The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20060138 Ver 2_401 Application_20080213u l =, ~-__`, ,_ ~~:~~~~. City of Greensboro Engineering & Inspections Deparhnent P.O. Box 3136 Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 Q~~~~e~~ FEB 1 3 2008 DElrffi - YVATER QUALITY WETUWDS AND STORMWAIER BRIWCH ~I ti I t I i I 'mil ~ l ~~ ~~~ J~ K°J ~tl~' TO: NC Division of Water Quality Date: Project: Re: February 12, 2008 DWQ #06-0138 401 Wetlands Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 WE ARE SENDING YOU: Hornaday Road & Overpass X ATTACHED ^ UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: X COVER LETTER X PCN APP ^ SPECIFICATIONS X PLANS X EECP RECEIPT X CHECK ^ OTHER COPIES DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION 1 2/11/08 COVER LETTER 1 2/4/08 CHECK FOR $475.00 7 1 /31/08 PCN APPLICATIONS 4 12/18/06 PLAN COVER SHEET AND PLAN DWGS (5 SETS THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW: X FOR APPROVAL ^ APPROVED AS SUBMITTED ^ FOR YOUR USE ^ AS REQUESTED ^ FOR REVIEW ^ RESUBMITTED ^ FOR DISTRIBUTION ^ OTHER f nnRnRCNme• ^ APPROVED AS NOTED ^ RETURNED FOR CORRECTIONS ^ RETURNED AFTER LOAN The Hornaday Road and Overpass project has been delayed, but is expected to be advertised in a few months. Minor Revisions were made to update the erosion controls to current standards. COPY TO Mr. Andv Williams, USAGE SIGNED City of Greensboro North Carolina NC Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Subj: Hornaday Road extension and overpass DWQ #06-0138, USAGE Action ID 200620357 PCN Application for Construction Permit Gentlemen; February 11, 2008 Q~~~~n~~ FEB 1 3 2008 DENR - WATER ClUAU7Y WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH The active permit, for this project, is expiring March 18"' of this year. Therefore we are resubmitting for your review and action seven (7) copies of the Pre-Construction Notification Application for the above referenced project. Also enclosed is a check for $475.00 made out to the NC Division of Water Quality. We are also forwarding one original and a copy of this application to the appropriate field office of the Corp of Engineers and the NCDENR office in Winston-Salem for review and concurrence. It was hoped that the overpass could have been constructed as part of the loop contract with Archer Western. But that did not materialize. From last update, it appears we will be able to advertise the contract for both the overpass and the roadway about April or May this year. If you have any questions in regard to the enclosed submittal, please do not hesitate to call me. Resp fully submi ed; '" ~ C~~ Thomas L. Cordell Project Manager City of Greensboro Engineering & Inspections PO Box 3136 Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 (336) 373-2039 thomas.cordell a,~~reensboro-nc_gov cc. Mr. Andy Williams cc: Ms. Sue Homewood U.S. Army Corps of Engineers NCDENR-DWQ Raleigh Regulatory Field Office 585 Waughtown Street 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Ste 105 Winston-Salem, NC 27107 Wake Forest, NC 27587 sao P.O. Box 3136 Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 www.greensboro-nc.gov • (336) 373-CITY (2489) TTY # 333-6930 ti- ~Eeos~stem }. -~ ~v ,. ,.L:~ A .~. ~ ~ ;: ~ ~ ~ i~~. ~_ .. PR062AM RECEIPT August 17, 2x07 Donald Ararat City of Greensboro 300 West Washington St. Greensboro, NC 27402 Project: County: DWQ #: USACE Action ID: EEP No.: Amount Paid: Check Number: Hornaday Road Improvements Guilford 06-0138 200620357 ILF-2005-4148 90,746.40 178227 The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) has received a check as indicated above as payment for the compensatory mitigation requirements of the 401 Water Quality Certification/Section 404/CAMA Permit(s) issued for the above referenced project. This receipt serves as notification that your compensatory mitigation requirements associated with t17e authorized activity as specified below have been satisfied. You must also comply with all other conditions of this certification and any other state, federal or local government permits or authorization associated with this activity. The NCEEP, by acceptance of this payment, acknowledges that the NCEEP is responsible for the compensatory mitigation requirements associated with the project. permit and agrees to provide the compensatory mitigation as specified in the permit. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the US Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998, as indicated below. River Basin Stream Credits Wetland Credits Buffer I & II CU (linear feet} (acres) (Sq. Ft,} Cold Cool Warm Ri arian Non-Ri arian Coastal Marsh Cape Fcar 0 0 220 0 0 0 44,340 03030002 Please note that a payment made to the Ecosystem Enhancement Program is not reimbursable unless a request for reimbursement is received within 12 months of the date of the receipt. Any such request must also be accompanied by letters from the permitting agencies stating that the permit andlor authorization have been rescinded. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at (919) 716-1921. Sincerely, ~_ j ~f. ~, ~ ~. .~'"lit ~' ~ ,,,-., W Iliam D~Gilmore, PE Director cc: Cyndi Karoly, NCDWQ Wetlands/401 Unit Andy Williams, USACE -Raleigh; Thelma Hemmingway, USACE Wilmington Daryl Lamb, NCDWQ Winston-Salem File 1~.P~StDYl~G(~... ~ ~ .. PYDt-2Gt"l~C~ OGLY .jtG{.~'L ,A~,A I~CDENR North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. City of Greensboro North Carolina D ~ '" ~~~~ D FEB ~ 3 2008 DENFi - Wq'~tk QUALITY 4METLANDS ANO S701iMYyA~R 6RANCH PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM FOR SECTION 404 AND/OR SECTION 10 NATIONWIDE REGIONAL AND GENERAL PERMITS SECTION 4O1 GENERAL WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATIONS, AND RIPARIAN BUFFER AND WATERSHED BUFFER RULES FoR HORNADAY ROAD EXTENSION AND OVERPASS CONSTRUCTION PROJECT P.O. Box 3136 • Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 • www.greensboro-nc.gov • (336) 373-CITY (2489) • TTY # 333-6930 1 Enclosure A ' PCN pp 5-13 1 1 1 1 Office Use Only' Form Version May 2002 USAGE Action ID No. DWQ No. (If any particular item is not applicable to thts project, please enter ~i~ot t~ppncaote or iwH .~ I. Processing 1. 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 ' 2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 14 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 Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete section VIII and check here: ^ ' S. 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), check here: ^ II. Applicant Information 1. Owner/Applicant Information Name: City of Greensboro Mailing Address: 300 W. Washin tgton St ' PO Box 3136 Greensboro NC 27401-3136 Telephone Number:_ Fax Number: 336/373-2338 E-mail Address: ' 2. Agent/Consultant 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: Thomas Cordell ' Company Affiliation: City of Greensboro Engineering and Inspections Department Mailing Address: PO Box 3136 Greensboro NC 27401-3136 ' ' Telephone Number: (336) 373-2039 Fax Number: (336) 373-2338 E-mail Address: Thomas.Cordell(a~greensboro-nc.gov Page 5 of 13 ' 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 MRCS 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: Hornaday Road Extension ' 2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A 3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/ 4. Location County: Guilford Nearest Town: Greensboro Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Follow I-40 West toward Winston-Salem. Take the Guilford College Road Exit and turn left off exit. Make a right at the 2°d signal onto Hornaday Road. Follow road approximately 0.5 to 1 miles to dead end. 5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): Lat 36 03 36.02 Long -79 55 07.88 (Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.) 6. Property size (acres): linear roadway improvements ' 7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): UT to Long Branch 8. River Basin: Upper Randleman Watershed ' (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 surrounding areas consist of forest, an unnamed tributary to Long Branch and residential properties to the south on the eastern portion of the project. ' The project section off Hornaday Road is currently an unpaved road. To the north and west are industrial and commercial businesses. To the east is existing~Hornaday Road. Martin Page 6 of 13 ' Marietta operates a quarry along the western portion of the project area. A quarry pond is located adjacent to the proposed roadway improvements. Hornaday Road is being bisected by the Greensboro Urban Looms (TIP U-2524 AC) which is currently under construction. 10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Grading equipment will be utilized to build the extension road. A retaining wall is proposed to avoid ' any disturbance to Zone 1 of the UT lust south of existing Hornaday Road and east of Long Branch Existing_Hornaday Road will be widened along its current location east of the urban loop The improvements to the west of the urban loop will be on new location. Existing ' Chimney Rock Court will be removed as part of this project and converted to grass and natural areas. ' 11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To extend and connect Chimney Rock Court to Hornaday Road to improve access and mobility to I-40. The Chimney Rock Road interchange with I-40 was eliminated due to the proposed urban loop interchange with I-40. ' 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.LP. project, along with construction schedules. This is a project for the City of Greensboro however NCDOT is currently constructing T.I.P. U- ' 2524 AC for which hermits have been issued for. ' 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. ' 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. The applicant must also provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream Page 7 of 13 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: Impacts due to roadway fill slopes. 1 1 1 1 2. Individually list wetland impacts below: Wetland Impact Site Number indicate on ma) Type of Impact* Area of Impact (acres) Located within 100-year Floodplain** es/no Distance to Nearest Stream (linear feet Type of Wetland*** W 1 Fill 0.005 No 13' Power Line W2 Fill 0.026 No 0 Forested Wetland W3 Fill 0.012 No 130' Forested Wetland W4 None 0 WS None 0 * List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized cleanng, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding. ** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or online at httU:i%www.fema.~ov. *** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond, Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only). List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.043 3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below: 0.043 Stream Impact Site Number indicate on ma) Type of Impact* Length of Impact (linear feet) Stream Name** Average Width of Stream Before Im act Perennial or Intermittent? (leases ecif ) S 1 None S2 None S3 Fill 220 UT to Long Branch 2' to 4' Intermittent S4 None * List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated np-rap, dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain), stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for bath the original and relocated streams must be included. ** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available .through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at Page 8 of 13 1 1 1 www.ustrs.t;ov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., w~aw.toporone.com, www.map uest.com, etc.). Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 220' 4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below: Open Water Impact Site Number (indicate on ma Type of Impact* Area of Impact (acres) Name of Waterbody (if applicable) .Type of Waterbody (lake, pond, estuary, sound, ba ,ocean, etc. P 1 None P2 None List each impact separately and identity temporary tmpacts. rmpacts mciuae, our are nun ,uuucu w. ~~~~, cn~avauvu, u,cugiug, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc. 5. 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 Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond, local stormwater requirement, etc.): Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area: 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. This nroiect is linear in nature and the_aliQnment of the roadway was adjusted to avoid and minimize environmental impacts. The bridge location was revised to the north and a retaining wall added to avoid impacts to the stream S2 (unnamed tributary to Long Branch). Existing businesses residential properties and a c~uarr~pond limited further adjustment to the alignment to avoid or minimize impacts. Page 9 of 13 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. USAGE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors 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 USAGE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP 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/strm~~,ide.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. 2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at (919) 733-5208 to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http:!/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the following information: Page 10 of 13 ' Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 220 Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): Zone 1 - 21,258, Zone 2 - 23,082, Zone 3 - 85,443 Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): n/a Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0.043 Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): n/a IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ) ^ Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? ' Yes ® No ^ . _ 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 a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA coordinator at (919) 733-5083 to review current thresholds for environmental documentation. Yes ^ No 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. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233 (Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )? Yes ® No ^ If you answered "yes", provide the following information: 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. Page 11 of 13 Zone* Impact (s uare feet Multiplier Required Miti ation 1 21,258 ftz 3 63,774 ft' 2 23,082 ft`' 1.5 34,623 ft` Total 44,340 ftZ 98,397 ftz * Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Gone z extenos an additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, Preservation or Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260. w XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ) Describe impervious acreage (both 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. Existing imRervious area was 2.4 acres (104, 544 ft2), proposed impervious area is 4.7 acres (204 733 ft2~ Stormwater will be collected in~ipes and ditches. Outfalls will use level spreaders prior to Zone 1 buffer. 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. N/A r 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. 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 Page 12 of 13 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). 1 1 1 1 1 Page 13 of 13 1 (Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.) ENCLOSURE B Environmental Services Report ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 524 S. NEW HOPE ROAD RALEIGH. NORTH CAROLINA 27610 919-212-1760 • FAX 919-212-1707 www.esinc.cc 16 November 2004 Mr. Tre Dugal Wilbur Smith Associates. 333 Fayetteville Street Mall, Suite 1450 P.O. Box 2478 Raleigh, NC 27602-2478 Re: Hornaday Road Delineation ESI Project Number: ER04-071 Dear Mr. Dugal: Thank you for contacting Environmental Services, Inc., (ESI) concerning the Hornaday Road improvements in Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina. At your request, ESI has conducted a jurisdictional wetland and stream delineation on the approximately 1.0-mile long proposed western extension of the existing Hornaday Road to Chimney Rock Road. The project study area boundaries that ESI used follow the preliminary slope stake limits provided by Wilbur Smith Associates. The project study area begins at Hornaday Road approximately 1,100 feet west of Guilford College Road and continues westward to the U-2524 right-of--way. On the other side of the U-2524 right-of--way the project study area continues westward to a point south of a truck facility located on Chimney Rock Court where it then continues to the north adjacent to Chimney Rock Court. The project study area terminates at Chimney Rock Road approximately 900 feet east of Boulder Road. The U-2524 right-of--way is not included as part of this delineation. A Project Location Map is attached as Figure 1. The eastern-most portion of the project study area consists of disturbed roadside, powerline, and natural gas easements. The western-most portio beyond the U-2524 right-of--way consists of undeveloped wooded land. vegetation associated with n of the project study area The project study area was reviewed on O1 June 2004. The field review was conducted by Lauren Cobb and Steve Kichefski. Ms. Cobb is a Senior Scientist with a B.S. degree in Natural Resources and more than four years of professional experience. Mr. Kichesfski is a Project Scientist with a B.S. in Environmental Science and more than one year of professional experience. Prior to the initiation of field efforts, available resources were reviewed, including U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles, Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) soil mapping, and digital mapping provided by Wilbur Smith Associates. Jurisdictional Evaluation The project study area was reviewed for the presence of jurisdictional wetland areas using the three- parameter approach (hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of jurisdictional hydrology) as outlined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual. The project study area was reviewed for the presence of jurisdictional stream channels using criteria provided by the COE and N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ). The extent of the wetlands and stream channels within the project study area were delineated, flagged in the field, and mapped using GPS equipment meeting NCDOT standards acceptable for this level of investigation. ESI delineated, flagged, and GPS mapped JACKSONVILLE • ST. AUGUSTINE • COCOA • JUPITER • DESTIN • SAVANNAH • ATLANTA • RALEIGH • CHARLOTTE three jurisdictional wetland areas and two jurisdictional stream channels within the project study area. In addition ESI GPS mapped one jurisdictional stream (consisting of segments S1 and S2) outside of the project study area and two ponds (P1 and P2) outside of the project study area (see Figures 2a-2b). Jurisdictional Wetlands Three jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the project study area. The first wetland (W 1) is located in the eastern portion of the project study area within a powerline easement adjacent to the existing Hornaday Road. Vegetation within this wetland is dominated by herbaceous species including the invasive grass microstegium (Microstegium virmineum) and touch-me- not (Impatiens capensis) with scattered sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) saplings. The other two wetlands (W2 and W3) are located in the western portion of the project study area within the wooded area south of Chimney Rock Court. One of these wetlands is adjacent to a stream channel and the other is a linear wetland. Vegetation within these wetlands is successional in nature and consists of common alder (Alnus serrulata), silky dogwood (Corpus amomum), touch-me-not, and netted chain- , fern (Woodwardia areolata). Soils within the three wetland areas exhibited hydric characteristics (see data forms for details). There was evidence of jurisdictional hydrology within each of the three wetland areas within the upper 12 inches of the soil profile ranging from saturated soil to areas containing at least 2 inches of surface water. COE Wetland Determination Forms for each wetland within the project study area are attached as part of this document. Potential wetland impacts are shown in Table 1. Jurisdictional Streams Three jurisdictional streams were identified in association with the proposed project. The first stream (consisting of segments S1 and S2) is located in the eastern portion of the project study ' area and is outside of the preliminary slope stake limits. This stretch of stream channel is approximately 10 feet wide and 5 feet deep from the top-of--bank. The substrate consists of sand and gravel. ' The second stream (S3) is located in the western portion of the project study area and is within the preliminary slope stake limits south of Chimney Rock Court. This stream originates north of the project study area at a culvert under the parking lot of the trucking company. S3 ranges from 2 to 4 feet wide and 1 to 3 feet deep measured at the top-of--bank. The substrate consists of sand and gravel with rip-rap in the northern portion of the stream. On the day of the field review the water had slight to no turbidity and was approximately 1 foot deep. The third stream (S4) is located within the slope stake limits near the western end of the project study area. S4 is approximately 3 feet wide and 5 feet deep from the top-of--bank. The substrate consists of ' sandy- soils and at the time of the field review water depth was approximately 6 inches. The northern portion of S4 has been altered due to clearing and grading work adjacent to Chimney Rock Road. A field review with the COE determined stream mitigation requirements for each of the segments located ' within the preliminary slope stake limits. The COE determined that stream segments S1, S2, S4, and a portion of S3 would require mitigation for impacts. S1 and S2 are not within the preliminary slope stake limits and 'no impacts are anticipated. DWQ Stream Classification Forms for each stream within the project study area are attached as part of this document. Potential stream impacts are shown in Table 1. 2 Table 1• Potential Jurisdictional Im acts a Areas and lengths are based on the preliminary slope stake limits provided by Wilbur Smrth Associates. b Mitigatable length confirmed during the 07 October 2004 field review with the COE representative. Wetland Number Area Stream (Acres)e Number Total Length within preliminary slope stake limits linear feet) e Mitigatable Length within preliminary slope stake limits linear feet e W1 0.01 S1 0 0 W2 0.02 S2 0 0 W3 0.01 S3 248 197 S4 50 50 Total: 0.04 Total: 298 247 Randleman Buffers Since the project study area is located within the Randleman Lake Water Supply Watershed, all surface waters within the project study area are subject to review for the Randleman Lake Buffers (15A NCAC 02B .0250). The Buffer Rules apply to a protected riparian buffer measured from the top-of--bank or mean high water line and extending landward a distance of 50 feet in rural watersheds or 100 feet in urbanized watersheds. The project study area is located in an urbanized watershed and is subject to 100 foot buffers. The buffer is composed of two zones within the first 50 feet that have specific restrictions on land disturbing activities and an additiona150 feet for the urbanized watershed that includes additional restrictions and specific BMP's for stormwater management. This includes intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, and ponds that are depicted on the most recent version of the USGS topographic maps, or county soil survey maps, or other site-specific evidence that indicates to the DWQ the presence of waters not shown on either of the two maps. These Buffer Rules do not include jurisdictional wetlands (non-surface waters) regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. ESI identified two jurisdictional stream channel segments within the preliminary slope stake limits (S3 and S4), two jurisdictional stream channel segments outside of the slope stake limits (S 1 and S2), and two ponds outside of the slope stake limits that are subject to the Randleman Buffer Rules. None of the features that were delineated are depicted on the USGS topographic map (photorevised 1994). Three of the stream segments (S1, S2, and S4) are depicted on the Soil Survey for Guilford County (1977) (see Figure 3). Therefore, these streams are subject to the Randleman Buffer Rules. One of the ponds (P1) is depicted on the soils map and is subject to the Randleman Buffer Rules. The other stream segment (S3) and pond (P2) are also subject to the Randleman Buffer Rules based on site-specific evidence. ' Afield review was conducted on 07 October 2004 with representatives of DWQ, COE, and the City of Greensboro (Water Resources) to evaluate the jurisdictional delineation and to confirm the application of the Randleman Buffer rules for individual streams. The approved jurisdictional map including buffers is depicted on Figure 2a-c. Permits and Certifications Required ' Permits are expected to be required for encroachment into stream channels and wetlands as a result of highway construction. ' Section 404 In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the United States. Assuming avoidance and minimization of impacts is demonstrated to the greatest practicable extent, potential impacts may be authorized under Nationwide Permit 14 (NWP 14). NWP 14 allows up to 0.5 3 acre of impact to jurisdictional wetlands and up to 300 linear feet of impact to jurisdictional streams. NWP 14 requires apre-construction notification (PCN) be sent to the COE and DWQ for impacts exceeding 0.10 acre of Waters of the United States or for greater than 150 total linear feet of stream. If requested by the COE, the PCN must include a compensatory mitigation proposal to offset permanent losses of Waters of the United States to ensure that those losses result in minimal adverse effects to the aquatic environment and a statement describing how temporary losses will be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Based on the preliminary slope stake limits, 0.04 acre of wetland impacts and two stream crossings (S3 and S4) that total 298 linear feet of stream impacts are anticipated. A NWP 14 can authorize stream impacts associated with each stream crossing within the project study area. Under NWP 14, mitigation may be required for impacts for an individual stream crossing greater than 150 linear feet. Impacts to the 197 linear feet of S3 determined to have important aquatic function (mitigatable length) will be subject to mitigation consideration. Section 401 Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341) requires each state to certify that state water quality standards will not be violated for activities that: 1) involve issuance of a federal permit or license; or 2) require discharges to "Waters of the United States." The use of a Section 404 permit requires the prior issuance of the 401 certification. Therefore, the City of Greensboro must apply to the DWQ for 401 certification as part of the permit process that is typically handled as a joint permit application to both the COE and DWQ. Summary ESI identified three jurisdictional wetland areas as well as two jurisdictional stream channels within the ' preliminary slope stake limits (S3 and S4), two jurisdictional stream channels outside of the slope stake limits (S1 and S2), and two ponds outside of the slope stake limits; the stream channels and ponds are all subject to the Randleman Buffer Rules. For the areas subject to Randleman buffers, activities must not encroach within 100 feet of the stream channel or pond without prior authorization from DWQ and the Piedmont Triad Regional Water Authority. In addition, based on the current functional design and the preliminary slope stake limits provided by Wilbur Smith Associates, stream channel impacts within the project study area total 248 linear feet (mitigatable length: 197 linear feet) for the crossing of S3 and 50 linear feet for the crossing of S3 and wetland impacts total 0.04 acre. Wetland and stream impacts will likely be authorized under NWP 14. Under NWP 14 mitigation will likely be required for stream impacts at individual stream crossings in excess of 150 linear feet for streams subject to mitigation consideration. Environmental Services, Inc., appreciates the opportunity to offer you our services. If you have any questions or comments, or need any additional information, please feel free to contact me at (919) 212- ' 1760. Sincerely, ' ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. Matt Smith Senior Scientist Attached: Figures COE Routine Wetland Determination Forms/DWQ Stream Classification Forms 4 ER04047/JUrIsA.dgn ~~ t ~ ~~'! ~~ Y ,i i j1~fi9 ~ ~ 219 Vu r ~~, '~ ~~ ~. ,,. Environmental Services, Inc. ~iBBB ESI I Figure: 2A Project: ER04071 Date: Nov 2004 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l~ ~ ~ Ir ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tnuaur ii~urise+.agn I~':•d Environmental Services, Inc. t868 E51 5 I I I r ar "~` ~ I C;' I ~ ' ''14 ~ ~i: .. ul ifi ~ ~~&~ ~~ Jurisdictional Areas Hornaday Road Greensboro, Guilford County North Carolina Figure: 2B Project: ER04071 Date: Nov 2004 P1 W3 W2 p Project Study Area Boundary Wetland - Stream/Pond 50' Stream/Pond Buffer Boundary 100' Stream/Pond Buffer Boundary ' ® Feature Number 0 50 100 150 Feet ' 0 25 50 Meters Source: 1998 USGS Color Infrared Image, Guilford Quadrangle ', S3 .~ Stream 3 Detail Figure: 2C Hornaday Road Project: ER04071 ' Environmental Greensboro, Guilford County Services, Inc. North Carolina Date: Nov 2004 ®18BB E51 i, . ER04071/solls.dgn `i ,~ :~, _. r' ; ,: -- -;;~ i v„ "`;~ ~ r ~ij Project Study Area ~ D USDA Soil Boundary t~ Ow USDA Water Boundary Approximate USDA Streams 0 500 1000 1500 Feet fy _ 0 250 500 Meters Source: 1993 USGS Digital Orthophoto Quarter °~ Quadrangle, Guilforcl; ~ ~~_ USDA Digital Soils, Guilford County, 1977 Project Soils Map Figure: 3 Environmental Hornaday Road Project: ER04071 Services, Inc. Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina Date: Nov 2004 ~1BBB E51 1 ' DATA FORM YA=W 1 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Wet !/ OQ^7 !'T. \x7>41anAc Tlr+linaatinn AAannall Project/Site: Hornaday Road Improvements Date: 6/1/2004 Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro County: Guilford Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Successional Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: YA2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Wetland ^Yes ^~ No ~ ~~ r_n-r n Ti nrr DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR 1. common alder Alnus serrulata shrub FACW 7. 2. silky dogwood Corpus amomum shrub FACW+ 8. 3. touch-me-not Impatiens capensis herb FACW 9. 4. netted chain-fern Woodwardia aereolata herb FAC 10. 5. 11. 6. 12. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): 100% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation requirement has been met. uvnu nr nnv ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs Q Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines Q NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0" ^ WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 7" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. SOILS MAP UNIT NAME (Series and Phase): Mapped as Chewacla Series DRAINAGE CLASS: somewhat poorly drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP): Fluvaquentic Dystrochre is FIELD OSERVATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes ~ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-18" 2.SY4/1 7.5YR4/6 common/distinct clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ~ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has been met. WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? 0 Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ~ Yes ^ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^~ Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present? ~ Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is jurisdictional. 1 DATA FORM YA=W 1 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Ul' (1987 CE Wetlands Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Hornaday Road Improvements Date: 6/1/2004 Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro County: Guilford Investigator: Envirorunental Services, Inc. State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Successional Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes Q No Transect 1D: YA2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes ~No ~71r !'_L`T A TTlIT.T DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR 1. multiflora rose Rosa multiflora shrub UPL 7. 2. morning glory Ipomoea sp. vine - 8. 3. blackberry Rubus spp. shrub - 9. 4. 10. 5. 11. 6. 12. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): <67% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation requirement is inconclusive due to unidentified dominant species. Tsvr~vnT nr~v ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper I2 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines 0 NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0" ^WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >18" emarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. SOILS MAP UNIT NAME (Series and Phase): Mapped as Enon Series DRAINAGE CLASS: well drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP): Ultic Hapludalfs FIELD OSERVATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes ~ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-4" SYRS/8 clay 4-18" 10YR6/8 clay HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met. WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ^ Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point undetermined Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ^~ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ^Q No Hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes ~ No Remarks: Data point is not jurisdictional based on non-hydric soil and lack of jurisdictional hydrology. 1 1 1 1 1 1 DATA FORM YC=W2 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Wet (1987 CF. Wetlands nelineation Manuall ProjectlSite: Hornaday Road Improvements Date: 6/1/2004 Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro County: Guilford Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Successional Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: YA2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Wetland ^Yes QNo VF,CTF.TATTnN DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR 1, sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua shrub FAC+ '7. 2. touch-me-not Impatiens capensis herb FACW 8. 3. microstegium Microstegium vimineum herb FAC+ 9. 4. 10. 5. 11. 6. 12. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): 100% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation requirement has been met. HYDROLO('7Y ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs Q Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other 0 Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0" ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 8" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. enrr c MAP UNIT NAME (Series and Phase): Mapped as Mecklenburg Series DRAINAGE CLASS: well drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP): Ultic Ha ludalfs FIELD OSERVATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes ^~ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-3" 5Y4/1 sandy clay loam 3-18" 2.SY6/2 sand HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List Q Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has been met. \x7RTT ATirl TIRTFAT~ATI~TATTnTT ydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? 0 Yes ^ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ~ Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present? ~ Yes ^ No emarks: Data point is jurisdictional. 1 1 1 DATA FORM YC=W2 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION up iiou~ r~ xxrArt~„,~~ TlalinPatinn Mannall ProjectlSite: Hornaday Road Improvements Date: 6/1/2004 ApplicanUOwner: City of Greensboro County: Guilford Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Successional Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ^~ No Transect ID: YC2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes ONo v DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR 1. sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua shrub FAC+ 7. 2. tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera shrub FAC 8. 3. blackberry Rubus spp. shrub - 9. 4. 10. 5. 11. 6: 12. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): >67% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation requirement has been met. I ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines Q NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0" ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >18" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. 1 ~nTT.~ MAP UNIT NAME (Series and Phase): Mapped as Mecklenburg Series DRAINAGE CLASS: well drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP): Ultic Ha ludalfs FIELD OSERVATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes ~ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-18" 2.SY4/4 sandy clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met. WRTT.ANTI TIF.TFRMTNATTnN Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ~ Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ^~ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ^~ No Hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes ^~ No Remarks: Data point is not jurisdictional. 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' DATA FORM YB=W3 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION Wet irtio~ ~~ ca~o+1.,..,7~ Tlol;,,o~+;..,, TR~,,,,all 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project/Site: Hornaday Road Improvements Date: 6/1/2004 Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro County: Guilford Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Successional Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: YBS Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Wetland ^Yes ONo yv DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES STRATUM INDICATOR 1. common alder Alnus serrulata shrub FACW 7. 2. touch-me-not Impatiens capensis herb FACW 8. 3. 9. 4. 10. 5. 11. 6. 12. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): 100% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation requirement has been met. r r~mr~nr nnv I ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ^Q Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs Q Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits Q Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 2" ^ WaterStained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: 0" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has been met. SOILS MAP UNIT NAME (Series and Phase): Mapped as Mecklenburg Series DRAINAGE CLASS: well drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP): Ultic Ha ludalfs FIELD OSERVATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes ^~ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-18" 2.SY4/1 2.5Y5/6 common/distinct sandy clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ~ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has been met. WETLAND DETERMINATION ydrophytic Vegetation Present? Q Yes ^ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Q Yes ^ No Wetland Hydrology Present? 0 Yes ^ No Hydric Soil Present? ~ Yes ^ No Remarks: Data point is jurisdictional. ' DATA FORM YB=W3 ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION UP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Project/Site: Hornaday Road Improvements Date: 6/1/2004 Applicant/Owner: City of Greensboro County: Guilford Investigator: Environmental Services, Inc. State: NC Do normal circumstances exist on the site? ~ Yes No Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? ^Yes ~ No Transect ID: YA2 Is the area a potential problem area (If needed, explain)? Plot ID: Upland ^Yes ONo v r.Un i r~ i iviv DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR DOMINANT STRATUM INDICATOR PLANT SPECIES PLANT SPECIES 1. sweetgum tree FAC+ 7. white oak shrub FACU Liquidambar styraciflua Quercus alba 2. white oak tree FACU 8. virginia creeper herb FAC Quercus alba Parthenocissus quinquefolia 3. shortleaf pine tree FACU 9. red maple herb FAC Pinus echinata Acer rubrum 4. black oak tree UPL 10. American holly herb FAC- Quercus velutina Ilex opaca var. opaca 5. multiflora rose shrub UPL 11. muscadine grape vine FAC Rosa multiflora Vitis rotundifolia 6. black cherry shrub FACU 12. Prunus serotina #N/A Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (Excluding FAC-): 36% Remarks The hydrophytic vegetation requirement has not been met. n i Lnvi .vim i ^ RECORDED DATA (DESCRIBE IN REMARKS): WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS Primary Indicators: ^ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gage ^ Inundated ^ Aerial Photographs ^ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches ^ Other ^ Water Marks ^ Drift Lines Q NO RECORDED DATA AVAILABLE ^ Sediment Deposits ^ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands FIELD OBSERVATIONS Secondary Indicators (2 or more required): ^ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches Depth of Surface Water: 0" ^Water-Stained Leaves ^ Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18" ^FAC-Neutral Test ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Depth to Saturated Soil: >18" Remarks: The hydrologic criterion has not been met. enrr e MAP UNIT NAME (Series and Phase): Mapped as Mecklenburg Series DRAINAGE CLASS: well drained TAXONOMY (SUBGROUP): Ultic Ha ludalfs FIELD OSERVATIONS: Confirm Mapped Type? ^ Yes ~ No PROFILE DESCRIPTION Depth (inches) Horizon Matrix Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Color (Munsell Moist) Mottle Abundance/Contrast Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc. 0-18" 2.5 Y6/4 clay loam HYDRIC SOIL INDICATORS: ^ Histosol ^ Concretions ^ Histic Epipedon ^ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ^ Reducing Conditions ^ Aquic Moisture Regime ^ Sulfidic Odor ^ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ^ Listing on National Hydric Soils List ^ Listed on State or Local Hydric Soils List ^ Gleyed or Low Chroma ^ Color ^ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: The hydric soil criterion has not been met. \T1L`TT AT~TII TlL'TRDTifTT~TATTnT~T Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ^ Yes ~ No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ^ Yes ~ No Wetland Hydrology Present? ^ Yes ~ No Hydric Soil Present? ^ Yes ~ No Remarks: Data point is not jurisdictional. ' _ NCDWQ Stream Classification Form -, Project Name: ~{o-'vtcrcla~ IZr,~l River Basin. ~ ~ ty: ~~ ~-~z- v~ Evaluator. ES .L DWQ Project Number. Nearest Named Stream: T--°~~`~ Latitude; Signature: LG ' Date: j u n ~ I , 2~ USGS QUAD: ~~~+ i ~ -Fo ~r I Longitude: Location/Directions: S ~~. = ~~~ 'kPLEASE NOTE: Ijeva/uator and landowner agree that the feature is a Wean-made ditch, then use ojthis jorne is not necessary. Also, ij in the best professional judgement ojthe evaluator, the feature is a ~nan-made ditclt and not a modifud nahtral strram-this rating system ' should not be used* Primary Field Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line) ' I. Geomo holo Absent W k Moderate Stron 1 Is There A Riffle-Pool S uence? 0 I 2 3 2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed 5) Is There An Active (Or Relic) 9) Is a Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 ~ 'NOTE.• ! Bed do Bank Caused Ditchin And WITHOUT Sinuosi Then Sc re=p• I 2 10) Is a 2'd Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated On Toro Man And/Or In Fieldl Presents y~3 Nom ~ PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:~_ II. Hydrololy Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1) Is There A Groundwater Flow/Dischar a Present? 0 1 2 PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:~_ 3 ' PRIMARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POI S: ~_ Secondary Field Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line) -Natural Drainaee Way? - 0 5 I i' 1 5 SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATORPOINTS: II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1) Is This Year's (Or Last Year's) Leaflitter .,~:' 3 Are Wrack Lines Present? .5 1 Z.5 ' 4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5 I 1.5 Lest lta~ O • I Di ndicatsd I bone This St rrd #S Bei 5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 Conditions Or In Growin Season ? S 1 1.5 ' Are H dric Soils Present In Sides Of Channel Or In Headcut ? es=1.5 - No-0 SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: III. Biolo Ab t ~. Weak Moderate Stron ' 8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV Mosby OBL (' NOTE• IjTotal Absence OfAU Plants In Stramnbed 2 1 Mostly FACW .75 Mostly FAC S Mostly FACU Mostly UPL 0 0 ' As Nottd Aba-e Skin Thu Step UNLESS SAY PraenP). SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: C?. 5 TOTAL POINTS (rrimary + secondary) _ ~ ~ (IJGreater Than or Equal To 19 Points The Stream Is At Least Intermittent) -. Notes: -- 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 NCDWQ Stream Classification Form Project Name: ' `oY~0.4 I River Basin: ~ ~~ ~ County:~~,i I~av~ Evaluator. ~S~ DWQ Project Number. Nearest Named Stream: ,~~~ h Latitude: Signature: (,,~ Date:.~U~'I~ ~ ~ 2~ USGS UAD: ~ ~~ Q li ( Longitude: Location/Directions: ~'y ~ = ~~ 'kPLEASE NOTE: Ijevaluator and landowner agree that the jeatun is a nran made ditch, then use ojthis john is not necessary. Also, ij in the best professional judgement ojthe cvaluator, the feature is a than-made ditch and not a modified natural strtam-this rcAng system should not be used* 2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed 5) Is There An Active (Or Relic) 9) Is a Continuous Bed 8c Bank Present? ~ ~ 0 l 2 .3 'NOTE: I Bed do Bank Caused Ditchin And WITHOUTSinu si 7leen Score=0• 10) Is a 2"d Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated ~----,~ PRIMARY GEDMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: II. HvdroloQV Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1) Is There A Groundwater PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS:- <~ W PRIMA R Y BIOL O G Y INDI CA TOR SECONDARY GEOMORPHOLOGY INDICATOR POINTS: ~ , 5 Primary Field Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line) Secondary Field Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line) II.IIvdroIogy Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1) Is This Year's (Or Last Year's) Leaflitter ' _ _ ' Present In Streambed? 1.5 1 .5 0 - - 2 Is Sediment On Plants Or Debris Present? 0 ~` 1 I.S 3 Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 I 1.5 4) Is Water In Channel And a48 Hrs. Since 0 .5 1 1.. h, ' Last S Ra' O - I icated I #9 bout S~Ei is St nd #S Below' ~ Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 S 1 I=5 _ Conditions Or In Crowin Season 7 ' Are H dric So' Present In Sides Of Channel Or In Headcut ? Yes=1.S - No=O SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: ~, ~ ' III. Biolo Ab nt Weak Moderate Stron 1) Are Fish Present? .5 1 1.5 2 Are 1u'bians Present? -- ~ .5 1 I.5 3 Are A ticTurtles Present? .5 1 1.5 ' 4 Are Cra sh Present? .5 I 1.5 Are Macrobenthos Present? .5 I I.5 6 Are Iron Oxidizin Bacteria/Fun s Present? .5 1 1.5 ' Is Filamentous AI ae Present? .5 1 I.5 8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed? SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW Mostly FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPL (' NOTE IJTotal.tb~sence Of AU Plants In StraQmbed 2 I .75 .5 0 0 ' As Noted.tbove Slba This Step UNLESSSdYPresent'1. SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS._~ TOTAL POINTS (~-imary + se~ondary) _ ~3 f '" (IJGreater Than Or Equal To l9 Poi>tts The Strram Is ' At Least Internrittent) -. Notes: __ 2 -~ .- ' _ NCDWQ Stream Classification Form -,. Project Name~ov na~~y ~ • River Basin: C~-~c ~-~ a k' Covnty: (~U; ~.~'pvc~ Evaluator. ~5~~ DWQ Project Number. Nearest Named+ Stream:~' `~~ ~ `~~,~ Latitude; Signature: ?.~~ Date: J U Y1 ~' l ~ ZCV ~- USGS QUAD: ~,~ I ~~~tDt/~ Longitude: Location/Directions: Cj ~~. #PLEASE NOTE: Ijevaluator and landowner agree that the feature is a man-trade ditch, then use ojthis jornt is not necessary, Also, if in the best professional judgetnatt ojthc evaluator, the feature is a than-made ditch and not a modified nahtral steam-this rating systetx should not 6e used* Primary Field Indicators: (Circle One Number Per Line) 2) Is The USDA Texture In Streambed 9) Is a Continuous Bed & Bank Present? 0 1 2 *NOTE: I Bed do Bank Caused Ditchin And WITHOUT Sinuosi Then Score=0• 10) Is a 2"d Order Or Greater Channel (As Indicated On Toro Man And/Or In Field) Presents ye~3 ~ y~ PRIMARY GEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: t F~ II. Hydrology Absent Weak Moderate Strong 1) Is There A Groundwater PRIMARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: Secondary Field Indicators' (Circle One Number Per Line) 1 1 .....~~,..~ ~=~i.w~ 1~rLl~,A1 vtc rul[v~~: ~- - - P -r'v ...,.......... . Natural Drainage Way? 0 5 (l ~ 1 5 SECONDARY CEOMORPHOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: II. HydroloQV Absent Weak Moderate Strom 1) Is 'This Year's (Or Last Year's) Leaflitter ~, 3) Are Wrack Lines Present? 0 ~ 5 ~ 1 1~~ 4) Is Water In Channel And >48 Hrs. Since 0 .5 1 1:5 t 8n Ra~ - Di icaotedl #9dba-ti 'This St nd #S Belmv' 5) Is There Water In Channel During Dry 0 .5 1 1.5 Conditions Or In Growin Season 7 ~ Are Hvdric Sor7s Present In Sides Of Channel (Or In Headcut)7 Yes=1.S J No=O SECONDARYHYDROLOGYINDICATOR POINTS: to 8) Are Wetland Plants In Streambed7 SAV Mostly OBL Mostly FACW Mostty FAC Mostly FACU Mostly UPL (' NOT>~ ljTotalAbse,ux ollu Prams In strantbed 2 I .75 .5 0 0 ' .!s Noted Above Shin ?Iris Step Ul NLESS SAY Pruext`). SECONDARYBIOLOGYINDICATOR POINTS., ~. TOTAL POINTS •ma + Seconds = 2(' ~ '~ I Greater Than u T ' rv ry) (f Ir Es ~ • 1 f Dints The Steam Is At least Intermittent) -. Notes: __ 1 2 ~t