20160521 Ver 1_Application_20160520

=EAS
PROFESSIONALS
May 13, 2016
le/Ms. Sue Homewood
NC DWQ WBSCP Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Mr. David E. Bailey
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE -SAW -RG -R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
201 60 52 1
fY 201016
Q&Np
A VOCU
�ps�
Subject: Pre -Construction Notification (CWA 401/404)
59.8 Acre +/- Parcel, Wrenn Farms 1410 Greensboro Road
High Point, North Carolina
EAS Project No.: EAS 15634
Dear Ms. Homewood and Mr. Bailey:
Attached are the required number of copies of the Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) and
supporting documentation for a mixed used development at 1410 Greensboro Road in High
Point, North Carolina. Planned site improvements include commercial buildings and low density
residential housing.
Following site meetings with David Bailey on March 10, 2016 and Sue Homewood on March 16,
2016, site development drawings were revised to avoid impacts to the verified intermittent
jurisdictional stream in the eastern part of the site and associated combined 50 foot Randleman
Lake Riparian Buffers. Total impacts to jurisdictional features in final design are 0.018 acres of
Headwater Wetlands, which as we discussed can likely be allowed under a Nationwide Permit 18
with no mitigation. Drawings depicting the earlier site layout as well as the final site design are
attached.
The revised site plans, which include a wet pond in the area of the jurisdictional features that
was reconfigured to avoid impacts to the intermittent stream and associated buffers, were
presented to and discussed with Terry Kuneff, a stormwater review engineer with the City of
High Point on April 21, 2016. Mr. Kuneff will be reviewing and approving all stormwater
management plans and measures for the project, including avoidance of impacts to the
Randleman Lake Riparian Buffers. At the conclusion of the meeting Mr. Kuneff gave conditional
approval of the revised design and stormwater management BMPs.
PCN WRENN FARMS GREENSBORO RO. PAGE 1 EAS PROJECT NO. 1 5634
HIGH POINT, NO MAY 13, 2016

EAS
PROFBSSIaNRLS
The package being submitted to NC Division of Water Resources includes the $240 application
fee for minor impacts payable to the NC Division of Water Resources along with five copies of
the PCN package, two copies with half size versions of the engineering drawings and three with
11x17 versions. The package being submitted to the Corps office in Wake Forest includes one
full copy of the PCN with 11x17 versions of the engineering drawings. Please let us know if you
need full or half size drawings and we will be glad to provide them.
Please review the attached submittal and let us know as soon as possible if you need any
additional supporting documentation. Also, thank you both very much for meeting with us on
the site so quickly and for taking the time to answer all of our questions.
Respectfully Submitted,
EAS PROFESSIONALS, INC.
J Ashley Brown, PE
Senior Environmental Engineer/Biologist
Enclosures:
Completed Joint USA COE, NC DEQ Pre Construction Notification Form, Version
1.4, January 2009
Figures:
Figure 1— USGS Topographic Map
Figure 2 — NRCS Soil Survey Map
Figure 3 — Vicinity Map
Figure 4 — NC SHPO Features Map
Figure 5 — USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper
Figure 6 — FEMA Map
Attachments:
Attachment A — Agent Authorization
Attachment B — Proof of Verification of Jurisdictional Features
Attachment C—Avoidance and Minimization
Attachment D — Stormwater Management Narrative and Drawings
Attachment E — Historic and Archeological Resources
PCN WRENN FARMS GREENSBORO Ro. PAGE 2 EAS PROJECT No. 1 5634
HIGH POINT, NC MAY 13, 201 G

O'/�l�Iot \N ATF
> -1
O Niii� T
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no
DWQ project no.
Form Version 14 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Q Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 18 or General Permit (GP) number.
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Q Yes ❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply).
❑X 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 ❑X No
For the record only for Corps Permit.
❑ Yes ❑X 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 ❑X No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes 0 No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Wrenn Farms/1410 Greensboro Road
2b County.
Guilford
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
High Point
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
2e NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Jemsite Development, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
7491/1789
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable).
Mr. Jeff Flattery
3d. Street address:
1608 US Hwy 221
3e. City, state, zip:
Jefferson, NC 28640
3f. Telephone no.:
336-846-7133
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is.
Q Agent ❑ Other, specify
4b. Name.
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address.
4e. City, state, zip.
4f. Telephone no..
4g. Fax no.
4h. Email address.
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name.
J. Ashley Brown (See Attachment A Agent Authorization)
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
EAS Professionals, Inc.
5c. Street address.
153C Brozzini Ct.
5d City, state, zip
Greenville, SC 29615
5e. Telephone no.:
864-354-9423
5f. Fax no..
864-234-7369
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
7811753845-00
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees).
ILatitude. 35.988005 Longitude: -79.952728
1 c. Property size.
59.8 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Unnamed Tributary to Deep River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -IV
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 subject property was graded and prepared for development in about 2009 when the developers defaulted and abandoned the project The site
remains largely unvegetated and this is exacerbated by unauthorized persons entering the site and driving off-road vehicles on it Land use in the site
vicinity is residential, commercial, industrial and institutional See Figure 4
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property. 0.066
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 230
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Planned development of the property will include commercial land usage as well a low density residential See Attachment D
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The site will be re -graded with bulldozers and pans Construct stormwater control structures, roads, sanitary sewer piping, utilities and buildings
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project(including all priorphases) in thepast?
Comments.
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. EAS Professionals, Inc
Name (if known). J Ashley Brown
Other.
4d If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Field verification of 404 jurisdictional features with David Bailey of COE on 3/10/16 Field verification of 401 jurisdictional intermittent stream with Sue
Homewood with NC DEQ on 3/16/16 Verification of no buffer impacts with Terry Kuneff with the City of Highpoint on 4/21/16 See Attachment B
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes X❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
N/A
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑X Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Construction of planned improvements will be done in phases as funds are available However, stormwater control structures for the full build -out will
be built during the first phase of work and any permitted impacts to jurisdictional features will occur during the first phase as well
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
Q Wetlands ❑ Streams —tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 F
Fill
Headwater Wetland
Yes
Corps
0 018
W2
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W3
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W4
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W5
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
W6
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
0.018
2h. Comments
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 -
Choose one
_
S2 -
Choose one
S3 -
Choose one
S4 -
Choose one
_
S5 -
Choose one
S6 -
Choose one
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 indiv ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e
Area of impact (acres)
01
Choose one
Choose
02
Choose one
Choose
03
Choose one
Choose
04
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c. 5d.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no.
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres)
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres).
5k. Method of construction.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then vou MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent P or
Temporary T
6c
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e
Buffer
mitigation
required
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
131
Yes/No
B2
Yes/No
133
Yes/No
B4
Yes/No
B5
Yes/No
136
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
61. Comments
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
Site development layouts that would have impacted the verified jurisdictional intermittent stream and Randleman buffers were abandoned and new
layouts were developed until one was produced that has excellent stormwater management features, avoids impacts to the intermittent stream and
associated buffers, and limits total wetland impacts to 0 018 acres See Attachment C
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Any site grading will only be done in accordance with the approved Stormwater Management Plan and implementation of this plan will include the
installation of silt and barrier fencing If impacts to the 0 018 acre wetland are approved though a NWP 18 this area will be flagged using one color
flagging and the limits of the combined 50' buffers associated with the intermittent stream will be flagged with a different color flagging In addition, the
50' stream buffer limit will be marked using orange barrier fencing and all those working in the area will be made aware of its purpose
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 Q No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type. Choose one
Type. Choose one
Quantity.
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature.
Choose one
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 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 ❑X 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 7 of 10

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.
❑X Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
42
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
59 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:
The overall Wrenn Farms development includes 3 wet detention ponds to meet stormwater quality and quantity requirements in the City of High Point
The wet detention ponds will adequately control the list inch of runoff, provide 85% TSS removal, and decrease the 2 and 10 year storms to at or
below the predevelopment calculated flows Only one detention pond discharge is directed toward the jurisdictional intermittent stream See
Attachment D for a general description of the Stormwater Management Plan as well as drawings depicting pre and post -construction site conditions
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
The City of High Point
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
The Cit of High Point
0 Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply):
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑X 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
X❑Other: Gen Cert 3890
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
Z Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑X Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑X Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes Q 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
El Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes' to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments.
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
El 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. WIII 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.
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
After construction is complete all wastewater generated in buildings constructed will be collected in the newly installed wastewater piping and
transmitted by gravity or force mains to the City of High Point's Eastside WWTP on Riverside Drive in Jamestown Contacts with the City of High Point
have confirmed that the Eastside facility has adequate capacity to treat the volume of wastewater generated by the planned site improvements
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

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 ❑X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑X Yes ❑ No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted
Raleigh
5d What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
USFWS Critical Habitat mapper (no critical habitat identified) Only one Threatened or Endangered Species listed for Guilford County, isotria
medeolides (small whorled pagonia) not observed Most of potential habitat for this plant (old hardwood forest) to remain as part of buffer See Fig 5
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The only natural water body on the site, the intermittent stream in the southeastern corner of the site will not be disturbed The USFWS Asheville
office's database for predicting the location of aquatic species in the area of the subject was also consulted
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. WIII this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑x 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?
The NC State Historic Preservation Office online mapper was used to verify several registered and listed cultural resources in the site area However
none were identified on the subject property and the protect should not impact any of the nearby listed properties See Fig 4 and Attachment E
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ❑X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements.
8c What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA FIRM Map Panel 7811 depicted on Figure 6
J Ashley Brown
A—
May 13, 2016
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Appllcan g nt's Signature
( nt's signaturelis valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided
Page 10 of 10

L '
FIGURES
Figure 1 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 2 NRCS Soil Survey.Map
Figure 3 Vicinity Map
Figure 4 NC SHPO Features Map
Figure 5 USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper
Figure -6 FEMA Map

SCALE 1:24 000
KI CIMETER S 2
10 CiJ t G METERS 1 LOCI 2000
? 0.5 0 1
MILES
'GCVO G 1030 2000 3000X. 5000 6000 7000 SOW 111 1DOW
TET
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1903
HIGH POINT EAST, NC
2010
USGS Topographic Map
North
A� Asseft s
GEOTECHNICAL and ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
SURVEYING • SPECIAL INSPECTIONS • LABORATORY
& CONSTRUCTION F.?ATERIALS TESTING
Project:
PCN Wrenn Farm/1410 Greensboro Rd.
Location:
59.8 -Acres +/-, High Point, NC
EAS Project No.:
15-634
Source:
USGS
Date:
Mav 2016
Scale:
As Shown FI ure 1

Soil Nlap—Guilford County, North Carolina
['''Wrenn Farm!1410 Greensboro Rd )
1.•'9) N
543:M 4e3BOP -em `.91100 4x140)
3
Nap rale 1:4510 Gpnrft1 an A Iandxare (11' , a.,F").hed.
N roses
0 50 1rA 200 300
kFeet
0 Z00.Y:n7 300 1-DOmap pn:59 on:'Nffb Pl.matur Ed3>.hrs:1-MI meMor.,'_:£4
.5eN Natural Resources 'A'eb Soil Survey
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
Map Unit Legend
Guilford County, North Carolina (NC081)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI
EnB Enon fine sandy loam, 2 to 6
percent slopes
MhB2 Me cklenburg san dy clay I cam, 2
to 6 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
MhC2 Mecklenburg sandy clayloam, 6
to 10 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
MuB Mecklenburg -Urban land
complex, 2 to 10 percent
slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
931300 54$4w 9 -IM
5!4!_'016
Fate 1 of 3
Percent of AOI
0.1 0.2%
44.7 81.1%
8.71 15.7%
1.71 3.0%
55_1 �_ 100.0%
USDA NRCS Soil Survey Map
North 4
ERSLocation:
GEOTECHNICAL and ENVIRONrv1ENTAL ENGINEERING
SURVEYING • SPECIAL INSPECTIONS • LABORATORY
& CONSTRUCTION rv1ATERIALS TESTING
Project:
PCN Wrenn Farm/1410 Greensboro Rd.
59.8 -Acres +/-, High Point, NC
EAS Project No.:
15-634
Source:
USDA NRCS
Date:
May 2016
Scale:
As Shown FI ure 2

s
IPI cz + Abbms Ave
µ T
l 7,
i�
� r r
za
m
eStwOld
. d5ev+
Q cOt3 Google-
y¢ia+o 212/2612 1993 35 5o N 79'57'13 45. 'L .8271 ^ c "

F
-7f, -AAWJW n�! da
*tcale 1: 36.111.9
•
rig w ill,
Ihsiynokd "111— 1t — L—d
Ha,Aum Dr* M Lvundwst(« to ttnwi p—ti)
4 j ti atr
-114., MR11N
1nftd. NWA
—.1 --
NC SHPO Features
North 4
AN"alk U s
ri
GEOTECHNICAL and ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
SURVEYING * SPECIAL INSPECTIONS LABORATORY
& CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING
Project:
PCN Wrenn Farm/1 410 Greensboro Rd.
Location:
59.8 -Acres +/-, High Point, NC
EAS Project No.:
15-634
Source:
HPOWEB NCHPO
Date.-
May 2016
Scale-
As Shown
Figure 4

USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper identified no critical habitat
for the subject site area
USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper
North
GEOTECHNICAL and ENVIRONrvIENTAL ENGINEERItJG
SURVEYING • SPECIAL INSPECTIONS • LABORATORY
& CONSTRUCTION rv'ATERIALS TESTING
Project:
PCN Wrenn Farm/1410 Greensboro Rd.
Location:
59.8 -Acres +/-, High Point, NC
EAS Pro'ect No.:
15-634
Source:
USFWS
Date:
May 2016
Scale:
As Shown Figure 5

DEEP
.✓. + AVE
" sA
r„ h
:l
x
¢ yyy 11
'S' v
T,.
LE 1 NORTH
O
<' •;_. ,r - �' �l'VJ`/ O MAP SCALE 1' � 500'11 : 6.000)
e
r
PANEL 7871)
UM4T OF U6v
ww = FIRM
833 oz r FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
830 `t ;�
825 cl_' PANEL 7811
n, 21
822
44
& e
-AE8,14
c
5
ZONE A EFFECTIVE DATE MAP NUMBER
802 JUNE 18, 2007 3710781100J
9 sLltI A N11mu a'oh'.a
a
fagot ttne abn t ncpde oa ap It
^ aAJ/ t S o t tied g F MIT p L s Thp tl - not rot ch ngos
ZON E y amentlment h ch may h pe made bseq lent to thedate on the
/k � ', rfo dock For the late6t product nformatrOn about NBtlonai flood In6uranco
-ogram good maps check It+e FEMA Flood Map hone at � ms, fema q-
�� Zone X: Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain
FEMA Map
North
GEOTECHNICAL and ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
SURVEYING • SPECIAL INSPECTIONS • LABORATORY
& CONSTRUCTION w1ATERIALS TESTING
Project:
PCN Wrenn Farm/1410 Greensboro Rd.
Location:
59.8 -Acres +/-, High Point, NC
EAS Project No.:
15-634
Source:
USFWS
Date:
Mav 2016
Scale:
As Shown Figure 6

_ - 5
- ATTACH M E NT A
Agent Authorization
r

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT N0. Guilford County 018463
PLAN N0. PARCEL ID: tY
STREET ADDRESS: 1410 Greensboro Road High Point, NC 27260
Please print:
Property Owner,
Property Owner
Mr. Jeff Flattery, President Jemsite Development, LLC
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
J. Ashley Brown of EAS Professionals, Inc.
i; (Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
I�
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
i' this permiC or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
I
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
P.O. Box 635 Jefferson, NC 28640
Telephone: [phone]
we hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
Authorized Signature
Date:

k
ATTACHMENT B
Proof of Verification Jurisdictional Features

Print:: Workspace Webmail Page 1 of 2
RE: [EXTERNAL] Wrenn Farms High Point JD
Bailey, David E SAW [David E.Bailey2@usace army mil]
Sent: 3/16/2016 11.06 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: "Jeff Flattery" <[e-mail]>, "Doug Spell" <doug spell@jemsitedevelopment com>,
"Doug Dunko" <ddunko@eas-pro com>, "Suzanne Stroh" <[e-mail]>, "Homewood Sue"
<sue.homewood@ncdenr gov>, "Allan" <[e-mail]>, "Casey Flattery"
<[e-mail]>
Thanks for the updated information, Ashley. The sketch looks correct based on changes made in the field during our site
visit.
For the wetland data sheet at sampling point DP -2a, it appears that most of the plant species listed occur on the banks
for the drainage valley rather than within the narrow wetland area. As such, those plants occurring outside of the wetland
footprint should be removed from the form. If there was no vegetation within the wetland portion of your sampling area,
then your Remark at the bottom of this page should be sufficient to explain the lack of vegetation. Please resend this
form once edits are made.
Based on our discussion in the field, the proposed project likely fits the terms and conditions of NWP 18, depending on
the final proposed impacts However, keep in mind that use of any Nationwide Permit requires that all impacts to waters
of the US be minimized to the maximum extent practicable, depending on the project purpose and need As such,
could only make the determination of use of NWP 18 after reviewing th6 entirety of the project proposal
Please let me know if you have any questions.
-Dave Bailey
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE -SAW -RG -R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext 30
Fax. [phone]
Email- David.E [e-mail]
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu usace.army mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0.
-----Original Message -----
From- [e-mail] [mailto.abrown@eas-pro com]
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2016 4:52 PM
To: Bailey, David E SAW <David [e-mail]>
Cc: Jeff Flattery geff flattery@jemsitedeve lopment.com>; Doug Spell <doug.spell@jemsitedevelopment com>, Doug
Dunko <[e-mail]>, Suzanne Stroh <[e-mail]>; Homewood Sue
<sue homewood@ncdenr gov>; Allan <Allan@Ipa-inc net>, Casey Flattery <casey flattery@jemsitedevelopment com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Wrenn Farms High Point JD
David,
First, thanks for all the time you spent with Doug Spell and me answering all of our questions on the current state of
wetland rules and regulations. It was very helpful.
Attached is the additional information you needed to complete the Jurisdictional Determination. In addition to the data
https:Hemai109.godaddy.com/window/print/?f=html&h=428589918&ui=1 5/6/2016

Print:: Workspace Webmail Page 2 of 2
point I did in the wetland area near where the drainage feature discharges to the culvert near Scientific Street, I did an
another data point in the wetland portion of the drainage feature (DP -2A.) Earlier I had done a data point just outside the
bed of the drainage feature (DP -2) and the soils for that one did not exhibit hydric characteristics
Let me know if you need anything else and of course if you need we can provide you a more dressed up sketch. As we
discussed, you will be able to issue the permit (NWP 18) and waive mitigation for any wetland impacts associated with
the proposed development provided wetland impacts are below 0 1 acre. After measuring the features' limits as we
discussed prior to your leaving the site, I am convinced that the proposed impacts for the site are well below the 0 1 acre
threshold
J Ashley Brown, P E.
Senior Engineer
153 Brozzini Court, Suite C
Greenville, SC 29615
Office:[phone] Fax [phone] Cell -[phone]
GEOTECHNICAL - ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
SPECIALTY INSPECTIONS - LAND SURVEYING
CONSTRUCTION & MATERIALS TESTING - LABORATORY TESTING
Please consider that This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to whom they are addressed and should not be shared with competing firms and/or individuals If you
are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to them, you may not copy, forward, disclose,
or otherwise use it, or any part of it, in any way. To do so may be unlawful. If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please
advise the sender immediately
Copyright© 2003-2016 All rights reserved
https://emai109.godaddy.com/window/print/?f=html&h=428589918&ui=1 5/6/2016

A,
1 ,GREAT;, -
�•lJ1 Z�-
7 0 C 0,
cu, 2
(D 0 �_
3 � h 3 C M
s
r)�A v c
rD
Ln Q,'.
S.
�-
rD
o 1
GD
t
��
A�,,
-N 0 :3-:E
t
VI
cn
--
0
W,F,
CD
TI,
Z, V T
r � � Oil j

Water Resources
ENVIR0NNhN(I\L0L,A, Iv
March 21, 2016
Mr. Ashley Brown
EAS Professionals
153 Brozzini Ct, Suite C
Greenville, SC 29615
PAT NICCRORY
DONAI D R VAN DER VAART
S. JAY ZIN-INIERN•IAN
Subject Property Wrenn Farm, 1410 Greensboro Rd, High Point NC, Guilford County
On -Site Determination for Applicability to the Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500)
Dear Mr Brown
On March 16, 2016, at your request and in your attendance, Sue Homewood conducted an on-
site determination to review features located on the subject project for stream determinations
with regards to the above noted state regulations Doug Spell with the Jemsite Development
was also present during the site visit.
The Division acknowledges the areas and boundaries Identified as jurisdictional wetlands by the
USACE. The attached map accurately depicts an Intermittent stream as determined by the
Division stream identification method
Please note that at the time of this letter, all perennial stream channels and jurisdictional
wetlands found on the property are subject to the mitigation rules cited above These
regulations are subject to change in the future. In addition, all Intermittent and perennial
streams within the Randleman Lake Watershed are subject to the Randleman Lake Riparian
Buffer Protection Rules, 15A NCAC 02B .0250
The owner (or future owners) should notify the Division (and other relevant agencies) of this
decision in any future correspondences concerning this property. This on-site determination
shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter.
450 W. Hanes klill Road, Sude 300,1binston-Salem, North Carolina 27105
Phone [phone] FAX [phone] l Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
Internet www ncdenr gov - www ncwater org

Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the Division or Delegated
Local Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a
determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to
the Director in writing c/o Wetlands and Buffers Permitting and Compliance Unit, 1650 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650. Individuals that dispute a determination by the Division
or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" surface water from the buffer rule may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter.
Applicants are hereby notified that the 60 -day statutory appeal time does not start until the
affected party (including'downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. The
Division recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be certain that third
party appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which
conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and
binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the mitigation rules and the buffer rules and does
not approve any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State or their
associated buffers If you have any additional questions or require additional information please
contact me at 336-776-9693 or sue [e-mail]
Sincerely,
Sue Homewood
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Enclosures- USGS Topo Map
EAS provided stream location drawing
cc Doug Spell, Jemsite Development (via email)
Terry Kuneff, City of High Point (via email)
David Bailey, USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office (via email)
DWR, Winston-Salem Regional Office

SCALE 1:24 000
K1.911 1TEAS 2
L'C1J 500 C DIETERS 000 'LOCO
0.=
0
IV LES
iOCG C 1000 Z.00 301 4C 0C 5115 EUX 700C 8000 9000 i000G
FE ET
CONTOUR I.IN IERVAL 10 FEET
NORTH AMERICAN VEIMCAL DATUM OF 19S3
HIGH POINT EAST, NC
2010
USGS Topographic Survey, Dated 2010 1 North
EASPr ' ct 181efl2nds Rpyipw
Location: +/-. Greensboro Road Hiah Point, NC
EAS Project NO: EAS 15-634
CIVIL • GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING • SURVEYING- Source: USGS
SPECIAL INSPECTIONS LABORATORY & CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TESTING Date: Feb. 2016 Scale: NTS Figure 1

1
r
1
f
. 1
ZY
' 15' STREET YARD �'- `-s► �,(
15.` UTILITY EASEMENT f

Print:: Workspace Webmail
RE: Stormwater and Stream Buffers - Wrenn Farm PUD
TERRY KUNEFF [terry kuneff@highpointnc gov]
Sent: 5/4/2016 4:03 PM
To: "Doug Spell" <doug.spell@jrvannoy com>
Cc: abrown@eas-pro corn, "Allan Fortner" <allan@lpa-inc net>, "Jeff Flattery"
<jeff.flattery@jemsitedevelopment com>
Doug,
Page 1 of 2
As follow up to our meeting, we met to review and discuss the determinations of the USACOE and DENR
representatives along with your proposal for the proposed stormwater pond. Based on this information,
the City is in agreement with the conceptual plan for the Wrenn Farm PUD presented and concur with the
proposed conceptual stormwater measures. A detailed review of the water quality structures will be
performed once submitted for approval.
Thanks,
TERRY KUNEFF
P.E., CFM
CITY OF HIGH POINT
CIVIL ENGINEER III
2115 Hamilton, Room xxxl High Point, NC 27260
336 883 8583 1 m 336 6013785 fax [phone]
[e-mail] I www.highpolntnc.gov
Follow Us—
Please be aware that e-mail and attachments sent to and from this address are subject to the North Carolina
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties
From: Doug Spell [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 8:38 AM
To: TERRY KUNEFF
Cc: [e-mail]; Allan Fortner; Jeff Flattery
Subject: Stormwater and Stream Buffers - Wrenn Farm PUD
Terry -
Thank you for taking time to meet with Ashley, Allan and I yesterday to discuss the redesign of the
stormwater measures in the vicinity of N. Scientific Street within the Wrenn Farm PUD. As discussed, the
stormwater measures were redesigned following field visits of the area with the USACOE and DENR
representatives. You had received and reviewed the information from the USACOE and DENR and
indicated you were comfortable with the determinations. Based on this the Intermittent stream area,
wetland area, and buffers were identified. Our Civil Engineer then redesigned the stormwater measures to
incorporate a wet pond to serve the project that did not encroach on the buffers.
https:Hemai109.godaddy.com/window/print/?f=html&h=440866386&uj=1 5/4/2016

Print:: Workspace Webmail Page 2 of 2
As you indicated, a revised Sketch Plan is not necessary since these revisions pertain only to the
stormwater design and can be addressed and reviewed by you with the Site Plan process.
Our next step is the submittal of the NWP 18 to Mr. Bailey with the USACOE. Ashley will send a copy of the
submittal package to you for your records. Likewise, once we have approval from the USACOE we will
ensure you have a copy of that as well. Depending on timing, we may submit the site plans to the City for
review in tandem with the review and permitting by the USACOE.
Thanks again for your time and guidance as we move forward with this project. I also appreciate your offer
for us to contact you as needed with any questions.
Regards -
Doug
S. Douglas Spell, P.E.
Senior Project Manager \ Broker
Jemsite Development, LLC
336-846-2250 (w) 1336-877-6693 (c) 1336-846-1677 (fax)
'JEMSITE
�+ DEVELOPMENT
This message and any attachment are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which
it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged and
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you are directed not to read, disclose, distribute
or otherwise use this transmission. If you have received this communication in error, please erase
all copies of the message and its attachments and notify the sender immediately. Any opinions
contained in this e-mail, explicit or implied, are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of Vannoy Construction.
Copyright © 2003-2016 All rights reserved.
https:Hemai109.godaddy.com/window/print/?f=html&h=440866386&ui=1 5/4/2016

•ti i
ATTACH M E,NT Cr
Avoidance andWinimization -
,

Avoidance and Minimization During Project Design
The design team considered several alternate site layouts to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional
areas. These included different wet pond configurations, the use of subsurface biocells, construction of
retaining walls and the use of geogrids to allow steeper slopes on the sides of the wet ponds. The final
design was able to totally avoid impacts to the intermittent stream and its associated buffers while
avoiding the construction of retaining walls or the use of steep slopes on the wet pond embankment. The
result is a stormwater control structure which in our opinion will provide superior sediment and
stormwater control while being easier to maintain. The attached figures depict an earlier wet pond design
that would have caused impacts to the intermittent stream and buffers and the final design which avoids
these impacts.

P:115.027 NC- Wrenn Farms ResiUent,—WG\Civil Dr—g-SACE EAMb115\15,021 USACE—Ibft-g I La I: —d AG -d.
May 13.2016.112:11 by.11-
IE
� a
o �
CD elr
O cr
cl 6'®
"C O
C
1
1 —
. I
I
i i 1
I
H c
Oa �`
m
9
m
D
y
m
y
A
0
-0 ()
o
m
C
m
m
r /
2
Z
z
m
D A0
A
<
z
I
I
II
co
D
C
m
r
T
9
C
O
' is
z'.
•� �
_ AG "
wZp \
\ �... n . i yp - -�__ \
>�a/
A
AGSt
__
i
I
ir
F
A
0
0 P-
n
<
Izz0
O
r
i
D
�,l -"
9-
Baa °�►
�, � � �� \u I
�.. r ♦i
/
G
3
(�
m
3
A
f7
A
0
O
O
ti
O
z
2
z
z
o
0
F
1
e g
II v. A
c o 1 1
c
4 1 1
n
ti 1 11
I
1
n
I 1
o
1
m
9
m
D
y
m
y
A
0
-0 ()
o
m
C
m
m
n
m
2
Z
z
m
D A0
A
<
z
X
co
D
C
m
r
T
9
C
O
z'.
=
�_ D
pm
A
O
0-OG7r
A
0
w
n
<
Izz0
O
z
D
A
3
(�
m
3
A
f7
A
m
9
D
A
m L
1'l
0
> —n
C
A
0
-0 ()
o
m
D
X
Zm
~
Z
z
>
D
C
m
r
T
9
C
O
71
2
pm
A
O
A
0
w
z
<
O
z
A
3
(�
m
0
O
O
O
z
z
z
0
Z p
o p
m�
m z ar,r
< a c H r D
�n HDZ
xniN O z 0
IV7 1
n= �-
m
z
o=Zrn
r -a1.w
m L
1'l
0
> —n
m
r 3
�-+D
rZ;a
0
-0 ()
< n m
N
r P.M
m ..�
Zm
Z p
o p
m�
m z ar,r
< a c H r D
�n HDZ
xniN O z 0
IV7 1
n= �-
m
z

P:\15.027 NC- Wrenn Farms ResiJenf.l\OWG\Civil --g- 05.027 USACE Exbibil New P -d -g I Lay-: P— A --
May 1).2016.112:5] by .Ilan
I
,
1
I
I ,
• I
� I
I / _
I
C� IE
�1IE
CD 69
lot
O Q
CD
cc /
G
I - /
O'
I "
ti
8 ZW copr
D
C n N \\ w i W yJ \ \
D
C) fooZ
'
<r ' I
A Z 1
,. oNm00�
_ Y I
n
co
- D
ml
D � a
Q
m
D O D y
0 x z
m. .
CD
(n
n p cr) m e C) 1 1
b Q 4
ti a o Ow o 1 1
a a 1 1
v 1 1
a 1
r
m � 1
p 1
i ( 1
s \
1
I
VJ 2 C
•.�.I
z G) m
(�
n
D
O
y
A
O
=
pOp
D
0 rr^^
-0 V!
v
m
z
c
3
�m
m
n
m
m
=
m
„
m
A
aoDz
y
o
75
75
O :
vyxm
X
p D
C
z
z
m
e
a�T
m
c
m
O
oz
1T=7
W
Z o
1
p
n
O
P.
O
c
z
n
�
p
o
A
x
;
v
3
A
A
A
VJ 2 C
•.�.I
z G) m
(�
Q= Z
m -0Z
m
< m
o
> —n
�
m
�
0 rr^^
-0 V!
v
m
f�
�m
a
o
3
aoDz
y
Cr
I
m
AO
m
D
C
z
z
m
e
m
m
m
O
m
m
1
p
n
O
P.
O
c
z
o
A
x
;
C
m
D
n
m
�
Oo
O
Z
Z
o
O
VJ 2 C
•.�.I
z G) m
(�
Q= Z
m -0Z
m
< m
o
> —n
m
r
KBD
rz�
0 rr^^
-0 V!
< n M
N
; W r
m wq
f�
�m
i
NONE
n N
D
o T
�P
tiDN z
z
D9r
OM
n a c
m r L
f�
vx�i'
0zo
aoDz
N�
Cr
I
i
NONE
on
II

ATTACHMENT D
Stormwater Management Narrative and Drawings

GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The proposed Wrenn Farms site is located between Greensboro Road and North
Scientific Street at the intersection of Penny Road. The proposed development includes
(5) commercial outlots (assumed 85% impervious - CN = 94), (69) multifamily units and
approximately (103) single family lots (1/4 acre - CN = 83). Penny Road will be
extended through the development to connect over to Penny Road Extension. In order
to meet stormwater quality and quantity requirements, (3) wet ponds are proposed
throughout the site. These devices will meet the 85% TSS removal requirement and the
1 st flush requirement to detain the 1 st inch of runoff for 2-5 days. See below for tables
showing the comparison of pre and post -development flows. Also, see the following
pages for pre and post -development drainage area maps and hydraflow calculations.
PREDEVELOPMENT RUNOFF (CFS)
Storm Event
Area 1
Area 2
Area 3
Area 4
2 year
22.04
16.23
14.50
72.04
10 year
40.21
29.16
26.32
131.54
25 year
51.52
37.19
33.66
168.59
50 year
60.53
43.58
39.50
198.12
100 year
69.73
50.09
45.45
228.25
POST -DEVELOPMENT
RUNOFF
(CFS)
Storm
Analysis Point 4
Pre
Post
Event
Analysis Point 1
Analysis Point 2
Analysis Point 3
Analysis Point 4
2 year
3.100
1.456
2.265
9.700
10 year
11.96
12.99
4.392
18.49
25 year
15.92
31.84
5.743
24.04
50 year
25.89
37.65
6.829
28.48
100 year
29.67
39.79
7.943
56.61
PRE VERSUS POST -DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF (CFS)
Storm
Event
Analysis Point
1
Analysis Point 2
Analysis Point 3
Analysis Point 4
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
2 year
22.04
3.100
16.23
1.456
14.50
2.265
72.04
9.70
10 year
40.21
11.96
29.16
12.99
26.32
4.392
131.54
18.49
25 year
51.52
15.92
37.19
31.84
33.66
5.743
168.59
24.04
50 year
60.53
25.89
43.58
37.65
39.50
6.829
198.12
28.48
100 year
1 69.73
1 29.67
1 50.09 1
39.79
1 45.45
1 7.943
1 228.25
1 56.61

As shown above the post -development flows are reduced for the 2- and 10 -year storms
for all analysis points.
Members of the design team met with the USA COE on March 10, the NC DEQ
on March 16 and the City of High Point on April 21, 2016 to define the limits of all
jurisdictional features and determine how to develop the site with minimal
impacts to identified jurisdictional features. These meetings resulted in agreement with
all parties that the proposed improvements could be done with only minimal impacts to
Wetland #1 under a NWP 18 with no impacts to Wetland #2, the jurisdictional
intermittent stream, or Randleman Buffers. This agreed upon approach is shown on
Figure 2 in the drawings following.

•:`.15.02]NC W,—farms bb.—lial!OWOSCi 1Orawirgs\15.0��_ Civil S,l C-100 C-10—gILayout: C-101E%CONO
May 1+, 2016 al 12 20 by a11an
\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ rye
\ \ \ \ tlY+p'd
\ \ \ \ \ \ lu \ \ \ \ ! Ye 1 \ \ h[
\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ O \ \ \
ri`5577N t hill
��•,
\ I\ €gll _
ctg
ed
it
+ _ L
\ \ \ \ �• \ �\ �� \`� \5 6555 ib \ .. II O ��v��
+fir
P_
t
�\ 3
\ $ s�
cS
st•5
t
5 !q N I
I Y I
X /
1
� I
I
_ i I
_ m
x
�(n
o z
< O
v0
m
�v
co
z
ch
>xn
R1.8(iE RM - N[SR. #1337
�0
Z
rO
� Z
_ m
Z
° i..
M
D
OZri
Z-
r
m
-i TD
Z T7
o
X
W
D
rn�
3
N
n
a D 2
z
C
m
m
m
Z
Z
j
c
m
n
Z
m
m.
0
v
m
O
]1
m
A
m
0
p
zoy
3
Q
0
2
T
x
O
D
X X
3
C
vt
D
~
D
O
Z
o
mA.�
0
>xn
R1.8(iE RM - N[SR. #1337
�0
Z
rO
� Z
_ m
Z
° i..
M
D
OZri
Z-
r
m
-i TD
Z T7
o
m
D
020
D
rn�
3
Z
a D 2
z
�
NZ
j
c
m
n
Z
m
i
0
v
m
O
Z
TO
m
A
m
0
p
A
{
2
T
x
O
A
X X
3
C
vt
D
~
D
O
0
1
Z
rO
� Z
_ m
Z
° i..
M
D
OZri
Z-
r
~avr
-i TD
Z T7
o
a ai
cn
020
D
rn�
m 0
Z
1
C1
Z
rO
� Z
'II
yz
D
mo D Z
~avr
pO
y
>
a ai
d xc+i D
m y
020
D
rn�
m 0
a D 2
z
C1
N
D
D
pO
y
D

P:115.02% NC -Wrenn Farms Residemial\OWG1GiNl Drawings\Pnase 2115.D22y111e 2-1 Set C-413-422 Grading t.dwg I Layout: C413 0-0 Grading
May 13. 20161113:52 by a11 -
to
CD a
e Q
C2
c
LL
1p
I
I
/
/
/
/
/
� 1
i
\ \ \ \ n
\
i'
o-
\ .1
,
W ,
y.
0
s
_M
D
A
a
D
0
D
IZ
> z - so > y
P m � � v
lo 0 0 s
° m m
m mo
- P ;z.
3
I
to
CD a
e Q
C2
c
LL
1p
I
I
/
/
/
/
/
� 1
i
\ \ \ \ n
\
i'
o-
\ .1
,
W ,
y.
0
°
O
m
_M
D
A
a
D
0
D
A
3
%
0
=
O
C
3
D
~
y
Z
y
Z
m
m
O
Dm
C
Z
Z
m
=
Km
O
a
_
m
.
z
O
D
€
p
A
I'm
r
y
O
6
I
z
r r
D
_F
O
A
a
;m
3
oEm
n
i
a
m
y
D
O
z
oz
0
/>
VJ
o
—
3
mT.
mT.
A
°
O
m
_M
D
A
n
Z ;u
D
A
3
%
0
=
Z m
3
u xnZU
~
S ��
m
'M
O
Dm
C
Z
Z
m
=
Km
O
_
m
O
A
p
A
y
O
6
z
O
A
3
n
i
m
y
D
O
z
oz
0
lm
DTii A __ D�IL
= v5 w a
mfo v° o ya�y
`m na �3 :0 0
m ; zoic
o m
F F xczy
H
\
I
1
✓✓/ .'t�,
----------
----------
--------------
---------------
In.
---------
_--------------
. F---------------
----------------
.0
-------------- ---------
_.-----------------
an -----------
-------------
---
1
O------
-----------------
= T
_M
m L
m
oZ
D
m
o
Z ;u
r�
cn
m e�
Drr
u+D 2
Z m
I 1 I
I I I I I
a I 1 j I 1
1 ,
1
y ��A a•9 r 1
1
f \
� 1
11
/ 1
,r
D
Z
[1 N
9
O
o �
n N D
'II
�
®
A I�z
CPQ mc'
Drr
u+D 2
\
1
I�
u xnZU
Q z a
S ��
a D �

P:\15.021 NC- Wrenn Farms Redd -,t l\DWG%CMI Drawings\15.Q27_1 51223 CMI Set C-119-123 Sill -9I L.y-1C-1190yera11 S9b
May 13.2016.113:31 by .11W
/
OdOtl D n
d s
b i5
a�3
o m I a 1,E
<p \ I 1
x
�! I
1
IN
� . I
\ Ir:
/
to
` ---
I
IN
y
� � I
I
1
_m 9�
R :
. ROAOIIn
``/
/'may Is .,
1 °.; ;'/ IN
I--------------
low.,f�NYIN I
r`
----------------
---
i 1 r , , IN;' ----------------
FCD�`. F----- ---------
__ - --- --- -- --- ----------------
�l - °
\ \\ ♦♦ \ ni�I I I I
o
o
m x--11 I I I
j I I I I I I
SII �- tl I I I
n
m
D _
r
IT!
m
z
> o �
m
m
v
D
=m
m0Z
OZ
0gZ
m
=mm
Z
O
m
c
m
m
n
x
z
z
m
3
O
3
�
N
o
m
m
A
T
D
A
D
0
z
0
o
O
m
o
a
A
.9
p
A
n
pe
z`11
»�
D r
°
o?A
Z r
A
C
N
m
D
n
_�
Oo
°
z
m
z
z
0
_
v
3
A
m
JC
m
T.
m
v
D
=m
m0Z
OZ
0gZ
m
=mm
Z
O
m
X
D
Cn
3
pl
m
0
m
3
�z
�
N
D =
i G1
A
T
D
m
D
0
z
0
O
z
o
a
A
.9
p
A
n
pe
z`11
cn
°
A
A
C
N
m
D
n
_�
Oo
°
z
z
z
0
m 110
S 1
n Y' m mm o� m s7o °x7'°O
°mi ez°o yO"> Di°1nz ny
g 'gym m o pPs D ��
oge D J D
z 0 0
_ �� ; Z !
iii
v
m
C
=m
m0Z
OZ
0gZ
zT
�D
=mm
Z
tiN<y
KZ
C-)
D
Cn
ZXq
x�z
m
0
iii
1
0
m�
oD�s
tiN<y
ui
x�z
Dz
ozo
=o
o m
�z
D
D =
i G1
nz
iii
••

P:%15.02) NC- Wrenn Farm, R -- —G-1-28 S dIg I layout PREDE—OPMENT
May 13. 016 n 12:31 by wM16n•y
O 1
Im
M
z R"/
\
ion
n z ;a
c1 11 11 m M
5 i p
\ \ 65 S k r m
di
1 P
P
' 0
1
9
t
' I II II m m
✓`� $, JJnn
i •,
M
w
I I C)z D >;0, a
• ? ° IIm'
~ D
1 ID t0 II a7
3 y
r C7 - ot,0
' I \
• r
s I
n z ;u �;omm
' -S1
I a I F
D D
I y w m
830-
I
-----------------
ts
\
we' v v y vv
Y \,�
,
r / —
---------
1
\
-------------------
o
D --------------
1 ----
o
I I I I
I I
✓' North ScientifiLM
c Street = �`\
-woo,
f AdIk R/M-KCS.R #1731 \
?1
v
m
O
W
>
D
D
ti
i
m
m
N
AAO
n
v
c
!^
m
n
m
z
z
z
-n
�m
D
W
A
0
>m
aim
m
z
m
m
o
3
m
�=
C
m
o m
oz
F
O
�s
w
r
O
Z
xc
O
;�
m
x
3
..36
m�
Dm
n
D
O
�
m
�
O
o
Z
�
z
3
A
JC
mT.
?1
v
m
D
v
A
T
A
v
ti
m
z
m
7J
m
0
>m
m
z
m
m
3
m
p
TO
m
O
w
O
Z
xc
O
x
3
n
D
O
�
m
�
O
o
Z
z
v
z
O
P—
.Z7
m
Z
Z
D
0 0 'I
m �
�s
F N y< y N D z
w 0 z o
N c o n z
c m 2 n
y i C)
m m y N
^ n z
n
p w O y
C A10
D
fi
pR
7'r
r�'
a

P\15.037NC- Wrenn Farms R.,o,e tial\DWG\SWM\160030_15.017SWM.d.g I Layout: POST—VELOPMENT
May 13. 2016 at 12.30 by —1-y
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\
met
A 4 9W
XA
. is•
V
O
d
d ,
�DNp r
—
m>
0
—
,a$ �I"
_
-���.,`���r✓'
'f
NorthSaentificStreet
Ablk R/M_KCS.R.
Da= ;
"rjoo
3
N733�zuWo
m
..
O vl
C�
Dp
�
��
O
m �
N
1
z
i y
m
m>
0
nd
m
m
o
o
O
(n
3
M-
m
..
0
m
Z
Z
-n
��
yC1
m �
N
oi
r
z
m
D
v
o
m
<'
0
.2s
G)
Z m
;=
C
cDi m
m
C-)
m
0mo'
�
n r
z
2
;13 "
T
rn
m o
Q
n
C
n
cn
iV
> i
M
0
o
—
0
0
z
Z
o
_
A
JC
JC
m
n
0
m
a
�
m
p
o
m
CP) :< i
_ < y
rr >
m D t
E:<
L. n n 2 fR
3
D
m m
yC1
m �
N
N O
m
m
y
m
o
m
e
0
m
n
o
A
C-)
m
z
2
;13 "
T
Q
C
n
cn
m
D
0
0
0
z
o
z
O
R
low 'N
j JOU
aAl
tf
WOMEN
IN
0
m
a
ME
—�
a,
CP) :< i
_ < y
rr >
m D t
E:<
L. n n 2 fR
G= a
D
m m
yC1
m �
n z
n
"
WOMEN
IN
Somme
ME
111111111

l
Historic•and Archeological Resources
v

Wrenn Farms Cultural/Historic Resources
Although sites listed on the NRHP were identified in the vicinity of the overall property, including
the George T. Perry House to the north of the subject site across Greensboro Road and the Harper
Welch House to the northwest, none of the listed sites are in the vicinity of the portion of the
property for which the Nationwide Permit is being sought. In addition this portion of the overall
property is a low-lying area and the planned improvements on and around it will not affect the
public view or historical context of the listed properties. For these reasons planned
improvements in the area of the requested Nationwide Permit will have no negative impacts on
the nearby listed historic properties.