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermi eren nial
g. quad Name: Apex Quadrangle
if z 19 or perennial if z 30
3
3
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 11.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
-
1
2
3
0
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5. Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
0
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
145
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
R Hvrtrnlnov Suhtntal = 11.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0_5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Bioloav Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1 1
1 1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Stream SE traverses a series of farm road crossings and
ATV trails. Offsite, SE dissipates into a large wetland system.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET _-AW
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: A Reusche, KHA, J Hartshorn, KHA
3. Date of evaluation: 10/18/2011
4. Time of evaluation: 12:00 pm
5. Name of stream: Stream SE 6. River basin: Neuse
7. Approximate drainage area: 22 acres 8. Stream order: First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: 100' 10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):-
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
35.635201 N
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.838898 W
Method location determined (circle): �PSI r u opo Sheet✓ Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓� ther GISE3Dther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SE is located between Ralph Stephens Road and Piney Grove - Wilbon Road. SE drains a large upstream pond and flows into large wetland system.
14. Proposed channel work (if any)
Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny and clear - no precipitation within last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Partly cloudy. Overcast morning. Weather clearing at time of observation, 75 degrees (F)
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: F Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
DTrout Waters 0outstanding Resource Waters . ✓� Nutrient Sensitive Waters DWater Supply Watershed (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 60,000 sgft
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 110 % Residential % Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
80 % Forested 10 ova Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 6' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: JZ[Flat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) lModerate (4 to 10 %) E[Steep (>I 0%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight 00ccasional bends ✓Frequent meander OVery sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 54 Comments:
� Upstream reach has been dust irbed by farm crossings and culvert installation
Evaluator's Signature AKR,JRH Date 10/18/2011
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SE
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
I
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 4
0-5
3
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 5
0-5
3
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
3
no buffer = 0• contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 4
0-4
3
4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
-
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
4
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
..
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
4
y
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max po ints)
G.�
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0 5
0-4
0 - 2
4
p'
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - 4
0-2
4
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
4
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
I I
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 5
1
(fine homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0 5
0-4
0 5
2
>4
12
(deeply incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max oints
-
-o
,
13
Presence of maj or bank failures
0 -5
0 -5
0 -5
3
a
04
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oints
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
F�
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0 4
0-5
1
15
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
0
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
d
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0-6
3
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0 -5
0-5
0 - 5
4
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
ri 9
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0- 4
0-4
1
dee 1 embedded = 0• loose structure = max
20
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max points)
21
Presence of amphibians
0 -4
0-4
0 - 4
2
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
0
(no evidence = 0; common numerous types = max points)
F23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
0
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
t00
t00
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
54
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City/County: Wake County Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Applicant/Owner:,Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: WAA -UP
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope ( %): � 1%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.640206 N Long: 78.833205 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: OrB2 - Orangeburg loamy sand NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes F71 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No
Are Vegetation 11 Soil R or Hydrology,B. naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area n
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes= No IZI
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
Remarks:
The site has experienced very wet recent conditions from significant rainfall within 72 hours as well as
record rainfall for the month of June. NOAA/NWS recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field
evaluation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Sec
ondary Indicators minimum of two re uired
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
✓
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Saturation Present? Yes No
✓ Depth (inches): >4011
✓ Depth (inches): 36"
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes n No IZI
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
The data point is approximately 50' from the wetland data point and
around 3' higher in ground
surface elevation. No surface hydrology indicators were observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
30
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
over
Species?
Status
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
40%
Y
FACU_
2.Pinus taeda
20%
Y
FAC _
3 Acer rubrum
'Liquidambar
20%
Y
FAC _
q styraci, flua
10%
N
FAC
5.
6.
7.
8.
90% = Total Cover
Saolina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
OBL species
x 1 =
1 Asimina triloba
—20% —
_Y
FAC
2 , Vaccinium corymbosum
_ 5% _
_N
FACW_
3 Liquidambar .styraciflua
_ 5% _
_N
FAC
q -Quercits nigra
5%
N
FAC
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
HE 30' )
1 Osmunda cinnamomea
2.Clethra alnifolia
3 _ Arundinaria gigantea
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifolia
2.
4.
5.
Sampling Point: WAA-UP
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
8
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 88%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
15% =Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
10% Y FAC height.
10% =Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes M No ❑
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The data collection point contains sparse herbaceous cover. The noted species were observed near the wetland edge
within the survey radius.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
35% =
_35%_ Total Cover
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
5%_ FACW
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
_ _Y
5 %_ FAC
_ _Y
5% Y FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
15% =Total Cover
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
10% Y FAC height.
10% =Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes M No ❑
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The data collection point contains sparse herbaceous cover. The noted species were observed near the wetland edge
within the survey radius.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
or co
Sampling Point: WAA -UP
Depth
Matrix
Histosol (Al)
Redox Features
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) %
Type'
Loc'
Texture Remarks
0 -6"
4/2
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
❑
Loam
_
6 -10"
_10YR
10YR 6/2
_100%
100%
Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_
Loam
10 -14"
10YR 6/2
80%
10YR 6/6 20%
C
M
Sandy loam
14 -20"
10YR 7/1
70%
10YR 6/6 30%
C
M
Sandy loam
20 -40"
10YR 7/1
50%
10YR 6/6 50%
C
M
*Sandy clay loam
RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
❑
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
BSandy
Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes n No ❑
No water table was observed in the upper 40 ". Some saturation was present at 36 ".
*mottles and clay increase with depth.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP NO. U -5318 city /county: Wake County
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.640828 N Long: 78.833206 W
Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Sampling Point: WAA-WET
- Slope ( %): <1%
Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: AgC2 - Appling gravelly sandy loam
NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes F;'-1 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil Ror or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No
Are Vegetation 11 Soil Hydrology,R naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes within a Wetland? Yes L 1 No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
The site has received very heavy rainfall within the previous 30 -45 days and severe storms within the past 48 hours. NOAA /NWS
recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field evaluation. The month of June was the wettest on record. The marginal hydrology
indicators are likely a good conservative estimate of the hydrology boundary based on antecedent conditions and significant indicators
further downslope in the wetland area.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two re ire
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reouired: check all that apply)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (B14)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water Marks (61) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
✓
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
✓
✓
✓
✓
Sediment Deposits (132) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
✓
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Water- Stained Leaves (69)
Aquatic Fauna (B 13)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
✓
✓
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No Depth (inches): 8':
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No Depth (inches): 8..
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes II No E]
includes capillary frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
The site has experienced significant rainfall. It is located near a change in the topographic slope
where the surface hydrology indicators are absent, indicating a clear transition between W ?? and
the surrounding upland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
30
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size )
° Cover Species? Status
Liriodendron tulipifera
40%
Y_ FACU
2. Acer nibrum
40%
Y _FAC
3 _Ulmus americana
5%
N _FACW_
q Liquidambar styraciflua
5%
N FAC
5.
6.
7.
6.
8.
7.
90%
= Total Cover
Saolina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
Multiply by:
OBL species
,. Vaccinium corymbosum
35%
Y
FACW_
2 Clethra alnifolia
10%
Y
FAC
3 Quercus nigra
5%
N
FACW
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
50%
= Total Cover
HE 30' )
Arundinaria gigantea
30%
Y
FACW
2._Osmunda cinnamomea
20%
Y
FACW
3 Woodwardia areolata
20%
Y
FACW
4.
5.
7.
B.
9.
10.
11.
12.
70% = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
,.Smilax laurifolia 10% Y OBL
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
10% = Total Cover
Sampling Point: WAA'WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 88%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is lit3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb -All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No ❑
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The data collection point has a very dense canopy cover and a thick herbaceous layer dominated by giant cane and
ferns.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WAA -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type ' LocZ Texture Remarks
0 -2"
3/2
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Loam
_
2 -5"
_10YR
10YR 4/2
_100%
100%
_
Loam
5 -17"
10YR 4/1
100%
*Sandy loam
17 -20"
10YR 6/1
100%
* *Sand
Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al)
Dark Surface (S7)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Lj
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
BSandy
Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
n
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes
No
The water table and saturation were observed at 8 ". The soil became too saturated for
collection /analysis past a depth of 20 ".
*Sand content increases with depth.
* *Sand becomes coarser as depth increases.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 city /county: Wake County Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: W1313-UP
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope ( %): <1%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.640934 N Long: 78.832382 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes F_71 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil Ror or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No
Are Vegetation 11 Soil Hydrology R naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes F1 No 71
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
Remarks:
NOAA /NWS recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field evaluation. The month of June was
the wettest on record for this area.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Se
ondary Indicators minimum of two re uired
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (85)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): >24"
t
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth (inches): >24�
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes F_1 No
includes capillary frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed at data point WBB -UP.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
7.
8.
95% =Total Cover
Saplina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1. none
2.
4.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifblia
2.Toxicodendron radicam
3,Smilax rotundifolia
0% = Total Cover
0% = Total Cover
20%
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Trr - )
° Cover Species?
Status
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
30%
Y
FACU
2. Liguidambar styracif ua
20%
Y
FAC_
3 Acer rubrum
20%
Y
FAC
q Pinus taeda
15%
N
FAC_
5. Quercus nigra
5%
N
FAC
6 Quercus alba
5%
N
FACU
7.
8.
95% =Total Cover
Saplina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
2.
3.
4.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1. none
2.
4.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifblia
2.Toxicodendron radicam
3,Smilax rotundifolia
0% = Total Cover
0% = Total Cover
20%
Y_
_FAC_
15%
Y
FAC
10%
N
FAC
Sampling Point: WBB-UP
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
4
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
5
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
80%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 -Dominance Testis >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
4.
5 Hydrophytic
Vegetation I 6. Present? Yes JI No
45% =Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Understory was dominated by vines, and the canopy layer was well established.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirn
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) Y. Color (moist) % Tvoe' Loc2
0 -6" _ _10YR 3/2 100%
6 -18" 10YR 4/2 100%
18 -24" 10YR 5/1 90% 10YR 4/4 10% C M
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
8 Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Grains.
Sampling Point: W1313-UP
the
Texture Remarks
Loam
Loam
Clay
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Dark Surface (S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
®Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes n No
IZI-
Remarks:
No hydric soil indicators were observed. Saturation was not found within 24" of the surface, and
the water table was not observed within the upper 24" of the profile.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 city /County: Wake County Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Applicant/Owner:,Town of Holly Springs State: LC _ Sampling Point: WBB -WET
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrac4 Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex Concave Slope ( %): < 1%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) LRR P _ L, 35.640859 N Long: 78.832292 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes F7—1 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No
Are Vegetation 11 Soil R or Hydrology 11 naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area 7Y/ Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No within a Wetland? Yes L No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
Wetland WBB is within a stream floodplain, but is better drained downstream of the adjacent road.
NOAH /NWS recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field evaluation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two r uir
✓
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aooly)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water Marks (131) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
✓
Sediment Deposits (132) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133) Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
✓
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water- Stained Leaves (89)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
✓
Shallow Aquitard (133)
Microtopographic Relief (134)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
✓
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
�
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No Depth (inches): 22"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes M No
includes capillary frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
WBB is a floodplain wetland that is likely inundated at least seasonally. Weak evidence of over
bank flow was observed, so this wetland is likely sustained by high ground water levels. Saturation
was observed at approximately 22 ", but the water table was not observed within 24" of the surface.
Given the clay content in the soil profile, it is likely the water table would recharge to the 22" depth
given sufficient time.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
30
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Trr^ )
ver Species? Status
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
30%
Y FACU
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
20%
Y FAC_
3 Acer rubrum
20%
Y FAC
4 Pinus taeda
15%
N FAC_
5. Quercus nigra
5%
N FAC
6. Quercus albs
5%
N FACU
7.
8.
95%
= Total Cover
Saplina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
j.-none
2.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1.Vitis rotundifolia
2.Toxicodendron radicam
3.Smilax rotundifolia
4.
5.
6.
0% = Total Cover
0% = Total Cover
_20% Y_ _FAC_
15% Y FAC
10% N FAC
45% =Total Cover
Sampling Point: WBB -WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 80%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.01
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
heiaht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation �
Present? Yes ' No E-1
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
WBB has an established canopy cover with no herbaceous vegetation present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W1313-WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc' Texture Remarks
0 -6" _ _10YR 3/2 100% Loam _
6-14" 10YR 4/1 80% 10YR 4/4 20% C M Clay loam
14 -24" 10YR 5/1 60% 10YR 4/4 40% C M Clay
'T e: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al)
Dark Surface (S7) ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (Al 6)
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
✓
Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (Al 0) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
✓
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
MLRA 136)
❑
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
®
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
8
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Laver (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Fy1 No ❑
The soil profile has a depleted matrix beginning at a depth of 6 ". The water table is not present
within 24 ", but likely would recharge to a depth closer to the saturation zone (22 ") given sufficient
time. Saturation is present at a depth of 22 ".
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake
ADollcant/OWner: Town of Holly Springs
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
State: NC Sampling Point: WG -UP
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 4
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.6341 N Long: 78.8392 W Datum: NAD 1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Appling sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
WG -UP is located approximately 15' outside of wetland boundary. Land use in the vicinity is
approximately 25% forested, and 75% cleared /residential /agricultural. No rain in last 48 hours.
Upland area is approximately 36" higher than wetland area.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Prir iary Indicators (minimum of one is r it d' check all that apply)
Surface Water (A1) True Aquatic Plants (614)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (65)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes No X
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators observed to a depth of 36 at soil boring location.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) % Cover ies? Status
1 Betula nigra 50 Yes FACW
2 Acer rubrum 20 Yes FAC
3 Liquidanibarstyracii lua 15 No FAC+
4 Liriodendron tulipifera 15 No FAC
5.
6.
7.
8.
Saolina
1
/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
Betula nigra
100
)
30
= Total Cover
Yes FACW
2
Acer rubrum
20
Yes FAC
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
10
No FAC
4
Liquidambarstyracii lua
5
No FAC+
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
65
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1. none
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Toxicodendron radicans
2 Smilax rorundifolia
3.
4.
5.
6.
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WG -UP
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multioly by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
H drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 1113.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
n/a = Total Cover Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
20 Yes FAG
10 Yes FAC
30 = Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
No herbaceous vegetation is present on this upland hillslope. Canopy coverage is very dense and
vine layer is intertwined with sapling layer.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

SOIL
TIP No. U-5318
Sampling Point: wG -UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0 -12
10YR 3/2
100
sandy loam
12 -24
2.5Y 6/3
100
sandy loam
24 -36
2.5Y 6/4
100
loamy sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion,
ric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (At 0) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11;
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sa
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
�Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
on: PL =Pore Lining, M =Matrix
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Non - hydric, upland soils lacking indicators. No evidence of reduction in upper 12 ". Soils are
friable when removed from ground surface with auger.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake
Aoolicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs
State: NC
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
_ Sampling Point: WG -WET
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope ( %): 4
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.634148 N Long: 78.839226 W Datum: NAD 1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Small wetland depression located east of Piney -Grove Road. Occurs in relic stream bed adjacent to historic
railroad. Current stream channel is along western edge of wetland WG. Stream channel also has been
disturbed by farm road crossing and culverts. Stream is impounded and influences hydrology in Wetland WG.
Wetland has been fragmented by farm road crossings. No rainfall in last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
✓ Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (65)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Water- Stained Leaves (69)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
Field Observations:
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): 10"
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 10" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes caoillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
Upstream is a pond and Stream E. Frequency and duration of flooding from SE into WG is likely
influenced by a downstream culvert. Depression is approximately 36 inches in depth compared to
surrounding landscape.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Fa Tr11Sratum (Plot size: 30' ) %Cover Species? Status
1 Acer rubrum 30 Yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
30 = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Arundinaria gigantea 80 Yes FACW
2 Alnus serrulata 10 No FACW+
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Microstegium vimineum
90
30
= Total Cover
Yes FAC+
2 Juncus effusus
20
Yes FACW+
3.
FAC species
x 3 =
4.
x 4 =
UPL species
5.
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Toxicodendron radicans
50
)
30
= Total Cover
Yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
30
= Total Cover
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WG -WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
F2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 It in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland area is located in the piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community and is primarily
dominated by giant cane.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

flIrL•'ilI iiit:'.
SOIL Sampling Point: WG -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox
Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
% Color (moist)
% Tvoe Loci Texture Remarks
0 -6
10YR 4/3
100
sandy clay
6 -18
10YR 4/2
60 10YR 5/6
40 RM M loamy sand
18 -36
10YR 4/1
100
sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, I
ric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
icators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
(� MLRA 136)
J�Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
ILJIPiedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No
Strong redox indicators at 6 ". Likely evidence of seasonal high water table
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (Al 6)
❑
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No
Strong redox indicators at 6 ". Likely evidence of seasonal high water table
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: WK -UP
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.63485 N Long: 78.83899 W Datum: NAD1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x X
within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
Remarks:
WK -UP is located east of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road, approximately 15' outside of wetland boundary,
in cleared area upslope from wetland. Area is near agricultural fields and farm roads. No rainfall in
last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Pri ary Indicators (minim m of one is reouired4 check all that a[)Dlv)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (814)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (81)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (63)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (65)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
includes capillary frin e
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators observed to 36" at soil boring location.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Betula nigra
Absolute Dominant Indicator
) % Cover Species? Status
50 Yes FACW
2.
Acer rubrum
20
Yes FAC
3.
Liquidambarstyraciilua
15
No FAC+
4.
Liriodendron tulipifera
15
No FAC
5.
No FAC+
5.
6.
6.
7.
7.
8.
8.
100
= Total Cover
Saplina
1
/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
Betula nigra
)
20
Yes FACW
2
Acer rubrum
15
Yes FAC
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
5
No FAC
4
Liquidambar.styracii lua
5
No FAC+
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
50
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 none
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
n/a = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Toxicodendron radicans 40 Yes FAC
2 Smilax rotundifolia 20 Yes FAC
3.
4.
5.
6.
60 = Total Cover
boaki 1<rdmu
Sampling Point: WK -UP
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
H drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Veaetation Strata:
Tree- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
No herbaceous vegetation is present on this upland hillslope. Canopy coverage is very dense and
vine layer is intertwined with sapling layer.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

SOIL
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WK-UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Tvoel_oc� Texture Remarks
0 -12
10YR 3/2
100
sandy loam
12 -24
2.5Y 6/3
100
sandy loam
24 -36
2.5Y 6/4
100
loamy sand
Ition. RM= Reduced Matrix, MS=
dw
ric Soil Indicators:
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (A1)
Dark Surface (S7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Coast Prairie Redox (At 6)
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑Umbric
MLRA 136)
Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Soils are very dry and non - hydric, upland soils lacking indicators. Soils are friable when
removed from ground surface with auger.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (co
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.634854 N
Soil Map Unit Name: Orangeburg loamy sand, Rains fine sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
_ Sampling Point: WK -WET
ncave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 1
Long: 78.838998 W Datum: NAD1983
NWI classification: UPL
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Stream SE begins off site and dissipates into Wetland WK. SE has been impounded downstream by a series of
culverts at farm road crossings and the majority of the channel has been backfilled as a result. Wetland is
located SW of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road, just behind residential housing development. No rainfall within last 48
hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Surface Water (Al)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
✓ Saturation (A3)
AL Water Marks (131)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
Iron Deposits (135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Water Table Present? Yes X No_
Saturation Present? Yes X No_
(includes caoillary frinoe)
True Aquatic Plants (614)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches): 24"
Depth (inches): 18" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Wetland area is a result of impoundment along stream SE due to road crossing. Area has been
backfilled and stream channel is no longer present throughout majority of wetland. No rainfall within
last 48 hours. Pond located upstream. Frequency and flooding from SE into WK is likely influenced
by a downstream culvert.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Liquidumbar st}racii lua
Absolute Dominant Indicator
) % ov r Species? Status
40 Yes FAC+
2 Acer rubrum
30
Yes FAC
3 Liriodendron tulipifera
10
No FACU
4.
FACU species
x 4 =
5.
x 5 =
Column Totals:
6.
7.
8.
80 = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Fraxinus pennsvlvanica 30 Yes FACW
2 Vaccinium corymbosum 20 Yes FACW
3 Photinia pyrifolia 10 No FACW
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
60 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Arundinaria gigantea
2 Microstegium vimineum
3. Woodwardia areolata
4. Boerhavia diffusa
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
50 Yes
FACW
30 Yes
FAC+
10 No
OBL
5 No
FACW+
95 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Smilax rotundiyblia 20 Yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
20 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Vegetation in wetland area is well established.
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WK -WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
vrevalence maexworKsneet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
H drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
jL 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

TIP No. U -5318
SOIL Sampling Point: WK -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % T7oer Loc7 Texture Remarks
0 -6 10YR 3/3 80 1 OYR 5/6 20 RM M loamy clay sand
6 -18 10YR 4/2 80 10YR 5/6 20 RM M loamy clay sand
18 -24 10YR 4/1 70 10YR 5/6 30 RM M loamy clay sand
24 -36 1 OYR 4/1 100 loamy clay sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
dw ric Soil Indicators: icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (177) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron - Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Hydric soils present. Saturation begins at 18 ".
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/21/2011
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: WL -UP
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.631969 N Long: 78.838120 W Datum: NAD1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
Remarks:
WL -UP is a hillslope above wetland WL. Point was taken approximately 5 feet upslope of wetland boundary at
trail /road bed next to established cotton field. Area is located approximately 500 feet east of Piney Grove - Wilbon
road. Recent weather conditions in the area have been cloudy with 0.84" of precipitation in the last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Hydrology Indicators:
Surface Water (Al)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Drift Deposits (133)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Surface Water Present? Yes
Water Table Present? Yes
Saturation Present? Yes
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
No X Depth (inches):
No x Depth (inches):
No x Depth (inches):
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (133)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections),
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators observed at this upland point.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Pinus taeda
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
30 Yes FAC
2 Carpinus caroliniana
20
Yes FAC
3 Liquidambar styracii lua
10
No FAC+
4. Betula nigra
10
No FACW
5.
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
6.
7.
8.
Saplina /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Carpinus caroliniana
70
)
30
= Total Cover
Yes FAC
2 Liquidambar styracii lua
20
Yes FAC+
3. Acer rubrum
20
Yes FAC
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
70
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Microstegium vimineum 80 Yes FAC+
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
80
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 none
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
= Total Cover
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WL -UP
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
N 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Y 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.01
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 It (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
n/a = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Upland is located adjacent to historically impounded area. Breech of dam and draining of
impoundment, resulted in predominantly FAC plants re- establishing in vegetative community.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

TIP No. U -5318
SOIL Sampling Point: WL -UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc= Texture Remarks
0 -4 10YR 3/4 100 sandy loam
4 -16 10YR 5/1 70 10YR 6/6 30 RM M sandy loam
16 -32 10YR 4/3 70 2.5YR 6/6 30 RM M sand
'Tvoe: C= Concentration. D= DeDletion. RM= Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
ric Soil Indicators: icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Redox Depressions (178) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) OPiedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
High- chroma, non - hydric, upland soils lacking indicators.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City/County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/21/2011
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: WL -WET
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; C. Evenhouse, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Relic Pond Local relief (concave, convex, none): none
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.6316 N Long: 78.8383 W
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam, Orangeburg loamy sand, Cecil gravelly sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
Slope ( %): 4
Datum: NAD 1983
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Wetland WL is in a historical pond and connects to stream. Area is still impounded by an old railroad bed. WL is
located east of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road, at the break in stream SD. WL is an emergent headwater wetland in a
piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community just upstream of a large impounded area. Recent weather
conditions in the area have been cloudy with 0.84" of precipitation in the last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Prim ary Indicators (minim m of one is reauired& check all that apoly)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (614)
✓
✓
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
✓
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (131)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
AL
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
✓
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 8"
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 6"
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland WL has been impounded in the past (as visible on 2009 aerial image).
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' ) % Cover Species? Status
1 Alnus serrulata 20 Yes FACW+
2 Salix nigra 10 Yes OBL
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
30 = Total Cover
Saplino /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Alnus serrulata 20 Yes FACW+
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
20 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Mierostegium vimineum 80
2 Boehmeria eylindrica 10
3 Phytolacca americana 5
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
95
Yes FAC+
No FACU
No FACU+
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Smilax rotundiJoha 10 Yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
10 = Total Cover
TIP No. U-5318
Sampling Point: WL -WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hy drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is B3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland WL has a sparse canopy and shrub layer, but is clearly dominated by herbaceous
vegetation.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

TIP No. U-5318
SOIL Sampling Point: WL -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0 -4 10YR 5/1 60 10YR 3/2 40 clay loam
4 -20 10YR 5/1 100 sandy clay loam
20 -24 10YR 6/6 100 sand
Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
ivi ric Soil Indicators: icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (At 0) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Coast Prairie Redox (At 6)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (At 0) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) �Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Soil in wetland WL is very moist with saturation beginning at 6 ". Location in historic pond bed
means this area is likely inundated during wet portions of the year.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

SIGNED PRELIMINARY
JURISDICATIONAL
DETERMINATION

flu P Y
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW- 2013 -00066 County: Wake U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -APEX
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Prouerty Owner: Town of Holly Springs
Kendra Parrish, PE
Address: 128 S. Main St,
Holly Springs, NC, 27540
Telephone: 919 - 557 -3931
Agent: Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
Chad Evenhouse
Address: PO Box 33068
Raleigh, NC, 27636
Telephone: [phone]
Study area description:
Size (acres) —150 Nearest Town Holly Springs
Nearest Waterway UT Basal Creek River Basin Neuse USGS HUC 03020201
Coordinates Latitude: 35.634 Longitude: - 78.837
Location description: Study area for proposed Main Street Extension (NCDOT TIP U- 5318): south of the
intersection of Pineyerove- Wilbon Road and Avent Ferry Road in Holly Springs, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X Based on preliminary information, there may be waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area.
We strongly suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA)
jurisdiction. To be considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary
determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33
CFR Part 331). If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which maybe appealed), by contacting the Corps district
for further instruction. Also, you may provide new- information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the
JD.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law
or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of
this notification.
_ There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area delineated. Due to the
size of your property and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner. For a more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any
delineation must be verified by the Corps.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be
reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to
CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on _ Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
Page 1 of 2

Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Eric Alsmeyer at 919 - 5544884 x23/
Eric .C.Alsmeyer(a)usace.army.mil.
Basis For Determination: The impact area contains streams with indicators of ordinary high water
marks, which are stream channels of unnamed tributaries of Basal Creek, impoundments of the
streams, and abutting wetlands. Basal Creek is a tributary of Middle Creek and the Neuse River.
The Neuse River is a Section 10 Navigable Water.
Remarks: This JD was confirmed by field inspection on 12/29/2011. The drawing on the attached
Figure 2, Aerial Map and Jurisdictional Features, submitted by Kimley -Horn on February 13,
2012, generally depicts the jurisdictional waters of the US within the subject study area.
Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date: 3/7/2013 Expiration Date: 3/7/2018
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the attached customer Satisfaction Survey or visit http• / /per2 nwp usace army.n-iil /survey.htnnl to
complete the survey online.
Copy furnished: Kimley -Horn (C. Evenhouse)

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Town of Holly S rin s File Number: SAW- 2013 -00066 Date: 3/712013
Attached
is:
See Section below
❑
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
ZI
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
I E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at hup://www.usace.amiy.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwo/re or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the pen-nit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Pennission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the pen-nit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the pcmnit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the pen-nit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the pennit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Pennit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional detenninations associated with the
pen-nit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a pen-nit under the Coups of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This fornn must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the fonn to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional infonnation to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and /or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Eric Alsmeyer
CESAD -PDO
US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
U.S. Arnry Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the o ortunity to participate in all site investi ations.
Date: Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Eris r4)w
RECEIVED
FED 15 2W
RALEIGH REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICE
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): 304209 -3,
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Kendra Parrish, P.E.
P.O. Box 8
128 S. Main Street
Holly Springs, NC 27540
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: i1t
M r4, 5�Te,e�- 6tki, 0-", , 4-7-D S4'�✓_1'10 /7 -00006,
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State:NC County /parish /borough: Wake City: Holly Springs
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.
35.632301 ON, Long. 78.832100° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Basal Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 2,045.2 linear feet: 3 -5 width (ft) and /or acres.
Cowardin Class:
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: 6.74 acres.
Cowardin Class: PUBHx/UPL
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal:
Non - Tidal:
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): (�/2����%

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
pre- construction notification (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
app Iicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant.
Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation repo
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s) . Cite scale &quad narne:Apex
quadrangle, 1988.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation:1970. Wel S�� Skyey,
0 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: 6-TS.
❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s):
RECEIVED
FEB ' 5 2011
RALEIGH REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICE
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: .
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
® Photographs: X Aerial (Name & Date):2009.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination (s). File no, and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The inform tion recaorded on this form has not
necessaril been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later urisdictional determinatlons.
Signature and dal
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
LA,
a r
e and a of
f person requestin eliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated
amount of
Class of
Site
Latitude
Longitude
Cowardin
aquatic
aquatic
number
(N)
(W)
Class
resource in
resource
review area
SC
35.634300
78.841499
1,017.8 LF
Jurisdictional
SD
35.632301
78.839401
A -w
445.6 LF
Jurisdictional
SE
35.635201
78.838898
499.2 LF
Jurisdictional
SF
35.627701
78.839798
Rv
217.8 LF
Jurisdictional
WA
35.632805
78.831863
P
0.1 AC
Non - isolated
jurisdictional
P�r7
wetland
WB
35.632164
78.832100
UPL-
Non - isolated
0.3 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
WC
35.632576
78.828148
0.5 AC
Non- isolated
jurisdictional
wetland
WD
35.633743
78.841034
OF
Kwetland
0.8 AC
Non- isolated
jurisdictional
WE
35.634987
78.84182
VPL
Non - isolated
eev
0.1 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
WF
35.635094
78.838867
UPL
Non - isolated
Pr-O
2.1 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
WG
35.634148
78.839226
JJOL
Non - isolated
P��
0.04 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
WI
35.62823
78.84078
f�_D
1.6 AC
Non - isolated
jurisdictional
wetland
78.83931
UM
Non- isolated
WJ
35.627789
11�,y1
0.4 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
WK
35.634854
78.838998
1d
Non - isolated
�O
0.2 AC
jurisdictional
t
wetland
WL
35. 16
78.8383
lC
Non- isolated
P �0
0.6 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
P� 3 6330 2. �3a�
P u B
�`.� C D
7g, Yn
Pug
I Ac �D
�3r9 ��. "3
4 �u�
��
C 3s.

NA 1 fir! h' t 1 tl
OK
all
PB
*rte .. , I - ,1� � i =� • /, `. y' `'\ ,i� �• r.,� �{
!• �`i � rep '�1�1� ��' l,•.: R•',".. o _ •^ ��Y ^F ,9.
i I � • i - ` n
NlM •-r.+ j
� , � W hPA � "�• 'r �r
i PC -, ♦ 1 .
e
+ Legend
S.c. Delineated Streams
Delineated Wetlands
t Delineated Ponds
�'�►i 0 750 1,500
4 s,'`• '� I I I �. __ p Study Area
Feet
.Y• lie
rnr Townor Figure 2
Aerial Map and Jurisdictional Features
Holly Main Street Extension
44
Springs TIP Project No. U -5318
n o a r n c n N o 1 l Y n Holly Springs, Wake County

SIGNED NC DWR STREAM BUFFER
DETERMINATION LETTER

4
N EMIR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, PE Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
February 28, 2012
Chad Evenhouse
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
PO Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636 -3068
Subject: Surface Water Determination Letter
NBRRO# 12 -028
Wake County
Dear Mr. Evenhouse:
The Raleigh Regional Office of the NC Division of Water Quality/Surface Water Protection Section conducted a
site visit at the subject property and is providing the below - listed determination pursuant to your request for a formal
surface water determination:
BASIN:
® Neuse (15A NCAC 213 .0233) ❑ Tar - Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B.0259)
❑ Ephemeral /Intermittent/Perennial Determination ❑ Isolated Wetland Determination
Project Name: Town of Holly Springs Main Street Extension TIP U -5318
Location/Directions: Subject property is a proposed roadway realignment and widening
project at Avent Ferry Rd, Hwy 55, and Piney Grove- Wilbon Rd in
Holly Springs
Subject Stream: UT to Basil Creek
Date of Determination: February 1, 2012
Feature
E /UP*
Not
Subject
Start@
Stop(g
Stream
Soil
USGS
Subject
Form Pts.
Survey­
To o
SB
X
X
X
SC
X
Offsite
Flag SC End
X
X
U stream
SD
X
Flag Start SD
Offsite
X
X
Downstream
SE
X
Flag SE Start
Flag SE End
X
SF
X
End of
Offsite
X
X
Railroad Bed
Downstream
Culvert
SXI
X
X
X
*&11P = Ephemeralllntermittent/Perennial
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection
Internet: www wwaterquality.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 -1628
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled /10% Post Consumer Paper
one
Np Carolina
)Vaturally
Phone [phone] Customer Service
FAX [phone]

Town of Holly Springs Main St Extenstion
TIP U -5318
Wake County
February 28, 2012
Page 2 of 2
Explanation: The feature(s) listed above has or have been located on the Soil Survey of County County, North
Carolina or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked
"Not Subject" has been determined not to be a stream or is not present on the property. Features that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be a stream. There may be
other streams located on your property that do not show up on the maps referenced above but, still may be
considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or to the Division of Water Quality.
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that
dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority may request a determination by the
Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this letter or from the date the affected
party (including downstream and /or adjacent owners) is notified of this letter. A request for a determination by the
Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Ian McMillan, DWQ Wetlands /401 Unit, 1650 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -1650.
If you dispute the Director's determination you may file a petition for an administrative hearing. You must file the
petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings within sixty (60) days of the receipt of this notice of decision. A
petition is considered filed when it is received in the Office of Administrative Hearings during normal office hours.
The Office of Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:00
pm, except for official state holidays. To request a hearing, send the original and one (1) copy of the petition to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -6714. The petition may also be
faxed to the attention of the Office of Administrative Hearings at (919) 733 -3478, provided the original and one (1)
copy of the document is received by the Office of Administrative Hearings within rive (5) days following the date of
the fax transmission. A copy of the petition must also be served to the Department of Natural Resources, c/o Mary
Penny Thompson, General Counsel, 1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1601.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, you ask for a hearing or appeal within sixty (60)
days.
The owner /future owners should notify the Division of Water Quality (including any other Local, State, and Federal
Agencies) of this decision concerning any future correspondences regarding the subject property (stated above). This
project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries should be directed to the
Division of Water Quality (Central Office) at (919)- 807 -6301, and the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office) at (919)-544 -4884.
Respectfully,
Martin R' mond
Environmental Specialist
cc: Wetlands/ Stormwater Branch, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -1650
RRO /SWP File Copy

YYf'�t \L VVVIY 1 1 t I�\..
MW (Joins sheet $3) W
-_ Myc Tom--__ -- _ _ _— e -2 - - - - — ------ ----C�
A
AfA _ Wy p No
AgC F cti N Ho
Ge y I e
WE Ce CeB2 AgC2 -% Q� ApB2
55 ` Rd ApC ,
O 0 •� )
q 9 / CeF \ `\ �% ApC2
•o �.' -• � ,' ApB2
FaB2 CeD FaB2 CnC�
2 CeC2 I ApB
A
Ra / . `�� AgC2 AgC2 -_-
w
�f FaB2 o
Go / AgB2
1 ( rB2. "' / �`0 . NoB \ \ AgC2
2 AgB2
y \ Eat Or
AgC2
FaC2
.., FaB2
Rd OrB2 '
FaB2 , ApB2
.a\
M f Ra
CeF AgC2; -
• oB2
� d fi ABC CeC
FaC2 �/ AB2 OrB2; 0
p
/ �y
'rac 40B OrB2 NoA Wo
FaB `Ra �, r82 \ \
'! • \�
OrC 00 Gu Wo /t
1 '� '
17' NoB r , o
OrB OrB2
NoB y 2io \ ' r
Nob 1
Rd Wa8 �r, Ij NoC -AgC2
W a B, Me
. ? O.`
a Wo Wo
OrB / NoC `t �`' 1 \ NoB
�'
CgC2 NoC /
• i, NoC OrB2
NoB \ l AgC2
NoC 0
o _ AgC2 '
la �� % Wow ApC2 AgB OrC
\ OrB r' Os o I'1 2 2 �
I /
�y � OrB NoC A
OrB % V Wo
OrB \ Ea FaC2 OrB2 \
OrB2
• I NoB / \,
� .
Go NoB �- " CgC2
B \-
oG
�o �, Ra j Wo � p� .. _
T P C¢Ri

�� ;A
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
Pat McCrory Thomas A. Reeder John E. Skvarla, III
Governor Director Secretary
Date Received - DWQ Use Only: Project#
Stream Origin /Buffer Applicability Determination
Required Information
1. Owner Information (corporation /individual who is legally responsible for the property and its compliance)
1a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed
Town of Holly Springs (currently in right -of -way acquisition)
1b. Responsible Party (for LLC)
Kendra Parrish, P.E.
1c. Mailing Address
128 S. Main Street, Holly Springs, NC 27540
1d. Telephone Number
919 - 557 -3931
1e. Email Address
[e-mail]
2. Location of Project Site - please include the county, nearest named town and highway number:
U.S. Highway 55, Holly Springs, Wake County
3. Has anyone from DWQ visited the site?
Yes
Staff Name
Martin Richmond
(South of NC55)
Rob Ridings
(North of NC55)
Date of Visit?
February 1, 2012
December 16, 2013
Additional Requested Information
4. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
4a. Name, Company
Chad Evenhouse, PWS, Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
4b. Mailing address
3001 Weston Parkway, Cary, NC 27513
4c. Telephone no.
919 - 677 -2121
4d. Email address
Chad.Evenhouse @kimley - horn.com
5. Project and Site Information
5a. Name of project
TIP# U5318 -Main Street Extension
5b. County
Wake County
5c. Nearest Named Stream
Basal Creek
5d. River Basin
Neuse
5e. Provide a brief description of this project (attach site plan if available): The purpose of the project is to realign and
extend SR1114 (Ralph Stephens Road) and SR 1101 (Piney Grove - Wilbon Road) to form a new intersection in order to
improve local connectivity and reduce congestion in the area.
Please attach a map of the site indicating project boundaries on the USGS 1:24,000 Topo and /or NRCS Soil Survey.
If you are unable to locate either of these maps, please contact the Regional Office for assistance.
DWQ Use Only: Is this stream call for the purpose of: buffer mitigation nutrient offset credit
Please return form to: Sara Knies
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1628
Fax: [phone]
Email: sara.knies(a)ncdenr.gov
Note: Submittals on Friday after 12:00 pm will be
stamped as received on the next business
day.
Please contact the Raleigh Regional Office at (919) 7914200 if you have any questions.
For DWR Staff.- Email following documents to applicant:
0 Riparian Buffer Authorization & Help Document F-1 PCN & PCN Checklist
0 Session Law 2012 -200 0 Minor/Major Variance

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Im
USEn=it»�r�s s
WNmkVW DisMcl
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
to the appropriate Corps Field Office (or project manager, if known) via mail, electronic mail, or
facsimile. A current list of county assignments by Field Office and project manager can be
found on -line at: http: / /www.saw.usace. army. mil / Missions /RegttlatorvPermitProl?ram.aspx , by
telephoning: 910 - 251 -4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 -5006
General Number: (828) 271 -7980
Fax Number: (828) 281 -8120
RALEIGH REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: (919) 554 -4884
Fax Number: (919) 562 -0421
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: (910) 251 -4610
Fax Number: (252) 975 -1399
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910 - 2514633
Fax Number: [phone]
Version: December 2013 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E and F.
If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part G.
Please be aware that all JD
requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to proceed with the
determination, which may include inspection of the property when necessary. This form must be
signed by the current property owner to be considered a complete request.
Property owner authorization/notification for JD
requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects will be
conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
A Corps approved or preliminary JD may not
be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or
your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you
should also request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural
Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: December 2013 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: [Note: The Town of Holly Springs is currently in Right -of -Way acquisition
City, State: for the affected properties in the project area. See attached Figure 5
County: for current parcel information]
Directions:
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): [See attached Figure 5 and Table]
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Town of Holly Springs, ATTN: Kendra D. Parrish, P.E.
Mailing Address: 128 S. Main Street, Holly Springs, NC 27540
Telephone Number: 919- 557 -3931
Electronic Mail Addressl: kendra.parrish @hollyspdngsnc.us
Select one:
❑ I am the current property owner.
❑ I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant
❑ Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
❑✓ Other, please explain.
The Town of Holly Springs is currently in Right -of -Way acquisition for the affected
property parcels required for this project.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION
Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address
3
Town of Holly Springs, ATTN: Kendra D. Parrish, P.E.
128 S. Main Street
Holly Springs, NC 27540
919 -557 -3931
[e-mail]
❑✓ Proof of Ownership Attached (e.g. a copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel /Tax Record data)
1 If available
Z Must attach completed Agent Authorization Form
3 I available
Version: December 2013 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY OWNER CERTIFICATION
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property /properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations
and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
Property Owner (please print) Date
Property Owner Signature
E. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION TYPE
Select One:
I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
This request does include a delineation.
I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
This request does NOT include a delineation.
F] I am requesting that the Corps investigate the property /project area for the presence or
absence of WoUS5 and provide an approved JD for the property identified herein. This
request does NOT include a request for a verified delineation.
I am requesting that the Corps delineate the boundaries of all WoUS on a property /project
area and provide an approved JD (this may or may not include a survey plat).
I am requesting that the Corps evaluate and approve a delineation of WoUS (conducted
by others) on a property /project area and provide an approved JD (may or may not
include a survey plat).
4 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT /USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
5 Waters of the United States
Version: December 2013 Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. ALL REQUESTS
❑✓ Map of Property or Project Area (attached). This Map must clearly depict the boundaries
of the area of evaluation.
❑✓ Size of Property or Project Area 35.3 acres
W] I verify that the property (or project) boundaries have recently been surveyed and marked
by a licensed land surveyor OR are otherwise clearly marked or distinguishable.
G. JD REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS OR AGENCIES
(1) Preliminary JD Requests:
10 Completed and signed Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Formb.
35.635400 - 78.836900
Project Coordinates: Latitude Longitude
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
✓0 Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
❑✓ Aerial Photography of the project area
❑✓ USGS Topographic Map
❑✓ Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
6 See Appendix A of this Form. From Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08 -02, dated June 26, 2008
Version: December 2013 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
❑✓ Wetland Data Sheets8
Tributaries:
❑✓ USACE Assessment Forms
Upland Data Sheets ❑✓ Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
❑ Landscape Photos, if taken
❑ Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
■ All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
■ Locations of wetland data points and /or tributary assessment reaches
■ Locations of photo stations
■ Approximate acreage /linear footage of aquatic resources
(2) Approved JDs including Verification of a Delineation:
❑ Project Coordinates:
Latitude Longitude
Maps (no larger than 11x17) with Project Boundary Overlay:
❑ Large and small scale maps that depict, at minimum: streets, intersections, towns
❑ Aerial Photography of the project area
❑ USGS Topographic Map
❑ Soil Survey Map
❑ Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site Plan,
previous delineation maps)
1987 Manual Regional Supplements and Data forms can be found at:
http: / /www.usace.army.miI/ Missions/ CivilWorks/ RegulatoryProgramandPermits /reg supp.aspx
Wetland and Stream Assessment Methodologies can be found at:
http://Dortal.ncdenr.org/c/document library /get file ?uuid= 76f3c58b -dab8- 4960- ba43- 45b7faf06f4c &groupld =38364 and,
http• / /www saw usace.army.mil/ Portals /59 /docs /regulatory /publicnotices /2013 /NCSAM Draft User Manual 130318.pdf
8 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland /community type.
Version: December 2013 Page 6

Jurisdictional Determination Request
Delineation Information (when applicable):
Wetlands:
Wetland Data Sheets9
❑0
IN
Upland Data Sheets
Landscape Photos, if taken
Tributaries:
❑ USACE Assessment Forms
Field Sketch overlain on legible Map that includes:
Other Assessment Forms
(when appropriate)
• All aquatic resources (for sites with multiple resources, label and identify)
• Locations of wetland data points and /or tributary assessment reaches
• Locations of photo stations
• Approximate acreage/linear footage of aquatic resources
Supporting Jurisdictional Information (for Approved JDs only)
Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form(s) (also known as "Rapanos
Form(s)")
Map(s) depicting the potential (or lack of potential) hydrologic connection(s),
adjacency, etc. to navigable waters.
9 Delineation information must include, at minimum, one wetland data sheet for each wetland /community type.
Version: December 2013 Page 7

Jurisdictional Determination Request
I. REQUESTS FOR CORPS APPROVAL OF SURVEY PLAT
Prior to final production of a Plat, the Wilmington District recommends that the Land
Surveyor electronically submit a draft of a Survey Plat to the Corps project manager for
review.
Due to storage limitations of our administrative records, the Corps requires that all hard -
copy submittals include at least one original Plat (to scale) that is no larger than 11 "x1T'
(the use of match lines for larger tracts acceptable). Additional copies of a plat, including
those larger than 11 "x1T', may also be submitted for Corps signature as needed. The
Corps also accepts electronic submittals of plats, such as those transmitted as a Portable
Document Format (PDF) file. Upon verification, the Corps can electronically sign these
plats and return them via e-mail to the requestor.
(1) PLATS SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL
❑ Must be sealed and signed by a licensed professional land surveyor
❑ Must be to scale (all maps must include both a graphic scale and a verbal scale)
F] Must be legible
❑ Must include a North Arrow, Scale(s), Title, Property Information
❑ Must include a legible WoUS Delineation Table of distances and bearings /metes
and bounds /GPS coordinates of all surveyed delineation points
F] Must clearly depict surveyed property or project boundaries
Must clearly identify the known surveyed point(s) used as reference (e.g. property
corner, USGS monument)
❑ When wetlands are depicted:
• Must include acreage (or square footage) of wetland polygons
Must identify each wetland polygon using an alphanumeric system
Version: December 2013 Page 8

Jurisdictional Determination Request
❑ When tributaries are depicted:
• Must include either a surveyed, approximate centerline of tributary with
approximate width of tributary OR surveyed Ordinary High Water Marks
(OHWM) of tributary
• Must identify each tributary using an alphanumeric system
• Must include linear footage of tributaries and calculated area (using approximate
widths or surveyed OHWM)
• Must include name of tributary (based on the most recent USGS topographic
map) or, when no USGS name exists, identify as "unnamed tributary"
all depicted WoUS (wetland polygons and tributary lines) must intersect or tie -to
surveyed project/property boundaries
Must include the location of wetland data points and /or tributary assessment
reaches
❑ Must include, label accordingly, and depict acreage of all waters not currently
subject to the requirements of the CWA (e.g. "isolated wetlands ", "non -
jurisdictional waters "). NOTE: An approved JD must be conducted in order to
make an official Corps determination that a particular waterbody or wetland is not
jurisdictional.
Must include and survey all existing conveyances (pipes, culverts, etc.) that
transport WoUS
Version: December 2013 Page 9

Jurisdictional Determination Request
(2) CERTIFICATION LANGUAGE
❑ When the entire actual Jurisdictional Boundary is depicted:
include the following Corps Certification language:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction
of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date.
Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, the determination of
Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five (5) years from
this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USA CE Action ID No.:
F] When uplands may present within a depicted Jurisdictional Boundary:
include the following Corps Certification language:
'This certifies that this copy of this plat identifies all areas of waters of the United States
regulated pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as determined by the
undersigned on this date. Unless there is change in the law or our published regulations,
this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from this date. The undersigned completed this determination utilizing the
appropriate Regional Supplement to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual."
Regulatory Official:
Title:
Date:
USACE Action ID No.:
Version: December 2013 Page 10

Jurisdictional Determination Request
(3) GPS SURVEYS
For Surveys prepared using a Global Positioning System (GPS), the Survey must include
all of the above, as well as:
❑ be at sub -meter accuracy at each survey point.
include an accuracy verification:
One or more known points (property corner, monument) shall be located with the
GPS and cross - referenced with the existing traditional property survey (metes and
bounds).
include a brief description of the GPS equipment utilized.
Version: December 2013 Page 11

ATTACHMENT A
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD):
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Town of Holly Springs, ATTN: Kendra D. Parrish, P.E.
128 S. Main Street, Holly Springs, NC 27540
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES AT DIFFERENT
SITES)
State: NC County /parish /borough: wake County
City: Holly Springs
Center coordinates of site (lat /long in degree decimal format):
Lat. 35.635400 'N; Long. 78.836900
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17
Name of nearest waterbody: Basal creek
ow.
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non - wetland waters:
541 linear feet: 3 -6 width (ft) and /or acres.
Cowardin Class Riverine
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: 1.16 acres.
Cowardin Class: Palustrine
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal: n/a
Non- Ti--,. n/a

E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD
(check all that apply - checked items should be included in case file and,
where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
© Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant /consultant:
❑ Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the
applic nt /consultant.
Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps
© U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24,000 Apex
© USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation: NRCS Soil Survey, Wake County (1970)
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is:
(National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
© Photographs: © Aerial (Name & Date): NC statewide orthoimagery Project (2010) or
❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
2

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre- construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.

This preliminary JD finds that there "may be "waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later jurisdictional determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
4
Z�41z�� 3/7/14
Signature and date of
person requesting preliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated
Site
amount of
Class of aquatic
Latitude
Longitude
Cowardin Class
aquatic
number
resource
resource in
review area
SAA
35.640654
- 78.832312
Riverine
93 linear feet
non - section 10 —
non -tidal
SBB
35.640702
- 78.832938
Riverine
115 linear feet
non - section 10 —
non -tidal
SD
35.631511
- 78.838581
Riverine
208 linear feet
non - section 10 —
non -tidal
SE
35.634120
- 78.839263
Riverine
125 linear feet
non - section 10 —
non -tidal
WAA
35.640726
- 78.832973
Palustrine
0.402 acres
non - section 10 —
wetland
WBB
35.640798
- 78.832289
Palustrine
0.055 acres
non - section 10 —
wetland
WG
35.634103
- 78.839226
Palustrine
0.040 acres
non - section 10 —
wetland
WK
35.634380
- 78.839142
Palustrine
0.001 acres
non - section 10 —
wetland
WL
35.631650
- 78.838340
1 Palustrine
0.658 acres
non - section 10 —
1
wetland

mmmar
I RAI I
IIIIIIIIIIIIF �
r -1��'
L U4,
CHATHAM !,,o
Z540
I Figure 1 1
L 1- fY
J
T
-\ I 'I , I I ;r'
HOLLY S
4�
_ \ � O,poi
0
0
co
0
J
I Ralph Stephens Road
J1.
wiu
0 0.75 1.5
------------ 1
Milel
'Z
\--1 ..
--1 A :�C
Virginia
L—Wake County
LEE
H 1KNETT JOHNST�
South Carolina
THE TOWN OF Legend Figure 1
Vicinity Map
Holly Project 13 Project Study Area Holly Springs ETJ Main Street Extension
TIP Project No. U-5318
NORTH CAROLINA Holly Springs Town Limit Holly Springs, Wake County

N _ • - B iyi 7 1
i • . -:
kbrr '
•
60 —
w 40*
•
1 � it Or
C1
s. • 1 I `� I �1 r 4 - t{
Ilk
1.�+a �' � •'
► I
� S� � _!� ,,_�•'_ r �� � 1, �'.
k � y
�,i /f• _ _ 0 750 1,500
Feet
Figure 2
THE TOWN OF Legend USGS Topographic Map (Apex Quadrangle, 1988)
Holly Main Street Extension
Springs Project Study Area TIP Project No. U -5318
M O K I N C A N O L I 'I A Holly Springs, Wake County

c
C
c �
2�
�a
Ez
G
C
11
,/1
m
m
m
to N
M
N N
d
m
m N M
n
O N
N
n
V1
d
O �o
n
d
0m 0
N M
d
N
m m
d n
m m
d iD
m m M
N
m
N
M N
10
p
m^
m
m 0
b
op
C9 m
m�
N
k6
O
0 M
co
0
0
O
v,
n n
M
O d N ✓,
N n
ti
M
O
m M
O
m V,
M M
O
,f,
O
m v,
1
m
0
,/1
0
V1 V1
N
n m
O
vt
0 0
Vl ,A
0
✓1 n
n
N
r.,�
� N
vt ,h
M
m
m
n
N
N N
U U
d
m
n N
N U
d
m
n d
N m
d n
m N
d d
m m
n
N
d n
m N
N
U
n
N
n n
N N
O
N ry
U
M n
m N
r-1
n
N
n n
N N
n N
N U
N
U
�..�
n
N O
n n
N N
d
m
d
m
d
m
U
Z
Z Z�
O
U z
Z
i
O
U ,o
Z O
to U
O Z
w m
O O
U
z
to U
O Z
z
U
Z
U U
Z Z�
m
m
z m
d
m
n U
z
n
D
U U
Z Z
U Z
Z
a¢
Z
m
U m
Z w
m
U U
Z Z
O to
w O
to
O
d i
'o O
'^
a¢
Z Z
D
n
¢
'^ Z
o
n
o
n
p
n '^
w o
n n
'^
D
n '^
O
z
a
z om
m
N
0 to
�
Q
W
to N
� �
V1 z
�%
z
z
D
o
0
z
<<
Q Q
v
z
Q
V
U
V z
U V
z
U z
❑
z
z z
z>
¢ a
l.7
M z
f.,�
J
J
z z
z ¢
a
a
z
z
z z
n V
u
n u
>>
Z>
z
x z
z
z z
Z
Q
0
¢
J a
>
a a
a >>
Q
a 0
a a
^� z
V S
z
S
N z
v S
=i
m l7
l7 J
l7 l7
z
<
<
z
> l7
l7
Z l7
o
0 O
<
a
a 0
w
a a
0
W
a o°
z
o
o o
2
0
o
z
0 0
U
o
O
g
o
o o¢
m �•,
Q¢
w
o w
W
LL
a
c
J
a
LL
a
Q¢
❑
❑
a
Z
�
N
O
Z
a
?
a
❑
❑
❑
❑
o
z
❑
m
❑
❑
❑
O
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑
❑
z
z
w
z
o z
z w
z z
o
z
z
3
= t
o w
z� o
z
�O
3
z
z
o z
❑❑
n
N
u >_
_
u
x
x
x
S S
x W
o
O
o
z~
Z
X
o
u
m
o
l7 N
❑ x
l7
x
l7
x
W l7
Y
x
S
S
S S
a
2 2
2 g
S
l7 M
a w
2
u,
x❑
x O
Z
z
m m
ry
Q S
S
Z
d
Ci
S
a (7
S
a 2
2
2 x
W
S ,,,
,y d
a
°C
,�
Q°
Ci
O
w N
S=
V
2
U
U 2
u
m
O
O
z p
0
0 uo
0 m
O O
m
uo¢
❑¢?
o
Z
m
z°
a
m
Oz
Y
O
Q z
z 0
a
a
d
m°
d
d
o_ m
o
a
0°
o 0
.�
Z
d F
o d
d
d m
o
o
U
m¢
m
m
m
MIMI
m
nrv�°m
N
a ti
°
z
a
2
w
i
z
w
}
w
a
J
J
J
m
3
N
z
W
0
m
w
z
3
u
}
J}
l7
Y
N
H
p
Y
x
Y
d
z
a
v}i
¢
,}i,
Z
m
i}i,
V
?
❑
w
J
Z
H
z
>'
H
w
m
H
a
o_
N
F-
a
o_
m
x m
o
z �2
O
0
O
�_
w
a
a
0
U
Z
❑
w
Y
J
Z_
W o
z z
¢
K
~
LC
J
¢
Z
z
a
V
Z
Q❑
Q
O m
N
Z N
U
Z
Y
LC
LL
3 Q
z
o
3
Q
3
x?
m>
W
w
o w
Z?
w
o
a
>>
�_
u
>
w
=
a~
J
W
m 4'
Y
N
w w
S>
w>
w w
z
w~
w D:
Q
m
w
O❑
Q g
❑
a
Z
w
Z
v,
o Y
Y
m
Q o
m
,,, Z
z
z z
i�
z o
9
a
3 K
a U?
Z~
U
Z
w
Z
>_
Z
°
z
z
Z¢
Z
H Z
=
¢
W Z
¢
Q
o_
N a
Q-
n.
x
a 0
x❑
0 z
S x
0 0
W
2
O p
m
x
N
-�
H
V' ¢
in
N
w ¢
z
2
K
S
Q z
Y
O m❑
l7
V
S
S 2
w Q
_
J
u
w
z
o
w v,
w w
Z
o
o z
z w
z z
o
z z
w
w
z a
=;
J<
w w
D z
m
a
O
z LL
z Q
Q ==
o
W
=,
m=
x o
z
O
z
a J<
z°
Q=
O
O=
O O�
O!
z
t7
z
~- a
Q
J
Z 7¢
Q
O
Q O
❑
m m¢
D!
3
O¢
w v
¢¢
u
S
W O_
O°
U O
Q
w
u lw7
Q
U v
O K
CC
W
W
-
V~,
m
m N
m
x m
m 3
m m
m
m
n
m
Y
a
m V
z¢
F-
{may,
ti
m n
rl
'i O
N
N d
d O
n lD
d
�D n
N
N
d n
n
N N
tD M
n
n m
m 0
�D
M
N d
d N
n n
d
m m
G
d
n V/
n
d N
to
N M
m N
d d
,O
,D lD
V1
O
m ,O
n
m-
.i .�-�
O .-�
N
to n
w
N n
N
ul
lD n
0 �D
n �O
d
W
m d
�
,O
m
m n
m m
✓,
m
n m
m m
M
m
n d
m m
M to
m m
d M
m m
V,
m
d m
m m
V1
m
V1
m
l0 m
m m
M
m
v1 n
m m
n l0
m m
1p
m
n lD
m m
,o n
m m
,D
m
i0
m
an d
m m
�O m
m m
n M
m m
M
m
d d
m m
Ea

SREAM AND WETLAND
DATA FORM

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 7/15/2013
Project/Site: TIP NO. U -5318 -
Stream SAA
Latitude: 35.6409 N
Evaluator: C. Evenhouse, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.8329 W
Total Points: 35
Stream Determination
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermitt t Perennial
.g. Quad Name: Apex Quadrangle
if ? 19 or perennial if z 30
0
1
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 21.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
,a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
pool se uence
0
1
2
3
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5. Active /relic flood lain
0
1
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 8.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biolocly Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
J 0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: The stream was evaluated from stream flag SAA -1.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET r, -
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: C. Evenhouse, KHA
3. Date of evaluation. 07/15/2013 4. Time of evaluation: 11:00 am
5. Name of stream: Stream SAA
6. River basin: Neuse
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
8. Stream order:, First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50'
10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.640900 N
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.832900 W
Method location determined (circle): aPS Ot opo Sheet�rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓�ther GIS❑Dther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads
and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SAA crosses beneath Main Street approximately 500' north of NC 55 bypass.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). NOAA recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 prior to field observation
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, mid 80s.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known:
Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
OTrout Waters 0outstanding Resource Waters
Q Nutrient Sensitive Waters Dwater Supply Watershed. (I -M
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 0.2 acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential
30 % Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
40 % Forested
20 % Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3'
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 21
24. Channel slope down center of stream: ✓Flat (0 to 2 %) .DGentle (2 to 4 %) DModerate (4 to 10 %) E[Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight 00ccasional bends , ✓LFrequent meander Overy sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 559 Comments:
Stream SAA iq n perennial channel draining through a foresters corridor within a developed and ex an nding commercial area_
Evaluator's Signature CWE Date 07/15/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SAA
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE'
S,
SCORE
0
LL, Piedmont
Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0
0
3
1
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
-5
-4
-5
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 — 5
0--5
3
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
2
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max poi nts
4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 — 4
0-4
3
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
.�
5
Groundwater discharge
0 -3
0 -4
0 -4
4
d,
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
U
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
3
y,
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 — 4
0-2
3
p"
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 — 4
0-2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
3
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0 — 4
0-4
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
2
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 4
0-5
2
12
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points
-
00
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
3
a
severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
3
Fy
(no visible roots = 0• dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0
0
0 -5
3
15
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-5
-4
16
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
4
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0• well-developed = max oints
F-
1
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 — 6
0-6
4
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
1s
Canopy coverage over streambe d
o -s
o -s
o -s
3
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
3
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous es =max oints
-
(�
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0 — 4
0-4
Q
(no evidence = 0• common, numerous es = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
3
(no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
59
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 7/15/2013
Project/Site: TIP NO. U -5318 -
Stream SBB
Latitude: 35.6407 N
Evaluator: C. Evenhouse, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.8330 W
Total Points: 40.5
Stream Determination
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermitt t Perennial
g. Quad Name: Apex Quadrangle
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
0
1
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 22
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
,a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
poolsequence
0
1
2
3
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5. Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
artificial ditches are not rated. see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 10.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: The stream experienced heavy recent rainfall 48 -72 hours prior to
the site visit. The month of June was the wettest on record. Many minnows
were observed in pools after the flood event. SBB continues beneath Main
Street and flows east towards wetland WBB.

I USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: C. Evenhouse, KHA
3. Date of evaluation: 07/15/2013
5. Name of stream: Stream SBB
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
35.640700 N
4. Time of evaluation: 11:45 am
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order:. First Order
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.833000 W
Method location determined (circle): aPS [ opo Sheet Q�rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ather GIS❑Dther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SBB drains from a sediment basin north of NC 55 Bypass and confluences with SAA before crossing beneath Main Street.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). NOAA recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 prior to field observation
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, mid 80s.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: OSection 10 OTidal Waters DEssential Fisheries Habitat
,[Trout Waters .Outstanding Resource Waters -Z Nutrient Sensitive Waters [Water Supply Watershed, (I -M
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 2 acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential 50 % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
40 % Forested _% Cleared / Logged _% Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3- 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: , ✓[Flat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) DModerate (4 to 10 %) .[Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight 00ccasional bends ,✓[Frequent meander Overy sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 55 Comments:
Stream SBB is a ,perennial channel draining a man-made sediment basin /Rend SBB drains through a forested area for a short
distance before a confluence with SAA at the culvert crossing beneath Main Street. SBB continues on the east side of Main
Evaluator's Signature CWE Date 07/15/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SBB
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Presence of flow / peesistent pools in stream"
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
o
3
1
o -s
0-4
-s
(no flow or saturation = 0• strong flow = max points)
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 5
0-5
3
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
-
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0 - 4
0-5
2
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 4
0-4
2
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
-
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0-4
0-4
3
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
3
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
"
Entrenchment / floodplain access
7
0-5
0 - 4
0 — 2
3
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - 4
0-2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0 - 4
0-3
1
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
2
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 4
0-5
2
12
(de e ply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
-
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 — s
0-5
2
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0• dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0-5
0 4
0-5
3
15
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 5
0-6
4
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0• well-developed = max points)
-
�
17
Habitat complexity
0 -6
0 -6
0 -6
3
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
-
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
(no shading vegetation = 0• continuous canopy = max points
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 5
0-5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
-
r
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
1
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
*4
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
2
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0 -6
o -s
o -s
3
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
55
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 7115/2013
Project/Site: TIP NO. U -5318 -
Stream SCC
Latitude: 35.6407 N
Evaluator: C. Evenhouse, KHA
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.8323 W
Total Points: 18
ermination (circle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral termittent Perennial
Apex Quadrangle
e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if z 30
0
1
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 6
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
1
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
pool sequence
0
1
-
2
3
1
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
0
5. Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
0
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
' artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal = 11.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal = 0.5
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
0
20. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: This is a roadside ditch that has naturalized in a wetland along the
toe of slope. The OHWM begins within the wetland boundary. The stream was
evaluated 48 hours after heavy rainfall. The month of June was also the wettest
on record. Upslope of the stream is a 18" RCP outlet.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: C. Evenhouse, KHA
3. Date of evaluation.. 07/15/2013 4. Time of evaluation: 12:15 pm
5. Name of stream: Stream SCC 6. River basin: Neuse
7. Approximate drainage area: 100 acres 8. Stream order:. First Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50' 10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): n/a
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.640700 N Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.832300 W
Method location determined (circle): aPS Ql opo Sheet rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓�ther GISQOther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SCC is east of Main Street, located approximately 500' north of the NC 55 Bypass.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). NOAA recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 prior to field observation
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, mid 80s.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: R Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
IITrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters ✓2 Nutrient Sensitive Waters IIWater Supply Watershed. (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 2 acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 20 % Residential 50 % Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
30 ova Forested % Cleared / Logged _% Other (
22. Bankfull width: 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: QFlat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) _DModerate (4 to 10 %) DSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Elstraight 00ccasional bends ✓Frequent meander Overy sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 45 Comments:
Stream SCC is a D renn;al channel beginning at a culvert nutlet an the east side of Main Street. SCG carries S . the drainage
from SAA and SBB
Evaluator's Signature CWE Date 07/15/2013
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SCC
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
G'IARACTE S1 S
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
};
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 4
0-5
4
1
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
—
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0-4
0-5
1
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max poi nis
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0 4
0-4
2
4
(extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
-
.�
5
Groundwater discharge
0 -3
0 -4
0 -4
3
U(no
discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
_.,
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
3
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points )
Entrenchment / floodplain access
7
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
2
a'
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0-4
0-2
3
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0 - 4
0-3
1
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
2
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
2
(fine, homogenous = 0• large, diverse sizes = max points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 4
0-5
2
>�
12
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
-
E-0
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
2
►�
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
H
(no visible roots = 0• dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0
0
0
3
15
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points
-5
-4
-5
Presence of riffle - pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
2
16
no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points)
F
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 — 6
0-6
3
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0 5
0-5
2
18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canoe = max points)
—
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
2
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0 4
0-5
0 5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous types = max points)
—
-
C�
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0-4
0-4
0
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
'4
0
22
Presence of fish
0 -4
0 -4
0 -4
0
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0-5
0-5
2
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
45
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 10/18/2011
Project/Site: TIP No. U -5318 -
Stream SD
Latitude: 35.632301 N
A. Reusche, KHA
Evaluator:
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.839401 W
J. Hartshorn, KHA
0
1
Total Points: 39.5
Stream DeterminaCnt rc a on
ther Apex Quadrangle
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermi erenn ial
e . Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
3
2
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 19.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Stron
Score
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
2
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
pool sequence
0
1
?
3
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
3
5. Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
2
8. Headcuts
0
1
1 2
1 3
1
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
R Nvrirnlnnv SiihtntgI = 9.5
12. Presence of Wa seflow
0
1
2
3
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
r Rinlnnv Ci ihfnfnl = 1 n s
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
2
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
23. Crayfish
0
1 0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 015; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Stream SD is a moderately straight channel with good baseflow. SD begins at
the outlet ofan offsite pond. SD has good floodplain access and is historically

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: A Reusche, KHA, J Hartshorn, KHA
3. Date of evaluation: 10/18/2011 4. Time of evaluation: 1:30 pm
5. Name of stream: Stream SD 6. River basin: Neuse
7. Approximate drainage area: 16.5 acres 8. Stream order:. Second Order
9. Length of reach evaluated: 100' 10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.632301 N
12. Subdivision name (if any
Longitude (ex. -77.556611): 78.839401 W
Method location determined (circle): aH Ql opo Sheet rtho (Aerial) Photo /GIS ✓�ther GIS❑Dther
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SD is located within the central portion of the project area. It is downstream of the confluence of SC and SE, east of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Clear, highs in upper 70s (F). No precipitation within last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Overcast, 70 degrees (F), cold front moving into area, but no precipitation falling as of time of observation.
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 .Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
DTrout Waters 00utstanding Resource Waters ✓Q Nutrient Sensitive Waters Dwater Supply Watershed, (I -M
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 8,000 sqft
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
90 % Forested 10 % Cleared / Logged % Other (
22. Bankfull width: 6' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: ✓j ( Flat (0 to 2 %) OGentle (2 to 4 %) OModerate (4 to 10 %) DSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight FV710ccasional bends DFrequent meander Overy sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 65 Comments:
Stream SD is a perennial stream that dissipat .s Onto a large wetland system_ Historically the upstream system was impounded
but the dam has failed and the system is now only partially impounded Stream SD begins at the breach in the relic dam
Evaluator's Signature AKR,JRH Date 10/18/2011
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SD
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
.CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
1
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
0-5
0 - 4
0-5
2
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
2
Evidence of past human alteration
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
1
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0 - 4
0-5
4
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max poi nis)
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
4
4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
a
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0 - 4
0-4
4
d
(no discharge = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0 - 4
0-2
4
no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
4
7
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - 4
0-2
4
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0 - 4
0-3
2
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0 -5
0 -4
0 -4
2
(extensive deposition- 0• little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA *
0-4
0 - 5
4
fine homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max oints
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 4
0-5
4
>-+
12
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
-
E-4
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 - 5
0-5
5
�
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oints)
Root depth and density on banks
0
0 -4
0 -5
4
14
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
-3
Cn
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0
0 -4
0 -5
2
15
(substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-5
Presence of riffle- pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 - 5
0-6
2
16
no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0• well-developed = max points)
17
Habitat complexity
0-6
0 - 6
0-6
2
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
18
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
1
(deeply embedded = 0• loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0 4
0-5
0 - 5
2
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max points)
-
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
3
O
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
1
no evidence = 0; common numerous es = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0-6
0 - 5
0-5
1
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points)
Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
65
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 10/18/2011
Project/Site: TIP N . U s518
Latitude: 35.635201 N
A. Reusche, KHA
Evaluator:
County: Wake
Longitude: 78.838898 W
J. Hartshorn, KHA
0
1
Total Points: 30
Stream Determinafiqpe o
ther
Stream is at least intermittent
Ephemeral Intermi nt Perennial
g. quad Name: Apex Quadrangle
if z 19 or perennial if ? 30
3
3
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 11.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
,a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple-
ool se uence
0
-
1
2
3
0
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5. Active /relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
2
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
0
8. Headcuts
0
1
1 2
3
1 2
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
- artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
R Pwirnlnrni giihtntal = 11 5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
r' Rinlnnv G ihtntal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
1 0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL
= 1.5; Other = 0
0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Stream SE traverses a series of farm road crossings and
ATV trails. Offsite, SE dissipates into a large wetland system.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
M STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Town of Holly Springs 2. Evaluator's name: A Reusche, KHA, J Hartshorn, KHA
3. Date of evaluation: 10/18/2011 4. Time of evaluation: 12:00 pm
5. Name of stream: Stream SE
7. Approximate drainage area: 22 acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 100'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
Latitude (ex. 34.872312):
35.635201 N
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order:. First Order
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if
Longitude (ex. - 77.556611): 78.838898 W
Method location determined (circle): aPS Dl opo SheetO✓ Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS other GIS❑Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
SE is located between Ralph Stephens Road and Piney Grove - Wilbon Road. SE drains a large upstream pond and flows into large wetland system.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Unknown
15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny and clear - no precipitation within last 48 hours.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Partly cloudy. Overcast morning. Weather clearing at time of observation, 75 degrees (F)
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: n Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
DTrout Waters 0outstanding Resource Waters 1r L Nutrient Sensitive Waters nWater Supply Watershed. (I -IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES If yes, estimate the water surface area: 60,000 sqft
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: 110 % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial % Agricultural
80 % Forested 10 % Cleared / Logged _% Other (
22. Bankfull width: 6' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 21
24. Channel slope down center of stream: 0171at (0 to 2 %) . Gentle (2 to 4 %) DModerate (4 to 10 %) DSteep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Doccasional bends ✓QFrequent meander Overy sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 54 Comments:
Upstream reach has been 6sturbad by farm crossings anti culvert installation. _
Evaluator's Signature AKR,JRH Date 10/18/2011
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919- 876 -8441 x 26.

Stream SE
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
ECOREGION POINT
RANGE
#
CHARACTERISTICS
SCORE
Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
o
0-4
o -s
3
-!-
1
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points)
-s
K';
-
Evidence of past human alteration
0
o -s
0-5
3
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points)
-6
3
Riparian zone
0-6
0 - 4
0-5
3
no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max poi nts
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
4
extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points)
5
Groundwater discharge
0-3
0 - 4
0-4
4
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)
6
Presence of adjacent floodplain
0 -4
0 -4
0 -2
4
(no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points)
Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0 - 4
0-2
4
p
(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points)
8
Presence of adjacent wetlands
0-6
0 - 4
0-2
4
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points)
9
Channel sinuosity
0-5
0-4
0-3
4
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points)
10
Sediment input
0-5
0-4
0-4
3
(extensive deposition= 0• little or no sediment = max points)
11
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0-4
0 - 5
1
(fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points)
Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-5
0 4
0-5
2
12
(deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points)
-
13
Presence of major bank failures
0-5
0 — s
0-5
3
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points)
14
Root depth and density on banks
0-3
0 - 4
0-5
2
(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points)
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0
0 -4
0 -5
1
15
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points)
-5
Presence of riffle -pool /ripple -pool complexes
0-3
0 - 5
0-6
16
no riffles /ri les or ools = 0; well- develo ed =max oints
�
17
Habitat complexity
0 -6
0 -6
0 -6
3
(little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
18
Canopy coverage over streambed
0-5
0-5
0-5
4
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
19
Substrate embeddedness
NA*
0-4
0-4
1
(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max)
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4
0 - 5
0-5
0
20
no evidence = 0• common numerous es =max oints
C�
21
Presence of amphibians
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
2
O
no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
22
Presence of fish
0-4
0 - 4
0-4
Q
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points)
23
Evidence of wildlife use
0 — 6
0-5
0 — 5
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points
POW,. F., Total Points Possible
100
100
100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page)
54
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City/County: Wake County Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Applicant/Owner:,Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: WAA-UP
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope ( %): <1%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.640206 N Long: 78.833205 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: OrB2 - Orangeburg loamy sand NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes F-7-1 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No
Are Vegetation B Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No ✓ within a Wetland? Yes= No Wl
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The site has experienced very wet recent conditions from significant rainfall within 72 hours as well as
record rainfall for the month of June. NOAA/NWS recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field
evaluation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland
Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Primary
Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that aooly)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (614)
High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
✓
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Yes n No ✓ Depth (inches):
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present? Yes _1 No ✓
Depth (inches): >40"
n
Saturation Present? Yes El No ✓
Depth (inches): 36"
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
The data point is approximately 50'
from the wetland data point and
around 3' higher in ground
surface elevation. No surface hydrology indicators were observed.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WAA-UP
9.
10. -
11.
12.
15% =Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifolia 10% Y
2.
3.
4.
5.
10% =Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
FAC hei ht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
Present? YesJ� No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The data collection point contains sparse herbaceous cover. The noted species were observed near the wetland edge
within the survey radius.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
_40%
Y
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2 Pinus taeda
Y
FAC
3. . Acer rubrum
_20%
20%
Y
_
FAC
Total Number of Dominant 8
Species Across All Strata: (B)
q Liguidambar styracilua
10%
N
FAC
Percent of Dominant Species 8$%
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8.
90 %_
=Total Cover
OBL species x 1 =
Saplin° /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Asimina triloba
_ 20%
Y
FAC
FAC species x 3 =
2 Vaccinium corymbosum
_ 5%_
_N
FACW_
FACU species x 4 =
3- Liguidambarstyraciflua
_ 5 %_
FAC
UPL species x5=
q Quercus nigra
5%
_N
N
FAC
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X
_ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 111113.01
10.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
= Total Cover
_
HE 30 )
_35%_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 Osmunda cinnamomea
_ 5%
Y
FACW
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2 Clethra alnifolia
— 5%
Y
FAC
3 "Arundinaria gigantea
5%
Y
FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
9.
10. -
11.
12.
15% =Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifolia 10% Y
2.
3.
4.
5.
10% =Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
FAC hei ht.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
Present? YesJ� No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The data collection point contains sparse herbaceous cover. The noted species were observed near the wetland edge
within the survey radius.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WAA -UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Tvoe' Loc2
Texture Remarks
0 -6"
10YR 4/2
1000/0
Loam _
6 -10"
10YR 6/2
1000/0
Loam
10 -14"
10YR 6/2
80%
10YR 6/6 20% C M
Sandy loam
14 -20"
10YR 711
70%
10YR 6/6 30% C M
Sandy loam
20 -40"
10YR 7/1
50%
10YR 6/6 50% C M
*Sandy clay loam
D= Deoletion. RM= Reduced Matrix, MS=
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
El Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes n No ❑
No water table was observed in the upper 40 ". Some saturation was present at 36 ".
*mottles and clay increase with depth.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP NO. U -5318 City/county: Wake County
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.640828 N Long: 78.833206 W
Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Sampling Point: WAA -WET
- Slope ( %): <1%
Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: AgC2 - Appling gravelly sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes F-;'—1 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil or Hydrology, significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 1 • i No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil or Hy F] naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No ❑ H within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
The site has received very heavy rainfall within the previous 30 -45 days and severe storms within the past 48 hours. NOAA /NWS
recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field evaluation. The month of June was the wettest on record. The marginal hydrology
indicators are likely a good conservative estimate of the hydrology boundary based on antecedent conditions and significant indicators
further downslope in the wetland area.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland
Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Primary
Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that aooly)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
✓
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_✓
Drainage Patterns (B10)
✓
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
✓
Water Marks 131 Presence of Reduced Iron C4
( ) ( )
✓
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (63) Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
❑
Iron Deposits (B5)
✓
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
✓
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes Non Depth (inches):
R
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 8
n ❑
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No Depth (inches): 8"
Wetland Hydrology
Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
The site has experienced significant rainfall. It is located near a change in the topographic slope
where the surface hydrology indicators are absent, indicating a clear transition between W ?? and
the surrounding upland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
6. _
7.
8. _
90% =Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Yaccinium corymbosum 35% Y FACW_
2.- Clethra alnifolia 10% Y FAC
3 Quercus nigra 5% N FACW
4.
7
8
9
1
HE 30'
1. Arundinaria gigantea
2 Osmunda cinnamomea
Woodwardia areolata
7.
8.
9.
10
11
12
50% =Total Cover
30% Y FACW
20% Y FACW
20% Y FACW
70% = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
,.Smilax laurifolia 10% Y OBL
5
10% = Total Cover
Sampling Point: WAA-WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size 30' )
% Cover
Species?
Status
1. Liriodendron tulipifera
40%
Y_
FACU
2 Acer rubrum
40%
Y
_FAC
3 'L lmus americana
5%
N
_FACW_
q *Liquidambar styraciflua
5%
N
FAC
6. _
7.
8. _
90% =Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Yaccinium corymbosum 35% Y FACW_
2.- Clethra alnifolia 10% Y FAC
3 Quercus nigra 5% N FACW
4.
7
8
9
1
HE 30'
1. Arundinaria gigantea
2 Osmunda cinnamomea
Woodwardia areolata
7.
8.
9.
10
11
12
50% =Total Cover
30% Y FACW
20% Y FACW
20% Y FACW
70% = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
,.Smilax laurifolia 10% Y OBL
5
10% = Total Cover
Sampling Point: WAA-WET
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
7
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
$
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
88%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes M No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
The data collection point has a very dense canopy cover and a thick herbaceous layer dominated by giant cane and
ferns.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: WAA -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc' Texture Remarks
0 -2"
3/2
100%
Loam
_
2 -5"
_10YR
10YR 4/2
100%
Loam
5 -17"
10YR 4/1
100%
*Sandy loam
17 -20"
10YR 6/1
100%
* *Sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, I
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
❑Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soi
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes n No ❑
The water table and saturation were observed at 8 ". The soil became too saturated for
collection /analysis past a depth of 20 ".
*Sand content increases with depth.
* *Sand becomes coarser as depth increases.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake County
Applicant/Owner:,Town of Holly Springs State: NC
Investigator(s): C. Evenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, Range: Holly Springs
Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
_ Sampling Point: WBB -UP
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope ( %): <1/0
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.640934 N Long: 78.832382 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil Ror or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil Hydrology❑ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No ❑
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
NOAA /NWS recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field evaluation. The month of June was
the wettest on record for this area.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland
Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reguiredl
Primary
Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that ao)ly)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3) Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (64) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
❑
Iron Deposits (135)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations: �
Yes No l v l Depth (inches):
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present? Yes F[ No I ✓ I Depth (inches): >24
❑ W1
Saturation Present? Yes E_1 No I y l Depth (inches): >24"
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No indicators of wetland hydrology were observed at data point WBB -UP.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
95% = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
3
4
7
f[r7
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1. none
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
11
12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifolia
2.Toxicodendron radicanr
3. Smilax rotundifolia
0% = Total Cover
0% = Total Cover
20% Y_ _FAC_
15% Y FAC
10% N FAC
45% = Total Cover
Sampling Point: WBB-UP
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 80%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Trr^ 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
30%
Y
FACU
2. Liquidambar styraciflua
20% /o
Y
FAC_
3 Acer rubrum
20%
Y
FAC
q taeda
15 %_
N
FAC_
_Pinus
5 Quercus nigra
5%
N
FAC
g Quercus alba
5%
N
FACU
7. —
95% = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
3
4
7
f[r7
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1. none
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
11
12
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1.Vitis rotundifolia
2.Toxicodendron radicanr
3. Smilax rotundifolia
0% = Total Cover
0% = Total Cover
20% Y_ _FAC_
15% Y FAC
10% N FAC
45% = Total Cover
Sampling Point: WBB-UP
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 80%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Understory was dominated by vines, and the canopy layer was well established.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W1313-UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0 -6" 10YR 3/2 1000/0 Loam
6 -18" 10YR 4/2 100% Loam
18 -24" 10YR 5/1 90% 10YR 4/4 10% C M Clay
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
❑Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (At 0) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
RM =Redu
Sand Grains.
❑ Dark Surface (S7)
F-1 Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
❑ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
❑ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
m: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
(MLRA 136, 147)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes F] No IZI
No hydric soil indicators were observed. Saturation was not found within 24" of the surface, and
the water table was not observed within the upper 24" of the profile.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /county: Wake County Sampling Date: 7/15/2013
Applicant/Owner:,Town of Holly Springs State: NC _ Sampling Point: WBB -WET
Investigator(s): C. EVenhouse (KHA) Section, Township, RangE Holly Springs
Landform (hillslope, terrace Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex Concave Slope ( %): <1%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) LRR P L, 35.640859 N Long: 78.832292 W Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Wo - Wehadkee and Bibb soils NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 5/__1 No= (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes = No ❑
Are Vegetation ❑ Soil ❑ or Hydrology ❑, naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ❑ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ II No L I within a Wetland? Yes Z No ❑
Wetiand Hydrology Present? Yes I y I No ❑
Remarks
Wetland WBB is within a stream floodplain, but is better drained downstream of the adjacent road.
NOAH /NWS recorded 0.53" of rainfall 48 hours prior to the field evaluation.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland
Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two reouired)
❑
Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Primary
Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that aooly)
❑
Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (1314)
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
✓
Drainage Patterns (610)
Saturation (A3) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
✓
Water Marks (B1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (B3) Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron Deposits (85)
❑✓
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
✓
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
✓
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
✓
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ✓ Depth (inches): >24
n ❑
Saturation Present? Yes F71 l No El Depth (inches): 22°
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
WBB is a floodplain wetland that is likely inundated at least seasonally. Weak evidence of over
bank flow was observed, so this wetland is likely sustained by high ground water levels. Saturation
was observed at approximately 22 ", but the water table was not observed within 24" of the surface.
Given the clay content in the soil profile, it is likely the water table would recharge to the 22" depth
given sufficient time.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: WBB -WEi-
95% = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
2.
J.
4.
V.
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
FACW species
Trr^ c.....,,.., of . o 30' )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
4
1 Liriodendron tulipifera
30%
Y
FACU
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
2._Liquidambar styraciflua
_20 %_
_Y
FAC_
Total Number of Dominant
5
3 Acer rubrum
20%
Y
FAC
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
4 Pinus taeda
%_
FAC_
5.
S.Qu ercus m $ ra
_15
5%
_N
N
FAC
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
80% (A/B)
g Quercus alba
5%
N
FACU
9.
10.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
12.
0%
95% = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
2.
J.
4.
V.
VI v.
OBL species
7.
FACW species
x 2 =
8.
x 3 =
FACU species
9.
UPL species
x 5 =
10.
(A) (B)
0%
= Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1. none
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
0%
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
1.Vitis rotundifolia
_20%
Y_ _FAC_
2,Toxicodendron radicans
15%
Y FAC
3. Smilax rotundlrolia
10%
N FAC
Total /o Cover of.
Cover
VI v.
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is B3.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1
m) tall.
Herb — All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Hydrophytic
Vegetation n
Present? Yes M No
45% = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
WBB has an established canopy cover with no herbaceous vegetation present.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: W1313-WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist) %
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0 -6" 10YR 3/2 100%
Loam
6 -14" 10YR 4/1 80%
10YR 4/4 20% C M Clay loam
14 -24" 10YR 5/1 60%
10YR 4/4 40% C M Clay
'Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM=
Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Hydric
Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
8
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
❑
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
❑
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
✓ Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
❑ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
✓
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
❑ Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
❑
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
❑ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Red Parent Material (1721) (MLRA 127, 147)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
n
Depth (inches):
Hydric
Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The soil profile has a depleted matrix beginning at a depth of 6". The water table is not present
within 24 ", but likely would recharge to a depth closer to the saturation zone (22 ") given sufficient
time. Saturation is present at a depth of 22 ".
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Prniect/sBe, Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: wake
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs
State: NC
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
_ Sampling Point: WG -UP
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 4
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.6341 N Long: 78.8392 W Datum: NAD 1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Appling sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
WG -UP is located approximately 15' outside of wetland boundary. Land use in the vicinity is
approximately 25% forested, and 75% cleared /residential /agricultural. No rain in last 48 hours.
Upland area is approximately 36" higher than wetland area.
HYDROLOGY
nd Hydrology Indicators:
I
Surface Water (A1)
FII
I
High Water Table (A2)
I
Saturation (A3)
l
Water Marks (B1)
ill
Sediment Deposits (132)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X
Water Table Present? Yes
No X
Saturation Present? Yes
No X
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (610)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
KemarKS:
No hydrology indicators observed to a depth of 36 at soil boring location.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Betula nigra
Absolute Dominant Indicator
) % Cover Species? Status
50 Yes FACW
2
Acer rubrum
20
Yes FAC
3
LiquidambarstyraciJlua
15
No FAC+
4
Liriodendron tulipifera
15
No FAC
5.
6.
7.
8.
100
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Betu/a nigra 30 Yes FACW
2 Acer rubrum 20 Yes FAC
3. Liriodendron tulipifera 10 No FAC
4 Liquidambarstyraciva 5 No FAC+
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
65 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 none
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
n/a = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Toxicodendron radicans 20 Yes FAC
2 Smilax rotundifolia 10 Yes FAC
3.
4. -
5.
6.
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WG -UP
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A -
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
aL 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
30 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
No herbaceous vegetation is present on this upland hillslope. Canopy coverage is very dense and
vine layer is intertwined with sapling layer.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: wG -UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type' Loc Texture Remarks
0 -12
10YR 3/2
100
sandy loam
12 -24
2.5Y 6/3
100
sandy loam
24 -36
2.5Y 6/4
100
loamy sand
Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion,
ric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (All 0) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11:
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
FSandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
In.dicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Non - hydric, upland soils lacking indicators. No evidence of reduction in upper 12 ". Soils are
friable when removed from ground surface with auger.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake
Annlicant /r)wnar, Town of Holly Springs
State: NC
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.634148 N Long: 78.839226 W
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
_ Sampling Point: WG -WET
NWI classification: UPL
_ Slope ( %): 4
Datum: NAD 1983
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Remarks:
Small wetland depression located east of Piney -Grove Road. Occurs in relic stream bed adjacent to historic
railroad. Current stream channel is along western edge of wetland WG. Stream channel also has been
disturbed by farm road crossing and culverts. Stream is impounded and influences hydrology in Wetland WG.
Wetland has been fragmented by farm road crossings. No rainfall in last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Drift Deposits (133)
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (65)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
Water- Stained Leaves (89)
Aquatic Fauna (613)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): 10
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 10" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes caoillary frinqe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
Upstream is a pond and Stream E. Frequency and duration of flooding from SE into WG is likely
influenced by a downstream culvert. Depression is approximately 36 inches in depth compared to
surrounding landscape.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WG -WET
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland area is located in the piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community and is primarily
dominated by giant cane.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Acer rubrum
30
Yes FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
2.
3.
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8.
OBL species x 1 =
30
= Total Cover
Saolino /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 A rundinaria gigantea
80
Yes FACW
FAC species X 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2 Alnus serrulata 10 No FACW+
3
4
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is E3.0'
10.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
90
= Total Cover
_
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1 Microstegium vimineum
30
Yes FAC+
-
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2 Juncus effisus 20 Yes FACW+
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8.
Sapling /Shrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50
= Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
1 Toxicodendron radicans 30 Yes FAC
2.
3.
4'
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
6
30 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland area is located in the piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community and is primarily
dominated by giant cane.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WG -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe 77 Texture Remarks
0 -6 10YR 4/3 100 sandy clay
6 -18 10YR 4/2 60 10YR 5/6 40 RM M loamy sand
18 -36 10YR 4/1 100 sand
Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
ric Soil Indicators:
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (Al)
Dark Surface (S7)
n
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Strong redox indicators at 6 ". Likely evidence of seasonal high water table
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: wake
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs
State: NC
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
- Sampling Point: WK -UP
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA , J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.63485 N Long: 78.83899 W Datum: NAD1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
NWI classification: UPL
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
(if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
WK -UP is located east of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road, approximately 15' outside of wetland boundary,
in cleared area upslope from wetland. Area is near agricultural fields and farm roads. No rainfall in
last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
I I
Surface Water (Al)
True Aquatic Plants (614)
FHigh
Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water Marks (1311)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
FiThin
Muck Surface (C7)
Drift Deposits (133)
FlOther
in Remarks)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
(Explain
Iron Deposits (135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
uWater-
Stained Leaves (139)
��--
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (816)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators observed to 36" at soil boring location.
No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
TIP No- U-5318
Sampling Point: WK -UP
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
No herbaceous vegetation is present on this upland hillslope. Canopy coverage is very dense and
vine layer is intertwined with sapling layer.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Testworksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Betula nigra
50
Yes FACW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent
2 Acer rubrum 20 Yes FAC
3 LiquidambarstyraciJlua 15 No FAC+
4 Liriodendron tulipifera 15 No FAC
5.
That reoOBL FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
8.
OBL species x 1 =
100 =Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
FACW species x 2 =
1 Betula nigra
20
Yes FACW
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Acer rubrum 15 Yes FAC
3 Liriodendron tulipifera 5 No FAC
4 Liquidambarstyracii lua 5 No FAC+
5.
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6.
Hy drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9'
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
10.
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50
= Total Cover
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation ' (Explain)
1 none
2'
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3.
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
6.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
7.
height.
8'
Sapling /Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
9.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
10.
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
12.
n/a
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
= Total Cover
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
1 Toxicodendron radicans
40
Yes FAC
2 Smilax rotundifolia 20 Yes FAC
3.
4.
Hydrophytic
5.
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
6
60
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
No herbaceous vegetation is present on this upland hillslope. Canopy coverage is very dense and
vine layer is intertwined with sapling layer.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

TIP No. U -5318
SOIL Sampling Point: WK-UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
Redox Features
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0 -12
10YR 3/2
100
sandy loam
12 -24
2.5Y 6/3
100
sandy loam
24 -36
2.5Y 6/4
100
loamy sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, M
ric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
icators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
�Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (At 6)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Soils are very dry and non - hydric, upland soils lacking indicators. Soils are friable when
removed from ground surface with auger.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (co
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.634854 N
Soil Map Unit Name: Orangeburg loamy sand, Rains fine sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
Sampling Date: 10/18/2011
_ Sampling Point: WK -WET
ncave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 1
Long: 78.838998W Datum: NAD1983
NWI classification: UPL
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Stream SE begins off site and dissipates into Wetland WK. SE has been impounded downstream by a series of
culverts at farm road crossings and the majority of the channel has been backfilled as a result. Wetland is
located SW of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road, just behind residential housing development. No rainfall within last 48
hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 18„ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland area is a result of impoundment along stream SE due to road crossing. Area has been
backfilled and stream channel is no longer present throughout majority of wetland. No rainfall within
last 48 hours. Pond located upstream. Frequency and flooding from SE into WK is likely influenced
by a downstream culvert.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
I Surface Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (614)
✓
High Water Table (A2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
✓
Saturation (A3) ✓ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water Marks (131) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Sediment Deposits (62) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Deposits FIThin Muck Surface (C7)
Drift (133)
F1 Other in Remarks)
Algal Mat or Crust (64) (Explain
Iron Deposits (85)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water- Stained Leaves (69)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 24"
Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 18„ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland area is a result of impoundment along stream SE due to road crossing. Area has been
backfilled and stream channel is no longer present throughout majority of wetland. No rainfall within
last 48 hours. Pond located upstream. Frequency and flooding from SE into WK is likely influenced
by a downstream culvert.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
TIP No. U-5318
Sampling Point: WK -WET
5. —
6. —
7. —
8. —
9. —
10. —
60 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
50
Yes FACW
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species?
Status
Number of Dominant Species
10
No OBL
1 Liquidumbarstyracii lua
40
Yes
FAC+
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
7
(A)
2 Acer rubrum
30
Yes
FAC
8.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Liriodendron tulipifera
10
No
FACU
Species Across All Strata:
7
(B)
4.
95
= Total Cover
Percent of Dominant Species
)
5.
20
Yes FAC
2.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
(A/B)
6.
3.
4.
5.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
6.
Total %Cover of:
Multiply by:
= Total Cover
8.
OBL species
x 1 =
80
= Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
FACW species
x 2 =
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica
30
Yes
FACW
FAC species
FACU species
x 3 =
x 4 =
2 Vaccinium corymbosum 20 Yes FACW
3 Photinia pyrifolia
10
No
FACW
UPL species
x 5 =
4
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
5. —
6. —
7. —
8. —
9. —
10. —
60 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Arundinaria gigantea
50
Yes FACW
2 Microstegium vimineum
30
Yes FAC+
3 Woodwardia areolata
10
No OBL
4 Boerhavia diffusa
5
No FACW+
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
95
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
1 Smilax rorundifolia
20
Yes FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
20
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Vegetation in wetland area is well established
Prevalence Index = B/A =
H drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 11113.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub —Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb —All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

TIP No. U -5318
SOIL Sampling Point: WK -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
Matrix
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Redox Features
Dark Surface (S7)
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
Color (moist) % Type'
Loc
Texture Remarks
0 -6
10YR 3/3
80
10YR 5/6 20 RM
M
loamy clay sand
6 -18
10YR 4/2
80
10YR 5/6 20 RM
M
loamy clay sand
18 -24
10YR 4/1
70
10YR 5/6 30 RM
M
loamy clay sand
24 -36
10YR 4/1
100
loamy clay sand
'Type: C= Concentration, D= Depletion, I
Aiu ric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Hydric soils present
Dduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains. Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Dark Surface (S7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1`19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
�Umbric Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Saturation begins at 18 ".
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake
Ann1ir nt/nwnPr. Town of Holly Springs
Sampling Date: 10/21/2011
State: NC Sampling Point: WL -UP
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; J. Hartshorn, KHA Section, Township, Range:
hillslope Local relief concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 2
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): (
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.631969 N Long: 78.838120 W Datum: NAD1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
NWI classification: UPL
No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x
Remarks:
WL -UP is a hillslope above wetland WL. Point was taken approximately 5 feet upslope of wetland boundary at
trail /road bed next to established cotton field. Area is located approximately 500 feet east of Piney Grove - Wilbon
road. Recent weather conditions in the area have been cloudy with 0.84" of precipitation in the last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
I I
Surface Water (Al)
Depth (inches).
Water Table Present? Yes
High Water Table (A2)
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
Depth (inches):
Sediment Deposits (132)
F
Drift Deposits (133)
E
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (135)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
Field Observations:
True Aquatic Plants (814)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Water Present? Yes
No X
Depth (inches).
Water Table Present? Yes
No x
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No x
Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspe
Remarks:
No hydrology indicators observed at this upland point.
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
Moss Trim Lines (816)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
if available:
No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
TIP No. U -5318
Sampling Point: WL -UP
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Pinus taeda
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
30 Yes FAC
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
2 Carpinus caroliniana 20 Yes FAC
3. Liquidambarstyraciflua 10 No FAC+
4 Betula nigra 10 No FACW
5.
6.
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: MOON by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
8.
70 = Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Carpinus caroliniana 30 Yes FAC
2 Liquidambar styraciJlua 20 Yes FAC+
3 Acer rubrum 20 Yes FAC
4
5.
6.
7.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
N 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Y 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
8.
9.
10. 70 = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Microsiegium vimineum 80 Yes FAC+
2.
3.
4.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree- Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb -All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 It tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30
1 none
2.
80
)
=Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
3.
4.
5.
6
n/a = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Upland is located adjacent to historically impounded area. Breech of dam and draining of
impoundment, resulted in predominantly FAC plants re- establishing in vegetative community.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
TIP No. U-5318
Sampling Point: WL -UP
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Lac Texture Remarks
0 -4 1 OYR 3/4 100 sandy loam
4 -16 10YR 5/1 70 10YR 6/6 30 RM M sandy loam
16 -32 10YR 4/3 70 2.5YR 6/6 30 RM M sand
'Type C= Concentration D= Depletion RM= Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains 2Location: PL =Pore Lining M= Matrix.
dju ric Soil Indicators: icators for Problematic Hydric S(
Histosol (Al)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
FIStripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Dark Surface (S7)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
BMLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Remarks:
High - chroma, non - hydric, upland soils lacking indicators
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Site: Main Street Extension TIP No. U -5318 City /County: Wake Sampling Date: 10/21/2011
Applicant/Owner: Town of Holly Springs State: NC Sampling Point: WL -WET
Investigator(s): A. Reusche, KHA ; C. Evenhouse, KHA Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Relic Pond Local relief (concave, convex, none): none Slope ( %): 4
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR -P Lat: 35.6316 N Long: 78.8383 W Datum: NAD 1983
Soil Map Unit Name: Rains fine sandy loam, Orangeburg loamy sand, Cecil gravelly sandy loam NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
No
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Wetland WL is in a historical pond and connects to stream. Area is still impounded by an old railroad bed. WL is
located east of Piney Grove - Wilbon Road, at the break in stream SD. WL is an emergent headwater wetland in a
piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community just upstream of a large impounded area. Recent weather
conditions in the area have been cloudy with 0.84" of precipitation in the last 48 hours.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
I I Surface Water (Al)
✓ High Water Table (A2)
✓ Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (131)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Drift Deposits (B3)
JAlgal Mat or Crust (134)
Iron Deposits (135)
✓ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations:
True Aquatic Plants (1314)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (616)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 8"
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 6„ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X
(includes caoillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available
Remarks:
Wetland WL has been impounded in the past (as visible on 2009 aerial image).
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
TIP No. U-5318
Sampling Point: WL -WET
5
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Microstegium vimineum
2 Boehmeria cylindrica
3 Phytolacca americana
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Smilax rotundifolia
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
20 = Total Cover
80 Yes FAC+
10 No FACU
5 No FACU+
95 = Total Cover
10 Yes FAC
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hy drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree— Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub— Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb — AII herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
10 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland WL has a sparse canopy and shrub layer, but is clearly dominated by herbaceous
vegetation.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version
Absolute
Dominant Indicator
Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
% Cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species
1 Alnus serrulata
20
Yes FACW+
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5
(A)
2 Salix nigra
10
Yes OBL
Total Number of Dominant
3,
Species Across All Strata:
5
(B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
(A/B)
6.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7.
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
8.
OBL species
x 1 =
30 =Total Cover
Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30'
)
FACW species
x 2 =
1 Alnur serrulat-a
20
Yes FACW+
FAC species
FACU species
x 3 =
x 4 =
2
3
UPL species
x 5 =
4
Column Totals:
(A)
(B)
5
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' )
1 Microstegium vimineum
2 Boehmeria cylindrica
3 Phytolacca americana
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30'
1 Smilax rotundifolia
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
20 = Total Cover
80 Yes FAC+
10 No FACU
5 No FACU+
95 = Total Cover
10 Yes FAC
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hy drophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 03.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree— Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling /Shrub— Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb — AII herbaceous (non- woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
10 = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Wetland WL has a sparse canopy and shrub layer, but is clearly dominated by herbaceous
vegetation.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

TIP No. U -5318
SOIL Sampling Point: WL -WET
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
0 -4 10YR 5/1 60 10YR 3/2 40 clay loam
4 -20 10YR 5/1 100 sandy clay loam
20 -24 10YR 6/6 100 sand
Type: C= Concentration, D =De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix, MS= Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
- c Soil Indicators: Icators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
n
Histosol (Al) Dark Surface (S7) 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Black Histic (A3) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) (MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
Stratified Layers (A5) Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Redox Depressions (F8) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Stripped Matrix (S6) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Soil in wetland WL is very moist with saturation beginning at 6 ". Location in historic pond bed
means this area is likely inundated during wet portions of the year.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

SIGNED PRELIMINARY
JURISDICATIONAL
DETERMINATION

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS_ fs'
WILMINGTON DISTRICT+
Action Id. SAW- 2013 -00066 County: Wake U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -APEX
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Town of Holly Springs
Kendra Parrish, PE
Address: 128 S. Main St.
Holly Springs, NC, 27540
Telephone: 919 - 557 -3931
Agent: Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
Chad Evenhouse
Address: PO Box 33068
Raleigh, NC, 27636
Telephone: [phone]
Study area description:
Size (acres) -150 Nearest Town Holly Springs
Nearest Waterway UT Basal Creek River Basin Neuse USGS HUC 03020201
Coordinates Latitude: 35.634 Longitude: - 78.837
Location description: Study area for proposed Main Street Extension (NCDOT TIP U- 5318); south of the
intersection of Pineygrove- Wilbon Road and Avent Ferry Road in Holly Springs, North Carolina.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
X Based on preliminary infbimation, there may be waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area.
We strongly suggest you have this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA)
jurisdiction. To be considered final, a jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary
determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33
CFR Part 331). If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district
for further instruction. Also, you may provide new - information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the
JD.
B. Approved Determination
_ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements
of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law
or our published regulations, this detemunation may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of
this notification.
_ There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ We strongly suggest you have the waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area delineated. Due to the
size of your property and/or our present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner. For a more timely delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any
delineation must be verified by the Corps.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been
verified by the Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be
reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to
CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be
relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
_ The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on _. Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this detern- Anation may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
_ There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the
permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
Page 1 of 2

Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Eric Alsmever at 919 - 5544884 x23/
Eric.C.Als meyer(a,usace.armv.mil.
Basis For Determination: The impact area contains streams with indicators of ordinary high water
marks, which are stream channels of unnamed tributaries of Basal Creels, impoundments of the
streams, and abutting wetlands. Basal Creek is a tributary of Middle Creek and the Neuse River.
The Neuse River is a Section 10 Navigable Water.
Remarks: This JD was confirmed by field inspection on 12/29/2011. The drawing on the attached
Figure 2, Aerial Map and Jurisdictional Features, submitted by Kimley -Horn on February 13,
2012, generally depicts the jurisdictional waters of the US within the subject study area.
Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/detennination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date: 3/7/2013 Expiration Date: 3/7/2018
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the attached customer Satisfaction Survey or visit ht!p://per2.pM.usace.ar.niv.mil/survey.litrnl to
complete the survey online.
Copy furnished: Kimley -Horn (C. Evenhouse)

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Town of Holly Springs File Number: SAW- 2013 -00066 Date: 3/7/2013
Attached is:
See Section below
F-11
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
❑
I PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
❑
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
®
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at httl?://www.usace.am-ty.mil/inet/functions/cw/cecwo/re or
Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
ri ghts to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request
that the pen-nit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district
engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will
forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your
objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your
objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After
evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in
Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the pen-nit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all
rights to appeal the permit, including its terns and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the
permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered pen-nit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein,
you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of
this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days
of the date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new
information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers
Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section I1 of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form
must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the
preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed),
by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the
Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial
proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or
objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is linvted to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record.
However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative
record.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division,
Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
Attn: Eric Alsmeyer
CESAD -PDO
US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Phone: [phone]
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the o ortunity to participate in all site investi ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.

ATTACHMENT
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
RECEIVED
FEB 1 5 2011
RALEIGH REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICE
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION (JD): 3 / //013 ,
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PRELIMINARY JD:
Kendra Parrish, P.E.
P.O. Box 8
128 S. Main Street
Holly Springs, NC 27540 ) / /y-
OT J �fLLQ
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: V� ✓ /
,Mug. 74-7-JP v-, - DOo66,
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE ATTACHED TABLE TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE WATERBODIES
AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State:NC County /parish /borough: Wake City: Holly Springs
Center coordinates of site (iat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.
35.632301'N, Long. 78.832100° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Basal Creek
Identify (estimate) amount of waters in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 2,045.2 linear feet: 3 -5 width (ft) and /or acres.
Cowardin Class:
Stream Flow: Perennial
Wetlands: 6.74 acres.
Cowardin Class: PUBHx/UPL
Name of any water bodies on the site that have been identified as Section 10
waters:
Tidal:
Non - Tidal:
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT
APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s): (� /�� /.-)-0 1/.

1. The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional waters of the
United States on the subject site, and the permit applicant or other affected party
who requested this preliminary JD is hereby advised of his or her option to
request and obtain an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) for that site.
Nevertheless, the permit applicant or other person who requested this
preliminary JD has declined to exercise the option to obtain an approved JD in
this instance and at this time.
2. In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or
a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring
"pre- construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting
NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an
approved JD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware of the
following: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization
based on a preliminary JD, which does not make an official determination of
jurisdictional waters; (2) that the applicant has the option to request an approved
JD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and
that basing a permit authorization on an approved JD could possibly result in less
compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) that
the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting
the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4)
that the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply
with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation
requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) that undertaking
any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting
an approved JD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the
preliminary JD, but that either form of JD will be processed as soon as is
practicable; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps
permit authorization based on a preliminary JD constitutes agreement that all
wetlands and other water bodies on the site affected in any way by that activity
are jurisdictional waters of the United States, and precludes any challenge to
such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement
action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether
the applicant elects to use either an approved JD or a preliminary JD, that JD
will be processed as soon as is practicable. Further, an approved JD, a proffered
individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual
permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331,
and that in any administrative appeal, jurisdictional issues can be raised (see 33
C.F.R. 331.5(a)(2)). If, during that administrative appeal, it becomes necessary
to make an official determination whether CWA jurisdiction exists over a site, or
to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional waters on the site, the Corps will
provide an approved JD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable.
This preliminary JD finds that there "maybe" waters of the United States on the
subject project site, and identifies all aquatic features on the site that could be
affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for preliminary JD (check all that apply
- checked items should be included in case file and, where checked and
requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the
applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the
applicanticonsuttant.
Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation repo
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUG maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s) . Cite scale & quad name:Apex
quadrangle, 1988.
N USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.
Citation:1970. Web Soil skyey
0 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: 63�5.
❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
RECEIVED
FEB 15 2011
RALEIGH REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICE _
[] 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum
of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):2009.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination (s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Other information (please specify):
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not
nPapssariliv been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for
later'urisdictional determinations.
Z� 31
Signature and dat
Regulatory Project Manager
(REQUIRED)
ALA
a re and a of
person requestin eliminary JD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)

Estimated
amount of Class of
Site Latitude Longitude Cowardin aquatic aquatic
number (N) (W) Class resource in resource
review area
35.634300 78.841499 Aiv 1,017.8 LF Jurisdictional
SC
SD
SE
SF
WA
W.
WC
WD
WE
WF
WG
WI
WJ
WK
WL
35.632301 78.839401 �;U 445.6 LF Jurisdictional
35.635201 78.838898 Aj 499.2 LF Jurisdictional
35 627701 78.839798 12v 217.8 LF Jurisdictional
35.632805
35.632164­78.832100
L 35.632576
78.831863
78.828148flt
78.841034
P
Pin
t1.91=
UPL_
35.633743
wetland
35.634987
78.84182
�
wetland
35.635094
78.838867
IAflL
wetland
P ro
35.634148
78.839226
,ldflL
wetland
PF-0
Non - isolated
78.84078
4^ f 1-1-0
35.62823
35.627789
78.83931
IfiPL
2.1 AC
jurisdictional
pff
35.634854
78.838998
Non - isolated
0.04 AC
jurisdictional
F-0
35. 16
78.8383
UPE
1.6 AC
jurisdictional
0
P� 36-633d ' �.�3a? puB
Pb �5 ��g Pug
C 3S. �3 �� X S3`t3 4 �u�
r,')A(
�3
3%�%
Non - isolated
0.1 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.3 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non- isolated
0.5 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.8 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.1 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
2.1 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.04 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
1.6 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.4 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.2 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
Non - isolated
0.6 AC
jurisdictional
wetland
�,? 6
5A
r,')A(
�3
3%�%

SIGNED NC DWR STREAM BUFFER
DETERMINATION LETTER

KLv;-WYWA
*'Ar
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Charles Wakild, PE Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
February 28, 2012
Chad Evenhouse
Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
PO Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27636 -3068
Subject: Surface Water Determination Letter
NBRRO# 12 -028
Wake County
Dear Mr. Evenhouse:
The Raleigh Regional Office of the NC Division of Water Quality/Surface Water Protection Section conducted a
site visit at the subject property and is providing the below - listed determination pursuant to your request for a formal
surface water determination:
BASIN:
® Neuse (15A NCAC 2B .0233) ❑ Tar - Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B .0259)
❑ Ephemeral /Intermittent/Perennial Determination ❑ Isolated Wetland Determination
Project Name: Town of Holly Springs Main Street Extension TIP U -5318
Location/Directions: Subject property is a proposed roadway realignment and widening
project at Avent Ferry Rd, Hwy 55, and Piney Grove- Wilbon Rd in
Holly Springs
Subject Stream: UT to Basil Creek
Date of Determination: February 1, 2012
Feature
E/UP*
Not
Subject
Start@
Stop@
Stream
Soil
USGS
Subject
Form Pts.
Survey
To o
SB
X
X
X
SC
X
Offsite
Flag SC End
X
X
Upstream
SD
X
Flag Start SD
Offsite
X
X
Downstream
SE
X
Flag SE Start
Flag SE End
X
SF
X
End of
Offsite
X
X
Railroad Bed
Downstream
Culvert
SXI
X
X
X
*MIP = EphemeraU/ntermlttentli erenniat
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection
Internet www.ncwaterquality.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 -1628
An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled /10% Post Consumer Paper
Nox Carolina
.atura!!y
Phone [phone] Customer Service
FAX [phone]

Town of Holly Springs Main St Extenstion
TIP U -5318
Wake County
February 28, 2012
Page 2 of 2
Explanation: The feature(s) listed above has or have been located on the Soil Survey of County County, North
Carolina or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1:24,000 scale. Each feature that is checked
"Not Subject" has been determined not to be a stream or is not present on the property. Features that are checked
"Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify it to be a stream. There may be
other streams located on your property that do not show up on the maps referenced above but, still may be
considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers and/or to the Division of Water Quality.
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that
dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority may request a determination by the
Director. An appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this letter or from the date the affected
party (including downstream and /or adjacent owners) is notified of this letter. A request for a determination by the
Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o Ian McMillan, DWQ Wetlands /401 Unit, 1650 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -1650.
If you dispute the Director's determination you may file a petition for an administrative hearing. You must file the
petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings within sixty (60) days of the receipt of this notice of decision. A
petition is considered filed when it is received in the Office of Administrative Hearings during normal office hours.
The Office of Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 am and 5:00
pm, except for official state holidays. To request a hearing, send the original and one (1) copy of the petition to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -6714. The petition may also be
faxed to the attention of the Office of Administrative Hearings at (919) 733 -3478, provided the original and one (1)
copy of the document is received by the Office of Administrative Hearings within five (5) days following the date of
the fax transmission. A copy of the petition must also be served to the Department of Natural Resources, c/o Mary
Penny Thompson, General Counsel, 1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699 -1601.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, you ask for a hearing or appeal within sixty (60)
days.
The owner /future owners should notify the Division of Water Quality (including any other Local, State, and Federal
Agencies) of this decision concerning any future correspondences regarding the subject property (stated above). This
project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries should be directed to the
Division of Water Quality (Central Office) at (919)- 807 -6301, and the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office) at (919) -544 -4884.
Respectfully,
Martin R' mond
Environmental Specialist
cc: Wetlands/ Stormwater Branch, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -1650
RRO /SWP File Copy

J
4f
.4

vv/-AI L VVIJIY 1 1
MFD2 (Joins sheet 83) w
CeC2
� d No 1
.A fA G` W y \' � • f N
�' Fs qgC ce. �: yeti A B Ho e
HrE /�° Ce Q' CeB2 W2 %' i,. p 2'i
i
-✓'tp � a p'' !`' PQV� :` < 55 R a3 A p C
� FaB2 ":
!, ApB
1- A9B2
t R a ; _.
ens Ag
i G o ,
rB2, c� r NoB
G �AgB2
Or62 :, 4 / AgC2
C'a a62 FaC2°
Ra, Or6
Fa62.j; ApB2
rvifE CoF rAgt,'z"
C C2
FaC2 ' r Or62"n {- f Q
�x � pet
4N06`' Or62' NoA
It
Y s
Al i
FaB ••`
- ( rC2„ Q
'. -i "Ly \
c� u .
� NoB
J a Nob OrB2
Ra WaB NoC AgC2
c?
1`
WaB Me
wo N o B
1 OrB N-C
�f ,. C f OrB2
r Nob gC2 N'oC
Noc o AgC2. qgB
5 ti c� r
WO ApC2 J ore'
Orb' tea. .
• Or`B`* _ rB NoC �Wo
OrB2
.. r Nob' /
Go G CgC2
-- '—