19980169 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19980223

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
1 ? •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
June 1, 1998
Henderson County
DWQ Project # 980169
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Norton Segal
S & N Properties, Inc.
500 Crooked Creek Lane
Hendersonville, NC 28739
Dear Mr. Segal:
. You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill
material in 318 linear feet of waters for the purpose. of constructing roads at the Triple Creek subdivision in
Henderson County, as you described in your revised application dated May 14, 1998 and original application dated
February 19, 1998. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water
Quality Certification Number 3108. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 26 when the
Corps of Engineers issues it. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go
ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-
Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or
CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application for a new certification. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification
and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC
2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and
any additional conditions listed below.
1. Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed in all lots with remaining jurisdictional
wetlands and waters to restrict future wetand and/or water impact. These mechanisms shall be put in
place within 30 days of the date of this letter or the issuance of the 404 Permit (whichever is later).
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Pne
+!
Q
1
on Howar , r. P.E.
3
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Feld Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
G. Thomas Jones; William Lapsley & Associates
980169.1tr
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
l14y66ti t ;? 16:56 NO. 762 Doi
'a G Iaa,??sley & 33 Associates, I':1?.
ii:i SL?11 ?1?;1`7.:C.rS c nd Land Planners
635 AshiMllc II ghway
z'(7Si tC)rfic t USX 596
,:; r..,on v1 1C, North Carolina '18793
FA? X.
Wil,liai1, (.:. 11P.tii Ci, ?.C.
),:hn Ezi,ee?•rs RE.
i
y
--rlersor .Cojnty
??wl
{v?2'
?rJ
L

Sincerely,
G. Thomas Jones III, P.E. .
ILI Printed fin IUCYLIC-d 1`410r'
t.d v be t i6 on, I U F t
o!r d I.turbng the
ai a ?nous a- ?ln be t,01 th V ,r;l;,1_
r .ii +.. Si ,h ?r P E :-_;i I :sv-;. 'mot; s ly -?{wn i rn l k a c ,t; In It proposed,
Cil be oil the 10-without disturb. Inn tile.,
s lr.. !! i , ',, i+ `hr: Genet C ` b iJ+ r F, f 4h ? ?sz 1 l' Qt (-" ; 't')r e s hotivE 'er,
v,at tc, t?'ie iollf.wlne-
? ,,±7r r. r,?ai ?'?•"t t, ?Lli ".??c.'.,: ,, (.t +r . t, , ,r fk? ?...i?"itr'?? .,li?"c?"r?,
'Ne lave atded a s ng1e drkJsmay 0-)C;eme.,`It 1C,t g r; e Pry pe y q, tO X-v`eSS IQ's ;'? al?d ft30, '*e
would agree to add a note `o the nal plat :,irnila to the foil()Wing;
Lots 29 and 30 must use common drive (Iifthrn 20' easement) as shown oil plat,
Please let us know if you have any questicns, We look forward to your approval of this project at your
earliest convenience.
y?15 41.99 16:59 NO. 762 902
10,
AREA #..?
LOTS 29 30 MUST USE COMMON
--?-? ; / DRIVE (WITHIN 20' EAS£MEN7)
__ - SkxK LOT 2B MAY NOT DISTURS
-?- ? - ' L - r EXISTING CREEk
'aVI;_LIAM G LAP UEY & AsSOCIATFS P,A, w1 TLAND/STI?EAIvf IMPACT CAI'
CMU'UTING ENGINEERS & ?.AND PLARNER4
1'FZIP'LF' CREEK SUBDIVISION w
t Wit') A,-hcvi3Ie lliahsvto SCALE, V" -FOO
... FnAt. Qrslue nox 594 PROPOSED I?t}Ai?E! .
\ / r Fl ondcrsonville.., NC 2MI i
f (rrl9} mq"/-7334 I>lsosse REWISED 5/98:
{- Cti.1; G97-7:i 3l 1'ax ADDED CONDITIONrS TD Lf)TS 2F, 29,36
William G. Lapsley & Associates, P.A.
{
Consulting Engineers and Land Planners
3 1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office,Box 546
' Hendersonville, North `Carolina 28793
828,697-7334 FAX,828-697-7333
William G. Lapsley, P.E.
- o John Echeverri, PE.
y •^.. 7 - - G. Thomas Jones III, P.E.
is
tlEfiIrnental Management
4401 fleetly Creek Road
a?? lad,
PAeOK Ploftt Carolina 27601
y 0199
RE: 'Ctiple Creek Subdivision,
Proposed Roads
°I
,N F
i
NC 191 Henderson County
?1ATER UALIY SEI , _
Dear Mr. Domey:
Enclosed please find a revised plan showing the following changes:
1. We have further analyzed lot #21, and feel that a house can be built on the lot without disturbing the
existing creek flowing through the lot. The plan remains as originally proposed:
2. We have further analyzed lot #26, and feel that a house can be built on the lot without disturbing the
existing creek running through the center of the lot. To ensure that the creek will'not`be disturbed however,
we would agree to the addition of a note to the final plat similar to the following:
Lot owner shall not disturb nor install culvert pipe in the existing stream.
3. We have added a single 20' driveway easement along the property line to access lots #29 and #30. We
would agree to add a note to the final plat similar to the following:
Lots 29 and 30 must use common drive (within 20' easement) as shown on plat.
Please let us know if you have any questions. We look forward to your approval of this project at your
earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
G. Thomas Jones III, P .E.
?,?a ' Printed on Recycled Paper
MILLS

CIMARRON FOREST
SUBDIVISION ENTRANCE
? _ TO HENp==N??E'
AREA #6
0 4 ' AREA #5
0
3 0
AREA #4

AREA #3
I/
NO IMPACT 62? 2 2 / I FUTU
CULVER
EXISTING
POND
20
ARE # I ® (
i ARE 1
LOTS 29 & 30 MUST USE COMMON
DRIVE (WITHIN 20' EASEMENT)
LOT 26 MAY NOT DISTURB
EXISTING CREEK
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A. WETLAND/STREAM
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION IMPACT MAP
1635 Asheville Highway SCALE- 1..=200'
Post Office Box 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
N9 [phone] Phone REVISED 5/98:
[phone] Fax ADDED CONDITIONS TO LOTS 26, 29,30
MILL POND CREEK
PARK
7 ® f ® A
REA
r
10
14 12 11 `__
16 I 1© I 18 ? 19
? i I ?
05/27/98 15:34

NO. 2t4 002
Tp UPS -"
-, OMARRON FOREST
'?- SUBDIVISION ENTRANCE
TO
NENL7E
., AREA ( #5
1
% ?... _. AREA #6
ti`F:r" ; '.F +' -r ++?-•- MELL POND CAW(
PARK
A
REA
AREA #4 `-
10 , ..?
N` I l
AREA #3 2
? FUT
NO IMPACT r? -
CULV'E
POND
A
Alacls r+'"r 1 r l ?. ( AR=
_ ---------11_/
LOTS 29 k 3O MUST USE COMMON
DRIVE (WITHIN 20' EASEMENT)
LOT Zs MAY NOT DISTURB
FJ057'1NG CREEK
WILLIAM G LAPSLEY & A SSOCiATES P.A. WETLAND/STREAM IMPACT MAP
COti'MTM fEN aquH3 & LAND PLANT TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION SCALE: 1"-200'
1WO ashevtlle tfigh.ay
Pont office Box Oda PROPOSED LOADS
Hentletaonville, NC 30793 REVISED 5/9B:
[phone] Phone
17041 047-7333 Max ADDED CON1117IONS TO LOS 29, 29,30

05/27/98 15:33
N
N0.814 901
William G. Lapsley & Associates, PA.
Consulting Enginccrs and Land Planners
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office Sox 546
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28793
828-697-7334 • FAX [phone]
May 14, ON
Mr. John Domey
Division of Eniftomentai Matraliement
NCDENR
4401 Reedy Crwk Road
Ra Igh, North Canna 27601
RE:.. ' Tdple,Crook Subdivision .
Proposed Roads
NC 181 H rson Cou*
Dear Mr. Dane.
Enclosed please and a revlsed plan showing the fopwing changes.
William G. LtpsW C$.
Jahn Me"til, F.E.
0. Thomas Jones III, P.E.
1. We have tutther anaipxed lpt #21, and feel that a house tan he, built on the lot wtthout disturbing the
existing orwk.flowing thro4h ft lot The plan rem*dns as originally proposed.
2. • We have furtiw analyzed bt#26, and teal that a house can be built on the. lot whhout disturbing the
exkdng creek runn ftbrou$h the -MW of the.lot.To ensure ihatthe creekwK not tie disturted t"ver,
we would agree-10 the addition of a note to the final plat similar t0 the bilowlrig: ;
Lot4wner S rlatditA not' *W cuhwtpipeln the BXizSGing?Sb+e m• :'
3. We have added a single 2Q' driveway easement along the property line to atxess lots #29 and 430.: We
would agree to add a mote to the final plA slm1aFto the following:
Lots 29 and 30 must use common drive (WIHrln 20' easemenQ as shown on plat
Piesse let us know I you have any questions. We bok bward to your approval of Ns project at your
earliest convenlortce.
Sincerely,
C, Thomas Jones iii, P.E.
to punted on Reeyelad Riper
{ TRIBUTARY TO
I MILL POND CR.
MILL POND I
CREEK i ., R.,.: .,.. '. .
MILL POND
CREEK
l
I
I
1
I
I
i
{
IF
i
ti
l
i
1
4
I
1
i
I
I
I
1
I /
i
1
1

WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A.
(:ON8ITI;r1NG ENGTN'EERE & LI,W ?WN) ERS
1636 Asheville Highway
Pont Office Box f)46
Hendersonville, NC 20703
W1 17043 8117-%734 Phone
(704) 097-77333 Fax
PARK
AREA
I

CIMARRON FOREST
SUBORRSICN ENTRANCE
710 ,ENO,
TRIBUTARY TO
MILL POND CR.

-- MILL POND CREEK
Zt- cTRf'AM E
a ri?
c1?' ? I
Ln ---
l
I

N?
TRJFLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
PROPOSED ROADS
{
I ?
r?
LEGEN0
IMPACT AREA
-? - PROPERTY LINE
STREAM IMPACT MAP
SCALE: I"=200'

a. #
3. The option of constructing a bridge seems reasonable to avoid mitigation at first
glance. However, the va..t majority of our roadway projects in new subdivisions
are designed to meet NCDOT requirements. NCDOT does not like nor want
more bridges so the policy creates a dilemma for the developer (private roads or
public roads with mitigat:.on).
The construction of a bridge will require significant disturbance to the stream
banks. In fact, we believe that floodwaters will likely erode the stream banks at
the bridge abutments ere€iting essentially the same situation as a culvert pipe,
4. Why can't a pond creation be used to mitigate a stream impact? If a pond creates
an extensive shore line, it seems to us that the situation is at least the same, Rs the
stream - it certainly has riot degraded the environment for aquatic life. It is just a
matter of time before someone challenges this policy. Do you have scientific data
to back this policy?
111. MITIGATION TECHNIQUES
No comments
IV. CUMULATIVE IMPACT
1. The policy clearly refers to the cumulative -impact on a panic lar stream. In our
recent application for the Triple Creek Subdivision, it is our opinion that there are
four (4) separate streams involved in the project (see attached sketch map). There
should be no mitigation required because each stream is impacted less than 150
feet.
2. If the DWQ takes the poiition that these four (4) crossings impact the same
stream, we feel that the private sector will suffer a tremendous financial impact by
this policy which will effectively stop all new development. This will no doubt
be challenged by someone in the court system.
It seems to us that a stream should be defined as a watercourse clearly identified
by "name" on the USGS quad sheet. Any other creek with a positive 7Qlo flow
would be considered a "tributary" to a "stream," and subject to the 150 foot limit.
(Each tributary would be a separate case.)
We thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on this policy. If you have any
questions or concerns about our suggestions, please feel free to call on Tom Jones or me.
William G. LaNley, P
WGL/ec

DwQ rules fcr pern,4tting of stream fill also reauire
consideration or cumulative impacts (15A NCAC 2H .0506 (b)(S))
This decision is espec=ally important in linear or phased
prc;ects. _- te=.,s cf streams, if n articular s rr ...m with J
positive 7Q10 or 30Q2 flow or with vertebrate aauatic life is
planned to he impacted by fill (i.e., hardening or culverc_ng)
greater that. 150 feet, then mitigation will be required for the
entire length includinC the 150 feet. Relocated streams which
have these characteristics will be reauired to follow stream
relocation guidelines. Past impacts which reau?reo A-04/401
authoriZaticn w_!-1 be considered when additlcna> >:-,pacts are
planned in order to control cumulative impacts. Several pCSS, ble
scenarios are snGf- on the attached sketch for illustrative
purposes anc are discussed below.
if multiple crossings of a particular stream are planned and
the stream r:eets the flow/biotic criteria outlined afove, then
ream
mitigation will be reauired if the total fill for that st
exceeds 150 feet. Mitication would be reauired for the entire
amount of impact to the stream.
_xcept as note,4 a^OVe, mitiaati^n reaui reorients will be
considered separately _or each stream. For instance if fill for
each separate (culverti ng) in a particular projec: _s less
than 150 fee- , tiler- r. stream mitigation will P_Ct be t=aut== . _Or
the proj iec-.unlesstotal fill of the stream exceeds 150 cue
to multiple cross?nc? of the same stream.
If a strec..T'i with positive 7Q10/30Q2 flow or vertebrate
F.auatic lif= is straightened using bioengineering techniauTes, any
loss of stream length greater than 150 feet will require
mitigation.
If biceng_::eering techniques are not used (for insta ce i?
the stream is placed 4, a concrete lined convevance), then the
entire length would reauire compensatory mitigation if the langth
exceeds 150 feet. `gain, bridging of streams will not requ'ir'e
compensatorv mitigation for the stream impacts since the aauatic
life use is still present beneath the bridge.
in addition, compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts
may be required in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). These
procedures are outlined in separate DWQ policies.
streampol.mem
x
POSSIBLE STREAM COMPENSATORY MITIGATION SCENARIOS
Division of Water Quality, Environmental Sciences Branch
October 2, 1997
2SO foot crossing -
need 2:1 mitigation
for entire 2S0
foot loss
stream
150 foot crossing
no compensatory
mitigation needed
stream
styessm
three 100 foot crossings
(300 feet total) - compensatory
mitigation at 2:1 ratio needed for
300 feet of impact since total
stream crossings exceed 150 feet
I slope

Relocated stream - if loss ((old stream (Lo)
length minus new stream (Ln) length)) is greater
than 150 feet, then compensatory mitigation at 1:1
ratio needed for difference as long as bioengineering
techniques are used to relocate the stream. If
bioengineering techniques are not used, compensatory
mitigation will be required for entire length.

* Assumes stream has positive 7Q10/30Q2 flow or aquatic vertebrates (see text for details)
A
05/1??98
, , kl-

ill. 17: ?3
PL.

C .' ^., l t 01 :; :k d'a rt '.St:.eaii: 7 d P,,o-d i` ialgation
if ILA
IN
"spr
E ; v a ? ., { 1rs t e docu o.,,.. B a +dae id til3 ..t 1 1 "v in jllf'
,iii (i:s I `,, private ?'d C,i7i111:
t o# t n s^ 0 d
the 1 So !:CAA ilea! distance l?('iTl"Iacfing on r titreann is aii arbitrary
we hat no tipeciffic daaa. to sq1?g , ,? flris +e..=g: . is --..$!?.justi led"
a?•"?, n,w.34 `v:-a :l i)a-- k iii 5??,S j4. g1h,
W +<t'?', At5 t! ;tt zt??? a$ `71?s t Yold} t?7 pa? ?t of 1?1 Ilmo.•re i n fi F ..
... t??V? 6 rci'te ;:1'??i ? y(li,' : 'il+ l?+ ?.
!?titl_f Pi' 61ke WV() W$V l T1C9'(i?l ,?i? _. and sanrk'vi w This see nis i'_-PEotiabl° to +?.
T ra?T N I'S
w.r
I The requirement t.}? Y ItiiL,:.s.lon W required, -ir S1r:.aTi_s with a pL,w [ t'e
i`dt , o ffin'v' seems reasunable and justified The USGS for
WiiiiS of th* Smam can be dayfIWned by any Mad pany.
The "e?PA h i_. ts;' t lti Presence o a!lumic veri.!?b: ate5 3ef"s:'nS •`-? uperl the
AM 0 OWN OWN W', 0hijed tO a Pl,-qie L It W d cost a d6zen a lot of tnoney to
t' 1i3,:.'iTeda bv,ed upon a DWQ ortafTper,son'S C;pinion, 'fsn*c the Wjps
zTT9ina.?t ti
cator of`.he cm, absence cWthis aquatic life''
t1C`•lV EL dear hd{ presence ., i f L:
al
NO. 759 901
to [? J
05,'12/99 17:114 NO. 759 D02
y. _
1 .-
„ '.a:+?, wa t at "'St
?t, t t. t i ?y.Y e ii (? ? i ? i, _.j;.[4 n cE j, subdi vis'Ct 5
fr t }" iiJ. ?vC r 1 :,iG tin; tic nor 1s' '!t
roads O
?t 1?i .lA i 4 ?i`.` ?: yI11fI;atlt. C?iSsu)altl;c- to the "iream
i;tW. iii.>j)C: V. -l ' erode te st- Ea., banks
r 't l ti<lj!, }. y y.3jt1 w't??Yaiion as a culvert pipc
CYte 4i e %?*'as t, TF 4 po, 1( rt mi dt_1 .a..f.:e ;mss}q {.i
? =,5t1'ie s the
t !y} rt ? V, ? ai if_ 'f'`"t I. is .t 04 4-A
I. t
5 j ? ' +i? s+n - r } i t uj t1i5t .R• `1t`a it Is itilt
v b a, der t..! c 1. e
C`,-?1`es this p=` i:`'r ?`?<., V?l1I Ila`e ScientiflC rata

i1Ct 'art 3 % i? ti 1l VSt I'r'a in C1Lir
iei':,s;-s 'a; rile { umntlla+'vv lI?V
s p' he 'ripie Creek ._h!1I I otl it IS CL9i' GYini >l: that there ai
575Lei`_ili Iil %O!'v'ed in th project ['se.e am o--che.I 'skc-tch i11<'1?There,
ii.t 3il i'Li{tfired r !' i '*E erle'il S I ai!? SS tI?:iravzgd less Ni!
t tie r y V Q t<a.k es f i'?S I of ition that tl ese `itil,lt (4) c n 'stings iF. pa T tht sam-_
Sfft?c^:si `?+: '"vC .::t3't l?^ fi?>l.zitt . C fv t4:i tiCif%:1' r? ti`i'•?IioS'.',lO i5 1II3Mlcia! impact bv
s.":Tt ;1t#? % Wrllc11 'Will eIfe.t<Sel\' stop, 01 tie Lv development his w'ili no doubt
"L ?':?8.i t'S?`LTtil by fsirii9E's)Tle 1si the court s?'S2eTi7.
. ?4sc'i It` o ns that a str'eani should be defiirt.ed aw a watercourse clearly ..CIA-IitifEe d
by "name- on the UTSGS c;tTa.d sheet. Any other oFeek with a pos"iti"e 1Q_o flow
v"o"A he, kconSF dewed a. "t'ibutat-v" to a stream" and subject to the 1 _50 foot, Emit
Fach tr'butarv . ould be a. separate Case.')
We tank you for giVim, us the C f)i ortu itv tJ comment (ail this policy If vote have any
, ,,estioni or concertis about our SL!9,9pFlS, ple s , feel Jfree to call or, Tom Jones or me.
W(-,L.,, e.C.
05112f9e 17:04
.-_---_._._
4r'
NG.759 P03

w.,.
Y ,,+'e.?.4 •-•:r'+.., ?-. _ +J. .. awl ?:.;;,
? T i,? A ? FJ r? j t `•C
_R Ic-
i _
11 ! -
I I
. r r,-.
PIN,
WACC-
PROPC8LD ROADS
'E ^ziera:n ;hi ACT MAP
?. 7 Ii!? 11 ?l 91 Bex SCALE: i°=200'
4, -- '0
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Jamey E3. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
L-iL,hY
FROM:
FNME:
F1
Division of Water Quality
Envirv.nmental Sciences Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, N.D. 27607
F? X:[phone]
NQ. ©F PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET:

" P WPL?.' "/a
LO,
Ile csly
w
qq-. x7333

UDC
If-r
4D
S' e? k? / Y'K e

Environmental Sciences Branch 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolinas 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Anirmallve Action Employer 50% recycled/10% past Consumer paper
r
+ Ste% of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
&IM?
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
March 9, 1998
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frank Vick, NC Department of Transportation
Frank McBride, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Wayne Wright, US Army Corps of Engineers
John Hefner, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Tom Welborne, US Enviro mental Protection Agency
FROM: Coleen Sullins
Acting Water Qua ' ectio ief
RE: Review of draft DWQ Stream and Pond Mitigation Policies
Attached for your review and comment is the final draft of stream and pond
mitigation policies for the 401 Water Quality Certification program. These policies have
been reviewed and field-tested by DWQ Regional and Central Office staff over the past
several months. These policies are intended to clarify our 401 Water Quality
Certification rules, namely 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (b) and (c) as they relate to mitigation
requirements for impact to streams and ponds.
Please provide any comments to John Dorney by 17 April 1997 at 4401 Reedy
Creek Road, Raleigh, NC 27607 (919-733-1786). In the interim, DWQ staff will continue
to utilize these policies in our decisions for the 401 Water Quality Certification program.
We will also mail copies of this draft policy to everyone on our 401 Water Quality
Certification mailing list with a forthcoming notice about revised General Certifications
and Neuse River buffer rules.
Stream.cov
Cc: Preston Howard
DWQ Regional Wetland contacts
Dennis Ramsey
John Dorney
John Parker, DCM
Environmental Sciences Branch 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 5001b recycled/10% post consumer paper
DWQ POLICY REGARDING COMPENSATORY MITIGATION FOR STREAM
IMPACT FOR THE 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM
FINAL DRAFT
Division of Water Quality
VERSION FIVE
October 2, 1997
Recently adopted 401 Certification rules have a separate
provision for the minimization of impacts to waters as well as
mitigation for unavoidable impacts to waters (15A NCAC 2H
.0506(b)). However unlike wetlands, the rules do not provide
numerical guidelines for compensatory mitigation regarding
impacts to streams. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) intends
to work with-Department of Transportation (DOT), NC Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC), US Army Corps of Engineers (COE),
other agencies and the private sector to develop and refine
gL'idell:l.c'S for Compensatory mitlgatlon for unavoidable 1'aC?S Co
streams. These decisions will be re_-ected in appropriate
General Certifications, concurrence letters for General
Certifications and Individual C=rz4"cations for the 401 Water
Quality Certification Program.
-Listed below is DWQ's policy developed to implement this
rule. We fully expect that work in this area will involve
additional discussion and related. fieldwork. if this policy
changes, we will notify our 401 Certif-ication mailing list o=
those changes. This mitigation pollcv applies to decis-- s made
by the 401 Water Quality Certification program in acccrcance with
i 5A NCAC 2H .05006 (b) Atte_nots have -Jeen made to coordinate
ool_CV with the U.S. Army Corps or E%^ineer-s. However i_ must be
recognized that stream mitigation policies of COE and DWQ may be
dif=event at times as a result of t d1_.erent mandates of these
agencies.
I. DWQ-Notification and Distance
Biological data (primarily benthic macroinvertebrate
analvsis) indicate that streams in culverts are biologically
impaired - that 1S, the aauatlc life use is degraded or lost.
Culverti ng or otherwise burying streams should be minimized _:.
order to protect these aquatic life uses. A linear distance of
150 feet seems to provide a reasonable balance between roadway
design criteria (allowing a four lane road with median and side
slopes), site design and DWQ staff workload. For the sake of
consistency, this distance will also apply to all projects which
propose to impact channels whether the project is linear (e.g.,
roads) or not (e.g., land development). This provision is a
reporting threshold for all projects eligible for Nationwide
Permit 26 as well as other Nationwide and Regional (General)

0
Permits which require written concurrence from DWQ and is listed
as appropriate in the accompanying General Certification.
For notification purposes, any time more than 150 feet of
stream is proposed to be impacted by the entire project (not just
necessarily in one location on that project), then notification
to DWQ will be required. Applicants will be required to
separately report the length of each stream crossing in the
project. Finally if notification is required to DWQ, staff may
add site specific conditions (such as a requirement for
stormwater ponds for commercial or industrial projects) as
allowed by the appropriate General Certification and the
associated Yule under 15A NCAC 2H .0500. Streams are linear
rather than areal features. Therefore streams (according to 1:,A
NCAC 2H .0506 (b)) are defined as intermittent or perennial
jurisdictional waters (i.e., non-wetlands) as designated by the
US Army Corps of Engineers whether or not they count toward the
500 linear-foot threshold provision for Individual Permits.
II. Mitigation Requirements
Compensatory mitigation must replace those unavoidably lost
or degraded existing aquatic life uses of these streams either
through instream measures and/or riparian techniques such as
buffer establishment and tree planting for temperature control.
In this regard, only loss or degradation of streams with existing
aquatic life uses will require mitigation by DWQ rules. For the
purposes of this policy, stream mitigation will be required for
streams which meet one of the following criteria:
1. a positive 7Q10 or 30Q2 flow, or
2. where aquatic vertebrates are present which require
continuous water (such as fish, crayfish, clams/mussels
or bullfrog tadpoles (who usually require at least two
years to mature]).
Streams meeting these biological criteria would be identified
from a field visit by applicants, their consulcancs or DWQ staff
for those streams with watersheds smaller than those predicted to
have poa Live 7Q10/30Q2 flow. DWQ staff will only 'make a site
visit for a 401 Certification decision after (or simultaneously
when) the COE has determined that the streams are jurisdictional
waters.
This definition of streams requiring compensatory mitigation
is consistent with decisions made by the DWQ's NPDES program.
This statistic can be readily calculated using methods developed
by the U.S. Geological Survey as described in "Low-Flow
Characteristics of Streams in North Carolina", 1003, USGS Water-
Supply Paper 2403 by G.L. Giese and R. R. Mason, Jr.
Streams that do not meet the flow or aquatic life
requirements outlined above would not require stream mitigation
by DWQ. If a stream has no existing aquatic life use (per 15A

? A
NC_`-_C 2B .0202(27)) due to existing watershed conditions'or
historic impact, then stream mitigation would not be required.
This distinction is important since DKQ rules state that uses
attained cn or after November 25, 1975 shall be protected. Any
stream supporting aquatic life (present in a "significant and not
incidental manner") is classified as Class C or SC and must be
protected to maintain C or SC uses. Furthermore, the existing
use definition (15A NCP_C 2B .0202 (27)) states that uses shall be
deemed attainable if the uses can be achieved through
implementation of reasonable Best Management Practices (BMPs).
DWQ urges applicants to install these BMPs to maintain the
existing uses of the water. For instance, applicants are
reminded that bridges are encouraged as a means to avoid the need
for stream mitigation.
if an applicant believes that the stream in question does
not have an existing aquatic life use even though the 7Q 10 or
30Q2 are greater than zero, then the applicant may collect data
(vertebrate and macrobenthos data) to present to DWQ to document
that situation. The studv deli do and analy i ca me`nodoloay mus
t; writ ..n ax rovai by DWO b=-?Y= -t-on is
under ake Unless these data are provided, streams with
positive 7Q10 or 30Q 2 flow will be assumed to have existing
aquatic !- use.
'z is clear that streams which are predicted to have either
zero flcw 7Q10 or zero glow 30Q2 can have existing aquatic life
uses depending primarily on the flow duration.. Until the
relationship of the presence and extent of aquatic life in these
streams is better understood, DWQ will not require compensatory
mitigation for the cul:Terting of these streams unless vertebrate
aquatic life is present. However applicants will be encouraged
to follow stream relocation guidelines were feasible for these
streams
When compensatory stream mitigation is required, the
mitigation ratio shall be one to one (1:1) based on stream length
for projects which propose stream channelization, hardening, or
relocation. DWQ believes that this ratio is justified since the
stream use would be degraded rather than removed. If the stream
is to be culverted or otherwise buried, mitigation shall be at a
2:1 ratio since the aquatic life use will be lost in the
channel1.Finally if the stream is classified as HWQ (ie., native
and special native trout waters, primary nursery areas, WS-I, or
WS-II) and SA waters),WS-III or ORW, then stream mitigation
should be done on a stream within the same river subbasin when
practical at twice the mitigation ratio as described earlier in
this paragraph. In all cases, restoration should include
restoration of both stream banks.
1 However since the operative DWQ policy with respect to stream mitigation
ratios has been 1:1 since January 1997, this change to a 2:1 ratio for
culverted streams will only be effective when this policy is finalized. DWQ
welcomes comment on this provision.
It
y ?
•
Mitigation procedures for impacts to canals must be handled
differently. Larger canals can have significant aquatic life
especially in the outer coastal plain. However replacement of
large canals in this landscape often requires wetland impacts.
O DT,Q will only require mitigation for fill of those canals that
the Corps of Engineers determine to be waters of the U.S. The
150 foot threshold still applies.
Stream impact associated with construction of a pond for
stormwater, irrigation or other purposes will not require
mitigation for the stream impa= as long as the pond is designed
to support aauatlc tife (i.e., with littoral shelves). However
oond creation may not be used to mitigate for additional stream
or wetland loss.
Projects that propose to improve drainage through means such
as channelization and dredging are not suitable sites for stream
mitigation since the-aquatic !if-- in these systems is usually
degraded or will be degraded by the stream work. Stream
1morOVement's which utlliZe bioengineering techniques which do not
utilize cnnelizatior_, dredging or hard bottom structures are
suitable candidates for stream mi-,_ ga-_ion efforts provide: thr
t-:e streams are degraded.
TI_. Mitigation techniques
DWQ has developed a techniCal memorandum (see attachment)
which addresses various technical aspects of stream mitigation.
Mitigation should 1) be done on approximately the same size or
order of stream, 2) replace or improve the physical
characteristics of the stream to be i mmacted, 3) include rips _ ian
measures such as planting of wooded buffers and livestock
exclusion, S) be in the same river subbasin and 5) (where
f? sible) be locate^ in watershe^s targeted in the basin:•:_de
management plan to be partially or non-supporting their uses cue
to nonpoint source problems. if suitable sites cannot be located
or acquired, the search areas should be expanded to' adjacent
subbasins.
Legislation establishing the Wetland Restoration Program
discusses mitigation for "wetlands and riparian areas". DWQ
believes that this language allows an in-lieu payment to the
program for stream mitigation by private and public parties on a
dollar per linear foot basis. DWQ plans to establish a process
with DOT whereby this procedure could be implemented rather than
have DOT invest extensive staff resources for stream mitigation.
Finally, the Environmental Management Commission on 10 April 1997
passed a temporary rule [15A NCAC 2R .0503 (b)(1)] to allow the
Wetland Restoration Program to charge $125 per linear foot of
stream in order to satisfy this mitigation need. This process
should be an attractive option in many instances for the public
and private sectors.
IV. Cumulative Impact

DWQ rules for permitting of stream fill also require
consideration of cumulative impacts (15A NCAC 2H .0506 (b)(4)).
This decision is especially important in linear or phased
projects, Tn termns or streams, if any particular stream with
positive 7Q10 or 30Q2 flow or with vertebrate aquatic life is
planned to be impacted by fill (i.e., hardening or culverting)
greater than 150 -feet, then mitigation will be required for the
entire length including the 150 feet. Relocated streams which
have these characteristics will be required to follow stream
relocation guidelines. Past impacts which required 404/401
authorization wi11 be considered when adG'_tional impacts are
planned in order to control cumulative impacts. Several possible
scenarios are shot.-m- on the attached sketch for illustrative
purposes and are discussed below.
If multiple crossings of a particular stream are planned and
the stream meets the flow/biotic criteria outlined above, then
mitigation will be required if the total fill for that stream
exceeds 1`50 feet. M? t_gation would be required for the enure
amount of impact to the stream.
Except as noted above, mitigation requirements will be
considered separately for each stream. Tor instance if =111 for
eacn separate strum (culverting) in a particular project is less
than 150 feet, th-en stream mitigation wi 1 1 not be required for
the prcDecc unless total fill of the stream exceeds 150 feet- due
to multiple crossings of the same stream.
I. a stream with positive 7Q10/30Q2 flow or vertebrate
aau'atic life is straightened using bioena-sneering techniques, any
loss of stream length. greater than 150 feet wi 1 1 require
mitigation.
I: bi oencri neeri na techniaues are not used-.. (for instance
tine stream is placed in a concrete lined conveyance), then the
entire 1 enath would re:i ire com-oensato?v mitigation if the lednath
exceeds 150 feet. .gain, bridging of streams will not require
compensa-torn mitication for the stream impacts since the aquatic
life use is still present beneath the bridge.
In addition, compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts
may be reauired in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). These
procedures are outlined in separate DWQ policies.
streamool.mem
$FESIBLE STREAM COMPENSATORY MITIGATION SCENARIOS
Division of Water Quality, Environmental Sciences Branch
October 2. 1997
250 foot crossing -
need 2:1 mitigation
for entire 250
foot loss
/ / stream
150 foot crossing -
no compensatory
mitigation needed
stream
three 100 foot crossings
(300 feet total) - compensatory
mitigation at 21 rtio needed for
300 feet of impact since total
stream crossings exceed 150 feet
stream
slope

Relocated stream - if loss ((old stream (Lo)
length minus new stream (Ln) length)) is greater
than 150 feet, then compensatory mitigation at 1:1
ratio needed for difference as Iona as bioengineering
techniques are used to relocate the stream. If
bioengineering techniques are not used, compensatory
mitigation will be required for entire length.

* Assumes stream has positive 7Q10/30QZ flow or aquatic vertebrates (see text for details)

v
_l
c: DE!f WQ Eft"SCI

R ooi
I Tole
Date Time
WHILE YOU
M A AM
WERE OUT
S
vi
Phone ( > '? .- 3
Area Code Number Extension
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALL8DTOSEEYOU__j WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message

Operator
O AMPAD
? ?? DER
EFFICIENCY®
The plan 'remains as originally submitted
Area #5
The creek impact is 76 LF.
Area #6
The plan remains as originally submitted. The creek impact is 40 LF.
It is our opinion that areas 5 and 6 should be considered the same stream. The cumulative impact
in areas 5 and 6 is 116 LF. Please contact our office at your earliest convenience if'further.
discussion of this proposal is necessary.
Sincerely,
G. Thomas Jones ill; P.E.

WATER QUALITY SECTION
March 31, 1998
MEMORANDUM.:
TO:
THROUGH:
FROM John Dorney, Wetlands Group

Wastewater- Consultant
Forrest Westall, Supervisor
Water Quality Section
Roger Edwards`IF 5
SUBJECT:. Triple Creek S/D, Henderson County
Project Number 98-0169
This subdivision does not culvert more than 150 feet of any
one stream. The total footage of stream in culverts is in excess
of 150 feet. While our regulations do not require mitigation for
less than 150 feet of stream there are impacts to the environment
when several hundred feet of stream is placed in culverts in the
same drainage area.
The opinion of the site inspector is the entrance culvert
located in area six (6) could be changed to a bridge- The bridge
may cost more than a culvert however, the bridge would enhance the
entrance to the project. The bridge would prevent the lost of
usefulness of that section of stream.
The site visit confirmed that area three(3) is not a stream at
the location of the culvert.
The engineer is to evaluate the proposed road layout in area
two(2). It is possible the road can be moved closer to the
property line and prevent the installation of the culvert in the
head of the stream.
Areas 1, 4, and 5 are streams which will be placed in
culverts.
The park area should be a separate deed to the homeowners
association or to a conservation group. This hopefully will
prevent this wetland area from being destoried.
ME -
TO: ?• ?J Nn Dorney Regional Contact:
n-Discharge Branch WO Supervisor:
A. Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name
T`>E le 'reek S/i) ?,K.. County Hencler5on -,
project Number 98 11169 County2
Recvd From APP RewrN Asheville 3
Received Date 2/2319$
Project Tye Resident develcrpment^
Certificates
Stream
Permit Wetland 'Wetland Wetland "Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp au?3 Req.
NW 26 O ti O F? 6-51 FC F-- 040302 0.240 i,
?x x a. ?i??iSr'. ys
E
Mitigation Wetland
Type Acres f=eet
?VtitigationType 7"

Is Mitigation required? O Y G N
Did you request more info? 0Y W1
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? Q Y Q-fl
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? Q- Q N
Comments' Recommendation: ssue O Issue/Cond O Deny
cc: Regional Office
Central Office
f North Carolina
rtment of En. ironment
t Natural RE s
lsion of Water Quality
James B. Hurt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Norton Segal
S & N Properties Inc.
500 Crooked Creek Lane
Hendersonville NC 28739
Dear Mr. Segal:
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 20,1998
DWQ Project # 980169
Henderson County
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your plans for the discharge of fill material into 0.24 acres of
streams located at Triple Creek subdivision in Henderson County for residential development. Based on this review,
,we have1dentified significant uses, which would be removed or degraded by this project. These uses are aquatic life
uses in these streams. Furthermore, insufficient evidence is present in our files to conclude that your project must be
built as planned in waters and/or wetlands in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0506. Therefore, unless modifications
of the proposal are made as described below, we will have to move toward denial of your 401 Certification as
required by 15A NCAC 2H .0507(e) and will place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional
information. Until we receive additional information, we are requesting (by copy of this letter) that the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers place your project on administrative hold.
Please provide us with information supporting your position that states your project must be constructed as
planned and that you have no practicable alternative to placing fill in these waters and/or wetlands. Specifically can
you construct your road crossing at area #6 to a bridge and reconfigure the road alignment to avoid,-tream fill at #2?
These alterations (especially those at area #6) would reduce the stream mitigation that would otherwise be required
for this project. Any documentation such as maps and narrative that you can supply to address alternative designs for
your project may be helpful in our review of your 401 Certification. Also this project will require compensatory
mitigation as planned as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506(h). Your mitigation proposal is insufficient because none
is proposed.
Please respond within two weeks of the date of this letter by sending a copy of this information to me and one
copy to Mr. Roger Edwards, Asheville Regional Office at 59 Woodfm Place, Asheville NC 28801. If we do not hear
from you in two weeks, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the
project as withdrawn. I can be reached at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions.
S' LRDmbey
n ter Quality CerVcati Program
cc: Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Wilmington Office Corps of Engineers
Central Files
John Dorney
Asheville Field Office Corps of Engineers
G. Thomas Jones III; William Lapsley & Associates
980169.nty
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 - Telephone [phone] - FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
. da

February 19, 1998 William G. Lapsley & Associates, PJL
Consulting Engineers and Land Planners
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office Box 546
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28793
704-697-7334 • FAX [phone]
William G. Lapsley, P.E.
John Echeverri, EE.
G. Thomas Jones III, P.E.
Mr. David Baker
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Reou(atory Field Office
151 Patton Ave - Room 143
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: Tnpie Creek`Subdivison
Proposed Roads
NC 191 Henderson CountV
n
4ft
to Printed on Recycled Paper
OEM ID:
COR25 ACTION ID:
NATIONWIDE 2ERMIT REQUESTED (2ROVIDE NATIONWIDE npll:T 4) :
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION APPLICATION
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO TIE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MAXAG' MNT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COLLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATEEN
MANAGEMENT
FIELD DIES SHOULD BECSENT TO TTHHEIN.ECR.SDI(SEE VISION OFYENVADDRESSES IRONMENTAL SHEET)
(7) COPIES
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
5 `U N PRav,?Q"C\'G S S t-z c-, NOCZTw'Sp-c- AL-
1. OWNERS NAME:
2. MAILING ADDRESS: ..5av GROav;E? ??`? L?Nfi
SUBDIVISION NAME:
28?
cJ L ZIP CODE:
STATE:
CITY : ?j
,--
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDINGSUBDIVISION NAME ((IF DIFFERENT FROM
q, Ar"Los.5 C--
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE): N
5tidfl?J?s?a? Ia?NDECLSON c-c??.?a? ?
70?-legc?-X2-7 (WORK): 23b-S(OL4
3. TELEPHONE NUMBER (HOME): -
4. IF APPLICABLE: AGENT'S NAME OR RESPONSIBLE CORPORATE OFFICIAL, ADDRESS,
PHONE NUMBER:
?-
G. V?q?s?.?( E. ,gssa??v4-??S
0 Li
ot"1vLL-k-f i Qc- 28793 ?'to??? (9?Z-?33?
5. LOCATION OF WORK (PROVIDE A MAP, PRE:ERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE) ?E?
N
COUNTY: ?A0t0 DF' fRsol.1 NEAREST TOWN OR CITY:
1
`IL'M9CRS,` LANCM.ARKS, ETC .) 'n? G PQ oSEc,T l5 L-bC,A T E-D OFr-
OF rsc X91 ??cR6ss r-RoN? c??.?,A-R:zvt? r? s? S?.?f3Dty?S?a?.T

V3E?2 (Lv?C?f?` ?M?D7?? SCE-1001 .
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Ml?-V PoNI>
RIVER BASIN: ?RGNGN 6CZ0Ar-->
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER
(SA), HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW), WATER
SUPPLY (WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [ ] NO [f IF YES, EXPLAIN:
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC) ? YES [ ] NO [vj
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR
LIST OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
NIA
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON
THIS PROPERTY? YES [ J NO...[ J IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I. D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION) n+e?' ??t lowKA
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PE? IT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ J NO [J1 IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND:
28. (o
9b. ESTIMATED.TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
Z.3 P4 c- C2" ir-l Et?T10.?v `C????
2
f" 4p
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED
OUT IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND
IMPACTS):-
W?\\V? STtZEJ>cv?nS MAST S3? Gt?vs?Fi? 1? dR??L TO
p?v ?w i? ?'H, per, up E,ZT ? ?? S ? 5.,.c3??v ? 5 ? orJ ? ,fir P A-R,v? ?a E,?A
y r w?. C3 f? ESC J E -To
P R E s ER T?-+? L v?a? ??-r
'C?ocL-f?o?? or- W GT L,/a,-sv1... s o,v -rw-?- C?ao1? tici-c-`?
1 U AR$ REQUIR:ADND TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE S
(USFWS) AL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE E AGENCY
ADDRESSES SHEET) REIN ENCE DERALLY LISTED OR
ill PROPOSED FOR LISTING ENDANGER 'lP 11'', 11; lit _7 CIES OR.CRITICAL HABITAT
IN THE PERMIT AREA BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPO DATE
CONTACT gaz DATA
FitOg THESE AGENCIES.] (ATTACH
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRES
(SHPO) (S SES SHEET) REGARDING
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT
PROJE CTED:
OF HISTORIC
BY THE PROPOSED
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [ ] NO [dr (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF'AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [ NO [ ] -
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [ ] NO [ ]
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE. TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGE"4-ENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH
CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH,
NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
4

5
i
8
k
i
1

_ ?• . ?i t?%O f :y ? /1' `j 1 ?^ ? ` ??-?"??r?'? 1 (•,'`.:u .r•• 'a '../,^ ?lf? ? -`'ipf4N1 ?J??l. 1 ...
(rte- I/.(5 4'A? •~~ j? // f ? ? - .L{?' ??' ,'??,' ?\•: • • :•w• ?a_ry/- n.. 1.2U??,: l t Mdlllr.?x}. C.v
:MID
I Mil Puncl C:rrir n. y.,?•? : n / ?? 1, l` J ,•• ?? • ?_ '''•i2• 'L. ?' /.nb.'/ (•.•t.
4\_ .%p ly' W /hlpggd So?j?-?\:...? . d :rtl lc\ .(Jtll)'' 1 I ?{ 1;J? tii?ll'?l{;Irl .?
OF 4 l ). 1
/ `\ • ?•/• ? W3 ? 7 ?.
F aa•p? t t??s' ??• •t' '•t' \\,(1! i tL,, ?. '????1`'T\ t1 ?•??•.
./? 1 .?., ?..1 , ?fta .. s'•_ .. g 1, •(feY•=!\ •:f 't •'1 \ , ?? ?,y' ) . Z;laa'?.•'• '/,3?'•-
%j? -?.. lU?l3?f. N-`-f•/ --14??1 \ ?r \? ..? ) l ! ?i/; `y 11 Gtti??? •.ny .fie:''' }\'? ,.
1F13'1a0 7 l r• - l _^i'• .)1), ty?'
?- Q rf'?C - C•.• ?(??'? r r / I i I /i .?l'? j •+r.rrk• y
\G9-,-?y\??( ?/' ?(,` .'?:\;??? 1?• (:'O?/1 a ll'? ? -1\1`?(?'r??(?j??^?ti?l,? '/tl `• , 'l. •L ??.',
(/` ''iaaa IU ,'??Yl~II?:'+?LV • (SIR ?, ;?-•?, ??
• \•? ?/?t,•:j ? .fir' '•\\ ? ?:? /?-'?? f/• z•')? "r\'•\? '•y ?,?? 'r )? 1 ??; ,, < ???\,_ _ •."? •
`t ???. s ? ?'?t U 195.x. ??? j `` 7. -- ?r "y' ••I(' =,? ": k„ i .i "•. r f .j- .t: .., d •
y? •?(t 1? Y ? _•j ? ' ?.; ??.? .l •) ? o n. Y;I'?1;•,):aL(.? s,?.h?`\` , ' ?; ? ???? ?, .r. ',1.
b"•(\ .:?'?• ! ~ .? v ? :Il. i?r afuA n• i;,'' i, fl,:l , ?, ' Vii'.°? i1,1'I' 1 ^ 1. Il`?Ij?..l. A.
?24 i I,`??'?1 •'Y:''t (!: r'Ifl?.4p" 1^•,? ntdin.
• J. .-
at o
• 1 l;? 3_ ?i.l. ? -• I r,? 1 -.. _ ?':n. ._.. wry e=;.'•?:1 ?Stur,yr'?lr lnt,ur' ?.`C J ? \.
"All
y%? 1?? '?_ ? `\/ -?l?l -1 = \ ??\[ ? 191 ? , • \? \ k?,., i :. -?:.? -•;\? '•' ' • ?l•
UFO. 19 1 7, IV-
--mci 4.
C\A ?" ?? /? C'K.y "?L ``? \r??• 'M?s)°?`•? ?_ ll•OIIy 1,?. •???.• 1 1• ./• .
undl1 1'?C ?\t??` _ .,t. °_??) 1• ?lTrit(ai;L C lj•,;• •j? •? I: .r:
v''/. \//•*l• is l?? A ?` ` p. \ a• ct, :.\c .. 4 (??0•?• `?'ty' .;%i4
"...r
/ • ?? z / (! Cn?h ?h?\b? ?? )t ;.... , /?..I L " , < /1k
?..?? `I \,J•\"la,' ? ? n1r. \?• In'rl ?.?- ?Z??/?) ?•.1 •., ll?fr'?I!•`??_ 1 .iI\ %` •'?! •`• '?? ':iw.
1 '/ • ;? `> ?•???J t \ ?? fir): 1
__ Kcdd::\?L•; ..li?,? •'.1 ; •' •' k..'
`, ` _ •`. `- .xrn , 4_7,• ?'• w` \ `? .! i '?:? ? ?.l •l?_ `n \? '{?'?r?4 11 °' \. • r. 1 ) :/' ? c. ?
+isa •?? :., .. .. IIFOCIyW' •-? '? ?• ' / / /? •• / 1 ` \ \ .,,?\ ?r i /.• .? I 1 ••?ti ? .. • ,s
b4? .? _ (Ji:,n.' .:moo • ":?,?\, ',l ?` . - ,::•
-fir l\ ? \ \ ` ^?•?? ? ^,h . -- ?`. ?' •r. •.? •? 1,.? ? ???• ?'!cy•t ? .d'r? • ?: .J. - • -?Y"?,
• • •? 1 ?? ? \ '? ` r• u 171 ..--•? ' .:. •%;..-' ?? ,,! . • ???{ j'`-? . ? .r , to/ryt? -=? ??.C:•?
•I ?? . '- _? .1 .. ,\ ,J `•\ ? • q? 1 / ' ? '? 1 a:. 4 .1'l• p `•.?\ ? ..`«.«.?«-•it.y, ` ..
Q /` pr •? V` J?ac \? I /.ate ,? /CI1YA? -aN V138
(( 7J 4J ti \
/(J) ?/ / ?\ 1 '
I• -' ?•-?1 h j-,• ! --• J \\`^?\~ ??'_.`--? 1 ? p` • ,•1 i?/'.% --•?' • ' '? ?i ?Sbaw C.erk CA; v.?ti;• •• r : I"•
t t )) .? a ? _ j/ .,? ,,, (i" l?-? D.:;? \•' pp ? '. , //;? --. ?'.'?? • 1'I'owli•?br st l,•;
i 1) r f.._ 4 ?urfcg` ` c ? c,,. •?aJf ? ?-???%" ?." (rj, t?J/ f • ?r ??j ?/'?, ` ? •1) • . . " ' ? ? • `?\?
I? ? l)• ???ti-' • ? ?aa ??? ?? r.?r{tlldY-I''_or?s\t1.., ?•-._.? li ?. •1 '\ ? ` ?, hJ?,.. ra ? '• .. \\t,)?[ f \?? ?.? r• •I ?, ? .,?.
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & A SSOCIATES P.A. VICINITY
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION MAP
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office Box 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
[phone] Phone SCALE: 1°=2000'
(704) 697-733:3 Fax
. „f I i
0
PROPOI?ED
SPECIAL DIM
(SEE DETAIL 0)
PROPOSED TEMPOR
SEDI ENT TRAP Q
FENCE C
7
SPECIAL DITCH #1
(SEE DETAIL A)
PROPOSED TEMPORARY
SEDIMENT TRAP #1

PROPOSED
STONE OUTLET
PROTECTION
WETLAND
IMPACT AREA
0.06 AC f
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office sox 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
[phone] Phone
[phone] Fax
AREA #1
SCALE: 1"=50'
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A. AREA #2
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office sox 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
N9 [phone] Phone SCALE: 1"=50'
[phone] Fax

WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A. AREA ##3
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
1635 Asheville Highway
Post office sox 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
N9 [phone] Phone SCALE: 1"=50'
[phone] Fax

WETLAND
IMPACT AREA
0.05 AC f
(SEE MTAL O) , \\
?S
1
6
PROPOSED
TEMPORARY E CULVERT #1
64' OF 15" CMP
SLOPE = 12.57E
Q = 5.7 cfs
PROPOSED TEMPORARY
SEDIMENT TRAP #3
PROPOSED
SPECIAL DITCH #8
(SEE DETAIL B)
PROPOSED
CULVERT #4
TWIN 142"x91" C.M. PIPE ARCHES
WITH CONC. ENDWALLS
SLOPE = 0.79E
Q25 = 1340 cfa
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & A SSOCIATES P.A. AREA #4
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office Box 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
[phone] Phone SCALE: I"=50'
[phone] Fax
1-1

WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office Box 546
Hendersonville, NC 28793
[phone] Phone
[phone] Fax
TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
PROPOSED ROADS
AREA #5
SCALE: I"=50'
PROPOSED TEMPORARY
SEDIMENT TRAP #k5
PROPOSED
SPECIAL DITCH #10
(SEE DETAIL E)

WETLAND
IMPACT AREA
0.01 AC f

PROPOSED
SPECIAL DITCH #9
(SEE DETAIL E)
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES P.A. AREA 6
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS TRIPLE CREEK SUBDIVISION #
1635 Asheville Highway
Post Office sox 546 PROPOSED ROADS
Hendersonville, NC 28793
D9 [phone] Phone SCALE. 1"-_50'
[phone] Fax