20090349 Ver 1_401 Application_20090309

ENV
E11VO011t111'1 "' ?+OhS11?11'Ig Sovims Inc.
%ftmamall,lillillill,lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilljlllllllllllllllllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIillilljlllllllllllllllllillillillillIlIllIllllilllllllllllllllllllillillillillillillillI -M
March 30, 2009
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NC DENR DWQ
Wetlands/401 Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Pte
RE: Cranberry Creek Estates
Avery County, NC
Dear Ms. Karoly:
3764 Rominger Road
Banner Elk, NC 28604
Ph: 828-297-6946
Fax: [phone]
e-mail: [e-mail]
09 0349
Nval
M!312009
DENR -WATER Q1,11WTY
WETLANDS AND STORMWASER BRANCH
Transmitted with this letter are 5 copies of the 404/401 permit application for the referenced project and
a check for $570. to cover the permit fee. The application is for a NWP 29 and WQC 3705. Proposed
impacts are 120 linear feet of permanent stream impact, 120 feet of temporary stream impact, and
0.021 acres of wetland impact. The streams are not designated trout waters. The Applicant's are DJF,
LLC, Mr. Dennis Fullenkamp is the contact and B&J NC, LLC, Mr. Dale Hafele is the contact. ENV Inc.
has prepared this application and is available to answer any questions you may have. If you need to
schedule a site visit please contact me. Please include ENV Inc. on the copy list of all correspondence
for this project.
If you have any questions regarding these items please call me at 828-297-6946, thank you.
Sincerely,
i
Jo n C. Vilas
President, ENV Environmental Consulting Services Inc.
cc: Mr. Dennis Fullenkamp
Mr. Dale Hafele
Mr. Bob Grasso
09-0349
o? Qc Office Use Only:
M Corps action ID no.
1
° DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing monk,
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: D4P
®Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ? Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program.
E] Yes ®No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Cranberry Creek Estates
2b. County: Avery
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Elk Park
2d. Subdivision name: Cranberry Creek Estates
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: DJF, LLC-1/2 Interest -- B & J NC, LLC-1/2 Interest
3b. Deed Book and Page No. 406/2363
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Dennis Fullenkam and Dale Hafele
P
3d. Street address: 3443 Hancock Bridge Pkwy. #301
3e. City, state, zip: N. Fort Myers, FL 33903
3f. Telephone no.: 239-278-1121
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page I of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

11
D
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: John Vilas
5b. Business name
(if applicable): ENV-ECS, Inc.
5c. Street address: 3764 Rominger Rd.
5d. City, state, zip: Banner Elk, NC 28604
5e. Telephone no.: 828-297-6946
5f. Fax no.: 828.297-1982
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 182800864606
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: see att. sheet Longitude: -
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size: 434.6 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Miller Branch
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C
2c. River basin: Watauga
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The site is primarily forested with evidence of historic timbering activities, i.e. existing skid roads, existing culverts, and
filled-in sections of streams. Recently, the site has been developed as a residential development with the construction of
subdivision roads, vegetated stormwater conveyances, lot creation, and the completed construction of several single
family homes. Land use in the vicinity of the site is mostly undeveloped land, timbering, and single family residential.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
2.33
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
9,860
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to construct a single family residential development. The project is composed of three
phases for development. Phase I has been completed, and phase II road construction has been started.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The entire project site is composed of 434.6-acres of property; 304.1-acres are being subdivided into 80 lots for
residential house construction; 71-acres has been set aside for preservation; 59.5-acres are being sold. Phase II road
construction has been completed along Bear Paw Rd. along an existing road grade used in the past for timber extraction
on the northern side of the site. Trackhoe, dozer, and dump truck are the primary equipment used in this operation. The
road alignment crosses over three jurisdictional wetlands and two stream channels. Impacts to these waters include both
temporary and permanent impact types. Temporary fill impacts will be mitigated along both stream crossings according to
a restoration plan being submitted with this PCN application.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
® Yes ? No ? Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
®Preliminary ? Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: ENV-ECS, Inc.
Name (if known): Sean Martin Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation
.
Linda Wiggs from the Asheville NC DWQ regional office made a site visit on February 26, 2009. Amanda Jones from the
Asheville USACE regional office conducted a site visit March 9, 2009.
Page 3 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
n
1

11
1

5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes ® No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ® Yes ? No
6b. If yes, explain.
Phase I residential site development has been completed. Phase II road construction for single family home development
has been started. A total of three phases for single family residential site development is proposed.
Page 4 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

1
1
1

1
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ? Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ? T Fill Seep ® Yes
? No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.009
W2 ®P ? T Fill Seep ® Yes ® Corps 01
0
? No ? DWQ .
W3 ®P ? T Fill Seep ® Yes
? No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.002
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 El P F-1 T El Yes El Corps
E] No El DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts 0.021
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - or
(PER)
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (I NT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ®P ? T Culvert UT-Miller Branch ® PER ® Corps 6 60
2E ? INT ? DWQ
S2 ®P ? T Excavation UT-Miller Branch ® PER ® Corps 6 10
2E ? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ® T Fill UT-Miller Branch ® PER ® Corps 6 110
2E ? INT ? DWQ
S4 ® P ? T Culvert UT-Miller Branch ? PER ® Corps 4 40
2B ® INT ? DWQ
S5 ®P ? T Excavation UT-Miller Branch ? PER ® Corps 4 10
2B ® INT ? DWQ
S6 ? POT Fill UT-Miller Branch ? PER ® Corps 4 10
2B ® INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 240
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
1

1

1

1
1
1

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4E Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres)
number of pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
? Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Temporary impact required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Page 6 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

1

1
1

1

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
All phase I site development has been designed to completely avoid 404/401 impacts. Phase II road construction has incurred
temporary fill impacts to streams which will be negated through a restoration plan established with the USACE. A total of 110
linear feet of stream channel will be restored on tributary UT-Miller Branch 2E below the road crossing by installing grade
control structures, shaping the banks, pulling fill from the channel, and planting disturbed portions of the riparian buffer. A total
of 10 linear feet of fill will be removed in the stream channel of UT-Miller Branch 2B below the road crossing. Project site
imperviousness has been reduced by aligning Bear Paw Road along the northern property boundary using an existing timber
road grade. This alignment allows using driveways to access lots reducing potential runoff and erosion from excessive road
gradients. In addition, 71-acres of the subject property will be permanently protected acting as preserves which include
vegetated buffer zones to stream corridors.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Existing graded timber roads have been used in the design of new road construction reducing the amount of excavation on-
site and the amount of vegetation that has to be removed, thus reducing potential erosion and sediment problems. Adequate
erosion and sediment control measures will be employed to capture all sediments generated on-site and will be maintained
through NPDES inspection protocol. Road design allows access to all phased lot sites using driveway standards, which
reduces the total length of subdivision roads on the project site and lowering the total site's impervious characteristics.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ? Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

1
1
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ? Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 7.3%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ? Yes ® No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: This project does not have any areas of
high intensity development, no drainage areas on the site have a proposed imperviou sness at or above 24%, and
stormwater will be transported along vegetated conveyances throughout the entire development.
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, na rrative description of the plan:
? Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
? Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ? No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties

4a.
Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW
? ORW
(check all that apply):
? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? ? Yes ? No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No
Page 9 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ? Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ® Yes ? No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): Property owners
who are developing the site as a single family residential project submitted a master site plan with lot and road alignments to
Avery County Planning and Inspections. After receiving preliminary approval for this master plan, the owners proceded with
site development and road construction. During the drought of 2008, the small streams and wetlands on the site were not
noticed. Following the initial grading of Bear Paw Road, work on the site was halted for several months. During an inspection
in January 2009, the owners' representatives and Avery County officials noticed the streams and wetland areas and
immediately hired an environmental consultant to asses the site and address any issues of non-comliance. This permit
application is a direct result of this action and has been prepared in accordance with guidance received from federal and State
agency representatives.
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
Phase I site development has been completed and is stabilized with paved subdivision roads, vegetated ditchlines and
side slopes. Phase II road construction is set to be finished following acquisition of required 404/401 permits. Phase III
road construction will result in no addional 404/401 impacts and will follow existing timber road grades reducing sediment
loads. The 59.5-acre tract that is being sold may be developed in the future by others, but the specific nature of that
development is uncertain at this time. Following the sale of the 59.5-acre tract, the current owners will have no control
over the this tract.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Single family residences will treat wastewater by septic tank and drainfield.
Page 10 of 11
PCN Form -Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
. .. :..:..a....%: '.....1

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat? ? Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes NO
Impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. El Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
http:/Iwww.fws.gov/n"sleWcountyfr.html
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requlrement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes No
Ob. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
httpJ/www.saw.usace.army.miilwedands/NWp20071specialwaters.html; httpJ/www.ncfisheries.nef/fmpatindex.html
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requiremant)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties signdicant in ® Yes No
?
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
http,lhvww.nenhff.org/index.htin; NC OneMap Vlewer
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. W01 this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100 year Foodplain? ? Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how jest meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) ou use a the tioodplain determination
?
http://www.ncRo
o
dmaps corn/
s
^
/
J
y y,,
'
1 d/ `? a G.
Y we' p T 2.1
Ap icartt/ g is rated Name Applicant! gent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter tram the applicant
is vided.
Page 11 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
PCN Form - attachment
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
lb. Site Latitude Longitude
Wl: 36.15535 -81.95272
W2: 36.15535 -81.95272
W3: 36.15718 -81.94830
S I: 36.15720 -81.94608
' S2: 36.15720 -81.94608
S3: 36.15720 -81.94608
S4: 36.15536 -81.95050
S5: 36.15536 -81.95050
S6: 36.15536 -81.95050
I I
Ch (Y) Q-
? N N
? a
(A C
W z O
a5 z mo
(1) U o
C)
L
^L
W
L
U
Y
N
N
U
N
c
CD
Cl)
Cl)
O
O
N
U
O
O
Cl)
N
(0
.r
N
W
Y
N
N
J

m
n
c
N
L
J
W
N
O
7
¦
Cranberry Creek Estates
' PCN NWP 29
Topographic Map
SCALE 1:24000
1 ?
o
??-- _ 1 MILE
' 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET
1 5 0 I KILOMETER
L-L ' CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
ELK PARK, N. C.-TENN.
N3607.5-W8152.5/7.5
1960
PH0TC?REVISED 1973
AMS 4656 111 NW-SERIES V842
WODSJa- 9@U401:Iiew3 00992 DN '113 la-- 6?./
N6T' L6Z'9Z9;xed Pd Ja6wwoa 49::s VNIIOV? H12?ON `J.1Nf100 .1b3?`d 60OZ '6T u:)apW
9b69'Z6Z'9Z9 :4d
•auI saalnaaS 6uialnsuo:) je4uawuoainu:l dIHSNM01 J1M38 W HO d p w u o i l e a u pa
AN3 >ill?10 J.?1?1?8Nd?l?
a
a
2
u
z
Q
?M
W
W
J
J
N

M
3

w
a
0
u
VIIII 1?
I
i
m
o
? \.J?:, to /\ Ml
- m9
MO /
a ' O ???\\ O I/II//
I ?? nC,
\ ??/ v 3
m °f
n
n y
00 E
D ?
.N
}
O
i .OJ il? nJ0
m
>? /n
ca
17
M IT
r \ ?
7
N I? /\ I i -O i?
ioi
v ?0 -
O
O
\1 NO NO r ?\
N N N
1
Nr°n ?
O 0 W
w
u
I z
w >
3: uj
? 3 Q3
a ?
P
\O

n
n
W
r
r
n v
i
n

W O
N
W m
K
a
\n2
z
O
oV)
Q ?
O
?m
CO w (n
0 W
mQ a a
W W
o nz coal V) V) V)C/) J
0? 0 Ln o O O O O O p N?
N (.0 W V) ?o O_l W fl . 00hMp?Nnj OM
d-m2 't n001""7'r-ON?f-r7
w
Q (n r7
W F- .. Q
?O I rno O
Q O O n o' S
n z r-
C?
z o°I-- oo?w
O w Ozzw,
Q Q W wwl-- . -- Uw
d wQWW?OOQw
V, Q??maov
LL,
r?
Y ? U N M J}- N
Z O(n C)W Qzmm W W W Qf zW W
-- m U) (n W W (n (n (n w W r- cn cn
WO JOmmQQQ?mtnQQ
W pmt Q?zz===Jzx==
?- w 0 O Q Q d d d Q Q W m m
? nn- r,orr_ srr

0
i
c
0
0
u
O
Wp
3 I
O
o T
o
CD
Cranberry Creek Estates
Wetland Table
Name Size
W-1 784.45
W-2 1,692.65
W-3 10,354.29
W-4 164.36
W-5 216.56
W-6 3,106.89
W-7 2,808.97
W-8 956.87
W-9 3,104.51
W-10 5,745.70
W-11 23,559.16
W-12 8,210.29
W-13 588.64
W-14 3,414.00
W-15 3,191.32
W-16 4,917.87
W-17 4,313.18
W-18 7,132.15
W-19 4,248.85
W-20 1,555.75
W-21 663.08
W-22 394.77
W-23 411.22
W-24 148.31
W-25 190.73
W-26 427.27
W-27 5,367.49
W-28 606.34
W-29 2,065.07
W-30 129.60
W-31 899.15
Totals 101,369.49 s .ft.
2.33 acres

1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 02/09/2009 Project: Cranberry Creek Latitude:
Evaluator: Sean Martin Site: 2E - perennial Longitude:
Total Points: 31.0 County: Avery Other: Elk Park, NC
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =_j5.5 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 2
2. Sinuosity
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 2
5. Active/relic flood lain 1
6. Depositional bars or benches 1
7. Braided channel 0
8. Recent alluvial deposits 2
9 a Natural levees 0
10. Headcuts 1
11. Grade controls 1.5
12. Natural valley or drainage way 1
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No = 0
a rvian-inaua Ulu nes are: [JUL IdLUU, see Uiscussions m manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 7 S )
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 2
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel - dry or growing season 3
16. Leaflitter 1
17. Sediment on plants or debris 1
18. Organic debris lines or piles rack lines 0.5
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features)
resent? No = 0
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 8 n 1
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 3
21b. Rooted plants in channel 3
22. Crayfish 0.5
23. Bivalves 0
24. Fish 0
25. Amphibians 0.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance 0.5
27. Filamentous algae; eri h on 0
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
• Caddisfly casings and left-handed snails.
.T ? pGc? S-L k-e c'S 1 t J t S' 3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 02/09/2009 Project: Cranberry Creek Latitude:
Evaluator: Sean Martin Site: 2B - intermittent Longitude:
Total Points: 23.25 County: Avery Other: Elk Park, NO
A. Geomorphology Subtotal =_11 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 1
2. Sinuosity 1
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 2
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 1
5. Active/relic flood lain 1
6. Depositional bars or benches 0
7. Braided channel 1
8. Recent alluvial deposits 1
9 a Natural levees 0
10. Headcuts 1
11. Grade controls 1
12. Natural valley or drainage way 1
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No = 0
a Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 7.5 )
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 2
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or

Water in channel -- dry or growing season 2
16. Leaflitter 1.5
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5
18. Or anic debris lines or piles rack lines 0
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features)

resent? Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 4.75 )
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 2
21b. Rooted plants in channel 1
22. Crayfish 0
23. Bivalves 0
24. Fish 0
25. Amphibians 0.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance 0.5
27. Filamentous algae; eri h on 0
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed FACW = 0.75
b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
• Stream channel emerges from wetland
unit W-11 above the road.
S(O
North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: 02/02/2009 Project: Cranberry Creek Latitude:
Evaluator: Sean Martin Site: W-13: not a stream Longitude:
Total Points: 12.5 County: Avery Other: Elk Park, NC
A. Geomorphology Subtotal = 5 Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1a. Continuous bed and bank 1
2. Sinuosity 0
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 1
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 1
5. Active/relic flood lain 0
6. Depositional bars or benches 0
7. Braided channel 0
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0
9 a Natural levees 0
10. Headcuts 1
11. Grade controls 0.5
12. Natural valley or drainage way 0.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No = 0
a rvian-rnaue u4Gne5 are not ratea; see oiscussions in manual
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = 4 )
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 1
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or

Water in channel -- dry or growing season 2
16. Leaflitter 0.5
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0.5
18. Organic debris lines or piles rack lines 0
19. Hydric soils (redoximorphic features)

resent? No=O
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 15 )
20b. Fibrous roots in channel 1
21b. Rooted plants in channel 2
22. Crayfish 0
23. Bivalves 0
24. Fish 0
25. Amphibians 0
26. Macrobenthos note diversity and abundance 0
27. Filamentous algae; eri h on 0
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fungus. 0
29 b. Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5
' b Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.) Sketch:
PCN permit Wetland Impact Site: W3
WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM
Project/Site: Cranberry Creek Date: 02/09/2009
A licant/owner: Coun : Ave
Investigators: Sean Martin State: NC

Wetland Wetland
Community I.D.: Miller Branch Plot I.D .: W-10 Community I.D.: Miller Branch Plot I.D.: ad'acent
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes
Significant disturbance (atypical situation)? No Significant disturbance (atypical situation)? No
Is this a potential problem area? No Is this a potential problem area? No

Vegetation
Vegetation
Dominant S ecies Stratum Indicator Dominant Species Stratum Indicator
1 S ha um -- Moss OBL Leriodendron tuli f era T FACU
2 Betula alle haniensts T FAC Betula lenta T FACU
3 lm atiens allida H FACW Ouercus rubra T FACU+
4 Rhododendron maximum S FAC Rhododendron maximum S FAC
5 Osmuncla cinnamomea Fern OBL Tsu a canadensis T FACU
6 Alnus serrulata T OBL Betula alle haniensis T FAC
7 Betula o difolia T FAC :J _
8
Dominant indicator status: OBL Dominant indicator status : FACU
Remarks: Broad forested valley flood bench. Remarks: Second growth northern hardwood forest.
H drol
Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water 0-2 (in.) Hydrol2gy
Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water 0 (in.)
Depth to Free Water 0-6 (in.) Depth to Free Water 12+ (in
)
Depth to Saturated Soil 0 (in.) .
Depth to Saturated Soil 12+ (in.)
Prima Indicators Seconda Indicators
Inundat
d Prima Indicators SeCOnda Indicators
e
X Oxidized Rhinos hens
Saturated <12" Inundated Oxidized Rhinos hens
X Water-stained leaves
Water Marks X Saturated <12" Water-stained leaves
Local soil sutrve data
Sediment De osits X FAC-neutral test Water Marks Local soil surve data

Drainage Patterns X Other (Remarks) Sediment Deposits FAC-neutral test
Drainage Patterns X Other (Remarks)
Remarks: Surface flow within a bowl shaped valley converging with Remarks:
stream 2A (UT-Miller Branch).

Soils
Soil Ma Unit Name: Cullasala cobbl loam 30 50% slo es
Profile Descri lion: CtE
extr
) B
l Soils
Soil Ma Unit Name: Cullasa'a cobbl loam 30-50% slopes
,
eme
ou
dery
Depth M Profile Descri lion: CtE, extreme) Bouldery
atrix Mottle
(inches.) Horizon Color Colors Texture Depth Matrix Mottle
(inches.) Horizon C
l
o
or Colors Texture
0-6 A 1 OYR 3/1 silty 0-12 A] I OYR 2/2 Cobbly
loam
6+ rocky 12+ A2 I OYR 3/3 Cobbly
loam
H dric Soil Indicators
Histosol H dric Soil Indicators
Concretions
Histic Epipedon Organic Content (sandy) Histosol Concretions
Histic E i ed

Sulfidic Odor Or anic streaking (sand) on Organic Content (sandy)
Sulfidic Odor

Aquic Moisture Regime X Local H dric Soils List
R Organic streaking (sandy)
A uic Moisture Re ime
Local H
dric Soil
Li
t
educing Conditions
National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Ch y
s
s
Reducin Conditions National H dric Soils List
roma Other (Remarks)
Remarks: Shallow soils atop rocky substrate withi Gle ed or Low-Chroma
Other (Remarks)
n a steep toe slope. Remarks:
Wetland Determination
Hvdro h is Vegetation Present? Wetland Determination
Yes
Wetland Hydrology Present? H dro h is --- -tion Present?
No
Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Wetland H drolo Present? No
Yes Hydric Soils Present?
Is this Sam fin Point Within a Wetland? No
Yes Is this Sam lin Point Within a Wetland?

Remarks: No
Remarks:
--ryv aC-v 5'?t-e : '\Q

WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM
Project/Site: Cranberry Creek Date: 02/09/2009
A licant/Owner: Coun : Ave
Investigators: Sean Martin State: NC

Wetland
Igmstances : Miller Branch Plot 1. D.
exist on the site?
rbance (atpical situation)?
l problem area?
: W-7

Yes
No
No Wetland
Community I.D.: Miller Branch Plot LD.: ad'acent
Do normal circumstances exist on the site?
Si ifcant disturbance (a ical situation)?
Is this a otential roblem area?

Yes
No
N
o
Vegetation
Dominant Species St Vegetation

1
Im atiens ca ensis ratum
H Indicator Dominant Species Stratum Indicator

2
Sara a mieranthidifolia
H FACW Leriodendron tuli i era T FACU

3
Monorda didyma
H OBL Betula lenta T FACU

4
Sambucus canadensis
H FAC ercus rubra T FACU+

5
Carex s
H FACW- Rhododendron maximum
T S FAC

6 .
Cardamine ensylvanica
H FACW -1- eanadensis T FACU

7
Lindera benzoin
S OBL
FACW Betttla alle haniensis T FAC
8
Dominant indicator status: FACW
Remarks: Herbaceous headwater seep. Dominant indicator status : FACU
Remarks: Second growth northern hardwood forest.
' Hydrology
Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water 0-1 (in.) Hydrology
Field Observations: Depth of Surface Water 0 (in
)
Depth to Free Water 0-4 (in.) .
Depth to Free Water 12+ (in
)
Depth to Saturated Soil 0 (in.) .
Depth to Saturated Soil 12+ (in.)
' Prima Indicators Seconda Indicators
Inundated Prima Indicators Seconda Ind
X Oxidized Rhizos heres
Saturated <12" X Water-stained leav Inundated Oxidized Rhinos here<
"
es
Water Marks X Local soil surve data Saturated <12
Water-stained leaves
Water Mark

Sediment Deposits X FAC-neutral test s Local soil survey data
Sediment De osits FAC-neutral test
Drainage Patterns X Other (Remarks)
Remarks: Groundwater seep appears to be perennial Drainage Patterns X Other (Remarks)
. Remarks:
w0:)-s0a-nuaMDuy0[ :Pew3 b098Z JN ' 113 Jauueg
Z86T'L6Z'8Z8:xe3 paJa6uiw0bb9L£ VNIIO?JVO HiaON `Jl1Nf100 QJ3nd ' ?J
9b69'L6Z'8Z8 4d E300z ?L ? W
'DUI 'S@DIAJ@S bui4lnsuoD jejuawuoainu?] dIHSNM01 J,2QJ38NVdO
dew 4DeduaI
°
O
C C
0-)
\,A
N O O
J?+ L J
> > (u > ro
Q ii li iL U LU ii U w U-
Mr^
V/ E
I? U U U
d (Q v M
N 0 0 0 O
C) E 0 0 +-{ O O O
00 O
U)
N a-i Q0 \ U7 to m m m m w
? 'O
O
Q '
L J
O 2 I O ,.Vl
U O V) C
S_ V)
Q` .^ C t!1
(O v
O L O
zU?
00
cn
I
°
a' JO
cn
0
Oo
cn
?,
N
N
O
N
00
N
°
0-) J
-0
° °
N J 1 ? J
NO N0
O
?I
O ° !
- )IL
- 0O \\
GO
_ ij' \ \1
N N
co
?- _ 1 I f

Cranberry Creek Estates
PCN NWP 29
Avery County, NC
Photosheet One
it

Photo One: View of the south side of Bear Paw
Road looking up at wetland unit W-7 where its
boundary is seen descending to the road and is
filled in by new road construction. The cut slope of
the road can be seen as well as the road edge in
' this photo. This impact site is called W1 in the PCN
permit application.

I
Qin 4
t6P 3
Y
kg . ..-

b '?
OCR

ree: View alonq the south of Bear

i e# Y 8a i 1
rr

ia?

n

Road looking up at the cut slope which has
' impacted stream UT Miller Branch 2B. The name
of this impact site in the PCN permit application is
S5 and is classified as an excavation impact type.

k?

4 ?.s-?k5+? Si
..
t

Y .1n Yn ? + ?,.- .,kamy e
u.
sr
x`: w
pw-

s
Photo Two: View along the south side of Bear Paw
Road looking up at the head of wetland unit W-10
where its boundary descends and is filled in by new
road construction. The boundary of W-1 0 proceeds
below the road and off the property boundary. The
name of this wetland impact site is W2 in the PCN
permit application.
Road looking down at the stream channel of UT-
Miller Branch 2B. The lower end of the culvert can
be seen in this photo. The pipe impact is named S4
and the fill within the channel below is named S6 in
the PCN permit application. The fill is to be
removed and the channel to be restored according
to a restoration plan included with the permit
application.

11

n
Cranberry Creek Estates
PCN NWP 29
Avery County, NC
Photosheet Two

"'^Yer.?..y, e•„a.: 'r'te ?' . ^W s` r"'? ,rt"? ?+vn ? ?.,`. '? ._ ? "`^ ?t
41
Photo Five: View along the south side of Bear Paw
Road looking up at the wetland unit W-13. This
' linear seep is impacted from new road construction
by fill. The impact site is named W3 in the PCN
' permit application.
Photo Seven: View of Bear Paw Road where it
d , q
3
crosses UT-Miller Branch 2E. The cut slope can be
'seen on the upslope side of the road. This
excavation stream impact is named S2 in the PCN
permit application.
Photo Six: View alona the north side of Bear Paw
Road where UT-Miller Branch 2E is piped under
the new road construction. The pipe impact length
is 60 If and is named S1 in the PCN permit
application. The fill material seen in the stream
channel is named S3; its length 110 If and is
proposed to be restored as outlined in the attached
restoration plan.

V
-V,
k

.. "
y?
5"
jh:
"
1W
y

1
6 ?

{?? Y +C2y'? T

Photo Eight: Close-up view along UT-Miller Branch
2E below Bear Paw Road where the fill material
has impacted the stream channel. This is stream
impact site S3 in the PCN permit application. This
material is proposed to be removed, grade control
structures installed, banks re-shaped and
stabilized with vegetation, and portions of the trout
buffer to be replanted as outlined in the attached
restoration plan.

Cranberry Creek Estates
Restoration Plan for Temporary Impact Areas S3 and S6
' 3-30-2009
Background: Both impact areas S3 and S6 are classified as temporary and were created
' during the initial grading phase of Bear Paw Road. The impacts at each of these sites can
be characterized as primarily boulder and cobble fill with areas of heavy sedimentation
from bank sloughing and wash. In both cases the original channel bed is mostly visible
' and complete restoration of the streambed can be accomplished by cleaning out the
boulders, cobble and sediment debris using a combination of manual labor and a mini-
excavator with a hydraulic thumb. A detailed description of each restoration is provided
' in the following sections.
Impact Area S3: Impact Area S3 is located on UT-Miller Branch 2E and is approximately
110 linear feet in length, extending from the end of a 60 foot-long CMP. Looking
downstream, the impacted area is from the channel bed, left for approximately 25 feet.
The right bank and buffer area is largely intact and minimally disturbed for this entire
reach.
1. All instream work is to be performed in the dry. A temporary pump-around will
' be installed by placing sand bags in the upstream end of the existing culvert,
pumped stream-flow will discharged through a filter dam below the work area.
2. A mini-excavator will be used to construct rock grade control structures at the
outlet of the 24" CMP and below to create a series of step pools that tie into the
existing channel bed. Two or three additional rock grade controls will be installed
at channel locations where substantial drops in the existing profile create a
' headcut risk. See attached Plan view and Profile details.
3. Boulders and fill will be used to create/restore the left channel bank along the
restoration reach. All freshly graded areas adjacent to the channel will be
' stabilized with erosion control mat (NAG 5-75 or equivalent) and seeded with a
temporary erosion control mix. (see Cross Section detail)
4. All remaining boulders and fill will be removed from the channel either by
machine or manual labor.
5. Following completion of channel restoration activities, all disturbed areas will be
prepared for planting. The entire riparian area will be over-seeded with a native
seed mix (Ernst seed mix # 178, 304, 187 or approved equivalent).
6. The restored buffer area will be planted with a mixture of trees and shrubs. Plant
spacing will be random with total numbers equal or exceeding 400 stems per acre.
The buffer area should be planted with a mixture of 3 or more of the following
trees and shrubs:
' a. Rhododendron (native)
b. Red Maple
c. Yellow Birch
d. Green Ash
e. Tulip Poplar
f. Oak sp.
' Cranberry Creek Estates
Restoration Plan Narrative 1 3/30/2009
1
' g. Dogwood
h. Shrub willow
i. Shrub dogwood
j. Approved alternates or transplants from the site may be used as approved
by the designer.
7. Trees and shrubs shall be staked and watered as needed to ensure successful
establishment.
8. The site will be inspected at the end of the first growing season to determine
stabilization and survivorship. Replacement planting will be required if less than
80% survival of trees and shrubs is determined. A monitoring report will be
submitted to the USACE and DWQ following the inspection. The monitoring
report will include a qualitative assessment of success with photo documentation.
1 This report will be submitted no later than 12-15-2009. See attached photo sheets
one and two for pre-restoration photos.
9. Impact Area S6: Impact area S6 is located on UT-Miller Branch 2B and is
approximately 10 feet in length extending from the end of the culvert
' downstream. The temporary impacts below the culvert consist of small boulders
and fill. The restoration plan for this area will consist of a labor crew removing
the boulders and fill outside the immediate riparian area. The buffer vegetation is
intact in this area and no replanting of trees and shrubs is needed. Any areas that
are disturbed during the sediment removal activity will be seeded with erosion
control mix. This site will be inspected at the end of the first growing season to
' determine the success of the restoration. A monitoring report will be submitted to
the USACE and DWQ following the inspection. The monitoring report will
include a qualitative assessment of success with photo documentation. This report
will be submitted no later than 12-15-2009. See attached photo sheets one and two
for pre-restoration photos.
' Cranberry Creek Estates
Restoration Plan Narrative
3/30/2009
w
C?
O
w
cc
w
LL
LL -
M
m
0 ?Q
Z
a
0
?
W J N
C7 M
O Q w O
wnw
W F- w
C11 czawa
r Z F-
= m Z W M
U xSW A.,
QO
Z W U >
Q
110
co co
w?
awz
-10
J H
H F-
LU H _
10
w
Y 1- z CU
w :D O
L,jvU J U
O ?/ Z a
O z cc
} J Z
w H = m
CLzF- Uzw
z cn ,
J
I L!) m Q H
z=X / H¢?
aU 111 U)H?
u z x W ?
0 96 w U "
H
F-
a
w O
CD O
F- w ,
U7 c) w
W zJ w
rr mmm J
crow Q
F- vLL U
(f)O:Dw U'
H Z m U
o< o< U O
LLmZm H T)
OWW<CL =
QJJ! n
WDJUI Q
m O H . , QmWO [[
O
W
C9
D
W
Cf) Q
w W
U-
D LL
wI D
O U m
<:D
D QO CD ?Q
z m~ Z O
o a p cn a
w J
Ca m 0 O H
00
oa a- F- W p
m "'cn cnp Mo d
Cn iJFw- o v
c?wa
¢Zw 4
cn cco A..
x=w
w0> Cf)
U m x
CL Cu ? 1,0
Co :E'
W E-+
I-- `?I X
Q >
F-- m U7
Cn Q X
W0 w
O Cu
Y W =
W :E: ?> ' w z
W W z ¢
Cr E z w
u a m
cr_ _
uw¢
>- O z w
CL LL m~J
CC ZJJ
/ H w H
WZ ,f??
m Q Z F-
zJ xwD
a< 96 w W U --
o U
U z w z
> a
=° .° O
F-H 7- W F- O Z LL O
f- ¢ .-U<
Q p Q Y3U JF-LLJ
LLJ IT- H ac m JQF-aaW
O U a OmZZO L ?J
<-Z
J
Li ?Q FJ0zw0zW U
CC zm <" < F-J"W cn
u-i ¢ww=Oaa Z O
mz F- O< <WmF=-a u Ln
Z mzmO - V'' WO= H
W<OLLWWLL"U
coU WM-i-i">= = LL CL
tI w J J W m Q O Q
O
0L LL L LLLLpa a wmHMLLW CL
ccw LLDw<< F-LL0 Cl)
Q..J DOZ=F-a":D0
mm"cncnZ3mw
0

OE+?
W -

J
J 0E+
G
H z
w m OL+L
O
? °
w
a OO+L
o
¢
a <

? J
no
m
?
Q U

?- -` J7?
m
o 06+0
u
Z)Z Q
YT
W .? 09+0

J (A

X
2:-
W Y

5
C)
0 CC

W 0Z- +0 z
W Uz o

U X W
WC7
0

U 09+0

w z
/
° Ob+O
0
m
O
H
1 o
a of+o

< 0
CC
I:
m< 0E+0
U

O L +O

L
'
- 00+0

oL no L Po O 0 0 0 0 0 n
0m m m m 1- -F- -m D0 0 V
NO Ii V AI ?l
0
Z
Q
W W W 2f
O W
F-
Q F-
Q F-
Q Z ¢ ~
W
F-
W YW W F
--
?Z
Y 0= Z a_ Y a_ F-" U] W
ZU QU ZU UJFACD
a m a w ¢w
m m CnQm>
J F-J J W W W CD
F- J LL J F- J 0 W O a
LL F-A W" LL ,-, 0
W LL J LL W LL O Z)
m
0 0
J
2
C]U =

WOU =
J
OU
0 m ZZ

U

W
WZZ OZZ WZZ LD °
z a_aw 0<W maw wz(nz a CD

O O m
F- Y F- m
(n Y O m
F- Y JHYO
m F- U Fi a=
Ur w
U7U0 WUO mU0 QcnOF-
?-{ wow crow wow f-" a:u o W
fn ¢a. F-
a a: F- a.¢F-
F- Inx D
W w 0
tJ J C7 F
- Co F- C7 F
- > F- 0
o Q
W U vzw m Lli CUZW ?a`oU) a ?

I- W I H(.D
mU7W I F ICD
m(n W I F-4 CD
U)U) w I QfZ
mWWO O

Q cn
x»
x»
x»
xza=U a.
a x
W

{ I j
W Cf)
O

W U
W

U a

J ?

I w
I
Ef 7-
1110

O? H Cn
C-D
C ? O
FF
FT- -
u O CD

vJ W w w
W

- - L-
NOIldnI-11
CRANBERRY CREEK ESTATES
NWP PCN 29
RESTORATION PLAN
VIEW OF IMPACT SITE: S3
UT-MILLER BRANCH 2E
r11ULV L4RUH um euye ur Dear raw Koaa iooKmg to the west. Image not to scale.
' LEGEND
/ V Extent of proposed fill area needed to establish left channel bank and bankfull bench
Stream Profile: riffle-pool sequence
' CD Proposed grade control features
Buffer areas to be seeded with Riparian Seed Mix (Ernst Seed Co.-see plant list)
Buffer areas to be planted with tree and shrub species (see-plant list)