The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20070429 Ver 1_401 Application_20070307~ r 2 0 0 7 0 4 2 9 aS ar- ' ~' •s • ;• -.: Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, Inc. ~~~ US Army Corps of Engineers Mrs. Amanda Jones 151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 Asheville, NC 28801 Re: Bald Mountain Development Company Bald Mountain (+/- 665 acres) Rutherford County, North Carolina Amanda and Kevin: March 5, 2007 NC Division of Water Quality Attn: Mr. Kevin Barnett 2090 US Highway 70 Swannanoa, NC 28778 The attached Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) is being submitted on behalf of Mr. Ed Kale of the Bald Mountain Development Company. Bald Mountain currently owns approximately 665 acres in Lake Lure, Rutherford County, North Carolina and is seeking permit authorization under Nationwide Permits 39 for impacts associated with the development of the first phase of a residential subdivision. Should you have any questions regarding the attached PCN and supplemental information do not hesitate to call me at 828-713-1930. A copy of this package has been sent to Mr. David McHenry of the NC Wildlife Resources. Best regards: ~f Rebekah L. Newton ~-.~ _-~ --°~ t a Pia ~ ~~ Y4 t 1 .ii .~ ~w l.. ~. . a kw^.` ~~1,'a ~~ ~~, ~~ 2 ~1',~ 1 Canton Office Newton Office PO Box 882 wnrinc.com PO Box 224 Canton, NC 28716 Newton, NC 28658 828-648-8801 828-465-3035 828-648-8802 Fax 1 828-465-3050 Fax r Enclosures: Authorization Form Project Summary Sheet for the Corps PCN Impact Summary Sheet Impact Maps (5) EEP Acceptance Letter Topo and Vicinity Maps (3) Aerial Photo Tax Parcel Map NRCS Soils Map DWQ Stream Classification Upland and Wetland Data Forms Data Form Location Map **Should you not receive the above attachments with this correspondence, please contact us immediately so that we may provide this supplemental information.** cc: David McHenry - NCWRC Canton Office PO Box 882 Canton, NC 28716 828-648-8801 828-648-8802 Fax wnrinc.com 2 Newton Office PO Box 224 Newton, NC 28658 828-465-3035 828-465-3050 Fax r 05/26!2006 14:02 7043354116 CIMG PAGE 02 +:'~. ~]L.L.L s+:~.~~. f~~~ ~~. Wetland and fYaturdi Resource k.r•. v•r Consultants, Inc, ~ ~~~~;: Department of ~ Army Wilmington D"~stritt, Corps of Engineers Atiy1: Ken Jolley, t~rieF Regulatory Oivisian PU Brnc 1890 Wilmington, North Carolinas 213402.2890 -and- NC pivision of Water QtaaHity Attn: Cyrfdi Karoly 2321 Crabtnae Blvd. Raleigh, North Catalina 27604-22bo I, the current landowner of tfie property id~entaified t+elow, hereby authorize wetland anti Natural Resource Consultants. Tnc bo act on mY behalf as my agent during the processing of permits too impact wetlands and Waters of the l1S that are regulated by the peen Weber Act and the Rivers and Harbors Act. Federal and State agents a~ autfiorized to be on said propQrty when accompanied by Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, Inc. staff'. Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, trtc, is authorized bo pnavide suppleme~i information needed for permit processing att~the~~est o~tha~~'Kor (~wlt^1.._..._,*~ ~,o ~r~'/ - 7 G ~r/~ Property Owner of Record: !~~ u~c1(a~ //k~ d~y~'C"iz.d~~ L~ ~ Address: /~{6 U /T~„pt.,~/,~ ,~6",~-~-~ rGZi IOZI Address: ~'~;~c-~v T,~..~ C ~~'T~~ Address: Phone Number; ~~ ~ '~ ~~ ~//~ ~oparty Location: ~dd C~itf ~' ,~,r_t~ ,~LLC~, lv Owners Signature: oat~e: ~ -D(~, Cdratvn Of~rce PO Sox $82 wnrinc com Newfcn pffrGe Canton, NC 28716 . PO Box 224 828-648-8$07 Newian. IVt~ 28458 82&448-8802 Fox I 8~dd5-3o3S 828.46550 Fax Project Summary Sheet for the Corps 2 0 0 0 4 2 9 Owner/Applicant Name: Mr. Ed Kale Mailing Address: Bald Mountain Development Company 1400 Harding Place ,Suite 100 Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 Phone Number: 770-335-4112 Street Address of Project: King's Drive Nearest Waterway: UT Lake Lure/Broad River River Basin: Broad River Basin Nearest City: Lake Lure County: Rutherford County Decimal Degree Coordinate Location of Project Site: 35.474799 N 82.216802 W USGS Quadrangle Name: Lake Lure PAID 24070429 Office Use Only: Form Version March 05 USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. (If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".) I. Processing 1. .Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project: ® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules ^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ ® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification 2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 39 3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification is not required, check here: ^ 4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII, and check here: 5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page 4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check_here ~.[~ ~ ~ II. Applicant Information ~; 1. Owner/Applicant Information Name: Bald Mountain Development Company ;-+~r~,w~a~ ~ ~~ ~ ,~,,,9~~,~~~~~ Mailing Address: Attn: Mr. Ed Kale 1400 Harding Place, Suite 100 Charlotte. North Carolina 28204 Telephone Number: 704-335-4112 Fax Number: E-mail Address: 2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.) Name: Rebekah Newton Company Affiliation: Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants Mailing Address: Post Office Box 882 Canton. North Carolina 28716 Telephone Number: 828-648-8801 Fax Number: 828-648-8802 E-mail Address: rebekah(a~wetland-consultants.com Updated 11/1/2005 Page 1 of 2 III. Project Information Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings, impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion, so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format; however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided. 1. Name of project: Bald Mountain 2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): 3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 1620284, 1620285 4. Location County: Rutherford Nearest Town: Lake Lure Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): Bald Mountain Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Asheville: Take Hi -hgway 74/64 southeast past the Town of Lake Lure, turn left (north) onto Bill's Creek Road, at Buffalo Creek General Store turn left (west) onto Buffalo Creek Road, Buffalo Creek Road takes a sharp bend to the right (north) and immediately crosses a brides bride take the first left (across from church , stop at gate house for directions to Bald Mountain Property. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.) Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.474799 °N 82.216802 °W 6. Property size (acres): +/- 665 acres 7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Lake Lure/Broad River 8. River Basin: Broad River Basin (Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.) Updated 11/1/2005 Page 2 of 2 9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application: The project site is mostly wooded with several lame pastures. There is an unimproved road network that provides access to the majority of the site. Also contained within the site is a residential out-parcel belonging to Mr. Roland King (outlined in red on Impact Maps). This property is adjacent to the Fairfield community general land use in the vicinity is recreational and residential. 10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The project includes the development of the first phase of a single family residential subdivision. Typical construction and earth-moving equipment will be utilized on site. 11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the proposed work is to provide road access to high ground residential building lots. IV. Prior Project History If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits, certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project, list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with construction schedules. A jurisdictional determination package was submitted on May 31, 2006. A site meeting to approve the delineation is scheduled for March 14, 2006. V. Future Project Plans Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application. The final, and second, phase of this development will need to be permitted at a later date. The nature of the work will be the same as in Phase 1; road crossings to provide access to high around building lots. VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts, Updated 11/1/2005 Page 3 of 3 permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet. 1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The impacts associated with this project include the installation of 8 culverted road crossin sg and placement of fill into 1 wetland area. 2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding. Wetland Impact Site Number (indicate on map) Type of Impact Type of Wetland (e.g., forested, marsh, herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within 100-year Floodplain ( es/no) Distance to Nearest Stream (linear feet) Area of Impact (acres) 2 Wetland fill Herbaceous N ~1001f 0.0354 Total Wetland impact (acres) 0.0354 3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: ~ 0.4738 acre 4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560. Stream Impact Average Impact Area of Number Stream Name Type of Impact perennial or Stream Width Len th Im act (indicate on ma) Intermittent? Before Im act (linea ~ eet) (a ces) 3 UT Lake Lure Culvert P 3 40 0.0028 4 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 3 40 0.0028 5 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 8 40 0.0073 6 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 5 35 0.0040 7 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 8 40 0.0073 Updated 11/1/2005 Page 4 of 4 8 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 6 35 0.0048 9 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 11 35 0.0088 10 UT Lake Lure Culvert p 3 35 0.0024 Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 300 0.0402 5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc. Open Water Impact Site Number (indicate on map) Name of Waterbody (if applicable) T e of Im act yp p Type of Waterbody lake and estua ( ~ P ~ ry, sound, bay, ocean, etc.) Area of Impact (acres) n/a Total Open Water Impact (acres) 6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project: Stream Impact (acres): 0.0402 Wetland Impact (acres): 0.0354 Open Water Impact (acres): 0 Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.0756 Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 300 7. Isolated Waters Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE. 8. Pond Creation If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application. Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond, local stormwater requirement, etc.): Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area: Updated 11/1/2005 Page 5 of 5 VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization) Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Impacts on site have been minimized to the maximum extent practicable. There are 10 crossings proposed within this phase of development. All are necessary to access high ground residential building lots. VIII. Mitigation DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial streams. USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include, but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar functions and values, preferable in the same watershed. If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at http : //h2o. enr.state. nc. us/ncwetlands/strm tide. html. 1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet) of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view, preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach a separate sheet if more space is needed. Mitigation will be made b~payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Pro ram CEEP). Updated 11/1/2005 Page 6 of 6 +..- 2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at (919) 715-0476 to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information: Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 300 Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ) 1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? Yes ^ No 2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)? Note: If you are not sure whether aNEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA coordinator at (919) 733-5083 to review current thresholds for environmental documentation. Yes ^ No ^ 3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^ X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ) It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the applicant's discretion. 1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233 (Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )? Yes ^ No Updated 11/1/2005 Page 7 of 7 2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer multipliers. Zone* Impact Multiplier Required (square feed Mitication I 3 (2 for Catawba) 2 1.5 Total * Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1. 3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ) Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed impervious level. In order for the development to exceed 20% impervious area on site in the first phase, 100 acres of land would need to be impervious. Approximately 350 lots are proposed for Phase 1 of the development. Calculations for impervious area allow for 6,000 square feet of impervious area der lot (the square footage has been adjusted to account for roadways, driveways, infrastructure, etc.). This would yield approximately 10% impervious area for the entire site. Square foota eg of impervious area per lot would need to be increase to approximately 12,000 square feet to exceed the 20% mentioned above. Roadways and lots have already been surveyed and platted. Lots will not be subdivided, adding additional homesites to the property, and road layouts in the field will be consistent with road layouts depicted on the plans. XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ) Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility. Wastewater generated by residents of this development will be treated via single family septic systems. XIII. Violations (required by DWQ) Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules? Yes ^ No Updated 11/1/2005 Page 8 of 8 Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ) Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No ^ If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description: Any >;oods and services needed by the residence of this development can be obtained from the nearby towns of Columbus and Lake Lure. This project will not result in additional development, which would impact nearby downstream water quality. XV. Other Circumstances (Optional): It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control). Applicant/Agent's Signature Date (Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.) Updated 11/1/2005 Page 9 of 9 Bald Mountain Impact Summary Site # Existing Proposed Net Notes 1 0 0 0 Existin brid e 2 0 0.0354 0.0354 Wetland Fill 3 0 40 40 Culvert 4 0 40 40 Culvert 5 0 40 40 Culvert 6 0 35 35 Culvert 7 0 40 40 Culvert 8 0 35 35 Culvert 9 0 35 35 Culvert 10 0 35 35 Culvert Total Stream 0 300 300 Wetland 0 0.0354 0.0354 t ~ i J ~° p '~ '.' U ~ , "~, ~_ J ~~, '~ ~ a ~~~ ~ ~--~ ~ ~~-~' , ~ o , C~ -\ -> - ~ ~-, _ ~ ~ l ;,~,,, ~~ ~.~ y / c ~' ~-~ ~` - l ~ ~ - ~ JixVsdktbral SirnMsl ~ / ~/ /~( /~ ~ ,huVShcetlorgl Vetlnnd(s) ~ ////i I ,' L// ~ ~ ~ JuNSdctbnnl Lhta~ VtNardfd ~ ~ ,,, ~ ~ --- ~ Culvert /Rood Crosskp ~ PMse Boundary \\ ~ "' ~ ~ Property L.Irie ~ ~ lkinproved Roads 4 Sheet H: 1 ca e: 1:750 town y: Rebekah Newton ate: 3-5-07 ~~ Map: ' Overview n ih ~ :+ ~ \Id! Project Name: Bald Mountain ~~,~ ~_~ ~ • * ~'.~: Jb'~,! Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants Location: ~~• ~ ~~k" ' P.O. Box 882 Canton, N.C. 28716 Rutherford County North Carolina ~II[~~W~te"..:Yr~* : `~ ""`~'+ 828-648-8801 lent: o~ect e: Bald Mountain Development Company' BMDC-1000 i S ~~ S ;y 5ii' ^ `~ 1 ~. _ Sheet #: e: raw Date: 2 1:200 ekah wto 3-5-07 ... MdP Crossings 1 - 4 Project Name: Bald Mountain • * { *. n ural Resource Consultants . ~ _;~. "; ~"" Location. Rutherford County North Carolina ~~^;.--~~~~~~• .O. x anton, N.C. 28716 , :: , ~-~;; ~` `~"''~` ~ ` ~ -648-8801 Client: Project o e: ~_,,, Bald Mountain Development Company BMDC-1000 ~~ 3 _~ i~ i ~ / / / X ~~ /////~~~/ / / / ~ ~ I ~aiu ivwu~~ui vcvcwN~ ~f l~ -- 1 ~ ! l / 1 / / I / ~~ / :G h^ / •`~ ~~ X38 \ ~" 13 ~ T ~. . J\ .~.L , .. ~t3 Wetland and Nat ral ~'' ~. ~ ~.;;x.~ ~ too : f -.~, ,~ ~• P.O. Bo~88 Ca to t r ~.. ca :.1:•- . 1 1 l3 ~ • tam Y Lake Lure Vicinity Map Rutherford C0 O O .p N CO Rives R~r ti y~ Jergenso~ In ~ ~ Ra ~C3' ~ ~~ 0~~~ U ~p"~ h/o C1 d ~``~, 'ts~ Southtork Rd _,_..._..-- - fd~7 cat O' ~Q. ~~~ e ~. Falrfl T~Be t °p ~n F ~~' `° -~ ~z V ~o NgrFok~ ~J Fo Laks ~ k~~ ~pr ~~ O t ~ - ~ ~m , ` ~ 1~ - X36 _ t 1. ~.~ _ ~~~ .~ ~ } - _ ~ ~ ~ - -- .1 ~ - -~ --. - f 1 .- _ _ ~ ~ . _ ~~"^^~~ 11 _ ___ ...~~-e.,_l~u rye ~ } - ,.~~. ~ ~, .~ ~ _- -~ _ ~ _- .ti _ : , ~ ~_ _ ~ _ --' _ r' ~ ; ~ i ~ , M( ~ ~ i ~ ~ ,+` -. _- _._ , ;; i ~ - ,~ -~ t ., _ _ _ 16th .. ,` ~ ~ r ~ _, ~ ~ ~ _ -, r _ - _ ~~t ~ ,' _ `~ \; ~~S '' \,~ ` I' , ~~.~,. ~:~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ 6°W Name: LAKE LURE Date: 3/20/2006 Scale: 1 inch equals 1212 feet Location: 035.4732957°N 082.2139716°W Caption: Lake Lure '~ Rutherford CO ~ ~'~ ~~ °='-' ~ ~~ > ~. ~. ~ 1~" ~ ~ i ~ ~--~- ~. ~~ - ( r )-BruwaA_ _~t~ ~ ~ t ~ ~~ ~ -~ ~~ ~ i ~ ,~.a e i , ~ ~ -. W! tlP°t M1 \ J ~~ ~ JS J ~' 1 ~- 8 ~ ~~~ ~. ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ,., ~ mr~ ~ - i ~ _ _ Y i .~ r~ -I. (f j~` i o t _ ~ ~r ; /-~ _ ~ c ~1 L / ;%r .°~.e-_ - -f../- _ ,{. ~\ ~:y '~) ~ ~T~~%~ .,r ~-;r. _ it _~.i: `. -f i.\ ~i : ~ .~, ~' , t` ~ ~ ~ v _ ~ ,` " , SS/ ., KrgC 1 ~ - v ~~ ~ ~' .~ I - - p4. - 1 l Rattlesnake ~ i- l'~ ~ - /W' ~ i 4 _ /.Y _, .p v ) - c, ~ - ~:. Lake Lure ~ ~ ~ > ,.~- J 1 - : ~~ ' -- _ t a ~~~, ; ~ ~~~ •+~ ~ ~_ ~ _ ~ _ < <~ , t `~ ~~ /e ~ _ ~. , . ~., f ( f. ~ ~ .. y S ~ - w, ~ . _,~- rs u i L ~ ~ ~ ramp - . ( //~ v ~ II F ~ c ~ ~; k ~ Q I / Mn Khcb i i . ,V _..-~.._.y ~. M[n~ ~ ~~~~` t• '~. J P' l '~ uy ~- ) ' _ - i _ ''~` ~ L --~ ~ ~ B~~d Mtn ~ i ~ "! ~-_ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - (,. ~ ~ , I, ~ __ \t( i 1. ~, i - ':~ ~~ 1 ~~ - p ~ "~ ~tf" ~ li ? I i tj" ~ If ~, ~` ~ a. •• .. ~ ~ ~ ~,. ~ '"" i ' _ _ 1'r .,e~r~ ao~na rup 1 ~ ... -. C ~~_ ~_,~~ ~'~. ~ ~ ~~ ~ s ° - ~ ~~ ~t f~. ~ ~Rr~ \,~ Y,, l~\I _. ) fib C~\ ~• I~l ] ~/ 4 I ,_ ti ~ ~ ~~, ,~ ~ ., ~ ~ r" ~_~:.-e ~f. y ;; _ = i ,.-~---- :.: ~ i f ~, _ t LAXE LURE ~ ~~~ , / ~\I !/ ~, ~~,~~ ~ ` _ r: . M,emneY R k Y / ./ !~ /~ ~Ii•akB.I.OfC ~ )~ ~ ~ '' j ~ ~~rN ~~ I~ ~ 1 g o W S ~;.' _- _ f ..~~ $ewJ6r Onppfel) ~ 1)l9C Name: LAKE LURE l1 Location: 035.4789599°N 082.213.5519°W Date: 3/20/2006 Caption: Lake Lure ;~; -~ _ n Scale: 1 inch equals 4000 feet Rutherford CO `'' ° ~% ' 'Windows Live Local Page 1 of 1 0 ~ 042 g Windows Live Local ~ -~ [Use current map view] t ,Virtual Earth BE'Ca What: Business name or category Where: Address, city, or other place Ntelcome Scratcfi Pad Locate Me Permalink Add ~""~ ~~ y`-L'p ~~~~.*~ http://local.live.com/ n Directions Settings Community Help About -: • :~ !' ~ .4 , 4 `YnE A~$1'~~^^ J.( r.'t:: jv 3/20/2006 Lake Lure Tax Parcel Nla p ~ ~ 7 • ~ ~ ~ ~ Rutherford Co SOIL SURVEY OF RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Lake Lure s,~:. rr ~. 390400 .~~-+u ~_ _ s'.w a~i uuu .. +~ ',~'~: ai i ~~ , ,iiiY' q ` • x a~ `~,i~-L i~~1/ T~, < ~+ $ ~~ R -~r i ~ P • ~ nn 3R9A00 39000iJ +~71 •~ 1 USA Natural Resources Conservation Service Meters 0 50 100 200 .~ Feet 0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 3/20/2006 Page I of 3 N m SOIL SURVEY OF RUTHERFORD COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA MAP LEGEND Soil Map Units o Cities 0 Detailed Counties Interstate Highways Roads ~~ Rails Water - Hydrography Oceans I aka I i irg MAP INFORMATION Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov Coordinate System: UTM Zone 17 Soil Survey Area: Rutherford County, North Carolina Spatial Version of Data: 3 Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:24000 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these m As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. USDA Natural Resources ----- (~onserralion Service 3/20/2006 Page 2 of 3 Y -~, , Stel~l ~ v o T• 0 4 2 9 PROGRAM ------- ------------- -- Februar-y-1~r2007- Edward Kale Bald Mountain Development Company 1400 Harding Place, Ste. 100 Charlotte, NC 28204 Project: Bald Mountain County: Rutherford The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP} is willing to accept payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that the payment will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCEEP will be approved. This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of ties letter. If we have not received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to NCEEP. Once NCEEP receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized wort . The amount of the In Lieu Fee to be paid to NCEEP by an applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at www.nceep.net. Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the followin table. Broad Stream (feet) Wetlands (acres) Buffer I Buffer II Cold Cool Warm Ri arian Non-Ri arian Coastal Marsh Impacts 300 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Credits 600 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. If the regulatory agencies require mitigation credits greater than indicated above, and the applicant wants NCEEP to be responsible for the additional mitigation, the applicant will need to submit a mitigation request to NCEEP for approval prior to permit issuance. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at (919) 716-1921. Sincerely, $• ~~~I ~ t tam D. Gilmore, PE Director _.- cc: Cyndi Karoly, Wetlands/401 Unit Amanda Jones, USACE-Asheville Kevin Barnett, DWQ-Asheville Rebekah Newton, agent File ~~~ ~~DYl.Gt~... E ~ ... PYDt~~ OuY .ftat~ q~~ North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1 652 1 91 9-71 5-4476 / www.nceep.net Soil Survey of Rutherford County, North Cazolina Lake Lure Map Unit Legend Summary Rutherford County, North Carolina Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI EvD Evazd-Cowee complex, 15 to 30 86.3 16.3 percent slopes, stony EvE Evard-Cowee complex, 30 to 50 261.3 49.4 percent slopes, stony EwF Evard-Cowee complex, 50 to 85 32.2 6.1 percent slopes, rocky GaC Greenlee-Tate complex, 6 to 15 27.8 5.3 percent slopes, extremely bouldery GaD Greenlee-Tate complex, 15 to 30 53.2 10.0 percent slopes, extremely bouldery HaC2 Hayesville sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 6.7 l .3 percent slopes, eroded HaD2 Hayesville sandy clay loam, 15 to 23.6 4.5 30 percent slopes, eroded TbC Tate-Greenlee complex, 6 to 15 28.8 5.4 percent slopes, very stony UdC Udorthents, loamy, 0 to 15 percent 9.1 1.7 slopes W Water 0.2 0.0 1J$~p Natural Resources Web Soil Survey I.0 3/20/2006 conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 NC DENR - DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY .0306 BROAD RIVER BASIN 2B .0300 Classification Name of Stream Description Class Date Index No. BROAD RIVER From source to Pool Creek, C;Tr 03/01/63 9 -(1) including b ackwaters of Lake Lure below elevation 991 Miller Cove Branch From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9 -2 Tom Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9 -3 Glade Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9 -4 Grice Branch (Grice Creek) From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 5 Duck Branch From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 6 Clear Branch From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9 -7 Laurel Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9 -8 Rock Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 9 Sand Branch From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 10 Rush Branch (Rush Creek) From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 11 Flat Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 12 Grassy Creek (Lake Charles) From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 13 Hickory Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 14 Middle Fork Hickory Creek From source to Dam at B; Tr 03/C1/63 9- 14- 1-(1) Lower Lake at Camp Mishemowka Middle Fork Hickory Creek From Dam at Lower Lake at C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 14- 1-(2) Camp Mishemowka to Hickory Creek Toms Fork From source to Middle Fork C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 14- 1-3 Hickory Creek Reedypatch Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 15 Turnbreeches Creek From source to Reedypatch C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 15- 1 Creek Slickrock Branch From source to Reedypatch C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 15- 2 Creek Hominy Mill Branch From source to Reedypatch C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 15- 3 Creek Little Creek From source to Reedypatch C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 15- 4 Creek Sugarloaf Creek From source to Little Creek C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 15- 4-1 Fall Creek From source to Broad River C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 16 BROAD RIVER (Lake Lure below From Pool Creek to B;Tr 03/01/63 9- (17) elevation 991) Carolina Mo untain Power Company Dam Pool Creek From source to Lake Lure, C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 18 Broad River Wolf Creek From source to Pool Creek C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 18- 1 Rock Creek From source to Lake Lure, C;Tr 08/03/92 9- 19 Broad River Buffalo Creek From source to Lake Lure, C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 20 Broad River Cane Creek From source to Dam at Camp B;Tr 03/01/63 9- 21- (1) Occoneechee Bathing Lake Cane Creek From Dam at Camp Occoneechee C;Tr 03/01/63 9- 21- (2) Bathing Lake to Lake Lure, Broad River 1 USACE AID# ~o DWQ# _ ___ v 0 7 (indicate on attached map) 0428 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: 1. Applicant's name: Lake Lure 2. Evaluator's name: Rebekah Newton 3. Date of evaluation: 05/10/2006 4. Time of evaluation: morning 5. Name of stream: UT Lake Lure 7. Approximate drainage area: ~15 ac 9. Length of reach evaluated: 50 If 11. Site coordinates (if known): 12. Subdivision name (if 13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): See Man. Site #1 14. Proposed channel work (if any): Residential Development 15. Recent weather conditions: Sunnv, mid-30 to low-70 16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunnv, cool l7. Identify any special waterway classifications known: C; Tr 18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? No If yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? No 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? No 21. Estimated watershed land use: 85% Forested, , 5% homesite and roadway, 10% Pasture 22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of 24. Channel slope down center of stream: Gentle (2-4%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Occasional Bends Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): ~,~ Comments: ,? a Evaluator's Signature ~`,f t Date c~ I I r C,%V 1 This channel evaluation form is infe~i ed to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please ca11919-876-8441 x 26. Site # 6. River basin: 8. Stream order: Third 10. County: Rutherford STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET A T C ECOREGION POIN T RANGI; . CH RACTERIS I S SCORE Coastal .piedmont Mounttsiin 1 Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points) 2 Evidence of past human alteration 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 3 (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) 3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 4 no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max points) 5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 4 (no dischar e = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) U ~ 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 1 (no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points) ~ Entrenchment /floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 1 p'" (deeply entrenched = 0; #'requent flooding = max oints) 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 0 (no wetlands = O; large adjacent wetlands = max oints) 9 Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 2 (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 10 Sediment input 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive deposition= O; little or no sediment = max points) 11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (fine, homogenous = O; large, diverse sizes = max points) 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points) 13 Presence of major bank failures 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 ~ (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 14 Root depth and density on banks 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 E,, (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throu out = max points) 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production 0-5 0-4 0-5 3 (substantial im act =0; no evidence = max points) 16 presence of riffle-pool ripple-pool complexes 0 - 3 0 - 5 0 - 6 5 E (no riffles/ripples or ools = 0; well-developed = max points) ~ 1 ~ Habitat complexity 0 - 6 0 - 6 0 - 6 5 (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points) f~ Canopy coverage over streambed 18 (no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canoe = max points) 0-5 0-5 0-5 3 19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0- 4 0- 4 3 (deeply embedded = O; loose structure = max) 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0 - 4 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) (,~ 21 Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 0 O (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints) 22 Presence of fish 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 0 (no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) Total Points Possible 100 100. 100 TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page} 62 * These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) _v07.0425 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ' Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: 1. Applicant's name: Mountian Brook 2. Evaluator's name: Rebekah Newton 3. Date of evaluation: 5/11/2006 4. Time of evaluation: morning 5. Name of stream: UT LAKE LURE 6. River basin: Broad 7. Approximate drainage area: ~40 ac 8. Stream order: Third 9. Length of reach evaluated: 50 if 10. County: Rutherford 11. Site coordinates (if known): 12. Subdivision name (if any): 13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location): See Man: Site #2 14. Proposed channel work (if any): Residential Development 15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny, mid-30 to low-70 16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny. cool 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: C; Tr 18. [s there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? No If yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? Yes 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? No 21. Estimated watershed land use: 85% Forested: 5% homesite and roadway 10% Pasture 22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 24. Channel slope down center of stream: Gentle (2-4%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Occasional Bends Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): !~a(Fi Comments: Evaluator's Signature ~~~-~ Date ~ J 6 ~ ~r~(;7 This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET CHARACTERIST CS ECQREGION POIN T RANGE I SCORE Coastal ..piedmont Mountain 1 Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 5 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points) 2 Evidence of past human alteration 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 4 (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) 3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 3 (no buffer = 0; Conti ous, wide buffer = max oints) 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive dischazges = 0; no dischaz es = max points) 5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 4 (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) U ~ 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 1 (no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max oints) ~ Entrenchment /floodplain access 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 2 1 p" (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points) 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 0 (no wetlands = O; lazge adjacent wetlands = max points) 9 Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 2 (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 10 Sediment input 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive deposition= O; little or no sediment = max points) 11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 (fine, homo enous = 0; lazge, diverse sizes = max pomts) 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 H (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max omts) ''" 13 Presence of major bank failures 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 ~ (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 14 Root depth and density on banks 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 E,, (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points) ~ 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (substantial im act =0; no evidence = max points) 16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes 0- 3 0- 5 0- 6 5 ~ (no riffles/ripples or ools = 0; well-develo ed = max points) ~ 1 ~ Habitat complexity 0- 6 0- 6 0- 6 5 ~ (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max oints) Canopy coverage over streambed 18 (no shading ve elation = 0; continuous canopy = max points) 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0- 4 0- 4 3 (deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max) 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0 - 4 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 ~ (no evidence = 0; common numerous es = max points) G7 21 Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 1 O (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) ~ 22 Presence of fish 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4 1 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max oints) ~ 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0 - 6 0 - 5 0 - S 0 (no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) Total Points Possible 100 100 100 .TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 66 * These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) - V 07.0429 -- . ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET - 'i Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: 1. Applicant's name: Lake Lure 2. Evaluator's name: Rebekah Newton 3. Date of evaluation: 5/11 /2006 4. Time of evaluation: morning 5. Name of stream: UT LAKE LURE 6. River basin: Broad 7. Approximate drainage area: > 100 ac 8. Stream order: Forth 9. Length of reach evaluated: 50 if 10. County: Rutherford 11. Site coordinates (if known): 12. Subdivision name (if any): 13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):- See Map; Site #3 14. Proposed channel work (if any): Residential Development 15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny, mid-30 to low-70 l6. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny, cool 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: C; Tr 18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? No If yes, estimate the water surface area: 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? No 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? No 21. Estimated watershed land use: 85% Forested, 5% homesite and roadway, 10% Pasture 22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 24. Channel slope down center of stream: Gentle ~2-4%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Occasional Bends Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. if a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): ~:,,~, Comments: ~? Evaluator's Signature ~,~(~~~ Date tjf f.~~r~tU This channel evaluation form is rote ded to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ECOREGION POIN T RANGE # CHAR S S U ACTERI TICS C+ RE Coastal piedmont Mountain 1 Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 5 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points) 2 Evidence of past human alteration 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 4 (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) 3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 3 (no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max points) 5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 4 (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) U 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0- 4 0- 4 0- 2 1 (no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points) ~ Entrenchment /floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 1 a (deeply entrenched = 0; fre uent flooding = max points) 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 0 (no wetlands = O; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 9 Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 2 (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 10 Sediment input 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive deposition= O; little or no sediment = max points) I 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (fine, homogenous = O; large, diverse sizes = max points) 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 ~ (deepl incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points) ~ 13 Presence of major bank failures 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 14 Root depth and density on banks 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 E, (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throu out = max points) ~ 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes 0- 3 0- 5 0- 6 5 E (no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-develo ed = max points) ~ 1 ~ Habitat complexity 0- 6 0- 6 0- 6 5 (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points) 18 Canopy coverage over streambed 0-5 0-5 0-5 3 (no shadin ve etation = 0; continuous canopy = max points) 19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0- 4 0- 4 3 (deeply embedded = O; loose structure = max) 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0 - 4 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 ~„~ (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) 21 Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 1 O (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) 22 Presence offish 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4 1 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous es = max points) 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 1 (no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) Total Points Possible 100 100 100 ..:TOTAL SCORE ....(also enter on first page) 6s * These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. USAGE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate on attached map) 07.0429 ~, 1 1 ° 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ' Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment: 1. Applicant's name: Lake Lure 2. Evaluator's name: Rebekah Newton 3. Date of evaluation: 5/1 1/2006 4. Time of evaluation: morning 5. Name of stream: UT LAKE LURE 6. River basin: Broad 7. Approximate drainage area:... 20 ac 8. Stream order: Second 9. Length of reach evaluated: 50 if 10. County: Rutherford ] 1. Site coordinates (if known): 12. Subdivision name (if any): 13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):- See Map; Site #4 14. Proposed channel work (if any): Residential Development 15. Recent weather conditions: Sunny, mid-30 to low - 70 16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny, cool 17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: C;Tr l8. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? No If yes, estimate the water surface area: l9. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? No 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? No 21. Estimated watershed land use: 85% Forested; 5% homesite and roadway, 10% Pasture 22. Bankfull width: 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 24. Channel slope down center of stream: Gentle (2-4%) 25. Channel sinuosity: Occasional Bends Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality. Total Score (from reverse): ti1.a? Comments: Evaluator's Signature --'~';`%~ Date ~~ 1 ~('~~ This channel evaluation form is inter ed to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USAGE approval and does not imply a particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change -version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26. STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET # ECOREGION POINT RANGE CHARACTERISTICS SCORE Coastal Piedmont Mountain 1 Presence of flow /persistent pools in stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points) 2 Evidence of past human alteration 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 3 (extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) ` 3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 4 (no buffer = 0; Conti ous, wide buffer = max points) 4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges 0-5 0-4 0-4 3 (extensive dischar es = 0; no discharges = max points) ,,a 5 Groundwater discharge 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4 4 U (no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) ,.~ 6 Presence of adjacent floodplain 0-4 0-4 0-2 1 (no floodplain = 0; extensive floodplain = max points) ~ Entrenchment /floodplain access 0- 5 0- 4 0- 2 1 (deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points) 8 Presence of adjacent wetlands 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 0 (no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands= max points) 9 Channel sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0- 3 2 (extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 10 Sediment input 0- 5 0- 4 0- 4 3 (extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points) 11 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate NA* 0 - 4 0 - 5 4 (fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points) 12 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 3 ~+ (deeply incised = 0; stable bed & banks = max points) ~ 13 Presence of major bank failures 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 4 ~ (severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) ~ d 14 Root depth and density on banks. 0-3 0-4 0-5 3 E,,, (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout:= max points) ~ 15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production 0-5 0-4 0-5 3 (substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes 0- 3 0- 5 0- 6 5 ~ (no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points) ~ 17 Habitat complexity 0-6 0-6 0-6 5 ~ (little or no habitat = 0; frequent varied habitats = max points) , 18 Canopy coverage over streambed 0-5 0-5 0-5 3 x (no shading vegetation ° 0; continuous canopy = max points) 19 Substrate embeddedness NA* 0- 4 0- 4 3 (deeply embedded = O; loose structure = max) 20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) 0-4 0-5 0-5 4 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points) 21 Presence of amphibians 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 0 4 (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types= max points) 4 22 Presence of fish 0- 4 0- 4 0- 4 0 ~ (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points) 23 Evidence of wildlife use 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 0 (no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) Total Points Possible 100 100 100 TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 62 * These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams. ~ ~ DATA FORM 0 7 0 4 2 Q ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual} Project /Site: L~t4~2 ,d~a'K'~ Date:_, Applicant /Owner: ~ County: -~ ~~ Investigator: ~ ~; State: , Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes~_ No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes Nom Transect ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No_~ Plot ID: (explain on reverse if needed) VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum- Indicator 1.-~ t~ ~$- 9. 2. _~ C~ L. 10. 3. _~}_ 11. 4.~~ S _~. 12. 5. _~ ~ 13. 6. ~~ IC'~yt A~. ~ 14. 7. ~ 15. g, 16. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). ~~~~~~®,~~ Remarks: HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators: Other Inundated Saturated in Upper 12" No Recorded Data Available Water Marks Drift Lines Field Observations: Sediment Deposits ~ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surtace Water: _(in.) Secondary Indicators: ~_ Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12" Depth to Free Water in Pit: ~ (in.) Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: ~ (in.) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS ~~ ~ Map Unit Name (Series and Phase)~~~~' °' `~- Drainage Class: Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes_ No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc. Hydric Soil Indicators: Histosol _ Concretions _ Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ~ Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List ~ Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List ~ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ~ No Hydric Soils Present? Yes ~ No Remarks: Is the Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yeses No, • ~'f .- DATA FORM ROUTINE aNETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual) Project /Site: ~~~~ ~'+~ Date: ~~ I ~ Applicant 1 Owner: (,~~,P~J'~'.~fQ.~'~'°I" Investigator: ~~~t~ ~~~'~e~ d County:c~'I~ State: `f~I G Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes~_ No_ Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes luo~_ Transect ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No a _ Plot ID: (explain on reverse if needed) VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. c~ ~~ ~ ~.~ ~-~ 9. 2. $?®d ~dr.~~ ~ ~~- 10. 3. ~~t~ ~$-~ 11. 4. 12. 5. 13. 6. 14. 7. 15. 8. 16. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). ~. Remarks: t~ HYDROLOGY v _ Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators: Other --~-Inundated Saturated in Upper 12" No Recorded Data Available ~ Water Marks Drift Lines Field Observations: Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: `~ (in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: ® (in.) Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12" --Y~- Water-Stained Leaves Local Soil Survey Data Depth to Saturated Soil: ~ (in.) FAC-Neutral Test Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS y !, w Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): ~~~ ~ _~ °' ~~'~~. Drainage Class: Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Profile Description: Depth Matrix Colors ' Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions, (inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc. ~~ ~~ Hydric Soil Indicators: _ Histosol Concretions _ Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils ~. Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List. ~ Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List ' -~ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ~ No Is the Sampling Point Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ~~ No Within a Wetland? Yeses No Hydric Soils Present? Yes ~ No Remarks: 1 ^ M DATA FORM ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION (1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual) Project /Site: t'~~ 'P Date:~~~ d ~ ®d`~ Applicant / Ow er: ~~'~'_ @t~~9~.~'~ County: ~.t~' Investigator: ~~~l~ ~~~`• State: Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yeses No Community ID: Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)? Yes luo 9L Transect ID: Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No_~_ Plot ID: (explain on reverse if needed) ~~~ VEGETATION ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator 1. ~~ Y'U10~ M ~ - 9. 2.x.9 d"dt;~l!1~Y1b~1 ^~Zp1~E~r~"'I[ 10. 4.1t!~6rX.9~.. )~~~- - 12. . 5. Vg ~ddt`tdd.. ~~ 13. 6. 91r.~ 1!)'~~!A. ~_ 14. 7. ~~~ DL ?~Sdr91P~Df'd~it. ~~ ~ 15. Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). = ~~~ R Remarks: ~ ~ ~ C {. ~ HYDROLOGY Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators _ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators: _ Other Inundated -Saturated in Upper 12" IVo Recorded Data Available _ Water Marks Drift Lines Field Observations: _ Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns in Wetlands Depth of Surface Water: ~(in.) Secondary Indicators: Depth to Free Water in Pit: ~" a in.) Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12" Water-Stained Leaves Depth to Saturated Soil: ~(in.) Local Soil Survey Data FAC-Neutral Test _ Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: SOILS ~ ~~ 11Aap Unit Name (Series and Phase): ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~' ~~° Drainage Class: Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No Profile Description: ', Depth Matrix Colors Mottle Colors' Mottle Texture, Concretions (i nc hes ) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell, Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure. etc. ~~ ®® !pp ~°'! P~~~ ~ Hydric Soil Indicators: ~ , Histosol• Concretions _ Histic Epipedon ~ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils Sulfidic' Odor ' '. Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Aquic ~llloisture Regime • L' fisted On Local Hydric Soils List Reducing,Conditiot5s Listed on National Hydric Soils List Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks) Remarks: WETLAND DETERMINATION Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes Hydric Soils Present? Yes Remarks: No ~L Is the Sampling Point No ~- Within a Wetland? Yes_ Nom No ~ Lake Lure -Data Form Map i Rutherford, NC ~ 0 7 •o a 2 S -1 ~ _ _ ~ , ,. G .- _._.. T ` -~' ,., _ - ~ ~ y -, _ Dp . ; `1 s r. ~ _ ._ ~ _ _ R ~~ . .~. _ -_. _ 1: -~. -- -.. . _ ~,~~ _ ;r" ~ _ J :' .~'. ~ f' ~~ ~. ~ _ - _ t .. ~ r~ ~ .- f - - ~ . ~.~ ,.., .Q _ ._ ..., ~ - .- .~ _ ~ _ _ ._ ,. _. -. ,. _~._ _ _ - i ~ `''jar' ~''+~(~. ~ - ) _ -- ~ _ .-~--= _~~-_,~ ~ '~~ ~e - ~. .