20041776 Ver 2_401 Application_20090727

04-rnto 02
consultants
O LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
; A I
? 4ve
& `Gf>
Nk/
i
3 0i
July 27, 2009
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NCDENR - Division of Water Quality
Wetlands and Stormwater Branch
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Re: Valterra Holdings, LLC - Carpenter Village Commerce
Water Quality Certification, Nationwide No. 39
Cary, NC
Dear Ms. Karoly:
Please find enclosed the application material for requesting coverage under the General Water Quality
Certification associated with NWP #39 for the subject property to cover impacts associated with the
construction ofa commercial development located in Cary, NC. The applicant for this notification is Valterra
Holdings, LLC, 5310 S. Alston Ave., Suite 210, Durham, NC, 27713, (919-313-2750). The site is 3.93 acres
which are currently undisturbed and is located adjacent to an existing mini-storage facility on the east side.
The other adjacent properties are undeveloped land. The project will consist of grading of a portion of the site
to provide for the construction of commercial buildings (3) with associated parking areas and entry driveway.
The wetlands are shown on the attached plan.
Proposed impacts to the waters of the U.S., resulting from the site development, consist of the
buildings and parking lot construction impacting a total .09 acres of wetlands. There are no stream or buffer
impacts associated with the project. The estimated total amount of wetlands on the site is approximately 0.185
acres. It is my understanding the USACE's policy requires mitigation for impacts that exceed the requirements
for notification. Because the impacts resulting from the project construction covered under NWP 39 do not
exceed 1/10 of an acre, or involve discharge into a special aquatic site, special mitigation is not required.
However, the Applicant has complied with requirements for avoidance and minimization, as required by the
Nationwide Permit conditions. The project has been designed to not cause impacts in the wetlands along the
eastern site boundary which are also included in a Natural Resources Conservation Easement; nor in the
wetlands along the southern boundary of the project and are located in the rear buffer. These measures provide
avoidance and mitigation for the total area of wetlands in the project.
LAND PLANNERS + CIVIL ENGINEERS
U
Erosion control protection will be in place to minimize any impact of the soil disturbance and siltation
to down-gradient wetlands. The applicant further plans to provide a stormwater sandfilter onsite to conform to
Town of Cary requirements for treatment of the runoff from the first inch of rainfall. Post development peak
runoff rate for the 1-year, 24-hour rainfall event will not be increased. Off site stormwater runoff from the
adjacent development to the east will be collected and passed through the site to discharge down-gradient of
the project. There are no streams on this site (DWQ stream determination attached) and, although the project
is in the Neuse River Basin, there is no Neuse River Riparian Buffer on the site. Level spreading of the
stormwater runoff will not be necessary to create diffuse flow from the project and is not provided.
Considering the fact that the wetlands effectively bisect the property diagonally, the responsible
development of the property allows no practical alternative to disturbing the wetlands in the center portion of
the tract given the only access is from Sowter Drive.
Please call me at [phone] if you have any questions concerning this request.
Regards,
William C. Mills, P.E.
Attachments :
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
Site Location Map (USGS copy)
Wetlands Impact Map (Sheet W-1)
Re-delineation of wetlands by Corps
Soil and Environmental Consultants Report, Wetland Delineation
DWQ letter on stream determination
Check for $240 to DWQ for Application Fee for 401 WQC
cc:
Mr. John Weigle
044_11-16%3 a-
M
o INA7-r4
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form A I
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: ?X Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 39 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ?X Yes ? No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
?X 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
? Yes ?X No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ?X 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 ?X No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ?X No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ?X No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Carpenter Village Commerce - Cary, NC
2b. County: Wake
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Cary
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no: N/A
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Valterra Holdings, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No. Deed Book 12766; Deed Page 2662
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): John Weigle
3d. Street address: 5310 S. Alston Ave., Suite 210
3e. City, state, zip: Durham, NC 27713
3f. Telephone no.: 919-313-2750
3g. Fax no.: 919-402-9919
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Keith Gettle
5b. Business name
(if applicable): Civil Consultants, Inc.
5c. Street address: 3206 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 100
5d. City, state, zip: Wake Forest, NC 27587
5e. Telephone no.: 919-453-2386
5f. Fax no.: 919-403-0336
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 10
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 0745-26-9214
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.8274 Longitude: -78.8854
1 c. Property size: 3.93 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project: Crabtree Creek
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C NSW
2c. River basin: Neuse
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:
The property is currently forested. Adjacent land to the east is a mini-storage facility. Other surrounding land is undeveloped.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.185
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 0
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The proposed project is the construction of commercial buildings (3) on the site with associated driveways and parking.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Conventional land clearing and grading equipment will be used to prepare the site for building construction and parking and driveway paving.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? ?X Yes ? No ? Unknown

Comments: Corps and DwQ
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
? Preliminary ?X Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Mr. Chris Flowers Agency/Consultant Company: Soil & Environmental Consultants
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Corps re-delineated the wetlands on 9/24/07 by James Shern; original delineation by Todd Tugwell, May 1998. DWQ by D. Edwards on 11/10/04.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
? Yes ?X No ? Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ?X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
?X 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.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T 2b.
Type of impact 2c.
Type of wetland 2d.
Forested 2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other) 2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 P Fill Headwater Wetland Yes Corps 0.09
W2 Choose one Choose one Yes/No
W3 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No -
W4 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No -
W5 - Choose one Choose one Yes/No -
W6 Choose one Choose one Yes/No -
2g. Total Wetland Impacts: 0.09
2h. Comments:
Wetlands that bisect the site will be excavated/filled to allow building development. Wetlands on the buffer areas of the site to the northeast and
southwest will remain undisturbed.
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.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T) 3b.
Type of impact 3c.
Stream name 3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)? 3e.
Type of
jurisdiction 3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet) 3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 Choose one
S2 - Choose one
S3 Choose one
S4 Choose one
S5 Choose one
S6 Choose one
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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 individual) list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or type
Temporary T
01 - Choose one Choose
02 - Choose one Choose
03 - Choose one Choose
04 - Choose one Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Pond ID number Proposed use or Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
purpose of pond (acres)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
P1 Choose one
P2 Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? ? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
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. Project is in which protected basin? ?X Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Catawba ? Randleman ? Other:
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer Impact Reason for impact Stream name Buffer Zone 1 Zone 2
number -
Permanent (P) or mitigation impact impact

Temporary T required? (square (square
feet feet
B1 Yes/No
B2 Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 Yes/No
B5 Yes/No

B6 Yes/No

6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
The project is in the Neuse River Basin but there are no NRRB's on the site.
Page 5 of 10
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 applicant requested a detailed delineation of wetlands and streams on this property prior to beginning the development plan. An area that was
thought to be a stream was determined by DWQ to not be a stream. A Natural Resources Conservation Easement on the east side of the property is
being protected and disturbance of the wetland areas which run middle of the property are proposed to be filled only to the extent necessary to allow
construction of the buildings and parking. Stormwater management for quality and quantity will minimize aquatic impacts below the development.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Sedimentation and erosion control measures will be used to minimize downstream impacts in the wetlands down gradient from the site both in the
rear buffer area and off site.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ?X No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps

2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project? ? Mitigation bank

El Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:

3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Makin 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: Choose one
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.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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 ?X 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
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 ? Yes XQ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 56%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? 0 Yes ? No

2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater will be collected from all built-upon (impervious) areas and conveyed to stormwater BMP via catch basins and stormwater pipes. The
BMP will be an underground stormwater sand filter that will treat the runoff from the first one inch of rainfall. The post-development peak flow will be
detained so that the runoff from the 1 year, 24 hour storm event will not exceed the pre-development peak flow. Stormwater runoff from the adjacent
off-site development will be collected and passed through the proposed project.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? Town of Cary
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? Town of Cary, approval pending
n Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management
ro
rams ? NSW
p
g
apply (check all that apply): ? USMP
? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ?X No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
ElCoastal counties
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply
HQW
?O
RW
?
(check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been

tt
h
d?
T
? Yes ? No
a
ac
e
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ? Yes ?X 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)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ?Yes ?X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ?Yes ?X 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 ?X 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.
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.
Existing sewer service is avaijable to the Town of Car
North WWT
Th
N
WWfP
y
.
e
o
is 12 mgd capacity and has ample available capacity for the
domestic sewage needs of this project.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.4 January 2009
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 ?X No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ?X No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. -
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Files of the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) office were searched for State or Federally protected species and Significant Natural Communities (see
attached report ).
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?
The proposed project is in Wake County which is not near any coastal or tidal habitat the would support EFH (i.e. salt marshes, oyster reefs, etc.).
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 Z 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?
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Office of the State Archaeology were contact and records checked (see attached report).
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ? Yes ?X No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
Most recent FEMA FIRM maps. Panel 0745 (Wake County, eff. May 2, 2006.)
v ??U ??I . YV?)? !?

4
AIZ

7
'
Applicant/Agent
s Printed Name s 9nature ate
t's
v lid only ' an authorization
letter from the ap lic s provided.)
Page 10 of 10
SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. PLAN NO.
PARCEL ID: 07z/6-Z# - 01 ;U41-
STREET ADDRESS: 02 D (e0 5ow+er fir, Vet
Please print:
Property Owner:
Property Owner:
tAvV%hgS, ?-L0.
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Kei` (e , of e tiL)t l Co»su(44?n- s" Zhc .
(Contractor Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
53 10 5 . s4on Aw. , Skile 21P ?tAC6M ?JC 27'I13
Telephone: - 3 k 3 - ,,27J D
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
Authorized Signature
Date:
• civil consultants
LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS
NSS Sowter Drive
Cary, NC
State Historical Records Review
Office of State Archaeology
Natural Heritage Program File Search
•
Civil Consultants, Inc., Project No. 13029
July 22, 2009
In July, 2009, Bill Mills, Civil Consultants, Inc., conducted a review of state records at the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and North Carolina Office of Archaeology (OSA). The review
included map room searches for sites and structures of historical, cultural, and archaeological
significance in and around the vicinity of the subject property. Also in July, 2009, the files of the Natural
Heritage Program (NHP) office located in Raleigh were searched for information on state and/or
federally protected species and significant natural communities in or around the vicinity of the subject
property. These records were updated utilizing the NHP Virtual Workroom (NHP 2009) and by
requesting information concurrence identification by NHP staff. A map with the results of this
information on a USGS map and location of the project site is attached to this report.
Findings: NC State Historic Preservation Office
NC SHPO maintains records and locations of buildings, structures and objects that are listed by local
governments as historic landmarks or those which are listed or eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places. The records check at the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) revealed
no structures on the property that appear on the National Registry (NR), Determination of Eligibility
(DOE), Study List (SL), or Locally Designated (LD) lists. North Carolina state law does not provide
protection for properties that are determined to be eligible but not listed in the National Register. Thus
neither placement on the Study List nor a fomiaT determination of eligibility by the Keeper of the
National Register has an official role in state environmental review procedures. No structures
appearing on the National registry list will be impacted by this project.
Maps at the SHPO offices did show an area that is listed on the National Registry which is located
approximately % mile south of the project. This location is identified as the Carpenter Historic District,
an area of approximately 210 acres consisting of a commercial crossroads and surrounding residences,
LAND PLANNERS + CIVIL ENGINEERS
3206 HERITAGE TRADE DR, SUITE 100, WAKE FOREST, NC 27587, 919.453.2386 PHONE [phone] FAX
WWW.CIVIL-CONSULTANTS.COM
farmsteads and community buildings. This area was entered on the National Registry in 2000. This area
is shown on the attached map. The project will not impact the historic district.
Staff member Renee Shearin was quite helpful in providing information in the map room and file listing.
Findings: NC Office of State Archaeology
North Carolina Office of State Archaeology records archaeological sites and excavations. The record
check was performed in July, 2009. No significant sites or artifacts have been recorded on the project
site. In addition there are no significant or Nationally Registered historic archaeological locations
recorded within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. Discussions with Ms. Dolores Hall, Deputy
State Archaeologist, indicated that due to the erodible soils in the area artifacts would not be likely to be
found in this part of the county (with a project located at the headwater area of the drainage area like
the project area, erosion would have uncovered items that may be of interest and they would not likely
to have survived the long term weathering).
Findings: NC Natural Heritage Program
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) records occurrences of rare plant and animal
species, exemplary natural communities, and special animal habitats known to occur in North Carolina.
Suzanne Mason, Environmental Biologist, NHP, assisted the search in the NHP Virtual Workroom to
determine that there are no listings of such occurrences in the project area. In the vicinity of the project
(2 miles) there are listed the following occurrences:
Scientific EO Common EO EO State Federal
Name Nb Name Rank Accuracy Protection Protection
Status Status
Buchnera 7 American H Low SR-P
Americana Bluehearts
Scutellaria 4 Veined H Low SR-P
Nervosa
rn
ar• Skullcap
.?)rx-r - 3ignirncantry stare-Peripheral'
Summary-
State I Global I Habitat
Rank Rank Comments
SH G5? Glades, open
forests,
streambanks,
primarily over
mafic or
calcareous
7rocks
S1 G5 Alluvial
forests
The records search at the Natural Heritage Program revealed that the above listed species are recorded
within a 2 mile radius of the project boundaries. The file search at the State Historic Preservation Office
produced no records of structures on the property listed on the National Registry (NR), Determination of
Eligibility (DOE), Study List (SL) , or Locally Designated (LD) lists. The records search at the North
Carolina Office of State Archaeology revealed no documented historical sites, surveys, or artifacts within
the project boundaries.

70 r \ \? '! J~1'?? /1 L

37

•

,
r
?-
•
r
? I 1 4 r
(f• '
??
77
0
68
V
??,1,
L? \? ? •
.
te:
Q tr`? 4
?,
U? . .
r
?
<) ,.•
_I 3B
50• NSS Sowter S ite

?

/ p I
, I -
r) / `
L14 / 1 NN
?? f
`
•'67 .
? \ • ?
s
? `\? \
\
•
?? ••'?._` 7
?
,
, 342 ^

v' Carpenter Historic
m66 District
1 - \" 35a ? 326
- - -, , -?J_?s •P> --.' -- - '--
^\?

1
_
'
-
-Z& A

U

v9U
n65

A. 6rr

.l8 NOIldI80934 3144 'A38 Z v

e
m
alto ,errs ,dV1?MS??e 'if it

xr? etee•e WON ,MONO r11 neP Fn,un UM

• ,
' 11r z
O
1?-1
NVICA
1.
NYMOM
FrYMYW "96 .ulnae nrHrna
/„NINN, 7111 ?rOM?e,M?NN, II ONY117 I"??
i /0 v
SJUVIIriSU03 JIAIJ h
frly ~
rn
OP
CE II ?
II
w0
o
? E
'Odl Sl?3dd0N1
a p .o
\ I! \?, w,wa vim`
E \ t ,I
2
C9
8
r
1 _.. i
SD
1 !
« 1

W d
YNPIORYO luvoN Ixav0
??II MIG RRIAOS 0903
NE11 a0$HNNOD HDrrIu HaINaduva

j
T 41 _-
i //j

i r%
1.
!

1 jl 1
• 1 e
i,f !
N
J v ??E r
N?0Zje
az:
p ti ,;`%r so
?t
a
Q
I,
/? tv
t t ••?? (?la' 114
4' /I
?n
i
! / 1
girl
?(LI? f 1tF? i1Li /f . i
I V
?I ?1 1J

??? laoaaly
?„sr

\,\p.
i
k 11?
a1
1
? c
? I
t{
?I
{ s
1 1 ,
5{D , 1 i
•? tl
erto 3,L?'t?
TAY&
inane 3^!a° •
elk
L? 1
1 \
Ill
rin
Ng
N

cull 0z; r nvlronmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
www.SandEC.com
September 25, 2007
S&EC Project # 3494.w3
North State Storage
Attn: Bruce Stankavage
14 Consultant Place, Suite 250
Durham, NC 27707
Re: Received Sign-Off Maps
Mr. Stankavage,
On September 25, 2007 we received the re-authorized sign-off maps for the Northstate Storage
project on Sowter Drive. Unless there is a change in Law or the USACE's published regulations
the delineation represented on the maps is now valid for five years from the date of the signature,
(September 24, 2007).
If you have questions or would like to discuss other aspects of the project please call or email me
at [e-mail] .
Thanks,
Chris Flowers
Wetland Scientist
CC: Bill Mills
Civil Consultants
Charlotte Office:
236 LePhillip Court, Suite C Greensboro Office:
Concord, NC 28025 3817-E Lawndale Drive
Phone: [phone] Greensboro, NC 27455
Fax: [phone] Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA.
11010 Raven Ridge Road - Raleigh. Noah Carolina 27614 - Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
www.SandP-C.com
August 8, 20-07
S&EC Project #3494.W3
USACE Action ID #:199820704
USAGE Raleigh Regulatory Branch
Attn: James Shern
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Re: JD Request- Lots 3 and 4, Cary Corporate Center
Cary, Wake County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Shern:
On behalf of Carpenter Associates we request a Jurisdictional Determination for Lots 3
and 4 of the Cary Corporate Center. The project is located to the south of Sowter Drive
in western Cary., NC. A jurisdictional determination was previously made for the entire
center in May of 1998 by Mr. Todd Tugwell (expired sign off maps attached). At this
time we are requesting a Jurisdictional Determination on lots 3 and 4. S&EC has since
refreshed the flags on Lots 3 and 4. A map depicting the updated flagging is attached
(figure 1). Please review the attached information and let me know if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,

Chris Flowers
Wetland Scientist/Project Manager
Attachments:
¦ Wetland Sketch Map
¦ USGS Map
¦ Soil Survey Map
¦ Wetland & Upland Data Forms
• Site Photos
¦ Expired Sign-off maps (for entire
Corporate Center)
¦ New JD Form
¦ Agent Authorization Form
Charlotte Office: Greensboro Office:
236 LePhillip Court, Suite C 31817-E ..awndale Drive
r ..mot:...., Mr T7dSC
CD
x
TWO A .- Md R-d.Comaitaats. PA
I IOIO lim 16:Iec Rood. 6eigyh. Nont: Cmou:wT+6li
r-. J919 846-5900 F C919) &16-9465
W.U." App-i-tim
.^w:yGe r:e tYdc._na.? fvn:i..S ?l
a'S.-iC nvn+.s:x. ?,: t:o musrr n?une; .l cn mc.?4ddmk
auRw+d alwmtiea mM HeeErrAC:ian+ln
nL
ttF.. ?sreeia*'+sro e2+o?+??umr:et N}'f^ss:+and G-
Px::ina3 S. [ha S S Amp Caps d
SOWTER
10A&B T1
T tt 20A 81208 /
A
.'IJ,.
ty
L_ 28A tt PL
Unimportant Channel must be confirmed by the USAC
Wetlands must be confirmed by the USACE
parcel
streets
Project Number: Vap Title:
3494.w3 Figure 3 - Wetland
Prat Vlawjer: Sketch Map
CF
Scale: Cary Corporate Center
j u = 1 '00` Wake County, NC
01BttPL
__._01Att PL
i
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Rdge Rd.- Raleigh, NC 27614
[phone] -[phone]
Web Page: www.SaidEC.com
Date:
na?n?in?
j , tom` r?? , '?1? ( ,,, a? t ??.? ,w ?,.y ? `?i3??' 1 _,- i ? ?? ?\ •, •tis\ ?\ ? ?1,-? 1., ` ?? I, s 4 t? ? r ? „
.? ? ? 4 D j ?.. i? ? ?? I'-L ?? ,.. ._-? 1 _? J L 1?<?/?_??• t ??-?". t ' ? ?; 1 :. )y??j?.c ?t?-o ?`:`
•l ;\ } j 1`?Ftl 'f v ?. ~~ 'L C l , %{ 1 I•:-?. r , 1 It `? ."x' '`'?".4. ^ 1 _.1',.....v ?rJ- Li .
f"'• i• ( ? t ?((;? ?^ ! ???h ;r i -r mot`" 'r 1 t 1
?
?? r ,\ s ? ti's i t( •• '` I -'°.c -e-c,- ?? _' LS ? .., t ??? ? -. C
?l?) t?\ \L....: '? t I ?1 it ``? ?; '? , 1 • , ht,? ?'; ? ..r't •, _-% t ??I
)\\,2??r`\)3;,-??? ???V. ?? {/ ????a ?t -?.i /I •??` \ \i ? t .L- ji. `r^-'? 1 ` ?i? `/???
''!'~?i ,?? , \\ ??Ii?F_ ?? 1 1? C r .? ??. ? _-. _ 3 ?-. ? it _t:??l? =? • `? t ?.t1 '- t\.i
` _ tom' L;,' ?' "- t? r ,? ? ` ...? 1Y' ?+?/, I ,. `?`?•. 1\ V ? ? r? `? ?-. ?: 1 ,.
1
+_ r ?? t Lr: ?.i i yt \•? ?y?t` l i ? }t v J; ? ? ? o i ( ? ? r'l? _ ,c-?
1 }, : 1 r
?` ??,f,?,"?"-\?•'? ? `? ? 1?!.^`j\ -Alf ! '?_ h-?y `\ - v7\? ?? ?•\ ?, t????? `\--? J r •i w ?? ? t
-? t-5??? ?u ? Ot .-..???`?='? nar'` \ ? •? r-?. t? -? f - u ? 1 ? ,.? ? \? fir.,
?•4?}?l-? , ;?E ?li - rl; ;.J?, „f1 t,l 1xi11 _ ?i '',` 3 '=?? 3 \?? 1 ?'-? ?...?..p? ?..:. ti. ?`??'., ???`-'1 :.?.? ? t
n't 1 `l?i`S4L 3 r 1 f . ' ;!1 r _ t _ _ ter' •Tf .? t p i•? X
t-;??r`'-)?? ?I t V .V ; ? 1 Jl ? 4?? ?- ! L ? ?'l 1 Yt-?i-. \ ?--?? _ i \ "?\ ?3 "? i ~ ? ?.`1 f?
1,, 1-
iJi 1 ?' ? -rte j 1! \ _t d ?• \?? ? , ? ?' \ ? `\? n t f ? ? t
k`?t11 ?•~ i i \ •.i 1 t..- ??- ``• 1 1 ,1 `t, '\CO\--? ?•???-, 'a? 3 `-- rr l ` ,,
~' l'?t ?`?-?°? ! (( ??i `"`,??.JyO _ t t. ? J } ll ???.' !.`l l? t s r;????tit` ?--"?` , \?• ii ?_-
-t" ?[_1 r : Yt lu! -? t ? 9f `t t a , t ?, ',may ??1,•?"•?.- ? ' ^??1! _? ?, • . ?' s \ t"?..
+?? { ? ' i 321;5 - ``•-''• ? ? ti ? `? ?r r +_ ? , `?"{` , r ! , ? ? 4 t •-- T??? ? _ \ ? - ! ? " Ste' vV
fi, ?\, `t*f•. r -`tip ??? "?? M ? ;'1 (( 3,,\"???? a`' •• ? ? ` /?
[, i n? t 1 p•'1 All 305
. rtlt 4 \ ?its \ i.' J' `i t ?`" { "; -?? V f'• /`
l i? - i"` X50 3325.N`_
r 7
{ ?•{ ? i%F 4 ""? \ /} , ??'{ y , J ? }? ?-??,?'? ? i ... _ 1 ? 1 i- Qi r - ! h
r t 4 tI FE } ?_j? -?}. Y ti ? t f
_1 1jf t .}r t ''..\ t `•1 --?.•,- . gL %i I"33W9}g - ?- i ay{? rat
??'? ?< iu!-} ? r ? !??•yr il)1 ??,,,1. ?If `. Iii .? _'L ilt1 ?t ?i•F ?
1 ? .? ' 3 3 t ? s } tit i ., i , t f?• ? r ? ' Fr. -'4 F•- ro >,rtC,.
j n l~r-??-? i r n ( ? r 1 ,r li\ ?• ". . z??;. fir!
s ' r• ?~_?? ? -i \?l?,?v?!!e!!( ??r 3J ???`{ / ^ r? L •S SIG ?3' t ? yli?k ? ? '?
01}L?>
{? ??` ° f? ?'?ti Il I ?G J 1 ? ?? ?,l ?\\??1 L?' ? ^? `??? ?• `_ , J ?,' 'ti-/I ?! I! t l1`r i 0, ?G?_-' .? ?L.i•:
I ' sdC
l' yl 13L t
Project No.
3494.W3 F)gure { - USGS
Project Mgr.: Cary Corporate Center
CF
North State Storage

Scale: Wake County, NC
'
`
I
= 2,000

Carv Quadranale
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.- Raleigh, NC 27614
[phone] - [phone]
Web Page: www.SandEC.carn

AW \-Y 1 a\!_ IMMOV MOI N., '

-

-
t ..l Sr 3t .a'^
Y
5Y
ai fill l
_

? F?
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.- Raleigh, NC 27614
[phone].(919) 946-M7
Web Page: www.SeMEC.com
Wetland Delineation Performed By- Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
[phone]
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Cary Corporate Center 3494.vv3 Action ID * 199820704 Date: 82!07
Applicant/Owner. North State Storage County: Wake
Investigator. Sold and Environmental Consultants-CF State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances e)dst on the site? X Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes x No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes X No Plot ID: 5' Inside flag 04A
If needed, explain on reverse.) I
vt(it 1 A I lulm
Dominant Plant Species
1 Stratum. Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
tiqufdambar styraxi®ua Tree FAC+ 9.
Eulaffa viminea Herb FAC+ 10.
Smilax rotund loffa
3. Vine FAC 11.
Juncus effuses Herb FACW+ 12.
Scirpus cypedrius Herb OBL 13.
14.
15.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBI, FACW, or FAC
(excluding FAC-): 100%
Remarks:
n 1 L0Mw1_vv 1
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)-
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth of Surface Water. - (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 5 (in.) - FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in_)
Remarks:
Wetland Delineation Performed By: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
[phone]
Project/Site: Cary Corporate Center 3494.w3 Action ID #. 199820704 Plot ID: 5' Inside flag 04A
5u1L,
Map Unit Name Drainage Class: Poorl y Drained
(Series and Phase): Worsham Sandy Loam Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Ochraquults Confirm Mapped Type? _ Yes _ No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color
Mottle Color Mottle
Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A 10 YR 411 San Clay
3-12+ B 10YR 511 10YR516 Common/Prominent Sand Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
x Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
DS DETERMINATION
WE TLAN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? x Yes _ No Is this sampling point within a wetland?
Wetland Hydrology Present? x Yes _ No x Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? x Yes _ No
Remarks:
L- -:I
Wetland Delineation Performed By. Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
[phone]
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Cary Corporate Center 3494.%%G Action ID * 199820704 Date: 8fM7
Applicant/Owner: North State Storage County: Wake
Investigator: Sor7 and Environmental Consultants-CF State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? X Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes X No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes X No Plot ID: 5' outside flag 04A
If needed, explain on reverse.
vcr_c-rerrnN
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Querc us atha Tree FACU 9.
Campsis mdc ans Vine FAC 10.
13. Ms rotunda Vine FAC 11.
Liquidambar sfyrwdflua Tree FAC+ 12-
5. arboreaum Tree NI 13.
Cornus florida Tree FACU 14.
15.
16.
Percent of Dominant Spectres that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(excluding FAC-): 60%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarksy
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
_ Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
_ Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth of Surface Water (in.) _ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Sort Survey Data
Depth to Free Water in Pit (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks: No Hydrology Indicators Met
Wetland Delineation Performed 6y: Soil iii Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
[phone]
Project/Site: Cary Corporate Center 3494.w3 Action ID #. 199820704 Plot ID: 5' outside flag 04A
SOILS
Map Unit Name Drainage Class: Poc
(Series and Phase): Worsham Sandy Loam Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Ochraquuits Confirm Mapped Type?
Profile DescriDbon:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color
inches Horizon (Munsen Moist) (Munsell Moist)
0-4 A 10YR 513
4-12 A2 25Y 5/9
Hydric Soil lndicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfides Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low-Chrorna Colors
i Remarks: No Hydric Sod indicators Met
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Drained
Yes No
Texture, Concretions,
Structure, etc.
Sand Loam
Sandy Loam
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Hydrology Present?
Soils Present?
x Yes No
Yes x No
Yes x No
is this sampling point within a wetland?
Yes x No
Remarks:
Job #: 3494.W3
7, 2007
Figure 1 Wetland Edge Near Flag 05A
Figure 2-Upland Soil
Job #: 3494.W3
7, 2007
Figure 3 Wetland Soil
Job #: 3494.W3
7, 2007
Figure 6 Unimportant Channel
Job #: 3494.W3
August 7, 2007
Figure 8 Wetland Near Flag 24A
Job #: 3494.W3
7, 2007
Cia;4.. D16-*wj for the Cav wi wi a"?i.°?. ceni?.i
Wake County, NC
Figure 9 Unimportant Channel
Figure 10 Wetland near Flag 03A & 03B
v1v
? rd
A ci
oll
.?Z 5101 M„60,01.10 S 'D b 4 / _J
z.d N ? V T °"n / RAY 5? 27 3 o
745-0
45C 00
NCO 'Z C4
alt i Ve)
4'K }? eve 'E Q;
?k?
.Ict 4 Wa
0
CS
N man ?
o
Cc lCb k3
g4
JCL
Ajj'
-is
i7 - .n - ? b^~ NJ tl O tt 'U 4
f 4
((? tc c
h of W ?'i n 't' o ° N ZIE a 4,E
caoo 0 +g ?C
CL d c
g a
i
?? .68'9LZt 3-41-0t.10 N - o ---
d
q n
OI g g a4a
I'S
??? z2w a+
? Ci?n a
U a ?nz ?`^ ?E? -
SECTION 131 CWA ANALYSTS
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 T_NW, complete
Section IILA.1 and Section 111D. I. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections 1P A.1 and 2
and Section IILD.1.; otherwise, see Section IRB below.
TN W
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
R CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT TS 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 Rspsnochave been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPW%I i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e_g., typically 3
months} A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, slap to Section IFF 2. M the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section M .D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus fording is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterhody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. lithe JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III. & I for
the tributary, Section I11R2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section MR3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section ITEC below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: (14 digit HUC) 52.63 ,, ffi
Drainage area 32
Average annual rainfall: 30 inches
Average annual snowfall: 2 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
Tributary flows directly into TNW..
® Tributary flows through ItnNitanes before entering TNW.
Project waters are ffIdentify flow route to TNWS: Wetland to UT 2, to UT 1, to Crabtree Creek, to Neese River.
aibutaij Sir:cm order, u knour, IA.
Project waters are
Project waters are
straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters arc
rial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries- F.xplaire
'Note that the instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW_
(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that gMlvl:
Tributary is: Z Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). F.xnlam:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width 4 feet
Average depth: 2 feet
Average side slopes:
.P_-- -_---
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
Silts 0 Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock [jVegetation. Type/0% cove-
El Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability fe.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Eroding Banks due to highly erodable
substrate.
Presence of run/rifll ool complexes. Explain: Moderate Riffle-Pool complexes exist.
Tributary geometry:
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 2 %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for.
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year.
10
Describe flow regime: anticipated to flow > 3 months during winter and spring. Stream channelizec below the
northern wetland at flag 11 and floux south for approximately 175' where the channel looses structure and dissipates in to the wetland at
flag 19.
Other information on duration and volume: .
Surface flow is: .?. - Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
0 Red and banks
Fg OH W M5 (check all indicators that apply):
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank
?I changes in the character of soil ?
F shelving
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
leaf litter disturbed or washed away
sediment deposition
® water staining ?
? o'dic list):
? Discontinuous OHWM' 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 OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line alongshore objects ? survey to available datum;
Ej- fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical maddirgs/charaeteristics ? vegetation hnes/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(k) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g-, water color is clear, discolored, oily film- water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain: water only present in persistent pools during time of evaluation.
identify spec iffic poll' if Ucwm
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the IiFiiVM bac been removed by development or agricultural nracficec)_ Where there is a break in the 0H WM that i.¢ unrelated to the waterhody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrW or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break
7lbid.
?vl Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
g Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): 20' average width.
® Wetland fringe. Characteristics: headwater wetlands.
IBC Habitat for-
(J- Federally listed species- Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? other environmentally .sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
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:0.15 acres
Wetland type. Explain:Headwater Wetland.
Wetland quality. Nxplain: Wetland exhibits habitat for aquatic and tereshial vertibrates and inverfibrates.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: NA.
(b) General Flow Relationshi with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Explain:
au11AA.C uow is:
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow. Explain findings:
F-1 Dye (or other) test performed: _
(c) Wetland Adjaucemcy Determination with Non-TNW-
® Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by bermtbarrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are a river miles from TNW.
Project waters are aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from:
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the floodplain.
(ir') Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e_g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: Water color is slightly brown from silty soils in suspension.
Identify specific pollutants, if known: No pollutants known, ollutant<s typical of road rrmofT; pdrolium, oil, etc, may be present
as a road bisects the drainage area north of the wetlands in the review area.
(ffQ Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
Fg Riparian buffer Characteristics (type, average width):15'-
® Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain: Hardwood overstory (80% cover) with well developed shrub layer.
Habitat for
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
E other environmentally sensitive species. Explain findings:
® Aquatidwildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (V any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( 0.15 ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.
For each wetland meeify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
V 0.15
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed- Flood storage, nutrient and pollutant
filtration, and habitat for aquatic and terrestrial vertibrates and mvertibrates.
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATFON
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.
Dray connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rananos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if auy? 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 arty), provide habitat and I fecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing yoffig for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributarv, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any I 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 1I1D:
Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNW& hxplain 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 lILD:
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 IIID: _
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERSJWETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
TNWs. linear feet width ($), Or, acres.
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
Tributaries of TN -W where tributaries have continuous flow --seasonally -7 (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional- 1)ata supporting this conclusion is provided at Section il!_B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
W Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft)_
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included'' is-i led waters with no, snbSiauuai neras to inter-mte'ui vi ` commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Ririe" (MBR}
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other. (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MHR
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):
Nor -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):
Nan-wetland waters (ie., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lak n1ponds: acres.
Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A SUPPORTING DATA Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicantfconsultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheetsldelineation report.
- Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
Corps navigable waters' study:
U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
[-] USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
100-year Floodplain 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.
Applicablelsupporting case law.
Applicabletsupporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMl1HNTS TO SUPPORT JD:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: 175 linear feet 4'width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TM W 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:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
EdWetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section 111.1)2, above- Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section 111.112, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tribunary to which they are adjacent
and withsimilarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TN W arejurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWL
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 "1N W are jurisdicti onal- Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area. acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.'
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from `waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus t0 commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COAOURCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):19
which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors- Explain:
8Scc Foomotc # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section T T ' .6 of the Inshuctional Guidebook
10 Prior to asserting or dedmmg CWA jwisdiction based solely. this category, Corp. Distrids will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
-- consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Ad lu u&cdon FoRewing Raparos.
I ILA VJ VI VL•LJr+ %,LVLL VVI ICYL{H431 1 1 L1II,,-
. --• --• -=-vo rnn 7L`J 5Vt `3119 Di.iweeg Companies
r
i
J L J • V J V J J V
ODOWDoi
vron?aten 'Consultants, IP.A.
Rdd916 NO& ta>dhA 27614 . Phooee (919) 84-5900 ? laic (919)116-41G7
wwwJ%xdBQcoft
Nam: --
Addr=-. t .S G T- e1`
-- e0l-rel. A- C-
Date,
-nom DePafaamc of the Atay
U.S. Army Cwpa of Eogmaca, W*ncgton District
P.O Box 1890
W miagtaa, NC 28402
Attn:
>:ieid tom:
Re: Wetiads Related Consaiting and Permitting
To Whom it May Concern:
1, -&a cunw t Imub rner or amwkipal official, h=by desigttaie and rAmm Sold & Eavit m=W Comdbms,
PA to ad In my 1 €as my age, is apt ag of pamit appNe , to fimimh tm request mvplemenW
itoo mabm m snppmt ofd, eec.fwmbrie dmor hrwa t 'L'ice day of
This wh6muon sttMmlm.any prmm corn ce cmcming the agog for flu pr%o&"

"1ICE: Tldl+ aath , fen llama md pv%moad courusy resmak m valid nib for elficisls t.
eater the By 4 wbm accompnM by S11rW WsM Yea dmM eap S&W sp art:sW? u.n to
rbhlagtLeeih. ? ?»?i
c1e?t„ eta j j ?- ;; ?-.
Pftd PIWatY 0--='* or Mnnw qnl .t}1&cW s Name Property OWft--'sot ;;,;c J81 G:?ai'S Sigaatum
cc M& C-yA&Kamly
NCDEMt-DWQ
2321 CtftftBoukvard
Raleigh, NC 27604
cc: Mr. Cis Rowers
Son & Fnviroammw Comsnlt m, PA
2361A 1ipCmw,SalteC 23192m-offim
[beomA NC 28025 3817- awodele Demf
Ph= [phone] Cbmabore, NC 27455
ram (704) 720-9m Phwc (33fi)540-8234
Fax: (336) SW8235
ACMAUMORIZATEON FM MI
All Blanks To.Ue Fliled In 1#v T$e Cum 1 nrrc r ?Lz;r iciaal Of11gw
o? wATF
?QG
0
Y
Michael F. Easley. Gnvem0
William a. Raac Jr.. Secetary
Nonh Carolina Department of linvirooment and Natural Rcsourccs
`November 10, 2004.
.!
Carpenter Associates, LLC
Attn: Mr. Glenn Futrell
PO Box 3006
Cary, NC 27519
Subject Property: Cary Corporate Center
UT to Crabtree Creek "303(d) list
2004
Alan W. Kitnek, P.E. Director
Division of Witter Quatlry
DWQ EXP# 04-1776
Wake County
Page 1 of 2
On-Site Deterudnation for Applicability to the Neuse River Riparian Area Protection Rules
(15A NCAC 2B .0233)-EXPRESS REVIEW PROGRAM
Dear Mr. Futrell:
On November 9, 2004, at yo'ar request I conducted an on-6te determination to review two
features located on the subje,;t property for applicability to ?c Neuse Buffer Rules (I 5A NCAC
2B .0233). The features are labeled as "A and B" on the attached maps initialed by me on
November 10, 2004.
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has determined that the features labeled as "A and
B" on the attached maps are not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rule. This on-site
determination shall expire fire (5) years from the date of this letter-,
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated
Local Authority that a surface water exists and that it is subject to the buffer rule may request a
determination by the Director. A request for a determination by the Director shall be referred io
the Director in writing c/o John Dorney, DWQ Wetlands/401 Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd.,
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260. Individuals that dispute a determination by the DWQ or Delegated
Local Authority that "exempts" a surface water from the buffer rule may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. Applicants are
hereby notified that the 60-day statutory appeal time does not start until the affected party
(including downstream and i:d*ent Iandowncrs) is notified of this decision. DWQ recommends
that the applicant conduct th s notification in order to be certain that third party appeals are made
in a timely manner. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter
150B of the North Carolina l,ieneral Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This determination is final and binding unless you
ask for a hearing within 60 days.
This letter only addresses the applicability to the buffer rules and does not approve any activity
within the buffers. Nor doe; this letter approve any activity within Waters of the United States
401 wetladacadruficn unh r.f ?c ca<n))inn
9&50MaNSarvlcpCanter,Ralelph,NoahCarolina 276pq-mo ,/MQl!!fQlrt?
2321 Crabtree Boukmard, Suite 250, Aalaigh, North CarDIA1 27609
Phone: B19.733 978@1 F ;X 919-733 68831 fitemet h_t1 Uh2q.* rstale.nc u 'icw,.s:A as
Carpenter Associates, LLC
Page 2 of 2
11/10/04
or Waters of the State. If ycu have any additional questions or require additional information
please call Deborah Edwardis at [phone].
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
AWK/dac
Attachments: Wak(.: County Soil Survey map
USG) Cary Quad map
Map''/ue sketch map
cc: Mike Horan, DWQ :Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy ?
Central Files
Todd Preuninger-S&ZC
Fileiame 04I776CaryCorp(W2kc)W+oriein
?•/ G O'/ GV V J V O. J./ rAA
Boil b Ratrirolautental Consultants PA
11C1t) PAvea Rid6o Road,! qh, North Carolina 276x4
Phenr. (919) 1346.5900 F&r. (919) $46-9457
Project . Da'd 3 Drive site ry lD t???a1 _ naris h=ero LLC I Protect X494 w2
Date: Jenuf3N 7 Z 4
YrelimiauT Wethind Approximation
eulwbis far Aetmilns ? pl.rmin 0*
8818C MK-n tk rlttft to modify this prop bascd on Ywr t fieldwork.
srr arrd dtdlaeaneas and top vow *44(ticad hrforesUen.
AwDalmawros Wereuwf* ufdllj IWO M bt map and avnnd vuthint.
1tth.-w emu are to ba used. Crq mum be- upprere4 said
Paroilled by the V.S. Aran Qvrps of P.trtfneem

'Vs 1

i

i
.41
6,0010 and 4e1000r. pe p.?f:c +d?n..1:.n cw?Ged
?> +a w. p0nrmynt vptnefeL U. wts« ..0?..
.eu.. •t r••r ..rr•.r. O"OVO. 0n .\ rtir .0t•
•ecoondr.+. P s04 1+, tM in4«roVen 0.01.d

u n
MapVUE
n 82 az
1 O . 1
. h rVd ? A
V
r ?0
V J }
a ? a
I t ti t a
LL

?
? '
. .
? ?
Q ~
~Q . ®V
~ id
O
~
®a ,n EXISITNG A91NI-ST~tAGE ATE .
~95 0~ ~ ~
NSS GARY LCC ~O D.B. 11926 » PG. 2149 ~ ~
PIN N0. 745.01-35-4105 sa ~ ~ ap
H ZONED: ORD ~ USE: CQMMERgAI ~ da
Q <°w~ qty
o I TE S 0 lta•0 m= tiN~ OF
~8 jtfm p~ji0
t_ ~ - - ~ . ~(1. ~ L~.7~-L~.. L,.rLL~ ~ ~.2 . , .~~1.~ . ~n n . ~r1•L~ . ,nom. rL.L, L~ ~ LL•
CqR ~'1L/yc TORM AIN G ~ t ~1 - - _ _ - _ _ - ~~v t~~w
pEN E SEM ~ ~ i i _ - EXISITiNG 12.5' TYPE °C° BUFFER\ ~ ~ ~R RD. , ~,t, - 5725912 471.40 i N~/ f ~i~ X44
~v ~ ~ 10 TYP~ C BUFFER tr ~ti ~ t THO~M~A~S/ J. GOEHL ~ ® F
` ~ i VICINITY MAP ~ ~ . ` ~ ' NATURAL STATE ~ \ . - - - - - - - - ~ ` ~ D.B. JlNS ~ PG. 866 i` r - t ~ ~ PIN NO.1745.01-35y4705 r ° ~ ~ ~ p
~ PRESERVA110N i ~ _ 1. 9-Btl~i G SETBACK U ~ EASEMENT _ ' ~ f ~ ~ , ZONED: AD.' % ®®e 0®N ' USE: VACAJVT i ANA ~ro9 ~ ?
~ ~ ?t ! 1. - ; ~ { I a~~ ~m~ o
, ~ ` ( ~ / gar d9~
r~ ~ ~ ` , ) ®q~p ~~0a1 ~ ~ ' ~
~ ~ ~ ~
RESERVOIR WATERSHED ~ ~ (PROTEC110N EASEMENT , ~...--~"O~ f ~ .
f ~ ti. 1 1 / ~ ~
S~ .53 .
p1Y ~ X3.1 F,. ~ i ~ ~ ~ , ~ ` ~ ~'J ~ ! Do N t Use for
~ t,, 1 `I ion
el ~ C ~ ~NJ~ISTURBED AND AREA 1 , i I it
OCR f i ~ f ~ ~ J \ , ~ Q f ~ ~ \ t _ , / ) Jj I I
J ' , I ' ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ Q ~
W CO ,l ~ . ~ f w:`..-,:~',,~ HADE ~ REA REPRESENTS - ~ ,F' / f 2'~
~ ~ C..., e i ~ ~ ~ ' , ANCE .av. ~ d \ ~ `w~;., WETL N DfSTUR6 ' I / ~ g `s
~ ( \ ' ' 4316 S . .09 ACRE IMPACT, i' \ o ,
~ ~ i ~ ( w~.~ ~ ~ C \ ~ ` 1`, ° m
! ~ ( ~ A ~ , ~ I ' ~
~ 1 W ~ i
i 3 fip~~
~ o / o ~ I ~ 1'.., ,lam ~ ~ ( I ~ 1 ` ~ y ~ . ~ O ~ ~ I `i \ ,.~tiF, / ~ ,,,0
/ 'A F-I
~ ~ wo% 1PETLANDS SUP! Y 1
4~ 4 ~ Q TOTAL 1~ETLANDS ON SITE = 8079 SQ FT
f- _ IMPACTED AREA = 4316 SQ FT
` ` ' ` 1 \ it } ~ _ ~ ~ ~
~ ti ti ~ _ i i ~ i VALTERRA HOLDINGS, LL _ _ - ~ ~ Z ~
~ + f i ~ ~ _ - ' ~ DEED ACRES: 3.93 AC -
a~ C F i { D.B. 12766, PG. 2662 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i PIN 0745-26-9214 ~ ~
~ ~ ( ~ ' ~ ~ _ ZONING: ORD I R AND AREA ~ ~ G4 AND AREA ~~~tia'
,
` z ~
A i r.~,. t ~ h L' a / /
, .o , i ,r'
(f i W \ ~ ~fi t i r ~ ~ u i 1 ~ 1 ` ~`gE18pCK

1 Y x 1 ~ \ ~ -
~l \ ~ T4G°~ ~
V \ `
~r~~`u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti ~ ^ N ? ~ li M ~ \ V.. ~ ~r1y'
~ •z i ~ ~ ~ ` 6
I ~ ~ ` rT,
~ A ~ ~ C \ ~ ~ A gU1W~N~ Fd~l ~
~ ~ ~ v ~~TgpCK ~
S ~ ~ DIV. i
i ~ ~ _ .i ~ ~ . ~
` 2 ski .ik1d~'
~ i . x~ ~
/ ~ y ~ i~ ~ / ~ i i ~ i roe -A
m
t 1 5 m~-= - . ~ ~s% .
~ 1 ~ ~ t _ IN ~g,09 , 33'!.79
\ 15 FE r ~ t
CURVE TABLE / .1BpCK . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ; ; ° ° BUS .J 1~1G ~ , ! ~ ~~xsfl : p, ~ l~ r i , TYPE C
CURVE DE1TA RADIUS ARC CHORD TANGENT " CHORD BRG ( 0 gUUD ~ \ ~ . ' 163.55 81.86 S 8675 ;33 E - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Cf 57228 1800.00 163.64 N ~ f`''ry ~ j ~
i 15 ° UFFER 358.91 ~ ~ C 8 z~~ - ~ .6 . S 1 . p. ~ , E (n1O VACANT OIP PROPERTY z
. ~ 46 ` i t SAS - g~17N ~ . T~ ~ ~ 0
~ ~ ~ 1999 r~` - - " o_
~ t 15 i ( - U
A . ~ _ 359.E .15' - N w
_ IdV a1T ~ ~ ~ - _ I i ~ ; 0
i - ,ice ~ _ _
~ w
M i~ M f Q 0
~ ; ~~R
~IH w _ w
/ ~ t~8 r
~ ~N) 35 ~ u~v 1.~ GRAPHIC SCA Q DATE: JULY 2'l, 2009
w (E~ ~ a' INY. ~13g9.2 N 30 0 15 30 60 HORIZONTAL SCALE: O VERTICAL SCALE: PUA
INV. _ 1~ PROJECT MANAGER: KPG
DRAWN BY: dal
i inch = SO 4t. PROJECT N0: 13029
DRAWING NAME: iaoze.Dw~
THIS DRAWING AND THE DESIGN HEREON
ARE THE PROPERTY OF CIVIL CONSIA.TANTS, a~ INC. THE INFORMATION ON THIS DRAWING IS NOT FOR USE ON ANY OTHER SITE OR
PROJECT. THEHEPRODUCTIONOROTHER
USE OF THIS DRAWING IN WHOLE OR IN PART, WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSEM OF CML
CONSULTANTS, INC., IS PROHIBITED.
COPYRIGHT 2006 CIVIL CONSULTANTS, INC.
~ SHEET N®.
CALL BEFORE YOU DIG..° OT°S E LAW
~ T
CALL N.C. ONE-CALL(i-B00-632-4949) ~ ~T~,81a~414
f FOR LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AT LEAST xge~®,~rs ®a~
2 WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO BEGINNING GRADING OR TRENCHING. NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATUTE 87-102
I
~ ~ -11 LP CONSTRUCTION
P:\13029113029-LDD\dwg\CD\13029.dwg, 401404 Submittal, 7/27/200911:01:23 AM