20061146 Ver 3_401 Application_20080208

^ ~ ~ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
February 5, 2008
Mr. Jamie Shern
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
1 US Army Corps of Engineers
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Q Co ' ~ ~ ~ to V 3
~~~~oe~~
FEB 6 2008
Ms. Cyndi Karoly DENR -WATER QUALITY
NC Division of Water Quality WETLANDS ANDSTORMWATERBRANCH
2321 Crabtree Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27602
Re: Nationwide Permit 14, 29, and 39 application
Park West Village, Morrisville, Wake County, NC
Dear Mr. Shern and Ms. Karoly:
On behalf of our client, Morrisville Partners, LLC (C/O Tomas Lowell, Casto
Lifestyle Properties), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. is submitting the
enclosed joint 404/401 Pre-Construction Notification for the above reference
project for your review pursuant to Nationwide Permit number 14, 29, 39, and
Genera1401 Water Quality Certification number 3402. The following
^
P.0. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068
mformahon is included as part of the application subm>;ttal: 0 ~ ~ ~ nnnr ~ O
• Project Summary Sheet ~J ~,~/
• Pre-Construction Notification Form FEB 6 2(108
• Site Location Map (Figure 1)
DENk -lNAiEk UVAI. ~ `
• USGS Topographic Map (Figure 2) yVETIAND5,4ND STOR4AWATEk 13.riiWGH
• Aerial Photo of Site (Figure 3)
• Project Plans (Figures 4-9)
• Agent Authorization Letter
• Jurisdictional Determination requests and supporting documentation
• Original site area request (dated 11/7/2007, previously submitted)
• Additional site are request (dated 11/12/2007, not previously submitted)
• NC EEP Mitigation Acceptance (partial) Letter
• NCDWQ Riparian Buffer Determination Letters
• Stormwater Analysis study (submitted to the Town of Morrisville, September
2007)
In development of the project site plan and through coordination with the Town
of Morrisville, additional property was added to the original site to provide

v
^
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]

~ Kimley-Horn
~ antl Associates, Inc.
access to Morrisville Parkway. Within this additional area is a cemetery that has
been identified and surveyed. The proposed site plan does not impact the
cemetery and site disturbance will be at least fifty feet from the surveyed
boundary of the cemetery.
The impacts include 185 LF of permanent impact to intermittent unimportant
~ stream for the road crossing and entrance into the site from Cary Parkway; 125
LF of permanent impact to intermittent important stream and 67 LF of permanent
impact to perennial stream for road crossings entering the site from Morrisville
Parkway; and 67 LF of permanent impact to perennial stream for a road crossing
within the residential component of the multi-use site development. There are
unavoidable Neuse River Basin Riparian impacts associated with anon-
perpendicular fill from road construction at the uppermost portion of the Stream
1 riparian buffer, the greenway trail stream crossing bridge, and a stormwater
outfall dissipater on Stream 1.
Mitigation for permanent impacts to streams and riparian buffers is proposed by
payment into the Forest Creek Mitigation Bank and the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (NCEEP) respectively since the NCEEP has only
accepted riparian buffer in-lieu fee in the Neuse O1 basin.
Based on our field review and conversations with Mr. Brown, we have proposed
a mitigation ratio of 2:1 for impacts to important intermittent and perennial
streams. No mitigation is proposed for the intermittent unimportant stream
impacts. We feel that this proposed mitigation is appropriate given the low
functional quality of stream S1, and the high functional quality of streams S2 and
S3, and due to the efforts made to avoid and minimize impacts on the site.
If there is any additional information you need or any way we can assist in
expediting the processing of this application, please do not hesitate to contact me
at [phone].
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chad Evenhouse, PWS
Enclosures
Cc: Mr. Thomas Lowell
Sal Musarra, KHA w/enclosures
file w/enclosures

®® Kimley-Horn
and Associates, Inc. project Summary Sheet
Project Name: Park West Village ~ ~ -' ~ ~ ~ y~
Applicant Name and Address: Morrisville Partners, LLC
C/O Tomas Lowell Casto Lifestyle Properties
9705 Chapel Hill Road
Morrisville. NC 27560
Telephone Number:~919) 336-8279
Type of Request: ®Nationwide PCN (NWP # 14, 29, 39) ^ Indivic
® Jurisdictional Determination ^ Other:
Included Attachments: ®Project Plans ®USGS Map
® Agent Authorization ®Delineation Sketch
® Data Forms (Up & Wet) ®NCDWQ Stream Forms
® NCEEP Confirmation ®Aerial Photo
® Agency Correspondence ^ Other:
lual Permit Application
® NRCS Soil Survey
® Delineation Survey
® USACE Stream Forms
® Site Photos
^ Other:
Check if applicable: ^ CAMA County ^ Trout County ^ Isolated Waters
^ Section 7, ESA ^ Section 106, NHPA ^ EFH
^ Mitigation Proposed (® NC EEP ^ On-Site ^ Off-Site ®Other)
County: Wake Nearest City/Town: Morrisville
Waterway: UT to Coles Creek
H.U.C.: 030020201
Property Size (acres): 119
Site Coordinates (in decimal degrees): 35.807 °N
River Basin: Neuse
USGS Quad Name: Cary, NC
Approx. Size of Jurisdiction on Site (acres): 0.2 - 0.25
78.820 °W
Project Location: The proposed mixed-use development site is located in Morrisville, Wake County, NC, on the south side
of NC 54 between Carv Parkway pad Morrisville Parkway. A site vicinitymap is included as Figure 1.
Site Description: The project site includes and abandoned industrial facility surrounded by forested areas.
Impact Summary (if applicable): The proposed permenant impacts include the placement of fill material into 125 LF
(0.0158 ac) of important intermittent stream channel, 134 LF (0.0252 ac) of important perennial stream channel, and 185 LF
(0.0158 ac) of unimportant intermittent stream channel associated with culvert and headwall construction at four stream
crossing locations. Construction of the headwall structures at these locations will also include temporary impacts to 10 LF
(0.0008 ac)of important intermittent stream channel, 15 LF X0.0023 ac)of important perennial stream channel, and 10 LF
(0.0013 ac) of unimportant intermittent stream channel.
O
W
t W
tl
d Stream Channel
NWP
# er
pen
a
(acres) e
an
(acres) Intermittent and/or Unimportant
A uatic Function Perennial and/or Important
A uatic Function
Tem Perm. Tem Perm.
Temp. Perm. Temp. Perm. if ac If ac If ac if Ac
14 10 0.0013 125 0.0108 5 0.0009 67 0.0156
29 10 0.0014 67 0.0096
39 10 0.0013 185 0.0158
Total
Total Permanent Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.0562
Kimley-Horn Contact: Chad Evenhouse
Direct Number: 919-677-2121
^ ^
P,0 Box 33068 TEL [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina FAX [phone]
276363068

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USAGE Action ID No. DWQ No. ~ ~ - < < ~ ~ y
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested. for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP Nos. 14, 29, 39
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), ch p ~~ lvJ ~ U,
II. Applicant Information l~ Y~J
FEB 6 2008
1. Owner/Applicant Information p~Nk . i~iAi tk QUA~'•i?
Name: Morrisville Partners, WETLANDS ANDSTORMWATEkBRFW~
C/O Tomas Lowell, Casto Lifest ly e Properties
Mailing Address: 9705 Chapel Hill Road
Morrisville, NC 27560
Telephone Number: 919-336-8279 Fax Number: 614-220-5619
E-mail Address: tlowell(~castolp.com (Tomas Lowell, Project Director)
2. AgentlConsultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Chad Evenhouse, PWS
Company Affiliation: Kimley-Horn and Associates
Mailing Address: 3001 Weston Parkway, NC 27513
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: Chad.Evenhouse(a),Kimley-Horn.com
Page 5 of 15

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project:_ Park West Village
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 0754.01 48 0486 and 0754.01 29 5206
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Morrisville
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.):
The site is located on the southeast corner of Cary Parkway and Highway 54
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a-sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.807 °N 78.820 °W
6. Property size (acres): 119 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Coles Branch
8. River Basin: Neuse Basin
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The existing site includes an industrial manufacturing
facility which has been abandoned and is currently under demolition The remainder of the
site is forested with mixed hardwoods. The site is near the topographic ridge line of NC 54
Chapel Hill Road) and slopes to the Southwest towards the property boundary adjacent to
Page 6 of 14

the railroad right-of--way. There are three headwater/first-order streams located within the
property. Stream 1 and 2 have been reviewed and verified by the USACE (August 2006) for
jurisdictional limits, and NCDWQ for Neuse River Riparian Buffer requirements (July
2006). Stream 1 was determined to be intermittent/unimportant and located adjacent to the
Cary Parkway fill slope on the eastern portion of the site. Stream 2 was determined to be
perennial/important at the culvert outlet location of an abandoned stormwater detention
facility located in the lower/southern portion of the p~erty. Stream 3 is an intermittent
stream (added after the 2006 USACE and NCDWQ field reviews) on the western portion of
the property. A jurisdictional determination application for this stream is submitted
concurrent with this application. NCDWO evaluated Stream 3 for riparian buffer
requirements in November 2007. Streams 1, 2, and 3 are Neuse buffered streams (letters
attached). See enclosed USGS topographic quadrangle (Fi ure 2), and aerial map (Fi ug re 3~
10. Describe the. overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed project is a mixed-use "lifestyle" center development. The plan features a
main street of large and small retail shops with residential units above. In addition, the plan
includes a theater, hotel, large retail shops, single-family and multi-family residential units.
The equipment will be that which is typical for similar construction projects. Also the site
plan includes roads, parking, associated amenities, stormwater management and a greenwaY
trail. The layout of the development avoids and minimizes impacts to streams and buffers to
the extent practical, however minor impacts are unavoidable. Proposed activities include
rg ading, excavating, and the placement of fill material, including rip-rap and culverts as
required for development of the site. Construction will be performed using heavy equipment
such as bulldozers, dump trucks, and excavators. On-site stormwater on inating from the
northern portion of the site will be routed to multiple stormwater basins along the southern
portion of the propert~ppropriately sized for the development.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The proposed residential and retail center
development will re-develop the industrial site to a mixed use development to provide
amenities and housing to the Morrisville area, which is experiencing continued growth and a
need for these units and amenities to meet demand. The posed fill is necessary to allow
development of the site. Streams and buffers have been avoided to the maximum extent
practicable, and unavoidable impacts have been minimized.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
There is no prior project history directly related to the proposed project The existing
manufacturing facilities were constructed between 1973 and 1987 based on the USGS map (date
Page 7 of 14

of map publication and date of photo revision). The Wake County Soil Surveyaerial
photograph date 1965) shows the site as forested and that the plant was likely constructed on
uplands. We are unaware of an~permittin~ that ma oy r may not have been associated with any
prior development. Thomas Brown, USACE, reviewed the original site (approximately 95 acres)
on August 7, 2006, which included streams 1 and 2. Cyndi Karoly and Lia Myott, NCDWQ,
evaluated the original site on July 27, 2006 and determined riparian buffer limits on Streams 1
and 2 (DWQ EXP# 06-1146). Lia M~ visited the additional property (Stream 3) on November
13, 2007 for the riparian buffer determination (DWQ EXP# 06-1146v2). Stream 3 has not been
field reviewed by the USACE at this time. A Jurisdictional Determination application package
for Stream 3 is attached to this PCN.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
The application for thepro_posed project includes all anticipated, built-out conditions.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Crossing 1 is a culvert and
headwall fill on Stream 1 (intermittent/unim~ortant) for an at-grade road entrance at the
existing Carv Parkway median crossing. The crossing will include the addition of a right
turn-in lane which includes additional unavoidable impact to the riparian buffer. No
dissipater is proposed at this crossing,
Separate from the road crossing and widening impact, is an allowable road crossing. The
unavoidable buffer impact is not perpendicular, thus not exempt; however, the width of the
road is less than 25-ft width and utilized retaining walls to minimize impact across the upper-
mostportion of the riparian buffer.
2. Crossing 2 is a culvert and headwall fill associated with a road crossing at the head of Stream
2. The crossing is unavoidable due road eg ometry requirements and the impact has been
Page 8 of 14

minimized by locating the crossing at the existing fill and dam for the abandoned non-
jurisdictional stormwater facility. Headwalls have been utilized to minimize fill limits, and
the stormwater and sidewalk have been re-routed to the upstream side of the crossing to
minimize downstream fill. To accommodate the road sidewalk and stormwater all of the
headwater buffer impact is unavoidable. No dissipater is proposed at this crossing.
3. Crossing 3 is a culvert and headwall fill associated with a road crossing on Stream 2 in the
residential development portion of the site. The second crossing on Stream 2 is necessary
safety and access for the residential communities. The limits of fill have been minimized
through the use of headwalls. No dissipater is proposed at this crossing.
4. Crossing 4 is a culvert and headwall fill associated with the roadway crossing of Stream 3.
The location and eometry of the road dictated the crossing location and the impacts has
been minimized to the extent practical through the use of headwalls. The location. of the road
is set by the existing location of the median crossing on Morrisville Parkway, and the
necessary e~y into and through the western portion of the development site. No
dissipater is proposed at this crossing:
Crossing 1 is proposed as an impact associated with the commercial development
Nationwide Permit 39), Crossings 2 and 4 are proposed as impacts associated with the linear
transportation project of the access road from Morrisville Parkway (Nationwide Permit 14),
and Crossing 3 is proposed as an impact associated with the residential development portion
of the project site (Nationwide Permit 29~
Temporary impacts to streams are anticipated with the footer construction of each headwall
location. These areas are shown in the site figures and are included in the table below.
5. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year
Floodplain Nearest
Stream Impact
(acres)
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) (es/no) (linear feet)
None
Total Wetland Impact (acres) None
6. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: None identified.
7. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Page 9 of 14

Stream Impact
Stream
Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number
Name Type of Impact
Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on ma) Before Im act (linear feet) (acres)
Crossing 1 S1 Permanent fill (culvert/hw) Int./unimportant 2 feet 185 0.0158
Crossing 2 S2 Permanent fill (culvert/hw) Per./important 4 feet 67 0.0156
Crossing 3 S2 Permanent fill (culvert/hw) Per./important 4 feet 67 0.0096
Crossing 4 S3 Permanent fill (culvert/hw) Int./important 4 feet 125 0.0108
Total Permanent Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 444 0.0518
Crossing 1 S1 Temporary fill Int./unimportant 2 feet 10 0.0013
Crossing 2 S2 Temporary fill Per./important 4 feet 5 0.0009
Crossing 3 S2 Temporary fill ~ Per./important 4 feet 10 0.0014
Crossing 4 S3 Temporary fill Int./important 4 feet 10 0.0008
Total Temporary Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 35 0.0044
Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact
Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number
(if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on ma) ocean, etc.) (acres)
None
Total Open Water Impact (acres) None
9. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resultin from the roject:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.0562
Wetland Impact (acres): none
Open Water Impact (acres): none
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.0562
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 479
10. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
11. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ®uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Page 10 of 14

Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): See stormwater management plans
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): State/Local stormwater requirements
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: forested
Size of watershed draining to pond: see plans Expected pond surface area: see plans
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The site layout was designed to minimize impacts to streams and buffers. Crossings 1 and 4
were set to align with existing driveways and traffic patterns to accommodate NCDOT
requirements. Crossing 2 is located at the outlet of an existing culvert that presumably was
placed when the manufacturing facilities were constructed. Crossing 3 is required for safety and
access into and through the residential development portion of the site. All of the crossing
make use of retaining walls to minimize the impact foot print within the stream and buffer
corridors. Since the streams are all small first-order tributaries, and considering that stormwater
management facilities will address storm flows, the culvert/headwall outlets will not include
energy dissipaters (rip rap) in order to minimize permanent impacts at the crossings
In addition to the above the project does include a substantial redevelopment component in that
much of the property includes an existing manufacturin facility. The existing facilities do not
provide for stormwater treatment The project also proposes the use of parking deck facilities
that minimize impervious cover by stackingparking areas. Finally the project will include
innovative stormwater design techniques intended to reduce the peak AND volume of runoff
through infiltration devices that make use of the existing buffer. These facilities are desi n
infiltrate the 1 year 24 hour storm event bypassing the excess runoff to stormwater wetlands
designed to the Town of Morrisville criteria.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
Page 11 of 14

including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stnngide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
The applicant proposes to provide payment to the Forrest Creek Mitigation Bank (Orange
County, NC, Neuse River Basin 030202011 to provide 518 feet of stream miti ati~on _(2.1
mitigation ratio for impact to 134 LF of perennial stream and 125 LF of important
intermittent stream). The MBI approval letter from the USCE is dated 8/15/2007 and
according to the Bank Owner, the Bank currently has sufficient stream credits necessary to
provide the requested mitigation.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into. the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 0
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): 52,524
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Page 12 of 14

IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ^ No
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether aNEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ® No ^
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(s uare feet) Miti ation
1 12,208 3 (2 for Catawba) 36,624
2 10,600 1.5 15,900
Total 52.524
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. The applicant proposes to provide payment
to the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Pros?ram for 52,524 Sa.Ft. of Meuse River Buffer
Mitigation (NCEEP acceptance letter attached). According to the Meuse Buffer Rules, the
Page 13 of 14

Crossing 1 (road crossing_greater than 150 LF of stream impact) and the uppermost area of
S 1 fill (non-pemendicular fill associated with a road crossing) have been determined to
require mitigation. All other riparian buffer impacts identified and included in the attached
figures are considered allowable activities where impacts are unavoidable and have been
minimized to the extent practical.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss Stormwater
controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. The Stormwater mana ement plans are attached. The Town of Morrisville began its
review of the Stormwater management facilities back in March of 2007 The final stormwater plans are to
be review by the Town which has an approved NPDES Phase II permit and ordinance in place
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
Sewage will be sent to the Town of Cary POTW
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 14 of 14

147
f Durham _ ~,
--
`- - ~ 147
,_
,`.: .~

cri;a rn~nt ,
Counties
Municipalities
- Cary
~ ~ Chapel Hill
Morrisville
Raleigh
Cities
QProperty Boundary 1 ,
Ho
~.
Title Vicinity Map
Park West Villa,e
I>rcpm~ed n,... Project Cary, North Carolina
CASTO Lifestyles Wake County
Properties Date
1 /30/08

Title USGS Topographic Mapping (Cary)
Park West Village
rrepa~~~ Ear. Project Cary, North Carolina
CASTO Lifestyles Wake County
Properties Date Project Number Figure
1I301OR 012811000 2
Prepared by Anua Reusuhe ~~~ wiz

Prepa~~ed 6y Annn Reusche ~~ ~

Title Site Plan and Impacts Overview
Park West Village
i,~~zp,,.e~r~, Project Cary, North Carolina
CASTO Lifestyles Wake County
Properties Date
2/&108
T~~~~~~,~~~~~~~~,~~~~~„~~.~~~~,,,,,~~~~..~m,~,:~,~,G«:~~o~„~,.~.,:...,.,~:~..o~,~.~.._T,_~„~~~~~,,,,,,,,•.~.,.~.~,....,,,._:..:_,,.,.,~„~„_ ~.
Project Number Figure
012811000 q
~:n~~~

i
p~,~. - ,, i
v ,,9:~ i ~
i
,'' i /
i
i
i
i
B

,~
,;;
;' ~%`
~~ ~ y% ~,,
,\ ~,
`\ ,°
~~ ;~,~
.~ __. ~
,~ ~ ~ ~ ~
/'~ i / ~
'~
~~-
~ ~~
'~
,~
-~
i~~' i
,~~ ~
.~
~~t r ~ ~ ,,
.% ~
~~, ~ ,
~~ .
~~ s ~~
j t ~~
~ ~~~
I
,~
~~ r,
i~ / ~
i ~ i~
i
~ ,i"
-~ i ~ ~~ ~
~ t
,.
~,
V 1
~,
~;
rossing 1
i~
i~
i
I
i
.~
~•' ~.
~~
~~~ •'~
.• ~~
~ I ~
'`
~ ,~I
i~~ j
j 0 50 100
i
!*~ I Feet I
Legend
® Temporary Stream Impacts
_ Stream Impact Areas
Area of Impact_Zone 1
Area of Impact_Zone 2
Property Boundary
Title: Close Up 1
Prepared By:
CASTO Lifestyles
Properties
S1

ream Buffer
rmination
-CE Stream Origin
Determination
*Note: No Dissipaters Proposed
Project: Park West Village
Cary, North Carolina
Wake County
Date
1 /30/08
Project Number
012811000
Figure Number
5
V
~~ 1
I~ ~~
I ~ ,,~ , ~I
~' ,,
~,
~~ ~
I~ ~'~
Crossing 1
Stream (S1) Intermittent/Unimportant
Permanent Stream Impacts 185 Linear Feet (0.0158 acres)
Temporar Stream Impacts 10 Linear Feet (0.0013 acres)
Riparian Buffer Impacts (Square Feet)
Zone 1 11,680
Zone 2 8,525
Buffer Impact (Road), Allowable With Mitigation (Square Feet)
Zone 1 528
Zone 2 2075
acti (R6"ac~,°
itf, i igat' n ~,
~ ~`~~

,,
~~
~ `
.\
.\
~,, \
~ ~\
~'~ ~~ ~
~~,, ,~
,~) '~
~\
~~
~ ~~
,\
~\ ~'0
~.
~~ \
`\~~ \ \
s2
_ _~I
I
~, ~ ,
,~
~~
~~ ~~ • ~~.
I
~~ I
•,~~ ,~I
~ ~
I
~~~ ~I
I~~r`~~~~~~~~ ~
~~~~
50 100
~ I I
r_ _~
i ~c~
Legend
® Temporary Stream Impacts
_ Stream Impact Areas
~;_~~ Area of Impact_Zone 1
Area of Impact_Zone 2
Property Boundary

~ i
~'
~' i
~'
~, ~
,y
/" / ~.
~ ~
,, ~- ~,
,~~
i / 1
~'
i' i' ~
i' 1
/ /
~ /i
~/, j /
d.- /
/' //
// /'
/' i
rj~/ / / /'/ /~/ /
/~ /`
!~/ /' _
/ ''
Q i ~ ~.
/ ~ ~, /
/ ~~-
`, ~,
~~ / ~ / J
X00\\0\\\ < ~\~~; ~
~ ~;~~
,`.\
`~
.~ ~
`\ ~ ~~
I ~~.~
\\ \~~.
Crossing 2
Stream (S2) Perennial/Important
Stream Impacts 67 Linear Feet
Temporary Stream Impacts 0.0009 acres
Riparian Buffer Impacts (Square Feet)
Zone 1 6,226
Zone 2 6,185
,,,,,,,,,,,- ~..~ . , ,, s ,~,

Title: Close Up 2
Prepared By: Project: Park West Village
Cary, North Carolina
CASTO Lifestyles Wake County
Pro
erties
p Date Pro ect Number
1
Figure Number
1 /30/08 012811000 7

o♦c

Crossing 4
~'

\~'
S3
~-
.~
'~~
...,~
i ~
i ~ ~
i' "~.
\\
~~..~~..r~ I
~~
~~
~~
~~~~~-
~~
i~~~
0 50 100
I I I
Feet
Legend
_ Temporary Stream Impacts
_ Stream Impact Areas
',~%",~' Area of Impact_Zone 1
Area of Impact_Zone 2
Q Property Boundary
~ ~ ~-~, ~I
-~~ _~~ ~~
*Note: No Dissipaters Proposed
Crossin 4
Stream (S3) Intermittent/Important
Permanent Stream Impacts 125 Linear Feet (0.0108 acres)
Temporary Stream Impacts 10 Linear Feet (0.0008 acres)
Riparian Buffer Impacts (Square Feet)
Zone 1 6,917
Zone 2 3,851
Title: Close Up 4
Prepared By: Project: Park West Village
CASTO Lifestyles Cary, North Carolina
Properties Wake County
Date Project Number Figure Number
1 /30/08 012811000 9

t i festyl~
PROPERTIES ~ ~i
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: Morrisville Partners, LLC
Address: 9705 Chapel Hill Road
Morrisville, NC 27560
Phone: [phone]
Project Name/Description: Park West Village Development, Morrisville, NC
Date: January 30, 2008
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attention: Jamie Shern
Field Office: Raleigh Regulatory Field Office, Wilmington District
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
To Whom It May Concern:
I, the current property owner, hereby designate and authorize Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. to act in my/our behalf as my/our agent solely for the purpose of
processing of Section 404 permits and Section 401 Water Quality Certifications
applications and to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of
applications, etc. from this day forward until successful completion of the permitting
process or revocation by the owner.
7h' ,~,>
Authorized this the ~~ ~: day of ~ y~~-1 ~1~~~(zL - ~'.~'C~
,, ~ ~ ,, .-
Morrisville Partners, LLC ,, l ~ ~ % ~,
By: Casto Southeast LLC, Acting as agent ~ ~ ~~ y
-,
• /~ ~' ~ 1l f 'I _
Print Applicant Name Applicant Signature
CC: Cindy Karoly,
N.C. Wetlands Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N. C. 27699-1621
9705 Chapel Hill Road, Morrisville, lYorth Carolina 27513
919.467.8880 •614.220.5619 (fax)

a ~ ^ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
November 7, 2007
Mr. Thomas Brown
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Re: Jurisdictional Determination Request
Casto Lifestyle Properties Site (SW of intersection at Cary Pkwy/NC 54)
Morrisville, Wake County, NC
Dear Mr. Brown:
Per your request, the following Jurisdictional Determination (JD) request
package is submitted for your review. The information if compiled to document
site conditions evaluated by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc (KHA) staff on
June 20, 2006, and from our on-site field review held on August 7, 2006.
The package includes the following sections:
• Agent Authorization
• Figure - "Site Aerial Map and Jurisdictional Determination"
o Documentation of USACE field review held on 8/7/2006
• Figure - "USACE Data Point Locations"
• USACE Data Forms
o Wetland Data forms (3 total)
^ DP1 (upland)
^ DP2 (upland)
^ DP3 (upland)
o Stream Evaluation Forms (2 total) -
^ S 1 (intermittent, unimportant)
^ S2 (perennial, important)
• Figure - "Photo Locations November 6, 2007"
• Site Photographs
• NC Division of Water Quality field review figures and forms
o Figure - "Site Aerial and Data Locations"
o Figure - "USGS Topo Map with Data Point Locations"
o Figure - "Wake Co. Soil Survey Site Map with Data Locations"
o NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms (8 total)
^ SDP1 through SDP8
o l~ - i ~ ~r b 1/ 3
^
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068
^
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]

~ Kimiey-Horn
~ ~ and ;~.ssociales, Inc,
Head of jurisdictional stream locations and NCDWQ stream data point locations
have been GPS surveyed with sub-meter accuracy. The delineation of streams
below the jurisdictional determination location are approximated based on Wake
County GIS. Specific locations of the jurisdictional streams will be surveyed by
a NC-registered Land Surveyor prior to a 404/401 permit application.
There are no jurisdictional wetlands located within the subject property.
Prior to KHA's fieldwork on 6/20/2006, the site had received normal to above
normal rainfall. Rainfall data collected at Raleigh-Durham International Airport
for the weeks prior are:
Date Rainfall inches
6/6/06 0.01
6/8/06 0.19
6/11/06 0.64
6/12/06 0.29
6/ 14/06 5.64
Total (2 weeks prior to
evaluation) 6.77
Please feel free to contact me at 919-677-2121 if you have any .questions, or if
additional information is necessary.
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN A D ASSOCIATES, INC.
t
Chad Evenhouse, PWS
Attachments
Cc: Thomas Lowell, Casto Lifestyle Properties

lifestyle
PROPERTIES nisi
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: CASTO SOUTHEAST LLC
Address: 401 N. Cattlemen Road, Suite 108, Sarasota, Florida 34232
Phone: [phone]
Project Name/Description: Casto Morrisville .
Date:
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attention: Monte Matthews
Field Office: Raleigh Re u~ latory_Field Office
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
To Whom_ It May Concern:
Jill ~ l_ 2006
YIP~ILEY ~0~~
~~~f~~
We hereby designate. and authorize Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to act in our behalf
as our agent solely for the purpose of processing of Section 404 permits and Section 401
Water Quality Certifications applications, Neuse River buffer determinations and to
furnish upon request supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this
day forward until successful completion of the permitting process or revocation by the
undersigned.
Authorized this the 30~'. day of June, 2006.
Drew A. Smith, Exec. Vice President
Print Applicant Name
4-,f
ant Signature
CC: Ms. Cyndi Karoly
N.C. Wetlands Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N: C: 27699=1621
Creating Places That Make A Difference.
401 N. Cattlemen Road Suite 108 Sarasota, Florida 34232 PHONE: [phone] Fax: [phone] www.castolp.com

W
oKy
,
r o
-
CD
LO
r
VL
a F
yt �' • W{ • � O LO U
% N LL
LO
�. a < 2i' k, i,,, %,`L • fib•` •�. - . • it ` N
-
c
x
} O +•
•
C
• -
Q
E n
r I 1
*46
r U
j U U
r'
w
1 L 06
• . > : Lo
Lo
1 i �
CL COo
L)
'• z
' T -z
�(f
• > O
r , •
LL o
W j
U0 Q
Qvi
cn
s
♦. � ,.
♦ u c co U5 g
♦co t M N
•• n
♦ , m m
(0 4 n
LL
CU
r m
♦. a� Z
U
_ _ O
0
N
rn
to U N � 0 O •� m U t- t
70 m
L o O L O N .♦ ,.� • 'L •
+' L •
����0;-F�� .ted r
C)- M> aom�
Ld
E p u0 a -a oo E m
U D m m O O U m (a N g �
Q O C CO E c "�0).C-
U)
C �. O o
fA ^C, E O m E m s o [ E
D W L ai o �1L♦ U '� L � [ p 5sva
Z H cn - 00 m-0cv o m m m
n a sgsg

1.
!1 s, � �•,�,� - • .; � .- orf. ,� �,
:a
i.•, � {tea " i - , : '
-y4 fit.. ~ -'�'.' ,� �, "a_ ' y 'Wa- , A:' • f 3
.,
it
00
CD
LL
i
d; .�
CD
N
.: _.... T�e`'N,.,, . �` •q.�T Z. ^ , .ICY! '
C
c.i
Fla, �.• '� V � +' rt.. \ ! � ,,
-41 OD
LU
f ,
f
»
U
I
E
L o6
OD
Ln
U)
a
•
•
a+r' It
, r
0 1 j r >1
�- ♦olPoo,
+�
It
• � '� 1 ., p � .,.E � .Aa a 4 �.
! .
w
-,lix•'w''�K`'.,r.!(' L `' } , ti C toD
o in
16
^_a �. r " •- ,.�,, a Y4 s.. -a ��k.h''41t�.• �,a, - � s ` •Ri N m
aero+ - a. •;4 ¢ LL
in
cc z1
LY
f.
1 � rn
1
ti r RSk •t O L
.. I .i r,• �� d a
� � ','R:� .- � � ^! �,. •,.+._ _ ivy
Iftv
`w ,=
1 �aa� N
• 4
-L 4 r4 U FcN
w
, l+i
v
w
+
x ,
LK
it
e F�
IN J
` . f _m�
E
1p
! m# c
v �
� ` iU az nu
t u J

DATA CORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Casto -Morrisville, NC Date: 6/20/2006
Applicant/Owner: Casto Lifestyles Properties County: Wake
Investigator: CWE, TM
State:
NC
Upland
DP1
Stratum Indicator
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) Yes Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID:
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species
1. Pinus taeda T/S FAC 9.
2. Acer rubrum T/S FAC 10.
3. Liquidambar styraciflua T FAC+ 11.
4. Ligustrum sinense S FAC 12.
5. Myrica cerifera S FAC+ 13.
6. Vitis spp. V FAC 14.
7. Toxicodendron radicans V FAC 15.
6. Microstegium vimineum H FAC+ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FACU): 90%
Remarks:
The area is adjacent to the field edge and fill slope of Cay Parkway.
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
F1ELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water: none (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >24 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 12 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
the site receives stormwater runoff from the Cary Parkway fill slope.
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac-Neutral Test
Other

®A`T/4 F®RM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Casto -Morrisville, NC Date: 11/6/2007
ApplicantJOwner: Casto Lifestyles Properties County: Wake
Investigator: CW E, TM State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) Yes Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID:
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species
1. Pinus taeda TES FAC 9.
2. Acer rubrum T/S FAC 10.
3. Liquidambar styraciflua T FAC+ 11.
4. Carpinus caroliniana T/S FAC 12.
5. Microstegium vimineum H FAC+ 13.
6. 14.
.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (e xcluding FACU): 90%
Remarks:
NC
Upland
DP2
Stratum Indicator
e area at the head of a drainagewayjust upslope of the railroad.
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water: none (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >24 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >24 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac-Neutral Test
Other

®ATA F®I~M ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
ProjeCtlSite: Casto -Morrisville, NC Date: 11/6/2007
Applicant/Owner:
Investigator:
Casto Lifestyles Properties County:
CWE
State:
Do Normal Circumstances exist on this site? Yes Community ID
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation?) Yes Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? No Plot ID:
Vegetation
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species
1. Pinus taeda T/S FAC 9.
2. Satix nigra T FAC 10.
3. Juncus effusus H FACW 11.
4. Microstegium vimineum H FAC+ 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
B. 16.
Percent of Dominant Spec ies that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (e xcluding FACU): 90%
Remarks:
Wake
NC
Upland
DP3
Stratum Indicator
The area at the head of a drainageway adjacent to the fence and entrance to industrial site.
Hydrology:
RECORDED DATA:
Stream,. Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Depth to Surface Water: none (in)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >24 (in)
Depth to Saturated Soil: >24 (in)
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS:
PRIMARY INDICATORS:
Saturated in Upper 12 inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
SECONDARY INDICATORS:
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Fac-Neutral Test
Other

~ :a~
~~~~, Y„
)fil'~~1.i,C~ ~,Tt€)l`~1 FbR~N
ACTION ID: APPLICANT NAME: C:asto .if s yles Pro} DATE: ~/20/200h
PROPOSED CHANNEL WORK (LE., culvert, relocation, etc) culvert/road crossing
WATERBODY/RIVER BASIN Sl(UT to Crabtree Ck) County/City Wake/Morrisville
RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS > 5 inches of rainfall within previous week prior to evaluation
P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
X Fish/shellfish/crustaceans Present
X Benthic Macro Invertebrates
X Amphibians PresentBreeding
X Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function) No visible aquatic habitat or biological
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells,
others communities.
X Federally Protected Species Present
Discontinue)
X Riffle/Pool Structure St
h
l

X
Stable Streambanks ream geomorp
o
ogy present (bed
and banks)
h
i

X
Channel Substrate
i..e. avel, cobble, rock, coarse sand ,
owever, no act
ve
floodplain (insufficient hydrology).
X Riparian Canopy Present (SP=/>50% closure)
X Undercut Banks/Instream Habitat Structure
X Flow in Channel
X Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel
Discontinue
X Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom (June
throu h Se t.
X Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June through
Se t.
X Adjacent Floodplain Present
X Wrack Material or Drift Lines
X Hydrophytic Vegetation in adjacent to channel
Important to Domestic Water Supply? Y /
Does Channel Appear ON A Quad or Soils Map? ~ N Approx.sDrainage Area: less than 5 ac.
Determination:
^ Perennial Channel (stop) ^ Important Channel: LF PROJECT MGR. Initials
® Intermittent Channel (proceed) ®Unimportant Channel 1,000 LF
^ Ephemeral Channel (no jd) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
^Ditch Through Upland (no jd)
Evaluator's Signature:
(if other than C.O.E. project manager)
P=Present SP=Strongly Present NP=Not Present
\\EAGLE\VOL2\PN\OOOenviron\Forms\intermittent channel evaluation.doc

~_ ,
rr~~~
tN'rEE~tVI.ITTCi'~IT Ci<-IA~~t1'~TEI. ' ~_._:;~_.
~'~'~'1I.U~r.TiQ'1`~ FCI~R.:t~'f
ACTION ID: APPLICANT NAME: C'asto i.ifestyles Proms DATE: 6/20/2006
PROPOSED CHANNEL WORK (I.E., culvert, relocation, etc) culvert/road crossing
WATERBODY/RIVER BASIN S2 (UT to Crabtree Ck) County/City WakelMorrisville
RECENT WEATHER CONDITIONS > 5 inches of rainfall within previous week prior to evaluation
P SP NP Observation Comments or Description
X Fish/shellfish/crustaceans Present
X Benthic Macro Invertebrates
~{ _ Amphibians PresentBreeding
X Algae And/Or Fungus (water quality function) Tadpoles in pools. No other aquatic
X Wildlife Channel Use (i.e. tracks, feces, shells,
others invertebrates observed.
X Federally Protected Species Present
iscontinue
X Riffle/Pool Structure
X Stable Streambanks Strong stream geomorphology present,
X Channel Substrate
i..e. avel, cobble, rock, coarse sand bed and banks, floodplain, etc.
X Riparian Canopy Present (SP=/>50% closure)
X Undercut Banks/Instream Habitat Structure
X Flow in Channel
X Wetlands Adjacent To/Contig. With Channel
Discontinue
X Persistent Pools/Saturated Bottom (June
throu Se t.
X Seeps/Groundwater Discharge (June through
Se t.
X Adjacent Floodplain Present
X Wrack Material or Drift Lines
X Hydrophytic Vegetation in adjacent to channel Channel incised
Important to Domestic Water Supply? Y /
Does Channel Appear ON A Quad or Soils Map? N Approx.-Drainage Area: ~ 20-30 ac.
Determination:
® Perennial Channel (stop) ®Important Channel: 900 LF PROJECT MGR. Initials
^ Intermittent Channel (proceed) ^ Unimportant Channel LF
^ Ephemeral Channel (no jd) (attach map indicating location of important/unimportant channel)
^Ditch Through Upland (no jd)
Evaluator's Signature:
(if other than C.O.E. project manager)
P=Present SP=Strongly Present NP=Not Present
\\EAGLE\VOL2\PN\000environ\Forms\intermittent channel evaluation.doc

w
j3 r 1` 5�., • f i �� ..,.r-., a �"�Y -. ,*F` ^. gid` ��'�'4 •aitt: ".• .r
Sri mo-`
-�..
- *
t
17 046
f CD
- +° • it i
O
00
e , i
e
O
LL
r
b+ CD
JU
kv
CIA
CD
„
e
D
.0
to
R
•X , yam„ � * _ � -.a o .r°*
,
,
,
-
,, , J
i T
(D L
ts
41
r.
•\ q/yuII�F �
+. + A ♦ .
•
°
r '
� t
M •.. , s.,x.A q U LL
t
cc
ko' IV
} ait � //r ++• 1
CD
y
a
+
I y
N € UE
"
LU
;_, .�, It G .. + .,, ,,,,�. ....r..yi. i .. �. .•rte o � ` £ � a A
44L

-CApnAn 1141 IiiUO Cauo-Parkwc dl~i@urt•sU'hutue\phuw p,~ecduc Prepared by Chad liccnhuusc [gin ~~ k.

Photograph 3: Upstream view of Stream S I (jurisdictional intermittendunimportant).
y~;
~,
t'
Photograph 4: Upstream view of Stream S I at beginning of jurisdictional channel (intermittent unimportant)
Title Silo Photographs (November 6, 2007)
Park West VillaEe
i,,.~r,,.~~,;,,. Project Canto Lifestyle Properties
Canto Lifestyle Morrisville, NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
I I /7/2007 O l 28 11000 2
T:ApnAul?FI InOn C,~sw-ParhwcsiAPieuicvVPhntus\phuto pu_cduc I'rcp~rcd by Churl lic~•nhoa~r [~~~ ~~.

T:ApnAnl?R I IuOU Cusco-I'urkwcstV'ieureaVPhowrAphmo puge.doc Prepared by Cheri Ifvcnhuusc [~~ ~~,

T:ApnAn RXI luu~i CllSlO-P~rkwusiAIigurnAPhutus\phow pugr.doe I'rcparud by Ch~U licenhuux' [~~ ~~,~,

s~ ~.R7 ~ ~
'r ~J k "n
~ ?~ p~ !
~.~ ~ ,
~~_. .

Photograph 10: Upslope view of Swale SW4 (non-jurisdictional)
Title ~ Site Photographs (November 6. ?007)
Park West Village
~>,.~,~.,,.~,~ ~,,,. Project Casto Lifestyle Properties
Casto Lifestyle Mon~isville, NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
11/7/2007 012811000 5
T:ApnAnl?HI In11U CatiLU-Pt~rkwcslAI'i ~urcti\Pholos\photn paec.duc Prrpai2d hY Ch;id I'ccnhnu,ac [~~~ ~ ~,~,i,~

Photograph 1 1: Downstream view ofi stream S2 (jurisdictional perennial, important).
.. t. r:
~^
n6~`
Photograph 12: Upstream view of stream S2 (jurisdictional perennial, important)
Title ~ Site Photographs (November 6, 2007)
Park West Village
r,~,~a«ar~,~, Project Canto Lifestyle Properties
Canto Lifestyle Morrisville, NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
I I /7/2007 0128 11000 6
T:ApnAu I _'H I I nun Cuvm-ParkwcstAI~i:uresVPhuuis\phuur paec.duc Prcpau~cd by Chad I ivcnhuusc [ ~~~ ~ ,~.

~..".,~_

. r'
f ., ..~J
Photograph 14: Downstream view of stream S2 (perennial, important) near beginning of jurisdiction (culvert outlet)
Title ~ Site Photographs (November 6, 2007)
Park West Village
~,,.,.~,;,«~ ~ ~,~, Project Canto Lifestyle Properties
Canto Lifestyle Morrisville, NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
11/7/2007 012811000 7
T:ApnAnl?RI loiui Ca.<u,-P:ukwrstAI'ieuresVPhohis\phutu puecdnc Prepared by Churl Iivenhous~e [ten 1°"~'~"'
~ ..e ~+~.. K.

Photograph I5: Upslope view of Swale SWS (non-jurisdictional).
F ,
.~
~~l {,!}q ~
`Fs .
,k St~i'~g~"d~~~ r
d ~j
'~ 4~
f y i ~ 4id">:
~~~~
Photograph 16: Upslope view of Swale SWS (non-jurisdictional)
Title ~ Site Photographs (November 6, 2007)
Park West Village
~,,.~~,~,~,~ ~ ~,~. Project Casto Lifestyle Properties
Casto Lifestyle Morrisville. NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
11/7/2007 012811000 8
T:ApnAnl:Xl IOOn Custo-Purkwcsdl~f~ure~APhuui.~~\pholu puac.due Prepared by Chad I:ceuhuuse [~~ „~,~~~

i d~ ~ t ~ ~J
.~ ~. :~

.®
`,~~

r~

^

~/
~%
~~~.
subject
..,~" ,
~; Begin subject channel
at SDP1 location
k
0
0
e
tf .'
® ,'
y !
~ ®:
~",
q ~ ~~9 ~..
$ p t~: ~ e
~ ,~•
,~, 1
~~
^
1
„~
i
+~_ , '`' ~
o ~ i "!
is
`'P,,•lemP"'m"°,ia°~~`°"°°'°S°`"e'Ae"a'""ee""9""aumXtl ~~~ KimleyHom NCDWQ Fleld Review for Subject Property: SW Corner ~~~SOUrt~
TylerMcEwen ~ and ASSOCIat@S, Inc. USGS Topo Map With 0 250 500
k Neuse Riparian Buffers of NW Cary Parkway & Data Point Locations ~ ~ w ~ E
July 2Q 2006
P.O.Box33068•Raleigh,NorthCarolina27636.3D68 July 27, 2006 NC Highway 54
~~~~~. ~an,areo„~~q~e~,m~re~~a,~~w~~~a~,e~~~~.~~~e~~~,~~~,r ~.... Feet
~`" <,~-~m a~,,,w„~,~„„„~~,,,,,,,,,ewmp~;~,„,,~,~,~,~ Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
~~~ ~ S

•••r••ti r ' •' r•••. •~ •L • . S: ••'~ r •' •r•'~- . ~ •rnr ~~::'Y• ~ ~ ti . rti .. .. •• .
.. ~ ;Itir.rrti, ti •• ,L•.•' ~ } - • ~I r •. Y. .Y- ~ .•.
r~ 1~ •• ~ ,. 1 ,r .. .{ - •r•, ',Lf•,,,.•, Y.: y:;VLY. 'r•
., ,
• ~ r' i T !- •r,ti ~'- ~ tip..:" rlr•,. .•~.'•' TI i ~ •~ r.
. • . • .
_ ti.r
'r' ~ .
r .. _ _ ~ -. - -.
i °°~ ti '
•"i, '
• . /~ 1 ~ . •
• ~ ~ .~. •.1 Not subject . ' ~ •. ; •• ~ ,
I -~ . `
' • ~~ ~ /•''~ ...Y ' ' . • . 010 •r r. ' ~~'~ <~ • 54 , ~ 7 , . .. . . •'
• ~S r r. 5 •' ~'r.. '~ ..r • ~. ~~~. e
•'r • /'• Begin subject stream 'r.• o o °~' R .• • ~.r r r . ti1.:R'1• •. '. •'. ~.• {~~
•• ' channel at culvert outlet ~ f }" r ~''~''^r"• ~'~~;':.r .`~; L ' :~;ti
, • .. ti.~ ti ` . ~ • ~
.. .•r- :°` ' r ti ~~'!L•Y ~~~:•' r;'~.1.. .. f '' 'rv~til~1: ~'ti I;. ~••'~'I
' ~ ti
1.: ~.r :'~_ T ~ ~ .. Not subject j` ', ;; • r .
~° .~+'r ~ Begin subject stream .. j
'ti ; r ~,~~ • Y : '~,` ~' ti . ' Not subject channel at SDP1 location ' i ~ ' '• •
: .. .r~..~• ~~,• ti ~• ..~ti•• ti. r ti' ti. rr, .r / ti ,
'ti ~ ' ~ Iti •• • •. 1 ' .! Yeti. Lrl• ' .. • ,~, 1. , • ; •'•• 0 0 1
r r,• ~ /
•. ti ~:1 •°~~ • ' . r. r' ;'Y ,Not subject i'j •' 1
• r .. 1 .tip ''~• ~. .:~; ~ oo r ~.
~ ~•. .. }. : 1 . .
r " ,I` ' - '
I ... • • ~ 1•r • •~' • ti ~ •~'•''~• ',r ••I• •~'r••~.ti•1.•.':.li Not subject I ^ ~ ~ see • '1 ~ ;~~. ti. { •
~ ~. r ~• r' ~•r•":err' /• j ..
..r r,' '. .. ~ - ti.
~~ r. ~ . • ..1 •.~~ •. Y . , •• r' '.L rr i Y •~ ~,.~ •, r. • ~
''Z 1• ~'~\ ti.'r;:.~ ,• ••~.ti • .•~L:r 1 a~f 0 rY ~1- -'~4 ~ ~ ' ' •
' ~ 5r 'ti.
r ' - ... • L
• •ti' f r •ti.~ti' + r i
•''r ti ',
L:Ipgltempl(jmlHarlanlCas(oMomsvillelTopoMeetingMap,mxd •• ~i
~ KimleyHom NCDWQ Field Review for Subject Property: SW Corner Wake Co. Soil Survey
~17ylerMcEwen ~~~ i~fldaSSOCk3tPS, inf. of NW ~ 125 150 500
Neuse Rlpanan Buffers Cary Parkway & Slte Map and Data
July 26.2006 P.O.Box33068•Raleigh,NorlhCarolina27636.3068 July 27, 2006 NC Highway 54 Locations '
Feet
a., ~ b, ~ „n, ~,M Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] "'~"
°";~ ,
S

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #1 Longitude:
Total Points: 20 Other
Stream is at least intermittent County: Wake
e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 2
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3 %;~;,'!s~ ~~;
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
0
1
2 ~~~~~~~~~
~r,~;~~~4
3 '
Water in channel -- dry or growing season ,
~'~ -;
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Or anic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5 ,
C. Biolo Subtotal = 4
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 b. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Cra Ish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; peri hyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5 ,~,,F ;,
29e. Wetland plants in streambed Fac = os; FACw = 0.~5; oe~ = 1 s; sa,v = z.o; other o ~ ~'~~ ~~~`
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #2 Longitude:
Total Points: 25
Other
Stream is at least intermittent Wake
COUnty: e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 4
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3 %, ~ '~ %
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3 ' ~ ~'
'
Water in channel -- dry or growing season ~%'/,~ ,;,~~i,;
%
.,
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0 ,yx~~i~ys ~,
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5 ;'~5~' „ y`~''
18. Or anic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~ ~~0 ~S'"%
19. Hvdric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5 °°~°_ `_ t3 %."~.~
C. Biolo Subtotal = 5

20b. Fibrous roots in channel
3
2
1 „ , ,.,,
0
21b. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5 '~' ~""
29e. Wetland plants in streambed Fac = os; Fa,cw = 0.75; oa r = 1.5; s,av = 2.0; otner o ;'. Cl. ~ ~'~;;
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #3 Longitude:
Total Points: 15
Stream is at least intermittent County: Wake Other
e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 3
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Or anic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hvdric soils lredoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Biolo Subtotal = 3.5
20e. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0 ~%~f ,r~ ~ ,, ,,
21e. Rooted lants in channel
P 3 2 1 0 ,~o/r~, °~ ~ ~ ~'~
,~ , ,;..
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~ ~
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3 ~~~%~~~~%~~`'
~.,
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5 '" ;~'~'r~~`
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5 y`G~'" '',;
26. Macrobenthos note diversit and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
27. Filamentous al ae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fungus 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = o.s; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #4 Longitude:
Total Points: 16 Other
Stream is at least intermittent County: Wake
e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 2.5
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3 '~~ ~%
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3 ,~,
~
Water in channel -- dry or growing season ;'
~~~~ ~,6!`
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0 ~ 145s ,z ;
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5 °" (~ ~,.;;~,
18. Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5 i3:5 ~'~ ~
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5 ~ '~~
C. Biolo Subtotal = 4
20e. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0 %~~~,~~
21e. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0 ~~~ ~y
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5 ,~,~~~~1~~ ~~
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3 ;'~ y~~,y, ;~`
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversit and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus 0 0.5 1 1.5 ='~~~~ = ~ ~_..~ .,;
29e. Wetland plants in streambed Fa,c = o.s; FACw = 0.~5; oar = 1 s; sav = 2.0; otner = o ; _ 0~~~~ ,~
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #5 Longitude:
Total Points: 15.5 Other
Stream is at least intermittent County: Wake
e.g. Quad Name:
if Z 19 or perennial if Z 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 2
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5 :..
18. Or anic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~~~ 0 5
19. Hvdric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5 ~0 ;
C. Biology Subtotal = 3.5
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21b. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Cra fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversi and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
t Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #6 Longitude:
Total Points: 14 Other
Stream is at least intermittent County: Wake
e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 2
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3
Water in channel --dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5 ,; ,,~;',,~; „ ~,

19. Hvdric soils (redoximorphic features) present?
No = 0 r ,~,~.
Yes = 1.5 ~~,,f ~~,,,
C. Biology Subtotal = 3.5
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0 %Y~%~,% F

21 e. Rooted plants in channel
3
2
1 ~~r~~~:
0 ~ ~h ~~~
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~`"~~'''~~~~"~'~
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Am hibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; periph on 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5 " ~1
29e. Wetland plants in streambed F,ac = o.s; FACw = o.7s; os ~ = 1.5; sAV = z.o; otner = o ~ ~ ~ .°{~,=- ~, - `~
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #7 Longitude:
Total Points: 16.5

Stream is at least intermittent Wake
COUnty: Other
e.g. Quad Name:
if 2 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 1.5
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel --dry or growing season 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0 ~ ,; ~ j;,
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5 ' °~ ~'~ `` f
18. Or anic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~~ C fix;
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5 ~ 0
C. Biolo Subtotal = 5
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 b. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0
22. Crayfish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversit and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; periph on 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; SAV = 2.0; other = 0
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: {use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
e Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form, Version 3.1
Date: 6/20/2006 Project: Casto Morrisville Latitude:
Evaluator: CWE, TJM Site: SDP #8 Longitude:
Total Points: 29

Stream is at least intermittent Wake
COUnty: Other
e.g. Quad Name:
if ? 19 or perennial if ? 30
B. H drolo Subtotal = 7.5
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or 0 1 2 3
Water in channel -- dry or growing season
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Or anic debris lines or piles Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. Hvdric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Biolo Subtotal = 7
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 e. Rooted plants in channel 3 2 1 0 ~,~~ ,,
22. Cra fish 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~ ~~~~ ~,
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3 ~, ',,, ,~°
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5 ~;~ °~
25. Amphibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; periphyton 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5
29b. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5; SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussion in manual

^ ~ ^ Kimley-Horn
~ and Associates, Inc.
November 12, 2007
Mr. Jamie Shern
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
Re: Request for Formal Jurisdictional Determination
Xpedx Property
Town of Morrisville, Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Shern:
On behalf of our client, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA) completed a
jurisdictional stream evaluation on the Xpedx property Morrisville, Wake
County, NC.
The project study area includes approximately 23 acres, situated in the Upper
Neuse River Sub-basin (HUC 03020201080010). The site is located in
Morrisville, NC, south of Morrisville Parkway, adjacent to the railroad. The site
is adjacent to the 95-acre property evaluated in August 2006. The site is currently
an industrial site with a forested riparian headwater stream.
KHA evaluated the stream and determined that it is an intermittent important
channel, and would likely be considered as a jurisdictional Relatively Permanent
Water (RPW) under the new USACE guidance for jurisdictional determinations.
The stream has not been surveyed, but will be surveyed prior to permit
application submittal.
In preparation for a field determination meeting, attached are an Agent
Authorization form, a site vicinity map, a USGS topographic map, aerial
photograph (2006), a Wake County Soil Survey map, associated USACE Stream
Quality Assessment Worksheet form, and site photographs.
Thank you for your assistance with this matter. Please feel free to contact me at
919-677-2121 should you have any questions or need additional information.
Very truly yours,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
had Evenhouse, PWS
Cc: Tom Lowell, Casto Lifestyle Properties
~l~-i~~l,~v3
P.O. Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina
27636-3068
^
TEL [phone]
FAX [phone]

Title ~ Vicinity Map
Prepared For:
Casco Lifestyle Properties
Xpedx Property
Project Morrisville Site
Wake County, North Carolina
Date
11/13/07
Project Number
012811000
Figure
File: T:/PN/0 128 1 1000/USACE fomrs/Figures.doc Prepared by Brandon Barhanr/Chad Evenhouse Can a~us~mas. me

~
~x ~
9
,~~.~ ~~- ~~ ~ _ } -+-~
.
r
~ eft *
~_ ~ ~' -
' -~ ~ l
L
~ ~,
'
4
~
~
~
{
i '
~ 5 , ~ 5 _ ,5-
`~ Y ~} ~,
''iJ ~
1 _ Y~ ,- '~°
`#je 71
E °~ ~" - t rt
; f 14
(( ~ ~
FF
~
, t
= ~a
~f t~s;, i r 1 ~j 4 3 y~d
v~ ~ ~azJs. FLifxi~~ia«1 11Ca~pe L~~
~ ~ ,~`.
~
~} +
''~ -. ~'v'}
S
F
~
:
t
@
e ~ ,
~
~
~~
,~
. t
~~. I
f
~F+y~LJ
F~
l ~
~
1
~ E'+ 4~,
-_t ~
~
`I
~
ti j
Y RT
"Y
'
~
'~
Z Y3
l~
l
I~
"'~ !
'(
~
k
t
~`
~ fi' l 19t , e'--~ ''')1~ ~ _- 9~ 7~ ~t ,~, '~t,;~ ,
'~ a~ ~ i,4 ~ ,~ ~',~ ,. ~^.
`_~ ~'k ~ __ • ~ q~ 5~~ J' ~ j ~y I~ Y - _, f t t 44.vD a. k'~ i ~ 'x ~ =i
! '> ..'
*r: }~j

~_
r
u
.. _
~e ~ _
'ti2a ~ ~ ~ .~ I r ~ _I ((,- t4 , ~ ~ ~ t ~y ` g r i ~d~ ~4~~t 1 i j ch, 4._ 1 - }9
~ a
~
' ~ r ~
', - [
~ ym~` r ``l ~ ,,,..... ~ ~' . 1 ~ ~ .>>~"~ ~ " rif E ~ 1~ E { ~ ~' 11 I ; a ~;' . : t,..
X f j ~~~:-, :.~-+."''.: -~~~ ` ~ ~ti -~;~ ~ , •,. ~;ri lJ r t ~ tr ~~ r ~~'^~ ~i ~' ? r~~r~~ P' -, s ~1'.
v
~

r ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~,~ I ;,~~ may'} A~ ! ~ _-
Y ~ _ ~ ~A ~'~_
; ~'
I
/ q £1f
'-
J •: ~ 4 \ 1 ti '4 t a1
,.x 3.
i_
.'t -
a
~~ ~~ /r 'F.,~ -" 4 C. `~'~+j;4~
\~ri
' ~
('~`k
•rr -
:
S d t
i
~
~~ ~
~ i
p~a
~ ~
. ~
..
,
:
.l ~~ fj r tP 'mot ,
~
f S
. _ , '"~ E~~,1 t,~#=.- _ ~~;~`,~ t k.~.~.~' ,.- ; Wake County Parcel Boundary ~t ~. ~' .' ~ ~( fad ~~~
t a~ ~ 1 ~ y ~ ,~ ~{~_ '~ Ir ~~,~ X11 ~. ~
9
I 4. IE 1
I ~ ~"' ~f
( ~ tE < A f +~ {'.. ~°~ ?" I ~ yY ,tiF~~~~
t
~
~
3 i J 1 ~ al~
l f I~y,~'y,
~ ~n ~
y a f~ f., :- ^: "~? s' "y t ~'~' ~ _~E ~ 14 - } ; `t .,, 4g k. 4,~ _' ~ ~a-_
~. .
J „,
r~ ~
~ ' l ~ _~,~ e 1 ,r~('' C t
t^ ll f ~ -
~"
r
t
~
_
,,y~
~
~
~y'~
L
1
f # . ~t/; i I 9 ~~F`~ +.~ Y ,7 ~ 1 i '"'~ } a '1~'
G
t ~ t ~ i ' 3i-1 Li ~£i r ~r pS,v~.r' ~ Y i.
`,
1
( 1
•
~
'
'
~.~ r
.
..s r. I
~
t - i. ~ l _. .. 1 Lf_. I l,~
y I E~.f~ of
rya__ ~
y~-~ y
r
, `Y
~~
j
f
I
'
4 ~ t
~ ~ ~
,~
~
~
5
A S
~
~s
~
~
4
_,
I {
f't `
L
~
l
-~-
_ I
-'~
S AI J~ '
- f
'C ~ 1 ~l
' 1
Y ~`
~
Y '`.+„ 'ft`` ;~, ~'~ }~ii.. / ~ i~. ~ t ~„.,.E ~~-.a ;_ q t.r~ ~,,.f, a `YF''~~5 ~ _ t"„~.... ''~y~ 1 `*`~4'.:
~
«~
i ~i~~~~~"'ie ~~ ",
~ A$,t ~~ ~l4'&
I 1`~
(1._?c,_t~
~ 1
~ Y
°
~
~
~ ~
l
~
1
~
~
~
;
.
~
t;
~...~VJ
t,
1
. ~. ' ~'~~~~ a ~tsr:~ -
~ ~ °~ ~ ~~~ ~° ` I ' 1~~" 1P ~`+~ r i 1' ', f
,
,
1
T _ ,i, 3----'{r' t Y1 ~ ~N... ~9 S,~ "I ~~l dt ~ -~ ~~ ! >!' t _
r/° i.
ty ~ ~.. l ~ ~
~
~
-_ - _ -
... ._
~,frir~ i ~ It _.!~ P ~ ..ea«,.~E ~~r ~" ,+~ ~~ 1 , • G a' i
f ~ ~ 1 1 ~~~ LI~ ~~. f ,~r ~. b i ~ ~~." ~ ~ , 4 rJ 1 ~. ~~

K a 1 ss
' ~FL" \. ., z~5 p y~ ~'
Ir I r y. - Zr} ~. Cf~ .~ .
a ~E , ap k j _ ~ ~ ~t i f{' _ ~' i ~ ,..
-. r q ry ~^1t .t_ .._ _ yyr l ..~ ..~ t 7. Y~ ~. _
{
~ Y ~ ~ 1 ~ ` I ~ ~ - "~ ~ 'tom ~~ ~, ~ ~s, y ' ''~` r ,. ' ~ehKa~~ l~l~~.~i
e
4I J as, ~~ - d r 1 _ T
7 ` .. C I ~i
' ---~ 1 5 k
~
i ~ ~, I ~,~ ~_-. r--. S [ o i l ' ~~ gyp" ~// a «v ~ j ~ t r - ~"' "~
'
f
~ ~ pI .,Y~s VY f~ ~, r _ _ r ,~t.;. ~ Y,-.. Er 4 a+...`?I .;e ' ~ ilyijY" !~ ~fw ~~4. ~"~ ~ .ia`, Y
{- I ~
€ I r~ i+`a'.~``.~(
{.:ahF Yip .a:... ':
1: k [ ,1~ ! "p ~ X13 t '~-, ~'' ~ d C'<~..s11~4.
{
t ~ 444 y`
¢ I
1
-
,
~
~
~~
'~
k 1
t `
/ fM1~
P__. ~~'
}
X
- "~
.~ ~~t 4~~ f
`
-~'f f~l
"' l ~4§
- ~ _ .,$ ~
L
'
'-'LL
4j1S 1 ~ _ ~a:k~ y- ;r+~ ~t
~ fi s # ,.. i , s ~ ~ -.. - ~sq,
J, Y
k l ~g L..
.
,
}
{
/ i -.
~ .
t
~
~
~
4'
f
.
Title USGS Topographic Map (Cary, NC, 1973, Photorevised 1987)
Xpedx Property
Prepared For PCOJeCt Morrisville Site

Canto I
Sestyle Pro
erties Wake County, North Carolina
,
p Date Project Number Figure
11/13/07 012811000 2
File: T:/PN/012811000/USAGE fonts/Fiw res.doc Prepared by Brandon Barhaut/Chad Evenhouse ~~~'~ W*+er~.vn
*.. es;aales. m~

File: T:/PN/OI2811000/USACE forms/Figures.doc Prepared by Brandon Barhan>/Chad Evenhouse ~®~~ „a~,`'w,im

Title I Wake County Soil Survey (1970)
Xpedx Property
Prepared For: Project Morrisville Site
Canto Lifestyle Properties Wake County, North Carolina
Date Project Number
11/13/07 012811000
File: T.,/PN/01281 1000/OSACE forms/Figures.doc Prepared by Brandon Barhatn/Chad Evenhouse
Figure
4

c
'CEd~l~,- ~ [ ,~. 1 ,~+M~~. ~,-Y~ '°~bt P ~'~ `Ti'°~{ ~' t
S ~t".~.~ f'~'F
~~~
~
A
'
~-
~
~
~"'r,~'r' ~
oy
t4+.
mac.
i"•
¢

C A F 1
of .~
~
~
~ J
,
~
w~3~T~~r
~t T
{~~~, ~W.k ' : ~~
~:

.
»~ a~ ~
t
~
'~
'~
~ ~
,..
~,
~
a~
L"t
4 t ^'N~'iwya t' „~ Y 'Y'„t..~. r •A..~~ f+~'i,r
ea ~
~f x ~ .` _ ;~ ~. -:,,
~ try 7 ~~ ~q, ~ 3~ ~

Photograph 1: Upstream view of the stream (jurisdictional intermittent, important) near eastern boundary of the property.
4k .~.._ ~ ~ ~s>

t ' d s ~
i-. ~ ',
F

c/
Y ~.
yr
~
.
~ ~
S
l
( ~ dad' '~ [~ l #s g.
~.
~~~ ~
'w
'
~
`~
' ~ ~
~~ r~ `.C lyy~~$palM~Y~i` n y,y ~}:W,
~~"'v<SY
-. ~ ~~
.
d ~ 'Y'Y s7
t.. GFt~z j' € 4 V~' y ~ ~. ~f ~ ~~a.~ ~ ~ C
d` m~ `~"
+
1
L~h;'
~1
r
~
^ s 5
f C
,i
.
y
~
~i
, r
'.
._ "~svfle
.~
,
'~.
r
r, ~
F ,' k` ' g5 _ '~, 9y
~
~
_ ~ ,~' f 'v
'~.:~ ~ i, ~~ '4 ,~ e^"'v,~x ~`
•?~ c ~ .'~F .r^+
t ~a rind a;;
t
net
~ ~ ., ~- '._ ; f ~ s ~' ~ i~
~ ~~ ~ ~,~~Y~ r,.
,
~ f. 3 Y`c ~~~ ~~ ae F .,fib '~`e~.. ~ ~, .. R s~~~
d
.
n
rt
` yx-~a+„~v . S
aa'....F .~ ..zt ~ ~~'~Srr.~ i~s~y .
2
~.~.,
~ ~. .~„~
5
r
k
~ 1Cg ~ ~y~g
~ f _ 4t r# ~ ~ a:.
Photograph 2: Downstream view of the stream (jurisdictional intermittent, important) near the eastern boundary of the property.
Title Site Photographs (November 6, 2007)
Xpedx Property
Prepared ror~ Project Casto Lifestyle Properties
Casto Lifestyle Morrisville, NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
11 /7/2007 012811000 1
T:\pn\01 28 1 1000 Casto-Pazkwest4ldjacent Property\photo page_Xpedx.doc Prepared by Chad Eveuhouse [~~~ ~.w-~~.nm „~

~~ F '~ t . f ~ - ~.
ya * , ~ • ~ _
,~il ~ F 5 ,~ ~~ ~ x ~~ /
~ a ~,i P aw ~-Y y .
1 ~ ~.,
x its ~ ~ , `~'~~ ~3.r , ~ ,
`~a~ u ~ ~ ,r. pv, } `~ Z,
Photograph 3: Up~l~.~atra 1.~~tiv of the stream (jurisdictional i~~termittent, in~pcirtant) near the wester portion of the property.
Fg~, a 1 $ Y ~ ~ ,~~
mt'#d J. ~`3 ~ ~t lam. uP ~k Jr •~',
}. 1. 9 ~ ~ ff `~ N ~
a F~.:fa 4 5 ~s4 t ~ ~ ap x„ S f.Y ~~ l-~ i p~"~ ,. ~P. ~..
yp~ ~ ~ ~ ~
J,
~3-~ *~ ~ _ ~ ~ to ~~'+c~ -; ~~. ~. gr ~ ~,,~.
- ~~ e ` se
A3 ~ yY
s~s34'k~ M' air M -y -~ ~ "" ~ k
'S V .d S. '
- i ~C` 4 Y
a~ ~ :~*.~ ~ s ~-~ ~'
~~~ ~ :sue a ~~ .:f~ r,tt ~~... ~, €~ * ..~ ~ § ~ ~e-F
~ y.
.`.dam '~` ~ ~aR- 4 _ E ° 4 ua!q.~G i
Y~.
~_
C s~ ~ ,
~_
.~ ..~-W=
Photograph 4: Downstream view of the stream 'urisdictional intermittent im ortaut near the westeni onion of the ro ert .
~ P ) p P P Y
Title Site Photographs (November 6, 2007)
Xpedx Property
Prepazed For: PCO~ect Canto Lifestyle Properties
Canto Lifestyle Morrisville, NC
Properties Date Project Number Page
11 /7/2007 012811000 2
T ~pn\012311000 Canto-Pazkwest\Adjacent Property\photo page_Xpedx.doc Prepazed by Chad Evenhouse ~~~ ~~~~ i~

USAGE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map)
~ ~ i STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: Casto Lifestyle Properties 2. Evaluator's name: Chad Evenhouse, Kimley-Horn & Assoc.
3. Date of evaluation: November 6, 2007 4. Time of evaluation: 1 pm
5. Name of stream: UT to Crabtree Creek 6. River basin: Neuse (HU #03020201080010)
7. Approximate drainage area: 8. Stream order: 1st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 900 LF 10. County: Wake
11. Site coordinates (if known): 78 49'20.72"W/35 48'38.12"N12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): intermittent
stream that bisects the industrial property which is south of Morrisville Parkway and east of the railroad track.
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Culvert/Road crossing
15. Recent weather conditions:0 in. rainfall within 48 hours; 4.36 in. rainfall within the previous 14 days (RDU Airport)
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Dry, sunny, ~60° F
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -Section 10 -Tidal Waters -Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters _ Nutrient Sens' 've Waters -Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey YE NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential 25 % Commercial 25 % Industrial % Agricultural
50 % Forested _% Cleared /Logged _% Other
22. Bankfull width: -~4 ft 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): Varies between 1 to 2 ft
24. Channel slope down center of stream: -Flat (0 to 2%) X Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate (4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight -Occasional bends X Frequent meander -Very sinuous -Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an'explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 47 Comments: The stream is a small headwater intermittent stream. The site was
likely aericultural at one time (evidence of abandoned field rows) but is now forested. Therefore, the stream has downcut (is incised)
but has a stable riparian buffer and a lot of woody roots along the banks. There is sinuosity and riffle/pool sequences, as well as some
eroding/cut banks. There was no flow or water in the channel at the time of evaluation, and thus no aquatic biological communities_
were observed.
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USAGE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please ca11919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ECOREGION POIN T RANGE
TERISTICS SCORE
# CHARAC
Coastal Piedmont Mountain

1 Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
0
no flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = max oints
2 Evidence of past human alteration 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 5
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max oints
3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 4
no buffer = 0; Conti ous, wide buffer = max oints)

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 4
4
(extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max oints)
5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 0
no dischar e = 0; s rip s, see s, wetlands, etc. = max oints

6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0 - 4
0 - 4
0 - 2
0
(no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max oints
,~ ~ Entrenchment /floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 1
a dee 1 entrenched = 0; fre uent floodin = max oints
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 0
no wetlands = O; lar a adjacent wetlands = max oints
9 Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 4
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max oints
10 Sediment input 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 2
extensive de osition= 0; little or no sediment = max oints
11 ~ Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 2
fine, homo enous = 0; lar e, diverse sizes = max oints
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 0
,'~ dee 1 incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max oints)
~
13 Presence of major bank failures
0 - 5
0 - 5
0 - 5
2
~ severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max oints
14 Root depth and density on banks 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 2
E,,, no visible roots = 0; dense roots throu out = max oints
~
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 - 5
4
substantial im act =0; no evidence = max oints
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes 0- 3 0- 5 0- 6 5
F (no riffles/ri les or ools = 0; well-develo ed = max oints
~ 1 ~ Habitat complexity 0- 6 0- 6 0- 6 3
~ little or no habitat = 0; fre uent, varied habitats = max oints)
18 Canopy coverage over streambed 0- 5 0- 5 0- 5 5
~ no shadin ve etation = 0; continuous cano = max oints
19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0- 4 0- 4 4
(dee 1 embedded = O; loose structure = max
20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0 - 4 0 - 5 0 - 5 0
~„~ no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max oints
(7 21 Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 0
O no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max oints)
~ 22 Presence of fish 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 0
~ no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max oints

23 Evidence of wildlife use 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 0
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max oints
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 47
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

Notes on Characteristics Identified in Assessment Worksheet
1. Consider channel flow with respect to channel cross-sectional area (expected flow), drainage area, recent precipitation, potential
drought conditions, surrounding land use, possible water withdrawals, presence of impoundments upstream, vegetation growth in
channel bottom (as indicator of intermittent flow), etc.
2. Human-caused alterations may include relocation, channelization, excavation, riprap, gabions, culverts, levees, berms, spoil piles
adjacent to channel, etc.
3. The riparian zone is the area of vegetated land along each side of a stream or river that includes, but is not limited to, the
floodplain. Evaluation should consider width of riparian area with respect to floodplain width, vegetation density, maturity of
canopy and understory, species variety, presence of undesirable invasive species (exotics), breaks (utility corridors, roads, etc.),
presence of drainage tiles, logging activities, other disturbances which negatively affect function of the riparian zone.
4. Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges includes pipes, ditches, and direct draining from commercial and industrial sites,
agricultural fields, pastures, golf courses, swimming pools, roads, parking lots, etc. Sewage, chlorine, or other foul odors,
discolored water, suds, excessive algal growth may also provide evidence of discharge.
5. Groundwater discharge maybe indicated by persistent pools and saturated soils during dry weather conditions, presence of
adjacent wetlands, seeps, and springs feeding channel, reduced soils in channel bottom.
6. Presence of floodplains may be determined by topography and the slope of the land adjacent to the stream, terracing, the extent of
development within the floodplain, FEMA designation if known, etc.
7. Indicators of floodplain access include sediment deposits, wrack lines, drainage patterns in floodplain, local stream gauge data,
testimony of local residents, entrenchment ratio, etc. Note that indicators may relic and not a result of regular flooding.
8. Wetland areas should be evaluated according to their location, size, quality, and adjacency relative to the stream channel, and may
be indicated by beaver activity, impounded or regularly saturated areas near the stream, previous delineations, National Wetland
Inventory maps, etc. (Wetlands must meet criteria outlined in 1987 delineation manual and are subject to USACE approval.)
9. Channel sinuosity should be evaluated with respect to the channel size and drainage area, valley slope, topography, etc.
10. To evaluate sediment deposition within the channel consider water turbidity, depth of sediment deposits forming at point bars and
in pools, evidence of eroding banks or other sediment sources within watershed (construction sites, ineffective erosion controls).
In rare cases, typically downstream of culverts or dams, a sediment deficit may exist and should be considered in scoring.
11. When looking at channel substrate, factor in parent material (presence of larger particles in soil horizons adjacent to the stream),
average size of substrate (bedrock, clay/silt, sand, gravel, cobble, boulder, etc.), and diversity of particle size (riprap is excluded).
12. Indications of channel incision and deepening may include a v-shaped channel bottom, collapsing banks, evidence of recent
development and increased impervious surface area resulting in greater runoff in the watershed.
13. Evaluation should consider presence of major bank failures along the entire reach under evaluation, including uprooted trees on
banks, banks falling into channel, formation of islands in channel as they widen, exposed soil, active zones of erosion, etc.
14. Increased root depth and density result in greater bank stability. Consider the depth and density that roots penetrate the bank
relative to the amount of exposed soil on the bank and the normal water elevation.
15. Assessment of agriculture, livestock, and/or timber production impacts should address areas of stream bank destabilization,
evidence of livestock in or crossing stream, loss of riparian zone to pasture or agricultural fields, evidence of sediment or high
nutrient levels. entering streams, drainage ditches entering streams, loss of riparian zone due to logging, etc.
16. Riffle-pool steps can be identified by a series of alternating pools and riffles. Abundance, frequency, and relative depth of riffles
and pools should be considered with respect to topography (steepness of terrain) and local geology (type of substrate).
Coastal plain streams should be evaluated for the presence of ripple-pool sequences. Ripples are bed forms found in sand bed
streams with little or no gravel that form under low shear stress conditions, whereas, dunes and antidunes form under moderate and
high shear stresses, respectively. Dunes are the most common bed forms found in sand bed streams.
17. Habitat complexity is an overall evaluation of the variety and extent of in-stream and riparian habitat. Types of habitat to look for
include rocks/cobble, sticks and leafpacks, snags and logs in the stream, root mats, undercut banks, overhanging vegetation, pool
and riffle complexes, wetland pockets adjacent to channel, etc.
18. Evaluation should consider the shading effect that riparian vegetation will provide to the stream during the growing season. Full
sun should be considered worst case, while good canopy coverage with some light penetration is best case.
19. Stream embeddedness refers to the extent that sediment that has filled in gaps and openings around the rocks and cobble in the
streambed. The overall size of the average particle in the streambed should be considered (smaller rocks will have smaller gaps).
20. Evaluation should be based on evidence of stream invertebrates gathered from multiple habitats. Scores should reflect abundance,
taxa richness, and sensitivity of stream invertebrate types. (see attached examples of common stream invertebrates on page 4).
21. Evaluation should include evidence of amphibians in stream channel. Tadpoles and frogs should receive minimum value, while
salamanders, newts, etc. maybe assigned higher value.
22. Evaluation of fish should consider the frequency and, if possible, the variety of different fish taxa observed.
23. Evaluation of wildlife should include direct observation or evidence (tracks, shells, droppings, burrows or dens, hunting stands,
evidence of fishing, etc.) of any animals using the streambed or riparian zone, to include small and large mammals, rodents, birds,
reptiles, insects, etc.

Common Stream Invertebrates
Sensitive Taxa -Pollution sensitive organisms that maybe found in good quality water.
~~
~c i ,Y:` it ,.: _
~ .`I
' ' ~ i
Caddisfly Mayfly Stonefly Dobsonfly
[;
Riffle Beetle Water Penny Gilled Snail
Somewhat Tolerant Taxa -Somewhat pollution tolerant organisms that maybe found in good or fair
~~ GP .' •`~r'
'sir,` j:.
r
~~ ~"~ ~f
~-
~:,
Beetle Larva Clam Sowbug Cranefly
~ --.~ ~-
~ a
1.
Crayfish
Tol
Damselfly Nymph
Scud
Dragon Fly Nymph
Brant "Taxa - Yolluhon tolerant organisms that may be found to any qualit wa
~x
Blackfly Larva Leech Midge Fly Larva
,,
' ~ ~
Aquatic Worm Pouch & Pond Snail
ter.
4

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section N of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Wake City: Morrisville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 78.820° N, Long. 35.807° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Coles Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows: Neuse River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03020201
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[^ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
[^ Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the US." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the US." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required)
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): r
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Q Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
[^ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands '
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 800 linear feet: 4 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established. by OHWM
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable);3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
~ Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
Z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TTIW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: ~20 acres Pick List
Drainage area: ~20 acres Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 10-15 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 10-15 aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWS: tributary flows to Coles Creek, then to Crabtree Creek, then to the Neuse River.
Tributary stream order, if known: first.
° Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ®Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 4 feet
Average depth: 2 feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ®Sands ^ Concrete
^ Cobbles ®Gravel ^ Muck
^ Bedrock ^ Vegetation. Type/% cover:
^ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: incised but relatively stable.
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain: yes. there are also many nick points.
Tributary geometry: Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope):
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Untcnown. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank ^
^ changes in the character of soil ^
® shelving
® vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ^
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition ^
^ water staining ^
^ other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
^ Discontinuous OHWM.~ Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
High Tide Line indicated by:
^ oil or scum line along shore objects
^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
^ physical markings/characteristics
^ tidal gauges
^ other (list):
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
^ survey to available. datum;
^ physical markings;
^ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: unknown (no water in channel when evaluated).
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): upland mixed hardwoods greater than 100' width.
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
® Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: terrestrial animal tracks observed, few crayfish mounds.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationsh~ with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
__
..............
Subsurface flow: PickrList. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacenc~Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
^ Ecological connection. Explain:
^ Separated by berm barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity~Relationshin) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( )acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a .
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
[} TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
® Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 800 linear feet~4'width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
^ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE) WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY);lo
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
BSee Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
^ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
^ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
^ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
^ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
^ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
^ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
^ Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
~ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
^ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
^ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
(] Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
^ USGS NHD data.
^ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:Wake County, NC 1970.
^ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/I,ocal wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
Photographs: ®Aerial (Name & Date):2006.
or ®Other (Name & Date):Site Photographs 11/6/2007.
Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
Applicable/supporting case law:
Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

~.-
o~- ~~ ~ ~ v3
F~cos stem
i` t 4 f ~. r 1 :~~: '~
K 7 i4
:'.. ...: .. .. ....:...:.. 1,...: ...:.
PROGRAM
January 30, 2008
Expiration of Acceptance: July 30,2008
Tomas Lowell
Casto Lifestyles Properties
9705 Chapel Hill Rd.
Morrisville, NC 27650
Project: Park West Village County: Wake
We have received your request to access the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program's (NCEEP} In-Lieu Fee
mitigation program for the above referenced project. We regret that we are unable to accept the full amount of credit
requested at this time. This letter constitutes an acceptance of a portion of the mitigation you have requested.
EEP recently proposed a revision to the fee schedule for wetland and stream mitigation as a means of allowing the program
to collect fees commensurate with our project implementation costs. The revision was passed by the Environmental
Management Commission and Rules Review Commission but has been delayed due to administrative rules regarding
comment submittals. Per established protocols far rule-making, the fee revision will now be considered during the next
legislative session beginning in May 2008. Until that time, EEP has developed a strategy that considers the financial
implications to the program far new requests to access the In-Lieu Fee Program and has determined that we are only able to
accept a portion of your mitigation request at this time, If you want to resubmit your request form at a later time, EEP will
reconsider the request in the future. We anticipate updating our strategy as new data and opportunities become available.
EEP will consider all requests on a case-by- case basis.
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarised in the
following table.
Neuse
03020201 Stream (feet) Wetlands {acres) Buffer I
(Sq. Ft.} Buffer II
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold Cool Warm Ri arian Non-Ri arian Coastal Marsh
Impacts Requested 0 0 254 0 0 0 17,860 20,038
Impacts Accepted 0 0 0 0 0 0 17,860 20,038
Credits 0 0 0 0 0 0 53,580 30,057
EEP is willing to accept payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the table above.
Please note that this decision does not assure that the payment will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation
for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP
will be approved.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not received a copy of
the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the
applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice
will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized
work. The amount of the In Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based. upon the Fee Schedule and
policies listed at www.nceep.net.
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies
require mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional
mitigation, the applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998. ~~ A
Resto~~... ~ ... n~ot?Gt7.~C9 ou,~ Stag Ncp Imo,
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1fi52 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.nel

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerel ,
~~
William D. ilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit
Jamie Shern, USACE-Raleigh
Ian McMillan, NCDWQ- Wetlands/401 Unit
Chad Evenhouse, agent
File
7Z~storu~... ~ ... P~otectir2~ Orr,Y Stag
Q'~~ 1
NCDEAR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net

O
ATF9
QG
,~. 'C
Costo Lifestyle Properties
Attn: Mr. Drew Smith
401 N. Cattleman Road, Ste. 108
Sarasota, FL 34232
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Cazolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
July 31, 2006
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
DWQ EXP# 06-1146
Wake County
~uG ®3 zoos
~~tvaLEY f~0~?
~~~f~~.
Subject Property:. Casto Morrisvile
UT's to Coles Branch
On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Neuse River Riparian Area Protection Rules
(15A NCAC 2B .0233)-EXPRESS REVIEW PROGRAM
Dear Mr. Smith:
On July 27th, at the request of Chad Evenhouse of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., Lia Myott
and Cyndi Karoly conducted an on-site determination to review 5 stream features located on the
subject property for applicability to the Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233The stream
features are labeled by GPS points on the attached maps initialed by Cyndi Karoly on July 31,
2006.
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has determined that the features labeled as "culvert
outlet" and "sdpl" on the attached maps are subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule. These
streams and their associated buffers should be identified on any future plans for this property.
The remainder of the stream features on the subject property are ephemeral streams and are not
subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules. The owner (or future owners) should notify the DWQ (and
other relevant agencies) of this decision in any future correspondences concerning this property.
This on-site determination shall expire five (S) years from the date of this letter.
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated
Local Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a
determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to
the Director in writing c/o Cyndi Karoly, DWQ 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260. Individuals that dispute a determination by the
DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" a surface water from the buffer rule may ask
for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter.
Applicants are hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not start until the
affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision.
DWQ recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be certain that third
party appeals are made in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which No"° Carolina
~ura!!y
401 OversightlExpress Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevazd, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] /Fax [phone]
Internet: httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Empbyer - 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Drew Smith
Page 2 of 2
July 31, 2006
conforms.to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and
binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity
within the buffers. Nor does this letter approve any activity within Waters of the United States
or Waters of the State. If you have any additional questions or require additional information
please call Lia Myott at [phone] or Cynthia Van Der Wiele at [phone].
Sincerely,
a
C ~~
~ Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
AWK/cd//lem j
Attachments: Wake County Soil Survey map
USGS Topo Quad map
cc: Eric Kulz, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
Chad Evenhouse, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 33068, Raleigh, NC 27636
Filename 061146CastoMorrisville(Wake)EXP+DET
NorthCazolina
~atura!!y
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] /Fax [phone]
Internet: httn://h2o enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

• ; r . yv ..Y-
r
: ten
•' I
'r• r• '-•'
•
Y•
.,
.
.
• • • y
• • Iy+ •.. . . • • .. I . ,r' .
J
r i T !- .
.. I
, y .. y,~
r
. .{ ••i •r•re- 'AIL f'••,.'. : Y . • y :xY. • •
~ ti~,' r '1. ~,.~ fF~
j
-tip
~..•
... .,o-.{ •~
•
~ ,~-

,•l

,
, y
I~
y
,
~
f~
i~
!
rJ1.._T
•
.
r ;
• r .~. '•i . \' y . _ .
.4~ . r,
1

•.' ', ''~ ' ' '.~!: ..1 Nofsubject
• 1 ••r L ~ ..
'`
y ,
.. ~r
.a
'
• ' 0 10
~ ~ "~'y .. .v
~
• ~' $4
'r r. ;•YJ I
'
•
•

•
•
i !•~ Y
• .
•
' ~" • . ' r • •I . . . , . • ~ • : r YI}: yr• •~. .I
• •• '
~ ~`•`~ ' .
- N
'
} ~c ' r
/' Begin subject stream 'r.• o a ° • • ~r ; •; r r . Vn..y~ :~•I'.:, -'. v {!~ ;F•
• ~.• channel at culvert outlet ,
..
. ti' r .. ti r•- .11.
• •
~'~C l
~r ~• •'.;I•.
~ '•'•I
k y r ,
,
,
.

'

1 ' ~'r
• i
!~
\
T ` r Not subject

• • ~ 1'
-
~
r
'
'y r r ~ ,y• : •
,,, ;
•
~ r+r'.r4"'•~ y.. ' Nat subject
y, , y

•
• Begin subject stream
channel at SDP1 location •
%
i •
y
.r
- y •h Yr~
r • •\•
.~ • \' ,• y . .•i ,~ I - ••k '~•'.r ~,., y
r
. , '
r. • ~• - .i~•
•
• •
•y
• ,J .,
'• '.`' I ..I
, . . •r •-L 1. 'I. '.' •. yr . ~•
Iy • 1 Y y• r .• • 1•
.•
y
'r • r ~
, •y. p i •} f
~ '•
. ~ •
~
J •:.
Y•
:
• •
.

'•
• . -r.
•1.y
.
•I• ~
•
•• • . ~5:•
. .
•
~ y
•
..y Yr :.•
r.'~V ~
\•\. • .. .. •.
, • j ~
• '{~
r'•••
' 0 0 r
',r t
. .. . ,.
,.
~:~ ~f~,y Not subject pp. ~' ~r i~.

-
•
•
'
•
- ~ '- ''
•
1 ~ r.y
K..... y
y .Not subject
~~'•:~ .'r ::~ I•
••
r. ^ r ~.•
•,~• y. {
••
•
~ •y~yr •• •V. ~::3:.,},.''r •;. `,
•y1 .y : ;..{L:r 1 p~~ rY =•1~ ••!• i ~
~ •r.r 'y.: ti..•~+ti'\'~
a ~._..~ ~ ~ , ~
•r
•
r
• ^
•~
r
'... _..-.
v
r:. _
'~
•
~~. ~
r I i •J
. •
r.
.•1 r.
- ^
f r •y.-y• i r `
..I
,
•
1••X•: r :{ I•~ •1
..
.
..
.........
L:IprffemplymWerlenlCesfs MoniavYlelT°p°Meelin9Mepmrtl

,~ KimieyHom
~
~
V
NCDWQ Field Review for

Subject Property:

SW Corner

Wake Co. Soil Survey
.
.
m......
N
Tyler McEwen ~
and Associates, inc.
Neuse Riparian Buffers
of NW Cary Parkway &
Site Map and Data 0 125 250 500 A~
^

... P.O.B°19p061-Raleigh, M°rth Carolina27606-3059
July 27, 2006
NC Highway 54
Locations t ~ ~ wQ®
Feet -E
y,...~,............: ~..~............~.......•...,..,.......,...M,.... Phone: [phone] Faa: 1919) 677-2060 ~,
~~~9 di1~ {d~e1~~.?il~t ~1N?iuA Y~~e~•.2A d'~
''11{JJ:±.,g~ar.,h;`9ah~, 'FM 1';'~'j'°~'. ~r,v~~i p~,µ-~
~a7ti j: .v:-i'utC;:Jy ii'.. '~'~~',f ~:IeUJU^.:~'°b:4~917 ~C~
S
~' l r
Ya ~ ^" ~i
._..

~ __ ~ zk® u
V F^ 16
~y ~' .A
i{TT
a.W tl •.111„ I F Y >w W v7 ., • d q L g~ ^ ~ r'Y.i
- .._.~.:aw~
e
lm 9 ~ .., a: }a a f~ ® emM~ r, ~ (.
.. ... ~.
.-i.
J~ G w
.`
- e. ~ -
.. ~i
,v .
e°~•
..,. ..
a - as ~'~`~... ~ ~ a .... - ~!~ nG7..,~ ~ ` E* •. .. ~°:,. ~•., ~.~.~:,
•.-.
• •- •- `& S
e
:~y ~.'
,u.::. ...mid"'~ ° il~'~.;~ .. ~: i ~ ~~~' _,~ . ._" .. ;.~ >wa._., ~~• - ,. ~J~n~ -
` '~ .. '. 1 ~ ~ .. ..
• ^
„~
Y' 6~u ~__ is 9 e .+... - ~ °~ 't1 .'~ ° ~,~, x ~.' „` ; 54`
^ ~e ~ ~~ ~
m' , -__ ~ ~,~ n~
.,
4 „ ~ -"~
4.~ ~
_~
° ~ ~ ~,°' i m subject channel Not subject v M =-~ ~
„~° 8~ ~ at ulvert outlet ~ ,. ~ ~,_ ~y ..a..,.`A ~ p,., s ;_ ` ~"' ` ° `
~ i t~r"r ~b i + ~ a fir! ~ ~~
• ~" ~' a df~ ~ _tr~ 6~Ai ~~. ~'~p .... ~'° ~ ~„,' ~ ~' _ .~.„ _. ~'~ ' k'', ~~ ~ .
~, •~~ ~qa n i' f Notsuhject ~ -
a
~" a
i 1y,
•. ~ _....r. = is
p '^ ` '~, m~ ~ ,', 9 ~ ~' ~ ,y ~ a ' ~ ~~ m Begin subject channel ~ i R
i"°~ .i,~ +.r `f li „, ~~~jj¢+++ °•_~. a,~ at SDPt location ~ ~~ `
n
x n r
. ~ .. ~ ~ n a a
~°~ r s - ~ ~ ~ a 1~ ~'' ~ ~ '~~ ~ t {'
ames.m~ ~A ~ ..
~„~ `. `., •~ '~ ~+m~ ~~ Q ~ f' ;~"a ~ra~ ~ pS~' °"a'~ ~~y, v ~idt i ~ u- p , ~, ' ^
_ ~1 f ,
,'. ~ N..:
~~ e ..`'•`m ~~ „ ~ ~ ~iSL_ .1 a' 164„' lea: ._ ,~~ ,..
•'
.;
y ~ '
~7i` ~'\e - a~ ~ R ~•~ ~ .._ -fie S '~ '' ~ a f`t k~ s:
'.
e`S
,
-3';11 .. `. ~' •a• r`z ~ , R>~ ~~ ell
^
v
,®: ,,g6
L. ~~~ ® ~
r'~i
3~ • _
°i al^a e
a' ~
IJ~ Lbf ~~ 161 ~ya. `~• 4~ ad' - ~ w.
_ a ,, ~ d~
,~. p.~ ,.. ~_~
~~
Rr~*' i.n' ~ ^. ~;~ .~ ~~:®~ RFq '~-:. "~ ~.a ~~ ~~ iii, ~ 0 2~~~ ~'• 5
y:~' Y 4
~"~ ~ ~ +x~ y.. ``~"~ i ~ - .. - ~ ~~ mss'' a4:4 J^GU.: a.
.~'` _
Wk °~ ~a s 'Y~:~'! ~ T'ae +6 k •°. W ~ll`W ~ O ~~ l~ _ _ ~. 1? •~$. o ,~ ~.
1 e ,r
;_ .
_ •.• ..
~ tc S.v
..~..~. ~
x . .~..~..~ _ k
~.. ,. „. _ „ ,. ,~ .. s ,. ..
Llp ~femplfjm61sr1enlLesN MOmsvJhVledelMe finpMep.mrd ~~ .. a N
~ KimleyHom NCDWQ Field Review for Subject Property: SW Corner USGS Topo Map With
Tyler MLEwen Ca~ and Associates, Inc. Neuse Riparian Buffers of NW Cary Parkway & 0 250 500 ~
July 27, 2006 NC Highway 54 Data Point Locations ~ ~ w~e
Juy76. 7066 P,O. Boz ]7666 • Raleigh, North Carolina 37676-]666
,,,,„,,,,,,,„,,,„,,,• ,,,,,-,,,„,,,,,, „ Phone: [phone] Far. X919) fi77-3656 ~ "" Feet ' Q ~
i ~„ a1f4` 9~es ~ NI
..e U~`,r' i~kE~ l4~uc ~ ~C'a c

o~~~ wATF9°~
r
>_ .:i
© `C
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
November 19, 2007
Canto Lifestyle Properties
Attn: Mr. Tom Lowell
401 N. Cattleman Road, Ste. 108
Sarasota, FL 34232
Subject Property: Canto Morrisville Site
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
DWQ EXP# 06-1146v2
Wake County
On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Neuse Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B
.0233)-EXPRESS RE'dIEW PROGRAl'/1
On November l3, 2007, at the request of Chad Evenhouse of Kimley-Horn & Associates, an on-site
determination was conducted to review one stream feature located on the subject property for applicability to the
Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233). The feature is labeled as "A" on the attached map, initialed by Lia
Myott on November 19, 2007. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has determined that the following:
Feature "A" is subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule on the property. It was determined to be an intermittent
stream.
This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties
that dispute a determination made by the DWQ that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule
may request a determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the
Director in writing c/o Cyndi Karoly, DWQ 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd.,
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. Applicants are
hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not start until the affected party (including downstream
and adjacent landowners) is notified of this decision. This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules of the stream features listed above and does not
approve any activity within the buffers or address features that were not observed during the site visit. Nor does
this letter approve any activity within Waters of the United States or Waters of the State. If you have any
questions, please contact Lia Myott at 919.733.9502.
Sincerely,
/~C~~~-~
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
CHS/cbk/lem
Attachments: NRCS Soil Survey Map, USGS Topo Quad Map
cc: Lauren Witherspoon, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
Chad Evenhouse, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 33068, Raleigh, NC 27363
401 Oversight /Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] /Internet: h~://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlattds
N °ehCarolina
J~tatura!!y
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

_ 1,_A~ t ~ ,IT` ''! l.r '~5i_ l' ~ ,~-. t't ~ ~ -r '' y Sr I 1

4 .1 '`, 1'°.-1-f ~ t p -~.
~ ~ .~' r '_- - -
,~ .,t J -"~. 1 ~ 4 s 1
~
p
(4
~C3,.1. S.i,eCAlf{od I4a~pr t- r .a
~
1 P r E E
.
µ
J .
rr S ~j ~.
. _
~ . ~
'
a
r
~
~ i ~
{ ~. f~ ~~' f

,
• 1
_
~
~
(
~ t
:
~
C
1

SS ,K
~
t.. f f
,
~r~r
7.;,
i ~
~.. ti,, ti -
,._„~
,, .. f a ,. 4 tt ,
k -

,.
I
' ~._ e i-
.
~ti i~ t
.

;'~ ~ e - `. ~ `' 1
.•'f . I~'J .• ~
` -.,
`~
~ ~~ ~
; ~
s
~~'
~
i
"
,
'
r
~ ~,
I
1~ i
~
r
:.: ._~ ~'
~'. r ii
~
i ~ 1

r
P l~~- Z~S ~ .^~~ ~~ ~ Vq ~~. 'V~y. I.. it .1 ~ 'S ; ~ _ J1 ~ t 1" `n. j'..

, ...
~ n l ~ 1 . ' ~'
~ r I ; !f r
•_. ~.~ ~
J r A y r i I ~~ ' ~,r = ~ f `y ~ ir, ~ 4 ~ - r
~ i rt('
~"`ac7
•

5
~ I
f
.
_
p l F ...¢ ~~1 f h. J.1~.1 ~ "\•' ~ `~- t .1h i r . jt ~ 1 `f~
_. , ; x
'r„ ~?/f - + ~ f . r r
.;
71
c
~
,
_ _
e Cou ei Bo dry `''
n a ~ ~~
p, i ~`~ ~ W my Par
~
1 ..
~
'
g
~:. ,~,
1 ~ , ~ ~
4 r - 7r-~',
,'
-yl~ ~ r.. .. ,~'A 1~~ r f ~~..
µa1. rs 1 't ~ 'r1~ ~
,~ '1i 5 R ', 4 r
p
~ ~ i
J
1
~
r i
I = 1
~ ~
_ I L )
r~ (,~ ~ i
} W . ~ t ~ ~ 1 '~ 1 ~~`
'_ /~p1R
E f+ 1
.. ~Y~U
~
J1F
~
~l
~
r
,,.
y,~
~
y ~ %r
i.
.
Y
Y.
t i 1 w I` r ~~ ti r ~
a ~ 4 L •:
S
~
~ ~
" y
,
e ."
`
1. 1,._ 1
til
-~S ~i f ~ °Ii~ ~
R:.
y„ 1,i k '~. 8:41 ~A6~-'-.~.~+ ~ ':1 r1 ~ c" ~ µ }'"~Z_ -^ p
. i f~r ~ ^.r ~{~ ` ~~,41~ # .,~Al'' +_ `~^rq ~~ ~ _
fy:~
ry
I ., j~ f
~l ~ `_. a Ix~ y..-
j
'
\
-
X
~.,
J
y^
- WJ'
t
r
Jr'
~
~• ~~
~
r
~
~r ~
'
'
'
~ f
~ j
f
'
a
~
1
'S
r
'.
i`~.
.,
N
Ip
...
I
,1
o
.
~
l~nli
`
/~
I ~
d
`
q
~
~
`
.
i
;t
A
I I .
J
~ ~ i.pt
S~ ,r~J
.r' , .J
.:~-'1,, f
4 tl~ ~.
ry' S !
~r
y
~~
f
'
~
!
1 f
_
.
1 ..~_.~
r ~ ~ ~ f
I
-'-..~A. i
,, ~ + 1 f r ~ , ~ ~ r ~.......
.
.
~
}
,
1 ~ q ~ rf .~
aE~a w
j
ti
~
t,l f
~
,fir,! ' •r ~~~., ~ t~ ~1 , !t l ~' ~ 1 r ~:,1t ./. k. f .Y r

.
_•.
~:
4
~

~
`R; ~,;
t ~ ~` r r ~ r
~. +
!/_
_ _~ , .
,< h ~ ~ 1ti ~ ' ~`~,.~ `r `
~ ` ~ t. -
A~~ta'~ i r '~P ; ~ ---~- {:, 1 GIs ~
~l~~Vi77S+TaT 3 ,a \ ~ ~ryr ~. l ~ ~ ~ E° ~++~-, .y. ., f^"..
~t ~~
'
t{~fpi y: •, _
'. +_1. ~ _
t a r
~
~ ~
1 1' p ~jp~. V+3~FC~1~ f -.
,~
,5
f
~
l
~
.~
1~1
f f t ~=
R~~
~~ ,~ ,~
{
~ ~ kr. ~
o'
^
r'i'
y
v
Y J ~
-
i
~ "~
~
ry ,
.
r
`
f
~ ~`: e,'`
~~ ~
(~
1
~~ y A Z
~q~©V GA ;QO ~
;~1 i 'g /
~
~
Y r
•n
~
,
~
q
y
'
yGs
f
~,u,
,?
~
~
~
t
.i ~ e ". it ."~. t. I f'.~ t'.
Title USGS Topographic Map (Cary, NC, 1973, Photorevised 1987)
Xpedx Property
Prcparea For: Project Morrisville Site

Lif
i
C
l
P Wakc County, North Carolina
asco
esty
e
rogen
es
Date
Project Number
Figure
11/13/2007 0128]1000 2
Fle: T:/PN/01?811000fUSACE foms/Figures.doc Prepared 6y Brandon BarharrJChad Evenhouse [~(~ .d.~,v..r=

lifestyle
PROPERTIES ~~
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Name: Morrisville Partners, LLC
Address: 9705 Chapel Hill Road
Morrisville, NC 27560
Phone: [phone]
Project Name/Description: Park West Village Development, Morrisville, NC
Date: January 30, 2008
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Attention: Jamie Shern
Field Office: Raleigh Regulatory Field Office, Wilmington District
Re: Wetland Related Consulting and Permitting
To Whom It May Concern:
I, the current property owner, hereby designate and authorize Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc. to act in my/our behalf as my/our agent solely for the purpose of
processing of Section 404 permits and Section 401 Water Quality Certifications
applications and to furnish upon request supplemental information in support of
applications, etc. from this day forward until successful completion of the permitting
process or revocation by the owner.
Authorized this the ~ day of ~~`'~ns~~'~Ri ~;c.~~.~
,'
Morrisville Partners LLC ^ ~~
By: Casto Southeast LLC, Acting as agent ~ r; , ~` ~ ,f -
Y~ v
Print Applicant Name Applicant Signature
CC: Cindy Karoly,
N.C. Wetlands Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N. C. 27699-1621
9705 Chapel Hill Road, Morrisville,lVorth Carolina 27513
919.467.8880 •614.220.5619 (fax)