20052231 Ver 1_More Info Received_20060421

SINCE
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC
GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS
ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES
"OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE"
® 310 Hubert Street
~ $ $ ~ Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Apri121, 2006

Mr. Ian McMillan
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1650
Re: Response to The February 13, 2006 Meeting concerning:
F&R's PCN for NWP #14
Glenwood Crossing
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
DWQ Project #OS-2231
F&R Project No. G66-5058E
Dear Mr. McMillan:
o ~~~~~
4P~ ~ 1 ~ 11t1~

Froehling & Robertson, Inc., (F&R) has been contracted by Pulte Homes, Inc. to perform
wetlands consulting services for the proposed extension of Barefoot Industrial Drive. The City of
Raleigh is requesting the continuation of Barefoot Industrial Road toward Marvino Road, which
will require crossing an unnamed tributary of Potts Branch Creek.
Based on conversations with Mr. Monte Matthews of the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USAGE) and the City of Raleigh, the project site consists of the proposed extension of Barefoot
Industrial Drive, and does not include the proposed residential development proposed by Pulte
Homes. Furthermore, please note the USAGE has approved the project and the Nationwide
Permit Number 14 (NWP 14) authorization is attached.
At the meeting held February 13th between F&R and the DWQ the following changes to the
project site were discussed and have been made:
~ • The storm water retention pond has been changed to a constructed wetland.
• The stream crossing has been realigned to reduce anticipated impacts to the stream bank.
• Site plans and a Storm Water Management Report have been prepared and include storm
water calculations and detailed level spreader specifications.
HEADQUARTERS: 3015 DUMBARTON ROAD ~ BOX 27524 ~ RICHMOND, VA 23261-7524
TELEPHONE [phone] ~ FAX [phone] ~ www.FandR.com
BRANCHES: ASHEVILLE, NC ~ BALTIMORE, MD ~ CHARLOTTE, NC ~ CHESAPEAKE, VA
CROZET, VA ~ FAYETTEVILLE, NC ~ FREDERICKSBURG, VA
GREENVILLE, SC ~ HICKORY, NC • RALEIGH, NC ~ ROANOKE, VA ~ STERLING, VA

SINCt
~~~
1881
Please find attached the revised PCN and information to address the DWQ's concerns discussed
at the February 13th meeting.
If additional information is required please do not hesitate to contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
FROEHLIN~ & ROBERTSON, INC.
C~iristopher J.`l3~
Project Manager
CJB/JES:cjb
Attachments:
Attachment A -Pre Construction Notification Application
Attachment B -Wetland Delineation Report
Attachment C - US Army Corps of Engineers Notice of Determination
Attachment D - NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program Acceptance Letter
Attachment E -Storm Water Management Report and Site Plans (over-sized}
CC:
Mr. Mark Farrell
Pulte Homes, Inc.
801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 118
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Glemvood Crossing 2 April 2l, 2006
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina F&R Project No G66-5058E

ATTACHMENT A
PRE CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION FORM

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. 200521290 DWQ No. OS-2231
fir any par<icuiar item is not appucante to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division o astal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further det
-°,~
II. Applicant Information ~~ ~,~, ~ D~
" "~ ~ ?(7(;~ .d~
1. Owner/Applicant Information ~~`~~~ ~~r..
Name: Pulse Homes Inc./Mark Farrell ~+~~a~c,.~~,~~n~,~~~~~c1~°y"
Mailing Address: 801 Corporate Center Drive
Suite 118
Raleigh North Carolina 27607

Telephone Number:~ 919) 816-1146 Fax Number:
E-mail Address: mark.farrell(a~pulte.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Christopher Burkhardt
Company Affiliation: Froehlin~ & Robertson (F&R)
Mailing Address: 310 Hubert Street
Raleigh NC 27603

Telephone Number: _ [phone] Fax Number:~919) 828-5751
E-mail Address: cburkhardt(a~fandr.com
Page 1 of 9

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Glenwood Crossing
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 0777682615
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Raleigh
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): The project site is located
approximately 1,000' north of the intersection of Glenwood Rd and Ebenezer Church Rd in
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina (please see Figures no. 1 and 2 in Appendix B of
F&R's Wetland Delineation Report located in Attachment B).
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.888583 °N -78.744361 °W
6. Property size (acres): 17.7
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Potts Branch
8. River Basin:
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/rnaps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The project site consists of wooded land. The
project is located in an area developed for residential, commercial and industrial uses. Please
Page 2 of 9

also see Grading and Storm Drainage Plan & Existing Tree Inventor plans prepared by
Withers & Ravenel attached.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The City of Raleigh is proposing to extend Barefoot Industrial Drive south to Marvino Drive.
Construction of the road will take place within a 60' wide right of way and consist of a three
lane asphalt paved road with sidewalk, curb and gutter totaling 46 feet wide. The mechanical
equipment used during the constriction of the project site will include conventional earth
moving_equipment used during development such as excavators bulldozers compactors and
other conventional earthwork construction equipment.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the posed road is to meet the
needs of the City of Raleigh's Master Transportation Plan. Please see letter from the Cit,~f
Raleigh dated December 14, 2005, addressing_the justification for the extension of Industrial
Barefoot Drive.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested. and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
The USACE issued a Notification of Jurisdictional Determination Action ID No. 199820907
dated June 29, 1988 for this parcel. This Determination expired on June 26 2003. F&R met with
both the USACE and the NC DWQ at the project site. Both agencies confirmed that the Potts
Branch Channel located on the project site is indeed a perennial stream channel that is
jurisdictional. The USACE determined that the previously delineated wetlands located on the
project site are no lon er jurisdictional. The USACE has issued Nation Wide Permit No 14 for
the project site (please see attached Permitl.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
F&R is not aware of future permit requests in connection with this project.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
Page 3 of 9

riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The project will consist of
installing, an approximate 80 ft long double reinforced concrete pip~RCP) culvert with
flared end sections of approximately 48 inches in diameter into the channel. The culvert will
be placed slightly below current ,grade of the stream to allow for maximum water flow. The
culvert will have rip-rap velocity dissipater outlet protection approximately 15 feet in length.
Compacted earthen fill will be placed over the culvert to brim the roadway to the proposed
grade. Acurb-and-gutter street section approximately 41 feet in width with a 5 foot wide
sidewalk will be constructed upon the fill.
In addition to the stream crossing 0.28 acre of wooded Neuse Buffer will need to be cleared
and graded for the proposed road. Of the buffer impacts, 6,875 ft2 will be curb and gutter
street section with asphalt pavement and one 5 foot wide section of sidewalk. The remaining
ass upon completion of the project.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number

(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e,g., forested, marsh,

herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Page 4 of 9

Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial o~
Intermittent. Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres
1 Potts Branch Culvert Perennial 3' 115 .00792
2 Potts Branch Velocity dissipater Perennial 3' 15 .00103
3 Potts Branch Improvements Perennial 3' 28 .00192

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 158 .01087
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of

Impact
(acres

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the proiect:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.01087
Wetland Im act (acres): o.oo
Open Water Impact (acres): O.oo
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.01087
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 158.00
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Page 5 of 9

Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.}:
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The purpose of the proposed road is to meet the needs of the City of Raleigh's Master
Transportation Plan. The proposed road is part of the City of Raleigh's Collector Road Svstem
and is required to meet the City's 1 500 foot grid rule On behalf of Pulte Homes Inc F&R has
made Good faith efforts to avoid the stream and buffer impacts In addition to individual
meetings held with the DWQ and USACE at the project site to discuss the proposed road good
faith efforts included several telephone conversations and email correspondences between the
City of Raleigh, the DWQ the USACE and F&R over a period of a few months In addition an
onsite meeting was held on October 26 2005 which all interested parties were invited The
USACE, the City of Raleigh Pulte and F&R participated and discussed the proposed road and
associated stream and buffers impacts. At this meeting several alternates were discussed
including the "no build alternative" and other potential locations within the area for a collector
road. The road is mostly located in right of way that was dedicated in the year 2000 and creates
as perpendicular a stream crossing as,practical The road right of way has been mobbed slightlX
to the east to avoid parallel impacts to the Neuse River Buffer Not building the road would fail
to meet the City of Raleigh's Collector Road Svstem initiative
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
Page 6 of 9

aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
far USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Pro ram (EEP) is willing.to accept payment for
impacts associated with this project. Please see the attached letter from the EEP.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 158
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): 6 875
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No
Page 7 of 9

3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^
X.
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico}, 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify Meuse)? Yes ® No ^
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(s uare feet) Miti ation
1 7,736 3 (2 for Catawba) 4,875
2 4,440 1.5 2,000
Total I 12,176 I I 0
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the neaz bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Gone 1.
XI.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEPI is willing to accent pavment for impacts associated with this project for
impacts to the Buffers that will not be re-vegetated. Please see the attached letter from the
Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
Stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. Please see the attached Storm Water
Mang eg ment Plan. ,
Page 8 of 9

XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
Waste water will not be generated on this project site
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
No additional development is anticipated as a direct consequence of this project. The proposed
subdivision adjoining the east of the road easement is anticipated to proceed regardless of the
construction of the extension of Industrial Barefoot Drive. And the property located adjoining
the. west is proposed to be placed in a Tree Conservation to meet the City of Raleigh's tree
preservation requirements for the construction of the Glenwood Crossings subdivision by Pulte
Homes. The property located north of the proposed Industrial Barefoot Drive extension is
currently developed for light industrial use.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
In reference to Question IX, F&R anticipates the Pulte Homes Inc. and the City of Raleigh will
enter into a joint public/private venture to fund this project.
d/06
(Agent's signature is
only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 9 of 9

ATTACHMENT B
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT

SINCE
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC
GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS
ENGINEERS • LABORATORIES
"OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS OF SERVICE"
~ 310 Hubert Street
~ B s ~ Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
June 29, 2005
~ IL E COPY
Mr. Mark Ferrell
Pulte Homes, Inc.
801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 118
Raleigh, NC 2760 7
Re: Wetlands Jurisdictional Determination
Glenwood Crossings Site
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
F&R Project No. G66-5058
Dear Mr. Ferrell:
Froehling & Robertson, Inc., (F&R) has been contracted by Pulte Homes, Inc. to perform
wetlands consulting services for The Glenwood Crossings Site, which includes wetlands
identification and delineation.
F&R presents herein the results of the wetland delineation completed for the above mentioned
project site located approximately 1,000' north of the intersection of Glenwood Road and
Ebenezer church Road in Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina.
F&R personnel delineated one wetland, one jurisdictional stream, and one non jurisdictional
stream on the project site. The delineation is depicted on the attached F&R Wetland Field Map (see
Wetland Field Map in Attachment A for approximate locations).
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The wetland delineation was performed in accordance with F&R's proposal no. 0666-609E and
was conducted in general accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual. The routine wetland determination, as described in Section D Subsection 3, was
employed. The methodology used for determining the stream classifications is in general
accordance with US Army Corps of Engineer's Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet Dated
June 2003 and the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources -Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) Stream Classification Method Internal Guidance Manual dated February 25,
2005.
HEADQUARTERS: 3015 DUMBARTON ROAD ~ BOX 27524 ~ RICHMOND, VA 2326 i-7524
TELEPHONE [phone] ~ FAX [phone] ~ wrvw.FandR com
BRANCHES: ASHEVILLE, NC ~ BALTIMORE, MD ~ CHARLOTTE, NC ~ CHESAPEAKE, VA
CROZET, VA ~ FAYETTEVILLE, NC ~ FREDERICKSBURG, VA
GREENVILLE, SC ~ HICKORY, NC • RALEIGH. NC ~ ROANOKE, VA ~ STERLING, VA

SINCE
F&
iea~
PRELIMINARY DATA GATHERING PHASE
The USGS 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle Map of "Bay Leaf, NC" dated 1987, located in the
Attachment B as Figure No. 1, was reviewed for obvious indications of wetlands or other Waters of
the U.S. on the site. Based on F&R's review of the USGS map, an unnamed tributary of Sycamore
Creek runs north to south along the western border of the project site.
F&R reviewed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) on-line
GEOTRACT mapping system (see Figure No.2 in Attachment B). The NWI mapping system
depicted no wetlands on the project site.
The Soil Survey for Wake County was reviewed for evidence of hydric soils and "Waters of the
US" on the project site (see Figure No. 3 in Attachment B). The soil survey depicts several
different soil series on the project site. Wedhadkee and Bibb soil series (Wo) is the only hydric
soil listed on the project site. One perennial stream channel, an unnamed tributary of Sycamore
Creek, is depicted on the soil survey. A branch of that channel, heir in referred to as Channel "A"
is also shown.
An aerial photograph of the project site dated 2000 was reviewed as part of this wetlands
delineation (see Figure No. 4 in Attachment B). The aerial photograph depicts the proposed
project site as wooded land partially developed for residential use.
ON-SITE OBSERVATIONS
The Routine Determination Field Data Sheets completed at the wetland Observation Points are
included in Attachment C. At the Observation Points, a determination of the three criteria for
wetlands -- hydrophytic vegetation, wetland hydrology and hydric soils was completed.
Mr. Christopher J. Burkhardt of F&R performed the site observations on June 15, 20, and, 24,
2005. The on-site observations consisted of a walking the perimeter of the wetlands affected by the
proposed project site and several transects through the potential wetland areas noted during
preliminary data gathering.
The majority of the project site consists of wooded land partially developed for residential use. The
wetland area consists of wooded land. F&R established observation points on the project site to
confirm the location of the wetland boundary (see Routine Determination Field Data Sheets in
Attachment C).
In addition, F&R evaluated Two stream channels to determine Their classification using the
DWQ's Stream Classification Method as well as the US Army Cozps of Engineer's Stream
Glemvood Crossing 2 June 29, 2005
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina F&R Project No G66-5058E

SINCE
~~
1881
Quality Assessment Worksheet. Based on F&R's evaluation, the Main stream channel appears
to be jurisdictional and subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules, which requires a 50' buffer on either
side of the channel (see Stream Classification Forms in Attachment D). Based of F&R's Scoring,
channel A is an ephemeral channel that is not jurisdictional and therefore not subject to the Neuse
Buffer Rules.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on F&R's wetlands delineation, one jurisdictional wetland and one stream channel are
located on the project site as indicated on the Wetlands Field Map included in Attachment A of
this report. Based on F&R's scoring of "Channel A", which is delineated with the 2000 series of
flags, the channel is ephemeral, not jurisdictional and not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules.
F&R is submitting this report to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for a jurisdictional
determination (JD) and to the NC DWQ for a determination of Neuse Buffer Rule Compliance.
Prior to impacting the area adjacent to the wetland boundary, or the identified channels, the
USACE JD and NC DWQ Neuse Buffer Rule determination should be completed.
F&R has made the next available appointment with the USACE for the JD to be performed on
August 30, 2005. F&R has also made the next available appointment with the NC DWQ for a
determination of Neuse Buffer Rule Compliance on July 13, 2005.
Once the U5ACE JD and NC DWQ Neuse Buffer Rule Compliance are completed, a NC
licensed surveyor should be retained to survey the wetland boundary flagged by F&R. Once the
survey is complete, F&R will review and then submit to the USACE for their certification of the
wetlands and other "Waters of the US" located on the project site.
Once the surveyor has produced a wetlands boundary survey and a site development plan is
available, F&R can assist with permitting needs. F&R recommends that alternatives to
impacting these areas be considered, and if impacts are determined necessary that these impacts
be minimized as much as practical.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Pulte Homes, Inc. for this specific project.
These services have been provided in accordance with generally accepted environmental
practices. No other warranty, expressed, or implied, is made. Our observations were based upon
conditions readily visible at the site at the time of our visit. If additional information becomes
available which may effect our conclusions and recommendations, we request the opportunity to
Glenwood Crossing 3 June 29, 2005
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina F&R Project No G66-5058E

SIMCE
~~
1881
review the information, and reserve the right to modify our report, as warranted. Please do not
hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.
Respectfully Submitted,
FROE LING & ROBERTSON, INC.
i' --_._
hristopher J. urkhazdt
Environmental Scientist
CJB/MJS:cjb
Attachments:
Attachment A - F&R's Wetland Delineation Field Map
Attachment B -Figures
Attachment C -Routine Wetland Determination Field Data Sheets
& Stream Classification Forms
CC: Andrea Wade
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 2761
Eric Kulz
NC DWQ
3800 Barrett Dr
Raleigh, NC 27609
GJemvood Crossing 4 June 29, 2005
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina F&R Project No G66-SOSBE
Project Manager

Attachment A
F&R's Wetland Delineation Field Map

F ~ SU6 , ,,
_~ ._
.
` - f.
~.,~. c a~R E ~, ~
'
s ~
-=1....
=5 • - ~~~ • Note: This map is provided for a graphic
~~`~..~. illustration of F&R's observations and is not to
~
Q
`*~~
~
~ r scale. This map may not be relied upon for the
~~~~
, jurisdictional limits of the wetlands and other
s~~~,fi~
-~ waters of the US depicted. The location of the
\•.,
~~~!
- information depicted on this map has been

~G~~wf -e~:~, .. estimated b a roximatin an les, acin
Y pP 9 9 P 9
~, ~ _ , , and/or using a tape measure. Prior to impacting
- areas adjacent to this boundary the USACE
..;~ • . should be contacted to review this delineation
` ~+;;"" and make a Jurisdictional Determination. A
~: licensed land surveyor should then be retained to
locate the USACE approved wetland boundary
,.~};~ -
.~ ~ ~ ~~. ~p1 y 0I l Ta.,~.~7 acRES
~ ._ ...
~ ~ •.. ,, .~ 4014 ~~
~_t~
~.~ ~•
~
K ~, -+, ~ -
404~t
,
~~~ ,w
`~" Ln~~..~"~ -
°`~ 2040 $~~~~~ r tHANNELIt-
..~~'
' ,~n7 = Joao ~~ QIFS = ('~-A~tlu CNA#~E
,~
.~ .,.~w ~jt~40 BEVIES ~ fa~,tl•RNt~
„,~~:.,
r -.... MrM$tR~ hRE SEatyENz~k~
1 ~, 1; ~ ~,. ~p~0~ 4 ~tEPT WF~IE1tE WOTEU
~
I~~O.~~ ;~ !~
~t~
w
3 t~ °

~~
Go"n~'~ ~ta ~ ~i`,
so
.~. ZG~ Gti1A
n ~ M .~.
,r aw, ~,. w w
• „z+~~ ~;F+uF M~Rl4~
<~'~
t'
-.
,, ___
,;
y
a4
-_
f ~ ~4y,~
~'
;`
3.0?2 ~
..,.:
u
w
rwa

Wetland Field Ma . ,,.~
North ~.
s,,,a:, C~ PulteHomes Inc.
FROEIiLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Pro'ect: Glenwood Crossin
Q
~~ GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS Location: Wake Co, North Carolina
VV ENGINEERING • LABORA"TORIES F&R Pro'ectNo: G66-5058E
.. , ~' "Over one hurutred years of service " Source: Client Provided Survey
Date: June 2005 Not To Scale Figure No.l

Attachment B
Figures

SITE VICINITY MAP
North
y nitClient:
Pulte Homes, Inc.
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC.
Pro ect:
Glenwood Crossing
Q_
GFOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS
Location:
Wake Co, North Carolina
ENGINEERING • LABORATORIES
F&R Project No.
G66-5058E
"Over one hundred years q% service'
7.5 Topo Quad:
"Bay Leaf, NC" dated 1987
Date: June 2005
Approximate Scale: I-= 2,000' Figure No.1

NWI MAP North
s ~, ~ E Pulte Homes Inc.
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Pro'ect: Glemvood Crossin
F
Q.
VV~~ GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS Location: Wake Co, North Carolina
ENGINEERING • LABORATORIES F&R Pro~ect No: G66-5058E
i s e i ~' "Cher one hundred years of service " Source: National Wetland Inventory. Website
Date: June 2005 Not To Scale Figure No.2

Soil Surve North ~
,;,„~t Client: Pulte Homes Inc.
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Pro'ect: Glenwood Crossin
O GF.OTECI{NICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • MATERIALS Location: Wake Co, North Carolina
QC ENGINEERING • LABORATORIES F&R Pro'ect No: G66-5058E
„, w; "Over one hundred years of sen~ice " Source: NRCS Wake County Soil Survey
Date: June 2005 Not to scale' Figure q.3

Tt ...
,-
~ ..
i. t r f ~ -~

t ~~'~ ~
'
~ ~ ~=
~
_ I
ii N

Yy!! Y J
~
.fi
~
:5~ ..'
'
'
~~
!
t
_J ~
~1!
; ~
V '1r.~
~
~ j 3
~
b.'n.
y -1
_ ~- ~~ j
. ~
_ ., t

...
~ ' i aye
i t '~ _,~ _~ ~ 4 t'ry

' "r~t~"` ~vt~~
~ ~` _t ~l'~ ~ r e~
~ y °+: ~ 1~
~.-
'
-
. `
-
C
S
-
_

~,
_
rL ..
Y ~
~
y
I..i~-'"a.

rat"+
~
y

.
`
`
{ ,
f ~~
y~j ~
iF +~, ~

L ,~
t --~~ ;~ v: • ~
F_ ~
.. ~ ~.
a `~ ' r
.,
~ .
.' •t ~• !i ~~ 3 ~ ~t t~ ~ ,~ '~
f ~ ^.. V tom,
. :. ~ i
eft ~a "~'- +. ~ «! S tir ~.r~A~ ..
Aerial Photo rah North ~-
g ~ ^ ~ E Client: Pulte Homes Inc.
FROEHLING & ROBERTSON, INC. Pro ect: Glenwood Crossin
Q
vv~~ GEOTF.CHNICAL • ENVIROtv'MENTAL • h4ATERlALS Location: Wake Co, North Carolina
ENGINEERING • LAI30RATORIES
" F&R Pro ect No: G66-5058E
,.. , ® Over one hundred years oJ.rervice ° Source: Wake County GIS 2000
Date: June 2005 Not to scale' Figure #4

Attachment C
Routine Wetland Determination Field Data Sheets
& Stream Classification Forms

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Glenwood Crossings Date: 6-15-01
Applicant/Owner: Pulte Homes County: Wake
Investigator: Froehlinl; & Robertson -Christopher Burkhardt State: NC

Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes ® No ^ Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ^ No

Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes
^
No
® Transect ID:

If needed, ex lain on reverse.) Plot ID 4001 WT
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator
1. Corms orida Tree FACU 9. Smilax bona-nox Vine FAC
2. Liriodendron tuli i era Tree FACU 10.
3. Li uidambar s raci ua Tree FAC+ 11.
4 Acer rubrum Tree FAC 12.
5. Osmunda cinnamomea Herb FACW+ 13.
6. Microste ium vimineum Grass FAC+ 14.
7. ,Iuncus s Grass FACW- 15.
8. Toxicodendron radicans Vine FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) ~7a/o
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
^ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
^ Aerial Photographs ^ Inundated
^ Other ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
® No Recorded Data Available ®Water Marks
® Drift Lines
® Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ®Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) ®Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
^ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) ^ Local Soil Survey Data
^ FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) ^ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee & Bidd Soils
Drainage Class: Poorly Drained

Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic and Typic Hapludult Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type?
® Yes ^ No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
Mansell Moist Size/Contrast Structures, etc.
0-7 A l OYR 3/2 Loamy Clay
7-12+ B 2.5 Y 3/2 2.5 Y 6/1 Loamy Clay

Hydric Soil Indicators:
^ Histosol
^ Histic Epipodon
^ Sulfidic Odor
^ Aquic Moisture Regime
® Reducing Conditions
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ^ Concretions
^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
^ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
^ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
^ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ®Yes ^ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ®Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? ®Yes ^ No ®Yes ^ No
Remarks:
Back water wetland, behind stream at toe of slope.

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Glenwood Crossings Date: 6-15-01
Applicant/Owner: Pulte Homes County: Wake
Investigator: Froehlinu & Robertson -Christopher Burkhardt State: NC

Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes
(If needed, ex lain on reverse. ®
^
^ No ^
No ®
No ® Community ID:
Transect ID:
plot ID 4000 UP
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant S ecies Stratum Indicator
1. Cornus orida Tree FACU 9.
2. Liriodendron tuli i era Tree FACU 10.
3. Li uidambar s raci ua Tree FAC+ 11.
4 Acer rubrum Tree FAC 12.
5. Smilax bona-nox Vine FAC 13.
6. Viburnum dentatum Shrub FAC 14.
7. Prunus serotina Tree FAC I5.
8. Toxicodendron radicans Vine FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 75
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
^ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
^ Strearn, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
^ Aerial Photographs ^ Inundated
^ Other
® No Recorded Data Available ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
^ Water Marks
^ Drift Lines
^ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: (in.) ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
^ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) ^ Local Soil Survey Data
^ FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) ^ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remazks:
Wetland hydrology indicators were not observed.

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee & Bidd Soils
Drainage Class: Poorly Drained

Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluventic and Typ
ic Hanludult Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type?
® Yes ^ No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
inches Horizon (Mansell Moist) Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
Mansell Moist Size/Contrast Structures, etc.
0-6 A 2.SY 5/6 Loamy Sand
6-12 B lOTR 4/2 lOYR 5/1 few/medium Loamy Clay

Hydric Soil Indicators:
^ Histosol
^ Histic Epipodon
^ Sulfidic Odor
^ Aquic Moisture Regime
® Reducing Conditions
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ^ Concretions
^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
^ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
^ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
^ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ®Yes ^ No
Wetland Hydrology Present? ^Yes ®No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? ®Yes ^ No ^Yes ®No
Remarks:

NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
Project Name:CilENWOoUGQossiN[~ River Basin: UEusC,
DWQ Project Number: County: W~-KE Evaluator: ~-'~13
Nearest Named Stream: SY~~4-ha~2t< Latitude:
Date: 06-IS-OS USGS UAD: Signature:
Q 8~'Y 1 E/4~F Longitude: Locaton/Directions:
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessar
Also, if in the best professional judgement of t/4e evaluator, the feature is a man-made afitch and not a modifred natural stream-,this
rating system should not be used*
MhIN ~t-Ir~k~N>r !_
Primary Field.Indicatars• (Circle One Number Per Line)
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
Tli4fssra.nr F,...... C~..._.<___ ~~ _ ...
5) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
9) Is a Continuous Bed & Bank Present? v ' 2
('NOTE: IfBed & Bank Caused By Ditching And WITHOUT Sinuo itv Then Score 0~1 1 2 `/
lU) Is a 2°" Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
On Topo Map And/Or In Fieldl PrPCr+nt9 t,_-., ~"' ~ .
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS._~_
1) Is There A Groundwater
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 3
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:
Secondary Field Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line)
3) Does Topography Indicate A
SECONDARY GEOMORPIIOLOGYIIVDICATOR POINTS: 2.5• I
1) Is This Year's (Or Last Year's) Leaflitter .a•.o.,..~ -'-'eaK Mo erate Stro

4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 5 1
Last Known Rain? NOTE: I Ditch Indicated In #9 Above Skr Thu Ste And #S Below* 1.5
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry p
Conditions Or Iri Grovain S on ? 'S 1 1.5
--~-.
6 Ace H dric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel Or In Headcut ? Yes 1. S
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS.~_ No=O
1) Are 1~ish Present?
0
1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? v 1 1.5
SAV Mostly OBL ostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU
Mostly UPL
("`NOTE: IjTotal Absence Of All Plants In Streambed 2 1 75
As No edAbove 'This Sr UNLE.S,SSAYPrnsent* . .5 p 0
SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: ~ 5
~~~ ,P01NTS tPrlmgrv + Secondarvl =
Stream Is At Least Intermittent) ~ ~ (I.f Greater Than Or Equal To 19 Points The
Notes:
2

NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
Project Name: C~lENWDOi~GQoss~Nfj~~erBasin: UEuSL Coun WAKE
DWQ Project Number: Nearest Named Stream: SY~t4-'-1aQE ry' Evaluator: x-713
Date: p6-IS-OS USGS UAD: Latitude: Signature:
Q 8J4Y ! EIfF Longitude: Location/Directions:
*PLEASE NOTE: If evaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form is not necessary.
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature u a rnan-made ditch and not a modified natural stream-this
rating system should not be used* v~}?E~C, ~ (~ y GN~N~II ~L
Primary Field.Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line) ~
9) Is a Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 1 3
N TE: I Bed & Bank Caused B Ditchin .Ind WITH UT Sinuo i The core=0* I 2 3
10) Is a 2"d Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOG'YINDICATOR POINTS:~_
1) Is There A Groundwater
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:___QQ_
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:
Secondary Field Indicators • (Circle One Number Per Line)
3) Does Topography Indicate A
SECONDARY GEOMORPIfOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: _ ~, 5 I
~~~..__~ w eax oderate Stran
1) Is This Year's (Or Last Year's) Leaflitter
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed

4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5
Last Known Rain? *NOTE: 1 Ditch Indicated !n #9 Above Ski Thu Ste And #5 Beli
S) Is There Water In Channel Dosing Dry 0 .5
Conditions Or In Growm Season ?
6~Are Hvdric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)? Ye
SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POIIVT.S': ~
1 1.5
I I.5
5 1_ __ I.5
6 Are Iron Oxidizn B.acteria/Fun us Present? ~ U •/ ~ 1.5
7 Is Filamentous Al ae Present? 'S l 1.5
0 ~ .5 1. 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants. In Streambed? SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU
Mostly UPL
(* NOTE: IjTotal Absence OfAll Plants In Streambed 2 I .75 .5 0
As Noted Above S ' This St `LESS SAV Present* . 0
SECONDARYBIaLQGYINDICATOR POINTS.~_
Ti~TAL .~'OINT-S (Px~imarv + Seeondarv) _ __ l~ __ (If Greater Thnn Or Pqual To 19 Points The
Stream Is At Least Intermittent)
Notes:
2

NCDWQ 5t~-eam Classification Form
Project Name:C~l~NVI~DoUGKosSiN[~ River Basin: UE~SC. Coup W~1-KE
DWQ Project Number: Nearest Named Stream: SYZt4--9a~E h'• Evaluator: ~'ot3
Date: 06-IS-oS USGS UAD: ~ Latitude: Signature:
Q &4Y 1 E F Longitude: Location/Directions:
*PLEASE NOTE: Ijevatuator and tandowner agree that the feature is a man-made ditch, then use of this form Is not necessar}
Also, if in the best professional judgement of the evaluator, the feature is a man-made ditch and not a madi~ed natural stream--this
rating system should not be used`
lvr~.lt± t~ "a ~' cHat~w~ ~.
Primary Field_Indicators• (Circle One Number Per Line)
2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed
S) Is There An Active (Or Relic)
9) Is a Continuous Bed & Bank Present? v 2 3
•N TE: 1 Bed Ban,E Caused B Ditchin ~fnd WITNOU Sinuo i Then ore=0* 1 3
10) Is a 2"~ Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated
PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS._~
1) Is There A Groundwater
PRIMARYHYDROLOGYIIVDICATOR P INTS: ~
PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:
Secondary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line)
1) Ts There A Head Cut Present In Channel?
A\ T .r~ _
3) Does Topography Indicate A
SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY
1) Is This Year's (Or Last Year's) Leaflitter
TOR POINTS:
__ is
~) Is Sediment On Plants (Or Deter„ is) Present? OJ i
3~ Are Wrack Lines Pr ~Pnr~ _ 'S - -- - ..
0

4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since ~ 5
Last Known Rain? NOTE: 1 Ditch Indicated In #9 Above ki This Ste Md #S Bel<
5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 .5
Conditions Or In Growin¢ Season)
6_) Are Hvdnc Soils Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)~ Ye
S&CONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: 2. ter-'
1) Are Fish PrESent?
1 is
1 1.5
~~
U ~ .5 1 1.5
6 Are Iron Oxdizui Bac eria/Fun Present? 0 .., ! .~
7 Is Filamentous AI ae Present? 'S l 1.5
U ,5 I 1.5
8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV Mostty OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU
Mostly UPL
(' NOTE: IjTotal Absence Of All Plants In Streambeaf 2 1 .']$ .$ 0 0
.!s Noted Above S~Sb ?Ytis Step IINLF..sS SA,YPrgsent«)
SECONDARYBI4LQGYINDICATOR POINTS: Q
?'D.TA~ POINTS tPrimarv + Secondaryl = . ~ _ (If Greater -Than Or E~uat To 19 Points The
Stream Is At Least Intermittent)
Notes:
2

USAGE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
;,~,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: Main Channel
1. Applicant's name: Pulte Homes Inc. 2. Evaluator's name:- Christopher J. Burkhardt
3. Date of evaluation: June 15 2005
5. Name of stream: U.T. of Svcamore Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: 65 Acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 1000'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
4. Time of evaluation: Early morning
6. River basin: Meuse
8. Stream order: 1st
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if any): None
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.888583 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.744361
Method location determined (circle): GPS opo Shee Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near v roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
Moth of the intersection of Glenwood Road with Marvino Road.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Road Crossing
15. Recent weather conditions:--- Dry
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Drv
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters X Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: .67 Acres
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? ~ NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 40 % Residential
40 % Forested
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ®NO
_% Commercial 20 % Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Cleared /Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 5' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%} X Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends X Frequent meander -Very 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
reach. 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): 81 Comments
Evaluator's Signature •~.~~ P ~~~ Jtute 28 2005
~'- Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USAGE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please ca11 9 1 9-876-844 1 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
M~ I N C !-! ~ N. hl ~ l...
# CHARACTERISTICS ECOREG ION POIN T RANGE

Coasbtl
Piedmont
Mountain SORE
1 Presence of flow I persfstent p oois in stream
no flow or saturation = 0; stron flow = max oints 0 - S 0 - 4 0 - 5
2 Evidence of past human alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max oints 0 - 6 0 - S 0 - S
3 Riparian zone
no buffer= 0; Conti uous wide buffer = max oints 0 - 6 0 - 4 0 - S ~~
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max oints 0 - S 0 - 4 0 - 4
,.a - S Groundwater discharge

V
no dischar e = 0; rin s, see s wetlands
etc. = max oints 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 ~(
6 ,
Presence of ad jacent iloodplain
no floo lain = 0• extensive flood lain = max oints 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 2
~ Entrenchment / tloodplain access
a'' dee entrenched = 0; fre ent floodin = max oints 0 - S 0 - 4 0 - 2
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
no wetlands = 0; I e ad•acent wetlands = max oints 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 2
9 Channel sinuosity
0
S
extensive channelization = 0• natural meander = max oints - 0 - 4 0 - 3
10 Sediment ing ut
extensive de osition= 0• little or no sediment = max oints 0 - S 0 - 4 0 - 4

11 Size & diversity of channel best substrate
Np
*
0
4
0
~
-~
fine homo enous = 0; tar e, diverse sizes = max oints ' - - 5 .
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening
?~ dee incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max oints 0 - S 0 - 4 0 - S
a 13 Presence of major bank failures

,~
severe erosion = 0• no erosion, stable banks = max oints 0 - S 0 - S 0 - S L'
~
Q
'
14 Root depth and density on banks , t
,
Ey no visible roots = 0• dense roots throw out = max oints 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 L-(
~
15 Impact by agrfcuttnre, livestock, or timber production

substantial im act ~; no evidence = max oints 0-S 0-4 0-S
16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes , I
H
no ri$lesJri les or oois = 0• well-develo ed = max oints
0 - 3
0 - S
0 - b
y
H 1 ~ Habitat complexity

~
ittle or no habitat = 0; fre went, varied habitats = max oints 0- 6 0- 6 0- ti
18 Canopy coverage over streambed

no shadin ve etation = 0• continuous cano = max oints 0- S 0- S 0- S 5
19 Substrate emb eddedness
*
dee 1 embedded = 0• loose structure = max NA 0 - 4 0 - 4
20 Presence of stream invertebrates {see page 4)
0

~ no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max oints - 4 0 - S 0 - S
[
'~' 21 Presence of amphibians
Q no evidence = 0; common, num emus t es = max oints 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4 (~
~ 22 Presence of fish
W
no evidence = 0• common numerous t es = max oints
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4
23 Evid once of wildlife use + r
no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max oints 0 - 6 0 - S 0 - S 1,.~
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first gags) g
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
;,~,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: Upper "A" Channel
1. Applicant's name: Pulte Homes Inc. 2. Evaluator's name: Christopher J. Burkhardt
3. Date of evaluation: June I S 2005 4. Time of evaluation: Earlv MominQ
5. Name of stream:- U.T. of Sycamore Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: <11 Acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 150'
11. Site Coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order: 1st
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if any): None
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.888583 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.744361
Method location determined (circle): GPS o Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions: Drv
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Drv
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters X Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-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 appeaz on USGS quad map? YES
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential
100 % Forested
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ®NO
_% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
_% Cleared /Logged _% Other
22. Bankfull width: 2'
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank):.5'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%) -,Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very 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 chazacteristic 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 aze obvious changes in the chazacter 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 sepazate form used to evaluate each
reach. 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): 44 Comments:
This channel was determined ephemeral by both the USACE and the NC DWO in 1998
`~~~:';~ June 28, 2005
Evaluator's Signature ~.w~.. Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please ca11 9 1 9-876-$441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
# CHARACTERISTICS ECOREGION POINT RANGE SCORE
Coasts~l Piedmont -Mountain
1 Presence of flow / persistentpools in stream
no flow or saturation = 0• strop flow= max Dints 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5
2 Evidence of pasthuman alteration n
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max Dints 0 - 6 0 - 5 0 - S J
3 Riparian zone
no buffer= 0; Conti uous, wide buffer = max Dints 0 - 6 0 - 4 0 - 5
4 Evidence ofnutrient or chemfcal discharges
extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max Dints 0 - ~ 0 - 4 0 - 4 tr'
,..a ~ Groundwater discharge

U
no dischar e = 0; rip s see s, wetlan etc. = max Dints 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4
6 Presence ofadjacent floodplain
no floo lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max Dints 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 2

7 Entrenchment / floodplain access
~" dee entrenched = 0; fre ent floodin = max Dints 0 - S 0 - 4 0 - 2 ~I
$ Presence of adjacent weflands

no wetlands = 0. 1 e adjacent wetlands = max Dints
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 2 O
9 Channel sinuosity t
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max Dints 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 3 1
10 S ~~ ent inp ut
extensive de osition= 0• little or no sediment = max Dints
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 4 O
i l Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
fine homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes = max Dints N'~* 0 - 4 0 - 5
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening
H dee 1 incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max Dints 0 - $ 0 - 4 0 - 5 U(
a 13 Presence of major b ank faflures

,,,,,
severe erosion = 0• no erosion, stable banks = max Dints 0_ 5 0- 5 0- 5

e~'
14 Root depth and density on banks

~ i,.. no visible roots = 0• dense roots throu bout = max Dints 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5
~
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production

substantial im act ~• no evidence = max Dints 0-S 0-4 0-S L_(
16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes

H

no ri87eslr' les or ooLs = 0• well-develo eel = max Dints

0 - 3

0 - S

0 - 6 O

17 Habitat complexity
little or no habitat = 0• fre en varied habitats = max Dints 0 - 6 0 - 6 0 - 6
18 Canopy coverage over streambed
no shadin ve etation = 0• continuous cano = max Dints 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 3
19 Substrate embeddedness

dee embedded = 0• loose structure = max
~~'*
0 - 4
0 - 4 Q
20 Presence of stream invertebrates {see page 4) 0
4

no evidence = 0• common numerous t es = max Dints
-
0 - 5
0 - 5 O
Z} 21 Presence of amphibians

0
no evidence = 0; common
numerous t es = max Dints 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4
,
Q 22 Presence of fish

~
no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max Dints
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4 O

23 Evidence of wildlife nse
no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max Dints 0 - 6 0 - 5 0 - S
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first. page} ~ ~-(
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams
2

USACE AID#
DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
;,~,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: Lower "A" Channel
1. Applicant's name: I'ulte Homes Inc. 2. Evaluator's name: Christopher J. Burkhardt
3. Date of evaluation: June I S 2005 4. Time of evaluation: Earlv Morning
5. Name of stream: U.T. of Sycamore Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: <11 Acres
9. Length of reach evaluated: 150'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees.
6. River basin: Neuse
8. Stream order: 1st
10. County: Wake
12. Subdivision name (if any): None
Latitude (ex. 34.872312): 35.888583 Longitude (ex. -77.556611): -78.744361
Method location determined (circle): GPS o Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmazks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (if any): None
15. Recent weather conditions: Drv
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Dry
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters X Nutrient Sensitive Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-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 ~ 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? ~ NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
100 % Forested _% Cleared /Logged _% Other
22. Bankfull width: 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 3'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: X Flat (0 to 2%} -Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight X Occasional bends -Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by detennnirung 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 fo 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
reach. 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): 36 Comments:
This channel was determined ephemeral by both the USACE and the NC 1~Wn ;,, 1998
Evaluator's Signature ~~ `~~~~~~~~~ June 28, 2005
Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
L.ow ~~ ~ /~" ~ ~--1 q.N lU Et..-
# CHARACTERISTICS ECUREGIQN PQIN T RANGE

Coastal
Piedmont
Mountain SCORE
1 Presence of flow / p ersistent p Dols in stream
no flow or saturation = 0; stron flow = m ax Dints
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5 O
E
id
Z v
ence of past human alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max Dints
0 - 6
0 - S
0 - 5
Ri
3 parfan zone
no buffer = 0; Conti uous wide buffer = m ax Dints
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 _ 5 G~
Evidence
f
tri
4 o
nu
ent or chemical discharges
extensive dischar es = 0• no dischar es = max Dints
0 ` $
0 - 4
0 - 4
~ G
-.
5
U roundwater discharge
no dischar e = 0• s rin s see s wetlands, etc. = max Dints
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 4
Presen
f
d
~, 6 ce o
a
jacent floodpiain
no floo lain = 0• extensive flood lain = max Dints
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - Z O
E
t
h
~
p" n
rea~c
ment / IIoodplain access
dee entrenched = 0• fre ent floodin = max Dints
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - Z o
Prese
f
d
8 nce o
a
jacent wetlands
no wetlands = 0;1 a ari•acent wetlands = max Dints
0 - 6
0 - 4
0 - 2
Ch
9 annel sinuosity
extensive channelization = 0• natural meander = m ax Dints
0 - $
0 - 4
0 - 3
S
da
i
10 e
m ent
np ut
extensive de osition= 0• little or no sediment = max Dints
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 4 O
Size & di
it
f
i l vers
y o
channel bed substrate
fine homo enous = 0; tar e, diverse sizes = max Dints
~~*
0 - 4
0 - 5
Evidence o[
h
l i
12
H c
anne
ncision or widening
dee incised = 0• stable bed & banks = max Dints
P
f
0 - ~
0 - 4
0 - 5 O
a 13
M resence o
major bank faflnres
severe erosion = 0; no erosion stable banks = max Dints)
0 - $
0 - ~
0 - 5
Q 14 Koot depth and density on banks "-
1.., no visible roots = 0• dense roots throu hout = m ax Dints 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 2
~
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber
production

substantial im act ~; no evidence = max Dints 0_ s 0_ 4 0- S
16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes
H
no riffles/ " les or Dols = 0• well-develo ed = max Dints
0 - 3
0 - 5
0 - 6
~ 17 Habitat complexity
M
little or no habitat = 0• fre en varied habitats = max Dints
0 - 6
0 - 6
0 - 6
18 Canopy coverage over str•eambed
h
0
S
no s
adin ve etation = 0• continuous cano = m ax Dints - 0 - S 0 - S
19 Substrate embeddedness
dee embedded = 0; loose structure = max NA* 0 - 4 0 - 4
20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
~,,, no evidence = 0• common numerous t es = max Dints 0 - 4 0 - 5 0 - 5
U' Zl Presence of amphibians

~
no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max Dints
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 4 Q
~ ZZ Presence offish
~ no evidence = 0• common numerous es = max Dints 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4
23 Evidence of wildlife use
no evidence = 0• abundant evidence = max Dints 0 - 6 0 - S 0 _ $
TotAl Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE {also enter on first page}
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2

~.
~2~,
December 29, 1498
Mr. Steve Roberts
Soil and Environmental consultants
244 West Millbrook Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
'ear Mr. Roberts:
~ ~~3
NORTN CAROLINA DEpgRTMENT pF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL, RESOURCES
_ RALEIGH REGIONAL OFFICE
Subject: Neuse River Basin Riparian Rules
$acarri (Hwy. 70)
NBR-RRO- 170
Durham County
net with you at a proposed development along Hwy 70 near the junction of Ebeneaer
`rurch Road. At your request, an evaluation was performed to determine whether two
features as indicated by a blue high lighter on the attached map would require
mpliance with the Neuse River Buffer requirements. (Please note: these are the only
Itures that I reviewed). Feature # 1 as indicated on the attached map is a stream and is
eject to the Riparian Buffer Rute. Feature # 2 as indicated on the attached map is not
Cream and is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule.
.o, the attached map indicates a proposed road pathway crossing the subject stream.
intent of this correspondence is not to provide Regional concurrence with the
:ement of the proposed road crossing foot print, only what is subject to the Neuue
arian Buffer Rule.
idition, in accordance with the rule, concentrated runoff from new ditches or
made conveyances must be dispersed into sheet flow before the runoff enters Zone
the riparian area.
Ifyou have any questions please call this office at (919).571-4700.
Sincerely,
~tin~. i
Danny ~fnith
Environmental Specialist
cc: RRO - file copy
John Dorney- Wetlands/401 Group
JCOO BARRETT DRIVE, SVITE ~Ol, RALEIq N, NORTH CAROLINA 27G09
AN EQUAL OppORTVNIiT/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER-EOONE ODD-S7/.g700 FAXB18~571-
X RECYGLEDlIp A7/6
X P09T-CONSVMEft P.: /+ER
V

• ,~
.5
~~
t
~~~
^~
-~~
>~ ~ ~-^
,~<- t
~~
~;
/ ~
I ~ ~
r~
I
~ = w~~-1a~~.
t1e~ : Ll„avr•1..} t3 L.bs ooa- -< I~
--.~,
., \ ,\_
:_
\.
.
. ~
i
•`, `

~
. ,
~ .

~~«: K gar}; Cam., ~o~
Preliminary Worland Apptoximriion
s~~~~~
~EC.aKrwa w.,~ w.bary ao,,.p r.,w <..~a. t~aw~,k,
*' ~uruiaa a aq «ha.ddeiaw idaaWian
.~ppO.mutiaa was ~ ~sq~oo+v~ a.o. ar v«+d ~w
~ewa ey a. ua. Moy Caps dRgioea~
,.
~:;
,, ;
'',

~- ~~ ~~ ~
Action ID: 199820907
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Wilmington District
Cou
D ~- _~
~uN z s isss
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property
Owner Bobby L Murray
Address 1820 Cantial Blvd
Raleteh NC 27604
Telephone Number 919-834-6441
Authorized
Agent ,l~tt`Y~Yrorunentai Consulfantr rem
(n Steve Roberts
Address 244 West Millbrook Road
RaIeiQh NC 27609
Telephone Number 919-846-5900
Size and Location of Pro a waterbod Iii hwa name/number town etc. :
The property is approximately 10 acres and is located northwest of the intersection of U.S. 70 (Glenwood
Avenue), and SR 1647 (Ebenezer Church Road) in Wake County, North Carolina. The site is adjacent to
an unnamed tributary of Sycamore Creek, above headwaters, in the Neuse River Basin.
`f Indicate Which of the Foltowin A !
J~ There are wetlands on the above described property which we stron 1 su est should be surveyed. The surveyed
' `wetland lines must be verified by our statT'before the Corps will make a final jurisdictional determination on your
property.
0 Because of the size of your property and our present workload, our identification and delineation of your wetlands
cannot be accomplished in a timely manner. You may wish to obtain a consultant to obtain a more timely
delineation of the wetlands. Once the consultant has flagged a wetland line on the property, Corps staff will
review it, and, if it is accurate, we strongly recommend that you have the line surveyed for final approval by the
~f Corps. The Corps wilt not make a final jurisdictional determination on your property without an approved survey.
9l The wetlands on your lot have been delineated, and the limits of the Corps jurisdiction have been explained to you.
\ Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period
not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
0 There are no wetlands present on the above described property which are subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
This project is located in the Neuse River Basin. You should contact the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
at [phone] to determine their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material in wetlands on this property without a Department of the
Army Permit is in most cases a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1311). A
permit is not required for work on the property restricted entirely to existing high ground. If you
have any. questions regarding the Corps of Engineets regulatory program, please contact
Todd TuQwell at telephone number (9191 R76 _ stddt ...,.e....:,... ~~
Project Manager
Date June 26 1998
k
Expiration Date June 26 2003
SURVEY PLAT OR FIELD SKETCH OF THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY AND THE WETLAND
DELINEATION FORM MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE YELLOW (FILE) COPY OF THIS FORM.

~ ~,. __ _ _
_ -- -_..
,, a;~..
q ~ ... .... .. ..
. ~+J.
a
' ~ _ - )~..
` x.
n ,
~ ~ .m
x - ~
~1- ~41~ ---~--- - oN
~ T
~ ,\
..
;.
_.
__ // i ~ ~ ~ . /~
~ _
..a :.
y
m
~ ~
` !" Y
~ ~ ~,~ ~~ i
% ' I av..
~ ' . ~? ` ~ i j ~o : 244 West Millbrook R
m oad, Raleigh, NC 27609 i
~ks~ t i ~ •- -' ; $o Phone [phone] F
No~,K~1,~~d~, ~ V ~ _~ ax(9t9)846-9467
tY t~ ~,lt ~ `~ v:~ _ '' ~ '~ ° ' c m ~ • Project: --~~SA rr ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~
~ e ~/ ~ v - --~-~V
~'t-l 1 (~'"~ ~~ _ ~ Preliminary Wetland Approximation
~ i ~ Suitable for Preliminary Planning Ord
~t \ y
Lys '~~~~
;s.~ ~ ' - SQcEC~ervea the right to modify thin map based on more fieldwork,
~ ryed delineations or any other additional information.
. 'D Q ~ ~- m I Approximations were mapped using topographic maps and ground frothing.
r ~ ~ ... _. N ^ I ~ y If these arcs: are to be used, they must ba approved and

ATTACHMENT C
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NOTICE OF DETERMINATIONS AND NWP 14
AUTHORIZATION

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action YD. 200521290 County: Wake
USGS Quad: Bay Leaf
Cp~,Y
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner /Authorized Agent: Mr. Mark Farrell
Address: Pulte Homes
801 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 118
Raleigh, NC 2760?
Telephone No.: 919-816-1146
Size and location ofproperty (water body, road name/number, town, etc.): The project site is located 1,000 ft north of
the intersection of Glenwood Rd. and Ebenezer Church Rd in Raleigh Wake County NC
Description of projects area and activity: This permit authorizes 145LF of impacts to Potts Branch (a aerennial
stream), associated with a public roadway
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
^ Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
Nationwide Permit Number: 14
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the
attached conditions and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your
submitted plans may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification is valid until the NWP is modified, reissued, or revoked. All of the existing NWPs are scheduled to
be modified, reissued, or revoked prior to March 18, 2007. It is incumbent upon you to remain informed of changes to
the NWPs. We will issue a public notice when the NWPs are reissued. Furthermore, if you commence or are under
contract to commence this activity before the date that the relevant nationwide permit is modified or revoked, you will
have twelve (12} months from the date of the modification or revocation of the NWP to complete the activity under the
present terms and conditions of this nationwide permit. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide
permit authorization is reissued and/or modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified
below, provided it complies with all new and/or modified terms and conditions. The District Engineer may, at any time,
exercise his discretionary authority to modify, suspend, or revoke a case specific activity's authorization under any
NWP.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality
Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone (919) ?33-1786) to determine Section
401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management
Act (CAMA), prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other
required Federal, State or local approvals/permits.
Tf there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers
regulatory program, please contact Monte Matthews at [phone] x30.
~ ~~~~
Corps Regulatory Officral Monte Matthews oK v' ,Date: January 23, 2006
Expiration Date of Verification: March 18.2007

-2-
Determination of Jurisdiction:
^ Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above
described project azea. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program
Admirustrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
^ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project azea subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is
a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed
five years from the date of this notification.
® There aze waters of the US andlor wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA}(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law
or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the
date of this notification.
^ The jurisdictional azeas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action.
Please reference jurisdictional determination issued _ Action ID
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: The nroaerty contains stream channels that exhibit an Ordinary Hi h
Water Mark as indicated by chances m soil character and absence or terrestrial veeetation and are identified as
Potts Branch in the Nease River Basin
Corps Regulatory Official: Monte Matthews /~ ~~~ ~~~t„`
Date January 23,2006
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORMS, PROJECT PLANS, ETC.,
MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
Copy Furnished:
Froehling & Robertson, Inc.
310 Hubert Street, Raleigh, NC 27603
Attn: Matt Stetter

WILMINGTON DISTRICT
POST-CONSTRUCTION COMPLIANCE FORM
Permit Number: 200521290
Permit Type: NW 14
Name of County: Wake
Name of Permittee: Pulte Hornes Mark Farrell
Date of Issuance: January 23, 2006
Project Manager: Monte Matthews
Upon completion of the activity authorized by this pernnit and any mitigation required by the
permit, sign this certification and return it to the following address:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attention: CESAW-RG-R
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to permit
suspension, modification, or revocation.
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been completed in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit, and required mitigation was completed
in accordance with the permit conditions.
Signature of Permittee
Date

r h ... *, ~„~~~~ r .,`c~'# t~;~ _ ~n y~'~~fu ^~r~ n~.~~} }~~s"".~v . r .~,~ ~~ +ox~~l x^ ~5~, f ,~ }.tX ~ rn,~f 4. s~ ~<.
. ';~ ~rY~ s. ~ a:9`~i~$+~y x~s ~ ` t~'"• ai~~d'~~- eiS~ xt*Y4' ~~~ ~srn ~.+~'~~... n ~ ~ ,k, t ~-t ir.-;
I~O`~I~ICATION OF
ADMIN7STItATIyL Al'F
~L
'
'
a
_
~.(
OP
~I~(J~l
S ; P~pCF~S
t bd o s f ~ t t z 5 i-4i+~~ ~ -c~,~~ ~~
REQUEST FORAPPEAL - ~ ~ ~ a ,, ' ; s ~~=,~ ~ .!'s s>: . t x ~ ~j ,
`
~
_ x T:~..~t~~~~~
4--
~
~
~~
A licant: Farrell Pulte Homes File Number: 200521290 Date:
Janu
23, 2006
A ttached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of A
ermission
PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of ermission B
PERMIT DENIAL C
X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
,.
SECTION I -The following idetitfes your rights aril options regarding an administrative appeal of the-above
decision. Additional information maybe found at httn:(lwww.usace.army,millinetlfunctionslc~t(cecwo/red or

,~
Co s re lotions at 33 CFR Part 331:
A: TI~IITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
pernrit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission {LOP}, you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive aII rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this nofrce, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved ID, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD, The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new
information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the TD.
SECTION II - RE UEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional infornnation to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps
may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
__.~
OF CONTACT FOR
If you have questions regazding this decision
and/or the appeal process you may contact:
Monte Matthews
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
919-876-8441 x30
INFORMATION:
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you
may also contact:
Mr. Michael Bell, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-ET-CO-R
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M 15
Atlanta, Geor 'a 30303-8801
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any
government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You
will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site
i»vtae4ti n.~ti nn n
Date: ~ Telephone number:
of appellant or
DIVISION ENGINEER:
Commander
U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490

ATTACHMENT D
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Acceptance Letter

~,-~ 1J YJU 1J, 11 i isv~ s iJi:ivn ~~r ~1~ r 1~LVJ101 1 - (5 ( YI~L U-Lly
~-
U 4V111
E~~~~
P120GRAM
April 19, 2006
Christopher y. Burkhardt
Proehling 8c Robertson
310 Hubert Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Project: Glenwood Crossings County: Wake
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that tho Notch Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NC EEP) is willing to
accept payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Plesse note that this decision does'not assure that
the payment will be approved by the permit issuing agenci©s as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the
applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NC EEP will be approved.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter, Yf we have not recefved a copy of the issued 404
pertnit/401 Certif5cation wiithia this tiYne game, this acceptance will excpire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send
copies of the 404/401/CAMA permits to NC )~P. Once NC EBP receives a copy of the 404 Permit and/or the 401
Certification an invoice will be issued and payment must be made,
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the
following table.
River Basin Wetlands Stream
Cataloging Buffer Huffer
(Acres) (Linear Peet) Zone 1 Zone 2
Unit
o I o - ---- .,.,.,. .. ~~
0 0 0 lss
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation far the permi[ttd impacts
up to a 2:I ratio, (buffers. Zone 1 at s 3:1 ratio and Zone 2 at a 1,5:1 ratio). The type and amount of the compensatory
mitigation will be as specified in the Seecion 404 Permit and/or 401 Water Quality Certification, and/or CAMA Permit. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C, Department of
Environment and Natural Resourcos and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated Novomber 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Mankoff at [phone].
Sincerely,
'W'illiam D. Gilmore, PB
~~ Cyndi Raroly, Wetlands/401 Unit Director
Monte Matthews, USACB -Raleigh
Eric l~ulz, DWQ Regional Office • Raleigh
Pile
• R
North Carolina Ecosystem enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699.1652 / 919-715-0476 I www.nceep.net

J1J 1 1JLC1 C11 1 f J( 1U1 U G1J
~ y.
T ,
.,.~
~ ~
.:~
~.r~.:3~s1i ~1.~'v+
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
I652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27499-165
919.X5-0476
Page ~ of I~
-.,~,
Fax

From Fax No.: 9l
r~~+,,. ~,/ / , .. .

~~
~ URGENT
L~PLEASE REPLY Ylf, 7/G, 1g2~ f
d Other:
lVort3~ Carolina Ircasy'ien ~nha ;c,met?t ~ragrarn, 165? ~i`fail Serv:, ..:... ... ., ~ ~IC1,~tR
ce Cente ; i;aleigti, Nr 27699-Ib52 ! 919.715-Ddld / www.nceP~.r-m

ATTACHMENT E
Storm Water Management Report and Plans
(Oversized)