Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-03-2018 8-e - Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application – Morgan Ridge SubdivisionORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: April 3, 2018 Action Agenda Item No. 8 -e SUBJECT: Maior Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application — Moraan Ridae Subdivision DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENTS: 1. Application Package 2. Site Assessment 3. Staff Correspondence 4. Morgan Ridge Plan 5. NIM Materials 6. Excerpt of March 7, 2018 Planning Board Minutes 7. Resolution of Approval 1 INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Mallett, Planner II, (919) 245 -2577 Michael D. Harvey, Planner III, (919) 245 -2597 Craig Benedict, Director, (919) 245 -2575 PURPOSE: To review and take action on a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application. The majority of the land area encompassing the project is located within Chatham County's planning jurisdiction while the proposed roadway access point is within Orange County. Orange County has limited discretion in taking action on this request. As detailed herein, over 51 acres of the 52 -acre subdivision property is located in Chatham County. Orange County is only reviewing and taking action on the proposed 89 -foot roadway connection /entrance to the subdivision and the proposed mail kiosk located on the 0.65 acres within Orange County. The Orange County Planning Board, the Chatham County Planning Board, and the Orange County Planning Director have all recommended approval of the request. The Chatham County Board of Commissioners is scheduled to consider approval of the entire subdivision pending entranceway approval from the Orange County Board of Commissioners. BACKGROUND: Morgan Ridge is a 16 lot single - family residential subdivision on approximately 52 acres of property primarily located in Chatham County, with 0.65 acres located within Orange County. The applicant is requesting approval of a public road extension and right -of -way dedication to connect a planned public road, tentatively called Morgan Ridge Way, onto Jones Ferry Road (State Road 1942). The Orange County portion of this project would require the extension of a 20 foot wide paved road within a 50 foot wide right -of -way from the county line approximately 89 linear feet to Jones Ferry Road. The entire road is planned to be constructed to NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) standards and dedicated to the state for maintenance. Per Section 7.2 of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), any dedication or improvement of a new public street other than widening is classified as a Major Subdivision, and therefore must follow the Major Subdivision process as outlined in Section 2.15 of the UDO. The basic facts concerning the application are as follows: Applicants /Owners: Jones Ferry Properties, LLC 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Agent(s): Warren Mitchell, PE 104 Amber Wood Run Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Location: Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) at the Chatham /Orange county line. Please refer to Attachment 2 for a Site Assessment of the parcel. Parcel Information: a. PIN(s): 9757 -30 -2873 (Orange County PIN); and 9757 -30 -5510 (Chatham County PIN). b. Size of parcel: 52.2 acres (0.65 acres in Orange County). c. OC Zoning of Parcel: Agricultural Residential (AR) and within the Haw River Protected Watershed. d. Township: Bingham. e. School District(s): Residential lots will be served via Chatham County Schools. f. Future Land Use Map Designation: Agricultural Residential. g. Growth Management System Designation: Rural. h. Existing Conditions /Physical Features: Varying topography with heavy vegetation, primarily mixed hardwoods, throughout. i. Roads: Vehicular access to the parcel is proposed via Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) within Orange County. j. Water and Sewer Service: The property is not located within a primary public utility service area according to the Water and Sewer Management Planning Boundary Agreement (WASMPBA). Proposed open space area within Orange County does not require public or private individual well and septic systems. Lots within Chatham County will be served with private systems regulated by Chatham County. Surrounding Land Uses: a. NORTH: Single- family residences and undeveloped properties (zoned AR and within Orange County). b. SOUTH: Single- family residences and undeveloped properties (zoned R -1 and within Chatham County). c. EAST: Single family residences (zoned AR and within Orange County). d. WEST: Single family residences and undeveloped properties (zoned AR within Orange County and zoned R -1 within Chatham County). 3 Development Process, Schedule, and Action: The typical cadence for the review of a major subdivision is as follows: • First Action — Planning staff schedules a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM). Staff Comment — DONE. This meeting was held on February 13, 2018. No residents attended the meeting. • Second Action — The Planning Board reviews and takes action on the Preliminary Plat application recommending approval or denial of the road extension. Staff Comment — DONE. At its March 7, 2018 regular meeting, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request. The Chatham County Planning Board has also reviewed and made a recommendation for approval to the Chatham County Board of Commissioners. Agenda materials for the Planning Board meeting can be viewed utilizing the following link: http: / /www.orangecountync.gov /3.7.18 Plan ningBoardAgendaPacket2.pdf An excerpt of minutes from the meeting is contained within Attachment 6. • Third Action — The BOCC reviews and takes action on the Preliminary Plat application. Staff Comment. The review and decision to approve or deny the request is scheduled for the April 3, 2018 BOCC regular meeting. • Fourth Action — Once all construction activities have been completed, or appropriate bonds have been approved, staff will sign off and allow the recordation of a Final Plat allowing for the right -of -way dedication. Proposal: As previously indicated, the applicant has submitted a request to approve a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application package for Morgan Ridge, a proposed single - family subdivision in Chatham County. Roadway access shall be off of Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) in Orange County. The development proposes to: 1. Dedicate public right -of -way and build a NCDOT maintained public street across the Chatham - Orange County line to connect to Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942); 2. Designate 0.37 acres of Common Open Space within Orange County's jurisdiction, which would be held by a subdivision Homeowner's Association (HOA); and 3. Construct a mail kiosk and subdivision signs within the Common Open Space area. Signage shall be installed per applicable Orange County land use regulations as detailed within the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). For information purpose, staff is providing a the following summary of the proposal: Subdivision Number of Lots Average Area in Area in Type Lot Right -of -way Common Size Open Space n Conventional 16 lots 2.95 0.08 acres with 0.37 Acres in Major Residential (all within Chatham Co.) acres 89 linear feet of public Orange Co. Subdivision with road in Orange Co. Plus Common Open Plus 0.11 acres in Space 2.8 acres with Chatham Co. 2,500 linear feet of road in Chatham Co. 0.48 acres total STAFF COMMENT — SUBDIVISION TYPES: The proposal does not conflict with Orange County UDO requirements for subdivisions and is consistent with Orange County Comprehensive Plan. Roads: The applicant is proposing the creation of public road (20 foot wide asphalt pavement within a 50 -foot wide public right -of -way) that would serve the proposed 16 single - family lots and common open space for the subdivision. The project is split between two NCDOT Districts. As a result the proposed roadway has been reviewed by the NCDOT District Engineer Offices in Pittsboro and Graham. The location for the connection was reviewed and deemed acceptable by both offices. Permitting and road construction oversight has been assigned to the Pittsboro District Engineer's Office. The road also requires a stream crossing and Section 401/404 permits by the US Army Corps of Engineers ( UPACE) and the NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). STAFF COMMENT - ROADS: Staff has determined that the proposed new roadway layout is consistent with the requirements of the UDO, and given the surrounding topography and existing roads, is likely the most desirable and safest location for a public street intersection. Staff will continue to work with NCDOT and Chatham County Staff during the review, approval and permitting for this project. Both County offices will sign -off on the Final Plat prior to recordation. Utilities — Water and Sewer: The applicant is proposing to serve the project with individual wells and septic systems developed on each lot reviewed and permitted by Chatham County Environmental Health. STAFF COMMENT - UTILITIES: Orange County and Chatham County Environmental Health Departments will coordinate and document the final locations for well and septic areas along the county line. Stormwater Drainage: Orange and Chatham County Stormwater and Erosion Control have coordinated regarding reviews and permits for temporary and permanent site drainage. STAFF COMMENT - STORMWATER: Orange County Stormwater and Erosion Control Staff will share information with their counterparts. At this time land disturbing activity within Orange County's jurisdiction is not envisioned to require Erosion Control and /or Stormwater Permits. Open Space: The development calls for +/ -0.48 acres (0.37 acres in Orange County) of Common Open Space. These areas will be maintained by a Homeowners Association. STAFF COMMENT — OPEN SPACE: Staff has determined the proposed open space and land use buffers meet the applicable requirements of the UDO. 5 Land Use Buffer: The development will require a 30 -foot Type B land use buffer along Jones Ferry Road. STAFF COMMENT — LAND USE BUFFER: Section 6.8.6 (D) of the LIDO requires that this project maintain a thirty (30) foot land use buffer separating the project from adjacent roadways. Staff has determined the proposed open space and land use buffers meet the requirements of the UDO. This buffer will be shown on the final plat and inspected for zoning compliance prior to recordation. Staff Generated Correspondence: Attachment 3 contains the various comments for this project as of the date of abstract preparation. Joint Review: The property is not located within a defined Joint Planning Area (JPA). Staff has however coordinated with Chatham County Planning regarding its review of the subdivision. Chatham County Staff anticipates a determination by the Chatham County Board of Commissioners in April of 2018. Analysis: As required under Section 2.15.2 (E) of the UDO, the Planning Director is required to: `prepare and submit a recommendation' on the plan to the Planning Board for consideration. In analyzing this request, the Planning Director offers the following: 1. The Preliminary Plat application has been deemed complete in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.2 and 2.15.2 of the UDO. 2. Staff has determined that the property is of sufficient size to support the proposed road extension. 3. The proposal appears consistent with the various goals outlined within the Comprehensive Plan concerning development, including: a. Land Use Overarching Goal: Coordination of the amount, location, pattern, and designation of future land uses, with availability of County services and facilities sufficient to meet the needs of Orange County's population and economy consistent with other Comprehensive Plan element goals and objectives. b. Land Use Goal 2: Land uses that are appropriate to on -site environmental conditions and features and that protect natural resources, cultural resources, and community character. c. Land Use Goal 3: A variety of land uses that are coordinated within a program and pattern that limits sprawl, preserves community and rural character, minimizes land use conflicts, supported by an efficient and balanced transportation system. 4. Staff has determined that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the provisions and goals of the Comprehensive Plan. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Director recommends approval of the project consistent with the imposition of the recommended Conditions of Approval as outlined within Attachment 7. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Staff has determined the project would not require augmentation of County budgetary outlays to support services and that anticipated revenues from property taxes should supplement increases in cost. n. SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goal is applicable to this agenda item: • GOAL: ESTABLISH SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE LAND -USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of people of all races, cultures, incomes and educational levels with respect to the development and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, policies, and decisions. Fair treatment means that no group of people should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, governmental and commercial operations or policies. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board: 1. Receive the Planning Board and Planning Director's recommendations on the Preliminary Plat application for the Morgan Ridge Subdivision and road extension, 2. Discuss the proposal as desired, and 3. Approve the Preliminary Plat as submitted and the Resolution of Approval contained in Attachment 7. APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL 7 MAJOR SUBDIVISION 0 6 U cQ ORANGE COUNTY I " 5105 PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT (INK ONLY) DATE :. 12, SUBDIVISION NAME: U IZG At- i DCa 1= LOCATION: _,1 U N f< s �Et22Y (zoa D (�T C j /�, t H Co UN r`; �t PI OWNERIDEVELOPER: -J-O(VE.5 Pe? -14 f eo PErz.- - I E- 5 , LL C- ADDRESS: 2 2 7 o ipu s W A '� TELEPHONE NO.: l j J 3 — ) J 1 G ABEL {11��� NG 275-16 AGENTICONTACT: 11A i 1-C H f— L. - q ADDRESS: O M'3F_ fL (n1 OyD 2 i� p U TELEPHONE NO.: ) G 14,4', P F_ L- N i i_.t.._. iy c 2 S ► A SUMMARY INFORMATION �-->1N : -) 15 -7 3 ° Z S' 13 Orange County Tax Map Block Lot(s) Township (I�� C� 1 I A` Zoning District(s): Total Number of Acres: O• C. 5 Total Number of Lots: O Average Lot Size: 0 Minimum Lot Size: Number(Type of Structures: (existin ) _ No" E (proposed) t-10N Linear Feet in Streets: u r-T Acres in Open Space: O. 3 77 ac- Water Supply; IVA Public (specify) Community Individual Wastewater Disposal: Public (specify) Community Individual School District: 0-ZANJ G E C0411V T- Fire District: kV 1-i /TE C 2oSS General Land Uses in Area: pe, E 5 I PE1-V7-1A_ L-- Critical Areas: O AC.. streamldrainageways O L flood prone areas O ,A L , watershed (specify) NA historic sites other (explain) Is the property to be subdivided currently under "farm use value taxation "? Yes No �. If "yes," please contact the Orange County Tax Office. Subdivision of the property may require payment of deferred taxes under "farm use value taxation." B All plats must be submitted on sheet no smaller than one inch equals two- hundred feet (t " =200') and no larger than one inch equals twenty feet (I " =20') and must contain the following information: subdivision name ✓ zoning of tract and adjacent properties name &address of owner(s) building setback lines by notation or typical lot layout ✓ name & address of subdivider location and width of existing and (if other than owner) proposed easements (drainage, / utilities, roads, etc.) ✓ name of surveyor, engineer, landscape Existing, proposed and adjoining architect or architect, address, rights -of -way including dimensions registration # $ seal and street names and State Road (title) Preliminary Plan numbers. Linear feet of road scale, north arrow centerlines and approximate acreage date of plan preparation and revisions of new street rights -of -way �7 township, tax map - block -lot references IYA existing and proposed utilities, Parent Parcel Identification # including type, sizes, hydrants, deed book and page # of property to be valves, manholes subdivided boundary described with bearings and tVA existing and proposed curbs, gutters distances and culverts, including sizes and grades / total acreage of the tract and acreage of location and width of alleys, 8 lots, Including and excluding area within sidewalks, bike lanes, transit rights -of -way / systems, and bus stops control corner ✓ typical street cross�sections and Intersection details including design and width of travelway and ✓ proposed lot 'lines with dimensions _/pia shoulders horizontal alignment, centerline ✓ lot & block numbers radius, and general curve data on all � phasing line(s) / proposed streets ✓ topography at tan (10) foot intervals v permanent features such as water bodies, streams, floodways and buildings, cemeteries, historic ` floodplains ✓ landmarks �- stream buffers adjoining lot layout names of location and size of parcels dedicated for adjoining property owners. If public use, recreational use or reserved subdivided, subdivision plat name, in common, with purpose noted plat book & page number, and �/� N� perimeter lot numbers. • impervious surface data (if located in location and size of lots of restricted water supply watershed) development potential and notation /U4- on plat regarding same vicinity map showing general location of stormwater detention and /or subdivision with streets and roads retention sites and undisturbed identified by State Road number and areas for infiltration purposes (if �� name located in water supply watershed) _V landscaping and buffer requirements township, corporate and extraterritorial identified natural areas and wildlife planning jurisdiction lines which cross corridors the property C OTHER SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: I. Twenty -five (25) copies of the Preliminary Plat. 2. One full size copy of an Orange County Tax Map (with tax parcels involved clearly marked). 3. Where municipal or OWASA sewer is not available, a copy of the Preliminary Plat indicating Health Department approval /denial for each lot show thereon. 4. Where a private road is proposed, a written statement by the applicant or hisiher authorized representative which sets for the justification for a private road (see Section IV- B -3 -d -1 of the Orange County Subdivision Regulations). 5. Auxiliary documents, in draft form, prepared in accordance with Section VI of this Ordinance which assure completion and /or maintenance of improvements required by this Ordinance. Such documents may include, but not be limited to, a private road maintenance agreement and articles of incorporation and restrictive covenants pertaining to a homeowners association. These documents may be required as necessary as evidence that the ordinance requirements are being met. 6. Fee - $500 plus $5.00 per lot (one fee for Preliminary and Final Plat). 7. If the subdivision contains 10 lots or more, the following information shall be submitted with the application: a. Number of years to buildout. b. Number of houses to be built during each year until buildout. c. Average price of houses including lots for each year to buildout. I certify that to the best of my knowledge the information contained above, and in the supporting documents, is a factual representation of the proposed development. I acknowledge that by signing this application, the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department is authorized, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. Section 153a -360, to make as many inspections of the subject property as may be necessary to verify that the proposed work outlined herein is consistent with the provisions of all applicable State and local laws, ordinances and regulations. By signing this application, I acknowledge and agree that inspectors, zoning officers, erosion control officers, and other staff of the Orange County Planning & Inspections Department have a right, upon presentation of proper credentials, to enter the subject property at any reasonable hour for the purposes of inspection or other enforcement actipn. (Z l� PLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE v FEES: Amount Date Paid Receipt # lZ' (> - /:7- DATE APPLICATION FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISION CONCEPT PLAN APPROVAL 9 DATE: J Z lS ' �� 9106 SUBDIVISION NAME: LOCATION: yN f 5 �F(t -R i i�oA % �� C �IATa -1� w. CovNrY l� 1 NE OWNERIDEVELOPER: J b N F 5 PCa-R- i ? R-n PE -NE— 5 LL C- r ADDRESS: 2 Z q (-�) P U 5 PHONE # °� 1- 593_ 1 C)1" Cµ NC- 5-1 (1 AGENTICONTACT: PHONE # A SUMMARY INFORMATION PIN: ci 7s--7- ,3o�8�°3 v.�5 Orange County Tax Map Block Lot(s) Twp _ Total acreage: Zoning Ate Total Lots C� Bonus Units O Open Space O. 34 acres Acreage in road right -of -way acres, Linear fe t in new roads, Public ✓ Private — Class Adjacent zoning and land usexL — e510E1__)77A-L Water Supply: Public (Provider: ), Community, or Individual Wastewater Disposal: Public (Provider: ), Community, or >< Individual Fire District: w (f'I7re C 2 0 55 School District n(?- NG, C CZ A) N TY B, SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS / Orange County Tax Map showing the location of the subject property Stamped envelopes addressed to each property owner within 500 feet of the subject property -� Application fee ($250.00 + $5.0011ot) �- Twenty -five (25) copies of the Concept Plan and Site Analysis Map at a scale not less than 1" =200' IM Comparison of potential impacts of Conventional versus Flexible Development Plan (see reverse) Applicants may submit a three -part Concept Plan including a Site Analysis Map, Conventional Subdivision Plan, and a Flexible Development Plan OR a combined Site Analysis and Flexible Development Plan. Each Concept Plan submittal must include the following information: 1. GENERAL INFORMATION: Each Site Analysis Map and Developmont Plan shall contain: Sketch vicinity map Plotted boundaries of the tract from deeds or recorded plats. Total acreage to be subdivided Tax map, block, and lot number reference Name, address and telephone number of the subdivider the person responsible for the subdivision design Scale, north arrow, and date of plan preparation Subdivision name 2. SITE ANALYSIS MAP - Refer to Section V -6.2. of the Subdivision Regulations Primary Conservation Areas including: ✓ Ten -foot contours with slope analysis showing 7.5 %-15% slopes and slopes > 15% Soil types from the USDA Soil Survey or a soils map prepared by a soil scientist —� Hydrology including drainage patterns, wetlands, streams, ponds, floodplains, etc. A14 Identified natural areas, habitats, and wildlife corridors Historic and archaeological sites (National Register, Study List, local landmark, etc.) W Secondary Conservation Areas including: Vegetation including open and wooded areas described by dominant species and age Current land use and land cover including pasture, cropland, structures, cemeteries, etc. Scenic views on site as well as from the site to off -site features Historic and archaeological sites I l� Transportation and Utility Systems: Railroad and road rights -of -way Easements for roads and utilities Public and private water and sewer lines, storm drainage facilities 3. CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION PLAN In addition to General Information listed above, shall include Proposed street layout, travelway and right -of -way widths, connections to existing roads Proposed arrangement of the lots, including size and number Location of soils suitable for individual septic systems 4. lV � FLEXIBLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN In addition to General Information listed under Item #1 above, Proposed street layout, travelway and right -of -way widths, connections to existing roads Proposed arrangement of the lots, including size and number Location, type, and acreage of proposed open space, whether part of individual lots or in a separate lot dedicated to a homeowners association, or other public or private entity Preliminary soil suitability analyses for 50% of the proposed lots with soils map prepared in //�� consultation with the Orange County Health Department rl Ivensity Bonuses Total bonus units proposed units Location: Transition Area (2.5 units /acre maximum density without rezoning) (check 1) Utility Service Area, Utility Provider (1.3 units/acre max) Within % mile of interstate, HOV, busway route (2.5 units /acre maximum) Within half mile of transit station as shown on regional transit plan (5 units/acre max) Acres of open space over 33% located on site = 1 bonus unit/acre over 33% Acres of open space over 33% @ off -site location Tax Map Ref. , Zoning acres Primary Conservation Area x 1 bonus unit/5 acres = bonus units acres Secondary Conservation Area in 2 -ac. zoning district x 1 unit/2 ac. =bonus units acres Secondary Conservation Area in 1 -ac. zoning district x 1 bonus unitlac.= units % Units designated for affordable housing on site or off site (see Article 6.28) 5. COMPARISON OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS FROM DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPT PLAN Linear feet of new roads Number of stream crossings Acres of farmland lost Habitat/Natural area lost Acres of woodland lost Wetlands destroyed Slopes > 15% disturbed Historic /archaeological sites disturbed Visual change (circle 1) Conventional Subdivision versus A)A Flexible Development I/ linear feet linear feet Na Na I✓A v O i� significant acres acres acres acres acres _ sites / moderate mirn acres acres acres acres acres sites significant / moderate / minimal certify that to the best of my knowledge the information contained above, and in the supporting documents, is a factual representation of the proposed development. I acknowledge that by signing this application, the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department is authorized, pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat, Section 153a -360, to make as many inspections of the subject property as may be necessary to verify that the proposed work outlined herein is consistent with the provisions of all applicable State and local laws, ordinances and regulations. By signing this application, I acknowledge and agree that inspectors, zoning officers, erosion control officers, and other staff of the Orange County Planning & Inspections Department have a right, upon presentation of proper credentials, to enter the subject property at any reasonable hour for the purposes of inspection or other enforcement action. i PPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE 0 NER'$ SIGNATURE DATE SPECTR.KSITE CON- P.-IUNICAA.TIONS LLC HrB r TaE DREES COh.1PANY DICKINSON BEVERLY h1� �R tAtl Ownership and Soils Map 11 E, "ERETT PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Hr 1{ DREES COMPANY W GeB DOI-JO dDON JOSE C OLSON REBECCA. L! CE CI_IRTIS T Li CE CELESTINE R December 12, 2017his map contains parcels prepared for the inventory of real property within Orange County, and is compiled from recorded deed, plats, and other public records and data. Users of this map are hereby notified that the aforementioned public primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the information contained on this map. PIN: 9757302873 The county and its mapping companies assume no legal responsibility for the information on this map. OWNER 1: JONES FERRY PROPERTIES LLC SIZE: 0.65A BUILDING COUNT: 1:2,400 OWNER 2: DEED REF: 6269/39 LAND VALUE: $ 0 0.02 0.04 0.08 mi ADDRESS 1: 227 OPUS WAY RATECODE: 01 BLDG VALUE: $ ADDRESS 2: TOWNSHIP BINGHAM USE VALUE: $0 0 0.0325 0.065 0.13 km CITY: CHAPEL HILL BLDG SQFT. TOTALVALUE: $ ---. STATE, ZIP: NC 27516 YEAR BUILT: DATE SOLD: 2/27/2017 ORAN61-- �-''OU TY LEGAL DESC: 1A REC ENCLAVE AT JONES FERRY P116/162 TAX STAMPS: 28 NORTH CAROLINA s� A Sg "G: aiu7 of �mB SURVEYOR'S CER77FIC47F 1, ROBERT S. JONES, CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAT WAS DRAWN UNDER MY SUPERVISION FROM AN ACTUAL SURVEY MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION( DEED DOCRIP77ON RECORDED IN BOOK _ . PACE _ ) : THAT THE RA770 OF PRECISION AS CALCULATED IS 1:10006+: THAT THE BOUNDARIES NOT SURVEYED ARE SHOWN AS BROKEN LINES PLO77ED FROM INFORMATION FOUND IN REFERENCES AS NOTED AND THAT THIS MAP WAS PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH G.S. 47 -30 AS AMENDED. AND THAT.. NO CS 47 -30 (0(11)(d) THE SURVEY IS OF ANOTHER CATEGORY, SUCH AS THE RECOUGINA77ON OF -- PARCELS, A COURT - ORDERED SURVEY, OR 07HER EXCEP77ON 70 THE DEFlNfTON OF SUBDIVISION. W/INE55/MY-ORIGINAL SIGNATURE, RECISTRATON NUMBER AND SEAL THIS? DAY OF F± dW 2017. 1� tCFESSONAL LAND SURVETOR L -3939 REGIS7RATON NUMBER 15�Ic It rte: 161, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF ORANGE 1. M78H,Aw- A404Tow SA. REVIEW OFFICER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CERTIFY THAT THE MAP OR PLAT TO WHICH THIS CERRFICATON IS AFFIXED MEETS ALL STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECORDING FOR WHICH THE RENEW OFFICER HAS RESPONSIBILITY AS PROVIDED BY LAW. RENEW LFI ORANGE COUNTY LANG RECORDS /CIS DATE OF CERTFICATON: Z'2'7 -ZO 7HE U14DERSGNED HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I (WE) ARE THE OWNER (S) OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN AND DESCRIBED HEREON, WHICH IS LOCATED V177HIN THE SUBDIVISION JURISDICTION OF ORANGE COUNTY AND THAT I (WE) HEREBY ADOPT THIS PLAT WITH MY (OUR) FREE CONSENT. OWNER � DALE OWr' 2 &3%} IL VICINITY MAP (NOT TO SCALE) 'I HEREBY CER7lFY THAT THE , DIVISION BR 7NAND DESCRIBED HEREON EXEMPT FROM SUBDIVISION A710N5 NE RouAp CONTAINED THE UNIFIED ORDINANCE 0 FE G R/ +�j (60. PLANNING DIRECTOR: "' ' �'i -t/ 'NT 9 2 i ,o N°V�"" euoo IT _ N1 _ °'.. . I' ENCLAVE AT JONES FERRY 't --ORANG E CO UNTY 195^.61 PB.715 P.52 CHA �'01E - 5.26 Acres R cOUN = N R—I hg 4 0.65 Acres 8597' - (0.40 Me1do R/W) ii praParty line ORES COMPANY D .6051 P-226 555 ,�- caxma 333.72' PIN(ORANGE 4 568293 p9• ^ I EAinVno 9raw1 dHw � Pr =Pity lino (ORANGE CO.) C0.) /V6376 '05-W TOTAL - 197258' NOS Mon. Gnd Coordlnate. N:770733.17 E 1952669.26 LEGEND Theca etondard aymbaLa 4I be 1Pand In the drcwing. U71UTY POLE ................0 EXISTING IRON ROD.......e PK NAIL..._ ................_.® COSTING IRON PIPE..... o 112" IRON PIPE SET ....0 STONE FOUND ............... ■ CONCRETE MONUMENT-0 COMPUTED POINT -...& OVERHEAD ELEC7RIO RIGHT OF WAY ............. 60 0 30 60 120 240 GRAPHIC SCALE JONES FERRY PROPERRES, LLC OB.5607 P.484 PIN. 9757313018 (ORANGE) D8.1748 P.757 PIN. 9757 -30 -5510 (CHA7HAM) 52.72 Acres (InELading Let IA) NOTES: 1.)ALL DISTANCES ARE HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2JSURVEY PERFORMED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TTLE SEARCH. REFERENCED MATERIALS ONLY USED. THERE MAY EXIST 07HER DOCUMENTS OF RECORD THAT AFFECT THIS PROPERTY. 3.)NO ATTEMPT MADE TO LOCATE CEMETERIES, WETLANDS HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SITES UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR ANY DINER FEATURES ABOVE OR BELOW GROUND 07HER 714AN THOSE SHOWN. 4.)ALL AREAS BY COORDINATE COMPUTATION. 5)NEW IRON RODS SET AT ALL CORNERS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. ,po-OJT = 975730 YBZrj 14= 92S-730Z8?3 REFERENCES PB.TTS PG.52 DS.6051 PO226 CURRENT OWNER: DRESS COMPANY 211 GRANDVIEW DRIVE FT MITCHELL KY 41017 -2790 a.: O -vHRit S 'y O IEDI biw b b b mmm=y 14 Patrick R. Mallett From: Lynn Richardson <lynn.richardson @chathamnc.org> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 2:08 PM To: Patrick R. Mallett Subject: RE: Morgan Ridge First Plat Submittal The Planning Board recommended approval of Morgan Ridge at last night's meeting. The only discussion was regarding the location of 5 off -site septic systems in Morgan Ridge in relation to an adjacent property owners well. The systems will be the maximum requirement of 100 feet from her existing well. The motion passed 8 -1 with one vote against because that Board member does not like off -site septic systems. Morgan Ridge will be on the 16 BOC meeting agenda. Thanks, Lynn W. Richardson Land Planner 11 /Subdivision Administrator 919 -542 -8207 lynn. rchardson @chathamnc. org PLAN CHATHAM 'Working to pr +srrar S progress Chatham County's 25 -year vision plan is underway! Check out more information at www.chathamnc.org/comprehensiveplan In keeping with the NC Public Records Law, e- mails, including attachments, may be released to others upon request for inspection and copying From: Patrick R. Mallett [mailto :pmallett @orangecountync.gov] Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 8:33 AM To: Lynn Richardson <lynn.richardson @chathamnc.org> Subject: RE: Morgan Ridge First Plat Submittal Lynn, Our PB is tonight. Just checking in to see if there was anything relevant from your PB meeting last night. Thanks! Very Respectfully, Patrick R. Mallett, Planner II Orange County Planning & Inspections Department Phone: (919) 245 -2577 Fax: (919) 644 -3022 E -mail: pmallett @orangecountync.gov Orange County Planning Website: http: / /www.orangecountync.gov Address 15 Michael, Hope you're doing well. We received a First Plat submittal for Morgan Ridge subdivision and I wanted to provide you a copy for your records. This item is scheduled for Planning Board review on February 6 and the Commissioners could take action as early as March 19. Please let us know if you have any questions. Jason Sullivan Planning Director Chatham County P.O. Box 54 80 -A East St. Pittsboro, NC 27312 Office: 919/542 -8233 Fax:919/542 -2698 FLAN CHATHAM working tngtttror to pr -esarve A pr4rgrast Chatham County's 25 -year vision plan is underway! Check out more information at www.chathamnc.or /g comprehensiveplan In keeping with the NC Records Law, emails, including attachments, may be released to others upon request for inspection and copying. 16 CFINNIAM COUNTY '""' 11 i "" "1 ''' A Chatham County Planning Board Agenda Notes Date: March 6, 2018 Agenda Item: VIII -1 Attachment #: ® Subdivision ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Rezoning Request ❑ Other: Subject: Request by Warren Mitchell, P. E. on behalf of Jones Ferry Properties, LLC for subdivision First Plat review of Morgan Ridge Subdivision, consisting of 16 lots on 52.20 acres, located off Jones Ferry Road, SR -1942 (entrance in Orange County), parcel #1443. Action Requested: See Recommendation Attachments: 1. Major Subdivision First Plat Application and checklist 2. Cover letter prepared by Warren D. Mitchell, P. E., dated December 21, 2017 3. Vicinity map 4. Map showing driveway location in Orange County 5. Report from the Chatham County Historical Association 6. Notification to Chatham County Schools 7. Copy of Environmental Documentation Submittal 8. Letter from North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, dated December 5, 2017 9. Community Meeting Report Form dated January 12, 2017 10. Comments regarding the First Plat from the Technical Review Committee meeting, dated January 24, 2018 { 11. Detailed Soil Scientist Report, Soils Map, and approval from Thomas Boyce, Chatham County Environmental Health, R. E. H. L., L. S. S. 12. Road name approval from Chatham County Emergency Operations Office 13. Riparian Buffer Report, dated August 11, 2016 14. Corp of Engineers Jurisdictional Determination map dated 6122116, and letter from Drew Blake, Chatham Page 1 of 6 17 County Environmental Quality Inspector, dated December 22, 2017. 15. First Plat titled 'Morgan Ridge', prepared by Warren D. Mitchell, P.E., dated 12/22/18 16. Revised septic layout map for Lot 1 prepared by Jason Hall, Soil Scientist 17. E -mail dated 2126118 from Thomas Boyce, LSS, REHS, Chatham County Environmental Health, regarding revised septic layout map for Lot 1. Introduction & Background: Zoning: R -1 Water System: Private on -site individual wells Sewer System: Private on -site and off -site septic and repair areas. Subject to 100 year flood: No floodable area General Information: The subdivision process is a four (4) step process: Concept Plan, First Plat, Construction Plan, and Final Plat. The applicant has completed the community meeting and the Concept Plan review. The minimum lot size requirement for the project is 1.50 acres of useable area. The Planning Board has two (2) meetings in which to act on the proposal. Discussion & Analysis: The request is for First Plat review and recommendation of Morgan Ridge Subdivision, consisting of 16 lots on 52.20 acres, located off Jones Ferry Road, S. R. 1942. The entrance to the subdivision will be located in Orange County and is discussed later in the agenda notes. A vicinity map showing the property location, attachment # 3, is included in the agenda packet. Per the Subdivision Regulations, Section 5.2C(4), a Public Hearing shall be held at the first Planning Board meeting to receive comments on the proposed subdivision. Item (b) states that following the Public Hearing, the Planning Board shall review the proposal, staff recommendation, and public comments and indicate their recommendation for approval, disapproval or approval subject to modifications. As stated above, the Planning Board has two (2) meeting to act on the proposal. The applicant has provided a cover letter, attachment # 2, with details of the project. Roadways: The road is to be built as a 50 foot wide public right -of -way, with a 20 foot wide travelway, will be approximately 2500 feet in length, and is to be a state maintained road. The entrance to the property will be located in Orange County (see attachment # 4). The location and acceptance of public right -of -way for the entrance is required to be reviewed by the Orange County Planning Board and approved by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. The applicant has submitted the required information to Orange County to begin the process for review and approval. The portion of the property located in Orange County is in Division 7 of the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the portion of property in Chatham is in Division 8 of the NCDOT. Per Justin Richardson, Assistant District Supervisor, Division 8- District 1, all of the roadway permitting will be Page 2 of 6 reviewed and approved by the Division 8 Office in Asheboro and the entrance location onto Jones Ferry Road appears to be acceptable. A fifty foot wide right -of -way for possible future road extension is shown between Lots 11 and 12 to the adjacent property. This will be a dedication of right -of -way and will not be constructed by the developer of Morgan Ridge. Historical: The applicant met on -site with Bev Wiggins, Chatham County Historical Association. Ms. Wiggins toured the property and was shown an old home place and several out buildings located on the property. The attached report includes pictures of the old structures. Per the applicant/developer, the structures will be removed and family members may have interest in repurposing some of the materials on their private properties. Per Ms. Wiggins report, attachment # 5, the property was owned by the Morgan families and the grave of William Morgan is believed to be on the property to the east of the subject property. The applicant has stated that no cemeteries/graves have been discovered on the subject property. Ms. Wiggins noted that there were several large trees located on the property and recommended saving them if possible. Mr. Mitchell contacted Grand Trees of Chatham regarding a large pine tree on the property. The organization measured the tree and said that the pine tree is not a champion tree but it is noteworthy. Mr. Mitched stated that there were no plans to remove the tree by the developer. Schools: Notification of the proposed development was provided to the Chatham County School System. See attachment # 6. General Environmental Documentation: The developer submitted the General Environmental Documentation and a letter, dated December 5, 2017 from North Carolina Department Environmental Quality Natural Heritage Program to Chatham County Land & Water Resources Division for review. See attachments 7 & 8. The letter states "A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation /managed areas with the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists." Rachael Thorn, Environmental Quality Supervisor, reviewed and approved the information submitted. Community Meeting: A community meeting was held on January 10, 2017 at Opus Financial Advisors, 4421 Mann's Chapel Road. Three people attended the meeting. Items /issues discussed were notification of target shooting on the adjacent property owned by George Barrett, question regarding whether the project included any commercial zoning, and during large rain events, the water in the creek will back up and there is evidence on the property and downstream of old beaver dams. The applicant thanked the residents and duly noted that the owner of the adjacent property, Mr. Barrett, did practice target shooting on his property and would continue to do so; that the development project was residential only; and noted evidence of old beaver dams on the Page 3 of 6 19 property. See attachment # 9. The adjacent property owned by Mr. Barrett and others is residential and has a non- conforming use that allows events to be held on the property several times a year along with a conditional use permit for a welding shop. Technical Review Committee: The TRC met on January 24th to review the First Plat submittal. The applicant/developer was present. Items of discussion included that Chief John Strowd, North Chatham Fire Department, had met on -site with the developer and determined that the pond size and depth would make it unsuitable for a water point; that the Corps of Engineers had completed the on -site jurisdictional determination and made a determination that the existing pond was non - jurisdictional; that the applicant will meet with Environmental Quality staff to discuss buffer authorization requirements; that the interconnecting roadway to the adjacent property was not to be constructed at this time, but shown only as a right -of -way dedication; that stream buffers, but not the feature, had been counted in useable lot area; that NCDOT District 8 will review the road plans and construction of the road; that the applicant had submitted the required information to Orange County to begin the process for approval of the entrance. Septic: A soils report and map, attachment 11, was submitted to Thomas Boyce, Chatham County Environmental Health, LSS, REHS, Chatham County Environmental Health, for review. Mr. Boyce stated that the report and map were adequate for a First Plat review. Several of the lots will have off -site septic and repair areas which will be considered a non - contiguous part of the lot. See attachment # 11. Water: County water is not available. Each lot will have an individual well. Road Name: The road name Morgan Ridge Way has been approved by Chatham County Emergency Operations Office as acceptable for submittal to the Board of Commissioners for approval. Water Features: A riparian buffer report, dated 8/9116, for parcel #1443 was prepared and submitted by David Gainey, Soil Scientist with Soil and Environmental Consultants, PA, along with a riparian buffer map, dated 6/22/16 to Drew Blake, Chatham County Environmental Quality Inspector for review. See attachment # 13. Mr. Blake and Mr. Gainey completed an on -site riparian buffer review on December 9, 2016 to verify the consultant's findings. Mr. Blake issued a confirmation letter of his findings dated December 12, 2016. On December 20, 2017, Mr. Blake was provided a copy of the Approved Jurisdictional Determination dated July 21, 2017. Stream F, shown on the buffer map dated 6122/16, as an ephemeral, was upgraded to an intermittent by the approved JD. Based on that information Mr. Blake revised his original confirmation letter and reissued the letter on December 22, 2017. The December 22, 2017 letter states that there are five (5) intermittent streams, one (1) perennial stream, and ten (10) wetlands. See attachment #14. Buffer authorizations and 404/401 permits will be obtained prior to Construction Plan submittal. The First Plat shows slight encroachments of the septic areas into the stream buffers on Lots 5 and 7. The developer has stated that the encroachments will be Page 4 of 6 20 removed and that soils map provided to Chatham County does not show the encroachments. Stormwater and Erosion Control: Two stormwater ponds are proposed and will be placed on private lots. A stormwater Permit and an Erosion Control Permit will be obtained from Chatham County Environmental Quality prior to Construction Plan submittal. No work can commence on the property prior to obtaining Construction Plan approval. Chatham County Environmental Quality will issue the stormwater and erosion control permits for the entire project including the property within Orange County. Site Visit: Planning Department staff and various Board members attended a site visit on January 29 and 31, 2018. Warren Mitchell, P.E. was present to walk the property with staff and Board members and discuss the project. Areas of the property viewed were the intermittent and perennial streams, center line of the proposed road alignment, existing pond, and old house and outbuildings. Area on the opposite side of the streams was not accessible due to amount of water in the streams due recent rain. Pictures of the site visit can be viewed on the Planning Department webpage at www.chathamnc.org/planning, Rezoning and Subdivision Cases, 2018. Plan Chatham Evaluation: Plan Chatham was adopted by the Board of Commissioners in November 2017 and is a comprehensive plan that provides strategic direction to address the most pressing needs in the county. This property is located in an area of the county identified as Conservation on the Future Land Use and Conservation Plan Map. The description for Conservation includes development that is primarily residential, is sensitively integrated into the landscape with overall low density, and encourages conservation subdivisions to protect natural resources while not disturbing agricultural practices. Although the proposed subdivision is not a conservation design it meets the adopted riparian buffer and stormwater control standards of the county, minimizes creek crossings, and has an average lot size of 3 acres. The developer also contacted the NC Natural Heritage Program to review their database for any rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation /managed areas within the project boundary and none were identified in their records. Additionally, Grand Trees of Chatham was contacted to evaluate a large pine tree on the property and representatives from that organization determined it did not qualify as a champion tree, but is noteworthy. The cover letter indicates this tree will not be removed as part of the road or utility construction. It should be noted that Plan Chatham is not intended to be used as a regulatory tool, but is a policy document. When reviewing subdivision applications the boards can use the plan as a tool to identify future regulatory changes. The Planning Board met on February 6, 2018 to review the request. Warren Mitchell, P. E. and Wesley Lloyd were present to answer questions. Also present were several adjacent property owners. The staff report was given and then a Public Hearing was held as required in the Subdivision Regulations, Section 5.2C (4). Warren Mitchell and Wesley Lloyd signed up to speak. Page 5 of 6 21 Mr. Mitchell addressed the Board and stated that the land had belonged to Mr. Lloyd's great Aunt and when she passed away, they purchased the property; that a minor subdivision had been completed in Orange County on a portion of the property to proposed Morgan Ridge creating 5 lots called 'The Enclave'. The road serving those 5 lots is Kieran Lane. A second minor subdivision across Jones Ferry Road from proposed Morgan Ridge creating 2 lots from one parcel in Orange County. This second minor subdivision was created simultaneously with the 5 lot Envlave Subdivision. Mr. Mitchell stated that a mail kiosk will be placed on common land to be owned by the homeowners association; that approximately 113 of the property was in stream buffers; that stream crossings will be designed with as small an impact to the steam as possible; that there were three (3) buffer crossings proposed; that he had met with Rachael Thorn and staff to discuss the necessary steps to obtain the buffer authorizations; that the pond would be drained for safety and liability reasons; that the entrance to the development was in Orange County because that was the safest location on Jones Ferry Road located midway between 2 curves; that a stub -out had been provided to a landlocked property to the south; and that there were nine (9) on -site septic systems and seven (7) off -site septic systems. The Public Hearing was closed. There were several issues /questions discussed by the Board listed below. After the Board discussion, the Planning Board tabled the request until the March 6th meeting to allow the developer time to meet with the Kirkley's to discuss their concerns regarding a possible future location of a new well on their property in relation to the location of the 5 off -site septic systems proposed by the developer adjacent to their property. Answers to the questions raised by the Board are provide by Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Lloyd and are shown in italics. *How many lots total will be developed out of the original tract? There will be 23 total counting the minor subdivision in Orange County. *How will the off -site septic area for Lot 7 be accessed? Access will be across the stream and wetland area. *Can Lot 5 accommodate the septic area for Lot 6? There is not sufficient room for an additional off -site septic system on Lot 5 since the stormwater pond is also located on Lot 5. Will pumps be necessary to reach off -site septic systems. Yes. Pumps are also required for many on -site systems when the septic field is higher than the house. Pumps are located close to the house which makes replacing the pump an easier task. *Distance of off -site septic systems and long term maintenance. Mr. Lloyd stated that pump systems are required to be inspected every 5 years by Chatham County Environmental Health. *Will one septic contractor install all of the off -site septic lines? Per Mr. Lloyd that has not yet been determined. Mr. Mitchell stated that if there are separate utility easement for each septic line, that there would be more clearing required, but, each line would have its own dedicated easement and it would be easier for a homeowner to identify which Page 6 of 6 22 easement is theirs in case that is a problem in the future, that if separate utility easements are used, each property owner /builder will be responsible for installation of the septic line versus if there is only one utility easement for multiple lines, then one contractor is required by Environmental Health to install the lines and meet other requirements. Is there a requirement for disclosure to a property owner that the lot has an off -site septic system? Homeowners are only required to disclose that they have aseptic system. But the buyer and seller's real estate agents have to disclose any material facts that they are aware of regarding the property. Also, the off -site septic systems will be a non - contiguous part of the main lot. The agent would explain his to the buyer. * Are septic easements recorded at Register of Deeds Office? Staff discussed this with Kim Warren, Chatham County Environmental Health Program Supervisor. Ms. Warren stated that off -site non - contiguous septic areas and off -site septic easements are shown on a final plat by metes and bounds and recorded at the ROD office. No other documentation is required by Environmental Health. *What is rational for draininq and filling in the pond? The pond will be very close to the proposed homes on lots 3 and 4. This will create a liability for anyone with children and would likely prevent anybody with children from buying one of those lots. Also, children living in houses nearby will be curious and would likely explore the pond. So it could still create a liability for the owners on lots 3 and 4 even if they do not have children. The safest solution is to fill in the pond. *What happens to the water if pond filled? Wesley Lloyd is one of the developers and will be the contractor who builds the subdivision. He has experience filling in ponds and the process is very simple. He will pump the water out of the pond into the adjacent stream. He will fill in the pond and grade a slope inside the pond to allow any surface water to drain to the intermittent stream. This procedure will have a detailed sequence which becomes a component of the erosion control plan that the Chatham County Environmental Quality Department must approve. Is pond considered a wetland after pond is drained? No. The pond is drained and immediately filled in. There is no period of time between these actions that would allow the pond to be considered a wetland. Is it possible to use the pond as a stormwater pond? No. The proposed road is on the eastside of the ridgeline. The existing pond lies on the west side of the ridgeline. The stormwater from the road cannot drain to the existing pond. If the pond is drained, what happens to the small portion of the pond that is located within the riparian buffer? None of the trees will be removed along that edge of the pond. If any of the existing pond is currently in the buffer, then trees will be allowed to grow back in the stream buffer. Page 7 of 6 23 *Where will pond drain to? The pond will drain into the intermittent stream adjacent to the pond. *Can stormwater feature on Lot 5 be relocated in order to allow Lot 5 to have an off -site septic area for Lot 6? We looked at this again and we don't see a better or alternate location for the stormwater facility. The topography falls gradually from Jones Ferry Road to Meadow Branch and the pond is at the lowest point of the road before Meadow Branch. *Can trees be planted along the common boundary of proposed Lot 7 and the James Baca property in Orange County? Yes, the developer agrees to plant trees along this property boundary in the clearing. Pine trees will create a visual buffer quickly and blend with the pine trees that grow naturally. We agree to plant pine trees. *Geor a Barrett an ad'oininq property owner, expressed concerns regarding trespass onto his property and asked if the 1700 foot common bounds of his Property and the subject property would be clearly surveyed and mark_ ed? The developer agrees to mark the common property boundary with George Barrett (Story Book Farm) when the lots are surveyed. This will be done before home construction. *Can signage be installed along the common boundary? We will install no less than 10 signs noting private property. *Is there a responsibility by the builders or realtors to disclose to potential buyers that Mr. Barrett's property has special events, a welding shop, and that Mr. Barrett target shoots on his property? No. *Where are the beaver dams? There are signs of old beaver dams on George Barrett's property and the Morgan Ridge property near the common boundary. *Per the Comprehensive Plan, the property is located in a Conservation Area that encourages farm land to be reserved? What would have made the property more desirable to be used as farm land instead of residential development? We understand the residential lot market and there is demand in this area for single family lots. We don't know what makes good farm land, but an extended Morgan family member mentioned the hardpan soil in this area is not ideal for grown crops. *Concern by an adjacent property owner, Tanith Kirkley, regarding the 5 off_ -site septic areas along the common border with her property. Ms. Kirkley explained that their existing septic is old and there is a concern that it may need to be replaced and a possibly a new well would need to be drilled near the common boundary where the 5 off -site septic areas are proposed and that with the distance requirement that a well cannot be within 100 feet of a septic or repair area, she is concerned that she will not have a location on her property to locate another well. The developers discussed the issue with Tanith and Robert Kirkley after the Planning Board meeting and made plans to meet at the Kirkley's house. Mrs. Kirkley later e- mailed a letter from a licensed soil scientist, Jeff Vaughan at Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. dated March 31, 2015. Warren Mitchell and Wesley Lloyd Page 8 of 6 24 met with Robert Kirkley at their home located at 4020 Jones Ferry Road on Wednesday 2114118. Robert showed Warren and Wesley the location of the septic tank drainfield and the well location. We noticed that the existing septic field showed no signs of failure. It appears to be working correctly at this time. The Kirkleys are concerned about their options when and if the septic system fails in the future. The letter from Jeff Vaughan states that the only repair septic system suitable for this lot is a surface wastewater discharge system. These types of systems are state approved systems. Mr. Mitchell has designed several of these systems and Mr. Lloyd has installed many of these systems. The system will treat the wastewater first with the septic tank and next with a sand filter or proprietary system like the Advantex by Orenco Systems. This system would be installed next to their existing septic system and the treated wastewater would discharge into the small creek behind their house. It appears that their existing well could remain where it is in the northeast corner of their property. There are other possible locations for another well on their property but the system proposed by Mr. Vaughn doesn't require the well to be relocated or abandoned. Their existing well is approximately 75 feet from our common property line where we show the proposed septic systems for Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6. We prepared a sketch of the system that Mr. Vaughan proposed for the Kirkley's septic system repair. Staff Note: After the 216118 Planning Board meeting and during discussion regarding the off -site septic areas with the developer, it was discovered that the original soils map included in the First Plat submittal and prepared by Central Carolina Soil Consulting, PLLC did not identify the well located on the Kirkley's property that is 75 feet from the common boundary line with Morgan Ridge and the location of the 5 proposed off -site septic areas. Chatham County requires a 100 foot separation between a well and a septic system unless there is a `fixed lot condition' which may allow the distance to be reduced to 50 feet. Per Environmental Health, this is not considered a `fixed lot condition'. Thomas Boyce requested a revised soils map showing the Kirkley's existing well and showing a 10.0 foot separation from the proposed 5 off -site septic areas. Jason Hall, Soil Scientist, provided a revised map, see attachment # 16. Mr. Boyce reviewed and stated that "the septic layout now meets the 100' setback to the neighboring well ". See attachment # 17. *Development is located in an area designated as a Conservation Area in the newly adopted Comprehensive Plan. Did the developer consider doing a Conservation Subdivision which is encouraged in a Conservation Area? A Board member noted that there are limitations on a Conservation Subdivision when wells and septic systems are required. We like the Conservation Subdivision concept but we don't think that this property is ideal for that type of design. The natural features, namely the stream buffers and wetland are linear in shape. The usable area on the property is also linear like the buffers. This makes it difficult to cluster the homes together in a compact manner. The roadway would be the same length in a conservation layout on this property because over half of the useable area is across Meadow Branch Creek. *Concern that Meadow Branch drains to Terrell's Creek which drains to the Haw River and there is a rare species in the river and this is a sensitive watershed. Acknowledge Page 9 of 6 25 Show wetland designated as W -2 on S &EC delineation map on Construction and Final plats. Acknowledged *Can road be realigned to avoid the crossing of the intermittent stream? To route the road around the intermittent stream, the road would need to pass between the septic systems and wetland stream buffer. The narrowest section is also the steepest section which falls about 8 feet in 65 feet. There is not adequate space for the road and the septic field easement required for access to the field and the force mains. However, we will use a concrete headwall on both sides of the road culvert to reduce the length of the intermittent stream disturbance. *A Conservation Subdivision would have much more open s ace and the stream buffers could possibly be located within the open or naturals ace instead of being located on individual lots. In addition to the justification we previously mentioned, storm water runoff can be reduced with a conventional subdivision layout versus a conservation subdivision. On a 3 acre lot, stormwater runoff has an opportunity to infiltrate on the lot before entering a creek. This is a benefit of a conventional subdivision over a conservation subdivision. *Are riparian buffers clearly marked so that installation of septic s stems does not encroach? The riparian buffers will be clearly marked and orange tree fencing will be installed along the boundary adjacent to the septic systems to protect the buffer. *How will roadway crossing of streams be handled? Will any wetlands be impacted b road crossis? The stream crossings will use culverts with headwalls to reduce the stream impact. In certain locations like the perennial stream crossing over the wetland, the developer will use retaining walls to limit the disturbance of the wetlands and the riparian buffer. Wetland will be impacted with the roadway crossing of the perennial stream. *Show sight triangles on Construction Plan and Final Plat on Lots 11 & 12 for future road extension. Acknowledged. *Verify with NCDOT that the type of stream crossings, using head walls, proposed bV the developer is acceptable. The developer spoke to Justin Richardson from NCDOT on 218118 and verified the use of retaining walls to cross the streams with the public road. Justin confirmed the use of moment walls (pour in place concrete) and segmental retaining walls (keystone) are acceptable. * Stormwater ponds need to comply with Chatham County Stormwater Ordinance requirements. Acknowledged. *Can number of septic utility easements be minimized? We researched having combined easements and we believe it to add additional complication for the homeowners. Something we can and will do is to install the forcemains close to each other but on Page 10 of 6 26 separate easements. That will allow us to leave some trees on the outside of each easement. Recommendation. The Planning Department recommends granting approval of the road name 'Morgan Ridge Way' and granting approval of subdivision First Plat for Morgan Ridge Subdivision with the following conditions: 1. The developer must obtain subdivision Concept and Preliminary Plan approval from Orange County prior to submittal of the Construction Plan to Chatham County. 2. All septic area encroachments shown within riparian buffer areas shall be removed. 3. Stormwater features shall meet all Chatham County Stormwater Ordinance requirements. 4. The Construction and Final plats shall show the wetland designated as W -2 on S &EC delineation map. 5. The Construction and Final plats shall show the sight triangles on Lots 11 & 12 for future road extension. Page 11 of 6 27 Patrick R. Mallett From: Michael Harvey Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 11:56 AM To: Craig Benedict; Patrick R. Mallett Subject: FW: Morgan Ridge First Plat Submittal Attachments: Morgan Ridge FIRST PLAT 12.22.17 (24 x 36).pdf, Morgan Ridge Ortho - Area Map.pdf, Natural Heritage and Photos.pdf, Septic and Enviromental.pdf, TRC and Community Mtg Materials.pdf, Various Emails.pdf; Application Cover Ltr and 1st Plat.pdf, BufferDeterminationLetter _Morgan Ridge rev 12- 22- 17.pdf, Corps of Engineers JD letter SAW- 2017- 01482AJD_PJD.pdf; Morgan Ridge Application 12.22.17.pdf; Morgan Ridge FIRST PLAT 12.22.17 (8.5 X 11).pdf FYI Michael D. Harvey AICP, CFM, CZO Current Planning Supervisor — Planner III Orange County Planning Department 131 West Margaret Lane PO Box 8181 (919) 245 -2597 (phone) (919) 644 -3002 (fax) Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 132, correspondence sent and received from this account is a public record and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Jason Sullivan [ mailto :jason.sullivan(&chathamnc.org] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 11:28 AM To: Michael Harvey Cc: Lynn Richardson; Kimberly Tyson; Rachael Thorn Subject: Morgan Ridge First Plat Submittal Michael, Hope you're doing well. We received a First Plat submittal for Morgan Ridge subdivision and I wanted to provide you a copy for your records. This item is scheduled for Planning Board review on February 6 and the Commissioners could take action as early as March 19. Please let us know if you have any questions. Jason Sullivan Planning Director Chatham County P.O. Box 54 80 -A East St. Pittsboro, NC 27312 Office: 919/542 -8233 Fax: 919/542 -2698 FLAN CHATHAM! working together to preserve s progress Chatham County's 25 -year vision plan is underway! Check out more information at www.chathamnc.org/comprehensiveplan In keeping with the NC Records Law, emails, including attachments, may be released to others upon request for inspection and copying. 401- / scene RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROAD ---------- — --- ---------------- a.— 29 MORGAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION First Plat a4 ft CHATHAM COUNTY, NC Demmber22.2017 S cale: 1 Inch =150 feet CHATHAM COUNTY SITE DATA OWNER JONES FERRY PROPERTIES, LLC m7opuaw'Y c.p.1 VIII. NL —1. PROPERTYADDIRMS: �JONESFERRYROAO CHAPEL HILL, NC V516 WAR M—ft"Er PB2014PG,01W PIN.1757�510 (CHA—I) CURRENT ZONING: WATEFISHEM W$4V PA IJIJBA SITE AREA: N -5220 ACRES TOTAL LOTS LOTS "G LOT s� 13.OACRES MINWMLOTS� 1.�ACFtES \�400foot I-ENGTH OF RO� -1.Z00 LF .ft. COMMUNITY/HOA ROPE— CH-0— 0.11 ACRES boundary OI—IGECOUNTY�. 0.37ACREB R.P.— Strap- e.. Rep 11-14or—undod- ? A Canco. lo -­— -.or u.fl1y.--1.r ba4, R--r—op-1—Ily—bloror 1A 'A Vicinity Mao Rdp—r1xHOAfCo,,.r1tyLard1 ORANGE COUNTY SITE DATA .—p-0 No J NOTES: 722 1. teproposatl Iola Z Los A & waatewamr 6. Ala p.-h 1401 M.H. r—,y I -W.d. 7. Tola l,p,,Io,. —111 � 24% n-111 ZoMro of.11.dj—.,roP" b WN tNe ..ptl—ftn. I- AREA SUMMARY .......... Warren D. Mitchell PE Engineering "o �iml .—b d _ .,b.n, NC —IN, C— HILL -M CAMUNA — rd_IP "Er 'Imm"911 P7 CHATHAM COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 30 LAND & WATER RESOURCES DIVISION Environmental Quality Department P.O. Box 548 Pittsboro, NC 27312 PHONE: (919) 542 -0945 Website: www.chathamnc.org General Environmental Documentation Submittal Form This form shall be completed by applicants building a Residential Development that includes 49 new lots or less. Proposed Subdivision /Project Name: Morgan Ridge subdivision (aka Vista Grande) Property Owner /Applicant: Representative (e.g., Surveyor, Engineer) Name: Jones Ferry Properties, LLC Name: Warren Mitchell Wesley Lloyd Company: Warren D Mitchell PE Address: 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill NC 27516 Address: 104 Amber Wood Run Chapel Hill NC 27516 Phone: (W) 919- 730 -0625 C same Phone: (W) 919- 593 -1916 C same Fax: Fax: Email: Wesley @lloydgu.com Email: warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com Parcel #: (AKPAR) 01443 Property address: 4074 Jones Ferry Road Total acreage: 52.20 acres For Office Use On Date Received: I Reviewed By: Summary /comments: 31 1. Project Description. Provide a narrative describing existing site conditions, land use, natural and cultural resources and how the proposed project may potentially impact the existing conditions and resources. Include proposed uses of the property. Please describe your development plans. The property is 52.20 acres. This property has been in the Morgan family for many decades. An existing single family is on the property and is is completely decayed. There are a few old barns that have also been decayed. There is old growth trees near the house but most of the land was cleared in the last 25 years and new growth trees are getting established. There is a perennial stream name Meadow Branch which flows from NE to SW. There are also several intermittent streams on the There will be 1 public road approximately 2500 feet long with shoulder and ditch section. The road will cross the perennial stream and 1 intermittent stream. The grade for the site is moderate or 'rolling' as classified by NCDOT. The road is located on the site to minimize cut and fill. Headwalls and retaining walls will be used at the crossings to minimize stream and stream buffer disturbance. Furthermore, the zoning allows 1 house per 1.45 acres with individual well and septic. Our project will have a maximum of 16 lots which is 1 house per 3.26 acres. So the proposed density is less than half the density allowed by the zoning. (see last page for historic association discussion) 2. Describe the Zoning and Uses of adjacent properties below. North R -1 South R -1 East R -1 West R -1 and CU -IND -L 3. Surface Waters (streams, ponds, lakes, wetlands). Are there any surface waters on the property? Attach a list of surface waters and a map showing the location of the water resources in relation to the proposed development. Include riparian buffers, if applicable. Visit our website for information regarding protected riparian buffers: http: / /www.chathamnc.orci/index.aspx ?page =883 and for a list of consultants to assist you with identification of streams and delineation of wetlands. 4. Is the project located in the Regulatory Floodplain /Floodway? Yes No _X FIRM Panel # Flood Zone If yes, please provide a map showing the Floodplain /Floodway on a site map. Use http : / /www.ncfloodmaos.com to view flood zones. 5. Is there a Significant Natural Heritage Area on the project site? Yes No X If yes, please provide a map showing the Significant Natural Heritage Area on the site. Use this website and select Natural Heritage dropdown menu. htto: / /www.chathamo /s.com. 6. Are there federally listed or federal aquatic species of concern in the designated 14 Digit Hydrologic Unit drainage basin of the project? Yes No X Use this website and select Wildlife Resources Commission dropdown menu. http.-Ilwww.chathamais.com. 7. Please circle the appropriate Watershed District (see the Watershed Protection Ordinance for descriptions). WS II Balance of Watershed WS IV Protected Area WS III Critical Area River Corridor WS III Balance of Watershed River Corridor Special Area WS IV- Critical Area Local Watershed Area 32 8. Does the project site contain element occurrences of natural diversity, including rare species, as determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program, NC Wildlife Resources Commission and US Fish and Wildlife Service? Yes No X If yes, please provide a narrative. Use this website to determine EO: www.ncnhp.oralweb/nholelement- occurrences. Rodney Butler with the NC Natural Heritage Program prepared a document which indicates that no records for rare species important natural communities, natural areas or conservation / managed areas exist within the proposed protect boundary His document is attached to the back of this 9. Does the project require a 404 Permit /401 Water Quality Certification? Yes X No If yes, please provide a copy of the 404 Permit application submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers and a copy of the 401 Water Quality Certification application submitted to the NC Division of Water Resources (formerly the Division of Water Quality). For more information, please contact Dan LaMontagne, Environmental Quality Director at (919) 542 -8268 or dan.lamontagneCfchathamnc.org or Lynn Richardson, Subdivision Administrator at (919) 542 -8207 or Iynn.richardson @chathamnc.org. We project there will be 2 roadway crossings ( 1 perennial and 1 intermittent ) and 1 driveway crossing of an intermittent stream. The total impact of all 3 crossings is expected to be less than 150 feet of stream. Permits for these 3 crossings will be obtained prior to construction plat submission. All wetland impacts are expected to be less than 10,000 sf. The developer would like to wait and submit the 401/404 permit until the first plat process is completed. The 401/404 permit would be submitted with the construction plan application. In case the stream crossing locations are revised during the first plat process we would not have to revise or resubmit the 401 + 404 permits. CHATHAM COUNTY HISTORIC ASSOCIATION VISIT The developer met Bev Wiggins from the CCHA on the property. Bev took photographs of the property and made notes. Her email regarding her site visit is included with this document. The house and barns do not have any historical value and are all beyond repair or preservation and do not warrant either. RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROAD 33 MORGAN RIDGE far Repre C.—m-1111.1'Pupti—ple- ORANGE COUNTY SUE DATA v0:110 PG:109 T— --PR-- NOTES.` P.. .:I 1. topmPaaetl bb 3. 3. Aplbft— ,en — 1a not p­rUy­­W­btlNIW,r. 4. A r.n- Ol10 5. Ape-1' I, A T. T� I­M-- w111 W 2416 magmum 6. Zp.r...' I.P.rIl 1. .1 on pf0m —1 '-1 bY G"M. M B—fterd 11 CU-1141- Th, P.FerLy —1 —W,Wp. LOT AREA SUMMARY Warren D. Mitchell PE I- C.— p— V Civil Engir,.eflng ­Nc NO 2— pa Amber WOW L-6 SUBDIVISION First Plat CHATHAM COUNTY, NC December 22, 2017 Scale: 1 i,ch = 150 feet CHATHAM COUNTY SITE DATA OWNER JONES PERRY PROPERTIES. LUO W Ows Wry CDepeI .111. NO V516 PROFEPTYADDRESS: Q74JONESFETWRW CHAPEL141I.L. NO 27616 MPAR --- DB.lM —7P PB2014 P"IN FIN-V�"5510 (c'—M) CUPFIENT ZO ING: WATERSHED: WSW PA IJLBA STEAR- µ5=,\CRES TOTAL LOTS. +2 LOTS AVG LOT — aP10ACRES MINIMUM LOT ISACRES 401 400 foot LENGTH OF ROAD +42500 UP 01 fft boundary COMMUNITYIHOAPROPER11' CHATHAM CO,NT,,. all ACRES ORANGE COUNT(: 0.37 ACRES far Repre C.—m-1111.1'Pupti—ple- ORANGE COUNTY SUE DATA v0:110 PG:109 T— --PR-- NOTES.` P.. .:I 1. topmPaaetl bb 3. 3. Aplbft— ,en — 1a not p­rUy­­W­btlNIW,r. 4. A r.n- Ol10 5. Ape-1' I, A T. T� I­M-- w111 W 2416 magmum 6. Zp.r...' I.P.rIl 1. .1 on pf0m —1 '-1 bY G"M. M B—fterd 11 CU-1141- Th, P.FerLy —1 —W,Wp. LOT AREA SUMMARY Warren D. Mitchell PE I- C.— p— V Civil Engir,.eflng ­Nc NO 2— pa Amber WOW L-6 z•eat I,m UN ��\ �'i UN j a 1 \ MORGAN RIDGE 112EIP SUBDIVISION I/YEIP Septic Field Layout Map CHATHAM COUNTY, NC attertOV 72. �pf] v 3taM: 1tr 100%. 1 •� ti� ' {� Lot 8y t.YEM osd R - Jones Fa�Pr++ as, 3.2 AC G ean lane 6 LEEN I: of NORE 16 r Pr v 7W) 1327A H. -„ .5AC s •.,.a UN •� Lot9 CT 2 PS.9 .122 �t� s• U LOUN - •rasamt�ysms ErdLanon aaauonai wor.is w*ee. Lot 75 " 1.95 AC •sm twmvywss axasm omo. mwrx+am,rav wares / �g$� /� ^ UN ✓ Lot N UN ,r 2.9AC •ratasu.vy. •ltw PdrtBUn twwa,Mreml.m ltws urvwt EC USea es V.ga�UezvlpJmn tar rvel.T ,w asYarWtabgN aownreneaon sr J•Lot2 sagm sn�smaemaauts�ea tebx lwnc«WS � 1) to 4pnPWern trea 2)tee'M1Vnxrct�cfa Wtnan�Umx Eft ,t� (Br (Gs TLS i� i Lot 14 Lo[10 � s ` 4 >sa tan svismvrarer lstaams, vanes. istes7. Lot 7 1.5 AC T o t a I -8.9AC z•eat I,m UN ��\ �'i UN j a 1 \ 1 •� ti� ' {� Lot 8y 3.2 AC G GER`zzaexRs N 6 LEEN I: of NORE 16 1327A H. -„ .5AC s •.,.a UN •� Lot9 CT 2 PS.9 .122 �t� s• (CHA MCO. EGIST s - •rasamt�ysms ErdLanon aaauonai wor.is w*ee. Lot 75 " se UN •sm twmvywss axasm omo. mwrx+am,rav wares 1.6AC - era,. dwnma�een�m ,asolmma..�c,a„m.wms��a. •ratasu.vy. •ltw PdrtBUn twwa,Mreml.m ltws urvwt EC USea es V.ga�UezvlpJmn tar rvel.T ,w asYarWtabgN aownreneaon sr tC. sagm sn�smaemaauts�ea tebx lwnc«WS � 1) to 4pnPWern trea 2)tee'M1Vnxrct�cfa Wtnan�Umx Eft ,t� (Br (Gs TLS i� i Lot 14 Lo[10 � s ` 4 >sa tan svismvrarer lstaams, vanes. istes7. UN . s:i• 2.77 AC •Arty msa,saw astreances suv, esema,v, wtne sratae of Ne eutahbaei areas m,rrarereas unwade tuwene septcctalems • 'easemapaWWeetangenfasmsetvr. :sg. _::_�-.•.:_•::' •waaona neu swYi. regweE RsWaarxen and +�awwsW )�zsc . v,su vativay, ccsc mnndearaaeaw areas Lot1�i sown ea v_Aadax4l to pamAtedh Nebral HeaFx cepamrerx %+iK 7.5A .w rc•. nos / /. %.'. UN r N Lot tl 1.82 AC Lot 12 ,gyp ' ,l 1.56 AC N>: SOI!'4f� 112Yi00 12' IP O V�• „off K E1. m� OS H ERRI REVOCABLETRUS Central Carolina Soil Consulting OB.1311 -P.8 329 South White Street (CHA .REGISTRY Wake Forest, NC 27587 Project# 15846 t• = 100' Jones Ferry Properties, U.C. Jones Ferry Road Tract Chatham County, NO z•eat I,m 35 12/22/2017 Gmail - Morgan Ridge SD mail Warren Mitchell < warrendmitchellpe@gmail.com> Morgan Ridge SD Thomas Boyce <thomas.boyce @chathamnc.org> Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 4:21 PM To: Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com> Cc: Lynn Richardson <lynn.richardson @chathamnc.org> Warren, The proposed layout and design of septic areas is acceptable. Remember, there will need to be encroachment agreements for the road crossings. Also, Central Carolina Soils Consulting report is adequate and they will need to sign the final map. Thomas From: Warren Mitchell [mailto :warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 10:40 AM To: Thomas Boyce <thomas.boyce @chathamnc.org> Subject: Morgan Ridge SD [Quoted text hidden] https: / /mall.google.com/ mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver =1 QCYKmliAi4.en.& view= pt &msg =l 6O7Oa727b5e8856 &q= Thomas. Boyce %40chathamn... 1/1 CHATHAM COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA 36 LAND & WATER RESOURCES DIVISION Environmental Quality Department P.O. Box 548 Pittsboro, NC 27312 PHONE: (919) 542 -0945 Website: www.chathamnc.org General Environmental Documentation Submittal Form This form shall be completed by applicants building a Residential Development that includes 49 new lots or less. Proposed Subdivision /Project Name: Morgan Ridge subdivision (aka Vista Grande) Property Owner /Applicant: Representative (e.g., Surveyor, Engineer) Name: Jones Ferry Properties, LLC Name: Warren Mitchell Wesley Lloyd Company: Warren D Mitchell PE Address: 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill NC 27516 Address: 104 Amber Wood Run Chapel Hill NC 27516 Phone: (W) 919- 730 -0625 C same Phone: (W) 919- 593 -1916 C same Fax: Fax: Email: Wesley @lloydgu.com Email: warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com Parcel #: (AKPAR) 01443 Property address: 4074 Jones Ferry Road Total acreage: 52.20 acres For Office Use Only Date Received: Reviewed By: Summary /comments: 37 1. Project Description. Provide a narrative describing existing site conditions, land use, natural and cultural resources and how the proposed project may potentially impact the existing conditions and resources. Include proposed uses of the property. Please describe your development plans. The property is 52.20 acres. This property has been in the Morgan family for many decades. An existing single family is on the property and is is completely decayed. There are a few old barns that have also been decayed. There is old growth trees near the house but most of the land was cleared in t e ast 25 years and new growth trees are getting established. There is a perennial stream name Meadow Branch which flows from E to SK There are also several intermittent streams on the There will be 1 public road approximately 2500 feet long with shoulder and ditch section. The road will cross the perennial stream and 1 intermittent stream. The grade for the site is moderate or 'rolling' as classified by NCDOT. The road is located on the site to minimize cut and fill. Headwalls and retaining walls will be used at the crossings to minimize stream and stream buffer disturbance. Furthermore, the zoning allows 1 house per 1.45 acres with individual well and septic. Our project will have a maximum of 16 lots which is 1 house per 3.26 acres. So the proposed density is less than half the density allowed by the zoning. (see last page for historic association discussion) 2. Describe the Zoning and Uses of adjacent properties below. North R -1 South R -1 East R -1 West R -1 and CU -IND -L 3. Surface Waters (streams, ponds, lakes, wetlands). Are there any surface waters on the property? Attach a list of surface waters and a map showing the location of the water resources in relation to the proposed development. Include riparian buffers, if applicable. Visit our website for information regarding protected riparian buffers: http: / /www.chathamnc.org /index.asox ?page =883 and for a list of consultants to assist you with identification of streams and delineation of wetlands. 4. Is the project located in the Regulatory Flood plain /Floodway? Yes No _X FIRM Panel # Flood Zone If yes, please provide a map showing the Flood plain /Floodway on a site map. Use hM.- Ilwww.ncf/oodmaps.com to view flood zones. 5. Is there a Significant Natural Heritage Area on the project site? Yes No X If yes, please provide a map showing the Significant Natural Heritage Area on the site. Use this website and select Natural Heritage dropdown menu. hyp: / /www.chathamais.com. 6. Are there federally listed or federal aquatic species of concern in the designated 14 Digit Hydrologic Unit drainage basin of the project? Yes No X Use this website and select Wildlife Resources Commission dropdown menu. hgp.11www. chathamais. com. 7. Please circle the appropriate Watershed District (see the Watershed Protection Ordinance for descriptions). WS II Balance of Watershed WS IV Protected Area WS III Critical Area River Corridor WS III Balance of Watershed River Corridor Special Area WS IV- Critical Area Local Watershed Area 8. Does the project site contain element occurrences of natural diversity, including rare species, as determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program, NC Wildlife Resources Commission and US Fish and Wildlife Service? Yes No X If yes, please provide a narrative. Use this website to determine EO: www.ncnhp.oralweb/nhp /element- occurrences. Rodney Butler with the NC Natural Heritage Program prepared a document which indicates that no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas or conservation / managed areas exist within the proposed prolect boundary. His document is attached to the back of this 9. Does the project require a 404 Permit /401 Water Quality Certification? Yes X No If yes, please provide a copy of the 404 Permit application submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers and a copy of the 401 Water Quality Certification application submitted to the NC Division of Water Resources (formerly the Division of Water Quality). For more information, please contact Dan LaMontagne, Environmental Quality Director at (919) 542 -8268 or dan.lamontagne@chathamnc.org or Lynn Richardson, Subdivision Administrator at (919) 542 -8207 or Iynn.richardson @chathamnc.org. We project there will be 2 roadway crossings ( 1 perennial and 1 intermittent ) and 1 driveway crossing of an intermittent stream. The total impact of all 3 crossings is expected to be less than 150 feet of stream. Permits for these 3 crossings will be obtained prior to construction plat submission. All wetland impacts are expected to be less than 10,000 sf. The developer would like to wait and submit the 401/404 permit until the first plat process is completed. The 401/404 permit would be submitted with the construction plan application. In case the stream crossing locations are revised during the first plat process we would not have to revise or resubmit the 401 + 404 permits. CHATHAM COUNTY HISTORIC ASSOCIATION VISIT The developer met Bev Wiggins from the CCHA on the property. Bev took photographs of the property and made notes. Her email regarding her site visit is included with this document. The house and barns do not have any historical value and are all beyond repair or preservation and do not warrant either. / / RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROAD 39 canpmo a a c,Ay arO Nob cm9a,e NcInM Mao MORGAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION r� First Plat �! CHATHAM COUNTY, NC Decemhe,22,2017 I Scale: 1 Inch =150 feet "• .- +� '° CHATHAM COUNTY SITE DATA ® OWNER JONESFERRYPROPEnW.l1C ORANGE COUNTY SITE DATA 22,Opua Way .�� Chapel HIII. NO M16 PRO — ADDRESS; 4074JONESFERRYROAD CHAPEL HILL. NO 27516 ouMw4oyyyry MPAR . ... _ DS:174 0. GB:1,46 PG01M PIN.175 PG:0130 • PISLRENT M I (CHATHAM) WARREN ZONING: R-1 WATER6HFD: WSN PA IJLEA SREAREA: -1 SZMACRES '\ TOTALLOTS: 4A16 LOTS AvO LOT SIZE N- 3.0 ACRES 00. `400 foot MINIMUM LOT SIZE 1SACRFS LENGTH OF ROAD H•2500 LF offset CCMMUNTW1HOAPR0%RTY boundary CHATHAM COUNTY: 0.11 ACRES ORANGE COUNTY: 0.57 ACRES ® Rapm 1b,$beemb- canpmo a a c,Ay arO Nob cm9a,e NcInM Mao %Na905 >.1 -. (OIWpE) axl..,wo 1RACT ARFw INEf Y 1. 18 Pmposad lob 2 Lots Mll baaerved pang llMlvltllul walb antl septic aptema D. Apubllewalersyatem is lwl DmsentlyavalAble to lneauptlMNOn, 4. Anorvdlxpag9 permltforelend eDWlcetivnwasle Olepwel eyemm w0lnm Mnaetlaplreceeaary. S. A per P8.1taa1wfle W,1weler dbpoaal system of 3D00 gall9na/ eayalergarla nol llaedee /neceaaary. 6. A404 permli /401. 111b,24%recessery /mpulletl. T. Z.1l g l­- 11 dj —wlll b924 %mexlmn 8. Zoningofallaelewnt pmpenp, W. wXp ibOe 11 =10 CNppmml aboam an N1, lb pour W TOet portal Is awnae by Geolga W. Ealretl and IsmnaO CW NDLTpe pmpady 1, lb, a welding sMp. LOT AREA SUMMARY M6zloc.lm • raidsme vvejcNiws,wmevdd -ai ee�invuMmvelsrbaN�ie�rM �`m,.v�'pro ,.,,' Rapblamtl5anayw: R5. Jorws aIM Aiwckroc Inc. 4,�� ,•' MIw.aDVSanI qms Nc zr>w 6336'8 ,' 0 Opyl6nproipNaswclmexcom aeghlered SO05clamap canrcalcalamwsol comMnna. Puc rows mamsaeel style up wok 1�9. NC R73B, dMa IIw16LanhclCOmOrgtol.cpm Warren D. Mitchell, PE <g � , Civil Engineering s da IW AmbHwweRUn -_ CHAPEL HILL NORM GROANA 27516 w9�lentlMKnelpeegme0.cem ��,�` P 191915911916 ' "•,.,. Q k ,. +• "• Repreaenb WeOantl bpuntledes RepesenLa steam lmpacl -med rmssing r� Revmeanla wmprpaanty ammw.amr Oealn Rapma —bb11 Ylovls1...y su1wW,r Convamlowl or — sapgc syelems. ®Repm.-.11 P-11111* Wbtble fw pmlllteaystems ® Rapmsenb; HGA/ C1111Hly lane ORANGE COUNTY SITE DATA %Na905 >.1 -. (OIWpE) axl..,wo 1RACT ARFw INEf Y 1. 18 Pmposad lob 2 Lots Mll baaerved pang llMlvltllul walb antl septic aptema D. Apubllewalersyatem is lwl DmsentlyavalAble to lneauptlMNOn, 4. Anorvdlxpag9 permltforelend eDWlcetivnwasle Olepwel eyemm w0lnm Mnaetlaplreceeaary. S. A per P8.1taa1wfle W,1weler dbpoaal system of 3D00 gall9na/ eayalergarla nol llaedee /neceaaary. 6. A404 permli /401. 111b,24%recessery /mpulletl. T. Z.1l g l­- 11 dj —wlll b924 %mexlmn 8. Zoningofallaelewnt pmpenp, W. wXp ibOe 11 =10 CNppmml aboam an N1, lb pour W TOet portal Is awnae by Geolga W. Ealretl and IsmnaO CW NDLTpe pmpady 1, lb, a welding sMp. LOT AREA SUMMARY M6zloc.lm • raidsme vvejcNiws,wmevdd -ai ee�invuMmvelsrbaN�ie�rM �`m,.v�'pro ,.,,' Rapblamtl5anayw: R5. Jorws aIM Aiwckroc Inc. 4,�� ,•' MIw.aDVSanI qms Nc zr>w 6336'8 ,' 0 Opyl6nproipNaswclmexcom aeghlered SO05clamap canrcalcalamwsol comMnna. Puc rows mamsaeel style up wok 1�9. NC R73B, dMa IIw16LanhclCOmOrgtol.cpm Warren D. Mitchell, PE <g � , Civil Engineering s da IW AmbHwweRUn -_ CHAPEL HILL NORM GROANA 27516 w9�lentlMKnelpeegme0.cem ��,�` P 191915911916 ' "•,.,. Q k ,. +• "• 41) IQ'EIP MORGAN RIDGE 2 f SUBDIVISION WTIP Septic Field Layout Map CHATHAM COUNTY, NC 11 N11 Pie Mrl LOUN 1.95 AC UN N UN Lot 6 2.9AC 0 Lot 2 Lot 7 1.5AC Tol,1-11.9AC aped UN UN o60A/ 3 N .-P - Lot 5 UN UN 6.5 AC , x \per -- °� , U Lot 8 3.2 AC G RGE W. R N LEEN NORE ot 16 SAC Lot 9 CT2 2.OAC eJ'f PB.9 122 H M Co. EGISTR W Rem— Lot 15 I .6AC UN N LZ'10 UW 2 to zA p6­— 3) r— UN Lot 14 sa 2.11 AC • (601 Lot 1b 1.5A C U N N N Lot 1'2 1.56 AC U '42" 7� R U FRRI REVOCABLE TRUS Central Carolina Soil Consulting DB. 1311 P.8 329 South White Street (CHAT REGISTRY Wake Forest, NC 27587 C—C SME Project # 1580-B Jones Ferry Properties, L-C. Jones Ferry Road Tract Chatham County, NC 41 12/22/2017 Gmail - Morgan Ridge SD mail Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe@gmail.com> Morgan Ridge SD Thomas Boyce <thomas.boyce @chathamnc.org> Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 4:21 PM To: Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com> Cc: Lynn Richardson <lynn.richardson @chathamnc.org> Warren, The proposed layout and design of septic areas is acceptable. Remember, there will need to be encroachment agreements for the road crossings. Also, Central Carolina Soils Consulting report is adequate and they will need to sign the final map. Thomas From: Warren Mitchell [ mailto :warrendmitchellpe@gmail.comj Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 10:40 AM To: Thomas Boyce <thomas.boyce @chathamnc.org> Subject: Morgan Ridge SD [Quoted text hidden] https: / /mail.google.com/ mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver =1 QCYKmliAi4.en.& view= pt &msg =l 6O7Oa727b5e8856 &q= Thomas.Boyce %40chathamn... 1/1 42 Chatham County Planning Department ^' 80 -A Fast Street CHATxt►t COUNTY P.O. Box 54, Pittsboro, NC 27312 -0054 NORTH C A ROL ! N A Phone: 919 -542 -8204 First Plat Review Fee: $250.00 + $50.00 per Lot MAJOR SUBDIVISION– FIRST PLAT REVIEWAPPLICATION Proposed Subdivision Name: Morgan Ridge Subdivision (formerly called Vista Grande) Property Owner /Applicant: Name: Jones Ferry Properties, LLC Address: 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill NC 27516 Phone: (W) 919- 730 -0625 Fax: (H) Representative (Surveyor, Engineer, Etc.): Name: Warren Mitchell Company Name: Warren D Mitchell, PE Address: 104 Amber Wood Run Chanel Hill NC 27516 Phone: (W) 919 -593 -1916 (C) same (C) same Fax: Email: Wesley@lloydgu.com Email: warrendmitchellpe@pmaii.com Who should staff contact (circle one)? Property Owner /Applicant Consultant PROPOSAL Parcel # (AKPAR): 0001443 P.I.N. # 9756 -00 -39 -8388 Zoning District: R1 Flood Map # 3710974600J Zone: none Watershed District: WSIV -PA / JLBA Existing Access Road (S. R. # and name): Jones Fegy Road SR 1942 Total Acreage 52.20ac Total # of Lots 16 Min. Lot Size (Acres) 1.5 Max. Lot Size 8.64 ac Avg. Lot Size 3.0 ac # Exempt Lots (over 10 ac.) 0 Phased Development/Development Schedule? YES ❑ NO X How Many Phases? 1 If Subdivision will be Phased or Developed under a Development Schedule, Please attached a DETAILED Phasing Schedule or Development Schedule (for subdivisions consisting of 50 Lots or More). Mixed -Use YES ❑ NO X Multi- Family (Townhomes, Apts., etc.) YES ❑ NO Proposed Number of Lots: Residential 16 Commercial Other If Other, Specify (i.e. recreation) Wastewater Disposal: Individual Septic X Community Septic ❑ Public System ❑ Water System: Individual Well X Community Well(s) ❑ Public System ❑ Public Water System Name: _— Public Wastewater System Name (ex. Aqua NC): Will New Road(s) be constructed? Type of Road: Private ❑ Length (mi.): YES X 43 First Plat Application Page 2 NO ❑ Internal X External/Access ❑ Public X Length (mi.): 0.5 miles Road Surface: Paved X Gravel ❑ Width of Road Surface (feet) 20 feet Will this be a Conservation Subdivision (See Section 7.7 of Subdivision Ordinance) YES ❑ NO X Type and Acreage of Other Facilities (ex. Recreation, Mixed -Use, Commercial, etc.): Date of Community Meeting: January 10, 2017 Location: 4421 Maims Chapel Road Provide At Least two (2) separate dates for County Staff and Board (Volunteer Advisory and Elected) site visits — Please provide at least one date when site will be available between Barn and 5pm, and one date when site will be available after 5pm DATE TIMES) Land is always available. My schedule is flexible and 1 am happy to show the property. (Warren Mitchell) Please See Attached for Submittal Requirements Signature of Property Owner /Applicant For Staff Use Only Date Received Date Fee Paid Date Review Completed By Received By -k)ke1( Fr= Date Applicant Contacted /7 - Date For Questions, Contact Lynn Richardson, Subdivision Administrator (Ivnn.richardson @ chathamnc.orA) or (919) 542 -8207 First Plat Application Page 3 CHATHAM CAUMN NORTH CAROLINA -��- First Plat Submission Checklist Subdivision Name: Morgan Ridge Subdivision (formerly Vista Grande Subdivision) Submit the following with this application: ..1-- 20 paper copies (folded) of the Plat showing proposed subdivision (minimum size 18" x 24 ") See Section 6.1 of Subdivision Regulation for information required to be on Plat f 1 digital copy of all documents conforming to Digital Document Submission Guideline ✓ 1 Reduced copy of plat (8.5" x 11 ") List 0 copy) of adjoining property owners with mailing addresses. List must include all adjoining property owners within 400 feet of property boundaries. A Microsoft Excel spreadsheet listing the names and addresses shall be submitted with the digital submission. Submit two (2) paper copies and one (1) digital copy of the following: /IA Utility Plan (proposed layouts for sewer and water where applicable, showing feasible connections to the existing utility system, or any proposed utility system). Submit 20 bound packets of the following information: Completed First Plat Review Application (2 Pages) Location Map (with Aerial Photo) from County GIS System (8.5" x 11 ") Topographic Map (contours at vertical intervals of not more than five [5] feet, at the same scale as the First Plat), if required by staff. Comments from Chatham County Historical Association from Concept Review (If any) Comments from Chatham County Schools from Concept Review (If any) ✓ Copy of Environmental Documentation or Environmental Impact Assessment and report from Environmental Quality Department. ✓ Community Meeting Report Form ✓ Recommendation(s) from Technical Review Committee Meeting at Concept (If any) Detailed Soil Scientist Report and Soils Map Road name submittal form from Chatham County Emergency Operations office V_ Copy of Riparian Buffer Review Army Corps of Engineers Permit, if required a J;kA UG GTE S v3 M) JITA L NC Division of Water Quality Permit, if required 'T DV$L%0 C-1 S uGM 1T TA L- If submitting a Conservation Subdivision, must also submit the following documentation along with 1 S paper copies (bound in a 3 ring binder) and I digital copy: N Documentation (i.e. deed, easement document) of Ownership of Conservation Space Conservation Space Management Plan (See Section 7.7 [G]) _ Legal Instrument for Permanent Protection (See Section 7.7 [H]) For Questions, Contact Lynn Richardson, Subdivision Administrator (Ivnn.richardson @chathamnc.ore) or (919) 542 -8207 45 Warren D. Mitchell, PE December 21, 2017 Lynn Richardson Land Planner II / Subdivision Administrator Chatharn County Planning Department PO Box 1550 Pittsboro, NC 27312 Re: Morgan Ridge Subdivision Chatham County, NC Dear Ms. Richardson: This application is for Morgan Ridge Subdivision which contains 16 lots on 52.2 acres in Chatham County and 0.65 acres in Orange County. The property in Orange County was included to provide the safest access to the subdivision on Jones Ferry Road. All land in Orange County will become property owned by the HOA / Community which will contain the sign, landscaping and the mail kiosk. The smallest lot is 1.5 acres, the largest is +/- 8.64 acres, and the average lot size is 3 acres. The proposed road has a 20' wide paved travelway with a 50' wide public right -of -way. The length of the road is approximately 2500 If. A 50' right -of -way is stubbed out to the parcel along the southern boundary for a future public road extension. An abandoned house and several barns are on the property. The only value in the structures is for reclaimed lumber. Some people have expressed interest in reusing the barn wood. Bev Wiggins mentioned that the Chatham County Historical Association records show the grave of William Morgan could be close by or on the adjacent property to the east. This property was owned by the Morgan Family. 1 asked the surveyor if he saw any cemeteries and he said that they did not see any sign of graves. Per Bev Wiggins' recommendation, I contacted Grand Trees of Chatham organization about a pine tree located between the old house and well house on lot 3. The pine tree is about 3 feet in diameter. The organization measured the tree and said that the pine tree is not a champion tree but it is noteworthy and wrote down the size. The road and utility construction will not interfere with the tree so we do not plan to cut this tree. An existing pond is located on lots 3 and 4. The Corps of Engineers determined that the pond is a non jurisdictional pond. It will be located directly behind the proposed homes on these lots. For safety, we are planning to fill in the pond. Three (3) stream crossings are proposed, 2 intermittent and 1 perennial crossing. 104 Amber Wood Run . Chapel Hill, NC 27516 e Phone 919- 593 -1916 . warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com We will use headwalls for all 3 crossings to limit the length of stream disturbance. Approximately 0.1 acre (4000sf) of wetlands at the perennial crossing are being affected / disturbed. Retaining walls will be used where the road crosses the wetlands to reduce the impact. There is approximately 13 acres of stream and wetland buffer. That amounts to 25% of the project area. Stormwater will be managed with a stormwater facility on each side of the perennial stream and outside of the stream buffer. Each lot will have individual wells and septic systems. Orange County is reviewing the public road concurrently with the Chatham County review of the subdivision. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call or email me. Thank you for your help with this application. Sincerely, Warren D. Mitchell, PE Page 2 W RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROAD 47 .b d �A pm— n bb.m- Ropment, -11 Pm 11 ffy WWI, far Cmm-wIb,LPP septic systems. Rep— a ollpmNslona0ysulbbb for ­.11. by — R.b— .0. 1 C—UNI, -d ORANGE COUNTY SITED&TA LENdrH OF UU7 S. A�� "'01TI bl"ft I 10—PPII.11� d1­1 �bl �b,! I 5. 4. �P' 1'— ..'7 1— —1., dI.p—I-t—r 3000 gd— �­r bb- g�—. w112 be —I... 8. �bI'o d1' : d),— p­fty 1. R-1 — Uh, —p- & t. Panel Tbbt ­1 by Gb­ B.—d Ib C— �—Idft —F. LOT AREA SUMMARY = AOi: A 4 Warren D. Mitchell, PE 71— --b- �---c —9— CIA EnGume nn 1-11 w, o ; g Mebane NC dR 0. O—EL— NORTH 'I. A 27311 PU919)-16 MORGAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION First Plat CHATHAM COUNTY, NC Dio-mbw22,2DI7 Scale: I inch= 150 feet CHATHAM COUNTY SITE DATA OWNER JONES FERRY PROPERTIES. LLC CWW HUI, NC 27516 ADDRESS: 4074 JONES FERRY ROAD CHAPIELMIU- NC 27516 M Rl- 0S:1 748 PO- 26=14 P"166 CURRENT ZONING: 1 ode I WATUUnHC : WSW PA AVGLOTS E f•3.0ACnS 400 loot L LENGTH OF ROM) offset C COMMUN—HOAPROPERTY —GECOUNTY. )XACRES RIP— Stream be— R. . �A pm— n bb.m- Ropment, -11 Pm 11 ffy WWI, far Cmm-wIb,LPP septic systems. Rep— a ollpmNslona0ysulbbb for ­.11. by — R.b— .0. 1 C—UNI, -d ORANGE COUNTY SITED&TA LENdrH OF UU7 S. A�� "'01TI bl"ft I 10—PPII.11� d1­1 �bl �b,! I 5. 4. �P' 1'— ..'7 1— —1., dI.p—I-t—r 3000 gd— �­r bb- g�—. w112 be —I... 8. �bI'o d1' : d),— p­fty 1. R-1 — Uh, —p- & t. Panel Tbbt ­1 by Gb­ B.—d Ib C— �—Idft —F. LOT AREA SUMMARY = AOi: A 4 Warren D. Mitchell, PE 71— --b- �---c —9— CIA EnGume nn 1-11 w, o ; g Mebane NC dR 0. O—EL— NORTH 'I. A 27311 PU919)-16 Chatham County Tax Map w� O a J r a L) U 4 0 �w �� 44 m F4T O a CRNWIFORD DAIRY RD ranch 0 � e* Meadow � X04- o G PY�ti .o �Z k C oN S.c eeK R -4 ER RD N A Feet 0 475 950 Service Layer Credits: Chatham County, Chatham County EOC, Chatham County GIS NC911, Chatham County, Chatham County CHATHAM COUNTY NORTH CAROLINA Date: 8/17/2017 Time: 5:02:22 PM we Community Meeting Deport Form REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT INPUT MEETING REQUIRED BY THE CHATHAM COUNTY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE To: Lynn Richardson, Chatham County Subdivision Administrator Subdivision Name: Vista Grande Approximate Location (or Address): 4074 Jones Ferry Road Proposed Number Lots: 16 Residential (Y /N): Y The undersigned hereby certifies that the required sign(s) was posted on the property proposed for subdivision, on each road frontage of said subdivision on (date) _December 20, 2016 A photo of the sign posted is recommended to be attached to this form. The meeting was held at the following time and place: January 10 from 5:00 to 7:00pm Opus financial Advisors 4421 Manns Chapel Road The persons in attendance at the meeting: See attached Attendance sheet The following issues were discussed at the meeting (Attach additional sheet(s) if needed): See attached As a result of the meeting, the following changes were made to the subdivision proposal (Attach additional sheet(s) if needed): No changes were made to the plan as a result of the meeting. Date: January 12, 2017 Applicant: Jones Ferry Properties, LLC By: Warren Mitchell Please submit this Report to the Chatham County Planning Department located at 80 -A East Street or mail it to Lynn Richardson, Subdivision Administrator, PO Box 54, Pittsboro, NC 27312 -0054. If you have any questions, please contact Lynn Richardson at (919) 542 -8207 or lynn .richardson(ab-chathamnc.org. The following people were in attendance: Kathy Barrett 919 - 967 -9491 George Barrett same Dan Edwards 336- 626 -0272 The attendees made the following comments: thebamgstorybookmetals.com same 50 1) George Barrett shoots guns next to the property and wanted to let us know that he will continue to use his property as a range. 2) The Barretts were concerned about commercial zoning and are glad that our proposal is not for a rezoning request. 3) During large rain events, the water in the creels will back up. There is evidence on the property and downstream of old beaver dams. 51 Warren D Mitchell, PE December 6, 2016 Re: Community meeting for proposed subdivision Vista Grande Subdivision - Parcel # 1443 Across Jones Ferry Road from Communications Towers Dear Adjacent Property Owner: We would like to invite you to a community meeting regarding the above mentioned property. The meeting date is Tuesday, January 10 from 5:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at Opus Financial Advisors 4421 Manns Chapel Road, Chapel Hill, NC 27516. The open house format will run for two hours but you are welcome to arrive and depart at any time between 5 —7pm to review exhibits and provide comments. The planning department regulations require all projects to hold a community meeting in advance of any formal submission to Chatham County. The objective of this meeting is to share the proposed plans with the local community and receive comments in advance of the plan submission. The County staff will not be attending this community meeting. We anticipate making the plan submission to the County in January and you will receive information from the County at that time regarding various meeting dates. The proposal is for a parcel of land approximately 52.2 acres in size (Chatham County Parcel Number 1443). We are proposing +/- 16 Lots on 52.2 acres having an average lot size of 3.2 acres. The lots will be served by private wells and private septic systems. A Concept Plan is enclosed for your information. You can also view the information on the Chatham County Planning website at www.chathamnc.org /planning under "Rezoning & Subdivision Cases Link, 2016 Cases ". We look forward to seeing you and hearing your comments at the meeting on January 10th. Please feel free to contact me at 919 - 593 -1916 or warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com if you have any questions prior to the meeting. Sincerely, Warren Mitchell 253 Tobacco Farm Way Chapel Hill, NC 27516 919 -593 -1916 warrendmitchellpe @email.com SUBDIVISION: 0 R. Cf A.N DIRECTIONS: TONS' 3 eo"AM 7744 T X40,— ,)'u13DIV)S10 N 129 Y P— Wt� Ar 52 DEVELOPER: .o Es Fna lzy -- _?� F TLL� YHONE NUMBER: 911- S1?3 -J 91 C,0 Major Development: Minor Develo meat: Development with acreage of 10 acreage of 10 acres or more: Proposed road names OIL to submit DUPLICATED 1A0(Z6A,N �L I l� Ca wp,� Do not Submit DATE SUBMITTED TO EOC: 8 Z 01 SUBMITTED BY:_ W A 1- M N N 1 T'4A ELL_ EOC OFFICER: DATE ROADS APPROVED: DATE FINAL PLAT RECEIVED: DATE GIVEN TO 911: DATE CONTACT MADE WITH NUMBERS: SURROUNDING COUNTY CONTACTED: PERSON SPOKEN WITH: COMMENTS: W:7.121 I a-Z ==-M Si�y.hY Otisw} 53 Technical Review Committee Comments Morgan Ridge Subdivision ( formerly Vista Grande Subdivision) Prepared by Warren D Mitchell PE August 16, 2017 1. Fire Chief —John Strowd: Can the existing pond be used as afire point/ waters upply? Chief Strowd and I met at the site to see the existing pond. Chief Strowd thought that the size and depth of the pond would make it unsuitable for a fire point. He stated that the fire department would not be interested in using it. 2. Drew Blake: Has the Corps of engineers reviewed the site and completed the Jurisdictional Determination yet? Did the Corps address the existing pond? The Corps wrote the JD letter on July 21. The existing pond is called out in the report at 'non- jurisdictional' which allows it to be filled in. 3. Planning: Connect the proposed road to adjacent property in the back / south side. Stream buffers can be included now in the lot area and count toward the minimum size lot. Add the proposed septic system forcemain easements to the first plat. The cul -de -sac radius should be 55 feet. Since the road enters in Orange County, which NCDOT office will address the driveway permit? What is the process in Orange County for the road approval? The subdivision road has been stubbed out to the rear property line. The stream buffer area has been added to the net lot area. The proposed septic system forcemain easements have been added to the plat. The cul -de -sac radius is called out. The NCDOT offices in Asheboro (Chatham County) and Graham (Orange County) will coordinate the approval. I have talked to both assistance District Engineers and both will review the plans. This situation is not uncommon and will be coordinated with both offices. I attached an email from Orange County Planning. The process will take a few months for review. 4. Env. Health Send the soil scientist's report to Thomas Boyce. Send the General Environmental Documentation report to Brian Burkhart. The soil scientist's report was sent to Thomas and the Env. Documentation report was sent to Brian. CHATHAM COUNTY NORTF1 CAROLINA Property Owner /Applicant: 54 Chatham County Planning Department 80 -A East Street P.O. Box 54, Pittsboro, NC 27312 -0054 Phone: 919 -542 -8204 Concept Plan Review Fee: $100.00 CONCEPT PLANREVIEWAPPLICATION Name: T° 1 e- -5 (=es pf-orer 11-'e5 L, .c Address: Z.2 -7- o Phone: (W) 3) 73 y © G S (H) (C) Fax: Email: W &f le )o !. ► o yd ,q Lt , c Wl" Who should staff contact (circle one)? Prope Representative (Surveyor, EnEtc.): Name: .W corm_- M,�I aAA Company Name: W A me -, D, v/ 4 e t l Q Address: 25-� i 3%�*L C C a Phone: (W) 7 c/3 91 G (C) Fax: Email: LU Ct rr-e n, d w .4- tie t S pe c e rty Owner /Applicant Consultant PROPOSAL Project Title: _\J! S Fch �1� o� �u b d ry.c Si�►'� Mixed -Use YES ❑ NO 1� Multi - Family (Townhomes, Apts., etc.) YES ❑ NO R- Proposed Number of Lots: Residential l If Other, Specify (i.e. recreation) Average Subdivision Lot Size (Acres) 3-a Number Lots Over 10 Acres Access Type PU % &A —A' C-O OF Commercial Other at Total Acreage 5�R ""- Disposal Type 5e t-? L- Water Source fwe // Will this be a Conservation Subdivision (See Section 7.7 of Subdivision Ordinance) YES ❑ NO 9 Will this Subdivision be Phased? YES ❑ NO AY- If Yes, how many Phases? Will this Subdivision have a Development Schedule (50 Lots or more)? YES ❑ When do you Expect Full Build -Out of this Subdivision (Year)? 2.0 /j3 p of Property Owner /Applicant 3 --- e - 1-7- Date 55 PROPERTY INFORMATION Parcel # (AKPAR): 141-13 Zoning District: R_ / Flood Map # /VyNr Zone: iJaN'= Watershed District: f�T o S. R. road name: jw_: ,Ga Will a Rezoning or Conditional Use Permit be Requested? YES ❑ NO PT- Has Property Been Timbered in Last 5 Years? YES ❑ NO ,% ._ If YES, what year? Is the Property Adjacent to Public Lands (i.e. State, County, Non - Profit or Federal) YES ❑ NO (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY) Is the Property Adjacent to any Voluntary Agricultural District(s) YES ❑ NO Environmental Features (Use County GIS [www.chathammis.com] to determine if features are present) Water Bodies (Rivers, Streams, Ponds, Lakes) YES )9� NO ❑ Wetlands YES �" NO ❑ Steep Slopes YES ❑ NO 0 Significant Natural Heritage Area (SNHA) YES ❑ NO Prime Farmland Soils YES ❑ NO Cemeteries YES ❑ NO Other known Historical Features (i.e. structures over 50 years in age) YES NO CI �Iou5r -E- 31 A-2NS Please Attach the Following: Vicinity Map showing the subject property, surrounding area, labels for access roads, and any water bodies on or near the property (available from www.chathamais.com) k List of Adjacent Property Owners (within 400 feet of subject property) for Community Meeting Notifications Draft Concept Plan (minimum 18 "x24" size) – This is a Horizontal plan giving a general overview of suggested layout(s) for development. If more than one plan is offered, it is suggested that at least one be a sustainable development plan with a conservation design incorporating Low Impact Development (LID) options. For Staff Use Only Date Received Date Fee Paid Date Review Completed By Received By Date Applicant Contacted For Questions, Contact Lynn Richardson, Subdivision Administrator (iynn.richardson@chathamnc.ors) or (919) 542 -8207 56 V 6-72.ANl� VV .IA) /V4 - t 2) Z-lc' � �r ,-h 0 S A, r/ k6oc 1� , t �r %�, co M �`�..��` Imo'_ �� t-•� G( 7l'�•Ph Q/.e ios © f �'i � � �� Gt�� -, 1 � c � •1 �-- fat' � ��_ js -fY6 I'll Le a �� �/��"1 off► w�� �5��° d.a� o �OPbf 7200 z> �� -�-,� ..�. �.. r s � F cc �' 1 -- �J w �22 � � n�ci� � � c.a►�, `� 1� - �� � -- 3Ss�- 3} A . Cow+ 57 WATERSHED PROTECTION DIVISION Environmental Quality Department CHATHAM COUNTY P.O. Box 548 NORTH CAROLINA Pittsboro, NC 27312 PHONE: (919) 545 -8394 Fax: (919) 542 -2698 • E -mail: drew.blake @chathamnc.org • Website: www.chathamnc.org December 22, 2017 Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA Mr. Steven Ball 8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 104 Raleigh, NC 27615 Project Name: Morgan Ridge Subdivision Parcel# 1443 Location: 4074 Jones Ferry Road, Chatham County Subject Features: Five 5) intermittent streams, one (1) perennial stream, and ten (10) wetlands Date of December 9, 2016 Determination: This letter is a revision to a previous confirmation letter issued on December 12, 2016. The original letter stated that the USACE completed an on -site review of the consultant's findings and concurred with all findings as depicted on the "Stream & Wetland Delineation Sketch Map" dated 6/22/16. This statement was based on information provided by David Gainey during the site visit completed by Chatham County personnel. Based on the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) and Approved Jurisdictional Determination (JD) dated July 21, 2017, Stream F was upgraded from ephemeral to intermittent by the USACE. The information below has been revised to reflect the PJD and JD that was provided to Chatham County for review on December 20, 2017. Explanation: The site visit was completed on December 9, 2016 by Drew Blake with Chatham County Environmental Quality and David Gainey of Soil and Environmental Consultants, PA (S &EC), on a 52.2 -acre property identified as Chatham County Parcel# 1443 that is located within the Jordan Lake watershed. S &EC personnel completed a previous site visit which resulted in the identification of one (1) ephemeral stream (stream F), four (4) intermittent streams (streams A, B, D & E), one (1) perennial stream (stream C), and ten (10) wetlands on the property. S &EC submitted a request for Chatham County to complete a formal review to determine if the features would be subject to riparian buffers according to Section 304 of the Chatham County Watershed Protection Ordinance. All points of origin, stream type transitions, and wetland boundaries were reviewed and agreed to in the field. Additionally, personnel from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) had previously completed an ,on -site review of the consultant's findings as depicted on the Stream & Wetland Delineation Sketch Map. A copy of the Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) and Approved JD was provided to Chatham County for review on December 20, 2017. The PJD was completed for Pond 1 and the feature was determined to be a "non - jurisdictional pond" and is shown encompassed by a yellow polygon on the Stream & Wetland Delineation Sketch Map, within the attached USACE Notification of Jurisdictional Determination. Pond 1 will not require a buffer as the pond is not located within a natural drainage way and is not fed by an intermittent or perennial stream nor directly discharges into an intermittent or perennial stream. Stream F n WATERSHED PROTECTION DIVISION Environmental Quality Department CHATHAM COUNTY P.O. Box 548 NOlt I CAROLINA Pittsboro, NC 27312 PHONE: (919) 545 -8394 Fax: (919) 542 -2698 • E -mail: drew.blake @chathamnc.org • Website: www.chathamnc.org was identified as ephemeral by S &EC and Chatham County; however, the USACE determined the feature to be an intermittent stream. Required Riparian Buffers: Streams A, B, D, E, and F will require a 50 -ft buffer from the top of bank landward on both sides of the features. Stream C will require a 100 -ft buffer from the top of bank landward on both sides of the features. All jurisdictional wetlands will require a 50 -ft buffer proceeding landward from the flagged wetland boundary. This on -site determination shall expire five (5) years from the date of this letter. Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by Chatham County, on parcels outside of the Jordan Lake watershed, may submit a request for appeal in writing to the Watershed Review Board. A request for a determination by the Watershed Review Board shall be made in accordance with Section 304 of the Chatham County Watershed Protection Ordinance. Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by Chatham County, on parcels inside the Jordan Lake watershed, shall submit a request for appeal in writing to NC DWR, 401 & Buffer Permitting Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27669 -1650 attention of the Director of the NC Division of Water Quality. Should this project result in any direct impacts to surface water features (i.e., crossing and /or filling streams or wetlands) additional reviews may be necessary. Additionally, a Section 404/401 Permit may be required. Any inquiries regarding Section 404/401 permitting should be directed to the Division of Water Resources (Central Office) at (919)- 807 -6364 and the US Army Corp of Engineers (Raleigh Regulatory Field Office) at (919) -554 -4884. Respectfully, l�uw At/le, Drew Blake Watershed Specialist Enclosures: USACE Notification of Jurisdictional Determination dated July 21, 2017 (provided by Warren Mitchell) cc: Rachael Thorn, Chatham County Watershed Protection Supervisor Lynn Richardson, Chatham County Subdivision Administrator Jason Sullivan, Chatham County Director of Planning Brian Burkhart, Chatham County Director of Environmental Quality 59 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT Action Id. SAW- 2017 -01482 County: Chatham U.S.G.S. Quad: Bynum NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION Property Owner /Applicant: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA Steven Ball Address: 8412 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 102 Raleigh. North Carolina 27615 Telephone Number: 919- 846 -5900 Size (acres) 52 (approximately) Nearest Waterway Meadow Branch USGS HUC 03030002 Nearest Town Chapel Hill River Basin Cape Fear Coordinates Latitude: 35.8651387440617 Longitude: - 79.1562090417338 Location description: The site is located approximately 750 feet northeast of the Jones Ferry Road, Storybook Farm Lane Road in Chatham County, North Carolina on Parcel Number 9757 -30 -5510. Both Approved and Preliminary jurisdictional determinations (JDs) were conducted at this site. The specific waters that were reviewed under the Approved JD are identified as follows: A single pond shown on the attached map as "Non Jurisdictional Pond" This feature is bounded by a yellow polygon (project area) approximately 1 acre in size. The specific waters that were reviewed under the Preliminary JD are as follows: Streams A,B,C,D,E and F. Wetlands W1, W2 W3 W4 WS W6 W7 W8 W9 W10 These 6 stream and 10 wetland features are also shown on the attached map and include all potential waters not reviewed under the approved JD. The project area for these waters are bounded by a red polygon (approximately 51 acres), excluding area bounded by the yellow polygon described above. Indicate Which of the Following Apply: A. Preliminary Determination X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and /or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and /or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an effective presumption of CWA /RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps. B. Approved Determination _ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. Page 1 of 2 Me SAW- 2017 -01482 _ There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. _ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps. _ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and /or RHA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years. _ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. X There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. _ The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at (252) 808 -2808 to determine their requirements. Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and /or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and /or 403). If you have any questions regarding this determination and /or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Thekla Spencer at (910) 251 -4802 or Thekla .M.Spencernusace.armv.mil. C. Basis For Determination: See the attached Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form and-the attached Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form D. Remarks: None E. Attention USDA Program Participants This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. The delineation /determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work. F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B. above) This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address: US Army Corps of Engineers South Atlantic Division Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer 61 SAW - 2017 -01482 60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 10M15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801 In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by September 18, 2017. * *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence. * * Digitally signed by WILLIAMS.ANDREW.E.1244561666 /) DN: c =US, Government, o . ou =PKI, ou= USAnWILLI AMSANDREW.E.1244 561665 Corps Regulatory Official: Date: 2017.07.21 16a0:47- 0400' Date: July 21, 2017 Expiration Date: July 21, 2022 (Approved JD) Does Not Expire (Preliminary JD) The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at http://corpsmapu.usace.army.mil/cm apex/f?p= 136:4:0. Copy Furnished: Warren Mitchell Jones Ferry Properties, LLC 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 W SAW - 2017 -01482 SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http: / /www.usace.army. mil / Missions/ CivilWorks/ RegulatoryProaramandPermits.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. o ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. ® OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit ® ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. ® APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: Steven Ball S &EC File Number: SAW- 2017 -01482 Date: July 21, 2017 Attached is: See Section below ❑ INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A ❑ PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B ❑ PERMIT DENIAL C ® APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D ZI PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http: / /www.usace.army. mil / Missions/ CivilWorks/ RegulatoryProaramandPermits.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. o ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. ® OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit ® ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. ® APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. 63 caw_7617_ni asz E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATIONt If you have questions regarding this decision and /or the If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may appeal process you may contact: also contact: District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer Attn: Thekla Spencer CESAD -PDO U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801 Phone: 404 562 -5137 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investi ations. Date: Telephone number: Signature of appellant or agent. For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to: Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD -PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 1OM15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801 Phone: (404) 562 -5137 MA 65 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: July 21, 2017 B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA (S &EC), Bob Zarzecki, 8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Raleigh, NC 27615 = Agent for Jones Ferry Properties LLC C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office; Mitchell, Warren/Jones Ferry Properties LLC, SAW- 2017 -01482 D. PROJECT LOCATIONS) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The site is located approximately 750 feet northeast of the Jones Ferry Road, Storybook Farm Lane Road, in Chatham County, North Carolina on Parcel Number 9757 -30 -5510. (USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND /OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES) State: NC County /parish /borough: Chatham City: N/A Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.: 35.865301° Long.:- 79.156074° Universal Transverse Mercator: Name of nearest waterbody: Meadow Branch E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): • Office (Desk) Determination. Date: July 21, 2017 • Field Determination. Date(s): May 09, 2016 (Cosultants); September 13, 2016 (Corps) TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEWAREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY JURISDICTION. Site Number Latitude (decimal degrees) Longitude (decimal degrees) Estimated amount of aquatic resources in review area (acreage and linear feet, if a licable Type of aquatic resources (i.e., wetland vs. non- wetland waters) Geographic authority to which the aquatic resource "may be" subject (i.e., Section 404 or Section 10/404 A 35.865483 - 79.15727 612 LF Riverine Section 404 B 35.866743 - 79.156344 742 LF Riverine Section 404 C 35.865301 - 79.156074 1,690 LF Riverine Section 404 D 35.864512 - 79.156157 221 LF Riverine Section 404 F 35.865723 - 79.157861 248 LF Riverine Section 404 W 1 35.866249 - 79.157918 0.122 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W2 35.865746 - 79.157917 0.006 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W3 35.865265 - 79.157579 0.067 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W4 35.864602 - 79.157198 0.058 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W5 35.86482 - 79.156762 0.028 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W6 35.864809 - 79.156383 0.354 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W7 35.864203 - 79.155397 0.057 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W8 35.865245 - 79.155807 0.647 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W9 35.866412 - 79.155725 0.055 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W10 35.867566 - 79.15726 0.034 Acres Palustrine Section 404 67 1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate. 2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and /or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information: M. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items: ® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor: Map: Sketch Mao ® Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requester. ® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report. ❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report. Rationale: ❑ 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: NC USGS Bynum Quad ® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Chatham County Soil Survey Sheet G1 National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Corps GIS data ❑ State /local wetland inventory map(s): ® FEMA/FIRM maps: Corps GIS data ❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) ® Photographs: ®A erial (Name & Date): Unnamed and undated provided by consultant or ❑Other (Name & Date): ❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: ® Other information (please specify):LiDAR, DEM, 2 foot contour digital data (Corps GIS data) IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corns and should not be relied upon for later iurisdictional determinations. Digitally signed by WI LLIAMSANDRE W.E.1244561655 A� /- 1 DN: c =US, o =U.S. Government, i�/ ou =DoD, ou= PKl,ou =USA, cn= W I W AMS.ANDREW.E.1 244561 65 5 Date: 2017.07.21 15:34:34 - 04'00' Signature and date of Regulatory staff member completing PJD Signature and date of person requesting PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is impracticable)' 1 Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action. M APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): July 21, 2017 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Mitchell, Warren /Jones Ferry Properties LLC, SAW- 2017 -01482 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The site is located approximately 750 feet northeast of the Jones Ferry Road, Storybook Farm Lane Road, in Chatham County, North Carolina on Parcel Number 9757 -30 -5510. State: North Carolina County /parish/borough: Chatham City: Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.8651387440617 °N, Long. - 79.15620904173380 W Universal Transverse Mercator: 17 666468.05 3970560.13 Name of nearest waterbody: Meadow Branch Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Haw, 03030002 ® 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: PJD form for all other waters on the site D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: July 21, 2017 ® Field Determination. Date(s): September 13, 2016 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no "navigable waters of 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 M "waters 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 U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): 1 ❑ TNWs, including territorial seas ❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs ❑ Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area: Non - wetland waters: linear feet, wide, and/or acres. Wetlands: acres. c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on. ME Elevation of established OHWM (if known): 2. 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: A single 0.5 acre (approximate) open water pond was evaluated. The environmental consultants for this project provided a report indicating that there was no apparent surface hydrologic connection from the pond to a stream located downslope and on the project site. The feature (pond) was determined to be an artificial pond created by excavating and /or diking dry land to collect and retain water. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally" (e.g., typically 3 months). 3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section HIT. -2- A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs 70 The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.I.; otherwise, see Section I11.11 below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Summarize rationale supporting determination: 2. Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent": B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round (perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section III.D.4. A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law. If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below. 1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) General Area Conditions: Watershed size: Pick List Drainage area: Pick List Average annual rainfall: inches Average annual snowfall: inches (ii) Physical Characteristics: (a) Relationship with TNW: ❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW. ❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW. Project waters are Pick List, river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW. Project waters are tick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW. Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: Identify flow route to TNWS: Tributary stream order, if known: (b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply): " 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. 71 -3- Tributary is: ❑ Natural ❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain: ❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain: Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate): Average width: feet Average depth: feet Average side slopes: Mrrlt_Iit. Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply): ❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete ❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck ❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover: ❑ Other. Explain: Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain: Tributary geometry: Pick List Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): % (c) Flow: Tributary provides for: Pick List Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:4lit Describe flow regime: Other information on duration and volume: Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings: ❑ Dye (or other) test performed: Tributary has (check all that apply): ❑ Bed and banks ❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply): ❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ❑ changes in the character of soil ❑ shelving ❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ❑ sediment deposition ❑ water staining ❑ other (list): ❑ Discontinuous OHWM 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 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 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 characteristics, etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants, if known: (iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply): ❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): ❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics: ❑ Habitat for: ❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings: 6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break. 'Ibid. 72 -4- ❑ 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: acres Wetland type. Explain: Wetland quality. Explain: Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: (b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW: Flow is: Pick List. Explain: Surface flow is: Pick List Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings: ❑ Dye (or other) test performed: (c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW: ❑ Directly abutting ❑ Not directly abutting ❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: ❑ Ecological connection. Explain: ❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: (d) Proximity Relationship to TNW Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW. Flow is from: Pick List. Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Wffi floodplain. (ii) Chemical Characteristics: Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed characteristics; etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants, if known: (iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply): ❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): ❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain: ❑ Habitat for: ❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings: ❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings: ❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings: ❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings: Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any) All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis. For each wetland, specify the following: Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres, Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size in acres) Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION 73 -s- A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus. Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example: • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or biological integrity of the TNW? Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented below: Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D: 2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: ❑ TNWs: linear feet, wide, 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 TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet wide. ❑ 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, wide. ❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. 'See Footnote # 3. 74 -6- ❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9 As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. ❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or ❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or ❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below). E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 10 ❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. ❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. ❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. ❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain: ❑ Other factors. Explain: Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet, wide. ❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: ❑ Wetlands: acres. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and /or appropriate Regional Supplements. ❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. ❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR). ❑ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: ® Other: (explain, if not covered above): See Section II.11.2 above. v To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Folloiving Rapanos. 75 -7- Provide acreage estimates for non- jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): ❑ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, wide. ❑ 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, wide. ❑ Lakes /ponds: acres. ❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: ❑ Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): ® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant: S &EC ❑ Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the applicant /consultant. ❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report. ❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ❑ Corps navigable waters' study: ® U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ® USGS NHD data. ❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. ® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24K; Bynum USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Chatham County 2006 ® National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Corps GIS Data (NWI) ❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s): ® FEMA/FIRM maps: Corps GIS data (FEMA Floodzones) ❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) ® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Unnamed and Undated provided by consultant 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): LiDAR, DEM and 2 foot contour (Chatham County) Corps GIS data B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: 1. September 2016 Consultants map indicates that the pond has no apparent surface (or subsurface) connection to the closest receiving stream downslope. 2. USGS map shows the pond but does not indicate any streams located in the immediate area. No stream symbols are located within the crenulations immediately downslope of the pond. 3. Soils map does not indicates a steam feature downslope of the pond. Shows smaller open water feature at this location, surrounded by soils (GaB) that are non- hydric and classified as well drained. 4. NWI map indicates only the pond. The Cowardin classification is: PUBHh (Palustrine /Unconsolidated Bottom/Permanently Flooded /diked). 5. Aerial photograph shows the pond feature. It does not provie any conclusive evidence of aquatic features, such as streams flowing into or exiting (upstream or downstream) of the pond. 7 FE MA floodmaps indicate the pond is located within zone X or outside of the 100 year floodzone. 8. Chatham County contour /LiDAR data indicates the pond is located in a relatively higher area than confirmed downslope waters. 9. No apparent hydrological surface or subsurface connection was observed during the site visit (16 September 2017). Appears to have constructed berm around most of the feature. 76 "iced �y KIP Ju . n saso North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Natural Heritage Program Governor Roy Cooper December 5, 2017 Warren Mitchell Jones Ferry Properties 104 Amber Wood Run Chapel Hill, NC 27516 RE: 4074 Jones Ferry Road Dear Warren Mitchell: 77 Secretary Susi H_ Hamilton NCNHDE -4808 The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) appreciates the opportunity to provide information about natural heritage resources for the project referenced above. A query of the NCNHP database, based on the project area mapped with your request, indicates that there are no records for rare species, important natural communities, natural areas, or conservation /managed areas within the proposed project boundary. Please note that although there may be no documentation of natural heritage elements within the project boundary, it does not imply or confirm their absence; the area may not have been surveyed. The results of this query should not be substituted for field surveys where suitable habitat exists. In the event that rare species are found within the project area, please contact the NCNHP so that we may update our records. The attached `Potential Occurrences' table summarizes rare species and natural communities that have been documented within a one -mile radius of the property boundary. The proximity of these records suggests that these natural heritage elements may potentially be present in the project area if suitable habitat exists and is included for reference. Tables of natural areas and conservation /managed area within a one -mile radius of the project area, if any, are also included in this report. Please note that natural heritage element data are maintained for the purposes of conservation planning, project review, and scientific research, and are not intended for use as the primary criteria for regulatory decisions. Information provided by the NCNHP database may not be published without prior written notification to the NCNHP, and the NCNHP must be credited as an information source in these publications. Maps of NCNHP data may not be redistributed without permission. The NC Natural Heritage Program may follow this letter with additional correspondence if a Dedicated Nature Preserve (DNP), Registered Heritage Area (RHA), Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) easement, or Federally - listed species are documented near the project area. If you have questions regarding the information provided in this letter or need additional assistance, please contact Rodney A. Butler at rodney.butler ncdcr.gov or 919.707.8603. Sincerely, NC Natural Heritage Program MAILING ADDRESS: Telephone: (919) 7D7 -8107 LOCATION: 1651 Mail Service Center wvnv.ncnhp.org 121 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27699 -1651 Raleigh, NC 27603 Natural Heritage Element Occurrences, Natural Areas, and Managed Areas Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area 4074 Jones Ferry Road December 5, 2017 NCNHDE -4808 Element Occurrences Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area Taxonomic EO ID Scientific Name Common Name Last Element Accuracy Federal State Global State Group Observation Occurrence Status Status Rank Rank Date Rank Butterfly 34564 Erynnis martialis Mottled Duskywing 1952 -07 -01 H 5 -Very - -- Significantly G3 S2 Low Rare Dragonfly or 33764 Somatochlora georgiana Coppery Emerald 2004 -Pre H? 5 -Very - -- Significantly G3G4 S2? Damselfly Low Rare Natural 25747 Dry Oak -- Hickory Forest - -- 2010 B 2 -High - -- - -- G4G5 S4 Community (Piedmont Subtype) Natural 25746 Piedmont Monadnock - -- 2010 B 2 -High - -- - -- G3G4 S3 Community Forest (Typic Subtype) Natural Areas Documented Within a One -mile Radius of the Project Area Site Name Representational Rating Collective Rating Terrells Mountain R5 (General) C5 (General) Managed Areas Documented Within a One mile Radius of the Project Area Managed Area Name Owner Owner Type Triangle Land Conservancy Preserve Triangle Land Conservancy Private Definitions and an explanation of status designations and codes can be found at httr) s:// ncnhde .natureserve.orq /content/help. Data query generated on December 5, 2017; source: NCNHP, Q4 October 2017. Please resubmit your information request if more than one year elapses before project initiation as new information is continually added to the NCNHP database. Page 2 of 3 NCNHDE -4808: 4074 Jones Ferry Road December 5, 2017 Project Boundary \' Managed Area (MAREA) Buffered Project Boundary Q Natural Heritage Element Occurrence (NHEO) ® NHP Natural Area (NHNA) Page 3 of 3 1:24,581 0 0.2 0.4 0.8 Ini 0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km Soumes: Esd, HERE, DeLorine. Iruermap, nw-t P Cop., GESCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoSasa, IGN, Kedastar NL, Ordnance Survey, Ead Japan, METI, Esd Chlna (Hong Kong), svowtopo, MapMIndia, ® OpenSte Wap conoibutx% and the GIS User Comunity 79 lgg December 5, 2017 Project Boundary \' Managed Area (MAREA) Buffered Project Boundary Q Natural Heritage Element Occurrence (NHEO) ® NHP Natural Area (NHNA) Page 3 of 3 1:24,581 0 0.2 0.4 0.8 Ini 0 0.325 0.65 1.3 km Soumes: Esd, HERE, DeLorine. Iruermap, nw-t P Cop., GESCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoSasa, IGN, Kedastar NL, Ordnance Survey, Ead Japan, METI, Esd Chlna (Hong Kong), svowtopo, MapMIndia, ® OpenSte Wap conoibutx% and the GIS User Comunity 79 80 8/16/2017 Gmail - Vista Grande � Q Vista Grande 1 message Jim and Bev Wiggins <jimerly @embargmail.com> To: Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @g mail. com> Cc: Lynn Richardson <lynn.richardson @chathamnc.org> Warren Mitchell < warrendmitchellpe@gmail.com> Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:17 PM Hi Warren- - Thanks again for meeting me at the site of Vista Grande today and showing me around. I'm copying this email to Lynn Richardson in the Planning Office so she'll know that I have visited the property. I got photographs of all of the structures for our records. I appreciate your offer to send me contact info for the previous owner so that I may see what more she might be able to tell me about the history of the property. I will do more deed research and will let you know if I turn up anything that you might find useful. I hope that you will explore the possibility that some of the large trees on your property might be worthy of recognition from the Grand Trees of Chatham organization. Such recognition could be beneficial, I think. I noted the large number of flowers near the house. In addition to daffodils, right now there are hellebores blooming. Perhaps you can use some of those plants somewhere in the development if they can't be left where they are. I think the big vine near the house might be wisteria. All show that someone in the family (probably some years ago, given the size of the vine and the spread of the other plants) took time to tend flowers. As we discussed, your plat indicates that the surveyor did not look for cemeteries on the property so I hope that you will be sensitive to the possibility that one could exist. Perhaps the previous owner will know where family members have been buried over the years. I will try to contact members of the Morgan family to locate the William Morgan burial site which is believed to be on the property to the east of yours. The goal of the Chatham County Historical Association is to preserve and share the history of the county. One way to do that is to save some of the stories about parcels such as yours. There are many ways to do that: • Saving some of the large trees and flowering plants and noting in your sales materials that these were associated with the Ivey (or ? ?) homestead. • Naming the subdivision and /or the roads after features of the previous owners or the property. After we've done some research, maybe we can suggest some possibilities if you are interested. I'm told that it is getting harder to come up with creative road names that haven't already been used in the county. • Reusing materials from the site - -such as using rocks from old chimneys (though yours seem to have already been repurposed) in walls or entryway structures - -or using old timbers from existing structures to build features for common areas - -can contribute to tying the new community to the past use of the land. • Using old photos of the homestead or brief stories about the family that lived there in your sales materials. https:// mail.google.com / mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver= diJsRESGZw4.en.& view= pt &q =bev &search = query&th =15b 127d5bbf399c3 &siml =15b 12... 1/2 81 8/16/2017 Gmail - Vista Grande All of these things save bits and pieces of Chatham's history and pass them along to new residents. CCHA will archive the photos I took and any info I can put together from my research and by talking to the previous owner. Please let me know if you discover any additional man -made features on the property as you begin work on it. One thing that I neglected to ask you about was old roads. If there are traces of any old wagon roads on the property I would really like to get coordinates so that we can map the old roads later. Since you'll likely be erasing the traces, this will be our only chance to know where the old roads ran. If you know of road traces please let me know so we can discuss this further. I'm happy to provide any information that I discover that might be of use to you. Best of luck with your project! Bev Wiggins CCHA Volunteer Jim and Beverly Wiggins jimerly @embarqmail.com https: / /mail. google.com/ mail /u /0 / ?u i= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver =d iJs RESGZw4.en.& view= pt &q =bev& search = query& th = l 5b 127d5bbf399c3 &sim1 =15b 12... 2/2 82 8/18/2017 Gmail - Chatham County Subdivision M Gmail Chatham County Subdivision Patrick R. Mallett <pmallett @orangecountync.gov> To: Warren Mitchell < warrendmitchellpe@g mail. com> Cc: Michael Harvey <mharvey @orangecountync.gov> Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com> Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 9:15 AM Enclosed are the full blown schedules.... What Michael and I have discussed is a more compressed /consolidated schedule that would include: NIM in September; Planning Board in October; and BOCC in November. Once the right -of -way is approved you'd then submit the mylar plat for recording. Can you get us plans and the application quickly? From: Warren Mitchell [mailto :warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 8:31 AM To: Patrick R. Mallett Cc: Michael Harvey [Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden] 2 attachments Major Subdivision - Preliminary Plat 2017 Calendar.pdf 90K Major Subdivision - Concept Plan 2017 Calendar.pdf 162K https: / /mail.google.com/ mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver= r7Nvl6ldd- 4.en.& view= pt &msg= 15deb2f807bc66d8 &q= pmallett %40orangecountync.go... 1/1 8/16/2017 Gmail - New Subdivision - School capacity mail Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com> New Subdivision - School capacity Randy Drumheller <randyd @chatham.k12.nc.us> Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:30 PM To: Warren Mitchell < warrendmitchellpe@gmail.com> Cc: Lynn Richardson <Lynn.Richardson @chathamnc.org> Thank you. On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @ gmail.com> wrote: Dear Randy: I attached a letter and plat map requesting capacity for a new 16 lot subdivision. Let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you, Warren Mitchell Randy Drumheller Director of Maintenance and Construction Chatham County Schools * ** *This Message was sent through the Chatham County Schools E -Mail Server * * ** All e -mail correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law, which may result in monitoring and disclosure to third parties, including law enforcement. https:llmail.google.com/ mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver= diJsRESGZw4.en.& view= pt &msg= 15dbdf7l6l ec118d &q= randyd %40chatham.kl2.nc.u... 1/1 84 12/22/2017 Gmail - Morgan Ridge Subdivision M Gmail Morgan Ridge Subdivision Rachael Thorn <rachael.thorn @chathamnc.org> To: Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @g mail. com> Cc: Lynn Richardson <lynn.richardson @chathamnc.org> I did and the submittal is complete and approved From: Warren Mitchell [mailto :warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 10:53 AM To: Rachael Thorn <rachael.thorn @chathamnc.org> Subject: Re: Morgan Ridge Subdivision Rachael: Warren Mitchell < warrendmitchellpe@gmail.com> Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 1:41 PM I wanted to ask if you received the revised Environmental Documentation for Morgan Ridge Subdivision? Lynn said that she only needs confirmation that you received the additional information from the Natural Heritage Program since no rare species were noted. Can you reply that you received it? Thank you! Warren On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Warren Mitchell <warrendm itch ell pe @g mail. com> wrote: Rachael: am sending you a revised General Environmental Documentation for Morgan Ridge Subdivision. You approved this back in October but we were delayed due to the septic system layouts so we did not submit the first plat then. Lynn and Jason thought it would be good for me to notify the Natural Heritage Program about evaluating our site for any rare species. Rodney Butler performed the evaluation and sent me the letter and map which I included at the back of the General Environmental Document. I changed my response to item #8 also. The last change I made was to include the latest copy of the subdivision plat. The layout is still the same except I revised the location of the future road extension at the far southern end of the project near the cul -de -sac. https: // mail.google.com / mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver =1 QCYKmIiAi4.en.& view= pt &msg= 1607014bee2a3a53 &search =inbox &dsqt =1 &simI= 160... 1/2 8/18/2017 Gmail - New/ possible road names ► ail Warren Mitchell < warrendmitchellpe@gmail.com> New / possible road names Denise Suits <denise.suits @chathamnc.org> Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:18 AM To: Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com> Good Morning Warren, I apologize it took so long but I was out yesterday and just got the email back late Friday afternoon. The only ones that can be used are Morgan View Lane, Morgan Ridge Way and Morgan Valley Run. We prefer you only use one of those since they all start with Morgan it is easy to get them confused if they are all used for one subdivision. Thanks, Denise From: Warren Mitchell [mailto :warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 10:01 AM To: Denise Suits Cc: Lesa Chavis Subject: Re: New / possible road names Denise: Did you get an answer back from Orange County on these road names? Thank you, Warren Mitchell On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:06 PM, Warren Mitchell <warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com> wrote: It is located on the east side of the road and the land touches Orange County. Just north of Storybook lane. On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Denise Suits <denise.suits @chathamnc.org> wrote: https: // mail.google.com / mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver =r7Nvl 61dd- 4.en.& view= pt& msg= 15de64249fe54b8b &q= Denise.suits %40chathamnc. org... 1/2 86 8/18/2017 Gmail - New/ possible road names Hey, Can you advise where this will be off of Jones Ferry Rd? I may have to check with Orange County also. Thanks, Denise From: Warren Mitchell [ mailto :warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, August 07, 2017 2:23 PM To: Lesa Chavis; Denise Suits Subject: New / possible road names Lesa and Denise: I am working on a proposed subdivision off of Jones Ferry Road. Can you tell me if these road names look acceptable for a proposed public road? Ivey Lane Ivey Place Ivey Path Ivey Way Willa Way Morgan View Lane Morgan Ridge Way Morgan Valley Run Thank you! Warren Mitchell https:H mail. google. com / mail /u /0 / ?ui= 2 &ik= 6e3deabb34 &jsver= r7Nvl6ldd- 4.en.& view= pt &msg= 15de64249fe54 b8b& q= Denise. suits %40chathamnc.org... 2/2 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT Action Id. SAW- 2017 -01482 County: Chatham U.S.G.S. Quad: Bynum NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION Property Owner /Applicant: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA Steven Ball Address: 8412 Falls of Neuse Road Suite 102 Raleigh, North Carolina 27615 Telephone Number: 919 - 846 -5900 Size (acres) 52 (approximately) Nearest Waterway Meadow Branch USGS HUC 03030002 Nearest Town Chapel Hill River Basin Cape Fear Coordinates Latitude: 35.8651387440617 Longitude: - 79.1562090417338 Location description: The site is located approximately 750 feet northeast of the Jones Ferry Road, Storybook Farm Lane Road, in Chatham County, North Carolina on Parcel Number 9757 -30 -5510. Both Approved and Preliminary iurisdictional determinations (JDs) were conducted at this site. The specific waters that were reviewed under the Approved JD are identified as follows: A sinele pond shown on the attached map as "Non Jurisdictional Pond ". This feature is bounded by a yellow yolyeon (project area) approximately 1 acre in size. The specific waters that were reviewed under the Preliminary JD are as follows: Streams A,B,C,D,E and F; Wetlands W1, W2 W3 W4 WS W6, W7, W8, W9, W10. These 6 stream and 10 wetland features are also shown on the attached map and include all potential waters not reviewed under the approved JD. The proiect area for these waters are bounded by a red polygon (approximately 51 acres), excluding area bounded by the yellow polygon, described above. Indicate Which of the Following Apply: A. Preliminary Determination X There are waters, including wetlands, on the above described project area, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and /or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). The waters, including wetlands, have been delineated, and the delineation has been verified by the Corps to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. Therefore this preliminary jurisdiction determination may be used in the permit evaluation process, including determining compensatory mitigation. For purposes of computation of impacts, compensatory mitigation requirements, and other resource protection measures, a permit decision made on the basis of a preliminary JD will treat all waters and wetlands that would be affected in any way by the permitted activity on the site as if they are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331). However, you may request an approved JD, which is an appealable action, by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. _ There are wetlands on the above described property, that may be subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344) and /or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403). However, since the waters, including wetlands, have not been properly delineated, this preliminary jurisdiction determination may not be used in the permit evaluation process. Without a verified wetland delineation, this preliminary determination is merely an effective presumption of CWA /RHA jurisdiction overall of the waters, including wetlands, at the project area, which is not sufficiently accurate and reliable to support an enforceable permit decision. We recommend that you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps. B. Approved Determination There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 USC § 403) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. Page 1 of 2 SAW- 2017 -01482 _ There are waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. _ We recommend you have the waters of the U.S. on your property delineated. As the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner, you may wish to obtain a consultant to conduct a delineation that can be verified by the Corps. _ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, on your project area have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the Corps. If you wish to have the delineation surveyed, the Corps can review and verify the survey upon completion. Once verified, this survey will provide an accurate depiction of all areas subject to CWA and /or RHA jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years. _ The waters of the U.S., including wetlands, have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on . Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. X There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described project area which are subject to the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification. The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Morehead City, NC, at (252) 808 -2808 to determine their requirements. Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US, including wetlands, without a Department of the Army permit may constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). Placement of dredged or fill material, construction or placement of structures, or work within navigable waters of the United States without a Department of the Army permit may constitute a violation of Sections 9 and/or 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC § 401 and /or 403). If you have any questions regarding this determination and /or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Thekla Spencer at (910) 251 -4802 or Thekla.M.Snencer(iDusace.armv.mil. C. Basis For Determination: See the attached Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Form and the attached Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form D. Remarks: None E. Attention USDA Program Participants This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, prior to starting work. F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in B. above) This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. Enclosed you will find a Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address: US Army Corps of Engineers South Atlantic Division Attn: Jason Steele, Review Officer M SAW- 2017 -01482 60 Forsyth Street SW, Room 1OM15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801 In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP. Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by September 18, 2017. * *It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this correspondence.** Digitally signed by WILLIAMSANDREW.E.1244561655 DN:c= US,o= WIL Government, o E.1244 61655, ou= USA ,cn= WILLIAMSANDREW.E.1244561655 Corps Regulatory Official: Date: 2017.07.21 16:20:47- 000' Date: July 21, 2017 Expiration Date: July 21, 2022 (Approved JD) Does Not Expire (Preliminary JD) The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to do so, please complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey, located online at http : / /corpsmapu.usace.army.mil /cm apex/Pp= 136:4:0. Copy Furnished: Warren Mitchell Jones Ferry Properties, LLC 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 .I SAW - 2017 -01482 SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http:// www. usace. army.mil/Missions /CivilWorks /Re ug latoryProgramandPermits.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. NOTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: Steven Ball S &EC File Number: SAW- 2017 -01482 Date: July 21, 2017 Attached is: See Section below ❑ INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A ❑ PROFFERED PERMIT Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B ❑ PERMIT DENIAL C ZI APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D X1 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I - The following identifies your rights and options regarding an administrative appeal of the above decision. Additional information may be found at http:// www. usace. army.mil/Missions /CivilWorks /Re ug latoryProgramandPermits.aspx or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331. A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below. B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section 11 of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the district engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. 91 cnw- 7n17-n1es7 E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION: If you have questions regarding this decision and /or the If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may appeal process you may contact: also contact: District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division, Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Review Officer Attn: Thekla Spencer CESAD -PDO U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801 Phone: 404 562 -5137 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investi at ions. Date: Telephone number: Signature of appellant or agent. For Permit denials, Proffered Permits and approved Jurisdictional Determinations send this form to: Division Engineer, Commander, U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic, Attn: Mr. Jason Steele, Administrative Appeal Officer, CESAD -PDO, 60 Forsyth Street, Room 10M15, Atlanta, Georgia 30303 -8801 Phone: (404) 562 -5137 WA 93 PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (PJD) FORM BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR PJD: July 21, 2017 B. NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERSON REQUESTING PJD: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA (S &EC), Bob Zarzecki, 8412 Falls of Neuse Road, Raleigh, NC 27615 = Agent for Jones Ferry Properties LLC C. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office; Mitchell, Warren/Jones Ferry Properties LLC, SAW - 2017 -01482 D. PROJECT LOCATIONS) AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The site is located approximately 750 feet northeast of the Jones Ferry Road, Storybook Farm Lane Road, in Chatham County, North Carolina on Parcel Number 9757 -30 -5510. (USE THE TABLE BELOW TO DOCUMENT MULTIPLE AQUATIC RESOURCES AND /OR AQUATIC RESOURCES AT DIFFERENT SITES) State: NC County /parish /borough: Chatham City: N/A Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat.: 35.865301° Long.:- 79.156074° Universal Transverse Mercator: Name of nearest waterbody: Meadow Branch E. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): • Office (Desk) Determination. Date: July 21, 2017 • Field Determination. Date(s): May 09, 2016 ( Cosultants); September 13, 2016 (Corps) TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES IN REVIEW AREA WHICH "MAY BE" SUBJECT TO REGULATORY JURISDICTION. Site Number Latitude (decimal degrees) Longitude (decimal degrees) Estimated amount of aquatic resources in review area (acreage and linear feet, if a licable Type of aquatic resources (i.e., wetland vs. non- wetland waters) Geographic authority to which the aquatic resource "may be" subject (i.e., Section 404 or Section 10/404 A 35.865483 - 79.15727 612 LF Riverine Section 404 B 35.866743 - 79.156344 742 LF Riverine Section 404 C 35.865301 - 79.156074 1,690 LF Riverine Section 404 D 35.864512 - 79.156157 221 LF Riverine Section 404 F 35.865723 - 79.157861 248 LF Riverine Section 404 W1 35.866249 - 79.157918 0.122 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W2 35.865746 - 79.157917 0.006 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W3 35.865265 - 79.157579 0.067 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W4 35.864602 - 79.157198 0.058 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W5 35.86482 - 79.156762 0.028 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W6 35.864809 - 79.156383 0.354 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W7 35.864203 - 79.155397 0.057 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W8 35.865245 - 79.155807 0.647 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W9 35.866412 - 79.155725 0.055 Acres Palustrine Section 404 W10 35.867566 - 79.15726 0.034 Acres Palustrine Section 404 95 1) The Corps of Engineers believes that there may be jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, and the requestor of this PJD is hereby advised of his or her option to request and obtain an approved JD (AJD) for that review area based on an informed decision after having discussed the various types of JDs and their characteristics and circumstances when they may be appropriate. 2) In any circumstance where a permit applicant obtains an individual permit, or a Nationwide General Permit (NWP) or other general permit verification requiring "pre- construction notification" (PCN), or requests verification for a non - reporting NWP or other general permit, and the permit applicant has not requested an AJD for the activity, the permit applicant is hereby made aware that: (1) the permit applicant has elected to seek a permit authorization based on a PJD, which does not make an official determination of jurisdictional aquatic resources; (2) the applicant has the option to request an AJD before accepting the terms and conditions of the permit authorization, and that basing a permit authorization on an AJD could possibly result in less compensatory mitigation being required or different special conditions; (3) the applicant has the right to request an individual permit rather than accepting the terms and conditions of the NWP or other general permit authorization; (4) the applicant can accept a permit authorization and thereby agree to comply with all the terms and conditions of that permit, including whatever mitigation requirements the Corps has determined to be necessary; (5) undertaking any activity in reliance upon the subject permit authorization without requesting an AJD constitutes the applicant's acceptance of the use of the PJD; (6) accepting a permit authorization (e.g., signing a proffered individual permit) or undertaking any activity in reliance on any form of Corps permit authorization based on a PJD constitutes agreement that all aquatic resources in the review area affected in any way by that activity will be treated as jurisdictional, and waives any challenge to such jurisdiction in any administrative or judicial compliance or enforcement action, or in any administrative appeal or in any Federal court; and (7) whether the applicant elects to use either an AJD or a PJD, the JD will be processed as soon as practicable. Further, an AJD, a proffered individual permit (and all terms and conditions contained therein), or individual permit denial can be administratively appealed pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Part 331. If, during an administrative appeal, it becomes appropriate to make an official determination whether geographic jurisdiction exists over aquatic resources in the review area, or to provide an official delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources in the review area, the Corps will provide an AJD to accomplish that result, as soon as is practicable. This PJD finds that there "may be" waters of the U.S. and /or that there "may be" navigable waters of the U.S. on the subject review area, and identifies all aquatic features in the review area that could be affected by the proposed activity, based on the following information: M. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for PJD (check all that apply) Checked items should be included in subject file. Appropriately reference sources below where indicated for all checked items: ® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor: Map: Sketch Map ® Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the PJD requestor. ® Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report. ❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report. Rationale: ❑ 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: NC USGS Bynum Quad ® Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Chatham County Soil Survey Sheet G1 ®.National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Corps GIS data ❑ State /local wetland inventory map(s): ® FEMA/FIRM maps: Corps GIS data ❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) ® Photographs: ®A erial (Name & Date): Unnamed and undated provided by consultant or ❑Other (Name & Date): ❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter: ® Other information (please specify):LiDAR, DEM, 2 foot contour digital data (Corps GIS data) IMPORTANT NOTE: The information recorded on this form has not necessarily been verified by the Corps and should not be relied upon for later iurisdictional determinations. Signature and date of Regulatory staff member completing PJD Signature and date of person requesting PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is impracticable)' I Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action. Digitally signed by WILLIAMS.ANDRE W.E.1244561655 DN:aUS,o =U.S. Gu=USA, nt, ou =DOD, ou =PKl, ou =USA, ,n =W ILLIAMS.ANDREW.E.1244561655 Date: 2017.07.21 15:34:34 - 04'00' Signature and date of Regulatory staff member completing PJD Signature and date of person requesting PJD (REQUIRED, unless obtaining the signature is impracticable)' I Districts may establish timeframes for requester to return signed PJD forms. If the requester does not respond within the established time frame, the district may presume concurrence and no additional follow up is necessary prior to finalizing an action. 97 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD): July 21, 2017 B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: Wilmington District, Mitchell, Warren /Jones Ferry Properties LLC, SAW- 2017 -01482 C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The site is located approximately 750 feet northeast of the Jones Ferry Road, Storybook Farm Lane Road, in Chatham County, North Carolina on Parcel Number 9757 -30 -5510. State: North Carolina County /parish borough: Chatham City: Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.8651387440617 °N, Long. - 79.15620904173380 W Universal Transverse Mercator: 17 666468.05 3970560.13 Name of nearest waterbody: Meadow Branch Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): Haw, 03030002 • 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: PJD form for all other waters on the site D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ® Office (Desk) Determination. Date: July 21, 2017 ® Field Determination. Date(s): September 13, 2016 SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There �" "navigable waters of 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 KNp "waters 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 U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): r ❑ TNWs, including territorial seas ❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs ❑ Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area: Non - wetland waters: linear feet, wide, and/or acres. Wetlands: acres. c. Limits boundaries of jurisdiction based on (boundaries) J Elevation of established OHWM (if known): 2. Non - regulated waters /wetlands (check if applicable):3 ® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: A single 0.5 acre (approximate) open water pond was evaluated. The environmental consultants for this project provided a report indicating that there was no apparent surface hydrologic connection from the pond to a stream located downslope and on the project site. The feature (pond) was determined to be an artificial pond created by excavating and /or diking dry land to collect and retain water. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. x 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). ' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F. -2- A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs ..* The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete Section IILA.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Summarize rationale supporting determination: Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent ": B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY): This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met. The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non- navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3 months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round (perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow, skip to Section III.D.4. A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law. If the waterbody4 is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below. 1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW (i) General Area Conditions: Watershed size: Pick List Drainage area: Pick List Average annual rainfall: inches Average annual snowfall: inches (ii) Physical Characteristics: (a) Relationship with TNW: ❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW. ❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW. Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Vick List, river miles from RPW. Project waters are Pick List, aerial (straight) miles from TNW Project waters are Pick List, aerial (straight) miles from RPW. Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: Identify flow route to TNW5: Tributary stream order, if known: (b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply): " Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and West. s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW. M -3- Tributary is: ❑ Natural ❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain: ❑ Manipulated (man - altered). Explain: Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate): Average width: feet Average depth: feet Average side slopes: kh k =t. Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply): ❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete ❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck ❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type /% cover: ❑ Other. Explain: Tributary condition /stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain: Presence of run/riffle /pool complexes. Explain: Tributary geometry: Pick List Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): % (c) Flow: Tributary provides for: Pick List Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Fick List Describe flow regime: Other information on duration and volume: Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings: ❑ Dye (or other) test performed: Tributary has (check all that apply): ❑ Bed and banks ❑ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply): ❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ❑ changes in the character of soil ❑ shelving ❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ❑ sediment deposition ❑ water staining ❑ other (list): ❑ Discontinuous OHWM.1 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 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 characteristics, etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants, if known: (iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply): ❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width): ❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics: ❑ Habitat for: ❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings: 6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break. 7 Ibid. 100 -4- ❑ 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: acres Wetland type. Explain: Wetland quality. Explain: Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain: (b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW: Flow is: Pick List. Explain: Surface flow is: Pick List Characteristics: Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings: ❑ Dye (or other) test performed: (c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non -TNW: ❑ Directly abutting ❑ Not directly abutting ❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain: ❑ Ecological connection. Explain: ❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain: (d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW Project wetlands are pick List river miles from TNW. Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW. Flow is from: Pick List Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain. (ii) Chemical Characteristics: Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed characteristics; etc.). Explain: Identify specific pollutants, if known: (iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply): ❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width): ❑ Vegetation type /percent cover. Explain: ❑ Habitat for: ❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings: ❑ Fish /spawn areas. Explain findings: ❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings: ❑ Aquatic /wildlife diversity. Explain findings: 3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any) All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List Approximately acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis. For each wetland, specify the following: Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed: C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION 101 -s- A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW. Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus. Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example: • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that support downstream foodwebs? • Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or biological integrity of the TNW? Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented below: 1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D: 2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D: D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECI{ ALL THAT APPLY): 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: ❑ TNWs: linear feet, wide, 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 TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet wide. ❑ 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, wide. ❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. 'See Footnote # 3. 102 -6- ❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III. C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9 As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. ❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or ❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or ❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below). E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE, DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):` ❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes. ❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce. ❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce. ❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain: ❑ Other factors. Explain: Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet, wide. ❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s) of waters: ❑ Wetlands: acres. F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. ❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce. ❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the "Migratory Bid 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): See Section II.B.2 above. To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Mentoranduin Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapunos. 103 -7- Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional judgment (check all that apply): ❑ Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, wide. ❑ 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, wide. ❑ Lakes /ponds: acres. ❑ Other non- wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: ❑ Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked and requested, appropriately reference sources below): ® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/eonsultant: S &EC ❑ Data sheets prepared /submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. ❑ Office concurs with data slieets /delineation report. ❑ Office does not concur with data sheets /delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ❑ Corps navigable waters' study: ® U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ® USGS NHD data. ❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. ® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24K; Bynum ® USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation: Chatham County 2006 ® National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: Corps GIS Data (NWI) ❑ State /Local wetland inventory map(s): ® FEMA/FIRM maps: Corps GIS data (FEMA Floodzones) ❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) ® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date): Unnamed and Undated provided by consultant 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): LiDAR, DEM and 2 foot contour (Chatham County) Corps GIS data B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: 1. September 2016 Consultants map indicates that the pond has no apparent surface (or subsurface) connection to the closest receiving stream downslope. 2. USGS map shows the pond but does not indicate any streams located in the immediate area. No stream symbols are located within the crenulations immediately downslope of the pond. 3. Soils map does not indicates a steam feature downslope of the pond. Shows smaller open water feature at this location, surrounded by soils (GaB) that are non- hydric and classified as well drained. 4. NWI map indicates only the pond. The Cowardin classification is: PUBHh (Palustrine /Unconsolidated Bottom/Permanently Flooded /diked). 5. Aerial photograph shows the pond feature. It does not provie any conclusive evidence of aquatic features, such as streams flowing into or exiting (upstream or downstream) of the pond. 7. FEMA floodmaps indicate the pond is located within zone X or outside of the 100 year floodzone. 8. Chatham County contour/L,iDAR data indicates the pond is located in a relatively higher area than confirmed downslope waters. 9. No apparent hydrological surface or subsurface connection was observed during the site visit (16 September 2017). Appears to have constructed berm around most of the feature. 104 Patrick R. Mallett From: Richardson, Justin T < jtrichardson @ncdot.gov> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 9:54 AM To: Patrick R. Mallett Cc: Jones, DeAngelo J; Chuck Edwards Contact; Kitchen, Matthew W Subject: RE: [External] FW: Additional comments for the December 21, 2017 meeting Patrick, Thanks for contacting our office on this matter, at this time there are no planned projects for this section of roadway. Feel free to direct any questions or concerns pertaining to this project. Thanks Justin Richardson Assistant District Supervisor Division 8- District 1 336 318 4000 office 336 318 4010 fax jtrichardson@ncdot.gov P.O. Box 1164 300 DOT Drive Asheboro, North Carolina 27205 -1164 s X5 i From: Patrick R. Mallett [ mailto :pmallett @orangecountync.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 9:38 AM To: Richardson, Justin T < jtrichardson @ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, DeAngelo J <djjonesl @ncdot.gov >; Edwards, Charles N <cnedwards @ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] FW: Additional comments for the December 21, 2017 meeting CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to report.spam @nc.sov. Justin, See attached and below. WRT the Morgan Ridge Subdivision. My understanding that your office will take the lead on this one since most of the proposed road is in Chatham County. Just checking to make sure there are no issues on your end, and to confirm there are not any planned or funded bike lane or other improvements at this time ... Please call or e-mail if you'd like to discuss in greater detail. Very Respectfully, 105 Patrick R. Mallett, Planner II Orange County Planning & Inspections Department Phone: (919) 245 -2577 Fax: (919) 644 -3022 E -mail: pmallett @orangecountync.gov Orange County Planning Website: http: / /www.orangecountVnc.gov Address 131 W. Margaret Lane, Suite 201 P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 132, correspondence sent and received from this account is a public record and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Abigaile Pittman Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 5:02 PM To: Molly Boyle Cc: Michael Harvey; Tom Altieri; Craig Benedict; Chuck Edwards Contact; Elaina Cheek Subject: Additional comments for the December 21, 2017 meeting Molly, I have some late comments for the December 21St meeting (see attached). The holiday days delayed my comments. My apologies. You advised me this morning that you could still accept these comments. On page 4 of the meeting notes pertaining to the Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat for Morgan Ridge, please delete bullet 4 that references a comment I made before the meeting. Rather, please insert the following comment: "The applicant and developer are advised that Jones Ferry Road is included in the adopted Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) prepared by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Orange County (October, 2013). While there is no immediate project planned for Jones Ferry Road, the road is designated as a Minor Thoroughfare in need of on -road bicycle improvements. Projects in an adopted CTP have the potential over time of gaining potential funding and then being included in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) for the planning jurisdiction in which they are included, which in this case is the Triangle Area Regional Planning Organization (TARPO). Through a project prioritization process, projects in the MTP have the potential of future inclusion in the State's Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). While at this time there are NO AVAILABLE PLANS for bicycle improvements on Jones Ferry Road, such improvements can vary from widened road shoulders to additional right -of -way for the development of bike lanes." Please contact me should you have any questions. Regards, HE Abigaile Pittman, AICP Planner —Transportation and Land Use Orange County Planning Department 131 W. Margaret Lane, Suite 201 P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Phone: (919) 245 -2567 Fax: (919) 644 -3002 http: / /www.orangecountync.,qov abpittman , - orangecountync.gov ORANGE COUNTY NOW11-1a C,►EtaiANA From: Molly Boyle Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2018 12:40 PM To: DAC Subject: Next DAC Meeting: Thursday, January 4th Hello DAC members, I hope everyone had a nice holiday break! Attached please find the agenda for our meeting, which is this Thursday, January 4t" at 9:30 am. I've also attached the notes from our last meeting. You can access the supporting documents for this week's meeting using the following pathway: T: \Orange County Planning - Development Advisory Committee (DAC) Meeting Folder \January 4, 2018 Happy New Year! Molly Boyle, MPA Planner I Orange County Planning & Inspections (919) 245 -2599 ORANGE COUNTY NOX-f H CAROLINA Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 132, correspondence sent and received from this account is a public record and may be disclosed to third parties. Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. 107 Patrick R. Mallett From: Chuck Edwards Contact Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 9:51 AM To: Patrick R. Mallett; Richardson, Justin T Cc: Jones, DeAngelo J; Kitchen, Matthew W Subject: RE: [External] FW: Additional comments for the December 21, 2017 meeting Attachments: Morgan Ridge - Preliminary Plan - Orange County 12.13.17.pdf; Morgan Ridge Chatham County FIRST PLAT 12.22.17.pdf Pat and Justin, Given that the proposed subdivision is almost exclusively in Chatham County, I believe that review and approval is best handled by the Division 8, District 1 Office. I have visited the site and am comfortable with the proposed access location. I am not aware of any funded improvement project on Jones Ferry Road in Orange County that would require coordination with the proposed development. Please advise if we can be of further assistance. Charles N. Edwards Jr., PE (Chuck) District Engineer N. C. Department of Transportation Division of Highways Division 7, District 1 336 570 6833 cnedwards(a)ncdot.gov 115 East Crescent Square Drive P. O. Box 766 Graham, NC 27253 Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. From: Patrick R. Mallett [ mailto :pmallett @orangecountync.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 9:38 AM To: Richardson, Justin T <jtrichardson @ncdot.gov> Cc: Jones, DeAngelo J <djjonesl @ncdot.gov >; Edwards, Charles N <cnedwards @ncdot.gov> Subject: [External] FW: Additional comments for the December 21, 2017 meeting CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless verified. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to report.spam@nc.Rov. Justin, See attached and below. WRT the Morgan Ridge Subdivision. My understanding that your office will take the lead on this one since most of the proposed road is in Chatham County. Just checking to make sure there are no issues on your end, and to Morgan Ridge Preliminary Plat / � ', J A�, e�-� 1° GCORGC'N, OARRC77 AKPAH 139/ PJ.4'9756- 2994,23 OR 169) PG: 0251 srR I gS I � I?a' tsN OFFSET CUL-DE-SAC ,r ! r ! ! , r ! v� ! i ', ` `. � �� ` �`.�`. \• �♦ ♦` \ � i ' yr+ / �- , ,\ \ `` \�' ` �` �\ ♦``.`, \ \ \ \\ �` T.; \�� 11 it i Jar 1: 26 l� "2:©AC— � f r � .•s, '^ r - -gip 1a _ / , 144A if i i )Cbt 10 I / ! of I C,� / I ! 1 -� • -- - - -- } �'ti.W ' /' /' i J' 'II ! r J f / 1 J / j !% / !'% /!% ' / �! !! j I � / ,/ ♦ Ji +,rte- �.�yr^"'.. I , I 1 t 1 1 1 1 J J AR`60M '- `�♦ ♦ `� 1I11I1\if,Rk ,dl S7•J`Jf _" •�� \` \ `. ti'.+,�J�,,,' / I /•�_'.. -M._ / ! / 1 1 111 0, +111 1 IbH, I f "'♦ 1 \ �� . -�'•.i % i ,"�_. - -_ - -_ �/i ,! J i 1 1 I i f � 111 l � IG:OiDB 1 1 / t -� ` � \ �♦ ', -- ..�'i ,l ,ji .•-�.....� 'r/ i ,! i j i 1 j 1 t j 1 1 1 l 1 j 1 1 1 ! `! !' 1 ♦`vl i's I 1 � 1 1 ♦ ♦-'I ! � `♦ N 500 foot offset boundary 1 1 I \ 1 DREES COMPANY DREES COMPANY \ \ PIN 9757-31-3138 PIN 9757 -21 -9104 6051 DB 6051 1 DB 6051 I 1 \ PG 226 PG 226 , \ EVERETT PROPERTIES pt / 1 , �� / ' / , I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP DB.896 P.586 /, (ORANGE CO. REGISTRY) CD BEVERLYMORGAN DICKERSON X4-1- - - -?` AKPAR 81608 -- PIN 9757 /' �' ''% / / /, ol�Ymi �^' -- -- - ---- -- ' - 1 N 11m1 , �� /•'' - _ ------ _ - -- - � • / ' - -\ , \`` `` - -- --- --- i `� I' I - -- - -- - - ./ ' tangle esmt. ,' ` - -- -- \ Hatched area will be r �� 1 �/� %T f= / I•I I\ \ 19 -6` , m. Community / HOA CURTIS T. and CELESTINE R, i' owned roe used - PIN 9757 -30 -6.827 MAIL I property rtY - DB B6 owned �2 �" for mail kiosk, sign PG 35 / KIOSK W and landscaping. Slp 5.26ACRES GLORIA P AND DALE D _ I ` ` FAULKNER vs p9 1 ` (1 l ' -- 1$ I I i ' au izi ' AKPAR 1367 - -'- - ' ' / I 69 / i i ( i / PIN 9757 -20 -2815 - -' -- / 56859 f / ( l S Lot 1 t ,._ , / ✓ 50 1- jurisdictional` — J I G \,, T` wetland buffer DB: 892 1.95 AC l ;_ PG: 0909 i NGS Mon. "Terrell" -- -- _ f /., , r i ,,.:� I. - ^ ^ .,Qeginningof Grid Coordinates: , - �^ r I Proposed Morgan Ridge Way `� ; ° Intelmilil / N-770733 11 1 /J r r , - ^ -- - J r r 50' Public R/W •� Stream ___� E:1952689.26 � tq f ( I r ` - -- - - - - -- -- 0.51 Ac I (� i o� .. `, /� ,Y Lot 6 / J / ' I - 2.9AC / __- - --- -- fsel5tjc field) f i ♦ i ? / - - ---------- Lot L t4e' �I Lott / ------------ °�� ' 0-' 0.42 #C e1 ' 1.5 AC l 1 -` - f - - -- / - - - -- (septiq'field) off j (1 I % �` t ♦♦ �r --.�` / ROBERT AND TANITH KIRKLEY _ _ -_ X ~`.� `. �` ♦ ' ��r / JONES FERRY PROPERTIES, LLG^ OR 1792 P.655 ^�� - -- - -= DB. P. -------- �`• ``\ `• � � ` � Nr \ PB.28 P.92 ^ O� 2��• ` ` ' `` ,�` Hours ``� `\` `�` \``� 'QO♦ PIN 9757 -30 -5510 %. ` (CHATHAM CO. REGISTRY) �6 "' -- (CHATHAM CO. REGISTRY) \ //�� \ (57(51 ABAND9NED `�` \ V�� / \ ``� ,``� HOUSE / JOHN S. HUDSON, III % / \ \, DB.876 P.856 0 50 ft. �t�_ "' '`, \ �` ; \ �♦ • ' LOT2A 1• jurisdictional �T., j �` ^ ^ ^�Q '000 �/` •1 ` wetland buffer G PB.96 P. 122 \ ox (CHATHAM CO. REGISTRY) Exist. Pond / ® Lot 5 --.® a ABANDONED 5.5 AC ABANDGNED BARN % 109 MORGAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION concept / preliminary plan ORANGE COUNTY, NC / December 15, 2017 Scale: 1 inch = 150 feet / / / / DOROTA and CHRISTOPHER SMOSNY PIN 9757 -31 -9190 DB 6372 PG 586 \ / E Kier _ n ane j_`"� private r/w LICE /V7 I I , I /I /I LORANGE COUNTI, CHATHAM COUNTY Lot 7 Total =8.9AC 100 ft. perennial ' stream buffer I i 50 ft. intermittent stream buffer X OWNER JONES FERRY PROPERTIES, LLC 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill, NC 27516 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4074 JONES FERRY ROAD CHAPEL HILL, NC 27516 AKPAR 1443 DB:1748 PG:0757 PB:116 PG :162 PIN:9757 -30 -2873 (ORANGE) TOWNSHIP: BINGHAM EXISTING TRACT AREA (NET): 0.45 ACRES EXISTING TRACT AREA WITH R/W 0.65 ACRES LENGTH OF ROAD +/ -89 LF ZONING: AR ( ALL PROPERTIES) WATERSHED: HAW RIVER PROTECTED PROPOSED R/W: 0.08 ACRES PROPOSED HOA PROPERTY: 0.37 ACRES LENGTH OF ROAD +/ -89 LF 59' —LIC RIeHi-0FWAY B'd• 3C WIDE PAVED ROADWAY sHOIwF1L sNOUnFa DrtcH �Fd ' S9S• 9urbu Couna M1` t9• ABC B.,• Wu.. RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROAD NOTES: 1. All Slopes are less than 7.5% 2. Soil types are HrC and IrB Warren D. Mitchell, PE Civil Engineering 104 Amber Wood Run CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27516 warrendmitchellpe @gmail.com P (919) 593 -1916 Registered Surveyor: R.S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 201 W. Clay Street Mebane NC 27302 919- 563 -3623 Bobbyj @rsjonesandassociates.com Registered Soil Scientist: Central Carolina Soil Consulting, PLLC. 1900 South Main Street Suite 110 Wake Forest, NC 27587 919 -569 -6704 jhall @centralcarolinasoil.com ``stttttllllllrr,� N CAR _.•' S/ ' -140 22547 v 1111 11 %%0%\%121151Y7 RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR ROAD Msw W �,�,yilwf�Yr�fYL�M �Ydi�,yl,h,i �."w m'rrL'aY e,r.ar w M �L +i saa.wwr I I � / 011"GE COUNTY CH4 Tl4,, COU, NOTES MORGAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION First Plat CHATHAM COUNTY, NC December 22, 2017 Scale: 1 inch = 300 feet CHATHAM COUNTY SITE DATA OWNER JONES FERRY PROPERTIES, LLC 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill, NC 27516 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 4074 JONES FERRY ROAD CHAPEL HILL, NC 27516 AKPAR 1443 DB:1748 PG:0757 PB:2014 PG:0138 PIN:9757 -30 -5510 (CHATHAM) CURRENT ZONING: R -1 WATERSHED: WS -IVPA /JLBA SITE AREA: +/- 52.20 ACRES TOTAL LOTS: +/ -16 LOTS AVG LOT SIZE +/- 2.95 ACRES MINIMUM LOT SIZE 1.5 ACRES LENGTH OF ROAD +/ -2500 LF COMMUNITY / HOA PROPERTY CHATHAM COUNTY: 0.11 ACRES ORANGE COUNTY: 0.37 ACRES ® Represents Stream buffers _ Represents Welland boundaries 104 Amber Wood Run CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27516 Repesents stream impact - road crossing wonendm8chellpe @gmal.com Represents water quality s(armwaler basin P (919) 593 -1916 Represents soil provisionally suitable for Conventional or LPP septa systems. _ ~' Represents soil provisionally suitable for saprolilte systems ORANGE COUNTY SITE DATA DB:1748 PG:0757 PS: 116 PG:162 PIN:9757- 30.2873 (ORANGE) TOWNSHIP: BINGHAM EXISTING TRACT AREA (NET): 0.45 ACRES EXISTING TRACT AREA WITH RM/ 0.65 ACRES LENGTH OF ROAD +1-89 LF ZONING: AR WATERSHED: HAW RIVER PROTECTED PROPOSED RAJ: 0.08 ACRES PROPOSED HOA PROPERTY: 0.37 ACRES 1. 16 proposed lots 2. Lots will be served using individual wells and septic systems 3. A public water system is not presently available to the subdivision. 4. A non- discharge permit for a land application waste disposal system Will not be needed / necessary. 5. A permit for a subsurface wastewater disposal system of 3000 gallons /day or larger is not needed / necessary. 6. A 404 permit / 401 certification is necessary / required. 7. Total impervious area will be 24% maximum 8. Zoning of all adjacent property is R -1 With the exception of the parcel shown on the western boundary. That parcel is owned by George W. Barrett and is zoned CU- IND -L. The property is used for a welding shop. Registered Surveyor. R.S. Jones and Associates, Inc. 201 W. Clay Street Mebane NC 27302 919 -563 -3623 BobbyjGnionesa ndassoclates.com Registered Sol Scientist: Central Carolina Sol Consulting, PLLC. 1900 South Main Street Suite 110 Wake Forest, NC 27587 919 -569 -6704 jhol@centralcorolnasol.com Warren D. Mitchell, PE `,,,,,11111111111 „� Civil Engineering _ 104 Amber Wood Run CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27516 22547 wonendm8chellpe @gmal.com P (919) 593 -1916 Attachment 5 111 PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director Administration 131 W. Margaret Lane (919) 245 -2575 Suite 201 (919) 644 -3002 (FAX) ORANGE COUNTY P. O. Box 8181 www.orangecountync.gov NORTH CAROLINA Hillsborough, NC 27278 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING MORGAN RIDGE MAJOR SUBDIVISION (ROAD EXTENSION) Tuesday, February 13, 2018 - 7:00 -8:00 pm West Campus Office Building Meeting Notes bn Attendance: • Michael Harvey and Patrick Mallett (Current Planning Staff) No Residents attended the Neighborhood Information Meeting 112 PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director Administration .... 131 W. Margaret Lane (919) 245 -2575 Suite 201 (919) 644 -3002 (FAX) ORANGE COUNTY P. O. Box 8181 www.orangecountync.gov NORTH CAROLINA Hillsborough, NC 27278 CERTIFICATION OF MAILING - NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MFFTING MORGAN RIDGE MAJOR SUBDIVISION (ROAD EXTENSION) (PIN 9757 -30 -2873) ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA I, Patrick Mallett, Planner II with Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.7 of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) I have mailed, or caused to be mailed, via mail a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) notice. This notice informed those property owners within 1,000 of the subject property of the proposed amended subdivision that the developers are seeking modifications to the approved plan. The owners were identified according to the Tax Records and as required by the UDO. The mailed notice specified the date, time, place and subject of the neighborhood meeting and provided information on the Special Use Permit review process. WITNESS my hand, this 29th day of January, 2018. / 0� �-"' /- A �;!/� Patrick Mallett Planner 11 113 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director Current Planning Sara° I"4, 131 W. Margaret Lane (919) 245 -2575 ,b Suite 201 (919) 644 -3002 (FAX) P. O. Box 8181 www.orangecountync.gov Hillsborough, NC 27278 . :loIh C4aco�• January 29, 2018 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING FOR THE MORGAN RIDGE SUBDIVISION Dear Property Owner: You are receiving this letter because Orange County tax records indicate that you own property near the Morgan Ridge subdivision. Section 2.15.2 (D) of the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) requires a notification to landowners within a thousand (1,000) feet of the Morgan Ridge subdivision. On December 15, 2017, the developer of the Morgan Ridge subdivision submitted an application to provide a public road connection to Jones Ferry Road (SR 1942) through a .65 acre portion of the property located in Orange County's jurisdiction. This connection would serve a 52 -acre 16 lot single- family subdivision currently being reviewed by Chatham County. This request requires approval by the Orange County Board of Commissioners (BOCC). Morgan Ridge Subdivision Summary The property is located in Bingham Township along Jones Ferry Road at the Orange /Chatham County line. The property is further identified as Orange County Property Identification Number (PIN) 9757 -30 -2873. The developer, Jones Ferry Properties, LCC, proposes to dedicate a 50' wide public right -of -way and extend 89 linear feet of 20' wide paved public roadway (proposed to be named Morgan Ridge Way) to connect to Jones Ferry Road (SR1492). The Orange County portion of the property is zoned Agricultural Residential (AR), and within the Haw River Protected Watershed. All 16 lots will have individual well and septic systems. See attached subdivision plans and below for more details. The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) to discuss the proposed road extension for Morgan Ridge is scheduled for: Date: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 Time: 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. Place: Orange County West Campus Office Building Basement Conference Room (Room 004) 131 West Margaret Lane Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 114 The purpose of the Neighborhood Information Meeting is to provide an opportunity for you to ask questions about the revised subdivision. At the meeting, the Orange County Planning Department staff will describe the subdivision review process and answer questions regarding the land subdivision process. After the NIM, the Planning Board will review the revised plans at their March 7, 2018 regular meeting. The request will then be heard by the BOCC at their April 3, 2018 meeting. You will receive separate notices of these meetings. Please refer to the enclosed map and contact the Orange County Planning Department if you need additional information. A staff member may be reached at 919 245 2575. Sincerely, ^ ,� / � VvV v Patr%c{e R. MRttCtt , Patrick R. Mallett Planner II Attachments: Morgan Ridge Subdivision Plans; and WCOB Direction Map. CC: File. Excerpt of Draft Minutes Attachment 6 Minutes Orange County Planning Board March 7, 2018 Regular Meeting 115 MEMBERS PRESENT: Tony Blake (Vice- Chair), Bingham Township Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At -Large Chapel Hill Township; Kim Piracci, At- Large; Township; Alexander Gregory, Chapel Hill Township Representative; David Blankfard, Hillsborough Township Representative; Randy Marshall, At- Large; Adam Beeman, Cedar Grove Township; Hunter Spitzer, At- Large; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; MEMBERS ABSENT: Lydia Wegman (Chair), At -Large Chapel Hill Township Representative; STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Patrick Mallett, Planner II; Meredith Kern, Administrative Assistant; OTHERS PRESENT: Warren Mitchell; Wesley Boyd; Peter Bellantoni; Danny Jones; Rebecca Ryan AGENDA ITEM 7: MAJOR SUBDIVISION — MORGAN RIDGE -To review an application involving a major subdivision located in Bingham Township on the Chatham /Orange county line. The only activity within Orange County is dedication of public right of way for a public road. PRESENTER: Patrick Mallett, Planner II. Patrick Mallett presented the item, which involved 0.65 acres. He reviewed the vicinity map, plan overview, and site photographs. The subdivision includes 16 lots, all within Chatham County. The average lot size is close to 3 acres. He reviewed there is an old barn on the property that will be dismantled. This item is scheduled to go before the Orange County Board of Commissioners next month and the Chatham County Board of Commissioners the following month. Paul Guthrie said he grew up near this property and has reviewed the topography. He wondered whether the developers thought there would be any problem getting well water in that location. He wondered whether there is going to be a problem maintaining stream flow into Lake Jordan by the time the developers draw down the wells. He acknowledged that his questions were outside the purview of this board for this development. Patrick Mallett noted Orange County does not have jurisdiction over those aspects of the project. As a general statement, he added that Chatham County has a similar process of approving subdivisions and similar permits. He noted Warren Mitchell is the site civil engineer and the developer. Warren Mitchell, project engineer and one of the developers, introduced himself to the board and introduced Wesley Lloyd, sitting in the audience with him, as the other developer on the project. Warren Mitchell said the streams have been evaluated by the Army Core of Engineers. Regarding the wells, others nearby have not had a problem getting water from their wells. He did not anticipate a problem. MOTION by Adam Beeman moved to recommend that the Orange County Board of Commissioners approve the dedication of the public right of way and continuation of that public road, provided that Chatham County approves. Seconded by Paul Guthrie. VOTE: Unanimous 116 Attachment 7 Resolution #: RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date: Name of Subdivision: Owner /Applicant: April 3, 2018 Morgan Ridge Jones Ferry Properties, LLC 227 Opus Way Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Agent(s): Warren Mitchell, PE 104 Amber Wood Run Chapel Hill, NC 27516 The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the Morgan Ridge Preliminary Subdivision Plat, dated December 15, 2017, containing the following: • The extension of a planned public road, tentatively named "Morgan Ridge Way" that will be constructed to North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) public road standards, and intersect with Jones Ferry Rad (S.R.1942); • The preservation of 0.37 acres Common Open Space as denoted on the Preliminary Plat; and • A 30 -foot wide "Type B" roadside buffer along Jones Ferry Road (S.R. 1942). The approval of this resolution authorizes and directs the Orange County Manager to accept for Orange County and on behalf of the public generally, the offer of dedication of all publically offered areas /easements, including rights -of -way for the public portions of the road tentatively named "Morgan Ridge Way" without maintenance responsibility. Per the Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) the applicant shall maintain all common areas and proposed roadways until such time as it is accepted for maintenance by a local homeowners association, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, or some other governmental on non - profit entity. Before the Final Plat of Morgan Ridge can be approved by the Planning Department and recorded within the Orange County Registrar of Deeds office the following conditions shall be addressed: A. Declaration of Restrictions 1. The Orange County Planning Department shall author a Declaration of Restrictions (hereafter `the document') establishing and describing the various development restrictions, standards, conditions, and requirements associated with development of, and within, the project. The document shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat and 117 approved, as to form and content, by the applicant and the County Attorney. 2. The document is not intended to serve, supplant, or take the place of any document recorded by the applicant establishing local homeowner covenants, or deed restrictions enforced by either the applicant or an established homeowners association. B. Sewage Disposal and Wells 1. The developer shall provide copies well and septic information to the Orange County Environmental Health Department for any permits on lots adjacent to the Orange- Chatham County line. C. Roads and Access 1. Morgan Ridge Way shall be constructed to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation in accordance with the approved Preliminary Plat. The public roadway, as well as the proposed stormwater management system, shall be located within a minimum 50 -foot right -of -way, with 5 -foot utility easements on each side. Construction shall be inspected and approved by NCDOT. OR A letter of credit or escrow agreement shall be submitted to secure construction of the aforementioned roadways to the standards of the North Carolina Department of Transportation in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. An estimate of the construction cost must be prepared by a certified /licensed engineer or grading contractor and submitted to the Planning and Inspections Department. The financial guarantee must reflect 110% of that estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. In this instance, the document shall state posted financial guarantee(s) will not be released until the road construction has been inspected and approved by NCDOT. 3. All lots shall receive access from the internal subdivision road as depicted on the approved Preliminary Plat. No driveway access for any of the lots shall be permitted off of Jones Ferry Road (S.R. 1942). 4. The existing gravel driveway onto Jones Ferry Road (S.R. 1942) that is depicted on the Preliminary Plat shall be removed (i.e. landscaped and /or made pervious) prior to acceptance of Morgan Ridge Way by NCDOT. 3. An erosion control and stormwater management plan for construction for the aforementioned roadways shall be submitted by the applicant to the Orange County Erosion Control Division for review and approval prior to any land disturbing activity on the site in accordance with the UDO. 118 4. Approved double - bladed street name signs shall be erected at the intersections of public streets prior to Planning Department signatures on the Final Plat or prior to issuance of any building permit if road construction is secured by letter of credit as described herein. 5. Prior to any construction or alteration of any existing access within the right -of -way of Jones Ferry Road (S.R. 1942), the owner /applicant shall secure a driveway permit from the NCDOT District Office. The owner /applicant shall submit a copy of the NCDOT- approved permit and NCDOT approval letter to the Planning Department prior to, or at the same time as, the request for a grading permit is made, or before Planning Department signatures are affixed on the Final Plat, whichever is first. 6. Sight triangles (10' x 70') shall be shown on the Final Plat at the intersection with each of the Morgan Ridge Way and Jones Ferry Road (S.R. 1942). D. Land Use Buffers and Landscaping 1. The 30 -foot wide land use buffer along Jones Ferry Road (S.R. 1942), identified on the approved Preliminary Plat, shall be preserved in perpetuity in accordance with the provisions of the UDO. The document, as well as any local covenants, shall require the applicant or future homeowners association to preserve the required land use buffer. 2. Upon completion of roadway improvements Planning Department staff shall complete an inspection in the area to ascertain if additional roadway plantings are required in accordance with the provision(s) of the UDO. In the event additional plantings are required, the applicant shall submit a formal landscape plan re- establishing required vegetation. The owner /applicant shall install landscaping as indicated on the approved Landscape Plan and the Planning Department shall inspect and approve such landscaping before signing the Final Plat. It should be noted no part of any additional landscaping shall encroach into the ten (10) foot by seventy (70) foot sight triangles at the public road intersection. OR The owner /applicant shall submit a letter of credit or cash bond to secure required landscape installation and preservation. The owner /applicant shall provide, as specified within the UDO, an estimate of the cost for required preservation, plantings and their installation. The financial guarantee shall reflect 110% percent of the estimate and be issued by an accredited financial institution licensed to do business in North Carolina. 3. Provision for protection of existing trees shall be included in the Final Plat, as well as the recorded Declaration of Restrictions as prepared by the Orange County Planning Department. E. F. 119 Drainage 1. The applicant shall submit a final stormwater management and erosion control plan for approval by Orange County Erosion Control prior to the commencement of land disturbing activities. 2. Drainage easements shall be located on the Final Plat as required following review and approval of the stormwater management plan by Erosion Control staff. 3. Drainage culverts shall be sized and located appropriately, as required by NCDOT and Erosion Control, by a licensed North Carolina Professional Engineer. Miscellaneous 1. The Final Plat shall contain a title block and vicinity map in accordance with the UDO. 2. The Common Open Space shall be conveyed into the Homeowner's Association before Planning Department signatures are affixed to the final plat. 3. If street lighting is proposed, then a lighting plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to purchase of lighting fixtures from the utility provider. 4. Any Outdoor lighting (including for signage) shall meet the Outdoor Lighting Standards as set forth in the UDO. 5. A sign permit shall be obtained from Orange County for the subdivision sign located at or near the entrance of the subdivision prior to beginning construction. 6. Methods of disposal of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris associated with construction activity shall be by some method other than open burning as required in the UDO. G. Certifications 1. A Certificate of Survey and Accuracy signed by a Professional Land Surveyor shall be notarized on the face of the Final Plat. 2. A Certificate of Declaration and Maintenance in the form provided in the UDO signed by the landowner and developer shall be on the face of the plat and included in a document describing development restrictions to be recorded concurrently with the Final Plat. 3. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall certify that the platted portion of Morgan Ridge Way has been entirely constructed to State standards or that construction plans have been approved prior to 120 Planning Department signatures on Final Plat. 1. A Certificate of Approval signed by the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department shall appear on the face of the Final Plat. 2. All other required certificates detailed within the LIDO, applicable to the project, shall be placed on the Final Plat for signature. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Orange County Commissioners that the Preliminary Plat for the Morgan Ridge Subdivision is approved in accordance with the above mentioned conditions and attached Preliminary Plat dated December 15, 2017. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner the foregoing resolution was adopted this the day of 2018. I, Donna S. Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on , 2018 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in Minute Book No. of the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of 2018. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners