20201569 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210315

DWR
Division of Water Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
October 26, 2020 Ver 3.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
r Yes
r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes r No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned
20201569
Is a payment required for this project?*
r No payment required
r Fee received
r Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office *
Fayetteville Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Spring Village
1a. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Jeff Harbour
1b. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
3/15/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Black River
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
C: Sw
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
35.5092
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
ID#
20201569
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date*
10/23/2020
Longitude:
-78.7226
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:*
Pre -Filing Time Clock has been reached for Spring Village - 20201569 Ver 1.msg
Version#*
1
What amout is owed?*
IT $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Chad Turlington:eads\ccturlington
1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
Version
1
158KB
A. Processing Information C^U
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Harnett

Is this a NCDMS Project
r Yes r No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
r Yes r No
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
* Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
r Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
r Yes
r No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
W Nationwide Permit (NWP)
r Regional General Permit (RGP)
r Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
r Yes r No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
W 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
r Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
r Individual Permit
29 - Residential Developments
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
F 401 Water Quality Certification - E)press
F Riparian Buffer Authorization
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
r Yes r No
Acceptance Letter Attachment
Spring Village DMS Acceptance.pdf
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
r Yes r No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
r Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
rJ Owner r Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
r Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Carolina Land Group
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Responsible party:
Kirby LaForce
2d.Address
375.82KB
*
r Yes r No
r Yes r No

Street Address
341 Kilmayne Drive
Address Line 2
City
Cary
Postal / Zip Code
27511
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Jeff Harbour
4b. Business Name:
Terracon Consultants, Inc
4c.Address
Street Address
2401 Brentwood Road
Address Line 2
Suite 107
city
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27604
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
Terracon Agent Authorization Form-2.pdf
State / Rovince / Rion
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Rovince / Rion
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
302.95KB
C. Project Information and Prior Project History O
1. Project Information
1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
1c. Nearest municipality/ town:
Angier
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
2b. Property size:
48
2c. Project Address
Street Address
152 Sundowner Lane
Address Line 2
city
Slate / Rovince / Region
Angier
NC
Postal / Zip Code
Country
USA
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Black River
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C: SW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*

Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300060101
4. Project Description and History
4a. 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 property is currently agriculture and abandoned residences. Several wooded areas are present and contain delineated and Corps approved wetlands and tributaries. Several man-
made ponds occur on the property as well. Surrounding land use is primarily agriculture and residential areas.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
topo.pdf 1.73MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
soils map.pdf 13.56KB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
6.5
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
310
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The purpose of the project is to provide affordable single-family homes to this region of Harnett County. The project layout has resulted in an efficient and low impact development that
only results in one small impact for a road crossing.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
The project as currently designed provides single-family lots and open space that will remain undisturbed. The site Will be accessed on Sundowner Lane from NC 210. The project
contains several road stubs that are a requirement of Harnett County for interconnectivity and future emergency access. The applicant does not control any activities on the adjoining
parcels where these studs are required to be placed. No detrimental indirect impacts are anticipated to result from this project. Typical construction equipment will be used including
graders, dump trucks, excavators, etc.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
1633-IMPACT MAP.pdf 1.06MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r Yes r No O Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
r Preliminary r Approved r Not Verified r Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2020-00870
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Jeff Harbour
Agency/Consultant Company: Terracon
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made bythe Corps or DWR
9/4/2020 USACE PJD
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
eSAW-2020-00870 Carolina Land Group PJD September 2020.pdf 2.62MB
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
r Yes r No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
C^)
1. Impacts Summary

la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
W Wetlands r Streams -tributaries
r Open Waters r Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
r Buffers
!a. Site #* (?) 2a1 Reason (?) 2b. Impact type * (?) 2c. Type of W. 2d. W. name* 2e. Forested * 2f. Type of 2g. Impact
Jurisdicition*(9) area*
mpact77#1 road crossing P Fleadwater Forest WHA Yes Both L(_I1r_0)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact 2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.000 0.110
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.110
2h. Comments:
NCWAM form attached
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation U
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The engineer has designed the project to avoid all wetlands and waters other than the small impact that is needed for the road crossing. The road
cannot be shifted due to an abutting property line.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
The road crossing is designed to impact the smallest area of wetland while still meeting all necessary engineering criteria. All applicable BMPs will be
used throughout the duration of project construction to prevent any additional wetland or ureters disturbance
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?
r Yes r No
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
r DWR W Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
r Mitigation bank W Payment to in -lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
r Yes r No
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
(lir�ear feet)
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWR only):
(square feet)
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
.11
4c. If using stream mitigation, what is the stream temperature:
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
(acres)
4h. Comments
applicant is proposing 1.5:1 ratio based on NCWAM rating of medium quality
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
r Yes r No
If no, explain why:
Project is not in a buffered basin or other buffered jurisdiction.
2. Stormwater Management Plan

2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
r Yes r No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
r Yes r No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater
program?
r Yes r No
r N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
r Local Government V State
State Stormwater Programs
W Phase II r Coastal Counties
r HWQ or ORW r Other
Comments:
The storm water on the site will be treated by sixwet ponds. The wet ponds are designed in accordance with the current NCDEQ MDC manual. The storm water will be reviewed and
permitted by NCDEQ DWQ.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
r Yes r No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)? *
r Yes r No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
r Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project is not anticipated to be a driver of development that would affect downstream water quality
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
r Yes r Nor NIA
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
r Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
r Yes r No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
r Yes r No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
r Yes r No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
r Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
r Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
r Yes r No
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
r Yes r No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?

Terracon biologists conducted a habitat evaluation and subsequent survey for Michaux's sumac in September 2020. No evidence of this species was
observed.
Consultation Documentation Upload
TE Survey memo September 2020.pdf 93.66KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
r Yes r No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOA EFH Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
r Yes r No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
Formal SHPO consultation
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
SHPO Response Letter.pdf 151.29KB
ER-20-2106.pdf 207.32KB
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
r Yes r No
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA website
Miscellaneous
Comments
Stub roads are a town requirement. The town requires developments to stub to undeveloped properties for cross access. The locations were chosen based on the layout of the internal
streets for the project. The streets were extended to any large undeveloped tracts as required by the town. There is not a requirement as to where on the property that the road is
stubbed as long as it is stubbed. The applicant is not responsible for any activities that may occur on adjacent parcels.
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
delineation.pdf 1.68MB
Wetland Impact Area.pdf 358.61 KB
NC WAM for impact area.pdf 140.94KB
Signature
*
F7 By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the INC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Jeff Harbour
Signature
Date
3/15/2021

March 11, 2021
Kirby LaForce
Carolina Land Group
341 Kilmayne Drive
Cary, NC 27511 Expiration of Acceptance: 9/12/2021
Project: Spring Village County: Harnett
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to
accept payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as
indicated in the table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in-
lieu fee mitigation program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts.
It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will
be approved. You must also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or
authorizations associated with the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will
expire. It is the applicant’s responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS receives a copy
of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must
be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the in-lieu fee to be paid by an applicant is
calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed on the DMS website.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts for which you are
requesting compensatory mitigation credit are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation
required and assigned to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the
impact amounts shown below.
River Basin Impact Location
(8-digit HUC) Impact Type Impact Quantity
Cape Fear 03030006 Riparian Wetland 0.11
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the In-Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the DMS in-lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Sincerely,
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: Jeff Harbour, agent
³
0 1,000 2,000500
Feet
Ogburn Property152 Sundowner LnAngier, Harnett County, North Carolina
EXHIBITNO.
Filename:
Date:
PM:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Approved By:
Project No.
Scale:
1
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1 in = 2,000 ft
February 2020
Project LocationHL207039CBD
CEW
CBD
SJK
Topo
Path: N:\GIS\2020\HL207039\Maps\Topo.mxd
Source: 2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i-cubed seamless USGS quadrangles (Angier and Coats, NC); Site Boundary provided by the client and based on Harnett County parcel data.Disclaimer: The inform ation depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. ESI does not warrant the work of regulatory agencies or other third parties data or inform ation.
Legend
Site Boun dary
Source: 2011 National Geographic Society/ESRI, i-cubed seamless USGSquadrangles (Angier and Coats, NC); Site Boundary provided by the client and based on Harnett County parcel data.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. ESI does not warrant the work of regulatory agencies or other third parties data or information.

SPRING VILLAGE
SOIL SURVEY MAP
SPRINGVILLAGEPROJECT NAMEREVISIONSCALEBCLIENTDRAWING SCALEDATE RELEASEDHORIZONTAL: 1"=250'OFW-12SHEET NUMBERPROJECT INFORMATIONDESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:CALEBSEAN1633OVERALLSITE PLANMARCH 2, 2021VICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALECAROLINA LANDGROUP, LLC341 Kilmayne Drive - Suite 201Cary, North Carolina 27511Phone:[phone]FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLYFINAL DRAWINGIMPACTAREATOTAL IMPACT AREA: 4,922 SFSITEHYACINTH LANE
SUNDOWNER LANE
AMARYLLIS LANE
ANASTASIA
STREET BLOODROOT STREETCLEMENTINE STREETHOSTA WAYCALLA LILY WAY
BLUEBOTTLE STREET
BLACKTHORN LANE
BEGONIA STREETLILAC COURTBLUEBELL STREETCIRCLE DRIVENC 210 N4D

S
I
TE SOLUTIONSNC GRID NAD 83 (2011)
60
310310311312311309309308309312308
3
1
1
61
274
32
SPRINGVILLAGEPROJECT NAMEREVISIONSCALEBCLIENTDRAWING SCALEDATE RELEASEDHORIZONTAL: 1"=40'OFW-22SHEET NUMBERPROJECT INFORMATIONDESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:CALEBSEAN1633WETLANDIMPACT MAPMARCH 2, 2021VICINITY MAPNOT TO SCALECAROLINA LANDGROUP, LLC341 Kilmayne Drive - Suite 201Cary, North Carolina 27511Phone:[phone]SITEXXXXXXXX FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLYFINAL DRAWINGIMPACT AREAIMPACT PROFILE -0+25 TO 1+25BEGONIA
STREET
4D SIT E SOLUT
I
ONSNC GRID NAD 83 (2011)

To: Scott Brown
From: Rhiannon Graham
Date: September 22, 2020
Re: Ogburn Property
Michaux’s Sumac Survey Results
__________________________________________________________________________
On September 11, 2020, Terracon biologist Rhiannon Graham completed the survey for the
federally endangered Michaux’s sumac (Rhus michauxii) on the Ogburn Property located in
Angier, Harnett County, NC. The survey was intended to document the presence or absence of
this species in previously identified areas of potential habitat. The letter of findings completed for
this project by Terracon in April 2020 identified areas of potential habitat; however, surveys could
not be conducted at that time because the survey window for Michaux’s sumac is May-October.

Ms. Graham visited a reference population of Michaux’s sumac located in Knightdale, NC before
entering the project study area. Once in the project study area, the areas of potential habitat were
surveyed by walking pedestrian transects and visually searching for the species. Common species
that were identified within the project study area include winged sumac (Rhus copallinum), Canada
goldenrod (Solidago altissima) and dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium). No Michaux’s sumac
was identified. These results lead us to conclude that Michaux’s sumac is not present in the study
area and the proposed activities in the area will have No Effect on this species.

No additional outstanding protected species issues remain associated with this project. Please let
us know if you have any questions.

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Office of Archives and History
Secretary Susi H. Hamilton Deputy Secretary Kevin Cherry
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6598

October 28, 2020

Melissa McKay [e-mail]
Terracon
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604

Re: Construct residential development on Ogburn property, 152 Sundowner Lane, Angier, Harnett
County, ER 20-2106

Dear Ms. McKay:

Thank you for your email of September 22, 2020, regarding the above-referenced undertaking. We have
reviewed the submission and offer the following comments. We apologize for the delay in our response and
any inconvenience it may have caused.

There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our knowledge of the
area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore, recommend that no
archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.

However, we are unable to accurately assess impacts to historic properties within the Area of Potential
Effect. Please provide photographs and descriptions of all structures 50 years or older within the APE. A
statement of intent should also be included and clarify if the structures will be unchanged, relocated, or
demolished.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or [e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above-referenced tracking number.

Sincerely,

Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer

North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Ramona M. Bartos, Administrator
Governor Roy Cooper Secretary D. Reid Wilson
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6898

February 5, 2021

Melissa McKay [e-mail]
Terracon
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604

Re:  Construct residential development on Ogburn property, 152 Sundowner Lane, Angier,
Harnett County, ER 20-2106

Dear Ms. McKay,

Thank you for your email of January 26, 2021, transmitting the requested structure photographs. We have
reviewed the submission and offer the following comments.

We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be affected
by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed. 

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919-814-6579
or [e-mail]. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the
above referenced tracking number.

Sincerely,

Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer

Myrtle DrApril CtC i r c l e D r C i r c l e D r Bowden Family LnCircle DrCindy DrE Myrtle DrNC-210 N Sundowner LnNC-210 N
SHA SHB
PHA
PHB
WHA
WHC/WHB
WHE
WHD
WHF
WHM FIGUREProject No: HL207071Date: 4/27/2020Drawn By: CEWChecked By: JHPotential Wetlands and Waters22401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107Raleigh, NC 27604Ogburn Property152 Sundowner LnAngier, Harnett County, North CarolinaDocument Path: C:\GIS\2020\HL207071_Ogburn\Maps\Aerial_11x17_Landscape.mxdLegendSite BoundaryPotential Wetland WatersPotential Non-Wetland Waters (Pond)Potential Non-Wetland Waters (Stream)
0 200100Feet
³
Latest High-Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery, NC OneMap Server; Site Boundary based on Harnett County parcel data.
Disclaimer: The information depicted in this file is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for and is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes. This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intended for use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.

Wetland Impact Area
Spring Village
Angier, NC

Proposed Road Crossing Location
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
Nearest Named Water Body
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
Yes No
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
•
•
•
•
Is the assessment area intensively managed?Yes No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes)LunarLunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island?Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?Yes No
1.Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2.Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch
≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3.Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non-marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a.A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
Sub
VS
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
35.5085, -78.7241
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
J. Harbour-Terracon
1/21/2021Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
Spring Village Wetland Impact Area
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Black Creek
03030006
Level III Ecoregion
River Basin
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Headwater Forest
Cape Fear
4.Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c.A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5.Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6.Land Use – opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
A A A ≥ 10% impervious surfaces
B B B < 10% impervious surfaces
C C C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
G G G ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
H H H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7.Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a.Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b.How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c.Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d.Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e.Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8.Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet
9.Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10.Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column.Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12.Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a.Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment.This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b.Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14.Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cuts.
Consider the eight main points of the compass.
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear-cut
15.Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16.Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
Well
WC
Loosely
17.Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a.Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b.Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c.Check a box in each column for each stratum.Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent
A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent
A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18.Snags – wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19.Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20.Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21.Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D
22.Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
AA WT
Notes CanopyMid-StoryShrubHerb
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Sub-Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Physical Structure Condition
Landscape Patch Structure Condition
Vegetation Composition Condition
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Hydrology Condition
Water Quality Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Conditon
Overall Wetland Rating
Rating
HIGH
HIGH
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Type
Wetland Site Name Spring Village Wetland Impact Area
J. Harbour-TerraconHeadwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
1/21/2021
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
Rating
HIGH
MEDIUM
NA
LOW
LOW
NO
NA
YES
NA
NA
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NO
HIGH
NO
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH