Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Wetland Delineation Report 06-04-19
Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Document Information i 20190528_Lennar_TroyEstates_DelinRpt.docx Document Information Prepared for Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc. Client Contact Stu Huckleberry Project Name Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana Project Number J162515M22 Cardno Contact Marc Woernle, PWS Date June 4, 2019 Prepared for: Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc. 9025 North River Road, Suite 100, Indianapolis, Indiana 46240 Prepared by: Cardno, Inc. 3901 Industrial Boulevard, Indianapolis, Indiana 46254 Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Table of Contents ii Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 Regulatory Definitions ....................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Waters of the United States ................................................................................................ 2 2.2 Waters of the State .............................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Wetlands .............................................................................................................................. 5 Hydrophytic Vegetation ........................................................................................ 5 Hydric Soils .......................................................................................................... 6 Wetland Hydrology ............................................................................................... 6 Wetland Definition Summary ............................................................................... 7 2.4 Streams, Rivers, Watercourses & Jurisdictional Ditches .................................................... 7 3 Background Information ................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Existing Maps ...................................................................................................................... 8 National Wetland Inventory .................................................................................. 8 National Flood Hazard Layer ............................................................................... 8 Stream Stats Basin Analysis ................................................................................ 8 National Hydrography Dataset ............................................................................. 8 Soil Survey ........................................................................................................... 8 4 Methodology and Description ........................................................................................... 9 4.1 Regulated Waters Investigation .......................................................................................... 9 Site Photographs .................................................................................................. 9 Delineation Data Sheets ...................................................................................... 9 4.2 Technical Descriptions ........................................................................................................ 9 Data Point and Wetland Descriptions ................................................................ 10 5 Jurisdictional Analysis .................................................................................................... 11 5.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management ...................................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Indiana Department of Natural Resources ........................................................................ 11 6 Summary and Conclusion ............................................................................................... 12 6.1 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 12 6.2 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 12 7 References ........................................................................................................................ 13 Tables Table 3-1 Soil Types Within the Troy Estates Study Area .................................................................. 8 Appendices Appendix A Figures Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Acronyms iii Figure 1 Project Location Figure 2 NWI & Watershed Figure 3 Construction in a Floodway Constraints Figure 4 Soil Survey & NHD Figure 5 Delineated Features Appendix B Site Photographs Appendix C Wetland Delineation Data Sheets – Midwest Region Acronyms APA Administrative Procedure Act BF Bank Full CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWA Clean Water Act DBH Diameter at Breast Height DNP Division of Nature Preserves DP Data Point EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPH Ephemeral (Stream Type) ETR Endangered, Threatened, and Rare FAC Facultative Plant FACU Facultative Upland Plant FACW Facultative Wetland Plant FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map GIS Geographical Information System HHEI Headwater Habitat Evaluation Index IC Indiana Code IDEM Indiana Department of Environmental Management IDNR Indiana Department of Natural Resources INT Intermittent (Stream Type) MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer Systems NHD National Hydrography Dataset NRCS U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service NWI National Wetland Inventory Acronyms (continued) NWP Nationwide Permit Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Acronyms (continued) iv NWPL National Wetland Plant List OBL Obligate Wetland Plant OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark PEM Palustrine Emergent Wetland PER Perennial (Stream Type) PFO Palustrine Forested Wetland PSS Palustrine Shrub Scrub Wetland PUB Palustrine Unconsolidated Bottom RGP Regional General Permit SNE Significant Nexus SWANCC Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County TNW Traditional Navigable Water TOB Top of Bank UPL Upland Plant USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USGS U.S. Geological Survey USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WOTUS Waters of the United States WQC Water Quality Certification Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Introduction 1 1 Introduction Cardno was contracted to perform a regulated waters delineation, including wetlands and streams, which are located at the Troy Estates Study Area in Section 19, Township 18 North, Range 3 East, in Hamilton County, Indiana (Figure 1, Appendix A). Field work was performed on May 21, 2019. The total size of the Study Area was approximately 23 acres. The Study Area was low density residential and open field. No wetlands or streams were delineated during the site investigation. This report identifies the jurisdictional status of the Study Area based on Cardno’s best professional understanding and interpretation of the Corps of Engineers’ Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (USACE) guidance documents and regulations. Jurisdictional determinations for other “waters of the U.S.” were made based on definitions and guidance found in 33 CFR 328.3, USACE Regulatory Guidance Letters, and the wetland delineation manual. The USACE administers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which regulates the discharge of fill or dredged material into all “waters of the U.S.,” and is the regulatory authority that must make the final determination as to the jurisdictional status of the Study Area. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Regulatory Definitions 2 2 Regulatory Definitions 2.1 Waters of the United States “Waters of the U.S.” are within the jurisdiction of the USACE under the CWA. “Waters of the U.S.” is a broad term, which includes waters that are used or could be used for interstate commerce. This includes wetlands, ponds, lakes, territorial seas, rivers, tributary streams including any definable intermittent waterways, and some ditches below the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). Also included are manmade water bodies such as quarries and ponds, which are no longer actively being mined or constructed and are connected to other “waters”. Wetlands, mudflats, vegetated shallows, riffle and pool complexes, coral reefs, sanctuaries, and refuges are all considered special aquatic sites which involve more rigorous regulatory permitting requirements. A specific, detailed definition of “waters of the U.S.” can be found in the Federal Register (33 CFR 328.3). On January 9, 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision, Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (No. 99-1178). The decision reduced the regulation of isolated wetlands under Section 404 of the CWA, which assigned the USACE authority to issue permits for the discharge of dredge or fill material into "waters of the U.S.". Prior to the SWANCC decision, the USACE had adopted a regulatory definition of "waters of the U.S." that afforded federal protection for almost all of the nation's wetlands. The Supreme Court decision interpreted that the USACE’s jurisdiction was restricted to navigable waters, their tributaries, and wetlands that are adjacent to these navigable waterways and tributaries. The decision leaves the majority of "isolated" wetlands unregulated by the CWA. Therefore, most wetlands that are not adjacent to, or contiguous with, any other “waters of the U.S.” via a surface drain such as a swale, ditch, or stream are considered isolated and thus no longer jurisdictional by the USACE. On June 19, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court issued decisions in regards to John A. Rapanos v. United States (No. 04-1034) and June Carabell v. United States (04-1384), et al. The plurality decision created two ‘tests’ for determining CWA jurisdiction: the permanent flow of water test (set out by Justice Scalia) and the “significant nexus” test (set out by Justice Kennedy). On June 5, 2007 the USACE and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued joint guidance on how to interpret and apply the Court’s ruling. According to this guidance, the USACE will assert jurisdiction over traditionally navigable waters, adjacent wetlands, and non-navigable tributaries of traditionally navigable waters that have “relatively permanent” flow, and wetlands that border these waters, regardless of whether or not they are separated by roads, berms, and similar barriers. In addition, the USACE will use a case-by-case “significant nexus” analysis to determine whether waters and their adjacent wetlands are jurisdictional. A “significant nexus” can be found where waters, including adjacent wetlands, alter the physical, biological, or chemical integrity of the traditionally navigable water based on consideration of several factors. In January 2015 an EPA sponsored publication, Connectivity of Streams & Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review & Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence (EPA, 2015), emphasized how streams, non-tidal wetlands, and open waters in and outside of riparian areas and floodplains affect downstream waters such as rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Regulatory Definitions 3 On May 27, 2015 the EPA released a statement that a new Clean Water Rule typically referred to as, “The Waters of the United States (WOTUS) Rule” was finalized and that it would “not create any new permitting requirements and maintains all previous exemptions and exclusions” (epa.gov). The Rule would only protect waters that have historically been covered by the CWA. The intent was to clearly define: jurisdictional limits of tributaries of navigable waterways; set boundaries on covering nearby waters; identify specific national water treasures by name (prairie potholes, etc.); clearly define when a ditch is jurisdictional, and when it is not; maintain status that waters within Municipal Separate Storm Water Sewer Systems (MS4) are not jurisdictional; and reduce the use of case-specific analysis of waters. Also on May 27, 2015 a publication, Technical Support Document for the Clean Water Rule: Definition of Waters of the United States (EPA, 2105), was released discussing in detail why the significant nexus (SNE) between one water and another is important. It specifically ties distances to the various types of waters mentioned within the Code of Federal Regulations [33 CFR 328.3(a)(1) through (a)(8)]. For example, the document states “Waters located within the 100- year floodplain of a Traditional Navigable Water (TNW), interstate water, or the territorial seas and waters located more than 1,500 feet and less than 4,000 feet from the lateral limit of an (a)(1) or (a)(3) water may still be determined to have a significant nexus on a case-specific basis under paragraph (a)(8) of the Rule and, thus, be a ‘water of the United States’ (EPA 2015).” On June 29, 2015 the new Clean Water Rule was entered into the Federal Register (40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, et al. Clean Water Rule: Definition of ‘‘waters of the United States’’; Final Rule). This report will refer to this Rule as “June 29, 2015 WOTUS Rule”. This Rule includes exact distances mentioned in the May 27, 2015 Technical Support Document as it relates to adjacent waters, including the following: waters within 100 ft. of jurisdictional waters; waters within the 100- year floodplain to a maximum of 1,500 feet from the OHWM; waters within the 100-year floodplain with a SNE to the TNW; and waters with a SNE within 4,000 ft. of jurisdictional waters. On October 9, 2015 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Court) issued a nationwide stay against the enforcement of the June 29, 2015 WOTUS Rule. The Court stated, “…we conclude that…Justice Kennedy’s opinion in Rapanos represents the best instruction on the permissible parameters of “waters of the United States” as used in the CWA, it is far from clear that the new Rule’s distance limitations are harmonious with the instruction. Moreover, the Court stated that the rulemaking process by which the distance limitations were adopted is facially suspect. Petitioners contend the proposed rule that was published, on which interested persons were invited to comment, did not include any proposed distance limitations in its use of terms like “adjacent waters” and “significant nexus.” Consequently, petitioners contend, the Final Rule cannot be considered a “logical outgrowth” of the rule proposed, as required to satisfy the notice-and-comment requirements of the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 553. As a further consequence of this defect, petitioners contend, the record compiled by respondents is devoid of specific scientific support for the distance limitations that were included in the Final Rule. They contend the Rule is therefore not the product of reasoned decision-making and is vulnerable to attack as impermissibly “arbitrary or capricious” under the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).” Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Regulatory Definitions 4 On February 28, 2017, President Donald Trump signed Executive Order #13778 titled “Restoring the Rule of Law, Federalism, and Economic Growth by Reviewing the ‘Waters of the United States’ Rule”. Section 1(a) states that the EPA “shall review the final rule entitled ‘Clean Water Rule: Definition of 'Waters of the United States,'’ 80 Fed. Reg. 37054; and ‘….shall…publish… proposed rules rescinding or revising, those issuances, as appropriate’ [Section 2(b)].” Until further notice, the June 29, 2015 WOTUS Rule is not in effect. Furthermore, this report does not attempt to include a professional opinion as it relates to the June 29, 2015 WOTUS Rule. 2.2 Waters of the State “Waters of the state” are within the jurisdiction of the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM). They are generally defined as surface and underground water bodies, which extend through or exist wholly in the state of Indiana, which includes, but is not limited to, streams and both isolated and non-isolated wetlands. Private ponds, or any pond, reservoir, or facility built for reduction of pollutants prior to discharge are not included in this definition. In addition to “waters of the U.S.”, IDEM also regulates and issues permits for isolated wetland impacts. Isolated wetlands are defined by state law as those wetlands that are not subject to regulation under Section 404(a) of the Federal CWA. Since 2004, IDEM has regulated isolated wetlands under Indiana’s State Isolated Wetlands Law (IC 13-18-22). Indiana’s State Isolated Wetlands Law establishes a classification system for wetlands and a set of general permits, exemption criteria, and individual permitting authority for IDEM to regulate the placement of dredged or fill material into non-exempt isolated wetlands. Indiana’s isolated wetlands are defined as being a Class I, Class II, or Class III wetland; these definitions are listed in Indiana Code 13- 11-2-25.8. Class I wetlands are significantly (more than 50 percent) disturbed by human activity or development and support only minimal wildlife or aquatic habitat or hydrologic function due to low species diversity or non-native invasive species dominance. Class II wetlands are those wetlands that are neither Class I or Class III wetlands or are wetlands that would be Class I wetlands were they not a “rare and ecologically important” [IC 13-11-2-25.8(3)(B)] wetland type. Class III wetlands are undisturbed or minimally disturbed by human activity and support diverse flora and fauna or are a “rare and ecologically important” wetland type [IC 13-11-2-25.8(3)(B)].. IDEM relies on the USACE decision regarding wetland determinations and delineations including whether or not a wetland is isolated or non-isolated. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Regulatory Definitions 5 2.3 Wetlands Wetlands are a category of “waters of the U.S.” for which a specific identification methodology has been developed. As described in detail in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), wetland boundaries are delineated using three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. In addition to the criteria defined in the 1987 Manual, the procedures described in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Midwest Region (Environmental Laboratory, 2010) were used to evaluate the Study Area for the presence of wetlands. Hydrophytic Vegetation On June 1, 2012, the National Wetland Plant List (NWPL), formerly called the National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands (Reed 1988), went into effect after being released by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as part of an interagency effort with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the U.S. EPA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (Lichvar and Kartesz, 2009). The NWPL, along with the information implied by its wetland plant species status ratings, provides general botanical information about wetland plants and is used extensively in wetland delineation, restoration, and mitigation efforts. The NWPL consists of a comprehensive list of wetland plant species that occur within the United States along with their respective wetland indicator statuses by region. An indicator status reflects the likelihood that a particular plant species occurs in a wetland or upland (Lichvar et al. 2012). Definitions of the five indicator categories are presented below. OBL (Obligate Wetland Plants): almost always occur in wetlands. With few exceptions, these plants (herbaceous or woody) are found in standing water or seasonally saturated soils (14 or more consecutive days) near the surface. These plants are of four types: submerged, floating, floating-leaved, and emergent. FACW (Facultative Wetland Plants): usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non- wetlands. These plants predominately occur with hydric soils, often in geomorphic settings where water saturates the soils or floods the soil surface at least seasonally. FAC (Facultative Plants): occur in wetlands and non-wetlands. These plants can grow in hydric, mesic, or xeric habitats. The occurrence of these plants in different habitats represents responses to a variety of environmental variables other than just hydrology, such as shade tolerance, soil pH, and elevation, and they have a wide tolerance of soil moisture conditions. FACU (Facultative Upland Plants): usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands. These plants predominately occur on drier or more mesic sites in geomorphic settings where water rarely saturates the soils or floods the soil surface seasonally. UPL (Upland Plants): almost never occur in wetlands. These plants occupy mesic to xeric non-wetland habitats. They almost never occur in standing water or saturated soils. Typical growth forms include herbaceous, shrubs, woody vines, and trees. According to the USACE’s Midwest Regional Supplement, plants that are rated as FAC, FACW, or OBL are classified as wetland plant species. The percentage of dominant wetland species in each of the four vegetation strata (tree, shrub/sapling, herbaceous, and woody vine) in the sample area determines the hydrophytic (wetland) status of the plant community. Dominant species are Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Regulatory Definitions 6 chosen independently from each stratum of the community. In general, dominants are the most abundant species that individually or collectively account for more than 50 percent of the total coverage of vegetation in the stratum, plus any other species that, by itself, accounts for at least 20 percent of the total. For the purposes of determining dominant plant species, the four vegetation strata are defined. Trees consist of woody species 3 inches or greater in diameter at breast height (DBH). Shrubs and saplings are woody species that are over 1 meter in height and less than 3 inches DBH. Herbaceous species consist of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including herbaceous vines, regardless of size, and woody plants less than 1 meter tall. Woody vines consist of vine species greater than 1 meter in height, such as wild grapes. Hydric Soils Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part. In general, hydric soils are flooded, ponded, or saturated for a week or more during the growing season when soil temperatures are above 32 degrees Fahrenheit. The anaerobic conditions created by repeated or prolonged saturation or flooding result in permanent changes in soil color and chemistry, which are used to differentiate hydric from non-hydric soils. In this report, soil colors are described using the Munsell notation system. This method of describing soil color consists of separate notations for hue, value, and chroma that are combined in that order to form the color designation. The hue notation of a color indicates its relation to red, yellow, green, blue, and purple; the value notation indicates its lightness, and the chroma notation indicates its strength or departure from a neutral of the same lightness. The symbol for hue consists of a number from 1 to 10, followed by the letter abbreviation of the color. Within each letter range, the hue becomes more yellow and less red as the numbers increase. The notation for value consists of numbers from 0 for absolute black, to 10 for absolute white. The notation for chroma consists of numbers beginning with /0 for neutral grays and increasing at equal intervals. A soil described as 10YR 3/1 soil is more gray than a soil designated 10YR 3/6. Wetland Hydrology Wetland hydrology is defined as the presence of water for a significant period of time at or near the surface (within the root zone) during the growing season. Wetland hydrology is present only seasonally in many cases, and is often inferred by indirect evidence. Hydrology is controlled by such factors as seasonal and long-term rainfall patterns, local geology and topography, soil type, local water table conditions, and drainage. Primary indicators of hydrology are inundation, soil saturation in the upper 12 inches of the soil, watermarks, sediment deposits, and drainage patterns. Secondary indicators such as oxidized root channels in the upper 12 inches of the soil, water-stained leaves, local soil survey data, and the FAC-neutral vegetation test are sometimes used to identify hydrology. A primary indicator or two or more secondary indicators are required to establish a positive indication of hydrology. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Regulatory Definitions 7 Wetland Definition Summary In general, an area must meet all three criteria to be classified as a wetland. In certain problem areas such as seasonal wetlands, which are not wet at all times, or in recently disturbed (atypical) situations, areas may be considered a wetland if only two criteria are met. In special situations, an area that meets the wetland definition may not be within the USACE’s jurisdiction due to a specific regulatory exemption. 2.4 Streams, Rivers, Watercourses & Jurisdictional Ditches With non-tidal waters, in the absence of adjacent wetlands, the extent of the USACE’s jurisdiction is defined by the OHWM. USACE regulations define the term “ordinary high water mark” for purposes of the CWA lateral jurisdiction at 33 CFR 328.3(e), which states: The term ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. Streams, rivers, watercourse, and ditches within the Study Area were evaluated using the above definition and documented. Waterways that did exhibit an OHWM were recorded and evaluated using the Ohio EPA’s Primary Headwater Habitat Evaluation Index (HHEI) methodology. If applicable, the results of the HHEI are presented in Section 3.2, Technical Descriptions and datasheets will be provided upon request. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Background Information 8 3 Background Information 3.1 Existing Maps Several sources of information were consulted to identify potential wetlands and wetland soil units on the site. These include the USFWS's National Wetland Inventory (NWI), the USGS’s National Hydrography Dataset (NHD), and the NRCS Soil Survey for this county. These maps identify potential wetlands and wetland soil units on the site. The NHD maps are used to identify low- lying areas, historical waterways, drainage patterns, and potential surface waters. The NHD maps are not field verified, and do not always account for human alteration such as ditching and tiling. The NWI maps were prepared from high altitude photography and in most cases were not field checked. Because of this, wetlands are sometimes erroneously identified, missed, or misidentified. Additionally, the criteria used in identifying these wetlands were different from those currently used by the USACE. The county soil maps, on the other hand, were developed from actual field investigations. However, they address only one of the three required wetland criteria and may reflect historical conditions rather than current site conditions. The resolution of the soil maps limits their accuracy as well. The mapping units are often generalized based on topography and many mapping units contain inclusions of other soil types for up to 15 percent of the area of the unit. The USACE does not accept the use of either of these maps to make wetland determinations. National Wetland Inventory The NWI map of the area (Figure 2) did not identify any wetland complexes on site. National Flood Hazard Layer The FEMA FIRMette map of the area (Figure 3) identified no areas of flood hazard on the site. Stream Stats Basin Analysis No streams were identified on site. National Hydrography Dataset The NHD map of the area (Figure 4) identified one flow line on site. This line did not correspond with a surface water. Soil Survey The NRCS Soil Survey of Hamilton County identified four soil series on the site (Figure 4). The following table identifies the soil unit symbol, soil unit name, and whether or not the soil type contains components that meet the hydric soil criteria. Table 3-1 Soil Types Within the Troy Estates Study Area Symbol Description Hydric Br Brookston silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Yes CrA Crosby silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes No MmB2 Miami silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes No Sh Shoals silt loam No Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Methodology and Description 9 4 Methodology and Description 4.1 Regulated Waters Investigation The delineation of regulated waters within the Study Area was based on the methodology described in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Environmental Laboratory, 2010) as required by current USACE policy. Prior to the field work, the background information was reviewed to establish the probability and potential location of wetlands and regulated waters on the site. Next, a general reconnaissance of the Study Area was conducted to determine site conditions. The site was then walked with the specific intent of determining wetland and jurisdictional stream boundaries. Data stations were established at locations within and near the wetland areas to document soil characteristics, evidence of hydrology and dominant vegetation. Note that no attempt was made to examine a full soil profile to confirm any soil series designations. However, when possible, soils were examined to a depth of at least 16 inches to assess soil characteristics and site hydrology. Complete descriptions of typical soil series can be found in the soil survey for this county. Site Photographs Photographs of the site are located in Appendix B. These photographs are the visual documentation of site conditions at the time of inspection. The photographs are intended to provide representative visual samples of any wetlands or other special features found on the site. Delineation Data Sheets Where stations represent a wetland boundary point they are typically presented as paired data points, one each documenting the wetland and upland sides of the wetland boundary. The routine wetland delineation data sheets used in the jurisdictional delineation process are located in Appendix C. These forms are the written documentation of how representative sample stations met or did not meet each of the wetland criteria. For plant species included on the National Wetlands Plant List, nomenclature will follow their lead. For all other plants not listed in the NWPL, nomenclature will follow the USDA’s Plants Database. Data point locations are shown on Figure 5. 4.2 Technical Descriptions Complete field data sheets from the site investigation are located in Appendix C. The site is located in Hamilton County, Indiana, north of W 141st Street and east of West Road (Figure 1). The area investigated was approximately 23 acres. The Study Area was low density residential and open field. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Methodology and Description 10 Data Point and Wetland Descriptions Upland Data Point Data Point 01 (DP01) Dominant vegetation in the vicinity of DP01 included Annual Blue Grass (Poa annua, FACU) and Meadow Garlic (Allium canadense, FACU). In addition, non-dominant vegetation observed included Tufted Meadow-Foxtail (Alopecurus carolinianus, FACW), and Neckweed (Veronica peregrina, FACW). The plants at this data point did not meet hydrophytic vegetation criteria. The soil from 0 to 20 inches had a matrix soil color of 10yr 4/3 with depletions in the matrix at 10 percent, and a texture of silty clay loam. The soil at the data point was mapped as Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded (MmB2), and did not meet any hydric soil criteria. Primary indicators of hydrology included High Water Table (A2) and Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8). This data point did not meet wetland criteria. Upland Data Point Data Point 02 (DP02) Dominant vegetation in the vicinity of DP02 included Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), Meadow Garlic (FACU), Neckweed (FACW), and Small-Flower Buttercup (Ranunculus parviflorus, FAC). In addition, non-dominant vegetation observed included Common Chickweed (Stellaria media, FACU), spring draba (Draba verna, UPL), Common Mouse-Ear Chickweed (Cerastium fontanum, FACU), Yard Knotweed (Polygonum aviculare, FAC), English Plantain (Plantago lanceolata, FACU), Great Plantain (Plantago major, FAC), Hairy Bittercress (Cardamine hirsuta, FACU), Queen Anne's-Lace (Daucus carota, UPL), and Prickly Lettuce (Lactuca serriola, FACU). The plants at this data point qualified as hydrophytic vegetation. The soil from 0 to 20 inches had a matrix soil color of 10yr 3/3 with a texture of silty clay loam. The soil at the data point was mapped as Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded (MmB2), and did not meet any hydric soil criteria. Primary indicators of hydrology included Algal Mat or Crust (B4), and secondary indicators of hydrology observed included Surface Soil Cracks (B6) and the FAC-Neutral Test (D5). This data point did not meet wetland criteria. Upland Data Point Data Point 03 (DP03) Dominant vegetation in the vicinity of DP03 included Small-Flower Buttercup (FAC), and Meadow Garlic (FACU). In addition, non-dominant vegetation observed included Curly Dock (Rumex crispus, FAC), Neckweed (FACW), English Plantain (FACU), Annual Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia, FACU), and Creeping Wild Rye (Elymus repens, FACU). The plants at this data point did not meet hydrophytic vegetation criteria. The soil from 0 to 20 inches had a matrix soil color of 10yr 3/3 with a texture of silty clay loam. The soil at the data point was mapped as Brookston silty clay loam (Br), and did not meet any hydric soil criteria. Only the secondary indicator, Crayfish Burrows (C8), was observed. This data point did not meet wetland criteria. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Jurisdictional Analysis 11 5 Jurisdictional Analysis 5.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Indiana Department of Environmental Management The USACE has authority over the discharge of fill or dredged material into “waters of the U.S.”. This includes authority over any filling, mechanical land clearing, or construction activities that occur within the boundaries of any “waters of the U.S.”. A permit must be obtained from the USACE under Section 404 of the CWA before any of these activities occur. Permits can be divided into three general categories: Individual Permits, Nationwide Permits (NWP), and the Regional General Permits for Indiana. Individual Permits are required for projects that do not fall into one of the specific NWP or the Regional General Permit (RGP) or are deemed to have significant environmental impacts. These permits are much more difficult to obtain and receive a much higher level of regulatory agency and public scrutiny and may require several months to more than a year for processing. NWP have been developed for projects which meet specific criteria and are deemed to have minimal impact on the aquatic environment. In Indiana, however, most NWP's have been rescinded and replaced by the RGP. The RGP for Indiana authorizes activities associated with the construction or installation of new facilities or structures as well as for agriculture or mining. Proposed wetland impacts must be less than 1 acre and meet specific criteria in order to qualify for these permits. Section 401 WQC must be obtained from IDEM before the USACE will perform their permit review. IDEM is responsible for issuing CWA Section 401 WQCs in conjunction with the USACE Section 404 permits. IDEM requires notification for all permanent non-isolated wetland impacts less than 0.10 acre, which entails a brief notification form that must be signed by the applicant. If only temporary wetland impacts are proposed, then notification is also required for the cumulative wetland temporary impacts that exceed 0.10 acre. However, for non-isolated wetland impacts greater than 0.10 acre, an application for WQC must be submitted concurrently with a wetland mitigation plan. IDEM will not initiate their review process until both the application and wetland mitigation plan have been submitted. Applicants proposing an impact to an “isolated wetland,” which is a wetland that the USACE has determined to be a non-federally jurisdictional wetland, are required to apply for and obtain Isolated Wetland Permits from IDEM. Isolated wetland permits are required under Indiana’s State Isolated Wetland Law (Indiana Code 13-18-22 and 327 Indiana Administrative Code 17). 5.2 Indiana Department of Natural Resources Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) has jurisdiction over mapped floodways, floodplains where there is no mapped floodway (Figure 3), and the floodway of ditches and streams with a watershed greater than one (1) square mile (Figure 3). If impacts are proposed to jurisdictional floodways, a Construction-In-A-Floodway Permit may be required from IDNR. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno Summary and Conclusion 12 6 Summary and Conclusion 6.1 Summary Cardno inspected the Troy Estates Study Area on May 21, 2019. No wetlands or 'other waters', and no jurisdictional floodways or floodplains were identitied within the Study Area. 6.2 Conclusion While this report represents our best professional judgment based on our knowledge and experience, it is important to note that the Louisville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has final discretionary authority over all jurisdictional determinations of “waters of the U.S.” including wetlands under Section 404 of the CWA in this region. It is therefore, recommended that a copy of this report be furnished to the Louisville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to confirm the results of our findings. Regulated Waters Delineation Report Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana June 4, 2019 Cardno References 13 7 References Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Wetland Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region, ERDC/EL TR-10-16, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. Gleason, H.A. and A. Cronquist. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. 2nd Edition. The New York Botanical Garden. Bronx, NY. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published April 28, 2016. ISSN 2153 733X Lichvar, R.W., and John T. Kartesz. 2009. North American Digital Flora: National Wetland Plant List, version 2.4.0 (https://wetland_plants.usace.army.mil). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, NH, and BONAP, Chapel Hill, NC. Lichvar, R., Melvin, N.C., Butterwick, M.L. and Kirchner, W.N. 2012. National Wetland Plant List Indicator Rating Definitions. ERDC/CRREL TN-12-1. Hanover, NH: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/documents/National-Wetland-Plant-List-Indicator-Rating- Definitions.pdf Reed, P. B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988. Washington, DC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed [6/4/2019]. StreamStats, United States Geological Survey. Available online at https://streamstats.usgs.gov. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2015. Connectivity of Streams & Wetlands to Downstream Waters: A Review & Synthesis of the Scientific Evidence (http://www.epa.gov/cleanwaterrule) United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2015. Technical Support Document for the Clean Water Rule: Definition of Waters of the United States (http://www.epa.gov/cleanwaterrule) Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana APPENDIX A FIGURES Project Location 3901 Industrial Blvd.,Indianapolis, IN 46254Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1986www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Figure 1: Project Location This map and all data contained within are supplied as is with no warranty. Cardno, Inc. expressly disclaims responsibility for damages or liability from any claims that may arise out of the use or misuse of this map. It is the sole responsibility of the user to determine if the data on this map meets the user’s needs. This map was not created as survey data, nor should it be used as such. It is the user’s responsibility to obtain proper survey data, prepared by a licensed surveyor, where required by law. ² 7.5' Quadrangle: Carmel T18n R3e Sec19 Project No. j162515m22 Project Location File Path: R:\Projects\16\162\162515M_CalAtlantic Homes\M22_TroyEstates\GIS\MXD\Delineation\F1_Location.mxd Basemap: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed, Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Date: 5/28/2019 Saved By: Stephen.LaFon HAMILTON TIPTON MARION MADISONBOONE HANCOCKCLINTON HENDRICKSArea of Interest 0 2,0001,000 Feet 0 200 400 600 Meters PFO1A R2UBH PFO1Ad PFO1A PUBGh PFO1A PFO1A PFO1A PUBGh PFO1/SS1A PFO1A PFO1A PEM1A PFO1A PEM1A PUBGx PFO1A PUBGx PFO1A PEM1C PFO1A PEM1C PUBGh PUBGh PUBGx PFO1C PFO1A PUBGh PUBGx R4SBC PUBGx PEM1C R4SBC PFO1A PUBGx PUBGx PUBGh PUBGx PUBGx R4SBC PUBGx PFO1A PUBGh PUBGh PEM1C PUBGx R4SBC R2UBH PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PFO1A PUBGh PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGh PUBGx R4SBC PUBGx PFO1A R4SBC PUBGx PEM1A PFO1A PUBGx PUBGh PUBGh PUBGx R4SBC PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx R4SBC PUBGx R4SBC R4SBC PUBGh PEM1A R2UBH PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGh PFO1A PUBGR4SBC PFO1A R4SBC PUBGx R4SBCx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGx PUBGh PUBGx PUBGx PFO1A R4SBC PUBGh R5UBH PEM1Fh PUBF PSS1C PUBGx PUBGx PEM1C PUBGx R4SBC R5UBH PFO1A PUBGh PUBGx PFO1C R4SBC R4SBC R5UBH R5UBH PUBGx R4SBC PEM1F PUBGh PFO1A PFO1A R5UBH 05120201120070 Little Eagle Branch-Woodruff Branch 05120201090060Williams Creek05120201120050 Eagle Creek-Jackson Run 05120201120080 Eagle Creek-Long Branch/Irishman Run 05120201120060 Little Eagle Branch-Headwaters05120201120060 Little Eagle Branch-Headwaters 3901 Industrial Blvd.,Indianapolis, IN 46254Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1986www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Figure 2: NWI & Watershed This map and all data contained within are supplied as is with no warranty. Cardno, Inc. expressly disclaims responsibility for damages or liability from any claims that may arise out of the use or misuse of this map. It is the sole responsibility of the user to determine if the data on this map meets the user’s needs. This map was not created as survey data, nor should it be used as such. It is the user’s responsibility to obtain proper survey data, prepared by a licensed surveyor, where required by law. ² 7.5' Quadrangle: Carmel T18n R3e Sec19 Project No. j162515m22 Project Location NWI Wetland 14-Digit HUC Watershed File Path: R:\Projects\16\162\162515M_CalAtlantic Homes\M22_TroyEstates\GIS\MXD\Delineation\F2_NWI.mxd Basemap: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed Date: 5/28/2019 Saved By: Stephen.LaFon 0 1,000 2,000500 Feet 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Meters Zone X Zone X Zone X Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone A Zone X Zone X Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone A Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone A Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE Zone AE 18057C0205G eff date 11/19/2014 5:00:00 AM18011C0351E eff date 1/18/2012 5:00:00 AM 18011C0240E eff date 1/18/2012 5:00:00 AM 18057C0115G eff date 11/19/2014 5:00:00 AM 18011C0355E eff date 1/18/2012 5:00:00 AM18063C0100D eff date 9/25/2009 5:00:00 AM 300 S 1200 E200 S W 141ST ST SHELBORNE RDW 146TH ST US 421S 1200 EW 131ST ST W 151ST ST DOLAN WAY W 156TH ST 131ST S T WEST RDWILLOW R D CONIFER DRCAMDEN LNBECKWITH DRVOYAGEUR WAY NINA DRYANCEY PL AUSTIN TRCMINK LNMURPHY CIRR O M A B N DHIATT DRTRAM LNPOLO TRLPELHAM R D FOSSIL DRBUCKSKIN DR MODESTO LN W 131ST STWEST RD3901 Industrial Blvd.,Indianapolis, IN 46254Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1986www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Figure 3: Construction in Floodway Constraints (2016 Aerial) This map and all data contained within are supplied as is with no warranty. Cardno, Inc. expressly disclaims responsibility for damages or liability from any claims that may arise out of the use or misuse of this map. It is the sole responsibility of the user to determine if the data on this map meets the user’s needs. This map was not created as survey data, nor should it be used as such. It is the user’s responsibility to obtain proper survey data, prepared by a licensed surveyor, where required by law. ² 7.5' Quadrangle: Carmel T18n R3e Sec19 Project No. j162515m22 Project Location National Flood Hazard - FIRM Panels FEMA Mapped 100-year Floodplain Regulated Floodway File Path: R:\Projects\16\162\162515M_CalAtlantic Homes\M22_TroyEstates\GIS\MXD\Delineation\F3_CIF_Constraint.mxd National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP), Farm Services Agency (FSA), U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), UITS, Indiana Spatial Data Portal , Indiana Department of Natural Resources DFIRM (Published 03/20/2017) Date: 5/28/2019 Saved By: Stephen.LaFon 0 1,000 2,000500 Feet 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Meters Bear Creek CrACrAMmB2MmB2MmC2 BrCrAWEST RDTARA CT LISTON DRGLENVIEW LN OVERBROOK DRPELHAMRDW 141ST ST ALDREW PLPEMBERTON LNVOYAGEUR WAY WILMUTH DRKODIAK DRDENALI DRPELH A M R D BEAR CREEK WAY EVERGREEN TRL NINA DRW 146TH ST CrA Br MmA MoC3 CrA Br CrA CrA Br CrA CrA MmB2 CrACrAMmAW MmB2 Br CrA Br BrMmB2 CrACrA MmC2 CrA CrA W Sh MmACrA MmB2 MmB2 MmB2 W MmA CrA MmD2W MmC2 Br Br MmB2 CrA CrA Sh 3901 Industrial Blvd.,Indianapolis, IN 46254Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1986www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Figure 4: Soil Survey & NHD (2017 Aerial) This map and all data contained within are supplied as is with no warranty. Cardno, Inc. expressly disclaims responsibility for damages or liability from any claims that may arise out of the use or misuse of this map. It is the sole responsibility of the user to determine if the data on this map meets the user’s needs. This map was not created as survey data, nor should it be used as such. It is the user’s responsibility to obtain proper survey data, prepared by a licensed surveyor, where required by law. ² 7.5' Quadrangle: Carmel T18n R3e Sec19 Project No. j162515m22 NHD Flowline Project Location Soil Unit Soil Unit - Hydric File Path: R:\Projects\16\162\162515M_CalAtlantic Homes\M22_TroyEstates\GIS\MXD\Delineation\F4_Soil.mxd Indiana Office of Information Technology, Indiana University Spatial Data Portal, UITS, Woolpert Inc. Date: 5/30/2019 Saved By: Stephen.LaFon 0 500250 Feet 0 50 100 150 Meters Symbol Description Hydric Br Brookston silty clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Yes CrA Crosby silt loam, fine-loamy subsoil, 0 to 2 percent slopes No MmB2 Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded No Sh Shoals silt loam No !( !( !( !P !P ps02 ps01 dp03 dp02 dp01 W 141ST STOVERBROOK DRKODIAK DRWILMUTH DRW 141ST ST 3901 Industrial Blvd.,Indianapolis, IN 46254Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1986www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Figure 5: Delineation (2017 Aerial) This map and all data contained within are supplied as is with no warranty. Cardno, Inc. expressly disclaims responsibility for damages or liability from any claims that may arise out of the use or misuse of this map. It is the sole responsibility of the user to determine if the data on this map meets the user’s needs. This map was not created as survey data, nor should it be used as such. It is the user’s responsibility to obtain proper survey data, prepared by a licensed surveyor, where required by law. ² 7.5' Quadrangle: Carmel T18n R3e Sec19 Project No. j162515m22 !P Photo Station !(Data Point Project Location File Path: R:\Projects\16\162\162515M_CalAtlantic Homes\M22_TroyEstates\GIS\MXD\Delineation\F5_Delineation.mxd Indiana Office of Information Technology, Indiana University Spatial Data Portal, UITS, Woolpert Inc. Date: 6/4/2019 Saved By: Ben.Hess 0 200100 Feet 0 20 40 60 Meters Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana APPENDIX B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS DP01, View Looking North DP01, View Looking East DP01, View Looking South DP01, View Looking West Woodsdale Duke Energy Butler County, Ohio Site Photographs Project Number: J156720M14 Project Number: XXXXXXX 3901 Industrial Blvd. Indianapolis, IN 46254 USA Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1982 www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Site Photographs Project Number: J162515M22 DP02, View Looking North DP02, View Looking East DP02, View Looking South DP02, View Looking West Woodsdale Duke Energy Butler County, Ohio Site Photographs Project Number: J156720M14 Project Number: XXXXXXX 3901 Industrial Blvd. Indianapolis, IN 46254 USA Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1982 www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Site Photographs Project Number: J162515M22 DP03, View Looking North DP03, View Looking East DP03, View Looking South DP03, View Looking West Woodsdale Duke Energy Butler County, Ohio Site Photographs Project Number: J156720M14 Project Number: XXXXXXX 3901 Industrial Blvd. Indianapolis, IN 46254 USA Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1982 www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Site Photographs Project Number: J162515M22 PS01, View Looking North PS01, View Looking East PS01, View Looking South PS01, View Looking West Woodsdale Duke Energy Butler County, Ohio Site Photographs Project Number: J156720M14 Project Number: XXXXXXX 3901 Industrial Blvd. Indianapolis, IN 46254 USA Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1982 www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Site Photographs Project Number: J162515M22 PS02, View Looking North PS02, View Looking East PS02, View Looking South PS02, View Looking West Woodsdale Duke Energy Butler County, Ohio Site Photographs Project Number: J156720M14 Project Number: XXXXXXX 3901 Industrial Blvd. Indianapolis, IN 46254 USA Phone (+1) 317-388-1982 Fax (+1) 317-388-1982 www.cardno.com Troy Estates Regulated Waters Delineation Report Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc Hamilton County, Indiana Site Photographs Project Number: J162515M22 Troy Estates, Carmel, Hamilton County, Indiana APPENDIX C WETLAND DELINEATION DATA SHEETS – MIDWEST REGION US Army Corps of Engineers prepared by Cardno Midwest Region (Updated 20190423) Yes No N N Yes No N N Yes X Yes X No Yes Remarks: Absolute Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius)% Cover 1. 2. 3. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A) 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: x1 = 1.2%x2 = 2.5%x3 = 3.4%x4 = 4.2%x5 = 5.(B) 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.3-Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 15.4-Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 16. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 18. 19. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 20. be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 13% 1. 2.No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) FACU Poa annua Yes Allium canadense Alopecurus carolinianus FAC species Prevalence Index worksheet: OBL species Multiply by: Prevalence Index = B/A = 0.44 3.38 9% FACW species Column Totals: (A)0.13 FACU species 0.36 4%0.08 UPL species 0%(A/B) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 Species Across All Strata:(B) Percent of Dominant Species Total % Cover of: A/B Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius) 0 Dominant VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -- Midwest Region (If no, explain in Remarks.) Sampling Date:5/21/2019 Total Number of Dominant Number of Dominant Species X significantly disturbed? naturally problematic?, Soil Is the Sampled Area Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius) = Total Cover X, or Hydrology No No No Yes Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Troy Estates City/County:Hamilton County Ben Hess & David Glista 19, 18 N, 03 ESection, Township, Range: State:Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc.IN Sampling Point:DP01 , or Hydrology N Hydric Soil Present? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X XWetland Hydrology Present? NAD83 UTM16N Local relief (concave, convex, none): Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Are Vegetation , Soil Are Vegetation N NWI classification:none 39.994903 Long:-86.231629 Datum:Slope (%):Lat:3% concave Soil Map Unit Name:Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded (MmB2) Stream TerraceLandform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) XYes Present? Vegetation Hydrophytic = Total Cover = Total Cover = Total Cover FACU No FACW No FACW Yes Veronica peregrina Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' radius) 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2-Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: US Army Corps of Engineers prepared by Cardno Midwest Region version 2.0 %Type1 10 D Type: Depth (inches):Yes No X Surface Soil Cracks (B6) X Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) X X N/A X 12" X >18"Yes X No High Water Table (A2) HYDROLOGY 3The hydric soil indicators have been updated to comply with the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils Hydric Soil Present? Redox Dark Surface (F6) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: DP01 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) silty clay loam Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Sampling Point: Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes Yes Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: No Remarks: Yes No No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Field Observations: Gauge or Well Data (D9) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Depth Matrix Redox Features 90 10yr 5/2 Color (moist)Loc2(inches) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Iron Deposits (B5) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Other (Explain in Remarks) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Saturation (A3) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Redox Depressions (F8) Dark Surface (S7) in the United States , Version 8.0, 2016. Depleted Matrix (F3) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) SOIL TextureColor (moist)%Remarks M0-20"10yr 4/3 Hydric Soil Indicators3: Test Indicators of Hydric Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. US Army Corps of Engineers prepared by Cardno Midwest Region (Updated 20190423) Yes No N N Yes No N N Yes Yes X No Yes Remarks: Absolute Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius)% Cover 1. 2. 3. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A) 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: x1 = 1.15%x2 = 2.5%x3 = 3.30%x4 = 4.20%x5 = 5.5%(B) 6.10% 7.15% 8.5% 9.2% 10.1% 11.3% 12.1% 13.1%X 14.3-Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 15.4-Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 16. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 18. 19. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 20. be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 113% 1. 2.No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) FACU Stellaria media No Allium canadense Phalaris arundinacea 0.3 FAC species Prevalence Index worksheet: OBL species Multiply by: Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.67 3.25 51% FACW species Column Totals: (A)1.13 6% FACU species 0.63 2.04 35% 21% 0.7 UPL species 75%(A/B) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 Species Across All Strata:(B) Percent of Dominant Species Total % Cover of: A/B Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius) 3 Dominant VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -- Midwest Region (If no, explain in Remarks.) Sampling Date:5/21/2019 Total Number of Dominant Number of Dominant Species X significantly disturbed? naturally problematic?, Soil Is the Sampled Area Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius) No = Total Cover Cerastium fontanum FACU FAC No Daucus carota FACNo No No Plantago major Cardamine hirsuta Ranunculus parviflorus Plantago lanceolata X, or Hydrology No No No Yes Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Troy Estates City/County:Hamilton County Ben Hess & David Glista 19, 18 N, 03 ESection, Township, Range: State:Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc.IN Sampling Point:DP02 , or Hydrology N Hydric Soil Present? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X XWetland Hydrology Present? X NAD83 UTM16N Local relief (concave, convex, none): Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Are Vegetation , Soil Are Vegetation N NWI classification:none 39.99371 Long:-86.23166 Datum:Slope (%):Lat:2% concave Soil Map Unit Name:Miami silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded (MmB2) TreadLandform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) FACU UPL FACU XYes Present? Vegetation Hydrophytic = Total Cover FACU Yes = Total Cover = Total Cover FACU No UPL Yes FACW Yes FACW Yes Polygonum aviculare Veronica peregrina Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' radius) No Draba verna 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2-Dominance Test is >50% No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: Lactuca serriola US Army Corps of Engineers prepared by Cardno Midwest Region version 2.0 %Type1 Type: Depth (inches):Yes No X X Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) X Geomorphic Position (D2) X FAC-Neutral Test (D5) X N/A X >18" X >18"Yes X No High Water Table (A2) HYDROLOGY 3The hydric soil indicators have been updated to comply with the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils Hydric Soil Present? Redox Dark Surface (F6) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: DP02 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) silty clay loam Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Sampling Point: Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes Yes Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: No Remarks: Yes No No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Field Observations: Gauge or Well Data (D9) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Depth Matrix Redox Features 100 Color (moist)Loc2(inches) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Iron Deposits (B5) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Other (Explain in Remarks) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Saturation (A3) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Redox Depressions (F8) Dark Surface (S7) in the United States , Version 8.0, 2016. Depleted Matrix (F3) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) SOIL TextureColor (moist)%Remarks 0-20"10yr 3/3 Hydric Soil Indicators3: Test Indicators of Hydric Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. US Army Corps of Engineers prepared by Cardno Midwest Region (Updated 20190423) Yes No N N Yes No N N Yes X Yes X No Yes X Remarks: Absolute Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius)% Cover 1. 2. 3. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:(A) 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: x1 = 1.5%x2 = 2.80%x3 = 3.25%x4 = 4.2%x5 = 5.1%(B) 6.1% 7.2% 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.3-Prevalence Index is ≤3.01 15.4-Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting 16. data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 17. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain) 18. 19. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 20. be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 116% 1. 2.No Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.) FACU Ranunculus parviflorus Yes Allium canadense Rumex crispus FAC species Prevalence Index worksheet: OBL species Multiply by: Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.75 3.23 29% FACW species Column Totals: (A)1.16 FACU species 2.55 1.16 2% 85% 0.04 UPL species 50%(A/B) That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 Species Across All Strata:(B) Percent of Dominant Species Total % Cover of: A/B Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 15' radius) 1 Dominant VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM -- Midwest Region (If no, explain in Remarks.) Sampling Date:5/21/2019 Total Number of Dominant Number of Dominant Species X significantly disturbed? naturally problematic?, Soil Is the Sampled Area Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius) No = Total Cover Ambrosia artemisiifolia FACU FACUElymus repens X, or Hydrology No No No Yes Project/Site: Applicant/Owner: Investigator(s): Troy Estates City/County:Hamilton County Ben Hess & David Glista 19, 18 N, 03 ESection, Township, Range: State:Lennar Homes of Indiana, Inc.IN Sampling Point:DP03 , or Hydrology N Hydric Soil Present? SUMMARY OF FINDINGS -- Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. within a Wetland? Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Wetland Hydrology Present? NAD83 UTM16N Local relief (concave, convex, none): Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Are Vegetation , Soil Are Vegetation N NWI classification:none 39.992521 Long:-86.232901 Datum:Slope (%):Lat:1% concave Soil Map Unit Name:Brookston silty clay loam (Br) Stream TerraceLandform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Are "Normal Circumstances" present? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) XYes Present? Vegetation Hydrophytic = Total Cover No = Total Cover = Total Cover FAC No FACU No FAC No FACW Yes Veronica peregrina Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' radius) Plantago lanceolata 1-Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2-Dominance Test is >50% Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: US Army Corps of Engineers prepared by Cardno Midwest Region version 2.0 %Type1 Type: Depth (inches):Yes No X Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Drainage Patterns (B10) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) X Crayfish Burrows (C8) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) Geomorphic Position (D2) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) X N/A X >18" X >18"Yes No X High Water Table (A2) HYDROLOGY 3The hydric soil indicators have been updated to comply with the Field Indicators of Hydric Soils Hydric Soil Present? Redox Dark Surface (F6) Restrictive Layer (if observed): Thick Dark Surface (A12) Remarks: DP03 Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required: check all that apply) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) silty clay loam Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Stratified Layers (A5) 2 cm Muck (A10) Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Sampling Point: Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Surface Water Present? Water Table Present? Saturation Present? (includes capillary fringe) Yes Yes Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: No Remarks: Yes No No Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Field Observations: Gauge or Well Data (D9) Water Marks (B1) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Depth Matrix Redox Features 100 Color (moist)Loc2(inches) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Iron Deposits (B5) Sediment Deposits (B2) Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3) True Aquatic Plants (B14) Other (Explain in Remarks) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Saturation (A3) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8) Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Aquatic Fauna (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) Histosol (A1) Histic Epipedon (A2) Black Histic (A3) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Redox Depressions (F8) Dark Surface (S7) in the United States , Version 8.0, 2016. Depleted Matrix (F3) Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Wetland Hydrology Indicators: 5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S3) SOIL TextureColor (moist)%Remarks 0-20"10yr 3/3 Hydric Soil Indicators3: Test Indicators of Hydric Soils: Other (Explain in Remarks) Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22) Sandy Redox (S5) Stripped Matrix (S6) 1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. www.cardno.com About Cardno Cardno is a professional infrastructure and environmental services company, with expertise in the development and improvement of physical and social infrastructure for communities around the world. Cardno’s team includes leading professionals who plan, design, manage, and deliver sustainable projects and community programs. Cardno Zero Harm At Cardno, our primary concern is to develop and maintain safe and healthy conditions for anyone involved at our project worksites. We require full compliance with our Health and Safety Policy Manual and established work procedures and expect the same protocol from our subcontractors. We are committed to achieving our Zero Harm goal by continually improving our safety systems, education, and vigilance at the workplace and in the field. Safety is a Cardno core value and through strong leadership and active employee participation, we seek to implement and reinforce these leading actions on every job, every day.