20210137 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20210603

DWR
Division of Water Resources
Initial Review
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
April 4, 2021 Ver 4
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
6 Yes
✓ No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
C Yes ( No
Change only 1 needed.
BIMS # Assigned*
20210137
Is a payment required for this project?*
✓ No payment required
✓ Fee received
6 Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office *
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
la. Name of project:
Eagle Crest Park
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Jeff Harbour
Version#*
What amout is owed?*
F $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Stephanie Goss:eads\szgoss
lb. Primary Contact Email:* lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
6/3/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Poplar Branch
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
C: NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.7211 -78.5730
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Wake
Is this a NCDMS Project
✓ Yes G No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
✓ Yes G No
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
Is this a courtesy copy notification?*
✓ Yes f• No

ID#
20210137
Version
1
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date
1/19/2021
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:
Click the upped button or drag and drop files here to attach document
DWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form.pdf
Fie type nust be FCF
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
f7 Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
I— Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
✓ Yes
( No
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
I7 Nationwide Permit (NWP)
I- Regional General Permit (RGP)
I— Standard (IP)
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
✓ Yes ('No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
39 - Commercial/Institutional Developments
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 18 - Minor Discharges
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
Id. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
I— 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
I— Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
f7 Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
If. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
✓ Yes (cNo
52.44KB
I— 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
I— Riparian Buffer Authorization
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
(c Yes r No
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
✓ Yes rNo
Acceptance Letter Attachment
Eagle Crest Park - Non -Riparian Wetland SOA 05-28-2021.pdf 545.34KB
lh. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
✓ Yes f• No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
CYesr No
B. Applicant Information
Id. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner 17 Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
( Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Sound Timber Management, LLC
✓ Yes ( No
✓ Yes 6. No

2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
Glenn Bagwell
2d.Address
Street Address
333 Sherwee Drive
Address Line 2
aty State / Province / legion
Raleigh NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
27603 US
2e. Telephone Number: 2f. Fax Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Ari M. Shalam
3b. Business Name:
RWN Real Estate Partners LLC
3c.Address
Street Address
65 East 55th Street, 31st Floor
Address Line 2
aly
New York
Fbstal / Zip Code
10022
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Jeff Harbour
4b. Business Name:
Terracon
4c.Address
Street Address
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Address Line 2
aty
Raleigh
Postal / ZZp (ode
27604
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
jellh a rbou r@trracon. com
Agent Authorization Letter*
Terracon Agent Authorization Form (002).pdf
State /Province / Region
NY
Country
US
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / legion
NC
Country
US
4e. Fax Number:
100.62KB
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information

1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality/ town:
Raleigh
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number: 2b. Property size:
1721671227 +/_38 acres of the total parcel
2c. Project Address
Street Address
4100 Auburn Church Road
Address Line 2
Qly State / Rovince / Fbgion
Raleigh NC
Ftstal / Zip Code Country
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Poplar Branch
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
C: NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Neuse
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030202011101
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The project area is currently undeveloped land with woodlands of varying age classes. There are several old roads and curb and gutter in the project area area that remain from a
halted attempt to develop the property. It was stopped due to economic conditions at that time. Land use in the vicinity is mixed use and light industrial with multiple facilities occurring
along the road frontage shared with this project.
Other portions of the larger tract of land owned by Sound Timber Management, LLC, contains relics of the old Eagle Crest Golf Course that was closed back in the 80s or 90s. This
area of the property is not currently proposed for development and is part of future phases that may on online in future years depending on the outcome of the Phase I development.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
r Yes (' No r Unknown
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
topo.pdf 3.43MB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
soil.pdf 3.31 MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
12.6 on entire property; +/- 1.35 ac in the proposed permit area
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
10,800 LF on entire property; +/- 600 LF in the proposed permit area along northern boundary
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
Purpose of the project is to construct two warehouse buildings and associated parking/docking areas along with the necessary infrastructure (roads, curb/gutter, etc.)
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*

The Eagle Crest Industrial Park (ECIP) is a new 362-acre commercial and industrial park located in the City of Raleigh (under 10 miles to downtown Raleigh) along Auburn Church Road
and just 4 minutes from the Jones Sausage Road Exit (303) of Interstate 40. ECIP can accommodate 4.1 M SF or more (i.e. multi -story projects) and the park will be developed in
phases.
Phase I, comprised of 38 acres which includes two rear load Class A industrial buildings will break ground in the fall of 2021. Building 1 is comprised of 166,250 SF, 133 car parking
spaces and 41 trailer spaces. Building 2 is comprised of 187,500 SF, 183 car parking spaces and 35 trailer spaces. In connection with Phase I, new infrastructure for ECIP is being
installed as set forth below. Phase 1 infrastructure includes the following:
1. A new 16" 4,755 linear feet offsite water main will be installed from Jones Sausage Road / Auburn Church Road
intersection to the end of the Phase 1 frontage.
2. Upsiang of approximately 1,426 linear feet of an existing 12" sewer main to an 18" sewer main will allow for an additional
130 gallons per minute of peak flow into the sewer system.
3. ECIP will be serviced by Duke Energy facilities that are currently located on power lines along road frontage.
4. Natural Gas will be serviced by Dominion Energy and is available along road frontage for the entire park. There is an
existing 8" natural gas main along Auburn Church Road.
5. Fiber is available along road frontage.
6. Auburn Church Road is a NCDOT maintained 2 lane divided street in which Phase 1 will include widening and providing for
turn lanes to accommodate ECIP.
7. Infrastructure work consists of a new +/-1,400 linear foot industrial street with a 69' wide public right of way built to City of
Raleigh standards and dedicated to the City for maintenance.
Typical construction equipment will be used to develop the site.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
Eagle Crest -Wetlands Exhibit-19May21.pdf 5.85MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
r' Yes
Comments:
r No r Unknown
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
a Preliminary r Approved C' Not Verified C' Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2020-01779
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
Jeff Harbour
Terracon
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
USACE review held on 11/20/2020 with David Bailey
DWR reviews held on 11/6/2020 and 12/23/2020 with Chris Smith. First visit focused on the 38 acre tract that is currently being proposed for development as outlined in this application
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
PJD Email from USACE.pdf
JD_Site _review Jan2021.pdf
Eagle Crest Industrial Property Tract 2.pdf
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
6 Yes ( No
71.59KB
1.33MB
3.33MB
6b. If yes, explain.
The proposed authorization currently being requested is for the initial phase of the development. Future phases would be determined based on tenant interest and leasing velocity. Al
there are conceptual plans for the future phases, they could change based on market driven variables. It is anticipated that the future phases would have minimal wetland and/or stream
impacts based on the current conceptual plan.
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
It is possible that future phases, if they occur, would require minimal permitting. Most likely a single road crossing would be needed to access the far side of the property and possibly
minor wetland impacts associated with building pads and/or grading. Should the future impacts, when viewed cumulatively with the currently proposed impacts, exceed the current NWP
threshold, the applicant would pursue an IP as required by USACE's Section 404 regulations
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
17 Wetlands I Streams -tributaries
/— Open Waters F Pond Construction
❑ Buffers

2. Wetland Impacts
2a. Site #* (?)
2a1 Reason (?)
2b. Impact type * (?)
2c. Type of W.*
2d. W. name *
2e. Forested *
2f. Type of
Jurisdicition*(?)
2g. Impact
area*
Wetland Impact
A
Stormwater BMP
P
Headwater Forest
W5
Yes
Both
0.020
(acres)
Wetland Impact
B
Building pad/grading
P
Headwater Forest
W6
Yes
Both
0.110
(acres)
2g. Total Temporary Wetland Impact
0.000
2g. Total Wetland Impact
0.130
2g. Total Permanent Wetland Impact
0.130
2i. Comments:
Wetland names are as identified on the approved PJD map (included with submittal). Wetland impact 1 will need approval under Minor Discharge NWP
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The design has avoided most all wetlands in the first phase other than a small area needed for a wet pond and a small area needed for grading for a
building pad. The team looked at several layouts to minimize impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
All required BMPs will be used for the duration of the project construction. Graded areas will be revegetated per regulations. The impacts are
minimized as much as possible based on engineering requirements.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
(Yes rNo
2c. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
r DWR fJ Corps
2d. If yes, which mitigation option(s) will be used for this project?
7 Mitigation bank r Payment to in -lieu fee r Permittee Responsible
program Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
Falling Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
3b. Credits Purchased/Requested (attach receipt and letter)
Type:
Non -riparian wetland
Attach Receipt and/or letter
Eagle Crest Park - Non -Riparian Wetland SOA 05-28-2021.pdf
Quantity:
0.13
3c. Comments
NCWAM forms for the impact areas are included with this submittal
545.34KB
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
(Yes CNo
What type of SCM are you providing?
r Level Spreader
r Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
r Wetland Swale (higher SI-WT)
fJ Other SCM that removes minimum 30% nitrogen
r Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer

Diffuse Flow Documentation
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
✓ Yes r: No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
✓ Yes r' No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater
program?
s Yes
✓ N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
2d. Which of the following stormwater management program(s) apply:
17 Local Government r State
Local Government Stormwater Programs
r Phase II fJ NSW r USMP r Water Supply
Please identifywhich local government stormwater program you are using.
City of Raleigh
r No
Comments:
The additional impervious area added as a part of this project will be treated through a wet detention pond designed in accordance with City of Raleigh stormwater requirements. Storm
drainage will collect runoff from the building, road and parking areas and transport the runoff to the wet pond. The wet pond will be designed to meet Water Quality and Water Quantity
requirements, pending review by the City of Raleigh.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
✓ Yes f No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15ANCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
✓ Yes ( No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
✓ Yes r No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Although this is the first phase of a light industrial, mixed use development; impacts that can be reasonably foreseen would be minimal and would be
designed to minimize impact to the environment, including wetlands and waters subject to Section 404/401 permit requirements.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
✓ Yes rNor N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated
at a treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
The project will be connected to City of Raleigh sanitary sewer service
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
G Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
✓ Yes r No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
✓ Yes
c No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?

✓ Yes 6 No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
6 Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
✓ Yes r No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
✓ Yes G No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
✓ Yes allo
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
Terracon biologists conducted habitat assessments for federal protected species. A species specific survey was performed for Michaux's sumac in the
fall of 2020. No occurrences of this species was observed. Terracon submitted a self -certification packet to USFWS in December 2020.
Consultation Documentation Upload
Eagle Crest FWS Self Certification Package.pdf
50 AC Eagle Crest Sumac Survey.pdf
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
✓ Yes f No
1.47MB
133.12KB
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA-EFH Mapper
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
✓ Yes C.' No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
Terracon archaeologists consulted directly with SHPO to determine the tasks that needed to be done. The requested work was completed and
accepted by SHPO. See attached documentation.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
HL207210 Task 4_EagleCrest ReconnaissanceReport_02-22-21.pdf
HL207210_SHPO RESPONSE_04-05-2021.pdf
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
✓ Yes
F No
7.65MB
149.05KB
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
Plans and surveys from the project engineer. The main perennial tributary along the western boundary is in the floodway but not identified as the 100
year floodplain.
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
NCWAM W5.pdf
NCWAM W6.pdf
Signature
*
rJ By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
435.19KB
408.6KB
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Jeff Harbour
Signature

Date
6/3/2021

Wildlands Holdings III, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203

Statement of Availability

May 28, 2021

RWN Real Estate Partners
Attn: Mr. Ari Shalam
65 East 55th Street, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10022

RE: Availability of Non-Riparian Wetland Credits for the “Eagle Crest Park” project
Bank Name: Falling Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bank Site: Falling Creek Mitigation Site
Bank Sponsor: Wildlands Holdings III, LLC
USACE Action ID: SAW-2015-00940
Non-Riparian Wetland Credits Needed: 0.13 acres
Non-Riparian Wetland Credits Available: 0.57 acres
Neuse 03020201 River Basin

Dear Mr. Shalam,

Wildlands Holdings III, LLC has the above mentioned non-riparian wetland credits from the Falling Creek
Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank: Falling Creek Mitigation Site to satisfy the mitigation
requirements related to the above-mentioned project. The project is located within the service area
(HUC 03020201) of the Bank.

Credits may be reserved for a period of 6 months upon the receipt of a non-refundable deposit of 10%
of the purchase price. Should credits not be reserved, they will be sold on a first come, first serve basis.
Credit prices will be guaranteed for a period of 6 months from the date of this letter and are then
subject to change.

An invoice for this transaction will be sent upon your request and we will reserve the credits and price
for a period of 30 days from invoice. This letter is a Statement of Availability as of the date provided – it
is not a reservation of credits nor a guarantee of price. Credits will be sold on a first come, first serve
basis.

Final transfer of credits will occur upon completion of the Mitigation Responsibility Transfer Form within
the completed 404 permit.

We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your mitigation requirements. Please contact me at
[phone] x124 or [e-mail] if you have any questions or need any additional
information.

Wildlands Holdings III, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203
Sincerely,

Ashley N. Yarsinske
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Marketing & Credit Sales
[e-mail]
O: [phone] ext. 124
M: [phone]

Cc: Mr. Jeff Harbour, PWS, Senior Scientist – Natural Resources | Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Wildlands Holdings III, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203

Statement of Availability

May 28, 2021

RWN Real Estate Partners
Attn: Mr. Ari Shalam
65 East 55th Street, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10022

RE: Availability of Non-Riparian Wetland Credits for the “Eagle Crest Park” project
Bank Name: Falling Creek Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Bank Site: Falling Creek Mitigation Site
Bank Sponsor: Wildlands Holdings III, LLC
USACE Action ID: SAW-2015-00940
Non-Riparian Wetland Credits Needed: 0.13 acres
Non-Riparian Wetland Credits Available: 0.57 acres
Neuse 03020201 River Basin

Dear Mr. Shalam,

Wildlands Holdings III, LLC has the above mentioned non-riparian wetland credits from the Falling Creek
Stream and Wetland Umbrella Mitigation Bank: Falling Creek Mitigation Site to satisfy the mitigation
requirements related to the above-mentioned project. The project is located within the service area
(HUC 03020201) of the Bank.

Credits may be reserved for a period of 6 months upon the receipt of a non-refundable deposit of 10%
of the purchase price. Should credits not be reserved, they will be sold on a first come, first serve basis.
Credit prices will be guaranteed for a period of 6 months from the date of this letter and are then
subject to change.

An invoice for this transaction will be sent upon your request and we will reserve the credits and price
for a period of 30 days from invoice. This letter is a Statement of Availability as of the date provided – it
is not a reservation of credits nor a guarantee of price. Credits will be sold on a first come, first serve
basis.

Final transfer of credits will occur upon completion of the Mitigation Responsibility Transfer Form within
the completed 404 permit.

We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your mitigation requirements. Please contact me at
[phone] x124 or [e-mail] if you have any questions or need any additional
information.

Wildlands Holdings III, LLC · Wildlands Engineering, Inc · 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104, Charlotte, NC 28203
Sincerely,

Ashley N. Yarsinske
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Marketing & Credit Sales
[e-mail]
O: [phone] ext. 124
M: [phone]

Cc: Mr. Jeff Harbour, PWS, Senior Scientist – Natural Resources | Terracon Consultants, Inc.

Terracon Consultants Inc. 2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107, Raleigh, NC 28208-3608
P: 919-873-2211 F: 919-873-9555 terracon.com

USACE/NCDWR Agent Authorization Form

Property/Site:

Address of Site: _____________________________

Parcel Identification Number (PIN):

Owner Information:

Name:

Address:
_______________________

Telephone Number: __________________

E-mail Address: __________________

Property Owner Certification:
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
and/ or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) to enter upon the property
herein described for the purpose of conducting on -site investigations and issuing a determination
associated with Waters of the U.S (WOTUS) subject to Federal/State jurisdiction under Section
404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Terracon, as designated by the current property owner, is the authorized consultant to coordinate,
schedule, and provide supplemental information to both agencies in support of this verification
and/or permit application.

Property Owner Signature: __________________________________________________

Date: ___________________________________________________________________
DWR Pre-Fil ing Meeting Req u est Form
ID#*Ve rsion *
Re gional Office *
Re v ie we r List *
Contact Name *
Contact Email Addre ss *
Proje ct Name *
Proje ct Owne r *
Proje ct County *
Owne r Addre ss:
Is this a transportation proje ct?*
Type (s) of approv al sought from the DWR:
Doe s this proje ct hav e an e xisting proje ct ID#?*
Ple ase list all e xisting proje ct ID's associate d with this proje cts.*
Do you know the name of the staff me mbe r you would like to re que st a me e ting with?
Ple ase giv e a brie f proje ct de scription be low.*
20210137 1
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Stephanie Goss
Pre-Filing Me eting Reque st submitte d 1/19/2021
Jeff Harbour
[e-mail]
Eagle Crest Industrial
H. Glenn Bagwell, Jr
Wake
City
Raleigh
State / Province / Region
NC
Postal / Zip Code
27603
Country
USA
Street Address
Sound Timber Management, LLC
Address Line 2
333 Sherwee Drive
Yes No
401 Water Quality Certification -
Regular
401 Water Quality Certification -
Express
Individual Permit Modification
Shoreline Stabilization
Yes No
NBRRO #20-331
no
Please give a couple of dates you are available for a meeting.
Ple ase attach the docume ntation you would like to hav e the me e ting about.
Signature
Submittal Date
Applicant proposes to construct two large commercial buildings to be
used for warehouse or industrial space along with the necessary car
and large truck parking and access roads. A stormwater BMP pond is
also proposed to be constructed.
2/3/2021
2/4/2021
2021-01-19 Conceptual Site Plan.pdf 738.34KB
Figures.pdf 138.01KB
pdf only
By digitally signing below, I certify that I have read and understood that per the Federal Clean Water Act Section
401 Certification Rule the following statements:

· This form completes the requirement of the Pre-Filing Meeting Request in the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification
Rule.
· I understand by signing this form that I cannot submit my application until 30 calendar days after this pre-filing
meeting request.
· I also understand that DWR is not required to respond or grant the meeting request.

Your project’s thirty-day clock started upon receipt of this application.  You will receive notification regarding meeting location
and time if a meeting is necessary.  You will receive notification when the thirty-day clock has expired, and you can submit an
application.
1/19/2021
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1
EXHIBITNO.Project Location
Eagle Crest Industrial PropertyWake County,North Carolina³Project No:
Scale:
File Name:
5/27/2021
70217017
Date:
topo
1 in = 2,000 ft
0 2,0001,000
Feet
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Dis claime r: Th e in formation dep icted o n this fig ure is for informa tion al pu rp oses only and was n ot prep are d for, a nd is n ot suitab le for leg al o r eng ine erin gpurposes.This info rmation prese nte d is n ot for regu la tory review and is inte nde dfor use on ly b y a P rofessional Lan d S urveyo r prio r to regu la to ry review.
Source: USGS Topo base map service of the TheNational Map (TNM); SIte Boundaries acquired fromWake County GIS parcel data, 2020.
Site Boundary
Phase I Boundary
Neuse River Basin
Wynmore
TharringtonMartin Branch
Watkins Valley
AlpineForestPointGJones Sausage Rd To
I
40PepsiI-40 Exit 303Jones SausagePearl
I-40Auburn Church2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
2
EXHIBITNO.NRCS Soils
Eagle Crest Industrial PropertyWake County,North Carolina³Project No:
Scale:
File Name:
5/27/2021
70217017
Date:
soil
1 in = 700 ft
0 700350
Feet
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Disclaime r: Th e in formation dep icted o n this fig ure is for informa tion al pu rp oses only and was n ot prep are d for, a nd is n ot suitab le for leg al o r eng ine erin gpurposes.This info rmation prese nte d is n ot for regu la tory review and is inte nde dfor use on ly b y a P rofessional Lan d S urveyo r prio r to regu la to ry review.
Source: NRCS Soil Survey of Wake County, 1970; SIteBoundaries acquired from Wake County GIS parcel data, 2020.
Site Boundary
Phase I Boundary
Soil Boundary
Soil Mapping Units
ApBApB2ApCApC2ApDCmDuBLoCWkEWmEWo
Appling sandy loam, 2-6% slop esAppling sandy loam, 2-6% slop es, erodedAppling sandy loam, 6-10% slo pesAppling sandy loam, 6-10% slo pes, erode dAppling sandy loam, 10-15% slopesChewacla soilsDurham loamy sand, 2-6% slopesLouisburg loamy sand, 6-1 0% slo pesWake soils, 10-25% slopesWedowee sandy loam, 19-25% slop esWedowee and Bibby soils
Neuse River Basin
ZONE XZONE XZONE X
ZONE XZONE XFWFWFWFW100YR100YR100YR100YR100YR
100YR100YR
100YR100YR
100YR100YR
100YR100YR100YR100YR100YR100YRFW FWFWFWFWZONE XZONE XZONE X
ZONE XZONE XZONE XZON
E
X
ZONE X
ZONE X
ZONE X
ZONE XZONE
X
ZONE XCROSS S
E
CTI
O
N 212.6
E
E
E
E
E EE
E
E
E
E EE
E
E
E
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W B.M. (NAIL IN PP)ELEV=266.74'P/LP/LP/L
P/LP/LPOBSSSS
SS(POB)(Parcels 4&5)P/L
P/L
P/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/L
P/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/L
P/L
P/L
WETLANDSWETLANDSWETLANDSWETLA
N
D
S
WETLA
N
D
S
WETLANDSWETL
A
N
D
S
WETL
A
N
D
S
WETLANDS WETLANDSWETLANDS
WETLANDS IMPACT "A"
800 SF
WETLANDS IMPACT "B"
4,750 SF
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
(TYP)
PROPERTY LINE
(TYP)
WETLANDS TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
WETLANDS TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
WELANDS TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
LOC
LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC LOCLOCLOCLOCLOC
LOCLOCLOCSFLOCLOC
LOC
LOCLOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC LOCLOC
LOC
LOC
NV5 ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS, INC.
6750 TRYON ROAD
CARY, NC 27518
P: 919.851.1912 www.NV5.com
NC License # F-1333
formerly CALYX Engineers + Consultants
0 200100
EXHIBIT:
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
P/L
LOC
WETLANDS
100YR
ZONE X
FLOOD LEGEND
FEMA FLOODWAY
1% ANNUAL FLOOD
0.2% ANNUAL FLOOD
WETLANDS (UNDISTURBED)
WETLANDS (IMPACT AREA)
NRB
WETLANDS LIMITS
1% ANNUAL FLOOD LIMITS
2% ANNUAL FLOOD LIMITS
NEUSE RIPARIAN BUFFER
PROPERTY LINE
STREAM
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
R/W
R/WR/WHCHCHCHCHC22'11'
11'
5'
11'
11'
11'
11'
5'HCHCHCHCHCHCZONE XZONE XZONE X
ZONE XZONE XFWFWFWFW100YR100YR100YR100YR100YR
100YR100YR
100YR100YR
100YR100YR
100YR100YR100YR100YR100YR100YRFW FWFWFWFWZONE XZONE XZONE X
ZONE XZONE XZONE XZON
E
X
ZONE X
ZONE X
ZONE X
ZONE XZONE
X
ZONE XCROSS S
E
CTI
O
N 212.6
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
FO
E
E
E
E
E EE
E
E
E
E EE
E
E
E
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W B.M. (NAIL IN PP)ELEV=266.74'P/LP/LP/L
P/LP/LPOBSSSS
SSFO(POB)(Parcels 4&5)P/L
P/L
P/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/L
P/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/LP/L
P/L
P/L
WETLANDSWETLANDSWETLANDSWETLA
N
D
S
WETLA
N
D
S
WETLANDSWETL
A
N
D
S
WETL
A
N
D
S
WETLANDS WETLANDSWETLANDS
WETLANDS IMPACT "A"
800 SF
WETLANDS IMPACT "B"
4,750 SF
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
(TYP)
PROPERTY LINE
(TYP)
BMP-10 OUTLET (1)
WETLANDS TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
WETLANDS TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
WETLANDS TO REMAIN
UNDISTURBED
LOC
LOCLOCLOCLOCLOCLOC LOCLOCLOCLOCLOC
LOCLOCLOCSFLOCLOC
LOC
LOCLOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOC LOCLOC
LOC
LOC
NV5 ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS, INC.
6750 TRYON ROAD
CARY, NC 27518
P: 919.851.1912 www.NV5.com
NC License # F-1333
formerly CALYX Engineers + Consultants
0 200100
EXHIBIT:
PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS
P/L
LOC
WETLANDS
100YR
ZONE X
FLOOD LEGEND
FEMA FLOODWAY
1% ANNUAL FLOOD
0.2% ANNUAL FLOOD
WETLANDS (UNDISTURBED)
WETLANDS (IMPACT AREA)
NRB
WETLANDS LIMITS
1% ANNUAL FLOOD LIMITS
2% ANNUAL FLOOD LIMITS
NEUSE RIPARIAN BUFFER
PROPERTY LINE
STREAM
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
149 LF,
2
4
"

@

1
.
0
1
%
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
S
WE
T
L
A
N
D
S
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
S
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
S
WE
T
L
A
N
D
S
WETLANDS IMPACT "A"
800 SF
2
3
0
24
0 245225225
230
235
240
245BMP-10 OUTLET (1)
0+
0
0
0+
2
5
0+5
0
0+
7
5
1+
0
0
1+25
1+47
235
229
233
239
LOC SFLOC
SF
LOC
SF
LOC
SF
LOC
SF
LOC
SFLOC LOC47 LF, 18" @ 0.88%
215 LF, 24" @ 0.61%
P/L
WETLANDS
WETLANDSW
E
T
L
A
N
D
SWETLANDSWETLANDSWETLANDSWE
T
L
A
N
D
S
0+
0
0
0+
2
5
0+
5
0
0+
7
5
1+
0
0
1+
2
5
1+
4
7
WETLANDS IMPACT "B"
4,750 SF
258
250
255
260
250
245
250
255
2
6
0
255
2
5
0
250
26024
5
24
5
LOC
LOC
LOC
LOCLOC
LOC LOC
LOC LOC
LO
C
LOCLOC
LOC
LOC
LO
C
NV5 ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS, INC.
6750 TRYON ROAD
CARY, NC 27518
P: 919.851.1912 www.NV5.com
NC License # F-1333
formerly CALYX Engineers + Consultants
EXHIBIT:
WETLANDS PLAN VIEW
WETLANDS IMPACT "B"
WETLANDS IMPACT "A"
0 3015
EXISTING
GROUND
PROPOSED
GROUND
PROPOSED
GROUND
EXISTING
GROUND
NV5 ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS, INC.
6750 TRYON ROAD
CARY, NC 27518
P: 919.851.1912 www.NV5.com
NC License # F-1333
formerly CALYX Engineers + Consultants
EXHIBIT:
WETLANDS PROFILES
WETLANDS IMPACT "B"
WETLANDS IMPACT "A"
PROFILE SCALE
HORZ: 1' = 30'
VER: 1' = 3'
All,

The updated map for the Eagle Crest site (SAW-2020-01779) at 4100 Auburn Church Road, Garner,
Wake County, appears to reflect the changes made and discussed during our site visit on 11/20/2020. I
will use this map when processing the PJD and/or permit application/request for this site.

As we discussed, please also provide the updated aquatic resources spreadsheet, and let me know if you
have any questions.

-Dave Bailey

---
David E. Bailey, PWS
Regulatory Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers
CE-SAW-RG-R
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Phone: [phone], Ext. 30.
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

We would appreciate your feedback on how we are performing our duties. Our automated Customer
Service Survey is located at: http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/f?p=136:4:0
Thank you for taking the time to visit this site and complete the survey.

Matchline 3b
Matchline 3a
W3
W5
W4
W6
W7
W1 W2
T9
T4
T1
T5
T7
T2
T8
T6
SW1
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
3a
EXHIBITNO.Potential Wetlands and Waters
Eagle Crest Industrial PropertyWake County,North Carolina³Project No:
Scale:
File Name:
2/4/2021
HL207210
Date:
aerial_Jan2021
1 in = 500 ft
0 500250
Feet
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineeringpurposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intendedfor use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: Latest High-Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery, NCOneMap Server; 4ft Contours, Wake County; SIte Boundariesacquired from Wake County GIS parcel data, 2020.
Note: Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology after initial site evaluationcan affect jurisdictional status and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries.
Project Study Area
Parcel Boundaries
Potential Wetland (W)
Potential Surface Water (SW)
50' Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Potential Tributary (T)
Neuse River Basin
Matchline 3b
Matchline 3a
W8
W10 W12
W13
W14
W9
W15
W11
T3
T17
T10
T11
T13
T15T14
T16
T2
T12
SW1
SW2
SW3
SW5
SW4
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
3b
EXHIBITNO.Potential Wetlands and Waters
Eagle Crest Industrial PropertyWake County,North Carolina³Project No:
Scale:
File Name:
2/4/2021
HL207210
Date:
aerial_Jan2021
1 in = 500 ft
0 500250
Feet
Location and Extent is Approximate.
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for informational purposes only and was not prepared for, and is not suitable for legal or engineeringpurposes.This information presented is not for regulatory review and is intendedfor use only by a Professional Land Surveyor prior to regulatory review.
Source: Latest High-Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery, NCOneMap Server; 4ft Contours, Wake County; SIte Boundariesacquired from Wake County GIS parcel data, 2020.
Note: Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology after initial site evaluationcan affect jurisdictional status and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries.
Project Study Area
Parcel Boundaries
Potential Wetland (W)
Potential Surface Water (SW)
50' Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Potential Tributary (T)
Neuse River Basin
DocuSign Envelope ID: 663FFSI 5-3F3A-41 F2-9CF8-4CD2C608FC46
ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
S. DANIEL SMITH
Director
Sound Timber Management LLC
333 Sherwee Dr.
Raleigh, NC 27603-3521
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
January 6, 2021
Subject: Buffer Determination Letter
NBRRO #20-391
Wake
Determination Type:
Buffer Intermittent/Perennial
Neuse (15A NCAC 213 .0714)
Tar -Pamlico (15A NCAC 2B .0734) Intermittent/Perennial Determination (where local
buffer ordinances apply)
ElJordan (15A NCAC 213 .0267) (governmental
and/or interjurisdictional projects)
Project Name: Eagle Crest Industrial Property - Tract 2
Address/Location: 4100 Auburn Church Road, Garner, NC 27529
Stream(s): Big Branch and UTs to Big Branch
Determination Date: December 23, 2020 Staff, J. Chris Smith
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources I Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive 11628 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1628
919.791.4200
DocuSign Envelope ID: 663FF515-3F3A-41 F2-9CF8-4CD2C608FC46
Eagle Crest Industrial Property - Tract 2
Wake
January 6, 2021
Page 2 of 3
Feature Feature E/I/P(')
Not
Subject
2)
Subject Start @ Stop @
Soil
Survey
USGS
Topo
DWR Terracon
A T2 P X Off Site Off Site X X
B
T4
I X
Start 1: 35.716828,
78.579666
Start 2: 35.718753,
78.580519 1
Stop 1: 35.713214,
78.584289
Stop 2: Stream A
X
C T1 P X Present Throughout X X
D T6 P X 35.713722; 78.577483 Off Site X X
E P X POND 4 Stream E X X
F T12 P X Present Throughout X X
G T14 I X 35.7093,-78.56845 Stream H X
H T15 I X 35.709678; 78.566856 Stream H X
I T16 P X Present Throughout X X
J T17 P X Off Site Stream J X X
K SV NP X X
L SW E X X
M SX E X X
N SY P X Off Site Stream C X
O SZ E X X
POND 1 SW1 N/A X N/A N/A X
POND 2 SW2 N/A X N/A N/A X
POND 3 SW3 N/A X N/A N/A X
POND 4 SW4 N/A X N/A N/A X
1) E = Ephemeral, I = Intermittent, P = Perennial, NP = Not Present, N/A=Not Applicable
2) Refers to State riparian buffer rules only. Stream, wetland, or pond impacts are still subject to applicable water
quality standards and permitting requirements.
Explanation: The stream(s)/pond(s) listed above has been located on the most recent published NRCS Soil Survey
of Wake County, North Carolina and/or the most recent copy of the USGS Topographic map at a 1: 24,000 scale.
Each feature that is checked "Not Subject" has been determined to not be an intermittent stream, perennial stream, a
D_EQ
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources I Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive 11628 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1628
91.9.791.4200
DocuSign Envelope ID: 663FF515-3F3A-4lF2-9CF8-4CD2C608FC46
Eagle Crest Industrial Property - Tract 2
Wake
January 6, 2021
Page 3 of 3
pond connected to a stream feature, or the feature is determined not to be present. Stream features that are checked
Subject" have been located on the property and possess characteristics that qualify them to be subject to the buffer
rules. There may be other streams located on the property that are not depicted on the maps referenced above and
are therefore not subject to the buffer rules. However, if the stream features are present on the tract they are subject
to all other applicable North Carolina stream standards and permitting requirements as outlined in 15A NCAC 0213,
and may be considered jurisdictional according to the US Army Corps of Engineers.
This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected
parties that dispute a determination made by the DWR may request a determination by the Director. An
appeal request must be made within sixty (60) days of date of this letter. A request for a determination by the
Director shall be referred to the Director in writing. If sending via US Postal Service: c/o Paul Wojoski; DWR
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit, 1617 Mail Service Center; Raleigh, NC 27699-1617. If sending via delivery
service (UPS, FedEx, etc.): Paul Wojoski; DWR — 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit; 512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, NC 27604.
This determination is final and binding unless, as detailed above, an appeal is requested within sixty (60)
days.
This project may require a Section 404/401 Permit for the proposed activity. Any inquiries should be
directed to the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh Regulatory Field Office) at (919)-554-4884.
If you have questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact J. Chris Smith at [phone].
Sincerely,
DoeuSipned by:
CStBCDA9D125DIA46D...
Scott Vinson, Regional Supervisor
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Raleigh Regional Office
Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ
cc: RRO DWR File Copy
Laserfiche
Contact via e-mail at Rhiannon.eraham&terracon.com
roan. uuD E Q,
drwnrt vw ni o.nr
V
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources I Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive 11628 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1628
919.791.4200
1
i
D 'O
D
0
0
O O
X. X.
3 3
c a
D rot
W Ln
h hdO
4 W
Ln OO
O
o.
v a
O
wi
d
0
0 .o
a0 0
rD0. v m
o N N a
a•
v
Z
m z
io x °c m
0 R A
m° rDr oom
0
C
0
p
0
r
Om
m
au
c
n
m
V1
rF
CU
fD fl+
O
10
m
r+
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726

Date:__________________________

Self-Certification Letter

Project Name______________________________

Dear Applicant:

Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended (ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended (Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.

The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:

“no effect” determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or

“may affect, likely to adversely affect” determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;

“no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2

We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the “no effect” or
“not likely to adversely affect” determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the “may affect” determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the “no Eagle Act permit required” determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pp.html.
If you have any questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact
Leigh Mann of this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.

Sincerely,

/s/Pete Benjamin

Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services

Enclosures - project review package
12/09/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00738   2

Project Summary
Consultation Code:04EN2000-2021-SLI-0346
Event Code:04EN2000-2021-E-00738
Project Name:Eagle Crest Industrial Property
Project Type:DEVELOPMENT
Project Description:Project is located in Garner off of Auburn Church Road, 50 acres,
CONFIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, timing is currently
unknown and to be determined
Project Location:
Approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/place/35.72034143581711N78.57330992862582W
Counties:Wake, NC
12/09/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00738   3

1.
Endangered Species Act Species
There is a total of 6 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries , as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
Birds
NAME STATUS
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
Endangered
Amphibians
NAME STATUS
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Proposed
Threatened
Fishes
NAME STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
Proposed
Endangered
1
12/09/2020 Event Code: 04EN2000-2021-E-00738   4

Clams
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Proposed
Threatened
Dwarf Wedgemussel Alasmidonta heterodon
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/784
Endangered
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Endangered
Critical habitats
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.
NCNHDE-13257
November 5, 2020
Katie Talavera
Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI) a Terracon Company
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: EagleCrest; HL207210
Dear Katie Talavera:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
A query of the NCNHP database indicates that there are records for rare species, important natural
communities, natural areas, and/or conservation/managed areas within the proposed project
boundary. These results are presented in the attached ‘Documented Occurrences’ tables and map.
The attached ‘Potential Occurrences’ table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is documented within the project area or indicated within a one-mile
radius of the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) for guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
https://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
Also please note that the NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional
correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Clean Water
Management Trust Fund easement, or an occurrence of a Federally-listed species is documented
near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at [e-mail] or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Intersecting the Project Area
EagleCrest
Project No. HL207210
November 5, 2020
NCNHDE-13257
No Element Occurrences are Documented within the Project Area
There are no documented element occurrences (of medium to very high accuracy) that intersect with the project area. Please note, however, that although the
NCNHP database does not show records for rare species within the project area, it does not necessarily mean that they are not present; it may simply mean that
the area has not been surveyed. The use of Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys if needed, particularly if the project
area contains suitable habitat for rare species. If rare species are found, the NCNHP would appreciate receiving this information so that we may update our
database.
No Natural Areas are Documented within the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within Project Area*
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
City of Raleigh Greenway Easement City of Raleigh Local Government
*NOTE: If the proposed project intersects with a conservation/managed area, please contact the landowner directly for additional information. If the project intersects with a Dedicated Nature Preserve
(DNP), Registered Natural Heritage Area (RHA), or Federally-listed species, NCNHP staff may provide additional correspondence regarding the project.
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/help. Data query generated on November 5, 2020; source: NCNHP, Q3 October 2020.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 4
Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
EagleCrest
Project No. HL207210
November 5, 2020
NCNHDE-13257
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic
Group
EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last
Observation
Date
Element
Occurrence
Rank
Accuracy Federal
Status
State
Status
Global
Rank
State
Rank
Dragonfly or
Damselfly
32043 Coryphaeschna ingens Regal Darner 2004-Pre H?5-Very
Low
---Significantly
Rare
G5 S2?
Freshwater Fish 37168 Lampetra aepyptera Least Brook Lamprey 2017-03-02 E 3-Medium ---Threatened G5 S2
Reptile 35529 Ophisaurus attenuatus Slender Glass Lizard 1980-07-10 H 4-Low ---Significantly
Rare
G5 S1
No Natural Areas are Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type
City of Raleigh Open Space City of Raleigh Local Government
City of Raleigh Greenway City of Raleigh Local Government
Town of Garner Open Space Town of Garner Local Government
City of Raleigh Greenway Easement City of Raleigh Local Government
City of Raleigh Greenway City of Raleigh Local Government
City of Raleigh Open Space City of Raleigh Local Government
City of Raleigh Easement City of Raleigh Local Government
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at https://ncnhde.natureserve.org/help. Data query generated on November 5, 2020; source: NCNHP, Q3 October 2020.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 3 of 4
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Page 4 of 4
Species Conclusions Table
Project Name: USFWS Self- Certification for The Eagle Crest Industrial Property
Date: 12-11-2020 Prepared by: Terracon Consultants Inc
Species / Resource Name Conclusion ESA Section 7 / Eagle Act
Determination Notes / Documentation
Red-cockaded Woodpecker No suitable habitat No effect
Habitat assessment by Terracon
biologists found no suitable
habitat.

Neuse River Waterdog
(proposed threatened) No suitable habitat No effect
The boundary stream (Poplar Branch) of
this 50-acre parcel is outside of the study
area. There will be no in water work and
there will be a maintained wooded buffer.
The area adjacent to the stream is also
inside a regulated floodplain and is not part
of the proposed development.
Carolina Madtom
(proposed endangered) No Suitable habitat No effect
The boundary stream (Poplar Branch) of
this 50-acre parcel is outside of the study
area. There will be no in water work and
there will be a maintained wooded buffer.
The area adjacent to the stream is also
inside a regulated floodplain and is not part
of the proposed development.
Atlantic Pigtoe
(proposed threatened) No Suitable habitat No effect
The boundary stream (Poplar Branch) of
this 50-acre parcel is outside of the study
area. There will be no in water work and
there will be a maintained wooded buffer.
The area adjacent to the stream is also
inside a regulated floodplain and is not part
of the proposed development.
Dwarf Wedge mussel No Suitable habitat No effect
The boundary stream (Poplar Branch) of
this 50-acre parcel is outside of the study
area. There will be no in water work and
there will be a maintained wooded buffer.
The area adjacent to the stream is also
inside a regulated floodplain and is not part
of the proposed development.
Michaux’s sumac Suitable habitat No effect
Michaux’s sumac survey was performed by
qualified Terracon biologists on 11/4/2020
following a visit to a nearby reference
population. No evidence of Michaux’s
sumac was observed.
Bald Eagle unlikely to disturb nesting
bald eagles No effect No Eagle Act permit be required
Northern Long-eared Bat Suitable summer habitat May affect

Relying upon the findings of the 1/5/2016
Programmatic Biological Opinion for Final
4(d) Rule on the Northern Long-Eared Bat
and Activities Excepted from Take
Prohibitions to fulfill our project-specific
section 7 responsibilities.

Critical habitat No critical habitat present No effect
Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all of the provided resources to make an
informed decision about impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas.

_______________________________________________________________ ___________________________
Signature /Title Date

Topographic Map for the Eagle Crest Industrial Property

Soil Survey of Wake County, NC
Eagle Crest Industrial Property

2007 Aerial Photograph
Eagle Crest Industrial Property

To: Ari Shalam
From: Jeff Harbour, PWS
Date: November 25, 2020
Re: Eagle Crest, Wake County, NC
Protected Species Habitat Assessment and
Michaux’s Sumac Survey Results (50-Acre Parcel)
__________________________________________________________________________
Terracon has completed the onsite survey for the federally endangered Michaux’s sumac (Rhus
michauxii) on the initial 50-acre tract associated with the Eagle Crest property in Wake County,
NC. The survey was intended to document the presence or absence of this species in previously
identified areas of potential habitat.

Species with the federal classifications of Endangered (E) or Threatened (T) are protected under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Species
officially Proposed (P) for such listing are not protected under the ESA, but are recommended for
inclusion in evaluations based on potential for status to be upgraded to official listing as E or T.
A North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database query was generated in October
2020 to determine if any of these spe cies have been documented inside of or within 1.0 mile of
the study area. The NCNHP results (attached) indicate that no threatened or endangered species
have been documented inside of or within 1.0 mile of the study area.

Terracon conducted habitat asse ssments inside the study area in November 2020, for those
species that are listed for Wake County . This memorandum of findings addresses the results of
the species-specific survey for Michaux’s sumac only. No other species -specific surveys were
determined to be warranted after Terracon’s habitat assessment.

Michaux’s sumac - Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont,
has been reported to as occurring in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or
circumneutral, well-drained sands or sandy loam soils with low cation exchange capacities. The
species has also been reported as found on sandy or submesic loamy swales and depressions
in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays; maintained
railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights -of-way; areas where forest canopies have been
opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned building
sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges
of other artificially maintained clearin gs undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont,
Michaux’s sumac has been reported as occurring on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The
plant has been characterized as shade intolerant and growing best where disturbance maintains
its open habitat (USFWS 1993). The optimal survey window for this species in North Carolina
has been identified by USFWS as May – October.

Potential habitat for Michaux’s sumac was identified within the study area. The well -drained
portions of the roadside ROW and forested edges along the study area may provide the open
habitat associated with this species. The disturbed edges along the abandoned roads inside the
study area also offer potential habitat. Jeff Harbour, Terracon senior scientist with 26 years
professional experience, conducted the survey on November 4, 2020. Mr. Harbour visited a
known reference population of Michaux’s sumac in Knightdale, NC prior to assessing the Eagle
Crest study area. The individuals observed at the reference population wer e still easily
recognizable and the leaves were a bright orange/red color.

The areas of potential habitat identified for this species in the 50-acre Eagle Crest study area,
were surveyed by meandering pedestrian transects. No evidence of Michaux’s suma c was
observed in areas of potential habitat surveyed in the study area. It is Terracon’s professional
opinion that the proposed project should have No Effect on Michaux’s sumac.

Cc: Development and Construction Insight, LLC

Archaeological Reconnaissance Report
Eagle Crest
Wake County, North Carolina
February 2021
Terracon Project No. HL207210
Prepared for:
RWN Real Estate Partners, LLC
Prepared by:
Terri Russ, RPA
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable i
ABSTRACT
At the request of RWN Real Estate Partners, LLC, Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon)
conducted an archaeological reconnaissance of an approximately 50-acre parcel located
on the west side of Auburn Church Road in Garner, Wake County, North Carolina
Fieldwork was conducted on November 3, 2020 by Terri Russ, RPA and Melissa McKay,
RPA. At the time of the archaeological reconnaissance, no federal permitting for this
development was anticipated; however, Terracon completed the site visit at the request
of the Client to assess and evaluate existing project conditions and identify surface signs
of possible cultural resources as part of their internal planning process. Terracon
requested comment on the project, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
assigned an environmental review tracking number (ER 21-0038).
Based on the results of the current investigation and comments from SHPO, the proposed
project should be allowed to proceed without concern for impacts to significant cultural
resources; however, if the project boundaries are modified outside of the current project
area and federal permitting is anticipated, additional coordination with the SHPO would
be necessary to determine if additional cultural resource investigations would be required.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT i
1.INTRODUCTION 1
2.ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 3
3.BACKGROUND RESEARCH 7
4.FIELD METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN 10
5.RESULTS 10
6.SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 22
REFERENCES CITED 24
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 1
1. INTRODUCTION
RWN Real Estate Partners, LLC, is proposing the development of an approximately 50-
acre parcel located on the west side of Auburn Church Road in Garner, Wake County,
North Carolina (Figure 1). At the request of the Client, Terracon Consultants, Inc.
(Terracon) conducted an archaeological reconnaissance of the project area on November
3, 2020. At the time of the reconnaissance investigation, no federal permitting for this
development was anticipated; however, Terracon completed the site visit at the request
of the Client to assess and evaluate existing project conditions and identify surface signs
of possible cultural resources as part of their internal planning process. Terracon
requested comment on the project, and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
assigned an environmental review tracking number (ER 21-0038).
Prior to the initiation of fieldwork, background research was conducted by North Carolina
Office of State Archaeology (OSA) staff on behalf of Terracon. Field methods employed
by Terracon during the investigation included visual (pedestrian) survey. In addition, eight
shovel tests were excavated within selected portions of the project area to evaluate the
property’s potential for intact, subsurface cultural resources. Shovel tests measured
approximately 30 centimeters in diameter and were dug to one meter, the water table, or
sterile subsoil. Field investigations occurred on November 3, 2020 and were conducted
by Terri Russ, RPA and Melissa McKay, RPA.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 2
Figure 1: Approximate Project Location
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 3
2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project area is located in the Piedmont physiographic province. The landscape of the
region is gently sloping to rolling and contains drainages bordered by moderately steep
slopes (NCDEQ 2015).Elevations within the project area range from a high of around 280
feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the eastern and southern portions of the project area
to a low of 210 feet along the drainages.
The project area is located within the Neuse River Basin. No named drainages cross the
project area; however, an unnamed tributary of Big Branch serves as the northern
boundary for the project area.
The soil map for Wake County shows five soil units occurring within the project area
(NRCS 2020;Table 1). The majority of the project area (85.6 percent) is mapped as
having well drained or excessively drained soils. The remaining 14.4 percent is mapped
as being somewhat poorly drained and is located along the floodplains of the tributaries
and drainageways.
Table 1: Project Area Soils
Unit
Symbol Soil Unit Name Slope Approx. % of
Project Area Drainage Landform
ChA Chewacla and Wehadkee
soils, frequently flooded 0-2%14.4%Somewhat
poorly drained Floodplains
RgC Rawlings-Rion complex 6-10%12.4%Well drained Interfluves
RgD Rawlings-Rion complex 10-15%31.9%Well drained Interfluves
WaD Wake-Rolesville complex,
very rocky 10-15%21.2%Excessively
drained Interfluves
WfB Wedowee-Saw complex 2-6%20.1%Well drained Interfluves
The project area is currently wooded with evidence of past disturbance. During the field
visit, several paved roads were observed crossing the project area with sidewalks and
water lines (Figures 2 and 3). Area photographs indicate these were constructed around
June 2007 in advance of a then-proposed residential development that never materialized
(Figure 4). The wooded areas along the sides of these paved roads consisted of a dense
thicket of pine and hardwood saplings, regenerated from clearing during that time. The
southern portion of the project area extends onto a former golf course, constructed around
1968 and closed in 2003. This portion of the project area was heavily disturbed and
consisted of paved golf cart paths and a pond. The remaining portions of the project area
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 4
were overgrown with areas of pine plantation in the upland portions and thick vegetation
and smaller trees in the wetland and lower elevations (Figures 5 and 6).
Figure 2: Existing Paved Roads
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 5
Figure 3: Existing Paved Roads and Modern Trash Dumping
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 6
Figure 4: June 2007 Aerial Photograph Showing Construction of Roads
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 7
Figure 5: View of Ridge Top in Northern Portion of Project Area, facing Southeast
Figure 6: View of Vegetation along Edges of Developed Area
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 8
3. BACKGROUND RESEARCH
Research conducted by the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on behalf
of Terracon revealed that no previously recorded archaeological sites appear to be
located within the project area and no archaeological surveys have been conducted.
Research conducted by Terracon using the North Carolina State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO) HPOWEB GIS service database revealed that no previously recorded
historic properties are located directly within the proposed project area.
Terracon conducted an examination of historical aerial photographs and maps in an
attempt to locate possible historical structure locations within the proposed project
boundaries. The 1914 soils map appears to show two structures located along the west
side of Auburn Church Road in the general project vicinity, prior to its realignment (Figure
7). These structures can also be seen on a 1959 aerial photograph of the project vicinity
(Figure 8).
Aerial photographs from 1998 show the western boundary of the project area (generally
adjacent to the drainages) had been clear cut (Figure 9). Aerial photography from 2002
shows the eastern and central portions of the project area appeared to have been
systematically planted in pine (north-south rows are visible).
Figure 7: 1914 Soils Map (Approximate Project Location)
Structure 1
Structure 2
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 9
Figure 8: 1959 Aerial Photograph(Approximate Project Location)
USDA Historic Aerial Photographs
Structure 1
Structure 2
Former Alignment of Auburn Church Rd.
Former Alignment of
Auburn Church Rd.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 10
Figure 9: 1998 Aerial Imagery (Approximate Project Location)
Figure 10: 2002 Aerial Imagery (Approximate Project Location)
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 11
4. FIELD METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN
Terracon conducted a brief field visit of the project area on November 3, 2020 to evaluate
existing project conditions and identify surface signs of possible cultural resources. Field
methodology included a general pedestrian (visual) examination of the project area
accompanied by limited subsurface testing (conducted judgmentally to generally evaluate
the potential for undisturbed archaeological deposits and to evaluate soil stratigraphy
along landforms that appeared to have the greatest potential for yielding cultural
resources. No systematic or transect shovel testing was conducted during this
reconnaissance investigation.
In addition to a general reconnaissance, the two likely structure locations (based on
historical aerial photography and topographic maps) were inspected for signs of above-
ground structural remains and are discussed in Results, below.
5. RESULTS
Based on the background research, it was expected that the southernmost portion of the
project area would be largely disturbed from the construction of a golf course in the late
1960s. Clearcutting and paving activities associated with a former planned development
were evident on recent aerial photographs. As such, it was expected that archaeological
sites would be limited to uneroded and relatively undisturbed upland landforms in the
project area, if extant.
Pedestrian inspection confirmed that the southern portion of the project area had been
disturbed by construction of a golf course. Paved golf cart paths were observed, as well
as an artificially-created pond. The central portion of the project area consisted of planted
pines interrupted by paved roads and infrastructure from the former subdivision
construction. The portion of the project area along the western boundary of the project
area was largely steep slope or wetland, with a few ridge toes overlooking an unnamed
tributary of Big Branch. General project area photos are shown on Figures 11 and 12.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 12
Figure 11: General Project Area
Figure 12: General Project Area
Three shovel tests (STs 3,4, and 6) were excavated along the ridge toes in areas that
appeared to be favorable for precontact habitation (Figure 13). Soils in these shovel tests
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 13
generally consisted of around 10 to 15 centimeters of grayish brown sandy loam over 10
to 25 centimeters of olive brown or light olive brown loamy sand. Subsoil was a yellowish
brown or strong brown clay. No artifacts were recovered from any of these shovel tests.
Figure 13: Shovel Test Locations
Background research suggested that two structures were located within the project area.
These probable locations of these former structures (based on historical aerial
photography and topographic maps) were inspected for signs of above-ground structural
remains and are discussed below.
Structure 1
Structure 2
(well)
Cinderblock Rubble
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 14
Structure 1
31WA2341
UTM: 17S 719620.81m E 3955752.51m N
Site Size: Unknown
Elevation: 280 feet amsl
Environmental Setting: Wooded/Developed
Soils: WfB, Wedowee-Saw complex, 2–6% slopes
Nearest Water: 220 meters northwest, unnamed tributary of Big Branch
Surface Visibility: 0–25%
Field Procedures: Pedestrian Survey and Shovel Testing (n=4)
Cultural Affiliation: Historic–Mid-19th to 20th Century
Site Function: Historic–Domestic Structure
Site Integrity: Poor
Aerial photographs from the 1960s as well as the 1964 topographic quadrangle map
showed a large dwelling with a circular front driveway with what appeared to be a barn or
garage to the west and two small square outbuildings to the northwest (possibly tobacco
barns). Visual inspection of the wooded area on the north side of a paved road revealed
two areas of cinderblock rubble in the approximate location of the small outbuildings
(Figure 15). Two shovel tests were excavated in the vicinity of these structures (Shovel
Tests [STs] 1 and 2; see Figure 13). ST 1 consisted of 20 centimeters of dark brown
sandy loam over 10 centimeters of dark yellowish brown loamy sand. Subsoil was a
yellowish brown sandy clay loam. ST 2 consisted of 10 centimeters of very dark brown
sandy loam over yellowish red clay (eroded). No artifacts were recovered.
Visual inspection of the south side of the paved road revealed remnants of the former
house, including a large two-story stacked stone and brick chimney, cinderblocks
foundation, asphalt roofing shingles, and a few scattered remnants of wood framing
(Figures 16–19). The structure appeared to be a two story dwelling with a large center
chimney. The structure likely originally rested on brick piers, which were later infilled with
mortared cinderblock. Two of the surviving siding fragments contained cut nails. Two
shovel tests were excavated in this area: ST 7 (along the north side of the structure) and
ST 8 (immediately west of the structure). ST 7 contained 15 centimeters of compact dark
brown silty clay loam over red clay. A single piece of window glass was noted. ST8
consisted of 20 centimeters of dark brown sandy clay loam over yellowish red clay subsoil.
This shovel test yielded a few fragments of asphalt roof shingles, a brick fragment, and a
small shard of window glass.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 15
Figure 14: Archaeological Site Locations
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 16
Figure 15: Concrete Rubble Likely Associated with Former Outbuildings
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 17
Figure 16: Structure 1 (31WA2341) Chimney, facing North
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 18
Figure 17: Structure 1 (31WA2341) Stairs, facing South
Figure 18: Structure 1 (31WA2341) Foundation Detail, facing South
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 19
Figure 19: Structure 1 (31WA2341) Foundation Detail, facing Northeast
The structure appearing on historical aerial photographs located to the west of the main
dwelling was not relocated and was likely destroyed by grading and the construction of
the paved road and adjacent sidewalk. A 2002 plat shows the location of two wells, which
appear to have been located west and north of the structure within the area that had been
paved and developed (Figure 20). These wells were not observed during the current site
visit.
Deed research suggests that the structure was the Charles Nicholas (C.N.) and Carrie
(Caroline) Virginia Johns Allen Homeplace referenced in a 1916 deed (Wake County
Deed Book 305 Page 55). The 1914 will for C.N. Allen indicates that the land was inherited
from Carrie Virginia Allen’s father, John Bunyan Johns in 1872. The 1872 deed makes no
reference to a structure, suggesting the home was constructed by C.N. Allen after 1872
and prior to his death in 1914. Based on aerial photography, the house appears to have
been demolished between 1981 and 1983.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 20
Figure 20: Portion of 2002 Plat Showing (former) Well Locations
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 21
Structure 2
31WA2342
UTM: 17S 719785.23 m E 3955360.30 m N
Site Size: Unknown
Elevation: 280 feet amsl
Environmental Setting: Wooded/Developed
Soils: WfB, Wedowee-Saw complex, 2–6% slopes
Nearest Water: 300 meters northwest, unnamed tributary of Big Branch
Surface Visibility: 0–50%
Field Procedures: Pedestrian Survey and Shovel Testing (n=1)
Cultural Affiliation: Historic–Mid-19th to 20th Century
Site Function: Historic–well associated with domestic structure
Site Integrity: Poor
Aerial photographs from the 1960s showed a smaller structure near the southern project
area boundary, within or immediately adjacent to the golf course. Inspection of this area
revealed several large oak trees and boxwoods as well as a large above-ground ceramic
well casing (Figures 21 and 22). The uncapped well surrounded an open large-diameter
stacked stone well. A paved golf cart path ran through the area; no evidence of structural
remains was encountered. One shovel test (ST 5) was excavated near the well. Soils in
this shovel test consisted of 25 centimeters of dark grayish brown sandy loam over 20
centimeters of light olive brown loamy sand. Subsoil was a yellowish brown sandy clay.
No artifacts were recovered. Based on an examination of historical maps and aerial
photography, the house appears to have been destroyed when Auburn Church Road was
realigned and shifted to the west.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 22
Figure 21: Structure 2 (31WA2342) General Vicinity, facing West
Figure 22: Structure 2 (31WA2342) Well
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 23
6. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This archaeological reconnaissance of the proposed project area was conducted by
Terracon of Raleigh, North Carolina, at the request of RWN Real Estate Partners, LLC.
At the time of the archaeological reconnaissance investigation, it was Terracon’s
understanding that no federal permitting for this development was currently anticipated.
The field inspection was conducted at the request of the Client to assess and evaluate
existing project conditions and identify surface signs of possible cultural resources as part
of their internal planning process; however, Terracon requested informal SHPO comment
on the project, and an environmental review tracking number (ER 21-0038) was assigned
(in the event that permitting needs changed).
Background research was conducted by the OSA on behalf of Terracon. In addition,
Terracon examined readily available and relevant historical aerial photographs and maps
in an attempt to locate possible historical structure or feature locations within the
proposed project boundaries. Field methods employed by Terracon during the
investigation included visual (pedestrian) survey. In addition, eight shovel tests were
excavated within selected portions of the project area to evaluate the property’s potential
for intact, subsurface cultural resources.
As a result of the investigation, two new archaeological sites (31WA2341 and 31WA2342)
were recorded within the project area (Table 2). Both sites consisted of above ground
structural remains with no evidence of intact subsurface deposits; however, no systematic
site delineation of either site was conducted.
Table 2: Summary of Site Data
Site Cultural Affiliation Site Type
31WA2341 Historic: 19th to 20th c.Above Ground Structural Remains
(Chimney and House Remains)
31WA2342 Historic: 19th to 20th c.Above Ground Structural Remains
(Well)
A letter requesting comment on the project was sent to SHPO on November 11, 2020. In
a response dated January 19, 2021, the SHPO indicated that additional archaeological
activities would be unlikely to identify significant historic properties and that no additional
fieldwork would be warranted. The SHPO requested that the results of the
reconnaissance site visit be submitted to the OSA for their records along with site forms
documenting the two former house sites.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 24
In summary, based on the results of the current investigation and comments from SHPO,
the proposed project should be allowed to proceed without concern for impacts to
significant cultural resources. If the project boundaries are modified outside of the current
project area and federal permitting is anticipated, additional coordination with the SHPO
would be necessary to determine if additional cultural resource investigations would be
required.
Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey
Eagle Crest ■Wake County, North Carolina
February 22, 2021■Terracon Project No. HL207210
Responsive ■Resourceful ■Reliable 25
REFERENCES
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2020 Wake County, Virginia Soil Survey. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, United States Department of Agriculture Web Soil Survey.
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov,accessed January 18, 2021.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ)
2015 Physiographic Provinces of North Carolina. ESRI interactive story map.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/north-
carolina-geological-survey/interactive-geologic-maps, accessed January
18, 2021.
United States Bureau of Soils: North Carolina Department of Agriculture
1914 Soil Map, North Carolina, Wake County. On file, North Carolina State
Archives, Raleigh, North Carolina.
https://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/301/rec/26
accessed November 6, 2020.
United States Department of Agriculture
1959 Aerial Photographs, Wake County. On File, University of North Carolina
Libraries.https://library.unc.edu/data/gis-usda/wake/1959.accessed
November 6, 2020.
Wake County Deeds
n.d. Miscellaneous deeds on file. Wake County Register of Deeds, Raleigh,
North Carolina.

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

April 5, 2021

Terri Russ [e-mail]
Terracon
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604

Re: Archaeological Reconnaissance Report, Eagle Crest, Wake County, ER 21-0038

Dear Ms. Russ:

Thank you for your March 2, 2021, letter transmitting the reconnaissance report and site forms for the
above-referenced project. We have reviewed the information provided and offer the following comments.

The reconnaissance survey identified two archaeological sites (31WA2341 and 31WA2342). Both sites are
structural remains that date from the late nineteenth through the late twentieth century. Although neither
site was systematically delineated, the report contains sufficient information to determine that 31WA2341
and 31WA2342 lack significant historical associations and sufficient integrity to be eligible for listing in
the National Register of Historic Places.

We concur that additional archaeological survey activities are unlikely to identify significant historic
properties in the project area as presently defined. This reconnaissance report is consistent with Office of
State Archaeology (OSA) Standards and Guidelines and will be incorporated into the OSA site file library.

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

Sincerely,

Ramona Bartos, Deputy
State Historic Preservation Officer
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
Nearest Named Water Body
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
Yes No
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
•
•
•
•
Is the assessment area intensively managed?Yes No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes)Lunar Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island?Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?Yes No
1.Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2.Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch
≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3.Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non-marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below . Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a.A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
Sub
VS
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
35.7223 -78.5726
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Jeff Harbour/Terracon
6/2/2021Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
Eagle Crest Wetland 5
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Big Branch
03020201
Level III Ecoregion
River Basin
Piedmont
Headwater Forest
Neuse
4.Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c.A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5.Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6.Land Use – opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
A A A ≥ 10% impervious surfaces
B B B < 10% impervious surfaces
C C C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
G G G ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
H H H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7.Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a.Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b.How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c.Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d.Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e.Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8.Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet
9.Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10.Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12.Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a.Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b.Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14.Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cuts.
Consider the eight main points of the compass.
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear-cut
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16.Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
Well
WC
Loosely
17.Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a.Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b.Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c.Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent
A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent
A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18.Snags – wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19.Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20.Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21.Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D
22.Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
AA WT
Notes CanopyMid-StoryShrubHerb
0 91°E (T) OO 35.722396°N, 78.572628°W *49ft • 248ft
:Y i
ti 1
1 H '^'rsWt. •
arStd'

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Sub-Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Physical Structure Condition
Landscape Patch Structure Condition
Vegetation Composition Condition
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Hydrology Condition
Water Quality Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Conditon
Overall Wetland Rating
Rating
MEDIUM
HIGH
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Type
Wetland Site Name Eagle Crest Wetland 5
Jeff Harbour/TerraconHeadwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
6/2/2021
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
YES
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
Rating
HIGH
LOW
NA
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NO
NA
NO
NA
NA
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NO
HIGH
YES
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
Nearest Named Water Body
USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit
Yes No
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if
appropriate, in recent past (for instance, approximately within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited
to the following.
•
•
•
•
Is the assessment area intensively managed?Yes No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area)
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
Publicly owned property
N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
Designated NCNHP reference community
Abuts a 303(d)-listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)-listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
Blackwater
Brownwater
Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes)Lunar Lunar Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island?Yes No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver?Yes No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions?Yes No
1.Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure
(VS) in the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable,
then rate the assessment area based on evidence of an effect.
GS
A A Not severely altered
B B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire-plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2.Surface and Sub-Surface Storage Capacity and Duration – assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub-surface storage capacity and
duration (Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for
North Carolina hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch
≤ 1 foot deep is considered to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and ditch
sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf
A A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
B B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
C C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
3.Water Storage/Surface Relief – assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non-marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column for each group below . Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland
type (WT).
AA WT
3a.A A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 foot deep
B B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
C C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
D D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b.A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot
Big Branch
03020201
Level III Ecoregion
River Basin
NC WAM WETLAND ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Jeff Harbour/Terracon
6/2/2021Wetland Site Name
Wetland Type
Eagle Crest Wetland 6
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
Sub
VS
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
35.7184 -78.5724
Piedmont
Headwater Forest
Neuse
4.Soil Texture/Structure – assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape
feature. Make soil observations within the 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for
regional indicators.
4a.A Sandy soil
B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b.A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
B Soil ribbon ≥ 1 inch
4c.A No peat or muck presence
B A peat or muck presence
5.Discharge into Wetland – opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub-surface pollutants or discharges (Sub).
Examples of sub-surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
A A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
B B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
C C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
6.Land Use – opportunity metric
Check all that apply (at least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the
assessment area (5M), and within 2 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M). Effective riparian buffers
are considered to be 50 feet wide in the Coastal Plain and Piedmont ecoregions and 30 feet wide in the Blue Ridge Mountains ecoregion.
WS 5M 2M
A A A ≥ 10% impervious surfaces
B B B < 10% impervious surfaces
C C C Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants)
D D D ≥ 20% coverage of pasture
E E E ≥ 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
F F F ≥ 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
G G G ≥ 20% coverage of clear-cut land
H H H Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7.Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer – assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a.Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of the wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b.How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is weltand? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
A ≥ 50 feet
B From 30 to < 50 feet
C From 15 to < 30 feet
D From 5 to < 15 feet
E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c.Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels/braids for a total width.
≤ 15-feet wide > 15-feet wide Other open water (no tributary present)
7d.Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
Yes No
7e.Is tributary or other open water sheltered or exposed?
Sheltered – adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
Exposed – adjacent open water with width ≥ 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8.Wetland Width at the Assessment Area – wetland type/wetland complex metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check a box in each column. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland complex at the assessment areas (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A ≥ 100 feet
B B From 80 to < 100 feet
C C From 50 to < 80 feet
D D From 40 to < 50 feet
E E From 30 to < 40 feet
F F From 15 to < 30 feet
G G From 5 to < 15 feet
H H < 5 feet
9.Inundation Duration – assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
A Evidence of short-duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
C Evidence of long-duration inundation or very long-duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10.Indicators of Deposition – assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.Wetland Size – wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear-cut, select “K” for the FW column.
WT FW (if applicable)
A A A ≥ 500 acres
B B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D D From 25 to < 50 acres
E E E From 10 to < 25 acres
F F F From 5 to < 10 acres
G G G From 1 to < 5 acres
H H H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
I I I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
J J J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
K K K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear-cut
12.Wetland Intactness – wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
A Pocosin is the full extent (≥ 90%) of its natural landscape size.
B Pocosin is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.Connectivity to Other Natural Areas – landscape condition metric
13a.Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
metric naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four-lane roads, regularly maintained utility
line corridors the width of a four-lane road or wider, urban landscapes, fields (pasture open and agriculture), or water > 300 feet wide.
A A ≥ 500 acres
B B From 100 to < 500 acres
C C From 50 to < 100 acres
D D From 10 to < 50 acres
E E < 10 acres
F F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b.Evaluate for marshes only.
Yes No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters/stream or tidal wetlands.
14.Edge Effect – wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non-forested areas ≥ 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors and clear-cuts.
Consider the eight main points of the compass.
A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear-cut
15. Vegetative Composition – assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in
at least one stratum.
16.Vegetative Diversity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non-tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (<10% cover of exotics).
B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (>50% cover of exotics).
Well
WC
Loosely
17.Vegetative Structure – assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a.Is vegetation present?
Yes No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b.Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non-marsh wetlands.
A ≥ 25% coverage of vegetation
B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c.Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non-marsh wetlands. Consider structure
in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
C C Canopy sparse or absent
A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
A A Dense shrub layer
B B Moderate density shrub layer
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent
A A Dense herb layer
B B Moderate density herb layer
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18.Snags – wetland type condition metric
A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12-inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
19.Diameter Class Distribution – wetland type condition metric
A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12-inch DBH.
C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20.Large Woody Debris – wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man-placed natural debris.
A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
B Not A
21.Vegetation/Open Water Dispersion – wetland type/open water condition metric (evaluate for Non-Tidal Freshwater
Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
A B C D
22.Hydrologic Connectivity – assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive
ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man-made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Wetland potentially a non-404 wetland
AA WT
Notes CanopyMid-StoryShrubHerb
SW W NW
210 240 270 I 30 330
• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I• I•
N
0 30
0 298°NW (T) OO 35.718430°N, 78.572486°W *22ft ♦ 260ft

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N)
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N)
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N)
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N)
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N)
Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Sub-Surface Storage and Retention Condition
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Physical Structure Condition
Landscape Patch Structure Condition
Vegetation Composition Condition
Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics/Notes
Hydrology Condition
Water Quality Condition
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
Habitat Conditon
Overall Wetland Rating
NA
LOW
LOW
NO
NA
LOW
HIGH
Rating
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
YES
LOW
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Type
Wetland Site Name Eagle Crest Wetland 6
Jeff Harbour/TerraconHeadwater Forest
Date
Assessor Name/Organization
6/2/2021
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
NO
NA
NA
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NO
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
HIGH
YES
HIGH
NA
HIGH
Rating
MEDIUM
HIGH
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO