20141042 Ver 1_401 Application_20140914

I'
J
-1 ALCON
ENGINEERING
September 16, 2014
Mrs. Karen Higgins
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
Re: Pre - Construction Notification letter to Request for 401 Certification Permit
Impacts to Wetlands at Proposed St. Sharble Mission Church
Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mrs. Higgins:
Falcon Engineering, Inc. (Falcon) is submitting this Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) letter as a notice
to the North Carolina Division of Water (NC DWQ) that the Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn is
requesting a 401 Certification permit relative to the proposed church construction, located on a 2.83 -
acre parcel in Morrisville, Wake County, North Carolina. The development will include a church, parking
lot, and office spaces /community buildings.
The new institutional construction will impact a total of 0.25 acres of wetland. No streams will be
impacted by the project.
Document Submittal:
We herein provide NC DWQ with five (5) copies of each of the following documents relative to the 401
Certification permit (with the exception of the check) for the institutional development:
• Check for $240.00 made out to "NC Division of Water Quality"
• Combined USACE & NCDWQ Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form completed
• Supporting Documentation Report, that presents a detailed delineation of the Waters of the
United States on the property
• Site data sheets (streams and wetlands)
• Current engineering plans for the project
• Discussion of the permitting requirements for this project
• An outline of proposed impacts (below)
pCc�I�Cl�jt
SEP 2 6 2014 '
DENR. WATER RESOURCES
401 &BUFFER PEfiMrrrlN 3
www.FalconEngineers.com 1
Engineering I Inspection I Testing I Agency CM
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110 1 Raleigh, North Carolino 27607 1 T919.871.0800 IF 919.871.0803

0*
E
7
Summary of Permitting and Mitigation Requirements:
September 16, 2014
The Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn has contacted USACE in respect to federal permitting
requirements pertinent to this project to mitigate for wetland impacts (no streams located on the
property):
O NWP 39 -Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 39 (Commercial & Institutional Developments)
Proposed Wetland Mitigation Plan:
The Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn understands that mitigation will be required for the impacts to
0.25 -acre wetland The Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn proposes the following mitigation for the
impacts, to the 0.25 -acre wetland•
• The payment of, $9,464.75 of in -lieu fees (Cape Fear River Basin) for a total of 0.25 -acre impacts
to riparian wetland to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NC EEP) via the
Department of Natural Resources Wetlands Trust Fund to fulfill compensatory- mitigation
requirements.
We hope that the information provided with this PCN letter is sufficient for NC DWQ to process this
permit application in a timely manner: 'Please contact us, at your earliest convenience, to let us know if
you need any additional information, relative to this application. We appreciate this opportunity to
provide services to you and look forward to supporting your project. If you have any questions, please
give us a call at (919) 871 -0800, or call Jeremy directly at (919) 20;1 -9670.
Sincerely,
FALCON ENGINEERING, INC.
<;� ?e5� �"_
Josh Dunbar, PE
Director of Design Services
Enclosures
J e I my S ewe
Environmental Project Manager

i�
V,

o�of
y r
I�.il o
2 0 1 4 1 0 4 2
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10. 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification PC Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
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:
St. Sharble Mission Church
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Morrisville
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Eparchy of St. Maron of Brooklyn
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
14589 DP 1208, 14589 DP 1204 & 14635 DP 2537
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
- -- —
3d.
Street address:
909 Church Street
(`"
3e.
City, state, zip:
Morrisville, NC 27560
6 ?014
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10. 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a
Applicant is
® Agent ❑ Other, specify
4b
Name
4c
Business name
(if applicable)
`
4d
Street address
4e
City, state, zip,
4f
Telephone no -
4g
Fax no
4h
Email address
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a
Name
Jeremy Schewe
5b
Business name
(if applicable)
Falcon Engineering, Inc
5c
Street address
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110
5d- City, state, zip,
Raleigh, NC °2.7607
5e
Telephone no
919 871 0800
5f
Fax no
5g
Email address_
jschewe @falconengineers com
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version,

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a Property identification no (tax PIN or parcel ID)
0746644139 ,
16 Site coordinates (in decimal,degrees)
Latitude 35 84954 Longitude - 78 84322
(DD DDDDDD) ( -DD DDDDDD)
1 c Property size
2 83 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc,) to
Unnamed tributary to Kit Creek
proposed project
2b Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water
WS -V, NSW
2c River basin
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a Describe'the existing conditions on the site and the general land use'in the vicinity ofthe.project at the time of this
application
The site is partially forested and partially maintained as mowed open space with occasional large trees,creating'a
savannah -like community The forested area,is associated with a small pond andmetland, though the forested area
extends well beyond themetland features The elevation of the site ranges from approximately 362 to 380 feet above
mean sea level (msl) Themetlands and pond are located at an elevation of 374 feet above msl The surrounding
properties are developed as single -family residential, or multi - family residential
3b List the total estimated acreage,of all existing wetlands on the property
0 47 acres
3c List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and'perennial) on the property
0
3d Explain the purpose of the proposed project
Institutional development on a-2 83 -acres that wdl'include a church, parking lot, and community buildings
3e Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
❑Yes [:1 No ®Unknown
pr'oject,(including all prior phases) in the pasty
Comments
4b If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
4c If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company
Name (if known)
Other'
Ad If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
5. Project History
5a Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ 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 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

i
6. Future Project Plans
6a Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b If yes, explain '
No this is not a phased project, all buildings are being reviewed and permitted at the same time
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

C Proposed Impacts Inventory
1 Impacts Summary
1a 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
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area,of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
_
W1 ®P ❑ T
fill
Palustrme
® Yes
® Corps
016
Forested
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 []PET
temporary
contruction
Palustnne
® Yes
® Corps
0 05
disturbance
Forested
❑ No
[-I DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
_
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6' ❑ P ❑ T
Ell Yes
El Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
021
2h Comments area W2T wdl,be regraded on site,and allowed to,return to natural vegetated conditions currently found therein
3:, Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream,sites impacted
3a
3b
3c
3d
3e
3f
3g
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps -404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) ,or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary" (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S3 [__1 P ❑ T
[-I ,PER
El Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 [-I ❑ T
[]'PER
❑ Corps
,P
❑;INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
E]' Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 [] P ❑'T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
A Total stream and tributary impacts
31 Comments
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed -impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean; or any other open water of
the U S then individually list all open water impacts below
4a
4b
4c
4d
4e
Open water
Name of'waterbody
impact number —
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
_
01 ®P [-IT
NA
Permanent (filled)
Pond
009
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4E Total open water impacts
4g Comments The shallow pond,located on the site,will)be removed completely as a result of'this project
r
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction_ ro osed, then complete the chart below
5a
5b
5c
5d
5e
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5E Total
5g Comments
5h Is a dam high hazard permit required
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no
51 Expected pond`surface area (acres)
5j Size of pond watershed (acres)
5k Method of,-construction
6.. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact`a protected riparian buffer„ then complete the chart below If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below If any impacts require mitigation, then You. MUST fill out Section D of this form
6a.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico El Other
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b
6c
6d
6e
6f
6g
Buffe(impact
number —
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream „name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary
impact
re wfed?
131 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
_
B3 [-],P [:IT
[-I Yes
❑'No
6h. Total buffer impacts
61 Comments
Page 6 of, 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a Specifically describe measures taken to avoid, or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project
Site was evaluated and surveyed to allow best design principles to avoid potential impacts as much as possible Most of the
proposed impacts are mostly due to site limitations and accessibility
lb Specifically descnbe'measures,taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques
Due to the small size of the project, and the site layout, the selection of a bioretetion cell was the best option for this project
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts 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 wdl'be used'for this
projects
❑ Mitigation bank
®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
Y3c Comments
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a Approval letter from m -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
0`25 acres
4f Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested
0 acres
4g Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested
0 acres
4h Comments This project'cannot be completed without the above - described impacts to the wetland area Based on the
size, length, and location of this feature on the property, the;proposed impacts cannot be avoided or minimized to develop this
track of land The owner proposes to pay an in -lieu fee for the impacts to 0 27 acre
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a If using a permittee responsible, mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan-
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December `10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b If yes,, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation Calculate the
amount of mitigation required
Zone
6c
Reason for impact
6d
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3,(2 for Catawba)
I
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 inAeu fee fund)
6h Comments
Page 8of11
PCN Form— Version 1 3 December 1 "0, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1a
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one,of the NC Riparian, Buffer Protection Rules
lb
If yes, -then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments
2.
Stormwater Management Plan .
2a
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
389%
2b
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c
If this project,DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why
2d
If'this project, DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then,provide a brief, narrative description of the plan
The subject property is located at 909 Church Street in Morrisville, North Carolina This site is, being developed for use
as a place of worship The site'is located between Church Street, Grace PomtRoad and Barbee Street The 2 6 acre
parcel is surrounded generally by residential uses In order to capture and treat the stormwater runoff generated from the
new development a bioretentidn area shall be constructed on the property A series of RCP stormwater pipes shall direct
thetistormwater runoff into the °bioretention area The bioretention area is located in the southwest corner of the property,
❑ Certified Local Government
2e
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater'Management Plan?
® DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified, Local Government Stormwater Review
3a
In which local government's jurisdiction is this -project?
Town of Morrisville, NC
❑ Phase II
3b
Which of the following locally- implemented stormwater management programs
® NSW
El
that
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
❑' ORW
(check all that apply)
❑ Session Law, 2006 -246
❑ Other
4b Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval "been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a Does the project involve an expenditure of,public (federal /state /local),funds,or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project, require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to1he requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy, Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c If you, answered, "yes "',to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter )
❑Yes ❑ No
Comments
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)'
2a Is the site in violation of DWQ`Wetland Rules'(1 5ANCAC 2H 0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
El 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
The surrounding area, has already been developedr into high- density,and single- family residential'neighborhoods The
implementation of this project continues the local pattern of development On -site, stormwater,plannmg will aid in the
protection of'water quality downstream to ,,some,extent
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
All wastewater discharge from the site will be connected to loca wastewater treatment
`Page 10 of 11
PCN Form, — Version 1 3 December'10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
0 Yes ® No
habitat?
5b Have you checked with the U SFWS, 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?
http / /www fws gov /nc -es /es /countyfr html - Habitat not appropriate to support any listed species based on field
observations by wetlands ecologist/biologist or,by NCNHP documentation of liosted species
6. Essential,Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b What data sources did you use to determine whether,your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
http //ocean flondamanne org /efh_coral /ims /viewer htm
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e g , National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
http Hgis 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
8c What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? http / /floodmaps nc gov /fmis /Map aspx ?FIPS =187
Josh Dunbar, PE
09/16/2014
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Apphcal5t/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is,valid only, rf an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided
Page 11 of-11
PCN Form — Version 1 3 December 10, 2008 Version

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROJECT NAME / DESCRIPTION: 909 CHURCH STREET, MORRISVILLE, NC
LION
;INEERINC.
PARCEL ID: PN: 0746 -64- 4139 -000
PROPERTY OWNER (PRINTED): SAINT SHARBEL CHURCH
PROPERTY OWNER (SIGNATURE): �✓I /JL1 C� � `t C'
OWNER ADDRESS: % 1,,Y Of' sT /ilifst o ti o� z..,�v✓
'Ref'14St2w ST &Z yd<< LYti, /f� 1 l 1
TELEPHONE #: fl X- ` 4 ?%-* - Y `7 /
THE UNDERSIGNED, REGISTERED PROPERTY OWNER(S) OF THE ABOVE NOTED PROPERTY, DO
HEREBY AUTHORIZE JEREMY SCHEWE AND /OR JOSH DUNBAR. PE I OF FALCON
ENGINEERING, INC. TO ACT ON MY BEHALF AND TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY FOR THE
PROCESSING, ISSUANCE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PERMIT OR CERTIFICATION AND ANY AND
All STANDARD AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS ATTACHED.
NOTICE: THIS AUTHORIZATION, FOR LIABILITY
VALID ONLY FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO
FALCON STAFF. PLEASE CONTACT THE ABOVE
PRIOR TO VISITING THE SITE.
AND PROFESSIONAL COURTESY REASONS, IS
ENTER THE PROPERTY WHEN ACCOMPANIED BY
FALCON AGENT TO ARRANGE A SITE MEETING
FALCON JOB #: E14032.00
a
www.FalconEngineem.com
Fngineering I Inspection I Testing 1 Agency CM
1210 Trinity Rood, Suite 110 1 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 17 919.871.0800 1 F 919.671.0803

LCON
WETLAND DELINEATION
Saint Sharble Church
909 Church Street I Morrisville, North Carolina

Wetland Delineation
Saint Sharble Church
909 Church Street
,Morrisville, NC
Pfepared for
Bobbit,Design Build
Atfn: Greg Guy, PE
600 ,Germanfown'Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Submitted by:
Falcon Engineering, Inc.
1210 Tnriify Road, Suite' 110
Raleigh, NC 27607
(9,19) 871. -0800
,www.falconengineers:com,
Falcon Project Number I El 4032.00
May 12,,20il4

TABLE ��� ����U�������
~.��~ ~~. .~.~.~.�...~
Page
Exeou,hveSurnrnmpy. --- — ..— .. — ..... ... .... . —.
_ — ........................... ---.. —.. Ili
Section 1 Regulation dehnition..— ... ......................... .....................
.... . ...... '... — — —. .. ........ l
1.1 Definition Vf "Waters cf the United States "
. -- —. — .... . ......................... .......... ...l
` l 2 Definition ofWetlands ................... ... —. ..
.... .. — .... .... .. —. . . .................. .... l
1.3 Regulation of Wetlands .` . — — .......... .
.... ......— ........... .............. .. — . —. .2
Section 21 Site Description ... ... ... .. — ..................................................................
— —. — .. .3
21 Site Location ........................................ .... ..
—.. .... ...... ... —, ... ...................... ..3
22 General Site Description .. .... ... ... .... ...
. =.. ... ................................... --. ...3
Section 31 Scope of Services ..... .................... ... ... ... ..
.. .... ... ....... ...................... ....... ..-.4
3.1 Performed Scope uf Work .... .... --. .
.. . .. ----------.... — .. 4
3.2 Wetland Evaluation -- '
— . .. ...... ........... ................ .. — ..4
3.3 Stu*annEvm|uutionMethodology — --...
.......... .................. . .... ... ... ..... ... 6
Section 41 Results cf Delineation .. ..... .................................................
.. .. ,.... — . , -----6
4l Wetlands Determinations .. .... ... ..... ..
= ........................... ..... .... ... .... ...6
4.2 Hohonol'VVeUond Inventory ........ .... ... ...
..... ... .. .. .... ......................................... 9
4.3 Stream Determinations .'. ............. ... ....
—.— ...... ... . . . ............. ..9 '
Section 1 Conclusions-.. . . ... ... . . . — . ------,------ — —. . . ...,...... ......... l0
ll Conclusions . . .... ......................
... .. .... ....... ............ ... ... ...... .. .... lO
.Sectiun6I References-- .................. ... . .— ..
—.. ..— — . . . ........... ........................ ll
Appendix A I Site Photos ............................ . .. ..—.
`
-- .. ...... .. —`A-
AppendmBI Figures/Maps . ............. ........... .... ... .
-- .. — . . ...— —. ...—...`.B'4
UF
`

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Falcon Engineering, Inc (Falcon) was retained by Bobbit Design Budd ( Bobbit) to perform a
wetland evaluation on an undeveloped property located in Wake County, more specifically at
909 Church Street, in Morrisville, North Carolina (PIN 0746 -64- 4139 -000). The purpose of this
evaluation was to determine whether "waters of the United States" exist on the said property,
and to thus determine the limits of any jurisdictional waters, of the US on the subject property. On
May 7, 2014, Mr Jeremy Schewe, of Falcon, performed a detailed wetland evaluation at the
2.83 -acre subject site The evaluated site is made up of one parcel located west of Church
Street and north of Grace Point Road. Figure 1 shows the general location of the site on the
Cary, North Carolina, USGS topographical quadrangle sheet and Figure 2 shows the applicable
portion of the NRCS Wake County soil survey.
During the field evaluation, a jurisdictional wetland (including a pond) was determined to exist
on the site The approximate size ( =0 4 acres) and location of the wetland area is depicted on
the Figure 3. These depictions are for informational purposes only and do not constitute a
certified survey of the area or provide the required jurisdictional determination. Based upon the
findings of this field investigation, it is necessary for a licensed surveyor to produce a survey
depicting the identified wetland area. An ephemeral stream was observed just off the site
draining the wetland area from the north boundary of the property. This ephemeral stream
drains to Kit Creek, which drains into Jordan Lake and eventually the Haw River.
The professional opinion of Falcon Engineering is represented in the following report as to the
presence and /or absence of wetland habitat and "other waters of the United States" and their
boundaries within the 2.83 -acre partially wooded lot on Church Street. `Verification of report
findings, as well as the final determination of regulatory jurisdiction will be determined by
representatives of the U S Army Corps of Engineers. The US Army Corps of Engineers (US-ACE)
and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCD,WQ) should be contacted in order to
coordinate a site meeting to provide a final ruling on this jurisdictional determination The USACE
and NCDDWQ must review, confirm, and approve all wetland and stream delineations in order
for these determinations to be considered valid
11

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

3. Vegetation: Vegetation commonly found in and adjacent to wetlands are rated based
on the percentage of time that each species is found in a wetland or on high ground
that is not wetland. Species found almost exclusively in wetlands (99% or more) are
considered obligate wetland species (OBL). Species found 67% to 98% of the time in
wetlands, are considered facultative wetland (FACW) species and species found in
wetlands 34% to 66% of the time are considered facultative species (FAC) Facultative
Upland Species (FACU) and Obligate Upland Species (UPL) refer to those species that
occur predominately in upland, or non - wetland areas. A plus and minus system (e.g.
FACW +, FAC -, etc.) is used to further define the level of occurrence-bf species in upland
or wetland areas In order for an evaluated area to meet the hydrophytic vegetation
requirement, 50% or greater of the dominant plant species must be FAC or wetter.
Positive indicators of all three parameters must be found in order for the area to be
considered a wetland.
1
1.3 Regulation of Wetlands
Wetlands are regulated "waters of the United States" under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Section 404, administered by USCOE, required permits for discharges of dredged or fill material
into .regulated "waters of the United States" The North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ) also regulates any disturbance activities in wetlands or other waters of the United
States in the state of North Carolina under the 401 permit process.
�2

SECTION 2
SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site Location
The site is located in Wake County, North Carolina. Specifically, the site is located at 909
Church Street in Morrisville, approximately 1 mile south of 1 -540 (See Figure 3). Church Street
provides the eastern boundary of the property, while private residential lots bound "the property
to the north. Grace Point,Road borders, the. property to the south and Barbee Road borders the
property to the west
2.2 General Site Description
The site currently consists of- 2.83 acres of partially wooded property. The site is located in a
residential area, which had, been highly developed within the past 15 years. The elevation of
the site ranges from approximately'362 to 380 feet above mean sea level (msl) The wetlands
and pond are found at an elevation of 374 feet above msl.
The site has been disturbed. It appears that the property is the merger of several historical
residential properties that were demolished and removed historically. Otherwise, the only
effects of surrounding area development to the said property are to limit the amount of
stormwater entering the site The construction of Grace Point Road in 2007 seems to have
caused a slight reduction in the amount of surface water runoff that enters the site, the pond,
and thus the wetland.
Native canopy trees remain throughout the site, which is mostly dominated by Salix nigra (Black
J
Willow), Fraxmus pensylvanlca ,(Green Ash), Liquidambar styancflua (Sweetgum), Pinus taeda
(Loblolly pine), and Acer rubrum (Red maple), all of which are at least indicator species of
forested`wetland ecosystems An ,old farm pond was a central feature to the wetland observed.
Runoff water from the site enters the pond and then slowly seeps through the failing dam and
creates a seepage -fed' riparian wetland complex that culminates at the north end, of the
property and is drained by a small ephemeral stream: According to Schafale & Weakley's
Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (3rd approximation), the wetland is
roughly approximated to be a Semi - impermanent Impoundment or Upland Depression Swamp
Forest The overall topography of,the site is fairly level
� 3

SECTION 3
SCOPE OF SERVICES
3.1 Performed Scope of Work
Falcon was contracted to complete an evaluation and delineation of potentially jurisdictional
features (i.e. wetlands) on the property. The Wake County GIS (►MAPS), NCOne Map, and NRCS
websites provided shapefiles to utilize in ArcGIS in order to generate maps depicting the
property boundary, topography, hydrology, soils, orthophotography, and historic aerial
photographs. A map and report discussing Falcon's findings were to be provided as a work
product. The methodology for our`work is discussed below
3.2 Wetland Evaluation Methodology
The detailed wetland delineation was completed using the current procedures specified and
described in the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual" (January 1987 - Final
Report) Prior to arriving on -site topographical maps, sod survey maps, orthophotographs, and
ArcGIS generated maps of the area were reviewed in order to preliminarily identify areas (e.g.
drainages, hydric sods areas, areas showing standing water, etc.) where, wetlands would likely
exist. A historic wetland delineation of the site was also available, completed by the Catena
Group in February of 2002, and reviewed prior to field investigation on May 7, 2014'.
The site was traversed on foot! and evaluated for the presence of hydric,soil indicators, evidence
of wetland hydrology, and existence of hydrophytic vegetation. A transect (A,) was established
across the property and the, wetland (see Figure 3), running, east, to west Four (4) sample plots
(A -1, A -2, A -3 and A -4) of 10 m2 each were established along the length of the transect. At
each plot location, any hydrologic indicators were recorded, vegetation was identified, and a
soil auger utilized (or test pit dug to 24 ihches depth) to collect a soil, core to stratify and classify
the soil conditions A total of 4 plots were established for'the, purposes of data collection along
1 transect throughout site ('see Figure 3).
For each plot, plants were identified to species within the 10 m2 area of each plot. The percent
relative cover of each species within the four common strata classifications was recorded. trees
(T), shrubs & understory tree (S /S), herbs (H), woody vines (V)., Wetland indicator status for each
�4

species represented within the sample areas were obtained from the National List of Plant
Species that Occur in Wetlands 1996 National Survey.
After the plant communities were defined, sod test pits were dug to a depth of 24 inches at the
center of each plot. Sod samples were inspected for hydric soil indicators. A Munsell Sod Color
Chart was used to identify the hue, value, and chroma of all soil samples at the exposed sod
horizons.
Two of the plots (A -2 & A -3) on the site demonstrated positive indicators of all three wetland
parameters The other two plots were clearly upland (A -1 & A -4) and had a dominance of
upland characteristics. The following subsections help to define the parameters and findings of
the three wetlands criteria throughout the site, 'including vegetation, hydrology, and soils.
Further, discussion of the site conditions is provided in the Results of Delineation section.
3.3 Stream Evaluation Methodology
No streams were observed on the property. One ephemeral stream found off -site drains the
wetland delineated for the purposes of, this protect off -site to the north.
�5

SECTION 4
RESULTS OF DELINEATION
4.1 Wetlands Determinations
The project site was evaluated per the methodology described above and all likely areas within
the project boundaries were evaluated. One wetland, including a pond, was identified at the
site. An unnamed tributary (UT) of Kit Creek, that ultimately flows into Jordan Lake, flows from
south to north beginning at the northern edge of the property and draining the wetland (see
attached Figure 3 for approximate location).
1. Vegetation: The 2.83 -acre wooded lot was investigated for the presence of hydrophytic, or
wetland vegetation, along the length of ,each of the 5 transects. Table 1 summarizes the total
percentage of dominance (Dominance Test) and the Prevalence Index (not necessary for the
completion of this study due to strength of the dominance test) of hydrophytic vegetation found
within each sample location along the length of each transect.
TABLE 1 I VEGETATION DATA (909 CHURCH STREET)
T= Canopy Trees
S/S= Understory &;Woody Shrubs
V= Woody Vines
H= Heibs
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >50 %)
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3 0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
Wetland species of vegetation were observed throughout the entire site The dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation was observed in plots A -1 & A -2,. Plots A -1 & A -4 were observed to be
dominated by upland vegetation. Vegetation identified at the site can be viewed in detail on
the field sheets. Paralleling these, findings, in general, hydrologic and sod indicators on the site
tends to mirror the results of the vegetation analysis, indicating an plot 'survey area as either
wetland or upland area respectively.,
�6
I
Transect Plot Dominance
Prevalence
Wetland
Id Location Test'
Index2
Vegetation
00
,,
43%M
T= Canopy Trees
S/S= Understory &;Woody Shrubs
V= Woody Vines
H= Heibs
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >50 %)
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3 0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
Wetland species of vegetation were observed throughout the entire site The dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation was observed in plots A -1 & A -2,. Plots A -1 & A -4 were observed to be
dominated by upland vegetation. Vegetation identified at the site can be viewed in detail on
the field sheets. Paralleling these, findings, in general, hydrologic and sod indicators on the site
tends to mirror the results of the vegetation analysis, indicating an plot 'survey area as either
wetland or upland area respectively.,
�6

2. Hydrology: Wetland hydrology consists of water that is on or, near -the surface of the sod for a
significant period of time during the growing season. Many factors determine wetland
hydrology such as topography, sod type, depth of the water table, and drainage. The
hydrology of the 2.83 -acre lot indicates that wetlands are found on the site. A summary of the
hydrologic indicators observed at the site are summarized in Table 2 below.
TABLE 2 1 HYDROLOGIC DATA (909 CHURCH STREET)
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >5090')
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3 0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
In general, hydrologic indicators were observed at the site in plots A -2 and A -3 where the, plot
incorporated the wetland as a result of seepage from the pond. Plots A -1 and A -4 did not
exhibit wetland characteristics.
3. Soils: Hydnc sods, as defined by USACE, are sods that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long
enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 12" of the soil
A hydric sod is different from a non - hydric sod due to the induced anaerobic conditions that
change the sod color, mottling, structure, and chemistry The soil colors and mottling are
described using a Munsell Sod Color Chart Soil structure is determined via field sod texture tests
Sods'.are a product of site conditions such as slope, aspect, and drainageln conjunction with the
source of the local geologic substrata and environmental conditions.
The site was investigated for the presence of hydric soils via core samples along the 5 transects,
to a depth of 24 inches Sods must be hydric in the upper 12 inches for an area to be
considered a wetland. The NRCS Buncombe County (NC) Soil survey shows the site to have two
(2) types of soil mapped for the entire site (Figure 2). The soil types are both listed as well-
drained on the sod survey:
�7
Tra.nsect Plot Dominance
Prevalence
Wetland
Id Location Tesf'
Iridex2
Vegetation
00
.,
43%WN
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >5090')
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3 0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
In general, hydrologic indicators were observed at the site in plots A -2 and A -3 where the, plot
incorporated the wetland as a result of seepage from the pond. Plots A -1 and A -4 did not
exhibit wetland characteristics.
3. Soils: Hydnc sods, as defined by USACE, are sods that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long
enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 12" of the soil
A hydric sod is different from a non - hydric sod due to the induced anaerobic conditions that
change the sod color, mottling, structure, and chemistry The soil colors and mottling are
described using a Munsell Sod Color Chart Soil structure is determined via field sod texture tests
Sods'.are a product of site conditions such as slope, aspect, and drainageln conjunction with the
source of the local geologic substrata and environmental conditions.
The site was investigated for the presence of hydric soils via core samples along the 5 transects,
to a depth of 24 inches Sods must be hydric in the upper 12 inches for an area to be
considered a wetland. The NRCS Buncombe County (NC) Soil survey shows the site to have two
(2) types of soil mapped for the entire site (Figure 2). The soil types are both listed as well-
drained on the sod survey:
�7

Carbonton- Brickhaven complex (CaB), 2 -6% slopes. somewhat poorly drained soil (50% of site)
White Store sandy loam,(WsB2), 2 -6% slopes: moderately well - drained sod (50% of site)
The hydric status of a soil must be determined in the field as site conditions can often vary. A
summary of the sod samples, collected from the test pits in transects A -E are found in Table 3
below.
TABLE 3 1 SOILS DATA (909 CHURCH STREET)
Transect
Identification
A
Sample
Location
A -1
Depth
(inches)
0 to 2
Saturatio.n
Depth (in)
NA
•
Matrix
Matrix 10 YR 3/3
Soil
Texture
sand -cla loam
2 to 4
Matrix 10 YR 6/3
sandy-clay,loam
4 to 24
Matrix 10 YR 5/4
sand -cla "loam
A-2
0`to 3
14
Matrix 10 YR 3/4
silt ,cla loam
3 to 18
Matrix 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
18 to 24
Matrix- 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
A -3
0 to 2 5
0
Matrix 10 YR 3/4
silty clay loam
2 5 to 20
Matrix 10 YR 7/1
silt clay loam
20 to 24
Matrix 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
A -3
0 to 4
NA
Matrix 1'0 YR 3/3
silty clay loam
4 to 18
Matrix 1,0 YR 6/3
silty cla loam
18 to 24
Matrix 10 YR 5/4
1 silty clay loam ,
The soils found in the plots were largely silty -clay loam type soil Soils were saturated in plots A -2
& A -3. Plots A -1 & A -4 exhibited some hydric conditions Plot A -1 demonstrated a
reduced /depleted matrix as a result of anaerobic soil conditions created by wetland conditions
and saturation at 4 inches of depth and below. Plot A -2 showed hydric conditions Well below
the 12 inch threshold, where hydric conditions were observed at 18 inches in depth. Anaerobic
soil conditions were consistent throughout the entire wetlands area, with reduction ,of chroma,
gleying, mucky mineral buildup, and other primary or secondary hydric soil indicators.
Figure 3 provides a visual representation of the approximate, size, shape, and location, of the
conditions on the site This figure is provided for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as a certified survey map or final approved jurisdictional determination. Any use of
this figure for site planning or ofherpurposes is strongly cautioned.
UF

4.2 National Wetland Inventory
The United States Department of Fish and Wildlife National Wetland Inventory Maps are
developed from aerial photographs. The National Wetland Inventory Map (NWI) for the site
shows no potential wetland areas located on the site.
4.3 Stream Determinations
Drainages on property were minimally evaluated as described in the "Stream Evaluation
Methodology" section above The stream draining the wetland from the site is an ephemeral
stream ,from the site on the northern boundary (See Figure 3). The ephemeral stream was not
flagged as it is off -site. The site area drains to Kit Creek that ultimately flows into Jordan Lake
and the Haw River
11
�9

SECTION 5
CONCLUSIONS
The USACE must review, confirm, and approve all wetland and stream delineations in order for
these determinations to be considered valid. USACE confirmation most often requires a site visit
with the appropriate agent assigned to the county that the site is in. A site meeting with USACE
and NCDWQ may not be necessary
5.1 Conclusions
The detailed wetland delineation was completed on the.Saint Sharble Church property, located
at 909 Church Street on May 7, 2014 The site contains one wetland area, of, approximately 0.4
acre. It is the intention of the property owner to preserve the wetland. USACE approval of our
field determinations should be obtained prior to finalizing site plans. Falcon Engineering staff are
available to assist with the planning of the project and to further discuss relevant wetland and
stream regulations and permit thresholds should site plans change that may involve any impacts
to wetlands.
ki
c

SECTION 6
REFERENCES -
GIS 2014 Downloadable Digital Data*
http./ /data nconemap.com /geoportal /catalog /main /home page Wake County, North
Carolina.
Microsoft TerraServer. 2001. Aerial Photograph and Topographic Map.
http• / /terraserver microsoft.com
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell Sod Color Charts. Gretagmacbeth, New Windsor, NY.
Radford, Albert E., Ahles, Harry E., and C. Ritchie Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC
Shopmeyer, C S 1974.,Seeds of Woody Plants in the,United States.,Agncultural Handbook No.
450 Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Swanson, Robert E. 1994. A Field Guide to the Trees, and Shrubs of the Southern Appalachians.
The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
Tiner, Ralph W., Jr 2000. Winter Guide to Woody Plants of Wetlands and Their Borders: Northeast
United States. Institute for Wetland and Environmental Education & Research, Inc.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2014. Web Sod Survey- Wake County, North Carolina 'Natural
Resources Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.0
httr)./ /websoilsurvey.sc.eaov.usda.gov /App /WebSoilSurvey.aspx
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1997 National List of Vascular Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands.
1996 National Summary (Indicator by Region and Subregion) US Fish and Wildlife
Service, Ecology Section - National Wetlands Inventory, St. Petersburg, FL
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory (USCOE) 1987. Corps,of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual Wetlands Research Technical Report Y -87 -1, US Army
Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS
U S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Plants Database,
www.plants.usda.gov.
University of Tennessee Herbarium, Knoxville, Tennessee,
http: / /tenn.bio utk.edu /vascular /"vascular.shtml
Weakley, A.S. 2010. Flora of the Southern and Mid - Atlantic States. Working Draft of 8March 2010.
The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
11

APPENDIX A
SITE, PHOTOS
B -1

Photo 1: Old farm pond found on the site (photo looking southwest from dam).
Photo 2: Seepage flowing north from pond sustains the wetland habitat.
B -2

Photo 3: Off -site ephemeral stream /drainage ditch which allows the wetlands to drain.
Photo 4: Test pit at plot A -3 where hydric soil indicators are readily visible.
B -3

APPENDIX B
FIGURES /MAPS
B -4

UNITED STATES
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
.......uevr . r—RU 'No [CONONC RE V.CRI
CARY OUADRANOLE
NOWIN CAROLINA
TD NI�U71 = «5�8= w �iRAR11C
jn,W, r"w. rw PA-aw by w Owwrn - --
.
•rlwa Yw1 �• f r _ _ ` Z Vn^r•I M +i `_
.erw w.r.rw+....Nw.w ►.NrA+� ..w. u+........w
t >I Ilrtr +r. IAf �.��K "rte u.ri.N:a rr+.. wn 'uta sup
�ur .r lO.Im`r MfrE�Mt. rYi ..r '� -
Ww�M rNr.r r...J. IOOPwW IA1..r�
rr...w... 11. �. rr. Ih s�R�• N'
A Mws• �M Nf MS.1r�r.w Pr/s Mlrr.l.+wf � uuf. .• ��tl/� �
.•s�rl erpuwra�..w «rnm...r+f•wt s +w •s..•.r• Nmsetne
n r. w.on. w.+►rwts•+r. .,. wa n�u aoiax•r�uwn +.... �..� �..r.«.o -•• .w• ��
...• .... a.r.w.+...Nr� «rr. w. •fam ���""�o.y�r.•.. .®wr�...r:.w ..�..'"ra. .... «r.w •+�^ rr_N ..i
.,,, •...•.... «Nw +r rw•z
n,�.. Iwo a..r...f
. w�.•.. w., «.r. w. s....�. r�,r,�.:....w wn m•... wr. r... :.......,..»

o6b696E
M.IEOS .8L
c
o
l9 N
U a�
L CAS
O l4
Z N
C
UL
U
Y �
L
f6 C
U
M.OVX"
OCW96E os46w OE4696E OT4696E 06E6%6 OLt6%6
OSE696E
M.IE AS At
_
v c�
00
"' a
aTi
�` •O
�QC
Y
j d
.ii
fn •��—••
�M
QQ
0
�U
O
SSSiii
�
�
Z
6
v
$�
m
u
� c
0 0
ro
e
ZQ
Z V
M,LA DS
oGL
O�

i rE
r.
r
Er
Ephemeral Drainage
Wetland Area
�r
J
` Old pond
. �M Property boundary
Saint Sharble Church Property
Wetlands Pel i neation
909 Church Street
Morrisville, NC
Legend
M4y 12, 2014
DRAWN BY:
J. SCHEWE
2 ft Contour Wake
J. DVNBAR
Wake_parce1s_po1y_030114
'
<all other values>
E14032.00
STNAME
Q NC
LRS_ARCS
Wetland Sample Point A-4
Wetland Sample Point A -3
Wetland Sample Point A -2
OrJOv ` O Wetland Sample Point A-1
G Wetland Edge Point
j
i
ed�
.y
A -1 ,s
�. ., cP
80 40 0 80 Feet
LCON
1210 TRINITY ROAD, SUITE 110
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27615
PHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
FALCON ENGINEERS.COM
FIGURE 3
Jurisdictional Features
DATE:
M4y 12, 2014
DRAWN BY:
J. SCHEWE
CHECKED BY:
J. DVNBAR
5CALE:
1 inch = 73 Feet
PROJECTNO.:
E14032.00

APPENDIX C
USACE MAP REQUIREMENTS
c -i

Required Information for a USACE
Jurisdictional Determination Map
The location of each point (numbered wetland flags & channel locations) on the map;
including a ,tick mark, with the notation (number, letter,, note, or other identifier) found on
the survey tape in the field (or sequential numbers assigned by `the surveyor for channel
locations) is required.
2. A listing of each point's northing's and easting's (NC coordinate grid) or metes and
bounds. If metes and bounds are,used, wetlands most be tied to a property corner or
other known point and ties shown on the map so that the survey could be replicated in
the future if required by a regulatory agency etc. is also required
3 The width of linear wetlands and stream channels must be labeled on the map as on the
survey flagging and preferably depicted to scale on the map.
4. All wetland boundaries should be closed off resulting in disfinct polygons. Total wetland
acreage should be indicated for each polygon.
5. Total acreage of jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and other surface waters (e.g. ponds,
lakes, rivers, etc.) within the evaluated area must be listed.
6. Property lines also must,be closed and the entire property or parcel,must be shown. Total
property acreage must be listed. If any part of the property was not evaluated, the
areas should be clearly,identified and labeled
7. Maps should show at least the property and wetland lines (topographic lines are optional,
and in some cases may detract from the overall readability of the map) The map
should include a vicinity map and be prepared on sheets no larger than 11 x 17. If
multiple sheets are used, match lines must be shown and there must be overlap, and a
master map of the whole site showing the sheets matched with each other must be
included
8. All final surveys must be signed and sealed by the surveyor
9. The map must have title, north arrow, and bar scale and the map title should be
"Jurisdictional Delinedtion for Prolect'Name."
10. The survey map should indicate that wetlands were delineated by Falcon Engineering,
Inc
11 The following corps sign off title block should be included on the map
"This ceriffles that this copy of this plat accurately depicts the boundary of the jurisdiction of Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act as determined by the undersigned,on this date. Unless there is a change in4he law or
our published regulations, this determination of Section 404 ju�isdictlon may be relied upon for a period not
to exceed five years from this date. This determination was made utilizing the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual."
Name:
Title:
Date:
0
C -2

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site- // ;7►tafm L-,1 m 5!m City/County- Q ' Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: I I - State: C, Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): . 5669LJOL Section, Township, Range:
Landform,(hilisiope, terrace, etc.): a ��e� -.� -�lYQG2�2 C Local relief (concave. convex, n°o9ne): Gory au-C Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): n -tLat• 3+. Long _ ° I �. ��/3 n39 _ Datum: ty-a .6 3
Soil Map Unit Name: 1 11 :c�t. Lv�� NWI classification: r
Are climatic / hydrologic cond'dions n the site typical for is time of year? Yes 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 problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF,FINDINGS - Attach site,map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydropfiytic Vegetation, Present? Yes No V Is the Sampled Area /
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No7'
Remarks, I
e-1rC.c Mo.�Ar-!w 4
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary4ndicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators,6ninimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_ Surface Water (A1)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water'Table (A2)
_ ,Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C7)
_ Drainage Patterns (1370)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (0)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks, (1311)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soffs,(C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (0)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal, Mat or Crust (64)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Iron Deposits (135)
_ Geomorphic Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (03)
_ Water- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (13113)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Feld Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
4
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No _V' Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
mdudes capidary fringe)
Describe Recorded'Data (stream gauge, monitoring,well, aerial photos, previous inspections)., if available.
Remarks-
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point.
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet=
Tree Stratum (Plot size: E M$ ) % Cover ftedeis? Status Number of Dominant Species
1. 9r -t,,n ++5 v+r +Bnn 'F,4C That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3- - Species Across All Strata. (B)
4 Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (�0 (AB)
6.
50% of total cover
),-., _ -7_
/5 = Total Cover
20% of total cover.
It 9,11 AO m
c _
Opt-
2-3 = Total Cover
50% of,total cover. 20% of total cover.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size- Mw 1
1 R%:6,4 IV1c, � 1� I r4
2. (Z„ r^ a
3.
5.
6.
50% of total cover.
5.
Total %Cover of
Multiply by-
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species
x3=
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hy pphyUc Vegetation Indicators:
_ ✓1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophyfic Vegetation
_Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 -Prevalence Index is 53.0'
_ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in,Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
2 I than 3 in. (7.6,cn) DBH.
6.
7.
8.
9.
lo-
ll.
Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Woody Vine Stmt m (Plot size• )
FA
' _ L-
2 a
3 `K 1 _O 4
t A AC
4.
5
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover.
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Amry Corps of Engineers
Shrub -Woody plants, 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, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) In height
Woody vine = All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation -
Present? Yes No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont,- Version 2.0
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
ZZ -Total Cover
Definitions of Five degefation Strata
— 20% of totai.cover
Tres -Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
�,a�v
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
W
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
5$ NACU
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and less
2 I than 3 in. (7.6,cn) DBH.
6.
7.
8.
9.
lo-
ll.
Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Woody Vine Stmt m (Plot size• )
FA
' _ L-
2 a
3 `K 1 _O 4
t A AC
4.
5
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover.
Remarks (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet )
US Amry Corps of Engineers
Shrub -Woody plants, 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, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) In height
Woody vine = All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation -
Present? Yes No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont,- Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point 2L—L4—
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or coMirm the,absence of indicators.) �
Depth Matrix Redox Features
6nc►es) Color mo % Color (moist) % Tj Lo Texture Remarks
� '0 z, 544 770 G Z° 011 0
RM= Reduced Matra. M
Hydric Soil
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
= Black Histic (A3)
_ 'Hydrogen'Suttide (A4)
— Stratified Layers (AS)
_ 2 an Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface (A72)
Mucky Material (St) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
Sandy Gleyed Matra (S4),
_ Sandy Redox (SS)
_ Stripped Matra (S6)
Type.
Depth Cinches):
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
amy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MUM 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Sow (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ Red Parent Material (F21),(MLRA 127,147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Se
_ 2 an Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
= Coast Prauie,Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematiQ
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and'Piedmont – Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: SVN"1.. (:66njn City/County: 14Fe- C -. Sampling Date: 5hhy
Appficarit/Owner• 1506--L ' -State: ni L Sampling Point:
Investigator(s). Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hiillslope, terrace, etc): w � Local relief (concave, convex, none): G�r�C,ssu t Slope ( %).
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): S. Lat Long. -78. j3g32401 Datum:! W3_
Soil Map Unit Name: — NWI classification -
Are climatic / hydrologgt conditions on the site typical for time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation I' . Soil f . or Hydrology for
disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point,locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
a e0Ae
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_
parsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
V Drainage Patterns (810)
ttirabon (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim,Unes (616)
✓ Water Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (62)
_ Recent Iron Reduction,in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_
_ Drift Deposits,(83)
_ Thin,Mluck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
5tunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
— Geomorphic Position (132)
Visible on Aerial imagery,(B7)
_ Shallow�Aquitard (D3)
�undatton
ater- Stained Leaves (69)
_ Microtopographic °Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Feld Observations:
/
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ Depth Cinches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth Cinches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth Cinches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes ca -ti 'frin
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available_
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and`Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size. AA ) %.Cover S—oj Status
1. »�
2 l-- �— op
3. �5 u?� 056
5.
6
= Total Cover
50% of total�cover 20% of total cover.
Sapling Stratum (Plot size•
l/-s ! ^!�
2
90
4.
5 - -
6
= Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size. to iM2 t
1 - - �P+f��Ct�t u►Sa.&C- �Q.J�oQ nrX� I o / VA C
Sampling Point: -2 -
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _7 (A)
Total Number. of Dominant
Species Across All Strata- to (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC. (A/B)
Total % Cover of
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x4=
- IUPL species x 5 =
Column Totals (A) (B)
2.
3
4
5.
6
= Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover-
Herb Stratum (Plot size•
FACU
1. �iit i i n�A,,�na ins IFS _
2 C I ; Z
3
4
5
6.
7
'8.
9
10
11
= Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size•
1 t
2
3.
4
=Total Cover
50% of total cover, 20% of total cover.
Remarks. (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
US Army Corps of Engineers
Prevalence � Index = B/A=
V- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
_ 4 -Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) ormore in heighLand 3 to
(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, 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, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less'than approximately 3
R (1 in) to height
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Vernon 2 0

$OIL
to the depth needed to document the indicator or
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color moist %
0-?z o oc-
3-1$_ ° -7 )
(8-7-1 VIL op
Redox Features
Color (moist) _% Type Lac
ID J-0-
r
Sampling Point: f'$—A-
the absence of indicators.)
' Type. C=Coneentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduced Matrix.,MS=Masked Sand Grains. 21-ocabon. PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Hisfic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Hrstic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
an Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (S5)
2Stripped'Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches).
Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
epleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
CoasfPrame Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophyt►c vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless, disturbed orrprobiemahc. l
Hydric Soil Present? Yes - No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains °and Piedmont - Version 2 0

T WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site City /County- W44e_ Sampling Date S ��
Applicant/Owner. �.,0we - State %C�- Sampling Point:
Investigator(s)- k% Section, Township, Range.
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc) n 091 4e me _ Local relief (concave, convex, none): LZAcetye— Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA)' 5. ' ej"+ Lat. 5 Long *0 78. BY-311 27 Datum: A/Ab 83
Soil Map Unrt Name: - INA4 NWltclassification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this lime of yea Yes No (if no, explain in Remarks)
Are Vegetation /. Sod / or Hydrology _,::!L,_sigmficarttry disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Soil . or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Hydnc Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks•
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum,of one is required, check all that apply)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_/ Surface Water (Al)
— True Aquatic Plants (614)
_
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (88)
(High Water Table (A2)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
�rainage Patterns (610)
- ZMaturation (A3)
= Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
,/�M1later Marks (B7)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_✓Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Drift Deposits (133)
_ Thin Muck Surface (0)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
nted or StressedPiants (D1)
Iron Deposits (B5)
L Geomorphic Position (D2)
undation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
_ Shallow Aquitard (D3)
jt/water-Stalned Leaves (B9)
_ 'Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes �ANo o
Depth pnches)
Water Table Present) Yes
�/_No
Depth Cinches)
Saturation Present? Yes
Depth Cinches)
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes j,./_ No
[includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
% Cover
Species? Status
✓ fAW-
20
3t7
50% of,lotal cover.
Stratum (Plot size: 10 W1'' )
20% of total cover
1
MM
2 v J
20
We
o.
L
P = Total Cover
Sapling
50% of,lotal cover.
Stratum (Plot size: 10 W1'' )
20% of total cover
1
MM
2 v J
2
a%d get- Qa"Irtwm
to
3.
(A) (B)
4
5
6.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20% of total cover.
Shrub,Stratum (Plot size* O� 1
1.����-
C(A &n�i
2
3
4
5
6.
�= Total Cover
50% of total cover
20 %,of total cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size. 0 W%3 )
CaWA
3 t3�L
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11.
= Total Cover
Woody
50% of total cover
Vine Stratum (Plot 0 jv�g )
20% of total cover
size.
1Lr�-
2
Cit 6 f:
l5
'
3
5m,JeAx 111
--
4
5
= Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover
(Include photo numbers here or on a separate
Sampling Point. A/3
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAG: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FAG% or FAC- (AB)
Total % Cover of-
Mulhply by:
OBL,species
x 1 =
FACW species
_ x 2 =
FAC species
x 3 =
FACU species
x 4 =
UPI-species
x 51=
Column Totals
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A
Rapid Test for'Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is s3 0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc soil and Welland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed, or problematic
Tree = Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 It (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, 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, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft'(1 m) in height.
Woody vine — All woody vines, regardless of height_
Hydrophytic
vegetation
Present? Yes J No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2 0

SOIL
to
Depth Matrix
finches) Color moist %
(0-2.5 o 9- 3 -55-
2.5 -2.0 10 I -aF
0 -2 0 1�0
Hydric Soil' Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histrc Epipedon (A2)
Black Hrstic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dark Surface(A112)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (St) (LRR N,
MLRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matra (S4)
_1Sandy Redox (S5)
_/Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type
Depth (inches)
Remarks
to
or
Sampling Point.
Redox Features
Color (moist) % ' TvDe L;-c' Texture Remarks
®` f.
S•
Sand
a
_ Dark °Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
ThimDark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
_/Loamy Gleyed'Matrix (72p
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (176)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (178)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont FloodpWn Soils (F19) CVILRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21),(IYILRA 127,147)
1
Indicators for Problematic Hydric So
_ 2 an Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(BALRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(IVILRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophyhc vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2,0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Atlantic and Guff Coastal Plain Region
Project/Sde: � -f+ W - C6 rdA City/County: kM � + Sampling Data d
Applicant/Owner State- 1C— 'Sampling Point:
Investigators) sC6we Section, Township, Range '-
Landform (hillslope, terrace, eta). Un�' - 14ZffAC# Local relief (concave, convex, none)) CA0*NC40- Slope ( %)
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) 5. �►[ ,�a!E Lat. 3. 2Lo Long '717.194�n(o Datum:AJAb
Soil Map Una Name NWI classification
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes U No E3 (If no, explain in Remarks ) ��
Are Vegetation �. Soil ®, or Hydrology 13 significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes @—No
Are Vegetation 0. Soil ®. or Hydrology ® naturally problematic? (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts „ important features, etc.
Hydroplhytic Vegetation Present? Yes ��+lo Is the Sampled Area
,Hyddc Soil Present? Yes ®' No ® No
,1Netiand Hydrology Present? Yes
___o No within a Wetland? Yes
Remarks. -
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Satrabon (A3)
check all that aooN)
® Water-stained Leaves (B9)
B;Mad Aquatic Fauna (813)
Deposits (B15) (LRR U)
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
0 Surface Soil Cracks (136)
®_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B6)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
13 Moss,Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (B1)
Hydrogen'Sutfide Odor (C1)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (1212)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Crayfish Burrows (C6)
Dd t Deposits (B3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
❑_ Algal Mat or Crust (84)
Iron Deposits (85)°
13 Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
7� Thin Muck Surface (Cn
7��
U Other (Explain in Remarks)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Shallow Aqudard (D3)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes ® No
Water Table Present? Yes ® No
Saturation Present? Yes ® No
th (inches)
d
pth (inches):
Depth (inches)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No
includes capillary fringe)
Descnbe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region -Interim Version
i

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant indicator
% Cover Sue Status
Species?
u
❑
7. ❑
= Total Cover
Sapling Stratum (Plot st A. OA'-' ) r
1.
2. ❑
3. ❑
4
5. ❑
6. ❑
7. ❑
��� ® =
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Total Cover
1 ❑
2. ❑
3 ❑
4.
5. ❑
6 ❑
7. z ❑
Z == Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: �
1 \Wog lC� ❑ d
2 N ❑
3. ❑
4. ❑
5. ❑
6. ❑
7 ❑'
8 ❑
9 ❑
10.
11. ❑
12. ❑
�= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Tot size. O vV%'L )
1. 0 ^\ /- JJ.i�
2. 3. r� e . Q � ®FAL
4. .64\1f
5.
5:7. = Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed, list morphological adaptations below).
USAnny Corps of Engineers
Sampling Point:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata- (B)
Percent of Dominant Species 'Z
That Are 0131, FACW, or FAC: ✓� (AB)
Total % Cover of
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species
x3=
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
r Dominance Test is >50%
= Prevalence Index is s3:0'
_rProblematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydnc sod 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 tafger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 It (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
Herb - All herbaceous (nonAvoody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody,
plants, except woody,vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height
Hydrophytic
Cation
Vegetation
Present? Yes ® No
Aflantic'and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

S01L
to the depth needed to
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color (moist)%
O
-�-y
Sampling Point.
or
Redox Features
Remarks
-%-,I ! �
W
Color (moist) % - Tie Lae
i
-
�i RA CJ4
L, jo
Q
' Type: Concentration, D= Depletion, RM= Reduoed Matrix,,CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains location: `PL =Pore Lining, M=Mat_r x
Bdric
Soil indicators:
® Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
Histosol (A1)
PoWWue Below Surface (S8) (LRR S, T, U) f3 1 cm Muds (A9) (LRR O)
Q
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U) ,®2 crn Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Black Ftistic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (171) (LRR O) 12 Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
nLpamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) t3 Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
Stratified Layers (A5) j7hipleted
Matra (F3) r3 Anomalous BrightLoamy'Soils (F20)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T, U)
ORWox Dark Surface (F6) (MLRA 1538)
_
5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRR P, T, U)
leted Dark Surface (F7) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Muck Presence (A8) (LRR U) _oRedox
Depressions (F8) Very Shallow Dark Swboe_(TF12),(LRR T, U)
—
1.cm Muck (A9) (LRR P, T) -
Mari (F10) (LRR U) r3 Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
a
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P „T) indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
13
Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T, U) weliand hydrology must be present,
Sandy Mucky Mureral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Delta Odvic (FM (MLRA 151) unless disturbed or problematic.
Sandy Gleyed Matra (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
uReduced Ver is (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1 SOB)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149A)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
_ Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A,153C,153D)
13
Dark Surface (Sri (LRR P, S, T, U)
Type-
Depth,(inches).
�krx dF l3 to
(OZ P
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

ca a" H1NaN a,NO ]N u
p i po
pp
wao®cgY- $13�eaR Hoe
--
a _,2_
"
B+T, N �.2Y15N ■ ■ / / g �' ! / —
6 1194' y► iG a
—
—�NIN a
_
NIQ•4V�
a
/
31,
z
�
I°
a
W�
i
I3
II"
—_ sip
1 a
k
l
b
a
a
—
CZT.,
-
'611 P.92 s
BARBEE RD' / / a 1 �3 ccu.96 -} — —� l a 1� A..a \°Efl °\ a a \ a
a /
,, \\&
�i >s�
y5, PUBLIC RN 4
N
_
a`rEf:,�°q /a a a /'r —a — I / �.9E.2C.00
NM �afld, / /� a
q
- 71 .SS
,(I 33H21yg 1vn ]l101N.GC
III
a
1
as 33aad9
a
\
ID
0
bit
\
Z o kisB
1
\
\
�cu 3
�o
W J
rn
W ce
\
W Z v
a N w
QU) p$a
ce 11
W N
C3 C
u g
\
H iUW
Z Z¢ Am
ii E� o
�+a n
X
Y
a>- z
L` ToWWWWWWf
- 85•
"� Raax;sa�
°� °�
u) ` ; L,a
DJ V77�v
c4
a5°
w
W Z PrC
> 3
a
�kN�NN$kk
d
�3= c
° = N
H = 7
v °
C5
6
cu u
�S
" M ,
\ w
W U
<
��^
a
1W LLJ
a n '_
u
ww
W Lam„
a
Z
I�
wQ z
z
o r,
w a v
6g
a Q J
ww,w
Nww oz
¢ U
3 F c
9 c
_ ° o
z
O iyi
} g PC J
<L>
�_j¢L'i °per
H
U ti a
ce
°
Lj LiJ N
a 3 o y
Y CY
°
N
86as
Z
a
W
$ Z� 5
o w
o a°
a
w i $ iAa
oww vm
o
°
ae
I 6
m
~ d o W Q
C3 M
_ a ¢
z -
Z
z�•
o
J a°
M °
F � N

W09 SS33NI0N3NOOlV3
Q
w
O
�
cr
Q
tj
Q
-
£61£-3 W?ll3 ON3 ON
V
'3111ASINNOW
P
a
Q
Q
M
h
y
°
°
H a
°
d
w
£080 IL86163
ON'IS33NION'3
ON I EgNIS HoanHO 606
0
w
w,
ZZ�
Z
°
LS 6 61
�i ®�� L09LL�N HJ31V?l
Ho�If1HD NOISSIW 1D8�1b'HS 1S
e.
-
lzi
CL
r
��X
_o
W
3
d� 0Liauns
3
U
3s
GVON kiINlal0LZL
Z
o
w
j
IL
Y
j� -
O
-J -
LL
z <o�
f m W x
z n u5 <'w
O w z r
°w 22a
°9 ow� Q?
w<
zaz
H `�Q as o,e�
cc 3� z UDw
Z and gw �z0
S y
< ,3,z ? ij d
z w aoz°
w
oo
HOho
J z
Z69
aiUOzOZ
cuiwo3� °`` <3
a..,Z,s.,Oz.,
ao��oa�z
omwo <ou
w
oz'i zzLLs,�
O�tl�z o
<u 0
_zFE4P-
` <Q w q m NF?'
i, -ft <
zw�zwaz
W
ya~ozE ° �N w w
Q
w
O
�
cr
U
tj
Q
N
N
V
w
Z�
P
a
Q
Q
M
h
y
w
Z
Z
Z
O
d
�
z
w
w,
oo
HOho
J z
Z69
aiUOzOZ
cuiwo3� °`` <3
a..,Z,s.,Oz.,
ao��oa�z
omwo <ou
w
oz'i zzLLs,�
O�tl�z o
<u 0
_zFE4P-
` <Q w q m NF?'
i, -ft <
zw�zwaz
W
ya~ozE ° �N w w
cr
(J
N
N
V
N
P
P
h
M
h
Z
IA v 0 m co
6
0 00
a
�O
e.
-
lzi
CL
Cc
✓�
(7
U
Z
IL
Y
j� -
__ ~�
__ +-_._ _ _ _
-J -
--I -
_ _
- qtr
l _ _ --"- -� •-- -
-_- _ __ � ^�
_ _-_
_ _ `-
IL
I"
'7 - -
*n..� �S� � • ��2s- \r
Z
n
n
n
n
n
1^
n
n
n
r
IC
_
,�,
� ^- ` �1
zz
!
�_
_
�,� ��yr
fir_~
•�'�� t %
� � Y k �
1 l
_
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
oo
HOho
J z
Z69
aiUOzOZ
cuiwo3� °`` <3
a..,Z,s.,Oz.,
ao��oa�z
omwo <ou
w
oz'i zzLLs,�
O�tl�z o
<u 0
_zFE4P-
` <Q w q m NF?'
i, -ft <
zw�zwaz
W
ya~ozE ° �N w w
cr
It Ir
^r`n�a
Tl
IA v 0 m co
6
0 00
a
�O
e.
-
lzi
CL
Cc
✓�
IL
Y
j� -
__ ~�
__ +-_._ _ _ _
-J -
--I -
_ _
- qtr
l _ _ --"- -� •-- -
-_- _ __ � ^�
_ _-_
_ _ `-
IL
I"
'7 - -
*n..� �S� � • ��2s- \r
_ _ _ pit
r
IC
_
,�,
� ^- ` �1
!
�_
_
�,� ��yr
fir_~
•�'�� t %
� � Y k �
' -1'}-
-
It
Ic
it
•p'ri
cr
It Ir
^r`n�a
IA v 0 m co
6
0 00
a
�O
e.
-
lzi
CL
✓�
IL
Y
j� -
__ ~�
__ +-_._ _ _ _
-J -
--I -
_ _
- qtr
l _ _ --"- -� •-- -
-_- _ __ � ^�
_ _-_
_ _ `-
IL
r
IC
_

8'
WOO Sd33NION3NOOlV3 �N a311� ^S���Ow
£61£ -O,WdH `ON3 ON '`�aPr.. 3� Z
£oso 1L861b3 O��r� _ 13�211S H��If1H� o o
JNIU3NIJN3 '1 - I o
0080 1 LS 616 1
�i ®�� L09LLON HJI3lVM £ r m
1�! `_.y, Ho�I(1HO NOISSIW l9'B�Ib'H'S 1S z
011 Kies ;Y bd ® Q a
dVOS ABNRllOIZI
Wt1+11uun9N` � � o v �
LL
yi $
€ :s
8$�
FG8
Di Pik
s ci-E <d� is
¢� H
o� �g
Pa
ai
Li
is
Ej a _6 >i
ai. OR NZ
rog figg_
QU 96 °
ai
5 RE m I Q 9a 50� M't ISO ad V91 wm§ � � _ €Fq
z $L 1906 M 09. 0 � �6Q _ 0 1 � Ss
� y
U g is
ISIS is
L � �2 z aF
aJ a _ 3
E5 my4S ay:pya -Ng r5 ♦u'3m -N n♦ n g -�m L^ NrR ♦mm Zc��
CR
C�U��HRV1
E8 USN NiMN (110 I3N -
19 I 0 � � ,C •S C 1070 '904.1 — 1
O
E1494 x / I
r a
GF \EQ
y
20 1
711 F
1 W
F1 /
- o —\�_ gym— �; �•�'
Li
^# — 4^ 151 C — 1
��sa� 1 1
1 — 376 / — w , . 376
O' - -'\
�
- \tee,
N
Lo
't
tat
1'Z.II
.0�
g �H3a °io
FC \ J 6 11
1 zu ^1 0,2
i
_376" _
I a o
3 C gevc
.RBEE RD ,n 9,0 \ n c91 ELI'a \ \ >
pUluc a/� / / o n i so �7— / p 9E 2C 00
nitl 37lHAd SS Ana e / ��
339 21H$ J /g nia 3rlendss a
_ /all GN 339NV9 m —
I
\ - 369 p