20190133 Ver 1_401 Application_20190129

CDCc
Design
Concepts, PA
Transmittal
Date: January 21", 2019
Project Name: 605 Old US 70 Hwy E
CDC Project: 11810
To: NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Via : Mail Overnight _ Hand Delivered _ Pick up @ CDC Office
REMARKS:
20190133
Date
--------------------
Description
----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------
01/21/2019
PCN — Signed
01 /21 /2019
$240.00 Check — Application Fee
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
01/21/2019
--------------------
Supporting Documents Package
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
01/21/2019
Stream Impact Bulletin Bulletin (11x17)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
01 /21 /2019
Stormwater Plan (11 x 17)
01/21/2019
Stormwater Plan (2406)
1"tIt rui,III II II
By: y Batchelder, PE
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 5432, Asheville, NC 28813
168 Patton Avenue Asheville, NC 28801 52 Walnut Street — Suite 9, Waynesville, NC 28786
Phone [phone] Fax [phone] Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

ccs
January 21St, 2019
NC DWQ, WBSCP Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
RE: 605 Old US 70 Hwy E
Buncombe County
CDC Project No. 11810
Dear Ms. Jones,
The above referenced project is a proposed residential subdivision located in Black Mountain, NC.
The project consists of two culverts to pipe the existing streams on site. Please find the following
information attached for review and approval:
• PCN Form
• Supporting Documents
• Culvert Extension Plan
• Corps Cover Sheet
• Agent Authorization Form
• USGS Map
The endangered species information will be submitted at a future date. According to the
Environmental Conservation Online System website, the ECOS application is currently
unavailable due to the expiration of government funding.
Sincerely,
r
Cody atchelder, P.E.
Civil Design Concepts, PA
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 5432, Asheville, NC 28813
168 Patton Ave, Asheville, NC 28801 52 Walnut Street, Suite 9, Waynesville, NC 28786
Phone [phone] Fax [phone] Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name 605 Old US 70 Hwy E
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: Steller Properties, LLC
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Gregory Hoffman, P.E., Civil Design Concepts, P.A.
*Agent authorization needs to be attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s):
5. Site Address: 605 Old US 70 Hwy E
6. Subdivision Name:
7. City: Town of Black Mountain
8. County: Buncombe
9. Lat: 35.619 Long: -82.290 (Decimal Degrees Please)
10. Quadrangle Name: Black Mountain
11. Waterway: UT to Swannanoa River
12. Watershed: French Broad
13. Requested Action:
Nationwide Permit # 29
General Permit #
Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre -Application Request
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
AID:
Prepare File Folder Assign number in ORM Begin Date
Authorization: Section 10 Section 404
Project Description/ Nature of Activity/ Project Purpose:
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. PLAN NO. PARCEL ID: 0629-27-3007
STREET ADDRESS: 605 Old US 70 Hwy E, Black Mountain, NC
Please print:
Property Owner: Steller Properties, LLC
Property Owner:
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
Gregory Hoffman, P.E. , of Civil Design Concepts, PA
(Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
PO Box 5474, Asheville, NC 28813
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above Information submitted In this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
kill I - -. *'
VGX HERE
razed st ture V Authorized Signature
Date: Date:

605 OLD US 70 HWY E
PCN SUBMITTAL PACKAGE
PREPARED FOR:
STELLER PROPERTIES, LLC
PO BOX 5474
AHSEVILLE, NC 28813
JOB NO. 11810
100 PATTON AVENUE
A6NEVILLE, NC 711111
PHONE [phone]
FA7(0 mf -67116
Civil
C C
Design
62 WALNUTSTMET-SUFE,
Concepts, PA
WAYNESVILLE. NO 267116
PHONE ON 0644410
NCBELS LICENSE F. 0.2166 rwMr.dNOs♦Ipnmbbpd.e0rn
FAX WN �66M66
JOB NO. 11810

OBOEWATA9q
> y
O
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Q Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑X Yes ❑ No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
❑X 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
❑ Yes 0 No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes 0 No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
❑ Yes ❑X No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes 0 No
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes Q No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
605 Old US 70 Highway E
2b. County:
Buncombe
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Buncombe County
2d. Subdivision name:
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Steller Properties, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
5699/1361
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Steller Properties, LLC
3d. Street address:
PO Box 5474
3e. City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28813
3f. Telephone no.:
3g. Fax no.:
3h. Email address:
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b. Name:
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
4d. Street address:
4e. City, state, zip:
4f. Telephone no.:
4g. Fax no.:
4h. Email address:
S. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Greg Hoffman, PE
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
Civil Design Concepts, PA
5c. Street address:
168 Patton Avenue
5d. City, state, zip:
Asheville, NC 28801
5e. Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
0629-27-3007
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.371 Longitude: -82.174
1 c. Property size:
8.35 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Unnamed tributaries 1 & 2 to Swannanoa River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
French Broad
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:
Existing Conditions include a small, abandoned building along grassland, wooded area, and a small intermittent stream. The land is currently unused.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 1,697
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of this project is to pipe the existing intermittent stream across the proposed private roads to serve a new residential subdivision.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The proposed project will use backhoes for trenching and filling. Dewatering and dikes will be utilized for construction of the stream pipes. Erosion
control measures will include silt fence, construction entrance, diversion ditches, and inlet control.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
roject includin all riot hases in the ast?
❑ Yes ❑X No ❑ Unknown
Comments: Survey determined streams were present.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
❑X Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
Approved: Buncombe County Board of Adjustments, Buncombe County Planning Board, Black Mountain Water, Metropolitan
Sewerage District Allocation, NCDEQ Authorization to Construct. Awaiting approval for: Buncombe County Storrnwater and Erosion
Control, MSDBC Non-discharge permit
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands X❑ Streams — tributaries ❑ Buffers ❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
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.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Unnamed Tributary
INT
DWQ
4
61
S2 P
Culvert
Unnamed Tributary
INT
DWQ
4
68
S3
S4
S5
S6
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
129
3i. Comments:
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then indivi ually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01
02
03
04
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c. 5d. 5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated Flooded
Filled Excavated
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 any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
-Planting and permanent seeding measures as described on plan details.
-Class 3 concrete pipe as required per soil properties
-Minimum impact possible for proposed site conditions
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
-Stream dewatering prior to construction
-Construction of dikes prior to construction
-Construction entrance, silt fences, and diversion ditches
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ❑X No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
❑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:
Type:
Type:
Quantity:
Quantity:
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:
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ❑X No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ❑X No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
30.3%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater will be conveyed using ditches, inlets, and pipes to bioretention cells on-site. Bioretention Cell A is undersized for the design storm (1 -year
24-hour per Buncombe County Stormwater Ordinance), so Bioretention Cell B is sized to account for the overflow from the design storm from
Bioretention Cell A.The effluent will drain to an unnamed tributary of the Swannanoa River.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
Buncombe County
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which localgovernment's jurisdiction is thisproject?
Buncombe County
❑x Phase 11
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
❑ USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
El Yes Q No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ORW
(check all that apply):
❑Session Law 2006-246
[-]Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
❑ Yes
Q 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)?
1c.
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
❑Yes
❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑Yes
❑X No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
❑Yes
Q No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑Yes
Q 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.
No future development is expected for the site.
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.
th-Metropolitan Sewerage District Buncombe County.
The
project seeks a non -discharge permit through of
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. WIII this project occur In or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have you checked with the I ISFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts?
Yes ❑ No
5c. If yes, indicate the I ISFWS Field Office you have contacted.
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
US Fish and Wildlife Service
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would Impact Essential Fish Habitat?
South Atlantic Fishery Management Council
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. WIII 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 significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
❑ Yes ©No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
Preservation Society of Asheville and Buncombe County
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA -designated 100 -year floodplain?
❑ Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
lortOr'n -o-L,
pli t/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
Letter from the applicant isprovided.)
S
Date
nVAgent's Printed Name
Page 10 of 10

USDA United States
Department of
Agriculture
N RCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
December 21, 2018

Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call [phone] (voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.

Contents
Preface.................................................................................................................... 2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8
SoilMap................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
MapUnit Legend................................................................................................
11
MapUnit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Buncombe County, North Carolina.................................................................
14
EdD—Edneyville-Chestnut complex, basin, 15 to 30 percent slopes,
stony.....................................................................................................
14
EdE—Edneyville-Chestnut complex, basin, 30 to 50 percent slopes,
stony.....................................................................................................
16
EdF—Edneyville-Chestnut complex, 50 to 95 percent slopes, stony ..........
18
EwC—Evard-Cowee complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, stony .....................
21
EwD—Evard-Cowee complex, basin, 15 to 30 percent slopes, stony........
23
TaC—Tate loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes .....................................................
25
TaD—Tate loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes ...................................................
26
TpE—Toecane-Tusquitee complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes, very
bouldery................................................................................................
27
UhE—Udorthents-Urban land complex, 2 to 50 percent slopes..................28
References............................................................................................................
30
4

How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5

Custom Soil Resource Report
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
11

Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
0

35° 37 29" N
35° 37rN
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
a
m m
382920 38300D 383080 3831W 383240 3833x0 3834T
3
Map Scale: 1:3,290 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet
Meters
m N 0 45 90 180 Z70
rD
0 150 300 600 900
Map projection: Web Mercator Caner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zx* 17N WGS84
9
35° 37 29" N
r;

MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
F7 Area of Interest (AOI)
Solis
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP INFORMATION
Ig
Soil Map Unit Polygons
. r
Soil Map Unit Lines
0
Soil Map Unit Points
Special
Point Features
Blowout
Very Stony Spot
Borrow Pit
X
Clay Spot
0
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
Landfill
n
Lava Flow
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
Marsh or swamp
Special Line Features
Mine or Quarry
®
Miscellaneous Water
0
Perennial Water
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
Rock Outcrop
+
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
4--.
Severely Eroded Spot
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
Sinkhole
Rails
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP INFORMATION
Ig
Spoil Area
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:12,000.
Q
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Wet Spot
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
Other
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
Special Line Features
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
Water Features
scale.
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
++-+
Rails
measurements.
Interstate Highways
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
US Routes
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Major Roads
Local Roads
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
Background
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
.
Aerial Photography
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
10
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Buncombe County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 10, 2018
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Nov 23, 2011—Nov
28, 2017
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
11
L--MIPUnit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
EdD
Edneyville-Chestnut complex,
0.3
1.3%
basin, 15 to 30 percent
slopes, stony
rEdE
27.1%
Edneyville-Chestnut complex,
6.2
basin, 30 to 50 percent
slopes, stony
Ed F
Edneyville-Chestnut complex,
0.2
0.9%
50 to 95 percent slopes,
stony
Evard-Cowee complex, 8 to 15
0.5
2.3%
EwC
percent slopes, stony
EwD
Evard-Cowee complex, basin,
6.7
29.2%
15 to 30 percent slopes,
stony
TaC
Tate loam, 8 to 15 percent
4.7
20.5%
slopes
TaD
Tate loam, 15 to 30 percent
1.6
7.2%
slopes
TpE
Toecane-Tusquitee complex, 30
0.4
1.9%
to 50 percent slopes, very
bouldery
UhE Udorthents-Urban land
2.2
9.6%
complex, 2 to 50 percent
slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
22.9
100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
11

Custom Soil Resource Report
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
12

Custom Soil Resource Report
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
13

Custom Soil Resource Report
Buncombe County, North Carolina
EdD—Edneyville-Chestnut complex, basin, 15 to 30 percent slopes,
stony
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vOy5
Elevation: 1,740 to 5,450 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 65 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 124 to 200 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Edneyville, basin, stony, and similar soils: 50 percent
Chestnut, basin, stony, and similar soils: 35 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Edneyville, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from biotite gneiss that is affected by soil
creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 5 to 31 inches: loam
C - 31 to 80 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95
in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
14

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Chestnut, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from biotite gneiss that is affected by soil
creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 7 to 35 inches: loam
Cr- 35 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Cowee, stony
Percent of map unit. 8 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Tate, stony
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Toes on coves
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope
Down-slope shape: Linear, concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
15

Custom Soil Resource Report
Ashe, stony
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit: 0 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Backslope, summit
Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
EdE—Edneyville-Chestnut complex, basin, 30 to 50 percent slopes,
stony
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. 2vOxr
Elevation: 1,350 to 5,780 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 77 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 142 to 219 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Edneyville, basin, stony, and similar soils: 58 percent
Chestnut, basin, stony, and similar soils: 28 percent
Minor components: 14 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Edneyville, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from muscovite -biotite gneiss and/or biotite
gneiss that is affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 5 to 31 inches: loam
C - 31 to 80 inches: sandy loam
16

Custom Soil Resource Report
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Chestnut, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from muscovite -biotite gneiss and/or biotite
gneiss that is affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 7 to 35 inches: loam
Cr- 35 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
17

Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Porters, stony
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional)
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Tusquitee, very stony
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Toes on drainageways
Landforrn position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Toecane, very stony
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Ashe, stony
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit: 0 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Backslope
Mountainflank, side slope
Backslope, footslope
Mountainflank, base slope
Footslope
Mountainflank, base slope
Backslope, summit
Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
EdF—Edneyville-Chestnut complex, 50 to 95 percent slopes, stony
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vOxh
Elevation: 1,060 to 5,420 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 80 inches
18

Custom Soil Resource Report
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period. 100 to 205 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Edneyville, stony, and similar soils: 48 percent
Chestnut, stony, and similar soils: 37 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Edneyville, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from muscovite -biotite gneiss and/or biotite
gneiss that is affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 5 to 25 inches: loam
C - 25 to 80 inches: gravelly sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 50 to 95 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Chestnut, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from muscovite -biotite gneiss and/or biotite
gneiss that is affected by soil creep in the upper solum
19

Custom Soil Resource Report
Typical profile
A - 0 to 3 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 3 to 28 inches: sandy loam
Cr - 28 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 50 to 95 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Cullasaja, very stony
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Drainageways, rockfalls
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional)
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave, linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Tuckasegee, very stony
Percent of map unit. 4 percent
Landform: Toes on drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional)
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Porters, stony
Percent of map unit. 4 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Backslope
Mountainflank, side slope
Footslope, backslope
Mountainflank, base slope
Backslope
Mountainflank, side slope
Ashe, stony
Percent of map unit. 2 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
20

Custom Soil Resource Report
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Cleveland, very stony
Percent of map unit. 1 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit: 0 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
EwC—Evard-Cowee complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes, stony
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. 1t3vx
Elevation: 2,400 to 3,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 80 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Evard, stony, and similar soils: 55 percent
Cowee, stony, and similar soils: 25 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Evard, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: loam
Bt - 5 to 32 inches: clay loam
BC - 32 to 45 inches: loam
C - 45 to 80 inches: sandy loam
21

Custom Soil Resource Report
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Cowee, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 10 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 10 to 38 inches: clay loam
Cr- 38 to 80 inches: weathered bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
22

Custom Soil Resource Report
EwD—Evard-Cowee complex, basin, 15 to 30 percent slopes, stony
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx2d
Elevation: 1,480 to 4,070 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 54 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 159 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Evard, basin, stony, and similar soils: 60 percent
Cowee, basin, stony, and similar soils: 30 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Evard, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, mountaintop,
side slope, crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Linear, convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from amphibolite and/or hornblende gneiss
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: loam
Bt - 5 to 32 inches: clay loam
BC - 32 to 45 inches: loam
C - 45 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: High (about 9.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
23

Custom Soil Resource Report
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Cowee, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, mountaintop,
side slope, crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Linear, convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from amphibolite and/or hornblende gneiss
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 5 to 38 inches: gravelly clay loam
Cr- 38 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Clifton
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Landform: Ridges, hillslopes
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Tate
Percent of map unit. 3 percent
Landform: Toes on coves
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Landform position (three-dimensional).
Down-slope shape: Concave, linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
24
Summit, backslope
Interfluve, side slope
Footslope
Mountainbase, base slope

Custom Soil Resource Report
TAC—Tate loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1t3y7
Elevation: 2,050 to 3,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 42 to 50 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 124 to 170 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Tate and similar soils: 95 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Tate
Setting
Landform: Coves, drainageways, fans
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loam
Bt - 7 to 46 inches: clay loam
C - 46 to 80 inches: cobbly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
25

Custom Soil Resource Report
TAD—Tate loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1t3y9
Elevation: 2,050 to 3,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 42 to 50 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 124 to 170 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Tate and similar soils: 85 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Tate
Setting
Landform: Coves, drainageways, fans
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 7 inches: loam
Bt - 7 to 46 inches: clay loam
C - 46 to 80 inches: cobbly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to
high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: High (about 10.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
26

Custom Soil Resource Report
TpE—Toecane-Tusquitee complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes, very
bouldery
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1t3yl
Elevation: 2,400 to 4,800 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 54 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period. 100 to 150 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Toecane, very bouldery, and similar soils: 55 percent
Tusquitee, very bouldery, and similar soils: 35 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Toecane, Very Bouldery
Setting
Landform: Fans, coves, drainageways
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Cobbly and stony colluvium derived from igneous and
metamorphic rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 8 inches: cobbly loam
Bt1 - 8 to 24 inches: very cobbly loam
Bt2 - 24 to 30 inches: very cobbly sandy loam
C - 30 to 80 inches: extremely cobbly loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 1.5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95
in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
27

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Tusquitee, Very Bouldery
Setting
Landform: Coves, drainageways, fans
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly loam
Bw - 8 to 48 inches: loam
C - 48 to 80 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 1.5 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95
in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonin-igated): 6s
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
UhE—Udorthents-Urban land complex, 2 to 50 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1t3z0
Elevation: 1,090 to 3,830 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 50 to 64 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period. 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Udorthents and similar soils: 55 percent
Urban land: 35 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
28

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Udorthents
Setting
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, footslope, toeslope
Down-slope shape: Linear, convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy to skeletal cut and fill
Typical profile
C - 0 to 80 inches: cobbly sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 50 percent
Percent of area covered with surface fragments: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to very high
(0.00 to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Urban Land
Setting
Parent material. Streets, parking lots, buildings, and other structures
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rubble land
Percent of map unit. 10 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit., 0 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
29

References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres 142 p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
30

Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 43041. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres 142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nres142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http..//
www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nresl42p2_052290.pdf
31

i
9402
JN 'NIYINIIOW MJYIB
vw.w.ma I
'n,•• ' .-.. w.-.�.. •,.m•,a.-r.M�n�.,.....
,p
OOO.L:t 33 X ':.• -s t.44u-n�-nw./n yvampoy
6 IM OL
w �� - ,'� •�` � _ A=bu � ° � �'� 1 - l tl tr<�
gI
-���lMf�l�i��.%% Inc l`i -� : � l� d I ✓ -a� Gift ( � 4 ��-
ly� -� �l �' I _tom �' i "� ,= � I'- � � e� x _��i >•, - i a'
, -t
S r
eI; s
C `�� � j � �� r '� S� t ��� � � � �'A � i �, � � � � !✓ � 1 1 1 l i � i� � ! w.� �t> ��1 ��C 4 m
I I
t •V _ i .. 11
F a tl
�'z
u. ��'' I� y,iiR C � t c X � � ,i- � fi��, .� F - „..a's`s-f� � �� � �' � r L` < 1 ✓ � 'i � �� J" ! .
`o a'1«u7V''
\
a
"' 3s3aod ivrvouvu xv9sld � � � � - nw•do � -
3,1
may
.w'G^"wl �wnw .. �.add,s•� cT .,_..Ipla 'I � a � � _ N1M
flIY3G 31f1Nw-G'[ I sn hM.N°r.�sle•
YNI10tlYJ X1YON ® UdUl .71 I ��� a3ntlns mlxw3o s -n C -^.`M. ,
339NYNOYf1L NIY1Nf10W NJYl9 - VONI3INI 3N1 d01N3W1NYd30 'STI V V V. ,

}FFA� 8714
I t1� FE ' 7. \.
NOt;1"N
0 30
I I/FE 75.8 11
a) FFE\9 5.2�\
/i , PROPOSED 60 LF 42" RCP
/'FFE 3.5� STREAM IMPACT= 61 LF
/ 6s
FFE� /81.0 / / X81
� K3
21KC Afi!m�
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
TO SWANNANOA RIVER
CD
!0w,.xff2.9A
A
AA
S
0 /
ROAD B
No
PROPOSED 65 LF 54" RCP I ,
STREAM IMPACT= 68 LF
UNNAMED
TO SWANNANIOA RIVER
i I G2
C CD civil
Design
Concepts, PA
NCBELS #: C-2184
95 /
.7
0
— ON ----
N
k
Dewatering Device
or dirt/sediment bag)
Discharge Hose
Dewatering Pump
F P (as needed) Sump—hole
Or Pool
12" Min Depth
' I q� 2' Min Diameter
Flow
ah Work Area Flow
�
Sandbag/Stone Barrier—",.
Y
Intake
Hose
P
Discharge Hose
Diversion Pump
Discharge Pump Work Area
Into Velocity
Dissipater Length Not To Exceed
That Which Can Be
Completed In One Day
Sheeting
Base Flow + 1 Foot
Work Area (2 Foot Minimum)
Cross Section Of Sandbag/Stone Diversion
SECTION A -A
PUMP AROUND / DEWATERING
PLAN VIEW DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
CULVERT SHALL BE 1 1 1 1 1 1=1 1=1 I I II I I� I I I
BURIED 1.0' MINIMUM CULVERT SHALL BE
ACKFILLED WITH
BELOW STREAM BED =I =III ENG ENGINEERED FILLED.
ELEVATION —2'54' CLASS I I I�— PLACED AND COMPACTED
— III RCP — IN 6" LIFTS
=III . X57 STONE TO
SPRINGLINE OF PIPE
12"'MIN o 0 0 0 o 0 BEDDING
o 0 o o o o (COMPACTED TO 98%
OF STANDARD PROCTOR)
#57 STONE WRAPPED
IN MIRAFI 140 N OR
EQUIVALENT
MIN. TRENCH WDTH
CULVERT INSTALLATION DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE
605 OLD US 70 HWY E
LAYOUT BULLETIN
JANUARY 2019

00 _
191
1 I�I(.... I 1
II 19
1I /
A6 ROAD D
A7
I I
253
EXISTING STREAM
EASING 30' STREAM BUFFER (TVP) 1\ II / - J I L
PROPOSED CROSSING
EXISTING PROPERTY UNE (TVP) \ ' �- 1 (TY►) (SEE PROBES)
252
I � s 82 y
I / A6 I 1 Bt 1 ) I
IIT 1
1' AS Dl �� / •Y / _ /
J _
A33
/
/2480 / / \ I \ K4 j I PROPOSED STREAM CROSSING
STRUCTURE TABLE
(INVERTS BASED ON 2D LENGTH TO INSIDE EDGES)
STRUCTURE
STATION
STRUCTURE DETAILS
DEPTH
DESCRIPTION
24'
25'
RIM 2475.1
HDPE
Al -A2
18'
95'
INV. IN 2470.1 (AI -A2)
HDPE
Al -C1
Al
10+30
INV. IN 2470.4 (A, -C1)
5.5'3
JUNCTION BO%
le'
ler
INV. OUT 2469.6 (AO -A1)
HOPE
A2 -E1
15'
16'
RIM 24819
HDPE
A3 -A4
16'
92'
INV. IN 2470.9 (A2 -A3)
HOPE
A}BI
A2
11+29
INV IN 24794 (A2 -El)
9.6'3
CURB INLET
18'
21'
INV. OUT 2474.3 (A1 -A2)
HOPE
A4-01
15'
16'
RIM 2503.e
HOPE
A5 -A6
15'
58'
INV. IN 2492.0 (A3-A4)A3
HOPE
A6 -A7
15'
13+18
INV. IN 24916 (A3_91)11.8'3
HOPE
CURB INLET
15•
54'
INV. OUT 24920 (A2 -A3)
HOPE
9I-32
15'
18'
RIM 2499.7
HOPE
C1-C2
A5
14+36
INV. IN 24911 (A5 -A6)
6.6'2
JUNCPON BOX
24'
29'
INV. OUT 24911 (A4 -A5)
HOPE
F1 -F2
24'
62'
RIM 2500.6
HOPE
F2 -F3
A6
14+96
INV. IN 2493.7 (A6 -A7)
6,9'3
CURB INLET
21'�32*I.0%
INV. OUT 2493.7 (A5 -A6)
HDPE
GI -JI
le'3.6%
RIM 2515.5
HOPEH1-X2
A7
16+72
INV. IN 25106 (A7 -AB)
90'i
CURB INLET
INV. OUT 2510.5 (AB -A7)
A6
17+26
R 0
INV, OUTM 25127 2510.(A7-Ae)
92'!
CURB INLET
RIM 2518.4
BI
11+67
INV. IN 23112 (BI -82)
92'}
CURB INLET
INV. OUT 25112 (A3-91)
82
11+66
RIM 2514&4
INV. OUT 2517.4 (81-82)
90'3
CURB INLET
Dl
'0"INV.
RIM 2499.8
16'3
CURB INLET
WT 2496.1 (A4 -DI)
E1
10+19
RIM
6.9'3
CURB INLET
INV. WT N]7].07.0 (( A2 -E7)
RIM 2466.1
INV. IN 2461.9 (GI -JI)
F1
10+32
INV. IN 2460.9 (A -F2)
5'2'4
JUNCTION BOX
INV. OUT 2460.9 (FO -FI)
RIM 2469.7
F2
10196
INV. IN 2461 6 (F2 -F3)
0.2'3
CURB INLET
INV. OUT 2461.6 (A -F2)
RIM 2470.5
F3
11+25
INV. IN 2454.5 (F3 -F4)
6,0':
CURB INLET
INV. OUT 2464.5 (F2 -F3)
RIM2471.6
F4
11+60
INV. WT 24618 (F3 -F4)
6.r3
OPEN THROAT INLET
H2
10+46INV
RIM 2n (1
Wi 2456A XI -X2)
4.5'3
OPEN THROAT INLET
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (TYP)
A2 o I
�� El -...�
�.�
PROPOSED LIMIT 0.i DISTURBANCE
/ / `` \ AL2 �' ~• i I / I I PROPOSED BIO -RETENTION CE11 •A'
I
ADO
C1
PROPOSED STREAM CROSSING (TYP) II - - P- l ` ` FI
PROPOSED BIO -RETENTION CELL •B• r- f2 47
2. HDPE
(UNE 1)
APE TABLE
(SLOPES BASED ON 2D LENGTH TO INSIDE EDGES)
APE NAME
SIZE
LENGTH
SLOPE
MATERIAL
AO -At
24'
25'
2.5%
HDPE
Al -A2
18'
95'
4.411
HDPE
Al -C1
15'
3r
1.911;
HDPE
A2 -A3
le'
ler
7.011
HOPE
A2 -E1
15'
16'
10.0%
HDPE
A3 -A4
16'
92'
1.0%
HOPE
A}BI
15'
164'
11.9%
HOPE
M -AS
18'
21'
1.0%
HOPE
A4-01
15'
16'
10.6%
HOPE
A5 -A6
15'
58'
1.0%
HOPE
A6 -A7
15'
172'
9.6%
HOPE
A7 -A6
15•
54'
4.0%
HOPE
9I-32
15'
18'
1.1%
HOPE
C1-C2
15'
17'
1.0%
HDPE
FO -F1
24'
29'
3.2%
HOPE
F1 -F2
24'
62'
1.0%
HOPE
F2 -F3
24'
24'
123%
HDPE
F3 -F4
21'�32*I.0%
HDPE
GI -JI
le'3.6%
HOPEH1-X2
24•1.9%
NOPE
APE TABLE
(SLOPES BASED ON 2D LENGTH TO INSIDE EDGES)
PIPE NAME SIZE LENGTH SLOPE MATERIAL
Kt -K2 W !V-.7
0.ASS III CONCRETE
K3 -K4 4r Dr 10.71[ CLA55 III CONCRETE
LINE 1 24' 88' 23% HOPE
APE TABLE
(SLOPES BASED ON 2D LENGTH TO INSIDE EDGES)
PIPE NAME
SIZE
LENGTH
SLOPE
I INVERTS
I MATERIAL
UWE 1
24•
88
23%
INV. UP 2464.0
HOPE
PROPOSED HEADWALL
P.O. BO% 5174
PROPOSED RIP -RAP APRON
ASHEVILLE. NC 28813
INV. DOWN 246200
CHRIS ELLER
i@ PRIrtWn
VICINITY MAP
INDT TO SCALE]
DEVELOPMENT DATA
OWNER:
STELLER PROPERTIES. LLC
PROPOSED STORM APE .
P.O. BOX 3474
PROPOSED CURB INLET STRUCTURE
ASHEVILLE. NC 26813
CONTACT:
CHRIS ELLER
PROPOSED DETENTION STRUCTURE
[phone]
DEVELOPER:
STELLER PROPERTIES, LLC
PROPOSED HEADWALL
P.O. BO% 5174
PROPOSED RIP -RAP APRON
ASHEVILLE. NC 28813
CONTACT:
CHRIS ELLER
[phone]
CIVIL ENGINEER:
CIVIL DESIGN CONCEPTS, P.A.
158 PATIO/ AVENUE
ASHEVILLE. NORTH CAROLINA 28801
CONTACT:
GREGORY HOFTMAN, P.E.
[phone]
SURVEYOR:
MCASEE t ASSOOATES
3 MCABEE TRAIL
FAIRVIEW. NC 28730
CONTACT:
ERIC S. MCABEE, PLS
[phone]
PROJECT DATA
PIN:
0629-27-3107
ADDRESS:
603 OD US 70 HWY E
BLACK MOUNTAIN, NC
DEED BOOK/PAGE:
5455/1761
SITE ACREAGE:
8.35 ACRES
ZOMING:
R-2
TOWNSHIP:
BLACK MOUNTAIN
LAT/LONC4
35.619, -62.290
SE BACKS:
FRONT:
10'
SIDES
7'
REAR:
15'
DISTURBED AREA:
5.8 AC
PROPOSED LOTS:
60 RESIDENTIAL UNIT PUD
DENSITY SUMMARY:
ALLOWED:
7.2 UNITS/ACRE - 60.1 UNITS
PROPOSED:
7.0 UNITS/ACRE
EXISTING USE:
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
PROPOSED USE:
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (PUD)
TOTAL PROPOSED ROADS:
2006 LF
STORM LEGEND
EXISTING STORM APE -
PROPOSED STORM APE .
- - - - - - -
PROPOSED CURB INLET STRUCTURE
A
PROPOSED JUNCTION BOX
Q
PROPOSED DETENTION STRUCTURE
Q
PROPOSED FLARED END SECTION
PROPOSED HEADWALL
PROPOSED RIP -RAP APRON
rs-
Krow
whafs below.
Cell before you dig. NORTH
STORM DRAINAGE PLAN
GRAPHIC SCALE
IN FEET )
1 inch - 50 ft
2
o �
D
� O �
L
to
DRAWN 2
N W
DMYM BY: CUL
CDC PRDJEC'T N0. 1tt10
M,m PROIH.T NO-- 201609!
SHEET
C401