20090501 Ver 1_401 Application_20090509

V
Chestnut Place II
09-0501
Indian Trail, Union County
North Carolina PA I
Joint Application Form and Supporting Documentation for
NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE NOTIFICATION
TO CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND NCDENR
Prepared For
Mr. E. Reese Gibson
4512 River Road
Stanfield, NC 28163
Prepared By
Leonard S. Rindner, PWS
Environmental Planning Consultant
3714 Spokeshave Lane
Matthews, NC 28105
[phone]
IR&WWROO
MAY 0 4 2009
DENR - WA QUAL1Ty
WTlANDS AND STORTERMWATER BRANCH
April 25, 2009
0 9- 0 5 0 1
Of W AT?R
T
? `?rr.riric? r
o <
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
JIL
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit - --------
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 and 12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ® Yes ? No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permi
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
t
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ? Yes ® No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information ch r!= nn q
2a. Name of project: Chestnut Place II Q o
Lg(ol mli
L=Rru vy
2b. County: Union County
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Indian Trail MAY 0 4 2009
2d. Subdivision name: Chestnut Place II DENR•WATER QUALITY
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Mr. E. Reese Gibson
3b. Deed Book and Page No. 3024, 401; 2045,574; 4096,140; 3793, 243; 3793, 240; 4370, 1 26; 3805, 444; 3802,801
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Mr. E. Reese Gibson
3d. Street address: 4512 River Road
3e. City, state, zip: Stanfield, NC 28163
3f. Telephone no.: 704 888 8376
3g. Fax no.: 704 888 1861
3h. Email address: N/A
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ® Other, specify: Owner
4b. Name: E. Reese Gibson
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address: 4512 River Road
4e. City, state, zip: Stanfield, NC 28163
4f. Telephone no.: 704 888 8376
4g. Fax no.: 704 888 1361
4h. Email address: N/A
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Leonard S. Rindner
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Leonrad S. Rindner, PLLC
5c. Street address: 3714 Spokeshave Lane
5d. City, state, zip: Matthews, NC 28105
5e. Telephone no.: 704 904 2277
5f. Fax no.: 704 847 0185
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 07-147-149;150; 151 A; 1 52A; 1 53A; 1 42C; 1 43G; 1 42A
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.0721 Longitude: - 80.7069
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: +/- 22 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to UT of West Fork Twelvemile Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C
2c. River basin: Catawba
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
Forested; disturbed; new and existing residential subdivisions
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Approximately 1.5 acres
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
+/- 1200 - 1500 (includes likely stream in proposed pond bed
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Residential Subdivision
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Single Family Residential Subdivision - earth moving equipment will be used to prepare lots and roads
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
? Yes ® No ? Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: Leonard S. Rindner, PLLC
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T

W1 ®P ? T
Fill PEM1C - drained ? Yes ® Corps
03
pond bed ® No ® DWQ

W2 ®P ? T
Fill PEM1C - drained ? Yes ® Corps
07
pond bed ® No ® DWQ
W3 ®P ? T Fill PSS1A ® Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ 07
W4 ®P ? T Fill PSS1A ® Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ .03
W5 ®P ? T Fill PSS1A ® Yes
® No ® Corps
® DWQ .01
W6 E] P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.21
2h. Comments: 0.10 acres is in a proposed drained pond bed
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear feet)
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet)
S1 ? P ®T NWP 12 - UT of West Fork ® PER ® Corps 4'-6' 80' temp
sewerline Twelvemile Ck ? INT ® DWQ
4'-6'
S2 ® PEI T Road Crossing Same ® PER
? INT ® Corps
® DWQ currently
partially 125 If
impounded

S3 ®P ? T
Fill
Same
? PER
INT
®
® Corps
®
DWQ
3' 180 If
unimportant
int. stream
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 385 If
3i. Comments: Stream in Sewerline Crossings will be restored - 15' maximum maintenance corridor; 180 linear feet
unimportant intermittent stream (19.5 and 21.75 per NCDENR Guidelines; linear feet of stream estimated for road crossina
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
because stream is currently impounded with a old farm pond that will be drained.
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
- Permanent (P)
or Temporary
(T) 4b.
Name of
waterbody
(if applicable) 4c.

Type of impact 4d.

Waterbody type 4e.

Area of impact (acres)
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4L Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: Existing pond is proposed to be drained
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.

Pond ID 5b.

Proposed use or purpose 5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres) 5d.
Stream Impacts (feet) 5e.
Upland
(acres)
number of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
K Total
5g. Comments: N/A
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Page 5 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ?Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number- Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
or Temporary impact required?
(T)
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The project layour was modified to avoid unnecessary imnpacts to streams by sewerline layout; lot layout was modified to
avoid approximate 1 acre wetland; pond will be removed to allow stream and wetland areas to renaturalize. With the exception
of primary road crossing impacts to wetland areas are limited to former pond bed areas and small pockets and disturbed areas
and unimportant intermittent streams. Impacts to the perennial stream and the large wetland area will be minimized. A house
pad is depicted on all the lots with wetlands to demonstrate adequate room for construction. Approximately 3 to 4 lots were
eliminated in order to preserve large wetland area.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
As depicted on the site plan, wetland areas will be adequately barricaded and or marked to minimize the potential of
inadvertant stream or wetland impacts. Site is subject to amn approved Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ® Yes ? No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ® Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
? Payment to in-lieu fee program
project?
® Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Wetland impacts over 1/101h acre include sections of a pond bed of a disturbed on-line farm pond to be drained. Other
wetland impacts are to small areas. The developer proposes to preserve the remaining larger wetland area and allow the
former pond bed to renaturalize to a stream and wetland area.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that
requires buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? ? No
? Yes
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: ? Yes
? No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
less tha 24% %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: El Yes ? No
less than 24%; lot development is not a high density/concentrated development
Impervious area for the development is
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with roof of approval
attached? P been
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof attached? of approval been
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
5
b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
-------------- -
? Certified Local Government
? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
? Phase II
? NSW
? USMP
? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
? Yes ? No
? Coastal counties
? HQW
? ORW
? Session Law 2006-246
? Other.
? Yes
----------- ? No
-
-------- ---
?Yes -
?No
? Yes ? No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ? Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
? Yes
? No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Project is a small infill residential subdivision tied in with existing roads and infrastructure.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Municipal sanitary sewer
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ® Yes ? No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ® No
impacts?
?
Raleigh
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. ? A
h
ill
ev
s
e
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Site was evaluated during the wetland delineation process for the presence of Schweinitz's Sunflower. The site is heavily
forested. Ecotonal edges along roads and clearings were inspected to determine if Schweinitz's sunflower was present.
Project site is not in a watershed that has been identified as habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
ttp://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/habitatprotection/efh/G IS-inven. htm
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ? No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
According to the latest published version of the National Register of Historic Places for the presence or absence of
registered properties, or properties listed as being eligible for inclusion therein, this site is not registered property or
property listed as being eligible for inclusion in the Register.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ? Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determinate n? ion County GIS and Civil Engineer

Leonard S. Rindner ,'-r ?- 4-25-09

Applicant/Agent's Printed Name pplicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent' sign ure is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
'
r
is provided.
Page 10 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
LEONARD S. RINDNER. PLLC
Environmental Planning Consultant 3714 Spokeshave Lane
Professional Wetland Scientist Matthews, NC 28105
Land Planning Tele: [phone]
Fax [phone]
April 25, 2009
Mr. E. Reese Gibson
4512 River Road
Stanfield, NC 28163
RE: Chestnut Place II; Indian Trail, Union County, NC
Dear Reese:
In order to interface with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources I will need your authorization. Please sign the
following statement:
This letter authori..es Leonard S. Rindner, PNS as our firm's agent in matters related to
Haters of the U. S. and Waters of North Carolina for the re i?renc•ed project site. This
includes interfacing with the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the North
Carolina Department of Natural Resources.
!fame Date --T
Please contact me if you have any questions or require additional explanation.
Si
onard S. Rindner, PWS
nvironmental Planning Consultant
Profession Wetland Scientist
A
MAPQWEST

zoos ?, ?
ft
Jd
4r
J?

MapUata 02()09NAVTE4 00 TekAtlas
).733 333° W' 80.716 666 W 80.700 000° W 80.683 333° W
•'Sub
1 •
f i o ?? • ?? Ranio Z
/ ?? 1 ?..1^' ?,i4:.'?"-'_)• -. Tower Cl)
M , v """ ?yy I
M \? •. 1.t 5C^? -: .,?• 1 r 11 t;I`/ '/I'C,?• /100'1, r { ?t ce)
Cl) ce)
00
- ? MasseY.•.. ,•1 1. ` 9? _\ v?. ' J4 - /y u" s ?Y \ ? • '• ••? -
Cem
700
aaas : , v -? 46 -
vm,Mturw? , .•K ,`••
- ?; ?> t!!
° C`C ,•',, r Jai! ?• r Zo
8 ti3xa . "C) 0 0
M
140
I,
j /7,
f y ?t N?
??$, 13J3' w -'?,•
A web C.a ?, _,,-r '?-•-•., ? • ',' + ' ?. ? h?
Z ?? •t ?,- •?•s, 700 ?. _ Z
1t? 1? ' ( Q
.gy k ..,.,. ' r l r
).733 333° W 80.716 666° W 80.700 000-W, 80.683 333° W
Name: MATTHEWS Location: 035.0721279° N 080.7069192° W CHESTNUT PLACE
Date: 2/9/2009
Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet HUC: 03050103
APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION

\ ( LMW
z n
..?TI I 9z
00
cs 5-? Z a
W N
4y z
14 ?
O N
Ww ?
z o ° O

x
~ N U

on
LL
N
g
3

U
N
4
?
?
?

a
O LAJ
G
?a
ZN
a?
>?
H m
gN
CL
C. 44C G. Irr-
4 V
01
s ?
IL
N x
z U.
Z ?-
;,. r • N? J W ? W
ay. ,
4
_,? •? 1 z t W
ts.. it \
+ s
'ZI
T
z
z
.aQ f W
W /j • W
cc
W
WtON
W D
,a z
C
a
M W •?
tn
1

0
U
L
C
O
Z
C
7
O
U
c
0
'c
D
n
O
0)
M
V
M
GO', ttl
..Z .Zb DF F

1
..8b .Zb X8
IOS6BB£ 004688E OOE688£

V

rnM
8
..Z Zb ..08
q? N
N m
l6
a
S
Z
O
H
a
w v
U O
J
a w
? N
z w
?
W
= X
V O
Ir
a
CL
a
's p
as
"v
? T
a?
_N
N .0
T(n
N
j
Oa
(n 0
.00
U
c
0
Z
v
?i
?O
ap O
O
? O
? O
Q
C
O
U
01
C
o

O
v
O
O p
O

l
N
N
N

N i.
U ?
n
C
7
o o ?
O

Z.< 7
l0 p
2U
ab
z b
oe ?
.
. „ ;
07
c
0
`m
U
L
r
0
Z
c
0
U
c
0
"c
CL
m
O
0)
2
O
C?
C
O
U.
Z
CL
cQ
G
0
Z
W
0
W
J
a
d
01
L
y
x
LO
Cd
01
N
Q
c
0
v
m
d
O
V
tf1
Ol
U
CL
m
O C

E _

`1 L
W >
rn r
m 0) O y
3 c o

v
f0 y ? c
C

01 fn 3 to !E C O
N _ U 0)

d O V

t
C U C f?
N N O
y
O
6 O I? f0 L-• w w;
.
y y 0 Z U N •• c E ayi
E 12
U 0 O ? a C `1 N C

U 0
Z
r- U) _
Z O
I°
O NQ -
dm?
0) y
0)
?' U
O p
'O y
0)
03
:zz 0 m
0)
E?md
d o o U g m m o>

N L
m "'L

-D
v Cy

°
r m O y 0

E
°n

l0 ._.. J
R o
lU 0)
N a
C > 3
y w
0) ? y
L y c d
Z E C N Oi O N O m
y
tll y y
O y a0. `l 0] O -p T 7
O _
07 > (n V Q M L C D_ C

N
T y N N 'O :3 2 a)
O1
p
O C
U
O E
() Q
7 A

y t fl 7
y a
•
Ol
y y Q U) 01 .
i d
O
07
EmE
a E tO3 U Hw u)co o °v E o
m
y m
C T
l6
O_ 10
r
a ?° U
T c = N o
0

`
`
N c E 10
N 0
0? a
`
m
Z m 2
U- 0 w a
i w N o

U) (j)
0 0
_j
J LL ~W

i••
U i? t a
U

{ LL O
N

+

\
• W
W } {
C
IL
3 ` T 1

o
Q o m U)
'

in

1

N N
N

W C
E

16

j

N
l0 0

0
U
?

C

a «

$

n

3

o

0

O

)

>

m
2
O

5

o O

`

w

v

a

Q o
o
3
!n °
>
a
w
_
_o
LL
c
O
u)
u)
T

w w

°

o

Q
g
LL 3 C T w ?
> > m t C O O Q)
C Y 0 C

[ _

_O
O
F
p
p

10 O

J

J

?p _ i O >

C_
'
0_
_
p
a

O
i
!n
M m U U 0 O M M M a cr (n m (n (o (n (n (n n
d
C W
`o r i ® • j: ® x ?? G > + .. III o Ilf C)

4
m m
8,6
N N
? 0)
N m
a
T
0)
Z
N O
T fn
d
Z >
o a
Cl) o
.Q o
C)U
c
c
0
m
z
Ol
U
U)
?
V
0 C
O
? 01
m w
3 y
m o
ZU
?6
Soil Map-Union County, North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Union County, North Carolina (NC179)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
ApB Appling sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 27.5 23.0%
AuB Appling-Urban land complex, 2 to 8 percent 6.3 5.2%
slopes
CeB2 Cecil gravelly sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent 7.5 6.3%
slopes, eroded
CeC2 Cecil gravelly sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent 0.3 0.2%
slopes, eroded
ChA Chewacla silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, 21.6 18.0%
frequently flooded
HeB Helena fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes 53.8 44.9%
TbB2 Tatum gravelly silty clay loam, 2 to 8 percent 2.8 2.3%
slopes, eroded
Totals for Area of Interest 119.8 100.0%
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 219/2009
?? Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3
w , NFJN3 doR xnpul
NLrftNOJ NOSE 0 spun" ?,,,m
1:
®® a?.SSB? ?Y?r?y j ?• JJJJ ?w
-mm -F

oo,

O
•

/ \,,
i
IA /
•
?aiiia
cl, IL
•
e
e '

N'
C?
!? 711,
NOSA9

®
ff
IMVJ

Im

. , 1111 ,«
l ?Sg 11 9 ?I'll -1

I
1

L
W
U
W
W
--
z0
Z

r -,
r /
\ r
W /
r
/ U
/ rr
/ N
a
Z
Z
(n
i\ \ v
z
J ?
\ W
Lij
M•'?lld '£tfl3NFJN3 ?T c?t?pp1??1 r' ?$
LLRS NOJ
® ?sg? ' 1111 ,..

Q
a
Q
w
cA \
J

Ills

x
.,?
-lop
Q \ 0 o
Z
z %
Q , m
w O
U w 0
Z
M O
o 0
+1 L
o,
w
z \

1
1

d
3
U
Q
a
z?
J
H
W
U
Q
0
C;
+I
0
LIJ
m
z
0

ffS D 1-W 'StMNFJN3 MrMNOO NOSSIJ do-AMW M"OMM a
10-0 -M %emw p
-ft
b®® ?rsssx
ponippow
.? ! ' J111 ?.?
1 U
Q
\1 11 \?
\1 1 32?
a 1\ ?
0 1\ 1 z
a \ ? _ s?
I \ o
w / +o

1

f

ONunsrao p pow
NOSSI9 d-r"19 AWwrAl ?... ? . :
sine®®
10

?SSS? ?„y 1111 ,.
1 11 9

°`v\ 1
V?
?V
?d
O
i
i
U
a
0
^ W
U
\ M
0
CD \
?OJ \
?j
1 \
LL
o
\ En
w
\ W
1
1

I
? II
0l-d 'Sl133NFJK3

Z' ?,nsNOO
m
`

OSSI9
f ISIS

?--ae •aWwn? ?.,,
I

I ?
J

w

b®®
I
ffs
v
ass
l
,°--ft
. woo „V
1
7
1
11
1
,.
a ?
; U?.X,

Q
W r
U

w Q
a
?
cn
W
?
a -
p
Z
Q
Z ~
LU
Q
?, ~ U
Q
?
0

/
6

/VVI

Sit
J lld FJN3 Pow
nMNOO xos?o dn-AOig ingno
?
MPM
®
ff!?INVJ
?SSS2I ¦~I?11M O~,,.,,
Imll
O
3
O
I
b
Gt
it
?tm G pp
r a
\\ e?450
\ e it ,
4 \ tp>?
e \ C1 K .S <n Q
? 3o Y*
G
CL ` em>
i
iC ??pW
' ' o c
h ?
J m ?r
1
1
Y ?
of
z v?
e O ^ N

o t e?

g g

r
E ??
ffS '31-W %U33NFJN3
s
ONUnsNOO NOSSI9 d"-A1O? ?"y"O qm pm
jw
®® ....e M ? ••.. p --ft pumdoomm Nil 11 SSSSN 11 O is ilff I J? II, w
0
it ct
• ?V? p Q
?\ o 106
t) CL
a
a \ t?>v
3c
h ?\ e o o
o V m o
10
3 0 ? o•
O C O U tp W
40
o
h
? p
_ I vQ*
:k
1
Y ,
%
of
C O ^ N
U=
o t ?i
8
IMPEPVIOUS AREA
CALCULATIONS
Total Site Area 944523 sf
24% of Total Area 226666 sf
Impervious Area in
Sidewalks, 104315 sf
Pavement, and C&G
Impervious Area in
Extra Long hared 2000 sf
Driveway
Amount of
Impervious Area 120371 sf
Available Per Lot
Total # of Lots 54 lots
Average Impervious
Area Allowable Per 2229 sf
Lot
Average Impervious
Area of Driveway 570 sf
(28.5' x 20")
Average Impervious
Area of Sidewalk to 48 sf
House (12'x 4)
Average Impervious
Area Allowable Per 1611 sf
House Pad
Proposed House 50 ft
Pad Length
Proposed House 32 ft
Pad Width
Proposed Actual
Impervious House 1600 sf
Pad Area
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV ofthe.ID Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE, NAME, AND NUMBER:
ASHEVILLE REGULATORY FIELD OFFICE
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 2880 1-500 6
Applicant: Reese Gibson, Indian Trail, NC
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Chestnut Place: RPWs: C/M, E/F, J; WTLD's: A/B, D, G/H, K,
L; IMPDMT 1
State:NC County/parish/borough: Union County City: Indian Tmil
Center coordinates of site (laUlong in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.07213°N, Long. 80.70692° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: West Fork Twelvemile Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Catawba River
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 03050103 : Lower Catawba River
0 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
? Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
N Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are AV "navigable wafers qJ the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
? Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "wafers of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [ Required]
1. Waters of the US.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
? TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent watersz (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
0 Impoundments ofjurisdictional waters
? Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) sire of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 1000 linear feet: 4 - 8 width (fl) and/or acres.
Wetlands: +/- 1.5 - 1.6 acres.
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual
Elevation of established OHWM (ifknown):
Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):'
© Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not,jurisdictional.
Explain:
Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.P.
SECTION III C?1 s' r ,
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW
Section III.A.1 and Section I ILD.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete S
and Section IILD.L; otherwise, see Section III.B below complete
L TN W
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TN W
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Raparms have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least ane "relatively months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resour , but permanent
(perennial) flow, skip to Section IILD.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abuttin seasonally (e g' typically 3
skip to Section IILDA. resource is not a TNW but has year-round
g a tributary with perennial flow,
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary s not
and its
adj
acen though a significant nexus finding
a srnot required as a matter of law.t wetlands if an
y) and a traditional navigable water, even
If the waterbod? is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TN W.
consider the tributary in combination with all of Ifthe tributary has aacent its adjacent wetlands,This significant nexusgeva uation that combines, forst
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary
and tributary,
the tributary, Section IIfor any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent ds, to that tributary, both onsite
e. The determination
whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section tI11wetlan .C belowomplete Section ?1.B.1 for
t
L Characteristics of non-TN Ws that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
0) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: (HUC 03050103 entire drainage) 1370 ogh&ba
Drainage area: (Welland study drainage area) +/_ 45 s . _ V aoiles
Average annual rainfall: 49 inches
Average annual snowfall:
inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) 'TNW
U Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through &'tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 20-2srivermiles from TNW.
Project waters are 1 (orless)rivermiles from RPW
are 1'0=15 aerial (s
Prolect waters traight) miles from TNW.
Project waters .
are 1 (orless)aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: No.
Note that the Instructional Guidebook ins additional inform
West. ation regarding
swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
Identify flow route to TNW`: Seasonal RPW.I and seasonal RPW E/F flow into perennial RPW C/M, which flows
through the site, to flow into West Fork Twelvemile Creek, which flows into Twelvemile Creek, which empties directly
into the Catawba River (TN W ). .
Tributary stream order, ifknown:
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that amolv)Tributary is: ® Natural
?Artificial(man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top ofbank (estimate):
Average width: 4'- 8' feet
Average depth: 2'- 3' feet
Average side slopes: 2:1.
Prima tributary substrate com osition (check all that apply):
Silts LV Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Some steep eroding banks.
Presence ofrun/rifflelpool complexes. Explain: Not present
Tributary geometry: Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 1-2 %
(c) E10M:
Tributary provides for: Seasenal`ilow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: Seasonal flows with input from storm events .
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Discrete andcoalmed. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
® Bed and banks
® OH WM' (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
® changes in the character ofsoil
? shelving ?
® vegetation matted down, hent, or absent
® leaf litter disturbed or washed away
® sediment deposition
? water staining ?
? other (list):
?DiscontinuousOHWM.7 Explain:
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
If factors other than the OH WM were used to determine lateral extent of CW A jurisdiction (check all that apply):
? High Tide Line indicated by: ? Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed chamcteristics, etc.).
Explain: Water was generally clear. .
Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TN W.
`A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows under&yound, or where
the OIiWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OH WM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regrime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.
(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): Forested, 100'+/-.
® Wetland fringe. Characteristics: Triburtaries have abutting wetlands.
® Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Channels support habitat for amphibians.
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetlandquality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: PickLbt. Explain: s.
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacency?etermination With Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity ( elation ip) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are PickListaerial (straight) miles from "fNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List tloodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, ifknown:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlite diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Fick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size fin acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (ifany), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (ifany), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section II I.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings ofpresence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section II1.1):
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs: linear feet width (fl), Or, acres.
? Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries ofTNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round arejurisdictional. Pmvide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Perennial RPW C/M was observed to have geomorphology, biology and hydrologic flow characteristics
consistent with perennial streams. The channel was observed to have a clear bed and bank, consistent flow, fish, and substrate
sorting. See JD package and North Carolina Stream Identification form for RPW C/M.
® Tributaries ofTNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally: RPW .I was observed to have geomorphology, biology and hydrologic flow characteristics consistent with
intermittent streams. The channel had observed flows, clear bed and banks, and substrate sorting. See.ID package and North
Carolina Stream Identification ibrm for RPW J.
RPW F,/F was observed to have geomorphology, biology and hydrologic flow characteristics consistent with intermittent streams.
The channel had observed flows, sediment deposition, and substrate sorting. See .ID package and North Carolina Stream
Identification form for RPW F, and North Carolina Stream Identification form for RPW F.
Provide estimates ton-jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 1000 linear feet4 - 8 width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetland D meets the criteria of the 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation manual (See
Routine Wetland Data Form WTLD D. Wetland D empties directly into and is not separated from RPW C/Nl.
Wetland L meets the criteria of the 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation manual (See Routine Wetland Data Form WTLD GM
(Typical). Wetland L empties directly into and is not separated from RPW C/NL
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section I II.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW: Wetland AB meets the criteria ofthe 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation manual (See Routine Wetland
Data Form WTLD A. Wetland A/B empties directly into and is not separated from RPW E/F.
Wetland G/H meets the criteria ofthe 1987 COE Wetlands Delineation manual (See Routine Wetland Data Form WTLD GM. Wetland G/H
empties directly into and is not separated from RPW E/F.
Wetland K meets the criteria of the 1987 COF Wetlands Delineation manual (See Routine Wetland Data Form WTLD G/H (Typical).
Wetland K empties directly into and is not separated from RPW
Provide acreage estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: WTLD AM 1.5 acres, WTLD 1) : <.01 acres,
WTLD G/H : <.01 acres, WTLD K : <.01. acres, WTLD L: <.01 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws.
0 Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW arejurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs..
Q Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW arejurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates forjurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.'
As a general rule, the impoundment of ajurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
0 Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters ofthe FI.S.," or
"See Footnote N 3.
" To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.b of the Instructional Guidehook.
? Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above( 1 -6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
ISOLATED JINTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATES WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):'a
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
? from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could he used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
? Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
? Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
? Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
? Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Ifpotential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based awdy on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the s potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
Judgment (check all that apply):
L I Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
? Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or p lat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/deiineation report
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USG S 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
"'Prior to asserting or declining C WA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanes.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24K - Matthews (NC) quad.
® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
? FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Flood lain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
? Other information (please specify):
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form: Version 3.1
i
Date: April 16, 2009 Project: Chestnut Place Latitude: 35.07194 N (NAD83)
Evaluator: JL, PK, LR, TW Site: RPW C/M Longitude: 80.70604 W
Total Points: Other Matthews, NC quad
Stream rs at iaast urferrrrrttent 31.5 County: Union County e g Ouad Name:
it > t9 or .rennkqt if a 30
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 14.5 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosltv 0 1 2 3
3 In-chanrei structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Active)relic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
._ --- ------- - - - - -- ----- -- --
9 a Natural levees 0
-- --
0 1
-
1 2
-
2 3

3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drain eway 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No (D
Yes = 3
a Man-made ditches are not rated. see drscuss:ons in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- d or ro0n season 0 1 0 3
16. Leaf fitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0. 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 f 1.5
19. H dric soils (redoximo hic features resent? No = 0 Yes 1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal =
20'. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21'. Rooted plants in channel
22. Crayfish 3
0 2
0.5 1
1 0
1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0. 1 1.5
25. Amphib?ans 0 0. 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note divorsity and ahundanco) 0 0. 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: penphyton
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria Hungus
29r'. Wetland plants in streambed 0 1 2 3 j
0.5 1. 1 1.5 1
FAC 0.5' FACW = 0.75: 0_8_L=__1 5 SAV = 2.0: Other-=.O
item: 20 and 1t focus on the prosnnce of upland planes. Item 2b focuses on the presence o+ aquatic or wetland plants
Sketch
Note:. {usn back. side of this form for additional notes l
8'- 12' wide, 2'- 3' deep @ T.O.B.
Sand, gravel, cobble
Abutting wetlands and impoundment
Fish observed
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form-, Version 3.1
Date: April 16, 2009 Project: Chestnut Place Latitude: 35.07189 N (NAD83)
Evaluator: LR, TW, JL, PK Site: RPW E Longitude: 80.70622 W
Total Points: Other Matthews, NC quad
Stream rs at ieast inrernwont 25 County: Union County e g Uuad Nome:
d> l p or _ranmril A z aO
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 12 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
12. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 3
3 in-channel structure: rile-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Activelrelic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
4-5 Natural levees 0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 D.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drains eway 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No ©0
Yes = 3
" Man-made ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B- Hvdroloov (Subtotal= 6.5 i
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and , 48 his since rain, or
Water in channel - d or roMn season 0 1O 2 3
16. Leatlitter 1.6 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. H dric soils (redoximor hic features) resent? No= 0 Yes 1.5
C Bininav (Suhintni = 6.5 1
20'. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21'. Rooted plants in channel
22. Crayfish 3
0 2
15 1
1 0
1.5
23. Bivalves C03 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0. 1 1.5
26, Macrobenthos (note divorslti and abundance) --Co) 0.6 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: penphyton
28. Iron oxidlzin - bacteriattun us
-0-- -- -
2i T.- Wetland plants in streambed 0 1 2 3
D 0.5 - - - 1 1.5
?- - - - - -
FAC 0.5? FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 -SAV- = 2.0, Other - 0
nui na zu arlu t r lut wu un ?lu plus.;mu OI uplanu planlb, Item 17J lotuses on inc, prewnce or, aquatic or Wotan plant-
Sketctm.
Notes. fuse bark side of this form for additional notes )
5'- 8' wide, 2'- 3' deep @ T.O.B.
Silt, sand, gravel, few cobble
Abutting wetlands

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form: Version 3.1
Date: April 16, 2009 Project: Chestnut Place Latitude: 35.07223 N (NAD83)
Evaluator: LR, TW, JL, PK Site: RPW F Longitude: 80.70577 W
Total Points: Other Matthews, NC quad
Suearn rs ar least lntermrrtent 19.5 County: Union County
e, t?r<ad Name:
Az 14 nr ..rennk?l rJ? 311 9
A. Geomor halo (Subtotal= 9 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
la. Continuous bed and bank 0 2 3
2. Sinuosl 0 ECO 2 3
3 In-chancel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Activelrelic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
9 a Natural levees 0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 005 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other docurnented
evidence.
No ©0
Yes = 3
man-maue ancnes are not raiea', see olscussons in manua
B. Hvdroloov (Subtotal = 6 t
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or rowin season 0 0 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. H ric soils (redoximor hic features) resent? No= 0 Yes 1.5
C Bin€nov (Suhtnta€ = 4.5
20'. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel
22. Crayfish 3
0 2
0.5 1
1 0
1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24, Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibans 0 D. 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note divorsity and aNindanco) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: penphyton
28. Iron oxidiziN bacteriattungus --- I
Wetland plants in streambed I 0 1 2 3
0 0.5 1 1 5
FAC 0.5 FACW = 0.75: OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0 i
Silt, sand
-11- - - - I-- "' . re P, cacti - - UV'.1'U PJU Mu, Runt [U ruWW url 111C prC5CDCC Ol agUatiC or WCnanct plants-
sketch
Notes: fuse back side of this fame to, ooditionai notes
4' - 6' wide, 1' - 2' deep @ T.O.B.
Has abutting wetlands

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form: Version 3.1
s
Date: April 16, 2009 Project: Chestnut Place Latitude: 35.07206 N (NAD83) E
Evaluator: LR, TW, JL, PK Site: RPW J Longitude: 80.70102 W I
i
Total Points: Other Matthews, NC quad I
Strearrr rs at yeast rnteranent .75 County: Union County
21 e g Ck1ad Name:
if ? N or perennial it z 30
1
A. Geomor holo Subtotal = 10.5 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
12. Continuous bed and bank 0 1
-
-- 2 3
'-_
- - -
2. Sinuosity 0 1 2 3
3 In-chancel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 2 3
5. Activelrelic floodplain 0 1 2 3
6. Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits
9 a Natural levees 0
0 1
1 2
2 3
3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valley or drains ewa 0 4. 1 1.5
13 Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No ©0
Yes = 3
" Man-made ditches are not rated; see dtscuss!ons in manual
R Hvrirninnv fSuhtntal = 5.5
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and ?- 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - d or growing season 0 0 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17, Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18, Organic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. H dric soils (redoximo hic features resent? No Not 0 Yes 1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal = 5.75
20'. Fibrous roots in channel 3 2 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3
22. Crayfish 0 2
D.5 1
1 0
1-5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Amphibians 0 0. 1 1.5
26. btacrobenthos (noto divorsib, and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae: penphyton I D V7061. 2 3
28 Iron oxidizing bacteriaMrgus 0 1 t 5
29 Wetland plants in streambed I FAC 0.5: FACW = 1 5 SAV = 2.0: Other = 0
"Items 20 and 2 ! tocus on the presence of upland plank. Item 211 Ior_uses on the prewnce or arluatlc er wetland plants
Notes. use baCV. side. of this form to' adtlnicptai notes Sketch-
. )
6'- 8' wide, 2'- 3' deep @ T.O.B.
Silt, sand
Abutting headwater wetland
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: CHESTN 9 P .A Date: 04/16/2009
Applicant / Owner: Reece Gibson County: Union
Investigator: LR. TW. JL. PK State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:Wtld
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X_ Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: WTLD A/B
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator

1. Acerrubrum T FAC Dominant Plant Species
Stratum Indicator
9. Microslezium vimineum H FAC+
2. Salix niera T OBL 10. Lonicera jg ica H FAC-
3. Liguidambarstyraciflua T FA-C+ 11. Boehmedacylindrica H FACW+
4. Acer rubmm S/S FAC 12. Toxicodendron radicans H FAC
5. Salixnigm S/S ORL 13.
6. Liauidambarstyraciflua S/S FAC+ 14.
7. Alnus sernulata S/S FACW+ 15.
8. Alnus serrulata H FACW+ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 92.y_
Remarks: Wetland Vegetation Present Based Upon Greater than 50% of the Plant Species are Classified as FAC-
OBL in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. Sample plot was taken in the center of Wetland
A/B.
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
- Other X Inundated
-Saturated in Upper 12"
- No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: - Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: o - 3 (in) Secondary Indicators:
_X_ _Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0-6 tin_) x Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 in.) FAC-Neutral Test
- Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): HeB - Helena tine sandy loam. 2-8% slol2es Drainage Class: Somewhat Doorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult s Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No_
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inchesl Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 A 2.5 YR 5/2
12 - 18+ B 2.5 YR 5/2 5 YR 5/8 Common/Distinct Sandy Clay Loam
NA NA Sandy Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
XGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
I Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No = Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No Within a Wetland? YesX No_
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No
Remarks: Wetland A/B is classified as a wetland based upon the criteria set forth in the 1987 Army Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: H . TN IT P .A Date: 04/16/2009
Applicant / Owner: Reece Gibson County: Union
Investigator: LR. TW, JL. PK State: NC
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:WJJd
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X_ Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: WILD D
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Salix nigra - T OBI . Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9. Cardamine Pennsylvanica H FACW+
2. Liriodendron tulipifera S/S FAC 10. Po&=um sagittatum H OBL
3. Salix nigra S/S OBL 11.
4. Salix nigra H OBL 12.
5. Microstegium vimineum H FAC+ 13.
6. Juncus effusus H FACW+ 14.
7. Lvpha latifolia H FACW+ 15.
8. Galium aparine H FACU 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 90%
Remarks: Wetland Vegetation Present Based Upon Greater than 50% of the Plant Species are Classified as FAC-
OBL in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. Sample plot was taken in the center of
Wetland D. The canopy is relatively open
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
- Other -Inundated
c Saturated in Upper 12"
- No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Field Observations: X Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) Secondary Indicators:
,X -Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 - 6 tin.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 - 4 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
- Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): HeB - Helena fine sandy loam. 2-8% slop Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup):_Aquie iinpludult s Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
tinchesl Horizon (Munsell Moistl (Munsell Moistl Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0-6 A 10 YR 511 10 YR 4/6 Few/Prominent Sandy Clay Loam
6 - 18+ B Gley 2 5/IOG NA NA Loamy Sand
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
XGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No _ Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No _ Within a Wetland? YesX No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No _
Remarks: Wetland D along stream C is classified as a wetland based upon the criteria set forth in the 1987 Army
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: CHESTNUT PLACE Date: 04/16/2009
Applicant / Owner: Reece Gibson County: Union
Investigator: LR. TW. JL. PK State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:WtJd
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: WTLD G/H
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum _T FAC Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9.
2. Liquidambar stvraciflua T FAC+ 10.
3. Quercus nigm S/S FAC 11.
4. Liquidambar stvraci ua S/S FAC+ 12.
5. Acer rubrum S/S FAC 13.
6. Liquidambar stvraci ua H FAC+ 14.
7. Lonicera japonica H FAC- 15.
_
8. Parthenocissus auinauefolia H FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). RR%
Remarks: Wetland Vegetation Present Based Upon Greater than 50% of the Plant Species are Classified as FAG '
OBL in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. Sample plot was taken in the center of
Wetland D. Sparse vegetation.
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
_ Other -Inundated
-X-Saturated in Upper 12"
- No Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: NA (in.) Secondary Indicators:
X_ Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 10 - 14 (in.) - FAC-Neutral Test
- Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): HeB - Helena fine swidy loam. 2-8% slopes. Drainage Class: Somewhat Doody drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hanludult s Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No_
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0-4 A 7.5 YR 4/3
4 - 18+ A/B 10 YR 7/2 NA NA Silty Clay Loam
7.5 YR 5/8 Common/Distinct Silty Clay Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
-Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
XGleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No _ Within a Wetland? YesX No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No _
Remarks: Wetland G/H is classified as a wetland based upon the criteria set forth in the 1987 Army Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project / Site: CHESTNUT PLACE Date: 04/16/2009
Applicant / Owner: Reece Gibson County: Union
Investigator: LR. TW. JL. PK State: NC

Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes X No Community ID:upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes No _X Transect ID:
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No X Plot ID: UPLAND 1
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Ouercus nhellos T FACW- Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
9. Tipularia discolor H FACU
2. Liriodendron tulipifera T FAC 10. Lonicerajgponica H FAC-
3. Liquidambarstvrac ua T FAC+ 11. Claytonia virizinica H FACU-
4. Pinus taeda T FAC 12. Hieracium venosum H N1
5. Ouercus falcata l_ FACU- 13. Pain is seratina H FACT J
6. Caaatomentosa T NI 14.
7. Ulm us alata S/S FACU+ 15.
8. Juniperus virQiniana S/S FACU- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 36%
Remarks: Wetland Vegetation Present Based Upon Greater than 50% of the Plant Species are NOT Classified as
FAC-OBL in the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands. Sample plot was taken upslope from stream
J.
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
- Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
_ Other -Inundated
-Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available Water Marks
Drift Lines

Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: NA (in.) Secondary Indicators:
-Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: NA (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: NA (in.) - FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): HeB - Helena fine sandy lo am. 2-8% slopes Drainage Class: Somewhat poorly drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No_
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc.
0-10 A 7.5 YR 6/6 N
10+ Rock A NA Silt Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_Histosol -Concretions
_Histic Epipedon -High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_Sulfidic Odor -Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
-Reducing Conditions XListed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors -Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Very rocky slope.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes - No X Is the Sampling Point
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes _ No X Within a Wetland? Yes_ NoX
Hydric Soils Present? Yes - No X
Remarks: Upland 1 is NOT classified as a wetland based upon the criteria set forth in the 1987 Army Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.

? a? m m ar as a? a? m
`o a a o 0 0 0 o
m
E
W
t9 r n Cs? c9 to ca [9 Lai
xmmmmmmmm
MMMMMMMMM
LL 0? as 00 00 0? 00 00 00
vvsrvvv -.'rv
00000000
R R R R R R R R
*MMMWWWWW
R R R R R R R R
mmmmmmmmm
cmmmmmmmm
066666666
rImo D000 mmm
?vvvvvvti?
?ooooo000
R R R R R R R R
w
?mmmmmmmm
w OD 00 0D O7 00 0D co
- N N N N N N N N
.,170, l OZ
-0 aa?-aa"0 -0
ay ati as m a? as m as
U cv crs c6 ca to cu ? tv
U] U] Cr7 Crl [!l Lrl U] U7
? ? ca c? co ? ca to ?
a a? m m m a7 a? m m
K? ,7 ?? 7 7 3 7 7
alNNNNNNNN
Ln Ln Ln LIj LD Ln LD LD
V d* I:T V dT V V "T
m?zrorrioc9-,t?
O R V ct ? N V O
(6?tLD rlN?-qM
0
00 V LnWmmomN
N-rmm67R0CD
a 0 0 o R R M 0 O
aymN #mm'-T m m
CD
0
CL) a)
U U O O O O m m
O O
0
as a) U0 U0 U0 U0 U0 U
? ? aY Q7 Q7 a.1 Qy al
CL)
g w W w W w w
uJ O w c
= 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O ? U7 ? ? ? C7
O L+Y 'O ? ? ? ? -+7
Cry 0
?krno?C?C??iC7rt
;r LD L7 m N
G Lf1 LD LID -7r '7 -4
4-O OtttRhtR
0 0 0 0 0 0
FIGURE 1. Perennial RPW CM.
FIGURE 2. Seasonal RPW E.

FIGURE 3. Seasonal RPW F.
FIGURE 4. Seasonal RPW J.

FIGURE 5. Wetland AB.
FIGURE 6. Wetland D.
qP It
FIGURE 7. Wetland GH.
FIGURE 8. Upland.
4? V.
FIGURE 9. Pond (impoundment).