20221796 Ver 1_More Info Received_20230315

Staff Review Form
Environmental Quality
Updated September 4, 2020
Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process? *
Yes No
ID#*
20221796
Version* 1
Is this project a public transportation project? *
Yes
No
Reviewer List: * Zachary Thomas:[e-mail]
Select Reviewing Office: *
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Does this project require a request for payment to be sent? *
Yes
No

Project Submittal Form
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk * below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Project Type: *
For the Record Only (Courtesy Copy)
New Project
Modification/New Project with Existing ID
More Information Response
Other Agency Comments
Pre -Application Submittal
Re-Issuance\Renewal Request
Stream or Buffer Appeal
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on:
Is this supplemental information that needs to be sent to the Corps? *
Yes No
Project Contact Information
Name: Amanda K. Short
Who is submitting the information?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
Existing ID #:
20221796
20170001 (no dashes)
Project Name:
Existing Version:
1
Sound Timber Management LLC, Project Ocean — Commercial Warehouse Project
(DWR # 20221796)
Is this a public transportation project?
Yes
No
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes No Unknown
Is this project connected with ARPA funding?
Yes No
County (ies)
Wake

Please upload all files that need to be submited.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Sound Timber Management LLC, Project Ocean —
Commercial Warehouse Project (DWR # 8.98MB
20221796).pdf
Only pdf or kmz files are accepted.
Describe the attachments or
comments:
Sign and Submit
By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:
• I, the project proponent, hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
• I, the project proponent, hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I agree that submission of this online form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a
written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the online form.
Signature:
�nre rda c�tott
Submittal Date: 3/15/2023
Is filled in automatically.

J�
Parker Poe
Amanda K. Short
Counsel
t: 704.335.9002
f: 704.334.4706
[e-mail]
March 15, 2023
Via NCDEQ Link and Email
Ms. Katie Merritt, Acting Supervisor
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources, 401 & Buffer Permitting
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
Atlanta, GA
Charleston, SC
Charlotte, NC
Columbia, SC
Greenville, SC
Raleigh, NC
Spartanburg, SC
Washington, DC
Re: Sound Timber Management LLC, Project Ocean — Commercial Warehouse
Project (DWR # 20221796) - Response to Request for Additional Information
for Exception to Neuse Buffer Rules
Dear Ms. Merritt:
On behalf of Sound Timber Management LLC, we wish to respond to the February 17,
2023, Request for Additional Information for Exception to Neuse Buffer Rules (the "Request")
from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality ("NCDEQ"). This letter is being
submitted to NCDEQ within 30 calendar days of receipt of the Request. We thank you in advance
for your prompt attention to this response.
To respond to comments 1 a and 1 b, it is first necessary to respond to comment 2a to
provide background and reasons for the variance request.
NCDEQ Requested Responses
2. Per 15A NCAC 02B .0611(c)(1)(D), the applicant must demonstrate that they did not
cause the hardship.
a. As stated in the applicant[ion], the applicant was aware of streams that were
subject to the Neuse Buffer rule prior to the development of a site plan. Under
those circumstances, please explain how the applicant can demonstrate that the
applicant did not cause the hardship when the site plan was developed after the
knowledge of the buffer rule limitations on the site.
Response:
The applicant was not aware that there was a NCDEQ Division of Water Resources
("DWR') determined buffered feature within the development footprint prior to
development of the site plan. The applicant did not cause the hardship, because in fact
there is not a buffered feature within the development footprint.
PPAB 8741687v1
Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP Three Wells Fargo Center 401 South Tryon Street Suite 3000 Charlotte, NC 28202-1935
t 704.372.9000 f 704.334.4706 www.parkerpoe.com

March 15, 2023
Page 2
The applicant respectfully seeks to demonstrate to DWR that the physical features of the
property in question, the expert evaluation by a highly experienced engineer at Terracon,
and the determination of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ("USACE'), none of which
Chris Smith, the DWR representative on the ground, questioned, disputed or otherwise
indicated that he believed were incorrect at the time of his physical inspection of the site
on December 23, 2020, all conclusively demonstrate that as a factual matter there is no
buffered feature within the development footprint. The applicant respectfully requests that
DWR, before it denies the applicant the opportunity to develop this site efficiently and
responsibly, have DWR's experts visit the site with our team and inspect the area in
question before dismantling a high -quality project in an opportunity zone that will greatly
benefit the City of Raleigh and all of Wake County and its residents.
The applicant respectfully points out that there are errors within the DWR determination
letter issued January 6, 2021. This variance is being requested because, during a national
pandemic in which the applicant and most other businesses and our consultants and
experts were worried for our personal health and safety, unable to travel, unable to meet
in person, and in many cases unable to even get to our places of business, the applicant
failed to discover, and therefore failed to notify DWR of, the errors within the 60-day appeal
window. As further explained below, our consultants had no reason to believe the letter
would contain any errors because they were given no indication by DWR, during the on -
site inspection or otherwise, that there was any disagreement with Terracon's findings or
with the determination of the USA CE, and unfortunately did not catch the errors when the
letter was issued.
Exhibit A graphically indicates the buffered feature locations identified in the DWR
determination letter. Feature B, Start 1 and Stop 1 are clearly not accurate as the
coordinates indicate a buffered feature extending across Interstate 40. In October of 2022,
the errors in the DWR report were noticed and the applicant requested a revisit of the
report from DWR to clarify where DWR believes the assumed buffer is located. To date,
the applicant has not received anything in writing from DWR that amends the report. In
lieu of an amended report or a revisit to the site by DWR, DWR stated that to impact the
(assumed) buffer, applicant should submit a request for a variance that is currently under
your review.
We believed that the determination letter located the buffered portion of the intermittent
stream consistent with the USACE stream area identified in Exhibit A. The
USACE/Terracon determination and the DWR determination are nearly identical. Exhibit
B demonstrates the similarities between both determinations. We fully agree that this area
is a stream, but it is outside the development footprint. Unfortunately, because of the errors
in the letter, the only area actually identified as buffered extends across Interstate 40.
It is extremely difficult for the applicant to request a variance or mitigation of a buffer for
an area that is legally not defined in a DWR determination letter. If DWR believes that
Start 1 and Stop 1 are not the same as the USACE/Terracon determination, then we
respectfully request a new determination letter that legally identifies a buffered area.
Since the determination letter does not provide coordinates to define a location of a
buffered area, Exhibit C graphically indicates an assumed location of Feature B. The
applicant cannot in fairness be held accountable for an assumed location, especially since
the assumed location area looks nearly identical to the USACE area as previously noted
in Exhibit B. If the assumed location is, in fact, the DWR determined buffered feature, the
PPAB 87416870

March 15, 2023
Page 3
applicant can factually demonstrate that this area is not an intermittent stream and
respectfully asks for the opportunity to demonstrate this fact to DWR's satisfaction.
The applicant's consultant, Terracon, visited the site on March 6, 2023. Exhibit D indicates
that the assumed area should not be considered a buffered feature because the assumed
area scored a 13.5, which is well below the required 19 to be considered a buffered
stream. As previously noted, on December 23, 2020, Terracon performed a site
investigation with the DWR representative, Chris Smith. Together they reviewed the
extents of the stream as determined by Terracon and the USACE and, at that time, it was
discussed that the feature did not meet the characteristics required to be an intermittent
stream. The DWR representative asked if Terracon thought the areas upslope (assumed
area) were a stream even though the USACE did not, and Terracon responded no. There
was no further discussion, and the balance of the site was walked with the DWR
representative. No DWR Stream ID form, completed by DWR, for this assumed buffered
area has been seen nor was supplied with the official buffer determination letter. The DWR
Stream ID form prepared by Terracon, for the initial buffer determination request, was
completed well downslope of the assumed area near a head cut where the USACE
terminated their jurisdiction. Note that the USACE Jurisdictional Determination ("JD') was
made prior to the DWR review and the upper limits of the jurisdictional intermittent stream
were clearly noted in the field and on the final JD delineation mapping. Please refer to
Exhibit E attached.
We were not aware that there was a discrepancy between the Terracon/USACE
determination and the assumed DWR location. There was a lot going on in the world and
here locally at the time, and we truly and in good faith believed that the DWR agreed with
the determinations of Terracon and USACE. We did not, and would never, intentionally
ignore DWR's determination and did not knowingly proceed with the project as if the
assumed stream were not an issue; we just had no idea that there was a discrepancy.
In summary, the applicant did not cause the hardship for which we are asking a variance, and in
fact did not develop a footprint within a buffered intermittent stream at all. We again respectfully
request DWR to allow us to demonstrate this to DWR's satisfaction, and to help us salvage the
contemplated project.
NCDEQ Requested Responses
Per 15A NCAC 02B .0611(c)(1)(C), "If the applicant complies with the provisions of this
rule, he or she can secure no reasonable return from, nor make reasonable use of, his or
her property."
a. From the application materials, it appears that the only use being complicated by
the prospective purchaser is construction of two distribution facilities of specific
sizes/designs. The specific use and design proposed by the applicant is
inconsistent with the spirit and intent of the rule and the Division's long-standing
implementation of the rule. Please address why construction of these two
specifically sized distribution facilities is the only reasonable use of the property.
Response:
The project is not two distribution facilities. The project is a single building that is being
designed to meet the needs of a specific tenant. The property is zoned heavy industrial
and is in an opportunity zone. As will be further explained below, due to its zoning, the
PPAB 87416870

March 15, 2023
Page 4
development expectations of the City and County, its location, surrounding development,
and physical limitations and features, the only possible use for the property is an industrial
facility.
As noted above, the project is being designed for one very long-term tenant, which is a
growing business, and which has been a corporate member in good standing with the City
of Raleigh and Wake County for over 50 years. A more detailed explanation is that the
single tenant will sublease approximately 200,000 square feet ("sf') of the 625,000 sf
facility until its business requires the expansion space. The single tenant's investment in
this facility must accommodate future expansion based on its growth trajectory and the
significant investment in material handling equipment and automation. For the project to
be economically feasible, the long-term needs had to be considered due to the significant
investment in fixtures and equipment. The overall project will invest approximately 100
million dollars in this facility, as well as significant expenditures for onsite and offsite
infrastructure supporting the surrounding area and will result in a projected hundreds of
well -paying jobs. A visual image of the significant interior improvements and equipment
being planned is shown below.
It is important to note that this tenant had searched for sites for two years until finding a
site that could accommodate their short- and long-term needs. This was the only site
available that kept them inside of Wake County and the City of Raleigh. Please see the
letter attached hereto as Exhibit F from the Raleigh Chamber of Commerce, commenting
on the lack of available industrial sites within the City of Raleigh.
This project will be part of Eagle Crest Industrial Park. This park has and will make
significant public infrastructure investments such as a 16" water line supply in this area,
upgrading the offsite sewer system to 24" for the sewer basin as well as road
improvements to Auburn Church, Jones Sausage Road, and East Garner Road. We are
anticipating approximately $16 million in total infrastructure improvements. The assumed
buffered area would cause a reduction in project size that would result in a reduction in
the available capital to support those projects and potentially create an environment where
Eagle Crest could not be competitive in attracting tenants and end users to Raleigh and
Wake County.
The site is zoned Heavy Industrial (IH) and is in a qualified opportunity zone (QOZ) as
defined by the IRS. QOZs are an economic development tool — that is, they are designed
to spur economic development and job creation in distressed communities. So,
PPAB 87416870

March 15, 2023
Page 5
considering the economic needs of this area along with (i) the lack of available industrial
land in the City of Raleigh; (ii) the site's Heavy Industrial zoning; (iii) its adjacency to an
active quarry that has a remaining life of 100 years or more, Interstate 40, and all of the
surrounding industrial projects; all of these factors demonstrate that this product type is
the only suitable use for this site. Other uses that could in theory provide a reasonable
return and avoid these impacts (e.g., multi -family or single family residential) are not
allowed by zoning and other regulatory limitations and are contrary to the expectations of
local government authorities for the site.
As stated in the letter from Kyle Touchstone, CEO of the Raleigh Chamber of Commerce
(Exhibit F), this site is the last significant industrial ground available in the City of Raleigh.
As mentioned above, the tenant did a multi -site search and could not locate another site
that met its requirements. The land is just not available.
The landowner and the tenant have been working on this project since late summer of
2021. During that time, a letter of intent, a joint venture agreement and a lease have been
negotiated as well as final details on the site plan that would be required for the lifetime of
the project. Architects, Engineers, and consultants have been hired to perform subsurface
borings, delineations, traffic studies, archaeological investigations, civil engineering,
infrastructure design and architectural design. The project is on its 2nd round of comments
with the City of Raleigh and the tenant is optimistic that the project could be started in the
summer of 2023. Approximately $480, 000 has been spent on planning activities to date.
NCDEQ Requested Responses
Per 15A NCAC 02B .0611(c)(1)(C), "If the applicant complies with the provisions of this
rule, he or she can secure no reasonable return from, nor make reasonable use of, his or
her property."
b. From the application materials, the warehouse distribution facilities is based on a
specific size, however no details are provided regarding the type of tenants, needs
of tenants or whether specific tenants have agreed to lease the proposed facilities.
The applicant indicates that occupant safety and movement of vehicular traffic is
essential, however, there is no explanation as to why the specifically sized
distribution facilities are the only point at which the applicant can secure a
reasonable return from the property. The applicant states that the project is "not
financially viable due to land and infrastructure costs that are required to develop
this site". Please provide more detailed information supporting this statement and
documenting that the current design is the minimum possible deviation from the
terms of this Rule that shall make reasonable use of the property possible."
Response:
The project has a tenant and has been designed to meet that tenant's needs and the
owner cannot expect a reasonable rate of return or develop the entire site because the
assumed buffer essentially dissects the property and reduces the site area that can be
used for heavy industrial as zoned.
As noted above, the tenant has been working with the landowner since 2021, to identify,
negotiate and develop this site. Sound Timber Management LLC is currently under a strict
non -disclosure agreement and cannot legally disclose the identity of the tenant at this
PPAB 87416870

March 15, 2023
Page 6
time. If DWR deems that information to be pertinent, a redacted form of lease can be
provided for its review. As noted above, the lease will be for the entire 625, 000 sf.
The project dimensions are required to support an advanced beverage receiving and
distribution process. As indicated on the floor plan below, the initial installation contains
multi -layers of sorting and packaging equipment, racking and bulk storage to meet
customer demands. Not shown in the plan below is an additional 40, 000 sf of office space
necessary for operations. The list of tenant requirements for this facility have been
described in the above and in our previous application. As shown on the image of the
material handling equipment, the facility requirements are extremely specific and have
already been reduced from 700, 000 sf to 625, 000 sf to meet those needs specifically.
��-..ems-
uuuuu -..0 uu uuuu uu uuu Juuuuuu uuuuuuu uuuuuuu uLu uu �u uL� �u
.Iillu IIYI 11114 1
�I��'II
aw
A
Industrial projects require large tracts of land, large building footprints, large parking areas,
and expansive vehicular circulation areas. The designed size of the building and parking
areas have been reduced to the smallest size possible that would still allow the tenant's
current and future needs to be met. The DWR assumed buffer would reduce the usable
area of the site by approximately 40%. The assumed buffer itself is not a large area.
However, the assumed buffer effectively cuts off the western end of the site making the
western area unusable for a heavy industrial zoning. The north -south dimension of the
building would have to be reduced and the truck loading area would have to be eliminated
to provide a development footprint around the assumed buffer. A reduced building size
does not meet the needs of the tenant and would cause the deal in place to collapse.
We are more than willing to answer any further questions or concerns and are hopeful that
we can work together with DWR to resolve this issue in a way that is a win -win for DWR, Wake
County, the City of Raleigh, the local community, our prospective tenant, and everyone else
involved. Thank you again for your consideration, and please let us know if NCDEQ requires any
additional information or documentation related to the matters described in this letter.
PPAB 87416870

March 15, 2023
Page 7
Sincerely,
Amanda K. Short
AKS/cle
cc: Sue Homewood (via electronic mail sue. homewood(�i,)ncdenr.gov)
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A — DWR determination
Exhibit B — graphical comparison of determinations
Exhibit C — assumed buffered area
Exhibit D — Terracon scoring and photos
Exhibit E — USACE determination letter
Exhibit F — Support Letter
PPAB 87416870

EN U S SIC 0 EA •'' TURE
STi
m�
IjWH INIFHKAIIIFNI
9 uY o"
Lu
0
z
xLu
o
- co,
Q W
11 ILL
d' II 11 't `� LL
v.
/ NR` �_ U
/ Start 1 - w - m
TREAM FEATURE B
/ LAT_36J1682 U a o
/ / LON:78.57966 w
L a o
�� ay
EXHIBIT A
Z
p
} Wl°y �NR, _ T
-
NR
All
y,�iU �� 1
n
u
I r
i
�r
STOP1 W IN MI N 0 0
STREAM FEATURE B
Stop 1 PEREXHA
i
}N 78.584289

Feature N
Colored areas
(yellow, green, blue) Feature
demonstrate
similarities between
USACE/Terracon .f
determination and
Start 1 /Stop 1 of
DWR determination. FeatureA
pproximate Site Boundary:
pproximate Start/Stop Point
20-391
Eagle Crest Industrial Property
Wake
�(F low
0 y r..
. * r
ITN . , ..,
WA11`
APC
AtA u E
B° roc
ri h'�s
WO-
J�
Feature E 71
Feature O j
Feature D Start Feature D Featurel
r Feature H Start Feature 1
/ AW
Feature G Start
Feature F ,.
Map provided by NCDEQ Division of
Water Resources
Locations are approximate and are
provided for reference only ::

Start 1 NR--
,Ar:35.7168z TREAM FEATURE B
LON:78.57966
� z
r
- - 1
aZ
EXHIBIT C
Z
r
I
STOP1 OF DWR INTE
STREAM FEATURE B
Stop 1PER Clift
LAT:35J13214
LON:78.584289
U N N
W
m
= z
w
0
z - o
W _ V
U
0 W
LL H LL
U
W - m
0 _
K
a o
Fll
IHEEI NI
EXHC

EXHIBIT D
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 3. G. a p a 3
Project/Site: rd' e4 aCEit1)
County:
Latitude: 3 s ?"p,N)
Evaluator: J Ct V l�
Longitude: - 7S, S?4'A ?(v
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
Stre rn Determination (circle one)
Other
if >_ 19 orperennial if 2! 30'
phemera ntermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology Subtotal =
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
0
1
�1
0
2
3
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
_
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
1
8. Headcuts
0
9. Grade control
0
0
0.
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0.
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
N = 0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. HvdroloCv (Subtotal = S ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
1
2
0.5
3
0
14. Leaf litter
1.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
_ 0
0
0.5
1 0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = T�y
Yes = 3
C. Biolow (Subtotal = 2A ).
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0)
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5
tgFer
= 0
.perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: a lueAl
a
[
rr1
w r o
��,.
0; ��1'$ tie' 44 o
Sketch:
1
AU're- (el

PROJECT OCEAN
WAKE COUNTY, NC
March 6, 2023
DWR# 20230217
0181°S (T) 6 35.717651°N, 78.580115°W f13ft ■ 278ft
REPRESENTATIVE PHOTO OF DRAINAGE FEATURE

120 ISO .� '- }�► la1 D 246
■ I I! I I I I 1 1 I I I I

PROJECT OCEAN
WAKE COUNTY, NC
March 6, 2023
DWR# 20230217
0 3130NW (T) • 35.717356°N, 78.579964°W ±13ft ■ 276ft
f 1
DRAINAGE FEATURE - FACING DOWNSLOPE

154 180 210 240 Tro
41
r
ter.. .�
116
6 Mac 2R. 09:5 1 ■ •�

PROJECT OCEAN
WAKE COUNTY, NC
March 6, 2023
DWR# 20230217
0 225°SW (T) • 35.717020°N, 78,579876°W ±13ft ■ 273ft
SOIL AT DATA POINT LOCATION

"NEE s sE
PA 4fi7 1',r: 1 ri[! 216'
Ns
�/M }Y• Spy ' - �•F��� � ' � "� ` ,• y • .
C .s.�� f �•. ri .
It , ti � � 'irk _!I�
� A1; •1 � r 1�iwa1
�-e
4 �
E SE S sw
I sU ISO 210 240
■: : ■:� "■
=...'*� '-3t �r ",fir •:.�-r; r� 4~�.: '�/
��.l=r �, r � , • ,f t 1 i s yam..
r46,
.r
06 Mar 2023, 10:1664

PROJECT OCEAN
WAKE COUNTY, NC
March 6, 2023
DWR# 20230217
a 348°N (T) 0 35.716866"N, 78.579704°W ±13ft ■ 277ft
HEAD CUT WHERE DRAINAGE FEATURE BEGINS

PROJECT OCEAN
WAKE COUNTY, NC
March 6, 2023
DWR# 20230217
0 119°SE (T) Of 35.716867°N, 78.579822°W ±13ft ■ 297ft
FACING HEAD CUT WHERE DRAINAGE FEATURE BEGINS

EXHIBIT E
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2020-01779 County: Wake U.S.G.S. Quad: NC -Garner
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERNIINATION
Requestor: Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Jeff Harbour
Address: 2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604
Size (acres) —362 Nearest Town Garner
Nearest Waterway Poplar Branch River Basin Neuse
USGS HUC 03020201 Coordinates 35.7178,-78.5720
Location description: The project area is located on the west side of Auburn Church Road, approximately 1.25 mile south of its
intersection with Jones Sausage Road, at 4100 Auburn Church Road, Garner, North Carolina.
The Review Area for the Approved Jurisdictional Determination is shown as the purple outlined "AJD Limits" on the figures
entitled "Exhibit No. 3a" and "Exhibit No. 3b."
The Review Area for the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination is shown as the red outlined "PJD Limits" on the figures
entitled "Exhibit No. 3a" and "Exhibit No. 3b."
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® There appear to be waters, including wetlands within the Review Area for the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination
on the above -described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC
§ 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The waters, including wetlands have been
delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. The approximate
boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction
determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For
purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a
permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way
by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not
an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further
instruction.
❑ There appear to be waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property, that may be subject to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However,
since the waters, including wetlands have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be
used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an
effective presumption of CWA/RHA jurisdiction over all of the waters, including wetlands at the project area, which is not
sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters, including
wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a
timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps.
B. Approved Determination
❑ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area/property subject to the permit
requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in 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 are waters, including wetlands on the above described project area/property 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.
❑ We recommend you have the waters, including wetlands on your project area/property delineated. As the Corps may not be
able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that
can be verified by the Corps.

SAW-2020-01779
❑ The waters, including wetlands on your project area/property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the
Corps. The approximate boundaries of these waters are shown on the enclosed delineation map dated _. We strongly suggest you
have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once verified, this
survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no
change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years.
❑ The waters, including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps
Regulatory Official identified below on_. 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 are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present within the Review Area for the Approved Jurisdictional
Determination on the above -described project area/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.
❑ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at [phone] to determine their
requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or
placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and/or 403). If you have any questions
regarding this determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David E. Bailey at [phone] X 30 or
David.E.Bai1ev2(&usace.armv.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: See the Approved Jurisdictional Determination and Preliminary
Jurisdictional Determination forms dated 07/28/2021.
D. Remarks: The Review Area for the Approved Jurisdictional Determination is shown as the purple outlined "AJD
Limits" on the figures entitled "Exhibit No. 3a" and "Exhibit No. 3b."
The Review Area for the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination is shown as the red outlined "PJD Limits" on the figures
entitled "Exhibit No. 3a" and "Exhibit No. 3b."
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site
identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security
Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request
a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B.
above)
If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed
you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and Request for Appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
US Army Corps of Engineers
South Atlantic Division
Attn: Mr. Philip A. Shannin
Administrative Appeal Review Officer
60 Forsyth Street SW, Floor M9
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8803
AND
PHILIP.A. SHANNINgUSACE.ARMY.MIL

SAW-2020-01779
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal
under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you
decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by 09/26/2021.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: l
Date of JD: 07/28/2021
Expiration Date of Approved JD: 07/27/2026
Expiration Date of Preliminary JD: Not Applicable
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so,
please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at hUs://regulatoryops.usace.a=."Vcustomer-service-survey/.
Copy Furnished:
Colleen Cohn, NCDEQ-DWR, 3800 Barrett Drive, Raleigh, NC 27609

N Project No: Potential Wetlands and Waters EXHIBIT
H L207210
Scale: Irerracon
9 Property
1 in = 500 ft
File Name: Eagle Crest Industrial Pro ert
aerial Jan2021 Wake County, 3a
Date: 2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604 North Carolina
0 Neuse River Basin 2141021 Phone: [phone] Fax [phone]

N Project No Potential Wetlands and Waters EXHIBIT
H L207210
Scale: Irerracon
9 Property
1in=500ft
File Name: Eagle Crest Industrial Pro ert
aerial Jan2021 Wake County, 3b
Date: 2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107 Raleigh, NC 27604 North Carolina
0 Neuse River Basin 2141021 Phone: [phone] Fax [phone]

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Attn: Jeff Harbour) File Number: SAW-2020-01779
Date: 07/28/2021
Attached is:
See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission)
B
PERMIT DENIAL
C
❑X
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
D
❑X
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
E
SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision.
Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.miUMissions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.asi)
OZI& Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331.
A: INITIAL 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 permit 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 all
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 notice, 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 JD, 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 district 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 JD.
SECTION II - REQUEST 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 information 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.
POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION:
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
appeal process you may contact:
also contact:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
MR. PHILIP A. SHANNIN
Attn: David E. Bailey
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
Raleigh Regulatory Office
CESAD-PDS-O
U.S Army Corps of Engineers
60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST, FLOOR M9
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8803
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
PHONE: [phone]; FAX [phone]
EMAIL: PHILIP.A.SHANNIN(aUSACE.ARMY.MIL
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 opportum to participate in all site invest] ations.
Date:
Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: David E. Bailey, 69 Darlington Avenue, Wilmington, North Carolina
28403
For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and Approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to:
Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Philip Shannin, Administrative
Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
Completion Date of Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD): 7/28/2021
ORM Number: SAW-2020-01779
Associated JDs: N/A or ORM numbers and identifiers (e.g. HQS-2020-00001-MSW-MITSITE)
Review Area Location': The project area is located on the west side of Auburn Church Road,
approximately 1.25 mile south of its intersection with Jones Sausage Road, at 4100 Auburn Church
Road, Garner, North Carolina. The AJD Review Area is shown as the purple outlined "AJD Limits" on
the figures entitled "Exhibit No. 3a" and "Exhibit No. 3b", submitted via email on 7/9/2021.
State/Territory: NC City: Garner County/Parish/Borough: Wake County
Center Coordinates of Review Area: Latitude 35.7178 Longitude-78.5720
II. FINDINGS
A. Summary: Check all that apply. At least one box from the following list MUST be selected. Complete
the corresponding sections/tables and summarize data sources.
❑ The review area is comprised entirely of dry land (i.e., there are no waters or water features,
including wetlands, of any kind in the entire review area). Rationale: N/A or describe rationale.
❑ There are "navigable waters of the United States" within Rivers and Harbors Act jurisdiction
within the review area (complete table in section 11.13).
❑ There are "waters of the United States" within Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review
area (complete appropriate tables in section II.C).
❑X There are waters or water features excluded from Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review
area (complete table in section II.D).
B. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Section 10 (§ 10)2
§ 10 Name § 10 Size I § 10 Criteria I Rationale for § 10 Determination
N/A N/A I N/A I N/A
C. Clean Water Act Section 404
Territorial Seas and Traditional Navigable Waters a 1 waters 3
(a)(1) Name (a)(1) Size I (a)(1) Criteria Rationale for (a)(1) Determination
N/A N/A I N/A N/A
Tributaries a 2 waters):
Fa 2 Name a 2 Size a 2 Criteria Rationale fora 2 Determination
N/A I N/A N/A N/A
Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters ((a)(3) waters):
(a)(3) Name I (a)(3) Size I (a)(3) Criteria I Rationale for (a)(3) Determination
Map(s)/Figure(s) are attached to the AJD provided to the requestor
2 If the navigable water is not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide or included on the District's list of Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigable
waters list, do NOT use this document to make the determination. The District must continue to follow the procedure outlined in 33 CFR part 329.14 to
make a Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigability determination.
3 A stand-alone TNW determination is completed independently of a request for an AJD. A stand-alone TNW determination is conducted for a specific
segment of river or stream or other type of waterbody, such as a lake, where independent upstream or downstream limits or lake borders are
established. A stand-alone TNW determination should be completed following applicable guidance and should NOT be documented on the AJD form.
4 Some excluded waters, such as (b)(2) and (b)(4), may not be specifically identified on the AJD form unless a requestor specifically asks a Corps district
to do so. Corps Districts may, in case -by -case instances, choose to identify some or all of these waters within the review area.
5 Because of the broad nature of the (b)(1) exclusion and in an effort to collect data on specific types of waters that would be covered by the (b)(1)
exclusion, four sub -categories of (b)(1) exclusions were administratively created for the purposes of the AJD Form. These four sub -categories are not
new exclusions, but are simply administrative distinctions and remain (b)(1) exclusions as defined by the NWPR.
Page 1 of 2 Form Version 29 July 2020_updated

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY PROGRAM
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)
NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE
Adiacent wetlands ((a)(4) waters):
(a)(4) Name I (a)(4) Size I (a)(4) Criteria I Rationale for (a)(4) Determination
I N/A I N/A I N/A I N/A I
D. Excluded Waters or Features
Excluded waters ((b)(1) — (b)(12))4:
Exclusion Name
Exclusion Size
Exclusions
Rationale for Exclusion Determination
Wetland W6
0.509 acres
(b)(1) Non -adjacent wetland
W6 has no connections to other potential jurisdictional
features. W6 is surrounded by upland areas
Wetland W7
0.493 acres
(b)(1) Non -adjacent wetland
W7 has no connections to other potential jurisdictional
features. W7 is surrounded by upland areas
III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION
A. Select/enter all resources that were used to aid in this determination and attach data/maps to this
document and/or references/citations in the administrative record, as appropriate.
X Information submitted by, or on behalf of, the applicant/consultant: Jeff Harbour- Terracon
This information is and is not sufficient for purposes of this AJD.
Rationale: Site visit on 1111012020 necessary to confirm delineation.
Data sheets prepared by the Corps: Title(s) and/or date(s).
X Photographs: Goog/e earth, 2020 and representative site photos
X Corps Site visit(s) conducted on: 1111012020
Previous Jurisdictional Determinations (AJDs or PJDs): ORM Number(s) and date(s).
X Antecedent Precipitation Tool: provide detailed discussion in Section 111.8.
X USDA NRCS Soil Survey: Wake County Soil Survey (1970)
USFWS NWI maps: Title(s) and/or date(s).
X USGS topographic maps: 1:24,000 Garner Quad
n.
X
Other data sources used to aid in this determination:
Data Source (select)
Name and/or date and other relevant information
USGS Sources
N/A.
USDA Sources
N/A.
NOAA Sources
N/A.
USACE Sources
N/A.
State/Local/Tribal Sources
N/A.
Other Sources
QL2 LiDAR NC Floodma s
Typical year assessment(s): 11/10/2020 site visit occurred during Normal Conditions according to
the APT.
Additional comments to support AJD: N/A.
Map(s)/Figure(s) are attached to the AJD provided to the requestor
2 If the navigable water is not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide or included on the District's list of Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigable
waters list, do NOT use this document to make the determination. The District must continue to follow the procedure outlined in 33 CFR part 329.14 to
make a Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigability determination.
3 A stand-alone TNW determination is completed independently of a request for an AJD. A stand-alone TNW determination is conducted for a specific
segment of river or stream or other type of waterbody, such as a lake, where independent upstream or downstream limits or lake borders are
established. A stand-alone TNW determination should be completed following applicable guidance and should NOT be documented on the AJD form.
4 Some excluded waters, such as (b)(2) and (b)(4), may not be specifically identified on the AJD form unless a requestor specifically asks a Corps district
to do so. Corps Districts may, in case -by -case instances, choose to identify some or all of these waters within the review area.
5 Because of the broad nature of the (b)(1) exclusion and in an effort to collect data on specific types of waters that would be covered by the (b)(1)
exclusion, four sub -categories of (b)(1) exclusions were administratively created for the purposes of the AJD Form. These four sub -categories are not
new exclusions, but are simply administrative distinctions and remain (b)(1) exclusions as defined by the NWPR.
Page 2 of 2 Form Version 29 July 2020_updated

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 7/28/2021
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Jeff Harbour, Terracon, 2401 Brentwood
Road, Suite 107, Raleigh, NC 27604
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
SAW-2020-01779 (Eagle Crest / 4100 Auburn Church Road / Garner / Wake County)
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR
AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State: NC County/parish/borough: Wake City: Garner
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format):
Lat.: 35.71818 Long.:-78.57632
Universal Transverse Mercator: 17S 719235 3955399
Name of nearest waterbody: Poplar Branch
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
x❑ Field Determination. Date(s): 11/20/2020
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY
JURISDICTION.
Site
number
Latitude
(decimal
degrees)
Longitude
(decimal
degrees)
Estimated amount
of aquatic resource
in review area
(acreage and linear
feet, if applicable)
Type of aquatic
resource (i.e., wetland
vs. non -wetland
waters)
Geographic authority
to which the aquatic
resource "may be"
subject (i.e., Section
404 or Section 10/404)
See Attached

Appendix 2 - PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH MAYBE SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION.
Site Number
atitude (decimal
de rees)
on itude
(decimal de rees)
Estimated amount
of a uatic
resource in revie
area (acrea e and
linear feet if
applicable)
Type of a uatic
resource (i.e.
etland vs. non
etland aters)
Geo raphic
authority to hich
the a uatic
resource may be
sub ect (i.e.
Section 404 or
Section 10/404)
Pond SW1
35.71602
-78.57502
2.007 acres
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Pond SW2
35.71474
-78.57532
1.089 acres
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Pond SW3
35.71383
-78.57724
0.127 acres
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Pond SW4
35.71337
-78.57509
0.112 acres
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Pond SW5
35.70936
-78.57147
0.09 acres
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T1
35.72161
-78.575601
2666 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T2
35.7154
-78.5831
916 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T3
35.7146
-78.5819
26 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T4
35.718
-78.58084
50 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T5
35.7179
-78.5803
185 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T6
35.72077
-78.57536
2077 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T7
35.7173
-78.5752
261 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T8
35.72117
-78.57452
542 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T9
35.72044
-78.57449
14 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T10
35.71367
-78.57752
52 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T11
35.70937
-78.57002
192 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T12
35.70943
-78.57014
2798 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T13
35.70932
-78.56852
163 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T14
35.70946
-78.56783
296 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T15
35.70967
-78.56689
215 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T16
35.70985
-78.56366
332 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Stream T17
35.70949
-78.56369
30 feet
Non -wetland waters
Section 404
Wetland W1
35.71911
-78.58077
0.029 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W2
35.71836
-78.58045
0.265 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W3
35.71689
-78.57526
0.277 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W4
35.72251
-78.57393
0.024 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W5
35.72342
-78.57332
0.817 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W8
35.71423
-78.57666
0.044 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W9
35.71309
-78.57534
0.202 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W10
35.70925
-78.57166
0.023 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W11
35.70931
-78.57118
0.285 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W12
35.70933
-78.57011
0.011 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W13
35.70967
-78.56704
9.612 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W14
35.71046
-78.56406
0.049 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Wetland W15
35.71358
-78.57761
0.022 acres
Wetland
Section 404
Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established time frame, the
district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action.
Page 2 of 4

1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in
the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option
to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an
informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their
characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate.
2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre -
construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non -reporting NWP or
other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the
activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has
elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an
official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the
option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit
authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result
in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the
applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms
and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can
accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and
conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has
determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject
permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance
of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered
individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit
authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the
review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and
waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance
or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7)
whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed
as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms
and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively
appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it
becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic
jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official
delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will
provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds
that there "may be"waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of
the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review
area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following
information:

SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply)
Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources
below where indicated for all checked items:
❑■ Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Potential Wetlands and Waters - Aerial, soils, and topo maps (Terracon)
❑■ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor.
❑x Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. Rationale:
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑■
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1-24,000 Garner
ON Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: NRcs Published so Survey of Wake county (1970)
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: .(National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
0 Photographs: 0 Aerial (Name & Date): 2018 NCCGIA
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Other information (please specify): QL2 LiDAR (NC Floodmaps)
IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily
been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional
determinations.
Signature and date of
Regulatory staff member
completing PJD
Digitally signed by Graham, Rhiannon J
Graham, Rhiannon J DN cn=Graham, Rhiannon J,—General
Users, email=[e-mail]
Date'. 2020.10.09 12'.02'.55-04'00'
Signature and date of
person requesting PJD
(REQUIRED, unless obtaining
the signature is impracticable)'
' Districts may establish timeframes for requestor to return signed PJD forms. If the requestor does not respond
within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is
necessary prior to finalizing an action.

EXHIBIT F
RALEIGH
Economic Development
To whom it may concern:
March 7, 2023
Raleigh Economic Development, a program of the Raleigh Chamber in partnership with the City of
Raleigh, serves as the primary business recruitment, retention and expansion program for Raleigh in
an effort to increase private capital investment and create jobs. The City of Raleigh continues to rank
as a top location for business, jobs and quality of life in the United States, and we attribute many of
these rankings to our diverse business sectors and their ability to hire from a continuous talent
pipeline through our strong education system while also recruiting workers to our region. Over the
past several years, the City of Raleigh has seen several significant economic development "wins" in
the technology office sector, through announcements by Bandwidth, Gilead Life Sciences and
Pendo. These three companies have invested over $200 million and created over 2,000 jobs.
Until recently, Raleigh has been lacking in available land zoned for heavy industrial uses. With the
rapid increase in population, most available land has been purchased at above average prices for
residential developments. However, through the development of Eagle Crest, which is conveniently
located along Interstate 40 and presently zoned for Heavy Industrial use with infrastructure to
support these uses, Raleigh has been able to actively pursue industrial sector projects to support
jobs and investment in an economically distressed area of our city. Raleigh Economic Development
is a strong proponent of equitable economic development, and through providing job opportunities at
all skill levels in all sectors, especially industrial jobs at Eagle Crest in Southeast Raleigh, our
community only strengthens as a location where all are welcome and all can prosper.
Without the Eagle Crest development, the City of Raleigh is left to rely on existing dated industrial
buildings, which are most times unsuitable for the majority of current industrial uses. Raleigh
currently has a 3.8% vacancy rate of industrial buildings while neighboring Durham has a 5.2%
industrial vacancy rate, according to CoStar, a provider of analytics and marketing services to the
commercial property industry. The ability to maximize the land available to support private
investments and jobs is critical to Raleigh's economy, and Raleigh Economic Development is very
supportive of the Eagle Crest development to elevate our investment and job opportunities.
Sincerely,
Kyle Touchstone, Director
800 S. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
919.664.7038