20191416 Ver 1_401 Application_20191014

W ATF9OG
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification PCN Form
A. AppHcant Information
1. Processing 4 j 6
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: NWP 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes RECEt o
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply): OCT 14
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit*t*r ResOOrIes
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization Pormitting Sects 1
1 e. 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:
Rogers Spring Subdivision
2b. County:
Alamance
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Graham
2d. Subdivision name:
Roger Springs
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Shugart Enterprises, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3830/0224
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
221 Jonestown Road
3e. City, state, zip:
Winston-Salem, NC 27104
3f. Telephone no.:
336-765-9661
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
j [e-mail]
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Clayton Properties acquired Shugart Homes
4b. Name:
Greg Garrett
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Clayton Properties
4d. Street address:
221 Jonestown Road
4e. City, state, zip:
Winston-Salem, NC 27104
4f. Telephone no.:
336-765-9661
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Michael T. Brame
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Pilot Environmental, Inc.
5c. Street address:
PO Box 128
5d. City, state, zip:
Kemersville, NC 27285
5e. Telephone no.:
336.708.4620
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
8872986536
Latitude:36.025934° Longitude: -
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
79.4067160
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
106 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Little Alamance Creek and Big Alamance Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS-V, NSW
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site contains undeveloped wooded land and agricultural fields. A high-tension powerline and associated easement
cross the southern portion of the site. Residential development is located within the vicinity of the site.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Wetlands=1.22 Ac
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Streams=3,775 LF
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to provide sewer services to Rogers Spring Subdivision.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project includes the installation of a sewer line extension in order of provide sewer services to the proposed Rogers
Spring Subdivision. In order to provide sewer services to the sub -division, it is necessary to install a stream crossing. To
facilitate the construction of the sewer line crossing, trenching and backfilling within the stream is necessary. Graders,
haulers, excavators and other heavy equipment will be used during grading and construction of the site.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Comments: The USACE and NCDEQ visited the site on July
19, 2019. A JD has not been issued at this time.
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: Pilot Enviromental, Inc.
Name (if known): Michael Brame/David Brame
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The USACE and NCDEQ visited the site on July 19, 2019. A JD has not been issued at this time.
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.
Page 3 of 12
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.
This is a phased project. We are not aware of impacts that may occur during future phases.
Page 4 of 12
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) or
(if known)
DWQ — non-404, other)
(acres)
Temporary
W1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P [-IT
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.005
2h. Comments: Wetlands impacts are not proposed.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non-404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ®T
Sewer Line
Little Alamance
Creek
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
❑ DWQ
5
5.67/28
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ INT
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ INT
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ INT
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ INT
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
5.67/28
3i. Comments: In order to connect an existing sewer line, it is necessary to temporarily impact 5.67 linear feet of stream in
order to excavate and bury the sewer line in the stream. Additionally, 28 linear feet of stream channel will be temporarily
impacted associated with a coffer dam/pump around. Following installation, the areas will be restored to similar pre -
construction conditions.
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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 number —
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ❑P❑T
02 ❑P❑T
03 ❑P❑T
04 ❑P❑T
4E Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: Open water impacts are not proposed.
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
Stormwater
0.42
P2
Stormwater
0.62
K Total
1.04
5g. Comments: Two stormwater ponds are being constructed in high ground/non-jurisdictional areas as part of this phase of
the development. Plunge pools have been designed to provide diffuse flow at the stormwater pond outlets. The stormwater
plan/ponds have been approved locally. Additional stormwater ponds will be required during future phases. Additional
stormwater ponds will be designed in non jurisdictional areas and will have diffuse flow, similar to the proposed ponds.
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes No If yes, permit ID no:
51. Expected pond surface area (acres):
0.42/0.62
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
11.72/32.67
5k. Method of construction..
Excavated in high ground
Page 6 of 12
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 ®Other: Jordan Lake
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary
impact
re wired?
B1 ❑P❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑P❑T
El Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The applicant is seeking buffer authorization for the project from the local DWR delegated municipality.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The applicant has designed the proposed sewer line crossing to avoid other impacts to streams and wetlands. The applicant
has designed the stream crossing in a relatively straight portion of the stream that does not contain adjacent wetlands. The
remaining 3,741.33 linear feet of stream and 1.22 acres of wetlands are being avoided.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The clearing limits will be staked and silt fence will be used. A temporary coffer dam will be installed upgradient of the
proposed stream crossing. During construction, water will be pumped around the construction footprint. Appropriate stream
bank protection will be provided in the channel during construction and all excess excavated material will be immediately
removed from the stream bank crossing area. Upon completion of the sewer line installation, the temporary sand bag coffer
dam will be removed and the disturbed banks will be restored to similar pre -construction conditions, matted and seeded/live
staked.
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
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
project?
❑ Perrnittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
S. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 12
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.
® Yes ❑ No
Comments: Dry detention ponds to plunge pools for diffuse flow.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
23.9 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
There are two stormwater ponds. Other ponds will be designed as required and will use similar diffuse flow outlets.
® 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 governments jurisdiction is this project?
City ofGraham
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ 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
❑ HOW
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 9 of 12
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/stateflocal) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered `yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered 'yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ® No
letter.)
Comments: A NEPA or SEPA is not required as part of this project.
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
We are not aware of additional development that will result which will impact nearby downstream water quality. If
additional impacts are required at a later time, the applicant is aware that impacts will be considered cumulative and could
require mitigation.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater from the proposed subdivision will be discharged into existing sanitary sewer lines located immediately north
of the project area. A stream will be temporarily impacted by the proposed line that is identified in Section C.
Page 10 of 12
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?
❑ 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?
We consulted the USFWS Website to determine if federally protected endangered or threatened species inhabit
Alamance County, NC. The Cape Fear Shiner is listed as a federally protected endangered species. The proposed
impacts to the stream are temporary and there will be no loss of potential habitat. Upon completion, the stream will be
restored as close as possible to pre -construction conditions. A pump around will be used during the culvert installation to
avoid sedimentation down stream. Additionally, stormwater from the impervious surfaces associated with the subdivision
will be treated prior to being discharged to down -gradient waterbodies. Based on our observations, it is our opinion that
the proposed project will have no effect on federally listed 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?
Based on our knowledge of the site, the site is not located in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat. Best
management practices and the use of sediment and erosion control devises will prevent sediment from entering down -
gradient waterbodies which may contain fish.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
We reviewed the SHPO Map (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) to identify historic and/or archaeological resources of the site.
The map does not identify eligible for listing properties at the site or on nearby properties. A copy of the map is included
as an attachment.
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: Installation of structures or changes in elevation to the stream bed
or banks that would cause a change in elevation within the 100-year or 500-year flood plain are not proposed
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? 3710887200K (Drawing 4)
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

a9'ON signed by Mifiael Borne
Pla
Michael T. Brame, PWS
Michael Brame �, 10.9.19
Date: 2019.10.0913:16:11-04'00'
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name I Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Date
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

AGENT AUTHORIZATION
This form authorizes Pilot to act as our agent in stream/wetland matters including U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Division of Water Resources field verification and
permitting. /,��, j�
Property Address: ) �� �-"w' `a�
Owner Information: 1
Address: S{MM4d,r"� POV+Pr fI -So
��1 iwn
ullgItN NC -q71 b �-
Telephone Number:
Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION REQUEST
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of recor of the property.
Print Name
Capacity: Zwner —Authorized Agent
Signatu

iRAHAM
Owner Name: SHUGART ENTERPRISES LLC
221 JONESTOWN ROAD
WINSTON SALEM, NC 27104
GP I N: 8872986536
PI D: 6-14-9
leavy Industrial Development Applicants Streets
APPLIED FOR PERMIT — Roads
Preliminary Roads
Q PERMIT APPROVED Private Roads
UNDER CONSTRUCTION 390 - TRAIL
391 - TRAIL
October 7, 2019
1:12,504
0 0.15 0.3 mi
I I I
— 392 - TRAIL
DISCLAIMER
The daresels -d maps aaiabbre nt —ey Wade or a Nd
groQhdoecd�er�°�m��lhe
— 393-TRAIL routrosTln�rfrovaro eeurrara mimaly, fie o bte of Nanh Cs aiq ad hae n
Almmoe Corny. Alamaioe CornywilnotbehWd reeporetb
3— TffhLLG for bemisuse. miaropeseraatiomormisFlerpretatonoftheddaa
ranI O i$ �fmpar�puss. �T�hese m�aup�syand detaeroas"loe presided for the beMll
Swrces: Esn, HERE, Garrrin, U'�11 '1171l6s�f%AWT -2W. r .
— 396 Jape fW, Esli China (Hong Vbng),he
Esri Korea, Esh (Thailand),
IJGCC,(c)OpenStreetMlpcontribulousywtl D(i16C1ag1alOwmaiityraMyfo.yenas.
o mi esion s, or hac as aces in the nformdim provided relpdese of
-+ Railroads hox caused; ors yde i ion made se men taken or not taken by
u aer h rolance rpm any hbrm dbn of dda farielyd fraeuMa.
The user ImovAryly.al. anyandslobhafordmap®pYW
any end all ofthe antes comprising the Alrhanm Casty GIS
SWsmth.t--ieelomtlamsooindda Oeb:10M21),19

Alamance County Government
TAX ADMINISTRATION RECORD SEARCH
olpertY Owner is ..f Jwlv.,eV I lA
HUGART ENTERPRISES LLC
221 JONEST.— ROAD
WINSTON SALE., NC 27104
f�roperxy Lcreation Address
ROGERS RD
dmi'utANWve Data
Add
Vaki,->-,gin Information
ared ID No.
130476
Legal Desc
ROGERS RD
L O Tax ID
6-14-9
Tax Value $ 381,438
PIN
6872986536
Dead Year Bk/Pg
2018 - 3830 10224
Tn value - tam am al pnmenam imprwamama, any, eeectiw Jarwary 1, 2017, dam d C..ny. mm
udder ID
0631193
Plat Bk/Pg
079I 0342
iarent Cameral Reappraisal
u<District
41 - E.M. HOLT
,,. ..,, ,.,,.
Asseasad Value $ 381,438
Dead Name
ROGERS GEORGE O JR ETAL
and Use Code
505
HAanrsad Veld. d— not aqua Marmot W-, than aie pnW may ne in a tax drmentefeprogram. ba sp
rnd Use Deac
VACANT LAND 40- ACRES
cold Date
2014-08-30
M tlw—tylkw nr b. overridden w mao- an atarredre valusbw approach.
Sold Amount S
0
eighborhood
06043
r —" 1'fC 01t Detail
st M.lor Imprvvemem on sublae Parch)
oar Built
0
Alt UwStyle
urrent Use
/
rade
/
Percent Compete
0
Bated Area (WF)
0
replace (Y/N)
N
asement (YM)
N
Bedroom(s)
0
Bathmom(s)
0 Full Bath(s) 0 Half Bath(&)
' Multiple Improvements
000
4oto r1e d January 1
Nde - B.d n,(s), Bm—(s), show) far Ja P— only
• Note - If mdbple imprw—M equa'MLT' men "a v,dudea additional major improvements
Previous Sales Found for Parcel number 130476
Record Num BooklPage Sale Prim
3830 / 0224 $927,500.00
0550 / 0473 $0.00
0550 / 0473 $0.00
4 1948 0205 / 0536 SO.00
Sales Year
Name
1
2019
SHUGART ENTERPRISES LLC
2
2015
ROGERS DIXIE W 6 STEPHENINANCY/GEORGE C JR/ELI7ABE
3
1989
ROGERS GEORGE O JR 6 STEPHEN/NANCY/GEORGE C JR/ELI
ROGERS GEORGE C & GEORGE O ROGERS

sans wog
�>ti nawo
C
/
NOTE
1. WETLANDS AND STREAM VERIFIED BY PILOT
ENVIRONMENTAL INC. WITH USACE AND NCDEQ—DWR ON
JULY 10, 2019. GREEN MOUNTIAN ENGINEERING, PLLC.
FIELD LOCATED THE VERIFIED WETLAND AND STREAM
FLAGS PLACED BY PILOT ENVIRONMENTAL INC.
2. THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY
OF GRAHAM AS A LOW DENSITY STORMWATER PROJECT,
WITH DRY DETENTION PONDS AS STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT DEVICES FOR JORDAN LAKE BUFFER
RULES.
TEMPORARY IMPACTS
5.67 LF UTILITY PIPE INSTALLATION
28 LF COFFER DAM IMPACTS
SCALE: 1 "=500'
DEVELOPER:
SHUGART HOMES
221 JONESTOWN RD.
WINSTON-SALEM, NC 27104
CONTACT: GREG GARRETT
PH: 336.765.9661
GREEN MOUNTAIN
ENGINEERING, PLLC
7A WENDY CT
GREENSBORO, NC 27409
Tel: [phone]
CORPORATE CERTIFICATE #P-0826
www.greenmountainengineers.com
STREAM / WETLAND
I M PACT MAP
ROGERS SPRING
SUBDIVISION

NOTE PERENNIAL STREAM/ WETLAND IMPACT MAP
1. WETLANDS AND STREAM VERIFIED BY PILOT RO G E RS SPRING SUBDIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL INC. WITH USACE AND N%,ULW-VTTM ON
JULY 10, 2019. GREEN MOUNTIAN ENGINEERING, PLLC.
FIELD LOCATED THE VERIFIED WETLAND AND STREAM
FLAGS PLACED BY PILOT ENVIRONMENTAL INC.m m
2. THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE CITY r--O n
OF GRAHAM AS A LOW DENSITY STORMWATER PROJECT, 1-0
WITH DRY DETENTION PONDS AS STORMWATER m
MANAGEMENT DEVICES FOR JORDAN LAKE BUFFER
RULES.
I
/I 1
An
� I
1
SCALE: 1 "=20'
DEVELOPER:
SHUGART HOMES
221 JONESTOWN RD.
WINSTON—SALEM, NC 27104
CONTACT: GREG GARRETT
PH: 336.765.9661
TEMPORARY IMPACTS
5.67 LF UTILITY PIPE INSTALLATION
28 LF COFFER DAM IMPACTS
\\i N N N
SSIM-OF-2
Ln D D
rn N.. Z
O
ZZ�Oo
Z�00 O
M CD00- Z
8 m
r- noon
C)
rn J Z
1 0
GREEN MOUNTAIN
ENGINEERING, PLLC
7A WENDY CT
GREENSBORO, NC 27409
Tel: [phone]
CORPORATE CERTIFICATE #P-082E
www.greenmountainengineers.cor

SCALE: 1 "=40' H
1 "=4' V
DEVELOPER:
SHUGART HOMES
221 JONESTOWN RD.
WINSTON—SALEM, NC 27104
CONTACT: GREG GARRETT
PH: 336.765.9661
t EX. STREAM FLOOR
18"
12"
'o'
o'
..
.. . 4.
. . .. .
12" —�
SECTION A —A
ZETE ENCASEMENT DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
PROPOSED DOGHOUSE
MANHOLE
11
I.I.P TO MANHOLE
:ONNECTION SHALL BE
IY MECHANICAL JOINT
unw°01"'ll.
CARn,
91
�N V .
Iuiu
5
PERENNIAL STREAM/ WETLAND GREEN MOUNTAIN
ENGINEERING, PLLC
IMPACT MAP 7A WENDY CT
GREENSBORO, NC 27409
ROGERS SPRING Tel.:[phone]
CORPORATE CERTIFICATE #P-0826
SUBDIVISION
www. greenmountainengineers. com
12"

fT� ♦ +. )t\\\, rvf is•�• _ ♦srGR y ' r ` �a .. �'� 17
�}_
i +r Golf fco.+�osr
,
OL
plim-
4� Vi / •
l .
l �
- ., - _ _ - : _ _---�; `• � � err~
r ,. f -• r � i
-� ,` �'-r�` . � T, ,•iv .T- �'F� ter., � • 1�'•
r �
t '
LEGEND
'�• ; % Site Boundary
Drawing 1 f USGS Topographic Map
USGS Topographic Map Approximate 106 Acre Tract
Rogers Road
NC Quadrangle , ,�
Burlington, g ;
Scale: 1" = 2 000' PILOT . Graham, Alamance County, NC
K I L O+ E N V I R- N F N- A L, N C
Pilot Project 3815

w.
Ss
i I,
' Ik7,7
LEGEND
Site Boundary
All r /'
Drawing 2 tP
USDA Web Soil Survey"\�j ' - iof Alamance County NC
PILOTScale: 1„=400, ILOT R N V I R 0% N I N T A L. I N[
Web Soil Map
Approximate 106 Acre Tract
Rogers Road
Graham, Alamance County, NC
Pilot Project 3815

�* r
^
r
I '
Al ,f
LEGEND .a.::
00
Site Boundary s
Freshwater Emergent
Freshwater Forested/Shrub
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater r �7► �4 _ ors --� a�
Estuarine and Marine
i Freshwater Pond�+
� Rlverinc
FAM Other Y,
Drawing 3
USFWS NWI
Wetlands Mapper
Scale: 1" = 600'
f
PIL I `
f I L 0 r ! N- I R 0♦ N r N• A L N C
N
NWI Map
Approximate 106 Acre Tract
Rogers Road
Graham, Alamance County, NC
Pilot Project 3815

K
LEGEND
Site Boundary
1%Annual Chance Flood Hazard
1 Regulatory Floodway
,f, Sped al Floodway
.Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard
0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard
Future Conditions 10'..Annual Chance Flood Hazard
IF, Area with Reduced Risk Due to Levee
7
WA
R
it
W_1,W,2
'' <.
. �
7.-
Drawing 4
National Flood Hazard Layer
From FEMA Web Map Service
Scale: 1" = 600'
N
" 4Y :1r8nFEE
- r
P I L r T E N v I P. 0 M E N ' A L N:
4
�
1
• • '
R
�". J,
E
�
s'
s g
FEMA FIRM
Approximate 106 Acre Tract
Rogers Road
Graham, Alamance County, NC
Pilot Project 3815

SD
SC .
We
sa
SC2 We
\ \ 1-4
We
Drawing 5.1
/ / SA
SAA SAB
WA 13-44
___WA 1-12
O DP-1
O DP-2
SA WB 1-10
SB
THE LOCATIONS OF FEATURES SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY WERE VERIFIED BY MR. DAVID BAILEY WITH THE USACE
AND MS. SUE HOMEWOOD WITH THE NCDEQ-DWR ON JULY 10, 2019. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SURVEYED OR GEOLOCATED.
Drawing 5
Aerial Imagery from ESRI
and Pilot Field Notes
Scale: 1" = 500'
Date: 10.7.19
k
t
PILOT INVIRO I M E N- A L. N f
Wetland Map
Approximate 106 Acre Tract
Rogers Road
Graham, Alamance County, NC
Pilot Project 3815

SD
SC
WC
sa
\ SCA
WC
1-4
WC
S(
THE LOCATIONS OF FEATURES SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE APPROXIMATE. THEY WERE VERIFIED BY MR. DAVID BAILEY WITH THE USACE
AND MS. SUE HOMEWOOD WITH THE NCDEQ-DWR ON JULY 10, 2019. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN SURVEYED OR GEOLOCATED.
Drawing 5.1 Wetland Map
Aerial Imagery from ESRI Approximate 106 Acre Tract
and Pilot Field Notes Rogers Road
Scale: 1" = 100'Graham, Alamance County, NC
Date:10.7.19 PILC* INI R I N!N Al, NC Pilot Project3815

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Approximate 106 Acre Tract - Rogers Road City/County: Graham/Alamance Sampling Date: 7/9/18
Applicant/Owner. Shugart State: NC Sampling Point: DP-1
Investigator(s): Pilot Section, Township, Range: NA
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Flat Slope (%): 1-2
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 36.024058 Long:-79.408380 Datum: wgs 84
Soil Map Unit Name: CnC2 - Cullen day loam NWI classification: None
Are dimatic / 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 I Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
The site is located in an overgrown dear -cut. The majority of the vegetation is less than 10 years old.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (B14)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
High Water Table (A2)
—Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
X Drainage Pattems (610)
_ Saturation (A3)
X Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_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)
X Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Deposits (133)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Drift
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
X Geomorphic Position (132)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (133)
X Water -Stained Leaves (89)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
X FAC-Neutral Test (135)
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 X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point: DP-1
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
=Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. Salix nigra 20 Yes OBL
2. Liquidambar styraciflua 20 Yes FAC
3.
4.
5.
6.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
4 (A)
4 (B)
100.0% (AB)
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
20
x 1 =
20
FACW species
20
x 2 =
40
FAC species
20
x 3 =
60
FACU species
0
x 4 =
0
UPL species
0
x 5 =
0
Column Totals:
60
(A)
120 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
2.00
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
g.
X 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
40 =Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover.
20 20% of total cover. 8
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1. Carex sp.
10 Yes FACW
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2. Juncus effusus
10 Yes FACW
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
3.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
4.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8,
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
g
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
20 =Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover.
10 20% of total cover: 4
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
i.
2.
3.
4.
5' Hydrophytic
=Total Cover Vegetation
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover: Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DPA
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicator.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-6 2.5Y 4/2 70 10YR 4/6 30 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
6-18 10YR 4/3 60 7.5YR 4/6 40 C M Loamy/Clayey Prominent redox concentrations
'Type: C--Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicator:
Indicator for Problematic Hydric Soils
_ Histosol (All)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
X Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
_Stratified Layers (A5)
X Depleted Matrix (0)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127,147,148)
Dark Surface (Al2)
_Redox Depressions (F8)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Thick
—Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
_Sandy Redox (S5)
_Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122,136)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
ResMcWe Layer (if observed):
Type:
I
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Approximate 106 Acre Tract - Rogers Road City/County: Graham/Alamance Sampling Date: 7/9/18
Applicant/Owner. Shugart State: NC Sampling Point: DP-2
Investigator(s): Pilot Section, Township, Range: NA
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Floodplain Local relief (concave, convex, none): Flat Slope (%): 2-3
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Let: 36.024143 Long:-79.408901 Datum: wgs 84
Soil Map Unit Name: CnC2 - Cullen clay loam NWI classification: None
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:
The site is located in an overgrown clear-cut. The majority of the vegetation is less than 10 years old.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reauired)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
—Surface Water (All) —True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
High Water Table (A2) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_Saturation (A3) _Oxidized
Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_Moss Trim Lines (B16)
—Water Marks (81) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
—Sediment Deposits (B2) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Solis (C6)
—Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (63) —Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_
Algal Mat or Crust (114) —Other
(Explain in Remarks)
—Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
—Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
—Shallow Aquitard (D3)
X Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (135)
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:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP-2
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1 •
Number of Dominant Species
2,
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
3.
Total Number of Dominant
4•
Species Across All Strata: 8 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6•
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 75.0% (A/B)
7•
Prevalence Index worksheet:
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover.
20% of total cover:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saolino/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15
)
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
1.
Acer negundo
20
Yes
FAC
FAC species 85 x 3 = 255
2.
Liquidambar styracffiva
20
Yes
FAC
FACU species 35 x 4 = 140
3.
Juniperus virginiana
10
No
FACU
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Li►iodendron tulipifera
10
No
FACU
Column Totals: 120 (A) 395 (B)
5•
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.29
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
60
=Total Cover
_
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover.
30 20% of total cover.
12
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Eulalfa viminea
20
Yes
FAC
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
10
Yes
FAC
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Rubus betulffolius 10 Yes FACU
4.
Smflax rotundffolia
5
No
FAC
Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 It tall.
45
=Total Cover
Woody Vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover.
23 20% of total cover:
9
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30 )
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
5
Yes
FAC
2.
Vdfs rotundifolia
5
Yes
FAC
3.
Lonicera japonica
5
Yes
FACU
4.
5'
Hydrophytic
15
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover.
8 20% of total cover.
3
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP-2
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
0-4 10YR 4/4 100
Loamy/Clayey
4-18 7.5YR 4/6 100
Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
—Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
—Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
—Black Histic (A3)
—Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
—Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(outside MLRA 127, 147,148)
Dark Surface (Al 2)
_Redox Depressions (F8)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
_Thick
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
—Other (Explain in Remarks)
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
MLRA 136)
—Sandy
Redox (S5)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 122, 136)
3Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
—Sandy
—Stripped Matrix (S6)
—Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Dark Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
This data sheet is revised from Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Supplement Version 2.0 to include the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric
Soils, Version 8.0, 2016.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

October 7, 2019 1:24,108
0 0.15 0.3 0.6 mi
NR Points NR Boundaries
• 0 0.25 0.5 1 km
NR Individual Listing National Register Boundary
NR Listing, Gone F1 Boundary of Destroyed/Removed NR Listing
* NRHD Center Point SL Points NC Center for Geographic Information & Analysis
0 SL Individual Entry