20201265 Ver 1_Pre-Filing Meeting Request Attachment_20200924

Barwell Road (SR 2251) Road Improvements Project
Natural Resources Memorandum

Wake County, North Carolina

Prepared for:
City of Raleigh

Prepared by:

1 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 600
Raleigh, NC 27603

June 2019

Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI i June 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
2.0 WATER RESOURCES --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
3.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES -------------------------------------------------------------- 2
Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S. --------------------------------------------------- 2
Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern -------------- 2
Construction Moratoria ----------------------------------------------------------------- 2
N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules ---------------------------------------------------------- 3
Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters ---------------------------- 3
Wetland and Stream Mitigation ------------------------------------------------------- 3
3.6.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts ------------------------------------------ 3
3.6.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts ---------------------------------------------- 3
Endangered Species Act Protected Species ------------------------------------------ 3
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act ---------------------------------------- 6
Endangered Species Act Candidate Species ----------------------------------------- 6
Essential Fish Habitat -------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
4.0 REFERENCES ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7

Appendix A ........................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 1. Vicinity Map ...............................................................................................10
Figure 2. Jurisdictional Features Map .......................................................................11
Appendix B ...................................................................................................................... 13

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Water resources in the study area ........................................................................ 1
Table 2. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area .............................. 1
Table 3. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area ...................... 2
Table 4. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the study area ................................. 2
Table 5. Federally protected species listed for Wake County. .......................................... 3

Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI 1 June 2019
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Raleigh plans to make improvements to Barwell Road (SR 2551) from Rock
Quarry Road (SR 2452) to Berkeley Lake Road including and the realignment of Pearl
Road (SR 2250) in Wake County, North Carolina (Figure 1). The following Natural
Resources Memorandum has been prepared to comply with federal and state environmental
regulations. The project study area is primarily composed of residential land use
fragmented with maintained roadsides, forest cutovers, and mixed pine hardwood forests.
METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS
A wetland and stream delineation was completed by SEPI biologists Chris Sheats, PWS,
Robert Lepsic, PWS, and Rachel Quindlen on March 7 and April 4, 2019 for the
approximate 82-acre project study area. Endangered species surveys were completed on
May 3, 2019. Potentially jurisdictional wetlands were identified by using applicable
methods as defined in the 1987 USACE manual and the USACE Regional Supplement to
the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Supplement (Version 2.0, November 2010). Stream determinations were completed in
accordance with the USACE Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05-05, Ordinary High Water
Mark Identification for Streams and NCDWR’s Stream Identification Manual (Version
4.11, 2010). Jurisdictional streams and wetland areas encountered during the site
assessment were marked sequentially with flagging and a GPS point with sub-meter
accuracy was taken at each flag.
2.0 WATER RESOURCES
Water resources in the study area are part of the Upper Neuse River basin [U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201. One stream was identified in the project
study area (Table 1) (Figure 2). The physical characteristics of this stream are provided in
Table 2.
Table 1. Streams in the project study area
Stream Name Map ID
NCDEQ Index
Number
Best Usage
Classification
UT to Big Branch SA 27-34-11 C; NSW
Table 2. Physical characteristics of streams in the project study area
Map ID
Bank
Height (ft)
Bankfull
Width (ft)
Water
Depth (in)
Channel
Substrate Velocity Clarity
SA 2-4 5 3-8 Sand Moderate Clear
No ponds were identified within the project study area. Stream SA originates as a stream
within a headwater wetland (i.e. wetland WA). SA then flows under Rock Quarry Road,
out of the project study area, and eventually converges with Big Branch. Big Branch flows
into Walnut Creek, a tributary of the Neuse River.
The Neuse River is designated as a Class C and NSW water by the North Carolina DEQ.
There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present
in the project study area. There are no designated High-Quality Waters (HQW) or water
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI 2 June 2019
supply watersheds (WS-I or WS-II) within one mile downstream. The 2016 Final 303(d)
list of impaired waters lists Walnut Creek 27-34-(4)b which is approximately 1.4 miles
downstream of the project study area. Walnut Creek is listed for copper, fecal coliform,
and PCB fish tissue advisory.
3.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
One potentially jurisdictional stream was identified in the project study area (Table 3)
(Figure 2). The location of the stream is shown on Figure 3 (Appendix A). North Carolina
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) stream identification forms are included for the
stream in Appendix B. The physical characteristics and water quality designations of each
stream are detailed in Section 3.2. All streams in the project study area have been
designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation. SA is located in
the Neuse River basin, and therefore is subject to buffer rules.
Table 3. Jurisdictional characteristics of streams in the project study area
Map ID Length (ft.) Classification
Compensatory
Mitigation
Required
River Basin
Buffer
SA 316 Perennial Yes Not Subject
SA 403 Perennial Yes Subject
Total 719
One potentially jurisdictional wetland was identified within the project study area (Figure
2). Wetland classification data is presented in Table 4. United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) wetland determination forms are included in Appendix B.
Table 4. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the project study area
Map ID
NCWAM
Classification
Hydrologic
Classification Area (ac.)
WA Headwater Forest Riparian 0.07

Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern
Wake County is not subject to Coastal Area Management regulations.
Construction Moratoria
There will be no construction moratoria associated with the project. Wake County is not
one of the 25 designated trout counties of North Carolina, the project area does not fall
within a designated trout watershed by USACE or NCDWR. However, the Neuse River,
located downstream of the project is classified as inland Anadromous Fish Spawning Areas
(AFSA). It is unlikely the project will affect these areas downstream.
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI 3 June 2019
N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
Streamside riparian zones within the project study area are protected under provisions of
the Neuse River Buffer Rules administered by NCDWR. Table 3 indicates that a portion
of stream SA is subject to buffer rule protection.
Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
No features within the project study area have been designated by the USACE as a
Navigable Water under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
Wetland and Stream Mitigation
3.6.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts
The City of Raleigh will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands
to the greatest extent practicable in choosing a preferred alternative and during project
design. At this time, no final decisions have been made regarding the location or design
of the preferred alternative.
3.6.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts
The City of Raleigh will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation
opportunities once a final decision has been rendered on the location of the preferred
alternative. If on-site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation could be purchased from an
approved mitigation bank to offset stream impacts. If no credits are available through an
existing mitigation bank, mitigation could be purchased through North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality’s Division of Mitigation Services (NC DMS).
Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of June 27, 2018, the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) lists 7 federally
protected species for Wake County (Table 5). A brief description of each species’ habitat
requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey
results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current
best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
Table 5. Federally protected species listed for Wake County.
Scientific
Name Common Name
Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle BGPA N No Effect
Notropis mekistocholas Cape Fear shiner E N No Effect
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded
woodpecker E N No Effect
Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf wedgemussel E N No Effect
Parvaspina steinstansana Tar River spinymussel E N No Effect
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI 4 June 2019
Scientific
Name Common Name
Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Elliptio lanceolata Yellow lance T N No Effect

Rhus michauxii

Michaux’s sumac E Y
May Affect,
Not Likely to
Adversely
Affect
E – Endangered
T – Threatened

Cape Fear shiner
USFWS optimal survey window: April-June (tributaries); Year-round (large rivers)
Habitat Description: The Cape Fear shiner lives in streams and rivers within the Cape Fear
basin. Streams consisting of gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates, as well as slow
riffles and pools, provide optimal habitat. The project study area is in the Neuse
River basin, therefore this project will have no effect on this species. Additionally,
a review of the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database on April 10, 2019
documented no occurrences of this species within one mile of the project study
area. The biological conclusion is No Effect.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Red-cockaded woodpecker
USFWS optimal survey window: Year-round; November-early March (optimal)
Habitat Description: The red-cockaded woodpecker prefers mature, open pine stands at
least 60 years old for nesting, and open stands of pines at least 30 years old for
foraging, preferably with a slightly open understory. Pine stands at least 60 years
old considered suitable nesting habitat were not observed within the project study
area. Pine tree stands at least 30 years of age considered suitable foraging habitat
were not observed within the study area, however pine trees in that age range were
observed fragmented among residential areas along Barwell Road.t. Additionally,
NHP records generated on April 10, 2019 documented no occurrences of the red-
cockaded woodpecker within one mile of the project study area. The biological
conclusion for this species is No Effect.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Dwarf wedgemussel
USFWS optimal survey window: Year-round
Habitat Description: The dwarf wedgemussel lives on stable muddy sand, sand, and gravel
bottoms in creeks and rivers of varying sizes, in areas of slow to moderate current
and little silt deposition. In the southern portion of its range, it is often concentrated
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI 5 June 2019
in areas along logs or in root mats. NHP records generated on April 10, 2019
document occurrences of dwarf wedgemussel within one mile of the project study
area. The stream (SA) present is a small headwater stream with a shifty sand
substrate. The stream was assessed for freshwater mussels and none were observed
in the project study area and to an extent 400 meters downstream. The reach of
stream SA observed does not have suitable habitat for the dwarf wedgemussel,
therefore the project is anticipated to have no effect on the dwarf wedgemussel.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Tar River spinymussel
USFWS optimal survey window: Year-round
Habitat Description: Optimal habitat for the Tar River spinymussel consists of fast-flowing
streams with substrates of silt-free uncompacted gravel or coarse sand. Stream SA
in the study area is a small, headwater stream with moderate flow and evidence of
flashy flood conditions. Additionally, NHP records generated on April 10, 2019
documented no occurrences of the Tar River spinymussel within one mile. The
stream was assessed for freshwater mussels and none were observed in the project
study area and to an extent 400 meters downstream. The reach of stream SA
observed does not have suitable habitat for the Tar River spinymussel. This project
is anticipated to have no effect on the Tar River spinymussel.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Yellow lance
USFWS optimal survey window: Year-round
Habitat Description: Optimal habitat for the yellow lance consists of well oxygenated and
flowing streams with coarse gravel or sand. Excellent water quality is a requirement
for the yellow lance. Additionally, NHP records generated on April 10, 2019
documented no occurrences of the yellow lance within one mile. The stream was
assessed for freshwater mussels and none were observed in the project study area
and to an extent 400 meters downstream. The reach of stream SA observed does
not have suitable habitat for freshwater mussels, and the project is anticipated to
have no effect on the yellow lance.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

Michaux’s sumac
USFWS optimal survey window: May—October
Habitat Description: Michaux’s sumac most commonly grows on highway rights-of way,
roadsides, or on the edges of artificially maintained clearings. NHP records
generated on April 10, 2019 document occurrences of Michaux’s sumac within one
mile of the project study area. There is a known population on Barwell Road to the
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C.
SEPI 6 June 2019
northeast, which was visited for reference before surveys were conducted, on May
3, 2019. Roadside habitats and adjacent woodlands were surveyed and Michaux’s
sumac was not found. However, since this project is within one mile of the project
study area, the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: May Affect – Not Likely to Adversely Affect

Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies
of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically
within 1.0 mile of open water. Bodies of water typically need to be at least 2 acres or larger
to be able to support a bald eagle population.
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1-mile
radius of the project limits, was performed on April 11, 2019, using 2010 color aerials.
The Neuse River is the only water body large enough to support foraging habitat within
one mile of the project study area and is 0.85 miles to the east. The bald eagle survey area
designated by U.S. Fish and Wildlife is a 660 foot buffer around the project study area.
Land use within and in the 660 feet surrounding the project study area is highly urbanized
and does not contain water bodies large enough to support bald eagle habitat. Additionally,
a review of the NCNHP database on April 10, 2019, revealed no known occurrences of this
species within one mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of habitat, known
occurrences, and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that
this project will not affect this species.
Endangered Species Act Candidate Species
As of June 27, 2018, the USFWS has no listed Candidate Species for Wake County.
Essential Fish Habitat
There is no Essential Fish Habitat located within the project study area. Essential Fish
Habitat will not be impacted or effected.
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C
SEPI 7 June 2019
4.0 REFERENCES
[NCDWR] North Carolina Division of Water Resources. NC Surface Water
Classifications [web application].
https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6e125ad7628f
494694e259c80dd64265. (Accessed on April 10, 2019)
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station.
Vicksburg, Mississippi.
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web
application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available
http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: April 10, 2019).
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2016 Final 303(d) list.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2016/2016_N
C_Category_5_303d_list.pdf
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). 1998. Hydrologic Units-North Carolina (metadata). Raleigh,
North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2012. Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and
Piedmont Region Version 2.0, ed. Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional
Working Group: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). 2018. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States,
Version 8.2 L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS,
in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Threatened and Endangered Species in North
Carolina: Wake County. Updated June 27, 2018.
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/wake.html .
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/bald-and-golden-eagle-
information.php. (Accessed: April 10, 2019).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Cape Fear shiner (Notropis mekistocholas)
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_cape_fear_shiner.html. (Accessed: April
10, 2019).
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C
SEPI 8 June 2019
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Red-cockaded woodpecker
(Picoides borealis) https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_red-
cockaded_woodpecker.html. (Accessed: April 10, 2019).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon)
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_dwarf_wedgemussel.html. (Accessed:
April 10, 2019).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Tar River spinymussel
(Parvaspina steinstansana)
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_tar_spinymussel.html. (Accessed: April
10, 2019).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Yellow lance (Elliptio lanceolata)
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?sId=4511. (Accessed: April 10,
2019).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Michaux’s sumac (Rhus michauxii)
https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_michauxs_sumac.html (Accessed: April
10, 2019).
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2016. Garner, North Carolina, Topographic
Quadrangle (7.5-minute series).

Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C
SEPI 9 June 2019

Appendix A
Figures

¯0 3,000 6,0001,500 Feet
Improvements to Barwell Road (SR 2251)from Rock Quarry Road (SR 2542) to Berkley Lake Road and Realignment of Pearl Road (SR 2250)
Wake County, North Carolina
May 2019
Figure 1Project Vicinity
Proje ct Vicinity
Legend
Proje ct Study Area
B
e
r
k
ele
y L
a
k
e
R
d
SA
SA
WABarwell RdPearl Rd
Rock Quarry Rd Holiday DrBattle Bridge Rd
Marshlane Way
R ic k er R d
Tomahawk Trl
Q u i t m a n T r lNational AvePric e Av e
B r a m b le to n A v e Tealbrook DrRoyal Acres Rd
Barwell Park Dr
M
arcony W
ay
Laurel Glen DrLeamon Wright DrCane Garden DrForest Point Rd Cont
i
nent
al
WayChatmoss Dr
F
r
a
n
k
s
Dr
Elkton Dr
Willano W
ay
A pperson D rDalcross Rd
Futura Ln
Wynmore Rd
A
dvantis Dr
Gamble Dr
Grandover DrIvybridge LnWeddi
ngton RdLakinsville Ln
Chehaw DrPaint R ock Ln
Potecasi DrBran dy cre st Dr
L ad ish L nPine Barren LnBracey Pl
Cha ste al Trl
Griffis Glen DrBryanstone Pl Talbot Ct WFinestra WaySher
r
i
f
Pl
WBearmont PlDeeda CtVal
l
ej
o Trl Carretta CtLane Ave
Herston Rd Baseline RdRock Ave
A r b a u g h C t
Flat Fern Dr Asgar CtNeals Creek DrVolkswalk PlAthens Clark WayTallis CtGeary TrlPerkins Ridge RdDowse Cir
Dolle CtP earl R d
Paint R ock Ln
This Exhibit is for planning purposes only andshown herein does not meet NC 47-30Requirements and therefore is not for design,construction, or recording or transfer of title.The Exhibit was compiled from availableinformation obtained from the sources listedbelow.Sources:NCDOT, NC OneMap, ESRI
I0 500 1,000250
Feet
Figure 2. Aerial Features Map
Improvements to Barwell Road (SR 2551) from Rock Quarry Road (SR 2542) to Berkley Lake Road and realignment of Pearl Road (SR 2250)
Wake County, North Carolina
Barwell Road P roject Study Area
Potentially Jurisdictio nal Wetlands (0.07 acre)
Ne use Rive r B uffe rs
Jurisdictio nal S tre am-Neuse River Buffers Required (403 feet)
Jurisdictio nal S tre am-No Buffers Required (316 feet)
WASA
SA
0 10050Feet
Natural Resources Memorandum City of Raleigh, Wake County, N.C
SEPI 12 May 2019
Appendix B
Stream and Wetland Forms
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Project/Site: Latitude:
Evaluator: County: Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream Determination: Other:
e.g. Quad Name: Stream is at least intermittent if
•19 or perennial if •30
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong SCORE
1a. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-Channel structure: ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, ripple-
pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11.Second or greater order channel No = 0 Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual.
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong SCORE
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table?No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal = ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong SCORE
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20.Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)0 1 2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5 Other=0
*perennial stream may also be identified using other methods. See p.35 of manual.
Notes:

Bank Height (feet)
Bankfull Width (feet)
Water Depth (inches)
Channel Substrate
Velocity:
Clarity:
Sketch:
04/04/2019
32.75
Perennial
GARNER
13
8
11.7 5
3
1
2
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
2
1
1
0.5
2
0.5
3
3
3
1
1
0
0
1.5
1.5
0.75
Sand
Moderate
Clear
2
5
3-8
pea clams present
aquatic worms
3 larval salamanders
green algae along entire channel
water primrose
Barwell Road
35.729554
-78.556943
SA
WakeR. Quindlen, SEPI Engineering
3
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
WA-UP-01
04-Apr-19
2.0%
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Sampling Point:
Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
State:
°Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Datum:
naturally problematic?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Remarks:
R
Are Vegetation
Long.:
significantly disturbed?
Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope:
Investigator(s):
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
City/County:
, Soil
/
Soil Map Unit Name:
, or Hydrology
, Soil , or Hydrology
NWI classification:
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Section, Township, Range: S
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Barwell Road
City of Raleigh
R. Quindlen, C. Sheats
Slope
LRR P
Raleigh / Wake County
NC

-78.55506135.729757
Me - Mantachie soils None
NAD83

convex
Upland located on slight upslope of concave wetland.
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0 US Army Corps of Engineers
1.1
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Hydrology
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Hydrology does not meet wetland criteria.
Heavy canopy layer, sparse understory. Does not meet wetland vegetation criteria.
85
5
5
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Yes No
087.6%FACU
5.2%FAC
15.2%FAC
2.1%FAC
0.0%
97
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0 0
0.0%
0 0
0.0%
12 36
85 340
0
0 0
0.0%
97 376
0.0%
3.876
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0.0%
0.0%
0
0 0.0%
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Dominance Test is > 50%
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0
0.0%
= Total Cover
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less than
3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb stratum – Consists of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants,
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1 m)
in height.
Woody vines – Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
height.
WA-UP-01Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)
Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0 0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0 0.0%
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
0 0.0%
Tree stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless
of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb stratum – Consists of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants,
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines – Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
Four Vegetation Strata:
Five Vegetation Strata:
Liriodendron tulipifera
Ilex opaca
Carpinus caroliniana
Ulmus rubra
(Plot size:30' circular
(Plot size:30' circular
(Plot size:
(Plot size:30' circular
(Plot size:15' circular
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
Absolute
% Cover
Indicator
Status
1
1
1
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
WA-UP-01SoilSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1
1
3
3
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
6-12+
0-6
10YR
10YR
5/6
4/4
85
100
10YR 5/8 15 C M
Loam
Sandy Loam
Soil does not meet wetland criteria.
Other (Explain in Remarks)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
WA-WET-01
04-Apr-19
5.0%
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Lat.:
Hydric Soil Present?
Sampling Point:
Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
State:
°Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
Datum:
naturally problematic?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Remarks:
R
Are Vegetation
Long.:
significantly disturbed?
Local relief (concave, convex, none):Slope:
Investigator(s):
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
City/County:
, Soil
/
Soil Map Unit Name:
, or Hydrology
, Soil , or Hydrology
NWI classification:
Subregion (LRR or MLRA):
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Section, Township, Range: S
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Applicant/Owner:
Sampling Date:
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Barwell Road
City of Raleigh
R. Quindlen, C. Sheats
Channel (active)
LRR P
Raleigh / Wake County
NC
-78.55506135.729757
Me - Mantachie soils PFO
NAD83
concave
Wetland includes concave area surrounding the headwater stream SA's channel.
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0 US Army Corps of Engineers
2.9
10
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Hydrology
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)
True Aquatic Plants (B14)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Stream channel borders eastern side of wetland. Saturation of soil at 10", water-stained leaves, and oxidized rhizospheres present. Hydrology meets
wetland criteria.
Heavy herb layer. Slightly open canopy. Vegetation meets wetland criteria.
25
20
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60
30
10
5
0
0
0
Yes No
738.5%FAC
30.8%FACW
730.8%FAC
0.0%
100.0%
65
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40 40
0.0%
25 50
0.0%
165 495
0 0
0
0 0
0.0%
230 585
0.0%
2.543
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%FAC
28.6%OBL
9.5%OBL
4.8%FACW
0.0%
105
0.0%
0.0%
20
0 0.0%
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
Prevalence Index is ≤3.0
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
US Army Corps of Engineers
Dominance Test worksheet:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Prevalence Index = B/A =
(A/B)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation 1 (Explain)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Percent of dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
(B)
Tree Stratum
Shrub Stratum
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
Dominance Test is > 50%
0
0
0
0
20
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%FAC
0
40
0
0
0
0.0%
100.0%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
40
0.0%
= Total Cover
Sapling-Sapling/Shrub Stratum
1.
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
Definition of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines, approximately 20
ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in. (7.6 cm) or larger in
diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less than
3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding woody
vines, approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb stratum – Consists of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants,
including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
species, except woody vines, less than approximately 3 ft (1 m)
in height.
Woody vines – Consists of all woody vines, regardless of
height.
WA-WET-01Sampling Point:
)
)
)
)
)
Morphological Adaptations 1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0 0.0%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0 0.0%
VEGETATION (Five/Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants.
0 0.0%
Tree stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless
of height.
Sapling/shrub stratum – Consists of woody plants, excluding
vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb stratum – Consists of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants,
regardless of size, and all other plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vines – Consists of all woody vines greater than 3.28 ft
in height.
Four Vegetation Strata:
Five Vegetation Strata:
Acer rubrum
Alnus serrulata
Liquidambar styraciflua
Ligustrum sinense
(Plot size:30' circular
(Plot size:30' circular
(Plot size:
(Plot size:30' circular
Microstegium vimineum
Woodwardia areolata
Juncus effusus
Sambucus nigra
(Plot size:15' circular
Gelsemium sempervirens
Dominant
Species?
Rel.Strat.
Cover
Absolute
% Cover
Indicator
Status
1
1
1
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
WA-WET-01SoilSampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth
(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0
Dark Surface (S7)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
Redox Depressions (F8)
1
1
3
3
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
6-14+
5-6
0-5
10YR
10YR
10YR
4/2
4/4
4/3
85
100
100
10YR 5/4 15 C PL
Loam
Sand
Loamy Sand
Concentrations also present within soil matrix. Meets wetland criteria.
Other (Explain in Remarks)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)