20071431 Ver 2_401 Application_20080408

~S&ME
April 9, 2008 ~ X'P O 1- l ~' 3 ~ V z
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit ~b""
2321 Crabtree Boulevard D
Suite 250 `"-~' ~ ~~ ~~~°
Raleigh, NC 27604 A /~
R9
Attention: Ms. Cyndi Karoly
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
Attention: Mr. James Shern
~fl~8
~Ca"~ o~, srro~~,
e~INCH
Keference: 401 Certification/Buffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting
E-31 Elementary School
Bryan Road and Ackerman Road
Garner, NC
S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
Dear Ms. Karoly and Mr. Shern:
S&ME, Inc. (S&ME) would like to submit an application for permitting review associated with
proposed impacts to waters of the U.S., including wetlands, in accordance with U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USAGE) Nationwide Permit (l~~VP) No. 12, and riparian buffers in accordance with
the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Neuse River Basin Buffer Rules for the
above referenced project. S&ME is working on behalf of Wake County Public School System who
will be considered the applicant for this permit.
Please find enclosed the following:
• A completed Pre-Construction Notification (PCN)
• Letter of Authorization to Act as Agent
• Vicinity/Topographic Map (Figure 1)
• Site Map (Figure 2)
• NRCS Soil Map/Aerial Photo (Figure 3)
• Pre-Construction Conditions (Figure 4)
S&ME, iNC. / 3201 Spring Forest Road /Raleigh, NC 27616 / p 919.872.2660 f 919.876.3958 / www.smeinc.com

401 Certification/Buffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
E-31 Elementary School -Bryan Road Garner, North Carolina April I, 2008
• zone 2 Buffer Impart (FiguTP 5~
• Water Main Buffer Impact (Figure 6)
• Sanitary Sewer Buffer Impacts (Figure 7)
• Utility Plans (Sheets C 0.1, C 1.1, C 1.2, C 1.3, C 1.4, C 2.2)
• Bioretention Outlet Calculations and Cross-Section
• Letter Report: Results of the U.S. Delineation, May 3, 2007
• Letter Report: E-31 Eiem School Site USACE Meeting Report, November 6, 2007
• NCNHP Response Letter
• A check for $3,000 (DWQ Express Review processing fee).
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The subject site is an approximately 50.44-acre mostly undeveloped parcel located on the east
side of Bryan Road, south of the intersection with Ackerman Road in Garner, North Carolina.
An unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek intersects Bryan Road and forms the northern and
eastern boundary of the project site.
The Wake County Public School System is proposing to construct an elementary school on the
southern portion of the site. Minimal stream, wetland, and Neuse buffer impacts will result from
proposed installations of sewer and water utility lines. Total impacts are below their respective
mitigation requirement thresholds. Jurisdictional wetland impacts are located within the existing
City of Raleigh sewer easement located on the northern portion of the site.
Provided below is a list of pertinent information relating to the site and permit applicant:
Applicant: Wake County Public School System
Facilities Planning & Construction Management
Contact: Mr. Jeff K. Young
Mailing Address: 1551 Rock Quarry Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
Telephone Number: 919-856-8291
Address of Project: Bryan Road
Size of Property: Approximately 50.44 acres

40l CertificationBuffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
E-31 Elementary School - Bryan Road Gamer North Carolina April 9, 2008
Closest Waterway:
River Basin:
County:
Coordinate Location of Site
USGS Quadrangle
SITE CONDITIONS
lYlahlers Creek
Neuse River Basin
Wake County
35.6689 °N, 78.5898 °W
Garner, N.C. (1964)
This site is an approximately 50.44-acre parcel of mostly cleared field with some wooded area.
A vacant and dilapidated wood-frame house is located near Bryan Road on the western portion of
the site. The adjacent land use includes woodland, residential development, and maintained
grassland. An unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek that crosses Bryan Road forms the northern
and eastern property boundary. A residential subdivision (Bingham Station) exists north of the
site, beyond two channels of the unnamed tributary.
ON-SITE JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC) performed wetland and stream
delineations on the subject site on March 12 and 16, 2007. Results of their findings are
documented in the attached letter report dated May 3, 2007. A stream assessment was conducted
by Lia Myott of NCDENR on August 31, 2007 at S&ME's request to determine the applicability
of Neuse buffer rules to on-site streams. A letter dated August 31, 2007 documenting Ms.
Myott's findings is attached. S&ME performed additional delineation of wetlands in the vicinity
of the existing City of Raleigh sewer easement and met with Mr. James Shern from the USACE
on October 31, 2007 to review the wetland delineations and other jurisdictional features on-site.
During the meeting between Mr. Shern and John Davis of S&ME, it was indicated that
Nationwide Permit No. 12 would be appropriate if all jurisdictional wetland impacts were
contained within the permanent City of Raleigh sewer easement. A letter report dated November
6, 2007 documenting the findings of the site meeting with Mr. Shern is attached.
In summary, an unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek forms the northern and eastern property lire
of the subject site. At the location of a proposed sewer line crossing, this tributary consists of

401 Certification/Buffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting S&ME Pro_ject No. ] 054-07-374
E-31 Elementary School -Bryan Road Garner North Carolina April 9, 2008
two channels separated by a distance of approximately 130 feet. Jurisdictional wetlands were
identified between and adjacent to the two charnels.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed elementary school location is on the southern portion of the site. A 30-foot
construction corridor for the installation of a sewer utility line will run northward from the
school and connect to existing utility lines servicing the Bingham Station residential subdivision.
The existing sewer line servicing Bingham Station is connected to the City of Raleigh Neuse
River Waste Water Treatment Facility.
The proposed sewer line installation (having a 30-foot construction corridor) will result in
crossing the unnamed tributary (two channels) of Mahlers Creek and impacting riparian
wetlands. These impacts are confined to the permanent City of Raleigh sewer easement. A
water main proposed to be installed west of the elementary school, also having a 30-foot wide
construction corridor, will run northward within the Bryan Road right-of--way and cross the
unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek (one channel) near the street intersection with Ackerman
Road. Construction details including profiles are included in this permit application.
PROPOSED JURISDICTIONAL IMPACTS
The proposed sewer line installation that crosses the northern property line will result in the
perpendicular crossing of two channels of the unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek. The
proposed water line installation that connects to an existing water main located near the
intersection of Bryan Road and Ackerman Road will also result in the perpendicular crossing of
the unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek (it should be noted that Mahlers Creek comprises only
one channel at ibis iocation). Based on 30-fool construction corridors, cumulative impacts equal
about 90 linear feet of stream channel. Approximately 0.15 acres of jurisdictional (riparian)
wetland and 10,100 square feet (about 0.23 acres) of Neuse buffer will also be impacted. This
includes approximately 6,500 square feet of impacts to Zone 1 and approximately 3,600 square
feet of impacts to Zone 2. Wetland impacts are confined to the permanent City of Raleigh sewer

40l Certification/Buffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
E-31 Elementary School -Bryan Road Garner North Carolina April 9.2008
easement on the northern portion of the site. Impacts are below their respective mitigation
requirement thresholds and the proposed maintenance corridor width is 10 feet
Each of the perpendicular channel crossings will result in riparian buffer impacts. Additionally,
a Zone 2 parallel buffer impact is proposed east of the school. This proposed impact is to the
outside portion of Zone 2 and totals approximately 1,100 square feet. It is necessary due to the
shape of the parcel, placement of the bio-retention basin on the low side of the site, and the
restriction of not being able to place the sewer line under the bio-retention basin. Following the
utility line installation, the impacted area will be graded and grass vegetation will be maintained.
PROTECTED SPECIES AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
S&ME sent scoping letters to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNI-IP) asking for a review of known occurrences of
federally threatened or endangered species on or near the subject site. Also, a scoping letter was
sent to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO} for a records review of historic sites on or
near the subject site. To date, S&ME has received a response from NCNHP stating they have no
record of rare species, significant natural communities, significant natural heritage areas, or
conservation/managed areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
The proposed project has been designed to avoid unnecessary impacts. These avoidance
measures resulted in minimal proposed impacts to wetlands, riparian buffers, and temporary
impacts to waters of the U.S. The utility corridors have been designed to cross the stream at near
perpendicular orientations (between 75 and 105 degrees). The proposed maintenance corridor
width is 10 feet. 3urisdictional wetland impacts are contained within the permanent City of
Raleigh sewer easement.
Justification for not using the directional bore technique to install pipe includes: a) the sewer
line has to be on lire and on grade and directional boring technique is not accurate enough, and

401 Certification/Buffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
E-31 Elementary School - Brvan Road Garner North Carolina April 9, ?008
b) the depth of the water line would need to be deeper far directional bore. Maintenance of the
water line and the likelihood of hitting additional rock is a concern.
The proposed impact to the outer portion of the Zone 2 riparian buffer east of the school (totaling
approximately 1,100 square feet) is necessary due to the shape of the parcel, placement of the
bio-retention basin on the low side of the site, and the restriction of not being able to place the
sewer line under the bio-retention basin. Following the utility line installation, it is proposed that
the impacted area will be graded and grass vegetation will be maintained.
REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
The stormwater management plans are currently being reviewed by the Town of Garner and upon
approval will be submitted to DWQ. As part of this permit application, stormwater discharge
calculations and a BMP (level spreader) cross-section have been provided to allow confirmation
that diffuse flow will be achieved. Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices equaling
those outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual" shall be in full compliance with all specifications governing the
proper design, installation, operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in
order to comply with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard. Impacts have been
avoided and minimized, and appropriate measures will be taken during construction to allow
flow anal circulation patterns of waters of the U.S. to remain unaffected.
MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation may not be required for this project since the impacts are minimal and
avoidance and minimization efforts have been undertaken in the planning process.
By copy of this correspondence and completed PCN, we are requesting your written concurrence
with this 401 riparian buffer authorization and Nationwide Permit No. 12 application. If we can
provide additional information or answer questions you may have, please feel free to contact us
at [phone].

401 Certification/Buffer Authorization and Nationwide Permitting S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
E-31 Elementary School - Brvan Road Garner North Carolina April 9, 2008
Sincerely,
S&ME, Inc.
ason Volker
Environmental Scientist
Lisa J. Beckstrom; C.E., C.W.B.
Senior Reviewer
Attachments:
cc: Mr. Jeff Young, WCPSS

Addendum to the Pre-Construction Notification and "Buffer Rules" Application Required for
Projects Submitted Under the
"Express Review Program"
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Version 5.0
October 1, 2006
Email Address: 401 [e-mail]
Purpose: To provide a detailed explanation of the information required by the Division of Water Quality
in order to expedite the review of applications for 401 General Water Quality Certifications, Isolated
Wetland Permits, Stream and Wetland Mitigation Plans and Riparian Buffer Approvals (Please Note: do
not leave any questions unanswered or use terms such as "N/A" without an explanation).
Fees:
401 Water Quality Certifications
Riparian Buffer Authorization:
Riparian Buffer Minor Variance:
Coastal General "Major Variance":
Isolated Wetland Permit:
Major (>/= 150' stream or >/= 1 acre wetlands) $2,000.00
Minor (< 150' stream or < 1 acre wetlands) $1,000.00
(exclusively or "in addition" to) $2,000.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
General $1,000.00
Please read the entire document before attempting to determine the proper fee. Fees are additive for
particular projects.
Things to keep in mind when filling out the application:
A specific answer must be provided for each question. For instance, if a numerical answer is requested
then a numerical answer must be provided along with the supporting information necessary for DWQ staff
to verify that the number is accurate. Likewise, if explanations are presented to justify certain responses,
the explanations must be completely supported by documentation. DWQ staff cannot assume that
unsupported or undocumented information is accurate. "N/A" is not an acceptable answer for any
question since the DWQ Staff reviewing the application must have an opportunity to determine whether or
not any requested information is pertinent.
All forms, guidance, worksheets, applications, etc. used must be the current versions as posted on our
web site at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. The Express Review Program website can be found at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/express_review.htm. Please note that it will be responsibility of the
applicant or the applicant's consultant to verify that the current versions are used. The versions posted
on our web site will be considered to be the current versions.
You are a very important part of the success of this program, if you have suggestions or clarifications
please send your comments to the Wetlands/401 Unit of the DWQ (via email at
401 [e-mail]).
Filling Out the Pre-Construction Notification Application:
The Corps of Engineers (USAGE)/DWQ official, joint Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Application
must be used as a basis for the expedited review process. The completed application should be
presented first and the supporting information tabbed and collated in the same order. Using a custom
format is not recommended. The open squares m are checklist items. The following items correspond to
the numbering system on the Pre-Construction Notification Form (PCN):
IMPORTANT: USE CHECK BOXES TO TRACK PROJECT INFORMATION!!

SECTION I. PROCESSING
^ 1 8~ 2.The USACE determines which Nationwide, Regional, or General Permit is
required. If you have verified with the USACE which permit they intend to use for
your project or if you already have written approval from the USACE, please
indicate by adding "verified" or "verified, attached", respectively, in the blank next
to the Permit number requested.
^ Attach the USACE Approval if you have it.
^ 3. It is not anticipated that the expedited process will be requested for this situation.
^ 4. If you propose to impact 150 feet or more of perennial stream or 1 acre or more
of wetland and onsite mitigation is not proposed, it is recommended that you
either locate an acceptable private bank with available credits (with
documentation to show that the bank can and shall provide the credits needed)
or obtain approval from the EEP for the entire amount of stream and or wetland
as DWQ will make the final determination as to whether or not mitigation applies.
A complete Express application is not considered received unless an EEP
approval letter is attached if mitigation is requested through EEP. Please note
that the USACE may have different mitigation requirements and thresholds.
^ 5. State whether your project will require a CAMA Minor, Major or General Permit
and give the status of the permit.
SECTION II - APPLICATION INFORMATION
1. 15 NCAC 2H .502(fl reads as follows: "Who Must Sign Applications. The application
shall be considered a "valid application" only if the application bears the signature of a
responsible officer of the company, municipal official, partner or owner. This signature
certifies that the applicant has title to the property, has been authorized by the owner to
apply for certification or is a public entity and has the power of eminent domain. Said
official in signing the application shall also certify that all information contained therein
or in support thereof is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge."
^ Please indicate how the applicant meets the above definition and provide
supporting documentation.
^ Please provide all of the requested contact information including a fax
number and email address.
2. ^ If the application is not signed by the applicant, please attach the agent authorization
letter. The applicant must sign the agent authorization letter. The applicant's name
and position must also be spelled out as many signatures are difficult to read.
3. ^ Please provide all of the requested contact information including a fax number and
email address.
SECTION III -PROJECT INFORMATION
The following is the most critical of all the information that you must provide. The quality and detail of the
information will often determine the expeditiousness of the review. The following is a checklist of the
types of pertinent information required at a minimum:

Maps and Plans:
^ The most recent version of the 1:24,000 USGS Topographic Map- Please cleanly
delineate the site boundaries, etc. on the map. If the delineation obscures any of the
features, it is recommended that a clean copy be provided. Please indicate the
quadrangle name. You can go to the USGS web site (http://mac.usgs.gov/maplistsn to
verify the most recent version.
^ The most recent version of the NRCS Soil Survey Map - (required for projects within
the Neuse River Basin, Tar-Pamlico River Basin, Randleman Lake Watershed and the
Catawba River Basin, also recommended for all projects) -Please cleanly delineate the
site boundaries, etc. on the map. If the delineation obscures any of the features, it is
recommended that a clean copy be provided. Please indicate the page or map number
from which the copy of the map was made. Copies of the current soil survey and/or soil
survey map sheets can be obtained from the local NRCS County Office
(http://www.nc.nres.usda.gov!). GIS soil layers are not acceptable.
^ Vicinity map -Please clearly mark the location and approximate boundaries of the
property and project on the map. Please indicate north and scale. Please include
applicable road names or State Road numbers.
^ The Site Plan -The most critical map to be provided is the site plan. You must provide
full sized plans. The following is the minimum list of plans that are typically needed.
^ Pre-construction/Pre-existing conditions -This sheet must be scaled and
include all jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetland, stream, water features,
State regulated buffers, topographic contours with elevations, approximate extent
and nature of forest, field, landscaping, or other cover. Any existing structures and
impervious area must be shown. Existing utility lines and easements must be
shown. Existing roads, culverts, and other pertinent features must be shown. North
arrow and the scale must be shown. Please note that the impact boundaries on the
maps should correspond to the flagged impact boundaries in the field.
^ Proposed conditions -These sheets must be scaled and show all existing
jurisdictional and non jurisdictional wetland, stream, water features, and State
regulated buffers (delineated into Zone 1 and Zone 2) must be underlain on the site
plan(s). The plans must show all built-out structures and impervious cover. The
plans must include the final grading contours with elevations. The plans must
indicate all utilities and easements. It is likely that several versions of the final built-
outsite plans will be necessary.
^ Drainage Plans -Final drainage plans must be included. The plans should include
the locations and pertinent elevations and sizes of the collection system and
drainage ways. All inlets and outlets must also be shown with pertinent elevations.
Scaled stormwater BMPs must also be indicated as required by DWQ rules and
policies. In certain cases, final stormwater management plans must also be
provided, but that will be addressed later in this document.
^ Plats -The plans must show the location and layout of all sub-divided parcels with
lot identifications. Platted parcels must be developable without further impacts to
jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional wetlands, streams, water features, and State
regulated buffers.
^ Proposed Impacts -All impacts to jurisdictional and non jurisdictional wetland,
stream, water features, and State regulated buffers must be shown and labeled on
the site plans. All excavation, fill, flooding, stabilization, and other impacts that will
be conducted in or near jurisdictional and non jurisdictional wetland, stream, water
features, and State regulated buffers must be indicated.

4
Wetland Impacts (on the site plan):
Precise grading and final elevation contours must be provided. Existing vegetation and
any clearing must be specified.
^ All subsurface utility lines must indicate the location of anti-seep collars. Construction
detail for anti-seep collars must be provided.
^ Roadway or other crossings of riparian wetlands may require floodway culverts to
maintain existing hydrological conditions.
^ When surface drainage features or groundwater recharge areas that feed or would
reasonably feed wetlands that are not to be filled are made impervious, it may be
necessary to direct some stormwater runoff to those areas in order to maintain hydrology.
You must identify these areas and address them. Supporting explanations and discharge
information must be provided to show that the wetland would not be eroded or receive
too much or too little hydrology. In many cases this could help satisfy part of a
stormwater management plan.
^ Flooding
^ Draining
Stream Impacts:
^ Stream impacts must be clearly shown on the plans. The centerline as well as the banks
of the stream must be surveyed or located by GPS for the portion of the stream to be
impacted.
Culverting:
^ The inlet and the outlet of the culvert should be aligned with the stream as much as
possible. Inlet and outlet elevations and streambed elevations should be indicated.
^ Any widening of the stream must be shown with elevations.
^ The extent of and plan details for all dissipation or grade control devices should be shown
with pertinent elevations.
^ For shorter culvert sections, such as for road crossings, a longitudinal cross section that
shows the stream bed invert at the inlet and outlet, the existing stream bank elevations
and the invert of the inlet and outlet of the pipe(s) must be provided.
^ For shorter culvert sections, such as for road crossings, a vertical cross section must be
provided that shows the stream cross section at the inlet and outlet overlain with the
culvert and fill cross section.
^ For bottomless culverts or other spans, a vertical cross section should be provided that
shows the minimum distance from each span to each stream bank, the stream cross
section, the height of the span above the stream and the minimum distance from the
edge of each footer to each stream bank.
^ For bottomless culverts or other spans, a plan view must be provided that shows the
location of the spans and the stream banks.
^ For longer culverts or culverts that will pass beneath substantial impervious cover, it will
be necessary to provide adequate plan detail to show that discharge velocity/energy will
be adequately dissipated.

^ Cross section details must be provided showing the provisions for aquatic life passage.
Aquatic life passage through culverts is typically achieved by placing the invert of the
culvert below the existing bed of the stream per the USACE or North Carolina Wildlife
Resource Commission guidelines. Other methods such as baffles may also be used.
Please be aware that such placement may require the use of grade/velocity control
measures up or down stream of culverts on steeper streams to prevent head-cuts or
streambed erosion. The culvert placement relative to the streambed can be indicated on
the longitudinal profile. Grade and velocity control measures must be indicated on the
plan view and typical designs should be provided.
^ Multiple culverts, wide culverts or sectioned box culverts typically require the use of sills,
off-setting or other means to match the cross section of the existing stream (in order to
maintain stream stability and provide aquatic life passage). A vertical cross section of the
culverts should be shown overlain with the up and downstream stream cross section
including the stream flood-prone area.
^ Impacts associated with dam construction must indicate and enumerate all fill associated
with the dam footprint, spillway and any bank stream bank stabilization. The length of
stream impounded must also be indicated and enumerated.
Stream Relocations:
^ Stream relocations must be conducted as specified in General Certification numbers
3402 and 3404 (available on the Wetlands Unit web site). Stream relocation plans must
include:
^ Morphological measurements (see Appendix B of the Internal Technical Guide for Stream
Work in North Carolina available on the Wetlands Unit web site) -not all of the
measurements are applicable in every instance.
^ Typical stream cross sections - Typically, a riffle cross section and a pool cross section
that includes the entire flood prone area. The bankfull and flood prone area elevations
should be indicated. Similarly, a riffle cross section of the reference stream(s) should be
provided.
^ Plan view -Provide scaled plans that show the location of the proposed (preferably with
stationing) and the existing stream. In most instances, the bankfull contours and flood
prone area contours, in stream structures, bank revetments/stabilization, channel plugs,
planting plan, vegetation conditions, stormwater outlets, grade controls, bridges, culverts,
sewer lines, roads, fencing, and easement lines should also be provided.
^ Longitudinal Stream Profile - A scaled profile that indicates the thalweg, bankfull, and top
of bank elevations should be provided for the design and reference streams. In many
cases, it will also be necessary to show the existing land elevations for the design
stream.
^ Planting Plan - A planting and/or vegetation management plan should also be provided
that makes use of appropriate native vegetation. The plan should indicate the extent,
density, and species of plants to be provided.
^ In-stream structure, bank revetment/stabilization, and stormwater outlet typicals -
Detailed, typical plans should be provided for all in stream structures, bank revetments or
stabilization, and stormwater outlets. The typicals should include materials and
specifications as well as relative lengths, positions, and angles.
^ Sediment transport analysis - A sediment transport analysis should be provided based
on the current, relevant, accepted practices. The sediment transport analysis should be
relevant to the streambed load type and should predict bed load transport equilibrium.

^ Permanent conservation easement or similar means of protection must also be provided.
Other Information:
^ 1. The project should always be referred to by this name in all correspondence as well
as the DWQ # once it is provided.
^ 2. This only applies to DOT projects, which are not expected to utilize the Express
Review Program.
^ 3. This should be the size of the project as identified by the USACE for 404 Permits or
by the Division of Water Quality for Buffer Approvals and Isolated Wetland Permits.
^ 4. Please provide the name (as depicted on the USGS topographic map and DWQ
Stream Classification Lists) of the nearest water body(ies) to which your project is a
tributary to (e.g. "Neuse River (Falls Lake below normal pool elevation)"). (Do not
simple state "stream", "river", "ocean", "sound" or "lake'.) Please provide the "stream
index number" of the named water body or water body section (e.g. "27-(1)"). Also,
please provide the full water quality classification (e.g. "WS-IV NSW CA") of the water
body. This information can be obtained from the DWQ web site
http://h2o.enr.state. nc. us/bims/Reports/reportsW B. html.
^ 5. Please state which river basin and sub-basin that your project is in (e.g. "Neuse River
Basin, NEU01"). This information can be obtained from the DWQ web site
http://h2o.enr.state. nc. us/bims/Reports/reportsWB. html.
^ 6. Conditions should also be indicated on the existing site plan where applicable.
Photos (including aerial photos) can be helpful in describing the existing conditions.
^ 7. You must provide an attachment that explicitly describes what the proposed project
will entail from the planning stage to final construction.
^ 8. This can be a simple explanation, but it is critically important because the purpose
dictates how the no practical alternatives are reviewed.
SECTION IV -PRIOR PROJECT HISTORY
^ Please include copies of all 401 Water Quality Certifications, Isolated Wetland
Permits, Buffer Approvals, USACE Permits, CAMA Permits for the site as well as a
copy of the final approved, site plan.
SECTION V -FUTURE PROJECT PLANS
^ For projects utilizing the express review process, all impacts both present and
potential future must be indicated. For instance, the location or configuration of
platted lots sometimes suggests that future impacts will be necessary to build,
access, or otherwise develop such lots. Failure to account for such potential impacts
could delay or disqualify a project from the rapid review process. If you believe that
the lot can be developed without impacts, but you anticipate that your assertion may
be questioned, it is recommended that you provide a potential building foot print
and/or grading plan to show that future impacts could be avoided.
SECTION VI -PROPOSED IMPACTS TO WATER OF THE US
^ 1. It is recommended that the individual impacts be described if there are special things
to note about the impacts. Typically the most important thing is to have detailed
accurate site plans as described above. Please make sure they are clearly labeled.
^ Please include all proposed temporary impacts.

7
^ Also, a current, signed delineation map from the USACE should be provided (if
available) and a map locating the stream origins signed by the appropriate DWQ
Staff must be provided if applicable.
^ 2. Each impact to a wetland must be clearly labeled and identified on the site plan. The
type of impact must be clearly stated. If the impact is temporary, a specific plan must
be described or shown as to how the wetland will be restored. Keep in mind that the
USACE delineates some features as wetlands that DWQ calls streams. Please list
any impacts in this table that DWQ would identify as a stream. If there is any doubt,
it is recommended that the impacts be listed as streams. Please follow current DWQ
policy with respect to whether a stream is perennial or not. It is recommended that
you assume that a stream is perennial (unless you are positive that it is not) so if
mitigation is required then the appropriate amount of mitigation would be anticipated
or requested from the EEP or private bank. If the EEP or private bank has pre-
approved too short of an amount of stream or if inadequate mitigation is proposed,
then that situation will result in delays.
^ 3. Sometimes it is difficult to determine whether a feature is a modified natural channel
or a ditch, especially in the eastern part of the State. Soils, drainage features,
topography, macroinvertebrates, and similar factors, all are important for making that
determination.
^ 4. Other items to address not specifically requested in the application include
downstream sediment starvation, thermal pollution, low flow releases from dams, and
aquatic life passage. Other important considerations are buffer reestablishment or
mitigation around ponds on buffered streams. The site plan should include the
precise elevation contour of the normal pool as well as the dam footprint. Mitigation
is required for wetland flooding of an acre or greater and for stream fill (if over the
150 foot threshold) under the dam footprint and any outlet stabilization.
SECTION VII -AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
Avoidance and minimization are critical aspects of an application particularly if you desire the application
to be processed expeditiously. The following is a checklist of avoidance and minimization questions that
DWQ Staff often look for in applications.
^ Are there any stream crossings at angles less than 75° or greater than 105°?
^ Are there any stream crossings that cross two streams above or at the confluence of those
streams?
^ Are there any stream, wetland, water, and/or buffer impacts other than perpendicular road
crossing near the edges of the property?
^ Can the stream be relocated as a natural channel design as opposed to culverted or
otherwise filled?
^ Is any single stream crossed more than once?
^ Can property access routes be moved or reduced to avoid stream, wetland, water, and
buffer impacts?
^ Can a building, parking lot, etc. be realigned to avoid impacts?
^ Can the site layout be reconfigured to avoid impacts?
^ Can headwalls or steeper side slopes be used to avoid/minimize impacts?

Can a retaining wall be used to avoid/minimize impacts?
Can cul de sacs be used in place of a crossing?
Can lots be reshaped or have shared driveways to avoid impacts?
If based solely on the practicable physical possibility, the answer is "yes" to any of the above questions
then you must have to provide substantial and convincing justification as to why the impacts are
necessary. If the impacts are required by a local government or other agency, the claim must be
supported with appropriate written documentation from the local government or other agency. Most
projects typically involve the need to justify avoidance and minimization. If this information is not readily
available, then the express review process may not be the appropriate venue to use. Providing
alternative plans (such as plans that avoid the impact, minimize the impact and the preferred plan, similar
to those used in environmental assessments) and explanations as to why the preferred plan is needed
and why the alternative plans won't work are many times helpful in the no practical alternatives review.
SECTION VIII -MITIGATION
Mitigation for the Express Review Program, final mitigation plans must be presented up front. The final
plans (except for plans that propose payment into the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP), Riparian
Buffer Restoration Fund, private mitigation banks, or similar banking instruments) must contain detailed
plans, specifications, calculations and other supporting data that show that the appropriate mitigation will
be achieved at the ratios required. The design plans must be developed to at least the "90%" level.
Monitoring plans must be final and specific. Any means of permanent protection, such as a permanent
conservation easement must be provided. If you elect to use the EEP or a private mitigation bank, it is
recommended that you request the maximum possible mitigation amount that DWQ may require so that
you will not have to get further approval from them on short notice. The EEP and private banks are not
part of the expedited review process and cannot be expected to meet any such deadlines. There will be
no conditional expedited approvals that require final plans at a later date. It is not recommended that
innovative mitigation techniques or greater than 10% preservation be requested as part of an expedited
process.
SECTION IX
If your project requires the preparation of an environmental document under NEPA or SEPA and an
approval letter has not been issued by the State Clearinghouse, then you cannot apply under the
expedited review process. It is your responsibility to find out if such documentation is required.
SECTION X
There are many aspects of the Buffer Rules that must be addressed in every application, if applicable.
The first and most important thing to keep in mind is that allowable activities that require written Approval
from DWQ triggers a review of the entire project for compliance with the Buffer Rules.
Diffuse Flow & stormwater Management:
^ The most common issues that arise involve the requirement for diffuse flow of stormwater
through riparian buffers. Basically one of three things must be indicated in regards to all
"new" stormwater that is collected and subsequently discharged. First, provisions for
diffuse flow through the protected buffer must be made. This usually involves the use of
level spreading devices designed to the latest DWQ guidance on level spreader design,
which is available on our web site. Please keep in mind that it does not matter how far a
discharge point is from a buffer. The stormwater must be flowing in a diffuse manner at
whatever point it eventually reaches the buffer. If the stormwater will not be flowing in a
diffuse manner through the protected buffer at the point it reaches the buffer, then one of
the following options may be allowed:
You may provide a nitrogen removing measure such as a forested filter strip,
grassed swale, stormwater wetland, etc. The measure employed should be

9
designed according to the NC DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices
Manual or other DWQ Guidance available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/regcert.html. After the nitrogen is treated, the
stormwater can be directly conveyed through the buffer with written DWQ approval.
^ You may discharge the stormwater to an existing man-made conveyance that
currently conveys stormwater through the protected buffer (assuming the
conveyance was not constructed in violation of the Rules) as long as that
conveyance does not need to be altered to convey the flow. Please remember that
there are no other choices. The following checklist is intended to help insure that
your application will not be deemed incomplete as a result of improper stormwater
design.
Stormwater Management (for Buffer Rules compliance only -Also, see Section XI):
^ All stormwater out-falls must be clearly shown and labeled on the site plan for projects in
Buffered watersheds. List each out-fall as labeled:
^ Option 1: Level spreading devices designed to the latest DWQ Guidance, and
devices that merely control velocity but do not provide diffuse flow such as rip rap
dissipators are not proposed. List each of these out-falls as labeled on the site
plan and provide a DWQ worksheet available at
http://h2o.enr.state. nc. us/ncwetlands/regcert. html:
^ Option 2: Nitrogen removing measures designed to DWQ Standards are
proposed for discharges for which diffuse flow through a protected Buffer cannot be
met. List each of these out-falls as labeled on the site plan and provide a DWQ
worksheet available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/regcert.html
^ Option 3: The stormwater will be discharged to an existing man-made (not
including modified natural channels) conveyance that carries the stormwater
through the Buffer. The conveyance was not constructed in violation of the Buffer
Rules. List each out-fall as labeled:
^ All stormwater out-fall must meet one of the options above. (Note: if you cannot check this
box your application will likely not be accepted into the express review process.)
Site Plans:
^ All applications on properties with DWQ protected buffers must clearly depict the buffers
and any impacts to the buffers on the site plans. The impact maps should clearly depict
both zones of the protected buffers and the proposed impact areas (provided in square
feet).
Surface Water >~ Buffer Delineations:
^ Any surface waters subject to DWQ protected buffers must be field located and accurately
depicted on the site plans and impact maps. The width, dimensions and pattern of the
surface water must be delineated. The surface water location must not be taken simply
from a USGS map, soil survey or local municipality's map. The buffers must be measured
from the surface water as required within the applicable buffer protection rule (e.g., all
buffers along streams subject to the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules must be
measured from the "top-of-bank" of the stream and not the centerline of the stream). All
streams must be surveyed or located by GPS and shown precisely on the site plans.
Impact Table:

10
^ Please provide additional impact tables that clearly state the area of impact for each
corresponding impact site.
Variances:
^ Projects that require a Major and/or "General" Variance will not be eligible for the use of the
Express Review Program (with the exception of the Coastal General "Major" Variance.
Mitigation:
^ As opposed to applications that are submitted under our regular process, final mitigation
plans must be presented upfront (see requirements for Section VIII above). The mitigation
plans must comply with the applicable buffer mitigation rule.
SECTION XI - STORMWATER
Please provide the following information in regards to potential stormwater requirements:
^ The total acreage of the site. (acres)
^ The total built-out impervious acreage (acres)
^ The total area that will be disturbed (acres)
^ If the total area exceeds 20% imperviousness, the development on the site is uniform in
density, and you claim that the total impervious area is less than 30%, you must provide a
complete, detailed breakdown of the assumed built-out conditions. The breakdown must
be detailed enough to show that all potential impervious areas are accounted for.
^ If there are concentrated areas of development such as multi-family, commercial, cluster,
club houses, etc. that exceed 30% imperviousness and the total imperviousness for the site
does not exceed 30%, a stormwater management plan will likely be required for those
areas that exceed 30% imperviousness.
^ stormwater management plans must be complete with a final design and an executed
Operation and Maintenance Agreement. There will be no conditional stormwater approvals
for the express review process that allow for approval of the final plans at a later date.
Worksheets must be provided that are available at
http://h2o.eh n r.state. nc. us/ncwetlands/mitresto. htm I.
SECTION XII -SEWAGE DISPOSAL
^ Response must be clear and detailed. Any disposal method that suggests further impacts
may be required other than those shown must be clearly addressed on the site plans.
SECTION XIII
^ Answering yes to either of these responses automatically precludes you from the express
review process.
SECTION XIV -SIGNATURE
^ The name, position and/or title of the applicant must be in type or long hand script here with
the signature. It should be the same person as described in Part II.
If you have any questions about these requirements, please email the Express Review Program at
401 [e-mail] and include your question and phone number and the appropriate staff will
respond as soon as possible.

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. ~ ~ ~~ ' 1 `~ ~ 1 y 2'
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
P~.i
1. Check all of the a royals re uested for this ro' ect:
PP () q p J
®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: Nationwide No. 12
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), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Wake County Public School System
Facilities Planning & Construction Management p ~(~~ ~~~
1551 Rock Quarry Road v
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610 APR 9 2008
Contact: Mr. Jeff K. Young DENR-WATER®UALITY
WETtlWDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
Telephone Number: 919-856-8291 Fax Number: 919-856-2911
Email Address: ikyoung~).wcpss.net
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: Jason Volker
Company Affiliation: S&ME, Inc.
Mailing Address: 3201 Spring Forest Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Telephone Number: 919.-880-3137 Fax Number: 919-876-3958
E-mail Address: ivolker~ir~smeinc.com
Page 5 of 16

R%$ t kill . ;'n 7.Xs

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 maybe 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: E-31 Elementary School
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): Not a NCDOT Project.
3. Property Identification Number: 1629176780
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Garner
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): No subdivisions are proposed.
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.):
The project site (about 50.44 acres) is located on the east side of Bryan Road, south of
the intersection with Ackerman Road. An unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek crosses
Bryan Road and forms the northern and eastern boundary of the project site.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long):
(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.)
Project Location: 35.6689 °N, 78.5898 °W
6. Property size (acres): The project area is approximately 50.44 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek (current
classification C; NSW)
8. River Basin: Neuse, NEU02 Subbasin, Stream Index No: 27-43-9
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The River
Basin map is available at http:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/admii~/maps/.)
Page 6 of 16

Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project at
the time of this application:
This site is mostly cleared field with some wooded area. A vacant and dilapidated
wood-frame house and shed/pen are located near Bryan Road on the western portion of
the site. The adjacent land use includes woodland, residential development, and
maintained grassland. An unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek crosses Bryan road
and forms the northern and eastern property boundary. A residential subdivision
(Bingham Station) exists north of the site, across two channels of the unnamed
tributary. Note that the unnamed tributary is divided into two channels at the location
of the proposed sewer line crossing. These buffered channels are separated by a
distance of approximately 130 feet. Jurisdictional wetlands were determined to exist
between and adjacent to the two channels.
9. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The applicant is pursuing the partial development of the approximately 50.44-acre tract
for construction of an elementary school. The school building, parking lot, multi-
purpose playing field, and bio-retention basin are proposed to be located on the
southern portion of the site. At some time in the future, as part of a separate project, a
middle school may be constructed on the northern portion of the site.
In order to provide the necessary utility services for the elementary school, an 8-inch
sanitary sewer line is proposed to be installed that will run from the proposed school
location northward across two channels of the unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek via
the City of Raleigh permanent sewer easement to the existing sewer line servicing the
Bingham Station residential subdivision. The two channels of the unnamed tributary
are separated by approximately 130 feet of jurisdictional wetland. The crossing of the
two channels will be perpendicular. Impacts resulting from the installation of the sewer
line are confined within the permanent sewer easement. Approximately 60 linear feet
(cumulative) of impacts to these channels are proposed. Impact of approximately 6,000
square feet (cumulative) of riparian buffers associated with the two channels is also
proposed. These impacts are based on a 30-foot construction corridor. The existing
sewer line that services the Bingham Station subdivision is connected to the City of
Raleigh Neuse River Waste Water Treatment Facility.
A 12-inch water main is also proposed to be installed. It will run from the school
westward to Bryan Road and then northward within the road easement, intersect
perpendicularly one channel of the unnamed tributary, and connect to the existing
water main near Ackerman Road. The impacts resulting from the installation of the
water line will be limited to a riparian buffer impact of about 3,000 square feet (based
on a 30-foot construction corridor) and 30 linear feet of impact to the unnamed
tributary of Mahlers Creek. Note that the unnamed tributary is a single channel at this
location.
Another proposed impact will result in approximately 1,100 square feet of Zone 2
Buffer being temporarily impacted east of the school. The extent of this impact has
Page 7 of 16

been minimized, but will impact an outside portion of Zone 2. This is necessary due to
the shape of the parcel, placement of the bio-retention basin on the low side of the site,
and the restriction of not being able to place the sewer line under the bio-retention
basin.
A total of approximately 10,100 square feet (about 0.23 acres) of Neuse riparian buffer
impacts (based on the 30-foot wide construction corridors) is proposed. The utility lines
will be installed using heavy equipment and the stream channels will be returned to
their original dimensions to the greatest extent practicable when the installations are
completed. The proposed Zone 2 Buffer impact of approximately 1,100 square feet east
of the school will be graded and grass vegetation will be established and maintained.
Maintenance corridors will be limited to a width of 10 feet.
A portion of Bryan Road, which borders the western property line, is proposed to be
relocated on the site. In total, approximately 9.0 acres of impervious surface is
proposed to be constructed on the site. This equals approximately 18% of the total site
area.
10. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
The impacts to the unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek and associated riparian buffer
and wetland impacts are necessary in order to provide water and sanitary sewer
services to the proposed public elementary school.
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
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC) performed wetland and stream
delineations on the subject site on March 12 and 16, 2007. Results of their findings are
documented in the attached letter report dated May 3, 2007. A stream assessment was
conducted by Lia Myott of NCDENR on August 31, 2007 at S&ME's request to determine
the applicability of Neuse buffer rules to on-site streams. A letter dated August 31, 2007
documenting Ms. Myott's findings is attached. S&ME performed additional delineation of
wetlands in the vicinity of the existing City of Raleigh sewer easement and met with Mr.
James Shern from the USACE on October 31, 2007 to review the wetland delineations and
other jurisdictional features on-site. A letter report dated November 6, 2007 documenting
the findings of the site meeting is attached.
Page 8 of 16

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.
We do not anticipate that this project will result in future impacts to jurisdictional areas
beyond those described in this application, or require additional USACE or DWQ permits.
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 maybe 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:
Based on 30-foot construction corridors for the placement of one 8-inch diameter sewer
line and one 12-inch diameter water main, the proposed impacts to Waters of the United
States total approximately 90 linear feet of stream and 6,750 square feet (about 0.15 acre)
of jurisdictional wetland. Proposed jurisdictional wetland impacts are contained within
the permanent City of Raleigh sewer easement. The water line will be installed for the
most part within the Bryan Road right-of--way but will also cross one channel of the
unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek requiring an impact to that feature.
2. 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
(indicate on Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year Nearest Stream Impact (acres)
map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain (linear feet)
(yes/no
A permanent forested yes adjacent 0.15
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 1.9 acres
Page 9 of 16

4. 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.
Stream Impact
Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on ma) Intermittent? Before Im act linear feet acres
Unnamed
1 tributary of Permanent Perennial 3 ft. 30 0.002
Mahlers Creek
Unnamed
2 tributary of Permanent Perennial 3 ft. 30 0.002
Mahlers Creek
Unnamed
3 tributary of Permanent Perennial 6 ft. 30 0.004
Mahlers Creek
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 90 0.008
5. 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.
There are no open-water impacts.
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
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.008
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.15
Open Water Impact (acres): None
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.16
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 90
7. 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.
No Impact to Isolated Waters
Page 10 of 16

8. 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
VII.
No ponds are proposed. Abio-retention basin will be utilized.
One 1.48-acre bio-retention basin and another 1.05-acre basin (used as a forebay) are
planned for stormwater management on-site. Survey drawings prepared by The
Wooten Company illustrating the preliminary layout are attached. The stormwater
management plans are currently being reviewed by the Town of Garner.
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): Excavation/embankment - A retaining wall is
proposed to be used with the bio-retention basin.
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): Stormwater management
Size of watershed draining to pond: 13.7 acres drain to the bio-retention basin
Expected pond surface area: 1.48 acres ofbio-retention basin surface
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 proposed project has been designed to avoid unnecessary impacts. These avoidance
measures resulted in minimal proposed impacts to wetlands, riparian buffers, and
temporary impacts to waters of the U.S. The utility corridors have been designed to cross
the stream at near perpendicular orientations (between 75 and 105 degrees). The proposed
maintenance corridor width is 10 feet. Jurisdictional wetland impacts are contained within
the existing permanent City of Raleigh sewer easement.
The proposed impact to the outside portion of the Zone 2 Buffer (approximately 1,100
square feet) is necessary due to the shape of the parcel, placement of the bio-retention basin
on the low side of the site, and the restriction of not being able to place the sewer line under
the bio-retention basin. The impacted area will be graded and grass vegetation will be
maintained.
Page 11 of 16

Justification for not using the directional bore technique to install pipe includes: a) The
sewer line has to be on line and on grade and directional boring technique is not accurate
enough, and b) the depth of the water line would need to be deeper for directional bore.
Maintenance of the water line and the likelihood of hitting additional rock is a concern.
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 January 15, 2002, 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 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.
Impacts have been avoided and minimized to the extent practicable. Appropriate
mitigation for the proposed project includes avoidance and minimization procedures
implemented during the design phase of the proposed project.
We do not anticipate that our client will be required to provide additional
compensatory mitigation since avoidance and minimization efforts have been
undertaken in the planning process. Temporary impacts are limited to 901inear feet of
stream channel. Approximately 0.15 acre of jurisdictional wetland will also be
Page 12 of 16

impacted. Jurisdictional wetland impact is located within the permanent City of
Raleigh sewer easement on the northern portion of the site. The unavoidable wetland
impacts are all adjacent to the unnamed tributary of Mahlers Creek. Stream and
wetland impacts are below their respective thresholds, above which require mitigation.
Maintenance corridors will be 10 feet wide.
In addition, impacts to the Neuse riparian buffers are limited to approximately 10,100
square feet (about 0.23 acre) and it is our understanding that the activity is allowable
without mitigation based on a review of the Table of Uses in 15A NCAC 02B .0233 (6).
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 willing 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): None
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): None
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): None
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): None
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): None
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
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 a NEPA/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.
Page 13 of 16

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 ^
Meuse Riparian Buffers
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
(s uare feet Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 6,500 ----- -----
2 3,600 ----- -----
Total 10,100
* 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.
Based on 15A NCAC 2B .0233 and the calculated acreages, mitigation threshold are not
exceeded and therefore no buffer mitigation is anticipated.
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 plans are currently in review by the Town of Garner. Approximately
9.0 acres of impervious area (about 18% of the total area of the site) is proposed for
construction of the elementary school and relocation of a portion of Bryan Road. One
1.48-acre bio-retention pond and another 1.05-acre basin (used as a forebay to the bio-
retention pond) are planned for stormwater management on-site. The total watershed
area (including the bio-retention and forebay basin) equals about 13.7 acres.
Survey drawings prepared by The Wooten Company illustrating a preliminary layout
(currently in review by The Town of Garner) are attached. A level spreader device will
be used to discharge diffuse flow to the existing washout near the receiving stream.
Flow calculations and across-section diagram of the proposed device are included in
this application package.
The detailed description provided by McNeely Associates P.A. is as follows:
Page 14 of 16

It is our intention to provide a distribution box at the Bioretention outlet location. Each
side of the box will have 12" diameter outlets at invert elevation of 272.00 (bottom of
level spreader). The lip elevation of the level spreader will be at 273.00. The length of
the level spreader will be based on the Ql routed flow out of the basin of 0.65 cfs. This
will be 65 feet X 0.65 = 42.25 feet minimum total (22 feet each side of box will be used).
An over flow 15" RCP pipe from the box will be set at elevation 273.15 and empty
through a 15" FES onto arip-rap apron sized for the routed Q10 of 5.7 cfs. We will
then use a 20 feet wide pyramat lined trapezoidal grassed channel (1.91 fps velocity per
attached calculation) for approximately 65 feet to carry the Q10 safely to an existing
washout near the stream. We will filUline the washout with 30" deep NCDOT Class 1
Rip-rap to convey the water safely into the stream without further washout or stream
bank erosion.
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.
The subject property will be connected to municipal sewer.
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:/Ih2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This project does not provide access to otherwise inaccessible properties and is not likely to
result in cumulative impacts that will cause a violation to downstream water quality
standards.
Page 15 of 16

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).
i~kSe~V V OGkc iP ~- ~ ' D
A~pJic~ant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 16 of 16

~S8cME
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: 4-9-08
Project Information
S&ME Project Name: E-31 Elementary School
Type of Project: 401 and Nationwide Permitting Services
Location: Wake County, North Carolina
Property OwnerlRepresentative Information
Business Name:
Mailing Address:
City, State, Zip Code
Telephone No.
Contact:
Wake County Public School System
1551 Rock Quarry Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27610
919-856-8291
Jeff Young
Agent Information
', Business Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip Code:
Telephone No.
Contact:
S&ME, Tnc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
Raleigh, NC 27616
919-880-3137
Mr. Jason Volker
Authorization: I ~ behalf of
'on t Signature
W~~n-~~~~~~~e~.t~~-tx~ereby authorize
(Name of La~r downer or Representative)
S&ME to act as agent with the USACE and DWQ in connection
with the above-mentioned project.
Q~c~~odr~
APR 9 2008
DENR - WATER ~UAl1TV
yyE'I-,ANDS AND STORMWATER BRAI'iDN

TIft-
-7-
A.
-7
A"
C7
�a Zy
J,
W
V0
fl!
�5
�7
J i. SITE
ACKERMAN ROAD
c;
ln�
za
Y
k
A"k
clRios
0
Ns'
P 11
q
o
k, cis
Z-V
IIWEP�UAUP
M ST
BA10
GARNER, NORTH CAROLINA USGS QUADRANGLE, DATED 1964, PHOTOREVISED 1987 1
NOTE:
THE ABOVE GIS DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM WAKE COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS) 0 1,500 3,000 6,000
DEPARTMENT WEB SITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT Feet
FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME, INC.
ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON
, ,
INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE ABOVE DATA.
A,
SCALE: AS SHOWN FIGURE
DATE, 3-4-08 VICINITY MAP No
DRAWN BY: ALV S&M E E-31 ELEMENTARY BRYAN ROAD
PROJECT NO: WWW.SMEINC.COM GARNER, NORTH CAROLINA
L 1054-07-374

II
t~
'l~
~~j`;F
f~:
~~'~ ,~ ,,
~T---
-___. `_
/----_ ACKERMAN ROAD
131 \
CHANNELS OF ~~ ~
UNNAMED TRIBUTARIES
OF MAHLERS CREEK
APPROXIMATE LOCATION
OF SEWER EASMENT
r
~e SITE
~~.~-,
ti~
o,~o
;T~
~ :~"
D C~C~a~]C
~ PR 9 2008
~.. _. ~.rrco.ra Sri ~ ~''o
_,.. f r u. ,~. ,
PROPOSED
I SCHOOL
'i SITE
SEE ATTACHED SURVEY _ ~- ~ __
DRAWINGS FOR DETAILED
BUFFER AND WETLAND IMPACTS
Legend
2-FOOT ELEVATION CONTOURS
L_~..._I APPROXIMATE AREA OF DELINEATED WETLAND
3 STREAM IMPACT NUMBER
NOTE:
THE ABOVE GIS DATA WAS OBTAINED FROM WAKE COUNTY GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS (GIS)
DEPARTMENT WEB SITE. PLEASE NOTE THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT 0 20o aoo aoo
FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES ABOUT ITS ACCURACY. S&ME, INC. Feet
ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON \
INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM THE ABOVE DATA. \ \
SCALE: AS SHOWN
FIGURE
DATE: SITE MAP NO.
3-4-08
DRAWN sY: ' E-31 ELEMENTARY, BRYAN ROAD
JLV ~~''-
PROJECTNO: GARNER, NORTH CAROLINA
\ 1054-07-374 ,

_..
,: ; _ _
., s _,
scA~e NTS
FIGURE
DATE: NRCS SOIL MAP NO
3-4-08 S&M E
oRAwri ev: JLV _, E-31 ELEMENTARY, BRYAN ROAD
PROJECT"o: GARNER, NORTH CAROLINA
1054-07-374

Channel Report
Hydratlow Express by Intelisolve
E31 Bioretention Outlet Channel
Trapezoidal
Botom Width {ft) = 17.00
Side Slope {z:1) = 3.00
Total Depth {ft) = 0.68
Invert Elev (ft) = 273.00
Slope (%) = 2.00
N-Value = 0.030
Calculations
Compute by: Known Q
Known Q (cfs) = 5.70
E1ev (ft)
274.00
273.75
273.50
273.25
273.00
272.75
Section
Monday, Apr 7 2D08, 8:31 AM
Highlighted
Depth (ft) = 0.17
Q (cfs) = 5.700
Area (sgft) = 2.98
Velocity (ft/s) = 1.91
Wetted Perim (ft) = 18.08
Crit Depth, Yc (ft) = 0.16
Top Width (ft) = 18.02
EGL (ft) = 0.23
~ 5 10
15 20
Reach {ft)
25 30
Depth (ft)
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
~- -0.25
35

~~ l~/iACT~~
;~
-j---- engineering and constructing a better tomorrow
May 3, 2007
Betty L. Parker, Director
Real Estate Services
Wake County Public School System
1551 Rock Quarry Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27610
Subject: Results of Waters of the U.S. Delineation
Bryan Property
Garner, North Carolina
MACTEC Project 6470-07-1720
Dear Mrs. Parker:
MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc. (MACTEC) is pleased to submit this report concerning the
preliminary detennination of waters of the U.S. and Neuse Riparian Buffer Rule applicability on a 54.2 acre
undeveloped parcel (Subject Property). This report documents the methodology used to assess approximate
boundaries of jurisdictianal waters of the U.S. and Neuse Riparian Buffer Rule applicability, the results of
our studies, and a summary of potential. permitting requirements under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344) and Section 15 of the North Carolina Administrative Code {15A NCAC 028.0233), also
known as the Neuse Buffer Rules.
Background and Methodolagy
The 54.2 acre subject property is located south of the intersection of Ackerman Road with Bryan Road in
Wake County, Garner, North Carolina (Figure l). The subject property is currently undeveloped, anal
surrounding land use adjacent to the subject property includes wooded land, residential development and
maintained grassland (Figure 2}. A delineation of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, was conducted
within the boundaries of the subject property.
Jurisdictional waters of the United States such as ponds, streams, and wetlands are defined by 33 CFR
328.3(b) and are protected by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), which is
administered and enforced in North Carolina by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE},
Wilmington District.
1iAC'I'EC Engineering and Consulting, [nc.
3301 Atiaatic Avenue • Raleigh, NC 27604 • Phone: [phone] Pax: 919.83 L8136
W W W. ~ttdC tGC. COt7t

Bryan Property rt1ACTEC Project Na.: 6470-07-1720
GVaters of tl~e U.S Delineation May 3, 2007
GVake County, North Carolina Page 2
Jurisdictional wetlands are defined in the field as areas that have positive evidence of three
environmental parameters:
• Hydrophytic vegetation (vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions),
• Wetland hydrology (substrate that is inundated or saturated to the surface at some time during the
growing season.),
• Hydric soils (soils that possess characteristics that are associated with reducing/anaerobic soil
conditions).
The Neuse Buffer Rules, administered by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resource (NCDENR), Division of Water Qttality {DWQ), protect the first 50 feet of riparian buffer
adjacent to surface waters (intermittent/perenniai streams, lakes, and ponds) in the Neuse River Basin
"that are approximately shown on the most recent version of either the USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle
topographic map or the NRCS. Soil Survey". The three stream ratings are generally defined as follows:
• Ephemeral stream: a drainage feature that carries stonnwater in direct response to precipitation,
• intermittent stream: a well-defined channel that may contain water for only part of the year, and
• Perennial stream: awell-defined channel that contains water year round during a year of normal
rainfall.
Wetlands observed within the subject property were delineated using the Routine On-Site Determination
Method as defined in the Cbrps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Observations of soils,
vegetation, and hydrology were made in order to delineate the appropriate wetland/upland boundaries.
Previously-mapped stream channels observed within the subject property were delineated in accordance
with the stream evaluation protocols described in DWQ's Identification Methods for the Origins of
Intermittent and Perennial Streanzs~,Yersion 3.1 (DWG 1Llethvdj, dated February 28, 2005. The DWQ
Method is a qualitative anal quantitative assessment of channel characteristics (i.e., biological,
hydrological., and geomorphological components) for the purpose of documenting ephemeral (non-
jurisdictional) versus intermittent or perennial channels (potentially jurisdictional).
' Environmental Labvratvry. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Washington, D.C. 100 pp. and Appendices
'NC Division of Water Quality. 2005. Identification Methods, for the Origins of intermittent and Perennial Streams,
Version 3.1. NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Divisivn of Water ~hraliry. Raleigh, NC. 38 pp.
and Appendices

13ryan Properly
GYaters of the U.S Delineation
4Yake County, 1Vorth Carolina
tLfACTEC Project No.: 6471)-07-1720
Mny 3, 2007
Page 3
A stream channel is classified as intermittent by the DWQ Method if it obtains a total score greater than
or equal to 19 on the corresponding Stream Identification Form (SIF). A stream reach is classified as
perennial if the total score is greater than or equal to 30 on the SIF. There are certain cases where a
stream may receive a score of less than 30 points but be classified as perennial if particular biological
indicators are present such as .fish, crayfish, amphibians, clams, or specific families of benthic
macroinvertebrates.
Delineated wetland and stream. boundaries were approximated based on mapped landscape features and a
limited amount of GPS data points. Wetland polygons and stream segments were generated, digitized,
and overlaid on Wake County 2005 aerial photography and NCDOT 2-foot elevation contours.
Approximate location information provided i.n this document is intended for preliminary planning
purposes only.
Prior to fieldwork, the following references were reviewed to identify potential locations of waters of the
U.S..
1) United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Garner, N.C. Topographic Map, dated 1973;
2) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory {NWI) Geographic
Information System (GIS) Shapetile;
3) Wake County Soil Survey, Sheets 86 and 87 of 104, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
Resources Conservation Service {N RCS), dated 1970;
4) List of Hydric Soils of Wake County, prepared by the NRCS, dated 1997; and
5) Wake County GIS, 2005 Color Aerial Orthophotography.
The USGS map depicts an intermittent stream in the vicinity of the eastern anal northern property
boundaries, and a small portion of a pond within the subject property {Figure 1). Wetlands mapped by
NWI did not appear within the subject property. The Wake County Soil Survey concurs with the USGS
map in the depiction. and location of an intermittent stream and pond within the subject property {Figure
3). hi addition, the Soil Survey indicates a second intermittent stream (52) flowing into S1 in the
southeastern portion of th.e subject property.
The Sail Survey also indicates the presence of four soil map units within the subject property that are
presented in the table below. The Wehadkee and Bibb Soils (Wo) and Worsham Sandy Loam (Wy)

Bryan Property
YT~aters of the U.S Delineation
Wake County, c1'orth Carolina
:1~I~tCTFC Project rVo.: 6470-07-1720
Mcry 3, 2007
Page 4
mapping units are included on the list of Hydric Soilsz of Wake County and are classified as Hydric A
soil mapping units.
Table 1: NRCS Soil Mapping Units Within Subject Property
Ma S mbol MaP1aing Unit Descriptio_n_ _~ciric Sta#us
A 82 Ap lin Sand Loam; 2 To 6 Percent Sla es, Eroded Non-Hydric
Dub Durham LaamY Sand, 2 To 6 Percent Slopes Non-H dric
Du(3 Durham Loamy Sand, 2 To 6 Percent Slopes Non-H dric
LoC Louisbur Loam Sand, 6 To 10 Percent Slo es Non-H dric
LoD Louisbur Loam Sand, 10 To 15 Percent Slo es Non-H dric
LoD Louisburg Loamy Sand, 10 To 15 Percent Slo es Non-H dric
WkE Wake Soils, 10 To 25 Percent Slo es Non-H dric
Wm62 Wedowee Sand Loam, 2 To 6 Percent Slo es, Eroded Non-H dric
WmB2 Wedowee Sand Loam, 2 To 6 Percent Slo es, Eroded Non-H dric
WmC2 Wedowee Sand Loam, 6 To 10 Percent Slo es, Erode Non-H dric
WmC2 Wedowee Sand Loam, 6 To 10 Percent Slopes, Erode Non-H dric
Wo Wehadkee And Bibb Soils H dric A
W Worsham Sand Loam H dric A
Findings of Field Review
MlACTEC Principal Scientist Richard Harmon, Project Scientist Amin Davis, and Staff Scientist Lauren
Saal conducted the field reconnaissance within the subject property on March 12 and March 16, 2007.
Results of the field observations indicate the presence of potential jurisdictional waters of the U.S. within
the subject property (Figures 2 and 4). Potential. jurisdictional areas and other potential non jurisdictional
areas identified on-site are as follows:
• Pond 1 [I'1 ]- a portion is situated in the southeastern corner of the subject property;
• Stream 1 [SIJ- originates at the ou.tfall of the pond in the southeastern portion of the subject
property;
• Stream 2 [S2J- originates in an upgradient topographic drainage feature in the southeastern
portion of the subject property;
• Wetland 1[W1J-situated i.n the southeastern portion of the subject property;
• Wetland 2[W2J-situated in the northeastern portion of the subject property;
• Wetland 3[W3J-situated in the northwestern portion of the subject property;
• Wetland 4[W4J- situated in the northwestern portion of the subject property;
z A soil formed under conditions ofsaturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop
anaerobic conditions in the upper part. A Hydric A mapping unit contains all hydric soils, or has hydric soils as a
major component.

Brvan Property d9ACTEC Project No.: 5470-07-1720
eaters of the 1LS Delineation Nfay 3, 2007
bT~ake County, .'Forth C"arolina Page J
• Wetland 5(W5J- sihiated in the northwestern portion of the subject property; and
• Wetland b(WCJ-situated in the northwestern portion of the subject property.
Surface Waters
Fond 1 (FIJ - A small portion of a pond was observed to be situated in the southeastern portion of the
subject property. This pond appears to be manmade and does not have a significant littoral zone around
its perimeter dominated by wetland plant species. Aquatic vegetation and wetland plant species were not
observed within the pond interior. PI appears to be jurisdictional due to its hydrologic connection with
Sl.
Stream 1 (SIJ - A jurisdictional stream channel was observed originating from and outfall pipe from Pl
and flowing into the southeastern portion of the subject property. S 1 comprises the eastern and northern
boundaries of the subject property. The Sl baseflow channel is approximately one to two feet wide and
less than i foot deep, with banks averaging Less than one foot above water surface level. Stream bed
substrate was predominantly gravel and cobble in the upstream reach, and predominantly sand in the
downstream reach. The riparian area along S 1 appeared to be intact with wooded vegetation of various
age and size classes within the subject property. S] was rated as perennial (DWQ score of 35.5) at its
origin within the subject property. The total length of Sl observed within the subject property was
approximately 3,200 linear feet.
Stream 2 jS2J -Anon jurisdictional drainage feature that originates at a headcut situated in an upgrad'tent
topographic depresssion i.n the southeastern portion of the subject property. No defined channel or
surface waters were observed within this topographic drainage feature.
Wetlands
Wetland 1 [W1J - A potentially jurisdictional wetland [W t ] was observed in a headwater topographic
drainageway in the southeastern portion of the subject property (Figure 2). The vegetation within this
wetland area was dominated by hydrophytic (wetland-adapted) species. Predominant species include Red
maple (~cer rubrum), sweetgum (Liquidambar sryraci~ua), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonlcera japonica),
and soft rush (Juncos effitsus).

B,yan Property MACTEC Project No.: 6470-07-1720
Waters of the U.S Delineation ,1?cry 3, 2007
Wake C'ot~nty, North Carolina Page 6
Wetland hydrology was indicated by the presence of surface water, water stained leaves, and
redoximorphic soil features in the upper i2 inches of the sail profile. Soil matrix colors of lOYR 4/2 and
l OYR 5/2 were observed with a sandy to sandy-loam texture. Wi encompasses approximately 0.2 acres.
Wetland 2 [w2J -- A potentially jurisdictional wetland [W2] was abserved in the northeastern portion of
the subject properly along the #loodplain of Stream 1 [SI] and extending landward to a topographic
contour break that extends across the northern boundary of the subject site (Figure 2}. The vegetation
within this wetland area was dominated by hydrophytic (wetland-adapted) species. Predominant species
include red maple, tulip tree (Liriodenron tttlipifera), sweetgum, Japanese honeysuckle, and soft rush.
Wetland hydrology was indicated by the depth to water in an unlined bore hole, which was 3 inches deep.
In addition, drainage patterns, water stained leaves, and oxidized root channels in the upper 12 inches of
the soil profile were observed within W2. Soil matrix colors of lOYR 4/1 were observed with a sandy
loam texture. The soils mapped w'sthin the floodplain of Sl (Wo, Wehadkee and Bibb soils) are listed as
1-Iydric A soils on the local Hydr-c Soils List for Wake County, North Carolina. W2 encompasses
approximately 1.1 acres.
Wetland 3 [W3J - A potentially jurisdictional wetland [W3] was observed in a headwater topographic
drainageway in the northeastern portion of the subject property (Figure 2). The vegetation within this
wetland area was daminated by hydrophytic (wetland-adapted) species. Predominant species include
American elm (Ulmus americana), red maple, creeping grass (11~licrostegium vimineum), and spicebush
(Lindera henzoin).
Wetland hydrology was indicated by the depth to water in an unlined bore hole of less than 6 inches deep.
Other indicators of wetland hydrology observed within W3 include drainage patterns and redoximorphic
sail features in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile. Soil matrix colors of iOYR 4/2 and lOYR 5/Z were
observed with a sandy to loamy-sand texture. W3 encompasses approximately 0.5 acres.
Wetland 4 [W4J - A potentially jurisdictional wetland [W4J was observed in the northwestern portion of
the subject property along the floodplain of Stream 1 [S 1 } and extending landward to a topographic
contour break that extends across the northern boundary of the subject site (Figure 2). The vegetation
within this wetland area was dominated by hydrophytic (wetland-adapted) species. Predominant species
include American sycamore (Platanus accidentalisj, red maple, tulip tree, giant cane (.4rundinaria
gigantea), and tag alder (~lntts serrulata).

Bryan Property MAC.TEC" Project No.: 4470-07-1720
Lfjaters of the U.S Delineation ,Play 3, 2007
Wake County, North Carolina Page 7
Wetland hydrology was indicated by the depth to water in an unlined bore hole, which was 3 inches deep.
Ln addition, drainage patterns, water stained leaves, and oxidized root channels in the upper l2 inches of
the soil protile were observed within W4. Soil matrix colors of l 0YR 3/1 were observed with a silty sand
loam texture. The soils mapped within the flooeiplain of Stream 1 (Wehadkee and Bibb soils) are Iisteci
as Hydric A soils on the local Hydric Soils List for Wake County, North Carolina. W4 encompasses
approximately 0.3 acres.
Wetland S [W5J - A potentially jurisdictional wetland [WS] was observed in the northwestern portion of
the subject property along the floodplain of Stream 1 [S I ] and extending landward to a topographic
contour break that extends across the northern boundary of the subject site (Figure 2}. The vegetation
within this wetland area was dominated by hydrophytic (wetland-adapted) species. Predominant species
include American sycamore, black willow (Sallx nigra), red maple, river birch (Betula nigra), Japanese
honeysuckle, and tag alder. .
Wetland hydrology was indicated by the depth to water in an unlined bore hole, which was 3 inches deep.
In addition, drainage patterns, water stained leaves, and oxidized root channels in the upper 12 inches of
the soil profile were observed within W5. Soil matrix colors of lOYR 3/1 were observed with a silty clay
loam texture. The soils mapped within the. floodplain of Stream t {Wo, Wehadkee and Bibb soils} are
listed as Hydric A soils on the local Hydric Soils List for Wake County, North Carolina. WS
encompasses approximately 1.3 acres.
Wetland S [W6J - A potentially jurisdictional wetland [W6] was observed in a headwater topographic
drainageway in the northwestern portion of the subject property (Figure 2}. The vegetation within this
wetland area was dominated by hydrophytic (wetland-adapted) species. Predominant species include
American ehn, red maple, creeping grass, and soft rush.
[ndicators of wetland hydrology observed within W6 include drainage patterns and redoximorphic soil
features in the upper l2 inches of the soil protile. Soil matrix colors of IOYR 4/2 and lOYR 5/2 were
observed with a sandy to sandy-loam texture. W6 encompasses approximately 0.3 acres.
The location and aerial extent of these resources have been estimated from remote sources, field
observations, and GPS mapping. This information is approximate and subject to change following
USAGE verification and final survey.

Bryan Property
t~Yaters of the U.S Delineation
Wake County, North Carolina
Threatened and Endangered Species ]Evaluation
,1~1ACTCC Project No.: G470-07-1720
rl~lay 3, 2007
Page 8
MACTEC conducted a literature search for federally Listed Threatened (T) and Endangered (E) plants and
animals known to have home ranges extending into Wake County (2006}. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program {NC NHP) list four species with federal
protection that have home ranges extending into Wake County {Table 1).
TahlP t~ Threatened and F,ndanuered Cneciec in Wake ("minty. North Carolina
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Record Status
Status
Bald ea ie Haliaeetus leucoce ~halus T Cun•ent
Vertebrate
Red-cockaded wood esker Picoides borealis E Current
Invertebrate Uwarf wed emussel Alasmidonta heterodon E Current
VPlantar Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii E Current

Habitat for bald eagle is generally adjacent to large aquatic habitats (coastal areas, rivers, lakes, and
reservoirs) with forested shorelines in the Southeast. They select large, super-canopy roost trees that are
open and accessible, and prefer live pines or cypress. The subject property does not contain suitable
forested area to support populations of bald eagles.
Habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) is generally associated with open and mature stands of
longleaf pine (Picots palustris) or other species of living southern pines encompassing 80-125 acres.
RCW's require open stands of pine containing trees 60 years old and older for nestinglroosting habitat,
and prefer stands of living pine trees 30 years old and older for foraging habitat. The subject property
does not contain the appropriate trees or suitable forested area to attract anal support nesting or foraging
RC W's.
Habitat for Dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) is generally associated with large rivers and
small streams with mixed substrates. This bivalve prefers streams situated in apredominantly-wooded
landscape with intact riparian buffers and good water quality. The subject property is not situated in a
wooded landscape and therefore is unlikely to support populations of Dwarf wedgemussel.
Habitat for Michaux's sumac {Rhus michauxii) is generally associated with sandy, loamy swales and
rocky open woods. Miehaux's sumac survives best in areas where some form of disturbance has provided
an open area, but this plant has low reproductive capacity. The subject property may contain areas of

Bryan Property rYfAC'lCC Project No.: 67(1-07-1720
Waters of the t,:S Delineation ,Llay 3, 2007
Wake County, North Carolina Page 9
potentially-suitable habitat, particularly at the upland edges where the cleared fields border the wooded
riparian area along the northern portion of the site (rigure 2}.
Regulatory Consideradons/Development Implications
Depending on the type and extent of waters of the U.S. {streams, ponds, and wetlands) to be impacted,
Section 404 permitting requirements can range from activities that are considered exempt or preauthorized, to
those requiring pre-construction notification (PCN) for a Nationwide Permit (NWP) or activities requiring a
Section 404 Individual Permit (IP) from the USACE. The completion of a PCN for a NWP would require a
discussion of the project's purpose and need, measures taken to avoid/minimize impacts, wetland mitigation
strategies, and the likelihood of having to address stone-water management. Following PCN submittal, the
USACE District Engineer (DE) must determine if the PCN is complete (within 30 days of the date of
receipt). The prospective permtttee shall not begin the proposed activity anti[ notified in writing by the DE
that the activity may proceed under the NWP; or unless 45 days have passed from the DE's receipt of the
complete notification {including a Section 441 WQC), and the prospective pernittee has not received written
notice from the DE.
Limited impacts of up to 1/2 acre to waters of the U.S., including wetlands, and up to 300 linear feet of
stream bed associated with the construction or expansion of commercial and institutional buildings, including
attendant features, may be authorized under N WP No. 39. Under N WP No. 39, any impacts of waters of the
U.S. will require the submittal of a PCN to the USACE. [n addition to a delineation of the jurisdictional
waters of the U.S. for the subject site, the submittal ofa PCN under NWP No. 39 may require that the
following concerns be addressed: presence of protected species, presence of significant cultural resources,
and mitigation planning to off-sot losses to jurisdictional waters.
Impacts allowable under NWP No. 39 will also require notification to the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ). ]mpacts to surface waters (streams and ponds} that appear on the most recent
version of the USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map and/or NRCS Soil Survey (Stream I) may also be
subject to the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer Rules. These regulations require a 50-foot vegetated
buffer around previously-mapped intermittent/perennial strea-ns, lakes and ponds. In addition, where
notification to the DWQ is required, compensatory mitigation will likely be required by the DWQ for
impacts to perennial streams and/or jurisdictional wetlands. Compensatory mitigation at a one-to-one
ratio may be required. for wetland impacts exceeding I/10 acre.

Bryan Property MACTEC Project t~'o.: 6970-07-1720
Waters of the U.S Delineation May 3, 2007
Wake Co:tnty, North Carolina Page 1 D
Compensatory mitigation may be required for impacts to surface waters (streams and ponds) based on the
discretion of the USACE DE. Activities conducted under the Nationwide Permit program must comply
with the USACE NWP General Conditions, USACE NWP Regional Conditions, and DWQ General
Conditions. Permitting under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act may require coordination with
interested agencies including, but not limited to, the USACE, the DWQ, the North Carolina Department
of Cultural Resources (NCDCR), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
if jurisdictional areas to be impacted exceed I/2 acre of wetlands, and/or 300 If of stream providing
important aquatic function, then a Section 404 Lndividual Permit ([P) would likely be required for the
proposed development. The 1P process involves a rigorous documentation procedure and will require
addressing protected species and culturaE resources issues, an alternatives analysis, wetland impact
avoidance and minimization strategies, and compensatory wetland mitigation. The IP process typically
includes a 30-day public notice period with an additional extended review schedule by the agencies.
Based on MACTEC's experience, it is not uncommon for the processing and approval of an 1P applEcation to
require six months or more.
Recommendations
If future development within the subject property is considered, MACTEC recommends that a jurisdictional
delineation, survey, and USACE veri.fcation be conducted of potential streams and wetlands identifed as
part of this waters of the U.S. determination. MACTEC also recommends a DWQ stream verification be
conducted to determine if any surface waters can be removed from Neuse Buffer Ruie applicability (i.e.,
mapped Stream 2), or if an.y development activities may be considered "allowable" or "exempt" within fifty
feet ofpreviously-mapped Stream 1 and Pond 1.
The USACE verification will provide appropriate documentation for McDonald-York, Inc. concerning the
area of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. located within the subject property. An overlay of proposed site plans
on USACE-verified jurisdictional boundaries will allow an approximation of impacts and subsequent
determination of permitting requirements. MACTEC recommends th.e completion of these activities prior to
any mechanized land clearing or other disturbance in proximity to potential waters of the U.S.
MACTEC further recommends that impacts to USACE-verified jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on site be
avoided and/or minimized to the extent practicable. Depending on th e extent of proposed impacts to certain
jurisdictional areas on the subject site, a permit may be required from the USACE, along with a 401. Water

13+~~an Property
Wcue+:r of the U.S Deli++eatfon
Wake County, Nvrtlr Carolina
tYIACTBC Project No.: t>470-0%-1720
rYfay 3, 2007
Page 11
Quality Cet•tification {WQC) from the DWQ. The project may qualify for an NWP if impacts are (cept below
3001E of aquatically-important stream and/or one-half acre of wetlands.
These recommendations do not consider t7oodway, tloodplain till, or startnwater eestrictions as mandated
by local ordinance, state requirements, or federal regulations. The findings of the waters of the U.S.
delineation are applicable only to the date of the field investigation, and are intended for project planning
purposes only. The findings of the waters of the U.S. delineation are subject to officio[ USACE and
DWQ verification.
Closing
We appreciate the opportunity to conduct these environmental services for McDonald-York, lnc. Please
contact Richard Hatrtion at (914} 831-8003, or Airiin Davis at (9l9) 831-8058 if you have any questions
regarding this report.
Sincerely,
I~IACTEC l.+.NGINEEI(iING ~,ND CONSULTING, INC.
Amin K, Davis
Project Scientist
RGI UAKD/aE<d
Enclosures: Attachment A -Figures
~(j ~ • _ ~t
Richard G. Harmon, P.'W.S.
Principal Scientist
P:1647W071172F1 WCI'tiS Ilryat}\Nxturd R¢sewre7s\Iteport_13iqun 14t~prrly.tkk

~S&ME
November 6, 2007
Wake County Public School System
Construction Management
1551 Rock Quarry Road
Raleigh, NC 27610
Attention: Mr. Jeff K. Young
Reference: E-31 Elem School Site USACE Meeting Report
S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
Mr. John Davis with S&ME, Inc. and Mr. Amin Davis with MACTEC met with Mr. James Shern
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on October 31, 2007 to review the wetland
delineation on the above referenced site. At this meeting, the USACE reviewed MACTEC's
jurisdictional delineation of the school site and S&ME's jurisdictional delineation of the existing
City of Raleigh public sewer easement.
The USACE conducted a field review of the jurisdictional features delineated by MACTEC and
found that wetland areas W2, W4, and WS located adjacent and abutting tributary S1 are
jurisdictiona1404 wetlands. Wetland areas W 1, W3 and W6 located in the drainage ways on the
site are not jurisdictional because they do not meet all three of the wetland criteria described in the
1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. See Figure 4 for location of these areas.
Feature S1 was determined to be a jurisdictional feature that is classified as a relatively permanent
water (RPW) tributary with important aquatic functions. Tributary S 1 flows into Mahler's Creek
which flows into Swift Creek which flows into the Neuse River. Feature S2 was determined to be
a jurisdictional RPW tributary with a point of origin approximately 60 feet from the convergence
with tributary S 1. See Figure 4. This point of origin is the same point that the NCDWQ
determined to be a buffered stream. Mr. Shern said that tributary S2 does not have significant
aquatic function.
S&ME, itvC. / 3201 Spring Forest Road /Raleigh, NC 27616 / p 919.872.2660 f 919.876.3958 / www.smeinc.com

E31 Elem School Site S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
Garner N C. November 6 2007
S&ME flagged the jurisdictional features in an approximate 80-foot wide corridor in the genera]
vicinity of the City of Raleigh's 30-foot sewer easement. The sewer easement has not been flagged
on the site and actual location within this 80-foot wide area is yet to be determined. The USACE
reviewed the jurisdictional features in this area and concurred with the delineation. This area
contains two RPW tributaries and adjacent abutting wetlands. See Figure 1 for approximate
location of these areas. The surveyors may use this figure to locate the boundaries of the wetlands
and tributaries.
Permitting details were discussed with the USACE and if the only jurisdictional impacts for this
site are in the existing sewer easement that a nationwide permit 12 could be used for the sewer
impacts. For permitting purposes, the following information will need to be obtained as the project
progresses.
• Size and placement depth of the proposed sewer pipe.
• Proposed and future facilities that the sewer will serve.
• Name of treatment plant for the proposed sewer pipe.
• Justification for not utilizing the directional bore technique to install sewer pipe.
• Details about sewer easement construction width and maintenance width.
• Construction details of sewer maintenance road, if any, that shows no above grade fill
including gravel
Other permitting items discussed at the meeting include mitigation of impacts. The width of the
maintenance corridor will be used to calculated wetland mitigation areas. Also, the preservation
of a tree canopy over the sewer easement will help reduce mitigation requirements.
In summary the areas W 1, W3, and W6 are not jurisdictional and may be used for storm water
devices or filled for buildings, parking etc. Mr. Shern indicted that obtaining a jurisdictional
determination report from the USACE maybe delayed and Mr. Shern mentioned that it may be
quicker to obtain a nationwide permit from his office than obtain the jurisdictional determination
report. Also, please forward Figure 1 and Figure X to the surveyors so they can locate the
approved wetland flags on the site and in the vicinity of the sewer easement. Also, the engineers
will need to be aware of the sewer details for our permitting documents.

E-31 Elem School Site S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
Garner N C November 6,_2007
If we can provide additional information or answer questions you may have, please feel free to
contact us at [phone].
Sincerely,
S&ME, Inc.
~Q~~~
R. Davis, Jr. L.S.S.
Natural Resources Project Manager
Attachments
cc: SME Figure 1
MACTEC Figure 4
MACTEC Wetland Flag Notes

SUBDIVISION
Notes: fi``~ .
Areas of sand deposits 4-8" over silty hydric soil ~ C
Streams flowing & entrenched 18-24" deep Approx. Center Line of
Forested wetland Proposed Sewer Line
Iron rod Open
Data Poi woods

W-5 •- ~ ,~
! 2 \
W-4 W-3 10' W-2
)( W-1
10' j^,~ Data Point
1 \.
S-13
•
S-13A S-14B
_~-11 B
~
S-14A
16B FIoW
S- 1A - S-18B
B1/white tap S-1 A
S-10B 40' 40' S-18A
_
~
S-5B ->
~ S-9B
S-10A ~
-7A - S-1
s-36 Flow
_ .rte
\ s-~
S-9A erennia
Date: 1 ~-23-7 Stream NTS
Scale: NTS

Wet Iron pipe corner
W-6 W-7 W-8 W-9

Up •
Bank FIGURE 1
Iron pipe corner .

MACTEC'S WETLAND FLAG NUMBERS
I've attached a map we originally created after our delineation in April. Since the USACE is not
claiming jurisdiction on W1, W3, & W6 per our meeting with Jamie Shern on Wednesday, 1 did not
include flag numbers for these wetlands. We did not flag the NRCS-mapped stream immediately
north of W1, but the coordinates where DWQ rated the stream as intermittent are 35.6656/-
78.5877.
Flagging (Flagging from East to West; Orange for Stream, Pink for Wetlands)
Stream 1 (S1): S1-1 to S1-89
Wetland 2 (W2): W2-1 to W2-11; W2A-1 to W2A-9
Wetland 4 (W4): W4-1 to W4-7 (double-flagged)
Wetland 5 (W5}: W5-1 to W5-16
AMIN K. DAVlS, C.E.
MACTEC Engineering & Consulting
3301 Atlantic Avenue
Raleigh, NC. 27604
Direct: 919-831-8058
www~.mt~ctec.com

! / ,/ r
/} / t % ''
e
__. ~
\\
I r , ~ ~r ~ ~ v ~\
~..
ff
- ~ ,, -
'k
~ ` ` , ~',
;:_ ffj , _ ,~~
-' _ ~ -.
/~ /~ --.
- _ /i:.
,....tit.^.."_/~ ~..
- ~ - ~ I' i ~

~ ! ~ ~
~. ~. ~ ~ ".

_ ~'~ ~:.
1 ~\
'~' i ~
.~ r ~~
~,~r ,
.•.. _ ~
r ,=\~ ~ ~ l~, ~:
1. ~ :.__ / / ,•'
11 ~
~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ` ~~ % ~ , ~~f//
W4 ~ ~ ~\\ t ~ _ cif, ~ ;~ ((
;.., _ `
,F
IN ~ ~~,
t •4,. ~`
~ ~ 1' `~ i _
~ ~ ~. `,
,~//_ i (
/A,_\ f ~ ~ tk; t.. ~ ~~ ! ~\>i~ _~ P1~,~ y~l~.t, \~ 'a 'I ~~i~1~~`', ~~\t ,~~'\\ 1~~1 \~`\
La ~Ff
L, ~ ,
\,•t s l ~ ~j i - - - i t ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ tit A l r.
~ -~°. ~ ~`'~` ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~~fi ~r~s 1 t "`~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ i,' ~r ~ ! ~", ~ i +I t' ~ ,;il.
=` ~ ~..._ -'~ ~) `` -...._,:" t ~ I ~~ ~ , ".'. I t ~ 1 ~ ~ r'.~ 1 ~ ! ti f- } ~+ UPI !~ ~ ~ ~!~ ~~ \ ~ ~ ~ it ~ ~ . _
J ~(
\~ ~ --~ - J ~tUrzf ltd ~ 1~ ~ ..,~, ~~~ ~_ !- t ;~~~ ~~ ~"~ ~ ~ ~ -~+~~ ~+~~ ~~+~',
~.
~, ~~ ~
l 7 ii'~' _ ~' ~~~' 3 ~F i ~ _. t r ( ~ ~` i ` _ _
~` i itr
:~
~ ~
J _ -
~1~ f ~ ~~ ~~ t ~ t vv t ~p't~ 1 ~ ~ y\\~ ~ v~
~.~" v t ~ i ~~ ~~ ~I I
~ 1, ~~ ~ / + ~\ 1 I~~ I F ' ~ ~
~ .~ 1 ~ ,
t• ~ j ~l
.V~~1 / ~~ ~ i~fl~, ~ iv'~ j~ r
~._ ~: ~ „+
•.
•~~. , , ~ ; t~ ~ r
.,
_. ~~"t
,, I r ~ ~,
1 l
_ ~~, ~ f ~`~,: ~~~ `, v ~`t`
+ ; ; ~' \ ~ JURISDICTION UMMARY
Roads ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~°,
~ Streams 1 , , , ~ , , '
! Stream 1 [S1] : 3,2001inear feet
WeHands , ~ t ` I / i ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~`
~% ~
Q Property Boundary I; I ! ~ ~ ~; ` ., ~ , , `• Wetland 1 [W 1] : 0.2 acres
Unnamed Waterbodies (USGS) ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~,~ ` ~`~`~ ` f - , ~;', Wetland 2 [4V2] : 1.1 acres
. Unnamed Tributaries (USGS) 1 `' ' ~ ~ , , l { ~, \ , '~` ' , ' ), ,.kf; t `. Wetland 3 [11V3] : 0.5 acres
%\% 2' Elevation Contours (NCDO7) ! { ~~'~ ~ ~ ; : Wetland 4 [W4j : 0.3 acres
~`~ '; ,•~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Wetland 5 [W5] : 1.3 acres
200 0 200 400 Feet ,`; ', ; ` i ' +` `~ Wetland 6 [W6] : 0.3 acres
~ _.
,' ~ '' ~, ~ ~~ ~ Total Wetlands : 3.7 acres
) ,~ -
SCaiC: 111= 5~0' ~ NOTE: Jurisdictional Boundary Shapes and Sizes Are 1 /Prepared /Date: ~~~ ~'3' O
Source: NCD4T, NCGIA, Wake County Approximate and Are Not Based On Surveyed Data f Checked /Date: ~ ~~~ ~J~ ~
Prepared For: Prepared By:
Jurisdictional Waters
Jurisdictional Determination JY Z-Foot Elevation Contours
VYr1KE Ct)UVTY ~` 1Y11~CTLC
Aryan Property ~~ ~~,:~,. ~ ., t,~_:1t1
MACTE'C EnB1oN111q 8 Ca1nW(6p, I„e.
Wake County North Carolina "°'""~^"°"w^~
RtlaIBMl~ CargNa 27664 (81B) 67&0416
Project: 6470-d7-172Q Figure 4 f

1~i.1(a-~1-2E~#~7 15:3 FR03'1.t7Wi~-1+JtiTLANG`u `~19r336893
~~©~ wA~~~PG
bj ~.
~_ ~
C3 "<'
T0:~~76395E3 P:~p3
M,.icl~ect'r=, $aslcy„ t;ovcrnc?r
~1+fi11ism (i, R,t1SS Jr'„ $car~t~ry
Naztlt Caraiinatl?~patimcot ofErtviranrnent and Natutai Resoun;~
Caleen H.Su(iins, D9rectar
DivrSian rrf watAr r,~,ai1ry
f~lu~tt at ~ l , 2~~~
Wake Cotrt3ty
Wake County Public Schools
Attn: Ms. Brian. C©nkl.n
Facilities Planning & Consttvction iulgrnt.
1551 Rcsck Qu•trry Road
Raleigh, NC 27G 10
Srx~ijcct Prgperty: E-31 Elerttentaity
Qn-Site 'Aeterrninatian for Ap~alicabiility to the lveuse ~2i~pariart Area Protection l?tules (1!SA NCAC 2B
.0233} - EXPRESS ~W PR©GR~.11~i
3~eaz~ Mr. Conklin.
On august 31, 2fl0~, at the reyucst of Mr..1ohn Davis of S&ME, Lia 1V1yott conducted an on-site determination to
review one stream fertture located ott the subject gropcriy for applicalaility to tltc NEUSe Suffer Rules{ISA NCAC
8.0233). The feature is labeled ~ •`A" on the t~ttached maps initialed lay T,ia Myott on August 31, 21107_ The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ} has determined that the following:
» Feature ",E1" {shown on the S&ME soils map as l'Eature "S2=') is subject to tla~ JVer,~se I3ufjer Ru~te at 21~e
ltag llbelerl "A1 °". Strea3m A.s an intermittent stream on the property.
This orr-site determination shall expire free (5} years from the date of this letter.
i..andr}wners or affected patties that dispute a determination made by tare I)WQ that a surface water exists ttnd that
it is subject to_the buffer rule may request a determination by the Director. 13, xecluest for a determination by the
S~irector shall be referred to the L?irecor in writing c1o Cyrrdi Karoly, T3WQ 401 (~vers~htlExpress Review
Permitting Unit,: 2321 Crabtree liivd., Raleigh, NC 276t~4-226fl. Xou must act within 60 days of the date. that you
receive this letter, Applicants are. herelay nvtifcd that the G{?-day statutory appe,~l time flocs not start until the
afl''ectcd parkv (including downstrean3 and adjacent landowners} is notified of tltts decision. This deterrttirratican is
> na,l and binding unless }fou ask for a hcarring within 6U days.
?his letter only 2tldre~sses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve axYy activity within the buffers.
T~1or does this letter apprrave any activity within 1~1•aters of the United States t}r Waters ofthe State, If you have
any questions, please contact Lia Myott at 919.733.9502.
5inc:crcly,
oc~~~~~~
D
Coleen H. Sullins, I}iri~etor APR 9 2008
North +Carolina Llivision of ~4'ater Quality
CTXSJchkl~em
DENk - rNATER UUAUTY
WETLANDS AND STOR3u1WATER BRANCH
tlttachr»ants: Wake County Soil Survey flap, USES Tolso~rsphic Map
;' ~G3ra11aa
of ~~'ersiyht f £xpmss Review Perminin~ Unit ~i~attlradf~
5SO Matt Sen+itst CcnSCr, Ttnleigh, Nnrt11 Csrntina 27b99-1654
321 ~;'Atyrtee $4uievnrd, Saito 2Sr3, Rnici ::. North Garotna 21C0'~
'bane: 919-733-1786 J FnX 934-?33-6$9,3 t G~tcrnat' ~~'r stttt.nv.ustncwattanda
tin Lquui Ogportvn3tytl~flinnatYvc Antit3n trmptt7ycr - 50°J~ Recycledtl t}"1o 3'nst C,an511Yncr Paper

~T~:
.`.~~~.r...~~
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
April 3, 200$
Mr. Jason Volker
S&ME, Inc.
3201 Spring Forest Road
Raleigh, NC 27616
Subject: Proposed Utilities Crossing - E-31 Elementary; Garner, Wake County
S&ME Project No. 1054-07-374
Dear Mr. Volker:
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, significant
natural heritage areas, or conservation managed areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area.
Although our maps do not show records of such natural heritage elements in the project area, it does not
necessarily mean that they are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. The
use of Natural Heritage Program data should not be substituted for actual field surveys, particularly if the
project area contains suitable habitat for rare species, significant natural communities, or priority natural
areas.
You may wish. to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at www.ncnhp.org for a listing of
rare plants ~tnd animals and significant natural communities in the county and on the quad map. Our
Program also has a new website that allows users to obtain information on element occurrences and
significant natural. heritage areas within two miles of a given location:
<http://nhpweb.enr.state.Haas/nhis/public/gmap75_main.phtml>. The user name is "public" and the
password is "heritage". You may want to click "Help" for more information.
NC OneMap now provides digital Natural Heritage data online for free. This service provides site
specific information on GIS Layers with Natural•Heritage Program rare species occurrences and
Significant Natural Heritage Areas.. The NC OneMap website provides Element. Occurrence (EO) ID
numbers (instead of species name), and the data user is then encouraged to contact the Natural Heritage
Program for detailed information.. This sei~~i:;e a3lz~ws the acct to quickly arid- efficiently gtt-site specftc
NHP data without visitirig the NHP workroom or waiting for.the Information Request to be answered by
NHP staff. For more information about data formats and access, visit <www.ncaneman.com>, then click
on "FTP Data Download", and then "nheo.zip" [to the right of "Natural Heritage Element Occurrences"]
You may also e-mail NC OneMap at <dataq_nncmaiLnet> for more information.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information.
S,ineerely, ~.. ,.: ::,;,
.:. :.. .
Harry E,. LeG,ra».d, Jr., Zoologist. , ; ~, .. ~ ..
Natural Heritage Program
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601. e
o Carolina
Phone: [phone]\ FAX: [phone] Internet vrww.enrstate.nc.usi~NR/ atura!!r~
An Equal Opportunity /Affirmative Action Empbyer - 50 % Recycled \ 10 % Post Consumer Paper

PLAY
AREA
1~. 1[J~+16.4 f
9typ4~'Ba" i~EST1
~0°~0'BD" ISOUTHI
TYP. ~0 FROM
EDGE OF BLDG,
TYP.1t' Ff~OM
EDGE ~F BL~~.
FIRE
H~'DRANT
ASSEMBLY
(~' 9EHIh1D
SIaE~ALfC~
LI

TYP,11' FR01~
EDGE OF BLRG.~
COMPANY
AIS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY IT IS NOT
S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY D
30VE DATA.

ti,
r
7 i
TYP, 10'
FR0~1 B ~
f~
f+
~ ~i
HEReARE NO
BASED UPON
t
..~ f
~E ~
1., z i~ ~JE 1
IJFFER} 301 ETA, 9+5~,~0
BUFF ~. 20~° 5~'~1~4~"
4 ~ ~~4'J ~"1rff~B ~!'B9~C
~ '. Ex~~ f. Pray, ~ J ~ ~~U
~ ~ ~ R g 2008
-~
~ ~ ,~r~.wAT~aa~~ea-~~+
~y~piyp5 ANA STORE
t+
I
IMPACT EQUALS
APPROXIMATELY 1,100
SQUARE FEET (ZONE 2)

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
BIO-RETENTION OUTLET
(SEE ATTACHED DIAGRAM
~ AND ALCULATIONS)
-r ~
~.
~ ~ ~.
~~ ~ ~
ti ~ ,
i ~
~ ~~ t
~.
NEU~ STOR~1 aRAI~JAIGE RIP
i 5EE L SHEETS ~
v~111 IY Yyl~YV
~ X11° 1~'3.~3"
B" DIJTFALL
O J
I
m
m o
W
Y
w U
~ ~ U
>Z ~
> M
0 ~
= o
Q o0
Z
~~
w W
~ a
W
nb
~~
QW oz
d OC ° o
gQ ~Q
-Z }~
W~ ~~
~F Wo
7W ~Z
w~
wZ
mF Jw
NW M~
W ~ w c~
Z~
Nm
FIGURE N0.
5

LOCATE E}CISTING 1~" WATER MAIN
OUTSIDE 6UFFER AND CONNECT
NEW WATER MWN. REMOVE EXIST.
WATER MAIN AND APPURTENANCES
FROM CONNECTION POINT TO END,
~a
~ t
E~.1B" RCP
PERMANENT UTILITY EASEMENT
(5' FROM ROW)
We trar~ds
~ ~
i
- Proaerfy trr~e ~~

~I BUFFER IMPACT EQUALS
APPROXIMATELY 3,000
SQUARE FEET
(50' buffer x 2 x 30' corridor max)
PROWIDE B~JK Sj~ABILIZ~TION
t20 ~Y} ~
~~~IU ~~
~ f 5Q' Nerlse ~2r~oericrr~ duffer (1('R
APR 9 7
~~~~aR ~ Wn1tr~ „ur„ ~BF
~'tlpi~DS.;ND STr,RMWa~P,
NEW FIRE HYDRANT
O J
~ ~
m
m o
W
Y
w U
~ O U
z ~
M
0 ~
2 0
N ~
N
Q ~O
~~
U
W W
~ a
W
~;
"~
~~

. !'~ ~
ASSEMBLY PROPOSED WATER LINE F
~o V
...
,..~ ~
~ ~ ~
W
-~
Ex. 8~" GAS' m
~- . 36" ChSP ~ a
fix. SQnrtery Sewer ~.., ~
~ ~
W
Q
3
oz
0~
IO
v0i Q
}U
~~
ZO
wZ
w~
J w
WZ
m~
LlJ (¢')
FIGURE N0.
SOURCE.THE WOOTENCOMPANY I
PLEASE NOTE THIS DATA IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT IS NOT MEANT FOR DESIGN, LEGAL, OR ANY OTHER USES. THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES
ABOUT ITS ACCURACY S&ME, INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DECISION MADE OR ANYACTIONS TAKEN BY THE USER BASED UPON INFORMATION
08TAINED FROM THE ABOVE DATA.

BUFFER IMPACT EQUALS
APPROXIMATELY 6,000
SQUARE FEET
(50' buffer x 4 x 30' construction corridor)
1
IMPACTS ARE CONTAINED
WITHIN PERMANENT
SEWER EASEMENT
EXIST. CITY 4F RALE
PUBLIC ~0' SANITARY
SEU~ER EASEMENT
BM SOBS P~ 12~
~~, ~~~ ~~ ~~ t~~
ANTI-SEEP COLLIER
~ r~ r~ ~
~a SY eANK ~TI~IUZArIaN
(PERI~ANENT~
~ fin, 4~e~'onds
~ ~
ANTI-SEEP COLLAR
\~
fix. fl'~-

. ~

NEB 8" QUTFAL L
SANITARY SEWER
{SEE SHEET C1,3
FOR PROFILE
~~
r
I
~~
f ~/~ ~
k
ti ~
f ~
~ ti~
~ ~
~ ~ ~~~~~
Exist. M~!
R~ - ~~~. as
fir. O~rt - ~~~ ~~
I STA, C*OO
~ ~ ~S9° 3~'O,S3"
~~ ~ ~f ~
1
' ~
~ ••.
~ y ~
~ ~ •~
~ ~ ,
5 ,
r ~ ~
r
~ 3f ~'~ IPF
~L~ No• 1
I ~ sr~ ~~[~~.~~ //y~c
II o I II
SOURCE: THE WOOTEN COMPANY ~ I , 14~~ ..1 ~ ~ ~,11 U
PLEASE NOTE THIS DATA IS FOR IN RMATIONALPURPOSESONLY IT IS NOTMEANTFDR SIGN,LEGALO A<JlOTHER.THEREAR~NOGUARANTEES
ABOUT ITSACCURACY SBME, INC. MES NO RESPONSIBILITY FORANY DECISIO MAD OR A ACTT A~EN BY THE U~ER BASED U ON INFORMATION '
OBTAINED FROM THE ABOVE DATA. I I I:

~enter~ae f~~ek APR 9 2008
' ~~yp~~pNp STTOKMWA R BAA~~
ELI ST, CITY CF RALEI ~H
PUBLIC 30' SANITARY
SEWER E~ISEI~ENTf
CCNSTRUCTIr~f~ LIMITS
~~ ~~a~ PG ~~~
30 5Y 6ANK 5T1~61LIiATIQN
{PERMANENT)
3a' CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS
O J
OD ~
v
m
m
w
Y
U
w
0 0 v
z ~
3
o
o
Q o0
~~
w W
Q a
~ a
W
I
I
y

H

a

~ J Q
Q Z
OJ
W ~~
~ NQ
~ }U
Q~
m ZQ

OG ~ ?
W w~
3 Jw
wZ
W MQ
y w c~

F
Z
a
N
FIGURE NO
7