20160107 Ver 1_401 Application_20160216 (2)

=.Mc.ADA.MS
January 29, 2016
i
Ms. Karen Higgins
I
NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
I
j
Re: Nationwide Permit 27/GC 3885
Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization
Knightdale, North Carolina
i
KND-15000
r
Dear Ms. Higgins:
On behalf of the Town of Knightdale, we are applying for a US Army Corps of
E
Engineers (USACE) Nationwide Permit 27 and an NC Division of Water
Resources (DWR) Water Quality Certification 3885 for proposed impacts to
jurisdictional waters associated with the stabilization of an unnamed tributary
to Mingo Creek. The project is known as the Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization.
The subject property is located 0.25 mile south of US -64 BR between Parkside
Commons and Fawn Ridge Court in Knightdale, North Carolina. The project
lies within the Neuse River Basin. The following attachments are included as part
of this permit application:
i
I • Signed Agent Authorization Forms (7 forms)
• PCN Form
• Fig. 1 - USGS Quad — Knightdale
• Fig. 2 - Wake County Soil Survey (Sheet: 51)
• Fig. 3.1 - Existing Conditions Exhibit
• Fig. 3.2 - Existing Conditions Exhibit with Aerial
The John R. McAdams
• Fig. 4 - Impacts Exhibit
Company, Inc.
• Fig. 5 - Proposed Conditions Exhibit
• USACE Wetland Determination Data Forms (2 forms)
Raleigh / Durham, NC
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, North Carolina 27713
PROJECT LOCATION/HABITAT: The subject property is located 0.25
[phone]
mile south of US -64 BR between Parkside Commons and Fawn Ridge Court in
Knightdale, North Carolina. The project area is approximately 1.65 -acres in
Charlotte, NC
11301 Carmel Commons Blvd,
size.
Suite 111
Charlotte North Carolina 28226
[phone]
McAdamsCo.com
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities

Ms. K. Higgins
Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization
January 29, 2016
Page 2 of 5
The project area consists of several residential lots. Approximately 20 percent
of the project area is developed impervious area consisting of single family
homes and associated driveways. Approximately 10 percent of the project area
is comprised of maintained vegetation. The remaining 70 percent of the project
area is forested with a mixture of hardwoods and pine species dominating the
canopy layer. Land use within the vicinity is residential and commercial
development with some forested areas.
The upstream watershed is approximately 20 acres of highly urbanized
residential and commercial development. Most of the runoff that reaches the
stream is storm drainage, resulting in high-energy, flashy, and frequent storm
events. As a result, the stream has recently become unstable and is actively
eroding, encroaching into the yards of several of the homeowners adjacent to
the stream. At 116 Fawn Ridge Court, the stream has eroded such that there is
only six feet between the top of bank and the footing for the back porch. A 4 -
foot localized headcut has formed that has progressed upstream approximately
350 linear feet. Where the channel incision is most significant, the stream has
downcut through the engineered fill material used in the development of the
adjacent neighborhood, and has exposed a saprolite subgrade layer, which is a
porous rock material. The erosion has also caused some trees located on the
stream banks to fall. During the field investigation, it was noted that other trees
were in danger of becoming unstable and falling. The headcut and erosion will
likely continue to progress upstream if not properly addressed. See Figures 3.1
and 3.2.
JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES: The 1.65 -acre project area drains to
Mingo Creek, which is designated Class C/NSW and is a tributary to the Neuse
River within the Neuse River basin (HUC 03020201). The unnamed tributary
to Mingo Creek flows from north to south through the project area, and is
subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules. The subject property is not
located within a water supply watershed (Figs. 1-3).
McAdams conducted a field assessment on January 27, 2016 to identify the
presence of streams and wetlands within the subject property. McAdams found
that the site contains approximately 0. 180 acres of marginal riparian wetlands.
Though hydric soils are present, it is believed that they may be relic hydric soils,
KND-15000

Ms. K. Higgins
Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization
January 29, 2016
Page 3 of 5
and that wetland hydrology may no longer be present in these areas due to the
entrenchment of the stream, which has cut down four to six feet below its banks
throughout the central portion of the reach. However, these findings have not
been verified by the USACE.
McAdams concluded that the unnamed tributary to Mingo Creek, which is
mapped on the Wake County Soils Survey, is present in the field and meets the
minimum criteria for either an intermittent or perennial stream feature as
defined by the "Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial
Streams and Their Origins Manual" (DWR, September 1, 2010; Version 4.11).
Therefore, this stream feature is subject to the Neuse Stream Buffer rules, and
50 -ft riparian buffers apply.
PROPOSED IMPACTS and PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed
project, known as the Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization, consists of stabilizing the
existing unnamed tributary to Mingo Creek within the property to control an
erosion problem. The project area is 1.65 acres on the east side of Parkside
Commons Drive and adjacent to Fawn Ridge Court and Arbor Ridge Court.
The stream runs from a culvert under Indian Springs Drive to another culvert
under Parkside Commons Drive. The stream length between the two culverts is
approximately 567 feet, and is actively eroding. According to land owners, the
channel was approximately 6 feet wide and 2 feet deep in March 2014. As of
September 2015, the channel had eroded to an average of 10 feet wide and 6 feet
deep.
In order to address the erosion issues and to protect homeowners' property, the
Town of Knightdale would like to relocate 549 linear feet of the channel back
into the public drainage easement. While there were various options proposed,
the primary goal of the proposed solution is to remedy the erosion problem by
moving the stream back into the public drainage easement and proposing a new
adequately sized channel with the proper amount of stabilization.
KND-15000

Ms. K. Higgins
Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization
January 29, 2016
Page 4of5
Currently the stream migrated out of the easement onto private property. By
returning the stream to the drainage easement, the stream will be raised back to
reconnect to a floodplain and the headcut will be removed. The banks will be
stabilized with coir fiber matting and seeded. This option is advantageous
because in addition to solving the current erosion issue, it also allows the
homeowners that are adjacent to the stream on the east side realize a larger buffer
zone between their homes and the stream.
Twenty-nine trees with a breast height diameter of 12 inches or more will be
removed to accommodate the new stream alignment, and to allow construction
vehicles and equipment to access the site. Riprap protection will be installed just
downstream of the outlet at the upstream end of the channel, and at the
stormwater outfall that drains to the channel between 117 Fawn Ridge Court and
109 Arbor Ridge Court. All riparian buffer areas within the limits of disturbance
will be re -planted on an 8' x 8' grid, with native containerized plants, bare -root
seedlings, and live -stakes. Plant spacing will take into account existing trees
within the buffer.
The entire project was designed to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic
resources. All sedimentation and erosion control measures will be implemented
before construction to minimize runoff. Typical construction equipment, such as
a long-arm track -hoe, front end loader, and bush hog will be used for the initial
clearing.
TOTAL PROPOSED STREAM IMPACTS:
KND-15000

Ms. K. Higgins
Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization
January 29, 2016
Page 5 of 5
PROPOSED RIPA RIA N B UFFER IMPACTS:
Impact Location Impact Type
Impacts (square feet)
Zone I / Zone 2
Figure 4 (perm) Grading (for restoration/
18,671 4,791
enhancement)
TOTAL IMPACTS
18,671 4,791
AVOIDANCE and MINIMIZATION: Impacts to jurisdictional streams,
wetlands, and buffers have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
practicable. There are no jurisdictional wetlands within the current proposed
project boundary of the stream stabilization project. Currently denuded buffer
areas will be utilized, while avoiding forested areas, to the greatest extent
practicable during construction.
Consideration of this project is greatly appreciated. If you should have any
questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me
at [phone].
Sincerely,
McAdams Company
Kelly Roth Kevin Yates
Environmental Consultant Senior Environmental Consultant
Project Manager
Enclosures
KND-15000

3 "3
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name:sacrGs,�1� L��zEowy®-� /fssa���•• /-'c.
Address: `r,
Phone: (911?) z33
Project Name/Description: Town of Knightdale - Stream Stabilization Project
Project Number: KND-15000 Project Manager: I Kevin Yates / Josh Allen
Date: December 14, 2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale" (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Firm and Agent for the "Town of Knightdale")
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
1, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when accompanied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff.
/L�, _e.,ti�_
Print
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCoxom

��Wllmlll
EEEF__=W
PR(IPTi RTV nWNVD A 1 TTixnDY7 A-rYn T VfIDNa
V L KI -111 A'"RALyl
Name: tt J,C�s1,l
Address: L/ .� ,di a q l-�-I Y)
Phone:'51-'14- g/ 0 " 7 ? 6)
Project Name/Description: Town of
Project Number: KND-15000
Date: December 14, 2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Stream Stabilization Project
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
Kevin Yates / Josh Allen
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale' (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Firm and Agent for the -Town of Knightdale'')
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
1, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when accompanied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff.
Print Property Owner
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

Name: V.
Address: /IN,;?
Phone: q1 q
Project Name/Di
Project Number
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: December 14, 2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale" (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Finn and Agent for the "Town of Knightdale')
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
1, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when accompanied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff.
En
h . •i, FIC111 _ mwra
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

j'
/y ,.t)
P ROPERT Y OWNER Ail' T HORIGA T jON FORM
Name: °1 r <� S K,1 ,n 2 5 x, ,n
Address: r "
Phone: j— l -7_
Project Name/Description: Town of Knightdale - Stream Stabilization Project
Project Number: KND-15000 Project Manager: I Kevin Yates / Josh Allen
Date: December 14, 2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale" (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Firm and Agent for the "Town of Knightdale'*)
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when eo91panied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff. !
Print Property Owner Signature
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

iJ
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: G '_6,,\,z i 1A 6L,C tVVQ 1,_1
Address: lI 2 i -D " C ZZ S `E
Phone: 19, 2,(, �, 3 2- i to
Project Name/Description: Town of Knightdale - Stream Stabilization Project
Project Number: KND-15000 I Project Manager: I Kevin Yates / Josh Allen
Date: December 14. 2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale" (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Firm and Agent for the "Town of Knightdale")
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when accompanied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff.
Print Property Owner S Onature
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

Name:
Address: l L
Phone: Cl n sc —
M ° D AI ./< v
PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
, -C, - ri Ci C hjr,� s -1T_
D
I AJ V\ AiAcie� (' 'i , K.i
IUUCr q�q-
Project Name/Description: Town of
Project Number: KND-15000
Date: December 14. 2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
r— J \ve
_Dial r N ' D7S-gS-
i'7- Cqq`�
- Stream Stabilization Project
Manager: I Kevin Yates / Josh Allen
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale" (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Firm and Agent for the "Town of Knightdale")
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when accompanied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc. staff.
S�)iv") �r
Property
. C. hr i S�C��ine,-- �;��IvL�
-y
Print Owner
S gnature
/
1
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: �E,•i Z-;-?
Address: `%Cv „vim /-�,t_t-c6- /k',.rrGy7-D_+4--£
Phone: ? r 2 1 -
Project Name/Description: Town of Knightdale - Stream Stabilization Project
Project Number: KND-15000 I Project Manager: I Kevin Yates / Josh Allen
Date: December 14.2015
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: David Shaeffer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Re: Town of Knightdale — Stream Stabilization Project
To Whom It May Concern:
I hereby designate and authorize the "Town of Knightdale" (North Carolina) and The John R.
McAdams Company (an Engineering Consulting Firm and Agent for the "Town of Knightdale")
to act in my behalf as my agent(s) in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon
request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward.
I, the undersigned, a duly authorized owner of record of the property/properties identified herein,
do authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
to enter upon the property herein described for the purpose of conducting on-site investigation
and issuing a determination associated with Water of the U.S. subject to Federal jurisdiction
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899.
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only
for government officials to enter the property when accompanied by The John R.
McAdams Company, Inc, staff.
Print Property Owner Signature
Raleigh-Durham Charlotte
2905 Meridian Parkway 11301 Carmel Commons Blvd., Suite 111
Durham, North Carolina 27713 Charlotte, North Carolina
[phone] [phone]
Designing Tomorrow's Infrastructure & Communities
McAdamsCo.com

oaoF warF9oG
4 i
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
®Section 404 Permit ❑Section 10 Permit
Corps:
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: or General Permit (GP) number: NWP: 27 / GC 3885
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
For the record only for DWQ 401
For the record only for Corps Permit:
because written approval is not required?
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
❑ Yes ® No
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer lh
❑ Yes ® No
below.
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
j ❑ Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization
2b. County:
Wake
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Knightdale
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed.
Bradford D. & Kristi J. Penny, John D. Bartholomew, Christopher L. & Barbara Spivey,
McKaig Investment Properties, LLC, Susan Skindzier-Todd, & Theresa M. Kaminski
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
DB: 6871 PG: 300; DB: 7445 PG: 133; DB: 13675 PG: 2001; DB: 15735 PG: 2372; DB:
15491 PG: 2035; DB: 13328 PG: 728
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
3d. Street address:
104 Indian Spring Dr., 112, 116, & 117 Fawn Ridge Ct.; 900 Mingo PI.; 109 & 107 Arbor
Ridge Ct.
3e. City, state, zip:
Knightdale, NC, 27545
3f. Telephone no.:
919-810-7780 (Penny), 919-961-0913 (Skindzier-Todd), 484-547-7156 (Kaminski),
919-266-3216 (Bartholomew), 919-357-0948 (Spivey), 919-201-2968 (McKaig)
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify: Developer
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(it applicable):
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
1 c. Property size:
4f. Telephone no.:
2. Surface Waters
4g. Fax no.:
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
4h. Email address:
proposed project:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Kelly Roth
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
McAdams Company
5c. Street address:
2905 Meridian Parkway
5d. City, state, zip:
Durham, NC 27713
5e. Telephone no.:
919-361-5000
5f. Fax no.:
919-361-2269
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1744947849, 1744947716, 1744945792, 1744945660,
1744945478,1744945420
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.794773 N Longitude: - 78.495673 W
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
1.65 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Mingo Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C; NSW Stream Index Number 27-32
2c. River basin:
Neuse / HUC: 03020201
Page 2 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
The stream stabilization project is located behind 116 Fawn Ridge Court in the central part of the Town of
Knightdale, just south of Knightdale Boulevard along the east side of Parkside Commons Drive. The 1.65 -
acre project area drains to Mingo Creek, which is designated Class C/NSW and is a tributary to the Neuse
River within the Neuse River basin (HUC 03020201). The unnamed tributary to Mingo Creek flows from
north to south through the project area, and is subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules. The subject
property is not located within a water supply watershed (Figs. 1-3)
The project area consists of several residential lots. Approximately 20 percent of the project area is developed
impervious area consisting of single family homes and associated driveways. Approximately 10 percent of the
project area is comprised of maintained vegetation. The remaining 70 percent of the project area is forested with
a mixture of hardwoods and pine species dominating the canopy layer. Land use within the vicinity is
residential and commercial development with some forested areas.
The upstream watershed is approximately 20 acres of highly urbanized residential and commercial
development. Most of the runoff that reaches the stream is storm drainage, resulting in high-energy, flashy,
and frequent storm events. As a result, the stream has recently become unstable and is actively eroding,
encroaching into the yards of several of the homeowners adjacent to the stream. At 116 Fawn Ridge Court,
the stream has eroded such that there is only six feet between the top of bank and the footing for the back
porch. A 4 -foot localized headcut has formed that has progressed upstream approximately 350 linear feet.
Where the channel incision is most significant, the stream has downcut through the engineered fill material
used in the development of the adjacent neighborhood, and has exposed a saprolite subgrade layer, which is a
porous rock material. The erosion has also caused some trees located on the stream banks to fall. During the
field investigation, it was noted that other trees were in danger of becoming unstable and falling. The headcut
and erosion will likely continue to progress upstream if not properly addressed. See Figures 3.1 and 3.2.
McAdams conducted a field assessment on January 27, 2016 to identify the presence of streams and wetlands
within the subject property. McAdams found that the site contains approximately 0.180 acres of marginal
riparian wetlands. Though hydric soils are present, it is believed that they may be relic hydric soils, and that
wetland hydrology may no longer be present in these areas due to the entrenchment of the stream, which has
cut down four to six feet below its banks throughout the central portion of the reach. However, these findings
have not been verified by the USACE. McAdams also concluded that the unnamed tributary to Mingo Creek,
which is mapped on the Wake County Soils Survey, is present in the field and meets the minimum criteria for
either an intermittent or perennial stream feature as defined by the "Methodology for Identification of
Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins Manual" (DWR, September 1, 2010; Version 4.11).
Therefore, this stream feature is subject to the Neuse Stream Buffer rules, and 50 -ft riparian buffers apply.
Page 3 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
There are no jurisdictional wetlands within project area.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
567 I.f. of Intermittent Stream
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the proposed project is to stabilize the actively eroding unnamed tributary to Mingo Creek that flows from
north to south through the project area.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed project, known as the Fawn Ridge Stream Stabilization, consists of stabilizing the existing
unnamed tributary to Mingo Creek within the property to control an erosion problem. The project area is 1.65
acres on the east side of Parkside Commons Drive and adjacent to Fawn Ridge Court and Arbor Ridge Court.
The stream runs from a culvert under Indian Springs Drive to another culvert under Parkside Commons Drive.
The stream length between the two culverts is approximately 567 feet, and is actively eroding. According to
land owners, the channel was approximately 6 feet wide and 2 feet deep in March 2014. As of September 2015,
the channel had eroded to an average of 10 feet wide and 6 feet deep.
In order to address the erosion issues and to protect homeowners' property, the Town of Knightdale would like
to relocate 549 linear feet of the channel back into the public drainage easement. While there were various
options proposed, the primary goal of the proposed solution is to remedy the erosion problem by moving the
stream back into the public drainage easement and proposing a new adequately sized channel with the proper
amount of stabilization. Currently the stream migrated out of the easement onto private property. By returning
the stream to the drainage easement, the stream will be raised back to reconnect to a floodplain and the headcut
will be removed. The banks will be stabilized with coir fiber matting and seeded. This option is advantageous
because in addition to solving the current erosion issue, it also allows the homeowners that are adjacent to the
stream on the east side to realize a larger buffer zone between their homes and the stream.
Twenty-nine trees with a breast height diameter of 12 inches or more will be removed to accommodate the new
stream alignment, and to allow construction vehicles and equipment to access the site. Riprap protection will be
installed just downstream of the outlet at the upstream end of the channel, and at the stormwater outfall that
drains to the channel between 117 Fawn Ridge Court and 109 Arbor Ridge Court. All riparian buffer areas
within the limits of disturbance will be re -planted on an 8' x 8' grid, with native containerized plants, bare -root
seedlings, and live -stakes. Plant spacing will take into account existing trees within the buffer.
The entire project was designed to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic resources. All sedimentation and
erosion control measures will be implemented before construction to minimize runoff. Typical construction
equipment, such as a long-arm track -hoe, front end loader, and bush hog will be used for the initial clearing.
Page 4 of 14
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
ElYes ® No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final ❑ (UNKNOWN)
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency/Consultant Company: Other:
Name (if known):
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 5 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands Streams - trihiitaries Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland
Type of jurisdiction
impact number
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
— Permanent
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
(P) or
Temporary T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -PER
-(PER)
or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P)
intermittent
DWQ — non404,
width
(linear
or Temporary
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
(T)
Figure 4: ,
Fill
(for Restoration/
Stream Feature
INT
® Corps
loft
549
Perm.
Enhancement)
A
®DWQ
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
549
3i. Comments: (See Figure 4)
Page 6 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of the
U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
number —
Permanent
(P) or
Temporary
T
01 ❑ P ❑
T
02 ❑ P ❑
T
03 ❑P❑
T
04 ❑ P ❑
T
4f. Total open water impacts
N/A
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then com tete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose of pond
(acres)
number
Flooded
I Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
N/A
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 7 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Impacts (for DWO)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑_ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
U Catawba IJ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer
impact
Reason for impact
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
number—
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Permanent
required?
(P) or
Temporary
T
Figure 4:
Perm
Grading (for
restoration/enhancement)
Stream Feature A
No
18,671
4,791
6h. Total buffer impacts
18,671
4,791
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Impacts to jurisdictional streams, wetlands, and buffers have been avoided and minimized to the maximum
extent practicable. There are no jurisdictional wetlands within the current proposed project boundary of the
stream stabilization project. Currently denuded buffer areas will be utilized, while avoiding forested areas, to the
greatest extent practicable during construction.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Proper sedimentation and erosion control methods will be utilized during all phases of construction and
installation, as described in the Erosion Control Plan sheets to be reviewed and approved by the NC Division
of Land Quality and/or Wake County Erosion Control. All work will take place during dry conditions and
can be facilitated from high, non jurisdictional, stable ground adjacent to the shoreline. The contractor shall
install silt fence, inlet protection, sediment traps, diversion ditches, tree protection, and other measures as
shown on the erosion control plans, clearing only as necessary to install these devices. All erosion and
sediment control measures will be checked for stability and operation following every runoff producing
rainfall, but in no case less than once every week. Any needed repairs will be made immediately to maintain
all measures designed. An erosion control inspections report is required and will be kept by the owner's
representative.
All slopes shall be graded no steeper than the angle that can be retained by vegetative cover or other
adequate erosion control devices or structures. No material for construction will be placed in wetlands,
streams, or riparian buffers at any time. Excavation will be limited to the area necessary for site preparation;
all excavated material will be placed and retained on high ground above the flood pool elevation. All
excavated material will be placed landward of the normal pool elevation contour on high ground and
confined by adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent erosion and sedimentation into adjacent
waters, wetlands, or riparian buffers.
Page 8 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to
Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires buffer
mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank, permittee
responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
Page 9 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6h. Comments:
Page 10 of 14
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
® Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: The proposed stream stabilization project will not create any
❑ Yes ® No
additional impervious surface, therefore, a diffuse flow plan is not required.
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
0%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: The proposed stream stabilization
project will not create any additional impervious surface, therefore, a stormwater managment plan is not
required.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 11 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
vP� n Mn
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 213 .0200)?
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project consists of stream stabilization to correct an erosion problem. The project does not involve
development, and will not result in further development.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The project does not consist of any development, and thus will not produce wastewater.
Page 12 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
® Yes ❑ No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
® Yes ❑ No
impacts?
® Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
The USFWS web page (http://www.fws.gov/endangered/) and the Natural Heritage database
(http://www.ncnhp.org/web/nhp/database-search) were accessed on December 28, 2015 to determine if
the project would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat. Based on this research,
dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmadonta heterodon), Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii), red -cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis), and Northern long-eared bat (Myotic septentrionalis) are federally listed
species that occur in Wake County. Based on field inspections, it is believed that no adverse impacts to
threatened and endangered species and their known habitat will occur due to the construction of the
proposed project.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
An interactive map called the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Mapper
(http://www.habitat.noaa.goy/protection/efh/efhmgpper/) was accessed on December 28, 2015 to determine if
the project will impact Essential Fish Habitat.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
A review of the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office interactive map, which shows the
locations of properties and districts in Wake County, North Carolina entered in the National Register of
Historic Places (http://gis.ncder.gov/hpoweb/) was conducted on December 29, 2015. It did not reveal any
listing within the project area. It is believed the proposed project will not occur in or near an area that has
been designated as having historic or cultural preservation status by the state, federal, or tribal
governments.
Page 13 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? North Carolina Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel
3720174400J.
Kelly Roth
®Z 1 C(p
D to
Applicant/Agent's Printed NameS
plicant/A ent's Signature
(Agent's si nature lid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.
Page 14 of 14
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

" FAWN RIDGE STREAM STABILIZATION
A404/401 PERMIT APPLICATION
FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP
o 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet PROJECT #: KND-15000
Iinch =2,000 feet KNIGHTDALE, NORTH CAROLINA
mj—
,m;j"'i, fie. J )!S" 3�,4 '`)

N
A
0 250 500
l0E0000EZZ:ZZZM
1 inch = 500 feet
FAWN RIDGE STREAM STABILIZATION
404/401 PERMIT APPLICATION
FIGURE 2. SOIL SURVEY EXHIBIT
1,000
m Feet PROJECT #: KND-1 5000
KNIGHTDALE, NORTH CAROLINA
JI
M-cl: A A M -S

sN
We
II
E
a
0
m 11 II
v O sivopVPVOO �O
''
O
z
D
0
m
z J
ou
Ra
5
U
W
0
a Q
a z_
Z �- J
0 m0
N W (aj
J U) _
QwC)
F-aa0
���z
wo''�
W d' W 0
� = 2
W (7 Ur
p-LL Z
� Y
z
s
J
r
N
o
z0
z
U
0 Lu
00
w
N U
N
ol
Q
W
2 0
U N
U o
000
<-t'
<
II
Z
o
L]
U)
Jo
o
N
~H
W
� ~
LL
QU
LL
W
W
Q
g
�C�1
LL =d
LL
=CJ
O
mJ
Z(O
mtz
m -
N
W co
W 0)
~
W ti
:D-
Z) d
V
(D +
2 +
Z +
Z +
a
3
v O sivopVPVOO �O
''
O
z
D
0
m
z J
ou
Ra
5
U
W
0
a Q
a z_
Z �- J
0 m0
N W (aj
J U) _
QwC)
F-aa0
���z
wo''�
W d' W 0
� = 2
W (7 Ur
p-LL Z
� Y
z
s

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: FA,t-ayX City/County: ni .T �i �{nia_�k, Sampling Date;
Applicant/Owner: 'I-AwA 0V �ftiv�e r a��4 State: Sampling Point: bP
Investigator(s): V--Rl Section, To4ship, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): (M A 1C... Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): ML -R -A Lat: 3C. *:M G Z i,_-', Long: -- - 6,Ll9 r- Lto5 Datum: NAM
Soil Map Unit Name: Aoglty, Sc.ndt�4 uw^ NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes �vf� No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes �-/' No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes ✓ No 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 required check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Surface Water (A1) _ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
T_
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68)
High Water Table (A2) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_ Drainage Patterns (1310)
Saturation (A3) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (B16)
Water Marks (131) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_, Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
_ Sediment Deposits (132) _ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
_ Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (133) _ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
— Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Algal Mat or Crust (B4) _ Other (Explain in Remarks)
_ 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 (B13)
_ FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No _4z 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:
!
iS l f it a� G�V.A b�itls c'�t Ct�•r1
t
�^ �-e,
0rsns4h OC 4& Sig aM1
win;cDn C,-,4- d wry (� %C' �oJ�s� ;�S kx>,Ak.S. `r`he,
aV4°1,1�.d SoyA Sk+ 10,%A
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

VEGETATION (Five Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Tree)) Stratum (Plot size: 3 C)�{ } °vJt-Vjower Species? Sta u[s�
1 L
. _ w%'fit t iA to C L -.%r- 11-]A!4ro c { t V` L` , �- _ V
2.
�-
3.p����-�-�
TS = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 38 20% of total cover:_
Sapling Stratum (Plot size:
-_-J-
02.0 =Total Cover
Sampling Point: V t
Test
Number of Dominant Species -4-
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: % (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (AB)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species O x 1 = 0
FACW species x2=
FAC species l�r� x 3= +'
FACU species �.:7ti X4= 1 c Cj
UPL species © X5= C)
Column Totals: 13S (A) L4 LIES (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 6..S
Indicators:
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:_ — 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 1 ) _✓ 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
= Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb 51ratum (Plot size: J )
N
21Mi•\Qcl
3.
4.
_ 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 Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
7. Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
$ herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
9. It (1 m) in height.
11.
020 = Total Cover
�l
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: '7
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: �� )
1.
2. )( 't r- hro,,
3. �:ci �a f�s*f<1 �-e�^• j'wtiiC�ir�t. S \! ��.
Woody vine -All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
= Total Cover I Vegetation
50% of total cover: ► 20% of total cover: 15 Present? ices No
numbers here or on a
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL
Depth
Matrix
(inches)
Color (moist)
%
o
G' �'g 'at 1
L G Ci
I r7 Y e -3i1
.;2_"?
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)
Type:
Depth (inches):
to
or
Redox Features
Color tmoist) % Type' Loc
MS=Masked Sand Grains.
�C_WV, 1 -000
Samplinq Point: DP
Texture Remarks
Dark Surface (S7)
_ Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
_ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
�[ Depleted Matrix (173)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_
Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (1713) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain 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 (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (1719)
(MLRA 136,147)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
'indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes V No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: t 1 �h� � � r^''� S�`6' `�yity/County: t 4%i Q AsLj �a� Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: _17�#\ o 11) State: M— Sampling Point: 47 Pa
Investigator(s): 16 -IK- Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope
Subregion (LRR or MLRA): Lat: Long: _11.49,5441 Datum: h)l OZ3,
Soil Map Unit Name:A 0�=-,o AJ r \00,&\ NWI 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? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes ✓ No
Are Vegetation . Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ✓ No Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No�— within a Wetland? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No ✓
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators (minimum of two required)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required, check all that apply)
_ Surface Soil Cracks (66)
_ Surface Water (Al)
_ True Aquatic Plants (1314)
_ Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
_ High Water Table (A2)
— Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
—Drainage Patterns (B10)
_ Saturation (A3)
_ Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
_ Moss Trim Lines (816)
_ Water Marks (B1)
_ 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 (B3)
_ 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)
_ Geomorphic Position (132)
_ 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 vl� Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes
No \ZDepth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes
No __. / Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No __1'
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 (Five Strata) - Use scientific names of plants.
_? Absolute Dominant indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: Z) 0 ) % Cover Species? Status
4.
(00 =Total Cover
50% of total cover. 13'O 20% of total cover: i
Sapling Stratum (Plot size: ( )
1. Ae a4 yaA6Y1 Av^ _J� f
5.
_� = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover: v
Shrub Stratum (Plot size: �s )
_0�1) = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 20% of total cover:
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 15 )
1. 5414-4-,i4g_
2. 1 at �: � f iyyt i•1i:Q c� �. j3. S�
� _ r•
11.
= Total Cover p�
50% of total cover: 4. 20% of total cover: 1
Woody Vine Stratum (Piot size: )
---J6 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: 10 20% of total cover:
photo numbers here or on a
Sampling Point: D9d
Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species LI
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- n (A/B)
Total % Cover of.,
Multiply by:
OBL species C>
x 1 = b
FACW species ©
x2=
FAC species i k aO
x3= i 3 0
FACU species .10
x4= IJ -0
UPL species O
X5=
Column Totals: 190
(A) (P-00 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =_vC
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
_ 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
v,"'2 - - Dominance Test is >50%
_ 3 - Prevalence Index is s3.0'
_ 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 Five Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and 3 in.
(7.6 cm) or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH).
Sapling - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 20 ft (6 m) or more in height and less
than 3 in. (7.6 cm) DBH.
Shrub - Woody plants, excluding woody vines,
approximately 3 to 20 ft (1 to 6 m) in height.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, including
herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody
plants, except woody vines, less than approximately 3
It (1 m) in height.
Woody vine - All woody vines, regardless of height.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes __V/ No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont -Version 2.0

SOIL
Description: (Describe to the depth needed to
or
�C,t�\tJ— I Spot
Sampling Point: 'D 1PQ1
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) °!o Color (moist) % Tvoe Loc Texture Remarks
.�_ I c-,, - 4 o Ick.. t 4 Q
o;�,ti,,, �
020 P— �)IaD ,�. �,� i cr rvr
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):
Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Indicators for Problematic Hydric
_ 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 (176)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
_ Iron -Manganese Masses (1772) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
_ Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA 136, 122)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
_ Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127,147)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
(MLRA 147,148)
_ Piedmont Floodplain Solis (F19)
(MLRA 136,147)
_ Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
31ndicators 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