20141042 Ver 2_401 Application_20150415

ALCON
��_� ...
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
TO: Mrs. Karen Higgins DATE: April 21, 2015
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit PROJECT NAME: St. Sharble Mission Church- Reg
512 North Salisbury Street for a Revised Section 404 Permit
Raleigh, NC 27604
PROJECT NO. E14032.00
SHIP VIA:
WE ARE FORWARDING THE FOLLOWING: X ATTACHED
UNDER SEPARATE COVER
5 Pre - Construction Notification Letter to Request for a Revised Section 404 Permit at Proposed
St. Sharble Mission Church
1 Check- DWR #14 -1042
ITEMS ARE TRANSMITTED FOR:
X YOUR APPROVAL
YOUR USE
X AS REQUESTED
REVIEW AND COMMENT
REMARKS:
APR 2 1 2015 J
WAT
SIGNED: Sarabeth Moore
COPY TO:
www.FalconEngineers.com
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110 1 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 ; T 919.871.0800 F 919.871.0803

Karen Higgins 2
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit - Raleigh, Wake County
April 20, 2015
Mrs. Karen Higgins
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604
a o /Oo 4�-d V4-)-
APR 2 1 2015 I
R
April 20, 2015
Re: Pre - Construction Notification Letter to Request for a Revised 401 Certification Permit for
Impacts to Wetlands at Proposed St. Sharble Mission Church
Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mrs. Higgins:
Falcon Engineering, Inc. (Falcon) is re- submitting this Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) letter as a
notice to the North Carolina Division of Water (NC DWQ) that the Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn is
requesting a revised 401 Certification permit relative to the proposed church construction, located on a
2.83 -acre parcel in Morrisville, Wake County, North Carolina. The development will include a church,
parking lot, and office spaces /community buildings. Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification was
issued on October 15, 2014 (DWR No.: 14- 1042), to authorize the permanent impact to waters of the
United States of up to 0.25 acres on the site (0.16 acres wetland, 0.09 acres open water). The new
institutional construction will impact a total of 0.47 acre of wetland, though only 0.38 acre requires
mitigation according to USACE. No streams will be impacted by the project.
Document Submittal:
We herein provide NC DWQ with five (5) copies of each of the following documents relative to the 401
Certification permit (with the exception of the check) for the institutional development:
• Check for $240.00 made out to "NC Division of Water Quality"
• Combined USACE & NCDWQ Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form completed
• Supporting Documentation Report, that presents a detailed delineation of the Waters of the
United States on the property
• Site data sheets (streams and wetlands)
• Current engineering plans for the project
• Discussion of the permitting requirements for this project
• An outline of proposed impacts (below)
Summary of Permitting and Mitigation Requirements:

Karen Higgins 3
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit- Raleigh, Wake County
April 20, 2015
The Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn has contacted USACE in respect to federal permitting
requirements pertinent to this project to mitigate for wetland impacts (no streams located on the
property):
• NWP 39 - Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 39 (Commercial & institutional Developments)
Proposed Wetland Mitigation Plan:
The Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn understands that mitigation will be required for the impacts to
0.38 -acre of the 0.47 -acre wetland. The Eparchy of Saint Maron of Brooklyn proposes the following
mitigation for the impacts to the 0.38 -acre wetland:
• The payment of $34,868.50 of in -lieu fees (Cape Fear River Basin) for a total of 0.50 -acre impacts
to riparian wetland to the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NC EEP) via the
Department of Natural Resources Wetlands Trust Fund to fulfill compensatory- mitigation
requirements.
We hope that the information provided with this PCN letter is sufficient for NC DWQ to process this
permit application in a timely manner. Please contact us, at your earliest convenience, to let us know if
you need any additional information, relative to this application. We appreciate this opportunity to
provide services to you and look forward to supporting your project. If you have any questions, please
give us a call at (919) 871 -0800, or call Jeremy directly at (919) 201 -9670.
Sincerely,
FALCON ENGINEERING, INC.
Josh Dunbar, PE
Director of Design Services
Enclosures
Jeemy S ewe
Environmental Project Manager
LF

VC
ot W A TF9
O`' pG Office Use Only:
6� � Corps action ID{nOi /RA
e. o < DWQ project no.
Form VersioFl 1:.3 =Dec 1� Q20b
Page l of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1 d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes N No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
N Yes
❑ No
1 g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
N No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
St. Sharble Mission Church
2b.
County:
Wake
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Morrisville
2d.
Subdivision name:
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Eparchy of St. Maron of Brooklyn
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
14589 DP 1208, 14589 DP 1204 & 14635 DP 2537
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
909 Church Street
3e.
City, state, zip:
Morrisville, NC 27560
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page l of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
® Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:,
Jeremy Schewe
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Falcon Engineering, Inc
5c. Street address:
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110
5d. City, state, zip:
Raleigh, NC 27607
5e. Telephone no.:
919.871.0800
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
jschewe @falconengineers.com
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0746644139
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.84954 Longitude: - 78.84322
(DD.DDDDDD) ( -DD DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
2.83 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Unnamed tributary to Kit Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
WS -V; NSW
2c. River basin:
Cape Fear
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is partially forested and partially maintained as mowed open space with occasional large trees creating a
savannah -like community. The forested area is associated with a small pond and wetland, though the forested area
extends well beyond the wetland features. The elevation of the site ranges from approximately 362 to 380 feet above
mean sea level (msl). The wetlands and pond are located at an elevation of 374 feet above msl. The surrounding
properties are developed as single - family residential, or multi - family residential.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.47 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
0
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Institutional development on a 2.83 -acres that will include a church, parking lot, and community buildings.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
El Yes El No Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
El Preliminary El Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company:
Name (if known):
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
USACE: SAW- 2014 -01885 NC DWQ: 14 -1042 EEP: 23721 Location: Cape Fear 03030002
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
No this is not a phased project, all buildings are being reviewed and permitted at the same time
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ❑ Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
® Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ❑ T
fill
Palustrine
® Yes
® Corps
0.38
Forested
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
® Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
0.38
2h. Comments: Client changed plan and the project will now impact all wetlands permanently.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
-Temporary
01 ® P ❑ T NA Permanent (filled) Pond 0.09
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: The shallow pond located on the site will be removed completely as a result of this project.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed ,
5a. I 5b.
then com' fete the chart below.
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
PondID I Proposed use or purpose
number of pond
5d. 5e.
Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Flooded I Filled I Excavated I Flooded I Filled I Excavated I Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
6b. 6c. 6d.
Buffer impact
number - Reason
Permanent (P) or for
Temporary T impact
B1 ❑P ❑T
B2 ❑P ❑T
B3 ❑P ❑T
6i. Comments:
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Other:
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6e. I 6f. I 6g.
Buffer
Stream name mitigation
required?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
(square feet) I (square feet)
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Site was evaluated and surveyed to allow best design principles to avoid potential impacts as much as possible. The
developer has changed their design and it will now impact all wetlands on the site.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Due to the small size of the project, and the site layout, the selection of a bioretetion cell was the best option for this project.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
ED Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.38 acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
0 acres
4h. Comments: This project cannot be completed without the above - described impacts to the wetland area. Based on the
size, length, and location of this feature on the property, the proposed impacts cannot be avoided or minimized to develop this
track of land. The owner proposes to pay an in -lieu fee for the impacts to 0.38 acre.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
38.9%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The subject property is located at 909 Church Street in Morrisville, North Carolina. This site is being developed for use
as a place of worship. The site is located between Church Street, Grace Point Road and Barbee Street. The 2.6 acre
parcel is surrounded generally by residential uses. In order to capture and treat the stormwater runoff generated from the
new development a bioretention area shall be constructed on the property. A series of RCP stormwater pipes shall direct
the stormwater runoff into the bioretention area. The bioretention area is located in the southwest corner of the property.
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
® DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
Town of Morrisville, NC
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
® NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
® Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered `yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The surrounding area has already been developed into high- density and single - family residential neighborhoods. The
implementation of this project continues the local pattern of development. On -site stormwater planning will aid in the
protection of water quality downstream to some extent.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
All wastewater discharge from the site will be connected to local wastewater treatment.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
El Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
http: / /www.fws.gov /nc -es /es /countyfr.html - Habitat not appropriate to support any listed species based on field
observations by wetlands ecologist/biologist or by NCNHP documentation of hosted species.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
http: // ocean. floridamarine .org /efh_coral /ims /viewer.htm
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? http: / /floodmaps .nc.gov /fmis /Map.aspx ?FIPS =187
Jeremy Schewe
4/20/2015
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Applicant/Agent's Signature
Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 1 1 of 11
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

ALCO N
WETLAND DELINEATION
Plodra Shaible Chuf-ch
909 Church Street I Morrisville, North Carolina

Wetland Delineation
Prepared for:
Bobbit Design Build
Attn: Greg Guy, PE
600 Germantown Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
Submifted by:
Falcon Engineering, Inc.
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27607
(919) 871 -0800
www.falconengineers.com
Falcon Project Number I E14032.00
May 12, 2014

Page
ExecutiveSummary ............................................................................ ............................... ............................iii
Section1 I Regulation definition ................................................................................. ............................... 1
1.1 Definition of "Waters of the United States" ........................................ ............................... 1
1.2 Definition of Wetlands ........................................................................... ............................... 1
1.3 Regulation of Wetlands ........................................................................ ............................... 2
Section2 1 Site Description ........................................................................................... ............................... 3
2.1 Site Location ........................................................................................... ............................... 3
2.2 General Site Description ........................................................................ ..............................3
Section3 1 Scope of Services ...................................................................................... ............................... 4
3.1 Performed Scope of Work .................................................................... ...............................
4
3.2 Wetland Evaluation Methodology ...................................................... ...............................
4
3.3 Stream Evaluation Methodology ........................................................ ...............................
5
Section 4 1 Results of Delineation ................................................................................ ...............................
6
4.1 Wetlands Determinations ..................................................................... ...............................
6
4.2 National Wetland Inventory .................................................................. ..............................9
4.3 Stream Determinations ......................................................................... ...............................
9
Section5 1 Conclusions ............................................................................................... ...............................
10
5.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................. .............................10
Section6 1 References ................................................................................................ ...............................
11
AppendixA Site Photos .......................................................................................... ...............................
A -1
AppendixB Figures/ Maps .......................................................................................... ............................B
-4
Appendix C USACE Map Requirements .............................................................. ...............................
C -1
ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Falcon Engineering, Inc. (Falcon) was retained by Bobbit Design Build (Bobbit) to perform a
wetland evaluation on an undeveloped property located in Wake County, more specifically at
909 Church Street, in Morrisville, North Carolina (PIN 0746 -64- 4139 -000). The purpose of this
evaluation was to determine whether "waters of the United States" exist on the said property,
and to thus determine the limits of any jurisdictional waters of the US on the subject property. On
May 7, 2014, Mr. Jeremy Schewe, of Falcon, performed a detailed wetland evaluation at the
2.83 -acre subject site. The evaluated site is made up of one parcel located west of Church
Street and north of Grace Point Road. Figure 1 shows the general location of the site on the
Cary, North Carolina, USGS topographical quadrangle sheet and Figure 2 shows the applicable
portion of the NRCS Wake County soil survey.
During the field evaluation, a jurisdictional wetland (including a pond) was determined to exist
on the site. The approximate size ( =0.4 acres) and location of the wetland area is depicted on
the Figure 3. These depictions are for informational purposes only and do not constitute a
certified survey of the area or provide the required jurisdictional determination. Based upon the
findings of this field investigation, it is necessary for a licensed surveyor to produce a survey
depicting the identified wetland area. An ephemeral stream was observed just off the site
draining the wetland area from the north boundary of the property. This ephemeral stream
drains to Kit Creek, which drains into Jordan Lake and eventually the Haw River.
The professional opinion of Falcon Engineering is represented in the following report as to the
presence and /or absence of wetland habitat and "other waters of the United States" and their
boundaries within the 2.83 -acre partially wooded lot on Church Street. Verification of report
findings, as well as the final determination of regulatory jurisdiction will be determined by
representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE)
and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) should be contacted in order to
coordinate a site meeting to provide a final ruling on this jurisdictional determination. The USACE
and NCDDWQ must review, confirm, and approve all wetland and stream delineations in order
for these determinations to be considered valid.
iii

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

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

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

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

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

RESULTS OF DELINEATION
4.1 Wetlands Determinations
The project site was evaluated per the methodology described above and all likely areas within
the project boundaries were evaluated. One wetland, including a pond, was identified at the
site. An unnamed tributary (UT) of Kit Creek, that ultimately flows into Jordan Lake, flows from
south to north beginning at the northern edge of the property and draining the wetland (see
attached Figure 3 for approximate location).
1. Vegetation: The 2.83 -acre wooded lot was investigated for the presence of hydrophytic, or
wetland vegetation, along the length of each of the 5 transects. Table 1 summarizes the total
percentage of dominance (Dominance Test) and the Prevalence Index (not necessary for the
completion of this study due to strength of the dominance test) of hydrophytic vegetation found
within each sample location along the length of each transect.
TABLE 1 I VEGETATION DATA (909 CHURCH STREET)
T= Canopy Trees
S /S= Understory & Woody Shrubs
V= Woody Vines
H= Herbs
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >506)
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3.0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
Wetland species of vegetation were observed throughout the entire site. The dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation was observed in plots A -1 & A -2. Plots A -1 & A -4 were observed to be
dominated by upland vegetation. Vegetation identified at the site can be viewed in detail on
the field sheets. Paralleling these findings, in general, hydrologic and soil indicators on the site
tends to mirror the results of the vegetation analysis, indicating an plot survey area as either
wetland or upland area respectively.
Transect Plot Dominance
Prevalence
Wetland
Id Location Test'
Index2
Vegetation
ME
100%
T= Canopy Trees
S /S= Understory & Woody Shrubs
V= Woody Vines
H= Herbs
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >506)
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3.0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
Wetland species of vegetation were observed throughout the entire site. The dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation was observed in plots A -1 & A -2. Plots A -1 & A -4 were observed to be
dominated by upland vegetation. Vegetation identified at the site can be viewed in detail on
the field sheets. Paralleling these findings, in general, hydrologic and soil indicators on the site
tends to mirror the results of the vegetation analysis, indicating an plot survey area as either
wetland or upland area respectively.

2. Hydrology: Wetland hydrology consists of water that is on or near the surface of the soil for a
significant period of time during the growing season. Many factors determine wetland
hydrology such as topography, soil type, depth of the water table, and drainage. The
hydrology of the 2.83 -acre lot indicates that wetlands are found on the site. A summary of the
hydrologic indicators observed at the site are summarized in Table 2 below.
TABLE 2 1 HYDROLOGIC DATA (909 CHURCH STREET)
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >50 %)
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3.0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
In general, hydrologic indicators were observed at the site in plots A -2 and A -3 where the plot
incorporated the wetland as a result of seepage from the pond. Plots A -1 and A -4 did not
exhibit wetland characteristics.
3. Soils: Hydric soils, as defined by USACE, are soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long
enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 12" of the soil.
A hydric soil is different from a non - hydric soil due to the induced anaerobic conditions that
change the soil color, mottling, structure, and chemistry. The soil colors and mottling are
described using a Munsell Soil Color Chart. Soil structure is determined via field soil texture tests.
Soils are a product of site conditions such as slope, aspect, and drainage in conjunction with the
source of the local geologic substrata and environmental conditions.
The site was investigated for the presence of hydric soils via core samples along the 5 transects,
to a depth of 24 inches. Soils must be hydric in the upper 12 inches for an area to be
considered a wetland. The NRCS Buncombe County (NC) Soil survey shows the site to have two
(2) types of soil mapped for the entire site (Figure 2). The soil types are both listed as well-
drained on the soil survey:
0
'JF
Transect : Plot Dominance
Prevalence
,
Wetland
Id Location Test'
Index2
Vegetation
ME,
100%
WE
1- Percent Dominance of hydrophytic vegetation (must be >50 %)
2 - Weighted prevalence index of hydrophytic vegetation (must be <_ 3.0)
3 - Percent absolute cover in the plot
In general, hydrologic indicators were observed at the site in plots A -2 and A -3 where the plot
incorporated the wetland as a result of seepage from the pond. Plots A -1 and A -4 did not
exhibit wetland characteristics.
3. Soils: Hydric soils, as defined by USACE, are soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long
enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 12" of the soil.
A hydric soil is different from a non - hydric soil due to the induced anaerobic conditions that
change the soil color, mottling, structure, and chemistry. The soil colors and mottling are
described using a Munsell Soil Color Chart. Soil structure is determined via field soil texture tests.
Soils are a product of site conditions such as slope, aspect, and drainage in conjunction with the
source of the local geologic substrata and environmental conditions.
The site was investigated for the presence of hydric soils via core samples along the 5 transects,
to a depth of 24 inches. Soils must be hydric in the upper 12 inches for an area to be
considered a wetland. The NRCS Buncombe County (NC) Soil survey shows the site to have two
(2) types of soil mapped for the entire site (Figure 2). The soil types are both listed as well-
drained on the soil survey:
0
'JF

Carbonton- Brickhaven complex (CaB), 2 -6% slopes: somewhat poorly drained soil (50% of site)
White Store sandy loam (WsB2), 2 -6 % slopes: moderately well- drained soil (50% of site)
The hydric status of a soil must be determined in the field as site conditions can often vary. A
summary of the soil samples collected from the test pits in transects A -E are found in Table 3
below.
TABLE 3 1 SOILS DATA (909 CHURCH STREET)
Transect
Identification.
A
Sample
A -1
-•
0 to 2
Saturation
-•
NA
Soil
Matrix: 10 YR 3/3
Soil
sandy-clay loam
2 to 4
Matrix: 10 YR 6/3
sandy-clay loam
4 to 24
Matrix: 10 YR 5/4
sandy-clay loam
A-2
0 to 3
14
Matrix: 10 YR 3/4
silty clay loam
3 to 18
Matrix: 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
18 to 24
Matrix: 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
A -3
0 to 2.5
0
Matrix: 10 YR 3/4
silty clay loam
2.5 to 20
Matrix: 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
20 to 24
Matrix: 10 YR 7/1
silty clay loam
A -3
0 to 4
NA
Matrix: 10 YR 3/3
silt clay loam
4 to 18
Matrix: 10 YR 6/3
silt clay loam
18 to 24
Matrix: 10 YR 5/4
silty clay loam
The soils found in the plots were largely silty -clay loam type soil. Soils were saturated in plots A -2
& A -3. Plots A -1 & A -4 exhibited some hydric conditions. Plot A -1 demonstrated a
reduced /depleted matrix as a result of anaerobic soil conditions created by wetland conditions
and saturation at 4 inches of depth and below. Plot A -2 showed hydric conditions well below
the 12 inch threshold, where hydric conditions were observed at 18 inches in depth. Anaerobic
soil conditions were consistent throughout the entire wetlands area, with reduction of chroma,
gleying, mucky mineral buildup, and other primary or secondary hydric soil indicators.
Figure 3 provides a visual representation of the approximate, size, shape, and location of the
conditions on the site. This figure is provided for informational purposes only and should not be
construed as a certified survey map or final approved jurisdictional determination. Any use of
this figure for site planning or other purposes is strongly cautioned.

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

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

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

SITE PHOTOS
1

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

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

APPENDIX B
FIGURES /MAPS
B -4

UNTfED STATES
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
wAf_.I AND RCA MC RLWUw 93
CARY OUADRAMOLE
"OM" CA
Td NI"LVT.- A ,MwNIC
Wrr l•0[. w]whl.A UML M MM W1Yw wi.zY•o' =� � �_ � wn v. w�a � -- ..---- – _--
ao. � R.rnwia/nr] M+wr�rrvr.
•lMr Meww//wwMW.1VM�]IAr • t rW
wM lw]- rW .1w].] I/q DDwtOW rwT[Aw 10 R/r .. )wlwll•e•.A �U ] rwre. 1�� W
w114[]YAwI /M Ya rwi• Me. �nrlr YtMMt.we],w K.r,W YNw M lew _+
p.wY�INww..1.wM1. 100P.wIw 1Ai.M1/
wM W4w1). •.w.Irr• 1!) Y RY,i.'
.)•.w.ria.0•r. .w.eal •awr f
w.ww+.be.vn ,w) wen M�.n D..r. •.wrw w.wsP
wl• W •M w.. Y)IPrr ,..r dv. ]Wow•. !w••iRO
wnr,wl.MDw14 )]..w .ewweKn..[r'. U6i[ prow /rrnr, rp [.l]NU•waR]I[A awr[I M+.•nva. .� .w.�•.wa.nw»N- MDIOru[RCl{'
Yw..,�Mr.�w.w.w�N..M.ee.��e.. ••••••'r ae.w •wrlltar'r1eCD wa]eArm.vY]r �..,. ,.d...r�^ > �u�
..w......s... o-rw� .raw. v[ )s[awr.• ww• r [orwi. • w.a] a •a.w �••• 1� r K Ia„ a .. r ..
,.w..•�a....r. rnsrr r.a,....r]M lri ...o- o-.w.«e+ .... ..,, a ww -]•
..�iw�..w W.wv...•re....w . w w�.:'1°wr.wrwrr.,w, :.r.e � n.. +�. .,..., ..w.�...Y...

Z
Z
�i
064696E OL4696£ OSY696E OE4696E OT4696E 06E1696E OLE696E OSE696E
M .1£.OS o81 . . y.. � M.tE AS o9L
R -
L t�
O Y1
(fl N
U �
r m
ZN
M �
2 L
O U
=3 j
O _
UU
m c
M
W
I L
dU �
m c
0
U
M.Ot',05 o8L
z
OL4696E 054696£ -0696E OT4696E _ _..
L�
�O
<7 Cl)
O O
N �
N
LO m
a
U
Z
»;
U
O
O
t
O N
O
�
3
m
m
Z
a
s
�
g
!t
tU
/U d
i U)
O C
O O
n
n
N
d
O
O
ti d
j N
Z
C
A O
Z U
M A4 Im oa
_
i'
z

1
4' Legend
s, .
" 2 ft Contour Wake
Wake_parcels_poly_030114
�? <all other values>
STNAME
NC
LRS_ARCS
r; Wetland Sample Point A-4
Wetland Sample Point A -3
. Wetland Sample Point A-2
050
.+ Ephemeral Drainage Q Wetland Sample Point A -1
Wetland Edge Point
r Wetland Area
i• 4
Old pond ,�, ,
CID
a . l'
� 5 ��
r -� Property boundary s
W
,!�
ze
r ,:�' •
80 40 0 80 Feet
FIGURE 3:
Saint Sharble Church Property LCON Jurisdictional Features
Wetlands Delineation
1_10 TRINITY ROAD, SUITE 110 DATE: May 12, 2014
909 Church Street RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA 27615 DKAWN Bl': SCHEWE
PHONE: [phone] CHECKED BY: ). DVNBAR
Morrisville, NC FAX: V19.871-0803 SCALE: f inch =73 feet
FALCONENGINEERS.COM PRO)ECTNO.: E14052.00

USACE MAP REQUIREMENTS
C -1

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

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: , • �7rl 1.66 �1 City /County: �Gl Sampling Date: -T/7//q
AppFicant/Owner. ` ` State: G Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): J. : ►� Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope. terrace, etc.): u fee , 4erraU?. Local relief (concave, convex, none): Gory Qu-L Slope ( %): =�-f°
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): a ig nM -"Ut: Long: —78. BN3 °ill Datum: NA') 33
Soil Map Unit Name: � r •kit, LOS^ NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions n the site typical for is time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation (Soil � or Hydrology I significantly disturbed? Are *Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No ✓ Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No __7" within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ,
v e—,r,- ens ,. P'AU�
re- CT A- . Altar oV 44-v,. pa4 d
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
_ High Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
_ Drainage Patterns (810)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Water Marks (137)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (82)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (114)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (65)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery
(137)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
_ Water - Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (04)
_ Aquatic Fauna (1313)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Feld Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth Cinches):
4
Water Table Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No _" Depth Cinches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
includes capillary hinge)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size. M� ) % Cover S Status
1. Prrn�n�n3 ViFwr��dnn �� ��
2.
3.
4.
6.
�,S = Total Cover
50% of total cover.
20% of total cover.
5t
0 PL
8
6_ _
=Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: O M? 1
2. �•.�rltn�,.r 4 _�� .� J,
3. �f
4.
5.
6.
Z— =Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover
H Stratum (Plot size: my )
.a 4 20 ✓ 6r� v
2. lS�+� .� ' r.c.�n)trM
3.
4. cc, Z FAe,
5.
6.
8.
9.
10.
11.
�= Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: j
,. renoel, � —T�
2. n,kund a
3. r�akc nes tQ FAC_
7— = Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate
Sampling Point:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL• FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: '� O (AB)
Total % Cover of
Multiply by:
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species
x3=
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
✓ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
°~ 2 Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling – Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 an) DBH.
Shrub –Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont – Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: /IT
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color mo' % Color (moist) % Tie_ Lo27 Texture Remarks
0-2 10'1K
to 1K s h -74) (, 101 zo ► t o
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Hislic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (A5)
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
_ Thick Dario Surface (Al2)
dy Mucky Mineral (S1) (tRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
Sandy Gleyed Matra (S4)
_ Sandy Redox (95)
_ Stripped Matra (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ Potyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
;/'r!11:mY Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ pleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dario Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122)
_ Piedmont Roodplain Sons (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

- WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: �t S � w�
C", Ciry/County: Ve- Co. Sampling Date: 51-711Y
Applicant/Owner: State: C Sampling Point
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hdlslope, terrace, etc.): L^ Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope ( %):
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): S. Piece- Lat Long: -78 8`324ol Datum: AJAb 83
Sal Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologii conditions on the site typical fort time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ✓ . Soil . or Hydrology d significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Soil . or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytiic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area . /
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wedand Hydrology Present? Yes 1Z No
HYDROLOGY
Wettand Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required:
check all that apply)
Surface Sot? Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (Al)
_True Aquatic Plants (B14)
V �Sparsety Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
&/saturation
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (B10)
(A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (816)
Water Marks (137)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (CO
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (114)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
` Stunted or Stressed Plants (131)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
/Geomorphic Position Position (D2)
undation Visible on Aerial Imagery (87)
_ Shallow Aquitard (133)
ater- Stained Leaves (B9)
_ Kcrotopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
/
Surface Water Present? Yes No
✓ DepP (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No
Depth Cinches): ILI
Weiland
Hydrology Present? Yes V111 No
mdudes capilhuy fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: A/12 ) % Cover She Status
3. o i
4.
5.
Sampling Point: —Z--
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species a
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: U (AB)
= Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover. OBL species x 1 =
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: M1 1 ✓ FACW species x 2 =
� FAC species x 3 =
4.
= Total Cover
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover. e -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 2 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
_)0 _ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2. _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
4.
5.
6.
10 Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Herb Stratum (Plot size:
2.—
3.
4.
5.
7.
9.
10.
11.
FAW
5 =Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 2 ,�
1. I
2. •Qf v+� �tA�
3. 5,8n L 15
4.
_ =Total Cover
50% of total cover 20% of total cover
numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wettand hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont –Version 2.0

SOIL
to
Depth Matrix
(inches) Color moist %
0- '� loyv, 3 �a
►o U, -7
! )
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Sampling Point:
th needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox Features
Color (moistl ° Tyres Loc Texture Remarks
IJ YK 1 o a see,- S
RM= Reduced
_ Histosol (A1)
_ Histic Fpipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
_ Stratified Layers (AS)
an Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
MLRA 147,148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
_
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
MS.--Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Mafrbc.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
_ Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147,148)
�amy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
pleted Matrix (F3)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ 2 cm Muck (Al 0) (MLRA 147)
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136,122) 'Indicators of hydrophylic vegetation and
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719) (MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147) unless disturbed or problematic f
Hydric Soil Present? Yes — No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: 5 ! 'C City/County: lN42V-41-- C'-0 • Sampling Date: S-/-7//y
Applicant/Owner: - - 50WV --J*2, State: /VC. Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): 5KAA0A Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): UPI - ee'r4c0— Local relief (concave. convex. 'none); LIn4ave._ Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 5. PteJ ate+ Lat: 35. 1314419 Long: • 713. &.34 *7!1 Datum: A
Sal Map Unit Name: 2-- I XAlk NWI cJassificatlon:
Are climatic / hydrologic condition on the site typical forlhis time of yead Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil . or Hydrology ��significandy disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
WeUand Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (614)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
_ igh Water Table (A2)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
�rainage Patterns (B10)
turation (A3)
_Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ ✓%mater Marks (61)
_ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_✓ Sediment Deposits (82)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (63)
_ Thin Muck Surface (0)
_ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
anted or Stressed Plants (D1)
tomkxphic
Iron Deposits (B5)
Position (132)
undation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
Shallmev Aquitard (133)
Water - Stained Leaves (139)
= Microtopographic Relief (D4)
_ Aquatic Fauna (613)
_ FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes �o
Depth pnches):
Water Table Present? Yes ✓ No
Z;/-No
_
Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
-Depth (inches):
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes-L// No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains arid Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
% Cover Species?
20 ✓
Status
DW
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
2D ,�
fA L
= Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Saoling Stratum (Plot size: o dy1�'
1. (1N 12- 1�,y
2. M % �_ k
3.
4.
6.
= Total Cover
Sampling Point. &3
Dominance Test worksheet
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata:
(B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
(AB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multi& by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species z4=
UPL species x5=
Column Totals: (A)
(B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover. �! jf Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: ©tMZ ) ft0002 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 -Prevalence Index is s3.0'
2. _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
3 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
4. _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
5.
6 'Indicators of hydric soil and Welland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(,� = Total Cover Definitions of Five Venatation Strata:
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover.
Tree — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) �.g approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
1 �„0 3 �' >t. (7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
2. Sapling — Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
3, approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
4 than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
5. Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
6 approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height
10.
11.
= Total Cover
50% of1f total cover. 20% of total cover.
Vine ne Stratum (Plot s¢ V
e: h-4�4
2.
3. 5M ` 1�
4.
= Total Cover
50% of total cover. 20% of total cover
photo numbers here or on a separate
Herb - All herbaceous (non - woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes J No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

SOIL
Depth Matrix
finches) Color moist %
0-2.5 1079 3
2.57729-1019 1
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol (Al)
_ Histic Epipedon (A2)
_ Black Histic (A3)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1)
_ Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
_ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N,
IVILRA 147, 148)
_ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_)Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
Sampling Point: A-1?
document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
�h
O 9. - 1S �>=rl .
- r s•
Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147,148)
_ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (IVILRA 147,148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Matrix (0)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron - Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
IVILRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (IVILRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Roodplain Soils (F19) (IVILRA 148)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MI-RA 127,147)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
_ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MI-RA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(IVILRA 147, 148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(IVILRA 136,147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0

}WETLAND (D�E�TERMINATTIIO /N DATA FORM — Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region
Project/She: 6) . 5.isf>i�- (�.f �_ City /County �'1 `�� • Sampling Date: J /
Applicant/Owner. State: �� Sampling Point:
invesfigalor(s): G Section, Township, Range: 1 �/
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): un) 4e ace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Cam_ Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): S. P% ± Lat: S5- 891LO240 Long: .5�(BlUI Datum:Als4t)
Soil Map Unit Name:
Are climatic ! hydrolol
Are Vegetation 1 Sol ®. or Hydrology ® significantly disturbed?
Are vegetation ®. Sol E. or Hydrology ® naturally problematic?
' NWI classification:
No ® (if no, explain in Remarks.) r�te//
Are 'Normal Circumstances' present? Yes �No
pf needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 13 0 is the Sampled Area
�tlydric Sol Present? Yes VNo ® stn a Wetland? Yes ® No P/
INetiand Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
19' 6� L
HYDROLOGY
fl Surface Water(Al)
High Water Table (A2)
_ Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (81)
Sediment Deposits (132)
[� Drift Deposits (83)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust (134)
1=3 Iron Deposits (135)
M Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137)
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
TV Aquatic Fauna (B13)
L3 Marl Deposits (1315) (LRR U)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C7)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
�! Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
L! Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Yes ® No u th (inches):
Yes ® No 1�th (inches):
Yes ® No U Depth (inches):
gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos,
Surface Sol Cracks (136)
® SS arsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (132)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
FAC- Neutral Test (135)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No
inspections),
US Amry Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
% Cover Species? Status
1 13 r±cd=2
7. ❑
2. = Total Cover
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
2.
3.
4. ❑
5. ❑
6. ❑
7. ❑
�� ® =
Shrub Stratum (Plot sae: ) Total Cover
1. ❑
2. ❑
3. ❑
4. ❑
5. ❑
6. ❑
7. ❑
X = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: & )
1. Cdce4 vt.10\4�► Adg ❑
2. u 2 ❑
3.
4. ❑
5.
6. ❑
7.
8.
9. ❑
10. ❑
11.
12.
�= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Blot size: 10 Jw 'L )
1. a^\ ML
2. o
3. M c Q FAC,
4. Vim
5. ❑
= Total Cover
Remarks: (If observed. list moroholoaical adaptations below).
Sampling Point
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: _ (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species Q
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A(B)
Total % Cover of
Muffioty by-,
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species
x3=
FACU species
x4=
UPL species
x 5 =
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
_ Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric sod and watland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 It (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size. Includes woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately
3 ft (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes ® No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region - Interim Version

SOIL
Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
Sampling Point:
or
Redox Features
Color (moist) % Tie Loe Texture Remarks
o 4 o®
I lTHT11 I. M -
Jhtdric Soil Indicators:
13 Hislosol (Al)
Q Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sutfide (A4)
Stratified Layers (A5)
Organic Bodies (A6) (LRR P, T. U)
_ 5 cm Mucky Mineral (A7) (LRjt P, T, U)
Muck Presence (AS) (LRR U)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR P. T)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (Al 1)
Q Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Q Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 150A)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR O, S)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix 06)
Dark Surface (S7) (LRR P, S, T. U)
Type:
Depth (inches):
CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 21_ocation: PL =Pore Lining, M-
-Matrix-Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':
®Polyvalue
Below Surface (88) (LRR S, T, U)
n 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR O)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (LRR S, T, U)
,® 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR S)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (LRR O)
in Reduced Vertic (F18) (outside MLRA 150A,B)
Gleyed Matrix (172)
r3 Piedmont Roodpiain Sorts (F19) (LRR P, S, T)
leted Matrix (F3)
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (1720)
ox Dark Surface (F6)
(MLRA 1538)
Obepleted
Dark Surface (F7)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Depressions (F8)
Very Shallow Dark Surface.(TF12) (LRR T, U)
_oRedox
Mart (F10) (LRR U)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Ochric (F11) (MLRA 151)
Iron- Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR O, P, T)
'Indicators of hydrophyfic vegetation and
ElDelta
Umbric Surface (F13) (LRR P, T. U)
wetland hydrology must be present,
-
DReduced
Ochric (F17) (MLRA 151)
unless disturbed or problematic.
Vertic (F18) (MLRA 150A, 1SOB)
Piedmont Floodplain Sois (F19) (MLRA 149A)
_
Anomalous Bright Loamy Soils (F20) (MLRA 149A,153C,153D)
Hydric Soil Present? Yes 2/No
US Army Corps of Engineers Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Region — Interim Version

NOR
ggEFt
a mayr;lt� :G igN{ —
� "•��
� LHU�'ni
IjL
§:19at tta\i/
9-1
°!�
if s 1� A
ie k ° ! °a a 1 /
11 3
� //if./ °° a
a t 1 Q
1
If
IF
I
DPRDEE ° a J f ze-A —
aft:
as 33eava
as r 33eava it 1
-
�,a
\1
eu ko
1
�
Ugnenay.6k ,1 d
�>86 s �•dx0y9A ?h
_ m
°zi O Gk° ab a�
4 �`q r�rrrrrr�r L
p a
k
$ e U
df
W
tt 3 J
n
fi33 AA ¢ Y
� Y
iti� as J 2 i N
LL O Z 3 r
i r
f 77 { KJfW p0�
�• >g[7 `�� C$, j maw

WOO Si133NION3NOOlV3
661C-O Wily ON3 ON
ONIN33NIJN3 `
NO ^�i
f0801116163
Z091ZOON H`J13lVa
I,,,J `
011311ns
€y
OVOiI XIININ101Z1
R -
€y
utl z�
QSo
i
isa �u �aU
y
�r
R
ON '3111ASISaOW 1 1332115 H:)NnHO 606
HoanHD NOISSIW IDON 'HS 1S
� E
a ><
aaa
C ig
M < °Oo
oo�
8 �
o $
0
x
I I
a �
3x S
LU
O
3Q
VopooQ�-
wp3w °F�
o `04m "o.
�- an °www o
aoa2 — .
i
1
i
aaa
C ig
M < °Oo
oo�
8 �
o $
0
x
I I
a �
3x S
LU
O
3Q
VopooQ�-
wp3w °F�
o `04m "o.
�- an °www o
aoa2 — .
i
1

W03 $a33NION3NOOWA �N �3��1nSR1210W
661CO Wall `JN3 ON l�J.
JNIN33N10N3 MW:LB6163 `
00801[86161 f 1332115 Ho21f1H� a
NO0^l ` `9'om N'�'ra `' HoanHO NOISSIW IDBN dHS 1S
0IM"0 zS 6pA, i'�
avow u wa> oI Q
azss
yB �,
8�
1
1
1
11
Z
0
z
z
U1
Z
O
O
m
w
i
: ®R °.
i
fit
6
ss
6
Z �
O O
l:

North Carolina Department
Pat McCrory
Governor
Michael Thomas
Eparchy oeSt. Maron of Brooklyn
109 Remsen St.
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Project: Saint Sharble Church
Environment and Natural Resources'
Ecosystem Enhancement Program Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
February 16, 2015
Expiration of Acceptance: August 16, 2015
County: Wake
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table below. Please
note that this decision does not assure that participation in the NCEEP will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will-be
approved. You must also comply with all other• state, federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated
withthe proposed activity including SL 2009 -337• An Act to Promote the Use of Compensato Mitigation Banks as amended by
S.L. 2011-343.
This.acceptance is valid for six months from' the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of the
issued 404 Nrmit/401 Certification /CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's
responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based
on the-required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work. The amount of the In-
Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the NCEEP, the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation
are summariied•in'the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned to NCEEP for this impact is determined by
permitting agencies and may exceed the impel t amounts shown below.
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. if you have any questions or need additional information, please contact'Kelly Williams at
(919) 707 -8915.
Sincerely,
V" Ja e . B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: David Shaeffer, USACE- Raleigh
Jeremy Schewe, agent
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
Phone: 919 - 707 -8976 \ Internet: www.nceep.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmallve Acton Employer — Made in part from recycled paper
River
Basin
CU
Location
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres)
Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.)
Buffer 17
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Riparian
I Non-Riparian
Coastal Marsh
Im act .
Cape Fear
03030002
0
1 0
0
0.38
0
0
0
0
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation will be performed
in accordance with the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In -Lieu Fee
Instrument dated July 28, 2010.
Thank you for your interest in the NCEEP. if you have any questions or need additional information, please contact'Kelly Williams at
(919) 707 -8915.
Sincerely,
V" Ja e . B Stanfill
Asset Management Supervisor
cc: David Shaeffer, USACE- Raleigh
Jeremy Schewe, agent
1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 -1652
Phone: 919 - 707 -8976 \ Internet: www.nceep.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmallve Acton Employer — Made in part from recycled paper

- ALCON
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROJECT NAME / DESCRIPTION: 909 CHURCH STREET. MORRISVILLE. NC
PARCEL ID: PN: 0746 -64- 4139 -000
PROPERTY OWNER (PRINTED): SAINT SHARBEL CHURCH
PROPERTY OWNER (SIGNATURE): C���"' �l�tNylQ% �',
OWNER ADDRESS: &/dlLAy 01' SS7, i -yo*to il/ p� Av✓
TELEPHONE
jv Y 'Re�nS SST " B✓Z Odit—L. t ( l
- :1 ! .1'
THE UNDERSIGNED, REGISTERED PROPERTY OWNER(S) OF THE ABOVE NOTED PROPERTY, DO
HEREBY AUTHORIZE JEREMY SCHEWE AND /OR JOSH DUNBAR, PE # OF FALCON
ENGINEERING, INC. TO ACT ON MY BEHALF AND TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY FOR THE
PROCESSING, ISSUANCE AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PERMIT OR CERTIFICATION AND ANY AND
ALL STANDARD AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS ATTACHED.
NOTICE: THIS AUTHORIZATION, FOR LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL COURTESY REASONS, IS
VALID ONLY FOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO ENTER THE PROPERTY WHEN ACCOMPANIED BY
FALCON STAFF. PLEASE CONTACT THE ABOVE FALCON AGENT TO ARRANGE A SITE MEETING
PRIOR TO VISITING THE SITE.
FALCON JOB #:
E14032.00
www.FalconEngineers.com
1210 Trinity Road, Suite 110 1 Raleigh, North Carolina 27607 1 T 919.871.0800 1 F 919.871.0803