20210456 Ver 1_AJD_NWP39_20210407

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
ACTION ID #: SAW- Begin Date (Date Received):
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM n
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: WNC6 Fayetteville
2. Work Type: ❑Private ❑Institutional ❑Government ❑ Commercial
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form B3d and B3e]:
NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC proposes the renovation of an existing building along with a parking lot expansion on an
approximately 17-acre property located at 1005 Dunn Rd in Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC (Figure 1).
4. Property Owner / Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
5. Agent / Consultant [PNC Form A5 — or ORM Consultant ID Number]:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS (Kimley-Horn)
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form B5b]:
7. Project Location — Coordinates, Street Address, and/or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
The project is located at 1005 Dunn Road in Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC. Project
Coordinates (decimal degrees): 35.061367 N,-78.840402 W
8. Project Location — Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form Bla]: 0447-76-8931
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Cumberland
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Fayetteville
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form B2a]: Locks Creek
12. Watershed / 8-Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form B2c]: Upper Cape Fear (03030004)
Authorization: Section 10 ❑ Section 404 ❑ Section 10 and 404 ❑
Regulatory Action Type:
0 Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit #39
Regional General Permit #
✓ Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
R
FlUnauthorized Activity
Compliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Kimley»>Horn
April 7, 2021
Ms. Emily Greer
Wilmington District, Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Mr. Paul Wojoski
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre -Construction Notification (NWP #39)
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Dear Ms. Greer and Mr. Wojoski,
On behalf of our client, NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the enclosed Section
404/401 Pre -construction Notification for the above -referenced project for your review pursuant to
Nationwide Permit #39 and General Water Quality Certification #4263. The project proposes the renovation
of an existing building along with a parking lot expansion. Authorization is requested under NWP 39 and
GC4263 to impact 466 LF / 0.043-acre of Stream 1 and 0.017-acre of Wetland 1 necessary for site
development. The center of the project is located 35.061367° N,-78.840402° W. The following information
is included as part of this application submittal:
• Project Summary Sheet
• Agent Authorization
• Pre -Construction Notification Form
• Jurisdictional Determination Request
• Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form
• Permit Figures
• Figure 1 — Vicinity Map
• Figure 2 — USGS Topographic (Vander) Map
• Figure 3 — SSURGO Soils and NWI (2021 Nearmap Aerial)
• Figure 4a — Existing Conditions / AJD Field Sketch (2021 Nearmap Aerial)
• Figure 4b — Existing Conditions / AJD Field Sketch (LiDAR)
• Figure 5 — Proposed Conditions (2021 Nearmap Aerial)
• Field Data Forms
• NCDWR Stream Identification Forms
• Wetland Determination Data Sheets
• Project Site Photographs
• Antecedent Precipitation Tool
• Permit Plans
• Agency Correspondence
• Compensatory Mitigation
• NCSAM Form
• NCDMS In -Lieu Fee Acceptance Letter
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Page 2
The WNC6 Fayetteville Site is a proposed 17-acre commercial development located in Fayetteville,
Cumberland County, NC. The project proposes renovating the existing building to serve as a distribution
center. Along with the renovation, the site will be developed to provide line haul truck docking and parking,
employee parking, box truck parking, van parking and van queuing. The site will be brought into compliance
with both state and local regulations for zoning, landscaping, and stormwater.
NON -WETLAND WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Stream 1 and 2 — Perennial (S1 & S2)
Two (2) perennial streams (S1 and S2) are present on -site. S1 originates at the downslope end of Wetland
1 and flows for 526 linear feet (LF) where it drains into S2 (Locks Creek). S2 flows north to south along the
western boundary of the site for 1,435 LF. Baseflow was continuous with moderate velocity throughout the
stream segments. The streams have well defined channels that likely contain flowing water year-round.
Primary influences of hydrology likely include groundwater, prolonged periods of interflow, and surface
drainage. S1 is approximately 4-foot wide and S2 is approximately 12-foot wide and demonstrate moderate
geomorphic structure. Relevant and consistent Ordinary High -Water Mark (OHWM) indicators, including a
clear natural line impressed on the banks and changes in the soil character, were observed. Based on these
observed OHWM indicators, it is likely that S1 and S2 are NWPR (a)(2) non -wetland WoUS.
WETLAND WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Wetland 1 and 2 (W1 & W2)
Observations for the presence of wetland vegetation and hydrology indicators were investigated and soil
borings were excavated to evaluate the presence of hydric soils. W1 is a 0.017-acre, predominately scrub -
shrub wetland that originates at a 24" RCP culvert and drains to Stream 1. Hydrology of W1 is primarily
influenced by fluctuations in the groundwater table and surface runoff. W2 is a 0.25-ac, predominately scrub -
shrub wetland that is situated in a topographic low point and abuts Stream 2. Hydrology of W2 is primarily
influenced by fluctuations in the groundwater table and by the floodplain of S2.
The wetland vegetation community is dominated by a shrub and herbaceous layer including Wax myrtle
(morella cerifera), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Broomsedge bluestem (Andropogon virginicus), and
Common rush (Juncus effusus).
Multiple soil borings were conducted along the wetland/upland boundary of the wetlands. The typical soil
profiles within these wetlands W1 included 0 to 4 inches of a dark surface layer, followed by 4 to 24 inches
of a depleted matrix. Based on the presence of a depleted matrix, indicators of hydric soils are present.
Typical hydrology indicators included high water table, saturation at the surface, drainage patterns, and
geomorphic position.
Based upon the sampled area data, it appears that the sampled soils are at least saturated for a long enough
duration during the growing season to establish hydric soil conditions and a wetland vegetation community;
therefore, it is likely that W1 and W2 are NWPR (a)(4) wetland WoUS.
NON -JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Stormwater Control Feature 1 (SCF1)
Excluded Water — Stormwater Control Feature 1 (SCF1) is located west of the existing warehouse building.
SCF1 is an isolated artificial stormwater feature that was constructed in uplands sometime between 1998
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Page 3
and 2001, according to a review of historical aerial imagery. No direct hydrologic connection to downstream
waters was observed; therefore, SC1 meets the NWPR (b)(10) exclusion.
Ditch 1 (D1)
Excluded Water — Ditch 1 (D1) is a man-made feature constructed in uplands. Berms are present on each
side of D1. D1 is not present on USGS Topographic maps or the NRCS Soil survey and was not observed
in a review of historic aerial imagery. Based on the field review, there is no evidence that the ditch was
constructed in or is a relocated tributary; therefore, D1 meets the NWPR (b)(5) exclusion.
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service
on March 28, 2021. No documented architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance within the
project boundary were identified. A request letter was submitted to SHPO to determine the presence of
archeological, cultural, or historic resources on March 30, 2021. At the time of the report, a response has not
been received. A copy of the request is attached.
PROTECTED SPECIES
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on March 29, 2021, did not
indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Additionally,
pedestrian surveys conducted by Kimley-Horn on February 23, 2021, did not identify any occurrences of
potentially suitable habitat for or occurrences of protected species within the property boundary. A
concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS on March 30, 2021. At the time of the report, a
response has not been received. A copy of the request is attached.
PROPOSED IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 39 and GC4263 for stream and wetland impacts
associated with grading activities necessary to construct the parking lot expansion. The proposed project will
result in 466 LF / 0.043-ac of permanent impacts to Stream 1 and 0.017-ac of permanent impacts to Wetland
1.
Overall, impacts associated with the construction of the development will result in 466 LF/ 0.043-ac
of permanent impacts to potential non -wetland waters of the US and 0.017-ac of permanent impacts
to potential wetland waters of the US.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
Unavoidable impacts to Stream 1 and Wetland 1 are necessary to accomplish the purpose and goals of the
project. Stream mitigation credits will be purchased to offset the permanent impacts necessary for this
project.
As a final leg delivery station, appropriate vehicle mobility and vehicle storage is required for the site. This
limits the ability to compress the spacing between site features such as drive aisles, parking spaces, and
sidewalks and still transition grades throughout the site, provide stormwater control measures, and
completely avoid impacts to streams and wetlands. Retaining walls have been provided on site to completely
avoid impacts to the stream on the western side of the site (S2) and minimize the overall impact. Stormwater
facilities are sized and positioned to minimize impacts to the greatest extents practicable. Temporary erosion
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Page 4
control measures, including but not limited to skimmer basins and silt fence, will be implemented to minimize
sediment laden runoff from exiting the site.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 466 LF of stream impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of stream
mitigation credits. Based on an NCSAM assessment of Medium for Stream 1 mitigation is proposed at a
1.75:1 ratio for impacts to this feature, or 816 stream mitigation credits. In total, 816 stream mitigation credits
will be purchased from NCDMS to offset impacts associated with this project. A copy of the NCSAM form
and the NCDMS In -Lieu Fee Acceptance Letter is attached.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information is
necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley>>>Horn
Project Name: WNC6 Fayetteville
Project Summary Sheet
Applicant Name and Address: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
201 Riverplace, Suite 400
Greenville, SC 29601
Telephone Number: 864-263-5431
Type of Request:
Included Attachments:
Check if applicable:
® Nationwide PCN (NWP #39) ❑ Individual Permit Application
® Jurisdictional Determination ❑ Other:
® Project Plans
® Agent Authorization
® Data Forms (Up & Wet)
® NCDMS Confirmation
® Agency Correspondence
® USGS Map
® Delineation Sketch
® NCDWR Stream Forms
® Aerial Photo
❑ Other:
® NRCS Soil Survey
❑ Delineation Survey
❑ USACE Stream Forms
® Site Photos
❑ Other:
❑ CAMA County ❑ Trout County ❑ Isolated Waters
❑ Section 7, ESA ❑ Section 106, NHPA ❑ EFH
❑ Mitigation Proposed (❑ NC EEP ❑ On -Site ❑ Off -Site ❑ Other)
County: Cumberland
Waterway: Locks Creek
H.U.C.: 03030004
Property Size (acres): 17 acres
Nearest City/Town: Fayetteville
River Basin: Upper Cape Fear
USGS Quad Name: Vander
Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 1.41
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.061367° N,-78.840402° W
Project Location: The subject property is located at 1005 Dunn Road in Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC.
Site Description: The site is a 17-acre parcel located at 1005 Dunn Road in Fayetteville, NC. The site is currently comprised
of an existing warehouse building, associated parking area, maintained grassy area, and two streams. The site is surrounded
by I-95, forested land, and commercial and industrial businesses.
Impact Summary (if applicable): The proposed development seeks authorization under NWP 39 and GC4263 for stream
and wetland impacts associated with grading activities necessary to construct the parking lot expansion. The proposed
project will result in 466 LF / 0.043-ac of permanent impacts to Stream 1 and 0.017-ac of permanent impacts to Wetland 1.
NWP
#
Open Water
(acres)
Wetland
(acres)
Stream Channel
Intermittent and/or Unimportant
Aquatic Function
Perennial and/or Important
Aquatic Function
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
Temp.
Perm.
if
ac
if
CY
if
ac
if
Ac
39
0.017
466
0.043
Total
0.017
466
0.043
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Wetland WoUS
0.017
Total Permanent (Loss) Impact to Non -Wetland WoUS
0.043
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS Direct Number: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
kimley-hom.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

AGENT AUTHORIZATION

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth LLC
Address: 201 Riverplace. Suite 400 Greenville SC 29601
Phone: [phone]
Email: ejackson[lrealtylinkdev.com
Project Name/Description: WNC6 Fayetteville
Date: March 25, 2021
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Attention: Emily Greer
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
NC Fayetteville Fort Worth LLC hereby designates and authorizes Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. to act in my/our behalf as my/our agent solely for the purpose of processing
Jurisdictional Determinations, Section 404 permits/Section 401 Water Quality Certifications
applications and to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of applications,
etc. from this day forward until successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by
the owner.
In addition, I, the undersigned, under contract to purchase the property/properties identified
herein, do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site
investigations and issuing a determination associated with Waters of the U.S. subject to Federal
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act of 1899.
Authorized this the day of MitC , 202-1
�KIG\s©,j
Authorized Representative
(Print Name)
AUtil rwr.native
(S ig

PRE -CONSTRUCTION
NOTIFICATION FORM

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
10 Permit
0 Section 404 Permit ❑ Section
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes 0 No
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from
the DWQ (check all that apply):
— Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
— Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
0 401 Water Quality Certification
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes // No
❑ Yes 0 No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter
fee program.
program proposed for mitigation
from mitigation bank or in -lieu
0 Yes ❑ No
lg. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties? If yes, answer
1 h below.
❑ Yes 0 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:
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
2b. County:
Cumberland
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Fayetteville
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:
NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Eric Jackson
3d. Street address:
201 Riverplace, Suite 400
3e. City, state, zip:
Greenville, SC 29601
3f. Telephone no.:
864-263-5431
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page l of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ 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:
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Kimley-Horn and Associates
5c. Street address:
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
5d. City, state, zip:
Charlotte, NC 28202
5e. Telephone no.:
704-409-1802
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0447-76-8931
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.061367 Longitude: -78.840402
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
lc. Property size:
17-ac
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to proposed
project:
Locks Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
Upper Cape Fear (03030004)
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is located at 1005 Dunn Road in Fayetteville, NC. The site is currently comprised of an existing warehouse building,
associated parking area, maintained grassy area, and two streams. The site is surrounded by 1-95, forested land, and
commercial and industrial businesses.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.27
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
The total length of all on -site streams is approximately 1,961 LF
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The WNC6 Fayetteville Site is a proposed 17-acre commercial development located in Fayetteville, Cumberland County,
NC. The project proposes renovating the existing building to serve as a distribution center. Along with the renovation, the
site will be developed to provide line haul truck docking and parking, associate parking, box truck parking, van parking
and van queuing. The site will be brought into compliance with both state and local regulations for zoning, landscaping,
and stormwater.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The project proposes renovating an existing warehouse to serve as a distribution center. Additional development on -site
includes the necessary parking and infrastructure improvements to serve the site. Permanent impacts include 466 LF
(0.043-ac) to Stream 1 and 0.017-ac to Wetland 1. General construction equipment includes, but are not limited to,
bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, etc. will be used for construction purposes.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the Corps
or State been requested or obtained for this property / project
(including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: AJD included in this request
Yes 0 No Unknown
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type of
determination was made?
Preliminary Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company: Kimley-Horn &
Assoc., Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑Yes // No ❑Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Page 3 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Which sections
were completed below
for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Buffers
Construction
0 Wetlands
0 Streams - tributaries
❑ Open Waters
❑ Pond
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
(if known)
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ - non-404, other)
2f.
Area of impact
(acres)
Impact 1 - W1
Fill
PFO
Yes
0 Corps
0.017
0 P❑T
0 DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
The project proposes renovating an existing building and developing an associated parking lot. Authorization is requested under
NWP 39 for stream and wetland impacts associated with grading activities necessary to construct the parking lot expansion.
The proposed project will result in 0.017-ac of permanent impacts to Wetland 1.
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
(Corps - 404, 10
DWQ - non-404,
other)
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
Impact 2 - S1
Grading/earthen fill
S1 - UT to
Locks Creek
// PER
0 Corps
4
466
0 P ❑ T
❑ INT
0DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
466
3i. Comments:
The project proposes renovating an existing building and developing an associated parking lot. Authorization is requested under
NWP 39 for stream and wetland impacts associated with grading activities necessary to construct the parking lot expansion.
The proposed project will result in 466 LF / 0.043-ac of permanent impacts to Stream 1.
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
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)
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
Page 4 of 9
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID
number
5b.
Proposed use or purpose of
pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
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 you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
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)
❑P❑T
Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: The proposed project will not impact protected riparian buffers.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Unavoidable impacts to Stream 1 and Wetland 1 are necessary to accomplish the purpose and goals of the project. Stream
mitigation credits will be purchased to offset the permanent impacts necessary for this project. As a final leg delivery station,
appropriate vehicle mobility and vehicle storage is required for the site. This limits the ability to compress the spacing between
site features such as drive aisles, parking spaces, and sidewalks and still transition grades throughout the site, provide
stormwater control measures, and completely avoid impacts to streams and wetlands. Retaining walls have been provided on
site to completely avoid impacts to the stream on the western side of the site (S2) and minimize the overall impact.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Stormwater facilities are sized and positioned to minimize impacts to the greatest extents practicable. Temporary erosion control
measures, including but not limited to skimmer basins and silt fence, will be implemented to minimize sediment laden runoff from exiting
the site.
Page 5 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
// Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ 0 Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
program
Mitigation
0 Payment to in lieu fee
❑ Permittee Responsible
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type Stream
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:
816 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
0 warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation Services
(NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 466 LF of stream impacts will be mitigated through the purchase of stream mitigation credits.
Based on an NCSAM assessment of Medium for Stream 1 mitigation is proposed at a 1.75:1 ratio for impacts to these features,
or 816 stream mitigation credits. In total, 816 stream mitigation credits will be purchased from NCDMS to offset impacts
associated with this project. A copy of the NCSAM form and the NCDMS In -Lieu Fee Acceptance Letter is attached.
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.
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 0 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)
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 6 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes // No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments:
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
61.6%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 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 proposed stormwater management and erosion control measures have been sized and designed using methods prescribed
by the City of Fayetteville and NCDEQ resources. One proposed wet pond will be utilized as a water quantity and quality SCM.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Certified Local Government
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Fayetteville
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
0 Phase II
NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Under Review; the SMP approval letter will be provided once it is
received.
❑ Yes ❑ No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
❑ ORW
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 7 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land?
Yes // No
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
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
❑ Yes ❑ No
lc. 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.)
Comments:
❑ Yes ❑ No
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,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
❑ Yes 0 No
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes 0 No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
Yes // No
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.. No additional or cumulative impacts
are anticipated due to the construction of the proposed project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility: Wastewater generated from the project will be
discharged to Fayetteville Public Works Commission sanitary sewer system adjacent to the project.
Page 8 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat?
Yes
// No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts?
❑ No
0 Yes
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
0 Raleigh
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on March 29, 2021, did not indicate known
occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Additionally, pedestrian surveys conducted by
Kimley-Horn on February 23, 2021, did not identify potentially suitable habitat for or occurrences of protected species within the
property boundary. A concurrence request letter was submitted to the USFWS on March 30, 2021. At the time of this report a
response has not been received. A copy of the request is attached.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes
0 No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NCNHP element occurrence database did not indicate the presence of EFH within the project boundary.
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 (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
Yes
// No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Kimley-Horn consulted the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service on March 29, 2021.
No documented architectural, historic, or archaeological sites of significance within the project boundary were identified. A request
letter was submitted to SHPO to determine the presence of archeological, cultural, or historic resources on March 30, 2021. At
the time of the report, a response has not been received. A copy of the request is attached.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
No
0 Yes ❑
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: A floodplain development permit and No-Rise/No-Impact certification
will be submitted to satisfy the City of Fayetteville permitting requirements for a floodplain development permit.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FIRM Panel 3720044700K
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
-'
4/6/2021
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 9 of 9
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
REQUEST

Jurisdictional Determination Request
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Wilmington District
This form is intended for use by anyone requesting a jurisdictional determination (JD) from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District (Corps). Please include all supporting
information, as described within each category, with your request. You may submit your request
via mail, electronic mail, or facsimile. Requests should be sent to the appropriate project
manager of the county in which the property is located. A current list of project managers by
assigned counties can be found on-line at:
http: //www. saw. usace. army. mil/Missions/RegulatoryPermitProgram/Contact/CountyLocator. aspx,
by calling 910-251-4633, or by contacting any of the field offices listed below. Once your
request is received you will be contacted by a Corps project manager.
ASHEVILLE & CHARLOIIL REGULATORY
FIELD OFFICES
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
RALEIGHREGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WASHINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
2407 West Fifth Street
Washington, North Carolina 27889
General Number: [phone]
Fax Number: [phone]
WILMINGTON REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
General Number: 910-251-4633
Fax Number: [phone]
INSTRUCTIONS:
All requestors must complete Parts A, B, C, D, E, F and G.
NOTE TO CONSULTANTS AND AGENCIES: If you are requesting a JD on behalf of a
paying client or your agency, please note the specific submittal requirements in Part H.
NOTE ON PART D — PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION: Please be aware that
all JD requests must include the current property owner authorization for the Corps to
proceed with the determination, which may include inspection of the property when
necessary. This form must be signed by the current property owner(s) or the owner(s)
authorized agent to be considered a complete request.
NOTE ON PART D - NCDOT REQUESTS: Property owner authorization/notification for
JD requests associated with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
projects will be conducted according to the current NCDOT/USACE protocols.
NOTE TO USDA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS: A Corps approved or preliminary JD
may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of
1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in
USDA programs, you should also request a certified wetland determination from the local
office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
Version: May 2017 Page 1

Jurisdictional Determination Request
A. PARCEL INFORMATION
Street Address: 1005 Dunn Rd
City, State: Fayetteville, NC
County: Cumberland
Parcel Index Number(s) (PIN): 0447768931000
B. REQUESTOR INFORMATION
Name: Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
Select one:
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, NC
[phone]
[e-mail]
I am the current property owner.
I am an Authorized Agent or Environmental Consultant'
Interested Buyer or Under Contract to Purchase
Other, please explain.
C. PROPERTY OWNER INFORMATION2
Name: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
Electronic Mail Address:
201 Riverplace, Suite 400
Greenville, SC 29601
864-263-5431
[e-mail]
i Must provide completed Agent Authorization Form/Letter.
2 Documentation of ownership also needs to be provided with request (copy of Deed, County GIS/Parcel/Tax Record).
Version: May 2017 Page 2

Jurisdictional Determination Request
D. PROPERTY ACCESS CERTIFICATION3,4
By signing below, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on -
site investigations, if necessary, and issuing a jurisdictional determination pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. I, the
undersigned, am either a duly authorized owner of record of the property identified herein, or
acting as the duly authorized agent of the owner of record of the property.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Print Name
Capacity: n Owner
4/2/2021
❑✓ Authorized Agents
Date
Signature
E. REASON FOR JD REQUEST: (Check as many as applicable)
I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all aquatic resources.
fl I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which would be
designed to avoid all jurisdictional aquatic resources under Corps authority.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps, and the JD would be used to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources and as an initial step in a future permitting
process.
fl I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities on this parcel which may
require authorization from the Corps; this request is accompanied by my permit application
and the JD is to be used in the permitting process.
❑ I intend to construct/develop a project or perform activities in a navigable water of the
U.S. which is included on the district Section 10 list and/or is subject to the ebb and flow of
the tide.
fl A Corps JD is required in order obtain my local/state authorization.
fl I intend to contest jurisdiction over a particular aquatic resource and request the Corps
confirm that jurisdiction does/does not exist over the aquatic resource on the parcel.
n I believe that the site may be comprised entirely of dry land.
❑ Other:
3 For NCDOT requests following the current NCDOT/USACE protocols, skip to Part E.
4 If there are multiple parcels owned by different parties, please provide the following for each additional parcel on a
continuation sheet.
5 Must provide agent authorization foun/letter signed by owner(s).
Version: May 2017 Page 3

Jurisdictional Determination Request
F. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD) TYPE (Select One)
u
I am requesting that the Corps provide a preliminary JD for the property identified herein.
A Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) provides an indication that there may
be "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United States"on a property.
PJDs are sufficient as the basis for permit decisions. For the purposes of permitting, all
waters and wetlands on the property will be treated as if they are jurisdictional "waters of
the United States". PJDs cannot be appealed (33 C.F.R. 331.2); however, a PJD is
"preliminary" in the sense that an approved JD can be requested at any time. PJDs do
not expire.
I am requesting that the Corps provide an approved JD for the property identified herein.
An Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD) is a determination that
jurisdictional "waters of the United States" or "navigable waters of the United
States" are either present or absent on a site. An approved JD identifies the limits of
waters on a site determined to be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act and/or
Rivers and Harbors Act. Approved JDs are sufficient as the basis for permit
decisions. AJDs are appealable (33 C.F.R. 331.2). The results of the AJD will be
posted on the Corps website. A landowner, permit applicant, or other "affected
party" (33 C.F.R. 331.2) who receives an AJD may rely upon the AJD for five years
(subject to certain limited exceptions explained in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-
02).
I am unclear as to which JD I would like to request and require additional information
to inform my decision.
G. ALL REQUESTS
Map of Property or Project Area. This Map must clearly depict the boundaries of the
review area.
nSize of Property or Review Area 17 acres.
Iv
The property boundary (or review area boundary) is clearly physically marked on the site.
Version: May 2017
Page 4

Jurisdictional Determination Request
H.
REQUESTS FROM CONSULTANTS
Project Coordinates (Decimal Degrees): Latitude: 35.061367 N
Longitude: -78.840402 W
A legible delineation map depicting the aquatic resources and the property/review area.
Delineation maps must be no larger than 11x17 and should contain the following: (Corps
signature of submitted survey plats will occur after the submitted delineation map has been
reviewed and approved).6
• North Arrow
• Graphical Scale
• Boundary of Review Area
• Date
• Location of data points for each Wetland Determination Data Form or tributary
assessment reach.
For Approved Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Jurisdictional wetland features should be labeled as Wetland Waters of the US, 404
wetlands, etc. Please include the acreage of these features.
• Jurisdictional non -wetland features (i.e. tidal/navigable waters, tributaries,
impoundments) should be labeled as Non -Wetland Waters of the US, stream, tributary,
open water, relatively permanent water, pond, etc. Please include the acreage or linear
length of each of these features as appropriate.
• Isolated waters, waters that lack a significant nexus to navigable waters, or non -
jurisdictional upland features should be identified as Non -Jurisdictional. Please
include a justification in the label regarding why the feature is non jurisdictional (i.e.
"Isolated", "No Significant Nexus", or "Upland Feature"). Please include the acreage
or linear length of these features as appropriate.
For Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations:
• Wetland and non -wetland features should not be identified as Jurisdictional, 404,
Waters of the United States, or anything that implies jurisdiction. These features can be
identified as Potential Waters of the United States, Potential Non -wetland Waters of
the United States, wetland, stream, open water, etc. Please include the acreage and
linear length of these features as appropriate.
Completed Wetland Determination Data Forms for appropriate region
(at least one wetland and one upland form needs to be completed for each wetland type)
6 Please refer to the guidance document titled "Survey Standards for Jurisdictional Deteuninations" to ensure that the
supplied map meets the necessary mapping standards. http://www.saw.usace.ainiy.mil/Missions/Regulatory-Pe
Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Version: May 2017 Page 5

Jurisdictional Determination Request
LL
✓❑
IL
Completed appropriate Jurisdictional Determination form
• PJDs, please complete a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form' and include the
Aquatic Resource Table
• AJDs, please complete an Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form'
Vicinity Map
Aerial Photograph
USGS Topographic Map
Soil Survey Map
Other Maps, as appropriate (e.g. National Wetland Inventory Map, Proposed Site
Plan, previous delineation maps, LIDAR maps, FEMA floodplain maps)
Landscape Photos (if taken)
NCSAM and/or NCWAM Assessment Forms and Rating Sheets
riNC Division of Water Resources Stream Identification Forms
u
Other Assessment Forms
' www. saw.usace. a ny.mil/Portals/59/docs/regulatory/regdocs/JD/RGL 08-02 App A Prelim JD Fofillable.pdf
' Please see http : //www. saw. usace. army mil/Missions/Regulatory -Permit-Pro gram/Jurisdiction/
Principal Purpose: The information that you provide will be used in evaluating your request to determine
whether there are any aquatic resources within the project area subject to federal jurisdiction under the regulatory
authorities referenced above.
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local
government agencies, and the public, and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by federal
law. Your name and property location where federal jurisdiction is to be determined will be included in the
approved jurisdictional determination (AJD), which will be made available to the public on the District's web site
and onthe Headquarters USAGE web site.
Disclosure: Submission of requested information is voluntary; however, if information is not provided, the
request for an AJD cannot be evaluated nor can an AJD be issued.
Version: May 2017 Page 6

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATION FORM

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
I. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
Completion Date of Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD): Select.
ORM Number: (e.g. HQS-2020-00001-MSW).
Associated JDs: N/A or ORM numbers and identifiers (e.g. HQS-2020-00001-MSW-MITSITE)
Review Area Location': State/Territory: NC City: Fayetteville County/Parish/Borough: Cumberland
Center Coordinates of Review Area: Latitude 35.061367° N Longitude --78.840402° W
II. FINDINGS
A. Summary: Check all that apply. At least one box from the following list MUST be selected. Complete the
corresponding sections/tables and summarize data sources.
The review area is comprised entirely of dry land (i.e., there are no waters or water features, including
wetlands, of any kind in the entire review area). Rationale: N/A or describe rationale.
▪ There are "navigable waters of the United States" within Rivers and Harbors Act jurisdiction within the
review area (complete table in Section II.B).
❑x There are "waters of the United States" within Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area
(complete appropriate tables in Section II.C).
❑x There are waters or water features excluded from Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area
(complete table in Section II.D).
B. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Section 10 (§ 10)2
§ 10 Name
§ 10 Size
§ 10 Criteria
Rationale for § 10 Determination
NI,
nl',. NI/
N/A.
C. Clean Water Act Section 404
Territorial Seas and Traditional Navigable Waters ((a)(1) waters):3
(a)(1) Name
(a)(1) Size
(a)(1) Criteria
Rationale for (a)(1) Determination
1 Map(s)/figure(s) are attached to the AJD provided to the requestor.
2 If the navigable water is not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide or included on the District's list of Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigable
waters list, do NOT use this document to make the determination. The District must continue to follow the procedure outlined in 33 CFR part 329.14 to
make a Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigability determination.
3 A stand-alone TNW determination is completed independently of a request for an AJD. A stand-alone TNW determination is conducted for a specific
segment of river or stream or other type of waterbody, such as a lake, where upstream or downstream limits or lake borders are established. A stand-
alone TNW determination should be completed following applicable guidance and should NOT be documented on the AJD Form.
Page 1 of 4 Form Version 10 June 2020

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
Tributaries ((a)(2) waters):
(a)(2)
Name
(a)(2) Size
(a)(2) Criteria
Rationale for (a)(2) Determination
S1
linear
feet
(a)(2) Perennial tributary
contributes surface
water flow directly or
indirectly to an (a)(1)
water in a typical year.
Stream S1 originates on -site at the end of a
wetland and flows as a perennial stream to its
confluence with S2. S2 is Lock Creek which is a
tributary to the Cape Fear River. Based on this
information, S1 was determined to be an (a)(2)
water.
S2
1492
linear
feet
(a)(2) Perennial tributary
contributes surface
water flow directly or
indirectly to an (a)(1)
water in a typical year.
Stream S2 flows along the western boundary of the
site as a perennial stream. S2 is Lock Creek which
is a tributary to the Cape Fear River. Based on this
information, S2 was determined to be an (a)(2)
water.
Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters ((a)(3) waters):
(a)(3) Name
(a)(3) Size
(a)(3) Criteria
Rationale for (a)(3) Determination
N''
N''
N/A.
Adjacent wetlands ((a)(4) waters):
(a)(4) Name
(a)(4) Size
(a)(4) Criteria
Rationale for (a)(4) Determination
02
acre(s)
(a)(4) Wetland
abuts an (a)(1)-
(a)(3) water.
The wetland delineation was conducted utilizing the
1987 US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands
Delineation Manual and the USACE Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Region (Version 2.0). Wetland W1 is a small scrub -
shrub wetland. Hydrology is primarily influenced by
stormwater and groundwater and W1 drains into Stream
1. S1 flows into Lock Creek (S2) which is a tributary to
the Cape Fear River.
\A/7
0.25
acre(s)
(a)(4) Wetland
abuts an (a)(1)-
(a)(3) water.
The wetland delineation was conducted utilizing the
1987 US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands
Delineation Manual and the USACE Regional
Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Region (Version 2.0). Wetland W2 is a scrub -shrub
wetland that directly abuts S2. W2 is situated within a
natural topographic low point and hydrology is primarily
influenced by S2 floodplain. S2 flows into Lock Creek
(S2) which is a tributary to the Cape Fear River
Page 2 of 4 Form Version 10 June 2020

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
D. Excluded Waters or Features
Excluded waters ((b)(1) — (b)(12)):4
Exclusion
Name
Exclusion Size
Exclusions
Rationale for Exclusion Determination
SCF1
.26
acre(s)
(b)(10) Stormwater control
feature constructed or
excavated in upland or in a
non -jurisdictional water to
convey, treat, infiltrate, or
store stormwater runoff
Stormwater Control Feature 1 is an isolated
artificial stormwater control feature that was
constructed in the uplands sometime between
1998 and 2001, according to a review of
historical aerial imagery. There is no direct
hydrologic connection to downstream waters.
D1
100
linear
feet
(b)(5) Ditch that is not an
(a)(1) or (a)(2) water, and
those portions of a ditch
constructed in an (a)(4)
water that do not satisfy
the conditions of (c)(1).
Ditch 1 is a man-made feature constructed in the
uplands - berms are present along each side of
the ditch. There is no evidence that D1 was
constructed in or is a relocated tributary. It is not
present on USGS maps. S1 receives water from
D1.
III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION
A. Select/enter all resources that were used to aid in this determination and attach data/maps to this
document and/or references/citations in the administrative record, as appropriate.
Information submitted by, or on behalf of, the applicant/consultant: Data Forms (2/23/2021)
This information is sufficient for purposes of this AJD.
Rationale: N/A
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: Title(s) and/or date(s).
❑x Photographs: Aerial: 2021 Nearmap Aerial
❑ Corps site visit(s) conducted on: Date(s).
❑ Previous Jurisdictional Determinations (AJDs or PJDs): ORM Number(s) and date(s).
❑x Antecedent Precipitation Tool: provide detailed discussion in Section III.B.
❑x USDA NRCS Soil Survey: NRCS Soil Survey, Cumberland County, Current
❑x USFWS NWI maps: HUC 8 - 03030004 NWI Wetlands
❑x USGS topographic maps: Vander (1:12,000)
Other data sources used to aid in this determination:
Data Source (select)
Name and/or date and other relevant information
USGS Sources
N/A.
USDA Sources
N/A.
NOAA Sources
N/A.
USACE Sources
N/A.
4 Some excluded waters, such as (b)(2) and (b)(4), may not be specifically identified on the AJD form unless a requestor specifically asks a Corps district
to do so. Corps districts may, in case -by -case instances, choose to identify some or all of these waters within the review area.
5 Because of the broad nature of the (b)(1) exclusion and in an effort to collect data on specific types of waters that would be covered by the (b)(1)
exclusion, four sub -categories of (b)(1) exclusions were administratively created for the purposes of the AJD Form. These four sub -categories are not
new exclusions, but are simply administrative distinctions and remain (b)(1) exclusions as defined by the NWPR.
Page 3 of 4
Form Version 10 June 2020

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
Data Source (select)
Name and/or date and other relevant information
State/Local/Tribal Sources
N/A.
Other Sources
N/A.
B. Typical year assessment(s): The Antecedent Precipitation Tool assessed the project area for February
23, 2021 as "Wetter than Normal" (See attached PDF). Features were primarily assessed based on the
presence of a OHWM, not the presence or absence of surface or groundwater.
C. Additional comments to support AJD: J/A
Page 4 of 4 Form Version 10 June 2020

FIGURES

NA
Feet
4,000 8,000
u
l
Cumberland
County
Legend
Kimley>>> Horn J Approximate Site Boundary
Cumberland County
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Legend
n Approximate Site Boundary
Kimley>» Horn
Figure 2
USGS Topographic (Vander) Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Legend
Approximate Site Boundary
NWI
SSURGO Soils
Hydric Rating
Not Hydric (0%)
Hydric (1-32%)
Hydric (33-65%)
Feet
0 200 400
Kimley»>Horn
Figure 3
SSURGO Soils and NWI
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Legend
nApproximate Site Boundary
Perennial Streams (Non -Wetland WoUS)
22) Wetlands (Wetland WoUS)
ON„..# Ditch (Excluded)
Stormwater Control Feature (Excluded)
Existing Contours
Wet Data Point
Upland Data Point
Photo Locations
S2 (a)(2) -
1,435 LF/ 1.1 ac
W2 (a)(4) - 0.25 ac
526 LF/ 0.04
W1 (a)(4) - 0.02 ac
SCF1 (b)(10) - 0.26 ac
At
0 150 300
Feet
Kimley»>Horn
Figure 4a
Existing Conditions/ AJD Field Sketch
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Legend
InApproximate Site Boundary
Photo Locations
Mew Perennial Streams (Non -Wetland WoUS)
ez Wetlands (Wetland WoUS) Elevation (ft)
�� Ditch (Excluded)
High : 92.3073
VC J4
Stormwater Control Feature (Excluded)
O Wet Data Point
0 Upland Data Point
- Low : 59.2878
S2 (a)(2) -
1,435 LF/ 1.1 ac
W2 (a)(4) - 0.25 ac
D1 (b)(5) - 100 LF
S1 (a)(2) -
526 LF/ 0.04 ac
W1 (a)(4) - 0.02 ac
SCF1 (b)(10) - 0.26 ac
300
Feet
Kimley»>Horn
Figure 4b
Existing Conditions/ AJD Field Sketch (LiDAR)
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

--11111111
negend
proximate Site Boundary - Proposed Parking Curb
rennial Streams (Non -Wetland WoUS) - Proposed Parking Edge of Pavement
Wetlands (Wetland WoUS)
Limits of Disturbance (LOD)
/\/ Proposed Contours
- Proposed Road Edge of Pavement
- Proposed Sidewalk
Proposed Retaining Wall
Impact 2 (S1)
Grading/Fill
466 LF / 0.043 ac - Permanent
Impact 1 (W1)
Grading/Fill
0.017 ac - Permanent
Kimley»>Horn
300
Feet
Figure 5
Proposed Conditions
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

FIELD DATA FORMS

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 2/23/2021
Project/Site: S1 - WNC6 Fayetteville
Latitude:
35.060271
Evaluator: Jason Hartshorn
County: Cumberland
Longitude:
-78.840738
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30
32
Stream Determination rcI nne
Other
.g. Quad Name:
Vander
Ephemeral Intermitt nt Perennial
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 16.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1 a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
1
2
3
1
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
2
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
2
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal =
9.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal =
6
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Wetland 1 enters the site through an RCP culvert and drains to Stream 1.
S1 has trong OHWM indicators strong throughout entire reach and drains into S2

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 2/23/2021
Project/Site: S2 - WNC6 Fayetteville
Latitude: 35.060837
Evaluator: Jason Hartshorn
County: Cumberland
Longitude: -78.841201
Total Points: 40.5
Stream is at least intermittent
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30
Stream Determination rcI nne
Other Vander
.g. Quad Name:
Ephemeral Intermitt nt Perennial
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 23.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
1 a.
Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
3
2.
Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3
3.
In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
1
2
3
2
4.
Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
2
5.
Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
2
6.
Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
3
7.
Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
3
8.
Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9.
Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
10.
Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1.5
11.
Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal =
10
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
1
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
3
C. Biology Subtotal =
7
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
3
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
S2 flows along western boundary.
Strong OHWM indicators strong throughout entire reach

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form, Version 4.11
Date: 2/23/2021
Project/Site: D1- WNC6 Fayetteville
Latitude: 35.060162
Evaluator: Jason Hartshorn
County: Cumberland
Longitude: -78.841047
Total Points: 11.5
Stream is at least intermittent
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30
nptermination (circle one)
Other Vander
e.g. Quad Name:
Ephemeral termittent Perennial
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 4
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
Score
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
1
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
0
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
0
1
2
3
0
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
1
5. Active/relic floodplain
0
1
2
3
0
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
0
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
1
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
3
0
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology Subtotal =
4.5
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
0
C. Biology Subtotal =
3
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
1
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
0
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
1
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
0
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; Other = 0
0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Ditch 1 is a man-made feature constructed in the uplands - berms are present along
each side of the ditch. There is no evidence that D1 was constructed in or is a relocated tributary.

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Applicant/Owner: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
Investigator(s): JH& MR
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depression
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136
Soil Map Unit Name: WmB
Lat:
City/County: Cumberland Co
Sampling Date: 2021-02-23
State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W1 Wet
Section, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%):
35.060311 Long: -78.840247 Datum: WGS 84
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology
significantly disturbed?
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
NWI classification:
No `� (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
According to APT, the delineation was conducted during "wetter than normal" conditions.
Wetland 1 originates on -site through a 24" RCP culvert and drains to Stream 1.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ ❑
0 El
0 0
0 0
a o
❑ o
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No Depth (inches): 0
Saturation Present? Yes ✓ No Depth (inches): 0
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspec ions), if available:
Remarks:
Hydrology is primarily influenced by fluctuations of groundwater table and surface runoff.
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W1 Wet
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. Baccharis halimifolia 10 ✓ FAC
2. Morella cerifera 10 ✓ FAC
3. Salix nigra 10 ✓ OBL
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
30% = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 15 20% of total cover: 6
1 Andropogon virginicus 10 ✓ FAC
2 Juncus effusus 10 ✓ OBL
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
12.
20% = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover: 4
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 20 x 1 = 20
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
FAC species 30 x 3 = 90
FACU species 0 x 4 = 0
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
Column Totals: 50 (A) 110
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.20
(B)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
El 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
II✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
✓l 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: W1 Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist)
0-4
10YR 5/2 100
4 -12 10YR 6/1 100
12 - 24 10YR 5/2 100
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type' Loc 2
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
.❑Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
R5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U) ❑
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑
.❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑
.❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑
.❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR 0, S) ❑
.❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
fi
Texture Remarks
Sand
Sandy Loam
Sandy Clay
unless otherwise noted.)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR 0)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
E1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR 0)
B
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
0 Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
(MLRA 153B)
❑I Red Parent Material (TF2)
LJ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Applicant/Owner: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
Investigator(s): JH& MR
City/County: Cumberland Co
Sampling Date: 2021-02-23
State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W2 Wet
Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136
Soil Map Unit Name: DI
Slope (%):
Lat: 35.058912 Long: -78.841460 Datum: WGS 84
NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No i (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes ✓ No
Yes ✓ No
Yes ✓ No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
According to APT, delineation was conducted during "wetter than normal" conditions.
Wetland 2 abuts S2 and is situated in a topographic low point.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ ❑
❑ El
❑ II
❑ II
p II
a ❑
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspec ions), if available:
Remarks:
Hydrology is primarily influenced by the floodplain of S2. Saturation below 14" and water
table below 18"
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W2 Wet
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1. Ligustrum sinense 60 ✓ FAC
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1 Lonicera japonica
60% = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover: 12
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
10 ,/ FACU
10% = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 5 20% of total cover: 2
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1 Smilax laurifolia 15 ,/ FACW
2.
3.
4.
5.
15% = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 7.5 20% of total cover: 3
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 66.7 (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
FACW species 15 x 2 = 30
FAC species 60 x 3 = 180
FACU species 10 x 4 = 40
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
Column Totals: 85 (A) 250 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.94
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
El 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
II✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
✓l 3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: W2 Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist)
0 - 6 10YR 4/2 95
6 -18 10YR 5/2 80
18 - 24 10YR 4/1 100
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type' Loc 2
10YR 3/6 5 C PL
7.5YR 5/6 20 C PL
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
.❑Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
R5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U) ❑
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑
.❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑
.❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑
.❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR 0, S) ❑
.❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
fi
Texture Remarks
Loam
Loam
Sandy Loam
unless otherwise noted.)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR 0)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
E1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR 0)
B
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
0 Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
(MLRA 153B)
❑I Red Parent Material (TF2)
LJ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/Site: WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Applicant/Owner: NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
Investigator(s): JH& MR
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Upland, Hillslope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P 136
Soil Map Unit Name: DI
City/County: Cumberland Co
Sampling Date: 2021-02-23
State: North Carolina Sampling Point: W1 & W2 Up
Section, Township, Range:
Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex
Slope (%):
Lat: 35.058942 Long: -78.841164 Datum: WGS 84
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic?
NWI classification:
No `� (If no, explain in Remarks.)
significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes `� No
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes No ✓
Yes No ✓
Yes No ✓
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No ✓
Remarks:
According to APT, delineation was conducted during "wetter than normal" conditions. The upland
data point is representative for W1 and W2. The upland point was taken 6 feet higher than wetlands.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
❑ ❑
❑ El
❑ II
❑ II
0 II
a o
❑ o
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Water -Stained Leaves (B9)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Marl Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Sphagnum moss (D8) (LRR T, U)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspec ions), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: W1 & W2 Up
Tree Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
50% of total cover:
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
1 Festuca subverticillata
50% of total cover:
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
= Total Cover
20% of total cover:
80 ✓ FACU
80% = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 40 20% of total cover: 16
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0
1
0
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
FAC species 0 x 3 = 0
FACU species 80 x 4 = 320
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
Column Totals: 80 (A) 320 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.00
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
El 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
II2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is <_3.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
Maintained field
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2.0

SOIL
Sampling Point: W1 & W2 Up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist)
0-6
10YR 5/2 100
6 -12 10YR 6/4 100
12 - 24 10YR 6/4 85
Redox Features
Color (moist) %
10YR 6/8
Type' Loc 2 Texture
15 C M Sandy Clay
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs,
❑ Histosol (A1)
❑ Histic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
.❑Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
R5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U) ❑
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U)
❑ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) ❑
.❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) ❑
.❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
❑ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A) ❑
.❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR 0, S) ❑
.❑ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑
❑ Sandy Redox (S5)
❑ Stripped Matrix (S6)
❑ Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T, U)
fi
unless otherwise noted.)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR 0)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Marl (F10) (LRR U)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR 0, P, T)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
Delta Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 150B)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A, 153C, 153D)
Remarks
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
E1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR 0)
B
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
_❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
0 Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20)
(MLRA 153B)
❑I Red Parent Material (TF2)
LJ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
❑ Other (Explain in Remarks)
3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No ✓
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2.0

PROJECT SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

Photo Page 1
Photo 1 — Stonnwater Control Feature 1 (SCF1)
Photo 2 — Concrete flume on -site
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page 2
Photo 3 — Ditch 1 (D1) enters site through 24" RCP culvert
Photo 4 — Looking up D1 — note berms on both sides
Title
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Photo Pages
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Date
2/23/21
Project Number
115243003
Prepared By
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page
Photo 5 — Representative community of Wetland 1 (W 1)
Photo 6 — Representative soil profile of W 1
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page
Photo 7 — Confluence of W 1 and Stream 1 (S 1), looking downstream S 1
Photo 8 — Looking downstream of S 1
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page 5
Photo 9 — Representative community of Wetland 2 (W2)
Photo 10 — Representative soil profile of W2
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page
Photo 11 — Representative coimnunity of W1 and W2 Upland
Photo 12 — Representative soil profile of W 1 and W2 Upland
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page
Photo 13 — Stream 2 (S2) — looking downstream
Photo 14 — Looking upstream S2
Title
Photo Pages
Prepared For
NC Fayetteville
Fort Worth, LLC
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, NC
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

ANTECEDENT PRECIPITATION
TOOL

Antecedent Precipitation vs Normal Range based on NOAA's Daily Global Historical Climatology Network
(n
6
U
= f
c
f6
4-
4
co
CC
r�
P
12- 5
JI ryn r
4,011miAl
- Daily Total
- 30-Day Rolling Total
30-Year Normal Range
Aug
2020
Sep
2020
Oct
2020
Nov
2020
Coordinates
35.061367, -78.840402
Observation Date
2021-02-23
Elevation (ft)
86.88
Drought Index (PDSI)
Extreme wetness
WebWIMP H2O Balance
Wet Season
Figure and tables made by the
Antecedent Precipitation Tool
Version 1.0
Written by Jason Deters
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Dec
2020
Jan
2021
Feb
2021
Mar
2021
Apr
2021
May
2021
Jun
2021
Jul
2021
30 Days Ending
30th %ile (in)
70th %ile (in)
Observed (in)
Wetness Condition
Condition Value
Month Weight
Product
2021-02-23
2.156693
3.561811
8.807087
Wet
3
3
9
2021-01-24
2.151575
4.185433
4.267717
Wet
3
2
6
2020-12-25
2.407874
3.870473
5.208662
Wet
3
1
3
Result
Wetter than Normal - 18
Weather Station Name
Coordinates
Elevation (ft)
Distance (mi)
Elevation 0
Weighted 0
Days (Normal)
Days (Antecedent)
FAYETTEVILLE (PWC)
35.0592, -78.8589
96.129
1.057
9.249
0.485
11159
88
FAYETTEVILLE 0.9 N
35.0839, -78.8969
203.084
3.554
116.204
2.012
17
0
FAYETTEVILLE 0.3 WSW
35.07, -78.905
184.055
3.702
97.175
2.025
13
0
FAYETTEVILLE 2.8 S
35.0313, -78.9061
124.016
4.258
37.136
2.074
3
0
FAYETTEVILLE 2.4 S
35.0367, -78.9068
153.871
4.124
66.991
2.132
20
2
FAYETTEVILLE 1.4 SW
35.055, -78.913
172.9
4.129
86.02
2.213
3
0
FAYETTEVILLE 2.6 N
35.1092, -78.8944
191.929
4.499
105.049
2.497
3
0
FAYETTEVILLE RGNL AP
34.9914, -78.8803
186.024
5.335
99.144
2.93
133
0
FT BRAGG WTP
35.1778, -79.0239
160.105
13.125
73.225
6.867
2
0

PERMIT DRAWINGS

/
FLOODWAV /
,/
- 50' BUILDING SETBAC
EXISTING STREAM CENTERLINE
100 YEAR FLOOD PLAINS
APPROXIMATE
TOP OF BANK
FLOODWAV
/
I
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
15' BUILDING/LANDSCAPE SETBACK
RO
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
I IAE0II �III�I: III �D
�11 [=MI: Imo
forma ram r/�1;'mll weal.
PPP 0000000
LANDSCAPE SETBACK
V X"
kN/ ROW— ROW— ROW
...,... LOD— — —Lao— — —LODy
I RO
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
0A Oj)
QJ
— ROW— ROW
0' BMP ACCESS
EASEMENT
IABLE WIDTH PUBLIC R/I/V
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND
SITE - PROJECT DATA
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
BUILDING / STRUCTURE
STANDARD DUTY ASPHALT PVNT.
HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT PAVEMENT
UGHT DUTY CONCRETE PVMT.
:•I HEAVY DUN CONCRETE PAVEMENT
CONCRETE 90EWAU(
=PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK
PANTED ISLANDS (-2' 0.C. 0 45 )
} r 1. TRAFFIC ARROWS
= CID SIGNS - MONUMENT / PYLON
SIGNS - SINGLE / DOUBLE
• SITE UCHTING
• ® BOLLARD / WHEEL STOP
KP) I
P4
l I
i W STOP, STOP BAR,
& YEILO MARKINGS
J OPEN SPACE
— —PROPERTY BOUNDARY,
ROW FIGHT -OF -WAY
BUILDING EXPANSION
—BUILDING SETBACK
— - L_e LANDSCAPING BUFFER
CURB AND GUTTER
SPILL CURB
Ir RETAINING WALL
- - FENCE AND GATE
ARE LANE MARKING
NPFL ARE LANE STRIPING
CUARO RAIL
POND - RATER SURFACE
POND - MP OF BANK
POND - BOTTOM, TOE
—ol—ol—tLl—to—JERSEY BARRIER
15ITE AREA:
TOTAL
18.94 AC
737,780-SF
BUILDING FOOTPRINT:
BUILDING USE:
WAREHOUSE:
OFFICE. @ 5.84'4
COVERAGE'.
OPEN SPACE
128,474-SF
120,974-SF
7,500-SF
17.4Y,
TOTAL'.
REQUIRED'.
PROVIDED'.
ACTIVE'.
55,333 SF (7.514
149.320 SF (20.2%
REQUIRED'.
PROVIDED'.
IMPERVIOUS AREA
27.574 SF(3.75h
10.221 SF (20.2,
PROPOSED'.
EXISTING:
10.84 AC
8.0]A�
PARKING REQUIRED:
WAREHOUSE 1/1,250 SF
OFFICE 1/300 SF
TOTAL
REQ. 4CCESSIBLENAN:
PARKING PROVIDED:
AUTO:
PRO, ACCESSIBLENAN'.
TRAILER STALLS'.
DOCK -HIGH DOOR'.
97 STALL
25 STALL
122 STALL
511
138 STALL
8I
STALL
STALL
ZONING:
4X. COVERAGE:
BUILDING SETBACKS:
HI
75,
FRONT VARD 50'
SIDE YARD INTERIOR 15
SIDE VARD EXTERIOR 15
EAR YARD
LANDSCAPE SETBACKS:
FRONT YARD
SIDE YARDS
FEAR YARD
25
15
25
OFF•STREET PARKING
STANDARD'.
DRIVE AISLE'.
9'x18
24
DEVELOPMENT DATA:
TAX PARCEL ID 0447708931003
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGL DESC
LAND USE OFFICEM0AREHOUSE (DIST.)
ZONING DATA:
IIF''E'MA FLOOD PANEL
00ATERSHED:
3710459490K
NIA
ROW —
ROW —
OVER EADCANOP
ROW —
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
Row,.
/ 9S
opSiN
L CS
R� 5307
X
•one,:Pak.,,
1 PROPOSED OFFICE SPACE
m_
ROW
EXISTING BUILDING
OPERATIONAL SPACE=66,594 SF
ROW`
X
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
OONCRE7E PARKING
CONCRETE AREA
NOT PART OF LEASE
CONCRETS RAMP
NOT PART OF LEASE
62,141 SF
25' LANDSCAPE SETBACK
30' SEWER EASEMENT
— LSB — — — B — Ls5 — — — — Lse — — — — LSB — — — Ls5 —
50' BUILDING SETBACK
15' BUILDING/LANDSCAPE SETBACK
L ���CO�rSflilrr�pp� i etali2'�D — —L06 u�"" —L D .9w) L,B�-8QTJ
ROW
RO
RO fI
ARLARN Rw ETH PURE, RAN
ROW
ROW —
OW
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
30' SEWER EASEMENT
25' LANDSCAPE SETBACK
59' BUILDING SETBACK
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
ROW
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
Know what's below.
CaII before you dig.
>88
32 a0oE
FSST fly �•.
�ay9 v
SEAL
046983 2
9 R,yCI NFE@'lam:
A9C4RfT HOJaa
rT
wo
o r T
aN
0
< N
0 N
❑o
0
SCALE AS SHOWN
0
LOD EXHIBIT
1005 DUNN ROAD
NORTH CAROLINA
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
SHEET NUMBER
EX
This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as on instrument of servi e, is Intended only for .e specificpurpose and client far which It was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Klmley—Horn and Associates. Inc. shall be without Ilobili
to Klmley—Horn and Associates. Inc.

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Project Review
Checklist
Step
Item
Required
Date completed/ Notes
1 and
2
Official Species List from IPaC
(will include map showing the
action area)
Yes
3/29/2021
3
NCDENER-Heritage Program
database results or correspon-
dence.
If Applicable
3/29/2021
4
Habitat Assessments or Species
Surveys
If Applicable
2/23/2021
6
Bald Eagle Conclusion Table
Yes
3/29/2021
7
NLEB
Yes
3/29/2021
8
Species Conclusion Table
Yes
3/29/2021
9
Online project review request
letter or Online project review
certification letter
Yes
3/29/2021
10
Other documentation to support
your conclusions
If Applicable
3/29/2021
Instructions
Submit project review packages electronically to Raleigh@fws.
gov. Please indicate in your email subject title if you are submit-
ting a "Review Request Letter" or a "Self -Certification Letter."
All project reviews will receive a return receipt to inform you
that your project has been successfully submitted to this office.
Please note that any single email, including attachments, must
be smaller than 25 MB. If a single email would be larger than
25 MB, please spread out multiple attachments among several
emails (use the same subject name and project reference in all
emails related to an individual project). If this is not practical,
please mail a hard copy or DVD containing the project review
package to our office:
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Maintain a complete copy of the project review package
in your files since it will become an integral part of your official
record of compliance.
Contact us
If you have questions or
comments concerning this
process, please contact
Leigh Mann at (919)
856-4520 extension 10 or
via email at
[e-mail]
http://Raleigh.fws.gov
Federal Relay Service
for the deaf and hard -of -hearing
1 800/877 8339
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
http://www.fws.gov
1 800/344 WILD
January 2017

Kimley»>Horn
March 29, 2021
Raleigh Field Office
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636
Re: WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Project Review Certification Letter
USFWS Raleigh Field Office,
On behalf of our client, NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting this letter
requesting concurrence regarding the results of the pedestrian survey performed for the above -referenced
project in accordance with the methodologies recommended by USFWS. The pedestrian survey was
conducted by Kimley-Horn staff Jason Hartshorn and Mackenzie Richards on February 23, 2021.
Background Information
The project is located on a parcel that consists of a warehouse building and associated area in Fayetteville,
Cumberland County, North Carolina. The area evaluated consists of undeveloped forested land, a stream,
a stormwater detention pond, warehouse building, associated parking areas, and access roads.
Future authorization from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) may be required to develop the site
within potentially jurisdictional waters of the U.S.; therefore, NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC, contracted
with Kimley-Horn to perform the pedestrian survey within areas of potentially suitable habitat in the project
area to identify and document occurrences of federally listed threatened and/or endangered species.
Methodology and Findings
As of March 29, 2021, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists six (6) federally protected
species for Cumberland County (Table 1). A brief description of each species' habitat requirements follows,
along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area.
Table 1: Federally protected listed species for Cumberland Count
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal Status
Habitat Present
Biological
Conclusion
Picoides borealis
Red cockaded
Woodpecker
E
No
No Effect
Neonympha mitchellii
francisci
Saint Francis'
Satyr Butterfly
E
No
No Effect
Schwalbea americana
American
Chaffseed
E
No
No Effect
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
E
No
No Effect
Lindera melissifolia
Pondberry
E
No
No Effect
Lysimachia
asperulaefolia
Rough -leaved
Loosestrife
E
No
No Effect
*E = Endangered, T = Threatened
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Red -cockaded Woodpecker
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: November — early March
Page 2
Habitat Description: Red -cockaded woodpecker's need old, living pine trees for their nest cavities. These
pine trees must be over 60 years old for suitable cavity construction. The Red -cockaded
woodpecker prefers longleaf, loblolly, shortleaf, slash, and pond pine trees.
Biological Conclusion: Potentially suitable habitat for Red -cockaded woodpecker is not present on the
subject property. A review of NCNHP records, updated February 1, 2021, indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the subject property. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, the
project results in a "no effect" conclusion.
Saint Francis' Satyr Butterfly
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May 5 - June 6 and July 26 - August 21
Habitat Description: The Saint Francis' Satyr Butterfly is found only in Cumberland and Hoke counties. The
butterfly prefers wet meadows maintained by fire and beaver. Vegetation of these meadows consist
primarily of sedges. In addition to disturbances created by fire and beaver, military practices at Fort
Bragg allow for a metapopulation of the butterfly to flourish.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Sant Francis' Satyr butterfly is not present on the subject property.
A review of NCNHP records, updated February 1, 2021, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0
mile of the subject property. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, the project results in a "no
effect" conclusion.
American Chaffseed
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May — August
Habitat Description: American chaffseed grows in sandy acidic, seasonally moist to dry soils in the coastal
plain. The species prefers fire -maintained savannas, moist pine flatwoods, and other open grass
ecosystems. American chaffseed is partially dependent upon another plant as a host, however, it
is not host specific. The species relies on fire -maintained ecosystems and it thrives in open areas,
such as the margin of forests.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for American chaffseed is not present on the subject property. A review
of NCNHP records, updated February 1, 2021, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of
the subject property. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, the project results in a "no effect"
conclusion.
Michaux's Sumac
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May - October
Habitat Description: Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows in
sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam
soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy
swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of
Carolina bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights -of -way; areas where
forest canopies have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food
plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Page 3
canopies; and in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural
succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant
is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing,
periodic fire) maintains its open habitat.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac is not present on the subject property. A review
of NCNHP records, updated February 1, 2021, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of
the subject property. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, the project results in a "no effect"
conclusion.
Pondberry
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: February - March, September — October
Habitat Description: In North Carolina, Pondberry is found in Sampson and Cumberland counties. The
species grows in bottomland and hardwood wetlands and around the margins of sinks, ponds, and
other depressions in coastal areas.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Pondberry is not present on the subject property. A review of NCNHP
records, updated February 1, 2021, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the subject
property. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, the project results in a "no effect" conclusion.
Rough -leaved Loosestrife
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: Mid May — September
Habitat Description: Rough -leaved loosestrife is a perennial herb that grows in moist areas between dry
pine forests and wet grassy areas. The species prefers moist to seasonally saturated sands.
Rough -leaved loosestrife thrives in fire -maintained ecosystems and does not tolerate shade. It is
mainly found along the coastal plain and in the sandhills of North and South Carolina.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Rough -leaved loosestrife is not present on the subject property. A
review of NCNHP records, updated February 1, 2021, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0
mile of the subject property. Due to the absence of suitable habitat, the project results in a "no
effect" conclusion.
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
USFWS optimal survey window: November - March
Habitat Description: 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. A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within
a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on March 29, 2021
using 2021 color aerials. No large bodies of open water were identified in the 1.13-mile radius. In
addition, a review of the NCNHP database, updated on February 1, 2021, revealed no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the lack of known occurrences, and the lack
of observed individuals or nests on -site, it has been determined that the proposed project will not
affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

Kimley»>Horn
Statement of Qualifications:
Investigator: Jason Hartshorn, PWS
Education: B.S. Environmental Technology, 2011
Experience: Environmental Analyst, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2011-Present
Responsibilities: Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) for project deliverables
Investigator: Mackenzie Richards
Education: B.S. Natural Resources — Ecosystem Assessment, 2015;
M.S. Renewable Natural Resource - Fisheries and Aquaculture, 2017
Experience: Environmental Analyst, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2018-Present
Responsibilities: Document preparation, GPS/GIS, wetland and stream delineations
Page 4
Please provide concurrence regarding the survey results and biological conclusions as well as any other
possible issues that might emerge with respect to protected species as a result of the proposed project.
Thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please email (Chris.Tinklenberg@Kimley-
Horn.com) a copy of your reply to my attention and/or send an original copy by mail. Please feel free to
contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
704-333-5131

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
IPaC
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat
(collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS)
jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list
may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be
directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood
and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional
site -specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project -specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of
proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the
USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each
section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for
additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.
Location
Cumberland County, North Carolina
Local office
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
k. [phone]
fi [phone]
MAILING ADDRESS
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
551 Pylon Drive, Suite F
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J 15H DBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources
1/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
Raleigh, NC 27606-1487
•cb-s\c'
Gios"�
,� FOB
�O
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J 15H DBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources
2/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of
project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of
the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a
dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly
impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move,
and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near
the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site -specific and
project -specific information is often required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary
information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area
of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any
Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can
only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in
IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website
and request an official species list by doing the following:
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Login (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries- ).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this
list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also
shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more
information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Birds
NAM E
STATUS
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 3/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
Red -cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Reptiles
NAME
American Alligator Alligator mississippiensis
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/776
Clams
Endangered
STATUS
SAT
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Proposed Threatened
Wherever found IJ
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Insects
NAME
STATUS
Saint Francis' Satyr Butterfly Neony pha mitchellii francisci Endangered
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://eco fCvs.go ecp/species/5419
loalorak
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
American Chaffseed Schwalbea americana
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1286
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Endangered
Endangered
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 4/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
Pondberry Lindera melissifolia
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1279
Rough -leaved Loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2747
Critical habitats
Endangered
Endangered
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered
species themselves.
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.
Migratory birds
•ci'b%
C..\)\114.
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory
birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing
appropriate conservation measures, as described
1. The Miggot,v. Birelt Act of 1918.
2. The Ban Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds
of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn
more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ
below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird
on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the
general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 5/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur
off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance
of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds,
and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret
and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to
reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at
the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON (IFA
American Kestrel Falco sparverius paulusre%
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus vociferus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED
FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE
BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR
PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN
THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED, 16
WHICH IS A VERY LIBER
ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE
WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS
likCROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE.
"BRADS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES
THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY
BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 31
Breeds May 1 to Aug 20
Breeds May 1 to Jul 31
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
Breeds May 10 to Sep 10
Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 6/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ
"Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to
interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.)
A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be
used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the
presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
m.4%How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the
week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that
week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was
found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence
is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence
across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted
Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any
week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it
is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of
presence score. IF4,00
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across its
entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.
Survey Effort (')
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all
years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 7/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
- probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
SPECIES
American Kestrel
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
++++ +1++ ++++ 4 I I I- ++++ +++-I 1 I 1 I- ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC - BCR (This is a .---- ilMh. A._ ____ NMI.
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Eastern Whip -
poor -will
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Prothonotary
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concirn (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +I 11 1 1 1 1 ! I I I II 1-+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
11%011111 ++++ ++++ +$++ IA+ ++I+ ++++ ++ SO ++I+ ++++ ++++ ++++
106
do
++ „H, 1iii 11111++++++++++++++++++++
ciC
+1
+0++ 0+++ ++++ +Ill 1111 1111 iiii 1111 1+1+ ++++ ++++ ++++
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 8/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
++++ ++++ ++++ +•++ ++II I+++ ++I+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at
any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to
occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and
avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to
occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or
bird species present on your project site.
N#\ %lam°
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species
„wa'
that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network
(AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is
queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project
intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that
area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore
activities or development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not
representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your
project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially
occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the
Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen
science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To
learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the
Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or
year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide,
or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds
guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur
in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 9/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range
anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because
of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from
certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to
avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For
more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird
impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of
bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal
also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.
Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps throughithe NOAA NCCOS
Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the
Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year,
including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on
marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam
Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
(.6
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the
Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority
concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be
in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring
in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10
km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a
red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of
presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a
lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a
starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to
look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about
conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize
impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 10/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.
Fish hatcheries
THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.
•cb-s\c'
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update
our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual
extent of wetlands on site.
This location overlaps the following wetlands:
FRLH�U TER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
PFO1 C
RIVERINE
R5UBH
A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level
information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high
altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error
is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on -the -ground inspection of any particular site may result in
revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 11/12

3/29/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts,
the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted.
Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be
occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and
the actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial
imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged
aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.
Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.
These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a
different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this
inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish
the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in
activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal,
state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may
affect such activities.
o-s
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/S6LM763J15HDBGCRSMM74A3DSQ/resources 12/12

■ ■m
—E■~■ NC DEPARTMENT OF
■ EI= NATURAL AN❑ CULTURAL RESOURCES
■.■■■
March 29, 2021
Taylor Kiker
Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
RE: WNC6 Fayetteville
Dear Taylor Kiker:
Roy Cooper, Governor
D. Reid Wilson, Secretary
Walter Clark
Director, Division of Land and Water Stewardship
NCNHDE-14324
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one -mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally -listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one -mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally -
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOVRCES
Q 121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 16S1 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27699
OFC 'M9.707.9120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
WNC6 Fayetteville
March 29, 2021
NCNHDE-14324
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the
Taxonomic
Group
Dragonfly or 33195
Damselfly
Dragonfly or 33740 Somatochlora
Damselfly georgiana
Dragonfly or 33780 Stylurus ivae
Damselfly
Freshwater 37335 Lampsilis sp. 2
Bivalve
Natural
Community
Vascular Plant
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name
Gomphurus septima
Septima's Clubtail
Coppery Emerald
Shining Clubtail
Chameleon
Lampmussel
28433 Mesic Mixed Hardwood ---
Forest (Coastal Plain
Subtype)
22821 Crataegus munda Batesburg Hawthorn
Project Area
Last Element Accuracy
servation Occurrence
Date Rank
1986-04-12 H 3-Medium
Vascular Plant 8142 Gelsemium rankinii
Swamp Jessamine
Natural Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Name
CPF/Upper Cape Fear River Aquatic Habitat
Cape Fear Botanical Garden
2004-Pre
2004-Pre
2015-06-16
2000-06-29
H? 5-Very
Low
H? 5-Very
Low
E 3-Medium
B 2-High
1933-04-28 H 5-Very
Low
1930-04-01 H 5-Very
Low
Representational Rating
R2 (Very High)
R5 (General)
Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name
NC Land and Water Fund Project
Cape Fear Botanical Garden
NC Land and Water Fund Project
Owner
NC DNCR, NC Land and Water
Cape Fear Botanical Garden
NC DNCR, NC Land and Water
Collective Rating
C3 (High)
C5 (General)
Owner Type
Fund State
Private
Fund State
Federal
Status
State Global State
tatus Rank Rank
Significantly G3 S3
Rare
Significantly G3G4 S1?
Rare
Significantly G4 S1?
Rare
Significantly G2 S2
Rare
G3 S3
Significantly G4G5 S2?
Rare
Throughout
Special G5 S1S2
Concern
Vulnerable
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/help. Data query generated on March 29, 2021
resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
source
NCNHP, Q4 January 2021. Please
Page 2 of 3

ooss Creel,
4°am at i
g z
r€
ITT Ik,. n st
y a-�- East card,rwi �,r
>>
m' Fayetteville
S ., f AF
P
NCNHDE-14324: WNC6 Fayetteville
March 29, 2021
Project Boundary
Buffered Project Boundary
1:3
NHP Natural Area (NHNA)
Managed Area (MAREA)
Simon St
pow to M St
0 0.175
1 s '
0 0.3
Downing Rd
1:22,635
0.35
0.6
0.7 mi
1.2 km
Sources' Esri, HERE, Garmia, Intermap, increment P Corp_. GEBCO, USGS,
FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esn Japan,
METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS
User Community
Page 3 of 3

NA
Feet
4,000 8,000
u
l
Cumberland
County
Legend
Kimley>>> Horn J Approximate Site Boundary
Cumberland County
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Legend
n Approximate Site Boundary
Kimley>» Horn
Figure 2
USGS Topographic (Vander) Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

InApproximate Site Boundary
Kimley»>Horn
1,000 2,000
Feet
Figure 3
Aerial Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Photo Pas e 1
Photo 1 — Maintained grass area on -site
Photo 2 — Maintained grass area on -site
Title
Project
Photo Pages
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Date
2/23/21
Project Number
115243003
Prepared By
Kimley »Horn

Photo Page 2
Photo 3 — Perennial stream on -site
Photo 4 — Maintained grass area on -site and stream crossing
Title
Photo Pages
Project
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Prepared By
Date
Project Number
2/23/21
115243003
Kimley »Horn

Kimley»>Horn
March 29, 2021
Ms. Renee Gledhill -Earley
Environmental Review Coordinator
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4617
Re: WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Gledhill -Earley,
Kimley-Horn is writing this letter on behalf of our client, NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC, to
request a review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to
cultural resource issues associated with the proposed project in Fayetteville, North Carolina.
The proposed project site is located 1005 Dunn Road in Fayetteville, Cumberland County,
North Carolina (Figures 1-3). The proposed project seeks a parking lot expansion.
We request that you review the site based on the attached information to determine the
presence of any archeological, cultural, or historic resources. If a response has not been
received within 30 days, we will assume that you have reviewed the project area and that
there are no issues to address at the present time.
Thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please email
([e-mail]) a copy of your reply and/or send an original copy by mail.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please feel free to contact me at (980) 296-
0810.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Taylor Kiker
Environmental Scientist
kimley-horn.com
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28203
704 333 5131

NA
Feet
4,000 8,000
u
l
Cumberland
County
Legend
Kimley>>> Horn J Approximate Site Boundary
Cumberland County
Figure 1
Vicinity Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

Legend
n Approximate Site Boundary
Kimley>» Horn
Figure 2
USGS Topographic (Vander) Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

InApproximate Site Boundary
Kimley»>Horn
1,000 2,000
Feet
Figure 3
Aerial Map
WNC6 Fayetteville Site
Fayetteville, NC

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION

NC SAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
USACE AID #: NCDWR #:
INSTRUCTIONS: Attach a sketch of the assessment area and photographs. Attach a copy of the USGS 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle, and circle the location of the stream reach under evaluation. If multiple stream reaches will be evaluated on the same
property, identify and number all reaches on the attached map, and include a separate form for each reach. See the NC SAM User
Manual for detailed descriptions and explanations of requested information. Record in the "Notes/Sketch" section if any supplementary
measurements were performed. See the NC SAM User Manual for examples of additional measurements that may be relevant.
NOTE EVIDENCE OF STRESSORS AFFECTING THE ASSESSMENT AREA (do not need to be within the assessment area).
PROJECT / SITE INFORMATION:
1. Project name (if any): WNC6 Fayetteville 2. Date of evaluation: 2/23/2021
3. Applicant/owner name: 4. Assessor name/organization: Jason Hartshorn / Kimley Horn
5. County: Cumberland 6. Nearest named water body
7. River Basin: Upper Cape Fear on USGS 7.5-minute quad: Locks Creek
8. Site coordinates (decimal degrees, at lower end of assessment reach):
STREAM INFORMATION: (depth and width can be approximations)
9. Site number (show on attached map): S1 10. Length of assessment reach evaluated (feet): -100 If
11. Channel depth from bed (in riffle, if present) to top of bank (feet): 2 I- Unable to assess channel depth.
12. Channel width at top of bank (feet): 5 13. Is assessment reach a swamp stream? r Yes r No
14. Feature type: C: Perennial flow r Intermittent flow r Tidal Marsh Stream
STREAM RATING INFORMATION:
15. NC SAM Zone: r Mountains (M) ( Piedmont (P)
16. Estimated geomorphic
valley shape (skip for r a .-V-
Tidal Marsh Stream): (more sinuous stream, flatter valley slope)
17. Watershed size: (skip C: Size 1 (< 0.1 miZ) r Size 2 (0.1 to < 0.5 miZ)
for Tidal Marsh Stream)
0 Inner Coastal Plain (I)
C b
(less sinuous stream, steeper valley slope)
Q Size 3 (0.5 to < 5 miZ) r Size 4 (>_ 5 miZ)
(' Outer Coastal Plain (0)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
18. Were regulatory considerations evaluated? I: Yes r No If Yes, check all that appy to the assessment area.
I- Section 10 water I- Classified Trout Waters E Water Supply Watershed ( r I r II r III r IV r V)
I- Essential Fish Habitat E Primary Nursery Area F High Quality Waters/Outstanding Resource Waters
I Publicly owned property I- NCDWR riparian buffer rule in effect I- Nutrient Sensitive Waters
E Anadromous fish I- 303(d) List E CAMA Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)
I- Documented presence of a federal and/or state listed protected species within the assessment area.
List species:
I- Designated Critical Habitat (list species):
19. Are additional stream information/supplementary measurements included in "Notes/Sketch" section or attached? r Yes C" No
1. Channel Water - assessment reach metric (skip for Size 1 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
r A Water throughout assessment reach.
r B No flow, water in pools only.
r C No water in assessment reach.
2. Evidence of Flow Restriction - assessment reach metric
r A At least 10% of assessment reach in -stream habitat or riffle -pool sequence is adversely affected by a flow restriction or fill to the
point of obstructing flow or a channel choked with aquatic macrophytes or ponded water or impounded on flood or ebb within
the assessment reach (examples: undersized or perched culverts, causeways that constrict the channel, tidal gates).
r B NotA
3. Feature Pattern - assessment reach metric
r A A majority of the assessment reach has altered pattern (examples: straightening, modification above or below culvert).
(• B Not A.
4. Feature Longitudinal Profile - assessment reach metric
r A Majority of assessment reach has a substantially altered stream profile (examples: channel down -cutting, existing damming,
over widening, active aggradation, dredging, and excavation where appropriate channel profile has not reformed from any of
these disturbances).
r B NotA
5. Signs of Active Instability - assessment reach metric
Consider only current instability, not past events from which the stream has currently recovered. Examples of instability include
active bank failure, active channel down -cutting (head -cut), active widening, and artificial hardening (such as concrete, gabion, rip -rap).
C. A < 10% of channel unstable
B 10 to 25% of channel unstable
r c > 25% of channel unstable
6. Streamside Area Interaction - streamside area metric
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB).
LB
rA
f� B
RB
rA
l� B
rc r C
Little or no evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction
Moderate evidence of conditions (examples: berms, levees, down -cutting, aggradation, dredging) that adversely affect
reference interaction (examples: limited streamside area access, disruption of flood flows through streamside area,
leaky or intermittent bulkheads, causeways with floodplain constriction, minor ditching [including mosquito ditching])
Extensive evidence of conditions that adversely affect reference interaction (little to no floodplain/intertidal zone access
[examples: causeways with floodplain and channel constriction, bulkheads, retaining walls, fill, stream incision,
disruption of flood flows through streamside area] or too much floodplain/intertidal zone access [examples:
impoundments, intensive mosquito ditching]) or floodplain/intertidal zone unnaturally absent or assessment reach is a

man-made feature on an interstream divide
7. Water Quality Stressors — assessment reach/intertidal zone metric
Check all that apply.
r A Discolored water in stream or intertidal zone (milky white, blue, unnatural water discoloration, oil sheen, stream foam)
B Excessive sedimentation (burying of stream features or intertidal zone)
E C Noticeable evidence of pollutant discharges entering the assessment reach and causing a water quality problem
D Odor (not including natural sulfide odors)
E Current published or collected data indicating degraded water quality in the assessment reach. Cite source in the "Notes/Sketch"
section.
I F Livestock with access to stream or intertidal zone
[- G Excessive algae in stream or intertidal zone
H Degraded marsh vegetation in the intertidal zone (removal, burning, regular mowing, destruction, etc.)
E 1 Other: (explain in "Notes/Sketch" section)
F71,1 Little to no stressors
8. Recent Weather —watershed metric
For Size 1 or 2 streams, D1 drought or higher is considered a drought; for Size 3 or 4 streams, D2 drought or higher is considered a
drought.
r A Drought conditions and no rainfall or rainfall not exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
r B Drought conditions and rainfall exceeding 1 inch within the last 48 hours
C� C No drought conditions
9 Large or Dangerous Stream — assessment reach metric
r Yes C•' No Is stream is too large or dangerous to assess? If Yes, skip to Metric 13 (Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition).
10. Natural In -stream Habitat Types — assessment reach metric
10a. CJ Yes r No Degraded in -stream habitat over majority of the assessment reach (examples of stressors include excessive
sedimentation, mining, excavation, in -stream hardening [for example, rip -rap], recent dredging, and snagging)
(evaluate for size 4 Coastal Plain streams only, then skip to Metric 12)
lob. Check all that occur (occurs if > 5% coverage of assessment reach) (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams)
A Multiple aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses T E E F 5% oysters or other natural hard bottoms
(include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats) F G Submerged aquatic vegetation
F B Multiple sticks and/or leaf packs and/or emergent `o [ H Low -tide refugia (pools)
vegetation r ° E I Sand bottom
C Multiple snags and Togs (including lap trees) r `m F J 5% vertical bank along the marsh
D 5% undercut banks and/or root mats and/or roots 0 F K Little or no habitat
in banks extend to the normal wetted perimeter
E Little or no habitat
"*"****************************REMAINING QUESTIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE FOR TIDAL MARSH STREAMS****************************
11. Bedform and Substrate — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
11a. r Yes a No Is assessment reach in a natural sand -bed stream? (skip for Coastal Plain streams)
11b. Bedform evaluated. Check the appropriate box(es).
I— A Riffle -run section (evaluate 11 c)
T B Pool -glide section (evaluate 11d)
C Natural bedform absent (skip to Metric 12, Aquatic Life)
11 c. In riffles sections, check all that occur below the normal wetted perimeter of the assessment reach — whether or not submerged.
Check at least one box in each row (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain Streams and Tidal Marsh Streams). Not Present (NP) =
absent, Rare (R) = present but < 10%, Common (C) = > 10-40%, Abundant (A) = > 40-70%, Predominant (P) = > 70%. Cumulative
percentages should not exceed 100% for each assessment reach.
NP
r
-1-1---) ---)-1-1---)
R C A P
r r r r
r r r
r r r
r r r
r r r
r r r
r r r
r r r
-1-I--) --)-1-I--)
Bedrock/saprolite
Boulder (256 — 4096 mm)
Cobble (64 — 256 mm)
Gravel (2 — 64 mm)
Sand (.062 — 2 m m )
Silt/clay (< 0.062 mm)
Detritus
Artificial (rip -rap, concrete, etc.)
11d r- Yes r No Are pools filled with sediment? (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12. Aquatic Life — assessment reach metric (skip for Size 4 Coastal Plain streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
12a. r Yes C No Was an in -stream aquatic life assessment performed as described in the User Manual?
If No, select one of the following reasons and skip to Metric 13. r No Water r Other:
12b. (' Yes C" No Are aquatic organisms present in the assessment reach (look in riffles, pools, then snags)? If Yes, check
all that apply. If No, skip to Metric 13.
1 >1 Numbers over columns refer to "individuals" for size 1 and 2 streams and "taxa" for size 3 and 4 streams.
Adult frogs
• I— Aquatic reptiles
I E Aquatic macrophytes and aquatic mosses (include liverworts, lichens, and algal mats)
• E Beetles (including water pennies)
Caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera [T])
- I- Asian clam (Corbicula)
- E Crustacean (isopod/amphipod/crayfish/shrimp)
I E Damselfly and dragonfly larvae
1 E Dipterans (true flies)

-1-1-1-177-17-17-1
E Mayfly larvae (Ephemeroptera [E])
E Megaloptera (alderfly, fishfly, dobsonfly larvae)
E Midges/mosquito larvae
E Mosquito fish (Gambusia) or mud minnows (Umbra pygmaea)
E Mussels/Clams (not Corbicula)
I— Other fish
I— Salamanders/tadpoles
E Snails
Stonefly larvae (Plecoptera [P])
E Tipulid larvae
I— Worms/leeches
13. Streamside Area Ground Surface Condition — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Consider storage capacity with regard to both overbank flow and
upland runoff.
LB RB
r A r A Little or no alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
r B r B Moderate alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area
C C r C Severe alteration to water storage capacity over a majority of the streamside area (examples include: ditches, fill,
soil, compaction, livestock disturbance, buildings, man-made levees, drainage pipes)
14. Streamside Area Water Storage — streamside area metric (skip for Size 1 streams, Tidal Marsh Streams, and B valley types)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB) of the streamside area.
LB RB
r A r A Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 6 inches deep
C B r B Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
r C r C Majority of streamside area with depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
15. Wetland Presence — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for the Left Bank (LB) and the Right Bank (RB). Do not consider wetlands outside of the streamside area or within the
normal wetted perimeter of assessment reach.
LB RB
r Y r Y Are wetlands present in the streamside area?
(: N N
16. Baseflow Contributors — assessment reach metric (skip for size 4 streams and Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all contributors within the assessment reach or within view of and draining to the assessment reach.
I— A
▪ B
▪ C
▪ D
E
▪ F
Streams and/or springs (jurisdictional discharges)
Ponds (include wet detention basins; do not include sediment basins or dry detention basins)
Obstruction that passes some flow during low -flow periods within assessment area (beaver dam, bottom -release dam)
Evidence of bank seepage or sweating (iron oxidizing bacteria in water indicates seepage)
Stream bed or bank soil reduced (dig through deposited sediment if present)
None of the above
17. Baseflow Detractors — assessment area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all that apply.
I —A
▪ B
▪ C
▪ D
▪ E
▪ F
Evidence of substantial water withdrawals from the assessment reach (includes areas excavated for pump installation)
Obstruction not passing flow during low flow periods affecting the assessment reach (ex: watertight dam, sediment deposit)
Urban stream (>_ 24% impervious surface for watershed)
Evidence that the stream -side area has been modified resulting in accelerated drainage into the assessment reach
Assessment reach relocated to valley edge
None of the above
18. Shading — assessment reach metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider aspect. Consider "leaf -on" condition.
r A Stream shading is appropriate for stream category (may include gaps associated with natural processes)
f: B Degraded (example: scattered trees)
C C Stream shading is gone or largely absent
19. Buffer Width — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider "vegetated buffer" and "wooded buffer" separately for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) starting at the top
of bank out to the first break.
Vegetated Wooded
LB RB LB RB
C A r A C A r A >_ 100-feet wide or extends to the edge of the watershed
B r B C B r B From 50 to < 100-feet wide
cc r C cc r C From 30 to < 50-feet wide
0 D r D D (• D From 10 to < 30-feet wide
(� E C: E C E rE < 10-feet wide or no trees
20. Buffer Structure
Consider for left
LB RB
r A G A
r B C) B
CC CC
Co GD
rE OE
— streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Vegetated" Buffer Width).
Mature forest
Non -mature woody vegetation or modified vegetation structure
Herbaceous vegetation with or without a strip of trees < 10 feet wide
Maintained shrubs
Little or no vegetation
21. Buffer Stressors — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Check all appropriate boxes for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB). Indicate if listed stressor abuts stream (Abuts), does not abut but
is within 30 feet of stream (< 30 feet), or is between 30 to 50 feet of stream (30-50 feet).

If none of the following stressors occurs on either bank, check here and skip to Metric 22:
Abuts < 30 feet 30-50 feet
LB RB LB RB LB RB
rA rA rA rA rA rA Row crops
r B r B r B r B r B r B Maintained turf
r C r C r C r C r C r C Pasture (no livestock)/commercial horticulture
r D r D r D r D r D r D Pasture (active livestock use)
22. Stem Density — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider for left bank (LB) and right bank (RB) for Metric 19 ("Wooded" Buffer Width).
LB RB
a A ( A Medium to high stem density
r B r B Low stem density
r C r C No wooded riparian buffer or predominantly herbaceous species or bare ground
23. Continuity of Vegetated Buffer — streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Consider whether vegetated buffer is continuous along stream (parallel). Breaks are areas lacking vegetation > 10-feet wide.
LB RB
(TA (TA The total length of buffer breaks is < 25 percent.
r B r B The total length of buffer breaks is between 25 and 50 percent.
r C r C The total length of buffer breaks is > 50 percent.
24. Vegetative Composition — First 100 feet of streamside area metric (skip for Tidal Marsh Streams)
Evaluate the dominant vegetation within 100 feet of each bank or to the edge of the watershed (whichever comes first) as it contributes
to assessment reach habitat.
LB RB
r A a A Vegetation is close to undisturbed in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of native
species, with non-native invasive species absent or sparse.
r B r B Vegetation indicates disturbance in terms of species diversity or proportions, but is still largely composed of native
species. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clear -cutting or clearing or
communities with non-native invasive species present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata or
communities missing understory but retaining canopy trees.
r C r C Vegetation is severely disturbed in terms of species diversity or proportions. Mature canopy is absent or communities
with non-native invasive species dominant over a large portion of expected strata or communities composed of planted
stands of non -characteristic species or communities inappropriately composed of a single species or no vegetation.
25. Conductivity — assessment reach metric (skip for all Coastal Plain streams)
25a. r Yes a No Was a conductivity measurement recorded?
If No, select one of the following reasons. r No Water r Other:
25b. Check the box corresponding to the conductivity measurement (units of microsiemens per centimeter).
( A <46 r B 46 to < 67 O C 67 to < 79 r D 79 to < 230 0 E >_ 230
Notes/Sketch:

NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1
Stream Site Name WNC6 Fayetteville
Stream Category Pb1
Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream)
Function Class Rating Summary
Date of Evaluation 2/23/2021
Assessor Name/Organization ason Hartshorn / Kimley Ho
USACE/
All Streams
NO
NO
NO
Perennial
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology
(2) Baseflow
(2) Flood Flow
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation
(4) Floodplain Access
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
(4) Microtopography
(3) Stream Stability
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(4) Stream Geomorphology
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(1) Water Quality
(2) Baseflow
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Indicators of Stressors
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
NO
LOW
NA
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
(3) Baseflow
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Stream -side Habitat
(3) Thermoregulation
(2) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(3) Flow Restriction
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology
(3) Tidal Marsh In -stream Habitat
(2) Intertidal Zone Habitat
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Overall
MEDIUM

ROY COOPER
Governor
DIONNE DELLI-GATTI
Secretary
TIM BAUMGARTNER
Director
Eric Jackson
NC Fayetteville Fort Worth, LLC
201 Riverplace, Suite 400
Greenville, SC 29601
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
April 5, 2021
Expiration of Acceptance: 10/5/2021
Project: WNC6 Fayetteville County: Cumberland
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
03030004
Warm Stream
466
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].
cc: Chris Tinklenberg, agent
Sincerely,
FOR James. B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
NORTH CAROLINA
Departmental Environmental Quality
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street 11652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
919.707.8976