20090136 Ver 6_401 Application_20140614

� ECOLOGICAL
ENGINEERING
June 23, 2014
NC Division of Water Resources
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Re: Request for Section 401 Approval
Dunn Creek Greenway Project, TIP No. EL- 5100AE
Town of Wake Forest, Wake County, North Carolina
To Whom It May Concern:
1151 SE Cary Parkway, Suite 101
Cary, North Carolina 27518
(919) 557 -0929
www.ecologicaleng.com
Ecological Engineering, LLP (Ecological Engineering), on behalf of Stewart, Inc. and the Town of Wake
Forest, respectfully requests project approval associated with the Dunn Creek Greenway Project with
regard to impacts associated with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, and buffer requirements
associated with the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules. As per environmental permitting requirements,
we have attached the following information to assist in your review of the project:
• Five copies of the completed Pre - Construction Notification;
• Five copies of the permit drawing denoting impacts to jurisdictional and buffer resources;
• Five copies of associated mapping with regards to the project area;
• Five copies of the USACE stream and wetland forms;
• Five copies of the NCDWQ stream and wetland forms;
• Five copies of the Biological Conclusions associated with Federally protected species included
within the Natural Resources Technical Report (approved by NCDOT);
• Five copies of the Agent Authorization Form; and,
• Check for Minor Water Quality Application Fee ($240.00).
Since riparian buffer impacts will occur as a result of project implementation, the impacts have been
addressed on the Pre - Construction Notification Form. Additionally, one stream will be temporarily
impacted as during the construction of the greenway trail. This stream is perennial and riparian buffers
exist along both sides of the channel. Due to the existence of the channel and associated buffer area,
Ecological Engineering did not request verification of these resources prior to the submittal of this
application.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding this submittal, please do not hesitate,to contact me at
919.557.0929 or via email,at [e-mail].
Respectfully submitted,
ECOLOGICAL ENGINEERING, L
' I /V I
Ed Hajnos
Project Scientist
cc• Candace R Davis, Town of Wake Forest
Michael Taylor, PE, Stewart, Inc -
File 10502 -053,
Ecological Engineering, LLP Project No 10502 -053 Page 2 of 2

o�oF wA7F6ly
r
'�) c oq o r'2 co v 6
Office Use Only:
$ PAID Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre - Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
® Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 23 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
❑ Yes ® No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes ® No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Dunn Creek Greenway Trail _
2b. County:
Wake
D
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Wake Forest
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
;UN 2 L014 I
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
EL- 51 00AE
=:.
mr 3. Owner Information ►rel�r Brands
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Multiple: Nancy H. Dameron and public rights of way (highway right of
way and public utility easements)
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
DB 012337 PG 02555 and public rights of way
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if applicable):
Note: The majority of the greenway will be constructed on public rights of
way. Where required, the Town of Wake Forest has and /or will acquire
easements from private landowners.
3d. Street address:
3e. City, state, zip:
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
❑ Agent ® Other, specify Municipality
4b
Name
Candace R Davis, Senior Planner
4c
Business name (if applicable) ,
Town ,of Wake Forest
4d
Street address
301 S Brooks Street
4e
City, state, zip
Wake Forest, NC 27587
0
Telephone no
919 -435 -9400
4g
Fax, no
4h
Email address
cdavis @wakeforestnc gov
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Ed Hajnos
5b
Business name (if applicable)
Ecological Engineering, LLP
5c
Street address
1151 SE Cary Parkway, Suite 101
5d
City, state, zip
Cary, NC 27518
5e
Telephone no
919 - 557 -0929
5f
Fax no
,5g
Email address
ehajnos @ecologicaleng com
Page 2 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January" 2009

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
Public Right of Way
1b Site coordinates,(in decimal degrees)
Latitude 35 9683 Longitude - 78 4998
1c Property size
Project easement = 1 83 acres across multiple parcels
2. Surface Waters
2a Name of nearest body of water to,proposed project
UT Hatters Branch
2b Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
Class C NSW
2c River basin
Neu`se
3'. Project Description
3a Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of'this
application
Site conditions are currently forested floodplain with utility easements for power and sewer lines In the vicinity of the project
land use is predominantl residential The Town of Wake Forest has acquired land and easements the length of the,cotridor
3b List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property
0 5 acres
3c List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property
850 linear feet of,perenrnal stream
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
Connect existing sidewalks and trials within Cardinal Park and Deacons Ridge subdivisions to the existing Dunn Creek
Greenway trail
3e- Describe the overall project m,detail, including th&type of equipment to be used
The project involves the construction of a 10 foofwide asphalt paved trail on new location The location of the proposed trail
avoids and minimizes impacts to jurisdictional resources to the maximum extent- practicable Existing rights of way and
cleared land are incorporated into the trail alignment Where feasible boardwalk is used to further avoid and minimize impacts
to jurisdictional resources The Contractor selected for the project will determine the equipment used on the project
However, trail contractors generally use small paving machines and earth moving equipment which results in smaller impacts
to the project area than traditional highway construction equipment Nationwide Permit 23 General Conditions will be included
in the construction documents to direct contractor operations in and around wetlands
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
Comments
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
4b If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
® Preliminary ❑ Final
of`determination was made?
Agency /Consultant Company -
4c If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Ecological Engineering, LLP
Name (if known) Lane,Sauls, Ed Hajnos
1151 SE Cary Parkway, Suite 101
Cary, NC 27518
4d If yes, list theldates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
A preliminary JD meeting was held with USAGE on August 20, 2013 with Mr James Lastinger
5. Project History
5a Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ❑ No ® Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b If yes, explain in detail according to "help file' instructions
Page 3 of 13
PCN Form — Version 14 January 2009

6: Future Project Plans
6a Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b If yes, explain
Page 4 of 1'3
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

C Proposed Impacts Inventory
1, Impacts Summary
la Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply)
® Wetlands ® Streams — tributaries ® Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2 Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted
2a
2b
2c
2d
2e
2f
Wetland impact number
Type ofyurisdiction
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or Temporary (T)
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
Corps,— (404, 10)
(acres)
DWQ — (401, other)
W1 ❑ P ® T
Culvert, Hand Clearing
Bottomland
Hardwood Forest
® Yes
❑ No
® Corps
® DWQ
< 0 02
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑, DWQ
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total Wetland Impacts
< 0 02
2h Comments
The,project can be broken into two segments, Hatters Branch and UT to Hatter Branch Trail construction will be limited to
upland areas and an existing sewer easement along Hatters Branch This corridor is preferred since the sewer right of'way is
cleared and frequently maintained A small area of hand clearing of wetlands will be required in this segment Similarly, trail
construction along UT Hatters Branch will also be limited to upland areas and an existing sewer easement The trail
segments will be connected by boardwalk above the confluence of the two streams Temporary wetland impacts, in the form
of hand clearing and installation of a temporary culvert crossing, will be required in order to construcUthe boardwalk
connection Less than 0 02 acres,of potential impacts to jurisdictional wetlands will occur within the project corridor
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete °this
question for all stream sites impacted
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
39
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial or
Type of
Average stream
Impact length
(linear feet)
number -
intermittent?
jurisdiction
width
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
S1 ❑ P ®T
Culvert
UT Hatters Branch
® PER
❑ INT
Z Corps
® DWQ
10
44
❑ PER
❑ Corps
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h Total stream and tributary impacts
44
31 Comments
Temporary = 44 feet,for the installation of °a culvert to,facilitate trail construction The culvert will be removed upon'installation
of the boardwalk
Page,5 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U S then individually list all open water impacts below
4a
4b
4c
4d
4e
Open-water
Name of°waterbody
impact
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
number —
Permanent (P)
or Temporary
T
01 ❑P ❑T
n/a
02 ❑,P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total�open water- impacts
4g Comments There are no Open Water impacts
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below
,5a
5b
5c
5d
5e
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
number
pond
Pi
n/a
P2
5f. Total
5g Comments There are not Pond or Lake impacts
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit.ID no
51 Expected pond surface area (acres)
5j Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of construction
Page 6 of 13
PCN Form —Version 1 4 January 2009

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian
buffer, then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a.
® Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other
Project is in which protected basin?
6b
6c
6d
6e
6f
6g
Buffer impact
number —
Reason for
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P)
impact
Stream,name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
or Temporary
required?
T
61 ®P ❑ T
Boardwalk
UT Hatters Branch
®Nos
10,187
12,805
B2 ® P ❑ T
Trail
Hatters Branch
® Yes s
3834
9516
6h Total buffer impacts
14,021
22,321
61 Comments
Greenway trials are an allowable use within buffer zones The trail and culverts are designed to only allow for flow which is
naturally conveyed through existing draws in the land All concentrated flows created by the trail are diffused with a level
spreader prior to entering the Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Page 7 of 13
PCN Form — Version 14 January 2009

M
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
Corridor Alignment — In order to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands, streams, and buffers the horizontal alignment
maximizes the use of existing utility'nghts of way
Minimize Stream Crossings - A detailed analysis was performed at all proposed stream crossings to identify the best crossing
location This analysis included locating narrow crossing locations and "crossing perpendicular to the stream
Culvert Invert — The temporary culvert crossing will be sized to allow for both proper burial of the pipe inverts and to ensure
passage of aquatic life Depending on the final pipe size, the pipe will be buried either 6" or 20% of the pipe diameter,
whichever is greater
Minimize Grading — The trail has been designed to match existing grade in order to minimize the amount of fill, reducing the
overall project,footpnnt, and thus the impacts to jurisdictional resources
Minimize Clearing —A large percentage, of the trail will be located within a cleared sewer easement The location of trail within
this cleared and maintained easement'has reduced the need to additional clearing in jurisdictional areas
Storm water Treatment — All ditches along the trail are designed to, outlet as diffuse flow
Erosion Control —Silt fence will'be installed along fill slopes and upstream of'all,wetlands and streams Tre&'protection fence
will be utilized to demarcate buffer zones m order to maximize protection of riparian areas during construction
Buried Dissipator Pads — NCDOT requires dissipator pads at the outlets of all pipes All dissipator pads on this project will be
buried to °the existing stream bed elevation to allow for aquatic life passage
Page 8 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

I b Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction, techniques
The contractor shall be responsible for minimizing impacts through construction,techniques The bid specification however,
will call for hand clearing, where possible, use of construction mats in sensitive areas, small paving machines, and generally
low impact machines to be used' in sensitive areas Multiple, construction entrances have been provided to minimize trip
distances,of heavy equipment Nationwide 23 General Conditions will be included in the constructionspecifications
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of,the State
2a Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U S or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes '® No
2b If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply)
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in-lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a Name of Mitigation Bank
3b Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type-
Quantity
3c Comments
4. Complete if Making a Payment,to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
❑ Yes
4b Stream mitigation requested
linear feet
4c If using stream mitigation, stream temperature
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only)
square feet
4e Riparian wetland mitigation requested-
acres
4f Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested
acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
acres
4h Comments
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description ofthe proposed mitigation plan
Page 9 of 13
PCN Form — Version 1 4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffermitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b If yes, then identify the square feet,of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
Zone
6c
Reason for impact
6d
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone, 2
1 5
6f Total buffer,mitigation required:
6g If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type,of mitigation is proposed (e g , payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund)
6h Comments
Page 10 ,of 13
PCN Form— Version 1 4 January 2009

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1a
Does the projectvclude or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1,b
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
All runoff directed in the riparian buffers,wdl pass thru culverts that flow under the
❑ Yes ® No
proposed greenway'trail All culvert outlets will have NCDOT standard -sized rip rap
velocity,dissipater pads All other runoff will flow as, "sheet flow" across the trail
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
10%
2b
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No
2c
If °this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
Notlapplicable for,this type of project
2d
If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of °the plan
❑ Certified Local Government
2e
Who will be responsibl&for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Wake Forest
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b
Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply)
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other
3c Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal, counties
❑ HQW
4a
Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ 0 R
(check all that apply)-
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other
4b
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof�of approval been
Yes El No
attached?
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the,appropnate requirements?
® Yes ❑ No
5b
Have all of the 401 Unit,submittal requirements been met?
® Yes ❑ No
Page 11 of 13
PCN Form —Version 14 January 2009

F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
fa
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds�or the
® Yes
❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1b
If you answered "yes" to,the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
® Yes
❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If, so, attach a,copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter)
❑ Yes
® No
Comments Stewart Engineering coordinated with NCDOT,and FHWA, Stewart
received a signed Programmatic Categorical Exclusion from FHWA on 03/10/2014
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a
Is the site,m violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes
® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B 0200)?
2b
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes
® No
2c
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s)
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future`impacts) result in
❑' Yes
® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy, If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description
4.
Sewage Disposal.(DWQ Requirement)
4a
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
'Not applicable
Page 12 of'13
PCN Form = Version 1 4 January 2009

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a.
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b.
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Ecological Engineering reviewed the NC Natural Heritage Program database, conducted habitat evaluations, and
coordinated with NCDOT PDEA biological surveys staff.
6.
Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a.
Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
FED Yes ® No
6b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Essential Fish Habitat Mapper website /database
7.
Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a.
Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Stewart Engineering coordinated with SHPO; on 09/16/2013 the SHPO issued a letter of concurrence that the project will
not affect historic resources
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 project has been coordinated with the Local Floodplain administrator and the NC Floodplain Mapping Program. For
structures that cross the floodway within detailed study areas CLOMRs or No -Rise Certifications have been submitted.
8c.
What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Floodplain Mapping Program
Ed Hajnos
6/23/2014
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's i nature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an auth riz ion letter from the applicant
is provide .)
Page 13 of 13
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

a
Gcvr Ppco'makrA6 cr'b'
ice Aid f a, �ree4
r
r
1 9fi� 2 Zb
C n
G�° rfdt Pfl
Ti G,ren q.1 p M
Q•
Q
,yam r +Orgen rtn o3 Hoyeen Rd voungsville • �4
Afe i17` A MB�9 ra�Hock Ghwcl'
CD
r
• E Carroll � _ i
jW Joyner Park
;b A • Dunn Creek Greenway
Study Area
ouvbuT,,, rya s^ Wake f orest;<<"'
rl ti r 987 f?r -alv n 98 ytg�t Ave 40i
-
�� ./ n b'rtd PeErcr r
Y t
C �Jy Q-
200D � • . —.
• -- . �S pl�¢J�e Pd • �'o9cr.s N� , �. f ., .401 'r'
e
a �yt�d d r'wrey =uwr. R! .
�. 1 . RoleKvilla
•N
?T� R�plingtrY' y ` 401 ,
awry 14
Durant aot Y� W .a
Nature Park s G r 3
d
;��•
Fowler kd
. :���•:' � G Rilav IIdI
Map Source: N
www.googlemaps.com ,y1, 'E
Not to Scale
S
1
PROJECT VICINITY
CEO( YICAL Dunn Creek Greenway Project FIGURE 1
RING Town of Wake Forest Wake County, NC

NRCS SOIL SURVEY
=ECQky, 'AL Dunn Creek Greenway FIGURE 3
EN (� t I NG Town of Wake Forest Wake County, NC

TIP EL- 5100AE WA
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and (IGulf Coastal Plain Region
Prole"Ite �vn� 1c �� city/county 11�t�c2 �oSe� I t Sampling Date: S afi13
Applicant/Owner a State .� Sampling Point
Invesdgator(s). - a l Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, to . etc.) Locei relief (concave, convex, none): 60c Slope ( %): d �a
Subregion (LRR,or MLRA). "x319`` Let Long- — 79.179$ Datum.
Soil Map Unit Name , C, nMut\C.A a NWI classification. 55 -
Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for tHs time of year? Yes —4— No (If no, explain in +Remarks)
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation Soil , or Hydrology, ,naturally,prublematic? (If needed, explain any answers'in Remarks:)
er rnraeneov nc t:wnwean — Attach site man showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc.
Hydrophytte Vegetation Present? Yes No is the,Sampled Area
Hydrie Sod Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes K No
Wetand Hydrology Present? Yes X No _
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
-
Weiland Hydrology Indicators:
S°onncle Iv ndicaMrs (minimum of two required)
PdmW Indicators fndnimum of one is required:
dleck 1.1s1 tha}'andyl
_ Surface Soil Cracks (88)
X Surface Water (Al)
Aquatic Fauna'(B13)
_ Sparsely Vegetate&Concove Surface (138)
_
High Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (B15) LW U)
Drainage Patterns (1310)
K Saturation (A3) _
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
— Moss Trim Lines (BIB)
WaterMar`ks (B1) _
Oxidlzed Rhtzospheres,along Uving'Roots (C3)
_ Dry- Season'WaterTable (C2)
_
Sediment Deposits (B2) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_
Drift Deposits (133) _
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_
Algal Motor Crust(134) ,
Thin,Muck Surface (C7)
Z Geomorphic Position (02)
_
_ Iron Deposits (65) ,
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
_ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (ST)
$phagnum moss (DS) (LRR T, U)
WatarStained Leaves (139)
_
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
%, Depth pnches).
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Yes �- No
Depth (inches). �`
Depth,(inctiaa :,_2 -- Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X _ No
Saturation Presets?
ndudes copmory fi e
Describe Recorded Date (stream gauge, monitoring vreU, aerial photos, previous mspecbons}, if available:
Remarks.
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Version 2 0
US Army Corps of Engineers

TIP EL- 5100AE WA
Sampling Point: W&-l_'& XT
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC' _ (A)
Total Number, of Dominant
Species Across Ail Strata (B)
Percent of Dominant Species I d D /� (AM) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC'
Total % Coyer ofL Multiply by.
OBL species % 0 x 1= SQ'
FACW species a5 x2=
FAC species -_ x 3 =, �5
FACU species x4=
UPL species X5=
Column Totals' IUO (A) 1'15 (B),
Prevalence Index = BJA = `?5
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
y� 2 -bominance Test is >50%
✓ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_, Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4 ' Indicators of hydric sod and welland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5.
6 = Total Cover
50% fatal cover. 20% of total coyer.
berh tratum (plot size: 3u i CA :•,�)
1. tic u5 1AS�� za
30 o� p�1\lrnA M 1-- OIL
2.
i�
3 C.
5 �r.cai tuM -
6.
7.
8.
8
10 _ �-
11. w = Total Cover
50% total or. it Q 20% of total cover 19, It
;nrendv Vine Stratum {Plot size Q k a )
1 FAC -
1 �
2.
Tree - 'Woody, plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more'In height,and'3In
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling -Woody-plants, excluding woodyvines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in heightland,less
than 3 in ,(7.6 am) DBH
Shrub - Woodypiants, excluding "woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m)'in height
Herb --All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, mod- -woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 it (1 m) In height
Woody vine -All woody, vines, regardless of height
3. —
4 '-
5. Hydrophytic
Vegetation
ti =Total Cover Present? Yes No -
50% of total cover. -0. S 20% of total cover. C . a
US Army Carps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0
VEGETATION,(Five Strata)— Use scientific names of plants.
/L Absolute Dominant Indicator
Trea Stratum (Plot,size
—)
% CMML Spad es? s
1 -
3.
5
6.
6 = Total Cover
50% of total cover:
20% of total cover
Cp �ui )
Sapling Mom Plot size
-s
�9y FA C.
1.
2
,3
4.
5.
8.
1 ` = Total Cover
50% opotal cover. O -S
2b% of total cover. a
Shrub Stratum (Plot size:
1
2.
-
3 -
TIP EL- 5100AE WA
Sampling Point: W&-l_'& XT
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC' _ (A)
Total Number, of Dominant
Species Across Ail Strata (B)
Percent of Dominant Species I d D /� (AM) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC'
Total % Coyer ofL Multiply by.
OBL species % 0 x 1= SQ'
FACW species a5 x2=
FAC species -_ x 3 =, �5
FACU species x4=
UPL species X5=
Column Totals' IUO (A) 1'15 (B),
Prevalence Index = BJA = `?5
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
y� 2 -bominance Test is >50%
✓ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_, Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
4 ' Indicators of hydric sod and welland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
5.
6 = Total Cover
50% fatal cover. 20% of total coyer.
berh tratum (plot size: 3u i CA :•,�)
1. tic u5 1AS�� za
30 o� p�1\lrnA M 1-- OIL
2.
i�
3 C.
5 �r.cai tuM -
6.
7.
8.
8
10 _ �-
11. w = Total Cover
50% total or. it Q 20% of total cover 19, It
;nrendv Vine Stratum {Plot size Q k a )
1 FAC -
1 �
2.
Tree - 'Woody, plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more'In height,and'3In
(7 6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling -Woody-plants, excluding woodyvines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in heightland,less
than 3 in ,(7.6 am) DBH
Shrub - Woodypiants, excluding "woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m)'in height
Herb --All herbaceous (non- woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, mod- -woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 it (1 m) In height
Woody vine -All woody, vines, regardless of height
3. —
4 '-
5. Hydrophytic
Vegetation
ti =Total Cover Present? Yes No -
50% of total cover. -0. S 20% of total cover. C . a
US Army Carps of Engineers
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

j• I .
TIP EL- 5100AE W1A,`a�!
• • Sampling Porn, WA- 101
SOIL -
ProflleDescription: escribe to the depth'needed,to document the indicator or confirm, the absence of indicators.)
(D
Depth Mel % mR ox Features Remarks
(inches) _ (Moist) --qgor (oist) me Loc Texture —
3�► 100 s.1' 1a
cs�3 l�Y►�
a-14 �`ISZ H a 50 t �`/°�. 50 N� _�_ , loaw� _ on nc
80 )o
+ e C= Concentration D=De etlon RM =Reduced Matrix MS=Masked Sand :Grains. kovation: PL -Pore Linfn M= Matrix -
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otheriNtse noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydrae Solis
Histosol (Al) _ Polyvalue Below,Surface (S8) (LRR,S, T, U) _ 1 am Muck (A9) (LRR O)
_._. Histic Epipedon (A2) _ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) _ 2 cm,Muck (A10) (LRR S)
50A
Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 1,8)
_ Black Hisgc (A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral,(F1) (LRR,O) _
I=* Gleyed Matrh( (F2) X Piedmont Floodplain Solls,(F18) (LRRvP,,A'T)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _
Stratified Layers (A5) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) _ Anomalous BrIght'Loamy Soils (F20)
-
,_ Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P. T, U) _ Redox Dark'Surface (F6) (MLRA 153%
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) , Red Parent Material (TF2)
_
_ Muck Presence'(A8) (LRR U) _ Redox,Depressions (F8) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other,(Explain In Remarks)
_ 1 cm Muds (A9) (LRR P, T) — Mari (F10) (LRR U) _
= Depleted,Below, Dark Surface (A11) _, Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron Manganese Mosses,(F12) (LRR O, P,`1') 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, and
Thick Dark Surface (Al2) = -
^_ Coast PmIde Redox (A16)'(MLRA 150A) Umbdc Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) wetland hydrology must be present,
�
unless disturbed or prematic
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR,O, S) Delta O chric (FIM111ILRA 151)
�_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (64) _ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A,15013)
_ Sandy Red�c (S5) Piedmont Floodplain Sons (F18) (MLRA 149A)
Anomaious,Bright Loamy Soils (F20) ({MLRA 148A,1 53C, 153D)
_ Stripped Matrix (S6) _
_ Dark'Surface,(S7) (LRR P, S. T, U)
Restrldive Layer (if observedy
Type', Hydric So11�Present ?` Yes No
Depth (inches)
Remarks:
Aflanticiand Gulf Coastal Plain,Region - Version 2.0
US Army Corps of Engineers

TIP EL- 5100AE WA
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
S �c�
Projec unite. ` � City /County: , Wbi6_ rtAtC , Ua 1 t &�y Sampling Date. _
Applicant/Owner. -'16v4- f lyleli State: Nr, Sampling,Point WA lat
Invest(gator(s): S -L AL Sv�bkS Section, Townshlp, Range,
Landtorm (hdlslope, terrace, etc) o g Local relief (concave, convex, none): cphy -41 Slope (%Y
Subregion'(LRR or MLRA)., '? �%U Let: 35.9r0R3 Long. " 7R , H 99� Datum �r�-
Soil Map Unit Name: %A0 I SU�a` c2.,� • NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes __X_ No (if no, explatn in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil , orHydrology significantly disturbed? Are Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No _
Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, eta
Hydrophyliovegetallon Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Sod Pmswd? Yes No K - within a Wetland? Yes No X_
Weiland Hydrology Present? Yes No __9,_
HYDROLOGY
J A
n+p'� Ali It,at aonNt
_Surface Soil Cracks (BB)
�imary lndir mu of one is
Surface Water (Al) _
Aquatic Fauna (813)
_. Sparsely Vegetated Concave Somata (SS)
High'Water Table (A2) _
Marl Deposits (875) (LRR U)
— Drainage Patterns (810)
Moss Tram Lines (316)
r §s6tion (A3) ,
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
Oxidized Rhizospheres along UvIng;Roots (CS)
,
_ Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Water Merles (B1)
T_ Sediment Deposits (B2) _
Presence of Reduced Iron (04)
_ Crayfah'Burrows (CS)
Drift Deposits (B3) _
Recent Iron Reduction`In Tilled Soils (C8)
, Saturation Vrsibte on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat Crust (gq) ,
Thin Muck Surface (C7)
, Geomorphic Position (02)
Iron Deposits ( ,
Other (Explain in Remarks)
— Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Sphagnum Test D8)
Sphagnum moss (OS) (LRR T, U)
Water- Stalned'Leaves (89),
Surface Water Present? Yes No X DeptK(inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): _ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
gauge.
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal, Plain Region -Version 2.0
US Army Corps of Engineers

TIP EL- 5100AE WA
• . • • ai ��'
VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet.
(Plot size % Cover Specles2 - Number of Dominant Species
1 -gSS 11eA. �_ �lyS CVA That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC• (A)
2 Total Number of.Dommant
3 Species Across All Strata (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species �D�d
5 That Are OBL, FACW,,or FAC ( )
= Total Cover
50% of total cover, iQ 20"A of total cover. 80
Sap ina'Strgtum (Plot sliz ' , 5 r u
c�1Ar` &T,
2.� _l0_ es
w
3 � jt r 0 --�-
4
5 to a vs -its �5 _
- MG
-
H5 = Total Cover
50% of total cover, as ,s 20% of total ever. 9
Shrub Slrtm (Plot size )
4
5.
6.
=Total Cover
509.5 of total cover.
20% of total cover.
Herb (Plot size. >
1 FAG1A
1 r%• .\k To c� c. a��
ait1 G1* �S
FAcyt
2,
res c�`S
TeD
3 _
4.
5 0.S view.'
5.
6.
T
6
8
- _
10.
11.
77= TataLCover
20% of total cover.
50% of total'covar:
_�
Wes„ V[n a Stratum (Plot size: _
)
'r -SAL
_
2.
3.
4 -
5.
= TotaMover
50& of total cover•
0. S 20% of total cover:' �, a
US Army Caps of Engineers
Total % Cover'of Multiply by,
OBL species x 9 =
FACW species �a - X2=
ib
FAaspecies a L x3=
X03
FACU Species *4 = J040
UPL species - x 5
Column Totals. /d (A) — (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = --8 °7
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ 2 - Dorrdnence Test Is >M'ifo
_ 3 - Prevalencedndex is 53.0'
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hyddc soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 In
(7.6 cm) or larger In diameter at breast height (DBH)
Sapling- Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately, 20 ft,(6 m) or more In height and less
than 3 in (7 6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - .Woody plants, exclu ding ,woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft 0 to 6 m) in height
Herb -All herbaceous (non woody) plants, Including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, ld woody
3 (
,plants, m) ewoo y vines, less than approximately
Woody vine - AII'woody vines, regardless of height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0

.
SOIL
TIP EL- 5100AE WA
Sampling Point ) a1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
the _�!nodst) % Color (moist) °— fie- � cc
_ Texture - Remarks
• N a. u YSz_ 5 $ lOD
is
a t
' e C- Concentration D =De letion, RM =Reduced Matrix MS= Masked Sand Grains.
Location. PL =Pore Linin M =Matrbx.
Indicators for Problematic Hydrlc Suits :
Hydric 3oll Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless btheNUise noted)
Histosol (A1)
_ Pxdyualua Below Surface (88) (LRR 8, T,
U) , 1 cm Mudx (A9) (LRR O)
Hislic Eplpedon (A2)'
— Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Reduced Vedic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
— Black Hislic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
_
Piedmont Fioodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
(A
_ Hydrogen 9ulflde (A4)
Hydro
_ Loamy Gleyed,Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous8right Loamy Soils (1720)
_ ed Layers
gorganic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T; U)
—
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
1538)
'Re
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral W) (LRR P, T, U)
, Depleted Dark Surface (FT)
_ d,PaA
Very Shallow Dark Surface (71712)
y She l Materiel ur fax
— Muck Presence (AS) (LRR U)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Marl (F10) (LRR'U)
_.
_Other (Explain In Remarks)
_ 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T)
_ Depleted Below Dark,Surfece (A11)
_
` Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151) 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR,O, P, T)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Af 2) _
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (AALRA 150A) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U)
wetland hydrology must e Present,
unless disturbed or probll ematic.
Sandy Mucky Mineral (81) (LRR O, S)
,_ Delta Ochdc,(F1�,(MLRA 151)
^ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Reduced Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A,1508)
r" Body Redox (S5)
_ Piedmont Floodpialn Solis (F19)'(BALRA 149A)
Bright Loamy MS #'20) (RALRA 149A,153C,153D)
Shipped Matrix (SS)
_ Anomalous
„
Dark Surface,(Sn (LRR P, 8, T, M)
_
Restrl ,tive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Hydrlc 3011 Present? Yes No
Depth (inches)'
Remarks.
Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Version 2 0
US Army Cops of Engineers

TIP EL- 5100AE WA
WETLAND RATING "WORKSHEET Fourth Version I
Project Name tCQ, a Nearest Road A) C, �g
County JiAkfL Wetland area 0.5 acres Wetland width a50 feet
Name of evaluator �r+G-6 Date r7 0)'?
Wetland location
_ on pond or lake
on perennial stream
_ on intermittent' stream
_ within interstream divide
other:
Soil series: N�-4ti
_ predominantly organic - humus, muck, or
peat
predominantly mineral - non -sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
steep topography
_
ditched or channel ized
total wetland width > 100 feet
Wetland type,(select one)*
Bottomland hardwood forest
_
Headwater-forest
_ Swamp forest
Wet flat
_ Pocosin
Bog forest
Adjacent land use
(within %2 mile upstream, upslope, or,radius)
forested /natural vegetation �66 %
agriculture, urban /suburban, ogy %
impervious surface
Dominant vegetationv\--
(2)
(3) lAvA Q &s
Flooding and wetness
_ semipermanently to permanently flooded or
inundated
1 seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittently flooded or temporary surfacemater
no,evidence of flooding or surface water
_ Pine savanna
Freshwater.marsh
_ Bog/fen
Ephemeral wetland
_ Carolina bay
Other:
The rating system cannot be applied to,saltor brackish marshes or stream channels
R
Water storage
x 4.00 =
Nu_71 =
A
Bank/Shoreline stabilization
Li
-
x 4.00 =
FI-4-1
Wetland
T
Pollutant removal
cJ
+` x 5.00 =
a r-
rating
I
Wildlife habitat
x2.00 =
F71
%L1
N
Aquatic life value
�j
x 4.00=
a 0 I
`
G
Recreation/Education
3
x 1.00 =
03
** Add 6 point if in sensitive watershed and1>10% nonpoint source disturbance within % mile upstream, upslope, or radius

r * USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
FM STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT W®RKSIMET A4P
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: n
1. Applicant's name: 2. Evaluator's name: d[ �a n t6 TIP EL- 5100AE SA
3. Date of evaluation: hwa013 4. Tune of evaluation: all
5. Name of stream: UTAb , V-el S0 r 6. River basin-_ i tus
7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order:
9. Length of reach evaluated: �� 1.ft. 10. County: Watc¢,
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any):
Latitude (ex 34.872312): - 35 6t% Longitude (ex. –77 556611): —'7 %.56019
Method location determined (circle): 'GPS o She Ortho (Aerial) Photo /GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note ne roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream (s) cation):
'
vo. \,5" o �.�2sb T�C3a• �^ 'Nt tt s �� i� r d A C9 Q, r Q 1�I6 oe.t (� F
14. Proposed channel work (if
15. Recent weather conditions: W JX <0 5 a4 •D _%Ac) l G► Vk\ r. % hh 71V, �OVjwS VW 0 MAy
16. Site conditions at time of visit: �5 ° � rV2a`t
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 _Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters �Outitanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed —0-IV)
18. Is there a,pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate�the Water surface area: -
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES©O 20. Does channeloappear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: a!�_ % Residential _% Commercial, _% Industrial _% Agricultural
'M % Forested �% CIeared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 10 Sk - 23. Bank'height,(from bed to top of bank):
24. Channel-slope.down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2 %) ,Gentle (2 to 4 %) Moderate (4 to 10 %) _Steep ( >10 %)
25. Channel sinuosity: 'Straight _Occasional bends 'J� Frequent meander Tery sinuous _Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page,2): Begin by,determining the most appropriate, ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation,, stream,classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of-a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture
into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
teach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a,score of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.,
Total Score (from reverse): (�� Comments:
Evaluator's Signature dz1dA
This channel evaluation form is intended C
gathering the data required by the Unit
quality. The total score resulting from it
particular mitigation ratio or requirement.
Date -
e used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental' professionals in
I Ptates Army Corps of'Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
Form•sublect to change –,version 06/03. To Comments please call,919- 876 - 8441.x26.

•
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMXNI'
WORKSHEET TIP EL- 5100AE SA,
,
°yl'�
� � � �i � ;�'}� - •'j��]"`��,,/'1
"
• '>lf�"'�V •� >•% "ti�,fJ \Y��.- �'�'f khtti T`'d~'...f�•�
�yFll���`'1 Y`
4�'.� iy7'�X .ti ti `�4aY ;l"' R• j.>,'r`1-; -
.. - . .w.,_�. yyti•,>f'.n.:.> v K
'
0�L4
X '• 0 `��5' 3
Presence of8ow /Ordstent'pools -in stream ,
satu 'on = 0• stt�011 flow = max omts
no flow ia -
;<
Evidence ofpast'hamen al}eration
;0 �6 0`t_ �` 0.'
2
extcesive alteration = 0 • no er8tion = Max mt8
s
Riparian zone
�b 0, 4 0 =§
3
no buffer = 0• coati 'wide buffer' = max rots
0` -5 Q--4 0,-4
Evidence of nutrient or the el dischai^g�p
4
extensive disc = 0• no dischaht` s = max Roo
-
-
'444 3
;'
Gro�endwater discharge
.0 0'- 4
S
IIo gLw = 0. etc. = max OW'
:'• . = a , ",, . -
��}, 0 =4 '3
"
Presence ofadjacent- MWdplain
t
6
W Aoo ' lain = 0• °extensi a $oo snax rots
-- '
Entrenchment' /'Noodpl Seem
'
ems' phep�d��p
„ \_ >�_{ . '
p a �twet�andsm$xf,
/� ,TOri
no Wetlands =0• 04 a�nt'W s max uit§
\ ` ”
,' ` ' 4=, •: f `
``'
;;E
4'Ciaan�lsi$uosity ..
~' : Q —4 �•
a
9
extensive chaUnelimtioii' 0' notival -zji lder r mak, oiitts
10
Sedh%en lnppt .. _ 1
"
< °0 » S 0-.- 4 =�,► �4 0l
`,',
extensive ositwn- 0• little o n� se `'
\ _. .' ..
;4' `
She dc' dives W of channel bail `snbstriite' ' `
0-4
homogenous = 0• daverse sus °max
'.
Evidence of elutnnel Inciskm or widening �`
" 0 �'S 0-4
-;
12
incised - 0. bed & banks °max ints
presence of rwor bank fames
0-5 0 - 5
r y�
13
severe erosion =A • no' emio ble banks - max' rots .
Root depth and density on'banks '
0-3 0-4 0-5 a
I4
no,visible roots •` 0• dense rootsthia' pt °'max ids
Aj
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or tlml;er produe"
0•- 5 0-4 0-5
15
substantial'' �• no evidence -.�' lab
0-6 °d
Presence of ri101e- pooUripaplc -pool completes
0-3 0 - 5-
16
r les or is 0• wall-de �elo =max in ffi
_
Habitat complexity
0-6 0-6 0- 6
•
1?
e or no habitat - 0• vaded'habitats =max
E
Canopy cover age over stMmbed
0-5 0 - 5 0-5
-
16
0•
no shad ve tion = continu us can ow max orate
'
{
-
5�ibsirate embeddedness
AS ,y > "'i 0-4 0 - 4 •3
19
embedded = 0. structure -max)'�
a ;� 1 �•
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
0-4 0 - 5 0-5 a
20
•
= mts
no evidence = 0 common mtimerous s -max
,FW
' Presence -of amphibians
0- 4 0'- 4 0-4 a
21
no evidence = 0• numerous' = max oints
Presence offish
0-4 0-4 0 -4 a
22
no,evidence = 0•`commo numerous s ='max rots
0-5 a
Evidence of wildgh use
0-6 0-5
23
no evidence = 0• abundant evidence max outs
h
F
'Otal �giufrlfq�il�le -<
` ° `f.r'`
characteristics are not assessefln�coastal streams.
*
These
2

TIP EL- 5100AE SA,
NC DW Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 tav ka AAU-S lkc�.. -
Date: (,, d QA3 • ProjecWlte.\ty n jgK% ,j Latitude: -&Sj Wp%�.
Evaluator. E Cowl° wa Longltr+de: - 78. Onto
,Nm noS
Total Points: Stmarri petenrdnation (cI Other
swem js at feast lntermWnt j Ephemeral hrtmrmittent nnl e. ma:
A. omo tm Subtotal = a3.5
Absent
Weak
Moderate
strong
10 Continufty of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
7 3
2. Sin ofchennetelon
0
1
2
1 1.5
3. In-channel structure: ex. dffle••pool, step -pool,
0
1
2
No - 0
rIELeMatIguence
0
1
2
1.
4. Part cle`size of stream substrate
0
0
0.6
2
1.5 5
5. A gvefrelict floo In
0
1
2
1.6
6. Qe bars or ba or benches
0
1
_
2
1.6
7. nt alluvial deposits
0
1 _
2
3
8. HeadcutS
0
0:
10.6
-
1.5
9. tirade contrd
1
_
10. Natural vaby
0
0.5
No 0
Yes= 3
11. Second,or rmar order channel
-amffciw mnss we not mma; 699 amutmMm Ut llwmw
B. Hygrology (Subtotal= t.l -
-
12. 'Presence of Basefl6W
0 1
2
13. Iron oxldizln bacteria
1
1
2
0 5 0
14. Leaf litter
.
1.6
b
1 1.6
15. Sediment on his or debris
0
1 1.5
18: mile debrialines or lies -
0
Y -
i T Soil -based evidence of high water tabwf
No - 0
21. Aquatic Mollusks
14
G. 13101
1
0
18. Flbrdus roots`in streambed
3
0
19. Rooted upland lasts In streambed
3
1
3
20. Macroberhihos not9 diversity end abundance
1
-2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1 __
2
1
1.
22. Flsh
0
0
0.6
1.5 5
23. CmYW
0
0.6
1.6
24. Am hiblens
0
0.5
1.6
26. Algae
26. Wetland plants In streambed
FAI,W 0.T
t] 3L =1.5 Other = 0
°perenrdai strearm mey SW b9 idenUW using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
-
Notes:
Sketch:

6 `
USACE AID#'
DWQ # Site# (indicate,on`attached TOP)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the,following informatlon'for the stream reach under assessment: TIP EL- 5100AE Hatters Branch
1. Applicant's name• 2. Evaluator'snamd:
3. Date�of evaluation: 3 — 4. Timerof evaluation:
,River basin.. �S®
5. Name of stream- 6:
_ a
-
T. Approzimate�drainage�area: !&:Stream order:
_ - -
9. Length of reach, evaluated:_`' 1 Sf5 r 10., County:
11.Site coordinatim(if,known): prefect' in decimal degrees. 12.'Subdivision name'Of any):
Ladtude (vL j4,s72 12): 3S 4(98$ - Long►tude (--- 77.55661): —
on determined circle : GPS o t Orth6,(Aeridphoto /OIS Other GIS �irc
Method locatt ( ) 13.`Location of reachunder evaluafion,(no nearby roa&s and landma&k and attach map idertifyng -
d
.rrl - A-� L• 1 dr 91.01q.19 l.. AM, -ez - -
14. Proposed channel °Work (if any,
, J
15. Recent�weather conditions:
16: Site °conditions at time of visit:_
o � -
Section 10 Tid Waters �Essential`�Fisheries1fabitat
17. Identify ;any special waterway classifications known: - al _
__ Trout Waters Oufstanding-
Resource Waters '_�4 NutrientSensitive'Waters _ Nater_Supply Watershed -(I -IV)
1>1. Is there uspond or -laKe locatediupstream of the evaluation point ?ONO Ifyes, estimate the water surface area:3s
NO
19. Does channel appear on,USGS1quad map? (9;� NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil 'Survey? e) id
21., Estimated watershed'land use:
?ia 0% Residential /b %o commercial % Industrial % Agrioultural
Sb % Forested %Cieare&/ Logged % Other'(
23.,Bank,height (from'bed,to top of bank): ,�C
22. BankfulLwidth:`• ')`'� >I'0%
24. Channeillope down center of stream: _flat (O,to 2 %) �„GendB (2 to 4%) _ Modezate'(4 to 10%) Steep ( )
25. Channel sinuosity: � Straight , Occasional- bends TYequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
instructions for completion of, worksheet (9ocated �on page 2):, Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteri sticmust be scored using t1ie, satne'ec°reg► °°. Asrevj -ruts
to each characteristic within the range shown for tile' ecoregion. Page 3 provides & brief description of ,how to review the
characteristics identified in'the worksheet Scores should' reflect an overall, assessment °of the stream reach under evaluation• If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions; enter 0 in the scoring hflz,and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where thereFare obvious changes in the character of�a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from „a pasture
into a forest), the stream may g'are obvi - smaller €reaches,that display more continuity, and a separate form used to eviluatefeach
reach. The total' score assigned to a stream reach must range Between 0 and 100;, with a.scoreaof 100 representing,a stream' of the
highest, quality.
Totaiscore (fro reverse):
m
Comments: � r- ardC • 'r ? _ � •�.
-
Evalieator's,Signature -- - - IDate
This,c6annel evalaation,form is intended to be used only,a#,a guide °to assistJandawners and,envrronmental�professionals m
veers to make ,a preliminary assessment of stream,
gathering the, data required' 'by° ,the United States Army Corps of Engi P
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of, this g form, sion Qject tTo Cbtn E applease,dall 9 9 876-844,1 imply 6.
particular mitigation ratioior requirement:. Form subject to change - version Q6 /03. To Comment, p
1

I
. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
TIP EL- 5100AE Hatters Branch

4
d II J�,t�rs��� TIP EL- 5100AE Hatters Branch
L'N%, !!MM OLl -MM 1lWCaawaa�.w�svu a•vaaa.
. wo....- -..�� - �- _ -
-
Elate: U j $
PMectMlte n�(rea}t �rt�, ..--
Latitude: iy gtpti
Evaluator: r.s
County: wAA
Longitude: -'A L SOO&
Total'Pohrts:
Stream Determination (cl
Other f ar t
wream is at (east bhter AWN ZIS
Ephemeral Intermittent erehni
6.9.� Name: -
Va 19 or mlylifa30-
-
1
A. Cteomon2hobgy (Subtotal = ���
Absent
Weak
Moderate
- Strong ---
1`ConUrwfty of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
-
2. Slnu of channel along Uhal
0
1
0.5
3
3. In- channel structure: ex. riffle-pool. step -pool,
0
1
2
0
Dols uence
0
1
2
-
4. Particle size of stream substrate
No = 0
1_
3
5. Ac tivehellot loodplaln
0
1
2
1.5
8. Depositional bwa or benches
0
1
2
-
7. R alluvial deposits
0
1
2
2
3
8. Lis! d uto
0
1
0.5
1
1.5
g. Q control
0
0
Ob
1.5
10. Natural valley
Y
=
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0 -
s ardckl ditdma we not rated; see dlscussms m manual
12. Presence of Basetlow
0
1
2
-
13. Iron oAdwM bacteria
0
1
- 2
.3
14. Leaf lifts
15
_ 1
0.5
3
15. Sediment on Lants or debris
0-
0.5
1
t16.,OManlodebriallnesorplies - -
0
- 0.5
1
Y,
.5
17. SoA -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
1_
4A
U. tilolo slinwral =
2
1
-
18. f=ibrous roots In skeambed
0
19. Rooted u land plants in streambed
2
1 -
3
20. Mac robenthos (Hate dWerW and abundance)
0
1
2
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
1
3
1.6
22. Fish
0
1_
1.5
ff
23: CraysM
0
0
1.5
24. Amphibians
1
1.5
25. Algae
28. Welland plants in streambad
0
-
.
FACW = 0.75; 013E =1.6. Other =0
_
soermhnhd swp ms may'slso be Iderdifled using ether methods.
Sea p. 35 of manual.
-
Notes:
- -
Sketch:

• o
L
ECOLOGICAL
ENGINEERING
MEMORANDUM TO PROJECT FILE
Date: June 23, 2014
Re* Dunn Creek Greenway Project, TIP No EL- 5100AE
Town of Wake Forest, Wake County, North Carolina
PCN Supporting Documentation
Endangered Species Act Protected Species
1151 SE Cary Parkway, Suite 101
Cary, North Carolina 27518
(919) 557 -0929
www ecologicaleng com
Ecological Engineering, LLP was retained by Stewart Engineering Inc. (Stewart) to complete ecological
and natural resources investigations along the proposed, Dunn Creek Greenway project in Wake Forest,
NC The purpose of the assessment was to document existing natural communities, Jurisdictional
resources and evidence of protected species'withm the proposed corridor
As of December 27, 2012, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three federally
protected species, for Wake County. A brief description of each species' habitat requirements follows,
along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area Habitat
requirements for each species are based on the current best available information from referenced
literature and /or USFWS: The following biological conclusions, from the Dunn Creek Greenway Natural
Resources Technical Report (January 2014), are provided to assist in the preparation of environmental
documentation and compliance for the proposed project:
(Alasmidonta heterodon) Dwarf wedgemussel
USFWS recommended survey window: year round
Habitat Description.
In North Carolina, the dwarf wedgemussel is known from the Neuse and Tar River drainages The mussel
inhabits creek and river areas with a slow to moderate current and sand, gravel, or firm silt bottoms.
Water in these areas must be well oxygenated. Stream banks in these areas are generally stable with
extensive root systems holding soils in place.
Biological Conclusion: No, Effect
Study area investigations conducted in June 2013 revealed that marginally suitable habitat for the dwarf
wedgemussel is present within UT Hatters Branch This perennial stream channel exhibits a drainage
area of approximately ,55 acres and the watershed `is comprised almost entirely of residential
development. Although the channel appears relatively stable, there is little habitat diversity for aquatic
fauna The baseflow of the stream is approximately one -foot wide and two inches deep. The bankfull
Ecological Engineering, LLP Project No 10502 -053 Page 1 of 3

V �
c r
width ranges between three and five feet. Within the study area, the channel substrate consists entirely
of coarse sand. Site investigations also revealed the lower portion of this tributary lacks a natural
connection with its receiving channel, Hatters Branch. Rather, a small wetland area receives surface
water from UT Hatters Branch prior to its confluence with Hatters Branch; no channel exists between
the wetland area and' Hatters Branch. The tributary flows across a wide area, perpendicular to the sewer
easement, and then over an armored (rip -rap) portion of the right bank of Hatters Branch. This
fragmentation of channel continuity prevents host fish migration into the tributary thereby inhibiting
the potential for mussel reproduction and colonization of UT Hatters Branch
A June 3, 2013 review of the NC Natural Heritage Program's database denotes there are no federal
protected species known to occur within one mile of the project. The database denotes a historic record
for the dwarf wedgemussel approximately 13 ,miles downstream in the Neuse River. Otherwise, the
closest viable population of the dwarf wedgemussel is in Swift Creek, more than 35 miles away. N'o
mollusk shells or middens were observed Immediately upstream, immediately downstream, or within
the study area As previously described in this `document (see Section 5 7.1 Avoidance and Minimization
of Impacts) in the event a stream or wetland crossings is required the resource will be, spanned with a
boardwalk. Given the marginally suitable habitat, minimal project Impacts, and existing barrier to host
fish migration, Ecological Engineering obtained concurrence with a "No Effect "'biological conclusion for
this species on February 11, 2014 (Appendix E).
(Picoides borealis) Red - cockaded woodpecker
USFWS recommended survey window: year round; November -early March (optimal)
Habitat Description:
The red - cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open, mature stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine, for foraging and nesting /roosting habitat_ The RCW excavates cavities for
nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, and' which are contiguous with pine
stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat The foraging range of the RCW is normally no
more than 0.5 miles
giological,Conclusion. No Effect
Marginally suitable nesting and foraging habitat for the red cockaded woodpecker exists in the study
area Mature pine trees were observed In the residential subdivision north and west of the study area
during a cursory'drive -by survey Within one -half mile of "the study area; a limited number of pine trees
greater than 60 years of age were observed. None of these trees exhibited evidence of RCW nesting
cavities In the southeast and northwest sections of the study area even -aged, evenly- spaced pine
stands were found. As previously stated in Section 4.1.2, historical aerial photography indicates these
stands were planted less than 20 years ago. The upland forests immediately adjacent to and south of
the study area (south of NC Highway 98) are also dominated by even -aged, evenly- spaced loblolly pine
(Pmus toeda) stands less than 20 years of age A June 3, 2013 review of NCNHP records indicated no
known RCW occurrences within ,one mile of the study area. The project; as proposed, will not result in
the removal of pine trees 30 years or older. Given the marginally suitable habitat, absence of known
occurrences, and minimal anticipated impacts, project implementation will not affect this species
Ecological Engineering, LLP Project No 10502 -053 Page 2 of 3

C �
(Rhus michauxiij Michaux's sumac
USFWS recommended survey window. May- October
Habitat Description:
Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows in sandy or rocky,
open, upland woods on acidic or arcumneutral, well - drained sands or sandy loam soils with low cation
exchange capacities. The species'is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales and depressions in
the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays; maintained railroad,
roadside,, power line, and utility rights -of -way, areas where forest canopies have been opened 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 othe "r artificially
maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont, It occurs on clayey soils
derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance
(e_g:, mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its open habitat
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac Is present in the study area along the existing sanitary sewer and
roadside rights -of -way. Plant -by -plant surveys were conducted during June to determine Its presence, or
absence. Neither Michaux's sumac (Rhus m►chauw►) nor any other sumac species were observed. In
addition, a June 3, 2013 review of NCNHP records Indicated there are no recorded occurrences of this
species within one mile of the project area. Project Implementation will not affect this species.
Ecological Engineering, LLP Project No 10502 -053 Page 3 of 3

� a
a
r
TOWN of
WAKE FOREST
July 25, 2013
Ms Iona Thomas, AICP
Stewart, Inc
421 Fayetteville Street
Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27601
Dear Ms Thomas,
301 S Brooks Street
Wake Forest, NC 27587
t 919 435 9400
www wakcroi cstnc gov
This letter is to serve as notice of written authorization approving Stewart, Inc and its sub consultant,
Ecological Engineering LLP, to act on'the Town,of Wake Forest's behalf to conduct a wetland delineation
verification site visit with the Wake County,'US'ACE field representative for the Dunn Creek Greenway —
Downtown Connector Project. Stewart is under contract with Wake Forest as the design firm of record for
the Dunn Creek Greenway and Ecological Engineering, LLP has been approved by Wake Forest as an
authorized subcontractor for this project. Please ensure that you provide the USACE representative with
the applicable maps and associMed,wetland delineation forms in advance�of the site visit and'that the
wetlands are clearly indicated in the field at the time onthe visit. If you need any further assistance feel
free to contact me at 919 - 435,- 9513,or cdavis wakeforestnc gov.
Sincerely,
Candace R. Davis
Senior Planner
Town of Wake Forest

—'-296 �\
Lj-
\.
WI N z � •1 ,�., � a �\ \ _292
290- - -`–�,
0` S W Z. g 0.g 2 2
-��
V��70
772 \
jp
\\ \•\... tom: L
. •'�
°6t . at \
Dad y r
c\
gas
IA
vo£'
/z i
i
a
d
4
1 �d 13 / /i, % % y.
\M
e'
\
O ry
J
Y
i%
316
\ as-
M Mil
M
�lg�
' roe
LL 5_ 90£ a _
— - ;Izz QbZ
' / a
P�
'E' G2323 ��� / /� 796.
°> II► L' / /�� c'o
? 7
LU
lee
/ '280.
�aLL..
290 i�ry�
—2
282
_272-
c
' o —27 �
n277`���2
� � �►LL tlt �-\ \ \� \ \ \ \�
m
_ L
N ?Q
a
_ 06L
\ \\\ B62\ \ 96r
I �
I '
zL� Z
toz
gey /b �
% b
96Z o0
6L'
, � -V to
toe
-i -- - - -- -ern d7f
f �
BO£–
Cie
A.zxn09 axdM `AeAIx9.7x9 xaaxa xxnQ
SNOIS1A30
$
589584$$$84$$$45N'J$$$ $8$$S58$$$$
$$SS$�, n _Sn $448484
i
a
Y
o �
w
\M
e'
\
O ry
J
Y
i%
316
\ as-
M Mil
M
�lg�
' roe
LL 5_ 90£ a _
— - ;Izz QbZ
' / a
P�
'E' G2323 ��� / /� 796.
°> II► L' / /�� c'o
? 7
LU
lee
/ '280.
�aLL..
290 i�ry�
—2
282
_272-
c
' o —27 �
n277`���2
� � �►LL tlt �-\ \ \� \ \ \ \�
m
_ L
N ?Q
a
_ 06L
\ \\\ B62\ \ 96r
I �
I '
zL� Z
toz
gey /b �
% b
96Z o0
6L'
, � -V to
toe
-i -- - - -- -ern d7f
f �
BO£–
Cie
A.zxn09 axdM `AeAIx9.7x9 xaaxa xxnQ
SNOIS1A30
$
589584$$$84$$$45N'J$$$ $8$$S58$$$$
$$SS$�, n _Sn $448484

D
f
0 m
5,
fl--
001
s
ZF 1
<
J
\V0
zo
N
oz
cXi�1u a
Wm4
3
S4
fl8 c�,i°
Sf
z
�n 3o
G
H4
o
z p <
Wt y z
\ a/
N
Z, O
I
m�
•
ffi
<3
os az
zg a
4W
o
Z
0
�E o
� p N
d
X33 ��NNp 'tVMVyN3d10 ?> ^
3arncrid
D
f
0 m
5,
fl--
001
s
ZF 1
<
J
\V0
a; Z4 I
N
oz
cXi�1u a
Wm4
3
S4
fl8 c�,i°
Sf
z
�n 3o
J\ \ \'Y x
H4
7
Z, O
m�
J
r
J
a
a; Z4 I
N
r
cXi�1u a
Wm4
3
S4
fl8 c�,i°
Sf
z
990' :I° m
H4
7
Z, O
m�
w
W
LL
LL
D
Z
a�
W
Q H
3
W W
Q CL
LL w
Q
CL
Z
g
W
N
O O aa3 O
LL
U U adQU a_ w�
o2uQ. WQz
d d Z Doc H J
f p p
Z -i y z V -
m m =Z LLZ E-Z °z ,
Q Q yoC y� y LLav �
3 3 WQ W Wy (L�Q O
J J 0- V O3 0 FW-3
Q Q W W W d
N�a o�N p p p z LD
cr
o a 2oc a
J V O
O
Z
W
N U N
d' Q M
w (L N
� _ N
LL N
co
m
W
z
O VI _
crN U N
C O
LLJ 0- v
LL —
w z m —
x Rz,
u,c3�
� � J
� � o
Se� x
V
r� F,
Z
A.zxnoD axdnl `AeAIx9999 x�.7xa xxnQ
lo
SNOISIAR
SSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSN SS S is,
$ SSSS ?A;7SSSS$3 $ . SASS545
a
a; Z4 I
3
Wm
N
�a \�°
N
Wm4
3
�`A \a
N
7
A.zxnoD axdnl `AeAIx9999 x�.7xa xxnQ
lo
SNOISIAR
SSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSN SS S is,
$ SSSS ?A;7SSSS$3 $ . SASS545