20220142 Ver 1_More Info Received_20220321

Moore, Andrew W
From: Jeff Golladay <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 2:31 PM
To: Amschler, Crystal C CIV USARMY CESAW (USA)
Cc: Leslie, Andrea J; Moore, Andrew W; Clement Riddle
Subject: [External] RE: Request for Additional Information, Busbee Phase 1 & la, Buncombe
County (DWR Project #20220142)
Attachments: Busbee Impact Drawings 3-21-22.pdf; Busbee Updated Impacts Table 3.21.22.pdf;
Busbee_CUP Application.pdf; Busbee PCN Additional Info Update.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an attachment to
Report Spam.
Crystal,
Please see our responses to your comments dated 02/24/22 below:
1) "First, just want to piggy back on Andrews comments from his email below dated 2/7/2022. 1 agree that the
road design in this location should be reconsidered to see if the meander can be avoided and impacts
reduced."
WGLA Engineering has redesigned the referenced stream crossing to avoid the meander as suggested.
This has reduced both the length and area of stream impacted. Linear foot of permanent stream impact
at the referenced crossing (Stream Impact S1) has been reduced by 35 LF (From 106 LF down to 71 LF).
Acreage of permanent streambed impact has been reduced by 0.004 AC (From 0.013 AC down to 0.009
AC). Temporary impacts to the stream remain unchanged at 20 LF (0.003 AC). Additionally, the redesign
reduces permanent wetland impact W1 from 0.066 AC to 0.065 AC and reduces temporary wetland
impact W2 from 0.020 AC to 0.007 AC. As a result of the redesign, temporary wetland impacts W3
(0.001 AC) and W4 (0.015 AC) are proposed to accommodate additional access for construction of the
retaining wall. Temporary wetland impacts will be restored upon completion of work. This will include
regrading of the temporarily impacted wetland areas to their original state followed by seeding with a
wetland species seed mix. Please see the attached schematic for the redesigned stream crossing plan.
An updated PCN impacts inventory table is attached as well.
2) "1 also need some additional information on the phasing of this project. As you know we issue permits for
single and complete projects. The plans and PCN indicate that this permit request is only for Phase 1 and
Phase la of an unknown amount of phases and future development. A plan showing all phases is required
on multi -phase projects if all phases are considered to be a single and complete project."
Please refer to the attached Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application for the Busbee Road Planned Unit
Development submitted to Buncombe County by WGLA Engineering and Flournoy Development Group
LLC. The CUP was approved on October 14, 2020. PDF Pages 11 (Exhibit A, Page 3) and 12 (Exhibit A,
Page 4) of the application package detail the development plans for all phases of the Busbee Road
Planned Unit Development. Future development phases include additional apartment units and 11
single-family lots. Additionally, Buncombe County zoning of the tract restricts the Planned Unit
Developments associated with Phases 1, la, and 3 to their current locations. Refer to PDF page 1 of the
CUP application for zoning language and PDF page 12 (Exhibit A, Page 4) for the site plan depicting the
zoning boundaries. There are no proposed aquatic resource impacts associated with future
development phases and the rest of the project may be developed without permits.
i

3) "Additionally, based on the information provided, it does not appear to me as though this project adequately
minimizes and avoids impacts to waters of the US. There seems to be substantial amount of high ground on
site that has not been used, and rather and in particular, Phase 1A seems to be in the one area that would
potentially result in the most impacts for the entire site. This issue ties back into the single and complete
project mentioned above. Without see future development plans that justify the impacts to the area of
Phase 1A, I see no reason why Phase 1A couldn't be placed in an area that isn't almost completely enclosed
by streams resulting in the stream crossings. Further, without plans for the entire development, its hard to
see why the roadway couldn't be re -designed to circle around the streams and access the high ground in the
Phase 1A area in the high ground area just above the termination of SS (as shown on the delineation
map). If there are to be future phases with more extensive road networks it seems that this area could be
accessed without a stream crossing."
Please refer to our response to comment #2 above.
4) "Lastly, the Blue Ridge Parkway is just north of the property. I just want to mention this as I still need to run
it down, but 1 believe it has some sort of protection under the Historic Preservation Act but not really sure. If
so, there could possibly be a view shed issue that we need to work out with SHPO. 1 will find out more about
this and get back to you but wanted to put it on your radar in case this does become an issue."
No structures are planned to be built within the BRP Overlay District. Please refer to PDF page 12
(Exhibit A, Page 4) in the CUP application. Additionally, 11.34 acres within the BRP Overlay District are
planned to remain as Greenspace/Recreation. Please refer to PDF page 3 (Page 3 of 8) in the CUP
application for language confirming the absence of structures within the BRP Overlay District.
We believe the stream crossing redesign along with the details and development plans outlined in the Conditional Use
Permit application adequately address the issues raised by the Corps. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have
any questions or need additional documents.
Thank you,
Jeff Golladay
Biologist
ClearWater, an EnviroScience Company
O. 828.698.9800 I C. 815.451.8139
From: Amschler, Crystal C CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 4:30 PM
To: Jeff Golladay <[e-mail]>; Moore, Andrew W <[e-mail]>
Cc: Leslie, Andrea J <[e-mail]>; Clement Riddle <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Request for Additional Information, Busbee Phase 1 & la, Buncombe County (DWR Project #20220142)
Hi Jeff,
I've reviewed the subject PCN and I have some comments/questions.
1) First, just want to piggy back on Andrews comments from his email below dated 2/7/2022. I agree that the road
design in this location should be reconsidered to see if the meander can be avoided and impacts reduced.
2) I also need some additional information on the phasing of this project. As you know we issue permits for single
and complete projects. The plans and PCN indicate that this permit request is only for Phase 1 and Phase la of
2

an unknown amount of phases and future development. A plan showing all phases is required on multi -phase
projects if all phases are considered to be a single and complete project.
3) Additionally, based on the information provided, it does not appear to me as though this project adequately
minimizes and avoids impacts to waters of the US. There seems to be substantial amount of high ground on site
that has not been used, and rather and in particular, Phase 1A seems to be in the one area that would
potentially result in the most impacts for the entire site. This issue ties back into the single and complete
project mentioned above. Without see future development plans that justify the impacts to the area of Phase
1A, I see no reason why Phase 1A couldn't be placed in an area that isn't almost completely enclosed by streams
resulting in the stream crossings. Further, without plans for the entire development, its hard to see why the
roadway couldn't be re -designed to circle around the streams and access the high ground in the Phase 1A area
in the high ground area just above the termination of S5 (as shown on the delineation map). If there are to be
future phases with more extensive road networks it seems that this area could be accessed without a stream
crossing.
4) Lastly, the Blue Ridge Parkway is just north of the property. I just want to mention this as I still need to run it
down, but I believe it has some sort of protection under the Historic Preservation Act but not really sure. If so,
there could possibly be a view shed issue that we need to work out with SHPO. I will find out more about this
and get back to you but wanted to put it on your radar in case this does become an issue.
If you have any questions regarding this email and information request, feel free to reach out to me.
Sincerely,
Crystal C. Amschler
Project Manager
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
(828)-271-7980 Ext 4231
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we
continue to do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at:
http://corpsmapu.usace.armv.mil/cm apex/f?p=136:4:0
From: Jeff Golladay <[e-mail]>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2022 3:30 PM
To: Moore, Andrew W <[e-mail]>
Cc: Amschler, Crystal C CIV USARMY CESAW (USA) <[e-mail]>; Leslie, Andrea J
<[e-mail]>; Clement Riddle <[e-mail]>
Subject: [URL Verdict: Unknown][Non-DoD Source] RE: Request for Additional Information, Busbee Phase 1 & la,
Buncombe County (DWR Project #20220142)
Andrew,
Thank you for the comments. The project engineer is considering options and we will have response for DWR as soon as
possible.
Thank you,
Jeff Golladay
Biologist
ClearWater, an EnviroScience Company
O. 828.698.9800 I C. 815.451.8139
3

From: Moore, Andrew W <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, February 7, 2022 3:48 PM
To: Jeff Golladay <[e-mail]>
Cc: Crystal C. Amschler ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>; Leslie, Andrea J
<[e-mail]>
Subject: Request for Additional Information, Busbee Phase 1 & la, Buncombe County (DWR Project #20220142)
Jeff,
On January 25, 2022, the Division of Water Resources (Division) received your application requesting a 401 Water
Quality Certification from the Division for the subject project. The Division has determined that your application is
incomplete and cannot be processed. The application is on -hold until all of the following information is received:
1. Stream impact S1 is proposed in an area of stream that contains a significant meander. It appears that the
impact associated with this crossing could be minimized by moving the crossing slightly downstream, or farther
upstream above the meander. Please revise the plans to minimize the impact by avoiding the meander or
provide a detailed explanation of why this plan for the activity cannot be reconfigured to better minimize
impacts to the stream. [15A NCAC 02H .0506(b)(1)]
Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e), the applicant shall furnish all of the above requested information for the
proper consideration of the application. Please provide your response by March 7, 2022. If all of the requested
information is not received, the Division will be unable to approve the application and it will be denied as incomplete.
The denial of this project will necessitate reapplication to the Division for approval, including a complete application
package and appropriate fee.
Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Andrew W. Moore, PG
Environmental Specialist II — Asheville Regional Office
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
NCDEQ — Division of Water Resources
828 296 4684 office
email: [e-mail]
2090 U.S. Hwy. 70
Swannanoa, N.C. 28778
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
4