20210885 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20220318

fr.,f DW R
mrlsloa of ware. Resources
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
December 6, 2021 Ver 4.2
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
Yes
No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned*
Version#*
20210885
1
Is a payment required for this project?
No payment required
What amout is owed?*
Fee received
$240.00
Fee needed - send electronic notification
$570.00
Reviewing Office*
Select Project Reviewer*
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Colleen Cohn:eads\cmcohn
Information for Initial Review
1a. Name of project:
Tupelo Junction Residential Cluster Development
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Nancy Oberle
1 b. Primary Contact Email: * 1c. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
3/18/2022
Nearest Body of Water
Lake Michael
Basin
Cape Fear
Water Classification
WS-II;HQW,NSW
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.112837-79.254763
A. Processing Information u
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Orange
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)

Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
58 - Utility Line Activities for Water and Other Substances (frequently used)
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:
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1g. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
Yes No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes No
B. Applicant Information
1d. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?
Yes No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Lebanon Road 3, LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
James W. Parker, Jr.
2d.Address
Street Address
320 Executive Court
Address Line 2
City
Hillsborough
Postal / Zip Code
27278
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:
[e-mail]
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
Yes No
Yes No
U

4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Nancy Oberle
4b. Business Name:
Three Oaks Engineering
4c.Address
Street Address
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Address Line 2
City
Durham
Postal / Zip Code
27701
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:"
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information
1 b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
Tupelo Junction
1c. Nearest municipality / town:
Mebane
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
9826416095
2c. Project Address
Street Address
1808 Saddle Club Road
Address Line 2
City
Mebane
Postal / Zip Code
27302
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:
Lake Michael
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
WS-II;HQW,NSW
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Cape Fear
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030300020407
4. Project Description and History
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
2b. Property size:
93
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
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 site of the proposed project is mostly forested, with residential and commercial uses in the vicinity. The site is located just downstream of Lake Michael.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
Yes No Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
1.25
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
3860
u

4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The purpose of the proposed project is to install a sanitary sewer line related to a proposed residential development.
41. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
The proposed project is to develop the Tupelo Junction Residential Cluster Development on parcel 9826416095, an approximately 93 acre property in Mebane, Orange County, NC. The
subdivision will be accessed off Lebanon Road and Saddle Club Road and extend north and west onto the parcel, respectively. One road through the subdivision will cross the stream
(Lake Michael) on the parcel. However, this permit application is only for the impacts associated with the sanitary sewer relocation being done in order to develop the parcel. The roadway
crossing the stream will be applied for under a separate permit at a later date.
Indirect impacts are not anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
Typical construction equipment, such as trucks and dozers, will be used during construction.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
Yes No Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
SAW-2020-01770
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): James Mason, PWS
Agency/Consultant Company: Three Oaks Engineering
Other:
5d. List the dates of the Corp jurisdiction determination or State determination if a determination was made by the Corps or DWR
Site visit October 28, 2020. Updated PJD Package submitted to agencies on November 12, 2020.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
This permit application is for the sanitary sewer work being done in preparation for developing the same parcel for residential use. The stream crossing needed for residential development
will be submitted in a separate application at a later date.
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?
Yes, the property owner will seek approval of a NWP 29 for the residential development.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands Streams -tributaries Buffers
Open Waters Pond Construction
3. Stream Impacts
S7
3a. Reason for impact (?)
Sewer Line
3b.lmpact type*
Temporary
3c. Type of impact*
Fill
3d. S. name* ��[3e.
Lake Michael
Stream Type*
?)
Perennial
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
Both
3g. S. width*
12
Average (feet)
3h. Impact
length*
(linear feet)
$y
Dewatering
Temporary::]
Dewatering
Lake Michael
Perennial
Both
h;;;J�J
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
0
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
46
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
46

3j. Comments:
The sanitary sewer line will be directionally -bored under the stream. Due to survey/depth issues, the sewer line casing will breach the bottom of the
stream, resulting in a temporary impact to the stream bed. The stream will be temporarily de -watered prior to the bore (approximately 40 lin. ft. [1,575
sf]). Sills will be installed to promote accumulation of native streambed material over the exposed casing, which will return the streambed to its pre -
construction state. The bore will start and end outside of the riparian buffer zones. Please see attached Construction Drawings for details.
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The original design was going to avoid any impacts to the stream. However, there will be minor impacts due to the depth of the bore not being deep
enough to clear the streambed. The sanitary sewer line will cross the stream perpendicularly. Because the sewer line will be installed under the stream
and the boring will start and end outside of the riparian buffer, there will be no impacts to stream buffers.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
Erosion and sedimentation BMPs will be installed prior to construction. Construction has been sequenced and designed to avoid/minimize impacts by
locating temporary pump arounds away from features. Water will be diverted around the work area to prevent sedimentation of downstream aquatic
resources. Impacts will be minimized by strict enforcement of Best Management Practices for the protection of surface waters, restrictions against the
staging of equipment in or adjacent to waters of the US and coordination with appropriate environmental staff.
The bore location of the stream will be dewatered for the sewer installation. A special sediment bag will be installed downstream of the bore location.
Once the sewer line is installed, sills will be installed upstream of the crossing to promote natural stream restoration.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
The relocation of the sanitary sewer line is being done with only 6 linear feet of temporary impacts, plus 40 linear feet of temporary dewatering. Therefore, compensatory mitigation is not
proposed at this time.
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 INC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No
What type of SCM are you providing?
Level Spreader
Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
Other SCM that removes minimum 30 % nitrogen
Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?"
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
Yes No
Comments:
The sewer line itself does not exceed low density requirements. When further design is completed and the NWP 29 is applied for for the future subdivision itself, this determination will be
recalculated to consider the entire development.
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federallstatellocal) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? *
Yes No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 211 .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
u
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)

3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The development project that this sewer line work is associated with is a build -out of the project site. No additional development or expansion of the site
is planned and no additional development outside of the project site is anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
Yes No N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Raleigh
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes No
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
Yes No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
Yes No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
Yes No
Unknown
51. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
Yes No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
USFWS IPaC website checked 3/17/2022 (no species listed for project site). No bridges or existing structures present within directional bore footprint on
either side of the creek.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?
Yes No
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 No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The impacts associated with the sewer line breach of the streambed will result in negligible impacts to the streambed. Native streambed material will be
allowed to re -accumulate in the impact area, restoring the streambed to its former state. This sewer line work will not result in any restriction of the
floodway or the floodplain.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
hftps://msc.fema.gov/portal/search
Miscellaneous

Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Tupelo Junction_PJD Package Post PJD Visit.pdf 6.32MB
19-0185_PP ROAD- C-12-C- BEELINE LANE 10+00-14+51-2.pdf 874.72KB
Tupelo Junction - Signed Agent Authorization Form_2022.03.17.pdf 160.88KB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the 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:
Nancy Oberle
Signature
Date
3/18/2022

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. PLAN NO.
STREET ADDRESS: 1808 Saddle Club Rd
Mebane, NC 27302
PARCEL ID: 9826416095
Please print: James W. Parker, Jr., Lebanon Road 3, LLC
Property Owner:
Property Owner:
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Nancy _ Engineering, Berle/Ja ..es Mason of Three Oaksring, Inc.
_
(Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
320 Executive Court, Hillsborough, NC 27278
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
Ele trrennic_a�llyjsiiggned by:
prized , i nature Authorized Signature
3/ 17/2022
m.. Date:
g ',.
Authorized Signature
Date:
3/17/2022

z H,llHJ1f10213M3SA2iVlINHSE3NHl3NF338
E¢ HWd Lo£LL ON'3 NHe36v'aVoa NONHe3l w
ll i 3 9331AH398NIMININNI MNNNIN30 A1Nn0030NV2108dIHSN�N01 SY33H0 N
NoilDNnI ogaani
9 �Fll AS/lu]vl U
803 S9NIAIVUQ NOI,LJCIH,LSNOJ
z
a o
g e 3
m w o0
_I I Q ode
s 3 S o /I / LL WSJ _
Q
so
m N I me
� rm �
=a
o�
43 a �w o
o 0
d
"�' wEa[asEn[xi m Lu
Lu
U)-
ow< w
�d_
IL' �.. j
a=w
w m = mma
ca
oQdw
0
w w
_ALL
m m
a=
a _ w � o � o
®a
00.
-pao� oo w§
w�.
$� sa
- m
R 4 e�+o� des 3w
a �
a
m o a <
g
GREY FLINT PLACE aa. nrµ>�
LLl
Z e
m
3 N o
�, � Q ��L dLs>ro3ae3ada� I
I
Lu �� _ = _ - I =o
-
J
W
e s Lu
> o
s a
z� d
a¢o
w
z -
0 o w io
m
s m I
=z
I
> 99
Al
v s
�.n,-� I>
an ua xvo cj ow
a<
m go

Three Oaks Engineering, Inc.
324 Blackwell Street, Suite 1200
Durham, NC 27701
[phone]
November 12, 2020

United States Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
ATTN: Samantha Dailey, Regulatory Project Manager
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587

SUBJECT: Updated Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) Request Package – Proposed Tupelo
Junction Residential Cluster Development in Mebane, Orange County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Dailey:
Three Oaks Engineering, Inc. (Three Oaks) was contracted to perform wetland and stream delineations for the
proposed Tupelo Junction Residential Cluster Development in Mebane, Orange County, North Carolina. Three
Oaks is working as a sub-consultant to Summit Design and Engineering Services (Summit), which was retained
by Lebanon Road 3, LLC to assist in the design of the development. The area of interest (on PIN 9826416095) is
approximately 93 acres in size and is located to the north of Lebanon Road and to the west of Saddle Club Road
(Appendix A; Figure 1). The site, which is predominantly wooded, is located in Orange County, within the City
of Mebane’s Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) boundary. Lee’s Bees, Inc. is the current owner of the property,
but has entered into an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Real Property with Lebanon Road 3, LLC (provided
with previous submittal, along with Site Concept Plan and Orange County Surface Water Identification Letter).

Field assessments of the project site were completed by Three Oaks staff on May 27 and May 29, 2020. During
these visits, thirteen potential jurisdictional features (four streams and nine wetlands) and one potential surface
water (Pond PA) were identified within the study area (Appendix A, Figures 2-4). All of these features are located
in the Cape Fear River Basin, Jordan Lake Watershed (U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Unit Code 03030002).
Potential features are also located within the Orange County Back Creek Protected Watershed Overlay.

A field verification meeting between Three Oaks staff members Nathan Howell and James Mason and United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) regulatory project manager Samantha Dailey occurred on October 28,
2020. During the visit, the following changes were made to the original delineation: 1) an area between
Wetlands WA and WB was included in the delineation, which connected WA and WB. The entire feature is now
called Wetland WA; 2) two small floodplain pool wetlands downslope of Wetland WC were added (WB and WJ;
the Wetland WB name was repurposed once the original WB was merged with Wetland WA and is not the same
feature as in the original package); and 3) Wetland WI was expanded within the existing sewer line right-of-way.
The remaining potential features identified by Three Oaks were verified during the field verification meeting.

An upland form was also completed for the area downslope of Pond PA to support the in-field determination
that it is not jurisdictional and is, therefore, excluded from USACE protection.

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Stream Identification forms are included for features that
require them. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetland Determination forms (wetland and
upland) are included and have been updated to reflect changes from the field verification site visit. North
Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM) forms are included for all jurisdictional wetlands that require
them (Appendix B). A USACE ORM Data Entry form, USACE Jurisdictional Determination Request form, USACE
PJD Form (with an updated water resources table), Agent Authorization Form, and updated USACE Waters
Upload spreadsheet are also included with this submittal (Appendix C) Below are updated tables containing
information associated with the potential streams, wetlands, and surface waters located within the project area
of interest. These tables reflect all changes made during the field verification site visit; features with updated
information are highlighted in red.

Table 1. Potential jurisdictional streams in the study area
NCDWR
Stream Best Usage NCSAM On Topo or Soil
Map IDIndex ClassificationLength
1
NameClassification RatingSurvey?
Number
Lake Lake
16-18-3-1 WS-II;HQW,NSW Perennial * Yes (Both) 3,289
MichaelMichael
Unnamed
Tributary
SA 16-18-3-1 WS-II;HQW,NSW Perennial * Yes (Both) 43
(UT) to Lake
Michael
UT to Lake
SB 16-18-3-1 WS-II;HQW,NSW Perennial * No 305
Michael
(UT) to Lake
SC 16-18-3-1 WS-II;HQW,NSW Intermittent * No 223
Michael
Total 3,860
1
NCSAM forms are typically completed for streams possessing characteristics conducive to them receiving lower functional rating values and mitigation
ratios. Streams represented by an asterisk (*) possess characteristics conducive to them receiving high functional rating values and mitigation
ratios; therefore, forms were not completed for these features.
Note: Although not on either topographic or soils survey mapping, which would exclude them from the state-regulated Jordan Lake Riparian Buffer Rules,
Streams SB and SC may still be buffered under Orange County riparian buffer protection if County staff confirm their jurisdictionality (Ordinance
6.13.2.A.3: “The stream buffer regulations and standards contained herein shall be applicable to all streams and water features, as follows: \[A\]
Streams identified by any of the following means: …. 3. A water feature identified by a field determination of County staff trained in surface water
identification through the North Carolina Division of Water Quality”). These features have not been reviewed by Orange County and would require
review if they or their potential riparian buffers will be impacted.
Table 2. Characteristics of potential jurisdictional wetlands in the study area (continued)
Hydrologic
1
Map IDNCWAM Classification NCWAM RatingArea(ac.)
Classification
WABottomland Hardwood Forest Medium (Sewer ROW only)Riparian 0.47
WB Floodplain Pool * Riparian 0.03
WC Floodplain Pool * Riparian <0.01
WDFloodplain Pool * Riparian 0.01
WE Floodplain Pool * Riparian 0.03

Table 2. Characteristics of potential jurisdictional wetlands in the study area (continued)
Hydrologic
1
Map IDNCWAM Classification NCWAM RatingArea(ac.)
Classification
WFFloodplain Pool*Riparian0.16
WG Bottomland Hardwood Forest * Riparian 0.12
WH Bottomland Hardwood Forest * Riparian 0.02
WI Bottomland Hardwood Forest Medium (Sewer ROW only)Riparian 0.40
WJ Floodplain Pool * Riparian 0.01
1
NCWAM forms were completed for wetlands possessing characteristics conducive to them receiving
lower functional rating values and mitigation ratios. Wetlands represented by an asterisk (*) possess
Total 1.25
characteristics conducive to them receiving high functional rating values and mitigation ratios; therefore,
forms were not completed for these features.
Table 3. Potential surface waters in the study area
Map ID of
Surface WaterJurisdictional Area (ac.)
Connection

PAN/A0.45
Note: PA is an old farm pond that was built in upland. Based on mapping, it pre-dates the 1977 Soil Survey Map.
There are no inlets or outlets to this farm pond, and it is not connected to a jurisdictional feature. Also, Orange
County confirmed that previously mapped features connecting to the pond were non-jurisdictional during their
2019 assessment. Therefore, this pond is designated as non-jurisdictional. A USACE upland form was completed
downslope of the pond and is included in this package.
If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact me by either phone at (704)
604-8358 or email at [e-mail]. I am the Authorized Agent managing the PJD
for this project and am submitting this request on behalf of Lebanon Road 3, LLC (contact:
[e-mail]). We appreciate your assistance on this project.
Sincerely,

Ejhjubmmz!tjhofe!cz!Kbnft!
Kbnft
Nbtpo

Ebuf;!3131/22/23!
Nbtpo
26;38;15!.16(11(

James Mason, PWS
Project Manager
Three Oaks Engineering, Inc.

Cc: Stephanie Goss, NCDWR

Appendix A
Figures

¯
^
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin,
USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,
NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri
China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri
(Thailand), NGCC, ©
Legend
Study Area
Roads
S
TAG
ECO
ACH
Date:
Prepared For:
September 2020
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination:
Figure
Scale:
Proposed Tupelo Junction Subdivision
0150300Ft
Job No.:
Vicinity Map
20-612
1
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Orange County, North Carolina
NDH
JSM

Legend
UplandFormLocation
Study Area
¯
Roads
Tupelo Junction Potential Non-wetland WOUS (Stream)
Intermittent
Perennial
Tupelo Junction Potential Wetland WOUS
Disturbed
Undisturbed
Tupelo Junction Potential Surface Water
WI
WH
WF
WG
PA
Lake Michael
SC
SB
WE
WJ
WB
WCWD
SA
WA
S
TAGE
COAC
H RD
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
Date:
Prepared For:
October 2020
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination:
Figure
Scale:
Proposed Tupelo Junction Subdivision
0150300Ft
Job No.:
Map
20-612
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Orange County, North Carolina
NDH
JSM

Legend
Study Area
¯
Roads
Upland Form Location
Tupelo Junction Potential Non-wetland WOUS (Stream)
Intermittent
Perennial
Tupelo Junction Potential Wetland WOUS
Disturbed
Undisturbed
Tupelo Junction Potential Surface Water
WI
WH
WF
WG
PA
Lake Michael
SC
SB
WE
WJ
WB
WD
WC
SA
WA
ST
AGEC
OACH
RD
Date:
Prepared For:
October 2020
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination:
Figure
Scale:
Proposed Tupelo Junction Subdivision
0150300Ft
Job No.:
Jurisdictional Features Map
20-612
3
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Orange County, North Carolina
NDH
JSM

Legend
UplandFormLocation
¯
Study Area
Roads
Tupelo Junction Potential Non-wetland WOUS (Stream)
Intermittent
Perennial
Tupelo Junction Potential Wetland WOUS
Disturbed
Undisturbed
Tupelo Junction Potential Surface Water
WI
WH
WF
WG
PA
Lake Michael
SC
SB
WE
WJ
WB
WCWD
SA
WA
S
TAGE
COAC
H RD
Date:
Prepared For:
October 2020
Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination:
Figure
Scale:
Proposed Tupelo Junction Subdivision
0150300Ft
Job No.:
Map
20-612
Drawn By:
Checked By:
Orange County, North Carolina
NDH
JSM

Appendix B
Wetland and Stream Forms

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
USACE AID # NCDWR#
Project Name Tupelo Junction Date of Evaluation 05/27/2020
Applicant/Owner Name Wetland Site Name WB
Nathan Howell - Three Oaks
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization
Engineering
Level III Ecoregion Piedmont Nearest Named Water Body Mill Creek
River Basin Cape Fear USGS 8-Digit Catalogue Unit 03030002
County Orange NCDWR Region Raleigh
Yes No Precipitation within 48 hrs? Latitude/Longitude (deci-degrees) 36.109881, -79.254071
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and/or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
Surface and sub-surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby septic
tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear-cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? Yes No

Regulatory Considerations - Were regulatory considerations evaluated? Yes No If Yes, check all that apply to the assessment area.
Anadromous fish
Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
NCDWR 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 Wind Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? Yes No
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 an effect.
GS VS
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. 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 sub-surface water. Consider tidal flooding regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
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 (skip for all marshes)
Check a box in each column. 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 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

4. Soil Texture/Structure assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes)
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 top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a.ASandy 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 (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
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).
WS 5M 2M
A A A > 10% impervious surfaces
B B B Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
C C C 20% coverage of pasture
D D D 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
E E E 20% coverage of maintained grass/herb
F F F 20% coverage of clear-cut land
G G G Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from little or no disturbance in
the watershed or hydrologic alterations that prevent drainage and/or overbank flow from affecting the
assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer assessment area/wetland complex condition metric (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
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 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 wetland? (Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the .water body. Make
buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.)
A
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 stream 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 condition metric (evaluate WT for all marshes and
Estuarine Woody Wetland only; evaluate WC for Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Headwater Forest, and Riverine Swamp Forest
only)
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT) and
the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT WC
A A t
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 (skip for non-riparian wetlands)
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 (skip for non-riparian wetlands and all marshes)
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-
WT WC 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 type 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 metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and/or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
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, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.

Well Loosely
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 and Estuarine Woody Wetland)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non--cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass. Artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in how many directions? If the assessment area is clear cut,

A 0
B 1 to 4
C 5 to 8
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, or expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non-
characteristic species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species), or 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).

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.
AA WT

y
p
A A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
o
n
B B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
a
C C Canopy sparse or absent
C

y
r
o
A A Dense mid-story/sapling layer
t
S
-
B B Moderate density mid-story/sapling layer
d
i
C C Mid-story/sapling layer sparse or absent
M

b
A A Dense shrub layer
u
r
B B Moderate density shrub layer
h
S
C C Shrub layer sparse or absent

A A Dense herb layer
b
r
e
B B Moderate density herb layer
H
C C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
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 (skip for all marshes)
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 (skip for all marshes)
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 and Salt/Brackish Marsh 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. Documentation required if evaluated as B, C, or D.
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.

Notes
This form represents the portions of wetlands WB and WI that are bisected by an actively maintained sewer right-of-way.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name WB Date of Assessment 05/27/2020
Nathan Howell - Three
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization Oaks Engineering

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM
Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Soluble Change Condition HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Physical Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
Opportunity Presence (Y/N)
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating
MEDIUM

Appendix C
ORM Data Entry Form
JD Request Form
PJD Form
Agent Authorization Form
Waters Upload Spreadsheet

Three Oaks aquatic resources in the review area which “may be” subject to regulatory jurisdiction
Estimated
Geographic
amount of
Type of aquatic authority to which
Site NumberLatitudeLongitudeaquatic resource
resource the aquatic resource
in review area
“may be” subject
(lf.& ac.)
Potential Non-
36.11333013-79.25578283
Lake Michaelwetland WOUS–Section 404
3,289linear feet
Perennial Stream
Potential Non-
36.10947611-79.25244268
SA43 linear feetwetland WOUS–Section 404
Perennial Stream
Potential Non-
36.11054661-79.25433913
SB305 linear feetwetland WOUS–Section 404
Perennial Stream
Potential Non-
36.11371410-79.25677419
SC223 linear feetwetland WOUS–Section 404
Intermittent Stream
Potential Wetland
36.10928029-79.25360034
WA0.47acreSection 404
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.1101195-79.25445901
WBSection 404
0.03acre
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.10982654-79.25441813
WC<0.01 acreSection 404
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.10988202-79.25363953
WDSection 404
0.01 acre
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.11002344-79.25362298
WE0.03 acreSection 404
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.11410488-79.25645507
WFSection 404
0.16 acre
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.11375933-79.25695450
WG0.12 acreSection 404
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.11413443-79.25721911
WHSection 404
0.02 acre
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.11492058-79.25668399
WI0.40acreSection 404
WOUS
Potential Wetland
36.11027446-79.25444678
WJ0.01acreSection 404
WOUS
Potential Non-
36.11360647-79.25244657
PAwetland WOUS-Section 404
0.45 acre
Pond