20230854 Ver 1_PCN attachments_Optimized_20230615

FIREFLY OVERLOOK
STREAM IMPACT OVERALL
EXHIBIT
CHATHAM COUNTY, NC
-- - '" APRIL 21, 2023
I FIREFLY OVERLOOK- BUFFER IMPACTS
I �
( ZONE 1 (INNER 30') 7,700 SF
ZONE 2 (OUTER 20') 5,909 SF
HORIZONTAL WIDTH BUFFER IMPACTS
FIREFLY OVERLOOK 100 LF*
'MEASURED AT WIDEST POINT OF IMPACT
FIREFLY OVERLOOK - STREAM IMPACTS
FOR�S��N TEMPORARY 135 SF, 15 LF
PERMANENT 768 SF, 101 LF
Q= PERMANENT- NO LOSS** 318 SF, 40 LF
"TOP OF RIP-RAP DISSIPATER PAD INSTALLED FLUSH
AT NATURAL GRADE OF EXISTING STREAM BED
IMPACT AREA
ti
100-01
0
S!P�OR,�N617BFFG�F0
CNORTH 9���rGGINGPP����?
CE GROUP
0 500' 1000' 301 GLENWOOD AVE.SUITE 220
RALEIGH,NC 27603
PHONE:[phone]
SCALE: 1" = 500' wwwcegrouptnc.com

i
335 FIREFLY OVERLOOK
STREAM IMPACT EXHIBIT
CHATHAM COUNTY, NC
APRIL 21, 2023
330
� - FIREFLY OVERLOOK- BUFFER IMPACTS
——ZONE 2 BUFFER IMPACT ZONE 1 (INNER 30') 7,700 SF
r —— _±3,902 SF
20' ZONE 2 (OUTER 20') 15,909 SF
ZONE 2— .ZONE 1 BUFFER IMPACT
325 BUFFER, — — ±7,700 SF
1 1 1
—-PERMANENT STREAM IMPACT
1 ±768 SF,±101 LF FIREFLY OVERLOOK - STREAM IMPACTS
ZONE 1 PERMANENT,NO LOSS STREAM IMPACT** TEMPORARY 135 SF, 15 LF
BUFFER ±318 SF,±40 LF
o PERMANENT 768 SF, 101 LF
TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACT
±82 SF,±10 LF PERMANENT- NO LOSS** 318 SF, 40 LF
*"TOP OF RIP-RAP DISSIPATER PAD INSTALLED FLUSH
AT NATURAL GRADE OF EXISTING STREAM BED
I
TEMP.STREAM ems. -
IMPACT
±53 SF,±5LF
�-A 336 PROPOSED TREE
LINE,TYP.
\ 33j_ LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE,TYP.
3
\\\\ 3 2S ZONE 2 BUFFER IMPACT
339 �� \ `±2,007SF
so
—D \c\`�y/\r�/,\�� \ \ \ \ c�\GK 811 BEFOG
\ \ \ wP \\` \ • Oe • Fp
346
\ \ a \ \ \ NORTH ���GGINGPP��
GROUP
0 50 100 301 GLENWOOD AVE.SUITE 220
RALEIGH,NC 27603
PHONE:[phone]
SCALE: 1" = 50' www.cegroupinc.com

FIREFLY OVERLOOK
STREAM IMPACT PROFILE
CHATHAM COUNTY, NC
340 340 APRIL 21, 2023
PROPOSED ROADWAY
335 PROPOSED 335
G ARDRAIL TYP.
330 330
PROPOSED
PROPOSED(1)64 LF 54"RCP(BURIED
325 12"MIN.TO PROVIDE AQUATIC 325
PASSAGE)
VELOCITY DISSIPATOR
INV=320.29 40'L x 15'W x 22.5"THK MIN.
CLASS 1 RIPRAP
---T 60"
EXISTING STREAM
— — INV=320.09 BED(TYP.)
— — — — — — — — — — — —
320 \ 320 \1
F�
� o
0
EXISTING 1-60"RCP 12"MIN.
STREAM BURIED
2
315 315 ��rGGING?
0 5' 10'
I I I I I I (t4
310 310 SCALE: 1" = 5' (VERTICAL) CE GROUP
10+00 11+00 12+00
0 50' 100' 301 GLENWOOD AVE.SUITE 220
RALEIGH,NC 27603
PHONE:[phone]
SCALE: 1" = 50' (HORIZONTAL) wwwcegroupinc.com

E SE 1 S sw
60 90 120 15 180 210 240
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
- 4
1-4
71
t
M
fa
t
Ala! �u�.,aj^8 .L yy '}� ��• _/
/ � t
13 Apr 2023, 09 37:29�`
S SW JV :' NW
180 210 240 I?70 300 330 0
• I I I I I ;; I • I - I - I - I - I - I - I - I - I - I - I - I
i
11
ee
y� F
�rt'r $
`r ( '
13APr2 023, 09:37:35

E E . SEI S SW
60 80 120 150 180 210
• I I •��1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
i � r
• -t� �+ tti '{ii`i � �:��'�, �h ;¢ s � gs" ' fit,' � ;" ;.
F
1 � d
e
SE S I SW W -
120 150 180 21 240 270 300
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •
P ' l Y��.p'•,+a

N
a
m
2
U
E
m
- m
' U
U
a
E
Neuse River Basin
@
L
U
DATA SOURCES: n
USGS TNM To o Base Ma r
@
Project Study Area approximated from Chatham County Parcel Data.
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet Note:Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrologym,
after initial site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status E
and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries. s
m
PM: Project No. Project Location EXHIBIT Ul
JH 70227223 NO. N
Drawn By: Scale: ierracon N
KT 1:24,000 N
Checked By: JFi Filename: Explorlwkhus Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 N
ChathamParcels Chatham County, N
Approved By: Date: FEE.:
Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC 27604 North Carolina
JH April 2022 Phone:[phone] Fax:[phone] p

r
N
- t GaC rsL
GaB
NaB
-
GaB
1
t '
We Nau
G aE
' NaB
GCi�
GCE
ti G aB
f11B � GkC Gab
FsE�
NaB
NaD PsB f
. fF� � � � 1 ••J
13
�
:
r
-- - NaD
GaB
i Cr
Soil Mapping Units e 1 700 !�
CkC Cid silt loam,6-10%slopes • a
CmB Cid-Lignum complex,2-6%slopes
GOC Goldston-Badin complex,2-6%slopes s
GOE Goldston-Badin complex, 15-35%slopes
NaB Nanford-Badin complex,2-6%slopes
NaC Nanford-Badin complex,6-10%slopes a
NaD Nanford-Badin complex, 10-15%slopes
PsB Pittsboro-Iredell complex,2-8%slop Neuse River Basin
L
U
a
m
DATA SOURCES:
N
Project Study Area 0 400 800 1,600 NRCS Soil Survey of Chatham County,2006;Project Study Area
Feet approximated from Chatham County Parcel Data. a
0 Soil Boundaries E
PM: JH Project No. NRCS Soils EXHIBIT Ml
70227223 NO. N
Drawn By: Scale:
KT Wrer �
1:9,600 0
Checked By: JH Filename: Expbnwkhus Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 N
ChathamParcels Chatham County, 2 N
Approved By: Date: FEE
Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC 27604 North Carolina
JH April 2022 phone:[phone] Fax:[phone] p

N
Qt7 CM
1 �
Nor,AM
TIM
i• +.
Neuse River Basin
DATASOURCES:
QProject Study Area Latest High-Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,INC
OneMap Server;2017;Project Study Area approximated
® Potential Wetland from Chatham County Parcel Data.
Feet Note:Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology
Potential Tributary after initial site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status
and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries.
PM; Project No. EXHIBIT
JH 70227223 ^�~�°� Potential Wetlands and Waters No.
Drawn By: Scale: rerracon
MM 1:4,800 Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070
Checked By: File Name: 3
RG ChathamParcles Chatham County,
Approved By: Date: 2ao1 Brentwood Roaa,suite 107 RaIelgh,Nc275oa North Carolina
JH May 2022 phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW-2022-01620 County: Chatham U.S.G.S.Quad:NC-Merry Oaks
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Requestor: Terracon
Rhiannon Graham
Address: 2401 Brentwood Road,Suite 107
Raleigh,NC 27604
Telephone Number: 760-717-2621
E-mail: Rhiannon.urahamAterracon.com
Size(acres) 76 Nearest Town Pittsboro
Nearest Waterway Jordan Lake River Basin Cape Fear
USGS HUC 03030002 Coordinates Latitude:35.71978
Longitude:-79.06740
Location description: The proiect review area is located lust north of the intersection of N Pea Ridge Road and Seaforth Road
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
® 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). 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 dated 5/1/2022. 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 wetlandson 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.
❑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 DATE.We strongly
suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion,this survey should be reviewed and verified by the Corps. Once

SAW-2022-01620
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 onDATE.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 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(252)808-2808 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 James C Lastinger at 910-251-4558 or
i ames.c.lastinger(&usace.army.mil.
C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination
form dated 03/23/2023.
D. Remarks: REMARKS
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.SHANNIN(a)USACE.ARMY.MIL
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 Not applicable.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Divi 'on Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.**
Corps Regulatory Official: u'mto .✓
Date of JD:03/23/2023 Ex iration Date of JD:Not applicable

SAW-2022-01620
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
https://regul�r�.ops.usace.gM.mil/customer-service-survey
Copy Furnished:

SAW-2022-01620
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 the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at
http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm_apex/Vp=13 6:4:0
Copy furnished:
Agent: Terracon
Rhiannon Graham
Address: 2401 Brentwood Road,Suite 107
Raleigh,NC 27604
Telephone Number: 760-717-2621
E-mail: Rhiannon.grahamna terracon.com
Property Owner: Pea Ridge Road Developers
Address: PO Box 5548
Cary,NC 27512
Telephone Number: 919-703-6203
E-mail: andrewross6647(&2maiI.com

NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND
REQUEST FOR APPEAL
Applicant: Terracon,Rhiannon Graham File Number: SAW-2022-01620 Date: 03/23/2023
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
❑ 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.gM.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Re ug latoiyProgramandPermits.aspx
or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 3,3 1.
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:James C Lastinger ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL REVIEW OFFICER
Washington Regulatory Office CESAD-PDS-O
U.S Army Corps of Engineers 60 FORSYTH STREET SOUTHWEST,FLOOR M9
2407 West Fifth Street ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303-8803
Washington,North Carolina 27889
PHONE: [phone];FAX[phone]
EMAIL:PHILIP.A.SHANNIN(&USACE.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 opportunit to participate in all site investi rations.
Date: Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to:
District Engineer,Wilmington Regulatory Division,Attn:James C Lastinger,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 10M15,Atlanta,Georgia 30303-8801
Phone: [phone]

PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 03/23/2023
B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Terracon,Rhiannon Graham,2401
Brentwood Road, Suite 107, Raleigh,NC 27604
C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Chatham Parcel Site, SAW-
2022-01620
D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project review area is located
just north of the intersection of N Pea Ridge Road and Seaforth Road
(USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES
AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES)
State:NC County: Chatham City: Pittsboro
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.71978 Longitude: -79.06740
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody:Jordan Lake
E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
®Office (Desk) Determination. Date: 03/31/2023
❑Field Determination. Date(s):
TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH"MAY BE"SUBJECT TO
REGULATORY JURISDICTION
Site Number Latitude Longitude Estimated Type of aquatic Geographic authority to
(decimal (decimal amount of resources(i.e., which the aquatic
degrees) degrees) aquatic wetland vs. resource"may be"
resources in non-wetland subject(i.e.,Section 404
review area waters) or Section 10/404)
(acreage and
linear feet, if
applicable
T1 35.72386 -79.06624 2050 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
T2 35.72370 -79.06770 87 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
T3 35.71920 -79.06824 594 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
T4 35.71861 -79.06846 610 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
T5 35.71845 -79.06824 377 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
T6 35.71803 -78.06634 193 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
T7 35.71824 -79.06783 90 LF non-wetland Section 404
waters
W1 35.72390 -79.06880 0.03 AC wetland Section 404
W2 35.72375 -79.06725 0.01 AC wetland Section 404
W3 35.72370 -79.06633 0.05 AC wetland Section 404
W4 35.71971 -79.06948 0.02 AC wetland Section 404

W5 35.71912 -79.06860 0.22 AC wetland Section 404
W6 35.71894 -79.06871 0.15 AC wetland Section 404
W7 35.71821 -79.06778 0.01 AC wetland Section 404
W8 35.71864 -79.06727 0.06 AC wetland Section 404
W9 35.71757 -79.06604 0.002 AC wetland Section 404
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 are included in the administrative
record and are appropriately cited:
®Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor:
Map:Exhibit 3
®Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. Datasheets:
®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: Merry Oaks
❑X Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Exhibit 2
❑National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑State/local wetland inventory map(s):
❑FENIA/FIRM maps:
❑100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929)
®Photographs: ® Aerial(Name & Date):Exhibit
or ® Other(Name&Date): Photos 1-10 Dated 2/27/2023
❑Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑Other information(please specify):
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 Signature and date of person requesting PJD
staff member completing PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is
03/23/2023 impracticable)1
1 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.

Firefly Overlook 70237172
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Historical Resources
Research conducted using the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
HPOWEB GIS service database on April 13, 2023, revealed that no historical resources are
mapped within 0.5 mile of the project study area.
Archaeological Sites
Research conducted by Terracon at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on
April 13, 2023, revealed that while no archaeological sites have been mapped directly within the
project study area, one site, 31 CH727, is located approximately 0.21 mile to the east. Site
31 CH727 represents a cemetery of unknown age containing approximately 31 graves. The
cemetery, recorded by Garrow and Associates in 1995, was determined to be not eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
CHA THAM COUNTY P.O. Box 548
Pittsboro, NC 27312
PHONE: [phone]
Fax:[phone]•E-mail:[e-mail]•Website:www.chathamcountvnc.gov
July 22,2022
Ms. Rhiannon Graham
Terracon
2401 Brentwood Road Suite 107
Raleigh,NC 27612
Project Name: Parcel# 17531 & 18070
Location: Pea Ridge Road&Seaforth Road,Chatham County
Subject Features: One 1) ephemeral stream, three 3) intermittent stream
segments,three 3) perennial stream segments,and nine
(9) potential wetlands
Date of July 14,2022
Determination:
Chatham County WP-22-338
Record Number:
Explanation:
The site visit was completed on July 14, 2022, by Drew Blake with Chatham County Watershed Protection
and staff of Terracon on Parcel # 17531 & 18070 that are located within the Jordan Lake watershed.
Terracon personnel completed a previous site visit which resulted in the identification of three (3)
intermittent segments, 3 perennial segments, and nine (9) potential wetlands on the property. Terracon
submitted a request for Chatham County to complete a formal review to determine if the features would be
subject to riparian buffers according to Section 304 of the Chatham County Watershed Protection Ordinance.
All points of origin, stream type transitions, and wetland boundaries were reviewed and agreed to in the field
by all parties in attendance.An ephemeral segment was added to the end of T4 connecting to T6.
Required Riparian Buffers:
All ephemeral stream segments will require a 30-ft buffer from the top of bank landward on both sides. All
intermittent stream segments will require a 50-ft buffer from the top of bank landward on both sides. The
perennial stream segment will require a 100-ft buffer from the top of bank landward on both sides.
The potential wetlands identified by Terracon have not been confirmed by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Once the USACE confirmation is received the 50-ft riparian buffers will be required from the flagged
wetland boundaries as confirmed by the USACE.
Impacts to Riparian Buffers:
Impacts to the riparian buffers may require a Riparian Buffer Authorization depending on the size and scope
of the impacts. Please refer to Section 304 Q)(3) of the Chatham County Watershed Protection Ordinance to
determine if your impacts will require a Riparian Buffer Authorization. If you determine that a Riparian

WATERSHED PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
CHA THAM COUNTY P.O. Box 548
Pittsboro, NC 27312
PHONE: [phone]
Fax:[phone]•E-mail:[e-mail]•Website:www.chathamcountvnc.gov
Buffer Authorization is required please contact Drew Blake to receive the required application and submittal
instructions.
This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected
parties that dispute a determination made by Chatham County, on parcels outside of the Jordan Lake
watershed, may submit a request for appeal in writing to the Watershed Review Board. A request for a
determination by the Watershed Review Board shall be made in accordance with Section 304 of the Chatham
County Watershed Protection Ordinance. Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made
by Chatham County, on parcels inside the Jordan Lake watershed, shall submit a request for appeal in writing
to NC DWR, 401 &Buffer Permitting Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27669-1650 attention of
the Director of the NC Division of Water Quality.
Should this project result in any direct impacts to surface water features (i.e., crossing and/or filling streams
or wetlands) additional reviews may be necessary. Additionally, a Section 404/401 Permit may be required.
Any inquiries regarding Section 404/401 permitting should be directed to the Division of Water Resources
(Central Office) at (919)-807-6364 and the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh Regulatory Field Office) at
(919)-554-4884.
Respectfully,
Drew Blake
Senior Watershed Specialist,CESSWI
Enclosures:
Exhibit 3:Approved Potential Wetlands&Waters Map—Completed by Terracon
Wetlands&Waters Delineation Report—Completed by Terracon
Exhibit 1: USGS Topographic Map—Completed by Terracon
Exhibit 2:NRCS Soils Survey Map—Completed by Terracon
Exhibit 3:Preliminary Stream and Wetland Map—Completed by Terracon
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form-Version 4.11 —Completed by Terracon
Wetland Determination Data Forms—Completed by Terracon
Major Subdivision Riparian Buffer Application
Authorized Agent Form
Authorization to Enter Property Form
cc: Rachael Thorn,Director,Chatham County Watershed Protection Department
Kimberly Tyson,Planner II/Subdivision Administrator,Chatham County Planning Department
Hunter Glenn.Planner I,Chatham County Planning Department
Angela Plummer,Planner II/Zoning Administrator,Chatham County Planning Department
Jason Sullivan,Director, Chatham County Planning Department

Approved N
Pending USACE - I
07/19/2022 11:19:19 AM
drew.blake
fs
Ulu VQ
1.A.L3
1 f1
r'Y;
�b
v 'c
Tributary Flow Regime
T1: Perennial
J.
1. T2: Intermittent
OR
� . y.
T3: Intermittent
T4:Perennial
T5:Perennial
. ' ='` " ' T6: Perennial
'" K•� T7: Intermittent
Q Project Study Area
Potential Tributary
Potential Wetland 0 200 400 800 Data Sources:
Site Boundary provided by Client
Ephemeral Drainage Feet
PM: Project No.
Potential Wetlands and Waters EXHIBIT
JH 70227223 No.
Drawn By: Scale:
MM 1:4,800 Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070
Checked By: File Name: 3
RG ChathamParcles Chatham County,
Approved By: Date: 2401 Brentwood Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC 27504 North Carolina
JH May 2022 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

rerracon 2401 Brentwood Rd, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27604
P [phone]
Terracon.com
Re: Chatham Parcels 17531-18070
Wetlands and Waters Delineation
Chatham County, NC
No. 70227223
Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon), has completed the requested wetlands and waters
delineation for the approximately 76-acre Chatham County Parcels 17531-18070 located in
Chatham County, NC (Exhibit 1). Terracon staff was tasked with evaluating features that may
be considered subject to jurisdiction and permitting requirements under Sections 404 and 401
of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and under the North Carolina Isolated and Other Non-404
Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters program.
Background Research
Prior to the initiation of field efforts, several available resources were reviewed, including the
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle of New Hope Dam, NC,
the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) published Soil Survey of Chatham
County, NC, aerial photography, and other publicly available mapping resources. Field work
was conducted by technical staff on May 3 and May 10, 2022.
Topography
Topography in the study area is characterized by flat land. Elevations range from a high of
approximately 435 feet above mean sea level (MSL) down to approximately 322 feet above
MSL (Exhibit 1) based on a review of USGS mapping and other online resources.
Soils
Exhibit 2 depicts eight soil mapping units potentially occurring in the study area: Cid silt loam,
6-10% slopes; Cid-Lignum complex, 2-6% slopes; Goldston-Badin complex, 2-6% slopes;
Goldston-Badin complex, 15-35% slopes; Nanford-Badin complex, 2-6% slopes; Nanford-
Badin complex, 6-10% slopes; Nanford-Badin complex, 10-15% slopes; and Pittsboro-Iredell
complex, 2-8% slopes.
The soil mapping unit Cid-Lignum complex, 2-6% slopes, potentially occurring in the study
area, is considered a hydric (wetland) soils by NRCS.
Preliminary Delineation Results
Our review of the Chatham County Parcels identified nine (9) potential wetlands, and seven
(7) potential tributaries, or in some instance's segments thereof (Exhibit 3). These features
may be subject to Section 404/401 jurisdiction by the USACE and/or NCDWR. The potential
wetlands were flagged with pink-and-black and blue flagging and potential tributaries and
surface waters were flagged with orange and blue flagging.
Explore with us

Chtham Parcels I Chatham County, NC
May 17, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 70227223 ■ Ferracon
These delineation results are considered preliminary and are subject to change pending site
review by the USACE. Exhibit 3 depicts the approximate location and extent of the potential
wetlands and tributaries and was prepared using non-survey grade, sub-meter GPS data.
Exhibit 3 is not a replacement for a traditional survey. It is suitable for preliminary planning
purposes only and for use by a surveyor to aid in locating flags. The potential wetlands and
tributaries will likely be subject to Section 404/401 jurisdiction.
Table 1. Potential Wetlands Identified for the Chatham County Parcels
Potential Hydric Soil Indicators
NCWAM Approximate Hydrophytic
Wetland Classification size (ac) Vegetations (Munsell of 1
ID color) Hydrology
Red maple,
Headwater sweetgum, 2.5Y 3/2 with Saturation,
W1 Forest 0.03 common redox drainage
patterns
rush
Red maple,
Headwater sweetgum, 2.5Y 3/2 with Saturation,
W2 Forest 0.01 common redox drainage
patterns
rush
Red maple,
Headwater sweetgum, 2.5Y 3/2 with Saturation,
W3 Forest 0.05 common redox drainage
patterns
rush
Red maple, Saturation,
W4 Headwater 0.02 sweetgum, 2.5Y 3/2 with water-
Forest common redox stained
rush leaves
Common
rush, Saturation,
Headwater 2.5Y 3/2 with water-
W5 Forest 0.22 American redox stained
sycamore, leaves
red maple
Common
rush, Saturation,
Headwater 2.5Y 3/2 with water-
W6 Forest 0.15 American redox stained
sycamore, leaves
red maple
Red maple,
Headwater sweetgum, 2.5Y 7/2 with Saturation,
W7 Forest 0.01 common redox drainage
patterns
rush
High bush
Saturation,
W8 Headwater 0.06 blueberry, 2.5Y 7/2 with drainage
Forest red maple, redox
patterns
sweetgum
2
Explore with us

Chtham Parcels I Chatham County, NC
May 17, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 70227223 ■ i-erracon
Potential Hydric Soil Indicators
NCWAM Approximate Hydrophytic
Wetland 1 (Munsell of
ID Classification size (ac) Vegetation color) Hydrology'
Red maple,
Headwater sweetgum, 2.5Y 4/2 with Saturation,
W9 Forest 0.02 common redox drainage
patterns
rush
Total: 0.60 ac
1 Does not include all hydrophytic vegetation or hydrology indicators
Table 2. Potential Tributaries Identified for the Chatham County Parcels
Potential Approximate
Tributary Flow Regime' NCDWR Stream Amount in Study
ID Score Area (LF)
T1 Perennial 39.5 2,050
T2 Intermittent 22 87
T3 Intermittent 26.5 594
T4 Perennial 33.5 610
T5 Perennial 32.5 377
T6 Perennial 37.5 193
T7 Intermittent 21.5 90
Total: 4,211
1 Based on NCDWR score
Several tributaries occur in the southern portion of the site and there are discontinuous
segments where the main channel appears to go underground and then reemerge. This area
will require review by Chatham County to determine the appropriate buffer requirements.
Riparian Buffers/Setbacks
The study area is within the Cape Fear River Basin. Specifically, the study area is in Chatham
county, within the Jordan Lake Watershed. Per the Jordan Lake Watershed Riparian Buffer
Rule, a riparian buffer may apply to streams that are mapped on either the most current
version of the 1:24,000 scale (7.5 minute) quadrangle topographic maps (Exhibit 1) and/or
the published Soil Survey prepared by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the
United States Department of Agriculture (Exhibit 2). Buffers in this area are defined by
Chatham County as follows:
• Ephemeral Streams - the riparian buffer is 30-ft from the top of bank
• Intermittent Streams - the riparian buffer is 50-ft from the top of bank
3
Explore with us

Chtham Parcels I Chatham County, NC
May 17, 2022 1 Terracon Project No. 70227223 ■ Ferracon
• Perennial Streams - the riparian buffer is 100-ft from the top of bank
• Wetlands - the riparian buffer is 50-ft from the delineated boundary
Tributary T1 is depicted on the topo and published soil survey and will likely be subject to a
100-ft buffer. Additionally, the topo and published soil survey depicts a stream near the
southern boundary of the site. There are at least three tributaries (or portions thereof) in this
area and a review with Chatham County is needed to determine which tributary will be subject
as there are three distinct channels (perennial and intermittent) present along with smaller
segments thereof.
4
Explore with us

N
I
• B EX:oft x
1urJen f.+kr m
_ N
N
U
m
E
m
L
- m
I U
N
U1
U
a
E
Neuse River Basin
m
L
U
DATA SOURCES: n
Project Study Area USGS TNM Topo Base Map;Project Study Area
approximated from Chatham County Parcel Data. N
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet Note:Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrologya
after initial site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status m
and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries. s
m
PM: Project No. Project Location EXHIBIT �I
JH 70227223 No.
Drawn By: KT Scale: ��erracon
1:24,000 y
zz�
Checked By: JH Filename: ExptoreVA*US Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 ti
ChathamParcels Chatham County,
Approved By: Date: 2401 Brentwood Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC27604 North Carolina
JH April 2022 phone:[phone] Fax:[phone] p

r r
GaC P N
56
` GaB
.W
. - NB GaB
" C,mNao
1J aD G of
Nab
GkQ-
nor GaB
n_i8 . • r, �,kC Gad
FsEi Go('
Y NO
po NO PsB � b
t r
1 �J .
fiHraB ' - 1
rJaD .
• -�.""- GaB
Cr
Soil Mapping Units 1 r U
CkC Cid silt loam,6-10%slopes G eG a
CmB Cid-Lignum complex,2-6%slopes E
GOC Goldston-Badin complex,2-6%slopes
GOE Goldston-Badin complex, 15-35%slopes
NaB Nanford-Badin complex,2-6%slopes
NaC Nanford-Badin complex,6-10%slopes a
NaD Nanford-Badin complex, 10-15%slopes
PsB Pittsboro-Iredell complex,2-8%slopes Neuse River Basin
L
U
a
m
DATA SOURCES:
N
Project Study Area 0 400 800 1,600 NRCS Soil Survey of Chatham County,2006;Project Study Area
Feet approximated from Chatham County Parcel Data. 2
0 Soil Boundaries E
PM: JH Project No. NRCS Soils EXHIBIT MI
70227223 No. ry
Drawn By: KT Scale: �ferracon ry
1:9,600 0
Checked By: Filename: Explonwklh us Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070
JH N
ChathamParcels Chatham County, 2 N
Approved By: Date: 2401 Brentwood Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC 27604 North Carolina rn
JH April 2022 phone:[phone] Fax:[phone] p

N
TOO� �� C
,F
A
f
•3
s
r'�T �: ♦, Wit• ��11
•� r �3
�f, •; � N, ►. �� 1. �f r �1'��/�,���.�'`
K .
yIr. r I /ff l f ,rl 7�J Y
y X UJC`V! ,, a i'
PIP
AM
f •Y_
DATASOURCES:
QProject Study Area Latest High-Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,INC
r�� 0 200 400 800 OneMap Server;2017;Project Study Area approximated
F77 Potential Wetland from Chatham County Parcel Data.
Feet Note:Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology
Potential Tributary after initial site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status
and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries.
PM; Project No. EXHIBIT
JH 7022722 Potential Wetlands and Waters No.
Drawn By: MM 1:4,800 Scale: orerracon
Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070
Checked By: File Name: 3
RG ChathamParcles Chatham County,
Approved By: Date: 24111 Bren-..1 Rosa,swle 1
o7 Raleigh,NC 276oa North Carolina
JH May 2022 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

T1
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 4/27/22 Project/Site: Chatham Parcels Latitude: 35.72386
Evaluator: Terracon-R. Graham county: Chatham Longitude: -79.06624
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other New Hope Dam
Stream is at least intermittent 39 5 Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if> 19 or perennial if 2:30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 24 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
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 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 9•5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 El
Date: 4/27/22 Project/Site: Chatham Parcels Latitude: 35.72370
Evaluator: Terracon-R. Graham county: Chatham Longitude: -79.06770
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other New Hope Dam
Stream is at least intermittent 22 Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if> 19 or perennial if 2:30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 12.5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
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 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 M
Date: 4/27/22 Project/Site: Chatham Parcels Latitude: 35.71920
Evaluator: Terracon-R. Graham county: Chatham Longitude: -79.06824
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other
Stream is at least intermittent 26.5 Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if> 19 or perennial if 2:30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 13.5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
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 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7 )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal = b )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

P-]
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: LA_/- 7 -�2- Project/Site:Z,Jaikol Latitude: ,-7 6/
Evaluator:^"("',' - axe �i County: G V�� �n m Longitude: -79, U W46
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other /VLk1J O
Stream is at least intermittent Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name: a.`Y\
if>_19 or perennial if>_ �j 30* ✓ /
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 114 C ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 3
2.Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 � 3
ripple-pool sequence _
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 3
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 1' 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2) 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1.5
10. Natural valley 0
11.Second or greater order channel No Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
12.Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14.Leaf litter 0.5 'i 1 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plants or debris 0 •E,0$ 1 1.5
16.Organic debris lines or piles 0 10. ) 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes
C. Biology (Subtotal = 1, 5
18.Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 2 3
22. Fish Q) 0.5 1 1.5
23.Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 .5 1 1.5
25.Algae 1_ 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other ' 0)
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

M
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 fE
Date: q -2 N ProjectlSite:i M act Latitude: �5, 7! kS
Evaluator:3ef(a.r R- County: ct"lakrAyh Longitude: - 7q,06ci �4
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other 4 rl
Stream is at least intermittent �� Ephemeral Intermittent erenni e.g. Quad Nam: r
if z 19 or perennial if>30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a,Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 `2.! 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 3
3. In-channel structure:ex.riffle-pool,step-pool, 0 1 ( ) 3
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2
5.Active/relict floodplain 0 1 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 '1 2 3
9.Grade control 0 0.5 1 .5
10. Natural valley 0 oCn4.5' 1 1.5
11.Second or greater order channel No LV Yes=3
artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter a .5 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plants or debris 0 1_ 1.5
16.Organic debris lines or piles 0 0.5 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes 3
C. Biology (Subtotal=
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3) 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 1 2 3
22. Fish 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish TP 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 l0.5: 1 1.5
25.Algae 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW= 0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other-
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

T6
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: �)- 2- -'-�� Project/Site: l G c- an, Latitude: 3 5 ' So3
Evaluator: Iafogz'n sR Ill "L.M County:nqCk Giv\ Longitude:-74 o66 3q
Total Points: /y Stream Determination(circl Other Me'\.J H p
Stream is at least intermittent / In^
if>_19 or erennial if 2!30 F Ephemeral Intermitte rennial e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal D ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1 a.Continuity of channel bed and bank ® 1 2 (3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 3
ripple-pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2
5.Active/relict floodplain i 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 T 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 T) 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 MP 1 1.5
11.Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes:0
artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hvdrold (Subtotal = S )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 210,
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 11 0.5 0
15.Sediment on plants or debris 0 1 1.5
16.Organic debris lines or piles I 0 0.5 1 1.5
17.Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes S
C. Biology (Subtotal=
18. Fibrous roots in streambed (3�i 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2) 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 1 2 3
22.Fish b 0.5 1 1.5
23.Crayfish (0) 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 111 1.5
25.Algae 6 0.5 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other fs
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

FT-1
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 TC
Date: 4/29/22 Project/Site: Chatham County Parcel Latitude: 35.71824
Evaluator: Terracon-R.Graham county: Chatham Longitude: -79.06783
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other New Hope Dam
Stream is at least intermittent 21.5 Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if> 19 or perennial if 2:30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 17.5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
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 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 8 )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal = )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

T8
TB
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 4/27/22 Project/Site: Chatham County Parcels Latitude: 35.71822
Evaluator: Terracon-R. Graham county: Chatham Longitude:-79.06771
Total Points: Stream Determination(circle one) Other New Hope Dam
Stream is at least intermittent 33.5 Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial e.g. Quad Name:
if> 19 or perennial if 2:30*
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 19 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a.Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure:ex. riffle-pool, step-pool, 0 1 2 3
ripple-pool sequence
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 3
7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5
11. Second or greater order channel No=0 Yes=3
a artificial ditches are not rated;see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 8.5 )
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3
14. Leaf litter 1.5 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 0.5 1 1.5
17. Soil-based evidence of high water table? No=0 Yes=3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 3 2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos(note diversity and abundance) 0 1 2 3
21.Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3
22. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
24.Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
25.Algae 0 0.5 1 1 1.5
26.Wetland plants in streambed FACW=0.75; OBL= 1.5 Other=0
"perennial streams may also be identified using other methods.See p.35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 City/County: Chatham Sampling Date:4-27-22
Applicant/Owner: Andrew Ross State: NC Sampling Point:W5 wet
Investigator(s): Terracon- R. Graham Section,Township, Range:NA
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Depression Local relief(concave,convex, none): None Slope(%):10-15
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR-P Lat: 35.71890 Long: 79.06905 Datum:WGS 64
Soil Map Unit Name: Nanford-Badin complex, 10 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Represents W2, W3, W4, W5, W6
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators minimum of one is re uired heck all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(136)
❑ Surface Water(Al) LJ True Aquatic Plants(1314) ❑Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
High Water Table(A2) ❑Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) ❑Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(131) ❑Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(132) ❑Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift Deposits(133) ❑Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) El Stuntedor Stressed Plants(D1)
0IronDeposits(B5) ❑ ❑Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) ❑Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(1313) ✓ FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):NA
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth(inches): 14"
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth(inches):2" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata)- Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:W5 wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) %Cover Species? Status
Acer rubrum 25 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 6
1. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: (A)
2.Liquidambar styraciflua 15 Yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 6 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100 (A/B)
6.
7 Prevalence Index worksheet:
40 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 20 20%of total cover:8 OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30ft Radius ) FACW species x 2=
1.Acer rubrum 15 Yes FAC FAC species x 3=
2.Liquidambar styraciflua 20 Yes FAC FACU species x 4=
3 UPL species x 5=
4 Column Totals: (A) (B)
5' Prevalence Index =B/A=
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8' X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9 35 - 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 17.5 20%of total cover:7 -
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1.Microstegium vimineum 75 Yes FAC - Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2.Woodwardia areolata 15 No FACW
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3. be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6 Tree-Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
7. height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub-Woody plants,excluding vines, less
9. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1
10. m)tall.
11. Herb-All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
100 =Total Cover of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50%of total cover: 50 20%of total cover:20
30ft Radius Woody vine-All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) height.
1.Smilax rotundifolia 15 Yes FAC
2.
3.
4' Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
15 =Total Cover Present? Yes X No
50%of total cover: 7.5 20%of total cover:3
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont-Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W5 wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Tyoe' LocZ Texture Remarks
0-20 2.5Y 3/2 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M LC
'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix.
H dric Soil Indicators: El Dark
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol(Al) El
Surface(S7) 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) Redox Dark Surface(F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
PMLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Zadell Chatham City/County: Chatham Sampling Date:4-27-22
Applicant/Owner: Andrew Ross State: NC Sampling Point:W5 Up
Investigator(s): Terracon- R. Graham Section,Township, Range:NA
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): HIIISIope Local relief(concave,convex, none): None Slope(%):10-15
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR-P Lat: 35.71900 Long: -79.06864 Datum:WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Nanford-Badin complex, 10 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: NA
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes NoX
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nox within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Nox
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators minimum of one is re uired heck all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(136)
❑ Surface Water(Al) LJ True Aquatic Plants(1314) ❑Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
High Water Table(A2) ❑Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑Drainage Patterns(1310)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) ❑Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(131) ❑Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(132) ❑Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift Deposits(133) ❑Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) El Stuntedor Stressed Plants(D1)
0IronDeposits(B5) ❑ ❑Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) ❑Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(1313) El FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):NA
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):>201,
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):>201, Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NoX
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata)— Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:W5 up
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) %Cover Species? Status
Juni erus vir iniana 20 Yes FACU Number of Dominant Species 4
1. p 9 That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua 15 Yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3 Plnus taeda 30 Yes FAC 8
Species Across All Strata: (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 50 (A/B)
6.
7 Prevalence Index worksheet:
65 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 32.5 20%of total cover: 13 OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30ft Radius ) FACW species x 2=
1.Carya glabra 5 No FACU FAC species x 3=
2 Juniperus virginiana 15 Yes FACU FACU species x 4=
3 Acer rubrum 10 Yes FAC UPL species x 5=
4.Ligustrum sinense 15 Yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B)
5' Prevalence Index =B/A=
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9 45 — 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 22.5 20%of total cover:9 —
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1. Ilex opaca 15 Yes FACU — Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2 Lonicera japonica 20 Yes FACU
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
3. be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6 Tree—Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
7. height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub—Woody plants,excluding vines, less
9. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1
10. m)tall.
11. Herb—All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
35 =Total Cover of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50%of total cover: 17.5 20%of total cover:7
30ft Radius Woody vine—All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) height.
,.None Present
2.
3.
4' Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
=Total Cover Present? Yes x No
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W5 up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' LocZ Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/3 100 L
3-20 10YR 6/4 100 L
'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix.
H dric Soil Indicators: El Dark
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol(Al) El
Surface(S7) 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) Redox Dark Surface(F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
PMLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 City/County: Chatham Sampling Date:4-27-22
Applicant/Owner: Andrew Ross State: NC Sampling Point:W8 wet
Investigator(s): Terracon- R. Graham Section,Township, Range:NA
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Depression Local relief(concave,convex, none): None Slope(%):10-15
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR-P Lat: 35.71954 Long: -79.0677 Datum:WGS 64
Soil Map Unit Name: Nanford-Badin complex, 10 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: PFO
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Represents W1, W8, W9, W7
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators minimum of one is re uired heck all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(136)
❑ Surface Water(Al) LJ True Aquatic Plants(1314) ❑Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
High Water Table(A2) ❑Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑Drainage Patterns(B10)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) ❑Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(131) ❑Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(132) ❑Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift Deposits(133) ❑Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) El Stuntedor Stressed Plants(D1)
0IronDeposits(B5) ❑ ❑Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) ❑Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(1313) El FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):NA
Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth(inches):>201,
Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth(inches):4" Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata)— Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:W8 Wet
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) %Cover Species? Status
Acer rubrum 15 Yes FAC Number of Dominant Species 7
1. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: (A)
2.
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 100 (A/B)
6.
7 Prevalence Index worksheet:
15 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 7.5 20%of total cover:3 OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30ft Radius ) FACW species x 2=
1.Acer rubrum 20 Yes FAC FAC species x 3=
2 Vaccinium corymbosum 15 Yes FACW FACU species x 4=
3 Liquidambar styraciflua 10 Yes FAC UPL species x 5=
4 Column Totals: (A) (B)
5' Prevalence Index =B/A=
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. X 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9 45 — 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 22.5 20%of total cover:9 -
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 Acer rubrum 10 Yes FAC — Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2 Carex lurida 5 Yes OBL
3 Juncus effusus 5 Yes FACW 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6 Tree—Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
7. height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub—Woody plants,excluding vines, less
9. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1
10. m)tall.
11. Herb—All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
20 =Total Cover of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50%of total cover: 10 20%of total cover:4
30ft Radius Woody vine—All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) height.
,.None Present
2.
3.
4' Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
=Total Cover Present? Yes X No
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W8 Wet
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Tyoe' LocZ Texture Remarks
0-20 2.5Y 7/2 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M LC
'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix.
H dric Soil Indicators: El Dark
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol(Al) El
Surface(S7) 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) Redox Dark Surface(F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
PMLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: Zadell Chatham City/County: Chatham Sampling Date:4-27-22
Applicant/Owner: Andrew Ross State: NC Sampling Point:W8 up
Investigator(s): Terracon- R. Graham Section,Township, Range:NA
Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): HIIISIOpe Local relief(concave,convex, none): None Slope(%):10-15
Subregion(LRR or MLRA): LRR-P Lat: 35.71998 Long: -79.06758 Datum:WGS 84
Soil Map Unit Name: Nanford-Badin complex, 10 to 15 percent slopes NWI classification: NA
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes NoX
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes Nox within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Nox
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators minimum of one is re uired heck all that apply) Surface Soil Cracks(136)
❑ Surface Water(Al) LJ True Aquatic Plants(1314) ❑Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138)
High Water Table(A2) ❑Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) ❑Drainage Patterns(1310)
❑ Saturation(A3) ❑Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots(C3) ❑Moss Trim Lines(B16)
❑ Water Marks(131) ❑Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) ❑Dry-Season Water Table(C2)
❑ Sediment Deposits(132) ❑Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils(C6) ❑Crayfish Burrows(C8)
❑ Drift Deposits(133) ❑Thin Muck Surface(C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9)
❑ Algal Mat or Crust(B4) Other(Explain in Remarks) El Stuntedor Stressed Plants(D1)
0IronDeposits(B5) ❑ ❑Geomorphic Position(D2)
❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) ❑Shallow Aquitard (D3)
❑ Water-Stained Leaves(B9) ❑Microtopographic Relief(D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna(1313) El FAC-Neutral Test(D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):NA
Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):>201,
Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth(inches):>201, Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes NoX
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections),if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata)— Use scientific names of plants. Sampling Point:W8 up
Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) %Cover Species? Status
Juni erus vir iniana 20 Yes FACU Number of Dominant Species 2
1. p 9 That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: (A)
2 Liquidambar styraciflua 15 Yes FAC
Total Number of Dominant
3. Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
4.
Percent of Dominant Species
5. That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 28 (A/B)
6.
7 Prevalence Index worksheet:
35 =Total Cover Total%Cover of: Multiply by:
50%of total cover: 17.5 20%of total cover:7 OBL species x 1 =
Saplina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30ft Radius ) FACW species x 2=
1.Carya glabra 15 Yes FACU FAC species x 3=
2 Juniperus virginiana 15 Yes FACU FACU species x 4=
3 Acer rubrum 10 Yes FAC UPL species x 5=
4 Column Totals: (A) (B)
5' Prevalence Index =B/A=
6.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7. _ 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8. _ 2-Dominance Test is>50%
9 40 — 3-Prevalence Index is<_3.0'
=Total Cover 4-Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50%of total cover: 20 20%of total cover:8 -
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft Radius ) data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
1 Carya glabra 15 Yes FACU — Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
2 Lonicera japonica 10 Yes FACU
3 Acer rubrum 5 No FAC 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
4. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
5.
6 Tree—Woody plants,excluding vines,3 in.(7.6 cm)or
more in diameter at breast height(DBH), regardless of
7. height.
8.
Sapling/Shrub—Woody plants,excluding vines, less
9. than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft(1
10. m)tall.
11. Herb—All herbaceous(non-woody)plants, regardless
30 =Total Cover of size,and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
50%of total cover: 15 20%of total cover:6
30ft Radius Woody vine—All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ) height.
,.None Present
2.
3.
4' Hydrophytic
5. Vegetation
=Total Cover Present? Yes No X
50%of total cover: 20%of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: W8 up
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' LocZ Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 3/3 100 L
3-20 10YR 6/4 100 L
'Type: C=Concentration,D=De letion,RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix.
H dric Soil Indicators: El Dark
icators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol(Al) El
Surface(S7) 2 cm Muck(A10)(MLRA 147)
❑ Histic Epipedon(A2) Polyvalue Below Surface(S8)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ Coast Prairie Redox(A16)
❑ Black Histic(A3) ❑Thin Dark Surface(S9)(MLRA 147,148) ❑ (MLRA 147,148)
❑ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix(F2) Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)
Stratified Layers(A5) ❑ Depleted Matrix(F3) (MLRA 136,147)
❑ cm Muck(A10)(LRR N) Redox Dark Surface(F6) Very Shallow Dark Surface(TF12)
Depleted Below Dark Surface(A11) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) ❑ Other(Explain in Remarks)
❑Thick Dark Surface(Al2) ❑ Redox Depressions(F8)
❑Sandy Mucky Mineral(S1)(LRR N, ❑ Iron-Manganese Masses(F12)(LRR N,
PMLRA 147,148) MLRA 136)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix(S4) Umbric Surface(F13)(MLRA 136,122) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Redox(S5) ❑ Piedmont Floodplain Soils(F19)(MLRA 148) wetland hydrology must be present,
❑ Stripped Matrix(S6) ❑ Red Parent Material(F21)(MLRA 127, 147) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer(if observed):
Type:
Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont—Version 2.0

7/19/22,9:58 AM OpenGov
County of Chatham,NC
07/19/2022
W P-22-338
On-site Riparian Buffer Review
Status:Active Date Created: May 24,2022
Applicant Location
Rhiannon Graham 1623 N Pea Ridge Rd
[e-mail] Pittsboro, North Carolina 27312
2401 Brentwood Road
Owner:
Suite 107
Raleigh,INC 27612 LIENAU LYDIA JAN COPELAND LIENAU CLINTON BERINGER
760-717-2621 930 SEAFORTH RD PITTSBORO, NC 27312
Project Information
Review Type
Major Subdivision Before continuing please complete a phone or email
conversation with Paula Phillips of the Planning
Department. [phone]
[e-mail]
If your project will result in a review of greater than If your project is a Major Subdivision please contact
10 acres please contact a private consulting firm to a private consulting firm to complete the surface
complete the surface water determination. For water determination. For stream determinations the
stream determinations the consultant must have consultant must have successfully completed the
successfully completed the NCDWQ/NC State NCDWQ/NC State University Surface Waters
University Surface Waters Classification. For wetland Classification. For wetland delineations the
delineations the consultant must demonstrate at consultant must demonstrate at least 2 years of
least 2 years of experience delineating jurisdictional experience delineating jurisdictional wetlands in
wetlands in accordance with the Eastern Mountains accordance with the Eastern Mountains and
and Piedmont Regional Supplement to the 1987 US Piedmont Regional Supplement to the 1987 US
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
Please visit the Watershed Protection Department Please visit the Watershed Protection Department
website for a list of consultants that regularly website for a list of consultants that regularly
complete work within Chatham County. complete work within Chatham County.
Number of Features Found
14 Feature is defined as any surface water that is
subject to Chatham County Riparian Buffers
(streams,wetlands, ponds). Include each stream
type transition, with corresponding forms, and
individual wetland in your total. Total is total
features found before USACE or County site visit.
Date Field Work Was Completed
05/10/2022
Has USACE on-site review been scheduled or completed
A Minor Subdivision is the creation of 5 or less new
lots. If the original tract is over 10 acres and the
https://chathamcountync.viewpointcloud.io/#/explore/records/26951/printable?act=true&app=true&att=true&emp=true&int=true&loc=true&sec=101118... 1/3

7/19/22,9:58 AM OpenGov
subdivision results in the total of that tract
becoming less than 10 acres then two lots have been
created by default.
Parcel Information
Parcel Number(s) Watershed District
17531 and 18070 Cape Fear
Is the property within the Jordan Lake Watershed
Yes
Property Owner Name
LIENAU LYDIA JAN COPELAND&CLINTON BERINGER LIENAU
Location of Tract(address if applicable)
1623 N PEA RIDGE RD
Driving Directions from Pittsboro
off of 64
Subdivision Name(if applicable)
Please describe access issues(provide gate codes,or information for scheduling site visit)
park and access off of N Pea Ridge Road
Applicants Information
Are you the Landowner or an Agent Full Name
Agent Rhiannon
Primary Phone Number Primary Email
760-717-2621 [e-mail]
Mailing Address City/State
2401 Brentwood Road,Suite 107 Raleigh, NC
Zip Code
27612
How would you like to receive the completed review letter?
I would like to pick up the completed Riparian Buffer Review at the County Office
O
1 would like the completed Riparian Buffer Review mailed to me
O
1 would like the completed Riparian Buffer Review e-mailed to me.
G
Statement of Understanding
Name
I have read and understand the regulations of the Watershed Rhiannon Graham
Protection Ordinance,Section 304,and I agree to adhere to these
associated policies and guidelines. New Field
05/24/2022
Attachments
https://chathamcou ntync.viewpoi ntcloud.io/#/explore/records/26951/printable?act=true&app=true&att=true&emp=true&i nt=true&loc=true&sec=101118... 2/3

7/19/22,9:58 AM OpenGov
pdf Agent Authorization.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:32 am
pdf agent form.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:35 am
npdf Chatham Parcels Buffer Letter of Findings.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:42 am
pdf wetlands and waters map.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:44 am
npdf Tl-T7.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:45 am
pdf Soilsl.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:43 am
pdf Topo.pdf
Uploaded by Rhiannon Graham on May 24,2022 at 9:43 am
History
Date Activity
May 18,2022 at 5:28 pm Rhiannon Graham started a draft of Record WP-22-338
May 24,2022 at 9:48 am Rhiannon Graham submitted Record WP-22-338
May 24,2022 at 9:48 am approval step Intake Approval was assigned to Drew Blake on Record WP-22-338
Jul 14,2022 at 8:14 am Drew Blake approved approval step Intake Approval on Record WP-22-338
Jul 14,2022 at 10:44 am Drew Blake changed Number of Features Found from"13"to"14"on Record WP-22-338
Jul 14,2022 at 10:45 am Drew Blake added a guest:[e-mail] to Record WP-22-338
Timeline
Label Status Activated Completed Assignee Due Date
Intake Approval Complete May 24,2022 at 9:48 am Jul 14,2022 at 8:14 am Drew Blake
Q Major Subdivision Riparian Buffer Review Fee Active Jul 14,2022 at 8:14 am
Field Review Inactive
Major Subdivision Riparian Buffer Confirmation Report Inactive
https:Hchathamcountync.viewpointcloud.io/#/explore/records/26951/printable?act=true&app=true&att=true&emp=true&int=true&loc=true&sec=l 01118... 3/3

Ge�,tY P u by,.,N
F
o �
5 Q
V t
��VjAM Co NYN Y h
w�"` n.a.o use uvrp.w
a H.aM1Wer l'hMhnm
CHATHAM COUNTY
AUTHORIZE,ll AGENT FOR FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. PARCEL ID(PIN)17531 and 18070 PARCEL SIZE 40ac and 36 ac totaling to 76 ac
STREET ADDRESS: 1623 N PEA RIDGE RD, pittsboro NC 27312
Please print:
Property Owner: Shaddox Creek Developers
Property Owner:
'fhe undersigned owner(s)of the above described property,do hereby authorize
of
(Contractor/Agent) (Name of consulting firm if applicable)
to act on mylour behalf and take all actions,Uwe could have taken if present,necessary for the processing,issiumce
and acceptance of reviews,inspections,or permits and any and al I standard and special conditions attached to
these approvals.The activities authorized include the following(Check all that apply):
F-1 Check here for all of the below options.
Building Permit
Zoning Compliance Permits
Ploodplain Determination
Soil Erosion&Sedimentation Control Permit
Permits to install,repair,evaluate,or expand onsite wastewater system(s)
Evaluation/inspection/permitting of a private drinking water well(s).
Riparian Buffer Review pursuant to §304 of the Chatham Co.Watershed Protection Ordinance.
Other:
Property Owner's Address(if different than property above):
Telephone: E-mail:
nT: information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the best of our
Owner Authorized Signature Agent Authorized Signature
Date: 4/2.0 1WL1 Date:
Revised 10/2017

Watershed Protection Department
CHA`1(HAM COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
P.O.Box 548
Pittsboro,NC 27312
Website:www,chathautnc.org
Authorization to Inter Ptoperty Form
Date: 5/24/22
17531 and 18070
PARCEL No.(AKPAR)
1,(print name) Shaddox Creek Developers as owner of the property described above,
or as a representative of the owner(s) do hereby convey permission to Chatham County staff to enter the property at
their convenience to conduct a surface water identification(SWID)necessary to determine whether or not water features
on my property are subject to the riparian buffer regulations described in Section 304 of the Chatham County Watershed
Protection Ordinance. The SWID will be public record and on file at the Planning and Watershed Protection
Departments,and may be requested in the future for review by interested patties.
I understand that stream delineations for the property listed above will be made by County staff only once and that If
future subdivisions are proposed within this property boundary,it will tequire a surface water identification by a private
consultant at the property owner's expense.
5E\4900x
(Prin( Owner's Name) (Signatut of wner)
(Date)S 11-01 t1wZZ
(print Authorized Agent Name) (Signature of Authorized Agent)
(Date)

ENT OF�y FISII&WILDLIFE
QPP r` F� SERVICE
Uj
Zo United States Department of the Interior
.t a9 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Date:4/18/23
Self-Certification Letter
Project NameFirefly Overlook
Dear Applicant:
Thank you for using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Raleigh Ecological
Services online project review process. By printing this letter in conjunction with your
project review package, you are certifying that you have completed the online project
review process for the project named above in accordance with all instructions
provided, using the best available information to reach your conclusions. This letter,
and the enclosed project review package, completes the review of your project in
accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544, 87 Stat.
884), as amended(ESA), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act(16 U.S.C.
668-668c, 54 Stat. 250), as amended(Eagle Act). This letter also provides
information for your project review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (P.L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 83 Stat. 852), as amended. A copy of this
letter and the project review package must be submitted to this office for this
certification to be valid. This letter and the project review package will be maintained
in our records.
The species conclusions table in the enclosed project review package summarizes
your ESA and Eagle Act conclusions. Based on your analysis, mark all the
determinations that apply:
❑ "no effect" determinations for proposed/listed species and/or
proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
❑ "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed/listed
species and/or proposed/designated critical habitat; and/or
❑ "may affect, likely to adversely affect" determination for the Northern long-
eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) and relying on the findings of the January 5,
2016, Programmatic Biological Opinion for the Final 4(d) Rule on the
Northern long-eared bat;
❑ "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.

Applicant Page 2
We certify that use of the online project review process in strict accordance with the
instructions provided as documented in the enclosed project review package results in
reaching the appropriate determinations. Therefore, we concur with the "no effect" or
"not likely to adversely affect" determinations for proposed and listed species and
proposed and designated critical habitat; the "may affect" determination for Northern
long-eared bat; and/or the "no Eagle Act permit required" determinations for eagles.
Additional coordination with this office is not needed. Candidate species are not
legally protected pursuant to the ESA. However, the Service encourages consideration
of these species by avoiding adverse impacts to them. Please contact this office for
additional coordination if your project action area contains candidate species.
Should project plans change or if additional information on the distribution of
proposed or listed species, proposed or designated critical habitat, or bald eagles
becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This certification letter is
valid for 1 year. Information about the online project review process including
instructions, species information, and other information regarding project reviews
within North Carolina is available at our website http://www.fws.gov. If you have any
questions, you can write to us at [e-mail] or please contact Leigh Mann of
this office at 919-856-4520, ext. 10.
Sincerely,
/s/Pete Benjamin
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
Raleigh Ecological Services
Enclosures -project review package

Species Conclusions Table
Project Name: USFWS Project Review for Firefly Overlook
Date:4/18/23 Prepared by Terracon Consultants Inc
Species/Resource Name Conclusion ESA Section 71 Eagle Act Notes 1 Documentation
Determination
Habitat assessment by Terracon
Atlantic Pigtoe No suitable habitat present No effect biologists found no suitable
habitat.
Habitat assessment by Terracon
Red-cockaded woodpecker No suitable habitat present No effect biologists found no suitable
habitat.
Habitat assessment by Terracon
Harperella No suitable habitat present No effect biologists found no suitable
habitat.
NCNHP data indicates no Critical Habitat
Critical habitat No critical habitat present No effect present in this area. The critical habitat
mapper does not depict any critical habitat
present within the study area.
Bald Eagle Unlikely to disturb nesting No effect No Eagle Act permit required
bald eagles
Any species the Service has determined is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range and the Service has proposed a
draft rule to list as endangered.Proposed
Tricolored Bat endangered species are not protected by the take
(Proposed Endangered) Potential Suitable habitat NA prohibitions of section 9 of the ESA until the rule to
list is finalized. Under section 7(a)(4)of the ESA,
Federal agencies must confer with the Service if
their action will jeopardize the continued existence
of a proposed species.
Acknowledgement: I agree that the above information about my proposed project is true. I used all of the provided resources to make an
informed decision about impacts in the immediate and surrounding areas.
Signature/Title Date

Roy Cooper,Governor
s ■■■
■■ a NC DEPARTMENT OF D Reid Wilson,Secretary
21
■■i■i NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
■ ■a■ Misty Buchanan
Deputy Director,Natural Heritage Program
NCN H DE-21542
April 6, 2023
Rhiannon Graham
Terracon Inc.
2401 Brentwood Road, Suite 107
Raleigh, NC 27603
RE: Firefly Overlook
Dear Rhiannon Graham:
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide
information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above.
Based on the project area mapped with your request, a query of the NCNHP database indicates that
there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, and/or
conservation/managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there
may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not
imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query
should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare
species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our
records.
The attached 'Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that
have been documented within a one-mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these
records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area
if suitable habitat exists. Tables of natural areas and conservation/managed areas within a one-mile
radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report.
If a Federally-listed species is found within the project area or is indicated within a one-mile radius of
the project area, the NCNHP recommends contacting the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for
guidance. Contact information for USFWS offices in North Carolina is found here:
httl2s://www.fws.gov/offices/Directory/ListOffices.cfm?statecode=37.
Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation
planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria
for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published
without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information
source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission.
The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a
Dedicated Nature Preserve, Registered Heritage Area, Land and Water Fund easement, or Federally-
listed species are documented near the project area.
If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance,
please contact Rodney A. Butler at rod ney.butler(a)ncdcr.aov or 919-707-8603.
Sincerely,
NC Natural Heritage Program
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
�p 121 W JONES STREET RALEIGH.NC 27603 • 1661 MAIL SERVICE CENTER,RALEIGH.NC 27699
© OFC 919.707 1J120 • FAX [phone]

Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Firefly Overlook
April 6, 2023
NCNHDE-21542
Element Occurrences Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Na Common Name Element Accuracy Federal State Global State
Group Observation Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank
M M V Date Rank A
Bird 7687 Haliaeetus Bald Eagle 2004 H 2-High Bald/Golden Threatened G5 S3B,S3
leucocephalus Eagle N
Protection
Act
Bird 40096 Haliaeetus Bald Eagle 2020 E 2-High Bald/Golden Threatened G5 S3B,S3
leucocephalus Eagle N
Protection
Act
Natural 8678 Dry-Mesic --- 2010 C? 3-Medium --- --- G4G5 S4
Community Oak--Hickory Forest
(Piedmont Subtype)
Natural 3972 Dry Oak--Hickory --- 2010 A 2-High --- --- G4G5 S4
Community Forest (Piedmont
Subtype)
Natural Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Site Nam 1JURepresentational Rating M Collective Rating
Parkers Creek Ridges R5 (General) C5 (General)
Managed Areas Documented Within a One-mile Radius of the Project Area
Managed Area Name Owner IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN Owner Type
B. Everett Jordan Dam and Lake US Army Corps of Engineers Federal
Lower Haw River State Natural Area NC DNCR, Division of Parks and Recreation State
Jordan Lake State Recreation Area NC DNCR, Division of Parks and Recreation State
NC Division of Mitigation Services Easement NC DEQ, Division of Mitigation Services State
Lower Haw River State Natural Area Dedicated NC DNCR, Natural Heritage Program State
Nature Preserve
Parkers Creek Ridges Registered Heritage Area NC DNCR, Natural Heritage Program State
Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httos://ncnhde.natureserve.org/help. Data query generated on April 6,2023; source: NCNHP, Q4,Winter(January)2023.
Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database.
Page 2 of 3

NCNHDE-21542- Firefly Overlook
Griffins C')eatolLi:
Crossroads
Ridge Vie
yy d \
0.
r---�
� 433 ftIN
Jordan Lake •� \
Stale
Re.reat:oo Area 4~1.
'� t \t\\ - \•�\
0 0.33 0.65 1.3 Miles
April 6, 2023
M NHP Natural Area (NHNA)
Managed Area(MAREA)
Buffered Project Boundary Sources Esn,Ai us DS USGS NGA NASA,CGIAR IJ Robinson NCEAS
ry NLS. OS. NMA. Geodatasryrelstm RllkswaWstaat. GSA. Geoland. FEMA.
Q Intermap ano the GIS user community
Project Boundary Sources Esn HERE Ga mm. FAO NOAA USGS Z OpenSzw%lap
c t ibutors,and the GIS User Community
Page 3 of 3

taEH�CF Ty 17
Q PP F.yT riwAV4M ru'i r•
a United States Department of the Interior 4' ',
!, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
=RCH 3 �s Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh,NC 27636-3726
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
In Reply Refer To: April 06, 2023
Project Code: 2023-0065744
Project Name: Firefly Overlook
Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project
location or may be affected by your proposed project
To Whom It May Concern:
The enclosed species list identifies threatened, endangered, proposed and candidate species, as
well as proposed and final designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your
proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The species list fulfills the
requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) under section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). If your project area
contains suitable habitat for any of the federally-listed species on this species list, the proposed
action has the potential to adversely affect those species. If suitable habitat is present, surveys
should be conducted to determine the species'presence or absence within the project area. The
use of this species list and/or North Carolina Natural Heritage program data should not be
substituted for actual field surveys.
New information based on updated surveys, changes in the abundance and distribution of
species, changed habitat conditions, or other factors could change this list. Please feel free to
contact us if you need more current information or assistance regarding the potential impacts to
federally proposed, listed, and candidate species and federally designated and proposed critical
habitat. Please note that under 50 CFR 402.12(e) of the regulations implementing section 7 of the
Act, the accuracy of this species list should be verified after 90 days. This verification can be
completed formally or informally as desired. The Service recommends that verification be
completed by visiting the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and
implementation for updates to species lists and information.An updated list may be requested
through the ECOS-IPaC system by completing the same process used to receive the enclosed list.
The purpose of the Act is to provide a means whereby threatened and endangered species and the
ecosystems upon which they depend may be conserved. Under sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Act and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 402 et seq.), Federal agencies are required to
utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of threatened and endangered

04/06/2023 2
species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or
designated critical habitat.
A Biological Assessment is required for construction projects (or other undertakings having
similar physical impacts)that are major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)
(c)). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a biological
evaluation similar to a Biological Assessment be prepared to determine whether the project may
affect listed or proposed species and/or designated or proposed critical habitat. Recommended
contents of a Biological Assessment are described at 50 CFR 402.12.
If a Federal agency determines, based on the Biological Assessment or biological evaluation, that
listed species and/or designated critical habitat may be affected by the proposed project, the
agency is required to consult with the Service pursuant to 50 CFR 402. In addition, the Service
recommends that candidate species, proposed species and proposed critical habitat be addressed
within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7
consultation, including the role of permit or license applicants, can be found in the "Endangered
Species Consultation Handbook" at:
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/TOC-GLOS.PDF
Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species
under the Endangered Species Act(ESA), there are additional responsibilities under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act(BGEPA)to
protect native birds from project-related impacts.Any activity, intentional or unintentional,
resulting in take of migratory birds, including eagles, is prohibited unless otherwise permitted by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). For more
information regarding these Acts see https://www.fws.gov/birds/policies-and-regulations.php.
The MBTA has no provision for allowing take of migratory birds that may be unintentionally
killed or injured by otherwise lawful activities. It is the responsibility of the project proponent to
comply with these Acts by identifying potential impacts to migratory birds and eagles within
applicable NEPA documents (when there is a federal nexus) or a Bird/Eagle Conservation Plan
(when there is no federal nexus). Proponents should implement conservation measures to avoid
or minimize the production of project-related stressors or minimize the exposure of birds and
their resources to the project-related stressors. For more information on avian stressors and
recommended conservation measures see https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-
birds.php.
In addition to MBTA and BGEPA, Executive Order 13186: Responsibilities of Federal Agencies
to Protect Migratory Birds, obligates all Federal agencies that engage in or authorize activities
that might affect migratory birds, to minimize those effects and encourage conservation measures
that will improve bird populations. Executive Order 13186 provides for the protection of both
migratory birds and migratory bird habitat. For information regarding the implementation of
Executive Order 13186, please visit https://www.fws.govibirds/policies-and-regulations/
executive-orders/e0-13186.php.

04/06/2023 3
We appreciate your concern for threatened and endangered species. The Service encourages
Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species into their project
planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please include the Consultation Code in the header of
this letter with any request for consultation or correspondence about your project that you submit
to our office.
Attachment(s):
■ Official Species List
• Migratory Birds

04/06/2023 1
OFFICIAL SPECIES LIST
This list is provided pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and fulfills the
requirement for Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary of the Interior information whether
any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of a proposed
action".
This species list is provided by:
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
[phone]

04/06/2023 2
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code: 2023-0065744
Project Name: Firefly Overlook
Project Type: Residential Construction
Project Description: Residential
Project Location:
The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https://
www.google.com/maps/035.72028055,-79.06790872244312,14z
n.✓'n w
j�
r.r K.1 i
•ram. ��,.
V
a
Counties: Chatham County, North Carolina

04/06/2023 3
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES
There is a total of 5 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on this species list.
Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include
species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species
list because a project could affect downstream species.
IPaC does not display listed species or critical habitats under the sole jurisdiction of NOAA
Fisheries1, as USFWS does not have the authority to speak on behalf of NOAA and the
Department of Commerce.
See the "Critical habitats" section below for those critical habitats that lie wholly or partially
within your project area under this office's jurisdiction. Please contact the designated FWS office
if you have questions.
1. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an
office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of
Commerce.
MAMMALS
NAME STATUS
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis sub flavus Proposed
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Endangered
Species profile:httpss://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515
BIRDS
NAME STATUS
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile:https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7614
CLAMS
NAME STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Threatened
There is final critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
Species profile:https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
INSECTS
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile:https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743

04/06/2023 4
FLOWERING PLANTS
NAME STATUS
Harperella Ptilimnium nodosum Endangered
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
Species profile:https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3739
CRITICAL HABITATS
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S
JURISDICTION.

04/06/2023
MIGRATORY BIRDS
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act!and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act2.
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to
migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider
implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
3. 50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your
project location.To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this
list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location,
nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact
locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project
area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species
on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing
the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to
additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your
migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be
found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures
to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE
SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and
breeding in your project area.
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Sep 1 to
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)in this area,but warrants attention Jul 31
because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types
of development or activities.
Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Breeds Mar 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 25
and Alaska.
Eastern Whip-poor-will Antrostomus voci ferns Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 20
and Alaska.

04/06/2023 2
BREEDING
NAME SEASON
Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus Breeds Apr 20
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 20
and Alaska.
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor Breeds May 1
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA to Jul 31
and Alaska.
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea Breeds Apr 1 to
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA Jul 31
and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA to Sep 10
and Alaska.
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus Breeds
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)only in particular Bird Conservation Regions elsewhere
(BCRs)in the continental USA
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Breeds May 10
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern(BCC)throughout its range in the continental USA to Aug 31
and Alaska.
PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the
FAQ "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting
to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence (■)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week
months.)A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort(see
below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher
confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated?The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in
the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for
that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee
was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is
0.25.

04/06/2023 3
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of
presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum
probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence
in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12
(0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on
week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the
probability of presence score.
Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across
its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project
area.
Survey Effort (1)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
No Data (—)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on
all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort —no data
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Bald Eagle Non-BCC 111I __:_ _3+1111111111111 1111 11111��
Vulnerable — --J ���� ---- -JAL -JL MMM �— ---- ---�
Chimney Swift I I I 1 I +—AI 1111 i"' „" '11+ ++++ ++++BCC Rangewide T
(CON)
Eastern Whip-poor- ++++ ++++ ++++ ++A 1++001
NONE �NONE +'10 11I
Will + ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Kentucky Warbler BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ ++++ + ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
(CON)

04/06/2023 4
Prairie Warbler BCC Rangewide T
+ 1TT++ I I +T+ ++T++ I I I• ii i "+' +++' AN 1101 0+++ ++++ ++++
(CON) „--
Prothonotary Warbler ++++ ++++ +++� ,'r I Jill 1111 Jill 1+11 ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Red-headed Woodpecker 111111A +011141 114 Qll I'll Oil 11111111 ill* wl
BCC Rangewide
(CON) yy
Rusty Blackbird *+++ ++++ ++*+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +++T +,++ +++,
BCC-BCR
Wood Thrush BCC Rangewide ++++ ++++ ++++ +0" "1' +1' I'++ '+,+ +++, *+++ ++++ ++++
(CON) ___
Additional information can be found using the following links:
■ Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/librarT�/
collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
■ Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
MIGRATORY BIRDS FAQ
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts
to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize
impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly
important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area.When birds may be breeding in
the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding
in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits
may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of
infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my
specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
(BCQ and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian
Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding,
and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as
occurring in the 10km grid cell(s)which your project intersects, and that have been identified as

04/06/2023 5
warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act
requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or
development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your
project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list
of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information
Locator(RAIL)Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds
potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data
provided by the Avian Knowledge Network(AKN). This data is derived from a growing
collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information
becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and
how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me
about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding,wintering or migrating in my area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding,
wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look
at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each
bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated
with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point
within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not
breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC)that are of concern
throughout their range anywhere within the USA(including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands,
Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non-BCC -Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on
your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or(for non-eagles)
potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities
(e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made,
in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC
species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can
implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.

04/06/2023 6
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species
and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the
Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides
birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.Alternately, you may download the bird
model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical
Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use
throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this
information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study
and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Lorin.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid
violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of
birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for
identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC
use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be
aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s)that
overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no
data" indicator (a red horizontal bar).A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey
effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In
contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of
certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for
identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might
be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you
know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement
conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities,
should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell
me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory
birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

04/06/2023 7
IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION
Agency: Terracon Consultants
Name: Rhiannon Graham
Address: 2401 Brentwood Rd.
Address Line 2: Suite 107
City: Raleigh
State: NC
Zip: 27610
Email [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]

N
a
m
2
U
E
m
- m
' U
U
a
E
Neuse River Basin
@
L
U
DATA SOURCES: n
USGS TNM To o Base Ma r
@
Project Study Area approximated from Chatham County Parcel Data.
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet Note:Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrologym,
after initial site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status E
and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries. s
m
PM: Project No. Project Location EXHIBIT Ul
JH 70227223 NO. N
Drawn By: Scale: ierracon N
KT 1:24,000 N
Checked By: JFi Filename: Explorlwkhus Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 N
ChathamParcels Chatham County, N
Approved By: Date: FEE.:
Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC 27604 North Carolina
JH April 2022 Phone:[phone] Fax:[phone] p

r
N
- t GaC rsL
GaB
NaB
-
GaB
1
t '
We Nau
G aE
' NaB
GCi�
GCE
ti G aB
f11B � GkC Gab
FsE�
NaB
NaD PsB f
. fF� � � � 1 ••J
13
�
:
r
-- - NaD
GaB
i Cr
Soil Mapping Units e 1 700 !�
CkC Cid silt loam,6-10%slopes • a
CmB Cid-Lignum complex,2-6%slopes
GOC Goldston-Badin complex,2-6%slopes s
GOE Goldston-Badin complex, 15-35%slopes
NaB Nanford-Badin complex,2-6%slopes
NaC Nanford-Badin complex,6-10%slopes a
NaD Nanford-Badin complex, 10-15%slopes
PsB Pittsboro-Iredell complex,2-8%slop Neuse River Basin
L
U
a
m
DATA SOURCES:
N
Project Study Area 0 400 800 1,600 NRCS Soil Survey of Chatham County,2006;Project Study Area
Feet approximated from Chatham County Parcel Data. a
0 Soil Boundaries E
PM: JH Project No. NRCS Soils EXHIBIT Ml
70227223 NO. N
Drawn By: Scale:
KT Wrer �
1:9,600 0
Checked By: JH Filename: Expbnwkhus Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070 N
ChathamParcels Chatham County, 2 N
Approved By: Date: FEE
Road,suite 107 Raleigh,NC 27604 North Carolina
JH April 2022 phone:[phone] Fax:[phone] p

N
Qt7 CM
1 �
Nor,AM
TIM
i• +.
Neuse River Basin
DATASOURCES:
QProject Study Area Latest High-Resolution NC Statewide Orthoimagery,INC
OneMap Server;2017;Project Study Area approximated
® Potential Wetland from Chatham County Parcel Data.
Feet Note:Vegetation removal or alteration of soils or hydrology
Potential Tributary after initial site evaluation can affect jurisdictional status
and may require re-evaluation of wetland boundaries.
PM; Project No. EXHIBIT
JH 70227223 ^�~�°� Potential Wetlands and Waters No.
Drawn By: Scale: rerracon
MM 1:4,800 Chatham Parcels 17531 and 18070
Checked By: File Name: 3
RG ChathamParcles Chatham County,
Approved By: Date: 2ao1 Brentwood Roaa,suite 107 RaIelgh,Nc275oa North Carolina
JH May 2022 phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]