20130082 Ver 1_401 Application_20130113

January 25, 2013
Mrs. Karen Higgins
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
19@R Y%
;' -`A ?92013
2013008&
LCON
ENGINEERING
$]PALI IV),
■ter
Re: Pre - Construction Notlicafion letter to Request for 401 Certification Permit
Impacts to Wetlands, Perennial Stream, Intermittent Stream, and Stream Buffers
North Main Street Mixed -Use Development
Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mrs. Higgins:
Falcon Engineering, Inc. (Falcon) is submitting this Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) letter as a notice
to the North Carolina Division of Water (NC DWQ) that Renaissance Development Partners, LLC is
requesting a 401 Certification permit relative to the proposed North Main Street Mixed -use
Development, located on a 4.96 -acre assemblage of three (3) adjacent parcels in Wake County. The
development will include a commercial /retail area, residential townhomes, and office spaces.
The new construction will impact a total of 0.08 acres of wetland (two wetland studies were conducted
with slightly different results showing either 0.06 or 0.08 acres total). In addition, a total of 40 linear feet of
perennial stream, 14 feet intermittent stream, and 14,799 SF of Neuse River basin stream buffers (Zone 1 -
4,713 SF and Zone 2 - 10,086 SF) will be impacted by the project.
Document Submittal:
We herein provide NC DWQ with five (5) copies of each of the following documents relative to the 401
Certification permit (with the exception of the check) for the residential and commercial mixed -use
development:
• Check for $240.00 made out to "NC Division of Water Quality"
• Combined USACE & NCDWQ Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form completed
• Supporting Documentation Report, that presents a detailed delineation of the Waters of the
United States on the property
• Site data sheets (streams and wetlands)
• Current engineering plans for the project
• Discussion of the permitting requirements for this project
• An outline of proposed impacts (below)
www.FalconEngineers.com
Engineering I Inspection I Testing I Agency CM
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110 1 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 1 T 919.871 0800 1 F 919.871.0803

Karen Higgins 2 January 25, 2013
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit - Raleigh, Wake County
Summary of Permitting and Mitigation Requirements:
Renaissance Development Partners, LLC understands that the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ) regulates streams. It is Renaissance Development Partners' understanding that a
corresponding General Certification will be required for this project for any potential impacts to 50 -foot
stream buffers.
In addition, Renaissance Development Partners, LLC has contacted USACE in respect to federal
permitting requirements pertinent to this project to mitigate for stream and wetland impacts:
• NWP 29 - Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 29 (Residential Developments), and /or
• NWP 39 - Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 39 (Commercial & Institutional Developments)
Proposed Wetland & Stream Mitigation Plan:
Renaissance Development Partners, LLC understands that mitigation will be required for the impacts to
the 4,713 SF in Zone 1 (mostly in CHN2 with lesser for CHN3) and 10,086 LF in Zone 2 of CHN2 and CHN3.
Renaissance Development Partners, LLC proposes the following mitigation for the impacts to the 14,799
SF of poor quality perennial and intermittent streams (a mitigation plan will be created with the USACE
and NC EEP for the stream and wetland impacts):
• The payment of $28,975.32 of in -lieu fees (Neuse River Basin) for a total of 29,268 SF of stream
buffer impacts (3x multiplier for Zone 1, 1.5x multiplier for Zone 2) to the North Carolina Riparian
Buffer Restoration Fund to fulfill compensatory- mitigation requirements.
We hope that the information provided with this PCN letter is sufficient for NC DWQ to process this
permit application in a timely manner. Please contact us, at your earliest convenience, to let us know if
you need any additional information, relative to this application. We appreciate this opportunity to
provide services to you and look forward to supporting your project. If you have any questions, please
give us a call at (919) 871 -0800, or call Jeremy directly at (919) 201 -9670.
Sincerely,
FALCON ENGINEERING, INC.
Josh Dunbar, PE
Director of Design Services
Enclosures
r Manager
F

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROJECT NAME / DESCRIPTION: North Main Street Multi Use Site
LCON
N ;fN ; ,jig _
PARCEL ID: PINs 0649-85-9345,0649-85-9067, and 0649- 942829
PROPERTY OWNER (PRINTED): Renaissance Development Partners, LLC (Mr. Rajvir Dhaliwal)
PROPERTY OWNER (SIGNATURE):
Jr
OWNER ADDRESS: 217 Rivendell Drive
Holly Springs, NC 27540
TELEPHONE #: [phone]
THE UNDERSIGNED, REGISTERED PROPERTY OWNER(S) OF THE ABOVE NOTED PROPERTY, DO
HEREBY AUTHORIZE Jeremy Schewe , OF FALCON ENGINEERING, INC. TO ACT ON MY
BEHALF AND TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY FOR THE PROCESSING, ISSUANCE AND
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PERMIT OR CERTIFICATION AND ANY AND ALL STANDARD AND SPECIAL
CONDITIONS ATTACHED.
NOTICE: THIS AUTHORIZATION, FOR LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL COURTESY REASONS, IS
VALID ONLY FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO ENTER THE PROPERTY WHEN ACCOMPANIED BY
FALCON STAFF. PLEASE CONTACT THE ABOVE FALCON AGENT TO ARRANGE A SITE MEETING
PRIOR TO VISITING THE SITE.
FALCON JOB #: E12028
www.FalconEnginsers.com
Engineering I Inspection I Testing I Agency CM
2736 Rowland Road I Raleigh. North Carolina 27615 1 T 919 871.0800 1 F 919.871 0803

of WArF9
0
> 1
o <
2 0 1 :''%
2013008 1
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
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 and /or 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
North Main Street Mixed -Use Development
2b. County:
Wake
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Holly Springs
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Renaissance Development Partners LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
14589 DP 1208, 14589 DP 1204 & 14635 DP 2537
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Mr. Rajvir Dhaliwal p
�,
k� v 1 N
_ , ��,
3d. Street address:
217 Rivendell Drive I A
- L '
3e. City, state, zip:
Holly Springs, NC 27540 1
J/-All 2 9 2013
3f. Telephone no.:
757.304.2294 D
_
3g. Fax no.:
panda
3h. Email address:
rdpllcnc @gmail.com
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
'i
1

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:
Jeremy Schewe
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Falcon Engineering, Inc
5c. Street address:
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27607
5e. Telephone no.:
919.871.0800
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
jschewe @falconengineers.com
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
7. Property Identification
1 a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0649 -85 -9345, 0649 -85 -9067, 0649 -94 -2829
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.66002 Longitude: - 78.83526
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size:
4.96 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Unnamed tributary to Middle Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C: NSW
2c. River basin:
Neuse
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:
Land use cover type is 449 -Other Mixed Decidous- Coniferous Forest Land. The site is primarily forested but contains
numerous old trails and culverted ditches. The elevation of the site ranges from approximately 408 msl at a point in the
southeastern comer of the property to approximately 388 feet above mean sea level (msl) along the northern property line
where the stream exits the property under Cayman Avenue.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.06 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
501 LF
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Mixed -use development on a 4.96 -acre assemblage of 3 parcels that will include residential, commercial /retail, and office
space.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Three (3) parcels, totaling 4.96 acres, planned as a mixed -use development. The site cannot be developed to meet the
layout needs without impacting 2 small wetland areas (0.04 -acre, 0.02 -acre) for a total of 0.06 -acre impact. In addition,
the road for the town homes will cross an intermittent stream (CHN 3) and require an existing culvert pipe (38') to be
removed and replaced with a larger & longer pipe (52') to accommodate the Town's road crosssection. The new culvert
will be buried at least 1 -foot below the bed of the stream in order to maintain aquatic biota passage. Main Street
culvertextensions for road widening will impact 40 feet of a perennial stream (CHN 2). Up to 12 feet of CHN 2 may also
be temporarily impacted in order to connect sewage from the residential area to the commercial area.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
Yes ❑ No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: 2 new parcels have been added to the original
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
El Preliminary Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company: ECS
Name (if known): James Lastinger
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
April 3, 2012
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
The original tract was delineated by Ryan Conchilla of ECS, Carolinas and approved on July 12, 2011.
The applicant submitted a PCN on Oct. 12, 2011, and was sent a verification on October 20, 2011, which expired under
the old nationwide on March 18, 2012.
The applicant resubmitted under the current nationwide with no changes to their plans, and received a verification on April
3, 2012, which is valid for 2 years.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
The current plan is to build the residential area first (Phase 1) with the portion of Main Street widened to accomodate and
this is currently being agreed upon with the City of Holly Springs. The second phase of the project will be accomplished
within the next 2 to 3 years. All site clearing, grubbing, and filling (impacts) will occur during Phase I of the project.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P)
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
or Temporary
T
W1 SPOT
fill
Palustrine
® Yes
® Corps
0.04
Forested
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 SPOT
fill
Palustrine
® Yes
® Corps
0.02
Forested
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P [IT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ POT
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.06
2h. Comments: If the original delineation from ECS is kept, then W1 would be 0.06 acres, and the total wetland acres would
be 0.08 acres total for all three properties.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) ) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P)
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
or Temporary
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
(T)
S1 ❑ P ®T
excavation
Unnamed
tributary to
® PER
❑INT
® Corps
DWQ
8
12
Middle Creek
S2 SPOT
Culvert
Unnamed
tributary to
® PER
❑INT
® Corps
®DWQ
12
40
Middle Creek
S3 ®P ❑ T
Culvert
Unnamed
tributary to
❑ PER
®INT
® Corps
El DWQ
2
14
Middle Creek
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
66
3i. Comments: S1 will be a temporary impact due to utility crossing under the stream (CHN 2). The site will be restored to pre -
impact conditions or better upon completion. S2 is impacts to CHN 2 for Main Street widening. S3 is impacts to CHN 3 due to
the Townhomes road access and culvert extension.
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
number —
Permanent
(P) or
Temporary
T
01 11 PEI
T
02 ❑P❑
T
03 ❑P❑
T
04 ❑P❑
T
4E Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then com lete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
number
pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5E 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:
Page 7of12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
® Neuse ❑Tar- Pamlico El Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for impact
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
(P) or
required?
Temporary
T
61 ®P ❑ T
parking
Unnamed tributary to
Middle Creek
® Yes
❑ No
2,655
B2 ® P Q T
grading /stormwater
Unnamed tributary to
Middle Creek
a No
929
4,924
B3 ®P ❑ T
road construction
Unnamed tributary to
Middle Creek
es Nos
3,784
2,507
6h. Total buffer impacts
4,713
10,086
6i. Comments.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Site was evaluated and surveyed to allow best design principles to avoid potential impacts as much as possible. Most of the
proposed impacts are mostly due to site limitations and accessibility.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Multiple alternative stormwater technologies were calculated to determine what would be the most appropriate BMPs for the
site. Due to the small size of the project, many alternatives were cost prohibitive, so the selection of stormwater retetion was
the best option for this project.
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
® Yes ❑ No
to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
® DWQ ® Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
® Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In4ieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
40 linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ® cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
14,799 square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4h. Comments: This project cannot be completed without the above - described impacts to stream 2 (CHN 2) and 3 (CHN 3),
as well as the two (2) low quality wetland areas. Based on the size, length, and location of these features on the property, the
proposed impacts cannot be avoided or minimized to develop this track of land. Renaissance proposes to pay an in -lieu fee
for the impacts to 52 linear feet (40 ft permanently due to Main Street culvert extension) of poor quality perennial Stream 2
(CHN 2). Renaissance Development Partners, LLC requests that the Corps of Engineers' District Engineer waive the impacts
to the wetlands areas (0.06 acres) and intermittent stream (14 linear feet of CHN 3). The reason for this waiver request is
presented in the accompanying Supporting Documentation Report.
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 ❑ No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
road widening/grading
4,713
3 (2 for Catawba)
14,139
Zone 2
parking, grading and /or
stormwater control
10,086
1.5
15,129
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
1 29,268
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).
Payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund (Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund)
6h. Comments:
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Yes No
❑
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
54.8%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® 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:
There is an existing 4 foot box culvert that crosses Main Street and discharges at the southwest comer of the property
and continues along the property line to 5 culvert pipes that pass under Cayman Avenue. All of the site runoff drains away
from Main Street to the channel that leads to the Cayman culverts. This is classified as a buffered stream. The soils on
these two parcels include hemdon silt loam (B soil), Mayodan gravelly silt loam (B soil) near Main Street and worsham
sandy loam (D soil) near the stream.
The third parcel sits behind Carrolls with access to Main Street. Most of this parcel drains to the north and discharges into
the same channel that flows to Cayman. This parcel is also wooded. The soils on the property include enon fine sandy
loam (C soil) and worsham sandy loam (D soil) near the stream.
The property is located within the Windward Point flood study area. Accordingly the existing approved flood model was
updated to reflect the proposed developed conditions for the commercial development and townhomes. The flood study
revealed no increase in the water surface elevation.
Because this project is located in an area of flooding concern onsite detention was designed to maintain the pre
development flow rates for the 1 year and 100 year storm events. Two wet basins (one for the townhomes and one for the
commercial) provide enough storage and also function as stormwater quality treatment to remove at least 85% of total
suspended solids as well as 25% nitrogen. Pre and post developed hydrographs were created using Hydrographs
software program. The 1 and 100 storm events were run to determine the resulting stormwater discharge. The detention
basins were modeled as if all of the site drained to them even though there is a portion of townhome entrance road that is
not routed to the basin. The townhome basin is then routed along the existing channel to the Cayman Avenue culverts
where it intersects with the basin located in the commercial part.
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
® DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Holly Springs, NC
❑ Phase 11
3b. Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
® NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes
❑ No
attached?
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
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes
® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes
® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes
® No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes
® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes
® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes
® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
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.
All wastewater discharge from the site will be connected to Holly Springs wastewater treatment.
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
Sa. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
D Yes No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑Yes ®No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Offich you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
httpl/ www .fws.gov /no-es/es/countyrr.htmi - Habitat not appropriate to support any listed species based on field
observations by wetlands ecologist/biologist.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
httpl /ocean.floridamarine.org/efh coraUimsMewer.hbn
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
Yes No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
http: / /gis.noder.gov/hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. Mat source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? http: /M oodmaps .ne.govNmia /Map.aspx?FIPS =187
Jeremy Schewe
1/25113
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
pplicanU nYs ignature
Date
vaBd on ff authoftaUon letter from the applicant
(AgenCs sin 4f
is
�-
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

LCON
1 NGINEERING
May 9, 2012
Renaissance Development Partners, LLC
Mr. Rajvir Dhaliwal
305 Juliet Circle
Cary, NC 27513
RE: Detailed Welland, Stream, and Riparian Buffer Delineation Report
North Main Street Mixed -Use Development Site
PIN 0649 -85 -9345, 0649 -85 -9067, & 0649 -94 -2829
Holly Springs, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Dhaliwal,
Falcon Engineering, Inc. is pleased to provide you with the attached copy of the Detailed Wetland,
Stream, and Riparian Buffer Delineation Report for the North Main Street Mixed -Use Development Site
located in Holly Springs, North Carolina.
If you have any questions, please contact me via email at [e-mail] or call me at
(919)871 -0800. We will contact you shortly to discuss the report and future actions.
Respectfully submitted:
FALCON ENGINEERING, INC.
Sean Clark, PWS
Environmental Project Manager
Q�
Josh Dunbar, PE
Director of Design Services
Attachment: Detailed Wetland, Stream, and Riparian Buffer Report
www.FalconEngineers.com
Engineering I Inspection I Testing I Agency CM
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110 1 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 1 T 919 8710800 1 F 919.871.0803

LCON
71NEERING
DETAILED WETLAND, STREAM, AND RIPARIAN
BUFFER DELINEATION
North Main Street Mixed -Use Development Site
PIN 0649 -85 -9345, 0649 -85 -9067, & 0649 -94 -2829
Holly Springs, North Carolina

Wetland, Stream, and Riparian Buffer Delineation
PIN 0643 -85 -9345, 0649 -85 -9067, & 0649 -94 -2829
Holly Springs, NC
Prepared for
Renaissance Development Partners, LLC
Attn: Rajvir Dhaliwal
217 Rivendell Drive
Holly Springs, NC 27540
Submffted by:
Falcon Engineering, Inc.
1210 Trinity Road
Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27607
(919) 871 -0800
www.falconengineers.com
Falcon Project Number I El 2028.00
May 9, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ExecutiveSummary ......................................................................................................... ..............................1
Regulationdefinition ...................................................................................................... ..............................2
1.1 Definition of "Waters of the United States" ........................................ ...............................
2
1.2 Definition of Wetlands ........................................................................... ...............................
2
1.3 Definition of Streams ......................................................................... ...............................
3
1.4 Regulation of Wetlands and Streams .................................................. ..............................4
1.5 Regulation of Riparian Buffers .............................................................. ...............................
4
SiteDescription ............................................................................................................... ..............................5
2.1 Site Location ............................................................................................ ..............................5
2.2 General Site Description ....................................................................... ...............................
5
Scopeof Services ............................................................................................................ ..............................6
3.1 Performed Scope of Work ........................................................... ...............................
6
3.2 Wetland Evaluation Methodology ............................................. ...............................
6
3.3 Stream Evaluation Methodology ................................................ ...............................
7
Resultsof Delineation ..................................................................................................... ..............................8
4.1 Wetlands Determinations .............................................................. ..............................8
4.2 Stream Determinations .................................................................. ..............................8
4.3 Riparian Buffer Determinations as per the NCDWQ Site Meeting ........................
9
Conclusions.................................................................................................................... .............................10
5.1 Conclusions .................................................................................... .............................10
References..................................................................................................................... .............................11
SitePhotos ...................................................................................................................... ..............................1
Figures /Maps .................................................................................................................. ..............................1
USACEMap Requirements .............................................................................................. ..............................1
3ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Falcon Engineering, Inc. (Falcon) was retained by Renaissance Development Partners, LLC to
complete a wetland, stream, and riparian buffer evaluation on three undeveloped properties
located immediately southeast of the intersection of North Main Street and Cayman Avenue in
Holly Springs, North Carolina. The purpose of this evaluation was to determine the extents of
"waters of the United States" on the property, and to thus determine the limits of any
jurisdictional waters of the US (e.g. wetlands, streams, ponds, etc.) on the subject property. On
May 8, 2012, Mr. Sean Clark, of Falcon, completed a detailed wetland, stream, and riparian
buffer evaluation on the 4.97 -acre assemblage. The attached Figure 1 shows the general
location of the site on the Apex, North Carolina, USGS topographical quadrangle sheet and
Figure 2 shows the site's location on the applicable portion of the NRCS Wake County Soil
Survey.
During the field evaluation, wetlands and streams within two primary drainages on the site were
determined to exist. Both streams found on property are subject to the Neuse River Riparian
Buffers. Additional information regarding the riparian buffers and their applicability on the site is
provided in section 4.3 below. The approximate size and location of the wetland and stream
areas are depicted on Figure 3. The portions of stream potentially subject to the riparian buffers
are also noted on Figure 3. These depictions are for informational purposes only and do not
constitute a certified survey of the area or provide the required jurisdictional determination.
These areas should be located by a licensed surveyor in order to produce a survey for the US
Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) approval.
Falcon's professional opinion as to the presence and /or absence of wetland, stream, and
riparian buffers and their boundaries within the evaluated property is represented within this
report and depicted on the attached Figure 3. Verification of report findings, as well as the final
determination of regulatory jurisdiction will be determined by representatives of the USACE and
the DWQ. The USACE must review, confirm, and approve all wetland and stream delineations in
order for these determinations to be considered valid. A DWQ site meeting will not be required
because the applicability of the streams on site is not being disputed. The USACE will be
contacted in order to coordinate if a site meeting to provide final rulings will be required.

SECTION 1
REGULATION DEFINITION
1.1 Definition of "Waters of the United States"
"Waters of the United States" is a broad term originally defined within the Clean Water Act of
1972, which includes intrastate lakes, rivers, perennial and intermittent streams, mudflats and
sand flats, wetlands, sloughs, wet meadows, and ponds, which could affect interstate and
foreign commerce.
1.2 Definition of Wetlands
Within the 1987 USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) wetlands
are defined as follows:
Wetlands are "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that
under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Three criteria are used to determine if a subject property is classifiable as a wetland. These
three criteria are soils, hydrology, and vegetation.
1. Souls: As currently defined by the USACE, some indicators of hydric soils include a chroma
value of 2 or less (i.e. grayish color) in the Munsell Soil Color Chart or a gleyed color, the
presence of a sulfidic odor, a high organic content in surface layer of sandy soils,
concretions (e.g. manganese), or the listing of the soil series on the national or local
hydric soils list.
2. Hydrology: Primary indicators of wetland hydrology include the presence of free water
in an excavated pit or saturated soils within the upper twelve inches of the soil, standing
water or inundated conditions, sediment deposits, or drainage patterns. Secondary
indicators include, but are not limited to, water stained leaves and oxidized root
channels in the upper twelve inches of the soil. Only one primary hydrology indicator is
required in order for an area to contain wetland hydrology, however two secondary
indicators are required if there is no primary indicator present.
32

3. Vegetation: Vegetation commonly found in and adjacent to wetlands are rated based
on the percentage of time that each species is found in a wetland or on high ground
that is not wetland. Species found almost exclusively in wetlands (99% or more) are
considered obligate wetland species (OBL). Species found 67% to 98% of the time in
wetlands, are considered facultative wetland (FACW) species and species found in
wetlands 347o to 66% of the time are considered facultative species (FAC). Facultative
Upland Species (FACU) and Obligate Upland Species (UPL) refer to those species that
occur predominately in upland, or non - wetland areas. A plus and minus system (e.g.
FACW +, FAC -, etc.) is used to further define the level of occurrence of species in upland
or wetland areas. In order for an evaluated area to meet the hydrophytic vegetation
requirement, 50% or greater of the dominant plant species must be FAC or wetter.
Positive indicators of all three parameters must be found in order for the area to be
considered a wetland.
1.3 Definition of Streams
In general there are three main stream types that describe the overall stream flow. These are
ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial. Ephemeral streams only contain water immediately
after a large rain event whereas perennial stream channels typically contain water throughout
the year. Intermittent streams may contain water during the winter (i.e. higher water table) but
are dry during the summer except after rain events. Streams are assessed and defined locally by
the USACE and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ). Each agency has its own
assessment form and methodology that is used to describe and define streams. Both forms
assign numerical values to different stream characteristics which generally break into the three
main categories of Geomorphology, Hydrology, and Biology. The DWQ currently uses the "NC
DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11" and the USACE currently uses the "Stream Quality
Assessment Worksheet ". DWQ's form is also utilized to determine the applicability of riparian
buffers on intermittent and perennial streams within the river basins where stream buffers are
applied.
33

1.4 Regulation of Wetlands and Streams
Wetlands and streams are regulated "waters of the United States" under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. Section 404, administered by USACE, require permits for discharges of
dredged or fill material into regulated "waters of the United States ". As granted under Section
401 of the Clean Water Act, the state of North Carolina through the NC -DWQ also regulates
disturbance activities in wetlands or other waters of the United States in the state of North
Carolina. NC -DWQ also regulates disturbance activities within wetland and stream areas that
are "isolated" from waters of the US and are therefore not regulated by the USACE due to their
lack of connection to other waters of the US. All areas regulated by DWQ are considered
"waters of the state" and disturbance to these areas are permitted through the 401- permitting
process which is separate from the USACE's 404 - permitting process.
1.5 Regulation of Riparian Buffers
In the Neuse River Basin, the NC -DWQ regulates activities within a 50 -foot buffer that extends
landward on each side of surface waters (e.g. streams, lakes, ponds, rivers, etc.) determined to
be subject as per 15A NCAC 02B 0233. Drainage features depicted on the most recently
published USGS topographical maps and /or the most recently published NRCS soil survey maps
are subject to these rules unless determined otherwise by NC -DWQ staff. A cumulative score of
19 on the previously mentioned "NC -DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11" is required in
order for the stream to be subject to the rules. A score of less than 19 typically means that the
stream is ephemeral and is therefore not subject to the 50 -foot buffers. Activities within the
buffers fall into the four main categories of exempt, allowable, allowable with mitigation, and
prohibited. All activities within the buffers except for those determined to be exempt require
prior written approval.
The Town of Holly Springs also places riparian buffers on surface waters that are indicated on the
USGS map and Wake County Soil Survey. Riparian widths vary depending on which river basin
and sub -basin the area is in. The subject site is in the Neuse River Basin and is not within the Bass
Lake watershed. As such, in addition to the DWQ's 50 -foot Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffers, the
Town of Holly Springs places an additional 50 -foot buffer on surface waters depicted as
perennial on the USGS topographical map and /or the Soil Survey map thereby creating a buffer
of 100 feet on each side of subject surface waters. Surface waters present in the field and
34

depicted on the Wake County Soil Survey and /or USGS topographical maps as intermittent have
only the 50 -foot buffer.
SECTION 2
SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site location
The site is located in southern Wake County, North Carolina. Specifically, the site is located
immediately east of North Main Street on the southeastern quadrant of the intersection of North
Main Street and Cayman Avenue in Holly Springs, North Carolina (See Figure 3). A residential
neighborhood exists immediately northeast of the site and primarily commercial development
exists along North Main Street. The property located immediately east of the largest reviewed
property is a wooded and undeveloped lot. The stream channels that flow through the property
are part of the headwaters of Middle Creek, which is in the Neuse River Basin.
Geologically the site is immediately east of the Jonesboro Fault within a relatively small are of
Felsic volcanic material of the Carolina Slate Belt. This area is located immediately east of the
Triassic Basin and runs generally north to south through a narrow band in the middle to western
portion of Wake County.
2.2 General Site Description
The project site consists of three parcels that are shown on the Wake County GIS records to
consist of 4.97 acres and has been forested in some form at least since 1981. The site is primarily
forested but contains numerous old trails and culverted ditches. The elevation of the site ranges
from approximately 408 msl at a point in the southeastern corner of the property to
approximately 388 feet above mean sea level (msl) along the northern property line where the
stream exits the property under Cayman Avenue.
Prior to 1988 a portion of the Durham and Southern Railroad line crossed the northern property at
a southwest to northeast angle. Although the railroad is no longer in place, the original grading
is. The drainage flagged with flags 100 - 140 demarcates a drainage and ditch system that was
35

previously immediately adjacent to the railroad line. Streams on the site have been ditched and
straightened. The spoil piles resulting from the ditching as well as numerous other spoil piles area
still present on the site. Large portions of the streams have also been culverted in two separate
locations.
SECTION 3
SCOPE OF SERVICES
3.1 Performed Scope of Work
Falcon was contracted to complete an evaluation and delineation of potentially jurisdictional
features (i.e. wetlands, streams, etc.) on the property. A sketch map which illustrates the
findings discussed within this report is attached and the methodology for our work is discussed
below.
3.2 Wetland Evaluation Methodology
The detailed wetland delineation was completed as per the procedures specified and
described in the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual' (January 1987 - Final
Report) and using the current regional supplements. Prior to arriving on -site topographical
maps, soil survey maps, orthophotographs, and ArcGIS generated maps of the area were
reviewed in order to preliminarily identify areas (e.g. drainages, hydric soils areas, areas showing
standing water, etc.) where wetlands would likely exist.
The site was traversed on foot and evaluated for the presence of hydric soils indicators,
evidence of wetland hydrology, and existence of hydrophytic vegetation. Data point plots
were established to identify the presence or absence of wetland indicators. At each plot
location, any hydrologic indicators were recorded, vegetation was identified, and a soil auger
utilized to collect a soil core to classify the soil properties.
For each plot, plants were identified to species within the 15 ft2 area of each plot. The percent
relative cover of each species within the four common strata classifications was recorded: trees
(T), shrubs & understory trees (S /S), herbs (H), woody vines (V). Wetland indicator status for
each species represented within the sample areas were obtained from the National List of Plant
Species that Occur in Wetlands: Region 2 - Southeast (1999).
-36

After the plant species were identified and recorded, soil cores were collected and described to
a depth of at least 12 inches at the center of each plot. Soil samples were inspected for hydric
soil indicators such as chroma 2 or less color. Hydric soils, as defined by USACE, are soils that are
saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic
conditions in the upper 12" of the soil. A hydric soil is different from a non -hydric soil due to the
induced anaerobic conditions that change the soil color, mottling, structure, and chemistry.
The soil colors and mottling are described using a Munsell Soil Color Chart.
As per the Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Regional Wetland Determination Data Form,
hydrology indicators such as the presence of surface water, saturated soils and /or the presence
of the water table within the upper 12 inches of the soil, water - stained leaves, etc. were
identified and noted. Further discussion of the site conditions is provided in the Results and
Recommendations section.
3.3 Stream Evaluation Methodology
Topographical maps, soil survey maps, and aerial maps of the site were reviewed in order to
preliminarily identify drainages where potential streams may exist. It is important to note that the
NRCS web -based soil maps do not indicate drainages and streams. Drainages on the site were
evaluated using the current NC -DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 and /or the
USACE's Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet. Both agencies have their own forms, which
assign numerical values to different characteristics such as the presence of fish, particle size in
the stream versus that of the adjacent upland area, etc. NC -DWQ's form is used to identify if a
drainage is subject to riparian buffers as well as to identify the stream's flow regime (i.e.
ephemeral, intermittent, or perennial). The DWQ's terms and the USACE's terms are not
interchangeable.
The USACE's form does not attempt to define a stream as being intermittent or perennial. The
USACE generally considers a drainage to contain a jurisdictional stream if there is a Mean High
Water Line or evidence of periodic concentrated flow. The stream designations from both the
USACE and DWQ hold more significance in the event that impacts (e.g. road or utility crossings
or general fill) are required. The DWQ will require mitigation for impacts to intermittent and
perennial streams. The USACE typically requires mitigation for impacts to streams that are
"important to aquatic function" and may not require mitigation for impacts to streams that are
not as much so.
37

SECTION 4
RESULTS OF DELINEATION
4.1 Wetlands Determinations
The project site was evaluated per the methodology described above and all areas containing
the three wetland criteria (hydric soils, wetland hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation) were
identified in the field using numerically labeled pink flagging. Two wetland areas were flagged
with their own number sequence and are described below.
Flags 01 -14 demarcate a small wetland polygon located between North Main Street and the
small stream located on the southern portion of the property (see Photo 1). This wetland area is
likely a result of the damming effect of a spoil pile adjacent to the stream (see Photo 2). This
wetland is primarily in herbaceous cover made up of such species as giant cane grass and
Japanese stilt - grass.
Flags 100 -140 delineate a wetland area that is a naturalized ditch (see Photo 3) that runs
immediately adjacent and parallel to the eastern side of the old rail road line. The ditch drains
toward Cayman Drive, which acts as a dam. This wetland is sparsely vegetated (see Photo 4)
with herbaceous species and was previously delineated by another consultant. A small area
located west of the old railroad line had previously been considered wetland but was
reevaluated by Falcon staff and found to lack the hydric soils necessary to be considered
jurisdictional (see Photo 6).
4.2 Stream Determinations
Drainages on property were evaluated as briefly described in the "Stream Evaluation
Methodology" section above. The site drains into an unnamed tributary of Middle Creek which
is classified as a Nutrient Sensitive Water (C NSW) by the NC DENR's "Classifications and Water
Quality Standards Applicable to Surface Water and Wetlands of North Carolina ". The site
contains two stream channels which are described and discussed below.
Stream Feature A (see Figure 3) flows generally south to north and crosses the narrow portion of
the southern property that provides access from North Main Street. The majority of this stream on
property is in an existing culvert which is approximately 50 feet long. Stream Feature A is on
average about 2 feet in width and is generally very straight due to historic ditching. This stream is
F

likely a naturalized ditch that was put in place historically to drain low lying wet areas in the
landscape. The stream ultimately enters a culvert along the southern property line of Carroll's
and then enters Stream Feature B from the culvert along Carroll's northern property line. The
stream scored a 19.5 on DWQ's Stream Identification Form.
Stream Feature B averages about 4 to 5 feet in width and enters the property assemblage from
North Main Street (western property boundary). The stream has been historically ditched and
straightened to flow along the common property line with Carroll's to the south. The stream
takes a 90 degree turn to the north along the eastern property line and then enters a culvert for
approximately 150 feet prior to day lighting briefly and exiting the property under Cayman
Avenue. Stream Feature B scored a 30.5 on DWQ's Stream Identification Form and exhibited no
fauna along the eastern property line.
4.3 Riparian Buffer Determinations as per the NCDWQ Site Meeting
Drainages within the Neuse River basin depicted to contain streams on the applicable USGS
topographical maps and /or the applicable NRCS county soil survey are subject to the NC-
DWQ's 50 -foot riparian buffers. The USGS Apex, NC topographical map (Figure 1) and sheet 83
of the Wake County Soil Survey (Figure 2) were reviewed prior to beginning the field work.
Feature A is depicted as a drainage (not perennial) on the Soil Survey map only. Feature B is
depicted on both the Soil Survey map and the USGS map as an intermittent stream. Both stream
features are subject to the 50 -foot Neuse River Riparian Buffers due to both features being shown
on one or both maps and their presence in the field. A site meeting with DWQ should not be
required because the applicability of the buffers is not being disputed. Similarly, both stream
features are subject to the Town of Holly Springs 50 -foot buffers. The total riparian buffer width
( Neuse Basin Buffers as well as Town of Holly Springs buffers) on either side of the streams will total
50 feet from the top of the stream bank landward.
39

SECTION 5
CONCLUSIONS
The USACE must review, confirm, and approve all wetland and stream delineations in order for
these determinations to be considered valid. USACE confirmation may require a site visit with
the appropriate agent for Wake County.
5.1 Conclusions
The detailed wetland and stream evaluation and delineation was completed on the 4.97 -acre
North Main Street Multi -Use Site on May 8, 2012. The site contains two streams and two wetland
areas that will be regulated by both the USACE and DWQ. As per the attached "Required
Information for a USACE Jurisdictional Determination Map ", the stream and wetland delineation
flagging should be surveyed by a North Carolina licensed surveyor in order to generate a map
for USACE approval. USACE written approval should be obtained prior to finalizing site plans.
Falcon will contact the USACE agent for Wake County to schedule a confirmation meeting.
Falcon Engineering staff are available to assist with the planning of the project and to further
discuss relevant wetland and stream regulations and permit thresholds should site plans change
that may involve any impacts to the stream.
1
10

SECTION 6
REFERENCES
GIS. 2012. Downloadable Digital Data:
http: // maps. raleiehnc .eov /imapsraleigh /index.html#
Wake County, North Carolina:
Microsoft TerraServer. 2001. Aerial Photograph and Topographic Map.
http: / /terraserver.microsoft.com
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Gretagmacbeth, New Windsor, NY.
Radford, Albert E., Ahles, Harry E., and C. Ritchie Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
Shopmeyer, C. S. 1974. Seeds of Woody Plants in the United States. Agricultural Handbook No.
450 Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1970. Soil Survey - Wake County, North Carolina. Natural
Resources Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington,D.C.
Resource Management Group, Inc. 1999. National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in
Wetlands: Region 2 - Southeast. Dickinson Press Inc.,Grand Haven, Michigan
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory (USCOE). 1987. Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetlands Research Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army
Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
311

APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOS
A -1

Photo 1: Data Point 4 (DP4) within the wetland flagged with numbers 01 to 14.
Photo 2: Spoil Pile adjacent to Stream Feature A.
3A-2

�cl
Soh !�!► t
a r It. • t:'q..
c •
w RA
zr
F
i
r. wry' �� � v 1
•. C - -
` '�
J
'
_
s'• r -
-
f
.t
ol
F

rte.
0
A
Lo

Photo 7: Looking upstream (south) and off property on Stream Feature A.
Photo 8: Stream Feature B flowing into the +/- 150 -foot culvert.
3A-5

APPENDIX B
FIGURES /MAPS
[UF

- -- ,7�fj ,` �� Jam, fi =�F I� ^'• � -`� . � i \;�., � / � �it° � \\ � ` i i
I •;
- 1
_ �_= -' tit` •' � "1, �.' � �� 'r` -fir ��1' 1 '
• f
9
111 k� r�l }f,' ;.•:`J !t Il�S1{ -VOil
't11,5 .5 -..._. �`,tr �: j�15 �, /Jf , .� f1y� - -'`� •� (( �4`
+,'vim --.
I if
Ir
lit
__ - f `- -'� -'� it ` _ .f • -
\� • • ice__ • I • ••
r
I ;��'�-�; \ 1 ,� /t 1. I �( L (-(r�� •sue
Project #:
Figure 1
E12028
North Main Street Mixed -Use
Project Mgr.:
Sean Clark
USGS Topographical Site
Date: 05 -07 -2012
Vicinity Map
Apex, NC Quad Sheet
Scale: NTS
Renaissance Development
Site;; = _
All-
t f
1
1f
t •"" t� C
• ■ �. lie -
•
yi • �l
LCON
ENGINEERING
1210 Trinity Road I Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
T 919.871.0800 1 F 919.871.0803

Project #:
Figure 2
E12028
North Main Street Mixed -Use
Project Mgr.:
Sean Clark
Wake County Soil Survey
Date: 05 -07 -2012
Site Vicinity Map
Sheet 83
Scale: NTS
Renaissance Development
ALCON
1210 Trinity Road I Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
T O 10 P71 nnnn I C O10 Q71 nan'l

Tie to
s
-- J
•.
LEG END:
Wetlands (to be confirmeu Lei USA( E)
c
Z% M
i Junsdictional Stream subject to 50'riparian buffers
•
0 Culvert
Evaluated property
_ / 1
o� 1' II141I r r 1
14 05
i
Stream Feature A
5. 10 t t t j
t �
Project #: Figure 3
E12028
North Main Street Mixed -Use 3-11ALCON
Project Mgr.:
Sean Clark
Date: 05 -09 -2012 Wetland and Stream Sketch
Map 1210 Trinity Road I Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Scale: NTS T 919.871.0800 F 919.871.0803
Renaissance Development

APPENDIX C
USACE MAP REQUIREMENTS
3C-1

Required Information for a USACE
Jurisdictional Determination Map
1. The location of each point (numbered wetland flags & channel locations) on the map;
including a tick mark, with the notation (number, letter, note, or other identifier) found on
the survey tape in the field (or sequential numbers assigned by the surveyor for channel
locations) is required.
2. A listing of each point's northing's and easting's (NC coordinate grid) or metes and
bounds. If metes and bounds are used, wetlands must be tied to a property corner or
other known point and ties shown on the map so that the survey could be replicated in
the future if required by a regulatory agency etc. is also required.
3. The width of linear wetlands and stream channels must be labeled on the map as on the
survey flagging and preferably depicted to scale on the map.
4. All wetland boundaries should be closed off resulting in distinct polygons. Total wetland
acreage should be indicated for each polygon.
5. Total acreage of jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and other surface waters (e.g. ponds,
lakes, rivers, etc.) within the evaluated area must be listed.
6. Property lines also must be closed and the entire property or parcel must be shown. Total
property acreage must be listed. If any part of the property was not evaluated, the
areas should be clearly identified and labeled.
7. Maps should show at least the property and wetland lines (topographic lines are optional
and in some cases may detract from the overall readability of the map). The map
should include a vicinity map and be prepared on sheets no larger than 11 x 17. If
multiple sheets are used, match lines must be shown and there must be overlap, and a
master map of the whole site showing the sheets matched with each other must be
included.
8. All final surveys must be signed and sealed by the surveyor.
9. The map must have title, north arrow, and bar scale and the map title should be
"Jurisdictional Delineation for Project Name."
10. The survey map should indicate that wetlands were delineated by Falcon Engineering,
Inc.
11. The following corps sign off title block should be included on the map:
"This certifies that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction of Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned on this date. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination of Section 404 jurisdiction may be relied upon for a period not
to exceed five years from this date. This determination was made utilizing the appropriate Regional
Supplement to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Name:
Title:
Date:
C -2

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Projwusits: /)?n; n Strui au /k, -Use S,- k Cfty /County: 9/lN 5506113 ZWkk Sampling Date: S 8 –1 26
Applkwt/Owner. W Al 5 S An ce- 'beya �-� C —�
� Pn�- -� • State: iii a Sampling Point
Investigator(s): S� el e 41- k Section, Township. Range:
Landform (hWslope, terrace, etc.): A&4WA f LeA d %4Vk Local relief (concave, convex, noner (OPr7c4vc Slope (%): / °b
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): /►7LRAQ6 •c LRRP Let: -35. GGD;' Long: —72?. 8 3s/ Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI dassitimdon:
Are climatic /hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of yeah Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) /
Are Vegetation &e • Soil A/ , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Chwmstances" present? Yes v 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, transacts, important features, etc.
Hydrophyttc Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is Dw Sampled Area
Hydra Soil Present? Yes :—z No within a Wetland? Yes _"Na
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �,-" No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators fmfnlmum oitwo recuiredl
Pdmary Indicators fminimum of one Is required:
check all that aoolvl
_ Surface Soil Cracks (Be)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1114)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
_ High WaterTable (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidlzod Rhizospheres on Living Roots (0)
_ Mass Trim Lines (016)
,Z Water Marks (B1)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ DquSeason Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (Ce)
✓ Drift Deposits (113)
_ Thin Muck Surface (CT)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ AEI Mat or Crust (114)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (05)
_ Geornorpphfc Position (02)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(Sn
_ Shallow Aquitard (03)
Water - Stained Leaves (99)
_ MBaotopogrephIc Reld (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1113)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (Inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
Saturation Presets? Yes
No Depth (inches):
No ✓ Depth
Wetland /
(inches):
Hydrology
Presets? Yes No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Date (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), if available:
Remarks:
T6...:., drl�• bch4�a•� 41,*e 12-y .
US Army Corps of Engineers i?astem Mountains and Piedmont– Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sempltng Point: Dp
Tree Stratum (Plot size: /0 X 3p� )
1.! of rwb r LLw.
Absotuts mmbuurt Indicator
-% Cover Owdes? Status
Sow
ominanceTestworksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (AIB)
2. L•Iau }a/4016a.r' 5f? rAC 1 -P4'C. 10% f4cf
4.
5.
6.
7.
Prevalence Imlex worksheet:
Total % Cover of Muitioly by:
OBL species xi.
FACW species x 2 -
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x4-
UPL species x6-
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index - BIA =
6.
GZ Total Cover
SoollnWShrub stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. b
6.
7.
Hydrophyfle Vegetation Indicators:
- 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ _, 2 - Dominance Test Is ),5096
,_ 3 - Prevalencs Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphologk�l Adaptations' (Provide supporting
- data In Remarks or on a separate sheet)
- Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hyddo soU and watlsrM hydrobgy must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
8.
B.
10.
Herb Strabrm (Plot size: _ /0 �O ) =Total Cover
1. /Y)iG_ PO ST�fLLY►'
2. i oniC4- /Dx FRG_
e
3._Tox ;caden �oK rlad:rss.'►s 2 F/•fC
4. Sa a r a r ti S CCf 11 Ct tl S 'LS'ly DAL
5. � rn,,1Ci 1 �1 Q /` i K 4 l a an mss•-
� � rllc: w
Deflnftlom; of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody Plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
MOM in diameter at breast halo (1391-1). regardless of
height.
1381311n905hrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 bL DBH and greater then 3.28 ft (1 m) tell.
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.
6. _ p prt S OIj3L
7
e.
8
10.
11.
12.
Woody vine stratum (Plot else: �� x 0 )
I. SM'fi x
WS Total Cover
twrq*ytjc
Vegetation
present? Yes No
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
= Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
to the depth
or
Sampling Point. DP"
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color o st Color (moist) %_ TM-1 Texture Remarks
Z 6;r:/can.
Z-0— S OW S Sim
*
10 Y4 6/z ZiH% /",
_
MOW (Al)
_ Histic Eplpedon (A2)
_ Black Hiatic (AS)
_ Hydrogen Solfide (A4)
_ Stratified Myers (AS)
_ 2 an Muds (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (81) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
_ Sandy oleyed Matrix (84)
_ Sandy Redox (85)
_ StripprA Matrht (,q6)
Type:
Depth ice):
Dark surface (S7)
_ Pdyvalue Below Surface (S6) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (69) (MLRA 147,148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
A,cDepletsd Maft (F3)
_, Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (Fe)
_ Imn•Mangenese Messes (F12) (LRR N.
MLRA 136)
_ Umbdc Surface (1`13) (MLRA 136,122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Solls (F19) (MLRA 148)
indicators for Problematic Hydrk Sc
_ 2 an Muds (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,146)
_ Piedmont Fkmdplain Eons (F19)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ Red Parent Material UR)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain In Remerke)
'Indicators of hydmphytic vegetation and
Welland hydrology must be present
unless disturbed or proWamatic.
Hydrlc Sob Present? Yea � No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
ProjecUSite: f kA $� i!�c !'�: - use $i % Cky /County: SP'_e9��W4 k Sampling Date: 5-,9-12
Applicant/Owner. Real G: 5 S an c,(= o�r�Gn��L L �- State: �C- Sampling Point
Investigator(s): Ska—V1 Cta r I, Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): -41��Q �a1�� Loral relief (concave, convex, none): "n v- G 2c: Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA�A LRA136 04'1 R(P Let '3 S. G 60(0 Long- —78. 1939-( Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: 17e f A4 n S / N /v A ",- NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes _LZNo (If no, explain In Remarks) /
Are Vegetation A_, Soil A4 . or Hydrology /'/,0 significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation Ab , Soil WO or Hydrology A01 naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydrk: Soil Present? Yes No ✓ within a Wetland? Yes No CI-11
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No f
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators imtnlmum of two required)
Primary indicators (minimum of one is required: check a8 ftt apply) _ Surface SOD Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (Al) _ True Aquatic Plants (814) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (08)
_ High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhlzospheres on Living Roots (0) _ Moss Trim Lines (816)
_ Water Marks (91) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry - Season WaWTeble (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (SM _ Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Solis (06) _ Crayfish Burrows (CB)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _ Other (Explain In Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (85) _ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water - Stained Leaves (89) — Micaotopographic ReNd (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13) _ FAC- Neutral Test (DS)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Jol Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes Nopepth (inches):
Saturation PrewV Yes No ✓✓ Depth (incthes):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
(Includes ca thin
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, serial photos, previous Inspections), H available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. Sampilng Point: a'2
Tree Stratum (Plot sirs: )
1. i4re� rubrt&w,
% Corer Sow? i
20% jai,
{ ,=
Number of Test worksheet: - - - -
��rof Dominant Species ( )
That Are 081, FACW, or FAC: A
Total Number of Dominant
Spades Across AN Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
2. P;,n M. S 4,�t� 10
3. L) r i o JLer<dro n 2 F11 C
4.
5
8.
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of Multiply by*
OBL species Ci x 1-
FACW species x 2 = Co
FAC species x3-
FACU species x4=
UPL species x6-
Column Totals• (A) (B)
Prevalence index - B/A -
8.
i 3 2 Z. Total Cover
Saolinc /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 5 )
1. L i tda+.b ar S'-* racl -P4,c. 506
'r .F�
2. /4ctr rwbnay.- 50* Fok
3.
4.
5.
6.
7
Hydrophyde VegetafJon Indicators:
_t-_1 - Rapid Test for Hydmphytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test Is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index Is 53.0'
- 4 - � lA on separate (Provide dwell �ng
Problematic HydrophyliC Vegciatim' (Explain)
'Indicators of hyddc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
8.
g.
10.
-Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: /D )
1
2.
3.
4.
5.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.8 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
Saplh*Shrub - Woody plans, excluding vines, less
than 3 In. DBH and greater than 3.28 It (1 m) tag.
Herb - AD herbaceous (non�voody) plants, regardless
of sire, and woody plants less than 328 ft tall.
Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 328 ft In
helghL
8.
7
8.
g•
10.
11.
12.
Woody
1.
i
Vine Stratum (Plot ss�hmn::
SmP %aX rb�uvo(i�OIl0.
3 -Total Cover
° FAC
"~Yoe
Vegetation
present? Yes No
2. 0;5 ro%tna�3�' i'1s. 2�s Fr¢C
3.
4.
5
8.
� - To Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here cron a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont- Interim Version

SOIL Sampling Point P- 2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
finches) Cabr (moist % Color (moist) % ewe Loe Texture Remarks
D- 9 OYR
'Tvoe: Cxormenftft. D= Deolellon. RM=Reduced Matrix. MS= Masked Sand Grains. 'Location: PL =Pore unina. M=Matr6t.
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Solis -
_ Hlstosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (ST)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Eplpedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (88) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Hiefic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
(MLRA 147,148)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Piedmont Roodplaln Soils (F19)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrbc (F3)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ 2 cm Muck (AID) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F8)
_ Red Parent Material (M)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
— Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ IrofWangenese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
MLRA 138)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrbc (S4)
_ Umbdo Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplein Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ Shipped Mabbi (S8)
artless disturbed or problematic
Type:
Depth (incites):
Hydrlc Soil Present? Yes No ✓
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Slha: I IAI S f l AL mk 1P -u bl /S ik- C1tylCounty �ipri)rt t bUa G Sampling Date: 5— 8-12
Applicangowner: A0 n Q& % 5 sa h c.¢. L7¢ue [o�/t tom. . L 'L V state: A) e— Sampling Point: D P 3
Investigator(s): —Sea., (21I 4 Section, Township, Range:
Landfonn (hillslope, terrace, eta): di kc-L�- Local relief (concave, convex, none): C0r1CAA#e Slope ( %): 2%r
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): AL41q IrsG . �'LRe Let: 3,'q.6-601- Long: "-7 Al • 8 3 S 3 Datum:
Sol[ Map Unit Name: &C111[on &4/01, NWI ossification:
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for tibia time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation 14 , Soil No • or Hydrology Alf significantly disturbed? Are'Normal Circumstances` present? Y1 y / No
Are Vegetaton 04 . Soil No , or Hydrology /moo naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, Important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hyddc Soil Present? Yes No '� within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ✓ No
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondery Indicarors (minimum of two reouiredl
Primary Indicators (minimum
of oche is required: check all that soohrl _ surface son Cracks (BB)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (814) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _ Drainage Patterns (810)
_ Saldration (A3)
Oxlu'l.od R1u7usp haras or, LIAng `'Woo (C3) _ Moss T'si , Lines (616)
_ Water Marks (81)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry - Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction In Tilled Sots (CB) _ Crayfish Burrows (Ce)
_ Drift Deposits (03)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Other (Explain In Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (05)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87) _ Shallow Aquilard (133)
JZ Water - Stabled Leaves (89) _ Microlopogrh;phic Relief (134)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC•Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Yes No __I,/ Depth (inches):
Water Table Present?
Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
�No
Saturation Present?
Yes No ✓ Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
eludes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous Inspections), If available:
Remarks:
.' DP -3 was 44ke , ok oi; 4cl- 46,+ no AAS Otd k4 S� A IC 1A4-
abe..kA4 rt+
/aver
�� >� /-et.? lroao�" �� W S S'%n te-A -0 -- pp dip ^914 �j0 t(e.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Interim Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Multiply by.
2,
o h e-
FACW species
3.
FAC species
x3=
4.
x4=
UPL species
5.
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
8.
7.
8.
Sepling'shfub
I.
Stratum (Plot size: )
uercx3 nr4ra
= Total Cover
2°lo FAG
2.
Ar. ' rib rL-
2
3.
4.
5.
S.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Strolum (Plot size: )
1. Aruwaiiilaf,`a QjAan/e�
2. Tv Ito Ad IV,, �.dlc4ns
Y fo =Total Cover
��
5�
3.
e r �br'r.c.wi P.Ct(ii s.
S� FAc
4.
k i i w
Ar Figc
5.
8.
7.
8.
g.
10.
11.
12.
Woody
1.
Vina Stratum (Plot site: )
.16, =Total Cover
2.
OIL
3.
4.
5.
8.
Sampling Point b) ,-3
- Status I Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across A8 Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(AIS)
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by.
OBL spades
x 1 e
FACW species
X2=
FAC species
x3=
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index - B/A =
✓ 1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dominance Test 19 :1,50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 - Morphologhrel Adapistona' (Provide supporting
data In Remaft or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vhres, 3 in. (7.8 cm) or
more In diameter at breast height (DOH), regardless of
height.
Saplingl8hrub - Woody plards, excluding vines, less
then 3 in. DSH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - AD herbaceous (non woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 328 ft tap.
hdlg fit. vine - AU woody vines greater than 3.28 ft In
ytie /
Vegetation
Present? Yes ✓ No
US Amry Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL. Sampling Point: A P -3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Egatures
(Inches) Color moist % Color (rtroietl _ % Type, I.-Oc' Texture Remarks
2.55- Y Y 2s Y
.il 13 S S3 2.sy ��
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sods':
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Dark Surface (ST)
— 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (SO) (MLRA 147,149)
_ Coast Prabie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histx: (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
(MLRA 147,149)
_ Hydrogen SuMde (A4)
_ Loamy Gleyed Mabbk (F2)
_ Piedmont Roodplaln Soils (F19)
_ Stratitied layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (03)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ 2 an Muds (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F8)
_ Red Parent Material (rF2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Thick Dark Surfacer (Al2)
_ Raft Depressions (F8)
_ Other (Explain In Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
_ Imn-Mangenese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy aleyed Matrbc (S4)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
°Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodplein Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
wetland hydrology must be present,
_ $ti+ijipod fria�Jin'• I'll
unless iii6`uirbbd or ji(Guiem3ti%.
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydrk 8011 Present? Yes No l'I/
US Army Corps or Engineers Easter Mountains and Piedmont – Interim Version

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont
Project/Sk9:1W., 5frru %% ,j : -us2 CRY/County: I%sIIt1 $0040 -3 �L•lAkV- Sampling Date: 5-8-f2
'�_
Applicant/Owner: aw cta 55" L �cv[�o�o _ LCC. State: AIC Sampling Point boo-V
Investlgator(s): _ <0,4.4 r -IAA -k Section. Township, Range:
Larx form (hMslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): 5115 W4f Gen CAVe . Slope L'ds-
Sulxeglon (LRR or MLRA):4Z8j2Tgo -t4PR P Let•. .35.6-589 L..: - 78. 8348 Datum;
Soil Map Unit Name: Wor$6m Se. Low NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yea .,-' No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil al. , or Hydrology A_ significantly disturbed? Am Wormal Circumstances' present? Yes No ✓
Are Vegetation µ . Sall 0 or Hydrology A& _ naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, Important features, etc.
Hydrophylte Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Sall Present? Yes ✓ No wifhin a Welland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �� No
HYDROLOGY
Welland Hydrology Indicators:
Seandary Indicaton (minimum of (coo reaulreM
Primary Indiatom (minimum of one is
required: check all that aoolvl
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (814)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Saturation (A3)
✓Oxidized Rhfzospheres on Living Roots (0) _ Moss Trim Linos (B16)
.'Water Marks (BI)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry - Season WaterTable (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (06)
_ Crayfish Burrows (CB)
_ Drift Deposits (83)
— Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (Di)
_ Iron Deposits (138)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
_ Inundation Visible an Aerial Imagery (ST)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Water-Stained Leaves (Bg)
_ Miaotopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAGNeutkal Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No 6'000� Depth
Water Table Present? Yes
(Inches):
No Pepth (Inches):
/
Saturation Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
.
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes V No
includes capillary frin
Deskxibe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, serial photos, previous inspections), If ovallable:
Remarks:
US Amry Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains end Piedmont - Inteflm Version

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
i
Tme Stratum (Plot size: 20 X 3- )
1. Aeer rL4-bru n1
noswu® uommam morwwr
% Cover SDBG W Status
251., 1=AC
2.
x2=
3.
x3=
4.
X4=
5.
x5=
8.
(A) (B)
7.
8.
SaoilnalShrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. Anne
Z 'r = Total Cover
2.
3.
4.
5.
8.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
I. 41- urtu(ins -ri , A fAAVl7K-o--
2. icros&q;um t/rw►date.kw-.
= Total Cover
VO E C�
qD F/fGt
3. Sgxrnb GUS --- ade.4S;1
2% FAti.J-
4.
1 irr /tJL
5.
8.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Sampling Point: -bp _ y
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (AIS)
Total % Cover of
OBL species
Multolv by*
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species
x3=
FACU spades
X4=
UPL spades
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
!�'1- Rapid Test for Hydrophytc Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test Is ),SD%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index Is S3.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data In Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytc Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree - Woody plants, excUing vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more In diameter at breast height (OBH), regardless of
height.
SeplbWShrub - Woody plsnts, excluding vines, lass
than 31n. DBH and greater than 3.28 ft (1 m) tall.
Herb - AN herbaceous (non - woody) plants, regardless
of size, and woody plants less than 328 ft tag.
93% = Totat Cover I Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft In
(Plot size: )
2. i n.. 2_
3. V1}ib fo %4hA S%,
4. PAr4t av%CJ S3KS ViN tl t-6 9.
5.
6.
►y °b = Total Cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes -Z No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Interim Version

SOIL
to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color moist %_ Color %_ Type, o
0 -57 2.SY 5/1 JIYW s'
9-12 * IoW y/
Sampling Point: bn- Y
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Dark Surface (87)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Histic Eplpedon (A2)
_ Polyvalus Below Surface (88) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Thin Dark Surface (89) (MLRA 147,148)
(MLRA 147,146)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Loamy Gteyed Met* (F2)
— Piedmont Floodplain Soils (Fig)
_ Sbatifled Layers (A5)
_ Depleted Matrix (P3)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F8)
_ Red Parent Material (72)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (712)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_. Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N.
_ IromManganess Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,146)
MLRA 136)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Umbria Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
'Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
_ Sandy Redox (85)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sags (F19) (MLRA 148)
welland hydrology must be present,
_ Stripped Matrix (S6)
unless disturbed or croblematia
Type:
Depth (inchasr
Hydric Soil Present? Yes —Z No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont— Interim Version
I

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: S-8-17-
Project/Site: N, N.,. S;•+±� ==
Latitude:
Evaluator: 5W-,
County: 6)#,4
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent I q,�
Stream Deterptina rcle one)
Ephemer I 'In, rmittent rennial
Other
e g Quad Name: Ai -- NC.
it t 19 or perennial if 2:30*
if
A. Geomorphology Subtotal =-LL-- )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-ppol a ence
0
3
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
0.5
2
3
5. Active /relict floodplain
0
'Yes = 3. r
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
0.5
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
"0)
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
25. Algae
2
3
9. Grade control
0
'(75
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
o = 0
Yes = 3
° artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = K 0 � 1
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
2
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
2
3
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1 0
0.5
1 A
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
I No = 0
'Yes = 3. r
C. Biolociv (Subtotal = W )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
r01
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
r01
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
"0)
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
(0 )
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
Other 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual
Notes: -fioi:s 5�,.��,.., ,, s. 'jd
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 5. B- 1�,
Project/Site: /U.r*U'-S+`"•"�'
Aa "i • wbd
Latitude:
Evaluator
WQ
Longitude:
Total Points:
Stream is at feast intermittent
Stream Determination (circle
Other
3D,
d 2:19 or perennial lr 2:30*
Ephemeral Intermittent erenm
e.g. Quad Name: �C
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 60
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. SinUosltil of channel along thalweg
0
1
2
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-pool sequence
0
1
1
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
0.5
2
3
5. Active /relict floodplain
0
Yes = 3
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
0.5
3
8. Headcuts
0
n
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11. Second or greater order channel
o =
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions In manual
B. Hvdrolociv (Subtotal = A.5, )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
0
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 4n
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
er
--S
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
l
Notes: llydraw J�;eA& L 'L,- ',s e ^r �' w 6
0 0 1 1
wL" n
�•: i.
Sketch:

#"-4CK1CDAI klf%'rCC
f :i IR1 /F TARI F
�1
Bateman CM Survey Cc, PC
200 N Main St. Hoag SP *Q% NC 27640
NMELS FIRM G2370
W4
21.51
3
a 3 g
N�
W
C)
°
C
G
�gn3
� s
Z
W
Z
$9:
V
< H z
z
W
Z$
E
"e K.
u 51` -�
O
LL
° J
a
28-M.
i'
11.161
�yY
tt C
n6 ✓
Me
Ugm Op
Z
s
��
a
€�
�
W
gg
8^7` 3E
a„ y g
€$Em
Z
�E e" $
° $
W
��
cc ES
s„e=�o
�es aS� CP
gca9�q
e _
$
YW°plc'�gi YET
`o
9°aLsr
,`V.
as�m
a
gm
�r°tA i;
u ° pp
?N
i:3g31aa
a
uEz °9
'1
e.. 62 �b £
x "3ua�azig8=
0
o
8 d .•1111°
- ° ^
°°gam
-; sa
to
it p
"$= •'=
..
a
a
RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT
PTNR LLC. (TRACTS AB, AND C)
PIN WS (A)0649859067
(B )0649859345
(C )0649942829
SHEET TITLE:
Jurisdictional Detannination
SHEET NUMBER t OF 4

J
PHANNEL LOCA
TOTAL LINEAR F
BETWEEN INVE,F
46.99' /
S1- S4)
,3
TAL WETLAI
*1S�
3
�o
�- a
U�
FAII
.04
Jl //
� Ind
}
X11 fl ��1
11 i-
I
WINDWARD P IN.TE SUBDIVISION
B.M. 1995 P-03-4455
RT 60" CMP
3) (S2)
1/ � � �
16) L2 ` (S1) `
/ �L43 @ INVERT F 48" RCP
k0i
EIP -
N(y) : 695,349.23 usft.
E(x) : 2,049,058.18 usk
LINE TABLE
LINE LENGTH
11 3.44
34.14
GENERAL NOTES
1. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY BATEMAN CIVIL SURVEY COMPANY, UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
STEVEN P. CARSON, PLS.
2 THIS PLAN HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR LAYOUT AND PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY.
3. FIELD EQUIPMENT USED: EPOCH 35 GLASS GPS AND TOPCON TOTAL STATION.
4. ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GRQUND DISTANCES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
S. PROPERTY OWNER: RENAISSANCE DEVEWPMENT PARTNERS, U.C.
6. ALL WETLANDS WERE DELINEATED BY FALCON ENGINEERING, INC.
'
7. THE PROPERTY LIES IN ZONE "X" PER NATIONACF\LOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP PANEL 37200649001, DATED MAY 02, 2006:
" ".
N
S. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED LB
9. TIED TO THE NATIONAL CORS NETWORK THROUGH NC V
LEGEND I a 10 zo
0 IPS - IRON STAKE SET
Q
Q EIP - EXISITING IRON STAKE FOUND /
lb WETLAND FLAG r �APHICSCALE r- l
LINE TABLE
BEARING LINE LENGTH
S36 °33'44"W L20 15.58
S03 °29'04 'E L21 5.61
JU.J $q tt -�L - -t�. N62 92858 "E L22 2.85
F 10 �}' `-� � �_ _ L4 17.63` ---NE 41 L23 36.
L5 19.25 X86"1 '09"E- L24 31.97
8.22 N '4 " - -625` X0.94
I j1j12) (124 .82 N84 °22'48 "E 126-
122) 21.96 -
�! t "� �8- 95 S84 °11'42 "E L27 16.2k
1 j I : • ;��. j 130) (1 �' 7 L9 �0. 1 _1d56°�3 a4 %' L28 15.09
I 1 jl 1 °' (131) ) L10 6.06 'tP"VI� L29 06
L11 32.12 N24 024'09 "E -
! (132) L12 14.69 N11 "'2!'06'E
5 60-
j I I (111) (110) --w-(133) L13 21.78 N01°0610 ' L32 7.87
L14 6.17 N12 0206"E\ L33 14.13
134) \ L15 17.53 NO3 033'10 "E L34 5.08
III a� 16 23.83 NO3 033'57 "E L35 14.09
III
L1T 12.90 N18005'160E L36 16.28
(� (109) �i7 (136) L18 14.02 N06 051'16 0E L37 15.73
I % L19 22.59 N0604528'E L38 11.41
(108) "9 L39 27.66
L40 15.44
L41 8.36
13.98
0
917 33.46
TRACT 11 A -1 cal 3s0
f "\ 1.58 ACRES ;'�,� 21.30
I 1 \ \ 69,107.00 90 FT., 03 �
RENNSSMC DD LCPMENT PTNR LLC
0%14 DD 1208 \ ` \ \ �7�7• ••• \
�� ^� � x(,01)• :���� (
(100)
BEARING
N08 027'01 "E
N58 °34'551W
07 °36'04'W
S 0 °09'43 "W
S01 °47'4=
- -
S10 041'21' W
N13029'14V
N00°12257W
S40 °55'07"W
S1 1 °49'04 "W
S46056'16'E
S50 032'57 "E
S75014'23"W
S83057'23"W
S83 °5320"W
N89 °10'14"W
N67047'14"W
S09 028'58 "E
S42 002'35 "E
S11 002391W
bo" 31,6,
7-SEALC•
L -4752 �
19.1
i
C7
W
z
z
W
Z
O
W
z
W
Qj
�j
1
11 ,
sue'
Bateman Civil Survey Co, PC
200 N Main SL Holy SpAngs, NC 27540
NCBELS FIRM C-W8
� E3
Ebb
ap,
°g °A8
}s8s•
� €mOEp,
>e
NA E
$ 1 18
s ;oag
Sl
•sY4•�gl
.�`RnEES L o
T�
PS
Hill
yy
tR I
° _g it- RE
L' «•mm
nEa °�P „o
s9 ag an
ej d E fS ° o r 91 •
2"•g of r2m
12 3 CAS
ggSgo3
Big b'S 1H H's
I RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT
PTNR I.I.C. (TRACT'S AB, AND C)
I PIN #'S (A)0649859067
(8)0649859345
(C)0649942829
- I SHEET NUMBER 20F4__

\
LENGTH
BEARING
L46
\
,043-05-
9.22 7575 -
��E LINE �= S 15 04834" E
\
S7
P °56'29"
S 11 024'40" E
EiipAl3Y EIP TO EIP)
N 14 W BOU
S 18 °45'18" E
L49
EIP
N(y) 2050 u (
L
d68- - L- 67
-
L50
z- `
-
4
E(x): ft
_
� �
/
1
S 39 °8'45" W
L52
27.12
S 73 °55'0" W
L53
N RT OF 48" RCP
+ \
L54
CHANNEL OC I ION #2
TOTAL LIN AR jOTAGE
BETWEE INVERTS
1 i 430.62 u. J j
r 6'STREA
�!
S1- S10!
TRACTr "�i�"
1.58 AC ;ES, / f
69,107.00 �S.
LSS 1
NlF
RENAANCE DEVEL� P"LLC I
,, 1 PO1
D B 14 6B9rOP 1208\
_3931RACT B
0.76 ACRES
33,223.33 SQ.FT.
- NIF
RENAISSANDE DEVELOPMENT PTNR LLC /
R. 1 4589 DP 12 0869 OP 12
D B. 1 `
` W /
-394
dD
- - - \ DUAL 3"ETAL PIPES y
O 1
EIP
1S
� I I
I-
Ilia:
11 to
ill v �
I �
a
in CD
!!!! co N
!! N
II co
' IGENR L NOTES
2. THIS SURV Y WAS PREPARED BY BATEMAN CIVIL SURVEY ! PANY, UNDER HE SUPERVISION
\STEVEN P CASON, PLS. r \
THIS PLAN(HAS BEEN PREPARED F LAYOUT AND PER ING PURPOS ONLY.
-_ FIELD EQUIPMENT USED: EPOCH 35 G 55 GPS AND TOP N TOTAL STA
S�ALL OISTANCERE HORIZONTAL GROU D DISTANCES U LESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ~
PROPERTY OWNS RENAISSANCE DEVf PMENT PARTN RS, U.C.
6. \ALL WETLANDS WER� DELINEATED BY FALCON ENGINEE NG, INC.
7. THE PROPERTY LIES IN ZONE "X' PER NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP PANEL 3720D64900J, DATED MAY 02, 2006.
8. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED • LB ".
9. TIED TO THE NATIONAL CORS NETWORK THROUGH NC VRS.
LEGEND 30 0 15 30
Q IPS - IRON STAKE SET
Q EIP - EXISITING IRON STAKE FOUND
$ WETLAND FLAG GRAPHIC SCALE
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
L46
20.38
S 6 °29'40" E
L47
23.79
S 11 024'40" E
L48
30.29
S 18 °45'18" E
L49
32.92
S 13 "25'6" E
L50
50.90
S 14 °5'53" E
L51
13.77
S 39 °8'45" W
L52
27.12
S 73 °55'0" W
L53
34.55
S 84 °5'39" W
L54
27.82
S 74 °45'57" W
L55
35.63
S 76 °6'37" W
L56
34.57
S 78 °13'1" W
L57
38.54
S 51 "54'0" W
L58
10.99
N 64 °22'45" W
L59
12.17
N 40 014'25" E
L60
34.32
N 67 °15'39" E
L61
32.06
N 80 04'17" E
L62
33.73
N 72 031'11" E
L63
32.36
N 73 "53'13" E
L64
35.44
N 87°36'9" E
L65
24.19
N 67 050'18" E
L66
9.43
N 45 °6`3" E
L67
49.27
N 15 °12'18" W
L68
30.33
N 18 944'57" W
L69
30.77
N 10 °47'7" W
L70
26.30
N 11 °17'30" W
L71
20.75
N 7°4'25" E
N 86 40 56 - 25.13' l h ! N/F
TIE BETW (S3) AND (S4) CARROLLS LLC
D.B. 08258 D C A R O
-�~'- EIP I - ' 2: �O �d' •'9
: a SEAL
(
�S 43°OT17" .21 S 2'58" W !
NVERT OF 4'X4' BOX CULVERT
Bateman Civil Survey Co, PC
200 N Mein SL Holy Spro,g% NC 27540
NCBELS FIRM C-2V8
Vol it
N X11 =3
O
Kill
l
V'
Y A
°
z
LL
I
Z 2131
LU 8 -0as�e
Z 5o'R�
?s;
sJ as_a�f
c�
EES a
LL
UJI
> 3g�88
a'Gx3 s
z it
a HIE I
UJI € s E $
$y
E o^
W t
�$ €ief�e a &z 3
.,
3
jjZ.
i<g�� ° 8E E c
a�g z
° `g
Z g9E > o E
EB�a t ��$ep5
3$ey'cpp�
W Cmtq �E
oErs�; ^z��
eda�eB xseR
fc
p3-�' 1.1 �Oiw
c EE V 15 fi
g az;_g gzg�$8
RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT
PTNR LLC. (TRACTS A,B, AND C)
PIN #'S (A)0649859067
(6)1649859345
(C)0649942829
LOCATION 2

CHANNEL LOCATION #2
TOTAL LINEAR FOOTAGE
BETWEEN INVERTS AND R
23.28'
N/F
YAP, CHO SING & OH LEE
D.B. 04446 D.P. 0789
w
Q LJJ �
Z O N wj
aa� N
(14)
1
C
w- 38.84
_twiWERT ► Auv `
GEi RAL (VOTES
1. THIS S RVEY WAS PREPARED BY BATEMAN CIVIL SURVEY COMPANY, UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
STEVEN P. ON, PLS.
2. THIS P HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR LAYOUT AND PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY.
3. FIELD EQ,IPMENT USED: EPOCH 35 GNSS GPS AND TOPCON TOTAL STATION.
4. ALL DIST CES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
S. O NER: RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, I.I.C.
6. ALL WETLA " WERE DELINEATED BY FALCON ENGINEERING, INC.
7. THE PROPE 1LIES IN ZONE "X" PER NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FLOOD INSURANCE
RATE MAP PAN L 37200649001, DATED MAY 02, 2006.
8. THE PROPERT IS ZONED " LB ".
9. TIED TO THE N TIONAL CORS NETWORK THROUGH NC VR5.
LEGEND 10 0 5 to
Q IPS - IROV STAKE SET
EXIS TING IRON STAKE FOUND
4 WETLA FLAG GRAPHIC SCALE
_t78-- _
_ , y
6 39'24" W
(3) A( 2d°
S14-39'05'E (2)
28 ��' \ .
(43) N 12°57'03 °•W' T118 °3T50 ",W
107 °E 8.51 (12) 12.54 (11)
..
°Is
' •3
EIP
I N(y) : 694,645.0 ust
E(x) : 2,049,088 2 LIM.
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
@ INVER -9
TRACT it C if
1.72
S 86 °59'31" W
/
2.62 ACRES ( TOTAL)
N 1 °8'36" W
L74
°25`32'
including 60' Easement
L75
11.88
S 33
(6)
114,305.35 SQ.FT.
rw
8.94
66
100 E
°�
L77
RENA13311I pE PTNR LLC
S 60 038'36" E
(c) �36
:7
.• r_
D9 14835 DP 2W
L79
1.52
S 70 °0'1" W
L80
11.741
S 9 039'5" E
g`j •
(7)
ry
6 39'24" W
(3) A( 2d°
S14-39'05'E (2)
28 ��' \ .
(43) N 12°57'03 °•W' T118 °3T50 ",W
107 °E 8.51 (12) 12.54 (11)
..
°Is
' •3
EIP
I N(y) : 694,645.0 ust
E(x) : 2,049,088 2 LIM.
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
L72
1.72
S 86 °59'31" W
L73
11.30
N 1 °8'36" W
L74
1.97
N 70 °2'13" E
L75
11.88
S 0 °287" E
L76
8.94
S 4 °15'3" E
L77
1.50
S 60 038'36" E
L78
10.52
S 11 °26'11" E
L79
1.52
S 70 °0'1" W
L80
11.741
S 9 039'5" E
(9) L 46569 °06'37" W
om—vC:
C
oNO Nd0
AREA # 2
TOTAL WETLAND ACREAGE
0.02 Acres
1,041.21 sq.ft.
WF 1 -14
N/F
LUNSFORD, CLARA LEE
D.B. 03091 D.P. 0872
���� �► C A ROB
•ate SEAL 9r:
su
P.
� /If I (II l 111
W � 0 4► s••. 11
Bateman CMI Surrey Co, PC
200 N Maln SL Malty Sp fts• NC 27540
NCRELS FIRM C,2M _
59�
2R5aEt
0�9
zais��
gd�go
y N
lM og
Y
.
�m�ma
°
°
O
Is � 4
w �Q�
,€sEEg
$ESz,�
_a
° a�
4-
�$
€c22e �sg
$" ,�
a tlgre �$E 2g �Cagew
$L° m`w Zs °e °B rma= 4 3;5 °4='ra
m� ., j g ,, w 2 z `°
t: 6r
Y •� B G
�£fzsry
g ��� °SaBsM
xay�1��ag
RENAWANCE DEVELOPMENT
PTNR I.I.C. (TRACT'S AB, AND Q
PIN #'S (A)0649859067
(6)0649859345
(C)0649942829
SHEET TITLE:
Junsdictional Detemdnatlon
CHANNEL LOCATION 3
AND AREA 2
4OF4

709 SF ZONE
rte.,
NF
WINDWARD POONTE
HOMEOWNEtS AS80C. !
PIb08N8950789
as T81a Po.e96
ex,9911>0ffi �� .�
r
� 1
EIP
IC N
N(1'):69SA02.63 usft
E(X).2,OU,79131 usfL
J � i
NE
CHAD. DABFsE. a CHRIS O
".09395 D.P. 0818
1,260 SF ZONE 2
1,914 SF ZONE 1
,T'RCP
+' INV ELEV 396.61'
I
I f
. f
A
AY
^� yd�era
GRAPHIC SCALE
r Ne a "e
IN mall
1 1"M - b 0.
d
�O
L
a
a� y ffi 2
E a
CL 'm ns
O 2?t:
N r0
� o=
p1D °�
c
m 3
1n
A
C
W
m
G Q
11
DM -3
1 OF 1
T
c
m
CL
E
ov
U
a
TRACT " A "
TRACT "B" B "
TRACT " C "
CKVA OABRIIEEL a c1 RIS 0
0.B m396 D.P. 0613
1.58 ACRES
0.76 ACRES
2.62 ACRES (TOTAL)
/
m
69107.00 SQ.FT.
33,223.33 SQ.FT.
Including 60' Easement
FT.
\
2
Nw
NE
114,305.35 SQ
NF
_
P004988RENAISSCEOEVSLCPMENPTMLLC RENAISSANCE DEVELOPMENT PTNR LLC
REWUSSAHM DEVELOPMENT PTNR LLC
PM06498&
D.0 USn OP 12M
D.S. M580 D.P. 1201
PM OB499am
D.& 14806 0P.2677
_
\
` M
6' WOODEN PRW. FENCE
SIR
cc W
6PROMCL
WNNOWARDPOIflESuaw m\
Bx 1685 Pa um
' `
I
I
1
!
\
w��
m1�N�
rf/ll\�
FR08A0.CREEII
CREEICR
\~
\ /
"� I I I l ` . o_ $
1
1
W
709 SF ZONE
rte.,
NF
WINDWARD POONTE
HOMEOWNEtS AS80C. !
PIb08N8950789
as T81a Po.e96
ex,9911>0ffi �� .�
r
� 1
EIP
IC N
N(1'):69SA02.63 usft
E(X).2,OU,79131 usfL
J � i
NE
CHAD. DABFsE. a CHRIS O
".09395 D.P. 0818
1,260 SF ZONE 2
1,914 SF ZONE 1
,T'RCP
+' INV ELEV 396.61'
I
I f
. f
A
AY
^� yd�era
GRAPHIC SCALE
r Ne a "e
IN mall
1 1"M - b 0.
d
�O
L
a
a� y ffi 2
E a
CL 'm ns
O 2?t:
N r0
� o=
p1D °�
c
m 3
1n
A
C
W
m
G Q
11
DM -3
1 OF 1