Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200555 Ver 2_Permit Package_20230825STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER GOVERNOR August 25, 2023 Mr. Steve Brumagin Charlotte Regulatory Field Office US Army Corps of Engineers 8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615 Charlotte, North Carolina 28262 Re: Nationwide Permit 914 —NC DOT TIP# U-5808 New location of the Chestnut Lane Connector (SAW-2019-00429 and NC DWR No. 20200555v.1) Indian Trail, Union County, NC Dear Mr. Brumagin: JAMES H. TROGDON, III SECRETARY NCDOT is submitting the enclosed Section 404/401 Pre -construction Notification (PCN) request for the above -referenced project for your review pursuant to Nationwide Permit #14 (NWP 14) and Individual 401 Water Quality Certification (IWQC). Authorization is requested for the proposed new location road, the Chestnut Lane Connector within the Town of Indian Trail, Union County. NC (NCDOT TIP# U-5808). The following information is enclosed: • Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form • Project Site Figures • Permit Drawings • Approved PJD • On Hold Response Letter • GC 4246 • No Archaeological Survey • No Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey Required • NCNHDE-22595 • NRTR • ESA Survey • Minimum Criteria Determination Checklist • USFWS IPaC Resource List • Mitigation Acceptance Letter Project Background More than 13 years ago, the NCDOT developed a concept for a new location roadway to connect U.S. 74 (Independence Boulevard) to SR 1009 (Old Monroe Road) near the Town of Indian Trail. This new location road, the Chestnut Lane Connector, was anticipated to relieve traffic Mailing Address: Telephone: (704) 983-4400 Location: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: (704) 982-3146 716 WEST MAIN STREET HIGHWAY DIVISION 10 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 716 WEST MAIN STREET ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 Website: www.ncdot.gov STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER JAMES H. TROGDON, III GOVERNOR SECRETARY congestion and improve connectivity within and around the Town of Indian Trail. Section 1 was funded by the Town of Indian Trail and is currently open to traffic, Section 2 (U-5808) is funded by NCDOT. Both projects have independent utility and logical termini and are under the Individual Permit thresholds. Section 1 or the northernmost portion of the Chestnut Lane Connector (Chestnut Parkway) was constructed by the Town of Indian Trail, opened to traffic in 2014, and is maintained by the Town of Indian Trail. This section, between Independence Boulevard and SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Road), is currently a four -lane median divided roadway with on -street parking near Carolina Courts and a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Section 2 is the proposed NCDOT STIP Project U-5808, which would extend SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from Matthews Indian Trail Road to SR 1368 (Gribble Road) for approximately half a mile and would include a grade -separated crossing over an active CSX rail line, as well as sidewalks along both sides of the roadway. There will be a traffic signal at the intersection with Matthews Indian Trail Road and a single -lane roundabout with turn lanes at the intersection with Gribble Road. U-5808 was original submitted for permitting through the online a-PCN process on April 26, 2020. Upon review of the application by NCDWR, U-5808 was put on hold after receiving a letter dated June 22, 2020, form Ms. Donna Hood, NCDWR for the following reasons: "The Division of Water Resources has reviewed your submittal for a 401 Water Quality for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it lacking necessary information required for making an informed permit decision. The permit application was deficient in the following areas": • No details for the impacts at Sites 2A and 2B • Supporting documentation for necessity of wetland impacts at Site 2A. • Lacking Indirect and Cumulative Impact Analysis • Lacking SEPA review • Lacking stormwater approval from Town of Indian Trail, MS-4 delegated program • Documentation and calculations supporting the amount of contributing acreage and surface runoff to all proposed pipes. • Correction on ePCN from `no' to `yes' for cumulative impacts, as there is no control of access on the proposed roadway. • The project design submitted to Historic Architecture is not the design presented for permitting, Historic Architecture requires resubmittal for project changes. A response letter to the request for Additional Information was written by Mr. Michael Turchy on Mailing Address: Telephone: (704) 983-4400 Location: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: (704) 982-3146 716 WEST MAIN STREET HIGHWAY DIVISION 10 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 716 WEST MAIN STREET ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 Website: www.ncdot.gov STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER GOVERNOR JAn/IES H. TRomoN, III SECRETARY July 30, 2020. This letter provided the requested information that was omitted from the original application. Please see the attached response letter. U-5808 was permitted by the NCDWR on December 2, 2020. Please see the attached General Certification. The USACE never responded with correspondence for the pennitting of U-5808. Agency Correspondence Cultural Resources This new road, the Chestnut Lane Connector was determined to have a No Survey Required for both Archaeology and Historic Architecture. See the attached No Archaeological Survey Required Form and No Historic Architecture and Landscapes No Survey Required Form. Protected Species A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database on July 11, 2023, did not indicate known occurrences of threatened or endangered species within the project boundary. Additionally, there is no potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species on -site. A Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) was prepared and submitted for this project. Biological conclusions of "No Effect" were rendered for all listed botanical species potentially occurring within the project boundary. In addition, a Post-NRTR Protected Species Survey was conducted by Three Oaks Engineering at the request of NCDOT July 19, 2023. See the attached Survey Report. On September 14, 2022, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced a proposal to list the tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus - PESU) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Construction activities for this project will not take place until NCDOT (in coordination with our lead federal agency) satisfies Endangered Species Act compliance for PESU. Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters The proposed road extension will result in unavoidable impacts at two impact sites: • Permit Site 1 o Stream SB- 22 linear feet (LF) of temporary impacts to SB results from installation of an 8" Water Line. 22 (LF) of temporary impacts are for the placement of an impervious dike for the dewatering of SB. Temporary SW impacts to Permit Site 1 at SB are .01 ac. o Stream SB-165 LF of permanent impacts to SB results from the installation of a 72" reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). Permanent SW impact to Permit Site 1 at SB are .02 ac. Mailing Address: Telephone: (704) 983-4400 Location: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: (704) 982-3146 716 WEST MAIN STREET HIGHWAY DIVISION 10 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 716 WEST MAIN STREET ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 Website: www.ncdot.gov STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER TAMES H. TROGDON, III GOVERNOR SECRETARY o Stream SB-20 LF of permanent impacts to SB results from permanent Bank Stabilization. Permanent SW impact to Permit Site 1 at SB are < .01 ac. o Stream SB-10 LF of temporary impacts to SB result from temporary Bank Stabilization. Temporary SW impact to Permit Site 1 at SB are < .01 ac. • Permit Site 2A o Wetland WD - 0.05 acre of permanent impacts to WD results for permanent fill. o Wetland WD - <.01 acre of permanent fill for Bank Stabilization • Permit Site 2B o Wetland WD -.03 acre of permanent fill for 8" Water Line. Overall, impacts associated with the proposed road extension will result in 185LF/ 0.021-acre of permanent impacts to non -wetland waters of the U.S. and 0.09-acre of permanent impacts to wetland waters of the U.S. Avoidance and Minimization Impacts to streams within the project area have been avoided and minimized to the extent practical through design. There are three wetland areas withing the project limits but only one wetland will be impacted by this project. There is an intermittent jurisdictional stream that is impacted by the proposed roadway. The wetland and stream are directly adjacent to the existing interchange that this new location roadway must tie into. Standard design concepts have been used from the BMP toolbox to minimize impacts and provide minor treatment/protection. Rip Rap pads have been placed at pipe outlets and preformed scour holes have been used where practical. Impacts to streams within the corridor will be avoided and minimized to the extent practical throughout the construction process. To avoid unnecessary impacts to streams within the project area, staging, storage, and construction access will occur in upland areas where feasible. Silt fencing will be installed along the construction limits to ensure all equipment and work stays within the permitted boundaries. Stormwater and erosion control measures will be utilized to avoid sedimentation impacts to downstream waters and control runoff from the construction site. Compensatory Mitigation Mitigation will not be required for the construction of this project under the new Nationwide 14 Permitting thresholds for mitigation. Mailing Address: Telephone: (704) 983-4400 Location: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: (704) 982-3146 716 WEST MAIN STREET HIGHWAY DIVISION 10 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 716 WEST MAIN STREET ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 Website: www.ncdot.gov STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER GOVERNOR JAn/IES H. TROGDON, III SECRETARY Please see the attached Mitigation Acceptance Letter that was received prior to the original permitting of U-5808. This letter was requested and received under the 2017 Nationwide 14 mitigation thresholds. Kristi Lynn Carpenter, NC Division of Water Resources, Transportation Permitting Unit will review the project through the electronic form (https:Hedocs.deg.nc.gov/Forms/Pre- Construction_Notification_ Form). Please charge the application fee of $570.00 to WBS element 946452.1.1. Please forward comments directly to the Corps with a copy to Division 10 PDEA Engineer. Please feel free to contact me at (704) 983-4400 if you have any questions or if additional information is necessary. Sincerely, Joel Howard Project Development & Environmental Analysis (PDEA) Engineer Mailing Address: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HIGHWAY DIVISION 10 716 WEST MAIN STREET ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 Telephone: (704) 983-4400 Fax: (704) 982-3146 Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 Website: www.ncdot.gov Location: 716 WEST MAIN STREET ALBEMARLE, NC 28001 �p pR � , F AL SIT. C Tak6d- —C �o S Fork ARR0 t 1fER R LU C, CATAN�B� o v y w I AKEV4 44 J ANTED DR ��'� woNa� tE � ydi F q�� IPo_ (i 0 S�. 0 O M1�o� wnRrrr c4ro N Map Date: April 2017 Feet Study Area Revised: 0 500 1,000 Revised: 9TA� Matthews (2013) USGS 1:24,000 Quadrangle Map Revised: [lip ya ��Ilr�T�T J/ TRAI 1, UNIONVILLE INDIAN TRL RD -- . TIP U-5808 (Chestnut Lane Connector) Union County, NC Figure 2: Project Study Area Map Vf � Q f' •: r'� 11 � �y may,! !�: lt.�; ■ . M:. Y �' .. IN S. ' _ `•r� ��' r IMF • i ����._� •1 ! n ' ,kit • r i_ .ry � " 'F -._µ'r .' • ' 41. .400 It �• �F" ► �! t: 1' y �T - j *i� ��� • Y, �y •��.yl—� � r s _ � k� 1 I � .. e "4 `�L � t' �_l_.: �a s J.�, � i- .p�.I�:JN�ti f'�i ■ i'=' �r /� `� '�...e h Tom. .. Li' _. L , rr- ':i Q r `_ k -I. - F. T .: 'es i• 1i.. .•.� - rtE; T AX ,ix�§'A�, , t� �v r r ems•. i NL, ' ?� �}4 SB SA ion W \ "OaT'+e Map Date: April 2017 TIP U-5808 Chestnut Lane Connector 4�w N Study Area �i Intermittent Stream Feet - Wetland Perennial Stream Revised: Union County, NC 0 150 300 Sheet Limits Previously Verified Jan 12, 2017 Revised: 0 y � > Figure 3: Jurisdictional Features Map °VTR" 2015 NC Statewide Aerial Photography Revised: Sheet I of 2 Concord wun,�rsY�i V y �{ Figure 1 P tV t roJeC i%, " y �y Chestnut Lane Connector (U-5808) �bd?WS ru �� Union Count North Carolina '° y� onbo� Gt�arlotte 9 c xan7q c 6 Apo ` S[an/y :� North Carolina S Hill Union = - f a Department of Transportation f4T 0! 1Rtixao IProject Vicinity 0 �co4' 6°3 a nroe �C., 00 w NORTH Project Vicinity o� Union County, North Carolina °'�s CP d 4 r �c c CD Lr D CD Q\1A CD °s�0 J saa\e CD�O° Gear �a N Catawba . ZC r /Z e y C, s c Glen idge Legend d 60� V\ % o Project Study Area �`eaa610 ° m Proposed Project or��gs\ae c o Roads Q< Blu onne n �a ticepO G g `a� Streams ,a ° CSX Railroad Line < \m °o c ��a `� F aR o Indian Trail oc ° °IS \ a Stallings \c o e e5 CA w y o �� Union County CO w \\ate fee Leo / NORTH q G�eSti��tiLn o aoo 000 z,000et Project Location E 11,trll�r ilk' North Carolina Department of Transportation wt r° Highway Stormwater Program STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (Version 2.08; Released April 2018) FOR NCDOT PROJECTS WBS Element: 44381.1.1 TIP No.: U-5808 County(ies): Union Page 1 of 2 General Project Information WBS Element: 44381.1.1 ITIP Number: U-5808 Project Type: New Location Date: 7/3/2019 NCDOT Contact: Sean Epperson Contractor / Desi ner: Roger Weadon(Mead & Hunt Address: 716 W Main St. Albemarle, NC 28801 Address: 111 E. Hargett Street Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27601 Phone:704-983-4400 Phone:919-714-8670 Email: smeooersonidncdot.aov Email: roaer.weadonidmeadhunt.com City/Town: Matthews Count ies : Union River Basins : Yadkin -Pee Dee ICAMA Count No Wetlands within Project Limits? Yes Project Description Project Length (lin. miles or feet): 0.59 Surrounding Land Use: IMixed (Rura,l Urban, and Commercial) Proposed Project Existing Site Project Built -Upon Area ac. ac. ac. Typical Cross Section Description: 4 lane (2 each direction) typical section with curb and gutter and raised grassed island No existing road - site is on new location Annual Avg Daily Traffic (veh/hr/day): Design/Future: 21650 Year: 2021 Existing: Year: General Project Narrative: (Description of Minimization of Water Quality Impacts) There are three wetland areas withing the project limits but only one wetland is impacted by this project. There is an intermittent jurisdictional stream that is impacted by the proposed roadway. The wetland and stream are directly adjacent to the existing interchange that this new location roadway must tie into. Standard design concepts have been used from the BMP toolbox to minimize impacts and provide minor treatment/protection. Rip Rap pads have been place at pipe outlets and preformed scour holes have been used where practical. Waterbody Information Surface Water Body (1): South Fork Crooked Creek NCDWR Stream Index No.: 13-17-20-2 NCDWR Surface Water Classification for Water Body Primary Classification: Class C Supplemental Classification: Other Stream Classification: Impairments: Aquatic T&E Species? Comments: NRTR Stream ID: Buffer Rules in Effect: Project Includes Bridge Spanning Water Body? No Deck Drains Discharge Over Buffer? N/A Dissipator Pads Provided in Buffer? N/A Deck Drains Discharge Over Water Body? N/A (If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) (If yes, describe in the General Project Narrative; if no, justify in the General Project Narrative) (If yes, provide justification in the General Project Narrative) North Carolina Department of Transportation 51{ 717114t': i!s r Highway Stormwater Program s STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (Version 2.08; Released April 2018) FOR NCDOT PROJECTS WBS Element: TIP No.: U-5808 Count ies : Union Page 2 of 2 Preformed Scour Holes and Energy Dissipators Sheet No. Station & Coordinates (Road and Non Road Projects) Surface Water Body Energy Dissipator Type Riprap Type Drainage Area (ac) Conveyance Structure Pipe/Structure Dimensions (in) Q10 (cfs) V10 (fps) BMP Associated w/ Buffer Rules? 5 -L-53+41 RT (1)South Fork Crooked PSH N/A 0.3 Pipe 15 1.5 1.9 No 5 -L- 56+62 RT (1)South Fork Crooked PSH N/A 0.3 Pipe 15 1.8 1.6 No 5 -L- 60+66 RT (1)South Fork Crooked PSH N/A 0.3 Pipe 15 4.9 3.0 No Additional Comments * Refer to the NCDOT Best Management Practices Toolbox (2014), NCDOT Standards, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 14 (HEC-14), Third Edition, Hydraulic Design of Energy Dissipators for Culverts and Channels (July 2006), as applicable, for design guidance and criteria. F 0) U a T 0 C3 Ln U) a L 0 0 a) 0 L c W H U O ti H H U O U See Sheet 9 A For Index of Sheets See Sheet 9 B For Conventional Plan Sheet Symbols 0 ��`�� 74 � . '0 0 1365 END PROJECT G 00, Stallings 1367 1365 1008 368 1009 1367 1371 BEGIN PROJECT 74 Indian Trail 1008 1009 VICINITY MAP BEGIN TO SR 1009 PROJECT U-5808 —Y1B— STA.13 + 00.00 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS U 1111011t 11lTY CO U LOCATI011t: CHESTNUT LANE CONNECTOR (SR 1362) FROM MATTHEWS INDIAN TRAIL ROAD (SR 1367) TO GRIBBLE ROAD (SR 1368) TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING, SIGNALS, AND STRUCTURE WETLAND AND SURFACE WATER IMPACTS PERMIT RFG[V RRIT)CrF. (MA TTHEIli - INDIAN TRAIL ROAD) —Y2— STA.17 + 40.00 THIS PROJECT HAS NO CONTROL OF ACCESS. CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III. THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF THE TOWN OF INDIAN TRAIL. STATE STATE PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEETS N.C. U-5808 STATE PROD. NO. F. A. PROD. NO. DESCRIPTION 44381.1.1 WA PE 44381.2.1 R/W & UTILITY ' PROJECT U-5808 -L2- STA. 72 + 00.00 PERMIT DRAWING SHEET 1 OF 9 GRAPHIC SCALES 50 25 0 50 100 DESIGN DATA ADT 2021 = 21,650 ADT 2041 = 24,650 K = 7 % D = 60 % = ° * T 4 /O V o 40 MPH TTST = 3 /o DUAL =1 /° FUNC CLASS = MINOR ARTERIAL REGIONAL TIER PROJECT LENGTH — LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT U-5808 0.541 MILES LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT U-5808 = 0.046 MILES TOTAL LENGTH TIP PROJECT U-5808 = 0.587 MILES Prepared for NCDOT Division 10 in the Office of: 111 E. Hargett Street, Suite 3 00 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 Meadbi lunt 919-714-86701 meadhunt.com NC License No. F-1235 HYDRAULICS ENGINEER PE SIGNATURE: 0� NOR?� o � p a© o� rR06% PLANS 50 25 0 50 l00 2018 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS RICK DECOLA, PE RIGHT OF WAY DATE: MAY 17, 2019 PROJECT ENGINEER SURAJ SANGHANI, El ROADWAY DESIGN ENGINEER P.E. SIGNATURE: PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) 10 5 0 10 20 LETTING DATE: JUNE 15, 2021 PROJECT DESIGN ENGINEER SEAN EPPERSON, PE NCDOT CONTACT PROFILE (VERTICAL) -L2- CURVE DATA to Z O w w C 7U CQ O I L CO a I n I T C� I O 03 Ln 0 C L / C O ,L w Iw - (n U o� L w 7U � oo00 0r)- r-- SITE 1 S SITE 2A ' BEGIN CONSTRUCTION � , M 25' BST � N � -Y2- STA. l0 +40.00 �,'�� /l _ n I -� - 1 =�2- POT Sto. 10+OO.00 WOODSl II i�J/ _ � / c� -Y-2 PC Sto. /O +50.00 G J 01 w� /i 9 DO NOT � DISTURB SIGN �T - -- In N -E ® g E m PI Sto 62 +10.64 A = 8° //' 40.4" (LT) D = 149' 11.0" L = 214.53" T = 107.45' R = 1,500.00' e = 0.03 RO = 114.00' PI Sto 68 +18.89 0 = 1°15119.0"(RT) D = 0° 30' 00.0" L = 251.05' T = 125.53' R = 11,459.16' e = NC PI Sto /0 +96.58 A = 0° 55' 39.3" (RT ) D = l° 00' 00.0° L = 92.76' T = 46.38' PI Sto 70+69.94 A _ l° 15' 19.0" (LT) D = 0° 30' 00.0n L = 251.05' T = 125.53' R = 11,459.16' e = NC -Y2- CURVE DATA PI Sto 11 +89.14 0 = 0° 55' 39.3n (LT) D = l° 00' 00.0" L = 92.76' T = 46.58' PI Sto 75 +55.62 0 = 27° 45- 5/.2" (LT ) D = 9° 45' 19.9" L = 284.60' T = 145.15' R = 587.32' PI Sto 16 +64.88 0 = /5° 23' 3/.On (RT ) D = /00 44' 58.8" L = 143.19' T = 72.03' 00 �O PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. U -5808 1 6 R/W SHEET NO. ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS ENGINEER I ENGINEER DO NOT USE FOR TW ACQUISITION DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED I I I E. Hargett Street, Suite 300 2701 Mead I I U 1 n 1t ` 919- Raleigh, 4-86701 Caroina meatdhunt com NC License No. F-1235 - G - - - • L T R = 5,729.58' R = 5,729.58' R = 533.00' BM 53 \\�� --J,% - - - - WOODS e = NC e = NC e = EXIST. p s/ DIANNE B. HARTIS PERMIT DRAWING / - = DB 154 PG 642 GR- oLn SHEET 2 OF 9 -L2- FT St' 63+/ 72 F BENT EIP - r2 -,PT Sto. 12¢ 35.5/ S o , 6 / // o i2 WOODS IP J I `v LJ ALTON PROPERTIES, LLC. / �B ;� -L2- PT Sto. 7/+95.46 WOODS D;B 4747 PG 659 15" / 11/ , s ELIZABETH G. HARTIS ALTON PROPERTIES, LLC. - R P- B/, S DB 1217 PG 515 DB 4951 PG 760 -L2 PC' Sto. 74+10.46 / B I - - -26- - - - - �' I SPECIAL LATERAL \ L T GV GV I I _ _ _ lo'GR T DITCH �� F 8„ W� �L� I --------- -- _ ,SE=DE ..� 27 _ -TV I/ N - 4 w�MHF1 / \ - _ _ - p B T 12 - - -P- JAMES DOUGLAS ARMSTRONG LARRY A. MCKINNEY F - F S TS ; EIP TOWN bF INDI N,,-TRAIt DB 468 PP� / PC M \ PG \ v / J \ E19 o _--``�w- - DB 1203 PG 591 � 1 C WOODS EIP 28 • 0 T - FI 1 P-1 ;/ / \ L T - ;s - 7 OWN N 0 A L DB 5468 PG I 1 / -r- -CB P;CJr.PG 900 C13 -P- PC M PG 830 , � I-L2- � r F BM 51 DI- - 5" -IV CHESTNUT PKWY 22' BST C I - - - - P - - - EIP 8" C 18" C&G II II �" C&G C 15" RCP CBS - I1 P I II 11 EM r CB / w _�_ _ C�- - CB _ 30" C&G / CHESTNUT PKWY 22'BST I -LZ IT C&G N 5 17' 8" E 18 TaT DI SCENIC GATEWAY AND EE I P R ESMT. P�ALI-� 30,,&G \\ OWL T 96' CONC iEP-� - -P- - - ��[t] \ �I RCP-T� - _ _ __B = 15 I l I / 18" c \r loo EATER MAIN CURRENTLY - - -� ' i/ - - _� _ 72"coNc- - - E IF / I II / 1 I I ENDS HERE AT LT LTA- �LT I I l l j l I II� -L2- PRC /Sto. 69+44.4/ \ II oD1 F 11 I II� �� II LTA=3�- _ / U5808 5 F - _ 18I I �C-G - IS '�� �� I - - L T \ DI F /I i Il -L2 Sto. 64 +66.20 / I10' 0 �B / � - - + L T 1 III I� \ I F- DI � Y2 Sto. l3 43.12 � BST q�LT � II I I I _ `� / II LT TOWN OF INDIAN TRAIL � I5" f l l l/j /5 END CONSTRUCTION j I �. I DB 5468 PG 1 2SMTLBUS ''-v-' - l/ -L2- STA. 66+00.00 PARTNERS IN HOOPS, LLC. I o I� DI I PC L PG 900- / I DB 5968 PG 143 C IN PC N PG 222 I I oil. I �I PC L PG 900 I Io II I I I END TIP PROJECT U-5808 �� _ _ + I � I� . I� � I III J I SITE 2 B L2 PC Sto. 66 93.36 I a o TENNIS COURTS I I I I � I II I IN -L2- POT STA. 72 + 00.00 10 /� -�� 1 -J � I = I I � < �&G & 18" G III I\ I � I lol I n \ c� I // I I�o, 6LT LT I I `z'I X� I I I� I l -Y2 - PC Sta /5 +92.86 o 6LT I �" r` + I I I I ,b���x} III I I I oDl X I I I I Xo, CANOPY SOCCER FIELD n Y // I C I 11 BST I I I / lI I I I I 10' CONC I I �X 1 / 1 I 10' cONC _ I I N / / I Xo _ - - - I r ,/ � 01 0 I II� / LT - I n IF l8' C&G LT - I I c� / - P- D I❑ -i X ISF I� DDI In � � I SDI I I O j_ � TOWN OF INDIAN TRAIL I_ - ' e BST DB 5468 PG I I� LT X , I I I I PC L PG 900 CONC - r- I I- I 18'C&G PC N PG 222 LTiD� I II -V7- 07- C'4- 17-LZG nit 20' SANITARY SEASEMENT -1 SEMEN Q -42- % 1 I 18' C&G 72" CONC - O /b/"\��� v EIP //_ G �-� C�B� CHESTNUT SQUARE DR 22' BST y EIP 48, X� v Cl) �P / Y 11 wD x_ END CONSTRUCTION -Y2- ST A.17 +40.00 -Y2 - PC Sto. 19 +56°38 p<b DENOTES TEMPORARY IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES FILL IN WETLAND • DENOTES MECHANIZED ' CLEARING DETAIL SU SPECIAL LATERAL 'V' DITCH ( Not to Scale) Natural �•1 °et Fill D Ground 3•� \0 Slope 1 Min. D= 1.5 Ft. FROM -Y2- STA. 12 + 50 TO -L2- STA. 67 + 00 PROPOSED SIGNAL FOR -Y2- PROFILE, SEE SHEET l0 FOR -L2- PROFILE, SEE SHEETS 8 & 9 FOR INTERSECTION DETAIL, SEE SHEET 2B -2 -L2 - CURVE DATA PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. U —5808 1 6 R/W SHEET NO. ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS ENGINEER I ENGINEER Ln Z 0 W w C 7U O U I O I T O 03 Ln C U L U C N F- O L W _ W �n U O N � I L J 7U � TL � oo00 0r)- r-- SITE SITE 2 i co co BEGIN CONSTRU -Y P - CT A /n 4,47 20' SANITARY SEWER DENOTES TEMPORARY IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES FILL IN WETLAND • DENOTES MECHANIZED ' CLEARING A = 8° 11' 40.4" (LT ) D = 3° 49' 11.0" L = 214.53" T = 107.45' R = 1,500.00' e = 0.03 RO = 114.00' A = 1*15119.0"(RT) D = 0° 30' 00.0" L = 251.05" T = 125.53' R = 11,459.16" e = NC A = 1* 15' 19.0" (LT) D = 0° 30' 00.0" L = 251.05" T = 125.551 R = 11,459.16' e = NC -Y2- CURVE DATA P1 Sto /0 +96.58 P1 Sto 11 +89.14 - — A = 0° 55' 39.3" (RT) A = 0° 55' 39.3" (LT ) D = /* 00' 00.0" D = /* 00' 00.0° L = 92.76' L = 92.76' T = 46.38' T = 46.58' R (!W00 = 5,729.58' R = 5,729.58' e = NC e = NC 0 = 27° 45' 51.2" (LT) D = 9° 45' 19.9" L = 284.60' T = 145.15' R = 587.32' A = 15° 23' 31.0" (RT ) D = 10° 44' 58.8" L = 143.19' T = 72.03' R = 533.00' e = EXIST. FROM -Y2- STA. 12 + 50 TO -1-2- STA. 67 + 00 DO NOT USE FOR TW ACQUISITION DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED 111 E. Hargett Street, Suite 300 Mead I I U 2701 1 n 1t ` 919- Raleigh, 4-86701 Caroina meatdhunt com NC License No. F-1235 PERMIT DRAWING SHEET 3 OF 9 PJ69 to Z O W w OVE La RE 03 R - 7 26 SITE RETAIN 6777 88 1 � N/// y�- Jv- 1 I Ly/zr e SMTLBUS 8 SIP CP s \ 8 / T Co 0 CL CD G \ �s TQWN F E� 91 N A / / DB 5 68 P ; P / C CD Ln CT) / \ I \ EIP QD F Cl) P 688 op f 2 = ONC LT .L - 18' �T \ S W CTI00 , TOWN OF I [ Co / o DB 54 I BST PC L /8 C&G PC P C o � •` 11111 � � 00 �Q PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. U -5808 6 R/W SHEET NO. ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS ENGINEER ENGINEER INCOMP L,]E % lE PLANS DO NOT USE FOIE W ACQUISITION DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED I I I E. Hargett Street, Suite 300 2701 Mead I I U 1 n 1t ` 919- Raleigh, 4-86701 Caroina meatdhunt com NC License No. F-1235 PERMIT DRAWING SHEET 4 OF 9 2 5' 0' 2 5' 5 0' 7 5' GRAPHC SCALE DENOTES TEMPORARY IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES FILL IN WETLAND DENOTES MECHANIZED CLEARING cn w w �w m� o� I i i -J -0 D=�\ /C r7 ocw..� � V 5 I V PROJ. REFERENCE NO. 511EET NU. U-5808 X-13 J J 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PERMIT DRAWING SHEET 6 OF 9 --`--- -- - - -- _ __ _- _ .� so 01, I I I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I \---- I�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII =I = • ,�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ------------ - ---------- -\ -- ----------- ------ ------------- --v------------- --- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----- ----- -_--- ------------ ----- 90690 ---------- ---------- -6— 69Q.58689.89 — — — — — — — — — LIIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ________________I________________ ________________ ________________I________________ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________I________________ ________________ ________________I________________ ________________ ________________I________________ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 66 + 00.00: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�;IIIIIIIII ________________ ________________I________________ ________________ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - I ________________I________________ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________I________________ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________I________________ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________I________________ IIIILIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________I___________ _____ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 700 = = = = = =I = I =I = ------------ ------------- ------- --------- 700 — — — — — — — — — — — r rOroN� � M __-- ------------- ------------- ------------- --------- 4-- 3 \ so 0.b20 ------- 000.020 ,0 - ---------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ----------------690 69©.21689.68 - - - - — — — — — — T— — ______________ __66,99--00 ________________y________________Ir__________ _________------------ ---------------- ---------------- ________________r________________ ________________y________________r_______________ :65 +50.00I ------ r---------------- I---------------- T---------------- r_______________yI ---------------- T---------------- r_______________yI ---------------- ________________Ir_______________yI TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ---------------- T________________Ir_______________y________________T________________Ir_______________yI________________ 700 = I =I = I = = = = I = = ----------- ------------- ------------- ----------------700 N 1-0O -- --IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII -- ---- TT=IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - -- --�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _ - - - - - 1=IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - - - - TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - - - - - - -=IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII - _ - - _ _ _ - - 4 � --IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 10 0.020 0020 .o_ 4- 90690 696.09 — — --` ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- 65 + 00.00: ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----700------------------ ---------------=------ ----------------------------=------------ ---------------------=----- ------------- ----------------- ----------------=---------------- I -------------- --- I ------------- ------------- ------------ --- I I I --------------------- ------------- ----------------700 Np ---- - - ---- � 0.020+--- 0020 O ----------- ------------ -------------- --- ---- ---------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ----------------690 689.61 TI TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIl _L 1 ----------------- r________________ ________________ ---------------- r---------------- ---------------- ---------------- r---------------- ---------------- ________________ ---------------- :64 +50.00 ________________r________________I________________.________________ ___________ _____________________ .IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _______ I _________I--________________ ________________ ---------------- ________________ ---------------- ________________I________________.________________ ---------------- ---------------- ----7 ------- -------- ---------- ----------------=--------------- ---------------=------- ----------- ----------------=-------------- = = = ---------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------ --------- ------------- 700 ---------- Mr � 01. r 0.0180.018 � 0.01618 690 I =I I I =I I I 3I I - 690 680.29 TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ____________ _______________________ _________ ________________r________________I________________ ________________r________________I________________ ________________r________________I_____________ ::64 + 00:: ________________r________________________________________________ _____________ ________________ ---------------- ________________ ____________ ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- .---------------- -- ---------------- I---------------- .---------------- ________________I________________ -------=---------------- ----------------I-------------- ------------------- I---------------- =---------------- -------------- ----------=------------------ ----- m- ------- - ------------ ------------- -- -----700 ----------------700 00 J CN tIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII N CN .. ---_690---- ---------------IIIIIIIIII 3� - - - jI --� - - - -- - - -- - - - ----690 = -- - - -- I IIIIIIIIII I -1 ---------------- IIIIIII I IIIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIII - IIIIIIII - IIIIIII 6 I 8 TyI ----------- IIIIIII / IIIIII IIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIII TIIIIIIIIIII TIIIIII TIIIIII T IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIII T IIIIII IIIIIII ---------------I-------- II ----------I II ----------------I-------------- II II II ----------------I----------------,----------------I II II II ----------------I----------------I II II II ---------------- I---------------- II I---------------- II I---------------- I---------------- I ------------- II II L II II ----------------I---------------- II II II I---------------- I---------------- II I --------- II I II ------------------------I-- II II ---------------- II ----------------I-------- II II ---------I II ----------------I---------------- II II 150 140 130 120 110 100 9:0 8:0 70 6:0 5:0 4:0 3:0 2:0 10 0 10 2:0 3:0 40 5:0 6:0 70 8:0 9:0 100 110 120 130 140 150 N i Q X =, co 03 / 3 L 0 w cn V Z.3 5 PROJ. REFERENCE NO. SHUA NO. U-5808 X-19 75 I 70 I 4I 5 4I 0 5I 5 510 4I 5 4I 0 5I 5 I 0 2I 5 20 1:5 1:0 5I QI 5I 1:0 1:5 20 25 N 55 40 45 510 55 4I 0 4I 5 70 7I5 ------------- ----------------I--------------- ------------- PERMIT DRAWING ---------------- I I I I ---------------- I ----------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I I I ---------------- I ----------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I I I ---------------- I ----------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I I I ---------------- I ----------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I I I ---------------- I ----------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I ---------------------- I I I I I I I I ----------------------------------- I I I I I I I -------------------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I I I ---------------- I ----------------- I I I I I I I ----------------- I I I I ----------- I ------------------------ I I I I I I I ---------- I --------- I I I SHEET 7 OF 9 I -------------------------- I I I I I ------------------------------------ I I I I I I 695 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 695 I I I I I I I I 690 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I so I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I °0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 690 ---------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ----- --------------------- 0 --------------- ------------------------------- 0.020 --------------- ------ ---------------- -------------------------------- ~0.016 --------------- 00 --------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- - _ I- 7o ►L I I - ---- -- - -- - - - V 4-1 --�--- ---� _ 685 0 _ 685 :14+50.00: 680 ________________ ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII ________________ ________________ IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII 680 IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII 695 695 -------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- N ---------------- -------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- --------------- ---------------------- -------------------------------- ---------------- -------- ----------------------- -------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- IO� , � 0M000 I I I I I I I o 0.005 0.005 `0690 6�J9 0 -------------- II II II II ------------------------- II II - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------- -------------- ---------------- ---------------- 3•7 II ---------------- --- II II ------- ---- II II ------------------- 685 _ _ 1II _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _LII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ iII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LII- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ iII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1II _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ iII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1-II _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ iII _-_-_-_-_-_- _ _ _ _ _ _ 1II _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LII-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1-II _ _ _ _ _ iII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-_-LII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ iII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1II _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LII _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-_-_- _____________ _____1I _____ _______________JII ____________LII ______________ ____ _____________JII 685 ___________ 14+00.00 695 695 6g0 690 --------------------------------- II II________________1II________________LII_______________JII II II �85685 _____ _____ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ 13 ________________ +50.00 ________________ ________________ ________________ ---------------- ---------------- 1---------------- L_______________J ---------------- 1---------------- L_______________J________________1________________L_______________J________________ 700 700 �695 ? 695 -------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -II - --------------------------------------------------------------------- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- •o 0.005 O.00a ------ 0� 1-0II ----------- -------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------- --------- -------------------------- ------------------------------------ III 4:1 III III III III III ----- --_---- ---- -_ ------ -------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- -------------- ------- 6Io33-------------------- --------------------------- --------- ---------— - - ------ --- ----------- --------------III ----------- 690 ------------- ------6--8--5 - 13 +00.00 685 II II -----I----------------- II II II II II II II II II II II I II II I I II II II II II II II II I II I II II I II II II ----------------I-------------- ------- II II 700 ---------------- I II -------- I II I II I II I II I II ----------------I------- I II I II I II --------------I----------------T I II I II ---------------- I II F----------------I------- I II I I------------ II I II I----------------I---------------- I I T---------------- II II I I F----------------I------------ II II I I-------I II I II ----------------I--- I II I II I II I II I II I II I II I II --------------- I I I ----------------I------------ ---- II II 700 _CW)• —————————-695—— ;V�^^ N -------------------------- ---------------- 695 -------------------------------- ".0 0.010IIII 0 37 - 4�'-7 IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII A ••1 IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII II IIII -0-.0-1III IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII III --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 692.19 69�.29690 - —— —IIII 690 III III :12 +50.00: 685 ---------------- -------- --------------------------I-----------------I ---------------- ----------------I-------- ----------- � --------I----------------T ---------------- F--------------- ------I----------------I----- ---------------- -------------------------------- ---------------- -------------------------------- ---------------- 685---- ---------------------------- YI:2 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 1:5 1:0 5 0 5 1:0 1:5 20 25 310 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 cn W O I L i -J -0 D=�\ /C r7 ocw..� � V 1.:) 5 PROD. REFERENCE NO. SHEET NU. J U-5808 X-20 J 75 70 65 -------------------------------- 60 55 ---------------- 50 --------------- 45 40 ---------------- 35 -------------------------------- 30 25 ---------------- 20 --------------- 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 ---------------- 25 --------------------------------.---------------- 30 35 40 ----------- 45 50 ------.---------------- 55 --------------- 60 65 70 75 PERMIT DRAWING ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ------------- SHEET 8 OF 9 690 - 690 66�5 = -----= = = - - ------------ -------------------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ - CV M- -- --------- ------------- ------------- ------------ - ----685 —--————� __ 0.015 0.000 �— 680_ = = ; = = = = = =----------------=---------------- ------- - - ------------- -� - ------------ -;- --- ------------ --- ------------- --- ------------- --- ------------ --- ------------- --- ------------- --- ------------ -------680 - � - ----- --- ------------ --- ------------- --- 17+40.00 690_ = ----------------------------- ------------------------ ---------------- --------------- ---------------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- ----------- 690 6 - = _ _ _ _ _ _ = = = -- - ------------ - -------------- ---------- -- - - - -C -- - -- - --685 -—— ———-�——— __ ——————_ 0.020 i0.017 d0 4:1 ___—- 17+00.00 690_ ; -------------------= ; ; ; ; = ; ; ; = ; - ------ ------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ ----690 m J - _ i - �- = ----------------- = ti►J ---6685--------------------- --------------- ---------- -------------------------------- _ -----_—_ --------------- ------------ -------------------------- ------------ ------------- 0.010 -------------- -------- r^ ---------- 4:7 ------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------665 - �• 680_ = = = = = = `. = = = =--------- 682.25 ------------- L T 680 — .✓ — :16 +50.0 690 -------------- ------------------- -------------------------- -- - - - m - - m - - - -- - �o --690 J J --685-----= ----------------------------------------------- - - -------------------------------- = ------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ -------------------------- ------------------ ------------ 00 ----- -------------- -- ------------------ ------------------------ --------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ----665 0.020 0.020 4:1 682098 — —--————L——— ——�___✓—————————— —— — -680-----= = --------------------------------=---------------- --------------------------------=---------------- ------------------------------------------------- ----------- = ------- -----680 690_ --------------- ---------------- ---------------- --------------- ---------------- ---------------- --------------- -------------- ----- - - - -- ------------- �l - - -- - - - 690 p� :M i 665 - -,-- -- - -_ -__ = _ M = ------ Q. - - 0 --- :M ;� 4:� 665 684.00 _— 15: + 60.00 69�5----- ---------------- _---------------- ------ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________ _____ _____________ 695_____ �V -----690--- ------------ --------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------11----------------IL--------------- ----------------11----------------IL------------- -------------------------- ------------ ------------- ---- - ----------- ------------- -------- -- - -- - - - ----690 00 o _ yoo T _ 110 0.020 0.020 ' ^ LJ 66 = =---------------- ----------------- _ 665 685.59 _ :15 + 00.00: 680________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-________________________________________________ ; ; ; ; ; ______________ 680_____ y 75 70 6:5 6:0 5:5 5:0 45 4:0 3:5 3:0 2:5 2:0 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 2:0 2:5 3:0 3:5 4:0 45 5:0 5:5 6:0 6:5 70 75 WETLAND AND SURACE WATER IMPACTS SUMMARY Site No. Station (From/To) Structure Size / Type Permanent Fill In Wetlands (ac) Temp. Fill In Wetlands (ac) Excavation in Wetlands (ac) Mechanized Clearing in Wetlands (ac) Hand Clearing in Wetlands (ac) Permanent SW impacts (ac) Temp. SW impacts (ac) Existing Channel Impacts Permanent (ft) Existing Channel Impacts Temp. (ft) Natural Stream Design (ft) 1 -1-2- Sta. 63+45 8" Water Line < 0.01 22 1 -1-2- Sta. 63+36 - 63+77 Fill, 72" RCP -IV 0.02 165 1 -1-2- Sta. 63+77 Bank Stabilization < 0.01 < 0.01 20 10 2A -1-2- Sta. 63+33 - 63+91 Fill, 72" RCP -IV 0.05 < 0.01 2A -1-2- Sta. 63+65 - 63+95 Bank Stabilization < 0.01 0.02 2B -Y2- Sta. 14+57 - 16+03 Fill, 8" Water Line 0.03 0.02 TOTALS*: 0.09 0.04 0.02 < 0.01 185 32 0 *Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts NOTES: 2018 Feb U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT Action Id. SAW No. 2019-00429 County: Union U.S.G.S. Quad: NC- Matthews NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION Requestor: North Carolina Department of Transportation Mr. Larry Thompson Address: 716 W. Main Street Albemarle, NC 28001 Telephone Number: 704-983-4437 E-mail: lthompson(a,ncdot.2ov Size (acres) 200.5 acres Nearest Town Indian Trail Nearest Waterway South Fork Crooked Creek River Basin Upper Pee Dee USGS HUC 03040105 Coordinates Latitude: 35.0808 Longitude:-80.6720 Location description: The proposed Chestnut Lane Connector would be constructed from Gribble Road to Chestnut Parkway in Indian Trail, Union County, North Carolina. 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 maps, Sheets 1-5, Figures 1-3, dated 4/3/2017. 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. SAW No. 2019-00429 ❑ 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 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 Nicholle Braspennickx at 704-510-0162 or Nicholle.M.Braspennickx.us ace.armv.mil. C. Basis For Determination: Basis For Determination: See the preliminary jurisdictional determination form dated 04/22/2019. D. Remarks: None. E. Attention USDA Program Participants This delineation/determmation 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) This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. 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: Jason Steele, Review Officer 60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 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 Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.** Corps Regulatory Official: Date of JD: 04/22/2019 Expiration Date of JD:Not applicable SAW No. 2019-00429 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/f?p=13 6 A 0 NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: North Carolina Department of File Number: SAW No. 2019-00429 Date:04/22/2019 Transportation, Mr. Larry Thompson 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 ® PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at or http://www.usace.army.mit/Missions/CivilWorks/Re ug latoiyProgramandPermits.aspx or the Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Admimistrativc 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. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer Attn: Nicholle Braspennickx CESAD-PDO Charlotte Regulatory Office U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division U.S Army Corps of Engineers 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15 8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 Charlotte, North Carolina 28262 Phone: (404) 562-5137 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. Date: Telephone number: Signature of appellant or agent. For appeals on Initial Proffered Permits send this form to: District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Attn: Nicholle Braspennickx, 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. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD-PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801 Phone: (404) 562-5137 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: 04/22/2019 B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: North Carolina Department of Transportation, Mr. Larry Thompson, 716 W. Main Street, Albemarle, NC 28001 C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, NC DOT, U 5808, Chestnut Lane Connector, SAW No. 2019-00429 D. PROJECT LOCATION(S) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The proposed Chestnut Lane Connector would be constructed from Gribble Road to Chestnut Parkway in Indian Trail, Union County, North Carolina. (USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND/OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES) State: NC County: Union City: Indian Trail Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Latitude: 35.0808 Longitude:-80.6720 Universal Transverse Mercator: Name of nearest waterbody: South Fork Crooked Creek E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: March 12, 2019 ❑ Field Determination. Date(s): TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES INREVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY JURISDICTION. Estimated amount of Geographic authority to Type of aquatic Latitude (decimal Longitude (decimal aquatic resources in resources (i.e., which the aquatic resource Site Number review area (acreage "may be" subject (i.e., degrees) degrees) wetland vs. non - and linear feet, if Section 404 or Section wetland waters) applicable 10/404) Stream A 35.0804 -80.6699 953 linear feet Non -wetland Section 404 (SA) Stream A 35.0806 -80.6664 1,171 linear feet Non -wetland Section 404 (SA) Stream B 35.0829 -80.6706 1,.301 linear feet Non -wetland Section 404 (SB) Stream C 35.0800 -80.6670 201 linear feet Non -wetland Section 404 (SC) Stream D 35.0804 -80.6781 1,174 linear feet Non -wetland Section 404 (SD) Wetland A 35.0800 -80.6723 0.67 acre Wetland Section 404 (WA) Wetland B 35.0804 -806714 0.13 acre Wetland Section 404 (WB) Wetland C 35.0808 -80.6657 0.12 acre Wetland Section 404 (WC) Estimated amount of Geographic authority to Type of aquatic Latitude (decimal Longitude (decimal aquatic resources in resources (i.e., which the aquatic resource Site Number review area (acreage "may be" subject (i.e., degrees) degrees) wetland vs. non - and linear feet, if Section 404 or Section wetland waters) applicable 10/404) Wetland D 35.0820 -80.6699 0.47 acre wetland Section 404 (WD) Wetland E 35.0815 -80.6760 0.32 acre wetland Section 404 (WE) Wetland F 35.0794 -80.6787 0.01 acre wetland Section 404 (WF) Wetland G 35.0803 -80.6781 0.01 acre wetland Section 404 (WG) Wetland H 35.0805 -80.6781 0.01 acre wetland Section 404 (WH) Wetland 1 35.0804 -80.6780 0.01 acre wetland Section 404 (WI) Wetland J 35,0811 -80.6770 0.01 acre wetland Section 404 (WJ) Wetland K 35.0809 -80.6775 0.39 acre wetland Section 404 (WK) Wetland L 35.0805 -80.6700 0.02 acre wetland Section 404 (WL) 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 orjudicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and/or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information: SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items: ® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor: Sheets 1-5, Figures 1-3, dated April 2017 ® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. ® Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Office does not concurwith 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: Matthews 1":24K ❑ Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: ❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: ❑ State/local wetland inventory map(s): ❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) ❑ Photographs: ❑Aerial (Name & Date): or ❑Other (Name & Date): ❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: ® Other information (please specify): For SAW No. 2019-00429, NC DOT U5808 The delineated stream channels (Streams A—D) are unnamed tributaries to the South Fork of Crooked Creek. The South Fork of Crooked Creek flows to Crooked Creek, which in turn flows to the Rocky River. Rocky River flows to the Pee Dee River, an interstate water of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulations at 33 CFR Part 328.3(a)(5) asserts Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction over tributaries to other waters of the U.S. Therefore, Streams A-D may be waters of the U.S. The delineated wetlands (Wetlands A-L) are adjacent to the delineated stream channels A-D. Corps of Engineers regulations at 33 CFR Part 328.3(a)(7) assert CWA jurisdiction over wetlands which are adjacent to waters of the U.S. Therefore, Wetlands A-L may be waters of the U.S. IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later jurisdictional determinations. Signature and date of Regulatory staff member completing PJD 04/22/2019 Signature and date of person requesting PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is 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. rp Pky �99.1 °p J' , Matthews', ° a Hemby Bridge auN s o Xm ee 74� �Rti Stallings Lake = Park a/ r y, 0' o `r �00 dian' � S��anri�t, 100 'P a 4 F` Q i Lat 36.0393 / Long-78.5329 4a °� ry � 'P r�0 Project Location: ,� 4g tt►* Union County, NC U his i N TIP U-5808 to Miles ] Study Area Union County, NC 0 0.375 0.75 USGS Named Streams Figure 1: Vicinity Map April 2017 ESRI Street Map World 2D D WE S iQ S� WD D m � hW pf KOR7� C4�O N \, Map Date: April 2017 TIP U-5808 � U-5808 Study Area �i Intermittent Stream � Wetland Revised: Union County, NC oM Feet ® Previously Verified (Jan 12, 2017) �i Perennial Stream Sheet Limits 0 150 300 Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map oF-T, F Matthews (2013) USGS 1:24,000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet I of 2 �WH C li [WA! WD WL SA, SC � ti i .. t j 189� jdOoe N.... 8L hW pf 1OR71{ C4�0 N Map Date: April 2017 TIP U-5808 \, U-5808 Study Area �i Intermittent Stream � Wetland Revised: Union County, NC oM Feet ® Previously Verified (Jan 12, 2017) �i Perennial Stream Sheet Limits 0 150 300 Revised: Figure 2: USGS Map oFranc0 F Matthews (2013) USGS 1:24,000 Quadrangle Map Revised: Sheet 2 of 2 N 7T '000., I F � 44 00, F� ✓ Yi - �O\� JA NA M iJ ,tk I a r�' "� .1J .r. i s✓<. r i a° _ F>• �� 41 j I i 1, � '@:. �f - -a. ., - 'w..;• � � '" i ' 0000\ �I er Of 1 P _ I I `f }I ,UA a�zr 4 � 1 Nil hWOF µORTH C4�O N Map Date: April 2017 \, U-5808 Study Area �i Intermittent Stream Wetland * 4 Revised: b o Feet ® Previously Verified (Jan 12, 2017) �i Perennial Stream Sheet Limits OFTF1 F, 2015 NC Statewide Aerial Photography Revised: r - IL •_ate . TIP U-5808 Union County, NC Figure 3: Jurisdictional Features Map Sheet I of 2 a'. hWOf 4OR76 C4 O tp "V � pal V� b 0 9 0F TFIrl F DocuSign Envelope ID: 5227CEOB-B196-4F60-9E00-0F2420A1 E75R ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary S. DANIEL SMITH Director Mr. Brett Canipe, PE NC DOT Division 10, Division Engineer 716 W. Main Street Albemarle, NC 28001 NORTH CAROLINA frrvor-onmentai Qualay June 22, 2020 Subject: Proposed improvements and extension of Chestnut Parkway in Union County, State Project No. U-5808 Dear Mr. Canipe: The Division of Water Resources has reviewed your submittal for a 401 Water Quality for the aforementioned project. Review of your application revealed it lacking necessary information required for making an informed permit decision. The permit application was deficient in the following areas: • No details for the impacts at Sites 2A and 2B • Supporting documentation for necessity of wetland impacts at Site 2A • Lacking Indirect and Cumulative Impact Analysis • Lacking SEPA review • Lacking stormwater approval from Town of Indian Trail, MS-4 delegated program • Documentation and calculations supporting the amount of contributing acreage and surface runoff to all proposed pipes • Correction on ePCN from `no' to `yes' for cumulative impacts, as there is no control of access on the proposed roadway • The project design submitted to Historic Architecture is not the design presented for permitting, Historic Architecture requires resubmittal for project changes Therefore, pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0507(a)(5), we will have to place the permit application on hold until we are supplied the necessary information. You have 21 days to respond in writing with the requested information or notification to this office that the information is forthcoming. If, at the end of the 21 days, this office has not received this information in writing, we will assume you are withdrawing your application and it will be returned. Furthermore, until the information is received by the NC Division of Water Resources, we request (by copy of this letter) that the US Army Corps of Engineers place the permit application on hold. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Donna Hood at (704) 682-2839 or doma.hood@ncdenr.gov. Sincerely, DocuSigned by: k&� an e §ir %,4Director Division of Water Resources Electronic copy only distribution: Crystal Amschler, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office Joel Howard, Division 10 Environmental Officer Larry Thompson, NC Department of Transportation Division 10 PDEA Engineer ij� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources DIE 512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 9-ft 919.707.9000 4n.. STAT� q �y STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER J. ERIC BOYETTE GOVERNOR SECRETARY July 30, 2020 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street Raleigh NC 27699-1617 ATTN Subject: Reference Dear Madam: Ms. Donna Hood, NCDOT Regulatory Coordinator Additional Information and Request to Lift "On Hold Status" for the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for the Proposed Improvements and Extension of Chestnut Parkway in Union County; Division 10; TIP U-5808; WBS 44381.1.1. NCDOT Permit Application for a 404 Permit and 401 Water Quality Certification dated April 26, 2020 NCDWR On Hold Notification dated June 22, 2020 (DWR Project ID: 20200555) This letter is in response to the NC Division of Water Resource's Deficient Application Notification for Transportation Improvement Project No. U-5808. The letter identifies 8 items considered deficient. This response addresses each concern below. Bullet 1: No details for the impacts at Sites 2A and 2B The design for this project requiring a special Detail is only required at one location (SL-1, and the Detail is located at the bottom of the page). Additionally, area and velocity information has been provided to pipes which discharge into a jurisdictional feature. Bullet 2: Supporting documentation for necessity of wetland impacts at Site 2A The necessity of the wetland impacts at Site 2A is the result of three main causes: • The new roadway facility. This new facility has been minimized to the narrowest design possible, while meeting anticipated traffic demands. • The need to match the grade of the existing intersection, and • The roadway begins to "ramp up" at this point up to the bridge crossing over the railroad tracks. Mailing Address: Location: NC DEPARTMENT OF ntANSPORTATION Telephone: (919) 707-6000 1000131RcH RIDGE DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 RALEIGH NC 27610 1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC 27699-1598 Website: www.ncdot.gov Bullet 3: Lacking Indirect and Cumulative Impact "Isi Please find attached Indirect and Cumulative Impact Technical Memo Bullet 4: Lacking SEPA Review The SEPA Document for this project was transmitted to Ms. Donna Hood via email on June 22, 2020. Bullet 5: Lacking stormwater approval from Town of Indian Trail, MS-4 delegated prog am NC General Statues provide NCDOT an exemption from local government stormwater permitting as our projects are covered by NCDOT's NPDES permit. Bullet 6: Documentation and calculations supporting the amount of contributingacreage creage and surface runoff at all proposed pipes. There are 4 main pipe systems on this project, One carrying a jurisdictional feature: 1. A 72-inch pipe, carrying water at Site 1 and Site 2A Drainage Area: 0.15 square miles Design Discharge: 190 CFS 100 year Discharge: 200 CFS This pipe data can be found on Permit Drawing Sheet 5 of 9. The remaining carry stormwater: 2. A 15-inch pipe, carrying stormwater to Site 2A Drainage Area: 1.04 acres, Discharge: 5 CFS 3. A 15-inch pipe, carrying stormwater from 1 catch basin to Site 2B Drainage Area: 0.07 acre, Discharge: 0.4 CFS 4. A 24-inch pipe, replacing an existing stormwater system that will be impacted by construction, and not associated with a jurisdictional impact site. Drainage Area 2.48 acres, Discharge: 10.5 CFS. Please find attached Sheet with the amount of contributing acreage and surface water runoff at each pipe. Bullet 7: Correction on ePCN from `no' to `yes' for cumulative impacts, as there is no control of access on the proposed roadway, U-5808 will have partial control of access. However, by way of this response, ePCN Question No. 3a is changed from "No" to "Yes". Bullet 8: The project design submitted to Historic Architecture is not the design presented for permitting, Historic Architecture requires resubmittal for project changes. Though the proposed road on the mapping has been refined to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional resources, the entire Area of Potential Effects (APE) shown in yellow on the first graphic, and red on the second graphic red was investigated for Historic Architecture resources. This study area surpasses the project boundary in all directions. By way of this reply, NCDOT feels the above responses satisfies the deficiencies in the referenced letter and requests the lifting of the "On Hold" Status and subsequent processing of the 401 application and permit. Sincerely, -0; � ?� Q - ��� Philip S. Harris III, P.E., C.P.M. Environmental Analysis Umt Head ecc: Crystal Amschler, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office Joel Howard, Division 10 Environmental Officer Larry Thompson, Division 10 PDEA Engineer cn Z O W w a� W c —I a� T I O 03 Ln W L F- E 0 oL w �68g RETAI N =72' CONC ire n�� MTLBUS Drainage Area: 2.48 acres 10.5 CFS (existing system) IV LONC LT /8' TOWN OF � I DB 54 I I BST PC L /8' C&G P C F F 71 00 �Q PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. U —5808 1 6 R/W SHEET NO. ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS ENGINEER ENGINEER INCOMP L,]E % lE PLANS DO NOT USE FOIE W ACQUISITION DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED 111 E. Hargett Street, Suite 300 Mead I I U 2701 1 n 1t ` 919- Raleigh, 4-86701 Caroina meatdhunt com NC License No. F-1235 PERMIT DRAWING SHEET 4 OF 9 2 5' 0' 2 5' 5 0' 7 5' GRAPHC SCALE F F Stormwater Information DENOTES TEMPORARY IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER DENOTES FILL IN WETLAND DENOTES MECHANIZED CLEARING H� STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Roy COOPER J. ERIC BOYETTE GOVERNOR SECRETARY DATE: July 28, 2020 TO: Michael Turchy, ECAP Western Regional Team Lead, EAU FROM: Herman Huang, Community Planner III, EAU SUBJECT: U-5808 ICE Technical Memorandum This Technical Memorandum presents a detailed Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE) study of Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Project U-5808 in Union County. A Community Impact Assessment for this project was completed in October 2017. The Indirect Effects Matrix finding is "Possible Land Use Scenario Assessment." However, Community Studies does not recommend the completion of a Land Use Scenario Assessment (LUSA) because the project's indirect effects on development and natural resources are expected to be minor due to limited project scale and because the FLUSA is expected to develop due to local growth trends regardless of whether this project is constructed. The information contained within this Technical Memorandum was obtained from online sources. Due to the ongoing COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic, local officials were not contacted nor was a site visit conducted. Project Description Project U-5808 proposes to extend SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from Matthews Indian Trail Road to SR 1368 (Gribble Road), a distance of approximately 0.5 mile. The project includes a grade -separated crossing over an active CSX rail line, sidewalks along both sides of the roadway, a traffic signal at the intersection with Matthews Indian Trail Road, and a single - lane roundabout with turn lanes at the intersection with Gribble Road. This project also proposes a signalized U-turn location west of the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection and a reverse superstreet configuration at the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection. Transportation Impact -Causing Activities The table on the next page shows that Project U-5808 has two Transportation Impact -Causing Activities: Travel Times and New Network Connections. Mailing Address: Telephone: (919) 707-6000 Location: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: (919) 250-4224 1000 BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 RALEIGH, NC 27610 1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH, NC 27699-1598 Website: www.ncdot.gov 2 TRAVEL TIMES Will the project result in travel time savings of more than one minute? This project provides a more direct route from Matthews Indian Trail Road (in the vicinity of Indian Trail Town Hall) to Gribble Road. The new route is approximately 0.7 mile shorter than using the existing road network. The resulting travel time savings is estimated to be one to two minutes. NEW NETWORK CONNECTIONS Will the project permanently add to the existino road network (e.o.. new location or new service roads)? This project provides a new connection between Matthews Indian Trail Road (in the vicinity of Indian Trail Town Hall) to Gribble Road. PROPERTY ACCESS Will the project provide new or expanded access to properties? CREATION OF ACTIVITY CENTERS Will the project open areas for concentrated, moderate to high intensity land development or redevelopment? Future Land Use Study Area ❑ NO ® YES ❑ NO ❑ YES ® NO ❑ YES ® NO The Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA) is the area surrounding a planned project that could potentially be indirectly affected as a result of the completion of a project and associated projects. The FLUSA encompasses the area examined for potential increases in development pressure as a result of project construction. As shown on the next page, the U-5808 FLUSA is bounded generally by developed parcels to the north and south, Matthews Indian Trail Road to the east, and South Fork Crooked Creek to the west. 3 LVINOTIV-8, Future Land Use Study Area 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Feet Legend u-5sas u-5808 FLUSA Streets Railroads Streams Municipal Boundaries Indian Trail Stallings 4 Indirect Effects Matrix and Methodology The categories listed on the Indirect Effects Matrix have been shown to influence land development decisions in numerous areas statewide and nationally. The measures used to rate the impacts from a high concern for indirect effects potential to less concern for indirect effects potential are supported by documentation sections. Each characteristic is assessed individually, and the results of the table are looked at comprehensively to determine the indirect effects potential of the proposed project. The scope of the project and change in accessibility categories are given extra weight to determine if future growth in the area is related to the project modifications. The Indirect Effects Matrix for U-5808 is shown below. Indirect Effects Matrix - TIP U-5808 - Chestnut Lane Connector Forecastetl Forecastetl Notable Natural Scope of Project Travel Time Population Employment Available Land Water/Sewer Market for Public Policy Environmental Result Savings Growth Growth Availability Development Features Rating Services available Notable Feature(s). High > 10 minute tray el >3%annualized >3%annuat¢ed 40% 1rgreaterof (80-1 o...d)FLUSA Development Activity Les Hhg.H no AbuSensitive ore More time savings population growth e mployment growth available land Abundant growth management Concern High X Metlium- X X High Medium X X Possible Land Uze Scenario Hzzezzm en[ Medium. X X X X Low Low Less Limited or no service Concern No travel time No populationgrowth Noemploy—H 0-9%ofavailable available now or n NODevelop—H More stnngent Notable Feature(s). Low savings or decline giowHordecline land future(0-20%of Activity growth management Minimal/Less FLUSA served) Sensitive Summary Report Scope of Project - This project will extend Chestnut Parkway by 0.5 mile on new location, thereby providing a connection between Matthews Indian Trail Road and Gribble Road. Due to the relatively short length of the project, the increase in accessibility and changes to travel patterns are expected to be minimal. Because of existing development (Indian Trail Town Hall) along the eastern part of the project corridor, along with the change in grade required to bridge the CSX rail line, this project is not expected to increase property access or create any activity centers. This category is rated Medium -Low. Travel Time Savings - This project provides a more direct route from Matthews Indian Trail Road (in the vicinity of Indian Trail Town Hall) to Gribble Road. The new route is approximately 0.7 mile shorter than using the existing road network. The resulting travel time savings is estimated to be one to two minutes. This category is rated Medium -Low. Population Growth - Data from the Office of State Budget and Management indicates that the population of Union County was estimated to be 232,465 in 2018. The population is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 2.05 percent between 2018 and 2039, to 355,872. This category is rated Medium. Employment Growth - For employment projection purposes, the North Carolina Department of Commerce has assigned Union County to the Charlotte Region. Employment in the Charlotte Region is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 1.18 percent between 2017 and 2026. This category is rated Medium -High. Available Land - The FLUSA contains 14 parcels with a total area of 115.55 acres. A parcel was considered to be available for development if the value of the land was greater than the value of the improvements. Seven parcels, with a total area of 81.16 acres, were identified as being available for development. These seven parcels included 6.43 acres that were within either the proposed right-of-way or 30 feet of stream centerlines and were considered not to be developable. Therefore, the FLUSA has a developable area of 74.73 acres, or 64.7 percent of the FLUSA. Because the seven parcels have seven owners, the available parcels -to -owners ratio is 1-to-1 and the weighting factor is 0.5. The weighted available land is 32.4 percent of the FLUSA. This category is rated Medium -High. Water and Sewer - The FLUSA lies entirely within the Town of Indian Trail. Most of the Town's water and sewer is provided by Union County Public Works; a small portion of the Town receives service from Carolina Water Services of NC. Maps of water and sewer service areas do not appear to be available online. It is assumed that the entire FLUSA has water and sewer service. This category is rated High. Market for Development - An examination of historical aerial imagery on Google Earth suggests that Indian Trail Town Hall (open as of February 2018) is the only development has occurred since 2010 within the FLUSA. There are no proposed, approved, or in -development projects within the FLUSA. This category is rated Medium -Low. Public Policy - The Indian Trail Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2013, divides the town into five sub -areas; the FLUSA lies within the Downtown Indian Trail sub -area. The Plan also identified nine primary land use types; within the FLUSA, the primary land use type is Downtown Indian Trail. The Plan notes that there are opportunities for new growth along Chestnut Parkway. Indian Trail's Downtown Master Plan, adopted in 2006, envisions single-family residential in the FLUSA south of the U-5808 project corridor; the remainder of the FLUSA is not covered by this plan. Union County's Comprehensive Plan envisions Mixed Residential and Town Center/Downtown in the vicinity of the FLUSA. Mixed Residential areas include a variety of housing types and densities, along with some commercial uses such as grocery stores and neighborhood services to serve residents. Town Center/Downtown areas "consist of existing downtowns or town centers with a range of uses including commercial office, civic, institutional and mixed residential products.... Policies that reinforce these Centers and prioritize infill development incorporating a mixture of uses should be adopted." (p. 25) Most of the FLUSA is zoned SF-1, Single -Family Low -Density, which stipulates a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet per unit for conventional development. One parcel is zoned L-I, Light 0 Industrial. The southern part of the FLUSA, roughly south of the U-5808 project corridor, is zoned O-DT, Downtown Overlay. Page 6-6 of the Indian Trail Unified Development Ordinance states that: "The Downtown (DOD) Overlay District is hereby established to encourage the development of a mixed -use, pedestrian -oriented downtown business district, with retail, financial, service, office, governmental, cultural and entertainment uses, along with residential options." No riparian buffer regulations are applicable. The FLUSA does not have any water supply watersheds. Indian Trail holds a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Phase II permit. Thirty-foot stream buffers are required for all built -upon areas. This category is rated Medium -Low. Notable Natural Environmental Features - South Fork Crooked Creek is listed on the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR's) 2018 Final 303(d) List. It is rated as Poor for Benthos and Fair for Fish Community. The Division of Water Resources classifies South Fork Crooked Creek as Class C Waters. The Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) identified 12 jurisdictional wetlands, totaling 2.16 acres, within the NRTR study area. According to the NRTR, no federally protected plant or animal species were located with the NRTR study area. This category is rated Medium Indirect Effects Conclusion Indirect Summary Statement - Based on the result (a total score of 18 points) of the Indirect Effects Matrix, a Land Use Scenario Assessment is possible. The matrix showed that the project has a low -to -moderate potential to influence growth and development. While the project will create a new roadway connection and reduce travel times, the ability of the project to stimulate growth and development is expected to be limited because of the short (0.5-mile) project length, existing development (Indian Trail Town Hall), and the necessary change in grade to bridge the rail line. Growth and development in the FLUSA are likely due to overall growth trends in Union County, regardless of whether U-5808 is constructed. Because indirect effects on development and natural resources are expected to be minor, a LUSA is not needed. Water Quality Statement - The potential for the degradation of water quality also exists through erosion and stream sedimentation. Any direct natural environmental impacts by NCDOT projects would be addressed by avoidance, minimization, and mitigation consistent with programmatic agreements with the natural resource agencies during agency coordination and permitting processes. Cumulative Effects Summary - The project vicinity has been a high -growth area in recent decades. The Town of Indian Trail proposes to further extend Chestnut Parkway from Gribble Road (the western terminus of U-5808) to Old Monroe Road. STIP Project U-4714 (widening of 7 East John Street -Old Monroe Road from Trade Street in Matthews to Wesley Chapel -Stouts Road in Indian Trail). Existing Chestnut Parkway (from Independence Boulevard to Matthews Indian Trail Road) opened to traffic in 2014. The Monroe Expressway opened to traffic in November 2018. Given the limited scale of the U-5808 project and that development is likely to occur with or without the project, this project is not expected to notably contribute to cumulative impacts to natural resources in the FLUSA. Sources A Guide to Surface Freshwater Classifications in North Carolina hiips://files.nc.gov/ncdeg/document- librqa/NC_ Guide_SurfaceWater AUGUSTI%202011_FINAL.pdf Indian Trail Comprehensive Plan hops: //www.indiantrail.org/DocumentCenterNiew/2163/Comprehensive-Plan Indian Trail Downtown Master Plan hops: //www.indiantrail. org/DocumentCenterNiew/ 194/Downtown-Master-Plan-Parts- l -and-2- PDF9hidld= Indian Trail Planning - What's New - Development Projects in Indian Trail htlps://www.indiantrail.org/470/Whats-New --- Development-Projects-in-Indi Indian Trail Post -Construction Storm Water Ordinance https: //www.indiantrail.org/DocumentCenterNiew/ 162/Post-Construction-Storm-Water- Ordinance-PDF Indian Trail Unified Development Ordinance hops: //www.indiantrail. org/DocumentCenterNiew/95 9/Unified-Development-Ordinance-PDF Indian Trail Zoning Map h!!ps://www.indiantrail.org/DocumentCenterNiew/I 18/Official-Zoning-Mgp-PDF Natural Resources Technical Report hops://connect.ncdot.gov/site/Preconstruction/division/div 10/U- 5 808/Natural%20Environment/U-5 808 %20NRTR%20FINAL%202018-04. North Carolina Department of Commerce, Labor and Economic Analysis (employment projections) h!!ps://nccareers.org/employmentprojections/industry employment�rojections.html# North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (interactive map of water classifications) hops://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webgppviewer/index.html?id=6e 125ad7628f494694e259c80 dd64265 North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (303(d) list) hiip s : //file s. nc. gov/ncde g /Water%20 Qualiiy/Planning/TMDL/3 03 d/2018/2018 -NC-3 03-d--List- Final.pdf North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NPDES list) https: //file s.nc. gov/ncdeg/Energ_y+Mineral+and+Land+Resources/Stonnwater/MS4_Documents/ Permitted-MS4-List.pdf North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (interactive map of water supply watersheds) https:Hdeg .nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/energy-mineral-land-data/wsw- maps-gis-resources Office of State Budget and Management (population projections) hiips://www.osbm.nc.gov/facts-figures/demogmphics The IT Factor (Indian Trail newsletter), February 2018 hiips://www.indiantrail.org/ArchiveCenterNiewFile/Item/122 Town of Indian Trail City Services and Utilities http : //indiantrail . org/5 03 /3 612/City-Services-and- Utilities?activeLiveTab=widgets#: -:text=Indian%20Trail%20residents%20are%20served%20by %20several%20utility,NC.%20They_ %20can%20be%20reached%20at%201-800-525- 7990.%20Electricity Union County Comprehensive Plan https://www.unioncouptync.gov/application/files/1114/9192/4072/Union_County Comprehensiv e Plan _web.pdf Project Tracking No. (Internal Use 16-09-0016 f� HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It Ir is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the Archaeology Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: U-5808 County: Union WBSNo.: 44381.1.1 Document State EA Type: Fed. Aid No: Funding: ® State ❑ Federal Federal ® Yes ❑ No Permit Section 404 Permit(s): Type(s): Proiect Description: Construct on new location SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Rd) to SR 1368 (Gribble Rd). SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW Description of review activities, results, and conclusions: Review of HPO quad maps, relevant background reports, historic designations roster, and indexes was undertaken on October 3, 2016. Based on this review there are National Register listed properties in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). This is a state -funded project with no permits required. No survey is required. This project is compliant with North Carolina General Statute 121-12(a). If the project requires Federal funding, permits, or licenses, then please notify NCDOT Historic Architecture because review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act will be required. Should the project limits or design change [including the addition of an off -site detour], please notify NCDOT Historic Architecture as additional review may be necessary. Why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predictinz that there are no unidentirted siganifcant historic architectural or landscape resources in the protect area: Using HPO GIS website and county tax data provides reliable information regarding the structures in the APE. These combined utilities are considered valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood of historic resources being present. Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEY REQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 1 of 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION ®Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ®Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN Historic Architecture and Landscapes -- NO SURVEY REQUIRED NCDOT Architectural Historian Date Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEY REQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 2 of 3 CD wa I OPT :q NOISE % ftt� ' R wr ��+ =.1�, � sty 4 •'�� # � t 5 � � - '� � �" � � +� i • rr lr' 'I � 1� 1 - � & Yk yr% a •� s rl 44 dws Mwb low a Bit s � f M1� * - ., a'�^ fly •� 3� - �# �� � �� ����#* - ,y '•� i��l�`- r _ 4 '� r♦ i r y ��I �4y+• � ,� •f.,_ln. a � •fir f'� + L>;'1� *,' WL Y' t �, t _�1 r4•,. 1i` h f ,. �,F. -L i' �J fi •'� pp I �+ � * ■ � F r � 'JAL 4 � �+ `�. � �� Y J/ } - 'W� '� � � _' �.' �• ' - -Fr � � Y MF P7P pot AM Tm WAR AP 111111 Ur NZ rT �� �_ r r F '�r = � 11 4.rY�•.�'` '_ ftS .fy .�4"'_�i. t - _ ,� • ^ _I # # # # �' 'r # - K ,.-• -' • r ;' +ram' 4 +i*� -f 4 • - +� fir+ _ - �r i --1 lool _ 1 � �F, ir� r � * .+ . � .' . � A � .ram � � y�4 � - . r �,,,, . �"p'� _ r. �' } �' '-7 ' _ - ■ _ .. r ' . , 3 . ' - _ � f " # i h . ,f ♦s Aw LZ 'E + w dL .?A!'* a } r, �, .fly'''!' '�'1i �-r,� � � ��. �_ �" � r - � _ _�� _ �i�� � a- � ' �� �• +� ` � ' 1. Wd D Firk IN 9T)MI - kk i ate- ..y�� ♦`} ##i. '�^' `f' - { . AlfWW4 Of , fir` _ '. 11Y # _ ■,.K� :' +++ f �^ a. a;. t ; i �, y 4 •3. .7r LLfi F �JM� i ;• — — }� a �.r _ `' �` -.e r y r t * f t,, _ ■ -�F* �► t. ~ i - - #ry '' ?'-'_'Y,. toor4� rf '..l F ��`` ft' '''.a ' 'r •J • ;' 'i i _{ ,•ALP # k k. IF oil fir y rt` r. 1a11 y+ fw • } I�• i• a y ' Y' r F ' I F y + • rt l + i 4 f �� * � I �,.�� � + �4 r , . + 01 IJ6 - + iOpp +=14 y _ •4 ',- .l- Y 'ram. _ k ■ .ram N.-�+ i� ,3 .ti # r 1 !` ,.'t'4 +.T " { — a' Y ter► # air�# it ti _ , + ter. r, `Tt ".. r' t r1 �' N4 sJ # ■ w '� 1d ,rh Tlf F �F S * -R•r. r dot vW '� .. r f+ � .y„y f' :•.y =. 5.^ -, \ • - 'a ~ � ' �` # � +� �� - � - L=' +Sr �N* ��.� - � _, � r �+ }r,�ry�� ''7:..��'� �• �+�'�'4J A* fiP275 'r� ��,.r _ , i'F�� { * ; �+ ,+ ; - l 1F+� F{ 4 T• is .y _ - '. y 3 / IF MF' "' f i*a•' �Tr *� • ? '* !� y • F+ . • -_. Y +` Y 4, 1�IPAPAep 46- �I,+J�� - a rPQI ai'-'a JA ~ � �' � ' ti'� + � �� � '+!t �F+a, . T t, -. +4��:- r .` � `` .r y r � -. r { • f �. � Y iT# /� � r } � � ; Y� N. 4- dly - 4 �• � 1 - - i� yP*' '��Lr� ,� - 'y` - J ,y,.l�' - � .� +' �5• � r ` r �- � i � •�'%� yl'+ -ir�r- �� - .. L J<I+ €� , {i •,N _ r �f _ ,r,••, *-r. #M. - . 4/ �� .L -� _ t. T mosop ��✓ F"v # •,rfi- }+_'r :r µ ` 16•`' ` ' a� rr _ r` '-t .� i �` Y �� 4 �. Y4 J+ � i +..� _ ■ li - ,y ,�* 74W �i • ,u-+. r a� hi ~y J; � • , - ,•' � f� yy� ' i'••R f • r :i' , X}.T ow Iwo • - . r + • � � � s �� J r� t � � - • Mrr - r.-" ' � x � aY� x -�' bo"�10 - b,Y.y'r - !r [{�y,�.J.7 * T • f • ice} ��y-- r -. +� � J � r � ��_ � "'ram # � # • �� � ' � l � 1��' jf -'� - 1 - •t_ mot`". + �fr+rrpy y;L w f a# L / �ti -• r 1+ -F f' PWA%ML*t r Z� M 'r�'F +Y'I r IA L _ _ ; € y�+ , ti �' +' � - 4 *` - - � ` rr �4' 7 ,� ,#� � * y.J',.1•- do ' '' ire ' 1. �'+. *'+f _ - ' J y _, 4 • -`' r" ifhfi�i/ y # # r *.rip - 1 km i � 7� k � "r'� � � r �•�Y���4i� � y �J�., r .r �- _ . ��. �� - - - �F � r*fir I � I� .. - i "'.J -- { L-! - �r t - y.n %\,N. UIW;41 �w ,IL67, �- � �` a� , � + ^'+r' �... � - Y � � l •'IIt ^.� ( -'gut _�.• - .'I' -a'Y'. �{ ��' k ��1 ,�• �� � ' � - v I..mom'-. �► _' r-- { '� ],fir^ DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 r ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary S. DANIEL SMITH Director NORTH CAROLINA. De►+bVftM#nr*1 Quality December 2, 2020 Union County NCDWR Project No. 20200555v.1 Chestnut Parkway Extension TIP/State Project No. U-5808 APPROVAL of 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION with ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS Mr. Brett Canipe, P.E., Division Engineer NCDOT, Division 10 716 East Main Street Albemarle, NC 28001 Dear Mr. Canipe: You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions listed below, for the following impacts for the purpose of constructing Chestnut Parkway Extension (U-5808) in Union County: Stream Impacts in the Yadkin-PeeDee River Basin Permanent Stream Fill in Temporary Fill in Bank Bank Total Stream Impacts Site Intermittent Intermittent Stream Stabilisation Stabilisation Impact Requiring Stream (linear ft) temp (linear permanent (linear ft) Mitigation ft) (linear ft) (linear ft) (linear ft) 1 165' (culvert) 22 (utility install & dewater) 10 20 217 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 1 0 1 10 1 20 1 217 1 0 Total Stream Impact for Project: 217 linear feet. DWR Mitigation Required for Project: 0 linear feet USACE Mitigation Required for Project: 185 linear feet North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources EQ 512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919.707.9000 DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 Wetland Impacts in the Yadkin-PeeDee River Basin Fill Fill Mechanized Bank Total pac s Excavation Requiring Site (pipe/waterline) (temporary) Clearing Stabilization Wetland (ac) Mitigation (ac) (ac) (ac) (fill, ac) Impact (ac) 2A 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.08 0.06 213 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 Total 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.13 0.09 Total Wetland Impact for Project: 0.13 acres Mitigation required by NC DWR: 0.0 acres Mitigation required by USACE: 0.09 acres The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated received April 27, 2020, additional information requested by DWR on June 22, 2020 and received on July 30, 2020. Additional permitting information requested by the ACOE on August 5, 2020 with partial replies received on September 2, 2020 and October 21, 2020. Wetland impacts were incorrectly submitted on the Pre -Construction Notification and have been corrected in the wetland table for the issuance of the 401 General Certification. Should your project change, you must notify the NCDWR and submit a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby responsible for complying with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, or of total impacts to perennial streams (now or in the future) exceed 300 linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to remain valid, you must adhere to the conditions listed in the attached certification(s) and any additional conditions listed below. Condition(s) of Certification: Project Specific Conditions 1. The NCDOT Division Environmental Officer or Environmental Assistant will conduct a pre -construction meeting with all appropriate staff to ensure that the project supervisor and essential staff understand the potential issues with stream and pipe alignment at the permitted site. NCDWR staff shall be invited to the pre -construction meeting. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2) and (b)(3) 2. Unless otherwise approved in this certification, placement of culverts and other structures in open waters and streams, shall be placed below the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being maintained if requested in writing by the NCDWR. If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or other limiting features encountered during construction, please contact the NCDWR for guidance on how to proceed and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 3. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they shall be designed to mimic natural stream cross section as closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation and/or sills where appropriate. Widening the stream channel should be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] D_ �FQ: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 919.707.9000 DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 4. Riprap shall not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be properly designed, sized and installed. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 5. For the 32 linear feet of streams being impacted due to site dewatering activities, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction contours and revegetated with appropriate native species. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 6. The stream channel shall be excavated no deeper than the natural bed material of the stream, to the maximum extent practicable. Efforts must be made to minimize impacts to the stream banks, as well as to vegetation responsible for maintaining the stream bank stability. Any applicable riparian buffer impact for access to stream channel shall be temporary and be revegetated with native riparian species. [I 5A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 7. Pipes and culverts used exclusively to maintain equilibrium in wetlands, where aquatic life passage is not a concern, shall not be buried. These pipes shall be installed at natural ground elevation. 8. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to 0.09 acres of riverine wetlands is required. We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to wetlands through the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) (formerly NCEEP), and that the DMS has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. DMS has indicated in a letter dated April 24, 2020 that they will assume responsibility for satisfying the federal Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for the above -referenced project, in accordance with DMS's Mitigation Banking Instrument signed July 28, 2010. 9. Compensatory mitigation for 185 linear feet of impact to streams is required. We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams through the North Carolina Division of Mitigation Service (DMS) (formerly NCEEP), and that the DMS has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. The DMS has indicated in a letter dated April 24, 2020 that they will assume responsibility for satisfying the federal Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for the above -referenced project, in accordance with the DMS Mitigation Banking Instrument signed July 28, 2010. General Conditions Unless otherwise approved in this certification, placement of culverts and other structures in open waters and streams shall be placed below the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and downstream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being maintained if requested in writing by NCDWR. If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or other limiting features encountered during construction, please contact NCDWR for guidance on how to proceed and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 2. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills. [15A NCAC 0213.0200] 3. During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the U.S., or protected riparian buffers. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 4. The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing shall not be modified. Disturbed floodplains and streams shall be restored to natural geomorphic conditions. [ 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] D_ �EFQ: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1617 919.707.9000 DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 5. The use of rip -rap above the Normal High Water Mark shall be minimized. Any rip -rap placed for stream stabilization shall be placed in stream channels in such a manner that it does not impede aquatic life passage. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 6. The Permittee shall ensure that the final design drawings adhere to the permit and to the permit drawings submitted for approval. [ 15A NCAC 02H .0507(c) and 15A NCAC 02H .0506 (b)(2) and (c)(2)] 7. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3) and (c)(3)] 8. Heavy equipment shall be operated from the banks rather than in the stream channel in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the introduction of other pollutants into the stream. [I 5A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3)] 9. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3)] 10. No rock, sand or other materials shall be dredged from the stream channel except where authorized by this certification. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3)] 11. Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to surface waters is prohibited. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3)] 12. The permittee and its authorized agents shall conduct its activities in a manner consistent with State water quality standards (including any requirements resulting from compliance with §303(d) of the Clean Water Act) and any other appropriate requirements of State and Federal law. If the NCDWR determines that such standards or laws are not being met (including the failure to sustain a designated or achieved use) or that State or federal law is being violated, or that further conditions are necessary to assure compliance, the NCDWR may reevaluate and modify this certification. [15A NCAC 02B.0200] 13. All fill slopes located in jurisdictional wetlands shall be placed at slopes no flatter than 3:1, unless otherwise authorized by this certification. [ 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2)] 14. A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be maintained on the construction site at all times. In addition, the Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the Division Engineer and the on -site project manager. [15A NCAC 02H .0507(c) and 15A NCAC 02H .0506 (b)(2) and (c)(2)] 15. The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities. Impacts to areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification. [15A NCAC 02H.0501 and .0502] 16. The issuance of this certification does not exempt the Permittee from complying with any and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances that may be imposed by other government agencies (i.e. local, state, and federal) having jurisdiction, including but not limited to applicable buffer rules, stormwater management rules, soil erosion and sedimentation control requirements, etc. 17. The Permittee shall report any violations of this certification to the Division of Water Resources within 24 hours of discovery. [15A NCAC 02B.0506(b)(2)] D_ �FQ: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1617 919.707.9000 DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 18. Upon completion of the project (including any impacts at associated borrow or waste sites), the NCDOT Division Engineer shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of Completion Form" to notify the NCDWR when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed. [15A NCAC 02H.0502(f)] 19. Native riparian vegetation (ex. Salix nigra, Juncus (spp), Carex (spp), et al.) must be reestablished in the riparian areas within the construction limits of the project by the end of the growing season following completion of construction. [15A NCAC 0213.0231(b)(6)] 20. There shall be no excavation from, or waste disposal into, jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with this permit without appropriate modification. Should waste or borrow sites, or access roads to waste or borrow sites, be located in wetlands or streams, compensatory mitigation will be required since that is a direct impact from road construction activities.[15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3) and (c)(3)] 21. Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in order to protect surface waters standards [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3) and (c)(3]): a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual. b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control measures must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices shall be maintained on all construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects, including contractor -owned or leased borrow pits associated with the project. c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Surface Mining Manual. d. The reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the reclamation in accordance with the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act. 22. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters unless otherwise approved by this Certification. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(3) and (c)(3)] If you wish to contest any statement in the attached Certification you must file a petition for an administrative hearing. You may obtain the petition form from the office of Administrative hearings. You must file the petition with the office of Administrative Hearings within sixty (60) days of receipt of this notice. A petition is considered filed when it is received in the office of Administrative Hearings during normal office hours. The Office of Administrative Hearings accepts filings Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:OOam and S:OOpm, except for official state holidays. The original and one (1) copy of the petition must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings. D_ �FQ: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1617 919.707.9000 DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 The petition may be faxed -provided the original and one copy of the document is received by the Office of Administrative Hearings within five (5) business days following the faxed transmission. The mailing address for the Office of Administrative Hearings is: Office of Administrative Hearings 6714 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-6714 Telephone: (919) 431-3000, Facsimile: (919) 431-3100 A copy of the petition must also be served on DEQ as follows: Mr. Bill F. Lane, General Counsel Department of Environmental Quality 1601 Mail Service Center This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Resources under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please contact Donna Hood at (704) 235-2193 or donna.hood@ncdenr.gov. Sincerely, DocuSigne��d by: ( *pl � 12 nie?Mi4th, Director Division of Water Resources Electronic copy only distribution: Crystal Amschler, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office Joel Howard, Division 10 Acting Environmental Officer Larry Thompson, Division 10 PDEA Engineer Michael Turchy, NC Department of Transportation Janet Mizzi, US Fish and Wildlife Service Marla Chambers, NC Wildlife Resources Commission Beth Harmon, Division of Mitigation Services Donna Hood, NC Division of Water Resources Mooresville Regional Office File Copy North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 11617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1617 919.707.9000 DocuSign Envelope ID: C495C87B-CC90-4D1A-8C97-E7A709972D65 r .. erg I s c: ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary S. DANIEL SMITH Director NORTH CAROLINA Efr0ronmertlal [girl ty NCDWR Project No.: Applicant: Project Name: County: Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification: Certificate of Completion Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the 401 Transportation Permitting Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Resources, 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1617. This form may be returned to NCDWR by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not necessary to send certificates from all of these. Applicant's Certification I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials. Signature: Agent's Certification Date: I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials. Signature: Engineer's Certification Partial Final Date: I, , as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the State of North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project for the Permittee hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials. Signature Date Registration No. D- �FQ: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources 512 North Salisbury Street 1 1617 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1617 °a s` 919.707.9000 Project Tracking No. (Internal Use 16-09-0016 ,r HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the Archaeology Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: U-5808 County: Union WBSNo.: 44381.1.1 Document State EA Type: Fed. Aid No: Funding: ® State ❑ Federal Federal ® Yes ❑ No Permit Section 404 Permit(s): Types) : Project Description: Construct on new location SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Rd) to SR 1368 (Gribble Rd). SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW Description of review activities, results, and conclusions: Review of HPO quad maps, relevant background reports, historic designations roster, and indexes was undertaken on October 3, 2016. Based on this review there are National Register listed properties in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). This is a state -funded project with no permits required. No survey is required. This project is compliant with North Carolina General Statute 121-12(a). If the project requires Federal funding, permits, or licenses, then please notify NCDOT Historic Architecture because review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act will be required. Should the project limits or design change [including the addition of an off -site detour], please notify NCDOT Historic Architecture as additional review may be necessary. Why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting that there are no unidentified significant historic architectural or landscape resources in the project area: Using HPO GIS website and county tax data provides reliable information regarding the structures in the APE. These combined utilities are considered valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood of historic resources being present. Historic Architectm•e and Landscapes NO SURVEY REQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 1 of 3 SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION ®Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ®Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN Historic Architecture and Landscapes -- NO SURVEY REQUIRED NCDOT Architectural Historian Date Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEY REQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 2 of 3 AO If At � � *w 44 <1 l�"ems' Y:16 "jiv 4 iV�o 1") t . US" } Illl�lk a try A' Ira nx _ ..;��..� a, a J.,.:a • 'Life ;3ik� yy..q �v�, !emu ✓+'. x � ... rtA r ��4� 1 .A. ll r 4 "AIL 5S ��� �. � �@ � • - ' s of 199 KsP ,"ys'ui Yas' (r�i �� a>Jilf i-4MT 1,ii tA • , +,' ,'�.. ue :+atyg�gf919 gar., rr �• 4j @°� AM � � �'� �;,(, �► � , �` Y@�� Q �f��- �Qt�l®N6•�t^� �iY ai .® • j yam, ��.: �rt�� � �►+� ��►;�'��� ,r o �� . �� ' a►,°��,`� �—.',�,../�� .i �� ` `�t"J �t// IDS `s� �r'^� -'�3y � h ' ��'s, '� Project Tracking No. 16-09-0016 oa NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not ice= p p ti9'a valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the k, ::.:.... Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: U-5808 County: Union WBSNo: 44381.1.1 Document: State Minimum Criteria Checklist Federal Aid No: Funding: ® State ❑ Federal Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: Project Description: Construct SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) on new location from SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Rd.) to SR 1368 (Gribble Rd.) in Union County. The Area of Potential Effects (A.P.E.) is approximately 706 meters (2,316 ft.) long and 66 meters (219 ft.) wide. Design plans provided. Project is State -funded and will require Federal permits (type unknown). Easements will be required. NOTE: This is an update of the 3/21/2017 No Survey Required form which includes design plans submitted in January 2018. The A.P.E. is slightly different than the 2017 submittal, but the recommendation has not changed. SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions: The review included an examination of a topographic map, the Union County soil survey, an aerial photograph, and listings of previously recorded sites, previous archaeological surveys, and previous environmental reviews at the Office of State Archaeology (O.S.A.). The A.P.E. is oriented northeast -southwest, but is considered north -south for this review. The topographic map (Matthews, N.C.) shows the A.P.E. is located on a hill top. It crosses two seasonal drainages near their heads. No structures are depicted in the A.P.E. The A.P.E. is wooded in the drainages and cleared on the uplands. The A.P.E. crosses a railroad near the mid point of the project. The landforms in the A.P.E. have a low to moderate potential for archaeological sites. The Union County soil survey shows the soils in the A.P.E. are Cid channery silt loam (1-5% slopes). This soil is moderately well -drained to somewhat poorly -drained, and is found on nearly level landforms like flats, ridges, and at the heads of drainages. The aerial photograph shows the landuse in the A.P.E. is a mix of wooded and cleared. There are no structures in the A.P.E. A review of information at the O.S.A. shows there are no previously recorded archaeological sites within or adjacent to the A.P.E. The A.P.E. has not been previously surveyed for archaeological sites. The north half of the A.P.E. is within a parcel that has been reviewed by the "No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 1 of 7 Project Tracking No. 16-09-0016 State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) (ER 15-1114). The project is "Construct Indian Trail Town Hall, Intersection of Matthews Indian Trail Rd. and North Indian Trail Rd., Indian Trail." No survey was recommended because the project had a low probability to impact any significant archaeological sites. Project ER 13-1675 is located along SR 1367 and existing Chestnut Pkwy. It is "Constructor Road from Highway 74 to Matthews Indian Trail Rd., Indian Trail." No survey was recommended because the project had a low probability to impact any significant archaeological sites. Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE: The landforms in the A.P.E. have a low to moderate potential for prehistoric archaeological sites. The north half of the project is within a previously reviewed project for which no archaeological survey was recommended by HPO. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: ® Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info ❑ Photocopy of County Survey Notes FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST NO ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEY REQUIRED Caleb Smith NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST II ❑ Photos ❑Correspondence Other: design plans 1/12/2018 Date "No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 2of7 BARRU STANLY MECKLEMB UNION —tw,- - ANSON Swces Ev I. HERE. DeLorme. IJW5, 1; P, I�Ikcwr CPS', METIL Esti Ch�le :"CeQ KWV� EiPi "No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 3 of 7 "No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 4of7 ` `• t ER 13-1675 f l y * Ilk .,. _ ; � � it 1•♦ Ap • . 1�'' :1 ER 15- r a � • SR 1362 connector t� • 41 }i i`Q�I Wtif1 CV75 } ] *. # '-. Ile • is _ `.\ � , • • , //yyam�_? ' � • j+ ' i n7 si i # y N w`Y Y4e • - +^ ��� r +y �f yy ,.} � __ ' ,� � , ram+ • "No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 5of7 '•r r. r I I : ► ) 14t] 70 0 140 h. ctr rs 500 250 0 500 Feet "No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 6of7 "No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement. 7of7 Roy Cooper, Governor 0■0■� INC DEPARTMENT OF ■■�■m NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ■ ■■■ July 11, 2023 Joel Howard NCDOT 716 West Main Street Albemarle, NC 28001 RE. The Chestnut Lane Connector, U-5808 Dear Joel Howard. d_ Reid Wilson, Secretary Misty Buchanan Deputy director, Natural Heritage Program NCNHDE-22594 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.butlerLncdcr.gov or 919-707-8603. Sincerely, NC Natural Heritage Program DEPAR71MENT OF NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOVRCES Q 121 W. JONES STREET. RALEIGH. NC 27603 • 1651 MAIL SERVICE CENTER. RALEIGH. NC 27699 OFC 918.707.9120 • FAX 919.707.9121 Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area The Chestnut Lane Connector Project No. U-5808 July 11, 2023 NCNHDE-22594 Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area Taxonomic EO ID cientific NamA Common Name W Element Accuracy Federal State Global State Group I Observation Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank Date Rank Freshwater Fish4660 Etheostoma collis Carolina Darter 1994-06-13 H? 3-Medium --- Special G3 S3 Concern Natural Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area Site Name entational Rating Collective Rating CTB/Twelvemile Creek Aquatic Habitat R5 (General) C4 (Moderate) Managed Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area Managed Are][Name er Type BE Town of Indian Trail Open Space Town of Indian Trail Local Government Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httr)s://ncnhde.natureserve.ora/heir). Data query generated on July 11, 2023; source: NCNHP, Spring (April) 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-22594: The Chestnut Lane Connector , � a wnlce C)Ok Ile , c 0 / c / 44 / 762 ft e� µd Bever\y Ic / aac 7G m / 9 m °,r Stal ngs rh r a Lake Par 5J 9 �- / � � 66P �a� 4�r• s �Ya 74 � Pd Cif Indian Trail Q�wette R o c, U a nit, 5 C, ® as a Ra Pebble Creek tic Executive Golf Chestnut Ln O Z' Course /ry 0 N W+)1 MclegO, °12 Rd S July 11, 2023 ® NHP Natural Area (NHNA) Q Buffered Project Boundary ® Managed Area (MAREA) Q Project Boundary Natural Heritage Element Occurrence (NHEO) y� �719ft p 0 0.33 0.65 1.3 Miles I i t i I t i i I So uroes. Fsri, Airbus DS. USGS. NGA. NASA, CGIAR. N Robinson. NCFAS. NLS. OS, NMA. Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat GSA, Geoland, FFMA, ntermap and the GIS user community Sources. Esri, HERE. Garm in. FAO. NOAA, USGS. © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User in, Page 3 of 3 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL DOCUMENT REVIEW TRACKING SHEET Corporate Project No.: 38588.00 NCDOT TIP No.: U-5808 Document Type: Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) NCDOT Project Manager: Carl Gibilaro Project Manager: Lauren Triebert Principal Investigator: Kris Dramby Date of Draft Completion: 01/24/2018 Date of Peer Review: (Reviewer Initials) DD 01/24/2018 1 St Review Date of Project Manager Review: Date of Revisions/Corrections: 21 d Review 3d Review LT 1/30/18 Date of Final Review: NCDOT Division approval received 4/15/18 Tracking Sheet Must be Submitted with Draft to NCDOT 05/18/15 QAQC Tracking Sheet.doc NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT Proposed SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Road) to SR 1368 (Gribble Road) Union County, North Carolina TIP U-5808 WBS Element No. 44381.1.1 tJORTH -r THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit Natural Environment Section January 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1 2.0 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS....................................................... 1 3.1 PHYSICAL RESOURCES......................................................................................2 3.2 Soils........................................................................................................................ 2 3.3 Water Resources................................................................................................... 2 4.1 BIOTIC RESOURCES............................................................................................ 3 4.2 Terrestrial Communities...................................................................................... 3 4.2.1 Maintained/Disturbed.......................................................................................3 4.2.2 Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest........................................................................ 3 4.2.3 Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest (Hardpan Subtype) ................................... 4 4.1.3 Pine Forest........................................................................................................ 4 4.1.4 Terrestrial Community Impacts........................................................................ 4 4.2 Terrestrial Wildlife............................................................................................... 4 4.3 Aquatic Communities........................................................................................... 5 4.4 Invasive Species..................................................................................................... 5 5.1 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES.................................................................................. 5 5.2 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.................................................................... 5 5.3 Clean Water Act Permits..................................................................................... 6 5.4 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern .................. 7 5.5 Construction Moratoria....................................................................................... 7 5.6 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules............................................................................. 7 5.7 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters ...................................... 7 5.8 Wetland and Stream Mitigation.......................................................................... 7 5.8.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts......................................................... 7 5.8.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts............................................................... 7 5.9 Endangered Species Act Protected Species ...................................................... 7 5.10 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act .................................................... 9 5.11 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species...................................................10 5.12 Essential Fish Habitat......................................................................................10 6.0 REFERENCES........................................................................................................11 Appendix A Figures Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Project Study Area Map Figure 3. Jurisdictional Features Map Figure 4. Terrestrial Communities Map Appendix B Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report Appendix C Stream and Wetland Forms Appendix D Qualifications of Contributors Appendix E Mussel Survey Report LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Soils in the study area....................................................................................... 2 Table 2. Water resources in the study area................................................................... 2 Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area ....................... 3 Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area .................................. 4 Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area .............. 6 Table 6. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the study area .......................... 6 Table 7. Federally protected species listed for Union County ..................................... 8 Table 8. Candidate species listed for Union County...................................................10 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. 1.0 INTRODUCTION The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to build SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane), a new location road from SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Road) to SR 1368 (Gribble Road), in Union County (Figure 1). The following Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) has been prepared to assist in the preparation of a State Minimum Criteria Determination Checklist (MCDC) for the proposed project. 2.1 METHODOLOGY AND QUALIFICATIONS All work was conducted in accordance with the NCDOT Natural Environment Section standard operating procedures and July 2012 NRTR template. Field work was conducted on March 1st-2" d 2017, and October 24th, 2017. Jurisdictional areas identified in the study area have not yet been verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). However, a portion of the study area was included in the Town of Indian Trail preliminary jurisdictional determination (PJD) request for Chestnut Parkway that was field verified on January 12, 2017. The principal personnel contributing to this document were: Principal Investigator: Rob Crowther Education: B.S. Environmental Resources Management, 2014 Experience: Environmental Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2015-Present Field Assistant, Virginia Tech, 2014 Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, stream assessment, natural communities assessment, and T/E species assessment, document preparation Investigator: Greg Price, PWS Education: M.S. Biology, 1989 Experience: Senior Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2016-Present Natural Resources Specialist, Froehling & Robertson, 2015-2016 Environmental Specialist, NCDOT-NES, 2006-2015 Senior Biologist, Buck Engineering, 2000-2006 Water Quality Specialist, City of Durham, 1997-2000 Environmental Biologist, NCDWQ, 1991-1997 Responsibilities: Wetland and stream delineations, GPS, stream assessment, natural communities assessment, and T/E species assessment, document review Additional personnel who contributed to portions of the field work and/or documentation for this project were Phil May (Carolina Ecosystems), Jen Morris (Carolina Ecosystems), Caitlin Cyrus (VHB), and Phil Bailey (VHB). Appendix D lists the qualifications of these contributors. May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. 3.1 PHYSICAL RESOURCES The study area lies in the piedmont physiographic region of North Carolina (Figure 2). Topography in the project vicinity is comprised of low broad hills with narrow, level floodplains along streams. Elevations in the study area range from approximately 665 to 720 feet above sea level. Land use in the project vicinity consists primarily of agricultural fields interspersed with forestland, residential areas, and commercial development. 3.2 Soils The Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey identifies five soil types within the study area (Table 1). Table 1. Soils in the study area Soil Series Mapping Unit Drainage Class H dric Status' Appling-Urban land AuB Well drained Nonhydric complex Badin-Urban land BuB Well drained Nonhydric complex Badin channery silty clay BdB2 Well drained Nonhydric loam Cid channery silt loam CmB Moderately well drained Nonhydric Secrest-Cid complex ScA Moderately well drained H dric* 1 Based on the percentage of a map unit that meets the hydric criteria (0% = nonhydric, 1-10% _ primarily nonhydric but with hydric inclusions, and > 10% = hydric). * Soils which are primarily nonhydric, but which may contain hydric inclusions. 3.3 Water Resources Water resources in the study area are part of the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin [U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03040105]. Four streams were identified in the study area (Table 2). The location of each water resource is shown in Figure 3. The physical characteristics of these streams are provided in Table 3. Table 2. Water resources in the study area. NCDWQ Index Best Usage Stream Name Map ID Number Classification UT to South Fork Crooked Creek SA 13-17-20-2 C UT to South Fork Crooked Creek SB 13-17-20-2 C UT to South Fork Crooked Creek SC 13-17-20-2 C UT to South Fork Crooked Creek SD 13-17-20-2 C 2 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. Table 3. Physical characteristics of water resources in the study area Map ID Bank Bankful Water Channel Velocity Clarity Height ft Width ft Depth in Substrate Clay, Silt, SA 0.5 2 6 Sand, Slow Turbid Gravel Clay, Silt, SB 0.5 2 6 Sand, Slow Turbid Gravel SC 0.5 3 3 Clay, Silt, Slow Slightly Sand, Turbid Clay, Silt, Slightly SD 1 4 8 Sand, Slow Turbid Gravel There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present in the study area. There are no Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), or water supply watersheds (WS-I or WS-II) present in the study area or within 1.0 mile downstream of the study area. No water resources within the project study area, or within 1.0 mile of the study area, are identified on the North Carolina 2014 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters for sedimentation or turbidity. No benthic or fish surveys have been conducted within a one -mile radius of the study area. 4.1 BIOTIC RESOURCES 4.2 Terrestrial Communities Four terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: maintained/disturbed, dry- mesic oak hickory forest, piedmont headwater stream forest (hardpan subtype), and pine forest. Figure 4 shows the location and extent of these terrestrial communities in the study area. A brief description of each community type follows. Scientific names of all species identified are included in Appendix B. 4.2.1 Maintained/Disturbed Maintained/disturbed areas are scattered throughout the study area in places where the vegetation is periodically mowed, such as roadside shoulders and disturbed fields. The vegetation in this community type is comprised of low growing grasses and herbs, shrubs, and tree saplings including blackberry, broomsedge, Carolina geranium, crown vetch, dandelion, fescue, henbit, Japanese honeysuckle, poison ivy, and sweetgum. 4.2.2 Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest The dry-mesic oak hickory forest community type occurs in areas of upland slopes in the study area, where eastern red -cedar, flowering dogwood, Japanese honeysuckle, northern May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. red oak, shortleaf pine, sweetgum, white oak, and yellow poplar are dominant species within the community. 4.2.3 Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest (Hardpan Subtype) The piedmont headwater stream forest (hardpan subtype) community occurs in very gently -sloped upper drainages of the study area where the terrain has dense clay hardpan soils that restrict internal drainage. Species in this community type include American elm, bigleaf periwinkle, Chinese privet, eastern red -cedar, English ivy, giant cane, green ash, Japanese privet, Japanese stiltgrass, loblolly pine, multiflora rose, muscadine, poison ivy, red maple, roundleaf greenbrier, southern shagbark hickory, sugarberry, sweetgum, white oak, willow oak, winter creeper, and yellow poplar. All wetland sites within the study area are found in the piedmont headwater stream forest community type. Using the NCWAM classification, wetland sites WA, WB, WD, WE, WH, WI, WJ, WK, and WL were classified as headwater forest, sites WF and WG were classified as floodplain pool, and site WC was classified as bottomland hardwood forest. 4.1.3 Pine Forest The pine forest community type occurs in areas of upland slopes throughout the study area. Pines within this community include loblolly pine, shortleaf pine, and Virginia pine. Eastern red -cedar and sweetgum are also present in this community. 4.1.4 Terrestrial Community Impacts Terrestrial communities in the study area may be impacted by project construction as a result of grading and paving within portions of the study area. At this time, decisions regarding the final location and design of the proposed road have not been made. Therefore, community data are presented in the context of total coverage of each type within the study area (Table 4). Once a final alignment and preliminary design have been determined, probable impacts to each community type will be calculated. Table 4. Coverage of terrestrial communities in the study area Community Coverage ac. Maintained/Disturbed* 157.7 Dry-Mesic Oak Hickory Forest 4.5 Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest (Hardpan Subtype) 33.1 Pine Forest 8.2 Total 202.9 * Roadways were included when calculating Maintained/Disturbed acreage. 4.2 Terrestrial Wildlife Terrestrial communities in the study area are comprised of both natural and disturbed habitats that may support a diversity of wildlife species (those species actually observed are indicated with *). Mammal species that commonly exploit forested habitats and stream corridors found within the study area include species such as eastern cottontail, 4 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. gray squirrel*, raccoon*, Virginia opossum, and white-tailed deer*. Birds that commonly use forest and forest edge habitats include the American crow*, blue jay, Carolina chickadee*, Carolina wren*, northern cardinal, red -bellied woodpecker*, tufted titmouse, and yellow-rumped warbler. Birds that may use the open habitat within the study area include American kestrel, belted kingfisher, eastern bluebird, eastern meadowlark, and turkey vulture. Reptile and amphibian species that may use terrestrial communities located in the study area include the corn snake, eastern box turtle, eastern fence lizard, five -lined skink, and northern dusky salamander. 4.3 Aquatic Communities Aquatic habitats in the study area consist of both perennial and intermittent piedmont streams. The perennial streams in the study area could support bluehead chub, creek chub, creek chubsucker, golden shiner, green sunfish, highfin shiner, northern dusky salamander, pumpkinseed, redbreast sunfish, redlip shiner, tessellated darter, warmouth sunfish, and white shiner. The intermittent streams in the study area would support aquatic communities of crayfish, spring peeper, and various benthic macroinvertebrates. 4.4 Invasive Species Nine species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina were found to occur in the study area. The species identified were bigleaf periwinkle (Watch List), Chinese privet (Threat), crown vetch (Watch List), English ivy (Moderate Threat), Japanese honeysuckle (Moderate Threat), Japanese privet (Moderate Threat), Japanese stilt grass (Threat), multiflora rose (Threat), and winter creeper (Moderate Threat). NCDOT will manage invasive plant species as appropriate. 5.1 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES 5.2 Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S. Four jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (Table 5). The locations of these streams are shown on Figure 3. USACE and NCDWR stream delineation forms are included in Appendix C. The physical characteristics and water quality designations of each jurisdictional stream are detailed in Section 3.2. All jurisdictional streams in the study area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation. 5 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. Table 5. Jurisdictional characteristics of water resources in the study area Map ID Length (ft.) Classification Compensatory Mitigation Re uired River Basin Buffer SA 1,175 Perennial Yes Not Subject SA 953 Intermittent Not Determined Not Subject SB 1,301 Intermittent Not Determined Not Subject Sc 201 Intermittent Not Determined Not Subject SD 1,174 Perennial Yes Not Subject Total 4,804 Twelve jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the study area (Figure 3). Wetland classification and quality rating data are presented in Table 6. All wetlands in the study area are within the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040105). USACE wetland delineation forms and NCDWR wetland rating forms for each site are included in Appendix C. Descriptions of the terrestrial communities at each wetland site are presented in Section 4.1. All wetland sites are included within the piedmont headwater stream forest (hardpan subtype) community. Table 6. Jurisdictional characteristics of wetlands in the study area Map ID NCWAM Classification Hydrologic Classification NCDWQ Wetland RatingArea (ac.) WA Headwater Forest Riparian 34 0.67 WB Headwater Forest Riparian 23 0.13 WC Bottomland Hardwood Forest Riparian 28 0.12 WD Headwater Forest Riparian 34 0.47 WE Headwater Forest Riparian 60 0.32 WF Floodplain Pool Riparian 37 <0.01 WG Floodplain Pool Riparian 37 <0.01 WH Headwater Forest Riparian 60 0.01 WI Headwater Forest Riparian 60 0.01 WJ Headwater Forest Riparian 60 <0.01 WK Headwater Forest Riparian 60 0.39 WL Headwater Forest Riparian 44 0.02 Total 2.16 5.3 Clean Water Act Permits The proposed project has been designated as a new location road. As a result, a Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14 will likely be applicable. The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. If a Section 404 permit is required, then a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWR will be needed. 6 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. 5.4 Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern Union County is not a designated coastal county in North Carolina; therefore, Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA) regulations do not apply. 5.5 Construction Moratoria A constriction moratorium is not anticipated. 5.6 N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules There are no buffer rules in effect in Union County for this portion of the Yadkin -Pee Dee River basin. 5.7 Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters There are no Navigable Waters designated by the USACE under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act in the study area. 5.8 Wetland and Stream Mitigation 5.8.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts The NCDOT will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands to the greatest extent practicable in choosing a preferred alternative and during project design. At this time, no final decisions have been made with regard to the location or design of the preferred alternative. 5.8.2 Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts The NCDOT will investigate potential on -site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities once a final decision has been rendered on the location of the preferred alternative. If on -site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided by North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). 5.9 Endangered Species Act Protected Species As of March 25, 2015, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three federally protected species for Union County (Table 7). A brief description of each species' habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered 7 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. based on survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS. Table 7. Federally protected species listed for Union County Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status Habitat Present Biological Conclusion Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's sunflower E Yes No Effect Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter E No No Effect Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E Yes No Effect E — Endangered Schweinitz's sunflower USFWS optimal survey window: late August -October Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont of North and South Carolina. The few sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation are found in Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights -of -way, maintained power lines and other utility rights -of -way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland oak -pine -hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi -sunny habitats where disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create open or partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from other vegetation. Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series, including Badin, Cecil, Cid, Enon, Gaston, Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer, Secrest, Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion, among others. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow, poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks. Biological Conclusion: No Effect VHB scientists Caitlin Cyrus and Phillip Bailey surveyed for Schweinitz's sunflower on October 24, 2017. Suitable habitat was present in the study area in open, sunny areas such as roadside shoulders, maintained field edges, and power line rights -of -way. Where habitat was present, a detailed transect survey was conducted to look for individual plants. No Schweinitz's sunflowers were located. A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) records, updated October 2017, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Carolina heelsplitter USFWS Recommended Survey Window: year round Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several locations within the Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River systems, and possibly the Saluda River system in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species is now known only from a 8 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. handful of streams in the Pee Dee and Catawba River systems. The species exists in very low abundances, usually within 6 feet of shorelines, throughout its known range. The general habitat requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in large rivers to small streams, often burrowed into clay banks between the root systems of trees, or in runs along steep banks with moderate current. The more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is in sections of streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and gravel, and with wide riparian buffers. Biological Conclusion: No Effect See Appendix E for information about this species. A review of NCNHP records, updated October 2017, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Michaux's sumac USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May -October Habitat Description: Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont, grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well -drained sands or sandy loam soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights -of -way; areas where forest canopies have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its open habitat. Biological Conclusion: No Effect A survey for Michaux's sumac was conducted by VHB scientists Caitlin Cyrus and Phillip Bailey on October 23, 2017. Suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac is present in the study area in open, sunny areas, such as roadside shoulders, maintained field edges, and power line rights -of -way. Where habitat was present, a detailed transect survey was conducted to look for individual plants. No Michaux's sumac was found. A review of the NCNHP records, updated October 2017, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. 5.10 Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. 9 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. A desktop-GIS assessment of the study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius of the project limits, was performed February 28, 2017 using the latest color aerial photography. No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding sources were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a survey of the study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not conducted. Additionally, a review of the NCNHP database in January 2017, revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the study area. Due to the lack of habitat, lack of known occurrences, and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect this species. 5.11 Endangered Species Act Candidate Species As of March 25, 2015, the USFWS has listed one Candidate species for Union County. Table 8. Candidate species listed for Union County Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Present Symphyotrichumgeorgianum Georgia aster Yes 5.12 Essential Fish Habitat The National Marine Fisheries Service has not identified any essential fish habitat in the study area. 10 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. 6.0 REFERENCES Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians (Eastern and Central North America). 3rd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 450 pp. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi. Environmental Laboratory. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Version 2.0. Vicksburg, Mississippi. Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press. 264 pp. National Geographic. 1999. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C. National Geographic Society. National Marine Fisheries Service. 2010. A Reference Guide to the Distribution of Anadromous Fishes in North Carolina Rivers. Available online at https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/h. d�ydraulics%20Memos%20Guidelines/ A%20Reference%20Gui de%20to%20the%20Distribution%20oP/o20Anadromous %20Fishes%20in%20NC.pdf National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Essential Fish Habitat Mapper v3.0. Available online at hgp://www.habitat.noaa.gov/protection/efh/efhmMer/index.html (Accessed: April 25, 2017). NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://www.natureserve.org/explorer. (Accessed: April 25, 2017). N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. 1995. Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. Fourth version. N.C. Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources, Division of Water Quality, Biological Assessment Unit. Yadkin River Fish Community Data. https:Hdeq.nc. gov/about/divi si ons/water-resources/water-resources-data/water- sci ences-home-page/bi ological-assessment-branch/fi sh-stream-assessment- program (Accessed: April 25, 2017). 11 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. N.C. Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources, Biological Assessment Unit. Yadkin River Benthic Macroinvertebrate Assessment Data. https:Hdeq.nc.gov/aboutldivi si ons/water-resources/water-resources-data/water- sciences-home-page/biological-assessment-branch/dwr-benthos-data (Accessed: April 25, 2017). N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. 1999a. Internal Guidance Manual - N.C. Division of Water Quality Stream Classification Method. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. 2010. Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and their Origins, Version 4.11. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC. N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. 2013. Basinwide Assessment Report. Yadkin River Basin. httDs ://ncdenr. s3 . amazonaws.com/s3 fs- public/Water%20Quality/Environmental%20 Sciences/Reports/Yad_1 l Final_with templates.pdf N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List 2014 Final 303(d) list. https://ncdenr.s3 . amazonaws.com/s3 fs- public/Water%20Quality/Planning/TMDL/303d/2014/2014_303 dlist.pdf N.C. Department of Transportation. 2012. Invasive Exotic Plants of North Carolina. N.C. Natural Heritage Program. 2001. Guide to Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species of North Carolina. Raleigh, NC. 134 pp. N.C. Natural Heritage Program Data Search. January 2017 Elemental Occurrences. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Office of Land and Water Stewardship, Raleigh, NC. N.C. Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual Version 5. Feb, 2016. https://ribits.usace.LM.mil/ribits_apex/f?p=107:150:11569560199876::NO::P 15 0 DOCUMENT ID:36296 N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission. North Carolina Species. Carolina heelsplitter. http://www.ncwildlife.org/Leaming/Species/Mollusks/Carolina-Heelsplitter (Accessed: April 25, 2017). Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Boston: Little, Brown and Company. 490 pp. 12 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. Peterson, R.T., editor. 1980. A Field Guide to the Birds of Eastern and Central North America. 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 384 pp. Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 1183 pp. Rohde, F.C., R.G. Arndt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Parnell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 222 pp. Schafale, M.P., and A.S. Weakley 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Schafale, M.P. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Fourth Approximation. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC. 592 pp. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/. (Accessed: April 25, 2017). United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 1998. Hydrologic Units -North Carolina (metadata). Raleigh, North Carolina. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899. http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/sectIO.cfm United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Endangered Species, Threatened Species, Federal Species of Concern, and Candidate Species, Union County, NC. https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/union.html. (Updated: March 25, 2015). United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata). https://www.fws.gov/asheville/htmis/listed_species/Carolina_heelsplitter.html (Accessed: April 25, 2017). United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es—michauxs—sumac.html (Accessed: April 25, 2017). United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Schweinitz's Sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) https://www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/es_schweinitz_sunflower.html (Accessed: April 25, 2017). 13 May 2017 Natural Resources Technical Report TIP U-5808, Union County, N.C. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2015.Optimal Survey Windows for North Carolina's Federally Threatened and Endangered Plant Species. hllp://www.fws.gov/raleigh/pdfs/Qptimal_Survey Windows_ for listed plants.pdf (Accessed: April 25, 2017). United States Geological Survey. 2013. Matthews, North Carolina, Topographic Quadrangle (1:24K). Reston: 1 sheet. Weakley, A.S. 2015. Flora of the Southern and Mid -Atlantic States. University of North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. 1320 pp. Webster, Parnell, and Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 14 May 2017 Appendix A Figures Matthews Mintrn �n a n � Ty �risrhar 1b� 147r o ,,,p arYn Dr a�16 � �4 Rdd �E`' �ba6c o e�y Hemby S 5 7,�nk r6wn Rr! . iw.. ridge o qY r PPS �-b sf'bs a 4 °4.y Fouryrtil reek C c l r% ' 74 01- `s��� p s ¢ g 4 p rt vok 9 y 4 441, C.�paec Qax or vo�ry 0aid Qa��at`bPso r c geyb4 D f,he�p Car°i Ave f .•.'' , � ��' s � S s� �3 'y��c pniter gla►�rn9 iiz, �`'r �c�i a�„�v�cbq� n n �mRpa rr h °% dd 5 ingsI �691 a 17� Ra Pleasant Pr �, 47 C; ti ai Ra CO�tsd - ;§ �q.f, ° Park y� f� Lake a Ga�wba C oIndian 4b 0,arJ� 5 +r N o d c bor o'r as G1r Tr a I d}y4 h �m U N o`c a o K� � ytprivetteKd� a771 ❑SG �° A � �(j a a. ark'�7 �n ,a� e4 ve t 30 >ti�' P b ° Edna Ra S Ches[n t o it Love Park x } iT4, S mclendan 9a C `�9�� $fir vs 0 ay pr m{e Af �� �puee Rh Ca deer ohm°a � ¢ � b� ti Pincher d RrdgE m a �' o- d� Lat 36.0393 / Long-78.5329 Ctr (il Ar�ettis ti41 r ponytm% mb Ln l �° try 9rV h C a, Project Location: c��ar pear L�ati` day '�e yyy Union County, NC N TIP U-5808 Study Area Union County, NC MENEM[z= Miles 0 0.25 0.5 USGS Named Streams Figure 1: Vicinity Map April 2017 ESRI Street Map World 2D �p pR � , F AL SIT. C Tak6d- —C �o S Fork ARR0 t 1fER R LU C, CATAN�B� o v y w I AKEV4 44 J ANTED DR ��'� woNa� tE � ydi F q�� IPo_ (i 0 S�. 0 O M1�o� wnRrrr c4ro N Map Date: April 2017 Feet Study Area Revised: 0 500 1,000 Revised: 9TA� Matthews (2013) USGS 1:24,000 Quadrangle Map Revised: [lip ya ��Ilr�T�T J/ TRAI 1, UNIONVILLE INDIAN TRL RD -- . TIP U-5808 (Chestnut Lane Connector) Union County, NC Figure 2: Project Study Area Map Vf � Q f' •: r'� 11 � �y may,! !�: lt.�; ■ . M:. Y �' .. IN S. ' _ `•r� ��' r IMF • i ����._� •1 ! n ' ,kit • r i_ .ry � " 'F -._µ'r .' • ' 41. .400 It �• �F" ► �! t: 1' y �T - j *i� ��� • Y, �y •��.yl—� � r s _ � k� 1 I � .. e "4 `�L � t' �_l_.: �a s J.�, � i- .p�.I�:JN�ti f'�i ■ i'=' �r /� `� '�...e h Tom. .. Li' _. L , rr- ':i Q r `_ k -I. - F. T .: 'es i• 1i.. .•.� - rtE; T AX ,ix�§'A�, , t� �v r r ems•. i NL, ' ?� �}4 SB SA ion W \ "OaT'+e Map Date: April 2017 TIP U-5808 Chestnut Lane Connector 4�w N Study Area �i Intermittent Stream Feet - Wetland Perennial Stream Revised: Union County, NC 0 150 300 Sheet Limits Previously Verified Jan 12, 2017 Revised: 0 y � > Figure 3: Jurisdictional Features Map °VTR" 2015 NC Statewide Aerial Photography Revised: Sheet I of 2 %,ITT m V may. •tir �;i ,M'.. "1r�Sj•a'i .11 ��'�,�1 �' }i �. .( �r .�}..+' . \ �_J •t.� r ■�..;i,:2l-��t.i "T�• , �. � �` � `5r. y� f W ..iM� �� , � it}STn��{•1 ..4 �J1� �� a/�� .� ,'3y' ' �� :� � i mgm `RP� r yL 77, V 1 �.. ro \,"11,11,0100000 Di F�, Y •.�^. 4 .� tit. .(� lxl yy � s / � � � '� A ` f f' rf T ^' .� Y Y - •�r f �9"'# s .sin ,,�^ i AW Study Area Intermittent Stream Feet Wetland Perennial Stream a ¢ 0 150 300 Sheet Limits ®Previously Verified (Jan 12, 2017) °VTR" 2015 NC Statewide Aerial Photography Map Date: April 2017 Revised: Revised: Revised: 'a ;, . TIP U-5808 (Chestnut Lane Connector) Union County, NC Figure 3: Jurisdictional Features Map Sheet 2 of 2 icy � �� ,, o K"a -� s •,�r-'�. ";, . OW\ OWN '" I IA NN W. „• , 41 k., �' •'�. � `1 JV ~ a-: A t - i. N Study Area Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest (Hardpan Subtype) Map Date: April 2oi� TIP U-5808 (Chestnut Lane Connector) x� Feet = Sheet Limits Dry Mesic Oak Hickory Forest Revised: Union County, NC la 0 150 300 Revised: Figure 4: Terrestrial Communities Map ,v O�Fn+� Pine Forest Maintained/Disturbed 2015 NC Statewide Aerial Photography Revised: Sheet 1 of 2 n r � AM 16 _$., 1 � � A `e S ♦ , � n Fes/ �R _ '. � i. P . 1 Ab NS 4-1 N Study Area Piedmont Headwater Stream Forest (Hardpan Subtype) Map Date: April 2017 TIP U-5808 (Chestnut Lane Connector) Revised: Union County, NC Feet Sheet Limits 4ft Dry Mesic Oak Hickory Forest 0 150 300 Revised: Figure 4: Terrestrial Communities Map �,A, Pine Forest Maintained/Disturbed 2015 NC statewide Aerial Photography Revised: Sheet 2 of 2 Appendix B Scientific Names of Species Identified in Report Plants Common Name Scientific Name American elm Ulmus americans Bigleaf periwinkle Vinca major Blackberry Rubus sp. Broomsedge Andropogon virginicus Carolina geranium Geranium carolinianum Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense Crown vetch Securigera varia Dandelion Taraxacum sp. Eastern red -cedar duniperus virginiana English ivy Hedera helix Fescue Festuca sp. Flowering dogwood Cornus Florida Giant cane Arundinariagigantea Green ash Fraxinuspennsylvanica Henbit Lamium amplexicaule Japanese honeysuckle Lonicerajaponica Japanese privet Ligustrum japonicum Japanese stiltgrass Microstegium vimineum Loblolly pine Pinus taeda Multiflora rose Rosa multiflora Muscadine Muscadinia rotundifolia Northern red oak Quercus rubra Poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans Red maple Acer rubrum Roundleaf greenbrier Smilax rotundifolia Shortleaf pine Pinus echinata Southern shagbark hickory Caryacarolinae-septentrionalis Sugarberry Celtis laevigata Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua Virginia pine Pinus virginiana White oak Quercus alba Willow oak Quercus phellos Winter creeper Euonymus fortunei var. radicans Yellow poplar Liriodendron tulipifera Animals Common Name Scientific Name American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos American kestrel Falco sparverius Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Belted kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon Blue j ay Cyanocitta cristata Bluehead chub Nocomis leptocephalus Carolina chickadee Poecile carolinensis Carolina wren Thryothorus ludovicianus Corn snake Elapheguttata Crayfish Cambarus sp. Creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus Eastern bluebird Sialia sialis Eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus Eastern fence lizard Sceloporus undulatus Eastern meadowlark Sturnella magna Five -lined skink Eumeces anthracinus Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas Gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Highfin shiner Notropis altipinnis Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis Northern dusky salamander Desmognathus fuscus Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus Raccoon Procyon lotor Red -bellied woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus Redlip shiner Notropis chiliticus Spring peeper Pseudacris crucifer Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi Tufted titmouse Baeolophus bicolor Turkey vulture Cathartes aura Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana Warmouth sunfish Lepomisgulosus White shiner Luxilus albeolus White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus Yellow-rumped warbler Dendroica coronata Appendix C Stream and Wetland Forms NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11 SA - Date: �� -� Project/Site: J� Latitude: Evaluator: County: _ Longitude:, 8b. �S n Total Points: Stream is at feast intermittent Stream Dete ' (circle one) Ephemeral Intermitter erennial Other e.g. Quad Name: if? 19 or perennial if ? 30' A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = � • 5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong 10- Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2 3 2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 C25 3 3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ripple -pool sequence 0 2 3 4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 2 3 5. Active/relict floodplain 0 2 3 6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3 7. Recent alluvial deposits 1 2 3 8. Headcuts 0 (175 2 3 9. Grade control 0 1 1.5 10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1 1.5 11. Second or greater order channel No = Yes = 3 afifflUal OiLGnes are VIOL rdLeU, see W5Glls51Of15 AI FIIdVIUUI B. Hydrology [Subtotal = } 12. Presenoe of Baseflow 0 1 0 3 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 1 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1. 1 0.5 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris CTI0.5 1 1.5 16. Organic debris lines or piles 0 1 1.5 17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0 C Yes = C. Biology {Subtotal = �7_ } 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 1 0 19. Rooted upland ptants in streambed 2 1 0 20. Macrobenthos {note diversity and abundance} 1 2 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks 1 2 3 22. Fish 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians 0.5 1 1.5 25. Algae 0.5 1 _ 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1. ther = 0 'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. Notes: Sketch: USAGE AID# ❑WQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) to STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WQRKSHEET S� .A4 Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: !� I. Applicant's name: L 2. Evaluator's name: 4 r , 3. Date of evaluation: 4. Time of evaluation: . 4--� 5. Name of stream: F 10J G-A)Ir— 6. River basin: y ,' 7. Approximate drainage area: D G f-S 8. Stream order: I 9. Length of reach evaluated: 10. County: 11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): Latitude (ex. 34.872312): Longitude (ex.-77.556611): —45 1 :2/)< Method location determined (circle): Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) i'hotolGIS Other GIS Other 13. Location of reach under evalua n (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): W > 3 r c�1 .1 14. Proposed channel work (if any): 15. Recent weather conditions: N , rti n S lb. Site conditions at time of visit: 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters _Essential Fisheries Habitat _Trout Waters `Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (1-IV) 18. is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES 'L� if yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?(YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey?( EE NO 21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential �% Commercial _% Industrial SiOL% Agricultural °/❑ Forested _% Cleared 1 Logged —% Other ) 22. Bankfull width: c� 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 24. Channel slope down center of stream: ✓r Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) _Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (> 10%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander _Very sinuous Braided channel Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): Li-3 Comments: Evaluator's Signature ■ Date 5/1/1 1 This channel evaluation form is inten ed to be used only as a guide to at landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USAGE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Farm subject to change— version 061r] i. To Comment, please call 91M76-844 Z x 26. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET # CHARACTERISTICS ECOREGION POINT RANGE Coastal Piedmont llgouuta SCORE 1 Presence of flow 1 persistent pools in stream (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = maxpoints) 0 5 0-4 2 Evidence of past human alteration (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) ` 6 0-5 Z4 3 Riparian zone no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) - 6 0 _. 40-5 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges f-2 (extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max oints] 0 0-4 0-43 4 5 Groundwater discharge U (no dischar e = 0; springs, see s, wetlands, etc. = max points) 0_ D- 4 COD 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = maxpoints)0 ^ 0-4 x 7 Entrenchment 1 tloodplain access ow (deep i entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points) 0 0-4 2 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands (no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 0 0 - 4 0 2 9 Channel sinuosity (extensive channelization = 0, natural meander = max points) 0 5 0 -- 4 0 3 10 Sediment input (extensive de osition= 0; little or no sediment = max ints) 0 5 0-4 0 4 ] 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate (fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sixes = max points) N 0-4 12 Evidence of channel incision or wideningdee +-5 l incised = 0; stable beed & banks = max oints 0 0-4 33 Presence of major bank failures (severe erasion = 0; no erosion, stable banks -max aims) 0 5 0 5YO6 14 Root depth and density on banksF_ (no visible roots = 0, dense roots throughout = max oints] 0 3 0 - 415 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production no evidence = max oints) 0 5 0-416 Presence of riffle-poollripple-pool complexes(no riffles/ri les or ools = 0; well-develo ed = max oints) 30-5 17 Habitat complexity (little or no habitat = 0; fie uent, varied habitats = max oints) 60-6 18 Canopy coverage over streambed (no shadingvegetation = 0; continuous cane = max points) 0 5 0 - 5 0 -•- 19 Substrate embeddedness (dee 1 embedded = 0• loose structure = max) $ 0 - 4 0 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) no evidence = 0_ common, numerous es = max oints 0 4 0 - 5 © � 0 1 Presence of amphibians 0 no evidence = 0, common, numerous types = maxpoints) 0-4 22 Presence of fish(no evidence - 0; common, numerous es = max oints)D-4 T F LJ 23 Evidence of wildlife use no evidence = 0; abundant evidence =max Dints) 0-5 0-5 Total Points Possible 100 100 100 TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) * These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.1.1 �St Date: 3 r ProjectlSite: U_ S�D� Latitude: s P� a Evaluator: aw County: - a Longitude: - b I d Total Points: Stream Is at least intermittent rj Stream Dete n rcle one) Other fi? 79 or perennial it? 30" p�- ifa30 Ephemeral tenmittent rennial e.g. Quad Name: A. Geomorphology {Subtotal =j 18. Continuity of channel bed and bank Absent: 0 Weak 1 Moderate (2) Strong 3 2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 2 3 3. in -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, ri le- ool se uence 0 2 3 4. Particle size of stream substrate 1 M 3 5. Active/relict floodplain 0 1 2 3 6. Depositional bars or benches 0 2 3 7. Recent alluvial deposits 1 2 3 8. Headcuts 1 2 3 9. Grade control 0.5 1 1.5 10. Natural valley 11. Second or greater order channel a 0 0 7 ❑ = 1 1,5 Yes = 3 arimcial ditches are not rate0: see aiscusslons in manual B. Hydrology {Subtotal = _7.,� ] 12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 3 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 1 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1 1 0.5 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris C.2z' 1 1 5 16. Organic debris lines or piles 17_ Soil -based evidence of high water table? 0 ❑, No = 0 1 1.5 es = C. Biology [Subtotal = d ) 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 2 1 0 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1 2 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks 1 2 3 22. Fish 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians 0 5 1 1,5 25. Algae 0.5 1 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1. Other = "perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. Notes: Sketch: [ESACE AID# DWQ # mm Site # (indicate on attached map) FE-91 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WQRKSHEET Provide the following information For the stream reach under assessment: 1. Applicant's name: K)C Z5­� 2. Evaluator's name: 3. Date of evaluation: 11 -;� 4. Time of evaluattion::14 5. Name of stream: �6 1% r ". River basin: W11^ - t� 7. Approximate drainage area:S(-) $. Stream order: 9. Length of reach evaluated: irb Id. County: 0/, t) �. I I. Site coordinates (if known); prefer in decimal degrees, 12. Subdivision name (if any): Latitude (ex. 34,872312): -S6 , a &S r,'- Longitude (ex.-77.556611): — go . � o Method location determined (circle): P Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/GIS Other GIS Other 13. Location of reach under evaiva iot�n(n(note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): 14. Proposed channel work (if any): 15. Recent weather conditions: r a� S,1- i.& L 16. Site conditions at time of visit: vvtn ,- 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: ,Section 10 Tidal Waters ,Essential Fisheries Habitat _Trout Waters _Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters `Water Supply Watershed (I -IV) 18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YE NO f yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YiNO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? � NO 21. Estimated watershed land use: �°/° Residential D% Commercial Q0% Industrial %Agricultural -2�N- Forested _% Cleared / Logged ,% Other ( } II 22. 13ankfuEl width: H 23. Sank height (from bed to top of bank): ' I 24. Channel slope down center of stream; Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 101/*)Steep (> 10%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Straight ,Occasional bends Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse):] Comments: Evaluator's Signature Date �f f This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 06103. To Comment, please call 010-976-9441 x 26. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WQRKSHEET ` CHARACTERISTICS ECOREGION POINT RANGE SCORE Coastal Piedmont Mountain 1 Presence of flow 1 persistent pools in stream no flow or saturation = 0; strogg flow = maxpoints) 0 0-4 015 2 Evidence of past human alteration (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) 0 0_ 5 0 5 3 Riparian zone no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) 0 6 0-4 5 3 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges (extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points) 0 5 0-4 4 Groundwater discharge Uno dischar e = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) 0 3 0— 4 - 4 Presence of adjacent floodplain r� no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max points) 0 4 0-4 0 2 Z 7 Entrenchment 1 floodplain access AW (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points) 0 5 0-4 0 2 S Presence of adjacent wetlands (no wetlands — 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 0 6 0-4 4 0 2 �j 9 Channel sinuosity {extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = maxpoints) 0 5 0 -- 4 0 3�7 10 Sediment input - extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points) 0 0-4 4 l 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate (fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points) N 0-4 5 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max oints 0 _4 0-4 — 5 13 Presence of major bank failures 04 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 0 0-5 5 14 Root depth and density on banks F, (no visible roots = 0, dense roots throu bout = max points) 0 0-4 5 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production (substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 0 ` 0-4 5 15 Presence of riffle-poollripple-pool complexes (no riffIeslri les or pools = 0; well -developed = max points) 0 — 0-5 0 G ?� Q 17 Habitat complexity 0_ {little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points) 0-6 0 5 18 Canopy coverage over streambed (no shadingvegetation = 0; continuous canopy= max points) 0 0-5 0 5 19 Substrate emheddedness * (deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max) N 0-4 0 aC 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints) 0 4 0-5 0 — 3 71 Presence of amphibians no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints) 0 4 0-4 0— C 22 Presence of fish 4 0-4 0 �] (no evidence 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints) 23 Evidence of wildlife use no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max.points) C 0-5 0-5 { Total Points Possible 100 100 100 TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. ........... .........._...__ ....�............. _ _ -- U SA CE AID# D WQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) 0 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: r(' 1. Applicant's name: 2. Evaluator's name: . C4 a h} 3. Date of evaluation: 3 f I I1 4. Time of evaluation: 4: 3 5. Name of stream: 1- in�a 6. River basin: pl. e. A - 7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order: 9. Length of reach evaluated: b t _ 10. County: 11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): ?� Latitude (ex. 34.872312): Yj 7 r O ?I �- Longitude (ex.-77.556611):-&_" A 0 C) Method location determined (circle): GPS opo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) Photo/G1S Other GIS Other 13. Location of reach under ev'alu nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): 14. Proposed channel work (if any): 15. Recent weather conditions: ca: t✓l� 1 .5 S 16. Site conditions at time of visit: �n 1�rL 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: _Section 10 Tidal Waters ,Essential Fisheries Habitat _Trout Waters `Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I -IV) 1& Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES(p If yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? 6� NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YL NO 21. Estimated watershed land use: 4) % Residential °/o Commercial Z% Industrial QC> °/o Agricultural Qh-% Forested ,% Cleared 1 Logged -% Other ( 22. Bankfull width: 23. ank height (from bed to top of bank): � r' 24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) �/ Gentle (2 to 4%) --Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Straight �ecasional bends `Frequent meander _Very sinuous _Braided channel Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flaws from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): 3 Evaluator's Signature slate/ ! /( This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement_ Form subject to change - verrion 06/03. To Comment, please call 019-876-8441 x 26. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET � r< # CHARACTERISTICS ECOREGION POINT RANGE SCORE Coastal Piedmont Mountain l Presence of flow 1 persistent pools in stream 0 0 — 4 0-5 no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max oints) 2 Evidence of past human alteration 0 6 0-5 0 5 (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = Max points) C 3 Riparian zone —6 0— 4 O S no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges —5 0-4 0 4 (extensive discharges = 0; no discharges = max points) .1 5 Groundwater discharge — 3 0-4 0 4 Vno discharge •_ 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) M., 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0-4 0 2 no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max points)4 7 Entrenchment 1 floodplain access 0 5 0-4 0 (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding= max points) 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0 6 0-4 0— (no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 9 Channel sinuosity 0 5 0-4 0- a (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 10 Sediment input 0 5 0-4 0— extensive de osition= 0; little or no sediment = max points) 11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate N 0-4 0— (fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points) 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 0-4 0— •incised (deeply — 0; stable bed & banks = max points) 0-0 13 Presence of major bank failures 0 0-5 0 — "4 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 14 Root depth and density on banks 0 0-4 0 (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points) f QO 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production 0 0-4 0 4 substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes 013 0— 5 0 6 (no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0. well -developed - max Dints) � 17 Habitat complexity 0 0-6 6 F ( little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = maxpoints) 02 18 Canopy coverage over streambed fl y 0-5 5 Q (no shading= ver�etation = 0; continuous canopy= max points) 19 Substrate embeddedness 0-4 — 4 (deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max) ?0 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) — 4 0 5 — 5 no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) � Presence of amphibians 4 0-4 — 4 C21 no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = maxpoints)— 0 22 Presence offish 0-4 0-4 — 4 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints) 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0-6 0-5 0-5 l no evidence — 0; abundant evidence = maxpoints) Total Points Possible 100 100. 100 TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) " 'These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. 5 C.. NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4-11 Date: 3 / / 7 Project/Site: U-5P9F Latitude: Evaluator: Cr�6/ �j.��s-�� County: �.�.' Longitude: Total Points: Stream is at least infermrtterzt Stream Determination circle one] Ephemeral iermitte Perennial Other Quad Name: if _ i 9 or rerrnial rf ? 3p' 1 . e.g. A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 5) Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1s- 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, ripple -pool sequence 0 1 3 4. Particle size of stream substrate 0 1 2 C3 5. ActivelreIict flood plain ❑ 1 2 3 $. Depositional bars or benches 0 2 3 7. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 3 8. Headcuts 0 3 9. Grade control 0 0.5 1 1.5 10. Natural valley 0 .5 1 1.5 11. Second or greater order channel No 0 Yes = 3 amnciai atcnes are not rated; see discussions in manual B. Hvdrolopv (Subtotal = '7 ] 12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2 3 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 0 2 3 14. Leaf litter 1.5 CZ20.5 0 15. Sediment on plants or debris 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 U. ljl010gv (subtotal = 11 18. Fibrous roots in streambed 3 2 1 0 19. Rooted upland plants in streambed 2 1 0 20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 1 2 3 21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 1 2 3 22. Fish 0.5 1 1.5 23. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5 24. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5 25. Algae ❑ 0.5 1 1.5 26. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other Verenniat streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual. Dotes: Sketch: USACE Ala# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET �G Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: r7 1. Applicant's name: C��la 2. Evaluator's name: < (s 0 u,4kLr 3. Date of evaluation: 1 I 4. Time of evaluation: 3 2 q 5 5. Name of stream: to . O�'!�C � 1�, (�p�C�, River basin: n -�i 7. Approximate drainage area: 1�5— o 8. Stream order: 9. Length of reach evaluated: 1 10. County: 11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in decimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any): Latitude (ex. 34.872312): QC'k Longitude (ex.-77.55661 1). Method location determined (circle): GPS Topo Sheet Ortho (Aerial) PhotolGIS Other GIS Other 13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): 14. Proposed channel work (if 15. Recent weather conditions: S 16. Site conditions at time of visit: Svc 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat Trout WatersOutstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sensitive Waters _Water Supply Watershed (I -IV) I.S. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YESO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YE ND 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey YE NO 21. Estimated watershed land use: c��/o Residential sue% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural 21% Forested —% Cleared 1 Logged _% Other ( r 22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): t! r 24. Channel slope down center of stream: _Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 40/0) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (> 10%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Straight %COccasional bends _Frequent meander Very sinuous _Braided channel lastructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): t Comments: Evaluator's Signature I Date -5 t This channel evaluatio form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United. States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change — version 06103_ To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26. 11111010% STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET _} c T—F CHARACTERISTICS ECDREGIDN POINT RANGE SCORE Coastal Piedmani_, Mountain 1 Presence of flow 1 persistent pools in stream 0 -..- -- - no flow or saturation = 0; strongflow = max points) D _ 4 0 5 Evidence of past human alteration {extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = maxpoints)- 0-5 0 5 3 3 Riparian zone no buffer = 0; conti uous, wide buffer = max oinfs) - 0 4 -- 5 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges (extensive discharges = 0; no dischar es = max points_ - 5 0 -4 -4 d 5 Groundwater discharge (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = maxpoints) -3 0-4 -4 2 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain ri F (no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = maxpoints) 0 4 0-4 0 2 x 7 Entrenchment 1 floodplain access (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = maxpoints) 0 0-4 0- 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands (no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 0 - 0-4 0— 9 Channel sinuosity 0- 0-4 0— (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 10 Sediment input 0 0-4 (extensive de osition= 0; little or no sediment = maxpoints) Size & diversity of channel bed substrate 11 (fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points) N 0-4 101 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 0 4 0 S (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points) 13 Presence of major bank failures 5 0-5 0 5 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max poinfs) M 14 Root depth and density on banks 3 0-4 S no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = maxpoints) i WO 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production (substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) ` 5 0 - 4 - G 1 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes (no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0; well -developed = max points) `- 0-5 0 6 17 Habitat complexity 6 0-6 0 - r� (little or no habitat = 0; fre uent, varied habitats = max points) of 02 18 Canopy coverage over streambed (no shading vegetation - 0; continuous cano =maxpoints) . 5 4 1 0-5 0- t9 Substrate embeddedness 0-4 0- (deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max) 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0 0-5 0 no evidence = 0; common numerous types = maxpoints) 5 21 presence of amphibians no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = maxpoints)V 0 _ 0-4 1-4 rr Q22 Presence of fish 0- 4 0-4 -- 4 m (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0 4 5 no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) - Total Points Possible 100 100 100 TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) i nese cnaracteristus are not assessed in coastal streams. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains a.. find Piedmont Region Project/Site: W~�a�5� Me-7"1�ti 0/ft - /-/a' h X 401y/County: 4n 7—W" Z17;- Sampling Date: Applicant/Owner: 1W P07- State:. r�r_ Sampling Poi ­kj�4 -� Investigator(s): _��g ­" rc A'A Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): rlpr Local relief (concave, convex, none): _ �vtacwl�� Slope (%):� Subregion (LRR or MLRA): _ 1 b _ Lat: • �$ b D Long: - S� . (7 `� 2 Datum:—/&—/�'A/ Soil Map Unit Name: nn p,,w+ NWI classification: 'Prig Are climatic ! hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes N,` (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Ufa Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes �No Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? eO (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampied Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes " No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: pp1 J ,r/x � ry - Glsv AIj C7 • �I YV 1 Mel 64 f^���I I` 41,4e jt0 S ir►1 r I�^I L d"fsr M7 �7 i7• 4ri nYUKULUUY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary indicators (minimum of two reguiredi Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) _ Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) _ True Aquatic Plan (B14] _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen SUIr{d Cdor [C1} _ Drainage Patterns (1310) -ZSaturation (A3) �idized Rh ,`spheres on Living Roots (C3) _�Aoss Trim Lines (B16) Water Marks (B9) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) _ Recent Iron eduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (CB) Drift Deposits (B3) _ Thin Muck urface (C7) Y- Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ S= or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Iron Deposits (B5) _, Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) — Shallow Aquitard (D3) -k--4ater-Stained Leaves (139) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) Aquatic Fauna (1313) _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes —L—�—No Depth (inches): S Saturation Present? Yes ----No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mourdains and Piedmont - Version 2.0 VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants. i Absolute Dominant indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 0 �u } % Cover S ecies? Status 1. 3.� ,'G✓G, bdr r, ogc .y.� Y� 4 ---"" 5. 6- 7. ��0 = Total Comer 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Sa lin 15 rub Stratum (Plot size: /S � 6, _.,/ ] 1- ZP, 'eh hrH. X/0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1-119 = Total Cover c� 50°% of total cover: 420 20°% of total cover: c'F orb Stratum (Plot size:A } 1. 2. 3. 4. I 0 = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 0 20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: ��� �fr� } t. �d�1iGC ,G f _F�r� 2. 3- 4- 5. r = Total Cover 50°% of total cover: - ] 20°% of total cover: Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Sampling Point: A1.4- Wz-�— Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are QBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata. (B) Percent of Dominant Species That ❑BL, Are FACW, or FAG. (AIB) Prevalence Indexworksheet: Total % Cover of: Multioly bv: CBL species x i = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = BIA = _ 1 - R- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation _L�2 - Dominance Test is >50°% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in- (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sap Iingf$hrub-- Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in- DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall - Herb —AII herbaceous (non -woody) piants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes —zNo US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -- Version 2-0 SOIL Sampling Point:Iz . 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' Loc Texture Remarks P1 -,Q-) 9 71-7d ZW Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) — 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, MLRA 147, 148) — Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Type. Depth (inches): Remarks: MS=Masked Sand Grains. Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) pleted Matrix (173) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Redox Depressions (F8) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA 136) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) _ Red Parent Material (1721) (MLRA 127, 147) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soi 2 cm Muck (Al0) (NILRA 147) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147, 148) _ Piedmont FIocdplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) _ Other {Explain in Remarks] 3lndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soil Present? Yes r, No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Project/site: - 50 S 7'//-, rl X 4/E2d b P] City1co ty: ��J, a� j �fJ �+�'p� Sampling Date: -� Applicant/Owner: 0 State: %1G Sampling Point:[I/ invesiigatar(s): G�+s �� �� oi7�'+' Section, Township, Range: Landform (WIslope, terrace, etc.): 4 Local relief (concave, convex, none): /lsL4 Slope (%): d Subregion (LRR or MLRA): ?/ nL, Lat: -55 , gV Long: ^ 5D . b_� ) °I Datum: F/GS Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification: Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes Na (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? �o Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes 6-f N❑ Are Vegetation SO" or Hydrology naturally problematic? /+Its (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 v No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No� Remarks? HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two reouired) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) _ Surface Soil Cracks (136) Water (Al) _ True Aquatic Plants (814) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) _Surface 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 (62) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8) Drift Deposits (133) Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (CH) Algal Mat or Crust (134) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Iron Deposits (65) _ Geomorphic Position (D2) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ 5haIlow Aquitard (D3) _ Water -Stained Leaves (139) r Microtopographic Relief (D4) Aquatic Fauna (1313) _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): 7 Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): ` Saturation Present? Yes No v1 Depth (inches): - Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 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. I ,� Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size 3 ►` �•r� } % Cover Species? Status 2. ' ti �L 3. 4. 5. fi. 7. 196) = Total Cover Total °I° Cover of: Multiply by: 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover. a OBL species x 1 = Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1 / ) FACW species x 2 = ! C7 �y of total cover: 50 -3� = Total Cover °k i� 20% of total cover: 7 S� Herb Stratum (Plot size: } 1. 2L0n""//1 ��,ddt7�Cln = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 1 20% of total cover: 1 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: /J 2. 3. 4. 5. r (�= Total Ccver 50% of total cover: If 20% of total cover: 'y Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Sampling Point: WA,- ;t worksheets Number of Dominant Species i That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: { (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: a (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)B) Prevalence Index workshoot: FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 — UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = BIA = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: _ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation A!""2 - Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0` 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) cr more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height- Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 328 ft ta11. Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Na US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 1 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' Loc Texture Remarks i LI45�1 IV-O 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pare Uninq, M=Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': — Histosol (At) _ Dark Surface (57) _ 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 Suifide (A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Piedmont Floodplain 5oits (F19) _ Stratified Layers (A5) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147) _ 2 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 (Si) (LRR N, _ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136) _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (54) _ Umbric Surface (1713) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators 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 US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 Wr' i wD WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version Project Name Nearest Road County t , o n Name of evaluator Wetland location on pond or lake on perennial stream ,' on intermittent stream within interstream divide other: Wetland area acres Soil series: predominantly organic - humus, muck, or peat _Zpredominantly mineral - non -sandy predominantly sandy Hydraulic factors steep topography ditched or channelized _ total wetland width > 100 feet Wetland type (select one)* _ Bottomland hardwood forest Headwater forest Swamp forest Wet flat _ Pocosin Bog forest Wetland width i bb feet Date � fa ;/ 4 Adjacent land use (within %2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius) V-111forestedlnatural vegetation 35'% igriculture, urban/suburban 5D mpervious surface ly-2% Dominant vegetation (1) 2g2k (2) C c (3) Flooding and wetness _ semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated seasonally flooded or inundated intermittently flooded or temporary surface water no evidence of flooding or surface water _ Pine savanna Freshwater marsh _ Bog/fen Ephemeral wetland Carolina hay Other: The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels R Water storage x 4.00 = = j A Bank/Shoreline stabilization x 4.00 = g Wetland I I T Pollutant removal 3 x 5.00 = 1 S. rating 1 I Wildlife habitat x 2.00 = F -3 1 j N Aquatic life value 1 x 4.40 = G Recreation./Education 1 x 1.00 = 0 * * Add l point if in sensitive watershed and >l0% nonpoint source disturbance within % mile upstream, upslope, or radius WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Project/Site: " SQb� �TI�s � J - Mel AAA � City/County: � air y O-A � � � � Sampling Date: � 4� ApplicantlOwner: �+ C� 7-tate: �Z Sampling Point: � L� e - Investigator(s): /31-2C fgl �i � 1�0� Section, Township, Range: Landform (htllslope, terrace, etc): 1 •v r Local relief (concave, convex, none): gngo-meoWe Slope Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 1 L 0, Lat: 5 . ORI Long: - W . �I) LA Datum: A&PsVY Soil Map Unit Name: ::�; NWI classification: Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? N2 Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes �No Are Vegetation J Soil . or Hydrology naturally problematic? Ala (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes '- No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes V No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: 4 HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required Primary Indicators (minimum of one is re uire& check all that apply) _ Surface Soil Cracks (136) 1i3Grface Water (Al) _ True Aquatic Plants (1314) ____ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68) _!high Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI) rainage Patterns (810) L--5'51(uration (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16) _ Water Marks (S1) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (B2) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (CS) _ Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Iron Deposits (B5) �eomorphjc Position (D2) Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) � �Inundation _,,Stained Leaves (139) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) — Aquatic Fauna (1313) _ FAC-Neutral Test (135) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes IGr No Depth (inches); Water Table Present? Yes ��No Depth (inches):0 Saturation Present? Yes +�- No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes,_�o (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. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: } % Cover Species? Status 1. %ray � 2. U x �a 3. 4, 5. 6. 7- = Total Cover 50% of total cover: JO 20% of total cover: l Sapling /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: Sampling Point: L` Test works heet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: �� (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: 7 (B) Percent of Dominant Species pp� That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: O' . (AIB) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) Prevalence Index = BIA = Total Cover 50°% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: ) 3 1. :H H Gr.e S al- S 4 1 f 0 — Zo 'f FWLj Y FAe k) Y �C = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 20°% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size. 30 ] 2. 3- 4- 5— = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: c- e photo numbers here or on a separate sheet-) (B) Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: _id Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53-0' 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate Sheet) _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. of Four Vegetation Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. SaplinglShrub — Woody plants, excluding sines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3-28 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No U5 Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Paint: Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features (inches) Color moist % Clow _ % Tyne Loc Texture Remarks 'Type: C=Concentration, D=De lefion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. Location: PL=Pare Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol (Al) _ Dark Surface (S7) _ 2 cm Muck (At 0) (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) t_-6epteted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147) 2 cm Muck (At 0) (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, MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136) _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122y 'indicators 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 Ve No Remarks: /�-- 3 �� 'C.f US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version 1" ?) Project Name 0- SRb& Nearest Road County L),;, or,, Wetland area (), 1-3 acres Wetland width Mfeet Name of evaluator 2- cl;OW4Er� Date 3AZI _ Wetland location on pond or lake on perennial stream _ �on intermittent stream within interstrearn divide other: Soil series: predominantly organic - humus, muck, or Peat ✓ predominantly mineral - non -sandy predominantly sandy Hydraulic factors steep topography ditched or channelized total wetland width �: 100 feet Adjacent land use (wit in '/z mile upstream, upslope, or radius) _ forested/natural vegetation S:!D% l agriculture, urban/suburban -5-D % impervious surface �% Dominant vegetation i} I'J' fi'aV)C. (2) Lx-6 , (3) l<J n.-o���l � wv-s Flooding and wetness _ semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated seasonally flooded or inundated intermittently flooded or temporary surface water ,/no evidence of flooding or surface water Wetland type (select one)* Bottomland hardwood forest Pine savanna _ Headwater forest _ _ Freshwater marsh Swamp forest _ Bog/fen Wet flat _ Ephemeral wetland _ Pocosin _ Carolina bay Bog forest _ Other: The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels R Water storage -- - 1 x 4.00 = -------------- ------------------ A Bank/ShoreIine stabilization J� x 4.00 = 'wetland iT Pollutant removal x 5.00 = rating I Wildlife habitat x 2.00 N Aquatic life value = I x 4.00 = FT I G Recreation/Education C7 x 1.00 = 0 * * Add i point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpoint source disturbance within '/z mile upstream, upslope, or radius WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Project/Site: U- 5 _J�b (Z 1,10� C 4 ^-City/County: rsi :ct. l M► 10,111 Sampling Date: ApplicanVOwner: IVGLOT state: A�r Sampling Paint: WL f Investigator(s): '^@5 �� u /�a% !iy7M� Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc,): Local relief (concave, convex, none): 4 ,. t_k.4/4 Slope (%):�1 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 2 I1 --- Li Lat: 3 5 . 1 Long: - a LL S. � Datum: MG� {� Soil Map Unit Name: - Jr GA�0'r4 !� 5:y)r, DMM^ NWI classification: P of A Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes N❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Sail or Hydrology significantly disturbed?/Vo Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes a Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? AlD (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes N❑ within a Wetland? Yes f�No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 1----N0 Remarks: N� rn.%Jy/�1 GI�rfJr�E+CTi as+ �JdA�snlG ry p� �,�!�r,J�9� �'oFPS HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators minimum of twu required) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that allply) — Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Surface Water (Al) _ True Aquatic Plants (B14) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) _ High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) rainage Patterns (1310) _ Saturation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (616) _ Water Marks (51) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (B2) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8) _ Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) — Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) iron Deposits (B5) ,eomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Shallow Aquitard (03) meter -Stained Leaves (139) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) Aquatic Fauna (1313) _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No r• Depth (inches): Water Table Preserit? Yes No f th (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes —o (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. ff Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3w' "e. } % Cover Species? Status 2. lei �Zt�fKs, 3. L % it: r� h �� 4. 5. 6. 7. g� = Total Cover 50% of total cover: _ �� 20% of total cover: 1 a i Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 3=PP4,5,P 1 FAGY 10 = Total Cover 50% of total cover: r 20% of total cover. a2. Herb Stratum (Plot size: �'`.f.•z ) = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plat size: ] 1. ❑n ��r� bsv r�ALU 2. 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 2 0 % of total cove r:^ Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Sampling Point_ Wc_ b,Je.f Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species 3 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: [A] Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: [AIB] Prevalence Index worksheets Total % Cover of Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic vegetation morcators: _ �1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation � 2 - Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapling/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 R (1 m) tall. Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 It tall. Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes _ No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point:/ef 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) % Types Loc Texture Remarks 'Type: C=Concentration, D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains. 21-ocatiom PL=Pare Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol (Al) , Dark 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) _ Lo Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Pled mont Floadplain Soils (F19) _ Stratified Layers (A5) epleted Matrix (F3) (MLRA 136, 147) _ 2 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, MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136) _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Redox (S5) — Piedmont Floadplain 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 Remarks: ,P5:73 US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version W(I Project Name Nearest Road County - 0 r. Wetland area jD, 9- acres Wetland width SD feet Name of evaluator Date 1 Wetland location on pond or lake _ �on perennial stream _ on intermittent stream within interstream divide other: Soil series: predominantly organic - humus, muck, or meat .Z predominantly mineral - non -sandy predominantly sandy Hydraulic factors steep topography ditched or channelized total wetland width �: 100 feet Wetland type (select one) ,%Bottomland hardwood forest Headwater forest _ Swamp forest _ Wet flat _ Pocosin Bog forest Adjacent land use (within '/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius) forested/natural vegetation 3% ,f agriculture, urban/suburban �D % v impervious surface I D% Dominant vegetation (2) (3) Flooding and wetness semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated seasonally flooded or inundated ,—intermittently flooded or temporary surface water no evidence of flooding or surface water Pine savanna Freshwater marsh Bog/fen Ephemeral wetland Carolina bay Other: The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels RWater storage x 4.00 = A Bank/Shoreline stabilization T Pollutant removal I Wildlife habitat N Aquatic life value G Recreation/Education a x 4.00 = " x 5.00 = x 2.00 = c� x 4.00 = - x 1.00 = --------- ------- — ------------ ------------- .......... Wetland ® rating FTI ** Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint source disturbance within '/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Project/Site: F Me ►J P City/county: Z4W, a , W Sampling Dater Applicant/Owner: I/6�01_ State: 1116 Sampling Point: W Investigator(s): Cv-n�2 - /Foi Section, Township, Range: �y Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): r9l6Sf 1*" Local relief (concave, convex, none): 4 a' ' G,OVZ _ Slope �� Long: _ . 6-T� GAGS Sy Subregion (LRR or MLRrA): � 11'46 Lat: 3� , g Datum: �i Soil Map Unit Name: C� - C jE 1RaO)� ± rr,1Jc oIN NWI classification: / "ra- ll i Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes �� No (If no, explain in Remarks.) _ Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? /' 0 Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes • No Are Vegetation 5oil or Hydrology naturally problematic? lira (if needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes " No is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes �7 No within a Wetland? Yes 4, No _ Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Kemarrts: ) O,6 HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Prima Indi ators minimum of one is re uired• check all that apply) _ Surface Soil Cracks (86) _ Surface Water 01J _ True Aquatic Plants (1314) — Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) — High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _ Drainage Patterns (810) Saturation (A3) — Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) f Moss Trim Lines (B16) _ Water Narks (81) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (62) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (C8) _ Drift Deposits (B3) _ Thin Muck Surface (0) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Algal Mat or Crust (64) Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Iron Deposits (85) geomorphic Position (D2) _ inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) _v6Vater-Stained Leaves (69) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) Aquatic Fauna (B13) T FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No vl�' Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No —C Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No_e�Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Na (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. Tree Stratum (Plot size -" r e j Absolute Dominant Indicator % Cover S ecies7 Status t� U FAC SI = Total Cover 50°% of total cover: 20°% of total cover: Saolina/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: fn 4ji :' �� = Total Cover, 50°% of total cover: �^ S 20% of total cover: Herb Strati (Plat size: n r } 1. Lrn,rt'oiA -'4 oN `r Sampling Point: Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAG: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (8) Percent of Dominant Species / M That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: Lp fD I (A!B) Prevalence Indexworksheet: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 4,-�Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks of on a separate sheet) Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 2 3, 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 4. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: 5. Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or 6. more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. $• Sap IingfShrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less g• than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 10. m) tall. �J = Total Cover I 50°% of total cover: off• 5— 20% of total cover — Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: r n 1 1 ( e } 1. 2. t7 3. 4. 5. = Total Cover 5 0 % of total cover: 20% of total cover: Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Herb — All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 328 ft tall. Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 4LE__W&_� Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix (inches)°% 7Color (moist) �j S l� ( �C 3 - /2 _21S yk VC -, 70 Hydric Soil Indicators: Redox Features Color [moist] Tvpe Loc 7. S YX 30 ,r 7. 5 0 Sand Grains. Texture Remarks La"Vw' 1 foa 'Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Indicators for Problematic Hydric _ Histosol (Al) _ Dark Surface (S7) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Histic Epipedon (A2) Polyvalue Below Surface (SS) (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) 2 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 (Al 2) ;74r"Redox Depressions (F8) _ Sandy Murky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, _ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA 147, 148) I ILRA 136) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'Indicators 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 WelNo Remarks I S F F a�• � s � c�v rr� ��rss; � US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version wif'_', 1) 6 Project Name U- S=& Nearest Road ) � County 01, d (1 Wetland area -' 0, p I acres Wetland width rfeet Name of evaluator . C_�row-4V-e.�( Date 3 `�_11 -�- Wetland location _ on pond or lake _/on perennial stream on intermittent stream within interstream divide other: Soil series- predominantly organic - humus, muck, or peat predominantly mineral - non -sandy ____ predominantly sandy Hydraulic factors steep topography ditched or channelized total wetland width > 100 feet Wetland type (select one) Bottomland hardwood forest Headwater forest _ Swamp forest Wet flat Pocosin Bog forest Adjacent land use (within'/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius) _Zforested/natural vegetation 3s-, % agriculture, urban/suburban <0 % impervious surface 15 % Domigant vegetation (2) �i.}QA3fw�• (3) Flooding and wetness semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated seasonally flooded or inundated intermittently flooded or temporary surface water no evidence of flooding or surface water _ Pine savanna _ Freshwater marsh _ Bog/fen Ephemeral wetland _ Carolina bay ,,,-Other: 1 6inp aF n rv1 The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels R Water storage x 4.00 = __------------------- — - - - - 0 A Bank/Shoreline stabilization '-� x 4.00 = Wetland I iv T Pollutant removal - ** x 5.00 = rating I Wildlife habitat x 2.00 = ® ` N Aquatic life value x 4.00 = 0 I G Recreation/Education x 1.00 = 0 ** Add i point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpoint source disturbance within '/z mile upstream, upslope, or radius WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region ProjecdSite: u Of U�t ,,`-elK wel !'r City/County, Ttid jak1 Urlr aYl Sampling Date:ApplicantlOwnern State: 4/6 Sampling Paint: r'�'�- G'J><►f _ lnvestigator(s): r Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): 7L+��r�T Local relief (concave, convex, none): /7044 Slope (%): Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 1 Lat: Lang: Datum: Soil Map Unit Name: - �5_; �-b NWI classification: P�pI A _ Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions on the site typical for thi time of year? Yes ��No (1f no, explain In Remarks.] Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed?/r/d Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? & (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes �No Is the sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes JCNn Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �No IVl HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Prima indicators Iminim p m of one is _Lg_q uired• check all that apply) _ Surface Soil Cracks (136) c-�urface Water (Al) i True Aquatic Plants (1314) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) igi YI Water Table (Az) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI)�nage Patterns (1310) aturation (A3) _!g�_xidiaed Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) :flT s Trim Lines (B16) _ Water Marks (131) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) , Dry -Season Water Table (C2) 4 Sediment Deposits (132) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (CS) Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (C9) Algal Mat or Crust (134) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) — Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Iron Deposits (135) !geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ter -Stained Leaves (89) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) _ Aquatic Fauna (B13) _, FAC-Neutral Test (DS) Field Observations - Surface Water Present? Yes L,-- No Depth (inches):/�+`� xy Water Table Present? Yes v No Depth (inches): r� Saturation Present? Yes --L,--No Depth (inches): ' Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �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. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum (Plot size: 3 } °% Cover S eci s? Status 1. r ., -A1,1!9 Fu = Total Cover 50°% of total cover: _!Y20°% of total cover: Sapling/Shrub Stratums (Plot size:: /5- ) _ F1j6 �- 2. 441 ePr Y F,4C a 0 �,_ iFi4 G L 50 = Total Cover 50% of total cover: a� 20%a of total cover-, Herb Stratum (Plot size: z } 1, r✓ i 1 `� ova 'tFA (_ 14 2. Sampling Point:' Dominance Test worksheets Number of Dominant Species That Are flBL, FACW, or FAG: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: S (B) Percent of Dominant Species '] That Are QBL, FACW, or FAG: �12C a {AIB} Prevalence I n dex wo rks hoot: Total % Cover of: Multiply OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals (A) (B) Prevalence Index = BIA = 1 -- Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation _Y2 - Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' 4 - Morphological Adaptations' {Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet} Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) `Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Four Venetatian Strata: U Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.$ cm) or 6 more m diameter at breast height (DSH), regardless of height. 8 5apting/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less g_ than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 10 m) tall. 11. � /Q = Total Cover 50% of total cover: !�Z� 20% of total cover: _] Wood 3Q Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3. 4. 5. Total Cover 50°% of total cover: ❑ 20%0 of total cover: y Remarks: (include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Herb— All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 328 ft tall. Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 328 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yesv US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 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 Lac Texture Remarks Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol (Al) _ Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11; Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N, MLRA 147, 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Stripped Matrix (56) Restrictive Layer (if observed): RM=Reduced — Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) _ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) i - l>repleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _ Redox Depressions (F8) _ Iran -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA 136) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) Type: Depth (inches): Remarks: F �?' JrXIr on: PL=Pore Lininq, M=Matrix. Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soiis3: 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) _ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147, 148) — Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soil Present? Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region �y Pro�ectlSite: d d Y �f�� 4 I'A )� City/County: rr'+� arl T/�� I ��1'a�" Sampling Date: r ApplicantlOwner: A& r State: Sampling Point: Ll�� Investigator(s): P14 Rn%C D,/� �i��/r^'r Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillstape, terrace, etc.): �� fI Local relief (concave, convex, none): .?194 Slope (%):L12 Subregion (LRR or MLRA): 13 Lat: 35 Long: '� 4-� Datum: S Soil Map Unit Name: r ..�n Cri 61' nJf y 0 ANC NW1 classification: Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes �No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil _or Hydrology significantly disturbed? l/0 Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes P NI Are Vegetation . Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? A (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. H ro h is Vegetation Present? Yes No '- yd p Yt g Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No � within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: d /lop � WF WIs 01-r mod 07. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators minimum of two r uired Primary Indicators minimum of one is re uired• check all that apply) _ Surface Soil Cracks (136) Surface Water (Al) — True Aquatic Plants (1314) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (BB) _ High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) _ Drainage Patterns (B10) Saturation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (1316) Water Marks (131) , Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) — Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (CS) Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) Saturation Visible on Aerial imagery (C9) _ _ Algal Mat or Crust (134) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Iron Deposits (B5) _ Geomorphic Position (D2) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water -Stained Leaves (139) Microtopographic Relief (D4) _ Aquatic Fauna (B13) _ FAC-Neutral. Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No l Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No (includes capillary Erin e) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: f US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0 ►►t_Ut t A t tUN �i-our Strata) — use scientific names of plants. n Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum {Plot size: /C y % Cover SDeeciStatus 2. 3 4 VA = Total Cover 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: Sa lin /Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1. x 4. ,Pn '� FAC U 2. Sampling Point: 41k- Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species ----77 That Are CBL, FACW, or FAC: vC (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: A Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: ■ (A/B) Prevalence I n dex works heat: Total % Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = LIPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) B. Prevalence Index = B/A = 7. Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 8. 9. 2 - Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' =Total Cover 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting ��. � Herb Stratum (Plot size: _ } data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) A —a _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 6- - Total Cover 50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:_ Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 3 iJ le-,e } 2. 3. 4. 5 �O_= Total Cover 50% of total cover: _! 20% of total cover: Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) 4,0 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height- Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb -AII herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall. Woody vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in heiaht. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? PresenYes Na US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 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 Loc Texture Remarks Q-q rPy 3 IdJls� 'T e: C=Concentration. D=De letion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains, Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix- Hydric Soil Indicators: Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils': _ Histosol (Al) _ Dark 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) _ 2 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, MLRA 147, 148) MLRA 136) _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) 'indicators yd ologyhyd must be prey etab nt 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 Y Remarks: �1���7 s c•� ; � cl� ��1� r ►s^� US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND RATING WGRKSHEET Fourth Version V) � i W &1 WH l W-1j \� Project Name Nearest Road L ; b" }�00kg� County / Wetland area n acres Wetland width feet Name ofevaluator -._ CrDv'q4'�.0_4-- Date a f Wetland location on pond or lake Zon perennial stream on intermittent stream within interstream divide other: Soil series: predominantly organic - humus, muck, or mat ✓ predominantly mineral -non-sandy T predominantly sandy Hydraulic factors steep topography _ ditched or channelized total wetland width > 100 feet Wetland type (select one) Bottomland hardwood forest _ Headwater forest Swamp forest Wet flat Pocosin Bog forest Adjacent land use (within Yz mile upstream, upslope, or radius) ✓ forested/natural vegetation 3� agriculture, urban/suburban 450% ," impervious surface +'5' % Dominant vegetation (1) 'od���•P_ (3) Flooding and wetness semipermanently to permanently Hooded or inundated seasonally flooded or inundated intermittently flooded or. temporary surface water no evidence of flooding or surface water Pine savanna _ Freshwater marsh Bog/fen Ephemeral wetland Carolina bay Other: 4 The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels — - — --------------- R ------------------------- ----------- -------------------- Water storage - - 3 x 4.00 = ----------------------------- ___........._........... I A Bank/Shoreline stabilization j x 4.00 = a� Wetland T Pollutant removal ** x 5.00 = rating 4� 1 Wildlife habitat x 2.00 = s N Aquatic life value x 4.00 = j G Recreation/Education x 1.00 = * Add i point if in sensitive watershed and >1 d% nonpoint source disturbance within '/z mile upstream, upslope, or radius WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region y Project/Site: U- � �WI� CitylCaunty: 2���'c3 ��� , t �dri = p +� Sampling Date: / ApplicantlOwner: State:[ Sampling Point. r ►t' "�� Investigator(s): t , r r �� _ Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): ewe 4 l-r- Slope (%):� Subregion (LRR or MLRA): lei (a Lat: 3 r? S Long: - �� �L,L,ci�n Datum: -] G S Soil Map Unit Name: '`` G - NWI classification:FdI 17 ■ Are climatic 1 hydrologic conditions an the site typical for this time of year? Yes N❑ (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? f►' Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes V-""'No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? Nv (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No is the Sampled Area HydriC Soif Present? Yes ��I❑ within a Wetland? Yes �No Wetland Hydrology Pf% �-nt? Yes f N❑ HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required Primary Indicators minimum of one is reciuire6 check all that a I _ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) ace Water (Al) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) �u _; High Water Table (A2) ^ — Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl) 5rainage Patterns (1310) t1�turation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) ze-laoss Trim Lines (1316) _ Water Marks (61) _ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Dry -Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (132) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (CB) _ Drift Deposits (B3) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Algal Mat or Crust (64) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI) _ Iron Deposits (135) L--�eomorphic Position (D2) _ Inu cation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) zater-Stained _ Shallow Aquitard (D3) Leaves (B9) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) _ Aquatic Fauna (B73) _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field observations: Surface Water Present? Yes ' No Depth (inches): �-/ Water Table Present? Yes --No Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes -4-:i—TVo Depth (inches): Weiland Hydrology Present? Yes 41Na (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. Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum [Plot size: f G A °% Cover Species? Status A = Total Cover 50°% of total cover: 20% of total cover: �y Sapling/Shrub Stratum {Plot size: l S rlet d ] = Total Cover _ total cover: ''?- Herb Stratum {Plot size: S� ) 1. Sampling Point: 1, � J, / Dominance Test worksheat: Number of Dominant Species That Are CBL, FACW, or FAC: (Al Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species That Are CBL, FACW, or FAC: (AIB) Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of. Muitioly by: CBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 = FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B} Prevalence Index = BIA = Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation _V 2 - Dominance Test is >50°% _ 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' _ 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) — Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation` (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic - Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. Sapiing/Shrub — Woody plants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft {1 m} tall- Herb— All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall- 50% of total cover: 20 % of total cover: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: leer) ) 2. 3. 4-- Total Cover 50°% of total cover: 0 . 20% of total cover: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet-) Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 L in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SM Sampling Point: &/Z--1.f/�fi 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 LOc' 3A1 `- Texture 0 xw s 7o /v 1� Ille 30C Ih s: 0,4, Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol (Al) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) _ Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (Sf) (LRR N, MLRA 147, 148) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) _ Sandy Redox (S5) _ Stripped Matrix (S6) Type: Depth (inches): Remarks Dark Surface (S7) Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) _ Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172) �pleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _ Redox Depressions (F8) _ Iran -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA 136) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) _ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) _ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) t�" F3����� Remarks Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (MLRA 147, 148) _ Piedmont Floadplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) _ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12) Other (Explain in Remarks) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soil Present? Yes —z" No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains andPiedmontRegion Project/Site: ��� � [� I d �1�n��1�� CitylCounty: rrwi1 N . n Sampling Date: 3 Applicant/Owner: C L)OT State: /f/d/- Sampling Point: lnvestigator(s): V Ids Section, Township, Range: Landform (hillsiope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): C oyt [4V e Slope (%):� Subregion (LRR or MLRA): P (o Lat: 5-. Long: -SO . b10D Datum:W6 I Sail Map Unit Name: NWI classification: /✓1 Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes 1- No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil _ or Hydrology significantly disturbed? l� Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes � o Are Vegetation , Sail , or Hydrology naturally problematic? //a (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transacts, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No within a Wetland? Yes No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Remarks: HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required Primary Indicators (minimum of one is requiredi check all that apply) — Surface Soil Cracks (136) _ Surface Water (Al) _ True Aquatic Plants (1314) _ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138) _ High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) _ Drainage Patterns (1310) _ Saturation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) _ Moss Trim Lines (B16) _ Water Marks (51) Presence of Reduced iron (C4) ❑ry-Season Water Table (C2) _ Sediment Deposits (132) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) _ Crayfish Burrows (CB) _ Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) _ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _ Other (Explain in Remarks) _ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) _ Iron Deposits (35) _ Geomorphic Position (132) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) _ Shallow Aquitard (133) Water -Stained Leaves (69) _ Microtopographic Relief (D4) ~ Aquatic Fauna (1313) _ FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No +Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: flan �j ��ra/odl y ;rty�R��s i" I US Army Carps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0 VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants. j Absolute Dominant Indicator Tree Stratum [Plot size: ❑ �A } % Cover Species? Status 3, 4. 5. 6. 7. (00 = Total Cover 50°% of total cover: 30 20% of total cover:1� Sa lip !Shrub Stratum (Plot size: f O } 1.�/t3Lfs �af� % Y 2. IfFAC 50% of total cover: Herb Stratum (Plot size: } 1. 2. 3 4 7 50% of total cover: Sampling Point:-� Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are bBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) Total Number of Dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) Percent of Dominant Species 3 3 That Are OBL, PACKor FAC: (AIB) Prevalence Indexworksheet: Total °% Cover of: Multiply by: OBL species x 1 = FACW species x 2 = FAC species x 3 - FACU species x 4 = UPL species x 5 = Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = BIA = 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation _ 2 - Dominance Test is >50% _ 3 - Prevalence index is 53.0' = Total Cover 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting 20°% of total cover: data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydro soil and we#land hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata: Tree — Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7-6 cm) or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height. SapIIng/Shrub— Woody piants, excluding vines, less than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft (1 m) tall. Herb— All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall- 2W.4 of total coven Woody Vine Stratum [Plot size: 3'0 } 2. D f+ r` • ds Z�Y SAC 3. 4, 5. Total Cover 50% of total cover: 2- 20% of total cover:^ Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) Woody vine — All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: _ ' 11 I Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features finches) Color {moist] °k Color (moist) % Type' Lac Texture Remarks 'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, I Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol (Al) r Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Stratified Layers (A5) _ 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) _ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) (LRR N, MLRA 147, 148) _ Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (86) Type. Depth (inches): Remarks: Dark Surface (S7) _ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148) Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Redox Dark Surface (F6) _ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N, MLRA 136) Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122) _ Piedmont Floadplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148) Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc 2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147) Coast Prairie Redox (Al6) (MLRA 147, 148) _ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 136, 147) Very Shallow Dark Surface JF12) ether (Explain in Remarks) 31rdicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. Hydric Soil Present? Yes No US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont — Version 2.0 WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Fourth Version W L Project Name 0- S_ZDg Nearest Road 4- } County n; o �. Name of evaluator -2— Wetland location on pond or lake _ on perennial stream _,,'-on intermittent stream within interstreatn divide other: Wetland area D , b a acres Soil series: predominantly organic - humus, muck, or peat /predominantly mineral - non -sandy predominantly sandy Hydraulic factors steep topography ditched or channelized total wetland width �! 100 feet Wetland type (select one)* Bottomland hardwood forest Headwater forest Swamp forest Wet flat _ Pocosin Bog forest Wetland width feet Date - 31 a -I f 74 Adjacent land use (within '/Z mile upstream, upslope, or radius) forested/natural vegetation 35i% agriculture, urban/suburban ] % impervious surface S% Dominant vegetation (2) (3) Flooding and wetness semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated ieasonally flooded or inundated ntermittently flooded or temporary surface water no evidence of flooding or surface water Pine savanna Freshwater marsh Bog/fen Ephemeral wetland Carolina bay Other: The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels .— ..— R Water storage ----..-.-.-.---------------------------------..-.-- x 4.00 = ..---------- A Bank/Shoreline stabilization x 4.00 = ® Wetland T Pollutant removal x 5.00 = 0 rating I Wildlife habitat �. x 2.00 = T47 N Aquatic life value a x �4.00 = � �l G Recreation/Education 1 x 1.00 = * Add I point if in sensitive watershed and >l0% nonpoint source disturbance within''/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius J Appendix D Qualifications of Contributors Investigator: Phil May Education: B.S. Biology, 1992 Experience: Senior Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2006-Present Senior Scientist, HDR Engineering, Inc., 2001-2006 Staff Scientist, GN Richardson & Assoc. 1995-2001 Responsibilities: Documentreview Investigator: Jen Morris Education: B.S. Natural Resources, 2014 Experience: Environmental Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2015-Present Environmental Specialist, TGS Engineers, 2015-Present Biotech Research Technician, Institute of Forest Biotechnology, 2014 Intern, NCDOT, 2013 Responsibilities: Document preparation Investigator: Brian Smith, PWS Education: B.S. Biology, 1992; M.S. Soil Science, 1998 Experience: Senior Scientist, Carolina Ecosystems, Inc., 2004-Present Environmental Scientist, Dewberry & Davis, 2003-2004 Environmental Scientist, Blue LWI, 1998-2003 Environmental Specialist, NCDWQ, 1997-1998 Responsibilities: Documentreview Investigator: Caitlin Cyrus, WPIT Education: B.A. Biology, 2012; M.S. Biology, 2016 Experience: Environmental Scientist, VHB, 2016-Present Field Botany Intern, VA Natural Heritage Program, 2015 Responsibilities: T&E species assessments, document preparation Investigator: Phillip Bailey Education: B.S. Wildlife and Fisheries Resources, 2017 Experience: Environmental Scientist, VHB, 2017-Present Intern, VHB, 2016 Responsibilities: T&E species assessments Appendix E Mussel Survey Report ROY COOPER GOVERNOR STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION January 24, 2018 JAMEs H. TROGDON, III SECRETARY Memorandum to: Michael Turchy, Environmental Program Consultant EAU, Environmental Coordination and Permitting Group From: Matt Haney, Environmental Senior Specialist EAU, Biological Surveys Group Subject: Freshwater Mussel Habitat Assessment Report for the Proposed Construction of SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from SR 3814 (Matthews Indian Trail Road) to SR 1368 (Gribble Road) in Union County TIP 4 U-5808. WBS # 44381.1.1 The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to construct SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from SR 3814 (Matthews Indian Trail Road) to SR 1368 (Gribble Road) (Figure 1). The project is located within the Yadkin Pee Dee River Basin (HUC903040105). The federally endangered Carolina Heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorates) is listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as occurring in Union County. Additionally, the Atlantic Pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), is being considered for listing by the USFWS and is known to occur in Union County. Historically, the Carolina Heelsplitter was reported from small to large streams and rivers as well as ponds. The ponds referred to in historic records are believed to have been mill ponds on small streams. In North Carolina, this species is found in a variety of substrates usually near stable, well -shaded stream banks. However, Turkey Creek, South Carolina specimens have also been found in the main channel of the stream, in relatively clean substrate comprised of sand, gravel, and cobble. The stability of stream banks appears to very important to the species. The Atlantic Pigtoe inhabits mostly medium to large streams. It prefers clean, swift waters with stable gravel, or sand and gravel substrate. It often is found at the downstream edge of riffle areas. On November 11, 2017, a habitat assessment was conducted by RK&K biologist Neil Medlin (Permit No. 17-ES00030) and NCDOT biologists Jared Gray (Permit No. 17- ES00314) and Tim Bassette. Three small streams (SA, SB, and SD- from NRTR) were observed within the project area but none provided suitable habitat for the Carolina Heelsplitter or the Atlantic Pigtoe No habitat for mussels was observed within the project area. MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: 919-707-6000 LOCATION: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: 919-250-4224 CENTURY CENTER, BUILDING A PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS WEBSITE: 1000 BIRCH RIDGE DRIVE 1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER HTTPS://CONNECTNCDOT. GOWRESOURCES/ENVIRON RALEIGH NC 27610 RALEIGH NC 27699-1548 MENTAL/PAGES/DEFAULT.ASPX A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database was conducted (January 23, 2018). The nearest known occurrence of Carolina Heelsplitter is EO # 21454 which is approximately 24 river miles downstream in Goose Creek. This EO ID was first observed in 1987 and last observed in 2016. The closest known Atlantic Pigtoe occurrence is EO ID # 22087 also approximately 24 rivers miles downstream in Goose Creek. This EO ID was first observed in 1994 and last observed in 1998. Due to the lack of mussel habitat and distances to known Carolina Heelslpitter, construction of this project will have "No Effect" on the Carolina Heelspitter. Biological Conclusion Carolina Heelsliptter: No Effect While the following species is not currently federally protected and a biological conclusion is not necessary at the time of the writing of this report, if this species were to receive federal protection, the appropriate biological conclusion due to the lack of habitat for mussels, is indicated below. Biological Conclusion Atlantic Pigtoe: No Effect References: hM2://www.ncwildlife.or Leaming/Species/Mollusks/Carolina-Heelsplitter#3063872- habitat-preferences http://www.ncwildlife.orgILeamingISpecies/Mollusks/Atlantic-Pigtoe#3028852-habitat- preferences North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). GIS Data accessed 1/23/2018 hlt2s://www.ncnhp.org/ Figure 1. 4 C,�d P1t0� i� b� Kin1 s".y Project Vicinity M. 0, MWe.=a 9p s G Z vv axn rm r ' rYSllil H Project Vicinity r q- M. Figure 1 Project Vicinity Chestnut Lane Connector (U-5808) Union County, North Carolina NorthCardina 4:7 Department rtment of Transportation Union County. North Carolina G r Legend QStucy Area • Proposed Protect r - Roads e Streams �4- C5X Rakwo bne Indan Trall + ° 'Staffno c � 5 - Union County Project Location Post-NRTR Protected Species Survey Form Project TIP/Project ID U-5808, Chestnut Connector, Union County, NC Species ❑ American chaffseed [May -Aug] ❑ Canby's dropwort [Jul -Sep] ❑ Cooley's meadowrue [Jun -Jul] ❑ Dwarf flowered heartleaf [Mar -May] ❑ Golden sedge [Apr -Jun] ❑ Green pitcher plant [Apr -Oct] ❑ Harperella [Jul -Sep] ❑ Mtn Sweet Pitcher Plant [May -Jun] ® Michaux's sumac [May -Oct] ❑ Pondberry [Feb-Mar/Sep-Oct] ❑ Rough -leaved loosestrife [May -Sep] ® Schweinitz's sunflower [Sep -Oct] ❑ Seabeach amaranth [Jul -Oct] ❑ Sensitive joint -vetch [Jul -Oct] ❑ Small-anthered bittercress [Apr -May] ❑ Small whorled pogonia [May -Jun] ❑ Smooth coneflower [May -Oct] ❑ Swamp pink [Apr -May] ❑ Virginia spiraea [May -Jul] ❑ White irisette [May -Jul] ❑ Other: Survey Date Time Information Date(s) of Survey Wednesday, July 19, 2023 Survey Duration 2 hours Surveyors Tess Moody, Adrienne Lambert (Three Oaks Engineering); Caleb BrabbleRose, William Wescott (NCDOT Division 10) Habitat Present Yes, along wood edges, irregularly -maintained roadsides, railroad ROW, and field edges Per the request of NCDOT, Three Oaks led a pre -optimal survey window survey for Schweinitz's Sunflower. Michaux's Sumac is also listed for the project per the USFWS IPaC site and was, therefore, also surveyed. Since this survey was ahead of the optimal survey window for Schweinitz's sunflower, a known occurrence of the species was visited prior to the survey (see below). Staff from NCDOT (listed above) also participated in the survey and known location visit. Remarks All available habitat in the requested survey areas (see attached Figure) was assessed. No Schweinitz's Sunflower or Michaux's Sumac were identified during the survey. A review of the NCNHP data explorer on 7/26/2023 did not identify any known occurrences of either species with a mile of the survey areas. Based on the lack of individuals and known occurrences within a mile, a Biological Conclusion of No Effect has been rendered for both species. ❑ Included graphic/drawing of survey limits and habitat. Reference Population(s) Visited o tional/encoura ed Locations/ Date Sunflower only: along Highway 52 in a roadside ditch, EO 182 (active; last observed 2020); 7/19/2023 In -flower No Remarks Schweinitz's sunflower was present at the site. None of the plants were flowering, but were easily identifiable. w Survey Area 1 F : •. .'• Survey Area 2 # Suitable Habitat (Both Species) 0 k' t Roads 4 x �:�.. t •,,� � t Q, 14 5 I ��\NEEBj*e Prepared For pF C 0 AW �C e OF SPP�Seo� Schweinitz's Sunflower and Michaux's Sumac Survey U-5808 Chesnut Connector Union County, North Carolina Date: July 2023 Scale: 0 100 200 Feet I I ,lob No.: 21-625 Drawn By: Checked By: KEMS JSM Figure DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 MINIMUM CRITERIA DETERMINATION CHECKLIST The following questions provide direction in determining when the Department is required to prepare environmental documents for state -funded construction and maintenance activities. Answer questions for Parts A through C by checking either "Yes" or "No". Complete Part D of the checklist when Minimum Criteria Rule categories #8, 12(i) or #15 are used. TIP Project No.: U-5808 W.B.S. Project No. 44381.1.1 Project Location: Indian Trail, North Carolina (Union County) Project Description: More than 10 years ago, the NCDOT developed a concept for a new location roadway to connect U.S. 74 (Independence Boulevard) to SR 1009 (Old Monroe Road) near the Town of Indian Trail. This new location road, the Chestnut Lane Connector, was anticipated to relieve traffic congestion and improve connectivity within and around the Town of Indian Trail. Chestnut Lane Connector was divided into three roadway sections for funding purposes. Section 1 was funded by the Town of Indian Trail and is currently open to traffic, Section 2 (U-5808) is funded by NCDOT, and Section 3 is anticipated to be funded by the Town of Indian Trail. Section 1 or the northernmost portion of the Chestnut Lane Connector (Chestnut Parkway) was constructed by the Town of Indian Trail, opened to traffic in 2014 and maintained by the Town of Indian Trail. This section, between Independence Boulevard and SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Road), is currently a four -lane median divided roadway with on -street parking near Carolina Courts and a posted speed limit of 25 mph. Section 2 is the proposed NCDOT STIP Project U-5808, which would extend SR 1362 (Chestnut Lane Connector) from Matthews Indian Trail Road to SR 1368 (Gribble Road) for approximately half a mile and would include a grade -separated crossing over an active CSX rail line, as well as sidewalks along both sides of the roadway (see Vicinity Map in Figure 1). There will be a traffic signal at the intersection with Matthews Indian Trail Road and a single -lane roundabout with turn lanes at the intersection with Gribble Road. Section 3, the remainder of the proposed new location roadway, from Gribble Road to Old Monroe Road, is currently a Town of Indian Trail project. Additionally, as part of STIP Project U-5808, a proposed signalized U-turn location west of the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection for westbound Independence Boulevard traffic to access Chestnut Parkway is included along with a proposed reverse superstreet configuration at the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection. This configuration which would be signalized allows a left -turn 01/15/19 1 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 movement off of northbound Chestnut Parkway on to westbound Independence Boulevard as an alternative to using Indian Trail Road. The preliminary design showing construction from the Monroe Bypass along Independence Boulevard and the proposed signalized U-turn location with a reverse superstreet configuration at the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection is shown in Appendix A. STIP No. R-3329/R-2559 (Monroe Bypass) would be adding a signalized U-turn location within the U-5808 study area east of the reverse superstreet configuration at the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection. This signalized U-turn location is for eastbound Independence Boulevard traffic to westbound Independence Boulevard. The proposed U-5808 project is included in the 2018-2027 NCDOT State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The current schedule shows right of way acquisition in FY 2019 and construction in FY 2021. Purpose of Proiect: The purpose of the three roadway sections are to add an alternative route between Independence Boulevard and Old Monroe Road. Specifically, Section 2 will construct a grade -separated roadway crossing over the active CSX rail line. A secondary purpose of the project consists of alleviating traffic congestion on Indian Trail Road and improving mobility within the Town of Indian Trail. Need for Proiect: There is an existing at -grade crossing of the CSX rail line along Indian Trail Road and there are no grade separations of the CSX rail line within the Town of Indian Trail. A grade -separated crossing of the CSX rail line by the proposed Chestnut Lane Connector would provide opportunities for improved response times for police, fire, and emergency medical service providers. The proposed Chestnut Lane Connector is forecasted to have approximately 16,200 vehicles per day (vpd) to 24,500 vpd in the design year 2040 and is forecasted to reduce traffic volumes along Indian Trail Road. Crash data was obtained for Independence Boulevard from Chestnut Parkway to Indian Trail Road, for Indian Trail Road from Independence Boulevard from to Old Monroe Road, and for Gribble Road at Indian Trail Road. The NCDOT crash summary memorandum and 5-year strip analysis for all three corridors indicates the following: • The overall crash rate along Independence Boulevard, as well as the non- fatal injury, wet and night crash rates all exceed the critical crash rate. • All crash rates, except for the fatal crash rate, for the Indian Trail Road corridor exceed the critical crash rates for urban secondary routes. 01/15/19 2 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 • The overall crash rate for Gribble Road also exceeds the critical crash rate for urban secondary routes. The non -fatal injury and wet crash rates for Gribble Road exceed the critical crash rate as well. • The predominant crash types within the study area were, in order: rear ends, left -turns, and sideswipe collisions. The addition of a superstreet configuration to the Independence Boulevard corridor (STIP Project No. W-5520) should help reduce crashes, by lowering the amount of conflict points at intersections along the roadway. Two intersections along Indian Trail Road (Unionville Indian Trail Road) and Gribble Road also see a higher amount of crashes, more specifically rear end crashes. Ultimately, the proposed Chestnut Lane Connector, proposed signalized U-turn for westbound Independence Boulevard traffic to access Chestnut Parkway and proposed reverse superstreet configuration at the Independence Boulevard and Chestnut Parkway intersection (STIP Project U-5808) will help provide an alternative and direct route between Independence Boulevard and Old Monroe Road and improve the overall traffic operations and traffic safety in and around the Town of Indian Trail. Anticipated Permit or Consultation Requirements: The proposed project has been designated as a new location road (linear transportation project). As a result, a Nationwide Permit (N WP) 14 will likely be applicable. The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. Based on the anticipated wetland and stream impacts, a Section 404 permit will likely be required and as a result, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWR will be needed. Special Proi ect Information: Environmental Commitments: The list of project commitments (green sheet) are located at the end of the checklist. Design Exceptions: There are no anticipated design exceptions for the proposed U-5808 project. Estimated Costs: Current estimated costs, based on 2018 prices, for the proposed U-5808 project are as follows: Construction - $10,000,000 R/W - $ 1,639,460 Utilities - $ 48,978 Total - $11,688,438 01/15/19 3 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 Pedestrian Accommodations: Six-foot sidewalks are proposed along both sides of the proposed Chestnut Lane Connector from Matthews Indian Trail Road to Gribble Road. To provide pedestrian safety of those crossing the bridge over the CSX rail line, two -bar metal railing (54" height) with bridge -mounted chain link fence is proposed along both edges of the proposed bridge. Section 3 also has proposed six-foot sidewalks along both sides of the proposed new location roadway. The existing Chestnut Parkway has a sidewalk along the south side of the existing roadway between Matthews Indian Trail Road and Chestnut Square Park. Additionally, there is a sidewalk along the east side of Matthews Indian Trail from existing Chestnut Parkway southward past Chestnut Square Park. Rail: For the CSX rail line southeast of the proposed (Chestnut Lane Connector, the NCDOT Rail Division in conjunction with CSX funding is proposing an approximate 10,000-foot siding extension as part of the freight rail project, STIP Project P-5704. The proposed grade separation will provide enough space for a future track parallel to the existing rail line. Alternatives Considered: No -Build Alternative — The No Build Alternative would not improve mobility in and around Indian Trail as there would be no grade separation of the active CSX rail line. Additionally, the No -Build Alternative would not result in any improvements to address the identified traffic congestion for the area. New Location Alternative (Recommended) — Constructing a four -lane, median - divided roadway (Chestnut Lane Connector on new location from Matthews Indian Trail Road to Gribble Road, a length of approximately half a mile, with a grade separation over an active CSX rail line. The proposed roadway typical section would include four 11-foot lanes, six-foot sidewalks along both sides, and a 16-foot median width (see attached preliminary design). The proposed structure over the active CSX rail line will be a 3-span prestressed - concrete girder bridge approximately 245 feet long with an out -to -out width of approximately 81 feet. A minimum vertical clearance of 23 feet will be provided over both the existing and future track. A minimum horizontal clearance of 25 feet from the center of each track to the face of any interior bridge bent will be provided to eliminate the need for crash walls. The bridge will include four 1I- foot lanes, six-foot sidewalks along both sides, and a 16-foot median width. There is one anticipated relocation, an abandoned residence at the proposed roundabout intersection of Chestnut Lane Connector with Gribble Road. 01/15/19 4 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 As described above by adding a signalized U-turn location northwest of the proposed reverse superstreet configuration for westbound Independence Boulevard traffic to access Chestnut Parkway would modify driveway access to the business immediately northwest of Smith Farm Road along Independence Boulevard. It is anticipated that driveway access to this business would be provided via Smith Farm Road through two driveways (one for trucks and one for their customers). Public Involvement: A public meeting for the U-5808 Chestnut Lane Connector from Matthews Indian Trail Road to Gribble Road (U-5808) and Gribble Road to Old Monroe Road (Town of Indian Trail project) was held on February 20, 2018 at the Indian Trail Elementary School. A total of 14 comments were received at the Public Meeting and no additional comments were received after the Public Meeting. Most of the comments were generally supportive of the project. Of the remaining comments, one mentioned that the design was confusing, one person said there should be no roundabout at Gribble Road and one person was undecided. There were no issues or concerns stated in the comments with the proposed U-5808 project as presented. Subsequent to the public meeting, NCDOT decided to add improvements to Independence Boulevard as part of STIP Project U-5808. With the proposed signalized U-turn location along Independence Boulevard (Independence Boulevard westbound U- turn bulb) as shown in Appendix A, NCDOT met with the business immediately northwest of Smith Farm Road along Independence Boulevard to discuss modifying their driveway access. 01/15/19 5 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 PART A: MINIMUM CRITERIA Item I to b the Ems: YES 1. Is the proposed project listed as a type and class of activity allowed under the Minimum Criteria Rule in which environmental documentation is not required? If the answer to number 1 is "no", then the project does not qualify as a minimum criteria project. A state environmental assessment is required. If yes, under which category? #8 If either category 48, 412(1) or 415 is used complete Part D of this checklist. PART B: MINIMUM CRITERIA EXCEPTIONS YES 2. Could the proposed activity cause significant changes in land use ❑ concentrations that would be expected to create adverse air quality impacts? 3. Will the proposed activity have secondary impacts or cumulative ❑ impacts that may result in a significant adverse impact to human health or the environment? 4. Is the proposed activity of such an unusual nature or does the proposed ❑ activity have such widespread implications, that an uncommon concern for its environmental effects has been expressed to the Department? 5. Does the proposed activity have a significant adverse effect on wetlands; ❑ surface waters such as rivers, streams, and estuaries; parklands; prime or unique agricultural lands; or areas of recognized scenic, recreational, archaeological, or historical value? 6. Will the proposed activity endanger the existence of a species on the ❑ Department of Interior's threatened and endangered species list? 7. Could the proposed activity cause significant changes in land use ❑ concentrations that would be expected to create adverse water quality or ground water impacts? NO ha I 0� �� Q� 01/15/19 6 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 8. Is the proposed activity expected to have a significant adverse effect on long-term recreational benefits or shellfish, finfish, wildlife, or their natural habitats YES NO El Z If any questions 2 through 8 are answered "yes", the proposed project may not qualify as a Minimum Criteria project. A state environmental assessment (EA) may be required. For assistance, contact: Manager, Environmental Analysis Unit 1598 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1598 (919) 707 — 6000 Fax: (919) 212-5785 PART C: COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS his 9-12 to be completed by Division EnIjEll&ental Officer. YES NO 9. Is a federally protected threatened or endangered species, or its ❑ habitat, likely to be impacted by the proposed action? 10. Does the action require the placement of temporary or permanent ® ❑ fill in waters of the United States? 11. Does the project require the placement of a significant amount of ❑ fill in high quality or relatively rare wetland ecosystems, such as mountain bogs or pine savannahs? 12. Is the proposed action located in an Area of Environmental ❑ Concern, as defined in the coastal Area Management Act? Rems 11-15 to b%mpleted by the 13. Does the project require stream relocation or channel changes? ❑ Cultural Resources 14. Will the project have an "effect" on a property or site listed on the ❑ National Register of Historic Places? 15. Will the proposed action require acquisition of additional right of ❑ way from publicly owned parkland or recreational areas? Questions in Part "C" are designed to assist the Engineer and the Division Environmental Officer in determining whether a permit or consultation with a state or federal resource agency may be required. If any questions in Part "C" are answered "yes", follow the appropriate permitting procedures prior to beginning project construction. 01/15/19 7 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 Question 10: Wetlands were identified within the project study area. Approximately 0.22 acres of wetland impacts are anticipated to Wetland WD. Approximately 210 linear feet of stream impacts are anticipated to Stream SB. PART D:( To be completed when either cate2ory #8, 12(i) or #15 of the rules are used. Items 16- 22 to be completed by Division Environmental Officer. 16. Project length: 0.587 miles 17. Right of Way width: Minimum 150 feet Asymmetrical along -L- Variable along -Y- Lines 18. Project completion date: Tentative Letting Date: June 15, 2021 19. Total acres of newly disturbed ground 9.9 acres surface: 20. Total acres of wetland impacts: 0.22 acres 21. Total linear feet of stream impacts: 210 linear feet 22. Project purpose: The purpose of the project is to add an alternative route between Independence Boulevard and Old Monroe Road and provide a grade - separated crossing over the active CSX rail line. If Part D of the checklist is completed, send a copy of the entire checklist document to: State Roadside Environmental Engineer Mail Service Center 1557 Raleigh, NC 27699-1557 (919) 707-2920 Fax (919) 715-2554 Email: dleegncdot.gov 01/15/19 8 of 9 DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 DocuSigned by: F�. �tMbl�,�. Prepared by: Date: Lou Raymond, PE, Mead & Hunt; Consultant Engineer DocuSigned by: F Reviewed by: � Date: C04 446AE6042C.. can Epperson, PE, NCDOT Division 10; Lead Engineer 1/15/2019 1/25/2019 DocuSigned by: l�"+ Ttt,6M fS6V, 1/28/2019 44F Date: Larry Thompson, PWS, LSS, NCDOT Division 10; Division Environmental Officer 01/15/19 9 of 9 Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 PROJECT COMMITMENTS: Union County SR 1362 — Chestnut Lane Connector on new location from SR 1367 (Matthews Indian Trail Road) to SR 1368 (Gribble Road) W.B.S. No. 44381.1.1 T.I.P. No. U-5808 NCDOT Division 10 • NCDOT should coordinate with Town leaders and stakeholders prior to removing on -street parking on existing Chestnut Parkway to operate four travel lanes on existing Chestnut Parkway and the Chestnut Lane Connector. • NCDOT should coordinate with Town leaders, local police, fire, EMS and stakeholders to communicate in advance about lane closures and alternate routes during project construction. • The NCDOT GeoEnvironmental Section should be notified if the footprint of the proposed right of way and easements changes from the preliminary design so that their potential impact(s) may be assessed prior to construction. • Sidewalks are included in this project. This should be included in a municipal agreement prepared and executed prior to construction for the Town of Indian Trail's participation and matching cost share, based on the municipal population. DocuSign Envelope ID: F21EFF6A-7305-43EC-8784-8CDF745F5771 concord Huntzr ii Figure 1 - Project Vicinity y Locust Chestnut Lane Connector (U-5808) Union Count\/f North Carolina ;� ba?os ru`Q sy�°d County, ec�jon Charlotte ° ,o S[an/y :� h�ynlHili North Carolina Union f a` Department of Transportation f4T °! 1Rtixao �Project Vicinity dMIAn in�:iVl- \eo- ^ 0 �co4' 6°3 a nroe w Nfaxt�avr 4L p NORTH Project Vicinity o� Union County, North Carolina m e C c�'6 Q\ C a aCDCD Gr A °S+ saa\e C, N Catawba ' e Ci s , c Glen idge Legend d , e 60� a % o � Project Study Area �eaa610 ° m Q o` — — • Proposed Project o<�ags\ae c o Roads Q< Blu onne n �a ticepO G g `a� 61 Streams ,a o < c CSX Railroad Line \m °o o Indian Trail oc ° Stallings o e e5 CA w y �a Union County o \.a ogee �e °� N NORTH et Cues\��\Ln 0 500 1,000 2,000 Project Location United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Asheville Ecological Services Field Office 160 Zillicoa Street Asheville, NC 28801-1082 Phone: (828) 258-3939 Fax: (828) 258-5330 In Reply Refer To: Project Code: 2023-0121493 Project Name: U-5808 August 25, 2023 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 designated critical habitat, that may occur within the boundary of your proposed project and/or may be affected by your proposed project. The enclosed 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.). Please note that new species information can change your official species list. 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. The Service recommends you visit the ECOS-IPaC website at regular intervals during project planning and implementation to ensure your species list is accurate or obtain an updated species 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 species and to determine whether projects may affect threatened and endangered species and/or designated critical habitat. A biological assessment (BA) or biological evaluation (BE) should be completed for your project. A BA is required for major construction activities (or other undertakings having similar physical impacts) considered to be 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)) (NEPA). For projects other than major construction activities, the Service suggests that a BE be prepared to determine effects of the action and whether those effects may affect listed species and/or designated critical habitat. Effects of the action are all consequences to listed species or critical habitat that are caused by the proposed action, including the consequences of other 08/25/2023 activities that are caused by the proposed action. A consequence is caused by the proposed action if it is reasonably certain to occur and would not occur "but for" the proposed action.. Recommended contents of a BA/BE are described at 50 CFR 402.12. More information and resources about project review and preparing a BA/BE can be found at the following web link: https://www.fws. gov/office/asheville-ecological-services/asheville-field-office-online-review- process-overview. If a Federal agency determines 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. The Service is not required to concur with "no effect" determinations from Federal action agencies. If consultation is required, the Service recommends that candidate species, proposed species, proposed critical habitat, and at -risk species be addressed within the consultation. More information on the regulations and procedures for section 7 consultation, including the role of permit or licensed applicants, can be found in the "Endangered Species Consultation Handbook" at the following web link: https://www.fws.gov/media/endangered-species-consultation- handbook. Migratory Birds: In addition to responsibilities to protect threatened and endangered species under the Act, 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 Service (50 C.F.R. Sec. 10.12 and 16 U.S.C. Sec. 668(a)). More information about MBTA and BGEPA can be found at the following web link: https://www.fws.gov/program/migratory-birds. We appreciate your consideration of Federally listed species. The Service encourages Federal agencies to include conservation of threatened and endangered species in their project planning to further the purposes of the Act. Please contact our staff at 828-258-3939, if you have any questions. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference the Consultation Code which can be found in the header of this letter. Attachment(s): • Official Species List • USFWS National Wildlife Refuges and Fish Hatcheries • Migratory Birds • Wetlands 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". 08/25/2023 This species list is provided by: Asheville Ecological Services Field Office 160 Zillicoa Street Asheville, NC 28801-1082 (828) 258-3939 08/25/2023 4 PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code: 2023-0121493 Project Name: U-5808 Project Type: Road/Hwy - New Construction Project Description: More than 13 years ago, the NCDOT developed a concept for a new location roadway to connect U.S. 74 (Independence Boulevard) to SR 1009 (Old Monroe Road) near the Town of Indian Trail. This new location road, the Chestnut Lane Connector, was anticipated to relieve traffic congestion and improve connectivity within and around the Town of Indian Trail. U-5808 will be Let July of 2024. Project Location: The approximate location of the project can be viewed in Google Maps: https: www. google.com/maps/(a)35.08079135,-80,673474879076,14z c Indian Titfl kk �1 n f` Counties: Union County, North Carolina fr, 08/25/2023 5 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES There is a total of 6 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 Fisheriesi, 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 Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/10515 CLAMS NAME STATUS Proposed Endangered 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 Carolina Heelsplitter Lasmigona decorata Endangered There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat. Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3534 INSECTS NAME STATUS Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus Candidate No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743 08/25/2023 H. FLOWERING PLANTS NAME STATUS Michaux's Sumac Rhus michauxii Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217 Schweinitz's Sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Species profile: https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3849 CRITICAL HABITATS THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA UNDER THIS OFFICE'S JURISDICTION. YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO DETERMINE IF YOUR PROJECT(S) MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON ALL ABOVE LISTED SPECIES. USFWS NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE LANDS AND FISH HATCHERIES Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns. THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS OR FISH HATCHERIES WITHIN YOUR PROJECT AREA. MIGRATORY BIRDS Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act! and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Actz. 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) MIGRATORY BIRD INFORMATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THIS SPECIES LIST WAS GENERATED. PLEASE CONTACT THE FIELD OFFICE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. MIGRATORY BIRDS FAQ Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds. 08/25/2023 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 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? 08/25/2023 8 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. 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 08/25/2023 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. WETLANDS Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes. For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District. Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site. RIVERINE • R4SBC 08/25/2023 10 IPAC USER CONTACT INFORMATION Agency: North Carolina Department of Transportation Name: Joel Howard Address: 716 W. Main Street City: Albemerle State: NC Zip: 28001 Email jmhoward@ncdot.gov Phone: 7049834400 ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary TIM BAUMGARTNER Director Mr. Larry Thompson NCDOT Division 10 Environmental Officer North Carolina Department of Transportation 716 West Mail Street Albemarle, North Carolina 28001 Dear Mr. Thompson: NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality April 24, 2020 Subject: DMS Mitigation Acceptance Letter: Division 10 Project, TIP Number U-5808 - Chestnut Lane Connector, Union County The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) will provide the compensatory stream and wetland mitigation for the subject project. Based on the information received on April 23, 2020, the impacts are located in CU 03040105 of the Yadkin River basin in the Southern Piedmont (SP) Eco-Region, and are as follows: Yadkin 03040105 SP Stream Wetlands Buffer (Sq. Ft.) Cold Cool Warm Riparian Non -Riparian Coastal Marsh Zone 1 Zone 2 Impacts (feet/acres) 0 0 185.0 0.09 0 0 0 0 DMS commits to implementing sufficient compensatory stream and wetland mitigation credits to offset the impacts associated with this project as determined by the regulatory agencies in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Instrument dated July 28, 2010. If the above referenced impact amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a new mitigation acceptance letter will be required from DMS. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth Harmon at 919-707-8420. Sincerely, a6 yyaA4"Al- James B. StanfiIl DMS Asset Management Supervisor cc: Mr. Monte Matthews, USACE - Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Ms. Donna Hood, Division of Water Resources, 401/Wetlands Unit Ms. Linda Fitzpatrick, NCDOT - PDEA File: U-5808 - Division 10 NORT9CARQLINAIP_ DeDartmeM of BMm"Mel North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Mitigation Services 217 W. Jones Street 1 1652 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652 919.707.8976