20240680 Ver 1_U-6087 Permit App_20240513

STATE.,N
y
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER J.R. "JOEY" HOPKINS
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
May 61h, 2024
Mr. Steve Brumagin, NCDOT Regulatory Project Manager
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
8430 University Executive Park Drive, Suite 615
Charlotte, North Carolina 28262
Ms. Mary Beth Plummer, Transportation Permitting Branch
NCDEQ - Division of Water Resources
610 E. Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
SUBJECT: U-6087 Permit Application, NCDOT Division 10
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is proposing to construct a
Roundabout (hereafter RAB) at the intersection of Wesley Chapel Road (SR-1377) and Potter
Road (SR-1346) in Union County. During the construction of the proposed RAB, a pipe under
SR-1346 that carries an unnamed tributary to Price Mill Creek (NCDWR Index No. 11-138-2-2,
Class C) is proposed to be replaced to accommodate a wider fill slope. On November 8t", 2023,
Steve Brumagin (USACE), Mary Beth Plummer (NCDWR), Caleb BrabbleRose (NCDOT), and
William Wescott (NCDOT) met onsite to verify the presence and boundaries of potential Waters
of the United States.
The current pipe is 45-feet of 24-inch CMP, and the proposed structure is two 54-feet, 30-inch
RCP culverts (see attached permit drawings). NCDOT requests 9 feet of permanent impacts on
this UT for increased pipe length, and 10 feet of permanent impacts for a proposed rip rap scour
protection at the outlet. NCDOT also requests 10 feet of temporary impacts for dewatering if
needed.
While these impacts are below the impact threshold for the USACE Nationwide Permit No. 3
notification and NCDWR General Certification No. 4239, NCDOT also requests concurrence for
tree clearing for this project, which we recommend May Effect, but is Not Likely to Adversely
Affect the Tricolored Bat (Perimyotis subflavus) upon formal listing. Approximately 1 acre of
tree clearing is associated with this project. On February 13t'`, 2024, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation received concurrence for these impacts from the USFWS (letter
attached).
NCDOT has agreed to implement these following conservation measures for this project:
1. Tree clearing will take place from October 16 to March 31, pending the federal listing of
the tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus).
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
NC department of transportation Fax: [phone] west main street
Division ofhighways Customer Service: 1-877-368-4968 Albemarle, NC28001
716 West main street
Albemarle, NC28001 Website: www.ncdot.gov

2. Tree clearing will be minimized to the maximum extent possible and limits will be
clearly marked for the contractor.
3. Percussive activities and blasting will not occur.
4. Night work and associated temporary lighting will not occur.
5. No additional permanent lighting will be added to the roadway.
I am enclosing a PCN application, a Natural Resources Technical Memorandum, informal
conference opinion from the USFWS, drawings showing the proposed work, maps, and other
supporting project information.
Permits Requested
NCDOT is hereby requesting impacts for tree clearing that May Affect, but are Not Likely to
Adversely Affect the Tricolored bat.
NCDOT is also hereby requesting 29 linear feet of stream impacts to a UT to Price Mill Creek.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at [phone] or
email at [e-mail]. Your early review and consideration will be greatly
appreciated.
Sincerely,
M. Caleb BrabbleRose,
NCDOT Division 10 Environmental Specialist II
Cc: Joel M. Howard, NCDOT PDEA Engineer
William Wescott, NCDOT Division Environmental Officer
Donald Griffith, NCDOT Project Manager
05/09/24 2 of 2

0
Nationwide & General Permits Checklist
Recommend starting when project appears on 13t" Month Let List.
Task
[0 Ensure Pre -Filing Request complete, or complete form.
ZProtected species surveys valid, resolved, or scheduled.
QConcurrence requested (if necessary)
✓❑ Moratoriums solidified with division and/or contracts
Z Tribal Coordination letters sent/ received for county of project.
0 Archaeology letter
0 Historic Properties and Landscapes letter
FJ NEPA/SEPA Document
❑Send debit ledger check for mitigation (if necessary),
Prepare DMS Request Form (if necessary)
0 Prepare Cover Letter, if needed. Only recommend if complicated.
(e.g., several impact sites, multiple impact types, ePCN cannot "stand alone")
Source
Check 2022 Mass Request here
Link to Pre -Filing Request form at DWR
I ink to IPq('.
Link to SharePoint
Check Tribal Coordination List here
Link to SharePoint
Link to SharePoint
Link to SharePoint
Link to SharePoint
Template on ECAP Website
Send Debit Ledger Check to: [e-mail]
Template on ECAP Website

Permit
Drawings

0 4 8 16 US Feet
0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --
--
Proposed Roadway
Current Roadway
Proposed Rip Rap
Current Pipe
Proposed Pipe
Potential Stream
Current Toe of Slope
Proposed Toe of Slope
J Site 1
Project STIP: U-6087
WBS No.: 47882.1.1
Permit Drawings
Union County, NC
SHEET 1

WETLAND AND SURFACE 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
-L- Sta. 11+48.56
Dewatering
< 0.01
10
1
-L- Sta. 11+48.56
Bank Stabilization
< 0.01
10
1
-L- Sta. 11+48.56
(2) 54 LF of 30" RCP
< 0.01
9
TOTALS':
< 0.01
< 0.01
19
10
0
*Rounded totals are sum of actual impacts
NOTES:
2018 Feb

Protected Species/
Section 7

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
DATE: October 12', 2023
TO: File
FROM: Caleb BrabbleRose, Division 10 Environmental Specialist
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Memorandum
INTRODUCTION
J.R. "JOEY" HOPKfNs
SECRETARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct a Roundabout
at the intersection of SR-1377 (Wesley Chapel Road) and SR-1346 (Potter Road) in Union County
(STIP: U-6087). The following Natural Resources Technical Memorandum (NRTM) has been
prepared to assist in the preparation of the appropriate environmental documentation.
PROTECTED SPECIES
As of August 8th, 2032, The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists the following
federally protected species within the study area under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (Table
1). For each species, a discussion of the presence or absence of habitat is included below along
with the Biological Conclusion recommended based on survey results in the study area.
Table 1. Federally protected species listed for project study area.
Scientific Name
Common Name
Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Lasmigona decorates
Carolina Heelsplitter
E
No
No Effect
Helianthus schweinitzii
Schweinitz's Sunflower
E
Yes
No Effect
Rhus michauxii
Michaux's sumac
E
Yes
No Effect
Perimyotis subflavus
Tricolored Bat
PE
Yes
MANLAA
T — Threatened
E — Endangered
PE — Proposed Endangered
MA;NLAA — May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Carolina Heelsplitter
USFWS optimal survey window: March 1 - November 1 (optimal)
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Although an onsite investigation on August loth, 2023, found 1 stream in the study area,
this stream was determined to have too low a base flow to be considered habitat. Therefore,
August 2023

Natural Resources Technical Memo STIP HS-2010A, Mecklenburg County, N.C.
no habitat for this species onsite. There is no USFWS final critical habitat for this this
species within the project study area, and there are no NCNHP element occurrences
(accessed August 2023) within 1 mile of the project study area. As there is no habitat on
site for this species, and there are no populations within one mile, it is recommended that
this project will have No Effect on this species.
Schweinitz's sunflower
USFWS optimal survey window: Late August - October
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower is present in the maintained overhead utility
corridors and roadside areas. A pedestrian survey was performed on August loth, 2023 of
the suitable habitat areas. No individuals were observed. A review of NHP records
(accessed August 7th, 2023) lists no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
As no individuals were observed during on -site surveys, and no populations have been
reported within 1 mile of the PSA, it is recommended that this project will have No Effect
on this species.
Michaux's sumac
USFWS Optimal Survey Window: May — October
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
An on -site investigation indicated the study area does contain suitable habitat for
Michaux's Sumac in the forested areas outside of NCDOT ROWS. The area was surveyed
by NCDOT biologists on September 2"d, 2022, and August loth, 2023, and found no
individuals onsite. A review of NHP records on August 7th, 2023 indicates one historic
occurrence within 1.0 mile of the study area, but no current occurrences are listed in Union
County. As no individuals were observed during on -site surveys, and no current
populations have been reported within 1 mile of the PSA, it is recommended that this
project will have No Effect on this species.
Tri-colored Bat
As of August loth, 2023, the Tricolored -Bat (hereafter TCB) is proposed as endangered by the
USFWS, and as such, receives no formal protection under the ESA. In preparation of the imminent
uplisting of this species, likely habitat will be discussed, and a biological conclusion will be
recommended.
Currently, NCDOT Biological Surveys Group recommends following the survey guidelines for
Indiana bat and Gray Bat: There is potential habitat for this species in the form of trees greater
than 3" in DBH outside of the heavily maintained NCDOT and Utility ROW. A review of NCNHP
element occurrences, accessed on April 7th, 2023, lists no occurrences within 1.0 miles of the
project study area. As there is potential habitat onsite, but no occurrences are listed, it is
recommended that this project May Affect, but is Not Likely to Adversely Affect this species.
2 August 2023

Natural Resources Technical Memo STIP HS-2010A, Mecklenburg County, N.C.
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act is enforced by the USFWS. Golden eagles do not nest
in North Carolina. Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forests 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.
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.0-mile radius of
the project limits, was performed on August 7th, 2023 using recent color aerials. Several water
bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding sources were identified.
Since there was foraging habitat within the review area, a survey of the project study area and the
area within 660 feet of the project limits was conducted, and no nests of sufficient size to be used
by Eagles were observed. Additionally, a review of the NHP database on August 7th, 2023 revealed
no known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of
habitat, known occurrences, and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined
that this project will not affect this species.
Essential Fish Habitat
There is no Essential Fish Habitat identified within the study area.
WATER RESOURCES
Water resources in the study area are part of the Yadkin Pee -Dee basin (U.S. Geological Survey
Hydrologic Units 030501030202). One stream, a UT to Price Mill Creek (NCDWR Index No. 1I-
138-2-2, Class C) was identified in the study area (Table 2).
Table 2. Streams in the study area
Bank
Bankfull
NCDWR Index
Best Usage
Depth
Stream Name
Height
Width
Number
Classification
(ft)
ft
ft
UT to Price Mill Creek
11-138-2-2
C
1
3
<1
There are no designated trout waters, anadromous fish waters, or primary nursery areas present in
the study area. No streams within the study area or within 1.0 mile downstream are classified as
high -quality water, outstanding resource waters, WS-I or WS-II water supply watershed. The
North Carolina 2022 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters identifies the no watersheds within the
study area as impaired due to benthos.
Clean Water Act Waters of the U.S.
3 August 2023

Natural Resources Technical Memo STIP HS-2010A, Mecklenburg County, N.C.
One potential jurisdictional stream was identified within the study area (Table 3). All streams in
the study area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream
mitigation.
Table 3. Characteristics of jurisdictional streams in the study area
Length
Compensatory
River Basin
Map ID
Classification
ft.
Mitigation Required
Buffer
PSI
C
None
None
Total
While one area was investigated, no potential jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the
study area. The location of two datapoints is shown in Figure 3. A USCE wetland determination
form for both datapoints is included in this report.
N. C. River Basin Buffer Rules
No part of the project study area falls within a NC River Basin Buffer.
Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
There are no Navigable Waters under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act within the PSA.
Coastal Area Management Act Areas of Environmental Concern
There are no Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC)
identified in the study area.
Coastal Barrier Resources System
No Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) units exist within the study area.
4 August 2023

Natural Resources Technical Memo
STIP HS-2010A, Mecklenburg County, N.C.
Qualifications of Contributors
Principal
Investigator: Joel Howard
Education: B.S. Biology, Botany; 2001
Experience: PDEA Engineer, NCDOT Division 10, 2004 — Present
Environmental Specialist, ITAM Program United States Department of the
Army, 1991 - 2004
Responsibilities: NEPA, permits, T/E species assessment, wetland and stream delineation
Secondary
Investigator: William Wescott
Education: B.S. Wildlife Management; 1990
M.S. Soil Science; 1994
Experience: Division Environmental Officer, NCDOT Division 10, 2023 -- Present
NEPA Coordinator, USMC, 2020 — 2022
Environmental Consultant, 2015 -- 2023
Regulatory Specialist / Project Manager, USACE, 2002 — 2014
Biologist, NCWRC, 1995 -- 2002
Responsibilities: NEPA, permits, T/E species assessment, wetland and stream delineation
Secondary
Investigator: Caleb BrabbleRose
Education: B.S. Biology, Environmental Science; 2018
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, 2022-present
Restoration Specialist, HARP, 2021
Research Scientist, Wake Forest University, 2018-2021
Responsibilities: T/E species assessment, wetland and stream delineation, document prep
5 August 2023

�fl 51
0
A 0
O �
L,
n �
m �
z �
a
Matthews
i
v / i North Fork C, 00*
c
07 � `Creek
o � �
i
o Stallings Lake Park
i
'�'eeRd � Indian Trail
i
i
i
i a
i o 74
i
16
i a
i
Project Study Area
Weddington ar/orrP s
Wesley Chapel
H.
Charlotte
Mineral
74
/Esri, CGIAR, USGS, Esri, HERE,
---------------------
Garmin, SafeGraph, FAO, METI/
NASA ,OSG-S�A, "N PS
NORT/I ;.
yq�co
Q
��"roFTRANs�° State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
kl/eddington Rd
Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS,
a
L
0 1.75 3.5 N
Miles
Union
Monroe
�v
- 733 ft
Esri, HERE, Garmin,
Unionville
ph, METI/NASA,
EPA, NPS, USDA
Vicinity Map
Figure 1
STIR U-6087
SR-1377 (Wesley Chapel Road) I Union County

13W
9
•
Legend
NORTH Cq O
9
y v
0 O
P
OFTRpNSQ°�� State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
0
� f
0 0.07 0.15 N
Viles
v
LI
�.�` `ram•
.ti
Eo ri® National eo ra hic Society, i- bed
9 p Y
Topographic Map
Figure 2
STIR U-6087
SR-1377 (Wesley Chapel Road) I Union County

Potter Road
k
Wesley Chapel Road
1 DP2:_
DPI
PSI
W
o I05 zlo N
Feet )4
USIS The National Map: National Bout
Progr�m, Geographic Names.lntormation
Datas,t, National Land Cover Database, N
end Nati�dnal Transportation Dataset; USGS
Bureau TIGER/Line dataTUSFS Roa
Project Study Area Depart ent of State HumanirMbn Inform
Cent- s r drw4m-@RtaI-I-rfivFM'Jt'"
Potential Stream
Ephemeral Stream
OF IAORTy Cq
9
99T Q�P
OF TR AState of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
ries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation
>tem, National Hydrography
onal Structures Dataset, and
ibal Ecosystems; U.S. Census
)ata; Natural Earth Data; U.S.
an Unit; and NOAA National
�. Coastal Relief Model. Data
refreshed April, 2023.
Topographic Map
Figure 3A
STIR U-6087
SR-1377 (Wesley Chapel Road) I Union County

OF p1ORTy C4
9
99T Q�P
OF TR AState of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Aerial Photography Map
Figure 3B
STIR U-6087
SR-1377 (Wesley Chapel Road) I Union County

NORTH cl O
9
y v
0 O
P
OFTRpNSQ°�� State of North Carolina
National Wetland Inventory Map
Department of Transportation
Figure 4
STIR U-6087
SR-1377 (Wesley Chapel Road) I Union County

QPQ��EtdT OF Tye' FISH W LDU E
SERVICE
q`` tim United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
H 3 8� Asheville Field Office���
160 Zillicoa Street Suite B
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
February 13, 2024
M. Caleb BrabbleRose
Division 10 Environmental Specialist II
North Carolina Department of Transportation
716 West Main Street
Albemarle, North Carolina 28801
Subject: Informal Conference for Roundabout Construction at Wesley Chapel Road and Potter Road
Intersection in Union County (TIP No. U-6087, Service Log 924-175)
Dear M. Caleb BrabbleRose:
On December 13, 2023, we received your request to initiate informal conference procedures for effects
the subject project may have on federally proposed species. We have reviewed the information you
submitted, and the following is provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C.§ 4321 et seq.); the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661
- 6670; and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 - 1543) (Act).
Proiect Description
According to the information provided, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to construct a roundabout at the Wesley Chapel Road and Potter Road intersection in Union
County. The primary purpose of the project is to improve the serviceability and safety of the existing
intersection. Site conditions of the project area consist of residential housing and agricultural fields.
Approximately 1 acre of clearing and grubbing will occur. The Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) is the federal lead for this project for section 7 purposes, with authority delegated to NCDOT.
NCDOT has agreed to implement the following conservation measures for the project:
1. Tree clearing will take place from October 16 to March 31, pending the federal listing of the
tricolored bat (Perimyotis subflavus).
2. Tree clearing will be minimized to the maximum extent possible and limits will be clearly
marked for the contractor.
3. Percussive activities and blasting will not occur.
4. Night work and associated temporary lighting will not occur.
5. No additional permanent lighting will be added to the roadway.
Federally Listed Species
The information provided indicates that "No Effect" (NE) determinations have been made for Carolina
heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata), Michaux sumac (Rhus michauxii), and Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii). In instances of suitable habitat being absent from the action area (and
downstream of the action area in the case of aquatic species), we would agree that NE determinations are
appropriate. In instances where suitable habitat is present and botanical surveys conducted during the
optimal survey window and within the past 1 or 2 years (depending on the species) have negative results,
we would concur with a biological determination of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" (NLAA).

We acknowledge that the request for consultation did not include these species. This information is
provided for the sake of the administrative record.
The correspondence received from NCDOT requests conference for tricolored bat.
Suitable forested habitat consisting of pines and mixed hardwoods (loblolly pine, (Pious taeda), red
maple, (Acer rubrum), laurel oak, (Quercus laurifolia), and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua))
provides suitable roosting and commuting habitat within the action area. One 24-inch diameter culvert is
described within the action area, which is below NCDOT's standard diameter for conducting surveys for
bat presence.
On September 14, 2022, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) published a proposal in the Federal
Register to list the tricolored bat as endangered under the Act. As a result, NCDOT has requested a
conference for the tricolored bat as the project may be on -going after the effective date of any final listing
rule, if one is published. Based on the information provided, the analysis above, and the commitments to
minimize project impacts, we have determined that the proposed project will not jeopardize the continued
existence of the tricolored bat. Additionally, we would concur with the NCDOT's determination that the
project is NLAA the tricolored bat should it become listed.
Conservation Recommendations
Conservation recommendations are discretionary agency activities to minimize or avoid adverse effects of
a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to help implement recovery plans, or to develop
information. General recommendations for the benefit of fish and wildlife resources are provided here:
Survey the 24-inch diameter culvert to the best of abilities prior to project work to ensure absence
of roosting bats.
Where appropriate, replant cleared forested area with native trees and shrubs to replace suitable
roosting and commuting bat habitat.
Reinitiation Notice
We believe the requirements under section 7 of the Act are fulfilled for the federally listed species
discussed above. However, obligations under section 7 must be reconsidered if (1) new information
reveals impacts of this proposed action may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not
previously considered, (2) this proposed action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed, or critical habitat is determined that may be
affected by the proposed action.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Ms. Holland Youngman of our
staff at hollandyouungmankfws.gov if you have any questions. In any future correspondence concerning
this project, please reference our Service Log 924-175.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
2

USDA United States
Department of
Agriculture
N RCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Union County,
North Carolina
October 6, 2023

529500
35° 0' 50" N
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
35° 0' 20" N
529500 529600 529700 5298M 529900
Map Scale: 1:4,480 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Meters
$ N 0 50 100 200 300
Feet
0 200 400 800 1200
Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
24
Custom Soil Resource Report
Map—Hydric Rating by Map Unit
529600 529700 5298M 5299M
0
530100
35° 0'50" N
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
r
�i
35° 0'20" N
530100
0

Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND
MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (A01)
Transportation
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
0
Area of Interest (AOI)
E F Rails
1 :24,000.
Soils
­0 Interstate Highways
Soil Rating
Polygons
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
US Routes
Hydric (100%)
Major Roads
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
0
Hydric (66 to 99%)
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
0
Hydric (33 to 65%)
Local Roads
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
Background
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
0
Hydric (1 to 32%)
Aerial Photography
scale.
0
Not Hydric (0%)
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
0
Not rated or not available
measurements.
Soil Rating
Lines
Hydric (100%)
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
* 0
Hydric (66 to 99%)
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
r 0
Hydric (33 to 65%)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
* 0
Hydric (1 to 32%)
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
Pm 0
Not Hydric (0%)
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
f
Not rated or not available
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
Soil Rating
Points
Hydric (100%)
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
0
Hydric (66 to 99%)
❑
Hydric (33 to 65%)
Soil Survey Area: Union County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 24, Sep 13, 2023
0
Hydric (1 to 32%)
0
Not Hydric (0%)
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Not rated or not available
Water Features
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 13, 2022—May
Streams and Canals
9, 2022
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
25

Custom Soil Resource Report
Table—Hydric Rating by Map Unit
Map unit symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
BaB
Badin channery silt loam,
0
8.8
10.5%
2 to 8 percent slopes
BdB2
Badin channery silty clay
0
4.0
4.7%
loam, 2 to 8 percent
slopes, moderately
eroded
CmB
Cid channery silt loam, 1
0
42.5
50.6%
to 5 percent slopes
GsB
Goldston-Badin complex,
0
6.6
7.8%
2 to 8 percent slopes
TaB
Tarrus gravelly silt loam,
0
7.9
9.4%
2 to 8 percent slopes
TbB2
Tarrus gravelly silty clay
0
9.0
10.8%
loam, 2 to 8 percent
slopes, moderately
eroded
TuB
Tarrus-Urban land
0
0.5
0.6%
complex, 2 to 8
percent slopes
W
Water
0
4.8
5.7%
Totals for Area of Interest
84.0
100.0%
Rating Options—Hydric Rating by Map Unit
Aggregation Method: Percent Present
Component Percent Cutoff.- None Specified
Tie -break Rule: Lower
W

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: U-6087 RAB on Potter and Wes Chapel City/County: Wesley Chapel, NC Sampling Date: 10/5/2023
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: DP1
Investigator(s): M Caleb BrabbleRose, William Wescott Section, Township, Range: Wesley Chapel, NC
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Valley Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.01052°N Long: 80.67388°W Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Cid channery silt loam, 1 to 5 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology X naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Surface hydrology of this site is primarily due to overland flow being impounded by a downed tree at the most downhill portion of the site. Soils on site
are not indicative of hydric soils. Rainfall for past three months was normal or above normal (data from WETS table, and recent rainfall data collected
aprox. 3 mi to the east).
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
—High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_Saturation (A3) X
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 (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (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)
X Water -Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): >20
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): >20
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): >20
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes X No
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Downed tree is acting as a dam to impound water
in site. Site receives overland flow from highway causeway directly up slope. Current impoundment
is primarily responsible for the hydrology indicators.
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP1
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
% Cover
Species?
Status
Dominance Test worksheet:
1.
Carpinus caroliniana
1
No
FAC
Number of Dominant Species
2.
Quercus phellos
5
Yes
FAC
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
3.
Quercus alba
1
No
FACU
Total Number of Dominant
4.
Liquidambar styraciflua
1
No
FAC
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B)
5.
Percent of Dominant Species
6.
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80.0% (A/B)
7.
Prevalence Index worksheet:
8
=Total Cover
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
50% of total cover:
4
20% of total cover:
2
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft
)
FACW species 4 x 2 = 8
1.
Carpinus caroliniana
12
Yes
FAC
FAC species 90 x 3 = 270
2.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
3
No
FACW
FACU species 70 x 4 = 280
3.
Lindera benzoin
6
Yes
FAC
UPL species 0 x 5 = 0
4.
Ligustrum sinense
4
No
FACU
Column Totals: 164 (A) 558 (B)
5.
Elaeagnus angustifolia
3
No
FACU
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.40
6.
Populus deltoides
1
No
FAC
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
7.
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
8.
X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
9.
3 - Prevalence Index is :53.0'
29
=Total Cover
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
50% of total cover:
15
20% of total cover:
6
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
-Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
1.
Ligustrum sinense
11
No
FACU
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be
2.
Toxicodendron radicans
7
No
FAC
present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
3. Lonicera japonica 50 Yes FACU
4.
Juncus effusus
1
No
FACW
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
5.
Ilex opaca
1
No
FACU
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
6
height.
7.
Sapling/Shrub - Woody plants, excluding vines, less
8.
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3.28 ft
9
(1 m) tall.
10.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
11.
of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 ft tall.
70
=Total Cover
Woody Vine - All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
50% of total cover:
35
20% of total cover:
14
height.
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
1.
Toxicodendron radicans
2
No
FAC
2.
Smilax rotundifolia
50
Yes
FAC
3.
Campsis radicans
5
No
FAC
4.
5.
Hydrophytic
57
=Total Cover
Vegetation
50% of total cover:
29
20% of total cover:
12
Present? Yes X No
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP1
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'
Loc2
Texture Remarks
0-4
2.5Y 5/3
98
7.5YR 5/8 2 C
PL
Loamy/Clayey
4-7
2.5Y 7/4
85
7.5YR 5/8 15 C
M
Loamy/Clayey
7-20
2.5Y 6/4
60
7.5YR 5/8 40 C
M
Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
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)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_Sandy Redox (S5)
_Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
—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 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers OMB Control #: 0710-xxxx, Exp: Pending
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
See ERDC/EL TR-07-24; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R (Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Project/Site: U-6087 RAB on Potter and Wes Chapel City/County: Wesley Chapel, NC Sampling Date: 10/5/2023
Applicant/Owner: NCDOT State: NC Sampling Point: DP2
Investigator(s): M Caleb BrabbleRose, William Wescott Section, Township, Range: Wesley Chapel, NC
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.): Hillside Local relief (concave, convex, none): Convex Slope (%): 1-5
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): LRR P, MLRA 136 Lat: 35.01059°N Long: 80.67431°W Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Cid channery silt loam, 1 to 5 percent slopes NWI classification: None
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS —Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No X Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X within a Wetland? Yes No X
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No X
Remarks:
Rainfall for past three months was normal or above normal (data from WETS table, and recent rainfall data collected aprox. 3 mi to the east)
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply)
—Surface Soil Cracks (136)
_Surface Water (Al) _True
Aquatic Plants (1314)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (138)
—High Water Table (A2) —Hydrogen
Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (1310)
_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 (132) _Recent
Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_Drift Deposits (133) _Thin
Muck Surface (C7)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Algal Mat or Crust (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)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
Aquatic Fauna (1313)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): >20
Water Table Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): >20
Saturation Present? Yes No
X Depth (inches): >20
Wetland
Hydrology Present? Yes No X
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
Sampling Point: DP2
Absolute
Dominant
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
% Cover
Species?
1.
Carya tomentosa
9
Yes
2.
Quercus nigra
3
Yes
3.
Populus deltoides
1
No
4.
Liquidambar styraciflua
2
No
5.
Juniperus virginiana
2
No
6.
Acer rubrum
1
No
7.
18
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
9
20% of total cover:
Saplinq/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30ft
)
1.
Carya tomentosa
27
Yes
2.
Quercus nigra
11
No
3.
Quercus velutina
5
No
4.
Lindera benzoin
8
No
5.
Liquidambar styraciflua
2
No
6.
Carpinus caroliniana
13
Yes
7.
8.
9.
66
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
33
20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30ft )
1.
Carya tomentosa
7
Yes
2.
Quercus nigra
7
Yes
3.
Quercus velutina
1
No
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
15
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
8
20% of total cover:
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30ft
)
1.
Lonicera japonica
3
Yes
2.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
1
Yes
3.
Vitis rotundifolia
1
Yes
4.
5.
5
=Total Cover
50% of total cover:
3
20% of total cover:
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Indicator
Status
UPL
FAC
FAC
FAC
FACU
FAC
4
UPL
FAC
UPL
FAC
FAC
FAC
14
UPL
FAC
UPL
c
FACU
FACU
FAC
1
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 9 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 44.4% (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species 0 x 1 = 0
FACW species 0 x 2 = 0
FAC species 49 x 3 = 147
FACU species 6 x 4 = 24
UPL species 49 x 5 = 245
Column Totals: 104 (A) 416 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 4.00
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 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 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
height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL Sampling Point: DP2
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' Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 5/3 75 10YR 6/6 25 C M Loamy/Clayey
3-20 10YR 6/8 90 10YR 7/6 10 C M Loamy/Clayey
'Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains
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)
_Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_Sandy Redox (S5)
_Stripped Matrix (S6)
Dark Surface (S7)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (MLRA 136)
—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 122, 136)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147, 148)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
_2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147, 148)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19)
(MLRA 136, 147)
—Red Parent Material (F21)
(outside MLRA 127, 147, 148)
_Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No X
ENG FORM 6116-4-SG, JUL 2018 Eastern Mountains and Piedmont —Version 2.0

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:10/23/2023
Project/Site: U-6087
Latitude: 35.01074
Evaluator: M. Caleb BR and William Wescott
county: Union
Longitude:-80.67377
Total Points:
Stream Determination (circle one)
Other Upstream of
Stream is at least intermittent if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30` 13.75
Ephemeral ntermittent Perennial
e.g. Quad Name: Pipe
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 9.5 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
0
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
U
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
Q
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
Q3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
LQJ
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
Q
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
0
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
®
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No =0
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 1 )
12. Presence of Baseflow
Q
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
Loi
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
15. Sediment on plants or debris
Q
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
Q
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No QO
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal = 2.75
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
Q
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
C111
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
Q
1
2
3
22. Fish
CD
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
Q
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
GD
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
Q
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0(D OBL =
1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 10/5/2023
Project/Site: U-6047, RAB Wes Chap
Latitude: 35.0106039°N
Evaluator: W. WeSCott, MC BrabbleRose
County: Union
Longitude: 80.6739215°W
Total Points:
Stream Deter ' ircle one)
Other
Stream is at least intermittent
21 0
Ephemeral ntermittent rerennial
e.g. Quad Name:
if >_ 19 or perennial if >_ 30`
1
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =15 )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
0
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
0
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
U
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
01
2
3
8. Headcuts
CD
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
0
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
CD
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0 J
Yes = 3
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0'"%2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No -no
Yes = 3
C. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
1 31
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
17
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW =
OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

Recent Conditions from KEQY
Monroe Airport
From the State Climate Office of North Carolina (climate. ncsu.edu)
Tota I
Precipitation
Compared to
Month
(1m)
WETS
2023-05
1.95
Below
2023-06
4.48
Normal
2023-07
3.48
Normal
2023-08
5.34
Normal
2023-09
6.3
Above
2023-10
1.02
Below Site visit occurred on 10/06/2023
USACE / NCDWR site visit on 11/08/2023

Archaeology

Project Tracking No.
19-02-0015
oa NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
.i.�This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not
�' n
y.o : valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: U-6087 County:
WBS No: 47822 Document.
Federal Aid No: STBGDA-1003 (70) Funding:
Federal Permit Required? ❑ Yes ® No
Union
Federal Categorical Exclusion
❑ State ® Federal
Permit
Type:
Project Description:
Construct a roundabout at the intersection of SR 1346 (Potter Rd.) and SR 1162 (Wesley Chapel
Rd.) in Union County. The Area of Potential Effects (A.P.E.) includes approximately 208 meters
(681 ft.) along SR 11162 and 161 meters (529 ft.) along SR 1346. The improvements will be
mostly within the existing right of way, other than the roundabout which will impact some new
location. The project is Federally -funded and will not require any Federal permits. Easements
will be required.
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
The review included an examination of a topographic map, 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.). SR 1346 is oriented east -west and SR 1162 is oriented
north -south.
The topographic map (Matthews) shows the A.P.E. is located on a ridge. The A.P.E. does not
include any stream crossings. In this region, level ridges have a low to moderate potential for
prehistoric archaeological sites. There are two structures shown near the A.P.E.
The aerial photograph shows the landuse in the A.P.E. is a mix of wooded and residential lots.
A review of information at the O.S.A. shows there are no previously recorded archaeological sites
within the A.P.E. The A.P.E. has not been included in any previous archaeological surveys. There
is one project in the A.P.E. that has been reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office (HPO).
The project is located along SR 1162 at the south end of the A.P.E. (ER 98-8123).
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 landform within the A.P.E. has a low to moderate potential for archaeological sites. \
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 6

Project Tracking No.
19-02-0015
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:
5/2/2019
Date
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
2of6

_
��e d' I
arD �: , t n Ldwsf
�${ % CA[ARRN5 MONTGOMER
v
� e` � sc3nt+zld SLANLY
G the
Cnanorrw d ' ice -- � Oskhnr:, N<•rn'r.
tb upla=_ w.:.Bwd 11.
I -VI Airpon
'di
� o. s •
a 4
I
skya a MICf€NBIG Mink .A
'bn ao ww. R NIII
6 v
ft
i r° � Matthgira a pp�
f �• AI I
Plnevll Pmr+i R ,ld+.w`Rd 4 Styli Labe Park S, ml R. LIMMYille
s tt
,. as Indh Tail
Q.a ¢ 1r I-ag5 4iny kwy 'I _..
[X0
3
Sp r! ���.-� Wedr}IngtW1 4b \12
C c
a`
St Fort Mill S1`" k,:.. i' lay P CSR al �4i. as
Pdktan
w.,,,,,,..,. •y Marshville
marm
.3a MaAN SON
�i Mow.w. .. --- - Wingate
aPq kd 9 WA
o �
l Mineral '"
1 Wmha springs -- - �
'k 1
`p:
% 1
Van vvyck 1 Al-
let
� J
8 a '�� l Sauces: Esri, HERE, Germin, 11SGS, Int—
i i 1 r Esri{Thailandj, NGCC, ®Op—St-4Aap can _ �__• = a
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
3 of 6

Wax h aw
_.' ass,
Monroe [
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
4of6

A.P.E. '
go: /
Us.
. Matthews rr
Pe
WesT y Cb4pel
1,
;-
-- • %
r �► '
1opPoll
GRyr�t:9 �° i�aticral � ra Rhic SeMety, fniY-r
"No ARCHAEOLOGY SUR VEYREQUIRED "formfor Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
5of6

"No ARCHAEOLOGY SURVEYREQUIRED" form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2015 Programmatic Agreement.
6of6

Historic
Architecture
and
Landscapes

Project Tracking No. (Internal Use
19-02-0015
�r
t HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
R' 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-6087
County:
Union
WBSNo.:
47882.1.1
Document
Type. -
CE
Fed. Aid No:
STBGDA-1003(170)
Funding:
❑ State ® Federal
Federal
Permits :
❑ Yes ® No
Permit
T e s :
none
Proiect Description:
Construct roundabout at the intersection of Potter Road and Wesley Chapel Road.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE 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 March 6, 2019. Based on this review there are no NR, DE, LL, SL, or
SS in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). There is one house older than 50 years in the APE.
The c. 1956 minimal traditional cottage does not have the level of integrity or architectural
significance to warrant further evaluation for National Register eligibility. No Survey is required
at this time.
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.
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 1 of 3

AT
' e ` -i ° Nz
2 ed Alp,
; ... �..si`' a� 4��t x _. '•k`_¢-. ^. �'�,« aka
" fr � Yam:. _ya t^$'s�!•� t'T s t � rAiw.�'f �x
• +x f'� k a Dg
Vt
e F 17
' � '���t , �-�,_:• .• vim. ,.x�, ::c '`'
LO
ni
Al
I-L-M Ell
IRLLLJ
r-
'++,
r
,3:«, '' t �'X F� to �'`dC/'h• 3ii � ..
• _ 7 � � N`�. 1. � � �' � �
• a �,,_ -

c. 1956 House
Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEY REQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
Page 3 of 3

Tribal
Coordination

Office 803-328-2427
April 12, 2024
Attention: Caleb BrabbleRose
NC Department of Transportation
716 W. Main Street
Albemarle, NC 28001
Re. THPO # TCNS # Project Description
2024-193-130 Roundabout in Union County (TIP No.: U-6087)
Dear Mr. BrabbleRose,
The Catawba have no immediate concerns with regard to traditional cultural properties,
sacred sites or Native American archaeological sites within the boundaries of the
proposed project areas. However, the Catawba are to be notified if Native American
artifacts and / or human remains are located during the ground disturbance phase
of this project.
If you have questions, please contact Caitlin Rogers at 803-328-2427 ext. 226, or e-mail
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
Wenonah G. Haire
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer