20060922 Ver 2_More Info Received_20070416

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
s
•
~ ~~--
F~ri~, , ronr
~~r~~~l
o~-ogaa-va
April 12, 2007
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attention: Kevin Barnett
Reference: Request for Additional Information
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, NC
DWQ Project # 06-0922
Dear Mr. Barnett,
e.-.., ~n~_ ..-R
> ~-
1 ~r _ ' x.~ r ;' s~P't
a X ~ ~ ~.' g
s6
pr, ~
-a~
kii~j'~ z ~ L~~4/

This letter is intended to provide additional information requested by your office in a
letter dated March 9, 2007 regarding the above referenced project. The letter specifically
addressed three points; 1) an alternative site plan layout proposed by DWQ, 2) stormwater
management, and 3) compensatory mitigation. Each point is addressed below, and we have
provided supplemental information in Appendices A-C to assist in your review.
DWQ Alternative Site Plan (Plan D)
Included in this package is an analysis and conceptual drawings of the alternative site
layout presented by DWQ at the site meeting on March 5, 2007 and included as a sketch in the
letter dated March 9, 2007. The alternative site plan is labeled Plan D and conceptual drawings
provided include the site layout, grading, grading profile alignment, and grading profile. Based
on the analysis provided by Freeland and Kauffman, Inc., the DWQ conceptual site plan (Plan D)
has a number of issues which make it nonviable. The issues addressed in the memo include
insufficient parking, unsafe and un-permitable access, safety considerations with parking
configuration, grading and retaining walls. You mentioned in your letter that the division staff felt
the alternative layout would minimize the need for extensive grading and reduce the overall cut
and fill. We examined this and have included for your review cross sectional drawings of the
proposed site plan and the alternative site plan presented in your letter for comparison. Please
refer to the enclosed memo from Freeland and Kauffman dated March 23, 2007 and conceptual
site plan drawings for a complete analysis.
The owner of this project has expended considerable time and resources to obtain
governmental approval of the currently proposed plan. These efforts have included public
hearing review of the project, and issuance of a Conditional Use Permit by Buncombe County,
the authority having jurisdiction. Modification of the current design to an approximation of the
layout suggestions of DWQ would require a complete redesign of the project, and would require
P0. Box 3744 Greenville, South Carolina 29608 (864).271-3040 Fax [phone]
~~; ~ ~~~

r
i
~/
all permits to be either amended or reissued. This would result in a substantial additional delay to
this project, as well as a substantial increase in design costs.
Stormwater Management
This item was included in the letter presumably because it was discussed as a matter of
clarification during the onsite meeting on March 5, 2007. As originally submitted to your office
on August 9, 2007, wet detention ponds with littoral shelves are proposed as part of the
stormwater management plan.
Comnensatory Mitigation
Per your request, a fence will be installed along the northern property line in an effort to
control dumping into Stream 1. As indicated in the revised compensatory mitigation plan and in
a letter to your office dated January, 30, 2007, DWQ and USACOE will be copied on all
monitoring reports. While we found that the alternative site plan was not feasible, we do agree
that the un-impacted wetlands might be enhanced by directing treated stormwater at non-erosive
velocities into the wetland. Stormwater management ponds will be designed to allow for non-
erosive discharge into onsite wetlands.
Proaosed Site Plan (Plan A)
The applicant's proposed site plan (Plan A) has a reduction in the overall impervious
surface to approximately 16.7 acres compared to the original site submitted in the permit
application which showed approximately 17.6 acres of impervious surface. The applicant applied
for and received a parking ratio variance to reduce the required parking ratio from 5/1000s.f of
retail space to 4.74/1000 s.f. of retail space. The current proposed site plan also involves a
retaining wall at the rear of the building which allows for a reduction of impact to the largest
wetland onsite, Wetland C. The result is a reduction of 0.15 acre of impact. In order to ensure
that the maximum impact feasible was minimized, the typical delivery truck turn around was
eliminated in favor of a one-way dock configuration which requires less space.
The applicant has avoided and minimized impacts to Waters of the US to the maximum
extent practicable. Alternatives were considered thoroughly prior to submitting the present
design and relying on compensatory mitigation. I hope that this addresses all your comments and
concerns regarding this project and we can proceed in a timely fashion. If you have any
questions, please call me at [phone]. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Re pectfully,
~~ ,
Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Cc: Mike Ranks, Freeland and Kauffman, Inc.
Randy Brown, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

•
•
•
i
r
~ ~ - coq a.a. v ,~
April 11, 2007
To: Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Re: Wal--Mart Store #9179
NC 280. (Airport Road), Buncombe County, North Carolina
Response to NC DFNR Comment Letter (3/9/07)
We have reviewed the comment letter provided by NC DENR in regards to
the above-re€erenced project, dated 3!9/07. We would specifically like to
address Comment No. 1 that was included in this letter, as we understand
that you will be providing response to the remaining comments.
We have previously submitted a Conceptual Alternate Layout Plan, which
is now labeled as Plan C far the purposes of this re-submittal. Upon
receipt of the alternate layout, NC DFNR requested that we evacuate
another modified version of Plan C. The updated alternate layout, labeled
D, as enclosed, was prepared to evaluate the sketch which NC DENR
provided. It was NC DENR's belief that Plan D may be a practical and
feasible alternative layout for this project, which would minimize the
amount of proposed disturbance of the large central wetland on the
property. In order to explore this possibility, we have prepared alternate
Plan D, and analyzed grading required for the layout_ This plan is an
approxima#ion of the sketch provided in NC DENR's 3!9/07 comment letter.
Upon completion of our analysis, we have reached the following
conclusions:
• Insufficient Parking: Plan D provides a tofal of 725 parking
spaces, which equates to a ratio. of 3.69 spaces/1000 s.f. This
parking ratio is insufficient for a project of this type. As we have
previously discussed, the applicable Buncombe County Zoning
Ordinance requires a minimum parking ratio for retail
developments of 1 space/200 s.f., or 5.0 spaces11000 s.f. We
.have previously obtained a variance which allows us to install
209 Went Storoc Avenue - Greernoiltc. South Carolina 29609 • Te~phone 864-23~3~549'X • Fax SF4233-89'15

i
i
i
•
•
•
•
only 931 spaces, or 4.74 spaces/1000 s.f., and this is what is
provided on Wal-Mart's current proposed-plan, Plan A. This
conceptual sife plan layout would result in a large shortage of
spaces from this approved variance. Municipalities provide
minimum parking ratio requirements for the safety and welfare of
the community, and far traffic flow considerations, and a very low
parking ratio is contrary to these goals.
• Unsafe and Un-permittable Access: Plan D plan shows two
entrance drives into the site, with one of these being directly at
the comer of the building, in accordance with the NC DENR
ske#ch. This entrance would never be permitted in this form by
NC DOT, as there is no room for stacking of vehicles waiting to
exit the site, and motorists would be forced to make a tum-
decision immediately after exiting Airport Road, which is a
signifcant safety concern. Additionally, moving this entrance to
the location shown on Plan D would offset it from the existing
entrance drive across Airport Road from the site, eliminating the
possibility of obtaining a traffic signal to control vehicle access to
the property.
Parking Configuration: while the concep#ual site plan provides
approximately 725 parking spaces, only approxima#ely 550
spaces are actually located at the front of the store, where all
ingress and egress to the store must take place. The remainder
of the spaces are placed to the side and rear of the building.
Wal-Mart does have guidelines to insure that customer and
associate parking shall generally not be provided past the mid-
point of the side building wall. While there are exceptions to this
guideline, as noted in the NG DENR letter, customer and
associate safety is always the primary consideration the review of
any parking configuration. In the instance of Plan D, the rear
parking area is completely isolated from the "activity center" of
the site, and has no visibility whatsoever from any adjacent
roadways or public areas. The parking provided along the entire
side of the building in Plan A, the proposed site plan, is clearly
better-situated, in that it is connected to the primary parking field,
is located along a primary travel-route within the development,
and is visible from the public right-af--way.
We note that the NC DENR sketch did not show any parking
along the front-left side of the building. Our conceptual site plan
shows parking in this area, as we are required to provide
handicap parking spaces directly in front of the garden center
entrance. In an effort to approximate the NC DENR sketch, we

~ kept parking in this area to a minimum, only allowing enough to
• provide the required handicap spaces. This is not an acceptable
setup to Wal-Mart, as the garden center entry is a vital entrance
~ (one of only three) for customers. and associates, but we feel this
~ plan clearly demonstrates that even with the absolute minimum
~ amount of parking in this area, it will not be possible to avoid

~ disturbance of the large wetland area in the central portion of the
site.

~ Additionally, the front parking area is shown angled to the front of
~ the Wal-Mart store in Plan D. This is not an acceptable parking

~ lot design configuration to Wal-Mart, as it results in an unsafe
pedestrian crossing condition for a(I access into and out of the
~ store.
~ • Outlot Canficuration: Plan D results in an oddly-shaped outlot
• areas. These outlots would ei#her require an additional driveway
directly to Airport Road, which NC DOT is unlikely to permit, or
r would be provided with very poor access internally from the Wal-
~ Mart property. The result is that the outlots shown on Plan D
• would be largely un-marketable due to their shape, separation

~ from the front of the Wal-Mart store, and poor access. As such,
the outlots have a reduced financial benefit for development of
~ the shopping center, and would have a negative affect on the
~ aesthetics of the shopping center.
• • Grading and Retailing Walls: the NC DENR letter states that the

~ site is presently at the level of Airport Road, and shifting the
building and parking lot closer to Airport Road would minimize the
~ need for earthwork operations on the site. A review of the
~ topographic survey reveals that there is approximately 72' of
• vertical relief (fall) across the site, and this grade change occurs
almost uniformly over the length of the site. This means that the
~ western portion of the site is more than 70' lower than the
~ elevations of Airport Road. By placing the Wal-Mart building
* immediately adjacent to Airport Road, as the NC DENR sketch

~ and Plan D shows, the fnished floor elevation of the Wal-Mart
structure will very nearly match the adjacent elevations of Airport
~ Road. Of course, the finished floor elevation of the Wal-Mart will
~ be the same on all sides of the building, which means the far left
• side of the building will be at nearly the same elevation as Airport
Road. We have attached a conceptual grading summary of Plan
r D, which has existing contours shown, and labels proposed
~ grades at key points throughout the shopping center. We have
~ noted what the elevation difference will be between the pavement

r

~ and existing grades. This plan clearly shows that, with the
• building location shown on the NC DENR sketch, we will be
'
'
approximately 45
to 4$
higher than existing grades along the
~ majority of the rear of the site. Grading this elevation change in
~ at a 3:1 slope with appropriate maintenance and stabilization
~ benches, this elevation difference of nearly 50' would translate

~ into a slope system approximately 150' to 170' in width. We have
sketched the toe of this proposed slope on the attached 11 px17"
~ exhibit, and it is evident that this slope would result in greater
~ wetlands disturbance than the original design, as shown in Plan
• A.
~ Replacing this slope with a retaining wall would clearly be
~ impractical, as the height and cost of the wall are simply not
~ realistic from a construction and financial standpoint.
~ The current proposed plan, Plan A, provides long entrance drives
~ which can be sloped steeply, lowering the build-able area" of the
~ site (the building and parking lot), to be much better suited to the
• terrain of the property. The fill slopes on the proposed site plan
'

r are on the order of 20
in height, while the majority of the fill
slopes on the attached conceptual site plan are greater than 45'
~ in height. In addition to the slope taking up more room with the
~ increased height, the conceptual plan would also represen# an
additional 20 to 25 vertical feet of fill material which would need to
be imported to the properly from elsewhere. The additional cost
~ of this imported fill, and additional land-disturbance on the borrow
~ property, makes this large-scale import both economically
• impractical and undesirable.
We have provided crass-sections through the currently proposed
~ site plan, as well as the conceptual alternate plan, to help
~ demonstrate the grading challenges of this project.
~
~ • Miscellaneous Operational Considerations: Plan D results in
several other site layout features which are not optimal for
~ operation of the proposed structure. These include poor delivery
~ and truck turn-around access for the side of the store closest to
. Airport Road, and poor visibility of the garden center from Airport
Road. Most significantly, there will still be wetlands disturbance
~ throughout the site, whether slopes, retaining walls, or both are
~ being utilized. The overall amount of wetlands impacts with a
• combination of slopes and retaining walls significantly exceeds

i
•
•

those impacts required by Plan A, the proposed Site Plan. If all
retaining walls, discounting cost and constructability
considerations, fhere will be large portions of the central wetlands
area will still be impacted. The cost to import the additional fill
and construct retaining walls around all wetlands areas is not an
economically viable option. We have provided a version of Plan
D with numerical keynotes, which helps to pinpoint many of the
issues associa#ed with this conceptual layout.
In summary, we have made extensive effort to provide a conceptual plan
which approximates the sketch that has been provided by NC DENR. We
have prepared and reviewed this plan in good faith, and unfortunately this
alternate plan simply does not represent a viable site plan, primarily for the
reasons listed above. We have not gone into extensive detail on many of
these items, but we will be happy to provide any additional information that
might be useful to facilitate fnal review of this project.
We continue to believe that the site plan we have proposed (and modified
extensively due to discussions with NC DENR and other commenting
agencies}, provides the best possible layout for this project, with the
minimum amount of required wetlands disturbance. Great efforts have
been made to insure that we have considered the reasonable alternatives
to the layout for this project, and the proposed site plan treats the wetland
areas and streams on this property as conscientiously as possible.
Please contact us should you have any additional questions and
comments. Thank you.
Si rel ,
M hael R nks, E
cc: Randy Brown, Wal-Mart Stores, Ine.
Josh Katzer, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
file

l~a,.s ML'FB N6 ECL
.«~. •.~ =~ vrlno o r~~av

ZC-6LIItt ~2fo1S 12fdW-"IrYM
^ ~.
~ ~~~~~~f
'ue ~ ~
~I~~~~~~~~~~$~~~

1 I
~~
~ ~,
~~
+ ~ ~~.
~'~~~ ~ 'I
~ ~ `~~.
®/~. ~.
~;' ~ ~~~ ,
~, r .
~; ~~
~___. _.
., ~~
~g ~ ~ ^ ~
~ ~ ~ O
~ ~ ~
~ r
~ ~ ~~~~°~ ~~ oQ i
Q
~~ ~ ~' 3~ ~~ °~
~t `s ~ `~ s ~ "' ( W
`v ~ _ ~~~ w
~~.~~g~= ~~~ Q
-~~ ~~'~
~ ~~3
~~^ ~ n ~ 3
.,
~.
. ~ 4m
O~

r ~~' 1
,~
~y~
~~
O
~7
~~
~~
7
o/ g
§~~
'~ ~a ~
~N
3
,':
! , =, ~~~~
77
~r
J ~ ~ ~ n pppa p
~ ~~~
~,,~ ~ a
~ e~l~~
~ \ A~Y
\~
/ ~ ~~
/ ~ \\
;. Fa m+ow e.ow
~' • i
`' .~
_ :.• :~.!
V..,... .~• /
r ':': ~: ~: •: •:
~ .. :...:.:...:...:~i
1 ~:~: ~:•: ~; •:~
-..
:/
t ~
.. .•/~
=!~: ''Jim
~:;:;:.;.:... s
/.;;;./ ~
'~ ~ ~~ ~ !~
•~1 ' ~ ~~
1,
o __. _., _
o e
\' \~\.
,: , \
V j '~
/ $~
.-
i/
i/
/ /
T /
~~
~~
~~ 4
~~ ~~

,~
.,
.,
.,
.-,
;~
~~~
~~`,.
4 ~
~~
[q ~ nl
±~
~~
a
oa $
~~ Q
R
N
Q
r

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~I
ala~cc.r o ooo+-six rKn ~s.urr.
R,~,W kit l+9rw^xv mrra`a»w~
91 ~+"~+ ,`ZO-6LII~ ~0 S~/13"ISV

43~ ~}~~~~~.
~~9~D~~~~$~~9
F
oJ(~
Z ~
Zip
~Z~
W
F-
J
Q
...'-
'` 7
~a' ~.. ~~~~r Iii i ~I 11~ ~~,'F ~ L,,•.~~ _.:. , ,!~\\, e\` \
Fir `• .~: <:;::.
,S ~~ ' 4 \
I ~~ g ~~-
t i :~-
~ ~ • \ \ E~4
q • r'u~ T.
h L ~ \,\ ~~ 1~~!.~ g :;} ~ ~ _, `1~ , 4. ; /. /r `\~' `'yam ~: ~. \.,
7C., I .\~~\~ `. I /r X11 \, _. .r,. 51 T ~' 1.!: `~ 3~~.~., \
r l \ \ ~ - I 1 r ~ I ; ~.+' /.. ~, . 1 ] i ~ `•~ . /. ,n:f!1;,. Y.:1 4-`w -
-~+ r:' S _ Q
.=.;-J. / ( ~`I i ~ ` jam: •• ;, _ ... . ~, I , j i r^..• ~ i.,'`rµ r . %' ^ ...~.
~ri / f •. ~/ ,. ~ ~~ r...r"•/ 7 ,•t~% ~.._~,.: is _...~~` tlt _:' y I I .. ~/. `, - - £. ',h. r.~y9Tyy(F
/ r ///..:1. ~:~~'~ ~!~~', Via!%6 ` ;~)J'/!l/,~,~ l ir~~'"r"}"`"' -_..._-__J ~ ~5 ..
~`.

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

~~'
,~
,~1~~~
--, %• ~ _ l
~, ~ , ~;
~,~~~~~
$~ ~~~~~$ ~~ \ ~ ~~° -- 'I ! ail ~ ~i~_
-. ~\
~. ~ ~` ~~.
~ ~
:~
I '•~ . \ ~
r ~~

~~~`~~~'~E~~I
~ \,
a
i
1
WAL-MART STORE a1179-02
ASI-EVILLE (AIRPORT ROAO), P°®-°"D °i° 1G°~~°µ ^~
w
~
~ ~
"
w,eL~
r
ic. w.
... b. m...
iwo.
rox sv erx}u sraxr
~.. ee+rarua ~racwsns rtro 4 .IDS
ac.•nreie
aOre• <nm zr}.ppp

D
~~
Drn
~~D~
^'~rnz
®~~Do
~~o
e rn C
-~
_ i
CL r e np
F2 T W -M T - - ---- - _ - __ _ _ -_ _ -
rn
WA z _ __ _ _
Cn
rn
0
~ -
i+
w
0

#- 9 ~'~~011'~
~~~~~~~ ~
~ ~
WAL-MART STORE a1i79-02
ASHEVILLE (AIRPORT ROAD) ^~0/'~ ~ ^~
,
NORTH CAROLINA °pi" "°°~
wx-wvr sra~ nc
Tox sw eta+ni sTCxr n..u. w. w
o..+ s.. oe.w aooo
~dTCNMJ.G ABCM6q$ T{T6 s 161~L/!!
~~ uTm m~.ooo

~,;
~~~' ~~ ~ I ~ ~~"
~~ y
C
~ mss' i ~.
_,~ ,.: a ~
z~, F:::::, . C
'' " ~
~i ;~ ~~
~ .: i ~~ C
~ ~4 (': ::: : jl ~
A /
'`' µ ~ s
~~ - l ,* `
~f
s ~ f~ i
"• < ~ _ t
\ ~ ~.~
~. ~ ~ c
. ,
,..
~ e
~ ~
d i
~ ~~ r
~ \ i .
~~ \ u
.\\\ \ &Q _
\ ~ ` . ~.
i ~~ ~~ ~~
~ ~
\ ~~ `
~ ~
~ \.
~ ~ ~
\ \ ~ _~
\ ~~
\ <
~ ~
z ~~~~~ P
~ !n
tl A ~ ~ ~\
~~a~m>° ~~ ~ ~~,
°v~o \' ~ ~
~ ~
.. ~ ~
- ~ A~ ~,\
~\ ~ `\t ba / ~, \
~\ ~• ~~ ~
~\\.a\ Eg
\ ~
~.
D ~ `:
r ~ \~~. `.
D~
O~D ,`.
® _+ Z
@ ~
° rn~D ~
„ 0 ~ ~
rn a
0

WAL-MART STORE n1179-02
ASHEVILLE (AT ROAD). '~~ •*+ Knr'~wa ~.
NORTI-J C WA °~ • ~^~ ~~
~a .. a.. ,.,.
w.a+.u¢. srar..c a..... a. m.e •cor
me sw ewn+ s+axr ao.-m~wr
m+ratiua .oceans mss . m.arws
~o.a• um z»-.ooo

•
•
•
•
•
r
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
l\ , .
t
I~ / . , ~:
_ i I i
~~%~ ! ! '' ` ~ t i!! a I I i I pia '^~.. 4 `a ~/j~ \• {; 4'~'
,• } +
~ ~i~~ "'w ~ ~ l ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ '~
~ 1 ~ ' 'i
~ .`
;~ ~
~ ~ \ ~ ~
P ~ ~ •
tl ~ \ ~
n
D D ~~`~~. ;~4 r~
~ \ =,,!
O ~ ~, ~• `•
D ``; ~ ~ \
CI 7t7 r~
® -a D
p Z
g ADD ~
o ~ ~ ~
zp ~
p ~ x
"rn
0

WAL-MART STORE n1179-02
ASI-EVILLE (AIRPORT ROAO), +s~e-aro mo Ko~rrn~a~ ~c.
nioRTU cARauvA ~ ~ '~

~~~~ ~~

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
s
•
•
•
~j~~ F . a
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~
~ t
~~ :\. -_.
--._ __
~: ~ ~ . "

J

i
\V
\ \ .~` \~
1~~ ~ '
~a
~~
-~
;~~
.~
~r~ , ~,
^ DD
AOA~
®_0=~-~D
~, z
p ~rnDOD
o~
~? p
rn
Q
i
i
WAL-MART STORE n1179-02
ASI-IEV~LE (AIRPORT ROAO) ''~~ ~ ~+~~ ~
.
NORTI-I CAROLINA °°~ • '°°°- ~°~^°-
w.~.urer sro~, .,c. ~ w s., ...,.
eea.am.L wx..srs mw . as.-a.sae
^-_. u»Y zrs.ooo
~\
~~
,•; ~ ~
., ,,
~.
.,
~ E~ ~~~ ~~
~~ ~ t~~4F
I~~~
r
\ ll`_,
. ~~ ~
,,
. €
•, -, ~~K.
x
V

~~~~~
Y
1 'i~~ j as
l~~'~'ZZ ' ~ ~ i' 3
~~N ' t ~ ~ R
ij ~ ~ ~
~'~) I ~ ~
DD
rn~~~~
O' ~ D
8 ~rnDOD
~~
~O
m
0
~~
i (~~~~~~
E¢ ~~~~~~
~ tll~~
3~~a
~ ~
i
wA~-nnARr srolzE ~In9-o2
ASI-IEVILLE (AIRPORT ROAD), ~~ °1O ~"'"'L '`~
NORM
a s~
~O'
C
r
i~c
s o - ~. a.~so.
pox sn eonw s~uxr
eenram~ ..ecsva~-a mn d.-m„n
. a~maos
R[re• um zr>.ooo

s
•
•
•
•
•
a
i
•
i
i
•
•
i
•
•
•
APPENDIX A
Permit Application Time Line

_~
M
r
Airport Road Individual Permit:
January 19, 2006 -onsite pre-application meeting with Dave Baker (USAGE), Kevin
Barnett (NC DWQ), Brian Tompkins (USFWS), and David McHenry (NCWRC).
Discussed overall site plan, the USAGE preference for onsite mitigation, and the
possibility of mitigating "Wetland E" on a 1:1 ratio through a relocation to and
restoration of "Stream 1".
March 23, 2006 -Jurisdictional determination issued under Action ID 200630338. A
copy is included herein.
April 27, 2006 -submitted request for 1 acre of wetland mitigation to the EEP
May 3, 2006 -received confirmation of acceptance for 1 acre wetland mitigation through
EEP.
May 8, 2006 -original individual permit application and conceptual onsite mitigation
plan submitted to Cyndi Karoly at the NC DWQ and Dave Baker at the USAGE. A copy
is included herein. The applicant proposed to impact 1.93 acres of Waters of the US.
July 5, 2006 -public notice issued by the USAGE
July 25, 2006 -additional information requested from NC DWQ. Information requested:
applicants name, description of waste treatment facilities, clarification of acres of
wetlands to be filled, and demonstration of avoidance and minimization.
August 11, 2006 -additional information provided to NC DWQ and USAGE.
Information requested included individual applicants name, specifications of stormwater
treatment, onsite mitigation plan (including 1.41 acres of onsite created wetlands and 500
linear feet of stream relocation and restoration, as well as 0.34 acre onsite wetland
preservation, 2.1 acres of onsite upland buffer preservation and the purchase of 1 acre of
wetland mitigation from the EEP), and avoidance and minimization. The alternative site
layout (Alternative 1) presented involved shifting the site plan slightly north and using a
retaining wall along the south/southwestpnrtion of the project in order to avoid impact to
"Stream 2" and the associated wetland. This alternative reduced overall wetlands impact
by 0.37 acres, but impacted 742 linear feet of stream due to the relocated stormwater
management pond. Estimated costs of the retaining walls increased from $260,000 for
the originally proposed site plan, to $1.8 million for the Alternative 1 site plan.
August 17, 1006 -agency comment letters received from US Fish and Wildlife Service
and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. NCWRC expressed concerns
regarding habitat loss in a rapidly growing area, the possibility (although noted unlikely)
of bog turtles in Wetland C, and the importance of wetlands to water quality protection.
NCWRC requested additional information on avoidance and minimization and the
mitigation plan. USFWS had similar comments. In addition, US FWS suggested
evaluating the use of parking decks or two story shopping centers to reduce the overall

_~
S
i
footprint and avoid impacts to Waters of the US, or reducing the overall parking ratio to
avoid impacts to Wetland E. Suggestions were made to incorporate low-impact
development techniques with regards to the storrnwater management plan, due to the
percentage of proposed impervious surface.
August 31, 2006 -response to agency comments submitted to USACE. Comments
regarding the possibility of bog turtle were addressed with the `Protected Species Habitat
Assessment' which was provided with the original permit application package. Copies of
the complete mitigation plan and demonstration of avoidance and minimization were
provided.
September 20, 2006 -letter received from NC DWQ indicating that the application was
considered incomplete and need more information regarding the "no fill" or "no
development" alternative, more specific information on the financial implications of
retaining walls vs. fill slopes, and alternative stormwater controls. The letter also
mentioned "Re-alignment of the building (as to minimize impacts) and multiple parking
facilities with bridges over waters must be fully evaluated as discussed during the onsite
meeting".
October 11, 2006 -onsite meeting with Tom Walker (USACE), Kevin Barnett (DENR),
Brian Tompkins (USFWS), and David McHenry (NCWRC) to review mitigation plan.
Discussed the proposed onsite mitigation plan, including revising to eliminate onsite
wetland creation in light of the quality of upland habitat surrounding the existing
wetlands and reducing the stream restoration component. Brought Tom Walker up to
speed on the project as he was taking over for Ronnie Smith, who had previously been
the project manager for the USACE.
October 20, 2006 - submitted a request for additional wetland credit (total of 1.59 acres)
through the EEP
October 24, 2006 -revised mitigation plan, cumulative analysis, and additional site
layout analysis submitted to DENR and the USACE. Mitigation plan was revised to
eliminate onsite wetland creation in favor of additional wetland credit purchased through
the EEP. Stream mitigation was downgraded from priority 2 to stream enhancement. In
a previous phone conversation with Kevin Barnett, he indicated his notes showed that a
layout that would shift the store to the SE corner of the property and provide satellite
parking with footbridges in order to avoid impact to Wetland E was brought up during
the very first pre-application site visit. This was the plan he was referring to in the Sept.
20, 2006 letter. Per his request to briefly address this layout and why it was not feasible,
Alternative 2 (Plan B) was included in this submittal.
October 30, 2007 -received confirmation from EEP for acceptance of additional credit
request.
December 7, 2006 -Received call from Kevin Barnett indicating that project review had
come to a halt due to a political inquiry.

• January 16, 2007 -request for additional information received from DENR.
Information requested included specifications of the treatment of wastewater not
accounted for in the stormwater management plan, a request that the mitigation plan be
• revised to indicate that NC DWQ would be included with the USACE for success criteria
• review, and more specific information regarding Alternative 2.
+` January 24, 2007 -faxed copy of revised mitigation plan to Bryan Tompkins (FWS) for
. review and comment.
January 30, 2007 -additional information provided to John Dorney of NC DWQ along
with a summary of previous information supplied and an additional alternative site
layout. This submittal included the previously supplied Alternative 1 and Alternative 2
(Plan B) and a new alternative layout, Alternative 3 (Plan C). Alternative 3 (Plan C)
involved rotating the building toward the NE corner of the property in an attempt to avoid
• impacts to Wetland C associated with the building footprint. This submittal also included
• a revised site plan (Plan A) added a retaining wall to the rear of the building to reduce the
impact to Wetland C by 0.14 acre and to reduce the overall impervious surface by
approximately 1 acre.

February 13, 2007 -meeting with John Dorney and Mike Ranks in Raleigh. Discussed
alternative site layouts and why they were not feasible. Specifically addressed safety
issues of isolated parking, grading in regards to the slope of the entrance drives, and the
• necessary height of the retaining wall under Alternative 3 (Plan C) as depicted in Layout
i 4 from the January 30, 2007 submittal.
February 15, 2007 -Letter received from FWS stating their agreement with the revised
• mitigation plan.
', March 5, 2007 - Onsite meeting with John Dorney (NC DWQ), Kevin Barnett
(NCDENR) and David McHenry (NCWRC). Prior to the meeting, Kevin and John had a
• lunch meeting where they created a hand drawn sketch of a layout they believed would
eliminate or significantly reduce all impacts, which was similar to Alternative 3 (Plan C)
as depicted in layout 4 of the January 30, 2007 submittal to NCDENR.

March 14, 2007 -received letter from Kevin Barnett and John Dorney requesting that an
analysis of the alternative site plan sketch from the March 5, 2007 onsite meeting be
provided.

APPENDIX B
Site Plans A-E

i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
•
•
•
•
,~,~ , 4
~'~1 i
I~ + a ~
~ ~ 3~
~~~t ~ (J
.\
~~
~\~. \~~
~ ~~ i
\\ ~\
°n
e
i
D
rr
D3
O~~
~ -~ D
~Z
cn~D
~~
rn0
., ~
rn
0
p
.~ j ~~
M ~ 1+
~•
n
! ~ «.
~w
~; y~i
C
~~ ~ ~' ~i' ~~ ~
'; r ~~~
i i ~;~ C
_~ j,
~y~_ .
.~
~.,.,. .
~.:..,:~,::'.I
l i.'.'.......7{
~ n~
~
~ i
F
~
~T~
~
:
:
~~ i
H
c:_::.y ~` ~~
~

~i~
•.}r~
~ r~ t
.n
•
~, ~
Z
)`
~~
1~
~'~
~w, :9~
r4
\\ ` r, /
~/\ ~
~~.
l
~~
'_.
~.
~°
~ ~:
. .

WAL-MART STORE x1179-02
ASI-EVILLE (AIRPORT ROAD), ~-°~'D °1O ~ ~
NORTH CAROLWA ~ v,,,, ,;, .,~ '°'
wx~.w¢r s.«as «c a.r. se. ms. aw
ro: A« eortu sram* as.-mewr
ee+.orrv.aa .,xc.reas mn
a,+ore. cam zri-.ooo . ee.-m~eoa
~ V~
~~.
~ '.
~ ~
~ ~
\ ~.
..
.. ~ ~
~~.\ ; ~
~'" A \
4 \ \
i fP ~ \ ~ 'i ~/.'
N T D ~ ~
WHO
O ~ ~
\ \ ^'
\\\ ~ ~~
~' y
, _ .~~
9

r
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
_^„_._. /
g~lp~' ! ', \~" _~~- ~-- ~~ ~ I ~ ('~~~ jam"-~~il, ' ~ f ~
' ~ ~1
~, ra1:~/vwA V' ~~
tip., -- ' '~~ ~ ~,
r
r'+ *~ \~ ~ ~ Vi'i' ~`~,1 \•~~` - ~'' ~- / ~~ \^ \\ \ ~~l
~,,
~. ~ ;~ \ ,fit,:\~~ ~' 1 - `
l
~ ,,I~ ~
~`i ~~` ~ ` \\ _
1 J L, '\
r--^'~ ,.
\ ,
~~1 ~ `, `_- 1 `~
`-~
3 ~ ~~
~,
~, ~~.~
~~ '
~ ~. \ ~'~~
~ ~ ~~ ~
O ~ 1 ~ `, -l
® ~D V
~ Z
p ~ D ~
zp ~
~rn a
0

WAL-MART STORE X11179-02
ASHEVILLE fA~Pp(~T ROAD), ~~ an Kat>~r+, r~
NORTI-I CAROLINA
WK#NRT $TC46 I4'
l02 SW airtM $19~f °pi-~ • ~~
I7~ rhY !!~ 1w
iwMa 9Y GsMa iMOr
FalICNN.tL a12CANSa$ TLM lM+~!!
RrOFb 1aT91 zI}~ppp

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~~~
~ ~ ~
li~ ~' ,tE M ~- ``may r-= _ ~~=:.1`', ~,7;'i 1!r~;~/~~,'•'``' i~,; ~_ Ir
,` J~~ ~\`~ n / / of
\~~
.: ~ ~I
'P i ~ ;•'~
r
_ _ ,:, . ,
i ,~ ` :~ .,EGG ~:
/ }} I 1 I Ira ~ ~. 1, ~ ' ~`
\ i
\~, •..
`\
r ~~ ~
t ~ /
~ , ;ESE \ ~ \ \ \ ; ~ ~ ,,;~ ~ ~/'
'~~ i ~ ~ ~
f
r • , ~~ _
.~
__~ ~;,-~
r ~, • ~ ~. -•,.,
~, - ~ o ~~
..: . ~.
~. s ~ _ ..
p~ ;,~r ~~.., ~, ~ - 1. ~I~~~~
~~CD-D ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~
rnQ~D ~~r ~
e
v ~ ~
i
f
WAL-MART STORE X1179-02
i ASI-IEVILLE (AIRPORT ROAD), "~'v'D o° '~^w+ ^~
NORM ~O~INA

~, wo'x sw ersm, sTVrzr o ~ ~o.
.m,,,,
ee..auyue .aenrB~s rtne . ea~ae
a.a~e• um zrs.ooo

ail ~ i
y'~~~ ~ _ ~
1; ~ ~ ~
i ~ 3
't~ ~ f ~ ~
DD
~ ~
II ~ ~ O ~ "~
O - -~ D
NCO Z
e ~rnDQD
~~
~O
rn
0
I f~
(~~ ~~~~
E~ ~~~~~~
~~~~i
~ ~~~~
1 Y
WAl-MART STORE 81174-02
A$1-IEV0..LE (AIRPORT ROAO) "~~ ~
K°~ ~
,
NORTH caaOl
~va, ~
. ~, ~, ,,..,,,.

~lTQNVL~ ABCAI$t7 TLT6
A,C.Ce (lN 3ry~pCp 4 GM~NlIp

~i
s ~I
~~.
3
1 ~~ ;4"
F:
~. ,.
~y'
/(Irv i ~
~..
^~.:::':::i
~~ ::::::::::::::::i
i:::: y
~..;;;::;.~ J
\ ~ i
~ \ ~ ..
\\ ~ \
>\ \
\\ \\
\\ \\ ~jl
\
\ \
~+
J \\
i *, /\ \
1
' \\ \\
~ \ \
\ ~
\ \
\\ \\ ~
\\ \\
\ \
\ ~
\ '
\ \\
\ \
\` \
i \~ \

::~
~:::,
1 ,l r.~'
! ~ ,
° {'i
i ~~
F.~/:; j!
i.:;:::
/::::'
~....,Y
i:: l
~~~~~~~:~:I
1;:~:;:;.;.~
~...,,.
{:;:::::;:j~j
~._ :~>-
l F:,;~
i ,.~.~J
~ ,~'`~\
F:::
I :~
I; {
I;'
~.r
~a
!~
~'1
{aG~Y~z \~ \\ ~'%
AV \ r'.
0~~~'~ \ -\\ !' ' a
gg i ^'=..
3377 \ 4
~g~0 ~ \\
\ \
\\\~\ •,i
\ ~
~ .\
D
rn
z~
® r
rnrnz
8
r ~p
° D
O
c
i
~\ ~
\ \ \ " o~
\ ~
\\ ~\
\ \ , '`
\ \
\ ~.
\
~ \: <
\\ \~ o
~f ~
~C
iC
~~
C
I~C
~C
i C
a
I~
~~
~~
0~
i
`a~Q
~~
~~ ~
~f
r::;: f
tS i;%
~:~

i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
r
•
•
•
f
~ i
~
~ ~
a
P ~
D
T
U

a~
D

D
~~
~~
f
A ~ A -.~
~
:
a 4
~ ~-
i_~,
--~
.,

Jr \

~ -
_ _ ./~
^'~ +~ 1 N

~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
1
\
h
~ ~ ~ ~
\
\
+
~ d
._
~
\
\
~.f~ ~~~
D
r
rn
Z~
® r
rnrnz
Q
vD~
.:
i
Q ~L~~A9 ,`.~\ 1
I a ~ \ 1 ~~ i
t A
.. ~
\ ~t \
. ~
~~~
~ ~~ ~ {4
`i:.\\\\~ \~`
., ~
.~~\ ~ \
.,
i~~~~~7~l~p~~~ ~
r;~~~~~ d a
~~/
i ~~
r i~~
,..
_l~~<
. C lI I
,~1 /
:~l - l r~ r r
N ~
WAL-MART STORE X1179-02
ASNEVILLE (AIRPORT ROAD> PR~d1'~ ob Nc.
,
rvoaTN cAaou-vA ~; ~
,
~~~~
.~,~

~~
nir>~ ~ ~

• s
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

~~l~~~~~~$~~~.
~-~~.~111~-~
~...
Yr ~AY ~i
r~ Nom, ~f ~ •~~1 t .\M1 ~• . ,'~cti:..._,,,a,~•'~, -: _.- :1 '~ ` ..~ p1~
fi ier r t /( ` ~: it ~.
~ ~ t • 1. ~ ' ~ ;• I <<t [ ~., _ •.~: ~ ~.;~:.• ,~• .. t ~' • ~
` `V-
~=~, ,, ,
~ ,~ fit;, _ _ , ~, •~,; ij'• :. _
_ ~~ :,
~.;. r ~/ ~ ~, ~ ` • )~' ~ sand`:'. - .r,
._ 1 ,
• ~•' i i , .~ ~\\ ley . ••:~ ^••/
~,~ _ ..
"`~ - -* _•, I' ~ ' ;.Ulf ,/t' ,J((, •; -.,~~• -_ -
„~ I ---~I I.iL._ • ~11~;_it:a -%'%~:!!r 6 i ~c' ~\ -.`:lr.::r~`~ •~`~.~ ~- ~ = .. ' ._ .,1~,- . - --~ ---
~ g~
~ ~~ ~
~~ s~.~
~~,
~~i9
4
S
f. _i
~'~".
~••:; ~ •, ~` by
. ~,
1 \
'~, ~.~
~... _ ~ -
;~ ~~t'1
%`-

•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
~ ~
~ ~
~~
m D
A
~j~ SQ~~
25 O ,31
bOOb Dcc~~
~~
~~
~~
0
~.
.. ,
~~
`. `~
~\ .

D
r
rn
z~
® rnrnz
0
" ~~
° D
0
~i
i
~ -~~~
~~
~~~~
6~
a

fC
A
C
C
I ~
)I C
0
i
l
1 s©
g~
)~
% s9
o, ~
;: ~~
\` ~ i~
~ ~ ,.
~.
`. ~ ~.
~ `:
E~~' ~1~~13E~ ~ ~
~~~~~ ~ ~~v~ €
~~ ~ o-

WAL-MART STORE a1i79-O2
A$~ENIt.LE (AIRPORT ROAO) "~~ ad ~ we
,
~~ ~ ~~~w
~ a.,.. ~.. a..

~. ,.~
o _ . ~.,, , .m , ' ,,..
~' ~ ~ ~ ~~ u
I
~~ ~o
p a .r~
emu.
i~
1: : % ~..
::>
rj~
~,
I:~
1: ~'
i.~
~. :1 1`
F./ .J 1
r.•. s
/:.. Yip J
~ ~ a
:: I
C;i:i..jl Q
~..-J --
J`. ~_~
='~~7/
:'%
~~../
CS
~~~ ~~
~~~ .
9

mm,.. o ooo+sa ~ .sav
~+ avBary •cQVOn m~~~t~n3-~d
__ LO-6tA+~ 32101S 121VW-'IVM
~J

,., ~ _ o. _.__ _%%~ 111~7','~/)"'I if r ' , ~ ,T', ~,
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Lam,, ~ -`~ ~~ `~ ~~'~ ,~' ~ ` ~~
~ ~ ,~_.T
_.- Pig -i ~--~\ 1lii~ # I I ~ i~T~ i ~ \ I.
~,
`\~//%%~/:'. n`%~~YYr`SY.7a.l~t1~.~ ~r TM `~~ .~ ..a.: !.~ ~ A~7t ~L~\.`. \ \~'\\~. i '
, f~
~ t I~
_ ~ ~
rn~Z~ fi.~ ~ ~,`t~ 11
-o r ~ , ~\~
•.. ~- \ i
a rn0 ~ ~..
~ \.
•, ~

z ~•
i
WAL-MART STORE X1179-02
A~VLLE (AIRPORT ROAO) ~~ ad '~1*^~+ nc.
,
NORTI-I CAROLWA °pi"'°°~'~*
w,uauar STOaes Nc
+oz an edm+ srvQr ~ wr sa...,.
a.nr ~ Nae aew
a'wr
~IiC7nM.tL ~[ar6~4 RM a
~..~~
ave, u»~ zrseooo
9

~ i ri I ~ I ~ I i i i i 8
D
~~
Drn
~~D~
^'~rnz
®~~D~
~~o
e rn C

a r a aC

- - - - - -- -- - - - -- - - - -- - -
T w ~ T

rn
- - -- - -
wa Z
O

N
D

i+

0

r~~~~i~~~~~~,~~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~r
_ O, a~~~1 /' P
~~~~~~ ~~
~ ~
I
WAL-MART STORE n1179-02
AS~VILLE (AIRPORT ROAD), ^~°-°''D °'° K°U"""''"~ '"~

ARaNA ao~. • usm..~wsw
"`
wa.~mr sroes
X72 SW ~i' (iIJ Si~!T a..+.
ova nor
!4-ffi3Ml
~1TONJIJG YXAlBAS 18716 4 lM~26M!
oi.gnL~ ulgl zri-000

~ o 0 0~~ ,Q~J
--- `
~~~ / / ~ I
r ~ 1
,s ~..r r I I ~~~ I o
F:~~t~:jl ~ I I ' C
~$~
~::.:. / 9 I i i ^
r 6
!~' '~'I / d C I I I C
!! ~ ~ II i I
/ ~~ / / I i
~' ~ I ~ I I C
r '~ ~ i C
J F
/ ~\ I C
Y ~.
° a
$g~g eg~ _
~S~ a
~~~~ ~
ho ~~
~`
\~ ~~ { ^
m~, ~"
~ ^
.~ '\. ~ ~ ~
~ ,~ ~ ~ `.
\~ ~~ ~o
~~ ~
~ ~.
. , ~
~.
.,
..
.,
.,
~.
.,
.,
.,
,.
..
.,
. $~
.,
.,
R
..
,..
,, Q
\~ ~L O~J
~ 'JJ
O \\ \\~
7~ ~
'^^v ~ ` \
V/ \~ `~ ~
®rnDDZ
O~
Ci ~ 8
9
~_
WAL-AAART STORE "1179-02

asf-EVn.LE, NORrta c,aRalrv,a ~~ aw Kxr~+weK ~
,,P.... ,~..~,,,~,.
v..... ~. ~.. ~.

~. ~.,~

\
-.; ~ \~'".`~~--_` ~'_= ±~.,~-^; ~s~~r~~ ~ ~~~~' ~ Cllr ~ ~ ~\ ~ .~, ~ , t
~; „s J~ ~
/~ i
~~ ,, j C ~~ . ~, ~('v~, ~,~•~ ~~ I
~i/ .._ ..., , , f //, ~ ,
'. ~ f iii _ , ~~t . ',.- ^~ •,, ~ ~ ~ ~~~; ~, /f
L...i ~% ' I' ~ ~~ r ~~~ -~~ i % ~ ~'' ~
~ ~'- ~ ~ ~ l'lr ( rii r~
~~ v' J'
\ / 1l \
t: ~
\• - \
~\ 1 ~ I _ \ ~ ~ /t l
\\ \ 1 \\~\. •\ ~ 2
\ \\ ` _~` 1\\\`\ `'
_ '11, __
6 ~e ~ _
1 ~~XX
~, _ l
1 1
~~~ \~~ ~ \~~5~
~0 ~ - _l
®DDDr ~~~ ~.. -
OrrZ
~?Drnrn ..~
-< ~
s ~
-~ ~
9
6
WAL-MART STORE n1179-02
ASFEVILLE. NORTI-I CAROLINA ~'~ °'0 Kd~""""' "'G
~ ~~
wxwu~er 57C4lfi ~. arr s. a+e aaov
'roe sw eWiu SiGSr es.~me.rr
9D/~rOMN.LG NMAM1btS Rn6 r e4-NA6
mare. um xra-.opo

APPENDIX C
Supporting Documents

• Action Id. 200630338
i
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
County: Buncombe U.S.G.S. Quad: Skvland
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
~, Property Owner/Agent: William W. Pulliam Jr.
Address: 2 Walden Ridge Drive Suite 70
Asheville, NC 28803
• Telephone No.: 828-684-4344
Property description:
Size (acres) 38 acres Nearest Town Asheville
Nearest Waterway Unnamed tributaries to the French Broad River
River Basin French Broad
USGS HUC 06010105 Coordinates 35.45570/82.52340
Location description The approximate 38 acre tract is located on the north side of Airport Road in Asheville
Buncombe Countv, NC
Indicate Which of the Followin Apply:
A. Approved Determination
X There are unnamed tributaries to the French Broad River and adjacent wetlands on the above described property subject to
the permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the
law or our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date
of this notification.
X The unnamed tributaries to the French Broad River and adjacent wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are
accurately depicted on the plat signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on March 23, 2006. Unless there
is a change in the law or our published regulations, this determination maybe relied upon for a period not to exceed five
years from the date of this notification.
Action Id. 200630338
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and/or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact David Baker at 828-271-7980 x. 231.
B. Basis For Determination
The site contains wetlands as determined by the USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual and is adjacent to stream channels
located on the property that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The stream channels on the property are unnamed
tributaries to the French Broad River which is a Section 10 navigable-in-fact waterway.
C. Remarks
D. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
deternnation you must submit a completed RFA form to the South Atlantic Division, Division Office at the Following
address:

Mr. Michael F. Bell, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-ET-CO-R
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M 15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the Division Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by May 2 4 , 2 0 0 6.
**It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the Division Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence.
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date March 23, 2006 Expiration Date March 24, 2011
2

JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION Revised 8/13/04
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
. DISTRICT OFFICE: Wilnvngton
• FILE NUMBER: 200630338
• PROJECT LOCATION INFORMATION:
State: NC
• County: Buncombe
• Center coordinates of site (latitude/longitude): 35.45570/82.52340
Approximate size of area (parcel) reviewed, including uplands: 38 acres.
• Name of nearest waterway: Unnamed tributaries to the French Broad River
Name of watershed: French Broad
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Completed: Desktop determination ^ Date: March 23, 2006
• Site visit(s) ~ Date(s): January 19, 2006
Jurisdictional Determination (JD):
• ^ Preliminary JD -Based on available information, ^ there appear to be (or) ^ there appear to be no "waters of the United States"
and/or "navigable waters of the United States" on the project site. A preliminary JD is not appealable (Reference 33 CFR part
331).
Approved JD - An approved JD is an appealable action (Reference 33 CFR part 331).
• Check all that apply:
• There are "navigable waters of the United States" (as defined by 33 CFR part 329 and associated guidance) within the reviewed
• area. Approximate size of jurisdictional area:
• There are "waters of the United States" (as defined by 33 CFR part 328 and associated guidance) within the reviewed area.
Approximate size of jurisdictional area: 2.6 acres
• There are "isolated, non-navigable, infra-state waters or wetlands" within the reviewed area.
'. Decision supported by SWANCC/Migratory Bird Rule Information Sheet for Determination of No Jurisdiction.
BASIS OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION:
• A. Waters defined under 33 CFR part 329 as "navigable waters of the United States":
The presence of waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used, or have been used in
• the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
B. Waters defined under 33 CFR part 328.3(a) as "waters of the United States":
• ^ (1) The presence of waters, which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in
interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
• ^ (2) The presence of interstate waters including interstate wetlands.
[~ (3) The presence of other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats,
. wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could
• affect interstate commerce including any such waters (check all that apply):
^ (i} which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
^ (ii) from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
^ (iii) which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
• (4) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the US.
(5) The presence of a tributary to a water identified in (1) - (4) above.
(6) The presence of territorial seas.
(7) The presence of wetlands adjacentZ to other waters of the US, except for those wetlands adjacent to other wetlands.
• Rationale for the Basis of Jurisdictional Determination (applies to any boxes checked above). The site contains wetlands as
determined by the USACE 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual and is adjacent to stream channels located on the property
• that exhibit indicators of ordinary high water marks. The stream channels on the property are unnamed tributaries to the
French Broad River which is a Section 10 navigable-in-fact waterway.
Lateral Extent of Jurisdiction: (Reference: 33 CFR parts 328 and 329)
• Ordinary High Water Mark indicated by: High Tide Line indicated by:
® clear, natural line impressed on the bank ^ oil or scum line along shore objects
~ 3
~~
V

•
•
•
•
^ the presence of litter and debris ^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
changes in the character of soil ^ physical markings/characteristics
destruction of terrestrial vegetation ^ tidal gages
shelving ^ other:
[) other:
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
^ survey to available datum; ^ physical markings; ^ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
Wetland boundaries, as shown on the attached wetland delineation map and/or in a delineation report prepared by:
Basis For Not Asserting Jurisdiction:
[ The reviewed area consists entirely of uplands.
Unable to confirm the presence of waters in 33 CFR part 328(a)(1, 2, or 4-7).
^ Headquarters declined to approve jurisdiction on the basis of 33 CFR part 328.3(a)(3).
^ The Corps has made acase-specific determination that the following waters present on the site are not Waters of the United States:
^ Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, pursuant to 33 CFR part 328.3.
^ Artificially irrigated areas, which would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased.
^ Artificial lakes and ponds created by excavating and/or diking dry land to collect and
retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing.
^ Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created
by excavating and/or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons.
^ Water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose
of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting
body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States found at 33 CFR 328.3(a).
^ Isolated, intrastate wetland with no nexus to interstate commerce.
^ Prior converted cropland, as determined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Explain rationale:
^ Non-tidal drainage or irrigation ditches excavated on dry land. Explain rationale:
^ Other (explain):
DATA REVIEWED FOR JURSIDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (mark all that apply):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant.
^ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant.
^ lltis office concurs with the delineation report, dated December 20, 2005, prepared by: Environmental Permitting Consultants
^ This office does not concur with the delineation report, dated ,prepared by (company):
[~ Data sheets prepared by the Corps.
C. Corps' navigable waters' studies:
[~ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Topographic maps: Skyland
U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 Minute Historic quadrangles:
U.S. Geological Survey IS Minute Historic quadrangles:
[] USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey:
National wetlands inventory maps:
~] State/Local wetland inventory maps:
[~ FEMA/FIRM maps (Map Name & Date):
100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (NGVD)
d, Aerial Photographs (Name & Date):
[~ Other photographs (Date):
^' Advanced Identification Wetland maps:
Site visit/determination conducted on: January 19, 2006
Applicable/supporting case law:
^ Other information (please specify):
'Wetlands are identified and delineated using the methods and criteria established in the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual (87 Manual) (i.e., occurrence of
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and wetland hydrology).
The term "adjacent" means bordering, contiguous, or neighboring. Wetlands separated from other waters of the U.S. by man-made dikes or barriers, natural
river berms, beach dunes, and the like are also adjacent.
4

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A licant: William W. Pulliam, Jr. File Number: 200630338 Date: March 23, 2006
Att ached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of A
ermission)
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) B
PERMIT DENIAL C
X APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
. ~.
r ~ q:. ERs <x r~ ter,. ~n~ r
,~U~ ~ "
~
4
+
+
4i
i
c
~
~
~
t
~~ t ~~,rn . jam"+.r ,~ c. u~i{i,~
"
A: IhTITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Pemut, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Pernut or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
pernut, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that the
permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your
objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right to appeal
the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the
permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify the permit
having determined that the pemut should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the district engineer
will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Pernut, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature
on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the
permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form
and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of
this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by
completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer
within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the date of
this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by
the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
5

E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an approved
JD (which maybe appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new
information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.
u.. .
..
APP{ .. ~~. t
SEG'I'~O ~. a A ~r~1 t~< ~~~ ~.
(~~7 _.
! (}k
~
S
Q
AN [J
.
~~ t
~l~V
"
.
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or~your
objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to
this form to clarify where your reasons or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps
memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the
review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps
may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify
the location of information that is already in the administrative record.
PQ ~ - ~„(~F~Ql~'I'"A~`~ ~0~~: ~TESTiOIYS. ~R~INF O~RNIATIOI~ .~'~^ . ~.?H ~~r, ''.: ~~'.` #Y , ,.
~
.. ;~:
If you have questions regarding this decision ,~
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you
and/or the appeal process you may contact: may also contact:
David Baker Mr. Michael F. Bell, Administrative Appeal Review
151 Patton Ave Officer
RM 208 CESAD-ET-CO-R
Asheville, NC 28806 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
828-271-7980 60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Geor is 30303-8801
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any
government consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You
will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site
investigations.
Date: Telephone number:
Signature of appellant or agent.
DIVISION ENGINEER:
Commander
U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490
6

•
i
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
p
0
``~„1111 ~ 1/////

In
rn
o
o ...,..,,.. o
~• P...••~ ,
?

o
o, ~ :
P
-
w ~ y
.~;
,moo=:~
J
~
~y
U
_
W Z N~
W rn^"
W
U
N
I
O
N _
W tW/1ry N_ti_
=
J :~`
'
1'
Z vi ~ o a o n ~ = i
:
b

' W '////
\\\
O O~ Q~ 1~ N O p W O ~ ///1111111111 ~~
Z
• ~~ w
VI Q F J< V W
V
N e
I pj
N N
= 3
y
N
J
~ N J~ O r I N ~ ^
z W
Q S a m
N
Z
1 ~ to
ID m
N I
m I n
in
O ¢
I
} O
W Q N W n ~ ~
d
N ~
5 O
~ U
~
w SUN r ~ N
J
~
7 ~ << B
U O
O O
O "'~
10
~
1 j ~a
c
~ t` mw p m

° rn O
rn O
Z j '

w

~ a

a w

o a

~
W
o
U
Z
t<
o

b ~^
J C
~~
~ ¢
O w
2' w
~ Q
H a
p ~
p a
O
~\` \
1{_~y \
Nf! `\\\ \
17 Q~ ~ `\ ~ w
7 KJ \
~~ t6i `;~ ~~~~~ W
C~fyy ~~~\ ~ o~$
~:~ ~\ ~n~
\~\ ` ~ ~~
L I ~ \~~ K
.~
3 I, W ~ ~ ~ \
~ ~
~ ~ 3
',, ~ ~~~~
~ a~ . W ~ ~ w
W ~ w
' _ ,~, _
~ ~ ~~ cn
,y>
~ ~ ! n "!•
j ~ Y ~ ~s°
~1 lT W ~'~~ v9 s
1 V / O f~~~~ ~ V
~~` s 7y
,~ w
d W
i e 3
~ ' fi i
L___~,~~
4~< __ ___
________ me_._________
' ~,1 ~~ ~ M
B ~ ~' ~ ~',
Z
~ ~
U~ Q
~ ~ Z
O m
~
Z ~

a O
~
W
~
o a W
F_ m W ~ o
U

va' \~ \~ onn
\\ ~\ ~n~
~ ~.~
ci I
,~
~.,,
,,
W
W
1 ~ ~
~~ ~
r ~
S_

~'
~'
~'
~'
~'
~~
~'
~'
~'

Q
Z ~/'-
Q ~
~O ~~~Z
~W ~QI-
Z O ~~ Q Q o
W
j W ~ w =
~m ~ a
VJ
~ \ ~ (L 1~3HS) ~NI~H~1dW o a
~ ~ Q C~ NCO 3 ~
~ ~ ~ ~ N °~~
0
~ ~ 01 M
/~-\y/ W J ri N~ M O O
LL_ N
~\ \ \ ~( \~ ~`7J ~vN fONV~ ~NOO
H\ \ ~/ v • W Z W V W Z W
•~r ~ ~ ~.
1
~ ~ ~ 5 a OSP~
1
~ ~ ~ ~ 6' ci
i-~ \ ~ ~ \ / 01~ry O
~ ` \ .~ ~
w ~ ° ~ i
w `,
_ ~ d N~9'5359 P <TEl
w ~
z ~ ~
_I b ~ ~ °m
= a~ ~ I'r om
U °' ~ m
F- I u+
Q ~
~ ~ a
~ ii
Oi
~ 1~ °:
/ .° p1-~^
goy
~r~p ZGin
.T oo.. I
tel. F
`' ~ ~~~~
Y ~~
n
nZ
zz
~ G~
~ ~'~ (~ l~~HS) 3NI~H~lb'W
$
o \\\\ \ u n n. u f iiiii~
i

O
I o m , O:~ ~ Y"u1 ,_
~'
~""
_
~ w
01 I
O -
Jn
~_
U.N
N N
W_
iN Z N W
I N "\ =
.
N
'W '~ "~`
N v N ~`~
..
iY "'
~i
YYY
___
~
Z Q W
' U Q N O ,
~
\
..... ~... ..
\\
'/,
W ~ O N Q ~ w N O O W O ~ ZO
,~~//fll lyl 11\\\
• ~ N w~ W ~ < 1~1 N I N Q
V1 a f- J V V
O U N I N
O N < ~ W
OL ,~ NJ~
Q ~ S~ m )
~ I
~ N
N
~,
~ n
~
o
w ~
1 Y Z W I C
W M < I ~
S ,°~ < ~
W
M
N d ~ rn
~
J
~ W
~ ~ a Q W
v O
p O
O "'~ ~ ~
~
~ W O W m
1" m
O ~
"' N Z J VI
w a o a o z o ~

~

a

O

i
¢

.
K

X

~

~

O

Q

O

~

~

O N
J
z

i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
•
•
s
•
•
•
•
•
i

~ o
°O \\\~lunll~l~iii/,

.n
rn
o
o
m \
/.
\~ ~p ........ O
:~.
VI W 1 - ~: J M 41.
N~ W 01 O _U_N W N y l~
W Z

W Oi~ o
Z N~~1°o

U
N
I
a
ri
~
m

~ _
- =W '~ 1
~Z-.~ J ~~~
,r d ~=r~~
Nv N ~~
~'~
~
"
Q w
T1
U U ~ Q N \
i/'Y
~ .............
\\
J
//
4Y
~ U X p O p ~ OI 10 \
/~/ ^
~~~
~~~~\ Z
N I- Q
• to ~~w~ to
W N
< O
pj O
N ~ ~ II illllll

J N
U
O
N J
~ V I
O
~ 1 N
1 I~ K
~ S a v
Q ~ '°
tp m
N m
~ n
~(1 o
O W tL
} Z W~~
cu
W
" < 1 N .D Q K
a N
n
~ J ~ ~ N a
j
jC v~
} w
~ v
N
W i
W ~ J
Q
~
U G
O O ~
~ {~
>
H
~ <
a~0 W
~ m
~ m
O rn 7
N O
Z Q
J ~_
~
w
~"
Z
a
a J
a
~
¢ W
°
1~
~ Q
~
x
~ p

'-'
o Z

~
p O

~
o
o ¢ i
Z
VJ
U~
O
~
f1r VJ Z
O
0 m
~ ~
~~QQ
t~
O ~ -
W ~ W
m

(S l~~HS) ~NI~H~1dW
~y ~,$
9 ~
0 ~%
~~ \/
m'
Oj
L~4 ~'%
L85
bbl \.~
f \~
W ~~
~y6
cn / /
W
_Z
J
~ ~s r\J
Q 9~9 • ~s
~ \s\ <<
ti\
~~
~9 ,
~g0
~~~
~/ /
~ ~~ l L2~ 6 ~~~9R~,2~ 5
~ti ~~ Use Li 80 ~.j
~ry`, ~~C\\b 183 ~~j
\. L-g4
,y~ i
h
~' > 1209
'o
~ryO ~ ~~
oy ~~i
~ry O6ll ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ Lt 89 Z _ (j'
o~ ary J N U
L2 .. ~ Q Q
~w~ ~
,•/7°ry ~~~ 3 Q °M° N
._ ~Y ~ °
~~i ~
N H W
J~~ ° ~ ~
~~ ~ v
W ° Q
~y9 N ~ p

F--
W
W
(/")
w
z
U
Q
~I
a' L292~~ ~ p
J
-_---_----------______ 3Nt1 WJY&35 ,OZ_
,Zl'Obl 3 ,40,9Z.Z0 N $ ---------
1 ' am NWT ,ll'Obl 3 ,LZ,Z£.ZO N ~~ ,OB'b£l ,S6'£9l
J ~ 3 „£I,SS.ZO N \ ~~ 3 ,Lb,8Z.Z0 N'
' ~ w~~ aW~I
~n ___
~ N ClC
~ W `O
~
~ =
n 3sroN ~ I
~
~
W N lTt „~ .a '
' w N U ~ N
' ~ O~
Z"~
-
I
~
~
O
QZ
~p
t
S
U S
WC
e.~ I 4W
I ~ YM \WK
~ 35f10H
~ i ~y~q 1S9
U ~
~ ^ ~
a

a
~
z~Y `
p
~ zk'
n
atnoa
Z== ~ SC~~ \
Z
W U>~ N ~ Q ~a
~ Q ~ ~
a~K nm f W U \
tAm
~
~ Q ~O
U T ~O
~
~r4N
W

~ __ o

l

N I OW 1 ., ~:Q Jr`~i
~
~
~ N N :
=Q:y Q W
=_
•~ U M
n U
W N N
L~_
U
W Z
.+
W N r•l
N _
;W Vl
_
J ~~`
O1 O 1 a
~ a m m d < m ~ ~ o ? dp" o
~P`
N 0 s o ~ o tl //~~rrrr
1~~~\```
~
~ W~ w 3 rr a 11
Q
~ Q ~' J y O N 1 ~ N < W
C
`a
5
v c N 1 n ~
Q
3
a
O Z W ~
~ ~
b a
O
N o, ~ p O w

w
W a
a .-
N
~ J
~
ry
~
S W M~N
Y
O
} w
a.
VI rnl
W e
J
Y W W
U ~
m O
m N. ~ F ~ i
n ~ m W
H
p T 7
N O
Z Q
J ~.
~
W
~

Q
o a

ti
¢ ~

1..
¢ <

X
~ p

~
o Z

Q
p O

~
o

O ¢:
'~ y "!
~j
I
J
o m
I~ ~I
/ N O~
J ~
IN JI
^ N~
f0
~~~ J
. ~I
++~ el
I~
,~ a
t~~~l
~~ ~/
H N
TWT IJ rI
r1 O
V / J
N
l~ ~'
w
z O J
r
J S«1 L`6 `'~~ 0. ~!
I •~, \ J
U y
~ ~l
~ °`1~ ~~;
~> ~~i
~~i
J
Q
Z
O ~- (!~
~- ~ w
OwU° ~ ~
In Q
IJ Q ~ J
'w~~w
~Q~~ °' M
ZI `r o
O
Z
(t~ 13~HS) ~NI~H~1bW

Q
Z
U~
U
Q W
O m
Z O
Z
~ I1'
rFQ^ m
VJ
(9 1~3HS) 3NI~H~1bW

H
_Z
O
a
Q
F-
a
ss~ °

N
H
_Z
a
Q
H
Q
°

~~\
.>
VJ
~ ~U
Q ~ ~ ZZ
Q O Q VJ
W
W ~
~ 2a
dye ~b~~\ \
•~r ~
N
W
W
W
Z
J
U
Q
s~
~~
,-
J \
~~
00
x
N

i
$
o \\\\\lnul~/I/// /

N
~
o
o
m '
\`` s~P , ,.. O
. ~t..
. ~ : ~
? ~ e
o
I
W a
j gip:
_~;
;7:~
~-
_
H
~ OI O ~M
-U"~ N N N
W
W Z N
W - Ol .. W
U N
I h
~ _
- :W J
- .~~
p
~ <rnuo m a rn o °o b :
~d~a gy
' W O O V
~ ~ ~ \1\\\`\\ O
'/~~//
`
Q
• N~~W~ 4
W N
a O
„j O
n ~Wl
3 O
I II 11111
lll
Q
~ Q F W a V U N I ~ N d
.-
N W
Y. (n J N O
°~ 1 N O
I
1 n
Z K
W3 S a m
Q
'
N
O Z ~ ~
~O m
N
~ n
N
N
p J l~
}
I
W Z r1W
J
~ ~
d _
1 5 b Q K
n~ ry
W ~ O > ~ ~ W r
~
~
~ ~ 7 a ~
U O
O O
O "~
b
~
1~/1 ~ u
' C
N W m W m m
O ~ N Z J
J d O Q O Z W
O J C
~ i
Iv
~ ~
<
O
l4
K
1~
~ ~
X
~
~
O ~
Q
D

D O
Ql~l9 ~N
\ \
\ \
\
fj \ \ \ _
~~9so\ \ ~ O r
~~gF\ \ \ ~ ^ ~ 3 0
s ~ \ Q ~O N ~ ~. _o
~~\ O N ° ~ z
_ ~~\\' \ \ O _ ~~1-
~\\ \ \ Q ~ U ~vN
J ~~\ \ \ ~"
_ ~ ~\ ~ \ \
i~ ~ ~~
J \~`b9 \ \ Ia2£ \
a ~ / ~ sb! \
ro~,~ \ ~
/~ ~~ ~ \ \
~ \
^~/ ~y~
v! n"kJy\ \
~^ v \9~
\ 9
tl'~ y ~ F
'n~ h~ (5 133HS) ~NI~H~1dW \~ \
n
W
W
(/)
W
Z
J
S
U
Q

\ \
~ \
OI

Z
VJ

°~ a ~

U~
O ~ ~ Z
~ ~
m O
O
Z ~
~ ! L/~
' O
'
~ J Q ~
J
j
Q o
L
L
O ~ W
~ W ' N

I
V,

a d
O
J ~
W ~
O
N \ \
\ \
3 \ \
c~
z d
\
a ~ 3~
z ~ z°° ~ w 2~ ~y f~ \
~aa~ ,s ~
O n
m ~a VO
aR ~°1 \
li aw
\
U N
a

~ 2d
~w
W
a~~
m ~~

~ j \ \

w

Z p ~
ZFK H ~ ~
~
rc~ \
\
~(Wjm
U Z O WaNO
m
W I W~ \
3
\

\
W
p W
~ E I e" \ ~''~!!J~
Z
t- Z Q
W s
N~ I ^'^~n
~ I \ ~

\ S
~ m ~ W Z m
a r
l}}
o~n
lZl I ~9
\
\
Z m
J N m N 7
N W O Z ~~,,
mmGiO
~d I ZuOa \
\

Vl 4=-~pW p e_O~OaF==
~ ~
~0 \
O
7 p
~ m
6
F9
I \
\
O
K N tl
K 3S wH
I
~ U
U I
b
s 3snoH I
.~A I
Ap I
E V
„91
~ I
b
~aH I

W I ~
~w"
o~
s~ ~
~ I
~-0^ I W
W
m~o m •Z.pm I =
v~ioe z
~ N
W ! ;~ .
,
- ~f10H I i .~
Za~^ ~ w I~ W
o;m j I~ Z
•-:~
~ I tY
~ J
2 V7
~ ~
~ c
3S~l1pH
W3 ~ i
~ ~
i0 Q
g I
m ~
1
I ~
I
I
R 35llOH
.~w I L257
~
s
(8
"
l~~HS) 3NI~H~1
`dW
~
N ry
~

0
~ ~\
'.. . „
o m
. ~
~p~)

n -~ r ~n -a:N a m ~:~
•
W Z N~
W
T
N
O
r7 __
- V .N yl N ~.L.~
~
:W VI

o
vi

~,

~ _
J '~~
;r~.d g~y~
C
N u 1Y N ~```~
.'.
~
1' ''
~
a W V Q
~ rn N m ,
i
~ .............
/ /
\~~
// /
1
W ~~
a O 14 N O O O 1111 ~
/!111111
Z
~
• ~ N W~ O ~ II J
~ Q F W ,~ V
~
o 2
U m
m I Y
~ ~
N d N ~ W
¢
of ~ vWl
~
S d m
0 y
I- i
m N
m °
m I
_ n
n z
O W
3
} Z W~~
W
a m N
I ~ N
N
10
a
~
<Nwn
N
~ a vl w
~ v
N vl
U
J
~ W
W ~-
U O O O
b yl ~
~
~ ~ m~
m W m
~ m
O i
O
~~ 7
N O
Z a
J N
J a ~ a O Z O O ¢

O

~
¢

L
K

X
H

~
O

Q
p

~
D m
~
J
Z

~ - o
0
p
`\\\\111111 ~ Ill/////

In
aD
rn
o

o /
~ ... ~........ O /
,~~~P;

c%\
I ~
~ ~•P~ ~~
:
I W ~
~
yi
~i U N C
W
QNi I
p ; JM
_
-U:N W N N
~
:
_
~
C77 m
p
d' ~:

W ~ O V Q ~ ti N O O ~ ~ ///11111111\\\1\ Z
• N A M lL ~
f Vf Q F- J< ~ W
U ~
~ Y
~ !rj
N N
n I
~? N II
~ J
W
°`~ I ~
3 5~ v
0 ~ ~ N ~, ~ p vi
~N~n~^ a o w h Inc
>
W MAN J o >- ~ wr
~ ~ v Q ~
U O O ~ ll N Q f
~ 4 Lp W m m ~ N Z J

-+
~
a
o
~ li
o (~
~ LL
o
'
o J C
¢:
a
o ~
~ 1:
¢ x
~ f-"
o a
0 k
0
Q
Z
r/~
v,

Q
Up

~

~

Z
U O _
O m
zU Z u- Q
~ ~ ~ W
j
~ m W J
L
r
O

~ _ o
\\ ~~ulu~uro

~
~
o
a
m \
''
\ ,~P .., .. ,O
...
~~

I p , O:~ ~%
~
~~~
_
N
~ U b y
LLI Z N~ W
U
W N
T I
m
O ~
; JM
-Q.y Q m ~.~_
_U_N NN N=~

W ~^

U
N
I
h
~ -
:W I
J .~
"
p `
Z
b
N
\`
' /
\ `
W O O U Q ~ 4. N O O 1~ ~ ~ /'~~~r 111 irlll~~\\\
OZ
• N N N w~ W d Nj N
Q
~ Q F j d a
N U m I ,° H y ~ ~
~ V I J
O
~ ~ w s a v
~ I
m N
m O
rn
I ^
^
o
_
lu n w a 5
y J M ~N
W U J
4
O yy
O "~ }

~ ~ ~ ~~
Q
~ U ~ ~
m w
~ m
H m
p m O
~ O
Z ¢
J ~_
~ J
a w
o < p = O ¢:
W
~ ~
a
¢
o
~
w
¢
~
w
~ ~
x
a
~
~
a
o ~
a
rr
0
~"
a
0 o
0
~m
5 "~
m
m ~ O
vii°o°d y 35lipN
e'Ic
wY!M
~~-~
za~~
W

°m' m
o
:o ~
~
Z 0
J
W
3
O ~ ~
npH
,
ot
J

9

tl
znl ~
9
m 1'~
~~
~ y zn^
i v i°
" asnoH
~~
rn
~~
x
.0'~l
a_
=~1
I
1
I
r
I
e'e I ~, ~ J 1
I
I
I IN~
I \
I m'
r
I N
J
I 1 ~\
I ~~
z J
IW ~N~
U
I7
I~
I O d ~
I I~~N
I J~ J
I
I
I
I
I IN N
`N,^~\ N
t J~
I ,- w w
I ~ ~ ~ NI 1
U 'N ~
I a ~' a ~
w co
I ~ O N
I ~ ~ ~ j~
I I
I s
I
I /~
L _ _ 3Nfi 7OY9135 pZ
--- ~
C<<~s~z)
1V101 ,B6'SLZ
3 .bb,SS.£0 N ,~
Z
V J
ry/~~
LV
U~
U a
~Z
~ '~
O m ~ O
~
lLU J
~Q
I
Q
N

'~~ ~ (8 13~HS) 3NI~H~1dW
z~~
I 1.25 ~ 6 1c+\
~a ~ l
N
~=9 B2~
/~ °~ ~ ~.~
j ~~,~ ~ ~ ~ps~ °e
/ w w ,~~
Z m d U \
Q N Q
~ Q o ~ ~a~
Q ~ O
N o ~~ 1C\
J
~°
~ i1
~~
d
/~
F-
~ 2 /_^
V /
~\ goo ~~ W
/~ \~~`0`~./
\vo`~ ~ J
~^~\'o_/ U
/O ~\y Jl
! ~\v p if
\\~- /!
~,:~\ J~ v
.BCIZZZ>•~~3 ~ tIYH~,
~HIOII!)B O
O
O
~ N O
~Jarn,^~
Z ~
Q Q O ~
~LL~n
\4 U N 0
= w°.o
m FV~i~
J N~"~
Z = ~m
U p
(n
F
~ ~ 1
F' I °- a
1^~ ~ N I W
^ ^ OI
j d r
O v
M1 '
.N..
C1 I
d
I
I
r
I
,60'OS t
3 6S LO to N
~ m
UZn
QZ-~
Soo
\~W ~~ W
Zw Jr7m
~Uln~
Q3om+m ~
N } V!O {
w a rn
Q~~

~ o
``~, I U I l i l l /,~~.

v~
~
o ,,
~`~~aP.~•" O
r ~
~~
O
M o ~ , o :
~,1
i=
~
•
W Z N C Y
W N
OI N
O =a.y a L6 ~_~_
-U.N NN N:W_

W ~ Q O
Z w~mm
U N
n
a h
b
m

o ~ :Wu~ I
~Z~.V J :~~
~~' d
pg'~~
N ~"~ ~ N a
~:
..
'
O'
'
Z a W
V U JaJ N p ,
~••~.......,.
~
y
~ ~~ V1 W~ W
~ Y ~ N W O
N II Illllllll\\ a

a
J N O
U
_
~ V
O I
N I ~ J
~
N N
i n ~
W
/ } ° 3 Z a ~ ~ ~ N tT ~ N O J
Z w ~ ,~
W a N w^ ~^ a
a ;
'~
w m a
U d

Y w MUNJ
w
O
O
'~
r
~
~
N Nt
g~.
a
~ ~ m W ~ m
t- m
p N N Z J '<

~ a
a w
o a
~ W
o p
z W
o N~
s:
w
~ ~
a
o
~
~
~
¢
x
~ ~

o a

p ~

o o
to N N
N

K Z Z
J (?
Om ~
JaJ Q
U¢Q
~
O
I'' V Z
a
~
O az
a
0
V N
O ~
¢
O
~0
NZ JVI~QU
W
7
,O N
a
U
N O 0 W ~
p ~
~
~w° 2
z0 WS~gZ
K1S-a OU
r W
O
w?z
K~ OW W
~~1=mw. X02
awi zo OZwop o?r
~ wmi ~~ O~a~w ¢w~
O

O aVl NJOW

> Z
Q W

2 Q~
7
I
} N
moo
za Z J N
a=o
a U W
~^zpmoa
zaz F-O^Z
oW~ aaa ~~~°~ ~ooa
aaa aoa zmvlpU
~ loo
ZO W?N ~
U
N ~y'U
V
Z ~a QO!p =
Z
Z
SVI~pyJj NFU
OZZZ N O N S a~ W
a S N a
N> O
>O Wa J
(
~w (pp~ F-
a
~U? NaJ MIWWOJ da
0
W
v WW
a' 2
w
~~
t•
O Vy c
U ZN
n
O
viO
oo
J W 000
~'
~ mw ~
U oW ~
w "I~
Z u
O
Z
~r
z
~t
J
a
W
O
a:_
S
W
4
~ 1~=€~'~
S ~'~~ 3
~~~~~~~~
~ ~Fa ~~~
~~~~~~~
~~~~`~~~
D
W O\ a W
OF ri0 0? Z WOr Z O ~ a to
ouz ez I-a ^wwx ~Jm a u? o or z
o:r ..~O$ rzZrn ~?Wg azm~ oaaQF;~~
V1 KI.IaJ C=aWOU ~ W ppJO m Z d O OZ OY I^O O~ F-Z
~W 033ZZ W=z°-zwUO NO ~ W d~~~W Wd ^~a;~I~~O
a O
NyNy/I~°oaz<~~~o~aOpo'o~_woW°~'~~W~~~m~ac~i
~3~NUa0 IwWNr? aZU~ZZO~wWmUmb;U~~~FZ-N
.. alo~aza~on~lo~"'o^z~^n~n~pmiNJ^~c:l°no~~aWgl¢¢J`
a ap WUNOiO ~~ w a~00^ZN n ZF ~~NO
Z O O~ <~~~^ yl N V^ a m~ a J~ Z W~ W O ~ O O m O V~~ W WI~ N U W
mZ mV W~ It)~ W I tC Z_ a N a W~ U ZU W NWT W~t~l7z~
WZ ZWIW ;.I ZO RiUO IIKOWabVOVmw?~WaZ.Z-.~K J~Ij~OZ~
27 ~O ~JWa~NO~pZ.-ZZZOJF`~~ 13f10~ b ~w
O~ OOO UOU~WWvQ_pW Yptn O, NZ ~'O WWN ~~~~m~
~1 ZZ Z~WaaOWZaoaWZ~~rnO~owVOn~(~In3'r~00WQ,
U ~3vU°d~~\3~MW~`~ry^~oWa'"ZwZ~a<Z~oay~~°m/a,~NZa
II~~ ZZ ; 3 ~
''TJ ~olomrn"'~pYZZZNaOHOOa 7a NZ OOpZ tmD~]y_~[ZO iOhNaO
U U~p~~~O~WOZOZW QOO~I.\OO~~O~WZO~WU~~~~N
`(V~~' ¢ ZINOOZ_WZW; JrOnV VNVW 6000 ~ NU
d 1-OVIaNZmOZaZOp<W~~<~~S~z~oWZao~pZaZo .<m~wl~
~r W wO vJp UZF "I~¢OW O\ I Wp Q'V Wp~NN~Wm~
UW a~a~$ a~~? 0) VO WIWi OOIWV/ Z N ~~ QQ~W ZZ~~a /N}OZW ~WN
Zr~OOWw200~~rya5w ~~Zr1Z ~<a000mZ~O0~aZWZa
~N a'2~02 ~l-~~=ZZ~~~=ZpZ.~3'Hp aprl-vZaj~t^p
~ K ~ O W W W< 2 Z W O N~ O Q IJ a W ONi W W O m W~ W T~ Z} N
c~na~~~~al~mc~a~~oVl~~~~~nld~°~u'~1~"~~°~~~3n
Z
U~
O
Z
OV
w Z
m
r
t"'
f- ~
Q ~ LL
W U
Q O ~
~ N ~
~t N
N ~
~~
LL
I~
a ~
~ ~ Z
Q
Q~Qc~n
W ~
Q
Z
m=
~W
m
Q
m
(n
a
H N M
~U ~~oJ
W ~ N Z 7 ~
°-oZaa~
~ Z W U O Q
g ~~
~ O Z Z ~ J
m~~oo~F=
w Z ~
00 =off'
rn
N
Q
m
_N ZO ~ W
F w
0
r ~~~ ~a~ N
IIyy c: m ~ J If
~wOaQNO7NY0WN7 Q
U
I
_N NOW 7 W W~ O J X~ W~ Z I ~ I
Z ~ U U Q W W 0 2 U 0! W a W 2
F ti14,IN 3~FTa0 W~a~z
a ap-ZrvlJaNm~OlnZO
U ~2rmamNw ~r OIn3wF
'~ J~J ~~~ az- Wa
~ W~ W U W Z W Z~°~ Z O?
~ 4~OwZ7Z~FZpZFInw
o w~a~l~~a~W= c'amz~o
a U F Z o 0 0= J W 1A a K~^ J W
~ I^a~b NUm~¢ aklml- z ~~ ~~
~ dam<°a~aao~~~''o°_'~ z IF la0
z
0
Q
U
W
LL
0
Z
O
W
N

r
•P.~
f
May 8, 2006
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of `Vater Quality
401/Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attention: Cyndi Karoly
Reference: Application for Individual Permit
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, North Carolina
EPC P/N: MR-05008
Dear Ms. Karoly,
Enclosed please find an application and design drawings for the project
referenced above. The site is located on Airport Road, east of the intersection with I-26.
The notification of jurisdictional determination associated with the project was issued on
March 23, 2006 with the Action ID 200630338. Additional information will be provided
to you as request it.
I appreciate your assistance with this project and would welcome the opportunity
to sit down with you and discuss the details. Please call me at your earliest convenience
so that we can begin the process. Thank you again.
Respectfully,
Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
. Box 3744 Greenville, Sauth Carolina 29608 [phone] Fax [phone]
P0. Box 2346 Hendersonville, North Carolina 28793 Phone/Fax [phone]

o~- D~aa v2
T
O
(0
r
ri.i
C7 '
~_
:. ~-
o
w ~.
0
o
ti
o
w
W
D~ ,
r
O
O
r
~ ;
LJ7 ~
ru _
W I

STYL XPP
/~
~ ~Oa
_ j p.~-C
~~ ~..~ ~rn
~ n~
~~
'~.~' Q
-~ z
v
~m
T
~~
m g.
n

~ ao
~ ~.
~ ~ -
~y
~ ~ o
1 rn ~ .
~'~~°
~ `°
~ ~`,'
w~
in ?
~ ~
J .n..
(A
D
-a
m
f
H3
1
x..^11.
m
1~ _ ~ ,
~N N
_ ~;. OD
~o ~
I
z

~ ~~ ! oqa~ v~, -_
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
• l33 CFR 325/ OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-0003
The Public burden for this collection of information is sestimated to average 10 hours Expires December 37, 2004
per response, although the majority of applications should require
• 5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
• completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
• Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law,
• no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control
number, Please DO N07 RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having
• jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
• PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section d04, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection ,Research and
• Sanctuaries Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application far a
permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies.
• Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit a liation cannot be evaluated nor can a
be issued. PP
permit
ne set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions! and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
. ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE F/CLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
• l/TEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BYAPPL/C
• 5. APPLICANT'S NAME
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE /anaperaisnarrepuiredl
. Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Laura Belanger, Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
2001 SE 10th St 9• AGENT'S ADDRESS
Bentonville, AR 72712 PO Box 3744
7.. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE Greenville, SC 29608
• 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a. Residence
a. Residence
b. Business [phone]
I b. Business (g64) 271-3040
• ,,.
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, Environmental Permittin Consultants InC
. tarnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit applic tion,my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to
•
•
. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
DATE
• NAME, LOCATION AND DESCAIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE /seeinsvuaians•
• Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
to ~a~e~ r,e ie,e rte.,,.,-_.
- -- •-•••-, ~.+..+v,, Ir nIVU VVN /il annlirah/al
U/N tributary of French Broad River
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Buncombe NC
• COUNTY STATE
14. PROJECT STREf=T ADDRESS !~/eppicae~ei
Airpor( Road, NC Hwy 280
.'6. OTHEA LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN, rseeinstruetlonsl
Northeast of the intersection of Bradley Branch Rd. and Airport Road, South Buncombe County
_]7 r]IRCrrln~lc T'. r
v ~ ~ ~c JI I C
Take I-26 east from Asheville. Take the Airport Road exit and turn left at the ramp. The site is located on the left past the
intersection of Bradley Branch and across from Spruce Road. 35.45570/82.52340
• ~ - J ~ EDITION OF FEB 94 IS O$SOLEi

•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
18. Nature of Activity (Description ofproreet, inerude ar/ lectures/
SEE ATTACHED SHEET
1 g. PrOjeCt PUrpOSe IOescrihe the recson or purpose of the project, see instruchorsl
SEE ATTACHED SHEET
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE OISC1iARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
SEE ATTACHED SHEET
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Tvoe in Cubic Yards
117,556 cubic yards of clean fill dirt.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled Iseeinsrrucrionsl
1.93 acres of Wetlands
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes Q No " IF YES. DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list).
SEE ATTACHED SHEET
25. List of Other Certifications or ApprovalslDenials Received from other Federal, State or Local Agencies for Wark Described in This Application.
TYPE APPROVAL" IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
entfication P 1200630338 112/12/2005 13/23/2006
'Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits
26, licati is hereb made far a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this
ap iicat n is com etc and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or a acting as the
d y e ant of the applicant. ~ ^~
,,,~i~3T ~ ~ ~ o b
SIG ATURE OF AP (CANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT TE
h applicati n must be signed y the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
thorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdetion of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes arty false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than S 10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
•

BLOCK 18
• The overall project involves the construction of a commercial retail shopping
center. The shopping center will consist of a newly constructed Wal-Mart store as well
as other commercial structures. Additionally, infrastructure (parking, access drives,
t
d
i
s
ormwater
etent
on, etc.) will be constructed to service the new facilities as required by
• all applicable Federal, State and local ordinances and regulation.
Extensive grading will be required on the site to bring it to an acceptable level
with Airport Road. The site has several wetlands, most of which have been highly
di
sturbed due to past site clearings and soil compaction due to heavy equipment. The
proposed development involves the filling of a total of 1.93 acres of wetlands.
• The northeastern most wetland, wetland area "E", on the property receives flow
from a stormwater pipe installed under Airport Road during its expansion from a two lane
f
to
our lane road. This linear wetland flows west towards the center of the property
where it appears to stop without connecting hydrologically to any of the other wetlands or
streams on property. The proposed project would pipe the flow from Airport Road north
to an existing drainage which ties into an existing stream. Based on the topography of
the site, it appears that this was the natural course for the water prior to being diverted
during the widening of Airport Road.
• Two small wetland areas adjacent to stream 1 which flows along the northern

'~ property boundary will be filled during grading. The eastern most, wetland area "A", of
h
t
e two will be filled with 13,148 cu. yards of clean fill, impacting 0.065 acres. The
western one, wetland area "B", will be filled partially with 556 cu. yards of clean fill dirt,
. impacting 0.01 acres.
The largest wetland, wetland area "C", is situated near the center of the property.
D
ue to the existing grade of the property and the location of the wetland, development of
the property is not feasible without filling some portion of the wetland. The proposed
project involves the placement of 85,046 cu. yds. of clean fill dirt impacting 1.32 acres of
wetland.
h
T
e southwestern most wetland, wetland area "D", flows northwest and joins with
stream 2 near the rear of the property. This wetland will be partially filled with 18,056
• cu. yd of clean fill dirt, impacting 0.2 acres of wetland.
BLOCK 19
The purpose of the project is to construct a retail shopping center. Extensive site
• work will be necessary to prepare the site for level construction. The site was chosen far
its proximately to I-26 and to other large retail and commercial developments.
BLOCK 20
• Extensive grading will be required to bring the site to an acceptable level with
Airport Road. Due to the location of the wetlands, which are spread throughout the
d
h
property, an
t
e existing grade, it would be impossible to develop the property without
impacting Waters of the US. Placing fill in the wetlands is necessary to achieve suitable
grade for building.

Adjoining Properties
Peter Hall
PO Box 15368
Asheville, NC 28813
Michael and Wilma Caldwell
5 Machen Rd.
Arden, NC 28704
Lewis and Florence Rogers
9 Machen Rd.
Arden, NC 28704
Isaac Pulley
PO Box 264
Fletcher, NC 28732
Jerome Gilbeaux et al
PO Box 456
Arden, NC 28704
David and Gwendolyn Suber
PO Box 534
Fletcher, NC 28732
Neil Farnam
7 Park Road
Asheville, NC 28803
Bradley Branch LLC
PO Box 1377
Arden, NC 28704
Harry Thomas
4332 Cerritos Ave.
Suite 207
Los Alamitos, CA 90720

Post Office 3or 77ae UftAwrv tlr ino
~ 111I~(((~jyyy } T 7,]y~~ 1Ip~t7. (1'x'1 ~ Greem~ile. SC 296C8 OA~E. 27a r12066
~~~~-~~±~~~' bi~~//~~ ~~ ~ ahone: la64i 271 JOJ0 p~
Fax: iB61i 27s-9299 c?C PRO.;eCT NO 1ARO6prnOC8 USACE P/N'
GRAPHIC SCALE
zso o zso seo
I I I I
1 inch = 500 feet
AIRPORT ROAD
Topographic Map
Wal-Mart
Buncombe County
SHEET NO.
1
of 12

Source: Buncombe County GIS
GRAPHIC SCALE
~~~Q~~~~.~ zi° i zi° '~° AIRPORT ROAD
ln~ 1 inch = 500 feet Soil Map
~~~~ Wal-Mart
~~p[~ gT Past Office Boa 3714 BRAWN BY Iht1
~~,~~~T ~1\I~ i \ TII`I,~.l Greenville. 5C 29608 pa'e: 27apn1200G Buncombe County
~~..2C'~66 L 99~~11 \Y ii ~i~ LLL ~J Phane: 18641271-7°a0
Fax: [phone] EPC PROJECT NO.. ~NRO6pcn008 USACE P/N:
REVISIONS
SHEET N0.
3
of 12
Complex 2-15% Fannin Loam $-15% slopes
slopes

O N
~ Z .-i
w ~ u-
= O
Q c
m ~ U
~-'- m
~ ~
a
0
O o' ~ E
~ c
~ m
Q
W
U
Q

t
•
o
W ~
J Z
Q ~ ti
••^~ U
vJ $ 2
2
O ; Iii a
U N a~ ~ U
^^_ ~~ O O W
I.~L V ~
c ~~
~ apc ~ m
p ON ~"~
O ~ 9 ~
C 0
9
1 ~ LL
,~ U
~~~
W~H
z~ ~
o ~ ~'
~w~
zaz
W O

i` ~\ ~ ~ r` '` ...
,~ ... ~ ~~ ) ~ ~ I ~ ~
. ~
'4~ 'a i
~~
.~ -~
i
} ~ .. '~,. - ..~ -- _ fir,' _ „Kw-sa=.- _.-., \ ~~~
„~ ~ ,, y r
. ,. ,
- .:
~... ,
_,~ ]
. .
;.. _
~.
~ ~ ; ~ ( ~ , ; ~-.ti ~ , ~ ~~ ,, .~
` } ~
~ ri u t~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 i .-.
,~ ,~~ ~ i - ~?i! ice, r
t i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ i/ / r
i
~ ~~~~
__
~ /f"
~~ s ~ i +.,,! `red `z o -~ .;ems
Stream 2 ~ _ ~~ ~` ~~, ~'~`~~~~~/~ ~ ~~ ~~~~
S81 s ~~~ 1t--1 , ~~r`'~k ~ ~~ -~~ ~~~,
sq. ft. '~ ~~~
s >>~`~.
x
0.013 acres ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~~ ~' '~ Wetland Area "C"
t ~~
1501in. ft. Wetland Area "D" ~~~~ 1~~, ~, ` ~ ~ ~~ ' `~~~'~ 72 233
~ ~ ~ ` ,~ sq. ft.
"~
9,834 s ft. `, ~ ~' ~ ~~` ~
q, ' '' ` ;. r ~ 1.658
;~u , ~~., ~t~ ~~ acres
0.226 acres r~ ~: t ~~ ~ , f
~, (
~ F 7%
ENVIRONMENTAL J GRAPHIC SCALE REVISI
1~5 1 1I6 2i aurm,r: rawaHn.
PERMITTING 1 1 ilnch = 250 feet
CONSULTANTS, INC. ~ ~°~ ~z39'S~ o°~E NeY: 27apn120 8
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone] EPC PROJECT N6t8i05pcn005
Wetland Area "E"
13,981 sq, ft,
0.321 acres
Stream 1
10,286 sq. ft.
0.236 acres
12991in. ft.
AIRPORT ROAD
Waters of the US
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
USACE P/N:.
`....
Wetland Area "A"
2,844 sq. ft.
0.065 acres
Wetland Area "B"
2,520 sq. ft.
0.058 acres
SHEET NO.
5
OF 12

sting 30"
ENVIRONMENTAL
PERMITTING
CONSULTANTS, INC.
GRAPHIC SCALE
~ ;~ ,~e
1 Inch = 100 feat
Paal0lfw Bor 37M DRAWN BY: yq
CxaamlYa, 8C YYBBO DATE:
P'twiw:IBBr)2I1-3810 Y7ap~Y2BOB
Far: (8 811 2 3 684 8 8 EPC PROJECT Ne1R05pogOp
AIRPORT ROAD
Impact Detail
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
USACE P/N:.
SHEET NO,
6
OF 12
Impact Area ".~" 42" RCP
Fill
0.321 acres
2537 cu. yd.

__ ...-
WE
( 4'
Imr~__ _ ~„~ L
Fill
0.01 acres
556 cu, yd.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PERMITTING
CONSULTANTS, INC.
GRAPHIC SCALE
4
I
~, _ ~ ~eB~
PaN OBICY Boa 77M DRAWN BY: ~p
~~' ~ ~~ DATE:
Plww:lBB1177t-7018 27rpilZpp9
F~a: (BB1) 23S02Bfl EPC PROJECT NOlf~tiprnOpB
s
Impact Area "A"
Fill
0.065 acres
13,148 cu. yd.
AIRPQRT ROAD
Impact ~eteil
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
USACE P/N:.
SHEET NO.
7
OF 1Z

-~-~

DISTURfiED • -.
Wl:. Tt..AN D S
(1;5,981 S.f.)
~\ ,
~~
~DISTURHED PROPOSED
WETLANDS WAL-MART
57,684 S.i',}C F F 2269 OR
ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC SCALE
60
PERMITTING , Wit, _ ,~ teet
CONSULTANTS, INC• ~~IficsBw 37M DfiAYYN BY: ~
G~Mmilr, SC 4O8W DATE: Y7aprY7008
Pn~.: ~es4~ sn-3oau
F.x: (eaq 23s•ene eac wzaecr ,ooe

Impact Area "C"
Fill
1.32 acres
85,046 cu yd.
AIRPORT ROAD
Impact Detail
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
USACE P/N:.
SHEET NO.
s
OF IZ

DISTURBL"D ~; ~ ;~ ~"; , ~~..; , ,;; I ,.~I_~
WETLANDS ?\ ,. ; 1,;~, . `;, //~~t
(8,895 S.F•) ~` ~: /~~
VEGETATED ', //y, %;;
;f~ ~//~
FILTi=R S1RIP ~~ ;r/~~
%~-~%;
~ , , ,;
~-~ ~ ,
'. ~ H
f ~l ^' {^ J !~~ '
I ! ~ ; :~\ ; \ is r} .t, ,.' ,>
~1 !j ! ~~\. ~1 ~ x.
j ~~
11 1, -I
i T f t 1 i 4
~i I i t; II ` `i!` i ~i ~i ~ t ~ ~~ ,,
l , j~ ~; i 1
ti ~? t
' i I `; \~~ r ; j \ ` ~
i~ i i "~ C~ l \t~\\ ~, ~~ , i ~h( i
t~ i z A ~~ ~~~ ~ ; I I I~'
sT~RMw~TeR ' ! ~~ ~~ I
4
I~i ~ - ~I,~ `4~ I ,41;
~ I+ , ~ I~ MANAGEMENT ~ ; , Ito , I~ ~~~~
~ilj ?~+~ FACILITY 1', ~:~,' 1~~~ ~~,\ t\1
I
.~
;,~1 j f,
.. ~~~
,. _
,,
/% f.: f
~~ ?~ ~ ~ Impact Area "D"
,` Fill
i ~'
'~ ~~~` ;;" 0.2 acres
~w'' 18,056 cu. yd.
.......... 1 Vx .
~:
k~
`. '~
lW q ,,._ wi~~
r ~
,~
~~~ ~~ _~ 36" RCP
1 ~ z, ~: ,~
~ ~ .. _,
~..
~ ~ ~~~
jl ' \`~.. ~~ ~ \\ ` \
~~ iti
,•
~.
~ ~
{~~~ 1~~1 ~~
1 1 ti
i`
~ ~~
,
~
~ ~ ~ V~\
~
. ~ ` \
,~ , :\ ~
'

-~
V
\4 ~`\ \\\\ ~ \l~)
V~ ~A 1. ~~~ ~~~~~~~.~~~~.~ ~
`.
5 \ \ \ ~~ ~ \ ~ ` I
\` \
~ 1: t ~ ,,
f; / ~ `\ , \
\ ~ \` ~ \
ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC SCALE REVISIONS
3~- I I ~ rbucnu
PERMITTING ~ In~t, _ ~o teat
CONSULTANTS, INC. Poa~Oldcaew 97„ DDR~WN BY: 27e Y20 B
cr..~~u~., sc 29808
Pnww:~esg2i~aono ~ P<
Faa: (884123&9288 EPC PROJECT N01fi05pm00B
AIRPORT ROAD
Impact Detail
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
USACE P/N:.
SHEET NO.
9
OF 12

•••••••7••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
vvvvvv~_-, / ~~ a
.vvv
li vvv
'; vvv
vvv
/I~~
Created Wetland 1
24,289 sq. ft.
0.56 acre
ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC SCALE
,oo
L~_ ~ 'i i
PERMITTING ,inch =zoo teat
CONSULTANTS, INC. Pwl°tlNsew77N DRAWNeY: „,
e.~„~. S~ 2Bfi0B
Phew: (B6C)271-3W0 DATE: 27aprY2008
F~:I~M1295-i29B EPC PROJECT NOIRO6pmOp9
/ r , ., ~ ~ ,
~~~ri~
w3
~~• '~ ~~. '~~ i_. ~ -
.<
F ~ yC
w{y`7 1 W~ f S ~C ~f ~J~
r ^~ y" r',
,~ ~ i.
~~ ti,.:fr

Buffer
Avg width 100 feet
2.07 acres
AIRPORT ROAD
Conceptual Mitigation Overview
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
USACE P/N..
SHEET NO.
10
OF 1Z
Created Wetland 2 t
Stream Relocation
36866 sq. ft. Priority 2 Restoration
0,85 acre Approx. SOO lin. feet

- _ _ __
,~ ~Q.pp
f' ' p'.., p.. p p p p D p p p ..
ppp "p_. p p p• p p
~ '~ D p ~ ~,'~~ ~ ~_ p p p p ~ ~ p ",ppp' _ ___~~~~~_..•~
,; ~~ obQppp ~ pp..ppp p.,,ppppp~, _------
~j~,; p,.p p p D p 0 p~'np p p ~, ~1! D p ~z..p p p•.. - ---
~" pp,...ppp D~ppV`,p p,~pp~p -
i~ p p p p p. ,,.. p p p p p p ~ p p Q"•,p p ••• _ppp p p
' •, pD.C7ppp ppp.,pppp,pp pp`'p,~pp~-_p C7 ,'p C7:<
~~(" it pppp pp`p....,ppp ppGr.pp pp•ppp
r.. ,.` pp~``p.ppp ~..... p•pppp`p p~.,pppp
r ~~, -_ ..
t,Dpppp ppDp, .., .,p p`pp •~ p~7p ,,.
0 pp pD.. ~p p'p• p p
' ~ •••
p p `p
f~~.
V
_w
- ' ~ p -- .. _ . - .,,._..~-.~...-.~._-..-----~': ~..~..~...,~.,, ,-gyp ....~.-.
. ;,--
~,
r ... ~ M.~ •`-~.. ~ .r."'_._.-•^-^ irk J ~~ ,.:.i /, ~ ';,,~fY `~ 1
~ ~~ c
.' ~ !,
' .......y.'S ~ S ~ 1. ~°M
r "`
i r ~ /'7. ~ ~ / / s
~~ /
..
,~
,. _ ;
{ ~ ~~ ~
A
~ • -.,
~ t
. F
-. ~." i
..
..
~, ~~~
,,
..n.,.~. ~ -.
f
,,,
i ~ ;.
,-
t ,~ ;,/` ~
,~
„~ .__ ~,
,-
.. _.
...~-
i`/ / ~.
a ~ / '~
} ~ ~ i ~ ~; /
.,,. ;
,..
~ 7 ~~ ~ ~ ,
~ ~~
.
• ~
f
/ t , ,"
„~-
.•,
•
F// ,/ ~ , ~~ ~~ ;
.~
;, ~ ~ « ~
i
~ / l
~,
\ ~\ ~
-. ~ ..
~ •~ I ~~j 1 i ~ ~
-- +.
1
-'iris ~- `~~~
'~ l _. / ~ ~~ ~ j ~~ i ~ . i .~,
Y~
Created Wetland 1 '' .~ ~`~, ~ ~, ~ ` ~~ ;,, ' ~;
24.,289 s Created Wetland 2 `-
q. ft. 36866 s Buffer
0.56 acre q• ft- Avg width 100 fee
0.85 acre t
_ 2.07 acres
ENVIRONMENTAL ,° G~PNIC SCALE
PERMITTING '° ~°
1 ~~ ° 90 feet
ONSULTANTS, INC. a~°~ ~~se a DRAWN BY:
PMns:(~4~271-304° UAiE: 27 IAh
Fax: (8g4) 235.9289 ~~~
EPC PROJECT N0lR05pcapp8
USACE P/N;,
AIRPORT ROAD
Conceptual Created Wetlands
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
SHEET N0,
11
OF 12

~••••••••i•••~•••~w~•••••••••~~•••••••••••••
Stream Relocation
Priority 2 Restoration
Approx. SOO lin. ft.
Pipe
Diversion of flow from
existing 30" RCP
Existing 30"
RCP
ENVIRONMENTAL
PERMITTING
CONSULTANTS, INC.
GRAPHIC SCALE
'; Y
1 inch = 80 feet
Pat OIBce Bac 3744 DRAWN BY: Bib
Graanv8k, SC 28808 DATE: 27apr82008
Phone: [phone]
Fan: (bOq) 235-8298 EPC PROJECT NO4R05pcn009
RE
S
USACE PIN:.
AIRPORT ROAD
Conceptual Stream Relocation
Wal Mart
Buncombe County
SHEET NO.
12
OF 12

•
• Y
•
• -~ cos stem .
t~ -~ z
• ~ $ _.
PROGRAM
May 3, 2006
Laura Belanger
• Environmental Permitting Consultants
PO Box 3744
Greenville, SC 29608
• Project: Airport Road Retail Center County: Buncombe
• The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NC EEP) is willing to
accept payment for impacts associated with the above referenced project. Please note that this decision does not assure that
the payment will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation for project impacts. It is the responsibility of the
applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NC EEP will be approved.
• This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter. If we have not received a copy of the issued 404
Pernut/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send
copies of the 404/401/CAMA permits to NC EEP. Once NC EEP receives a copy of the 404 Permit and/ar the 401
• Certification an invoice will be issued and payment must be made.
•
•
Based on the information supplied by you the impacts that may require compensatory mitigation are summarized in the
following table.
River Basin Wetlands Stream Buffer Buffer
Cataloging (Acres) (Linear Feet) Zone 1 Zone 2
Unit (Sq. Ft.) (Sq. Ft.)
Ri arian Non-Ri arian Coastal Marsh Cold Coal Warm
French Broad 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
06010105
Upon receipt of payment, EEP will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation for the permitted impacts
up to a 2:1 ratio, (buffers, Zone 1 at a 3:1 ratio and Zone 2 at a 1.5:1 ratio). The type and amount of the compensatory
mitigation will be as specified in the Section 404 Permit and/or 401 Water Quality Certification, and/or CAMA Permit. The
mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the N. C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Mankoff at [phone].
~ erely, Ci~~~~
~~ ,
William D. Gilmore, PE
Director
cc: Cyndi Karoly, Wetlands/401 Unit
Angie Pennock, USACE-Asheville
Kevin Barnett, DWQ-Asheville
File

• 1~.P~StOI'' F ~ .. PlrOt2Ct ~ ~GLY St~~ Q~~
• ~"' ~ NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 / 919-715-04761 www.nceep.net
•

PROTECTED SPECIES HABITAT ASSESSMENT
AIRPORT ROAD WAL-MART
BUNCO.VIBE COUNTY, NC
EPC PROJECT NO.: MRO~eco008
PREPARED FOR:
FREELAND & KAUFFMAN, INC.
209 WEST STONE AVENUE
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29608
PREPARED BY:
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING CONSULTANTS
125 WEST STONE AVENUE (29609)
POST OFFICE BOX 3744
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29608
APRIL 2006

i
r
r
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION.
3.0 METHODS ,
3.1 HABITAT ASSESSMENT ,
3.2 AGENCY REVIEW
3.3 SELECTION OF PROTECTED SPECIES
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 HABITAT CHARACTERIZATION .
4.2 PROTECTED FAUNA
4.3 PROTECTED FLORA
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
6.0 REFERENCES AND FIELD GUIDES
7.0 APPENDICES
7.1 FIGURES.
7.2 REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
7.3 AGENCY RESPONSES. ,
Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wat-Mart
EPC Project No. OSeco008
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10

i
Protected Species Habitat Assessment
• Airport Road VVaI-Mart
EPC Project No. OSeco008
1.0 INTRODUCTION

• Freeland and Kauffrnan, Inc. of Greenville, South Carolina, retained Environmental
Permitting Consultants (EPC) to provide a protected species habitat assessment for the Airport Road
W
l
M
a
-
art property located along Airport Road in Buncombe County, North Carolina. The habitat
. assessment was performed in Apri12005 to detemune if habitat for protected species was present on
the property. Endangered and threatened species are protected under the Endangered Species Act
ES
(
A) of 1973 (16 USC 1531-1543).

• Endangered species are defined as those plants and animals whose prospects of survival are
in immediate danger. Threatened species are those species that may become endangered if
conditions related to their existence continue to deteriorate (e.g., loss of suitable habitat). A third
• category of concern includes candidate species. Candidate species are those species that may be
listed as endangered or threatened in the future (species of concern). Candidate species are not
l
ll
ega
y protected under the federal or state ESA. They are provided in this report to account for the
• possibility that they might become protected in the near future.
EPC's assessment of potential protected species habitat on the Airport Road Wal-Mart
• Property was conducted in three (3) phases. The first phase involved the qualitative and
• quantitative assessment of general habitat types on the property. 'The second phase consisted of a
i
rev
ew of existing records obtained from federal (US Fish and Wildlife Service) and state (North
• Carolina Natural Heritage Program) agencies. Both agencies provided listings of potential protected
• species and for Buncombe County. Types of habitat for the protected species were found in various
keys and field guides, and on US Fish and Wildlife web pages. The third phase of the assessment
consisted of co
i
h
h
mpar
ng t
e
abitats identified in phase 1 with those protected species requirements
• identified in phase 2. Thus, a determination of critical habitats and the potential for the existence of
protected species was conducted.

• 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
• The Airport Road Wal-Mart Property consists of approximately t38 acres ofproperty in
Buncombe County, North Carolina. The majority of the site was previously harvested for timber.
The site is significantly disturbed with remnant logging debris and rutted out access roads
The
• .
surrounding properties are a mix of undeveloped, residential and commercial land uses. Two
• streams with associated wetlands are located on the property as well as several smaller isolated
wetlands. Wetlands, streams and isolated wetlands comprise 2.59 acres of the property.
Vegetation, soil and hydrologic characteristics observed on the property indicated non-wetland or
• disturbed conditions. Non-wetland/waterway areas comprise 35.41 acres of the property. A site
location map is provided as Sheet 1 in Appendix 7.1

. The majority of the property is considered disturbed by past land use practices. Existing
vegetation consisted primarily of early successional species. Large areas of Smilax sp. and juncos
s
we
p.,
re present as well as Virginia pine (Pinus virginiana}, sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus)

• ,
sweetgum (Liquidambar styrac~zra), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), and rhododendron. The
. vegetation of the riparian-wetland area consisted of tulip poplar (Liriodendron tzrlipifera) in the
t
overs
ory. The understory consisted of common rush (Juncus effusus) and hazel alder (Alms
• serrulata).

Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. 05eco008
3.0 METHODS
3.1 Habitat Assessment
An assessment of the habitat types of the Airport Road Wa1 :Mart Property was determined
by performing on-site surveys in Apri12005. Habitat characteristics were based on vegetation type,
location in the landscape, past anthropological disturbances, and hydrologic features.
TABLE 1
HABITAT ASSESSMENT SUMtrIARY
AIRPORT ROAD WAL-MART PROPERTY
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Habitat T e A roxirnate Acrea e
I. Seconda Secessional Forest 35.41 acres
2. Ri arian 2.59 acres
Total: 38 acres
Two (2) major habitat types were identified on the property. Habitat characteristics were
compared to documented requirements for protected species to determine the potential presence of
those species on the property. Specific requirements for protected fauna and flora are discussed in
Sections 4.2 and 4.3, respectively.
3.2 Agency Review
Agency reviews were performed via Internet on websites maintained by the federal and
state agencies responsible for the protection of threatened and endangered species. Requests for
information regarding the occurrence of protected species on or neaz the project site were directed to
the USFWS and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. The North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program Database was examined for the existence of recorded sightings in the project area. The
target property was located on the Skyland Quadrant.
3.3 Selection of Protected Species
Protected species habitat requirements, as determined from literature review and agency
databases were compared to those habitat types identified on the praperty. If protected species
habitat requirements corresponded to any of those habitats identified on the property, a qualitative
assessment of the potential presence of that species was provided.
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Habitat Characterization
Habitat types on the Airport Road Wal-Mart Property were distinguished by vegetation
type, location in the landscape, past disturbances and hydrologic characteristics.
Two (2) major habitat types were identified on the property. Secondary secessional
growth was found on the majority of the property due to land clearing about five or ten years ago
2

Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. OSeco008
(~35 acres). The remainder was wetlands and riparian areas (~3 acres). Habitat characteristics were
compared to documented requirements for protected species to determine the potential presence of
those species on the property. Specific requirements for protected fauna and flora are discussed in
Sections 4.2 and 4.3, respectively.
4.2 Protected Fauna
Lists of protected animal species for Skyland Quadrant were provided by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Listed species, status, and on-site
potential are summarized in Table 1. The results of this survey indicate that none of the animal
species listed for Buncombe County, Skyland Quadrant, were present on the property.
TABLE 1
PROTECTED FAUNA SUM'bIARY
SKYLAND QUADRANT, BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Common Name Scientific Name Status 1) On-Site Potential
Bo turtle Clemm s muhlenber 1I FT/ST None
A alachian elktoe Alasmidonta raveneliana FE None
Tennessee Heels litter Lasmi ona holstonia SE None
Gra M otis Myotis grisescens FE/SE None
Cree er Strophitus undu/atus ST Mar final
Sli a shell Mussel E ioblasma ca sae ormis FE None
~ FT =Federal Threatened, , ST =State Threatened, FE =Federal Endangered, SE =State Endangered ~
A habitat assessment was performed for each protected animal species listed in Table 1.
Species requirements were compared to those habitats observed and on-site potential for each
species was assessed. A summary of habitat requirements for each species is provided below:
Boe Turtle:
The bog turtle "occurs in the mountains and upper piedmont of North Carolina and southern
Virginia. These secretive turtles are generally rare and widely scattered. They inhabit damp grassy
fields, bogs, and marshes (Martof et. al. 1980.)" When disturbed they quickly bun-ow into ffiud or
debris (Martof et. al. 1980). Their potential habitat can be described as spring-fed, soggy, and
sunny. Habitat for the bog turtle was not present on the property. No bog turtles were observed
during the site assessment.
Appalachian Elktoe:
"The species has been reported from relatively shallow medium-sized creeks and rivers with
cool, well-oxygenated, and moderate- to fast-flowing water. It has been observed in gravelly
substrata, often mixed with cobble and boulders; in cracks in bedrock (Gordon 1991); and
occasionally in relatively silt-free, coarse, and sandy substrata (J. Alderman, North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, personal communication, 1992; personal observations, 1989,
1991). Stability of the substrate appears to be critical to the Appalachian elktoe, and the species is
seldom found in stream reaches with accumulations of silt or shifting sand, gravel, or cobble"
(USFWS 2002). Habitat for the Appalachian elktoe was not present on the property. No
Appalachian elktoe were observed during the site assessment.
Tennessee Heelsplitter:

Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. O~eco008
"The Tennessee heelsplitter is widely distributed in small streams throughout the Tennessee
and Alabama River drainages in Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North. Carolina, and Virginia;
however, it has not been documented in North Carolina since before 1913. The Tennessee
heelsplitter is found in small, headwater streams. High densities are most often observed in
sand/mud substrates" (http://www.ncwildlife.org/pg07_WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7blal_12.htm). The
habitat for the Tennessee Heelsplitter was not present on property and the Tennessee Heelsplitter
was not observed during the site assessment.
Gray Myotis: -
"Gray bat colonies are restricted entirely to caves or cave-like habitats. During summer the bats
are highly selective for caves providing specific temperature and roost conditions. Usually these
caves are all located within a kilometer of a river or reservoir. In winter they utilize only deep,
vertical caves having a temperature of 6-11 degrees Centigrade. Consequently, only a small
proportion of the caves in any area are or can be used regularly. There are nine known caves that are
believed to house roughly 95 percent of the hibernating population" (USFWS website). There were
no caves or other habitats found on property. No gray myotis were observed during the site
assessment.
Creeper:
"The range of the creeper includes both the Atlantic Slope and the Interior Basin. It is found
through the Mississippi and Ohio drainages from Central Texas to Lake Winnipeg, Canada. In the
Atlantic Slope it occurs from the Savannah River in South Carolina to the St. Lawrence River in
Canada" (Johnson 1970). "This species has been taken from silt, sand, gravel, and mixed substrates.
Throughout its range it has been found from headwater streams to large rivers and lakes to a depth
of 4 meters" (Gordon and Layzer 1989) (http://www.ncwildlife.
org/pg07_WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7blal_20.htm). The on site potential for the creeper is marginal
due to the wide range of habitat types it can live in. Creeper was not observed during the site
assessment.
Slippervshell Mussel:
"This species has a widespread distribution that includes the Upper Mississippi River Basin;
Ohio, Cumberland and Tennessee River Subbasins; St. Lawrence River Basin; and Lake Huron,
Lake St. Clair, and Lake Erie drainages in Canada."" This species has been found in a wide variety
of habitats across its range. In North Carolina, the slippershell mussel inhabits riffle areas with
gravel/cobble/boulder substrate. In other locations, the species has been found in small to large
streams and lakes; substrates ranging from silt and sand to cobble; and slow to fast currents. It is
often found in and around waterwillow, Justicia Americana."
(http://www.ncwildlife.org/fs_index_07_conservation.htm) The streams on site did not match the
habitat type. The Slipperyshell Mussel was not observed during the site assessment.
4.3 Protected Flora
• A list of protected plant species for Skyland Quadrant was provided by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Listed species, status, and on-site
potential are summarized in Table 2. The results of this survey indicate that no specimens were
• observed during the site assessment.

i
•
•
•
•
•
•
Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. OS eco008
TABLE 2
PROTECTED FLORA SUbhYL~RY
SKYLAND UADRANT, BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Common Name Scientific Name Status (1) On-Site Potential
Bunched arrowhead Sa ittaria asciculata ST None
Mountain sweet itcher- lant Sarracenia n~bra ss . Jonesii FE/SE None
FT =Federal Threatened, , ST = State Threatened, FE =Federal Endan ered, SE =State Endan ered
Bunched Arrowhead:
The bunched arrowhead is found in seepage areas with very low water flow and no
stagnation, soils aze sandy loams overlain by muck 10-24 inches deep; some shade is beneficial
(http://web.ral.r4.fws.gov/plant/barrow.html). Habitat for the bunched arrowhead was not present on
the property in the seepage area due to stagnation. No bunched arrowhead was observed on the
property.
Mountain Sweet Pitcher Plant:
This species is native to bogs and a few streamsides in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North
Cazolina and South Carolina (USFWS 1990a). Streams on the property were inspected for the
presence of this species. Habitat was not present for the mountain sweet pitcher plant in the streams
on the property. No specimens of the mountain sweet pitcher plant were observed during the site
assessment.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions presented herein are based on field surveys and comparisons of habitat
requirements of listed protected species of flora and fauna for Buncombe County. No federally
protected species were identified on the property.

Pratected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. 05eco008
6.0 REFERENCES AND FIELD GUIDES
Martoff, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles
of the Carolinas and Vir inia. University of North Cazolina Press. Chapel Hill, NC
247pp.
Nelson, John B. 1986. The Natural Communities of South Carolina. South Carolina Wildlife &
Marine Resources Department
Page, L.M. and B.M. Burr. 1991. Freshwater Fishes of North America and Mexico.
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA. 247pp.
Porcher, Richard Dwight and Rayner, Douglas Alan. 2001. A Guide to the Wildflowers of
South Carolina. University of South Carolina Press. SSlpp. Illus,
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and C.R. Bell. 1983. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press. 1183pp.
Schafale, Michael P., and Weakley, Alan S. .1990. Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Cazolina: Third Approximation. North Cazolina Natural
Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, N.C. Dept. of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources.
South Carolina Department of Natural Resources-Heritage Trust Database for Rare,
Threatened, and Endangered Species. Internet. 2004.
US Fish and Wildlife Service. Species Accounts for Threatened and Endangered Species.
Email Transmittal. 2004.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990a. Mountain Sweet Pitcher Plant Recovery Plan.
Atlanta, Georgia. 39 pp.
US Soil Conservation Service. 1972. Soil Survey of Greenville County, South Carolina. US
Department of Agriculture.
Webster, W.D., J.E. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia and
Maryland. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, NC. ZSSpp.
6

i
•
•
•
•
Appendix 7.1
Figures
Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. OSeco008

GRAPHIC SCALE SHEET NO.
~~~~~~~L 2'9 o z~a ~~o AIRPORT ROAD
~~. ~~"~~`~~'~ 1 inch = 500 feet Topographic Map 1
Wal-Mart
Fly //~R1.1~1IL7 1t 11 11PP~ -i~[~ 1i POSt OfSCe 3oa 1716 DRAWN 9Y Ih6
~+ ii 1'; dlN ~, I'~ II T ~~ I;\I ~ \,~ ~ li~l ~ • Greenv~Ile. 5C 296CB OA'E: 27apn1290fi Buncombe County
td ~A`3]I 4..Y S-~ ~~, 44~' 1~ Phone:l~127t~]Oa0
Fax: [phone] 'c PC PROJECT NO ~NR05pcn008 USACE P/N: OF

Source: Buncombe County GIS
GRAPHIC SCALE SHEET N0.
~~~.~'~~~~ ZiD ~ zoo ~'D AIRPORT ROAD
~~. ~`~~~~~' 1 inch= 500 feet Soil Map 3
~ ~•~' Wal-Mart
~1 ///,,,~~~,,,;;; x~ ~•(s g Fosl ornu ao. 77aa Dvtnwn av. ino
,I „ ,~~~~~~~ fl~l. ' `~ ~~~~ Greenville. SC 29608 DATE: 27apri12D06 Buncombe Cour~ry
v.l ~3' 1 ~1 1 S3~ J J s Pnone: Ie6a~ 271.30x0 ^~
FaA: (86x1235-9299 EPC PROJECT NO.. tAR05pcnC08 USACE P/N: OF 3
Complex 2-15% Fannin Loam 8-15% slopes
slopes

Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project Ivo. OSeco008
Appendix 7.2
Representative Photographs
8

Protected Species Ffabitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-~1art
EPC Project 1`; 0. O~eco008
Photo 1: View of tributary located near western property boundary
9
rnoto z: v tew of typical wetland area on the property

Protected Species Habitat Assessment
Airport Road Wal-Mart
EPC Project No. OSeco008
Appendix 7.3
Agency Responses
10

OF W ATF
,~`'"-9Q Michael F. Easley, Governor
~~;~ ~` G
~ +' +~ ~ William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
~ } r North Carolina Department oFEnvironment and Natural Resources
':, '~. Alms W. Klimek, P.E. Director
"`~.,,; Division of Water Quality
July 25, 2006
DWQ Project # 06-0922
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Buncombe County
7002 2410 0006 2900 4025
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
2001 South East 10th Street
Bentonville, AR 72712
Subject Property: Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Unnamed Tributary to French Broad River
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dear Messers:
On June 13, 2006, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application to
impact 1.93 acres of wetlands to construct the proposed Airport Road Retail Shopping
Center. The DWQ has determined that your application was incomplete and/or provided
inaccurate information as discussed below. The DWQ will require additional information
in order to process your application to impact protected wetlands and/or streams on the
subject property. Therefore, unless we receive the additional information requested
below, we wilt have to move toward denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC
2H .0506 and will place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this
additional information. Please provide the following information so that we may
continue to review your project.
Additional Information Requested:
1. Applicant's Name ~~h E. G~a~.~e.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0502 (a) (3), you must provide an application
which states that the name of the corporation, "the state in which it is domesticated,
the name of its principal officers, the name and address of the North Carolina
process agency, and the name of the individual who shall be primarily responsible
for the conduct of the activity for which certification is sought."
One
401 Wetlands Certification Unit Nor[hCarolina
. 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 w!!f!!l7l~~f
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
• Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] /Internet: http //h2o.enr state nc us/ncwetlands
• An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
•

Wal-Mart Real Estate. Business Trust
Pale 2 of 3
July 25, 2006
2. Waste Treatment Facilities
In accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0502 (a) (8), you must provide a description of
the treatment and disposal of all waste generated from this project, including, but
not limited to, domestic and process wastewater, stormwater, etc...
3. Acres of Wetlands to Be Filled
Included in item 22. of your submitted application you indicate that 1.93 acres of
wetlands will be filled as part of this project. In the attached Ecosystem
Enhancement Program mitigation acceptance letter, you have only been approved
for 1.0 acres of mitigation. As during the on-site, pre-application meeting, the
4. Avoidance and Minimization
As a part of all CWA Section 404 / 401 application reviews,
demonstrate efforts to Avoid and Minimize impacts to Waters.
meeting, the resource agencies requested that both the use c
the applicant must
As these necessary items have not been addressed in your application, your application
has been placed on hold until such time that additional information regarding these topics
has been submitted as an addendum to your application. Please respond prior to the
close of business on August 15, 2006 by sending this information to me in writing and to
Cyndi Karoly of the DWQ 401 Central Office. If we do not hear from you by the close of
business on August 15, 2006, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this
project and we will consider the project as withdrawn.
attempt to reduce impacts. Neither of these options, nor alternative sites have
been discussed, have been included in the discussion of the project.

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Page 3 of 3
July 25, 2006
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to
wetlands, waters or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested
within your application are not authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call Ms.
Cyndi Karoly or Mr. John Dorney at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions regarding
or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
r ----~'"
Roger C. Edwards, Regional Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
Surface Water Protection
JRD/khb
cc: Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Post Office Box 3744
Greenville, SC 29608
Cyndi Karoly, DWQ 401 Central Office
USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
David McHenry, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
File Copy
Central Files
Filename: 06-0922.AirportRoadRetailShoppingCenter.Addinfo

~.
-.t f r 1 P ~.~-
~nv~rann~~~.~ rs~
" ~nit~~n ° ~~
~:
-- - ~ ~ ~; ~
August 11, 2006
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attention: Cyndi Karoly
Reference: Request for More Information
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, NC
DWQ Project # 06-0922
Dear Ms. Karoly,
This letter is intended to provide additional information requested by your off ce
in a letter dated July 25, 2006 regarding the project referenced above. Specifically, it
addresses avoidance and minimization efforts related to impacts to Waters of the US as
required by Section 404(b)1 of the Clean Water Act. Different scenarios and
considerations are provided below and give details on why the current location and
configuration of the proposed sports complex is as such.
A~p~plicant's Name
The applicant's name in John E. Clarke, Assistant Vice President of the Wal-Mart
Real Estate Business Trust. '
Waste Treatment Facilities
The project will utilize awetlands-type retention basin and will be designed in
strict accordance with the requirements of Buncombe County and NC DENR. Attached
is a memo from Freeland and Kauffman, Inc. sumn~larizing the Stonn Water Management
Design.
Acres of Wetlands to Be Filled
Total acreage of impact is 1.92 acres. During the on-site, pre-application ii~eeting
with resource agencies on January 19, 2006, a 2:1 mitigation ratio was requested for all
areas with the exceptioof Impact Area "E". Due to the isolated nature of Area "E",
which maintains no surface connection with downstream waters, and existing topography
on the site which suggests that the flow from the e.-Fisting culvert on Airport Road
originally connected to "Stream 1 ", relocation was proposed. During the onsite pre-
application meeting, a l:l ratio for Impact Area "E" was discussed, with the proposed
~:C. ~o~~ 3 r~~' ~ ~~ree;~ville, youth Carolina 29608 ~ [phone] Fax ~864J 235-92aa
~.

mitigation to be the relocation of the flow to the draw located above "Stream 1" with a
Priority 2 stream restoration.
Based on the discussion at the on-site pre application meeting. a conceptual
mitigation plan was created which included 1.41 acres of onsite created wetlands, 0.34
acres of onsite wetland preservation; 1 acre of wetland mitigation from the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, 2.1 acres of onsite upland buffer preservation, and X00 linear feet
of onsite stream relocation and restoration.
Included in this package is a complete onsite mitigation plan for your review.
Avoidance and Minimization
No Development
The "No Development" scenario is not feasible in this area. Airport Road is a
rapidly growing commercial area in close proximity to the Asheville Regional Airport,
the Western Carolina Ag Center, I-26, and a number of `big-box" retailers such as
Lowe's and Target. The area between Hendersonville and Asheville is rapidly growing.
According to recently released estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau, population in the
Asheville metro grew by 1.4 % over the last year, adding 5,46 new residents. Among
the four counties that make up the metro area, Henderson had the highest rate at 1.8 %.
The national average is 0.9 %. These factors contribute to the increasing demand for
retail services.
Utilizing a Different Site with Less Impacts
There were several criteria for the selection of the site: 1) it had to be large
enough to support the proposed project, 2) it needed to serve the area between Asheville
and Hendersonville, 3) it needed to be located in a commercial area with proximity to I-
26 for easy access, and 4) it needed to be available. Only one other property was
available in the immediate vicinity. The property consisted of 12-14 acres, which was
not large enough to support the proposed project. Additionally, the site contained 6-8
houses, which would have had to be demolished in order for the site to be developed.
Included herein is a map of the vicinity with the location of the proposed project and
alternative site. A second map of current Wal-Mart locations is also included.
Reduction of On-Site Impacts
Every effort was made by the applicant to reduce on-site impacts to the maximum
extent possible. The current configuration of the Wal-Mart also lends itself to avoidance
acid minimization as much as is practicable. Alternative site layouts were proposed
during the design phase. Included herein is a copy of the alternative site layout. In the
alternative layout, the use of two retaining walls did allow for an overall reduction of
wetland impacts by a total of 0.37 acres, however. by relocating the stormwater detention
basin and consolidating the stornzwater management system to one basin rather than two
basins, the alternate site layout also impacts 742 linear feet of stream. The proposed site
layout does utilize a one retaining wall for reduction of impact by eliminating all impacts
to stream 1. Additionally, overall impervious surface was reduced from 18.E acres to
17.6 acres, and outlots were reduced from a total of ~.3 acres to 1.99 acres.

Due to the required grading, the retaining wall near the western property
boundary would incur a significant increase in cost when compared to the northern
retaining wall. The overall cost of both retaini ~ of thesnorthern retaining ~alllbyortself
approximately $1.8 million dollars, while the cos
is $260.000.
Taking into account all of the above mentio~eution of verall amper~iouds suarface
avoidance of 742 linear feet of stream impacts, r
and outlot acerage, and substantial reduction of costs associated with the construction of
the western retaining wall was prefered both ecologically and economically.
Existing Design with Mitigation
The proposed project includes 1.41 acres of onsite created wetlands, 0.34 acres of
onsite wetland preservation, 1 acre ,te u land budffer preservation,nand 500 near feet
Enhancement Program, 2.1 acres of onsi p
of onsite stream relocation and restoration.
The onsite stream relocation and wetland creation was originally proposed during
a January 19, 2006 onsite meeting with regulatory official theBulvert on Airport Rd
topography of the site, it is believed that the flow coming from
which flows into "Area E" originally connected to "Streaml" prior to the road widening
project. Thus, we have proposed to relocate the flow and perform a priority 2 stream
restoration project onsite. The onsite wetlands creation is designed tutilnzina in aart
enhance the higher quality wetlands located near the back of the property P
the hydric soils and associated seed bank from the areas to be impacted.
A complete on-site mitigation plan is included for your review.
All in all, the applicant has avoided and minimized impacts to Waters of the US to
the maximum extent practicable. Alternatives were considered thoroughly prior to
submitting the present design and relying on compensatory mitigatdi we an°poceed inla
addresses all your coomm Vesan dquest ons, p ease call me at [phone] pThank you
timely fashion. If y y
for your assistance in this matter.
Respectfully,
Laura Belanger
Envi.~°onmental Pei°»~itting Consultants, Inc.
Cc: Ronnie Smith. USACOE
Mike Ranks, Freeland and Kauffman, Inc.

• - 06 TUE 0232 PM BILL BURGIN REAL ESTATE FAX K0. 828 277 0366
~ MAY-09 20 _ _ _ _ ._- ~ "`
S i ~ f a, O ,.~ :,~_..7 ~~yk..
F=~ .u ~ '~ it ~~SF G
• ~ I ~ M ~ ~ ~tt1.iS i ~
• ~ ~ itt } SXYCAND ~ ~ ~ MOUA11Alf!
~,~
` EVf L
• ~~~~_. ~ IRS I.iil: I r~ 1
~,, ' a `tl
• ; ~ su ala 25 ~ "~s
fCRit
4 tel: f! I ~nr I [q ~
>tIOU~ A I{ `,~ S>sWd 7c ~
• v ae ~o
• t a Yalos s Bunc ~t c~tn ~ ~ c d' qd ~
/t u uu gn
~' 1-~'-' d= ,
60tf
s ~1- s typ
t'1 3
C ~"r ~m"~i ~r J~yl. x r':, s K ~ SCa 4~ Af ? n
~.. ~~~~ n.T K Q QI.
q ~'$.
• , x;,, °r ~ ~ ,pP 4
v ~
g . ,~+ 1
., '~
• ~~ ~ FiDYAI PI~ ~ ~ '`~
~~~_~, _ ~ POOC d P 25
:~ ~' Arden ~f ~ c3
~•
~ , ~~
~ ~ ~ ~~
~: a ~ 4
i ° ' wrA
• ® ~' $
I~ We Id Q ~ ~•
• Fn ~` ~~Tr 9 ~ ~r ,
~ ~~ ~ d KII• ~ db
25 /~ ~
~ ~ ~ I r
I
~ ~ ~~ ~/ I 9
• ~ <~ .~ ti
B ~~Oak Parma ~ ~ '{ ~,
_ _ _ _Ai,
n
2 c ` 71MG41'IY FU s
a'~ ~ dr.
9nnrlck N.. Ip$H~1/ILL ~ ~~ I~tA~ ! BpfyCOMBfi~~ 1 -.
/ AEGkpNA _ '
•
~Y_v,, ' A~RpORT ` # wit ;~81111fb' . 4g$~ ra .{ ~ Q `~' -.- sy,~n ~ by ..nwh 4~ ~ ~~ :..
' ' ~ '~ ~~ :'° }, ~ ~ ,~J "" any.., p . v
rn % ~
t ~+t
• .CAF c~ ~ y s ."M } ~ ~~ ~..~'~ r°'+ :ti
~g,:: ~~,:
• ?XF tt~-r,~ ~ .a Yv~1~y 3 ~~ i ~ 'Q ~. 1 3 ~i :. ~4 .i
i j~~+!t. x~yrY44F~' S ~t vd. f ~ *t. tcl x';, a`~~ ~ ,w~ s# ''d~
., t ~(~7 ri
~. ~~„~ ~ ._y _. _ Fpm ~~ `'i - - ~: _ .
P. 02/02
t'•~$

_. ~
Q, N
N' ~!: J
~~~ ~ ~ ~ j
~ ~, :::
~-~
~ ~ J ~ i ~ -
N I c/
Ip.O Z ~. O ~ W Y ~ >
1~\ `o
• ~ I~~c R I ~ ~ ~ O y I _
,M.. M F .r ~r N m -a
~~, a a
;,, ` `. ~ o ~ o a
• / ~ Y ~ ~ ~ _
~ ~~ ~ . `~
~ ~ '~
r`~ ~ ..... ;f Y r ~ I E
`r~^
`°
n. I I ` t m
3 •-•.
/~ i ~ ~ n
• 3, ~
Y
U m3 =(~,r 3 Nz~ g m
• ~1L^`` ~ ~ - > C > O f0 U
• W ~ d ` I• L CC r~ ip GpoI O - y ~ O
m ~ 4I ~ ` d t `I N ~ _~ N~- ~ '~
1
Q I ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ N l0 ~ m
ffp66 U
~ I ~ ca ~ (/
~ ~ C I I . ~ \ ;~; S V1 ~N I ~ N ~ '~~ o
• O ~ _ ~p '.~ I~ y of i~ ~ y ~ N = y ~= O it
• z ~- -. Y .~ ~f+ N3 ~a' c oho', I I C' p, ,, 1G~- y
p ~ pN; O•` E U
N m I `m 2 ~` I F ._ ~ 0 2' ~
m~ y U I Q ~ O
~ ~ ~ > ~ 3!~ ZI ~ ~:~ oN r
~~ ~. i0 ~Z O ~~ ti; I ~ 7
! S" N
I. ~' ~ U ~_ t0 ~', O f6' N
• ~ ~ ~iruSN'L!' ~ T i W
I •~ -~i Q~ Q ~ a Z r~ •C
'G ~ U ~ - _ ~ v °'
~~~ I \ L y .Q
- i O o'' ;' _ y yN i'' ~ ~ ~d t E
~ ~-t~ 3~ c ~ n ~ ~~ ~ ~ c
• ~ C m ~
U ~;~ ° ~ U
cn y ~~. _~
1.' C' to / y ~ \ r
• O N ~-= U ~ \ i 3
Z c C7
U Q. ~ d Q ~ m
N ~~ ~ L ~ m
• C ~..0 ~ cd3 Q _
i ds ti~ ~ v _v~
• ~ ( ~ "`
\ a~
J ~ ~ m G~
~ U
,. - _
r ~ N r ~
R ~~
N J' p ~
1 V ~
~ m ~ U ~ Z ~~
~ O `o v
O a Y ~_ s Q' U ~
C E ~ ~m
• l0 y ~ .~ O ~ g V- ~
i y w C /r ?~ Ll. m E m
U O ( ~ W `°~~ N r ~'
o~ 00 ~ ~ mmY~
• L ~<
~~ m • ~ / 9
_ ~ i T
• ~ C N ~ CxL N` 1~i
U ~ ~ ~~
• -~.,

• ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
-,f`4 ~7--~-V~
Z -._ ^ .--_._---- ----------- --
• I b ~ _
:!1 ~ ~ ! i .
~-
~~~ ~:)
- ~~ ~ , 7
i ~ j!/ // Yi~1
.~ ::; , i J
/ l/
(/~} h'
\ 1 ~ ~ i~J J
j ;; „` ~ ~~) I;
m ~ I ,
~ _ ~ ~ o v ~,~ ,~ - -tee
n ~~ ro n ~ r'7_ _ • ~ 1I7
• " ~ W D !
e ~ ~ oC
~; ~
Z rn ~ ~ ~ I
• ~ i. ~ ,.
•J _
C;- ~
~ C
~$, `~^, ~,~ ~ J I 0
.. ~ ~
_~ ~ Imo/ ~ "L,
Z \\ _ __ v,~ Y ~ __
~~ ~ \\~ `.J~~ (~^ ~~:~'1('` ~ min--' ""~^ LJ/~ ~ .i
J
~ ~ ~ ~`~~~ ~~ '~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o c~ ~
~ o~ m C7 N ~ ~~ I
~ > Z I ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ O
o
~ _ ~ m _ ~ \
\ \
--i ^ / I/7~~ ~ \
~~ ~ ~ ~
~> ~ i 9 iN„> N n
• 0 ~ m on I n~~ 'a I
om Imm+i ;n
.T ~ o n .n 'n m ~

Z - - ___ -
• ~ ~' ~ ~~
~ y ~ =a ~~ ~ ~ ~~;
V1 Z I ~ III'
y
¢g ~ ; i
N V n x + /1 ~~/,s ~/~ ~
O ~ O~ i Ja~' `y i
m c g ~ _Z ~ ~ ~ .~ 1 ~ ~ ~'
~ y rn -., g
• ~ - 0 7 / ~ .ate`` ~a ~,~~
,.
~ ~'!9a ~: ~'I~ ~~ :~ ~
V ~~ / ~
• ' ` ~ ~
~~ ~ \ "~ n '~ ; ; ~ ~~
~ =>~
Z '--~ '~>
cn ?~ ~ `'~ jam//`~~
` ` (1
~~
;~)
• m ~ ~ ~ ~
w : j
• z
~ N ~ ~ ~
~ D ~ ~ \ ~ \,, ` I ~,
~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~~ ~ /~ ~
y i ~+
,~ 0 'B ~, ,~ \ ~~.3 j
,I'
~- ~ ~'
~ ~ ~ `~ a~ ~'~ o
•B ~ ~
~ ~
n ~
~ 2 r-r ~ \\
• N ~ ~ \

pax y, 2006
~ifW+q~d4+~ ~~'-~`~'~^'~"~ ~%4'f'"j't'`~IIG'H~J'- ~4+G.
f~,,: M , pE
fie: W,~M.~tSx~ ~~~
NCZ~O (A;~,Q~wll, ~~~ Gam, N~l~~
Tic kGwe-tie~ene~.ce~ f.~ayuX ~ ~' Qe'^,~`ed ~ ..r.:~r•NS.,;~.e waXQw~•d ~. (-r. wti. e~o~X za ~+-;,r~:.n.:~e
X~te ;.n•~kt.~i ~w7~ avr.~ ~,ve ~ ~ ;.r. ccnXt•.:.~• Nn,ewt. 6Ue e~~~1e X~e ca4x oG ~ ~
,,e,~.tiw;,~~ ~wr.E~i ~~ ~e ~.y,f "°~;"r'rxe~ 260, 000. T~ :~. a ~~~ ~.e~"`'t~'°~. (N°'"' zee wte
y.~..r., .wP~ ~ eve ~u( $1.8 M•:.P~:.Qw ,w~ ~ ~ .w~.. Tie ~ ~ u.
"~` ~ ~~X -,.:Qe °~ ~ devee°f"~``e"•~' z?~. f~af~°~^"`& k ti~3 tivr~. Tie
~"^"~""'~ ~".~ M~~ ~ zee ~ Q;,~..e ~ur~. wed Zcwwut X~ ~ :~ wr• e~ ~
eP,;,n~.wXe wr• ~,.y'~'~^'"^<•xe.~ $yS0,000 Worot~ o~ ~.eXt~~ wu.Pl'.

~i~E~LAND and KAUI=FMaN, INC.
ENGINEERS • L.hNDSCAPE ARCNI?>_Cf5
August 9, 200fi
70: Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
From: Michael Ranks, PE
Re: Wa/-Matt Store #1179
NC 180 ~Alrport RoadJ, Buncombe County, North Carolina
Storm Water Management Design Summary
AfRI fate
Freeland-Kauffman
and Fradeen, Inc.
BcrrGanville, Arkanga6
The above-referenced project will utilize awetlands-type retention basin, which wilt include
a permanent pool, forebay (initial stilling basin), and a 10 foot wide shallow-vegetated shelf
to promote wetlands'vegetation, This storm water management facility will be designed in
strict accordance with the requirements of Buncombe County and North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), in regards to both flood
control and storm water quality. The pond's permanent pool depth will be based on an
appropriate surface area to drainage area ratio. A vegetated filter strip will be installed
between the pond's outfall and the adjacent drainage feature.
Freeland and Kauffman is currently preparing the storm water management design for this
project, and we will begin appropriate permitting processes as soon as the design is
complete.
Please contact us should you require additional information. Thank you.
209 Wegt Stone Avenuc • vrcenvllie, South Caroftna 29609 • Tclcphone 864-233-rs497. Fax [phone]

7
ONSITE MITIGATION PLAN
AIRPORT ROAD RETAIL CENTER
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EPC PROJECT NO. MR05008
USAGE P/N: SAW-2006-32342-311
PREPARED FOR:
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
2001 Southeast 10`h Street
Bentonville, AR 72712
PREPARED BY:
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING CONSULTANTS
125 WEST STONE AVENUE
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29608
[phone]
AUGUST 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. 1
Impact Overview. 1
Mitigation Overview.. 1
Z BASELINE INFORMATION OF PROJECT SITE. 1
3 UNIT 1 : Stream Relocation/Establishment Area. 2
4 UNIT 2 : Priority 2 Stream Enhancement Area. 3
5 UNIT 3 : Wetland Creation Areas. 7
6 MITIGATION WORK PLAN. 8
7 Monitoring and Success Criteria.. 8
APPENDIX 1: Overview Figures and Pictures of Project Site. 10
APPENDIX Z: Level 2 Assessment of Existing Stream Channel. 11
APPENDIX 3: Reference Reach. 12
APPENDIX 4: Restoration Figures. 13
2

1. MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Impact Overview
• This plan is being submitted by the Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust to mitigate for
proposed impacts associated with the construction of the Airport Road Retail Center.
The impacts that are being compensated for include 1.6 acres of wetlands and 504 linear
feet (0.321 acres) of stream/linear wetland.
Stream Mitigation Overview
To compensate for the proposed stream impacts, this mitigation plan encompasses
a combination of stream relocation/establishment and priority 2 stream
enhancement activities. A total of 570 linear feet of stream will be improved by
the proposed activities.
• All activities are proposed to take place onsite.
• The overall goals and purpose of the project are to reconnect and enhance
previously disturbed onsite waters.
^ Stream Relocation/Establishment Area (Unit 1 ~ The linear system being
impacted enters the property through an existing pipe, the proposed
activities would extend the pipe and redirect the waters into an existing
ephemeral channel. Approximately, 160 linear feet of ephemeral channel
will be enhanced to accommodate the new flow.
Prioritv 2 Stream Enhancement Area (Unit 2): As shown in the mitigation
overview figures in Appendix 1, the Stream Relocation/Enhancement
Reach flows into an existing intermittent/perennial system. Presumably
due to previous site activities and development of the watershed, the stream
has downcut and is no longer associated with a floodplain. The proposed
priority 2 activities will enhance approximately 410 linear feet of stream
channel.
Wetland Mitigation Overview
To compensate for the proposed wetlands impacts, the applicant proposes a
combination of onsite wetland creation activities as well as utilizing the EEP
program.
^ Wetland Creation Areas (UNIT 3): Two wetland creation areas are
proposed to offset the proposed impacts. As shown on figures in
Appendix 1, a total of 1.45 acres of wetlands are proposed to be created.
2. BASELINE INFORMATION OF PROJECT SITE
Eco-Region -The project is located in the French Broad River Basin (USGS Hydrologic
Unit: 06010105). The project area falls within the Blue Ridge EcoRegion. The Blue

r
i
Ridge extends from southern Pennsylvania to northern Georgia, varying from narrow
ridges to hilly plateaus to more massive mountainous areas with high peaks. The mostly
forested slopes, high-gradient, cool, clear streams, and rugged terrain occur on a mix of
igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary geology. Annual precipitation of over 80 inches
can occur on the well-exposed high peaks of the Great Smoky Mountains that reach over
6000 feet above mean sea level. The southern Blue Ridge is one of the richest centers of
biodiversity in the eastern U.S. It is one of the most floristically diverse ecoregions, and
includes Appalachian oak forests, northern hardwoods, and Southeastern spruce-fir
forests. Shrub, grass, and heath balds, hemlock, cove hardwoods, and oak-pine
communities are also significant.
Location- The Airport Road Property consists of approximately 37.287+/- acres and is
located on the west side of Airport Road north of the intersection with I-26 in Buncombe
County, North Carolina. The property is bounded by a mobile home park to the north,
commercial and residential properties to the west, commercial properties to the south, and
Airport Road to the east. A tributary of the French Broad River flows west along a
portion of the northern property boundary. Two small wetlands are adjacent to this
tributary. A linear wetland runs from Airport Road toward the center of the property,
terminating before creating a clear connection with either the tributary or its adjacent
wetlands. To the south and near the center of the property is a larger wetland (1.658
acres) which runs northwest to the property boundary where is connects to the first
tributary. A second u/n tributary of the French Broad River occurs in the southwest
corner of the property and has an associated wetland. The USGS HUC unit is 06010105.
A site location map is provided in the Appendix 1.
The majority of the site was previously harvested for timber. The site is significantly
disturbed with remnant logging debris and rutted out access roads. A protected species
habitat assessment was conducted to determine if habitat for protected species was
present on the property. No federally protected species were identified on the property.
Quantify Wetland Resources - A jurisdictional wetland delineation was conducted on
the property identifying wetlands and waterways. Wetlands, streams and isolated
wetlands comprise 2.59 acres of the property. The first u/n tributary originates on
property and runs east-west along the northern property boundary. The second u/n
tributary run northeast near the western property boundary and includes an associated
wetland. Two small wetland areas are located adjacent and south of the first tributary. A
linear wetland runs east-west from Airport Road towards the center of the property. This
wetland receives runoff from stormwater off Airport Road. A large wetland is located in
the center of the property and runs northwest to the northern portion of the western
property boundary.
i Existing Hydrology- Hydrologic characteristics on the property are based on local
• rainfall and overflow of the unnamed tributaries of the French Broad River located near
the northern boundary of the property. Stormwater run off from Airport Road enters the
site from a culvert near the center of the eastern property boundary.
• 2

i
•
•
•
•
Existing Vegetation- The majority of the property is considered disturbed by past land
use practices. Existing vegetation consisted primarily of early successional species.
• Large areas of Smilax sp. and Juncus effuses were present as well as Virginia pine (Pinars
• virginiana}, sawtooth blackberry (Rubus argutus), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflara),
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), hazel alder (Alnus serrulata) and rhododendron.
r
Existing Soils- The dominant soils within the project area are Tate-Urban Land Complex
and Fannin Loam. Prior site disturbance and soil compaction have resulted in gleyed or
low-chroma color hydric soils with a hue of SY 5/2 and SY 5/1. A USDA soils map is
included in Appendix 1.
Slopes on the property ranged from nearly level to 12%. Soils identified on the property
included the following:
Soil Series and Characteristics Identified in the Soil Survey `for the
Ai ort Road Pro
Series Symbol Slope Surface Hydric
Color Soil?
Tate 121U 1-15% slope Nearly No
sil cla loam black
Fannin 351C 8-15% slope Dark No
silt loam brown
3. UNIT 1: Stream Relocation/Establishment Area
As shown in pictures included in Appendix 2, the existing ephemeral channel is to
be modified and stabilized to handle the flows redirected into the drainage by the
proposed pipe. We propose to utilize the same dimension pattern and profile
constraints to be utilized in the adjacent, downstream "Priority 2 Stream
Enhancement Area". The derivation of the proposed channel parameters is
described below in UNIT 2.
• Total stream channel relocated and enhanced: approximately 160 linear feet.
• The same bank protection and replanting proposed for the "Priority 2 Stream
Enhancement Area" will be applied to this reach.
4. UNIT 2: Priority 2 Stream Enhancement Area
LEVEL II STREAM ASSESSMENT
Data collected during the Level II stream survey included, but not limited to: thalweg,
edge of water, water surface, bankfull, top of low bank, width (channel, bankfull), depth
(mean, bankfull, max) and slope. All elevations were measured using a surveyor's rod
and level. Data collected during the analysis is presented in Appendix 2.

• DIMENSION
Stream dimension is measured by the cross section data. Key features along the cross
section are identified including top of bank, breaks in slope along the cross section,
bankfull, edge of water and the thalweg.
These measurements are used to determine and calculate the following stream
dimensions and ratios; bankfull cross sectional area, bankfull width, mean and max
bankfull depth, width/depth ratio, width of flood prone area, entrenchment ratio, and
bank height ratio. The width of flood prone area is the width measurement at an
elevation twice the maximum bankfull depth. The entrenchment ratio is the width of
the flood prone area divided by the bankfull width. The bank height ratio is the height
of the low bank divided by the maximum bankfull depth. These measurements help
determine the degree of vertical containment of the stream channel. Data Summary
sheets for the impaired reach are included in Appendix 2.
• PROFILE
• The stream channel profile is a description of the gradient and bed facets (riffles,
runs, pools and glides) and the spacing of these facets along the length of the stream.
Profile data is gathered by performing a longitudinal profile of the stream by
surveying the thalweg, edge of water, bankfull and top of low bank (when present) at
• least a distance of twenty bankfull widths. Survey data was collected at the top of
each facet. A total of 410 linear feet of the unnamed tributary of the French Broad
River were assessed.

These measurements are used to determine and calculate the following stream
dimensions and ratios; average water surface slope, valley slope, facet slopes, pool to
pool spacing and pool length.
CHANNEL MATERIALS
The channel materials data was collected using the Wolman pebble count methods.
Channel Material Data Summary sheets are included in Appendix 2.
• DATA ANALYSIS
Once the field data was collected it was entered RiverMorph and formulas were
established to calculate the morphological parameters associated with dimension,
profile and channel materials. Estimates of bankfull discharge were determined based
on hydraulic geometry, channel roughness and slope using Manning's equation.
Level II Assessment Summary of Unnamed Tributary of French Broad River
Parameter Pro'ect Reach
Ros en Stream T e Fob
Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 0.0697
Bankfull Width ft. 5.62
Mean Bankfull De th ft. 0.4
4

i
i
r
Width/De th Ratio 14.05
Bankfull Area (s . ft. 2.26
Entrenchment Ratio 1.39
Water Surface Sloe % 0.027
Sinuosi K A rox.1.2
D50 mm 5.89
Bankfull Dischar e cfs 7.9
** A more comprehensive list of stream variables is included in the reach comparison
sheets in Appendix 2.
REFERENCE REACH
As shown in figures included in Appendix 3, the chosen reference reach is located on
Little Grove Creek, approximately 51 miles from the project site. This particular
reference was selected because:
^ The valley type, slope and soils are similar to the project area.
^ Many years ago, this reach abandoned it's floodplain, widened and has since
established a bankfull bench and stable form.
^ The reach has been and will continued to be measured annually to monitor
stability.
BASELINE INFORMATION for Reference Reach
^ ECOREGION
"Tributary K Reference Reach" is located on Little Grove Creek in the Grove
Creek watershed of the Saluda River Basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit: 3,050,109).
The reference area falls within the Southern Lower Piedmont EcoRegion. A site
location map and infrared photo is provided in Appendix 3.
^ SOILS
The dominant soils within the project area are Cartecay sandy loam and Toccoa
sandy loam associations. A USDA soils map is included in Appendix 3.
VEGETATION
The forest along Little Grove Creek has been undisturbed for at least 2 decades.
The forests maintain a diverse assemblage of tree. Some tree species found in the
project area include white oak (Quercus alba), red oak (Quercus rubra), black
oak (Qzrercus veluntina), chestnut oak (Qzrercus prinus), maple (Ater rubrum),
poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), hemlock (Tsuga sp.), sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua).
• LEVEL II STREAM ASSESSMENT of Reference Reach
Similar to the project reach a Level II Assessment was performed, data collected
during the survey is summarized in Appendix 3.
5

Level II Assessment'. Summary of reference reach K an Little Grove Creek
Parameter Pro'ect Reach
Ros en Stream T e B4c - C4
Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 2.073
Bankfull Width ft. 17.9
Mean Bankfull De th ft.) 1.74
Width/De th Ratio 10.31
Bankfull Areas . ft. 31.3
Entrenchment Ratio 3.62
Water Surface Sloe % 0.005
Sinuosi K A rox.1.6
D50 mm 1.75
Bankfull Dischar e cfs 154
** A more comprehensive list of stream variables is included in Appendix 3.
Data generated from the reference reach was utilized to create dimensionless ratios,
which were utilized a parameters for the stream restoration design.
RESTORATION PLAN
• Restoration figures including proposed channel dimension modifications, bank detail
drawings and typical structure plans are included in Appendix 4.
• The streams current instability stems from the lack of a functioning flood plain. To
stabilize the stream the stream's dimension will be adjusted.
o Dimension Adjustments
• The existing channel has downcut and is currently widening to create a
new flooplain. The proposed activities would speed up the natural
progression by modifying the existing banks to establish a functioning
bankfull bench and narrowing the existing channel to increase
competency.
• Across section of the proposed channel is included in Appendix 4.
Summaries of the proposed channel dimensions are included in
Appendix 4.
• As shown in the Typical bank stabilization diagram included in
Appendix 4, Bio-D70 matting will be utilized to stabilize the banks
and the banks will be vegetated with a combination of herbs and
woody vegetation. A list of vegetation proposed to be planted can be
found in Appendix 4.
• In-stream structures (cross vanes) will be utilized to prevent down
cutting. They will be placed at the top of the "Stream
Relocation/Enhancement Reach, the top of the "Priority 2 Stream
Enhancement Reach" and a the bottom of the "Priority 2 Stream
Enhancement Reach".
6

i
•
•
•
All of the structures are proposed to be made of rocks, wood or a
combination rock and wood.
Proposed Channel Parameters
Parameter Pro'ect Reach
Ros en Stream T e Bob - E4b
Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 0.0697
Bankfull Width ft. 4.4
Mean Bankfull De th ft. 0.51
Width/De th Ratio 8.58
Bankfull Areas . ft. 2.24
Entrenchment Ratio 3.62
Water Surface Sloe %) 0.023
Sinuosi K A rox.1.3
Bankfull Dischar e cfs 7.84
** A more comprehensive list of stream variables is included in Appendix 4
5. UNIT 3: Wetland Creation Areas
As shown on figures in Appendix 1, the proposed creation areas are downhill from the
wetland areas proposed to be impacted and adjacent to an existing wetland. The success
of the wetland creation areas relies on providing appropriate hydrology, soils, and
vegetation.
Planned Hydrology- Due to the existing topography and stream channels that
cross the area, this portion of the property is inherently wet. Prior to previous
disturbance the existing wetlands were presumably much larger. The hydrology
provided to this area should be increased due to the proposed storm water
management and grade modifications. The hydrology will be further assisited by
minor grading that will result in lowered topography.
Planned Soils- The hydric soils (top 12" to 18") of the areas to be impacted will
be removed and stockpiled for use in the wetland creation areas. The wetland
creation areas will be initially excavated 12" to 18" below proposed grade, and
then backfilled with the stockpiled hydric soils. Preserving the naturally occurring
hydric soils containing the existing seed bank should promotes the establishment
of native hydrophytes and aid in containing necessary hydrology.
Planned Vegetation - It is assumed that the seed bank present within the
transplanted hydric soils will supply the needed herbs. Woody trees and shrubs
will be planted 8 ft. on center. At least 915 trees, shrubs and/or saplings will be
planted in the created forested wetland area. Planting schedules for each species
and plant category is dependent on dormancy period and expected germination
times. It is expected that most of the planting will occur during late fall or early
spring periods. Vegetation characteristics for each area will be designed to allow
7

• the highest species diversity and greatest vegetation survival rates. Selected
i
i
i
on
c compos
t
species will be dependent on availability of transplants. The florist
of the existing wetland areas was analyzed to aid in creating the list of species to
• be planted. All selected species will be native to North Carolina and will be
• obtained from local nurseries if possible. A vegetation list of species that may be
utilized is included in Appendix 4.

•
6. Mitigation Work Plan.
• All work will be done utilizing current Best Management Practices.

• All disturbed riparian areas will be replanted 8 to 12 ft on center with bare root or
• containerized woody trees and shrubs. (Species List in Appendix 4).
Adaptive Management Clause:
• During construction minor changes to the proposed restoration may be made if
• more logical or affective means to achieve the projected goals becomes apparent.
Construction Schedule
• All proposed restoration activities will begin once the final grades have been
• acquired for the proposed project and adjacent slopes have been stabilized. The
restoration activities will be complete prior to the completion of the construction
• of the proposed project.

• 7. Monitoring and Success Criteria
• 6 monitoring reports over 5 years (a 6-month and 5 annual) will be submitted to
• the USACE for review.

• • Monitoring reports will include:
o Photographs taken from established photo locations that will depict all of
• the restoration sites.
0 4 Permanent cross sections will be established along the enhanced
• tributaries. Cross sections will be overlaid with previous reports to
• determine if the streams dimension is changing.
l
d
d
wet
an
o Survival rates of planted woody vegetation in both riparian an
areas will be analyzed utilizing a stem count.
o Hydrology success will be monitored utilizing peizometers.
• Success Criteria:
o Successful stream restoration will be characterized by creating stable
• streams, which are not aggrading or degrading. Cross section data will be
utilized to demonstrate the stability of the established tributaries.
• o Vegetation success on both stream buffer areas and within the created
wetland areas, will be qualified by 75% survival.
• o Hydrology success within the created wetland areas will be achieved by
having soils saturation within 14 inches of the surface for 3 consecutive
•

• 8

weeks during the growing season. Hydrology will be regularly monitored
for level of saturation, using established piezometers.
• Contingency Plan:
If changes to the streams dimension, pattern or profile are deemed to be negative,
leading toward instability, changes to the stream may be made.
o Changes may include:
• Placement of in-stream structures to stabilize the stream.
• Modifying the streams dimension to establish a more appropriate
stream dimension.
• Stabilizing the stream banks with additional coir matting and
vegetation.
If the created wetland fails to meet hydrologic standards; the elevations within the
created wetland may be adjusted or adjustments may be made to redirect surface
flows through the created wetland areas. If the wetlands fail to meet vegetation
success the areas will be replanted with different species or hardier stock.
Party Responsible for Mitigation Activities: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust.
Party Responsible for Monitoring: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust.
9

APPENDIX l: Overview Figures and Pictures of Project Site
10

~ ~
~~~~
a7AtTC~T Ti ~T ~ YTTT1 T1~7
GRAPHIC SCALE
2~ o z~
1 inch = 500 feet
ice Box 3744 DROWN BY: Imh
LOCATION MAP
Airport Road Retail Center
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Ri ~nrnmhn f ni ~nfii N(`
SHEET NO.
Figure 1
of
Appendix 1
Property Boundary REVISIONS

~~.~.I
GRAPHIC SCALE
zi o 2io 5~0
1 inch = 500 feet
Post Office Box 3744 DRAWN BV:
AERIAL PHOTO
Airport Road Retail Center
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Rnncnmha ('.nnntu N(:
SHEET NO.
Figure 2
of
Appendix 1
Property boundary REVISIONS

i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Source: Buncombe County
GI S

z5a GRAPHIC S~cALE 5~
i i i i
1 inch = 500 feet
so.
SOILS MAP
Airport Road Retail Center
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
SHEET NO.
Figrure 3
of
Appendix 1
Land Complex Fannin Loam 8-15~
2-15~ slopes slopes

Q
...
C
a~
c~
W ..+
a~
O ca;
~ ~
U :~
O ~
.--~
~ ~
k
~ O
~ t1.
~ a
d
~ ~ ~
N ~ 4N
v
.~ ~ ~
aW~
a
4'~'
~~
a~
~~
-~ 3 ~
~- ~ o
~ Q N
N
'~
ftS
~ ~ ~
~? ~p ~
~ ~
U c° o
':3
C
3 ~- ~,
~~
~ N ~G
F. ~
L ]_n ~
~ a' X
Z
N _ 'O
LLI 7 O ~ LL
_ ~ a C
to Q
~ ='
> ~ w z
O ~ ~, ,;
~ ~~ W c
O ~ ~ 'o
;~, ~ U
~ o m ~
~ ~ ~
~ o ~ ~
a m
°? Q
.N
c
O
u
c
U
Z
O
~~
$~ ~
s ~€
v
W ~ ~
J
Q `
d ~ u
~$ m ~
Z 0
U 8 ~ a b
= ii o 0
a ~ o
Q~ - ~~€
~ ;~
c~ m "
m~~
s m~`
~_-~
o~m~
at~~~
,~ U
~~~
wz~;
r--i
O ;.% ~"~
~-LI 6G~ ~"'1
~ °" FZ
w O
r~

• ~ ~ X
• Z
~ yil ~~ ~ w ~ o ~
• w ii a ~
• ~ Q
.. _ _ __
~ DD
~ D
DDD ~
~ D °'
D D `~ Q ~ ~
• C
~DDD'D\l_. o ~~r
~ DDDDD
~ ~ ~
~~QDD` ~ ~ ~~o
• A D D D`D D' ~ °a ~ m
~ DDDDDDDD~~~ ;I ~ Q
~ D D D D D D D ' a ~
D~DpDD ~~
~ DDDDDD ~ 00
,-, -
• DDDDDp ~ •' ~,~ ~,
.~ '^' U
~ DDD~DD ~ 3~ z
~ pDpDDD I ~ ~ ~ o
.~ > o
~ DDD.DD:DD~ ~~ri >~
_. , , ~ ~
~ DDDDDDD .
~ DDDDDDD ~
~ D D D D N
~ DDDDDDD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DDDDDDD. ~ ~ ~~~
^~ m° 0 7
~ DDDDDDD ~ ~ ~~ ~~
0
W c
. J F
~ DDDDDDD ~ ~'~ U
-b v o m
• DDDDDDD ~ ~ ~ `~ ~p ~ ~<<
~ ~ - ~~ o o
D D D .. a~ oo =
~ DDDDDDDD U`M°o ~° ~~~~
~ ...,DDDDDDDD ~ s~-~
~ D D D D s a v~:
D D D D ~~~~
~ D D D D a~a`
~ D'DDDDDpD .~ ~ U
~ ~ ~
~ ;pDDDDDDDD a ~ W ~E~--~
~ DDDDDDDDD ~ ~ a" ~~~
D D D D ~ ~ ~, ~ ,_ Q
~ DDDDDDDDD ~ ' ~~` ~ 0~~
• DDDDDDDDDD ~ ~~ ° ~w~
. _ U N O Z a'' O
r ~

•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
CC
C
W ..+
a~
o
~~
o '~
a~
R:
~o
a
cC
cG Q
~ ~
~ ~ ~
N ~ N
~ ~ ~+,
.O ~ ~
~, ~ O
~' W ~t
~a~~
~,
`~ ::

D
'D
D
~D
1
~_
O
3a
o U
~~
0 0
O M
cn
~~ ~
~ ~ ~~
a .> ...,
aQ
~.,~
~""~,~
~~ ~., ~,
<,
`~e
~$~-
~~
i
.'_~~~;
j
i
~~

j
~~
Z
~r
-
u.l
E-w~ e
~,
g
'SW_! `~

~ Q ,Q
o
r.,_ ~, ~ ~
*,
~
~ ,
~

r ,o F
~r
'e~
~'`
,P
~~
~~
Z ~ _X
N ~
W 3 O ~ LL
_ ~ Q C
cA Q
cv
N ~
~ ~ T
c ~~,~
~. 'm 'L o
c~ ~ ~ ~
~~~~
~~~
E `°
m a~~
~ Q
0
u
c
u
~_
W
8 ~
J ~
Q
,N ~ u
~ C ; ~ n
U ~ ~ a a
_ ~i o o LL
a ~_ o
° ~s
~ ~~
''^^
V U~~
mvl "n
~ 8m~~
o~~_
a°c~au
_`
w ~ H
Z ~
E-y
~ ~
0. Z
z o
w

Picture #3: Additional View of
existing intermittent channel that
will be modified.

Picture #4: View of exiting stream
to be enhanced via priority 2
restoration techniques.
Picture #6: View of lower end of
proposed restoraion reach.
Picture #5: Additional View of
proposed priority 2 restoration
area.

APPENDIX 2: Leve12 Assessment of Existing Stream Channel
11

RIVERMORPH REACH SUMMARY
River Name: Unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
Stream Type Valley Type D50(mm) Val Slope BKF Q(cfs) DA(sq mi)
F 4b VIII 5.89 0.031 7.9 0.0697
Dimension Summary
Variable
Floodprone Width (ft)
Riffle Area (Sq ft)
Max Riffle Depth (ft)
Mean Riffle Depth (ft)
Riffle Width (ft)
Pool Area (Sq ft)
Max Pool Depth (ft)
Mean Pool Depth (ft)
Pool Width (ft)
Pattern Summary
Variable
Sinuosity
Profile Summary
Data Based on the following:
Variable
S riffle (ft/ft)
S pool (ft/ft}
S run (ft/ft)
S glide (ft/ft)
P-P(ft)
P length (ft)
Dmax riffle (ft)
Dmax pool (ft)
Dmax run (ft)
Dmax glide (ft)
Low Bank Ht (ft)
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft)
Hydraulic Summary
Variable
Discharge (cfs)
Velocity (fps)
Hyd Radius (ft)
Bkf Shear (Ib/ sq ft)
Min Avg Max
7.8 7.8 7.8
2.26 2.26 2.26
0.59 0.59 0.59
0.4 0.4 0.4
5.62 5.62 5.62
3.97 3.97 3.97
1.27 1.27 1.27
3.58 3.58 3.58
Min Avg
1.2
Max
Min Avg Max
0.02719 0.03611 0.04512
0.00386 0.00882 0.01345
0.00748 0.10578 0.37329
0.0092 0.01265 0.02074
19.22 30.64 35.75
5.88 11.67 16.26
0 0.59 0
1.27 1.27 1.27
0 0 0
0 0 0
1.59 4.41 6.1
0.027
Min Avg Max
7.9
4
0.38 0.38 0.38
0.72 0.72 0.72
Figure 1
of
Appendix 2

_ ~ Y
v ~ m m a a a
• -
N
N X
~ O ~
a
Ll. d
Q
L
y-+
~~~//
LL
Q~
0
y-+
V
N~
I.L
~-+
~_
X
W
O
N
0
a
=v
.~
c
0
J
~_c
G
fC
N
~..
rn
c
0
~a
m
U
C
f6

(~) uoi~ena13

N
M X
0
N
7 O ~
°_' a
ii a
Q
K~
N
N
C ',,~
~O w
a ,.y
U R.,
7
f0

Y J ~
~~
T 'I
N N '"
o x
U C]
O ~
}, C
3
}~ Y
(~ C
~+' f0
m
. ~
~_
~_o
~n
w
x
A
N 3
C
O
a
c
O
C~

O
(.}
c
f~
~_
0
N
.`
O
2
n

~~}~ U01~2n2~~

N
~ X_
~ ~ ~
7 O ~
°_' a
ii a
Q

N „
c ,,.,
~o x
a .,;
a~ ~
U
(0
J
N
(0
MO
W ~
II
Q V1 W
}, O x
f1't ~ =~
~~ ''O
' ^ C
vJ 7
O Y
C
n C0
O ~
1..~ •
I
W
x
(A `~•
C
O
a
c
3
O

U
_~
~_
~--~
O
N
L
O
2
~}}~ UOI~~'Aa~~

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: Unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
sample Name: Riffle
Survey Date: 08/08/06
Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM
----------
-------------------
0 - 0.062 --------------
6 ----------
6.00 -----------------
6.00
0.062 - 0.125 6 6.00 12.00
0.125 - 0.25 12 12.00 24.00
0.25 - 0.50 12 12.00 36.00
0.50 - 1.0 14 14.00 50.00
1.0 - 2.0 10 10.00 60.00
2.0 - 4.0 6 6.00 66.00
4.0 - 5.7 8 8.00 74.00
5.7 - 8.0 0 0.00 74.00
8.0 - 11.3 8 8.00 82.00
11.3 - 16.0 2 2.00 84.00
16.0 - 22.6 0 0.00 84.00
22.6 - 32.0 0 0.00 84.00
32 - 45 10 10.00 94.00
45 - 64 6 6.00 100.00
64 - 90 0 0.00 100.00
90 - 128 0 0.00 100.00
128 - 180 0 0.00 100.00
180 - 256 0 0.00 100.00
256 - 362 0 0.00 100.00
362 - 512 0 0.00 100.00
512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00
1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00
Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00
D16 (mm) 0.17
D35 (mm) 0.48
D50 (mm) 1

D95 (mm) 48.17
D100 (mm) 64
/
y (/)

0
Sand
(/) 54
Gravel (%) 40
Cobble (%) 0
Boulder (%) 0
Bedrock (%) 0
Total Particles = 100.
Figure 5
of
Appendix 2

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
Sample Name: Reach
Survey Date: 08/08/06
Size (mm) TOT #
--- ITEM %
---------- CUM
--------------
-------------------
0 - 0.062 -----------
3 2.97 2.97
0.062 - 0.125 3 2.97 5.94
0.125 - 0.25 12 11.88 17.82
0.25 - 0.50 11 10.89 28.71
0.50 - 1.0 5 4.95 33.66
1.0 - 2.0 5 4.95 38.61
2.0 - 4.0 5 4.95 43.56
4.0 - 5.7 10 9.90 53.47
5.7 - 8.0 6 5.94 59.41
8.0 - 11.3 5 4.95 64.36
11.3 - 16.0 8 7.92 72.28
16.0 - 22.6 9 8.91 81.19
22.6 - 32.0 7 6.93 88.12
32 - 45 5 4.95 93.07
45 - 64 7 6..93 100.00
64 - 90 0 0.00 100.00
90 - 128 0 0.00 100.00
128 - 180 0 0.00 100.00
180 - 256 0 0.00 100.00
256 - 362 0 0.00 100.00
362 - 512 0 0.00 100.00
512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00
1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00
Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00
D16 (mm) 0.23
D35 (mm) 1.27
D50 (mm) 5.1
D84 (mm) 26.41
D95 (mm) 50.29
D100 (mm) 64
silt/Clay (%) 2.97
Sand (%) 35.64
Gravel (%) 61.39
Cobble (%) 0
Boulder (%) 0
Bedrock (%) 0
Total Particles = 101.
Figure 6
of
Appendix 2

APPENDIX 3: Reference Reach Figures and Pictures
12

•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r-. ~
~ ~
--. ~
O +.
d. ~ M

c~
z ~ x
~ m
C w ~ o ~ ~
tU t w ~ a ~
~ U ~ Q
~ N
~ ~ (/1
a
m
~ ~ „v
c ~ mz
U y
•~ w c
U ~ ~ U
E
N ~ ~ o
r m c
~ °~~m
~ a
~ ~
'n
LL
a
(/
-..
'~ N '
a
`~.. ;~ ~P !, '`~" ~„ ~` six l ~ ,r°
w~ Ea ~ ,
~ ,~
..
~"' f 4 ~ o'' ~"~..
yyy jj 0
1 ~ t ~
~ ~~ ~ I ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~~ ""} ~~~
r "+kZ,>"
'' ~ •+0~~ ~ 3"-,.~,,~ ~y~ tit; ' ~ ' ~ ~ ,~
P ~V ~ p
~,~~ ~ ~
~. ~ f4 ~ I~ ~ w,~, Cy.
Q .,~ ,
SEA ~""'" ~-" r'. ~_g. '' ~~. `'~,~,, m ~ Q ;C?
k ~` a ~ .`:- - ~ ; .~`~ ~ ~
~,,~, tat, ,. ~°'.+~ ~ ~ 1 r
#~ ~~"a„~, 'tom ~i t >. ~{ ~ .i ! "t t
G. tL ~ ~ .,~ ~ ~ `~"' ~~
'~~" ~_ w~ .~ ~`
«~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1. ,re` ;P~ ~.3.. A,%
t t ~-F~
k
~,~ u~ ~.~.a..,q :` $,
_ p~,r~~ ~ ~ . ~, ~
~'. s ~ r ~..~. ~ ~ ~
Z
O,^
V/
W

rI ~
•Jr~
t~:.,
fir ~
=
~,
~
$
~~
Q

U$
~
_

~

~
°o

" a
Y

m

z
o ~
~

o F
D
C

c

f

~
~ ~
0 ~_

$~
$~'

~'
~"e, ~ ~
$ f
$y~i
~ ~ i
~
Q (". $ m t
~c9ai
t~
~° °'
~ U
o
~ ~ J Z

w` S z

1
~"` ~.
' ~ ~/
..,,~„ ~
t, z 0
W
~~~ n / 1

• M
• O N X
C Z
~~~
•~ w ~Oaci LL
++ w ~
• ~ ~ N ~ Q O
V O
• ~ J
L =
• ~
W ~
~ ~ _O
.r
U a;
_~ ~
~.~- L -w ~
~. .' ~A ,' ,: ~ ~. O
~ y
~~; _ ~ ? ~
U
'~~ f ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ a ~ 7
~ "~ L Q
' M:~ ~ ~. u
~ ~ ~ ~ C
".9 ,~` " u
t ~~ ~ ~ a
~~ ~,
. ~ i- S _~ s~• t
~ ~ r
air ~,~
9 ~~
r . ~ ~-
~ ~
t k
~~' + ~ >
~~ 'k. ~ ~
d~ 3 ~ ~ s
~ ~ ~ ~ ~`+,
~~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ 'r3 ? 4
_,
Y
. L ~ ~
1R 9t J c
11 U W
~~ ~ r
• ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~
~,._ ~ ~.,, V ~ v
~ k ~~ ~ o w
s
~.~ ~ U
a
~ ~ << ~ fi~ a
., ~ j
~ % ~
,.. ~ R ~i
-:
>a. ~ .., m N ^ ~
'~ ~~ , ~~ ~ _~ ~ 8 m
_. ~- -
~ ~.~ o~`•
F ~R .,
~- ~ ~i ., ~~~ ~ 3~a1~. a C7 a u
:. - r..
s~: z ~ ~ ~~ W ~ Z
• ~ ~ e ,.
... ..
Q
t7 ~ -•, N
"~!
~. .. ,p r
4 ~ ~
n ,.~ 'r
" w _ ~-~- ~ ,~,~ ~, ~ ~ Z
:..,~ ~ ..
-- a W C'3
t~ ~ ~~.
~ Z ~
~~~ ~ 0~~
~ 5 ~~z
~ ~ zw0

C
!~
u o
C J
~ L
~ V
~ fQ
O ch
z ~''~ x
= v~ ~ a O
~ ~ Q
L
U
t0
N m
Q-' ~ -°' z
N U ~°
U - ~j ~
~~ c
~ ~ ~ o
NL ~ ~ U
O
f.L ~
~ m c
aim
to a
.`
N
Q ~
'a
LL
L
Q
V.
W
~ ~ m
a
Y 'p
8 ~ O
N
J d
Q ~ z
••~~ U
aD
vJ g ~_ W
U_ ~
N 3 H U
Z t O 0 W
U
Qp C_
~ S~g~
S 5~~~
~~~~
m
aC1 aLL
U
J z
F- ~
Z
~ Z Q
O ~ J
~ ~ ~
Z
ZWO

o r'
C Z a' x
*+ w 3 0 ~ ~.
rn a O.
!p ~ ~ Q
V O
C -~
~ L
~ L ~
~ ~ L
N
`t ~" "9t ,"` alt` ~ > ~ c °? Z
~~ s~ ~~ y~ ~} U c~ ~p
`~
s ' ~ ~'' N' ~~!)r* ~~ Yf ! ~~ ~ 'gip w c
..~~ ~ .,rte `*yo $ ,y '. '""+y,~r ;,~»- ~ y ~ ~ ~ U
»,~
~ ~_ ~ ~ ~,p r- 't.,~ ~ Ta c
pf. w.~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ a ~ m
~ ~, ~ ,.,. '" ~ -way,.` "" x~ ~ Q
.~...., '4.~ s' ti . z U.
r ~ _
s
a a+.a'
... s ~.. _. ~' s~ ~t~ ~~~
~ ~ w ~,~
.~
~ , -.«
s'''ue `" *,~ F i.« ~ y*
~' ~ `~.,~ J°~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~~
`~,,,
.,',,,a;, ~„~,, 1 a
~ ~~ fi
~ ey
.~' ."" ~ 1
5 ~'~~ 3~~ ~' A °~ ~_ 0
~ 4
y ~ m ~ a ~..
~f +~
~~ t ~1 ; i
,~ ti, {
~~ Y V
r ~~~
,~ ~.
!~ ' ' ~ ~ o
.~ '~~
Z
p 4 ~ y _ I I ~ ~ ~
m
L~LR o
a. ~ ~ ~
V ~
~pN~
... ,. ~ ..p. m (~ ""
W h
l +F s - a: <<> , 8
.w,. 'N.y. N _ s
p' ~m~
#~ ~ i. ( a° t7 a
-K !4
~~~~ ~ _ ~ Z
~„~ ~ ~~ 3 ~ ~ ~ Cn
~` ~ a ~,~
'~! ~ ~ Z
~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-. 1 - -_ _ ~
_ _$ -- ~~Z
zw0
~~i n C)

RIVERiViORPH REACH SUMMARY
River Name: K ref
Reach Name: Reach 1
Stream Type Valley Type D50(mm) Val Slope BKF Q(cfs) DA(sq mi)
C 4 VIII 2.85 0.009 154 2.703
Dimension Summary
Variable Min Avg Max
Floodprone Width (ft) 64.94 65 65
Riffle Area (Sq ft) 31.3 31.3 31.3
Max Riffle Depth (ft) 2.46 2.46 2.46
Mean Riffle Depth (ft) 1.74 1.74 1.74
Riffle Width (ft) 17.94 17.94 17.94
Pool Area (Sq ft) 25.97 25.97 25.97
Max Pool Depth (ft) 2.61 2.61 2.61
Mean Pool Depth (fl) 1.46 1.46 1.46
Pool Width (ft) 17.75 17.75 17.75
Run Area (Sq ft) 18.31 18.31 18.31
Max Run Depth (ft) 1.6 1.6 1.6
Mean Run Depth (ft) 0.82 0.82 0.82
Run Width (ft) 22.46 22.46 22.46
Glide Area (Sq ft) 27.88 27.88 27.88
Max Glide Depth (ft) 2.26 2.26 2.26
Mean Glide Depth (ft) 1.41 1.41 1.41
Glide Width (ft) 19.73 19.73 19.73
Pattern Summary
Variable Min Av g Max
Sinuosity 1.6
Meander Wavelength (ft) 87 125 160
Radius of Curvature (ft) 26 29 42
Belt Width (ft) 37 47 67
Profile Summary
Variable Min Avg Max
S riffle (ft/ft) 0.01817 0.02078 0.02272
S pool (ft/ft) 0 0.00164 0.00379
S run (ft/ft) 0.02065 0.03398 0.04089
S glide (ft/ft) 0.00316 0.00491 0.00757
P - P (ft) 28.48 63.45 97.11
P length (ft) 8.54 34.6 78.31
Dmax riffle (ft) 0 2.46 0
Dmax pool (ft) 2.61 2.61 2.61
Dmax run (ft) 1.6 1.6 1.6
Dmax glide (ft) 2.26 2.26 2.26
Low Bank Ht (ft) 4.71 5 5.36
Bankfull Slope (ftlft) 0.00513
Hydraulic Summary
Variable Min Avg Max
Discharge (cfs) 154
Velocity (fps) 4.9
Hyd Radius (ft) 1.62 1.62 1.62
Bkf Shear (ib/ sq ft) 0.52 0.52 0.52
Figure 5
of
Appendix 3

Q1
Y
.`
F-
...
N
U
C
L
4-
N
2 ~ Y m N (~ O
~ ~ m ~ a a a
• -
~_
c~
a~
rn
c
0
~o
a~
U
C
N
N
0
M
K
~ O ~
~ d.
LL Q
Q
(~) uoi~ena~~

^i
~i
~\ '+;
Y.
~ x
I~ `'
ti
M
M
C
~_
f~
- I fl
'N~_ a
LJ..
U
L
4~
N~
L.L
a
r~
~~
x
.Q
3
N
C
~' 'o
o a
y U

C U
° ~ ~
a
a ~ ~
C
~ ~
~ C f0
m >

O
O
0
M
ti

M
~ x
~ 0 ~
°_' a
ii a
Q

Q~
U
C
(6
_~
(D
C
0
N
.`
O

~~~ UOI~L'AB~~

~'
` 'o
o d
N U U
C
_
O
~c
't
a - 3
~ ~
~
C

3 Y N
O ~ (p
(~ m
~ ~
N
w
x
.a
Y
~L
`/
0
/~-~
L.L ~
~ o
U ,~,
C Y
o
L
Q~
L.L
N
M
co
~ x
~ o y
Q1
ii a
Q

Q1
U
C
cv
~_
0
fa
+...
C
0
N
.`
O

r
I
«~
3
0
~}}~ U01~2A81~

c~
m ~ X

N c

° ~ w'p

~

~' o
3 a
~ ~
a
ii a
s ~ .~ Q
a - ~
~
~
C
7 ~
Y _~
O
(~ ~
CO f6
~ ~
M
Yx
n
~ ~'
~L
~-+
`i
_0
~~
~~
m
~ u
N~ w
N ~
u
U
^C
W
L
Q~
~^~'
W
i..~
O
l(7

0
M

Q~
U
C
_~
N C
N
~L
0
2
0
0
(~}) uoi~enal~

r
~1 N
Y ~~
.o x
~L ti
`i
N
C
O
N
(~ _,.
-,
Q~ ~i
w
r. Y
V
Q~
U
C
L
4~•

r
rn
x
3
c
m ~o
`o a
N U U
C ~

°
` ~
a -
c ~ ~
Y ~
O ~ j
(~ m >
~ ~
0

m
U
C
(p
~_
0
fd
._..
c
0
N
.`
0

o M
x
~ "- C
~ O y
°-~ a
t.i Q
~}}~ UOI}2n2~~

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: K ref
Reach Name: Reach 1
sample Name: Reach
Survey Date: 07/19/06
Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM
-------------------
0 - 0.062 --------------
7 ----------
6.67 ---------------------------
6.67
0.062 - 0.125 2 1.90 8.57
0.125 - 0.25 4 3.81 12.38
0.25 - 0.50 12 11.43 23.81
0.50 - 1.0 12 11.43 35.24
1.0 - 2.0 10 9.52 44.76
2.0 - 4.0 13 12.38 57.14
4.0 - 5.7 3 2.86 60.00
5.7 - 8.0 6 5.71 65.71
8.0 - 11.3 8 7.62 73.33
11.3 - 16.0 4 3.81 77.14
16.0 - 22.6 11 10.48 87.62
22.6 - 32.0 10 9.52 97.14
32 - 45 3 2.86 100.00
45 - 64 0 0.00 100.00
64 - 90 0 0.00 100.00
90 - 128 0 0.00 100.00
128 - 180 0 0.00 100.00
180 - 256 0 0.00 100.00
256 - 362 0 0.00 100.00
362 - 512 0 0.00 100.00
512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00
1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00
Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00
D16 (mm) 0.33
D35 (mm) 0.99
D50 (mm) 2.85
D84 (mm) 20.32
D95 (mm) 29.89
D100 (mm) 45
silt/Clay (%) 6.67
sand (%) 38.09
Gravel (%) 55.24
Cobble (%) 0
Boulder (%) 0
Bedrock (%) 0
Total Particles = 105.
Figure 11
of
Appendix 3

e
e

e
F
F
e
13
lix 3

APPENDIX 4: Restoration Figures
13

RIVERMORPH NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN REPORT
River Name: Unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
Reference Reach: K ref; Reach 1 (C 4)
--Boundary Conditions--
Drainage Area: 0.0697 sq mi
Valley Slope: 0.031 ft/ft
Bankfull Discharge: 7.9 cfs
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area: 2.26 sq ft
Mean Depth Calculation Tolerance: 0.2 ft
-Sediment Data--
Riffle Bed Material ID: Riffle
Riffle Bed Material D84: 16 mm
Riffle Bed Material D50: 1 mm
Bar Sample ID:
Bar Sample Dmax: 30 mm
Bar Sample D50: 0.5 mm
---------------NCD Results---------------
--Alignment--
Meander Wavelength: 36.5 ft
Channel Length: 48.58 ft
Sinuosity: 1.33
Radius of Curvature: 7.13 ft
Bankfull Slope: 0.02329
Meander Belt Width: 14.4 ft
Meander Width Ratio: 3.27
Deflection Angle: .1 rad
--Riffle Cross Sectional Properties--
Width to Depth Ratio: 8.58
Entrenchment Ratio: 3.62
Floodprone Width: 15.93 ft
Bankfull Width: 4.4 ft
Bankfull Mean Depth: 0.51 ft
Bankfull Velocity: 3.5 ft/s
Bankfull Hydraulic Radius: 0.42 ft
Bankfull Shear Stress: 0.61 Ibs/sq ft
Required Roughness (n): 0.0364 ft^(1/6)
Entrainable Particle Size: 36.6 mm
--Rosgen Stream Classification--
Reference Reach : C 4
Proposed Reach : E 4b
Existing Reach : F 4b
--Sediment Transport Competency--
Ratio -Riffle Slope /Bankfull Slope: 4.05
Ratio - D50bed / D50bar: 2.000
Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress (1 ): 0.0456
Required Mean Depth (1 ): 0.32 ft
Ratio - Di bar / D50bed: 30.000
Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress (2): 0.0019
Required Mean Depth (2): 0.01 ft
Minimum Required Mean Depth: 0.32 ft
Figure 1
of
Appendix 4

i
•
•
•
•
S
•
t
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
s
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
N
(O

o ~~

;..
N

U

o ~ . - - -__ _ ~ . __ ~_ __ - - __

0
a
o
..

__
_ -
- -
--~_
- ~~
r
~
~_
_. _ - _ ___
0
In V N O) cD t0 tC) M N O
O O O O O O ~ O O T m
O O O O O O O O O Q7 O
N K
N ~ 'O
~ ~ C
~ ~
LL d
Q

i
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
a
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0
_

~'I - ~ N
i
i ', '.
I
'.
~

'.
' '. '.
~
i
i N

'. '., ', ii
O
__ _-._ _. ... _ .. _.-~- .__. _._ __~_-._ _._ __. O
N
j
I
j
'
~
~

i i ~

j
~'. i
!
I.
O ~ °
_. __ ~ _._ -_ -__. •-_. __._1- __ ~___._.
' _-_ . _. ~
}~ ~ ,, r
U I.
^'
^
W I
(
V / j
~ _ ~,.
N
' ~
O ~ I .
-
L ~ r
U

o
i ~ ._ o

Q

0 I
_
- ~ - I ~
i I ~
o
it I ' ~,
j j
I
I
I

~
N

O
O
In ~ N T O CO O M N O
O O O O O O ~ O O O O
O O O O O Q~ O Q7 W Q1 O
M x
~ o ~
~, Q
Q
Q

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
s
•
•
•
''~

~+ N
~
~ ~
~
W ~ ~
~ ~ <
•~ _ ,~
~ ~
~
~ ~
o a
~

~ O
~ ~
O
~
~
_
+~
.N i.

~~~J
VJ

~ i
M
W
j
U
.
Q

-60.00
~flf ~I~ -29.00
-28.00
;~, 1 I I -27.00
-~.~~; , -
rt=~ %' ~ ~ ~ I -26.00
~''~ ` ~ 25.00
~_
i I 24.00
O
ti
cN
G
0
0
u~
~'

1.00
19.00
f 18.00
17.00
. I I ( 16.00
_ 15.00
_ ~ ( ! 14.00
13.00
_ I I I 12.00
i 11.00
_ ~ ~ ( 10.00
f .oo
_ I (' .00
~^ 7.00
'~I~ .oo
.00
f ~ ( ~ ! --- 3.00
i ( ~ ~ I ~ 1 2.00
-~ ~ ~ ~ ( 4 1.00
.00
', 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O Of 00 n c0 ~ ~ t7 N ~ O
Z ~ X_
~ ~
W ~ ~ C
W QI N LL
~ ~ ~ C
Q
N
__ ~
C73 U N ~
~ 'm W o
y ~ U
~ ~ a
Y
(t3 ~ ~ c
m a~m'
a
c
i
Z
0
>~
W
~~
~ ~ E
a3~ c
W ~ ~
Q ~ 4
U °'
m
(n z o
0
w
U ~<o
Z ~~ o o
a ~ o
Q° - ~f
~ m~_~
$C.1~c
N
0
"' tl
C
a°~a~
r~
W VZ E"'
Q
i--i
o
F~ F^^i+
7 F~
W O

'~

i

• ,
•
•
•
3ar"-;rr° ?u"-3n"
tiill
1
0
~ REVISIONS
Np ']iGWN BV: ClM1EM9.
• Source: Rosgen, David L. 2001. ASCE Conference
~ ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHIC SCALE
~ i i I i
~ PERMITTING 1 inch= feet
n i1 ~ 1 n 1 u T w ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Post Office Box 3744 DRAWN BV:
Typical Cross Vane Detail
Airport Road Retail Center
Wal-Mart Real Estate
..___~~_ ~_.._... un
--~
SHEET NO.
Figure 5
of
Appendix 4
r-I<h~,
W II
~ i ~ ~ i _, ~ i _,

TREES AND SHRUBS TO BE PLANTED IN
RIPARIAN AREAS
Trees
Amelanchier canadensis Serviceberry
Caprinus caroliniana Ironwood
Cercis canadensis Redbud
Celtis laviegata Sugarberry
Cornus Jlorida Dogwood
Diopyrus virginiana Persimmon
Fraxinus pensylvanica Green Ash
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore
Quercus alba White Oak
Quercus phellos Willow Oak
Quercus nigra Water Oak
Shrubs
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry
Callicarpa Americana Benybeauty
Calycanthus floridus Sweetshrub
Cephalanthus occidentalis Button Bush
Chinonanthus virginicus Fringe Tree
Cornus amomum Silky Dogwood
Itea virginica Virginia Sweet Spire
Lindera aestivale Spicebush
Rhus glabra Smooth Sumac
Sambuscus canadensis Elderberry
Vaccinium arboretum Sparkleberry
Vaccinium dentatum Arrow Wood
Vaccinium nudum Possum Haw
TREES AND SHRUBS TO BE PLANTED
IN CREATED WETLAND AREAS
Trees
Betula ni ra River Birch
Alnus serrulata Alder
Fraxinus ens Ivanica Green Ash
ercus alba White Oak
ercus hellos Willow Oak
uercus ni ra Water Oak
*N ssa s Ivatica Black Gum
*Acer ne ndo Box elder
Shrubs
Anus serrulata Ta Alder
*Salix ni ra Black willow
Ce halanthus occidentalis Button Bush
Cornus amomum Silk Do wood
Clethra alni olia Sweet Pe erbush
viburnum dentatum Arrow Wood
* Found in existing wetlands
**Planting schedules for each species and plant category is dependent on dormancy period and expected germination times.
It is expected that most of the planting will occur during early spring or late fall periods. Vegetation characteristics for the
area will be designed to allow the highest species diversity and greatest vegetation survival rates. Selected species will be
dependent on availability of transplants. All selected species will be native to North Carolina and will be obtained from local
nurseries if possible. The following list includes a selection of species that may be used for the restoration project.
Figure 6
of
Appendix 4

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVENUE
ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
August 17, 2006
Regulatory Division
Action ID. SAW-2006-32342-311
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
John E. Clarke
2001 SE Tenth Street
Bentonville, Arkansas 72712
Dear Mr. Clarke:
Reference your May 3, 2006 application for Department of the Army authorization to
impact wetland adjacent to an unnamed tributary of Lake Julian in conjunction with the
construction of a retail shopping center off of Airport Road, south of Asheville, Buncombe
County, North Carolina.
Your proposal was advertised by public notice dated July 5, 2006. Comments in response
to the notice were received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission in letters dated August 2, 2006 and July 28, 2006. There were
no comments received from individual citizens or organizations. The comments received are
enclosed for your information and to provide you with the opportunity to address any of the
stated concerns.
Please provide any responses to these comments, in writing, on or before
September 1, 2006. If you have any questions, I may be reached at [phone],
extension 232.
Sincerely,
Q-~~
Ronnie Smith
Regulatory Specialist
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Enclosures

i
•
•
i
•
•
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
July 28, 2006
Mr. Ronnie Smith
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
~ Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006 A~~ 42006
Mr. Kevin Barnett
w NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
2090 U.S. Highway 70
• Swannanoa, NC 28778
SUBJECT: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Individual 404 Permit Application and 401 Water Quality Certification
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County
Action ID: SAW-2006-32342-311, DWQ No. 20060922
Dear Mr. Smith and Mr. Barnett:
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc., on behalf of Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust,
~ requested an Individua1404 Permit. Staff with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (Commission) visited the project site most recently on July 17, 2006. Comments
from the Commission are provided under provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C.
466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
• 661-667d).
The applicant is proposing to fill about 1.93 acres of wetlands and to relocate a stream reach to
' develop a commercial retail store on Airport Road near Fletcher, N.C. About 1.4 acres of on-site
wetland creation, 1 acre of wetland restoration through the Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 2.1
acres of upland buffer preservation, and 500 feet of onsite stream relocation and restoration are
• proposed as compensatory mitigation.
Wetlands and streams on the property provide important wildlife habitat in a region experiencing
,, rapid habitat losses. These areas have been disturbed in the past resulting in changes to their relief
and hydrology, probably from equipment rutting and slash piling during logging operations.
~ Nevertheless, they are comprised of dense herbaceous vegetation and trees as partially described in
• the Protected Species Habitat Assessment. There are scattered areas with a thin or open overstory
• and soils, sphagnum moss and other vegetation typically found in bogs. Some neotropical birds,
which as a group are declining nationally, should nest and forage in these wetlands. Mole
~ salamanders (State SC), four-toed salamanders (State SC), and other amphibians and reptiles may
• Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
~ Telephone: [phone] Fay: [phone]

Wal-Mart Page 2
Buncombe County July 28, 2006
~
i also occur here. The property has excellent early successional habitat for rabbits and other small
mammals as well.
~
~ Bog turtles (State T, Federal T S/A) could occur in the wetlands, particularly wetland area "C",
provided there axe downstream water course
i

. connect
ons to other wetlands. Since the azea drains to
Lake Julian, they likely do not occur on the property though the possibility of an isolated population
in the drainage cannot be di
i
d

~ sm
sse
. The lack of bog turtles sited during the applicant's Apri12005
habitat assessment cannot be relied upon as a determination of thei

• r occurrence; documenting them
would be difficult even with targeted surveys. Therefore, the assertion that suitable habitat for bog
turtles is not on the property is incorrect
d
an
request that the file be updated to reflect such.
• Similar to habitat values, the wetlands are important to water quality protection in this increasingly
urbanized area. Removal of sediment and pollutants fr
f
om run-o
f and attenuation of stonnwater
flows by wetlands aze well documented. Headwater streams and wetlands axe particulazly important
to watersheds
. .

• The stream i.'npacts for the project as proposed should be verified. There would be 500 feet of
stream relocation with restoration in the northeast
f
comer o
the property, but it is unclear from the
jurisdictional map (sheet 5 of 12) where the existing stream channel actually is. This relocation may
be wetland area "E", which appears to be a naxrow lin
l

• ear wet
and with a stream channel. However,
a stream is not shown here; and only stream 2 which extends from the western property line into the
relocation/restoration reach (sheet 10 of 12) is shown on the northern
rt
f

~ pa
o
the property. Part of
the relocation reach would be a channel creation if there is not a stream channel in wetland area "E",
which is probably incorrect. If there is a channel there, then the culvert impacts by lineaz length
should be accounted for in total stream im
acts
p
.
.
• The application does not include a discussion of avoidance and minimization of impacts as directed
under Clean Water Act guidelines. During the initial pre-project meetin
sev
l
d

~ g,
era
a
potential project
justments were discussed, but the site plan does not seem to reflect these changes with no
substantiated explanation of wh
i
b
i
y,
n part,
u
lding and pazking reco~gw'ations, headwalls instead
of fill slopes, and use of open space in the property's southern corner caxmot reduce wetland impacts
Because of the value of the w
tl
d
h
.
e
an
s, t
ese efforts of minimization axe particularly important and
require consideration.
~ Compensatory mitigation for the project is not consistent with current guidelines and would not off-
set the project impacts as currently proposed. For restoration and creation of wetlands, ratios of 2:1
• and 3:1, respectively, are used. Therefore, the proposed wetland mitigation leaves a deficit of about
1 acre. The upland buffer preservation and stream restoration augment the overall mitigation
~ proposal, but not much since, in part, the buffer preservation involves one side of a stream channel
and the restoration appears to be more avoidance of impacts rather than mitigation. Again,
uncertainty remains about the stream channel relocation and culvert impacts.
• Information about the wetland creation and stream restoration is needed to complete the review of
this project. Presumably the wetland creation would involve grading and replanting with native
vegetation, but details were not included. Any wetland creation should attempt to replicate bog
• conditions to the extent practicable; though complete replication of bog soils, hydrology, and cover
is extremely difficult if not impossible. Further, dimensional design information for the restored
stream from regional reference information is needed. Monitoring plans that include requirements to
• remediate any failing mitigation should also be outlined.
The Commission recommends that permits not be issued for this project as currently proposed.
~ The Commission would provide a more favorable review of this project with additional measures
for avoidance and minimization of impacts to streams and wetlands to the extent practicable and

Wal-Mart Page 3
Buncombe County July 28, 2006
adequately mitigates for any permanent losses. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on this project. If there are any questions regarding these comments, please contact me
at [phone] extension 24.
Sincerely,
~,~"-~
Shannon L. Deaton, Program Manager
Division of Inland Fisheries
cc: Ms. Laura Belanger, Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Mr. B. Tompkins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville
Ms. Becky Fox, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

i
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
July 28, 2006
Mr. Ronnie Smith
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Mr. Kevin Barnett
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
2090 U.S. Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
SUBJECT: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Individua1404 Permit Application and 401 Water Quality Certification
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County
Action ID: SAW-2006-32342-311, DWQ No. 20060922
Dear Mr. Smith and Mr. Barnett:
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc., on behalf of Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust,
requested an Individual 404 Permit. Staff with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (Commission) visited the project site most recently on July 17, 2006. Comments
from the Commission are provided under provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C.
466 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
The applicant is ;1~~,llk~~~l~~~l~'a f wetlands and to relocate a stream reach to
develop a commercial retail store on Airport Road near Fletcher, N.C. About ~~:afzarrt-`situ
~~?~: 2; I
z ~~~..G4~lll~~st$~~1~'

Wetlands and streams on the property provide important wildlife habitat in a region experiencing
rapid habitat losses. These areas have been disturbed in the past resulting in changes to their relief
and hydrology, probably from equipment rutting and slash piling during logging operations.
Nevertheless, they are comprised of dense herbaceous vegetation and trees as artiall described in
the Protected Species Habitat Assessment. ~ ~ ~ Y
,~i~d?pis wtth a''t1'Iin or o en crv~~story;
~`'Qil~~-s!°~~}R~~ ~;~~~~-~~~pitral;L~ fdulid. in boggy Some neotr pical birds,
which as a group are declining nationally, should nest and forage in these wetlands. Mole
salamanders (State SC), four-toed salamanders (State SC), and other amphibians and reptiles may
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

~J
. Wal-Mart Page 2
Buncombe County July 28, 2006
also occur here. The property has excellent early successional habitat for rabbits and other small
mammals as well.
~ ~,- Bog -turtles. (State T, k'ederal T S/A) could occur in the wetlands, particularly wetland ~.rea;"C'?, i
~ provided there. are:downstream water e4t7rse connections tQ othex wetlands: ~ Since the area drains to~.q
~ Lake Jitiliah, they likely do~not occt~ on the proper€~ ,thpugh the poss~t~~ty p~.an~~iseilatedpopulatio~~
$~ the drainage caz~nat be dismissed. the ~lack`,af bog turtles`sitec~durtna the a
~ ~ pp~icatt's A ri12QR
habitat assessment cannot be relied upp.~.as a deterr>rlinatiari of then occurrence; docuinent~ g totem
r
~ ~t~oulsd be ~liffcult even with~~targ~ted-s>li~ve~s.'' ~hefeforer the assertion`that suitable habitat'for bog''
rtuctCe`s~~ zxot'at~the ..ra e .
• P p rty is ~ncorreci:..and_ request that the: file be updated to reflect auc
~~rrt~larto habitat values ;the wetlands,are z~ ortartt'
~ ~ .. ~ ~ -to water,,~ttY:P~~t~,gt~'p~n„in this increasiYi~l
~~rbanized ar~a~. Removal of sediment and pollutants from run-off and attenuation of stormwater
~ flows by wetlands are well documented. Headwater streams and wetlands are particulazly important
• to watersheds.
+~ The stream impacts for the project as proposed should be verified. t~~e`vvoild be Sr~O feet'i#f~
• stream. relocation with restoration: in the nortb.~ast ;carn~r o1= the property,. bui: it is unclear fxom.th
• ~isdictanal miap (sheet:5 of 12) wher~~the exsting~strearn'channel actually is._° This teloGation rna~
::wetland area "E", which appear~,to be' a narrow linear. wetland. with a stream channel,, , However°
~;;.~a~ is_not shown here; and artly stream 2 which`:extends"frcirrr the western ~t~op~~y lznein~o they
.~
reloGat~on/restoratian~:reach •(sheet "'I O o~ 12}"is Shown on the;northern part of the ,property. Part a
tlz~-relc~~atlon reach`t?vould be a channel :creation if there is not a stream ehangel .in w~~land:, axea 4`B'`~,
~ ~~~~nch, is prob.~bl~ iziebrrect. If thew is ~.~.~,~hanpel, there, then. the ,culvert i~p~rts ~y liztear ~egth
• should k~e acedunted.far in~total stream.iinpaets,:
i
The application does not include a discussion of avoidance and minimization of impacts as directed
under Clean Water Act guidelines. Y ~e,~n~ttzal:p_pr~le~t ~,~etin~ several pQreriti~l project-
p ~. t
uatment~ ~v~ere drsc~ssed; but.fhe~site plait" does nat;seetts to re#l~ct >these changes Vvtl~; rtc?r
~u~starlt>ta~ec`~"exp~anaton-of:why; ~n~aark,~,bui~d~ng and p~rkzng re~on£igurations;`headwalls instead
at ttCl.~iopes,:and useof open space,in'fh~` ra e s sou .
~ p jt3' t_r~'co?er.cannot reduce we>~)rand,irripact~.
Because of the value of the wetlands, these efforts of minimization are panc~u~arly important and
require consideration.
Compensatory mitigation for the
set the project impacts as current
~r;id' ~~1;~r~~pecauely,:are tYSe'
>ac~{ e~itplartd~buffernrecPr
. ~. _t.:;
th'~stor~t~on a
t~gcertarlty rezl~atis
sect is not consistent with current guidelines and would not off-
roposed. ~~r~'restiratfb;ri' aiYd~cr'eatiori tsf:i~Vetlarids;~ratioa of 2:1
efvre;~ e~cQpase~ tvetl~d; rrtitigatior~ `lexve~ :a,deficit of about:.
>n~an strearn'restbraf#onsa~grnent the overall mistgatia°
r4,~o R,.~ w -...~...._. . ~...._ - _ _ w _ .. u
Information about the wetland creation and stream restoration is needed to complete the review of
this project. Presumably the wetland creation would involve grading and re lanting with native
vegetation, but details were not included.: -°r~etlar~a creatio~i-s~,`tQt~°~>lt~~t.'fo r~~~~~t.lkliu
to,.the extent ~r~; though complete replication of bog soils, hydrology, and cover
is extremely difricult if nod impossible. Further, dimensional design information for the restored
stream from regional reference information is needed. Monitoring plans that include requirements to
remediate any failing mitigation should also be outlined.
The Commission recommends that permits not be issued for this project as currently proposed.
~ The Commission would provide a more favorable review of this project with additional measures
• for avoidance and minimization of impacts to streams and wetlands to the extent practicable and

Wal-Mart Page 3 July 28, 2006
Buncombe County
adequately mitigates for any permanent losses. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on this project. If there are any questions regarding these comments, please contact me
at [phone] extension 24.
Sincerely,
r,~--~
Shannon L. Deaton, Program Manager
Division of Inland Fisheries
cc: Ms. Laura Belanger, Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Mr. B. Tompkins, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville
Ms. Becky Fox, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

•
•
r
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WII.DLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Cazolina 28801
August 2, 2006
• Mr. Ronnie Thomas
• Asheville Regulatory Fieid Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
r 151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
~p ~c~cue~
auc a ~~
~ Dear Mr. Thomas:
Subject: Proposed Construction of a Wal-Mart Retail Store Located on Airport Road, South of
Asheville, in Buncombe County, North Carolina (Action ID 2006-32342-311)
This is the report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Irate '
U.S. Army Corps of En 'neers' Co s nor on the
~ ( rp) public notice of an application for an individual permit
~ submitted by Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, represented by Mr. Chris Grose of
• Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc., to construct a Wal-Mart retail shopping center and
consequent infrastructure, Information for this report is based on a review of the individual
permit application received on July 28, 2006; the public notice issued by the Corps on Jul 5
2005, which we received on July 6, 2006; and a site visit conducted by Mr. Bryan Tompkins Hof
• our staff on July 13, 2006. This report is submitted in accordance with the provisions of the Fish
• and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description -According to the information provided, the project will involve the
. construction of a commercial retail shopping center and associated infrastructure. The proposed
project will be constructed on a 38-acre property that contains about 2.32 acres of wetlands and
two streams totaling about 1,4491inear feet. The application states that about 1.93 acres of
wetlands will be filledlimpacted by the proposed project.
• Federally Listed Species -The applicant does not resent evi
project area for federally listed species known from Buncomb eCounty. Dunn the s tthe
Mr. Tompkins found suitable habitat for the bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii), currently sit

r
i
•
r
•
r
federally listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance.a AIthough the provisions of
section 7 of the Act do not currently apply to this species, we would greatly appreciate your
assistance in determining if any are present within the project impact area. If bog turtles are
present, impacts to them should be avoided. In accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility
of the appropriate federal agency or its designated representative to review its activities or
programs and to identify any such activities or programs that may affect endangered or
threatened species or their habitats. If it is determined that the proposed activity may adversely
affect any species federally listed as endangered or threatened, formal consultation with this
office must be initiated.
Alternatives -The application does not include a completed alternatives analysis that
demonstrates how the applicant has avoided or minimized the aquatic impacts of the project. We
are concerned about the 1.93 acres of wetlands that will be impacted by this project. The
applicant has stated that impacts to the 1.93 acres of wetlands cannot be avoided because the
wetlands are spread throughout the property. However, we believe there are design alternatives
that would provide the high-density shopping experience, thus fulfilling the purpose of the
project but eliminating the impact to the jurisdictional wetlands on the property. Alternative
designs could include maximizing the space in the parking lot by building a small stacked
parking deck, using less ground/wetland space by changing the store layout to a two-story
design, and using head walls instead of fill slopes. If a parking deck cannot be constructed, then
the size of the parking lot could be reduced to avoid impacts to the linear wetland in the northern
section of the property.
Fish and Wildlife Resources - As stated above, we are concerned about the direct
impacts to the 1.93 acres of wetlands as well as the indirect and cumulative impacts to the
remaining streams, wetlands, and forested areas on the subject property. Because the
project will convert over 50 percent of the open space to impervious surface (such as
roofs, roads, and parking lots), the treatment of storm water leaving the project area and
the maintenance of adequate riparian buffers are of particular concern. Therefore, we
recommend the following measures to help further minimize project impacts:
~~
`~ Use grassed swales in place of curb and gutter and on-site storm-water
management (i.e., bioretention areas) that will result in no net change in the
~" ' hydrology of the watershed. All storm-water outlets should drain through a
vegetated upland area prior to reaching any stream Qr wetland area. Sufficient
retention designs should be implemented to allow for the slow discharge of storm
"Section 4(e) of the [Endangered Species) Act authorizes the treatment of a species (subspecies or population
segment) as endangered or threatened even though it is not otherwise listed as endangered or threatened if: (a) The
species so closely resembles in appearance an endangered or threatened species that enforcement personnel would
have substantial difficulty in differentiating between the listed and unlisted species; (b) the effect of this substantial
difficulty is an additional threat to an endangered or threatened species; and (c} such treatment of an unlisted species
will substantially facilitate the enforcement and further the policy of the Act" (Federal Register, November 4, 1997).
The southern population of the bog turtle is listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance) because it is
similar to the northern population of the bog turtle, which is federally listed as threatened but does not occur in
North Carolina.
2

r
r
r
r
water, attenuating the potential adverse effects of storm-water surges, thermal
spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges.
2. Minimize the amount of impervious surface area that will result from this project.
All parking areas should be constructed of a pervious material (i.e., pervious
concrete, interlocking/openpaving blocks, etc.). Pervious materials are less likely
to absorb and store heat and allow the cooler temperatures of the earth below to
cool the pavement. Pervious concrete also requires less maintenance and is less
susceptible to freeze/thaw cracking due to large void spaces within the concrete.
Pervious parking areas minimize changes to the hydrology of the watershed, can
be used to facilitate groundwater recharge, and often eliminate the need for curb
and gutter for drainage.
3. Incorporate a rooftop garden or any type of green rooftop into the building
construction plans. Green rooftops have many benefits, including: (a) keeping
buildings warmer by adding a layer of insulation to the roof and keeping buildings
cooler by allowing plants to take in water that evaporates into the atmosphere,
resulting in lower heating and cooling bills; (b) reducing the amount and
improving the quality ofstorm-water runoff because water is absorbed and
filtered through plants and soil; and (c) improving overall air quality by removing
particulate matter from the air. This, along with the proposed storm-water runoff
collection devices that will be constructed, will dramatically decrease the amount
and increase the quality ofstorm-water runoff.
4. Install and maintain stringent measures to control erosion and sediment in order to
prevent unnecessary impacts to aquatic resources within and downstream of the
project site. Frequent maintenance of these devices is critical to their proper
function in order to minimize sediment discharge from the project site. Perimeter
erosion-control devices should be installed prior to any on-the-ground activities.
5. Preserve and/or restore forested riparian buffers. Given the close proximity of
this project to aquatic resources and the increase of impervious surfaces because
of the development, we are concerned about the loss and lack of riparian buffers.
We noticed that the applicant is proposing to preserve a portion of the riparian
buffer along only one side of the on-site stream. We recommend that the project
size be decreased to allow for the preservation of riparian buffers along both sides
of the stream and along all preserved wetland areas. Forested riparian buffers, a
minimum of 100 feet wide along perennial streams and 50 feet wide along
intermittent streams and wetlands, should be created and/or maintained along all
aquatic areas. Riparian buffers provide travel corridors and habitat for wildlife
displaced by development. In addition, riparian buffers protect water quality by
stabilizing stream banks, filtering storm-water runoff, and providing habitat for
aquatic and fisheries resources.
3

i
r
i
i
r
s
a
a
r
6. Install utility lines (i.e., sewer, gas, water) outside the above-recommended buffer
widths. All utility crossings should be kept to a minimum, and all utility
infrastructure should be kept out of riparian buffer areas. The directional bore
stream-crossing method (installation of utilities beneath the riverbed, avoiding
impacts to the stream and buffer) should be used for utility crossings. Manholes
or similar access structures should not be allowed within buffer areas. Stream
crossings should be near perpendicular to stream flow and should be monitored at
least every 3 months for maintenance needs during the f rst 24 months of the
project and annually thereafter. Sewer lines associated with crossing areas should
be maintained and operated at a1i times to prevent discharges to land or surface
waters. In circumstances where minimum setbacks cannot be attained, sewer
lines shall be constructed of ductile iron or a substance of equal durability.
7. Keep equipment out of streams by operating from the banks in a fashion that
minimizes disturbance to woody vegetation. Equipment should be inspected dail
and should be maintained to prevent the contamination of surface waters from y
leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. Ail fuels,
lubricants, and other toxic materials should be stored outside the riparian
management area of the stream, in a location where the material can be contained.
Equipment should be checked for leaks of hydraulic fluids, cooling system
liquids, and fuel and should be cleaned before fording any stream. Also, all
fueling operations should be accomplished outside the riparian management area.
Mitigation - We do not believe the mitigation package (proposed by the applicant to
compensate for the adverse impacts of the project) is complete or adequate. No information was
provided for the proposed mitigation ratios or for the wetland creation and stream restoratio
portion of the mitigation plan. From the information provided, we assume that the a licann'
pp t is
proposing to provide compensation for the aquatic impacts using a 1: I ratio, which is not
consistent with the current mitigation guidelines. According to the "Stream Mitigation
Guidelines" endorsed by the Corps, mitigation for aI1 wetland impacts should be calculate
d using
a 2:1 ratio. Therefore, about 3.86 acres of wetland mitigation credit will be needed to rovid
adequate compensation for the impacts of this project to aquatic resources. We recommend e
minimizing impacts on the subject property by avoiding or reducing impacts to streams and
wetlands, thereby minimizing the amount of mitigation needed and establishing a com rehen '
mitigation plan that provides adequate compensation for the remaining unavoidable im acts save
p
We recommend that more information, including a detailed alternatives analysis; an anal si
all direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts; and a more detailed mitigation packa e that y s of
adequately compensates for the adverse impacts of this project, be required before a Co s
permit is issued. We recommend that this permit be held in abeyance until this information i
presented for review. s
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If we can be of assistance or i
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Tompkins at 828/258-3939 E f you
xt. 240.
4

~ ~Y future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Lo Nu
4-2-06-294. g tuber
Sincerely,
~ ~
~l
y "~~_
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
cc:
Mr. David McHenry, Mountain Region Reviewer, North Carolina Wildlife Resour
Commission, 20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway, Waynesville, NC 28786s
5

2
CF w/encls:
Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants
POB 3 744
Greenville, North Carolina 29608

August 31, 2006
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue
Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-SOOb
Attention: Ronnie Smith
Reference: Response to Comments
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, NC
SAW-2006-32342-311
Dear Mr. Smith,
This letter is intended to provide additional information and responses to the
comments received during the public notice period for the above referenced project.
Specifically; it addresses avoidance and minimization efforts related to impacts to Waters
of the US as required by Section 404(b)1 of the Clean Water Act. Different scenarios
and considerations are provided below and give details on why the current location and
configuration of the proposed sports complex is as such.
Waste Treatment Facilities
The project will utilize awetlands-type retention basin and will be designed in
strict accordance with the requirements of Buncombe County and NC DENR. Attached
is a memo from Freeland and Kauffman, Inc. summarizing the Storm Water Management
Design.
Acres of Wetlands to Be Filled
Total acreage of impact is 1.92 acres. During the on-site, pre-application meeting
with resource agencies on January 19, 2006, a 2:1 mitigation ratio was requested for all
areas with the exception of Impact Area "E". Due to the isolated nature of Area "E",
which maintains no surface connection with downstream waters, and existing topography
on the site which suggests that the flow from the existing culvert on Airport Road
originally connected to "Stream 1 ", relocation was proposed. During the onsite pre-
appIication meeting, a l:l ratio for Impact Area "E" was discussed, with the proposed
mitigation to be the relocation of the flow to the draw located above "Stream I" with a
Priority 2 stream restoration.
P.O. Box 3744 • Greenville, South Carolina 2~6.0__~_•~864)_~71-3nan • Fay rQadl_~~~_o9nn

Based on the discussion at the on-site pre application meeting, a conceptual
mitigation plan was created which included 1.41 acres of onsite created wetlands, 0.34
acres of onsite wetland preservation, 1 acre of wetland mitigation from the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, 2.1 acres of onsite upland buffer preservation, and X00 linear feet
of onsite stream relocation and restoration.
A complete mitigation plan was submitted August 11, 2006.
Alternatives Analysis
No Development
The "No Development" scenario is not feasible in this area. Airport Road is a
rapidly growing commercial area in close proximity to the Asheville Regional Airport,
the Western Carolina Ag Center, I-26, and a number of `big-box" retailers such as
Lowe's and Target. The area between Hendersonville and Asheville is rapidly growing.
According to recently released estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau, population in the
Asheville metro grew by 1.4 % over the last year, adding 5,465 new residents. Among
the four counties that make up the metro area, Henderson had the highest rate at 1.8 %.
The national average is 0.9 %. These factors contribute to the increasing demand for
retail services.
Utilizing a Different Site with Less Impacts
There were several criteria for the selection of the site: 1) it had to be large
enough to support the proposed project, 2) it needed to serve the area between Asheville
and Hendersonville, 3) it needed to be located in a commercial area with proximity to I-
26 for easy access, and 4) it needed to be available. Only one other property was
available in the immediate vicinity. The property consisted of 12-14 acres, which was
not large enough to support the proposed project. Additionally, the site contained 6-8
houses, which would have had to be demolished in order for the site to be developed.
Included herein is a map of the vicinity with the location of the proposed project and
alternative site. A second map of current Wal-Mart locations is also included.
Reduction of On-Site Impacts
Every effort was made by the applicant to reduce on-site impacts to the maximum
extent possible. The current configuration of the Wal-Mart also lends itself to avoidance
and minimization as much as is practicable. Alternative site layouts were proposed
during the design phase. Included herein is a copy of the alternative site layout. In the
alternative layout, the use of two retaining walls did allow for an overall reduction of
wetland impacts by a total of 0.37 acres, however, by relocating the stormwater detention
basin and consolidating the stormwater management system to one basin rather than two
basins, the alternate site layout also impacts 742 linear feet of stream. The proposed site
layout does utilize a one retaining wall for reduction of impact by eliminating all impacts
to stream 1. Additionally, overall impervious surface was reduced from 18.5 acres to
17.6 acres, and outlots were reduced from a total of 3.3 acres to 1.99 acres.
Due to the required grading, the retaining wall near the western property
boundary would incur a significant increase in cost when compared to the northern

retaining wall. The overall cost of both retaining walls for the alternate site layout is
approximately $1.8 million dollars, while the cost of the northern retaining wall by itself
is $260,000.
Taking into account all of the above mentioned factors, it was determined that the
avoidance of 742 linear feet of stream impacts, reduction of overall impervious surface
and outlot acreage, and substantial reduction of costs associated with the construction of
the western retaining wall was preferred both ecologically and economically.
Existing Design with Mitigation
The proposed project includes 1.41 acres of onsite created wetlands, 0.34 acres of
onsite wetland preservation, 1 acre of wetland mitigation from the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, 2.1 acres of onsite upland buffer preservation, and 500 linear feet
of onsite stream relocation and restoration.
The onsite stream relocation and wetland creation was originally proposed during
a January 19, 2006 onsite meeting with regulatory officials. Based on the existing
topography of the site, it is believed that the flow coming from the culvert on Airport Rd.,
which flows into "Area E" originally connected to "Streaml" prior to the road widening
project. Thus, we have proposed to relocate the flow and perform a priority 2 stream
restoration project onsite. The onsite wetlands creation is designed to increase and
enhance the higher quality wetlands located near the back of the property utilizing in part
the hydric soils and associated seed bank from the areas to be impacted.
A complete on-site mitigation plan was submitted August 1 1, 2006.
Comments Received
FWS and NCWRC
In a letter dated July 28, 2006 NC Wildlife Resources Commission comments on
several aspects of the permit application. In a letter dated August 2, 2006, Fish
and Wildlife Service made similar comments. Both sets of comments are
addressed below.
• Both FWS and NCWRC first addressed the issue of federally listed
species on the target property. EPC, Inc. completed a Protected Species
Habitat Assessment for the target property in April, 2006. This was
submitted with the permit application. Based on our findings, no bog
turtles exist on the property. Bog turtle habitat is dependant on
connections to other wetlands, and the wetlands on the property do not fit
that description as they drain into aman-made lake. While we do concur
that wetlands in area "C" could prove suitable if a downstream water
course connection to other wetlands was present, we do feel that the
presence of an isolated population highly unlikely.
• Both FWS and NCWRD requested an alternatives analysis. The requested
information is provided above. Additionally, supporting documentation
regarding the cost of retaining walls has been supplied in the form of a
memo from the site engineers.
• FWS addressed both concerns and suggestions for the treatment of
stormwater leaving the project site. The project will utilize a wetlands-

type retention basin and will be designed in strict accordance with the
requirements of Buncombe County and NC DENR.
o Appropriate erosion and sediment control measures will be
taken throughout all phases of construction.
o All riparian buffers outside of the area of construction are
going to be restored or preserved as part of the on-site
mitigation plan.
• FWS and NCWRC requested a complete mitigation plan. Mitigation has
been addressed in the "Onsite Mitigation Plan, Airport Road Retail
Center" dated August 2006 and submitted August 11, 2006.
All in all, the applicant has avoided and minimized impacts to Waters of the US to
the maximum extent practicable. Alternatives were considered thoroughly prior to
submitting the present design and relying on compensatory mitigation. I hope that this
addresses all your comments and concerns regarding this project and we can proceed in a
timely fashion. If you have any questions, please call me at [phone]. Thank you
for your assistance in this matter.
Respectfully,
Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Cc: Brian Cole, FWS
Shannon Deaton, NCWRC

~J
~ _ _ MAY-09-2006 TUE 02 32 PM BILL BURGIN REAL ESTATE FAQ N0. 828 277 0306 P. 02102
• i ~~~ ~ ~ C apT TIELRFFIi ~`'u`"L.' ~ a,,y # I .
e 1p SHOE LTR ~~'
• ~ I ~ i I °-~~ i Y-M~Ff ~ Cj~
1 ~ : Oxr ~ ~
~` ~t * ^2 -
• L ~ ° ~ ~ ~
s SE!2110\ ep ~ s 5 ~ zi
s
• i `-e<~'~'~a*` .t+a„~, II ~ , ~~~ ~ ~ ~ re~~u rain ~ rr':• ;. t;. 6.5, G~,x ~~i
~:?.liSi = t ~ r
D4CXiA 4 all l~,lii: -
• ~rooulrrua ~., , o,va p,Lkrct f~l P5 I ~,~„ +n' ~~a ~'
~~rt ~ r ~ a~ Its ifd'" J,~ 4 lira ~ ~yd5
1 bYH'~ ~ d" S &r ~ Ebr cam, I G]
L•, vtrrA oy/ ~yty-Yak,' ~~~ in,-: I `f~T~ Q ~8~, • c I 3 qy r~ ` va`
• ~ 1 ~ ° ~ ~ ]:eJa6 SXYlAYD ' • ~ ' 'isn ' + S' 6 9E7 • ~i ~ ~ ryE `~~ /~_
9 9unc AEL 17N u .J.G_ Jr ~ F ~. ~ ~ e~ +I.`MNF~ ^-'
>~ ' ~ LC !. I N t..>~ 'Qa 7ytr t.
r ~' fig' .4;a~~ . c+ Y fir. s 'y Ifs°o ~~ 3+^ a
. :`~t »os y ~.~ 4 ~=~~ ~ °v " dR00,7V/CCL D~ I -
* 90 ~ ?- s s 1.117) I M 5~~' - e ~ SHVI 601fc tl ~
a q,4+~ I ~t S r tt V ~ ~ CDUAS_ ~,. ~ ~
~ 3~ 3 1 Y ~~ s ~ ~QJ ., . 't ~~ / D~N OdD
~ dC ~ ,.,,r. /~ ~ , ~ J MCllNlwul
x - ~igr-~.~~- b fi r .a:ry~' $ ~C. ,; y ~ WDllcnf f
S, u 9 C~
• ~~ .~ ~ ,t-'3~~i, ~ - ^ art ~4 ~ . z i~ ~ 6 z y' v ~ '
a z
3^ E r~~
t
9,_ q ~
~ ~
~~,. ~j' .Q 4 ~\
• c. p~- a ' _ri
~~ ~_ 1"~ ~ 9sv3. Arden" ~ I
.! ti ADYAC Pfryto~ `r s ~ 21ers3. iltAOa
• I ~.. ~ P0016P 25 ~ 4 ~ j N taro C~ ~~ ~:
74 1s. °~ ~ Y
\ f F ~ Slsn a..
~, r„:,1 Arden a 3 f~ ~ '~ ~
• + \\ ~- = ~ .eta ~re ~
.w~1~ Wa snlre r C xQ .l , e ~5' ~ ~ g, ~y~ ~'F~ ~ ~ .q 9~
• ~ r 1 i ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~j 6
~ t L6Ti y .y~'
t ~~ ~sn rd ti ~ r 25 ~ ti, ~ ~c. ~. ~' Mr ~' ~ .
~ ~ ~ c .. $ - 6~reE 1` I UAt
+ ~~ ~,. a 6 ~ ~ Oak Par,R'~'~ . ~~ ~'~~ ~ E ~ I
ermn^~fASHEVJLL , ~, R' ¢~ ~I ~ y 3i ' y~ ~' ~ u_4 atau~'urn
~x~.~ AERPORT ~,'- u~ on 4^ wt' r~• ..~+8++/5tnti.rs~x+osxar~ au I ~ t`'a ~ c ~ rr+ B O , l
F3z 3~.s a~~ s. ~ ~ ~ ~ i, `v~~s~ ~ ~ i~'~t -,~ '~ ~~/ .~ 1 = ~ ~~5~E4t~ , Cp
• F E': ~r ~ it ` ;~~~ ~ Y. '7 r'te` -.~~'' 'e'it ~ N ~ Y ,~~ ;t ` y~~.r f _ + p,~ ' ~ ,
i= ~-
-_ -f ~ I 3~ ' ,. 9 ;r" r.1i+RU'P+tFK~ t t
• l ~rD y. 3~ ~ ~ en _ i
• .ice ~-~~. 80~. ~ ~ s sue' ,` ~ ~y'`r~ ~ ..~ Z
• .:, ~~ J {~. tom' 9~'~j~~- L _ _- ~ ! 1 ~~ ~ - ~- ~ ~ £ ~f - _ - /
i lx 3 __ t. - - ~
~~-. .l W~.S_~ ~~~ .L. !t 3 vim` // .: G C 1 ~
i ~4 mcau z 2 {rte. ~~~ ~L._ C ~ t r t F 1.~ ."c-
. ~'~ st' f,~'J ~ S~`i. ~ '.a1,~ ~ 'x ~{ .~ 21 ~ .Z ~.h5. ~" .P :(. s'fJ JS M ~~~~, ti-~ ~.~~~
' ~ n",it .,. ^3' ...s^ .4,,. ~r..a -•..sa >--v ~' ~.K..F~ `` }:' 'Y-+~ '-SZ r'"s'+ti .~ u'i..._~ -._'@

A
l~ ~ i f ~ , ~ Q' 1 ~ N
J
`N / ~ e _ ~
i ~ ~ /
i is
p rv J .~,~ .L
• ~ ~ J ..
`C ,,
. ~ t\ ~ J ,~ ~` ~
Nr' 1' \ i
• U Y W ~ n( 1 -
I ^ O z. 0 ~ `tom _ (~ `.: gyp. n. N ' _7
• I j ~ ° ~\' O t~ LcLI ° ~ ~ i
c' ~m _ v 7( ~r ~
• M_M ~ I J H 14~. O
7 m
~~ J d d
f ~ _...._. ~ Y ,. o. \
~~ ~ C ~ O Q
~ /f0 ri _~
_.Q _C ` <
• CG ~ ~ 1°~-_~~
Z
/U ~ I ~
m O ~1/
a ~ 2 (J~ i U . .. ... _..._ ._...~ ~
m ~ ~Z ^o
• ~ ~ _ Y ~ _
,,, _ O
~ 'D ~ m
l ~ u _O~ ~ N
O I ~ c ~ ~I ~ cv~~m o m,~ ~~ a
• ~ m I a N 1° 1< a i o 1 J 2 cn ni 2 m-~ ai ~' f ~
• U1 ~ ~ m~ ~ ~owca' is o oai ,v" ~ m` .r ~ o
~-r-~ c~ ; - ~ ~ z o ~3' c ~ f ~'' 'o 0
V! ~ N V~ p `41:= C): l 1: y N r~ ~ W m
• ~: ` /
m ~ ~ ~ _ N ~ lD Y d. a ~ ~ J 1~ \ f~ 7
_ S.. L ~'
C w~ L ~~ "'~ Q C' C f6~ J
C y h
> . ~" a , r
Z ~:o.c or W r
c~ ~ U ~ v
N ~ ~ c; ~
c~ . =~~ _ ~
N ~T
U .i T~fJ ,Q i tC. C z m ~ t ... v. ? y ~ o
j =?
• O d uL1l~~ M N I C 2 ~ ,~~ ~ )~ E~
• J ~ ~ ~ I L e
~:~ ~_
• ', ~ /~ _ -
I \` ~t
1 i\ c 1 ~ '~_~ N ~% ~
M i s ~ ~' ra ~ ~ z
TLS' p ~ N ~' ~ Y ~ ~~`\ Y C _
QS.. t ~~~~ i__ c
_,
~ N r-i ~ (~ ~ ( C~ C7~ ~~J 1i O Ta C.
F : ~ ( ~~ ~ _ 1.y

~ _--.

• N ~'V~v'I L1C~
1 L%[J~ :.lei
I ~ GC <~ Gam;
\~ \ \~ ~~~.1 Ir'n ~ i ~ c. ~~ ~ . i j~
.\
\\ I ~ ~ ~ I i ! _
~\ ~ .... ~
\~ ,.
~. r
_ ~

' L4 I .f T 1
J
I
i \
~ y
I
~ 3 in G I
'
7
rte' \\
\
,\\\ O ~ N r.,
~ L
. ~ ~
~' ~j _
- ~
~: ~t
\
.\ O V -

i \

0
z
W f ~
W `
2 `
Q`.
O ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~; ~ o
.r ~ ~
ca ~
~ m
Q¢
~~ w_ ~ • U',, ~ JAI ~ ~ Cr . \ ~~\~, ~
• ,~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~\-I",i:=, ^V1O ~11~~ J ~ `v`im \\ \\\ \\ Z
• ~ ~ ~~ H I~...I~;I ;`\1 Imo.. i.. `' ~Y. `~`~ ~\. ~\ _O
r ~-~ V ~., \\ \ W
/I _; gym. X ~ ,~, -,~. ,~ i ,; ~ ~.,
~\ i
~" o
I // /~
I ("i / ?+
~ i '~ ~ "
;~
• cv 3 ui
{,,~ 0 m m I
~~' fir: ~ ~ ~'~ / ~'
I~ / / ~ r'
~ ~ r ^ ~ f-~
~ i/ 1. _- _ .. ~ ' ~ ~L..i `./
~ ~. ~
ICI: r i ~'7
I / - I ~-±
• ! ~y~ -- __ ~L
/ ! ~ r-~ r--' ll
/ ~ / I FO~ ~ I--~+
• I ~ I
___ , r
-- -~
~ ~ -'' ~
I ~ -_ ~ r ~ ~ C"'
1 J
• `-' '~ ' --~ o ~-~-
r r_i O I
z
a
W
U

o
~'.
~~~. \ ~ ~
+-~ r ~
~;
~- ~ A ~~ ~ ~ ~ J ,~ U
r r
~y r ;~
~~ = ~ r +' ~
~~ r Q
~ ~L i Y ~~'__ c
.~ ~ \-.' ~ ~'~ f` ~~ _ iU• U ~ ate.
:.~ ~ ~ _
J~ ~ ~ t, ~ ~~ ~ ~ .~ ~ Chi ~ Q
~' ~! ~ r..., ~ d
~ ~ '~\ U
I ~ : f pp~ ~ _ G;;
~ ~::-
"~ ~= ..
~ ~_ c~
}t ! c / - °
T i ~ ~ o \ J \ ~ ,C / ~/ 'v p O
t- 12
. i ~ ~ `. /,~ ~ S, ~// / _ moo/ ~o C $°
T'--~-'"~ y ~ - ~ m
' .. ~ I N~ N
;~"/
~~
I' ~ `~ ti ~-
~J ~ ~ ~ ~ F Z
'fir ~L- - ~ I ~ u F"''
- i o~~
__
- _~_ --- -
-----___--- a, Z I
____ z
r

A+~t 9, 2006
T~; L.~.~,E $~~v,.
Ems; M;~eQ , ~E
~c; k4c~f1.c~S~c #~7~y
NC'2~0 (A~t~P~I, ~ , NAG
A~~'~.:~ l~Y.~lGs
Tie have-aeGe,~.e~.cei( y~.aje~X pua ~,~, ilea;,~s,e~f z, ,n~,j,.;,N,,;~,e ~w~E~' .~(:.n.~~, (~ ~.i• e(~ zo n.;~,K.;~e
X~e~e +~ryk~,7~. ~.aX~we..:.~~ av~.t ~.-ve $eer., ~.o~aJt~ ;.y. cviXt~.r• atiewt. ~Ue ~r~:.++.~,~e ~e roy~ ~ ~e ~,n~,..otie~
~,,~ -wr.~,,. -w;.~' ~e ay'f^ti°~^~.xiE~ X260, DDO, T~:~.:~. a i~.,.,~ ticdti•~• ~ji.o~s• ~e w?,~e~.arxz
~v~ ~v~l eve a.ef X1.8 M•;.~;.nti. -w~ o~, a.eX~s,;~..& aur,.2~t, TPA ~,o~u~( ~Xe ~. ~. a
~^ zee ave~x ode ~, zee dwe~,yw,•e.:,.x, ,. ~,,~ yN,6 k ~x ~~, Tie
~'~'~"'~"& ~.as~X tivr.~ -mo~;.e~ roc ~e u•~.~ ~;.,,e 1uw~ ~j~ed Xwuwur ~e Qc.;~i(;e,~ ;,i. ~ r. e~o~X xo
~ ~. ~,~~ev,.,. sy~o,ooo .~~ ~ ~..~.~.& ~~z.

F~1=ELAND and 1CAUFFiM1~N,1NC.
EK~rv~~~s • L.^NDSCAPE ARCNIT7=CT9
August 9, 2006
To; Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
From; Michael Ranks, PE
Re; hfial-~Llart Store #1179
iVC 280 (Airport Road), Buncombe County, North Caio/ina
Storm Wafer Management Design Summary
~~!-~~
Freeland-Ka ufr'ma n
and ~recieen, Jnc.
Bentonville, Arkan5a6
The above-referenced project will utilize a wetlands•type retention basin, which will include
a permanent pool, forebay (initial stilling basin), and a 10 toot wide shallow-vegetated shelf
to promote wetlands'vegetation, This storm water management facility will be designed in
strict accordance with the requirements of Buncombe County and North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), in regards to both flood
control and storm water quality. The pond's permanent pool depth will be based on an
appropriate surface area to drainage area ratio. A vegetated filter strip wilt be installed
between the pond's outfall and the adjacent drainage feature.
Freeland and Kauffman is currently preparing the storm water management design for this
project, and we will begin appropriate permitting processes as soon as the design is
complete,
Please contact us should you require additional information. Thank you,
`L09 rYGS'. 9tcne Avenue o Greenville, 5cuih Ga.rofina 29009 • Tslc~hone 56423397 • Fax [phone]

_ __ _ _
•
•
•
a`'~~ ~ a r~Rpr,
~ ~
o Y
SEP 2 6.2006
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Enviromtrent and :Qatar~l Resources
Aran W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Septdmber Z0, 2006
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT:REQUESTED
7005 3110 0003 5 74 0318
John E. Clarke, Asst. Vice President
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
2001 South East 10`~ Street
Bentonville, AR 7271 Z
~!:Ih;eCt i?FOperty: ~-Airport Road Retail. Shopping Center
Unnamed Tributary to French Broad River
Project Return as incomplete
Dear Mr. Clarke:
DWQ Project # 06-0922
Buncombe County
On September 5, 2006, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your additional
information response in regards to your request to fill streams and wetlands as part of
your site development. As of today, the DWQ has not received a satisfactory response
to ail of the items discussed in the : on-site meeting and the additional information
request. Therefore, we are returning your application as incomplete in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H .0506.
Should you decide to pursue you project, the following items must clearly be included in
any future application to the Division of Water Quality for filling Waters of the State:
The "no-fill" altemative must be:fully explored.
• The use of retaining walls as opposed to fill slopes must be fully justified from
both an Avoidance and Minimization and a justified #inancial point of view.
• Re-alignment of the build'mq ~(as to minimize impacts) and multiple parking
facilities with bridges over waters must be fully evaluated as discussed during the
on-site meeting:
• A complete review of the ones alternative presented with respect to alternative
stormwater cantrals which wouCd not cause further impacts.
401 Wetlands Cortltication Unk
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, Nortr Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 2T60d
Phone: [phone] ! FAX g19-733.631 Iniemet http~//h2o enr state. nc us/ncwetlands
An Equal OpQor!<:nilylAffirmalive Action Empbyer - 50~ Recyctedlt 0~o Post Consumer Paper
~thCaroh
~1~atrrral~

i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
a
•
•
•
•
•
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Page 2 of 2
September 20, 2006
As you have no authorization under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act for this activity,
and work within waters of the state would be a violation of North Carolina General
Statutes and Administrative Code. Please call Ms. Cyndi Karoly at 919-733-1786 or Mr.
Kevin Barnett at 828-296-4657 if you have any questions this matter.
Sincerely,
Roger C. Edwards, Regional Supervisor
Surface Water Protection Section
. _ Division of Water Quality
C K/khb
cc: Cyndi Karoly, DWQ, Wetlands ! 401 Permitting Unit
David Baker, USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
David McHenry, Wildlife Resources Commission
Becky Fox, US EPA, Region 4 ~ .
File Copy
Central Files
Filename: 06-;0922.AirportRoad RetailShoppingCenter.returned

• Attention: Cyndi Karoly
Reference: Request to Reactivate
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, NC
• DWQ Project # 06-0922
Dear Ms. Karoly,
• On behalf of the applicant, Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, we would like
~ to respectfully request that the above reference permit application be reactivated.
~ Included herein is the additional information requested by your office in a letter dated
September 20, 2006. Four complete copies are included a one complete copy has been
• sent to Kevin Barnett at the Asheville Field Office. Additionally, a new check for
$475.00 in included.
I hope that this addresses all your comments and concerns regarding this project
and we can proceed in a timely fashion. If you have any questions, please call me at
[phone]. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
S Respectfully,
• Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
i Cc: Tom Walker, USACOE
• Kevin Barnett, NCDENR
Mike Ranks, Freeland and Kauffman, Inc.
~ P.O. Box 3744 Greenville, South Carolina 29608 [phone] Fax [phone]
~ P0. Box 2346 Hendersonville, North Carolina 28793 Phone/Fax [phone]
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604

oo{
~
~ _l ~
o m
z
~
~
Z
-
m

o z
~ D

'' r
~ ~ ~
~
.~7 ~ m~
zG'O~
`
~ r
~
^ i
O yx
c~vZ
LIl A
~

W /
~
"
O
O Z
RJ (n
r C
~
-~ ~
D
•• z
~ ~
'
r
O Z
O n
~, ~ .
O

D

O
~
N ~ ~S1

V
(~ \ ~ ~1
/~
Y~

~ V
~ _`=

Envronmer~at
Perm%tfing
.~.,.
Consul~ants,anc.
October 24, 2006
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attention: Cyndi Karoly
Reference: Request to Reactivate
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, NC
DWQ Project # 06-0922
Dear Ms. Karoly,
This letter is intended to provide additional information requested by your office
in a letter dated September 20, 2006 regarding the project referenced above. We would
like to request that the permit review process be reactivated.
Avoidance and Minimization
No Development
The "No Development" scenario is not feasible in this area. Airport Road is a
rapidly growing commercial area in close proximity to the Asheville Regional Airport,
the Western Carolina Ag Center, I-26, and a number of `big-box" retailers such as
Lowe's and Target. The area between Hendersonville and Asheville is rapidly growing.
According to recently released estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau, population in the
Asheville metro grew by 1.4 % over the last year, adding 5,465 new residents. Among
the four counties that make up the metro area, Henderson had the highest rate at 1.8 %.
The national average is 0.9 %. These factors contribute to the increasing demand for
retail services. The corridor in which this parcel is located has been specifically targeted
by the state for this kind of development. Infrastructure, such as the road widening of NC
280 and I-26, makes this area the logical location for the retail services demanded by the
growing population. The infrastructure provides the foundation for commercial
development and allows such development to remain consolidated in one area.
Under the No Development scenario, the project would not take place and the
proposed retail center would not be built. No impacts to Waters of the US would occur,

and consequently, no on site restoration would occur. Investments in property, design,
and time will be lost, along with the potential for approximately 350* new jobs. The
project would relocate to a new site that would possibly require upgrades to existing
infrastructure. The expansion of roads to handle traffic would then allow for additional
smaller developments to move in, creating a new commercial area else ware in the
region.
Reduction of On-Site Impacts
Every effort was made by the applicant to reduce on-site impacts to the maximum
extent possible. The current configuration of the Wal-Mart also lends itself to avoidance
and minimization as much as is practicable. Alternative site layouts were proposed
during the design phase. Included herein are copies of two alternative site layouts.
Alternative 1:
In the first alternative layout, the use of two retaining walls did allow for an
overall reduction of wetland impacts by a total of 0.37 acres, however, due to the
relocation of the stormwater detention basin, the alternate site layout also impacts 742
linear feet of stream. The stormwater management needs to be located at a lower
elevation than the developed area. Therefore, the logical locations for the ponds are at the
lowest points on the property. If the area behind the western retaining wall was utilized
for a detention pond, it would still be necessary for a second pond in order to meet the
detention requirements for the site. Storm drain would have to be punched through the
retaining wall and be routed to the proposed pond. In order to install the storm drain, a
fair amount of wetlands would still have to be impacted. Thus impacts would exist on
the stream as well as the western wetland area "D". The configuration of the ponds on
the alternative layout shows the least amount of impact possible.
Due to the required grading, the retaining wall near the western property
boundary would incur a significant increase in cost when compared to the northern
retaining wall. The overall cost of both retaining walls for the alternate site layout is
approximately $1.8 million dollars, while the cost of the northern retaining wall by itself
is $260,000. From a strictly economic standpoint, the $1.5 million (592% increase in
cost) is not viable for the scope of the project and represents a dramatic increase in
overall cost.
Alternative 2:
This alternative involves rotating the building so that the side is oriented toward
Airport Road and utilizing the out lots as satellite parking with a span over Wetland "E".
As you can see from the site plan, the re-orientation of the building and the spanning of
Wetland "E" does not allow for adequate parking or access to the front of the building.
Commercial centers are required by law to provide a certain number of handicapped
parking spaces with easy access to the front of the store for patrons with disabilities.
Additionally, the grading requirements for the site still exist, so retaining walls would be
necessary, along with the span for Wetland Area "E". This layout would not be feasible
due to the lack of adequate parking, lack of adequate access to the front of the store and

r
S
r
additional costs associated with abridge/span and the multiple retaining walls needed to
avoid impact to "Wetland Area E".
The proposed site layout does utilize one retaining wall for reduction of impact by
eliminating all impacts to stream 1. Additionally, overall impervious surface was
reduced from 18.5 acres to 17.6 acres, and outlots were reduced from a total of 3.3 acres
to 1.99 acres. Taking into account all of the above mentioned factors, it was determined
that the avoidance of 742 linear feet of stream impacts, reduction of overall impervious
surface and outlot acreage, and substantial reduction of costs associated with the
construction of the western retaining wall was preferred both ecologically and
economically.
Existing Design with Mitigation
The proposed project includes 1.41 acres of onsite created wetlands, 0.34 acres of
onsite wetland preservation, 1 acre of wetland mitigation from the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, 2.1 acres of onsite upland buffer preservation, and 500 linear feet
of onsite stream relocation and enahcement.
An onsite mitigation meeting took place October 11, 2006 with NCDENR,
USACE, FWS, and NCWRC. Based on discussions regarding the proposed mitigation
plan, we have revised the plan to eliminate the priority 2 stream restoration in favor of
stream enhancement and spot stabilization, due to the lack of buffer available. We have
also ensured that the outflow from the stormwater management ponds will flow into the
created wetland areas to add to the over hydrology of the area. A complete revised on-site
mitigation plan is included for your review.
All in all, the applicant has avoided and minimized impacts to Waters of the US to
the maximum extent practicable. Alternatives were considered thoroughly prior to
submitting the present design and relying on compensatory mitigation. I hope that this
addresses all your comments and concerns regarding this project and we can proceed in a
timely fashion. If you have any questions, please call me at [phone]. Thank you
for your assistance in this matter.
Respectfully,
Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Cc: Tom Walker, USACOE
Mike Ranks, Freeland and Kauffinan, Inc.

r
•
•
•
•
M
s
•
r
•
~.~~~
~~\
~,
\~~
~~
~% , ~,\
~'"
\~
~~ ~~ z
~ O ~ ~\ Nwtr
~ A ~ w > w
r \~~ ~ I I
o ~\\\ Q v v
I~~ ~\\ „
~^ ~ \\
0 \\~
i Z ~\v
3 ~ \~~
~.~ N a
u~ ~\
r-°~ ~~~\
Li
,`J`y\ ~
~! .IIC v
~~
Q'
S~ i NQ°N
O~VI~ /
I `~ O ~ I ao
a3rnN
ti ^ I
~= U
i
z
~J p C7 ~ /' ~ / %~
~`_ o
J /.
~J~ ~W < ~
~~ a~3 ~
-_
~~~
C
L~ r:
a ~ ~~;
-~- ~ Z
a=
~' $? ~
a~3 ~
j \_
J _
0
z
W r~ w
= O
N
Q ~ ~
~ J~a
~ ~ a
m ~
a ~ ~ c
:?
a' ¢ m
Q
Z
Q.
W
Q
~_
W
a ,p ~
o L
N G
N
Q ~
U '^ w > W
,^ m
VJ ^ ~ Z C
U ~ ~ < ~
_ ~~ o o w
U
C s
e _ 3 8S $,'
'^ ^ N
v r
sy~"
``~
^ ~~
aC~7~ii
~ U
~~~
w~H
F" ~
Z ~ H
~~~
'-'w~
Paz
w o

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
s
•
•
,~~~,
~, .
\\\
~ ~
~ ~~ \
~ ~
~ ~
\ \
C
/ /~
_-~
J`_-' '
°i
~~:,
r.:~~
I~; j
~~
_^,
~: ~(
A:
~~
~ ^\ ~
~ \
~; `~ .~ ;t
~,sp
~\ ,~ ~a
~~ ~ `K
~~\~
~ ~
~ ~
\~
~'~
~~ \ \
~~
~ `~
'~~~~ ~,
~~`
.~, ~
~ z \
~ ~ Cf~
---4 ~
P:•: •:~:~:\
~ /;::~:1 I•:~ /;:;:;:;:;:•:~: j
•''~ f`
~ • •'
1 ~;~
1
i /! :~:~ i i
i~::;"i i
~, ~ [~:•:~:•:•:•: S
~ I r
i~ o ~ ~.,~
~ ~ ~'i ~~
,:~ ,,
.: ~. :<~
.~
F:~, u
1 k k~`c
~j ~ .1 1
~~ ~~~~~~~_~~ ~i t
___h___ _+~.w~_.__ _
f~~ ~. -
I ~ _ _ .___
re
r- ~ ~_ ~~d€ `"' ~ ~ __''~ 'fie:
,~_
~°~ ass i~:°~ 3§~, ~:

\\\
/ \ ~
~~
O
z
N
W
W
S
N
tL
0
Q N
NON ~ C
L7.. J ~ ~
U
~ ~ ~ a
~ m E
t1O C ~ U
LJ.. Qj j
~ a m
Q
a
w

r
N
W
J _ _
Q ~ w
TU N
i II ~ C
6Lo ~ ~~~~
N
~ ~°"~_
~o~~
~ ~
w 1~7 l '
z~~,
~aZ
w O

i
e
r
i
•
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
AIRPORT ROAD RETAIL SHOPPING CENTER
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EPC PROJECT NO. MROSPCN008
PREPARED FOR:
WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUISNESS TRUST
PREPARED BY:
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING CONSULTANTS
125 WEST STONE AVENUE (29609)
POST OFFICE BOX 3744
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29608
OCTOBER 2006

The State of North Carolina's 401 Water Quality Certifications require that the Division
of Water Quality confirm that the project it is evaluating "does not result in cumulative
impacts, based upon past or reasonably anticipated future impacts, which cause or will
cause a violation of downstream water quality standards".
The Division of Water Quality evaluates cumulative impacts based on the guidelines of
the "Draft Internal Policy, Cumulative Impacts and the 401 Water Quality Certification
and Isolated Wetland Program. NC Division of Water Quality, October 3, 2002, Version
1.6". Based on these guidelines, DWQ's policy provides for three levels of analysis. For
projects involving only small amounts of added impervious surface or occurring in
heavily developed areas, a "Generic Description" of the project's possible cumulative
impacts will be required. If the project will involve a significant increase in impervious
surface (generally 20% or more), but is located near existing roads and development, a
"Qualitative Analysis" will be required. The highest level, the "Quantitative Analysis",
is required where a project is significant in size and likely to stimulate growth in the area.
DWQ's policy provides that it is applicable to private development projects, although it
recognizes that many of the projects are unlikely to cause cumulative impacts. DWQ
recognizes that private development projects are most likely cause cumulative impacts
when they are "1) relatively large, 2) involve commercial development, and 3) occur in
otherwise relatively undeveloped landscapes with an impact on regional growth
patterns".
For the Airport Road Retail Shopping Center project, DWQ has determined that a
qualitative analysis of the potential cumulative impacts of the project would be
appropriate in terms of determining the effects on downstream water quality.
To determine potential cumulative impacts, this project was reviewed for any growth
stimulating effects that could potentially foster downstream impacts on water quality.
Factors taken into consideration include the project size, its nature, and its proximity to
the developed local landscape.
Project Description
The site is located on the west side of Airport Road north of the intersection with I-26 in
Arden, NC. The property is bounded by a mobile home park to the north, commercial
and residential properties to the west, commercial properties to the south, and Airport
Road to the east.
The proposed project would create a total of approximately 17.8 acres of impervious
surface on the 37.287+/- acre site. The overall project involves the construction of a
commercial retail shopping center. The shopping center will consist of a newly
constructed Wal-Mart store as well as other commercial structures. Additionally,
infrastructure (parking, access drives, stormwater detention, etc.) will be constructed to
service the new facilities as required by all applicable Federal, State and local ordinances
and regulation.

~ Extensive grading will be required on the site to bring it to an acceptable level with
Airport Road. The site has several wetlands, most of which have been highly disturbed
. due to past site clearings and soil compaction due to heavy equipment. The proposed
development involves the filling of a total of 1.93 acres of wetlands.
r
Project Area Description
The project is located in Arden, North Carolina. Arden is located in south Buncombe
County along I-26, in between Hendersonville, NC and Asheville, NC. Arden, NC is
home of the Asheville Regional Airport, which is located approximately 1 mile from the
proposed project site. Arden is a rapidly growing area due to its proximity to both
Hendersonville and Asheville. Hendersonville and Asheville have solid positions as top
retirement destinations, repeatedly appearing on lists of top place from sources such as
Modern Maturity, HARP, RelocateAmerica.com and Baryons. Hendersonville is ranked
number five -- Asheville is number three and Brevard is number six -- in a just released
book by Warren Bland, Retire in Style, 60 Outstanding Places across the USA and
Canada. Additionally, Asheville was listed by Rolling Stones magazine as the "freak
capitol of the Untied States" and by National Geographic Adventure as a top 10
adventure town. The diverse nature of the area has contributed to the growing
population.
Watershed Description
The project is located within the French Broad River Basin. The onsite streams are
unnamed tributaries of Lake Julian, which is classified as "C" waters. Class "C" waters
are defined as "freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life
including propagation and survival, and wildlife."
The current condition of Lake Julian is listed as "Fully Supporting" based on the 2000
French Broad River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Lake Julian is monitored by Carolina
Power and Light Company. Comparison of chemistry characteristics from data obtained
in 1992 and 1996 show that the lake has remained relatively unchanged. In addition, a
special study of trace elements preformed in 1995 showed that trace elements "were
comparable to background concentrations or slightly above background concentrations."
Project Induced Growth
The proposed project is not likely to induce adjacent development as much of the
surrounding area is already developed. The corridor in which this parcel is located has
been specifically targeted by the state for this kind of development. Infrastructure, such
as the road widening of NC 280 and I-26, makes this area the logical location for the
retail services demanded by the growing population. The infrastructure provides the
foundation for commercial development and allows such development to remain
consolidated in one area. This particular parcel is one of the last remaining undeveloped
parcels and is surrounded by other "big-box" developments.

Based on the developed nature of the surrounding area and the overall nature and purpose
of the project, it is not believed that the project will induce adjacent developments that
would have impacts on downstream water quality.
Summary
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust proposes to develop this project in accordance with
likely conditions in the 401 Water Quality Certification and the previously received 404
permit authorizations. The purpose of implementing these guidelines is to protect the
downstream water quality in the area of the project. Based on the projects proximity to I-
26, Airport Road, the Asheville Regional Airport, as well as the surrounding commercial
development, the applicant does not believe that any potential effects on growth will
occur due to the Airport Road Retail Shopping Center project.

ONSITE MITIGATION PLAN
AIRPORT ROAD RETAIL CENTER
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EPC PROJECT NO. MR05008
USAGE P/N: SAW-2006-32342-311
PREPARED FOR:
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
2001 Southeast 10`" Street
Bentonville, AR 72712
PREPARED BY:
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING CONSULTANTS
125 WEST STONE AVENUE
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29608
[phone]
AUGUST 2006
REVISED OCTOBER 2006
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.
Impact Overview. 1
Mitigation Overview.. 1
2 BASELINE INFORl~1ATION OF PROJECT SITE. 1
3 UNIT 1 : Stream Relocation/Establishment Area. 2
4 UNIT 2 : Stream Enhancement Area. 3
5 UNIT 3 : Wetland Creation Areas. 7
6 MITIGATION WORK PLAN. 8
7 Monitoring and Success Criteria.. 8
APPENDIX 1: Overview Figures and Pictures of Project Site. 10
APPENDIX 2: Level 2 Assessment of Existing Stream Channel. 11
APPENDIX 3: Reference Reach. 12
APPENDIX 4: Restoration Figures. 13
2

i
•
1. 1VIITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
•
Impact Overview
This plan is being submitted by the Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust to mitigate for
proposed impacts associated with the construction of the Airport Road Retail Center.
• The impacts that are being compensated for include 1.6 acres of wetlands and 504 linear
• feet (0.321 acres) of stream/linear wetland.
Stream 1Vlitigation Overview
• • To compensate for the proposed stream impacts, this mitigation plan encompasses
. a combination of stream relocation establishment and stream enhancement
activities. A total of 570 linear feet of stream will be improved by the proposed
activities.
•
• All activities are proposed to take place onsite.
• The overall goals and purpose of the project are to reconnect and enhance
previously disturbed onsite waters.
^ Stream Relocation/Establishment Area (Unit 1Z The linear system being
impacted enters the property through an existing pipe, the proposed
activities would extend the pipe and redirect the waters into an existing
ephemeral channel. Approximately, 1601inear feet of ephemeral channel
will be enhanced to accommodate the new flow.
r
Stream Enhancement Area (Unit 2): As shown in the mitigation overview
figures in Appendix 1, the Stream Relocation/Enhancement Reach flows
into an existing intermittent/perennial system. The existing stream contains
large amounts of solid waste and debris, as well as several areas of bank
failure. The proposed activities will enhance approximately 410 linear feet
of stream channel.
Wetland Mitigation Overview
To compensate for the proposed wetlands impacts, the applicant proposes a
combination of onsite wetland creation activities as well as utilizing the EEP
program.
^ Wetland Creation Areas (UNIT 3): Two wetland creation areas are
proposed to offset the proposed impacts. As shown on figures in
Appendix 1, a total of 1.45 acres of wetlands are proposed to be created.
2. BASELINE INFORMATION OF PROJECT SITE
Eco-Region -The project is located in the French Broad River Basin (USGS Hydrologic
Unit: 06010105). The project area falls within the Blue Ridge EcoRegion. The Blue
Ridge extends from southern Pennsylvania to northern Georgia, varying from narrow

ridges to hilly plateaus to more massive mountainous areas with high peaks. The mostly
• forested slopes, high-gradient, cool, clear streams, and rugged terrain occur on a mix of
. igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary geology. Annual precipitation of over 80 inches
can occur on the well-exposed high peaks of the Great Smoky Mountains that reach over
6000 feet above mean sea level. The southern Blue Ridge is one of the richest centers of
• biodiversity in the eastern U.S. It is one of the most floristically diverse ecoregions, and
includes Appalachian oak forests, northern hardwoods, and Southeastern spruce-fir
forests. Shrub, grass, and heath balds, hemlock, cove hardwoods, and oak-pine
communities are also significant.
Location- The Airport Road Property consists of approximately 37.287+/- acres and is
located on the west side of Airport Road north of the intersection with I-26 in Buncombe
County, North Carolina. The property is bounded by a mobile home park to the north,
• commercial and residential properties to the west, commercial properties to the south, and
Airport Road to the east. A tributary of the French Broad River flows west along a
portion of the northern property boundary. Two small wetlands are adjacent to this
S tributary. A linear wetland runs from Airport Road toward the center of the property,
• terminating before creating a clear connection with either the tributary or its adjacent
wetlands. To the south and near the center of the property is a larger wetland (1.658
acres) which runs northwest to the property boundary where is connects to the first
• tributary. A second u/n tributary of the French Broad River occurs in the southwest
corner of the property and has an associated wetland. The USGS HUC unit is 06010105.
A site location map is provided in the Appendix 1.

• The majority of the site was previously harvested for timber. The site is significantly
disturbed with remnant logging debris and rutted out access roads. A protected species
habitat assessment was conducted to determine if habitat for protected species was
• present on the property. No federally protected species were identified on the property.
Quantify Wetland Resources - A jurisdictional wetland delineation was conducted on
the property identifying wetlands and waterways. Wetlands, streams and isolated
• wetlands comprise 2.59 acres of the property. The first u/n tributary originates on
• property and runs east-west along the northern property boundary. The second u/n
tributary run northeast near the western property boundary and includes an associated
wetland. Two small wetland areas are located adjacent and south of the first tributary. A
• linear wetland runs east-west from Airport Road towards the center of the property. This
wetland receives runoff from stormwater off Airport Road. A large wetland is located in
the center of the property and runs northwest to the northern portion of the western
property boundary.

Existing Hydrology- Hydrologic characteristics on the property are based on local
rainfall and overflow of the unnamed tributaries of the French Broad River located near
the northern boundary of the property. Stormwater run off from Airport Road enters the
site from a culvert near the center of the eastern property boundary.

• 4

r
r
Existing Vegetation- The majority of the property is considered disturbed by past land
use practices. Existing vegetation consisted primarily of early successional species.
Large areas of Smilccr sp. and Jzznczrs effizses were present as well as Virginia pine (Pinzrs
virginiana), sawtooth blackberry (Rzrbzzs ar,;zrtus), sweetgum (Ligzridambar stvrac~zra),
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tz~lipifera), hazel alder (Alnz~s serrzrlata) and rhododendron.
Existing Soils- The dominant soils within the project area are Tate-Urban Land Complex
and Fannin Loam. Prior site disturbance and soil compaction have resulted in gleyed or
low-chroma color hydric soils with a hue of SY 5/2 and SY 5/1. A USDA soils map is
included in Appendix 1.
Slopes on the property ranged from nearly level to 12%. Soils identified on the property
included the following:
SoilSeries~and'CharacteristicsTdentified irithe SoiI~Survey:for the
' A- ort Road Pro e ~ ~ ~ `"
Series Symbol Slope Surface Hydric
Color Soil?
Tate 121 U 1-15% slope Nearly No
sil cla loam black
Fannin 351C 8-15% slope Dark No
silt loam brown
3. UNIT 1: Stream Relocation/Establishment Area
• As shown in pictures included in Appendix 2, the existing ephemeral channel is to
be modified and stabilized to handle the flows redirected into the drainage by the
proposed pipe. We propose to utilize the same dimension pattern and profile
constraints to be utilized in the adjacent, downstream "Stream Enhancement
Area". The derivation of the proposed channel parameters is described below.
• Total stream channel relocated and enhanced: approximately 1601inear feet.
• The same bank protection and replanting proposed for the "Stream Enhancement
Area" will be applied to this reach.
4. UNIT Z: Stream Enhancement Area
LEVEL II STREAM ASSESSMENT
• Data collected during the Level II stream survey included, but not limited to: thalweg,
edge of water, water surface, bankfull, top of low bank, width (channel, bankfull), depth
'
(mean, bankfull, max) and slope. All elevations were measured using a surveyor
s rod
and level. Data collected during the analysis is presented in Appendix 2.

• DIMENSION
. Stream dimension is measured by the cross section data. Key features along the cross
• section are identified including top of bank, breaks in slope along the cross section,
bankfull, edge of water and the thalweg.
i
These measurements are used to determine and calculate the following stream
dimensions and ratios; bankfull cross sectional area, bankfull width, mean and max
bankfull depth, width/depth ratio, width of flood prone area, entrenchment ratio, and
bank height ratio. The width of flood prone area is the width measurement at an
elevation twice the maximum bankfull depth. The entrenchment ratio is the width of
the flood prone area divided by the bankfull width. The bank height ratio is the height
of the low bank divided by the maximum bankfull depth. These measurements help
determine the degree of vertical containment of the stream channel. Data Summary
sheets for the impaired reach are included in Appendix 2.
PROFILE
The stream channel profile is a description of the gradient and bed facets (riffles,
runs, pools and glides) and the spacing of these facets along the length of the stream.
Profile data is gathered by performing a longitudinal profile of the stream by
surveying the thalweg, edge of water, bankfull and top of low bank (when present) at
least a distance of twenty bankfull widths. Survey data was collected at the top of
each facet. A total of 410 linear feet of the unnamed tributary of the French Broad
River were assessed.
These measurements are used to determine and calculate the following stream
dimensions and ratios; average water surface slope, valley slope, facet slopes, pool to
pool spacing and pool length.
CHANNEL MATERIALS
The channel materials data was collected using the Wolman pebble count methods.
Channel Material Data Summary sheets are included in Appendix 2.
• DATA ANALYSIS
Once the field data was collected it was entered RiverMorph and formulas were
established to calculate the morphological parameters associated with dimension,
profile and channel materials. Estimates of bankfull discharge were determined based
on hydraulic geometry, channel roughness and slope using Manning's equation.
Level II Assessment Summary of Unnamed Tributary of French Broad River
Parameter Pro'ect Reach
Ros en Stream T e Fob
Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 0.0697
Bankfull Width ft. 5.62
Mean Bankfull De th ft. 0.4
6

r
Width/De th Ratio 14.0
Bankfull Areas . ft. 2.26
Entrenchment Ratio 1.39
Water Surface Sloe % 0.027
Sinuosi K A rox.1.2
D50 mm 5.89
Bankfull Dischar e cfs 7.9
** A more comprehensive list of stream variables is included in the reach comparison
sheets in Appendix 2.
REFERENCE REACH
As shown in figures included in Appendix 3, the chosen reference reach is located on
Little Grove Creek, approximately 51 miles from the project site. This particular
reference was selected because:
^ The valley type, slope and soils are similar to the project area.
^ Many years ago, this reach abandoned it's floodplain, widened and has since
established a bankfull bench and stable form.
^ The reach has been and will continued to be measured annually to monitor
stability.
BASELINE INFORMATION for Reference Reach
^ ECOREGION
"Tributary K Reference Reach" is located on Little Grove Creek in the Grove
Creek watershed of the Saluda River Basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit: 3,050,109).
The reference area falls within the Southern Lower Piedmont EcoRegion. A site
location map and infrared photo is provided in Appendix 3.
^ SOILS
The dominant soils within the project area are Cartecay sandy loam and Toccoa
sandy loam associations. A USDA soils map is included in Appendix 3.
VEGETATION
The forest along Little Grove Creek has been undisturbed for at least 2 decades.
The forests maintain a diverse assemblage of tree. Some tree species found in the
project area include white oak (Qz~erczrs alba), red oak (Quercus rubs), black
oak (Quercus velzmtina), chestnut oak (Quercus prinus), maple (Ater rubrum),
poplar (Liriodendron tzrlipifera), hemlock (Tsuga sp.), sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), sweet gum (Ligzridambar sryrac~ua).
• LEVEL II STREAM ASSESSMENT of Reference Reach
Similar to the project reach a Level II Assessment was performed, data collected
during the survey is summarized in Appendix 3.
7

i
•
•
•
r
r
i
Level II Assessment Summary of reference reach K on Little Grove Creek
Parameter Pro'ect Reach
Ros en Stream T e B4c - C4
Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 2.073
Bankfull Width ft. 17.9
Mean Bankfull De th ft. 1.74
Width/De th Ratio 10.31
Bankfull Areas . ft. 31.3
Entrenchment Ratio 3.62
Water Surface Sloe % 0.005
Sinuosi K A rox.1.6
D50 mm 1.75
Bankfull Dischar e cfs 154
** A more comprehensive list of stream variables is included in Appendix 3.
Data generated from the reference reach was utilized to create dimensionless ratios,
which were utilized a parameters for the stream restoration design.
4. RESTORATION PLAN
Restoration figures are included in Appendix 4.
• Work in the "Stream Enhancement Area" will involve the removal of all solid waste
debris within the existing channel. In addition, spot stabilization using hand tools and
Bio-D70 matting will occur in areas showing signs of bank failure. More extensive
bank sloping will not take place due to the proximity of the stream to the property
line.
o Dimension Adjustments - "Stream Relocation/Establishment Reach"
• Across section of the proposed channel is included in Appendix 4.
Summaries of the proposed channel dimensions are included in
Appendix 4.
• As shown in the Typical bank stabilization diagram included in
Appendix 4, Bio-D70 matting will be utilized to stabilize the banks
and the banks will be vegetated with a combination of herbs and
woody vegetation. A list of vegetation proposed to be planted can be
found in Appendix 4.
• In-stream structures (cross vanes) will be utilized to prevent down
cutting. They will be placed at the top and bottom of the "Stream
Relocation/Enhancement Reach.
• All of the structures are proposed to be made of rocks, wood or a
combination rock and wood.
8

Proposed Channel Parameters
Parameter Pro'ect Reach
Ros en Stream T e Bob - E4b
Drainage Area (sq. mi.) 0.0697
Bankfull Width ft. 4.4
Mean Bankfull De th ft. 0.51
Width/De th Ratio 8.58
Bankfull Areas . ft. 2.24
Entrenchment Ratio 3.62
Water Surface Sloe % 0.023
Sinuosi K A rox.1.3
Bankfull Dischar e cfs 7.84
** A more comprehensive list of stream variables is included in Appendix 4.
5. UNIT 3: Wetland Creation Areas
As shown on figures in Appendix 1, the proposed creation areas are downhill from the
wetland areas proposed to be impacted and adjacent to an existing wetland. The success
of the wetland creation areas relies on providing appropriate hydrology, soils, and
vegetation.
Planned Hydrology- Due to the existing topography and stream channels that
cross the area, this portion of the property is inherently wet. Prior to previous
disturbance the existing wetlands were presumably much larger. The hydrology
provided to this area should be increased due to the proposed storm water
management and grade modifications. The hydrology will be further assisited by
minor grading that will result in lowered topography.
Planned Soils- The hydric soils (top 12" to 18") of the areas to be impacted will
be removed and stockpiled for use in the wetland creation areas. The wetland
creation areas will be initially excavated 12" to 18" below proposed grade, and
then backfilled with the stockpiled hydric soils. Preserving the naturally occurring
hydric soils containing the existing seed bank should promotes the establishment
of native hydrophytes and aid in containing necessary hydrology.
Planned Vegetation - It is assumed that the seed bank present within the
transplanted hydric soils will supply the needed herbs. Woody trees and shrubs
will be planted 8 ft. on center. At least 915 trees, shrubs and/or saplings will be
planted in the created forested wetland area. Planting schedules for each species
and plant category is dependent on dormancy period and expected germination
times. It is expected that most of the planting will occur during late fall or early
spring periods. Vegetation characteristics for each area will be designed to allow
the highest species diversity and greatest vegetation survival rates. Selected
species will be dependent on availability of transplants. The floristic composition
of the existing wetland areas was analyzed to aid in creating the list of species to
9

•
r
i
s
•
i
be planted. All selected species will be native to North Carolina and will be
obtained from local nurseries if possible. A vegetation list of species that may be
utilized is included in Appendix 4.
6 iyliti~ation `Vork Plan.
• All work will be done utilizing current Best Management Practices.
• All disturbed riparian areas will be replanted 8 to 12 ft on center with bare root or
containerized woody trees and shrubs. (Species List in Appendix 4).
Adaptive Management Clause:
• During construction minor changes to the proposed restoration may be made if
more logical or affective means to achieve the projected goals becomes apparent.
Construction Schedule
• All proposed restoration activities will begin once the final grades have been
acquired for the proposed project and adjacent slopes have been stabilized. The
restoration activities will be complete prior to the completion of the construction
of the proposed project.
7. Monitoring and Success Criteria
• 6 monitoring reports over 5 years (a 6-month and 5 annual) will be submitted to
the USACE for review.
Monitoring reports will include:
o Photographs taken from established photo locations that will depict all of
the restoration sites.
0 4 Permanent cross sections will be established along the enhanced
tributaries. Cross sections will be overlaid with previous reports to
determine if the streams dimension is changing.
o Survival rates of planted woody vegetation in both riparian and wetland
areas will be analyzed utilizing a stem count.
o Hydrology success will be monitored utilizing peizometers.
Success Criteria:
o Vegetation success on both stream buffer areas and within the created
wetland areas, will be qualified by 75% survival.
o Hydrology success within the created wetland areas will be achieved by
having soils saturation within 14 inches of the surface for 3 consecutive
weeks during the growing season. Hydrology will be regularly monitored
for level of saturation, using established piezometers.
• Contingency Plan:
If changes to the streams dimension, pattern or profile are deemed to be negative,
leading toward instability, changes to the stream may be made.
10

o Changes may include:
• Placement of in-stream structures to stabilize the stream.
• Modifying the streams dimension to establish a more appropriate
stream dimension.
• Stabilizing the stream banks with additional coir matting and
vegetation.
If the created wetland fails to meet hydrologic standards; the elevations within the
created wetland may be adjusted or adjustments may be made to redirect surface
flows through the created wetland areas. If the wetlands fail to meet vegetation
success the areas will be replanted with different species or hardier stock.
Party Responsible for Mitigation Activities: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust.
Party Responsible for Monitoring: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust.
11

APPENDIX 1: Overview Figures and Pictures of Project Site
10

GRAPHIC SCALE SHEET N0.
i, ~~~~~~~~~~"~ 2~0 ~ 2~0 ~o LOCATION MAP
Figure ~
~~~~~
1 inch = 500 feet Airport Road Retail Center

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Of
A endix 1
PP
Post Office Boz 3744 DRAWN BY: Imh n
NC
b
C
B
~~~(~~j ~~~~~''~'~
~
' c~ee~~~ue.sczssoe DATE: oaioaizoos ty,
ou
uncom
e OF
~
~
~+i ~
~3 Phone: (B6J) 271-3040
Paz: [phone] EPC PROJECT NO.: MROSjwtl009 USACE P/N:
Property Boundary REVISIONS
~--r-

~w - - ~„,

D
r
Property boundary
REVIS

~~i~~ GRAPHIC SCALE
2
~ 2~ ~o
AERIAL PHOTO SHEET NO.
, ~ Figure 2
~~~ ~j~"y"'j" e" 1 inch = 500 feet Airport Road Retail Center Of
~1~~a ~ a Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
A
endix 1
` PoaloBice6o:3744 ORAWNBY: Imh C pp
~r ~~j ~j~
~x~l~
~1®~~~~~~I 1~ ~ a o~e~~
esa
zi~aao onre. oeroarzoos Buncombe County, N
.,
~u )
t
Faz: [phone]
EPC PROJECT NO.: MR05008
USACE P/N: OF

s
Source: Buncombe County
GIS

~' ~~~~~~~ GRAPHIC SCALE
2i° i 2i° si°
SOILS MAP SHEET NO.
Figrure 3
~~~~` =' 1 inch = 500 feet Airport Road Retail Center Of
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
DRAWN BY: Imh Appendix 1
1 ~)~,°~` ~~p(,~
~~'~~~~~
~ Past 0(flce Box J7a4
Greenville, SC2960B DATE: OB/08/2006 Buncombe County, NC
~ ~1 ~N W'.~
~~N ~ Phoee ler~l v~-Joao
Faz: (864) 3359299
EPC PROJECT NO.:
USACE PIN: OF
Land Complex Fannin Loam 8-15~
2-15~ slopes slopes

x_
O ~ ~ ~
Z ~ ~ C
sue, ~v- r = W Q O
Q ~
.~
C
s ~~ ~'~~
~'~~:
_ ~, l-.
~ ~ ~ .,
~ \ ~\
~ ~~A ~ _~
~ ~ \ ~~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~. ~ 1
.~ ~} ~ \ li ~ > ~ m Z
~ C ~< ~ O m
p / < ~ ~~ w c
I ~ ~ V`~~ ~ a r~
~- X ~ ` y ~ I / ~ E
tom.. C.. ~~ ~, . ~ \ ti Ia? ~ o m c
~ ~ ~" 1I I~ ~ o.~ o
/
~ #..~
O ?
W
~ ~ \ U
~ ~ ~
U ~~ /
C ~ / ;,
~ ~., ~ ~ ~ ~
_ ~ 8~~ ~ ~
\ m
/ '~
/ ` ~`
D I
C N ~ S
D ~ ~ = N W ~
~;/ .~ J z
~ ~ ~ r
DD ~.~ ~ R ~~ ~ ~ ~ w > w
~ ,~ $ m O
DDD ~ / \\ Q~j ~ ~ 0 3 tii a
DDDD\ ~~ ~ 3 4--~ ~ N ~ o w
D D ~+ ~ = II
DDDD r \ ~ L L
'."3 d v
DD D~ I ~ra \ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ CC ,Qy~ ~ e~grn
DDp DD ~~~ ~ ~ N OO ~ rLLrnn x~nrn
a.~ ` ~ ~
~ DD DDDD ~ \~ \ ~ ~ // - / r~j~~ ~ ~ ~ V g ~ m~N_
~+ DDD DDDD \~ \\ `7 \' ~ ~ o<
~ O DDDDD D~i \ .. \ ~ ~~ /.5 dc7aii
r ,
~ DDDDDD 4i _~ ~ ,£
C~.r O DDDDDD S \ ~ \ ~y4"3
MM~ DDDDD DD~~ \ ~ .. \\~\ //jh ry~ 1 U
W ~ Cl1 ~ DD DDDD D~~`~ ~~~~~ ,~;` F~1
~ DDD ~ ~7!
RS 1 ~ DDDDD DDDDD ~~ ~y' ,~ ~~ _ / 1 ~~~% r '` ~1
D DDD D ~ ~ " / ~~~~1, ~. ~ ~ ~ /,~.~~ ~--I ~ IF"y--~
,,/ ~}"" i
1 ~ ~-'
D DD DD DDD (i \~~:. ~ _-~ ~ 7 H~
DDDD f ~- r-^
DDDDD ~ /~y~~ Y ~ ~y~G1y~]I'
DD DD DDD DDD ;~~ ~(i 3 ,,/ I-~
D D pD D D ~~w~m %liG~~ _ _ ~ __._ l~ ~ CT U /~ V1
DDD DD DDDDD ~ ~" ~ F~1
~~ ~ ( ~
DDDDDDDD D ~ J dYm-.~W - /
' D __ yNV~
D '~ = ~ w
_ > DDDDD \~t i " i..i
----~ ~. , U N o
U

Z ~ X
W 7 O ~
W ~ LL
= ii a ~
cn Q
- -- -T-
D ~ " y
DDD
DDDDD
DDD- _D- D 1
D D-'
-DDDD ;
;DDDDD ,~~ ~~
D D D D D
D D D; % I, ~ ~~~~
D D D
D D D D D D
~~
`DDDDDD ~;
D D D D D D ~
~ 3,
D
D D D ~ D D'.
D D D
DDDDDDD ~~
DDDDDDD
D D D D D D D
D D D D
D D D
D D D D D D D.
DDDDDDD•
D D D D D D D
DDDDDDD~D
DDDDDDD D
D D D D
DDD©DDDD
DDDDDDDDD
DD~DDDDDDD
DDDDDDDDD
DDDDDDDD.,D
~-_
,-- z_

~~-
.,
l
~I
~ ~
~ ~
'
~
\

\ ,\
,
i
,
~
\
~ ~ ~ `~

,y
\
\ `
~ ~
~
~,
',,~

~
~

`,
\ '\ ' ! 1 /'
~~.~ ~_ ~/ y~~ ~ ~ .~
~ ~ ~~.\ % ti i , I
,~
~ ~ x~
~~ / ~
~ ~/ 4
i i ~ x
r~~a~ f ~+ ~~I,
`-------"_ ` ~' ' ~r
------' ~
. r.
' ~' I

%~ ~~'
;~~~_
o
4-~ ~
~1 ~ f..~
•~ ~3 ~
~ ~o
Q; ~ N
c~
~ ~ Z
U y
w c
(d m ~ o
~ ~ ~ U
° ~° E
~ ~ o
c a ~ ~
~ m
a
z
0
N
'd
a" G~
~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
U ~ O

c~
~ ~ ~,
~ ~
~ ~
~ N `O
x., ~ ~
U c~ o
Z
W
U
Q
~$~
m o~
o~
J z
a
r w
U o '- m
(n ° Z &
U ~ ;
= i~ o o w
~' c_
~~ a~$~
S~"'"
e
o~"n
ac7 `ai
,,~ U
z
~ c~
W ~ ~
z~'~
~ ~ ~
•~ C/1
Z a Z
W O

o ~ o
z a,
`~ .~ 1il ,~.. ~ ii a
~ w Q p
Q ~ _
o N
~ 3 a,
~ U
~ ~
~ o'
o
~ C ch
O
~ ~~„ , ~ (0
•,,r _> .
~. a
U r--~ ~`-. Q~ C U m >•
ti c
O ~ 'm w o
~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~~ ~ ~ a
N ~ / I / ~ '//~~~ \ _ c
~ YY ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ m
~ Q ~ <,~ VVV r I ~ ~ ~ :~ ~ a ~i
- ---
I J _ _ ~~~ ~
=/ ~
~~~
~ _ ~ ~~"sii; ',
/ ///
~j ( T.,
~~//~
~il~ o
=-- ~ ~
j ;t w-
~ ~ ~~
-, ,,
c ~ ~~ v ~
U ~ _ ., , ~..,~~ g
U '-ate. ~ ; ~ . ~~
W _ ~. ~ _ w ~
~ J/~wr, / Q ~ w
cG - Q ~ ~ .,w, v' U ~ '~ m 'o
++I
C Q I OZL~.. ~ _ ~~ ^ ^ w
~ ~ ~ ~ d ~ o
~ Qa
~ ~ - °°~°'
~, Mm~~
~' mg
''//
I ~ ~ -_
'~~ ~ Z
~ '/ W z h
,~ ~ z
i ~ E~
i ~,-' ° ~ ~
~' _~ = Paz
,,
,;~

Picture #3: Additional View of
existing intermittent channel that
will be modified.

Picture #4: View of exiting stream
to be enhanced.
Picture #6: View of lower end of
proposed enhancement reach.
Figure 8
of
Appendix 1
Picture #5: Additional View of
proposed enhancement area.

APPENDIX 2: Level 2 Assessment of Existing Stream Channel
11

RIVER~IORPH REACH SUMMARY
i
- ----------------
----------------------------------------------------
River Name: Unnamed tributary of French Broad River
• Reach Name: Reach 1
------------
--------------
--------------------------
• ------------------
Stream Type Valley Type D50(mm) Val Slope BKF Q(cfs) DA(sq mi)
• F 4b VIII 5.89 0.031 7.9 0.0697
•
Dimension Summary
M
Variable Min ax
Avg

Floodprone Width (ft) 7.8 7.8 7.8
• Riffle Area (Sq ft) 2.26 2.26 2.26
Max Riffle Depth (ft) 0.59 0.59 0.59
4
0
Mean Riffle Depth (ft) 0.4 .
0.4
. Riffle Width (ft) 5.62 5.62 5.62
Pool Area (Sq ft) 3.97 3.97 3.97
• Max Pool Depth (ft) 1.27 1.27 1.27
. Mean Pool Depth (ft) 1.1 l 1.11 1.11
58
3
Pool Width (ft) 3.58 .
3.58

Pattern Summary
Variable ---------
------------------- -Min --- A vg Max
-----------------------=
. Sinuosity 1.2
Profile Summary
Data Based on the following:
Variable Min Avg Max

S riffle (ft/ft) 0.02719 0.03611 0.04512
Spool (ft/ft) 0.00386 0.00882 0.01345
• S run (ft/ft) 0.00748 0.10578 0.37329
S glide (ft/ft) 0.0092 0.01265 0.02074
• P - P (ft} 19.22 30.64 35.75
P length (ft) 5.88 11.67 16.26
Dmax riffle (ft) 0 0.59 0
• Dmax pool (ft) 1.27 1.27 1.27
Dmax run (ft) 0 0 0
Dmax glide (ft) 0 0 0
• Low Bank Ht (ft) 1.59 4.41 6.1
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) 0.027

Hydraulic Summary
Variable Min Avg Max

Discharge (cfs) 7.9
• Velocity (fps) 4
Hyd Radius (ft) 0.38 0.38 0.38
72
72 0
0
Bkf Shear (lb/ sq ft) 0.72 .
.

Figure 1
of
Appendix 2

L
~~/
I.L
~~
U
(a
N
C
~X
W
4•-
O
Q~
4-
0
^L
LL
.~
J
_ `~ Y ^] cu `~ 2
U 3 m ~ a a
~ - •
N
N X
7 Q C
~ ~
Q
LL. Q
Q

E
f9
N
c
0
m
a~
U
C
N
0
(~) uoi~ena13

-~
~ ~
o w
a
m y
v Fc
m
t
a~
is
3
ltd
r
~ i
N N
L, x
O A
O
_~
+.~ -
N
/'~^~ Y
VJ m
^, m
W
~_

W
x
.Q
N 3
C_
O
d
C
7
O
C~
n
N
M X
7 O ~
~ Q
ii a
Q

N
U
C
c~
N
c
O
N
~L
O
2
~~~ UOI~BA2~~

c
0
d
m
U
c0
7
N
cb

a
MO
W
J
O N
ox
_U _
~~ ~
^ C
v, 7
O Y
nQ m
Li
s
N 3
C
O
a
a
c
0
c7
~n
:~
0
l15
i~
Q~
U
c
c~
_~
0
y
o c
0
N
L
Q
2

0
N
~ X
~ ~ N
a
LL Q
Q
(~) uoi~enal3

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
sample Name: Riffle
Survey Date: 08/08/06
Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM
-------------------
0 - 0.062 -------------
6 -----------
6.00 ---------------------------
6.00
0.062 - 0.125 6 6.00 12.00
0.125 - 0.25 12 12.00 24.00
0.25 - 0.50 12 12.00 36.00
0.50 - 1.0 14 14.00 50.00
1.0 - 2.0 10 10.00 60.00
2.0 - 4.0 6 6.00 66.00
4.0 - 5.7 8 8.00 74.00
5.7 - 8.0 0 0.00 74.00
8.0 - 11.3 8 8..00 .82.00
11.3 - 16.0 2 2.00 84.00
16.0 - 22.6 0 0.00 84.00
22.6 - 32.0 0 0.00 84.00
32 - 45 10 10.00 94.00
45 - 64 6 6.00 100.00
64 - 90 0 0.00 100.00
90 - 128 0 0.00 100.00
128 - 180 0 0.00 100.00
180 - 256 0 0.00 100.00
256 - 362 0 0.00 100.00
362 - 512 0 0.00 100.00
512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00
1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00
Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00
D16 (mm) 0.17
D35 (mm) 0.48
D50 (mm) 1
D84 (mm) 16
D95 (mm) 48.17
D100 (mm) 64
silt/Clay (%) 6
Sand (%) 54
Gravel (%) 40
Cobble (%) 0
Boulder (%) 0
Bedrock (%) 0
Total Particles = 100.
Figure 5
of
Appendix 2

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River tvame: unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
Sample Name: Reach
Survey Date: 08/08/06
Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM
------------
-------------------
0 - 0.062 -------------
3 -----------
2.97 ---------------
2.97
0.062 - 0.125 3 2.97 5.94
0.125 - 0.25 12 11.88 17.82
0.25 - 0.50 11 10.89 28.71
0.50 - 1.0 5 4.95 33.66
1.0 - 2.0 5 4.95 38.61
2.0 - 4.0 5 4.95 43.56
4.0 - 5.7 10 9.90 53.47
5.7 - 8.0 6 5.94 59.41
8.0 - 11.3 5 4.95 64.36
11.3 - 16.0 8 7.92 72.28
16.0 - 22.6 9 8.91 81.19
22.6 - 32.0 7 6.93 88.12
32 - 45 5 4.95 93.07
45 - 64 7 6.93 100.00
64 - 90 0 0.00 100.00
90 - 128 0 0.00 100.00
128 - 180 0 0.00 100.00
180 - 256 0 0.00 100.00
256 - 362 0 0.00 100.00
362 - 512 0 0.00 100.00
512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00
1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00
Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00
D16 (mm) 0.23
D35 (mm) 1.27
D50 (mm) 5.1
D84 (mm) 26.41
D95 (mm) 50.29
D100 (mm) 64
Silt/Clay (%) 2.97
Sand (%) 35.64
Gravel (%) 61.39
cobble (%) 0
Boulder (%) 0
Bedrock (%) 0
Total Particles = 101.
Figure 6
of
Appendix 2

APPENDIX 3: Reference Reach Figures and Pictures
12

O M
~ X

r ~
~ z
w N
7 O ~
yJrOr
W ~L
_~
O
N U ~ ~ Q
~ N ~ ~
~ U ~ ~ ~
.~ U .~
~ ~ M

4 ~ ..
;~, c _ s I
~~ ai f. -" '"~ ~
w ~ ~•
-..~ , a ~
-...-'
---r--rf^'~ w
l c ~~.
Q
Ct5
~
~ ~ U
°~ ~ Z
C
p
_ U ~ ~;
- w ~

C
,r
,m,
~

~

> ~
o ~ ~
~ ~o
` R Q ~ m
~ ~~~ .~ •
n. ! ^``s
^
W
_
:'mi ~
l
,~~ ` a
,~e ~ J ~4_ ~~j - ' ~
i ~ ~ ~ ~n ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~t.
.-
~ t r
O I 'I ~ y~. O 1 (~ G ~.
~E
.' a W ro ...r' - ~ x
~., •~ ~ Cri Q m Z
_"may,,,- ~'~ ~ _ "-.y m '~ ^ ~ Ir Cn ~ o° 'm o
r
= L 1 ,-, - 4 4 = ' r U
r .- y- 1.. .. ~ -~ ~ L
,~ . L r 1~ ' ~ ~' '~i 00 Q o c
4` 'iq.~l~ ---. ~" i_~ ~ r„ f ~ ~ _ ~~~ X41.. ~ C ~ ~~"~
" ~~ _ ~
N.
yr ~i, d fi! ~ 7r"++ , ~ Q ~ f' ~~ 4~
C V1 „" .v ~ ~. Cp -~ ~` i - - z
f V % %' .1.~ ~"! r ~ ..ems'' • c • -~°" `Q ..
.~ ~ CV . ~ '-. ~'r ~ C
,,,. `--, z W ~
W rZ U

C
fp
~ U
v O
O J
47 =
L V
w t0
G7 ~
~ ~

1 ~ ~~}.
.. ~. i

~.~
aE "" , ,~+
1
M
O N x
w 7Oaci w
w ~ n O
= ii a
cn Q
C
O
(~
U ~
O ~ ~ Z
J CJ m
L - w
~ C
~ ~ ~ U
~ ~ ~ a
Q1 ~ ~ o
U r ~ ~
~ o. ~ m
w
~ z
Z
O
~_
W
Pr t~,' a
Y °
i
~t ~
k ~ oo
N
J
~

m
~
o
i
!-
P

~~ U~
N a

O
~ m
Z

~
w

o
a

w
/// _
~
Q o C

g~$m

' my'n
mm
O'
' c
a° C7aLL
~~.
U

~'`°~
~ J Z

r.
~~- _ .
N
a ~

W

C~

Z
.
o ~ Z Q
H
U 0
cn Z W O
W ~ U

o
~ X
z
~
~
O w
'~
~
fC ~ ~ Q
v
O
C J

~ ~
w
~
U

- CII
~ U
c ~ z
~
~ i& ~
~ U ~

«'~ U - w
'~
o
~
~
L ~ ~ U
~ m
~ ~ ~ E

~^' `~ ~ ~ °
r m c
°
~
o. ~ m
:~ ,.
~ (~ Q
" °"+
„, ~ ~

U
Q

,~ :. ~
~. ,
'
~
k ' !
~
~
~
-
T
~ O
~
v (~
~

+~ ~ ~ .<
' m
ter: ~
_P _
~ c ~
Y

~
~

~
O

. o a
._.
,~
~; J Y^~~
~T
i i I
J
.
Z
~ RI
~ ~ ~ H

~
~' ~ ~
$ `
y
w
U

: (n O m O
¢
~,

~
!' U p ~ w

O a

U
W
11
~„ II = L
Q. U
C O

' I Q ~
~ ~
m 3 „

~i
~ ~ n
°
Y
jy i
T re ~
~

~ m
mD~.,
~ =

r
# e
' ~ ~
cn ~ .
J
n 9 o x
a' c7 a`~i
;.. ~ ..:
~. w~~
~~ ~ i U
` ~' Z
~.
~;~ J _
~.
~`
~zQ
z ~ J
,:. ~
~
Cn
-._ Z
zw0
W~U

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
•
C
V ~
C J
/a ~I .~1 ~~ ~ U
w ~
L
4
~~ ~~_;".
~~
1 ~~ _ _ __...,•
' ~ _ ~ ~ ~,
y~8
~y
;~ ,~,
~~
~~~ ~
~_ i ..
Y ~ ~
e
d~..... ~
.r. ,~ , y~ ~ a;. .. ...
.. y 1r
~~ d ^
a I~
~~~
~a ~ ~
~. c+Yew~i, ~'
lP~~ * ~
O
Z M
'~ X
W j p ~ IL
i
~ °' o- ~
Ll.
Q
L
U
(II
~ ~,
a~ ~ ~ ~
~ „ ~, z
C U N T
.~
-w
C
G7 ~ O
v- ~ ~ U
o ~ a
~ ~ ~ o
~ m c
(6 ~- ~ m
O
Z
a
wl
U
Q
N
Z
O
w
Y ~ m
n ~
J a
Q m =
''^^ ~ V
vJ ~ O Z d
U ~ ;
_ ~~ ~ a a
~ O W
L
U
Q O C G
c~qq(~
m N N A
~ 8~~~
~'~m
~ ~ o x
ac7 a`~i
U
~ Z
~~-- Cn
W C~ z
Z
0 ~ J
~ ~ ~
Z
ZWO
w a. U

RIVERI~LORPH REACH SUMMARY
River Name: K ref
Reach Name: Reach 1
Stream Type Valley Type D50(mm) Val Slope BKF Q(cfs) DA(sq mi)
C 4 VIII 2.85 0.009 154 2.703
Dimension Summary
Variable Min Avg Max
Floodprone Width (ft) 64.94 65 65
Riffle Area (Sq ft) 31.3 31.3 31.3
Max Riffle Depth (ft) 2.46 2.46 2.46
Mean Riffle Depth (ft) 1.74 1.74 1.74
Riffle Width (ft) 17.94 17.94 17.94
Pool Area (Sq ft) 25.97 25.97 25.97
Max Pool Depth (ft) 2.61 2.61 2.61
Mean Pool Depth (ft) 1.46 1.46 1.46
Pool Width (ft) 17.75 17.75 17.75
Run Area (Sq ft) 18.31 18.31 18.31
Max Run Depth (ft) 1.6 1.6 1.6
Mean Run Depth (ft) 0.82 0.82 0.82
Run Width (ft) 22.46 22.46 22.46
Glide Area (Sq ft) 27.88 27.88 27.88
Max Glide Depth (ft) 2.26 2.26 2.26
Mean Glide Depth (ft) 1.41 1.41 1.41
Glide Width (ft) 19.73 19.73 19.73
Pattern Summary
Variable Min Av g Max
Sinuosity 1.6
Meander Wavelength (ft) 87 125 160
Radius of Curvature (ft) 26 29 42
Belt Width (ft) 37 47 67
Profile Summary
Variable Min Avg Max
S riffle (ft/ft) 0.01817 0.02078 0.02272
S pool (ft/ft) 0 0.00164 0.00379
S run (ft/ft) 0. 02065 0.03398 0.04089
S glide (ft/ft) 0.00316 0.00491 0.00757
P - P (ft) 28.48 63.45 97.11
P length (ft) 8.54 34.6 78.31
Dmax riffle (ft) 0 2.46 0
Dmax pool (ft) 2.61 2.61 2.61
Dmax run (ft) 1.6 1.6 1.6
Dmax glide (ft) 2.26 2.26 2.26
Low Bank Ht (ft) 4.71 5 5.36
Bankfull Slope (ft/ft) 0.00513
Hydraulic Summary
Variable Min Avg Max
Discharge (cfs) 154
Velocity (fps) 4.9
Hyd Radius (ft) 1.62 1.62 1.62
Bkf Shear (lb/ sq ft) 0.52 0.52 0.52
Figure 5
of
Appendix 3

N
y-
O
a.
Y
ALL
f
`i
U
C
^L\
W
~^~\
W
li
= m Y m a `" a
~ ~ m ~ a a
• ~ ~
0
~_
E
m
a~
L
Q7
C
O
c0
a~
U
C
f6
Y

~ X
7 O ~
~ a
ii a
Q
(~) uoi~enal3

~~
Y~
~Y
F~ d
ti
M
M
O
i~
rr~^~
vJ I
Y
'A~r_' G
1.^~..\.
W
V
C
L
N
T
3
C
N O
O ~

U
C (O
O C ~
a - ~
~ w ~
C Y ~
O ~ ~
(~ m
~ ~
O
0
M
N
0
O
M
~ X_
~ ~ ~
7 O ~
~ a
ii Q

Q~
U
C
fB
..
~_
•~+
O
N
.`
O
2
~}~~ U01~6n213

~•
Y
~L
~--~
~i
Q
^~
I..L
Q)
U
^~
W
L
LL
n
Y
C
.~.
C
0
a
c
7
O

O
c0
U_
c
Y
C
c0
OJ

N
C
O
d
U
a`>
(d

N
(h
C'7
~ X
~ ~ ~
ii a
Q

U
C
cy
~_
C
0
N
L
0
2
3
O
(~) uoi}ena13

M
y ~ X_

V7 C
p ~ ~
3 0 C
° ~
°; ~ d
ii a
~
a a
5 ~
~ Q

~
C ~
~
~
~
O
(~ C
~
m _
(0

/~
Y
~L
~4~+
`/
0
t~
''~^
VJ ~
~ ~
~ c
U
L
~+-
N

O
c'~

U
C
CC
~_
ca
o +.
c~ C
O
N
.`
O
2
0
0
(l~) uoi~ana13

c
N
` o
o a

N U U
C _
II

°
~ ~
a
~
a
c ~
Y ~
o ~ ~
C7 m ~
• ~
T
~\ '~~
Y

d'
ao
N
C
O
(~
/~~ P
W II
~ ~.
rn~ x
V ~
Q~
U
C
L
Q~
L.1..,
G

W
U
C
(II
_~
CQ
c
0
N
L
O
O Ch
.r X
~ ""' C
~ O ~
C) Q
11. Q
(~~) uoi~enal~

RIVERMORPH PARTICLE SUMMARY
River Name: K ref
Reach Name: Reach 1
Sample Name: Reach
Survey Date: 07/19/06
Size (mm) TOT # ITEM % CUM
----------
-------------------
0 - 0.062 --------------
7 ----------
6.67 -----------------
6.67
0.062 - 0.125 2 1.90 8.57
0.125 - 0.25 4 3.81 12.38
0.25 - 0.50 12 11.43 23.81
0.50 - 1.0 12 11.43 35.24
1.0 - 2.0 10 9.52 44.76
2.0 - 4.0 13 12.38 57.14
4.0 - 5.7 3 2.86 60.00
5.7 - 8.0 6 5.71 65.71
8.0 - 11.3 8 7.62 73.33
11.3 - 16.0 4 3.81 77.14
16.0 - 22.6 11 10.48 87.62
22.6 - 32.0 10 9.52 97.14
32 - 45 3 2.86 100.00
45 - 64 0 0.00 100.00
64 - 90 0 0.00 100.00
90 - 128 0 0.00 100.00
128 - 180 0 0.00 100.00
180 - 256 0 0.00 100.00
256 - 362 0 0.00 100.00
362 - 512 0 0.00 100,00
512 - 1024 0 0.00 100.00
1024 - 2048 0 0.00 100.00
Bedrock 0 0.00 100.00
D16 (mm) 0.33
D35 (mm) 0.99
D50 (mm) 2.85
D84 (mm) 20.32
D95 (mm) 29.89
D100 (mm) 45
Silt/Clay (%) 6.67
sand (%) 38.09
Gravel (%) 55.24
Cobble (%) 0
Boulder (%) 0
Bedrock (%) 0
Total Particles = 105.
Figure 11
of
Appendix 3

:e

e
F
f
;e
X13
jix 3

APPENDIX 4: Restoration Figures
13

RIVERMORPH NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN REPORT
River Name: Unnamed tributary of French Broad River
Reach Name: Reach 1
Reference Reach: K ref; Reach 1 (C 4)
-Boundary Conditions--
Drainage Area: 0.0697 sq mi
Valley Slope: 0.031 ft/ft
Bankfull Discharge: 7.9 cfs
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area: 2.26 sq ft
Mean Depth Calculation Tolerance: 0.2 ft
--Sediment Data-
Riffle Bed Material ID: Riffle
Riffle Bed Material D84: 16 mm
Riffle Bed Material D50: 1 mm
Bar Sample ID:
Bar Sample Dmax: 30 mm
Bar Sample D50: 0.5 mm
--NCD Results------------
-Alignment-
Meander Wavelength: 36.5 ft
Channel Length: 48.58 ft
Sinuosity: 1.33
Radius of Curvature: 7.13 ft
Bankfull Slope: 0.02329
Meander Belt Width: 14.4 ft
Meander Width Ratio: 3.27
Deflection Angle: .1 rad
-Riffle Cross Sectional Properties--
Width to Depth Ratio: 8.58
Entrenchment Ratio: 3.62
Floodprone Width: 15.93 ft
Bankfull Width: 4.4 ft
Bankfull Mean Depth: 0.51 ft
Bankfull Velocity: 3.5 ft/s
Bankfull Hydraulic Radius: 0.42 ft
Bankfull Shear Stress: 0.61 Ibs/sq ft
Required Roughness (n): 0.0364 ft^(1/6)
Entrainable Particle Size: 36.6 mm
-Rosgen Stream Classification-
Reference Reach : C 4
Proposed Reach : E 4b
Existing Reach : F 4b
-Sediment Transport Competency-
Ratio -Riffle Slope /Bankfull Slope: 4.05
Ratio - D50bed / D50bar: 2.000
Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress (1): 0.0456
Required Mean Depth (1 ): 0.32 ft
Ratio - Di bar / D50bed: 30.000
Critical Dimensionless Shear Stress (2): 0.0019
Required Mean Depth (2): 0.01 ft
Minimum Required Mean Depth: 0.32 ft
Figure 1
of
Appendix 4

v
N X
3 O ~
Q' a
ii a
C
O
U
N
L
U
a~
~_
m
0
a
0

v

0

N
O

v
M X
0
+-~
U
N
L
U
0
0
a~
0
a
0
N Q
~ ~ ~
~ O ~
° 'u. a
l(')
N
N
O
O
N

ri
n
V

-;

•
w
•
•
r
•
•
•
•
•
~i0.00
-29.00
~~
^~
W
'.}~/
n~
W
~_+
N
._
.Q
~ ^~
V J
M~
W
U
.\Q
L
C
N
~ ~
L
''/~^ ~
V J (Q
Q.
0 ~
O
~:
~ II I 22.00
}~ -
I II - 21.00
~ II I
- 20.00
~
=- I I I
-
_
19.00
I I 1a.oo
17.00
I I I 16.00
-_ 1s.oo

j~ II
l I I- I 14.00
13.00
~~ ~ II I 12.00
I - 11.00
-I I I 10.00
~ II I
~
-~=
~ - .00
_
~~
-II I .oo
~~ ~ I I I - 7.00
~~ -i I I .oo
-I I - .00
II I .oo
~I I I I 3.00
-1 1 II I 2.00
I = ,.oo
.oo
O O~ GO I~ cp iA of M N ~ O
z ~ x
w ~ o ~
W ~ N LL
m LL °' ~
Q
_ N ~ T
.~ U y 7
~ '~ W U
~ ~ ~ a
Y
(ti3 ~ ~ c
m a ~ m
Q
Z
d
W
Q
Z
0
w~
o:
~ ~
o a
W ~~
J g
a~
U °' W
~ m
a
U ~ a a
_ oow
n.
0
Q= - x g~
~ ~~~~
~ $N~~
g~~_
os'~
mo..
a°c~au.
,,~ U
z
~~~
w~~
z~~
~~~
zaz
w o
~I
III _28.00
,, I I I- -27.00
Y ""- I I I -26.00
I I _ 26.00
`;-.-
--_. ( I 24.00
I- 23.00

w
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
)
- ~ fl ~~ ... ~c.hinl Ic
,_,,...
( F- Floe
fuUl Y
., •~
•
'~:
'
~
~'S!:!,` Peril '•
'Y•.~;:.::::+.:t::;::;~.=;:~;1-;~.~;'v;~:;:,~.~.~;1;:~;t~;,•.•.~;v;•.;.:~;:
~'~~
.
~c
Fl
o
`'
l
I
l;; ,, I
ii i
ii

'~ Sill

1
O
Plan Vie~~ DLR
REVISIONS
Source: Rosgen, David L. 2001. ASCE Conference
GRAPHIC SCALE SHEET NO.
ENVIRONMENTAL I
I Typical Cross Vane Detail
Figure 5
PERMITTING 1 inch = feet Airport Road Retail Center
Wal-Mart Real Estate Of
Appendix4
P°"°~~~°x"°' ORAWNfiY KPG
CONSULTANTS INC. Greenville, SC 29608
864
271
3040
Ph DATE: 08/08/2006 Buncombe County, NC
~ )
-
one: (
Fax: [phone]
EPC PROJECT NO.:
USACE PIN: OF

TREES AND SHRUBS TO BE PLANTED IN
RIPARIAN AREAS
Trees
Amelanchier canadensis Serviceberry
Caprinus caroliniana Ironwood
Cercis canadensis Redbud
Celtis lavie ata Sugarberry
Cornus orida Do ood
Diopyrus virginiana Persimmon
Fraxinus ensylvanica Green Ash
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore
uercus alba White Oak
Quercus phellos Willow Oak
Ouercus ni ra Water Oak
Shrubs
Alnus serrulata Tag Alder
Aronia arbutifolia Red Chokeberry
Callicarpa Americana Berrybeauty
Calycanthus oridus Sweetshrub
Cephalanthus occidentalis Button Bush
Chinonanthus vir inicus Frin a Tree
Cornus amomum Silky Do ood
ltea vir mica Vir inia Sweet S ire
Lindera aestivate Spicebush
Rhus labra Smooth Sumac
Sambuscus canadensis Elderberry
Vaccinium arboretum Sparkleberry
Vaccinium dentatum Arrow Wood
Vaccinium nudum Possum Haw
TREES AND SHRUBS TO BE PLANTED
IN CREATED WETLAND AREAS
Trees
Betula ni ra River Birch
Alnus serrulata Alder
Fraxinus ensvlvanica Green Ash
uercus alba White Oak
uercus hellos Willow Oak
uercus ni ra Water Oak
*N ssa Ivatica Black Gum
*Acer ne undo Box elder
Shrubs
Alnus serrulata Ta Alder
*Salix ni~ra Black willow
Ce halanthus occidentalis Button Bush
Cornus amomum Sil Do ood
Clethra alni olia Sweet Pe erbush
Viburnum dentatum Arrow Wood
* Found in existing wetlands
**Planting schedules for each species and plant category is dependent on dormancy period and expected germination times.
It is expected that most of the planting will occur during early spring or late fall periods. Vegetation characteristics for the
area will be designed to allow the highest species diversity and greatest vegetation survival rates. Selected species will be
dependent on availability of transplants. All selected species will be native to North Carolina and will be obtained from local
nurseries if possible. The following list includes a selection of species that may be used for the restoration project.
Figure 6
of
Appendix 4

QF W ATF9 Michael F. Easley, Governor
Q
~ William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
r- North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
~ -I
p ~ Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
r Division of Water Quality
October 31, 2006
DWQ Project # 06-0922 V2
Buncombe County
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Laura Belanger
PO Box 2346
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28793
Subject Property: Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Individual Permit Application
® REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
^ PERMITTING FEE MISSING/INCORRECT
^ RETURN OF APPLICATION PACKAGE
Dear Ms. Belanger:
• On October 30, 2006 the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received package dated October 24, 2006 for
the above referenced project. The DWQ has determined that your application was incomplete and/or
provided inaccurate information as discussed below. The DWQ will require additional information in
. order to process your application to impact protected wetlands and/or streams on the subject property. '
w Therefore, unless we receive five copies of the additional information requested below, we will have to
move toward denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and will place this project on
hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information. Please provide the following information
so that we may continue to review your project.

Additional Information Requested:
^ Water Quality Certification, See I. Processing, Item 2.. Please state which Permit
(Nationwide, Regional or General) number you intend to use. You may want to contact the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) to determine which permit they will allow you to
use.
^ DWQ requires the name of an individual shown as "Owner/Applicant" to set up the project.
^ The PCN Application failed to contain the Applicant/Agent's Signature and Date. See last
page of application. (Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from applicant is
provided).
^ Water Body information not stated. See III Project Information, Item 7.
^ Incorrect and/or missing wetland, intermittent-perennial stream and/or buffer impacts.
DWQ is unable to review this project without noted or corrected impacts reflected.
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] /Internet: http://h2o.encstate.naus/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
No°t hCarolina
Jl~atura!!y
•

i
~•
^ Lack of permitting fee. Please note that beginning January 1, 1999, the N.C. General
Assembly passed legislation requiring payment of a fee for a11401 applications. The fee for
applications is $200 for projects impacting less than an acre of wetland and less than 150
linear feet of streams. For projects impacting one or more acres of wetland or 150 or more
feet of streams, the fee is $475.
^ Incorrect permitting fee amount. Please see above item. Your check # for $
is herein enclosed for fee correction. DWQ does not retain any payment unless it is in the
correct amount.
^ A request for a modification of an issued permit requires re-submission of five (5) application
sets and appropriate fee. We have herein returned your modification request.
^ Application was missing pages or sections of information. See Other section below.
® OTHER: The package material failed to contain the Application for Department of the Army
Permit (33 CFR 326). Please submit one (1) original and four (4) copies signed and dated to
move forward with the review and approval process.
Please contact the DWQ within three weeks of the date of this letter to verify that you have received this
letter and that you remain interested in continuing to pursue permitting of your project and will be
providing the DWQ the requested information at a later date. Please contact this office in writing and
Kevin Barnett of the DWQ Asheville Regional Office. If we do not hear from you within three weeks,
we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the project as
withdrawn.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands, waters
. or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your application are not
authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call Mr. Ian McMillan or Ms. Cyndi Karoly at 919-733-
1786 if you have any questions regarding or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
v
Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor J
401 OversightlExpress Review Permitting Unit
CBK/ljd
cc: Kevin Barnett, DWQ Asheville.Regional Office
USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
File Copy
Central Files
Filename: 060922AirportRdRetailS6oppingCtr_Hold_IP Appl

O~O~ W A TF9PG
~ ~
o ~
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
January 16, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
2001 South East 10th Street
Bentonville, AR 72712
7005 1820 0002 9207 4762
Subject Property: Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Unnamed Tributary to French Broad River
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dear Messers:
On November 21, 2006, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application
to impact 1.61 acres of wetlands and 504 linear feet of streams to construct the
proposed Airport Road Retail Shopping Center. The DWQ has determined that your
application was incomplete and/or provided inaccurate information as discussed below.
The DWQ will require additional information in order to process your application to
impact protected wetlands and/or streams on the subject property. Therefore, unless
we receive the additional information requested below, we will have to move toward
denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and will place this project
on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information. Please provide the
following information so that we may continue to review your project.
Additional Information Requested:
1 ~~.. ~-llties
In accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0502 (a) (8), you must provide a description of
the treatment and disposal of all waste generated from this project, including, but
not limited to, domestic and process wastewater, stormwater, etc...
2. ~-
Under section 7 of you mitigation plan, you reference sending reports to the USA
COE for review. The NC DWQ must be included in any success criteria review.
3. Avoidance and Minimization
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone]! FAX[phone] lntemet: htto://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
DWQ Project # 06-0922, Version 2
Buncombe County
NotthCarolina
JVatura!!y
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

All alternatives must be fully explored, with all
a c~~~d Lastly, as both the US Fish and Wildlife and
t e NC i i Resources Commission have expressed concerns about the largest
wetland on site and minimizing or avoiding that wetland altogether as part of this
proposed development, an alternative site plan which would provide for the
proposed "big box" store should be evaluated which provides for it's location and
supporting parking which would completely avoid this wetland. (ie: explore shifting
the store to the NE with the parking needed being placed such that it avoids the
largest wetland and the stream complex.)
As these necessary items have not been addressed in your application, your application
has been placed on hold until such time that additional information regarding these topics
has been submitted as an addendum to your application. Please respond prior to the
close of business on February 6, 2007 by sending this information to me in writing and to
Cyndi Karoly of the DWQ 401 Central Office. If we do not hear from you by the close of
business on February 6, 2007, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this
project and we will consider the project as withdrawn.

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
Page 3 of 3
January 16, 2007
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to
wetlands, waters or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested
within your application are not authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call Ms.
Cyndi Karoly or Mr. John Dorney at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions regarding
or would like to set up a meeting to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
,~ ~`. ~ ~
Roger C. Edwards, Regional Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
Surface Water Protection
J RD/khb
cc: Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Post Office Box 3744
Greenville, SC 29608
Cyndi Karoly, DWQ 401 Central Office
USACE Asheville Regulatory Field Office
David McHenry, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
File Copy
Central Files
Filename: 06-0922.Version2.AirportRoadRetailShoppingCenter.Addinfo

E nor onn~~~z~~'~ ~: ,.
i JY
er~~~~in~ ~- ~ ~ "r ~ `.
.. z , r.
r~
~~~z~tan~. fl~~a~c.
ist~o~a1`~ater Quality
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attention: John Dorney
Reference: Request for Additional Information
Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Buncombe County, NC
DWQ Project # 06-0922
Dear Mr. Dorney,
January 30, X007
This letter is intended to provide additional information requested by your office
in a letter dated January 16, 2007 regarding the project referenced above.
Waste Treatment Facilities
Stormwater
• The project will utilize awetlands-type retention basin and will be designed in
strict accordance with the requirements of Buncombe County and NC DENR.
Attached is a memo from Freeland and Kauffinan, Inc. summarizing the Storm
Water Management Design.
Wastewater
• The site will tie into existing sewer lines, so all wastewater will be treated by the
Metropolitan Sewerage District of Buncombe County, NC.
Mitigation Plan
An onsite mitigation meeting took place October 11, 2006 with NCDENR,
USACE, FWS, and NCWRC. Based on discussions regarding the proposed mitigation
plan, we revised the plan to eliminate the priority 2 stream restoration in favor of stream
enhancement and spot stabilization, due to the lack of buffer available. We have revised
the wetland mitigation by eliminating the onsite wetland creation in favor of utilizing the
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). A complete revised on-site mitigation plan is
included for your review. Monitoring reports will be submitted to both the USACOE and
NC DWQ for review.
Avoidance and Minimization
Included in Appendix Aare five site layouts. The first layout is the original site
plan submitted in the permit application, dated May 8, 2006. The second layout is the
P0, Box 3744 Green`ille, South Carolina 29608 [phone] Fax (864) 23~-9299

/~
1~
/~
1~
'! first alternative explored, previously referred to as Alternative 1. This layout was
,~ originally submitted August 11, 2007. The third layout is the second layout that was
explored, previously referred to as Alternative 2. This layout was originally submitted
1~ October 24, 2006. The fourth layout is the one requested in your letter dated January 16,
~~ 2007, in which the store is relocated and reoriented to the NE. Finally, the fifth layout is
„ of the current proposed site plan. Each layout is addressed below individually:
Layout 1-Original Site Plan:
The original site plan submitted involved impacting 1.93 acres of Waters of the
US for commercial development. The plan called for approximately 110,000 to 120,000
c.y. of imported clean fill material, due to the significant difference in elevation between
Airport Road and the site. The site plan included a retaining wall along the northern
portion of the proposed development in order to avoid impacts to "Stream 1 ".
Layout 2 -Alternative 1:
In the first alternative layout, the use of two retaining walls did allow for an
overall reduction of wetland impacts by a total of 0.37 acres, however, due to the
relocation of the stormwater detention basin, the alternate site layout also impacts 742
linear feet of stream. The stormwater management needs to be located at a lower
elevation than the developed area. Therefore, the logical locations for the ponds are at the
lowest points on the property. If the area behind the western retaining wall was utilized
for a detention pond, it would still be necessary for a second pond in order to meet the
detention requirements for the site. Storm drain would have to be punched through the
retaining wall and be routed to the proposed pond. In order to install the storm drain, a
fair amount of wetlands would still have to be impacted. Thus impacts would exist on
the stream as well as the western wetland area "D". The configuration of the ponds on
the alternative layout shows the least amount of impact possible.
Due to the required grading, the retaining wall near the western property
boundary would incur a significant increase in cost when compared to the northern
retaining wall. The overall cost of both retaining walls for the alternate site layout is
approximately $1.8 million dollars, while the cost of the northern retaining wall by itself
is $260,000. From a strictly economic standpoint, the $1.5 million (592% increase in
cost) is not viable for the scope of the project and represents a dramatic increase in
overall cost.
Layout 3 -Alternative 2:
This alternative involves rotating the building so that the side is oriented toward
Airport Road and utilizing the out lots as satellite parking with a span over Wetland "E".
As you can see from the site plan, the re-orientation of the building and the spanning of
Wetland "E" does not allow for adequate parking or access to the front of the building.
Commercial centers are required by law to provide a certain number of handicapped
parking spaces with easy access to the front of the store for patrons with disabilities. In
addition, extensive retaining walls would be necessary, along with the span for Wetland
Area "E". This layout would not be feasible due to the lack of adequate parking, lack of
adequate access to the front of the store and additional costs associated with abridge/span
and the multiple retaining walls needed to avoid impact to "Wetland Area E". Based on

the initial lack of feasibility, this alternative was not pursued further with regards to
preliminary engineering plans, stormwater plans, grading, etc.
Layout 4 -Alternative 3:
The third alternative layout looks at rotating the building and relocating it towards
the northeast corner of the property. With this site plan, the northern entrance drive is
significantly shorter, thereby .necessitating that the overall finished elevation of the
development be higher in order to keep the drive at an allowable slope. In the proposed
site plan, the drive drops down at a 6% slope over a much longer distance. With this site
plan, the slope would increase to 8% and the finished elevation would rise by 20 feet. By
increasing the finished elevation by 20 feet, the overall amount of imported fill material
required jumps from approximately 110,000 - 120,000 c.y. to somewhere on the order of
400,000 to 500,000 c.y. By using the conservative estimate of $7.50/c.y. provided by the
engineer and using the difference between the estimated 120,000 c.y of fill required for
the proposed project and the estimated 400,000 c.y. of fill required for this layout, the
cost difference would be a minimum of $2.1 million dollars. Clearly, this would be cost-
prohibitive for this project.
In addition to the added cost of fill material, the cost of the retaining walls would
increase dramatically, as they would now be significantly higher. The retaining wall
separating the development from Stream 1 would now be approximately 45 feet tall along
the rear of the store, at least twice as tall as what was originally proposed. As with
Alternative 1, the cost of the retaining walls makes the project non-viable.
Furthermore, because the overall elevation must be raised in this plan, the fill
slopes become much larger along the back of the project. The height of the fill slopes
requires that it be graded out at a 3:1 ratio, rather than transitioning to a 2:1 ratio as in the
proposed site layout. This results in greater overall impact, specifically with the largest
wetland, Wetland C.
In this layout, the outlots have remained as it was not possible, due to the shape of
the property, to place the store any closer to the corner of the property without impacting
the stream. Also, please note that Wal-Mart does not allow parking past the mid-point of
their building when it would be isolated from the main parking field, across major access
and service drives, or when it will be hiddden from view by the building due to safety
considerations. Therefore, it would not be possible to use the outlots as additional
parking in order to reduce the amount of parking elsewhere.
Layout 5 -Revised Site Plan:
The revised site plan reduces the overall impervious surface to approximately
16.7 acres. By pulling back along the northern portion of the proposed development, the
new site plan stays off of stream to avoid impact without the use of a retaining wall.
Eliminating the need for the original retaining wall without increasing impact, the
developer was able to shift the wall to the back of the development and further reduce
impacts to the largest wetland onsite, Wetland C. The result is a reduction of 0.14 acre of
impact. Under the revised site plan, the total proposed impacts to Waters of the US

equals 1.78 acres. Additionally, please note that the outlots do not require stream
impacts.
All in all, the applicant has avoided and minimized impacts to Waters of the US to
the maximum extent practicable. Alternatives were considered thoroughly prior to
submitting the present design and relying on compensatory mitigation. I hope that this
addresses all your comments and concerns regarding this project and we can proceed in a
timely fashion. If you have any questions, please call me at [phone]. Thank you
for your assistance in this matter.
Respectfully,
Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
Cc: Tom Walker, USACOE
Mike Ranks, Freeland and Kauffinan, Inc.

~ 0
\ ~ , ^
\ ~ ~ Z v /
~ ~ ~ W ~1 ~
~ ~ ~ W ~ Q
~V ~~ N N
~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~~ ~ U ~
\ `\ ` U ~ ~ U
~~
~ ~O cCN _
~ ~ ~
M
~o
U Q ~
~ , ~ r/~
~~ \ \ a ~ ~
i~i ~ ~ ~ ` ~ r--~ U ~ c ~ U
I ~ ~ _
~~ *y ~~~ ~~~ U ~ ~ ,m ~ a
«3
~, ~
~~~ ~ ''
\ .--..-~ _ o m
` ~ T
\ ~ Q l9
~ ~ J
~ ~
v: \ ~ Z
~ ~
~ ~ ` \ d
~ ~
` ~
\ Q
~ 'I~b ~`I iI ~ r
~~ ~ ~~
~~ ~,
~~ \ O
\\ \ / ~ \ ~ \ie Z
/ ~
O ' / / ,, ~ \ \ \ \ ~ ~ ~ b
\~~~ ~ m
r /
(`~v
~ I ~~~ ~ ~` 1 ~~
~~ ~a
~ ~ ~ ~~ LSD
~ ~~~ ~' : ~ ,, ~ ~ m
~~ ~ / w ~
~ Q ~
~. / ~ ~ ~ ~ c gym W
~!7 ~
~a ; /~ / ~ ^ N 3 w a
~ i- /~ U N C Q d
i ~ - n~~~
~„ ~,
~ ~ • ~ ~ % (~ oU~m
,-
~ ~~ a°c7 `aLL
~~
t, ~~ ~ \ i ~~ 4~
F::::. ~ ~ -~ ~ ~
fi ~ a ,,. ~ . ~ ~"~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'`~~ ~
i U U ~ w
~N z~"z
~-, o w O
U

N
w
S
•
r
z ~
w N LL
= o
OZ QJ ~
~- XL~ za-
O Z ~ ~ ~
a Q J ~ ~
J ~-
y ~WQ~O QN
~/ ~ ~~~Q~
~~ Q
w
---° •~ O
`~' ~ Z ~ N ~ U
r~
Q' m
~~ O ~ ~ZQ~ ~ m'
~-l-- ~ u ~ a ~~ w Q
IIV
~ Q ~~ ~ Z
Q
Z ~,
`,~ ~ ~
O. _ -~ z
- op \ O
n = F \, > a
~~
~ -
,,
~ ~ o
~--~ ~ ~ y
`~-- ~ Q
~ ~i ~ o ~
~° ~O~ ~'O
~ °w~~v' oN r ~ ~
o ~QC~ +1 ~ ~ ~ x
O~cn°'
O~ ~ ~ ~ J
a~rno ~~ Ue _m w
m
o I ~ .~ ~ (/~ ~ ° ~ w a
U V N ~ a a
/_ ~~ D o w
~ I I.L V $p pq~
/ f^
.~/ SN~~
/. ~ ~€pg~
/ ac~SLL
^_~ Q U
~~~~ Z
:~~~ ~ i_~ ~ Z ~ ~
(n Z X -i `__-l w Z E-~
N
O~J~r7 i ~
~wQ~co a
r---,
;~~ ~~ i 1
~, -J i Z
~~ w 0
U

O In
Z
w M LL
= O
~> /~ `l i~
~/
~~
~~
~ ~ s
I ~ ~A
~~ I' ~

T
~J i ~

.. ~ N ~ U
7 ~
~ o ~ a
r c i ~~

~^ ~~~ b ~ m E
J
a ~
~ I ~~~ Q m
~~
' ~
~I ~ z
a
U
~~
i ~
4
~~
~A
~ ,
`~/ i IC \~
~~
4

~
\/
/
'^
V/
~ ,O_,^^
VJ
/ \
^' ' ~ 1 >
~
`-~ ~J p
_~ ~ ~
~~ • €
I 'O N -
.
' W ~
z
I
I / Q
~ o O 3
®®
c F .;:~:''''
P •:~: • U N
= II ~
D a
D a
w
I
~~~
~
~ If--~~
a i~ ~ LL
~~ I

....
.. .
I
U
..
~` ~ • ~--i
e ~ ~ Z
,l wZ~
~F"Z
I~ ' i ~ ~ iry~ ~ ~p.~
n O FrL~~ ~l
~J M~

zaz
w O

• -
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
t
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
t
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0009-EGL (6LC) ~~CI-id
m9-2L~rOB ~ 91GZL SVSM1^YV21V 3?VIVC1J39
c5R 5FZ-v99~ 3'd1i Mit:Jl3 MS 'OL
~am~ w5 '%wae9 'ON 'S3JO1S 1tfdN}-?dM
,,,,,,~,~ ;d„~~^M f1N1~021'd0 Hl?~ON
~,y .,~ ~ ~,~ '(ab'O?~ 1JOdc'Jlb') ~~~IndHStY
LO-6LIItt ~~IOlS lc'Jf/W-~'dM
d ~~$-"~
~~ z ~ t ~~~~~~a Qz
U9~ ~ ~~~ vK 3~a~ ~Q
A~ o
.g
G
c' J ~ ~ ~g~~ ~~ ~~
_ ~~~
~,y ayqq
~~ ~~~~ R
3~ n ~ ~~gP '4 `~ ~ ~ v
r `.
-- __
_ ~ ~ py
1 f
7^ ~
h
~ 1 Q ? ~~ ~ ~~ 41 ~ ~ `
1 '~ ~ ~ ,' I ~ ~\V\\ '
rt
~ `M ',
` I N ' +
~' ~. - ~ ~~
^r
~- ~ _~ ~ y
~ ~~~i y3._ -.~ ~~
e -~ i ~ ~
-~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~l
5 ~ ~ n
x ~
r ` ~ ~ ~ / '
e` d v
I
'~-'~ 1 _ i
- ~ ~~ ~~ 8.§ ~ ~~ .-,5 ~-- e ~ v
--.y ~ ~ ; ~~~ .~~x i dos ~ r'
~ s l ~x~ ~ ~ ~~ .~
.~~.~ ~_
k ~~~ 4-----'~'^ ~ ~c~ St .- ~ i
_~ ® °~ s
~ ,. - ~, s
i i~ ~
,~~ 3 ~ ~ x _ ~ ~ a. ,~
;'~ ~ : ... soon ~, s, - A~~ I
_~ I _ ~~ ~I. ! ~ ~S GzG 4~ d I
~ ) _
~l
•

r"_
~,~,
F ~4!~Y\
C~
~ ~
Q U
U ~
c~ ~
C, ~
O
O
~~~~
W
~ N
Q U
U ~
cd '~
a„ N
M
~-, O
U
C~
~. ~
~ ~
U U
c~ ~
M
i--i .--
o ~
z
W ~ LL
W ~
2
c
0 f0
Q 4.
O m ..
~ ~ ~
0
m ~ U
Q.• 'm~a
O ~ 3 E
U
a ,~~
~ o m
Q
J
\~
M -~~
W ~;
~/ a~
~ ~~ d
~ ~ ~ ~;
~.
~ ~
~-, o ',~1~ ~~ ~~

".1,
~~~; ~
~~
~? d ~% /~~
Z
d
W
U
Q
~~\ .~ ~~,
~~~ ~.
O
,~ \
~~~ o ~,
\~ 5
~,
`~~a
,0~
_~
~,~ ~;
~I ; ~~
~ g=~ ~
'~.- `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~ '~~-

~
' / ~~
~" ~ '~ v
\
~.

~~ ~
-~•~~''0
~ ~
l ~ ~e
i
4 /
t ~ ~ / _

,~ i O
any -

~ ~ ~
~ ~
w
~a~ -~
- ~ ~
^\
/~/~ < "%

,/~
~t : ~~' //..
_
~ 8 s

/~6 /
q i~~ ~ N

' ~

~
\ J
~ .~~
p t O
U m } W
l^

!
~
~~

i ~

O . ,..i
.~ G
am: C~
~
N
~ ~~ ~ ~

U
_ ~
N
~~

O w

O a

w

C S
^~~^ia
~ Hof
^
^
y
~
„
$mg-

a°c9a~i
,...a U
~
~ ~

W

r--ti
ll
f~i

a
z z

W O

•
i
•
•
•
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
February 15, 2007
Ms. Laura Belanger
Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 3744
Greenville, South Carolina 29608
Dear Ms. Belanger:
Subject: Revised Mitigation Plan, Wal-Mart Retail Store Located on Airport Road, South of
Asheville, in Buncombe County, North Carolina
This is the report of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior on the
revised compensatory mitigation plan submitted by Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, which
you represent, to construct a Wal-Mart retail shopping center and consequent infrastructure. On
August 2, 2006, we provided comments to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regarding
the individual application that was submitted for this project, and on October 11, 2006,
Mr. Bryan Tompkins of our staff met with you at the site to discuss the project plans, proposed
impacts, and the compensatory mitigation plan proposed by the applicant. Information for this
report is based on a review of the revised compensatory mitigation plan which we received via
fax on January 24, 2007. This report is submitted in accordance with the provisions of the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e).
Mitigation Overview -The proposed mitigation plan is being submitted by the Wal-Mart Real
Estate Business Trust to provide mitigation for the proposed impacts associated with the
construction of the Airport Road Retail Center. Mitigation is proposed for impacts to 1.59 acres
of wetlands and 5041inear feet (lf) of stream channel. The original mitigation plan proposed a
combination of stream relocation establishment and Priority 2 stream enhancement activities for
impacts to on-site stream channels, and two wetland creation areas were proposed as mitigation
for impacts to on-site wetlands. The proposed stream relocation consists of redirecting a portion
of the on-site stream into an existing ephemeral channel and enhancing about 1601f of the
ephemeral channel to accommodate the new flow. Priority 2 stream enhancement is proposed
for about 4101f of the remaining stream channel. During the site visit, we expressed our
concerns regarding the creation of wetlands; we generally do not recommend wetland creation
for mitigation because a successful wetland creation cannot be guaranteed.

Revised Mitigation Plan - We agree with the proposal to relocate and reestablish the existing
stream into the existing ephemeral channel, and we agree with the Priority 2 stream
enhancement. The stream channel has experienced some down-cutting and bank erosion in the
past, possibly during the on-site logging activities and watershed development. It currently
appears to be stabilizing. During the site visit, we noticed a large amount of debris in the stream,
but we did not notice any active stream-bank erosion. The pattern and profile of the stream
appear to be stable; therefore, we believe that replanting/reestablishing the riparian vegetation
and removing the debris from the stream channel will greatly improve its quality. However,
from the total impacts to the stream channels, we agreed that 504 if of mitigation credits will be
needed to compensate for the impacts of the project to on-site stream channels. If we subtract
the 1601f of mitigation (for relocating and restoring 160 if of existing ephemeral stream channel)
from the tota15041f of impacts, 344 if of mitigation credits is needed to compensate for the
remaining impacts. If Priority 2 stream enhancement is used as mitigation for the remaining
3401f of impacts, a mitigation activity multiplier of 1.5 to 2.5 is used to determine the amount of
mitigation credits needed.' If we use the lowest mitigation activity multiplier of 1.5, then 5161f
(1.5 multiplied by 344 lf) of Priority 2 stream enhancement is needed to mitigate for the
remaining 344 if of stream channel impacts. Your client is proposing 4101f of Priority 2 stream
enhancement activities, which results in a discrepancy of 106 if of stream channel mitigation
credits. We recommend that the mitigation plan be revised (e.g., increase payment to the
NCEEP) to provide compensation for the remaining 106 if of stream channel mitigation credits
needed.
The revised mitigation plan states that the wetland creation mitigation proposal for project
impacts to wetlands has been eliminated and that a payment to the NCEEP will be made to
compensate for the impacts. We commend your client for removing the wetland creation from
the mitigation proposal. We recommend that the payment to the NCEEP be calculated using a
2:1 ratio. Therefore, we believe about 3.2 acres of wetland mitigation credits should be
purchased from the NCEEP to adequately compensate for the wetland impacts of the project.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If we can be of assistance or if you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Tompkins at 828/258-3939, Ext. 240.
In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number
4-2-06-294.
Sincerely,
rian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
' According to the "Stream Mitigation Guidelines" established by the Corps, a mitigation activity multiplier is
"applied to each mitigation type to recognize, that for a given reach, the functional improvement associated with
mitigation projects increase along the continuum from preservation to enhancement to restoration." The guideline
states that for Priority 2 stream enhancement activities, a mitigation activity multiplier of 1.5 to 2.5. This means that
for every 100 if of mitigation needed, 150 if to 2501f of mitigation work is required.
2

CC:
Mr. David McHenry, Mountain Region Reviewer, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, 20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway, Waynesville, NC 28786
Mr. Tom Walker, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
3

•
t
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
of wa rF
`Q~ 9QG Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
j r North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
0 ~
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
l~fazch 9, 2007
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 7006 2150 0005 2 59 72S~t ~~, I ~ ?(~(~l
Mr. John E. Clazke, Assistant Vice President
Wa1-Mart Real Estate Business Trust
2001 South East l0a' Street
Bentonville, AR 72712
Subject;.. _ _ _. _ Airport Road Retail Shopping Center --
Unnamed tributary to French Broad River
DWQ # 06-0922 version 2
Buncombe County
On IV1azch ~, 2007, Division of Water Quality staff (Kevin Barnett, Asheville Regional Office and John Dorney,
Raleigh Central Office} conducted a site visit at the proposed Wal-Mart site on Airport Road in Buncombe
County, NC. The purpose of the site visit was to examine the presence and quality of wetlands and streams on
the property, to discuss stream and wetland mitigation and' on-site stormwater management as well as
alternative site plans for the property. Present were Dave McHenry with the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission as well as Richard Bates and Laura Belanger with Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc. The
following issues are listed that need to be addressed in order for us to complete action on the required 401
Water Quality Certification for this project. Until we receive answers for the following issues, this project will
remain on hold as incomplete in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0506.
1. Alternate Site Plan -Please see the attached sketch entitled "DWQ Alternative Design, March 5,
2007". The Division believes that this plan (or a slight alteration thereof} is a practical site plan that
minimizes impacts to the large central wetland on the property while allowing construction of the
Wa1:lrlart, parking equivelant to the proposed plan, an outparcel and possible commercial
development of the. southwest corner of the property. We are aware that development of the
southwest corner of the' site may require impact of the smaller wetlanddstream ili that area and are
willing to discuss possible site plans in that regard.
One concern raised by your consultants with regard to this site plan is that Wal-Mart reportedly has a
policy to prevent parking on the side of your stores more than one-half the length of the building.
However, we believe that this policy must be flexible since the new Wal-Mart at RiverBend
Shopping Center in Asheville has pazking at least three-c}uarters down the side of the building. The
amount of parking shown on our alternative plan is about the same amount shown on the applicant
preferred plan but we aze not able to measure it precisely. If additional parking is needed on the site,
it may be possible to widen the connection between the larger parking lot and the one shown on the
side of the building in order to have more spaces. If some, small additional wetland fill is needed far
this pazking, we are willing to discuss this issue with your consultants.
•
•
~~~a
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 2090 U.S. Highway 74 Swannanoa, tiC 28778 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet www.ntrrale~qua6ly.otg FAX [phone] I-877.623748
An Equal OpportunilylAffimtative Allan Empbyer-5096 Retydedfl OYe Post Consumer Paper

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•.
•
•
•
•
•
•

Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Unnamed tributary to French Broad River
DWQ # 06-0922 version 2
Buncombe County
Page 2.
Another concern raised by your consultants is the grading that would be needed on the site and
concerns about balancing cut and fill on the site. Division staff believe that the proposed plan would
minimize the need for extensive site grading and note that the site presently is at the level of Airport
Road. Therefore location of the building and parking lot closer to Airport Road should require less
cut and fill overall.
In summary, we believe that this alternative site plan is practical and would clearly reduce the
amount of wetland fill on the site to less than one acre. If wetland fill is less than one acre, then the
Division will not require compensatory wetland mitigation but we understand that the US Army
Corps of Engineers will still require mitigation for the reduced impacts to the wetlands on the site
(see item three below).
2. Stormwater management -The present plan for stormwater management is to construct a "wetlands-
type retention basin" according to the August 9, 2006 letter from your engineers {Freeland and
Kaufmann, Inc. - Mr. Michael Ranks). According to the description in this memo, you are basically
planning to construct wet detention ponds with littoral shelves as required by DWQ's Stormwater
Design Manual. .
3. Compensatory mitigation
a. Stream mitigation -The present plan to restore the hydrology of the channel that flows along
the northern property boundary is acceptable to the Division. We suggest that a fence be
constructed along the property line to help control trash dumping into the stream. In
addition, please be sure that DWQ and the US Army Corps of Engineers are copied on the
mitigation plan and annual reports.
b. Wetland mitigation - As noted above, impacts to wetlands would be much less than one acre
with the proposed alternative site plan. Therefore if this plan is implemented, DWQ will not
require compensatory wetland mitigation. However we understand that the US Army Corps
of Engineers will still require compensatory wetland mitigation. V4~e believe that it may be
possible to provide on-site enhancement of the large, central wetland by directing treated
stormwater to flow at non-erosive velocities into the wetland. From our field visit, the upper
end of the wetland appears to be somewhat drier than expected. We believe that rewetting
this area with the treated stormwater will enhance the hydrology and water quality function
of the wetland and then may serve as adequate compensatory mitigation for the reduced
impact. If the Corps is able to accept this approach as mitigation, then a payment of about
$88,553 to the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program for mitigation would not be needed.
We have had initial discussions with Tom Walker of the US Army Corps of Engineers
concerning this approach and if you would like to pursue this approach to mitigation, please
have your consultants contact him directly. If we can assist in this discussion, please let us
know as well.

Airport Road Retail Shopping Center
Unnamed tributazy to French Broad River
DWQ # 06-0922 version 2
Buncombe County
Page 3 _
In summary, we believe that a revised site plan (as outlined above and shown on the attached sketch plan}
would greatly reduce impacts to the lazge, central wetland on the site. In addition, direction of treated
stormwater to the remaining wetland will both serve to keep the wetland wet and gossibly serve as
compensatory mitigation through enhancing the hydrology and water quality value of the wetland. In order for
DWQ to complete our review of the 401 Water Quality Certification for this project, please give provide a
thorough analysis of this approach to the Division within two weeks of receipt of this letter. If you have any
questions, you can reach John Dorney in Raleigh at 919-733-9646 or Kevin Barnett in Asheville at 828-296-
4657. Thank you in advance for your cazeful consideration of these matters.
Sincerely yours,
-~_
~'~
Kevin Barnett, DWQ Asheville Regional Office
~ John Dorney, DWQ Raleigh Central Office
Cc: Tam Walker, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office
Dave McHenry, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Laura Belanger, Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc., P.O. Box 2346,
Hendersonville, NC 28793
Richard Bates, Environmental Permitting Consultants, Inc., P.O. Box 3744,
Greenville, SC 29608
File copy
John Domey, DWQ Raleigh Central Office
Central files

~ .~ ~ _`
-; , r~
~~` Gf~'-~~ f' ~ °` _R1

'~~A
~~D"b
~,1
n
w,
~',
N ~-
_--` ~ ~
~ ~~ ~ 1
~1
~ ~--_!`
_~~ ~, /
~~.,~ c-IZc~ P~,~~~
~~~`~~rN; U~~jrkt~
P~~it.~c, ~- E ~~~~
Mbi~ ~ ~ItA7t~~
Url~~~~ t~ ~A~ v~4
r