20120466 Ver 1_401 Application_20120512

WITHERS & RAVENEL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
1410 COMMONWEALTH DRIVE SUITE 1o1
WILMINGTON NORTH CAROLINA 28403
(9101) 256 9277
FAX [phone]
TO NC Division of Water Quality — 401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699
WE ARE SENDING YOU
❑ Shop Drawings
❑ Copy of Letter
LETTER' L,F7L'LN 13MFT L
DATE 5/8/12
1 JOB NO 02100060 00
ATTENTION Mr Ian McMillan
PHONE# [phone]
RE Fuquay Eastern Regional Park — PCN Submittal
4/26/12
02100060 00
NWP 39 PCN
1
/2/12
0210006o oo
® Attached ❑ Under separate cover via
❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples
❑ Change order ❑ Diskette ❑
the following items
❑ Specifications
COPIES
DATE
NO
DESCRIPTION
4/26/12
02100060 00
NWP 39 PCN
1
/2/12
0210006o oo
CD of PCN
1
/8/12
0210006o oo
Check for $24o Ap licatlon Fee
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below
® For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval
❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution
❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints
❑ For review and comment ❑
❑ FOR BIDS DUE 20 ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
Signature
Date
COPYTO File SIGNED Troy Beasley
if enclosures are not as noted kindly notdy us at once

WITHERS RAVEN EL
April 26, 2012
US Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Attn: Mr. James Lastinger
3331 Heritage Trade Drive
Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
NC- Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
Attn: Mr. Ian McMillan
1650 Mail Service Center.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
Re: Fuquay Varina Eastern Regional Park — NWP 39 PCN Submittal
W &R Project #0210006o.00
Dear Mr. Lastinger and Mr. McMillan,
On behalf of the Town of Fuquay Varina, we are requesting authorization from the USACE to use NWP
39 for 0.235 acres of permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. We are also requesting
authorization from DWQ for 7,356 sq ft of impacts to riparian buffers.
The project is ±13.66 acres in size and is located ±19oo if north of the intersection of NC 55 and
Jones Lake Road, north of the South Lakes Subdivision in Fuquay Varina, Wake County (Latitude:
35.5765o8 °N; Longitude: - 78.754536 °W). The project is located in the Neuse River basin (HUC
030202o1) and onsite waters drain to Black Creek. The Water Quality Classification for Black Creek
is C; NSW and the Stream Index Number is: 27-33-5•
Proposed Project
The proposed project consists of the construction of a community park which will provide recreation
for the residents of Fuquay Varina. The proposed park will consist of a small parking area, a frisbee
golf course, a play area and a greenway. The proposed greenway within the park will connect to the
existing greenway within the South Lakes Subdivision.
Project History
Onsite wetlands were delineated by Withers and Ravenel on in January 2012. Data forms and JD
Forms are included in support of our delineation.
The onsite streams were determined to be present and subject to riparian buffers. Therefore, a
Buffer Determination from DWQwas not requested.
Proposed Impacts
The proposed impacts consist of 0.235 acres of permanent wetland impacts for the construction of
the proposed greenway. The construction of the greenway will also result in 3,494 sq ft of impacts
to Zone 1 buffers and 3,862 sq ft of Zone 2 buffers.
1410 Commonwealth Drive I Suite 1011 Wilmington, NC 28403 1 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]
www.withersravene[.com I License No. C -0832

WITHERS II RAVEN EL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYOR5
Avoidance and Minimization
Prior to site plan design, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland delineation be conducted
so that impacts to wetlands and "waters" could be minimized.
Due to the fixed tie -in point of the greenway within the South Lakes Subdivision, impacts could not
be avoided entirely. Stream impacts have been avoided by utilizing pedestrian bridges to cross the
onsite streams. Buffer impacts have been minimized by crossing the buffers at as close to
perpendicular as possible.
Mitigation
The applicant proposes to mitigate for the 0.235 acres of permanent wetland impacts through the
purchase of mitigation within the Pancho Stream & Wetland Mitigation Bank at a 2:1 ratio. This will
result in the purchase of o.47o acres of riparian wetland mitigation for the proposed wetland
impacts.
Greenways are classified as an "Allowable Use" in the Table of Uses. Therefore, buffer mitigation is
not required for the proposed buffer impacts.
The current request is for 0.235 acres of permanent wetland impacts and 7,356 sq ft of riparian
buffer impacts (see the attached maps and PCN for details).
Please feel free to call if you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
Troy Beasley
Environmental Scientist
Attachments:
• PCN Form
• Agent Authorization
• Owner Information
• Exhibits
• Letter of Availability from Pancho Mitigation Bank
• JD Supporting Information (Corps Application Only)
WITHERS RAVENEL Page 2 of
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS

o�oF w a rF9o�
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 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: or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? NWP 39
® 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
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 In
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:
Eastern Regional Park
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Fuquay - Varina
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
PIN — 06763479676 — Town of Fuquay Varina
PIN — 0676340956 — South Lakes Investors, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
See Attached Owner Information Appendix for complete information.
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
3e.
City, state, zip:
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Town of Fuquay Varina
4b.
Name:
Jon Barlow — Town Manager
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
Town of Fuquay Varina
4d.
Street address:
401 Old Honeycutt Road
4e.
City, state, zip:
Fuquay Varina, NC 27526
4f.
Telephone no.:
919 - 552 -1400
4g.
Fax no.:
919 - 552 -7481
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
Troy Beasley
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
Withers and Ravenel
5c.
Street address:
1410 Commonwealth Drive, Suite 101
5d.
City, state, zip:
Wilmington, NC 28403
5e.
Telephone no.:
910 - 256 -9277
5f.
Fax no.:
910 - 256 -2584
5g.
Email address:
tbeasley @withersravenel.com
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0676340956;06763479676
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.576508 °N Longitude: - 78.754536 °W
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
13.66 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Black Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C;NSW (Stream Index # 27 -33 -5)
2c. River basin:
Neuse — HUC 03020201
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 existing conditions currently consist of undeveloped woodlands. The land use in the general vicinity consists of a
mixture of undeveloped woodlands as well as residential and commercial development.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
2.72 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
1540 If
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to construct a community park that will serve the Fuquay community.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project consists of the construction of a community park, which will include parking area, a play area, a frisbee golf
course and a greenway trail which will connect to the existing greenway within the South Lakes Subdivision. The
greenway will be constructed within an existing cleared sewer line corridor. Pedestrian bridges will be utilized for stream
crossings. Standard commercial construction equipment will be used to construct the project.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
El Yes ®No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
El Preliminary El Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company:
Name (if known):
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ 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 11
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.
Page 4 of 11
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 (T)
Impact #4
Herbaceous
El Yes
®Corps
® P ❑ T
Fill for Greenway
(Cleared Sewer
® No
® DWQ
0.235 ac
Easement
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.235 ac
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
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
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
N/A
3i. Comments:
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
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

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 of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
K Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico El Other:
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)
for impact
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
(T)
Impact #1
® P ❑ T
Fill for
Greenway
UT to Black Creek
❑ Yes
® No
1,280 sq ft
1,727 sq ft
Impact #2
® P ❑ T
Fill for
Greenway
UT to Black Creek
❑ Yes
® No
N/A
631 sq ft
Impact #3
® P ❑ T
Fill for
Greenway
UT to Black Creek
❑ Yes
® No
2,214 sq ft
1,504 sq ft
6h. Total buffer impacts
3,494 sq ft
3,862 sq ft
6i. Comments: Greenways are identified as an "Allowable" use, which does not require mitigation.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Prior to site plan design, the applicant requested that a detailed wetland delineation be conducted so that impacts to wetlands
and "waters" could be minimized.
Due to the fixed tie -in point of the greenway within the South Lakes Subdivision, impacts could not be avoided entirely.
Stream impacts have been avoided by utilizing pedestrian bridges to cross the onsite streams. Buffer impacts have been
minimized by crossing the buffers at as close to perpendicular as possible.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The greenway has been designed to utilize pedestrian bridges to cross the stream to avoid stream impacts.
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2.
Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a.
Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
2c.
If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
® Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3.
Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a.
Name of Mitigation Bank: Pancho Stream & Wetland Mitigation Bank
3b.
Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
Riparian Wetland
Quantity 0.47 acres
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:
5.
Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a.
If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
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 8of11
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: The majority of the greenway will be constructed at grade which allows
diffuse flow. In areas where the greenway is above grad, there will be swales on
❑ Yes ® No
the high side of the greenway which directs runoff into the onsite wetlands to
achieve diffuse flow prior to entering the buffer. The proposed parking area will
drain into the existing ditch along NC 55.
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
4.27%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: The proposed project will result in
less than 24% impervious area, which does not require a stormwater management plan.
2d.
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ 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
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
❑ 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
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes
❑ No
F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes
❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes
❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ 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.
The project consists of a community park, which will not be catalyst for future development.
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.
N/A
Page 10 of 11
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?
E] 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?
W &R reviewed the NC Natural Heritage Program database, located at http: / /portal.ncdenr.org /web /nhp, to identify if there
were any known occurrences of endangered species on or near the proposed project. The review of the NHP database
did not identify any recent occurrences of endangered species or critical habitat on the subject property or within 2.0 miles
of the project.
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?
There are no waters in Wake County classified as EFH.
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?
There were no historic or cultural resources observed within the
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a.
Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b.
If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? www.ncfloodmaps.com
Troy Beasley
l ��
Authorized Agent
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 11 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM

WITH ER5 6V RAVEN EL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
AUTHORITY FOR APPOINTMENT OF AGENT
The undersigned owner(s) Town of Fuguav Varina do(es) hereby appoint Troy Beasley /
Withers & Ravenel. Inc. as his, her, or it's agent for the purpose of petitioning the appropriate
local, state and federal environmental regulatory agencies (US Army Corps of Engineers, NC
Division of Water Quality, NC Division of Coastal Management, etc.) for: a) review and approval
of the jurisdictional boundaries of onsite jurisdictional areas (wetlands, surface waters, etc.)
and /or; b) preparation and submittal of appropriate environmental permit applications /requests for
the Eastern Regional Park project.
The owner does hereby authorize that said agent has the authority to do the following acts on
behalf of the owner:
(1) To submit appropriate requests /applications and the required supplemental
materials;
(2) To attend meetings to give representation on behalf of the Client.
(3) To authorize access to subject property for the purpose of environmental
review by appropriate regulatory agencies.
This authorization shall continue in effect until completion of the contracted task or termination by
the property owner.
Agent's Name, Address & Telephone:
Troy Beasley / Withers & Ravenel, Inc.
1410 Commonwealth Drive, Suite 101
Wilmington, NC 28403
Tel. [phone]
Date: & l Zol
Signature of Owner(s):
I G WA r-
(Name - Print) (Title)
(Signature)
4"eMTE1D
Mailing Address
&& z7�tQ
City .
�
State Zip
111 MacKenan Drive Cary, NC 275111 tel.: [phone] fax: [phone] www.withersravenel.com I License No. C -0832
1410 Commonwealth Drive I Suite 1011 Wilmington, NC 28403 1 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]
7011 Albert Pick Road I Suite G I Greensboro, NC 27409 1 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]

PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION

Eastern Regional Park
Property Owner Information
PIN 06763479676 — f2.6 acres
Owner — Town of Fuquay Varina
Jon Barlow — Town Manager
401 Old Honeycutt Road
Fuquay Varina, NC 27526
Deed Book — 07346
Page No. — 0464
PIN 0676340956 — ±11.03 acres
Owner — South Lakes Investors, LLC
Tim Smith
100 Weston Estates Way
Cary, NC 27513
919 - 481 -3000
vane ssa prestondev.com
Deed Book — 14212
Page No. - 2279

USGS QUAD MAP
WAKE COUNTY SOIL SURVEY

A ft. h
v
C-
��� ;two'• i+� y - i t
` 4 # r s - •.
* _ r # ,y
■
1 -
F► 1
■ r
r .
WEPT
�7
t
7
r
P
1r t
■
u
� 4\
A

PROPOSED
WETLANDS GREENWAY
+f
� F
............
..........
RISDICTION �
JU AL
STREAM = -
4'„
ar

GRAPHIC SCALE
0 250 500
'z+
,
' +
�. _! 64
1 inch = 500 ft.
_ +�
ap ...
t
*�•, �,.
• �
�
! + _�� 1. � ��.
s r _
'
NON, '
•* •
L �f
40p•
EASTERN REGIONAL PARK
USGS QUAD - FUQUAY VARINA
WITHERS RAVENEL
■Mi1NLLRS 1 PLAMN[RS 1 tORYLYORS
I L[']L �V L'•V{IY� WAKF cot,NTY tiOR71{ CARpl 1�1A

•.
GRAPHIC SCALE
0 1000 2000
�3 , 4 - l - •'
C 1 inch — 2000 ft.
y0�1. • It �' Points VlfiliQ
r'�-I ti .• ' 'i • 1 �I
•ti • :ter r r. �"�
psi
1
Pat l ,:•_�� ,
�01
V WW
r I I • � ��:��� ,.Jl � e \ Apr -' � r' �= �
y 1 r J, 1f..
V.
1 r
+ 1134[' � •'�, � � •�. - . `� �� � t
Tolland
• � � � Jq�' _ ! � t"'� i i '� 1 � ■ 'ti/- � fir.
�� .��� 4 tt � � / .H Mr 5�,1 . n ` _, hs�l 'R'r r r •,,
EASTERN REGIONAL PARK LOCATION MAP W�TF#ERSLR3RAVENEL

GRAPHIC SCALE
I inch = 50o ft.
LOIN
9
WaB
1 NoB
■
wac
4y
N o B
Wa B
w
WaC
NoB
waa wac
Ly WaB i w 0 WgA
WgA WaC -woe-
w
08 N Wa(
W=Q -wa
EASTERN REGIONAL PARK WAKE CO. SOIL SURVEY - SHEET 98 WITHERS RAVEN EL
I PLANNERS 1 SURVEYORS
1" 1•M1hl \M1 WAKE Ffll.\TY %1111 {ARCH MA

PANCHO MITIGATION BANK
LETTER OF AVAILABILITY

Mitigation Credit Reservation Confirmation Letter
Statement of Availability
Pancho Stream & Wetland Mitigation Bank
April 26, 2012
NC Division of Water Quality U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
401 Oversight /Express Permitting Unit CESAW -RG -R
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 Wetland Mitigation Credits
Project: Town of Fuquay Varina — Eastern Regional Park
Corps AID #:
DWQ Proj #:
This document confirms that The Town of Fuquay Varina (Applicant) has reserved for purchase
0.47 Wetland Mitigation Credits from the Pancho Stream & Wetland Mitigation Bank.
Restoration Systems (RS) attests to the fact that 0.47 wetland credits are currently available for
immediate transfer from its Official Bank Credit Ledger to Applicant and that as of this date RS
has placed 0.47 credits into "no- sale " - reservation status under the name of the project
referenced on this document (Project).
Forty -seven one hundredths (0.47) credits will remain in reservation status until payment in full
is received from the Applicant, resulting in the issuance of a Credit Transfer Certificate 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
Town of Fuquay Varina — Eastern Regional Park — Compensatory Mitigation — RS — Page 1

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.
RS will issue the Transfer Certificate within ten (10) days of receipt of the Purchase Price. RS
shall provide to Applicant the Transfer Certificate 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,
Tara Disy Allden
Regulatory Manager
Restoration Systems, LLC
Town of Fuquay Varina — Eastern Regional Park — Compensatory Mitigation — RS — Page 2

JD SUPPORTING INFORMATION
(CORPS APPLICATION ONLY)

WITHERS u RAVEN EL
ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
JD Request Information
Eastern Regional Park
Applicant - Town of Fuquay Varina
Jon Barlow — Town Manager
401 Old Honeycutt Road
Fuquay Varina, NC 27526
Written Authorization — See attached Agent Authorization form
Project Location — Project site is located ±1900 if north of the intersection of NC 55 and Jones
Lake Road, north of the South Lakes Subdivision in Fuquay Varina, Wake
County.
County — Wake County
PIN# -0676340956;06763479676
Nearest Waterbody — Black Creek
Drainage Basin — Neuse River
HUC Code — 03020201
Decidegrees — 35.576508 °N; - 78.754536 °W
USGS Quad Map — Fuquay Varina
Soil Survey Sheet(s) — Wake Co. Soil Survey — Sheet 98
Total Area — ±13.66 acres
Wetland Area — ±2.72 acres
RPWs — ±1540 if (streams)
1410 Commonwealth Drive I Suite 1011 Wilmington, NC 28403 1 tel: [phone] fax: [phone]
www.withersravene[.com I License No. C -0832

1<
GRAPHIC SCALE
100 200
k4
I inch 200 ft.
WETLAND G h '�
�•`v -� •ll. WETLAND
JURISDSCTIONAL WETLAND E
of STREAM
C]�
` WETLAND 8 a'► i
WETLANLI D WETLAND A l
WETLAND
—
_ •�
t �-
-
• JURISDICTIONAL
�. Ys STREAM
ar
Llu f ' •�

C RAPH IC SCALE
r loo 200
1 inch 200 ft. Wa
NoB
s • � T�
r
t
r
EASTERN REGIONAL PARK WAKE CO. SOIL SURVEY - SHEET 98 WITHERS RAVENEL
[Mi1N { {RS 1 PLANNERS IfORYIYORf
F UAY VNPNn H'Al:k Co UNJ Y NORNI CAMLINA 11 1

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Eastern Regional Park City /County: Fuquay, Wake County Sampling Date: 2012 -01 -31
Applicant /Owner: Town of Fuquay Varina State: NC Sampling Point: DP -1
Investigator(s): Troy Beasley - W &R Section, Township, Range.
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):. Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %): <5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.576508 °N Long: - 78.754536 °W Datum: NAD27
Soil Map Unit Name: Wedhadkee and Bibb Soils NWI classification: Headwater Forest
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 0 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
El No ❑ within a Wetland? Yes El No ❑
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes El No
Remarks:
This sampling point is located within Wetland E.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is reauired. check all that apply)
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
12 Surface Water (Al)
0 Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
Q High Water Table (A2)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑I Drainage Patterns (1310)
0 Saturation (A3)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
r
t-1 Moss Trim Lines (1316)
BWater Marks (B1)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
x Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
BDrift Deposits (133)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
0 Iron Deposits (B5)
_❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
x❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No
0 Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes IT No
El Depth (inches): 22
Saturation Present? Yes 0 No
❑ Depth (inches): 8" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes IT No ❑
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Wetland hydrology was present at this sampling point.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP -1
Tree Stratum 30' Radius
Absolute
% Cover
Dominant Indicator
Sp Status
❑ominancc Test worksheet:
(Plot size: }
cieO
Number of Dominant Species
1. Acer rubrum
40%
x
❑ FAC
That Are OB $ L, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
20%
FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant 8
3•
Species Across All Strata:
4.
❑
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
100%
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC
7
❑
Prevalence Index worksheet:
60%
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30' Radius )
OBL species x 1 =
1 Acer rubrum
15%
x❑ FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2 Ilex opaca
10%
❑x FAC
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 = .
3. _ ❑
4•
❑
UPL species x 5 = —
Column Totals: (A) (B)
5. Cl
6.
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A = _
❑
7
25%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' Circle )
= Total Cover
X Dominance Test is >50%
1 Clethra alnifolia
15%
[F] FACW
Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2 Vaccinium corymbosum
10%
x❑ FACW
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
❑
4
❑
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5
6.
❑
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
7.
❑
-
°
25%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
10' Circle
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
1 Arundinaria gigantea
20%
0 FACW
❑
Sapling -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2• —
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
3
❑
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4. --
❑
Shrub -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5.
❑
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
❑
---
❑
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
8
❑
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
❑
3 ft (1 m) in height.
9
10.
❑
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
❑
12.
❑
20%
=Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10' Circle y
1 Smilax rotundifolia
10%
0 FAC
—
2.
❑
3.
❑
4.
❑
Hydrophytic
❑
5• -
°
10 /o
=Total Cover
Vegetation
Present? Yes ❑x No ❑
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
The vegetation at this sampling point was hydrophytic.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -1
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) _ % Tvpe Loc Texture _ Remarks
0 -6 10YR 3/2 LS Loamy Sand
6 -14+ 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/6
'Type: C =Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced
8 dric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
a Black Histic (A3)
Q Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
�.1 Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
a Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Q Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
5% C PL LS Loamy Sand
CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
❑Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
_Depleted
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Dark Surface (F7)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
- ryDepleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
Umbric Surface (1713) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A,
e soils at this sampling point were hydric.
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
153C, 153D)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes El No ❑
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: South Lakes Subdivision
Applicant /Owner: Town of Fuquay Varina
Investigator(s): Troy Beasley - W &R
City /County: Fuquay, Wake County
State: NC
Section, Township, Range
Sampling Date: 2012 -01 -31
Sampling Point: DP -2
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none):. Slope ( %): <5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.575675 °N Long: - 78.742347 °W Datum: NAD27
Soil Map Unit Name: Wagram loamy sand - 6 -10% slopes NWI classification. Upland
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.
rHdrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No ❑ Is the Sampled Area
dric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ❑ No ❑ within a Wetland. Yes tland Hydrology Present? Yes
This sampling point is located within uplands adjacent to Wetland E.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required check all that apply)
Q Surface Water (Al)
_❑ Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Q High Water Table (A2)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (613)
0 Saturation (A3)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
BWater
Marks (B1)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
BDrift
Deposits (B3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
0 Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No 0 Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes El No El Depth (inches): >24
Saturation Present? Yes ❑x No ❑ Depth (inches): 20
(includes capillary_ fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream► gauge,
etland hydrology was not present at this sampling point.
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
0 Surface Soil Cracks (136)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
T ❑I Drainage Patterns (1310)
I J Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No ❑x
, previous inspections), it avauaule:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP -2
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 Radius )
Absolute
% Cover
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number Dominant Species
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
25%
❑x FAC
of
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 6 (A)
2 Acer rubrum
15%
0 FAC
g Quercus alba
15%
0 FACU
Total Number of Dominant 9
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4 Pinus taeda
10%
❑ FAC
❑
Percent of Dominant Species o
66 /�
5•
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC (A/B}
6.
❑
7
❑
Prevalence Index worksheet:
50%
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30' Radius )
OBL species x 1 =
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
20%
0 FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2. Acer rubrum
10%
0 FAC
FAC species x 3 =
3•
❑
FACU species x 4 =
4_
❑
UPL species x 5 =
5•
❑
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
❑
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' Circle
= Total Cover
X Dominance Testis >50%
—
1 Symplocos tinctoria
15%
❑x FAC
Prevalence Index is <_3 0'
2
❑
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
4
❑
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5
6.
❑
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
7.
❑
- —
15%
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
10' Circle
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: y
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Pteridium aquilinum
10%
x❑ FACU
❑
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2.
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
3
❑
than 3 in. (7 6 cm) DBH.
4•
❑
❑
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5.
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
❑
Herb -All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
8
❑
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
❑
3 ft (1 m) in height.
9.
10.
❑
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
❑
12.
❑
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10' Circle
10%
=Total Cover
1 Rubus floricomus
15%
0 FACU
2 Smilax rotundifolia
100/6
0 FAC
3.
_ ❑
4.
❑
0
Hydrophytic
5•
25%
= Total Cover
Vegetation ❑
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
The vegetation at this sampling point was considered
hydrophytic based on the dominance test. However, it should be
noted that the vegetation fails the FAC - Neutral
test.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

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) % TypgL Loc Texture Remarks
0 -7 10YR 3/2 LS Loamy Sand
7 -14+ 10YR 4/3 LS Loamy Sand
'Type: C =Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
H dric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
OPolyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
(Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
_OThin
Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Q Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR 0)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_01-oamy
Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
❑. Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
❑ 5 Mucky Mineral P, T, U)
URedox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
cm (A7) (LRR
(F7)
Presence (A8) (LRR U)
rlRedox Depressions (F8)
_
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
eMuck
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
D
Other (Explain in Remarks)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
a Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) �Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S) Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Q Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) OReduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 15013)
Sandy Redox (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6) Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
[� Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches)
he soils at this sampling point were not hydric.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No El
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Eastern Regional Park City /County: Fuquay, Wake County Sampling Date: 2012 -01 -31
Applicant/Owner: Town of Fuquay Varina State: NC Sampling Point: DP -3
Investigator(s): Troy Beasley - W &R Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): one Slope ( %): <5%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P Lat: 35.576508 °N Long: - 78.754536 °W Datum: NAD27
Soil Map Unit Name: Wedhadkee and Bibb Soils NWI classification: Headwater Forest
Are climatic I 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 El No ❑ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes x ❑
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
❑x No ❑ Within a Wetland? Yes 0 13 No
Remarks:
This sampling point is located within Wetland A.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required;
check all that apply)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Q Surface Water (Al)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
❑ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
a High Water Table (A2)
❑I Aquatic Fauna (1313)
❑ Drainage Patterns (1310)
0 Saturation (A3)
T
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Moss Trim Lines (1316)
Water Marks (B1)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
BDrift Deposits (133)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
_❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
x❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No
Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes El No
El Depth (inches): 22
Saturation Present? Yes IT No
❑ Depth (inches): 8 Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No El
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Wetland hydrology was present at this sampling point.
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP -3
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30 Radius )
1 Acer rubrum
Absolute
% Cover
40%
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
IT FAC
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
20%
FAC
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100% (A/B)
3-
4.
5•
6.
7
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30' Radius )
o
60 /o
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
=Total Cover
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply b
— y'
OBL species x 1 = ,
1 Acer rubrum
25%
❑x FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2.
❑
FAC species x 3 =
3,
❑
FACU species x 4 =
4.
❑
UPL species x 5 =
5,
❑
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: N/A )
25%
El
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
X Dominance Test is >50%
1
❑
_ Prevalence Index is :53.01
2
❑
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
❑
4
5
❑
❑
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
6-
❑
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
7.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 10' Circle )
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1 Arundinaria gigantea
2.
3
25%
❑x FACW
❑
❑
Sapling –Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4•
5.
❑
❑
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
7.
-
❑
Herb –All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
8
9
❑
❑
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
10.
❑
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
❑
12.
❑
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10' Circle )
25%
= Total Cover
1 Smilax rotundifolia
10%
❑x FAC
2. ❑
3-
❑
4-
5-
10%
❑
❑
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation ❑
Present? Yes 0 No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
The vegetation at this sampling point was hydrophytic.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Interim Version

SOIL
Profile Description; (Describe to the del
Depth Matrix
inches Color (moist) %
0 -6 10YR 3/2
6 -14+ 10YR 4/2
RM
Sampling Point: DP -3
needed to document the indicator or Confirm the aosence of inaicators.)
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type Loc
7.5YR 4/6
H dric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
B_ Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Q Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
j� Sandy Redox (S5)
a Stripped Matrix (S6)
Q Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type
Depth (inches):
5% C PL
Texture Remarks
SL Sandy Loam
SL Sandy Loam
Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
OPolyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
X
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
L-IRedox
Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 153B)
_Depleted
Dark Surface (F7)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
eMarl
(F10) (LRR U)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
of hydrophytic vegetation and
Urnbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
�DReduced
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
e soils at this sampling point were hydric.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No El
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: Eastern Regional Park
Applicant /Owner: Town of Fuquay Varina
Investigator(s): Troy Beasley - W &R
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P
Soil Map Unit Name: Wedhadkee and Bibb Soils
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.
City /County: Fuquay, Wake County
State: NC
Section, Township, Range:
Sampling Date: 2012 -01 -31
Sampling Point: DP -4
Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %): <5%
Lat: 35.576508 °N Long: - 78.754536 °W Datum: NAD27
NWI classification: Upland
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Remarks:
Yes
El
No
❑
Yes
❑
No
El
Yes
❑
No
El
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes D No 0
This sampling point is located within uplands adjacent to Wetland A.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators minimum of one is reauired: check all that a
a Surface Water (Al)
_❑ Water- Stained Leaves (139)
12 High Water Table (A2)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
0 Saturation (A3)
Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
R
Water Marks (131)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑
Sediment Deposits (132)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
BDrift
Deposits (133)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
❑
Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
❑ Iron Deposits (135)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
0 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Field observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No El Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No El Depth (inches): >24
Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No El Depth (inches): >24
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous
nd hydrology was not present at this sampling point.
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
❑ 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)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes El No El
ble:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP -4
Tree Stratum 30 Radius
Absolute
% Cover
Dominant Indicator
Species? Status
Daminance Test worksheet:
(Plot size:
Number of Dominant Species
1 Pinus taeda
50%
❑x FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC 4 (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua
20%
❑ FAC
❑
Total Number of Dominant
4
1
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4_
❑
❑
Percent of Dominant Species
100%
5.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
6.
❑
❑
Prevalence Index worksheet:
7
70%
= Total Cover
Total % Cover of: _Multiply by:
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: 30' Radius )
OBL species x 1 =
1 Liquidambar styraciflua
15%
0 FAC
FACW species x 2 =
2 Ilex opaca
20%
❑x FAC_
FAC species x 3 =
3.
❑
FACU species x4=
4.
❑
UPL species x 5 =
5.
❑
Column Totals: (A) (B)
6.
❑
❑
Prevalence Index = B/A =
7
35%
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: N/A I
= Total Cover
X Dominance Test is >50%
1
❑
_ Prevalence Index is 53.0'
2
❑
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
3.
❑
4
❑
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
❑ —
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5
l
6.
❑
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
7-
❑
Tree – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
N/A
= Total Cover
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: y
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
1
❑
❑
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
2
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
3
❑
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
4•
❑
Shrub – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5.
❑
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
6.
©
❑
Herb –All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
7.
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
8
❑
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
❑
3 ft (1 m) in height.
g
10.
❑
Woody vine – All woody vines, regardless of height.
11.
❑
12.
❑
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 10' Circle )
= Total Cover
1 Smilax rotundifolia
15%
0 FAC
2.
❑
❑
3,
4.
❑
❑
Hydrophytic
5•
15%
= Total Cover
Vegetation ❑
Present? Yes ❑ No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below)
The dominant vegetation at this sampling point was considered hydrophytic
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Interim Version

SOIL
Sampling Point: DP -4
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) % Tvpe Loc Texture Remarks
0 -14+ 10YR 4/6 LS Loamy Sand
C= Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix.
IHdric Soil Indicators:
Histosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
FHydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
BMuck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
L_I Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
a Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR Cl, S)
El Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
R Sandy Redox (S5)
a Stripped Matrix (S6)
Q Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
ooservea):
Type:
Depth (inches):
e soils at this sampling point were not hydric.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Interim Version
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
OPolyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
(MLRA 153B)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) (LRR T, U)
Mari (F10) (LRR U)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
�lDepleted
Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
3Indicators
�Iiron-Manganese
Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
of hydrophytic vegetation and
�jUmbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
Della Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Thedniont
Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
—
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA
149A, 153C, 153D)
e soils at this sampling point were not hydric.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No 0
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region – Interim Version

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION L• BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: NC County /parish/borough: Wake County City: Fuquay Varina
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.576508° J, Long. - 78.754536° �.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Black Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Black Creek
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is /are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc... ) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION H: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There � "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There W "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): i
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
LJ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 1540 linear feet: 5 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: ±2.72 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on:
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable) :3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
2 For purposes ofthis form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
s Supporting documentation is presented in Section IILF.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section HIA.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections IILA.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IH.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IH.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section HIBA for
the tributary, Section HIB.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section HIB.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section IH.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through � tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs:
Tributary stream order, if known:
4 Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apps
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes:
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
❑ Concrete
❑ Muck
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/ op of complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: �. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by:
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings /characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum,
❑ physical markings,
❑ vegetation lines /changes in vegetation types.
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
7Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick Lis. Explain:
Surface flow is: -
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: -. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick Lis river miles from TNW.
Project waters are lick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the � floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section IILD:
2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: The onsite tributary was determined to be perennial based on the NCDWQ "Identification Methods for
the Origins of Intermittent and Perennial Streams.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non -RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Onsite wetlands were deteremined to be abutting as drainage patterns within wetlands
flow directly into the tributary with no physical barriers.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 11I.13 and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
11 Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) :"
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
'See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section IILD.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps /EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapauos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
17 If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in ` SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
. dgment (check all that apply)
Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
❑ Lakes /ponds: acres.
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
❑ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall 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: Withers & Ravenel.
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 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:Fuquay Varina Quad - 1:24000.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County Soil Survey.
❑ 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):Wake County Aerial Photographs - 2010.
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable /supporting case law:
❑ Applicable /supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

oai mar — - - NOTES:
w s32..58 1 I I 1) SEE INDIVIDUAL SHEETS FOR DETAILS OF IMPACTED AREAS.
Wv IN MN -07
PROPOSED STREAM BUFFER & WETLAND IMPACTS
SHEET
IMPACT
#
PERMANENT
STREAM BUFFER IMPACTS
PERMANENT WETLAND
IMPACTS
A
1
j�k.l l
1,280 5F (0.029 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
NRB ZONE 2
1,727 SF (0.040 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
2
NRB ZONE 2
631 SF (0.014 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
B
3
NRB ZONE 1
2,214 SF (0.051 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
NRB ZONE 2
1,504 SF (0.035 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
1
0 SF (0.000 AC)
10,258 SF (0.235 AC)
y
7,356 SF (0.169 AC)
10,258 SF (0.235 AC)
- ♦ ti, \ ♦a`
\-
tlt ,* lyl' t ♦ti'`�`L.�
\• }1:�� \ \`
♦
*`��• Jam_
(� .
PROPOSED STREAM BUFFER & WETLAND IMPACTS
SHEET
IMPACT
#
PERMANENT
STREAM BUFFER IMPACTS
PERMANENT WETLAND
IMPACTS
A
1
NRB ZONE 1
1,280 5F (0.029 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
NRB ZONE 2
1,727 SF (0.040 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
2
NRB ZONE 2
631 SF (0.014 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
B
3
NRB ZONE 1
2,214 SF (0.051 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
NRB ZONE 2
1,504 SF (0.035 AC)
0 SF (0.000 AC)
4
0 SF (0.000 AC)
10,258 SF (0.235 AC)
TOTALS
7,356 SF (0.169 AC)
10,258 SF (0.235 AC)
RKPI r�wCFAL ral `ti` ~ �~ �� -__��� - / / r/ /��` _ �� ■1 r� If 11
i
I _ I� +PLAY yl � i \ \ \y - \ `� � -� � � -_ � }RI �o8ra�el>:sa ♦ t � � _ f .- _r
1 . �_ ♦ \ 1 __- _ man I
I \t '. 1 i -� •.j + I , \ .` / ♦ w L \ ` �� ti U$E MwJrAC1LPi44
}yi / ♦ I - ARF,(1 j \ \ / ♦ �.. \ y i y ': • M1 �� �� +rte -�— N .�. - 1 / rJ ❑
I i i ii /� � � M1 k ♦Ik, � ti I 1 'a ■, \\ \ \ �, yy -- --37i ►� \ '1 1♦ ♦•, �� � +�\ ,/ / f r� �r '�
ow 1
IMPACT CT #1 2 1,�
-
♦� ' ��/ r /'1 ,n = `\�y�a__ ^�— \� > -3� —\ , �\ �F��` f , ryq�s vwuw ipyx .
IMPACT #1 \ \ '\ - °— — . J. UK&-]79AC -- —
sr t1�rF�I�py 1 � l r I i 1 1 ._ F� \ -i \ \• ��. \ ` 1 \ � \ - � — / rr __� �
J[ 4Lw.+J1EESr r I 1 r \`� 1� � \ \ \ t \ \~+`��_ .1' r ■� '
°nP4 Oeiux. \1 J PHAS€�-
uaG V"I i _ ly- Jr \�•' ( ` \\ rr�- 1 \ 1 `\ ` F S,BEE GAOL -F
CO'U­dSE r' "35 ` r~ - — " _ 1/1 - \ ■ +- /' yr
J /�- /•/ nl 1 1 rf fJ Ir r I + ! \ 1 1\ �M1 ♦r/ `\�� 11' \` \y \► 1 � �� r ~ /�� �- --r ^`�� f - 'I � f l �� •� \\ �- ..
I /� 1 � rr 1 r f !1 ! 1\ 1 1� \ � � ��\\ \ \ � - _ J /' •' � \\ \ y �- _ -� . -r-/ r_ \ +�
,� -� /f H 1' 1 Jj+ Jj ■'PHP�jEIl/ If Ij I \\ \\ \I , � � 1\ �� `NI`.
jfR)S#E GOLF , \ \ \ , \ \\ 1 ��� �� +��_ -` 7
`-
/� /• I. y r r rr rrrrJ ■ -- +rte 1 , ~ j \\ \` \ \ \ rl / // v _ -- - — — i�
_ _
�� r/ _ ` r � _►��rr r ��' f ,'/ /r/ y� /I� \ \ ■\ ti�^n -y y / 1-
r -
s I� � r' frf I 2 1 � r / / � I �. � � •tY - � ^�7•= -r■ ,r V C'Yr� ..1� �'' �W�7ri � ��� `�
/ 1 I tir " _ "._ / / / o�Eti IMPACT #4 JOHN KE°E,'XXa. —r I. C
PIN I ari4s34ae
TSS WS} C1 IAC Tyr^ L ♦I I — •�'•�— l
os 14 PO wsy _ f _ ■ IMPACT #3 ItX
._ 41 A
SITE DATA
TOTAL SITE AREA
13.66 ACRES
WAKE COUNTY PIN
0676340956
0676347976
i \
N4, ' : J r + GRAPHIC SCALE �' /
100 0 50 100 200 tJ t `
�• / ; -� J/ \ i ' " =rAK!
_ + N IMPACT #3
1 inch = 100 ft. \ - r : -■ T. \ \ \ y
Na- Rpvisim o,rp. By D. , �a 5a° EASTERN
w R, WITHERS &- RAVENEL
er Wb� „ REGIONAL PARK OVERALL SITE PLAN &IMPACT EXHIBIT ENGINEERS I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS 2'0
wl8 OM72.t. FCARY WAKE COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 111 M­.... )­, eah,N.fthC­00, 7511 10:01 -3340 fa 9taa07-0000 wwwwimes�.� i.

a
E
s
AS`E \3
'LAY
LQ
Al
M PACT #2
PHA4/�
jSf3lE GoLE / / -
O�tJ IBS "t/
1 101
GREENWAY
PATH
IMPACT # 1
ZONE 1 -NEUSE RIVER BUFFER IMPACT
_ ZONE 2 - NEUSE RIVER BUFFER IMPACT
PERMANENT IMPACTS
IMPACT #1 : NRB ZONE 1 IMPACT = 1,280 SF (0.029 AC)
NRB ZONE 2 IMPACT = 1,727 SF (0.040 AC)
IMPACT #2 : NRB ZONE 2 IMPACT = 631 SF (0.014 AC)
l
10'x20'
PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE —
� ice,
� f
ya/l�
z
O
y
x
GRAPHIC SCALE
50 0 25 50 100
1 inch = 50 ft.
EASTERN NEUSE RIVER BUFFER AND WITHERS & RAVENEL
REGIONAL PARK WETLAND IMPACTS ENOINEERs I PLANNERS I SURVEYORS
FUOUAY VARINA WAKE COUNTY NORTH CAROUNAl - SHEET A _

16
�E2t
ENE 1
1'
2
1
IMPACT #,z
FS, �,
0 ZONE 1 - NEUSE RIVER BUFFER IMPACT
_ ZONE 2 - NEUSE RIVER BUFFER IMPACT
WETLANDS IMPACT
PERMANENT IMPACTS
IMPACT #3 : NRB ZONE 1 IMPACT = 2,214 SF (0.051 AC)
NRB ZONE 2 IMPACT = 1,504 SF (0.035 AC)
IMPACT #4. WETLAND IMPACT = 10,258 SF (0.235 AC)
\ \
lk 10,
1 GREENWAY
PATH -
� t
1 _
JOHN DEERE TURF\ CARE INC
JOHN DEERE CENPANY
BM1996 -1697\
P1N N 067645343\2
ZONED 1
I M PACT #4
I M PACT # 3
10'x30'
PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE
\-�_ I
Z
0
GRAPHIC SCALE
50 0 25 50 100
1 inch = 50 ft.
EASTERN NEUSE RIVER BUFFER & WITHERS &— RAVENEL
REGIONAL PARK WETLAND IMPACTS RN /INIRRS I PLANNERS i ■URVKYORS<
VU QUAY VARINA WAKE COON IY NORTH CAROLINA SHEET B