20130292 Ver 1_401 Application_20131113

o�OF W ATFRQG
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Pre - Construction Notification PCN Form
A. Applicant Information
1.
Processing
1 a.
Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b.
Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29 & 18 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c.
Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
® Yes
❑ No
1d.
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e.
Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
® Yes
❑ No
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
❑ Yes
® No
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Thorns Estate
2b.
County:
Buncombe
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Asheville
2d.
Subdivision name:
Thorns Estate
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
NA
3.
Owner Information
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Gated Communities of Asheville, LLC
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
4969/0145
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Ron Brittian
3d.
Street address:
2323 NE Marlberry Ln
3e.
City, state, zip:
Jensen Beach, FL 34957
3f.
Telephone no.:
3g.
Fax no.:
3h.
Email address:
Page 1 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
® Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
John Vilas
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
ENV -ECS, Inc.
4d.
Street address:
3764 Rominger Rd
4e.
City, state, zip:
Banner Elk, NC 28604
4f.
Telephone no.:
828 - 297 -6946
4g.
Fax no.:
828 - 297 -1982
4h.
Email address:
john @env - ecs.com
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
John Vilas
5b.
Business name
(if applicable):
ENV -ECS, Inc.
5c.
Street address:
3764 Rominger Rd.
5d.
City, state, zip:
Banner Elk, NC 28604
5e.
Telephone no.:
828 - 297 -6946
5f.
Fax no.:
828 - 297 -1982
5g.
Email address:
john @env - ecs.com
Page 2 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B.
Project Information and Prior Project History
1.
Property Identification
1a.
Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
9740 -77- 0484 -00000
1 b.
Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Latitude: 35.644N Longitude: 82.545W -
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1 c.
Property size:
82 acres
2.
Surface Waters
2a.
Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project:
Beaverdam Creek
2b.
Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2 F c.
River basin:
French Broad
Page 3 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3.
Project Description
3a.
Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
This Project may be characterized as a revitalization Project for a failed development. The Project site
is currently partially developed as a single family residential development. The total project area is
approx. 82 acres. Within this area are 72 platted lots in Phases 1 (30 lots) and 2 (42 lots). These lots
are served by paved roads with utilities and other infrastructure in place. Phases 1 and 2 cover roughly
38 acres including roads and common area. The remaining 42 acres of the development is partially
disturbed, undeveloped land. Disturbance within the 42 acres consists of graded trails, material storage
areas, and a stockpile area for excess soil.
The Thoms Estate project is located in North Asheville, an area with a long g istory of development
and is rag dually becoming more urbanized. Surrounding properties are mostly developed and include
a golf course, low, medium and high density residential areas.
The project site is located on the southern slopes of the Elk Mountains and eg nerally has a southern
aspect. Elevations on the site range from about 2530 in the northern portion at the upper end of UT-
beaverdam creek, to about 2130 in the southeastern portion at Beaverdam Creek. UT- Beaverdam
Creek flows from north to south through the site, two other smaller drainages converge with this
tributary from the west, both of these are ephemeral or dry. Beaverdam Creek (Class C) flows from
east to west in the southeastern portion of the site. Two drainages converge with Beaverdam Ck. from
the north (both unnamed). Spooks Branch flows into Beaverdam Ck. from the south. Soil types
through most of the site are Evard -Cowee complex on the slopes and Tate in the valleys. In the
southern portion of the site, Clifton soils are predominant with some Tate and Udorthents in the valley
floor. There are no mapped hydric soils on the site.
3b.
List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.23 acres in 7 wetland units all in UT- Beaverdam Ck drainage (does not include a delineation of southeastern portion of
site, which is already developed and was delineated by others in 2008. )
3c.
List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
The project site contains approximately 2278 linear feet of stream channel in 3 streams. (streams in southern part of site
were not investigated in detail as part of this permit process, these streams were delineated by others in 20081
3d.
Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The project purpose is to complete a single family residential development project started by others in 2008 but halted
during the economic downturn.
Page 4 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Project Description General: The Thoms Estate Project is a mid to uper ran ge single family
residential development Project located in North Asheville. The Project was started in 2008 by others
and shut down in 2010 due to financial difficulties. The project was repossessed by the bank in 2010
and for about a year and a half. the bank funded the completion of City of Asheville and HUD
requirements, on the developed portion, in an effort to make the project attractive to a prospective
buyer. In 2012, the current Applicant purchased the project with the intent of completing the original
plan, with modifications, to account for the changed economic climate.
The Thoms Estate project includes 5- residential phases and an amenity phase, residential Phases 1, 2,
and 3A are basically completed with paved roads and virtually all required infrastructure. Phases 3B
and 4 have been rough graded in areas with no completed project elements. The amenity phase has not
been completed. The focus of this PCN is to obtain permits to complete Phases 3B, 4 and the amenity
phase. Phase 3B will include 1165 feet of subdivision road serving g 7 single family lots. Phase 4 will
include 3100 feet of subdivision road serving 33 lots and 245 feet of private drive serving 2 lots. The
amenity areas include a pavilion with parking, gardens, outdoor event area, picnic facilities,
restrooms, and a playground. In addition there will be a soccer field and basketball court. A walking
trail will wind throughout the development.
Previous USAGE Authorizations: The previous developer obtained a NWP -29 authorizing impacts
to 0.83 acres of wetlands and 135 linear feet of stream channel on UT- Beaverdam Ck. for the
construction of road crossings and amenities. The previous developer also received approval to
replace approximately 1055 linear feet of existing half -pipe with buried round pipe; the location of
this 1055' of pipe replacement is on UT- Beaverdam Ck. from about 217' north of the southern
property boundary, north for 1055 linear feet.
Previous Work Completed: Between 2008 and 2010 the previous owner replaced the half -pipe and
installed approximately 150 linear feet of additional pipe in UT- Beaverdam Creek (15 linear feet of
this pipe was not authorized under the NWP -29 obtained by previous owner).
Current Proposed Work: The current Applicant proposes to remove the unauthorized pipe and 85
linear feet of additional pipe to reclaim approximately 110 linear feet of UT- Beaverdam Creek below
Wetland Unit -1. The old stream channel will be restored in this area and will be surrounded by a
vegetated buffer. The channel will be designed using natural channel design concepts (see Stream
Reclamation Plan for details).
Impact Site l: A new road crossing is proposed at the location of the existing 25 -foot long pipe
between wetlands W -1 and W -3, the proposed pipe length at this crossing will be 85 feet, so total new
permanent impacts at this location will be 60 linear feet. Installation of a grade control log just
upstream of the pipe will cause temporary impacts of additional 4 -linear feet. A portion (1292 sq.ft.)
of wetland W -1 will be impacted at this location as well.
Impact Site 2: Construction of a SWM BMP (Rain Garden 43) will impact all of Wetland Unit -2.
This 1164 sq.ft. impact will be covered under a NWP -18.
Impact Site 3: Construction of a proposed soccer field will impact all of Wetland Unit -6 (684 sq.ft.
Impact Site 4: Construction of a small subdivision road will impact all of Wetland Unit -5 (359 sq.ft.
Completion of project Page 5 of 15
Typical earth moving equipment will be uRdNalsoyar-t\QfrssiWl.&N)ol optrot iyorsiwkhoe,
bulldozer, and dump truck.

4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: In 2008, under direction of previous owner,
wetlands and streams were delineated for portion of the site,
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
no maps or data is available to current owner. In 2012
current owner hired ENV -ECS, Inc. to delineate undeveloped
(northern) portions of site.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Preliminary El Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): John Vilas /Sean Martin
Agency /Consultant Company: ENV -ECS, Inc.
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Site meeting with USACE 9 -12 -2012 reviewed wetlands W -1 to W -7 and UT- Beaverdam Creek. See attached data
sheets and JD forms.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
In 2008, the Previous developer (Global Resources) obtained a NWP -29 authorizing impacts to 0.83 acres
of wetlands and 135 linear feet of stream channel on UT- Beaverdam Ck. for the construction of road
crossings and amenities associated with Thoms Estate. The previous developer also received approval to
replace approximately 1055 linear feet of existing concrete half -pipe with buried round pipe; the location
of this 1055' of pipe replacement is on UT- Beaverdam Ck. from about 217' north of the southern property
boundary, north for 1055 linear feet (see Stream and Wetland Delineation Map). After Global Resources
went bankrupt, in 2010, BB &T assumed ownership. In 2010, BB &T, acting through Atlas NC, extended
the existing NWP -29 and completed /repaired phases 1, 2, and 3A of the Thoms Estate Project. The
extended permits expired on 3 -18 -2012. The current Applicant does not have copies of any permits or
maps showing the location of previously authorized impacts. Lori Beckwith (USACE - Asheville) acted
as project manager for the Army Corps and coordinated with the previous owners.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
The Thoms Estate project includes 5- residential phases and an amenity phase, residential Phases 1, 2, and
3A are basically completed with paved roads and virtually all required infrastructure. Phases 3B and 4
have been rough graded in areas with no completed project elements. The amenity phase has not been
completed. The focus of this PCN is to obtain permits to complete Phases 3B, 4 and the amenity phase.
Page 6 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
Page 7 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e.
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non -404, other)
(acres)
Temporary (T)
W1 ®P ❑ T
Fill /pipe (NWP -29)
Non -Tidal
El Yes
® Corps
.030
Freshwater Marsh
® No
® DWQ
W1 ❑ P ®T
Temp disturbance
Non -Tidal
❑ Yes
® Corps
.001
Freshwater Marsh
® No
® DWQ
W2 ® P ❑ T
Fill (NWP -18)
Non -Tidal
❑ Yes
® Corps
027
Freshwater Marsh
® No
® DWQ
W3 ® P ❑ T
Fill (NWP -29)
Non -Tidal
❑ Yes
® Corps
.016
Freshwater Marsh
® No
® DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
Eliminated
Non -Tidal
❑ Yes
® Corps
0
Freshwater Marsh
® No
® DWQ
W5 ®P ❑ T
New Fill (NWP-
Non -Tidal
❑ Yes
® Corps
18)
Freshwater Marsh
® No
® DWQ
.008
2g. Total wetland impacts
.082
2h. Comments: W1 is riparian and has formed in the bed of an old farm pond. W2 is also riparian and located in the same old
pond bed as W1; W2 is separated from W1 by an area of uplands. W2 will be impacted by construction of a stormwater BMP
and Applicant seeks to authorize this impact through NWP -18. W3 is non - riparian and has formed in a depression, it is fed by
an adjacent spring /seep. W4 is non - riparian and has formed at the upper end of an ephemeral drainage. W5 is non - riparian
and formed in a depression along an ephemeral drainage, the impacts are associated with a SWM BMP and, therefore,
authorization under NWP -18 is requested.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ® P ❑ T
pipe
UT -B Ckerdam
® PER
® Corps
9
60
❑ INT
® DWQ
S1 ❑ P ®T
Temporary
UT- Beaverdam
® PER
® Corps
9
4
Disturbance
Ck.
❑ INT
® DWQ
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
64
3i. Comments: UT- Beaverdam Creek is a low quality stream at the point of impact. USACE Stream Quality Assessment Score
= 48. Impact site is within footprint of old farm pond. Channel lacks bedform and profile diversity, bed material is nearly all silt.
Proposed permanent impacts are associated with a 48" pipe for a road crossing. Temporary impacts are associated with the
installation of a grade control log at the upstream invert to the pipe. An existing 25 -foot long pipe is within footprint of proposed
impact; this existing pipe will be removed and replaced. Total pipe length is 85 feet. In addition to the proposed new pipe, the
Previously installed unauthorized pipe and approximately 85 feet of pipe authorized by NWP -29 (installed by previous owner)
will be removed and the stream restored to natural condition. The following table shows each of the impacts and reclamation
activities and shows a total net impact of 114 linear feet.
Page 8 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Thorns Estate PCN
Stream Impact Table
Date
Action
Impact
Impact
Status
Type
Quantity
2008
NWP -29 issued to previous owner
Stream pipe
135 lin -ft
Completed
2008
Unauthorized by previous owner
Stream pipe
15 lin -ft
Completed
2013
Remove unauthorized
Stream
-15 lin -ft
Proposed
pipe impact, restore channel
2013
Remove approx. 85' of
Stream
-85 lin -ft
Proposed
pipe installed in 2008
restore channel
2013
Install new 85 -ft long pipe for road
Stream pipe
64 lin -ft
Proposed
crossing over existing 25 -ft long pipe
includes 4 lin -ft of temporary impact
TOTAL
Stream impacts permitted under
Stream
114 lin -ft
Proposed
NWP -29
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number — (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. I 5b. I 5c. 5d. 5e.
Pond ID
number
Wetland Impacts (acres) I Stream Impacts (feet)
Proposed use or purpose
of pond I Flooded Filled Excavated I Flooded I Filled Excavated
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Page 9 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico ❑ Other:
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
Buffer impact
number —
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason
for
impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1 impact
(square feet)
6g.
Zone 2 impact
(square feet)
B1 ❑P ❑T
F-1 Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑P ❑T
F-1 Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The Thoms Estate Project was initiated by others in 2008. The Project was abandoned during the economic
downturn and subsequently repossessed by the bank. The current Applicant has Purchased the Project from
the bank and intends to complete the original plan with only minor modifications. Because the all the planning
and local approvals were completed by others, and about 45% of the roads and infrastructure have been
constructed (at least partially) the current Applicant has had only minimal opportunity to adjust the basic
Master Plan without initiating a new application and approval process with the local government.
The site contains about 2278 linear feet of stream corridor with only one stream crossing proposed. This
crossing has been located over the footprint of an existing 25 -foot long pipe thereby reducing impacts to open
stream channels from proposed new construction. This is the result of a well designed site plan. All the major
stream corridors have been placed in common areas with intact buffers. Of the four proposed wetland impacts,
two are small non - riparian wetlands of low quality; both of these formed in areas of past disturbance. Only
W1 and W2 are riparian wetlands, both of which formed in the bed of an old farm pond. Only about 25% of
W1 is to be impacted. A grade control log will be installed upstream of the proposed pipe at S1 to prevent
headcut formation and subsequent impacts to streams or wetlands above.
The previous owner /developer obtained a NWP -29 to impact 135 linear feet of UT- Beaverdam Creek,
however, a site investigation revealed that past impacts were approximately 150 linear feet. The current
Applicant proposes to remove 100 linear feet of pipe on UT- Beaverdam Ck. and restore the channel to an
open, stable and natural state. This action will effectively eliminate 100 linear feet of stream impact caused by
the previous developer. The proposed road crossing will cause 60 linear feet of new impact but the total
stream impact on the site will be reduced from 150 linear feet to 110 linear feet.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
The installation of the proposed pipe at S1 /W1 will be performed in the dry. UT- Beaverdam Ck. at this
Page 10 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

location is small enough to pump flow around the work area. A grade control log will be installed upstream of
the proposed pipe to prevent headcutting. Construction of the reclaimed reach of UT- Beaverdam Ck will also
be performed in the dry. A temporary diversion pipe or open lined diversion channel will be used to maintain
flow until the reclaimed channel is stabilized. Grade control logs will be installed in the new channel
approximately every 20 linear feet to prevent headcutting,
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
® Yes ❑ No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ® Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
®Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
® Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
NO
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.140 acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
0.024 acres (will be mitigated as riparian per EEP letter)
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments: The project involves impacts to a total of 0.164 acres of wetlands. This includes 0.083 acres of wetland impact
completed by previous owner /developer and 0.081 acres proposed by current applicant. The location and quality of the
Previously impacted wetlands are unknown. The currently proposed wetland impacts will occur in 4 separate areas, all of
which are of low to medium quality (see photo sheets). WAM scores for each of the 4 wetland units was low (see attached
WAM sheets). Given that the proposed impacts to wetlands will occur in lower quality wetlands the Applicants requests a 1:1
wetland mitigation ratio.
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 11 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 12 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E.
Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1.
Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a.
Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
❑ Yes ® No
1 b.
If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments:
❑ Yes ❑ No
2.
Stormwater Management Plan
2a.
What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
22%
2b.
Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c.
If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
The overall imperviousness of the site exceeds City of Asheville threshold for SWM. A plan to address both water quality (to
85% TSS removal std.) and quantity has been prepared by the project engineer and submitted to the City of Asheville.
The initial review of the SWM plan resulted in minor comments, which are being addressed in the final SWM plan. Final
approval of this plan is anticipated in the next few weeks. SWM plan sheets are included with this PCN package. The
SWM plan includes 8 rain garden (bioretention) BMP's in the Phase 3B and 4 portions of the site. SWM for Phases 1, 2,
and 3A was completed by the previous owner /developer.
2e.
Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
® Certified Local Government
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3.
Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a.
In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Asheville
3b.
Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
® Phase II
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Plans are attached but final approval has not vet been received.
❑ Yes ® No
4.
DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a.
Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
❑ ORW
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
❑ Other:
4b.
Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5.
DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a.
Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 13 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5b.
Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
F.
Supplementary Information
1.
Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a.
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
❑ Yes ® No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c.
If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2.
Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a.
Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b.
Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c.
If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of
the violation(s):
3.
Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a.
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b.
If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4.
Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a.
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The project site is served by the City of Asheville for both water and sewer.
Page 14 of 15
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5.
Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a.
Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
❑ Yes ® No
habitat?
5b.
Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
❑ Yes ® No
impacts?
F-1 Raleigh
5c.
If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
5d.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
USFWS online database for T &E species by county
6.
Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a.
Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
6b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
South Atlantic habitat and Ecosystem IMS digital database: ocean.floridamarine.org
7.
Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a.
Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
❑ Yes ® No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b.
What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NC SHPO database: gis.ncdcr.gov /hpoweb/
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a.
Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain? A portion
of the project site lies within the 100 year floodplain, however, this area has
❑ Yes ® No
been designated as common area and no land disturbing activities or
impacts to jurisdictional waters will occur in this area.
8b.
If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
8c.
What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? NC Emergency Mgmt floodplain mappping website:
Flood maps.nc.gov /FMIS
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
is provided.)
Page 15 of 15
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version