20071531 Ver 1_401 Application_20070907

S

Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Please provide the following info:
1. Project Name: StoneRidge at Hayes Mountain
2. Name of Property Owner/Applicant: SJH Enterprises, LLC / Mr. Sheldon Harnash
3. Name of Consultant/Agent: Jennifer Robertson, Wetland & Natural Resource Consultants
*Agent authorization attached.
4. Related/Previous Action ID number(s): none
5. Site Address: Hookers Gap Road
6. Subdivision Name: StoneRidge at Hayes Mountain
7. City: Enka / Candler
8. County: Buncombe
9. Lat: 035 35 12.47 ° N Long:: 082 42 44.28 ° W
10. Quadrangle Name: Enka
11. Waterway: UT's to Pole Creek
12. Watershed: French Broad River Basin
13. Requested Action:
® Nationwide Permit # 29
^ General Permit #
® Jurisdictional Determination Request
^ Pre-Application Request
The following information will be completed by Corps office:
Prepare File Folder
AID:
Authorization:
Assign number in ORM
Section 10
Project Description /Nature of Activity /Project Purpose:
~~'~~~.
..q.
07- 1 53 1
~"-~-~ - ~ It
"~ ~
S~~P ~ v Z00~
t.~~rvti? . w~a~i ~_€~ ~u~~ ~~
;~~r~nJai;~ ~?~~ ~rE r~.n~~~fF~ ~~cx
Section 404
Begin Date
Site/Waters Name:
Keywords:

4

I
Wetland and Natural Resource
Consultants, Inc.
August 30, 2007
To: US Army Corps of Engineers
Attn: Ms. Lori Beckwith
151 Patton Ave, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Re: SJH Enterprises, LLC
StoneRidge at Hayes Mountain (63.83 acres)
Enka, Buncombe County, North Carolina
Lori and Kevin:
NC Division of Water Quality
Attn: Mr. Kevin Barnett
2090 US Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
The attached Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) is being submitted on behalf of Mr.
Sheldon Harnash of SJH Enterprises, LLC for the project known as StoneRidge at Hayes
Mountain in Buncombe County, North Carolina. SJH Enterprises, LLC currently owns
63.83 acres within Enka in Buncome County, North Carolina and is seeking permit
authorization under Nationwide Permit 29 for impacts associated with the construction
of a residential development including one stream/wetland road crossing and an
amenity/recreation pond which will impact a stream and wetland. This area has been
highly impacted by cattle for many years. Please see the pictures within the enclosures.
Impact Justification /Avoidance and Minimization
The one road crossing impact has been located during the planning process at an
existing road crossing to minimize new impacts due to access. This road will impact 10
linear feet of stream. Headwalls are being proposed to further reduce impacts. No lots
are proposed on the southwest side of this stream which would have resulted in the
necessity for additional road or driveway stream impacts. The entrance road was re-
aligned toward the southwest to eliminate the requirement for additional wetland
impacts from side slope fills.
The stream and wetland proposed for impacts have been highly impacted by cattle.
These low quality systems will benefit from the enhancement activities proposed in the
Canton Once
PO Box 882
Canton, NC 28716
828-648-8801
828-648-8802 Fax

attached mitigation plan. Previous site plans for the proposed recreation pond would
have required greater than 300 linear feet of impacts for the pond (both flooding and
dam embankment). We convinced the development team to reduce their optimal
preferred larger 1 acre pond to a smaller pond (0.44 acre) to minimize impacts and
avoid an Individual Permit.
The proposed impacts for the pond of 218 linear feet should be allowed under
Nationwide 29. The existing topography is dictating the location of the pond. It is not
possible to build the pond off-line adjacent to the stream because of the steeper
topography conditions. There are other drainages within the community that do not
have jurisdictional streams and/or wetlands but these areas will be used to construct
stormwater treatment facilities required under the stormwater ordinance for Buncombe
County.
The proposed pond will be used by the residents for fishing and canning. The pond will
also serve as an aesthetic amenity at the entrance to the community and pavilion.
These residents should be afforded the opportunity to recreate on the pond which
results in minimal aquatic impact. The additional aquatic habitat created by the pond
will add to the diversity of wildlife within the area. There are currently no fish present
in the stream and no non-native fish species will be stocked in the proposed pond.
The impacts at StoneRidge at Hayes Mountain have been kept to a minimal amount and
have been limited to the greatest extent possible in order to gain access to high ground
across the stream/wetland and to create an amenity/recreational pond. There will be
5-6 acres of common open space.
CostingAnalysis Benefits for Ponds
Being able to market a central amenity is crucial for creating initial and long-term
interest in residential communities. Pond front lots generate three times the asking
price than that of non-pond front lots. Pond view lots generate two and half times the
revenue of non-pond view lots. Developers are able to generate one and half times the
revenue on the remainder of lots within communities with ponds than those without.
The following is the financial benefit of the proposed pond for StoneRidge:
• Pond Front Lots (2): Increased revenue factor of six
• Pond View Lots (8): Increased revenue factor of twenty
• Pond Access Lots (41): Increased revenue factor of sixty two
The overall cost benefit for the developer of StoneRidge at Hayes Mountain would
increase by a factor of eighty eight with the addition of the recreational pond. The cost
to construct, permit, and mitigate for the pond have been considered in the cost
analysis. The cost benefit factor still outweighs these costs significantly.
Canton Once
PO Box 882
Canton, NC 28716
828-648-8801
828-648-8802 Fax

Pond Monitorin4
DWQ has concerns about pond impacts on the chemical variable of streams (water
temperature and dissolved oxygen) that have the potential of affecting the integrity of
the water resource. The language of 15A NCAC 02B .0211 FRESH SURFACE WATER
QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CLASS C WATERS states that ~~(b) Dissolved oxygen: for
non-trout waters, not less than a daily average of 5.0 mg/I with a minimum
instantaneous value of not less than 4.0 mg/I; swamp waters, lake coves or backwaters,
and lake bottom waters may have lower values if caused by natural conditions;". The
water quality standards for temperature are °(j) Temperature: not to exceed 2.8
degrees C (5.04 degrees F) above the natural water temperature, and in no case to
exceed 29 degrees C (84.2 degrees F) for mountain and upper piedmont waters;".
The installation of a cold water release will reduce water temperature below that of the
current stream. A portion of the stream is currently in a pasture with little vegetated
cover. The proposed stream enhancement plan downstream of the proposed pond will
also benefit water quality as it is related to stream temperatures since additional native
vegetation is proposed where it is currently minimally present.
The outlet pipe structure will create churn and bubbling of the water flowing out of the
pond which will create aeration within the stream which should increase the dissolved
oxygen content. The cold water release structure, which will create colder water than
is currently present, will create higher dissolved oxygen content since colder water
holds more oxygen. The outlet protection at the outlet of the embankment pipe will be
constructed to create astep-pool system that will also churn and bubble the stream.
The current stream condition is polluted with cattle waste and sedimentation from
eroding banks. This nutrient-rich condition results in low dissolved oxygen conditions.
In order to ensure that the pond has not had an affect on temperature or dissolved
oxygen that would exceed the water quality allowances, pre-construction
measurements for each variable will be collected. Four measurements will be collected
upstream of the proposed pond (two in pools and two in ripples) and four
measurements will be collected downstream (two in pools and two in ripples). The
same protocol will be followed for the post-construction measurements which will be
collected once the pond has been established for six months and one year. No
additional monitoring will occur if the water quality standards are being met.
We do not anticipate exceeding the standards, but if the water quality standards for
dissolved oxygen and temperature for class "C" streams are being exceeded, a remedial
action plan will be implemented which could include the addition of an aeration
structure at the upper end of the pond. The monitoring will continue once the
Canton Office
PO Box 882
Canton, NC 28716
828-648-8801
828-648-8802 Fax

approved devices have been implemented for the same time periods described above.
WNR will continue to correspond with the Corps and DWQ until the standards are met.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached PCN and supplemental
information, do not hesitate to contact me at [phone]. A copy of this package
has been sent to Mr. David McHenry of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and the
Asheville Field Office of the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Best regards,
~~ •.
Jennifer L Robertson
Enclosures:
Corps Submittal Cover Sheet
Cover Letter
Agent Authorization Form
Pre-Construction Notification Application Form
Impact and Site Plan Maps (2)
Wetland Map
Stream Road Crossing Detail
Topo and Vicinity Maps (3)
Aerial Photo
FEMA Map
Tax Parcel Map
5' Contour GIS Map
Soil Survey Map
DWQ Stream Classification for Pole Creek
Corps JD Wetland Data Form
Corps and DWQ Data Forms (3)
Photograph Summary and Photographs
Mitigation Plan
**Should you not receive the above attachments with this correspondence,
please contact us immediately so that we may provide this supplemental
information.**
cc: David McHenry - NC WRC
Cyndi Karoly - NC DWQ (4 copies)
Jeff McGahee -Land Design Studio
Canton Once
PO Box 882
Canton, NC 28716
828-648-8801
828-648-8802 Fax

FRDM FAX N0. :9542552959 Aug. 23 2007 02:31PM P2
:'L
~:' ~ :a.- js ~.
Wetland and Natural Resource s°~a.:~ .~•,.
Cansuftants, Inc. • ~:: ~+:-
,i~r-+'ii ~~
Department of the Army
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
Attn: Ken Jolley, Chief Regulatory Division
PO Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
-ahd-
NC Division of Water Quality
Attn: Cyndi Karoly
2321 Crabtree Bivd.
Raleigh, Norifi Carolina 27604-2260
I, the current landowner of the property identified below, hereby authorize Wetland and Natural
Resource Consultants, Inc. to act on my behalf as my agent during the processing of permits to
impact Wetlands and Waters of the US that are regulated by the Clean Water Act and the
Rivers and Harbors Act.
Federal and State agents are authorized to be on said property when accompanied by Wetland
and Natural Resource Consultants, Inc. staff.
Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants, Inc. is authorized to provide supplemental
information needed for permit processing at the request of the Corps or DWQ.
Property Owner of Record: ~~'' ,~ ~ ~~_.sC Q iZ t ~~ ~ L4. C
Address: ~ 1F; 4 Y_. _N I,J • C-, 9 ~k f L~t~
Address: ~~ (C~ D ~'L-c~2.e rI ~ .33G 6
Address:
Phone Number: 9~~'_a-5~.~ ~ ~~~ ~/
Property Location: ~i ~G~ ~~ ~ ~~ k €1t~ f;,~p a~~ ~~1 Of.~L ~!C .
~~'3I•~
Owners Signature:
Date: ~u y_•~sT' ?~ti~ ~c~7...,...
Canton O~iee Newton 0~ice
~ Box 882 wnrinccam P'O Box 2z4
Canton, NC 28716 Newr~n, NC 28638
828-646-8801 8Z8-465-3835
828-648-8802 Pax f 828-465-3050 Fax

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
p 7- 1 5 3 1
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
~,
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 29
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
S:P ~ is ~.UC~
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Mr. Sheldon Harnash a~s~rt - ~~~,-r~k r;;t;~ ;; ~~
Mailing Address: SJH Enterprises LLC 1N~7~t~t~;? Ain '~°~"'~w''' ~~ aiuncra
11844 NW 69th Place
Parkland, Florida 33076
Telephone Number: 954-255-5084 Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jennifer Robertson
Company Affiliation: Wetland and Natural Resource Consultants
Mailing Address: Post Office Box 882
Canton. North Carolina 28716
Telephone Number: 828-712-9205 Fax Number: 828-648-8802
E-mail Address: Jennifer.Robertson(a~wetland-consultants.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 8

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: StoneRid eg at Haves Mountain
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 869802694292
4. Location
County: Buncombe Nearest Town: Enka
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): StoneRid ewes Mountain
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Asheville, take
19/23/74 toward Canton. Take a right on Justice Ridge Road in Enka. Take a ri hg t on
Moran Road then onto Hookers Gap Road. Take a left onto Ride Road and the site will be
on the right. See the attached USGS maps.
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.351247 °N 82.424428 °W
6. Property size (acres): 63.83 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: UT to Pole Creek
8. River Basin: French Broad River Basin
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 8

9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The site has an old abandoned house on it. The site is
mostly a cow pasture The wooded areas have been grazed by the cows as well.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will include a residential development and associated infrastructure. An amenity
pond and stream/wetland road crossing are_proposed. Typical earth-moving and construction
equipment will be utilized on site
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the proposed work is to build an
access road to high ground for the use in development of access for the residential
community and to construct an amenitypond that will be used for recreation.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. No previous submittals.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No future project plans are anticipated at this time that will impact jurisdictional areas.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 8

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The impacts associated with
this proiect include the fill flooding and~ipin~ of a stream and wetland.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
5 Flooding Herbaceous, Impacted No 10 0.008
6 Flooding Herbaceous, Impacted No 100 0.074
7 Fill Herbaceous, Impacted No 50 0.027
8 Pipe Herbaceous, Impacted No 50 0.003

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0.1 ] 2
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: ,., 0.17 acres
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact
Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Impact Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
1 UT to Pole Creek Pipe and Rip-Rap P 8 78 0.014
2 UT to Pole Creek Flooding P 6 78 0.011
3 UT to Pole Creek Flooding P 3 21 O.OOI
4 UT to Pole Creek Flooding P 6 41 0.006
9 UT to Pole Creek Pipe P 4 10 0.001

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 228 0.033
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill excavatinn_ rlreduinu_ fl~~din~_ draina~e_ hulkheads_ etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on map) ocean, etc.) (acres)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 8

No impacts
Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.033
Wetland Impact (acres): 0.112
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.145
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 228
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ®stream ®wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): dam/embankment with outlet pipe
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): recreation and aesthetic (canoeing_and fishing)
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: cow pasture (stream and wetland impacted)
Size of watershed draining to pond: 15 acres Expected pond surface area: 0.44 acre
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Please see the cover letter for
a detailed impact iustification. Impacts on site have been minimized to the maximum extent
practicable All proposed impacts are necessary for development of the site including the pond
and road crossing construction.
VIII. Mitigation
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 8

DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Stream Mitigation = 390' of Enhancment Level 2 /Wetland Mitigation = 0.033 acre
littoral shelf and 0.05 acre preservation
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 8

IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ^ No
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(square feet) Mitigation
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone I.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 7 of 8

Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. Stormwater on site will be treated by ram
swales and existing buffers. Impervious surface will be between 12% and 16% based on the
following calculations: 5324 if - 95832 sq ft of roads (2.2 acres), 4500 sq ft (51 lotsL5.3 acres),
25000 sq ft pavilion area (.57 acre); total acreage 8.07 acres to 10 acres.
XIL Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
Wastewater generated on site will be treated by individual septic tanks (51 of them) on each lot.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description: This
project will not result in additional development which would impact nearby downstream water
quality. All goods and services can be obtained in nearby Enka or Asheville for the residents of
this community.
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).

08/31 /07
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the.applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 8

~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ Q ~X
0 ~ W
M ~ ~
~ O ~

'~a N
~03~ N
~ 1 ~~~~
...
g,
--
6 e //.
:r -
OD ~'y.=-
^' ~` ~:~
o
\\
~~~
~m
M f/`^
i/
0
PmR~
~~z C7
~m~
~~"~
~ s~~
gin
$sa
~l
\ o-
~ g~€
~n ~
~o~~ ~
O
o
~,
o ~$~ v LL ~
~ o ,~
v m
m m
os~ O n ~ v w °' u
a N v, 3 _~ v
c 3 fl. m ~ ~o
Z d ~ ~ ~ r
n ~ ~ ~ ~ >
.', ~ v
LL n (p .. .. .. ..
~ a 'n V~N
c oo~~o-o' ~
voooLLLL~a~ Qv
~~i nooom~3m'-x ~aL., U
v aLL~'icov~mW (n (d
Q~°~°rvc°o,ooo~ s~.+OpN
riNM~lll lO I~OD 01 ON~..~
r.-~ # at # xc xk xt xc ~t xt H N

0 0
o
o
~ ~
,_..,
~ •~ ~
~ ' ..
~ o ~ x
~ ~
~
o
U
"
~
~ ~ a
~ ~
U p
~ ~
¢, ~ z
~
~ x ~ ~

~ ~ o a
o
~,, ~ on U
r. ~ :b a~
,
_ ~ .~
a~ ~ o ~.'

U ~
O
~
~ W

,~~yy
t-~I
C~
r1 V./
•~~
N
U
~U
z
°o~
~~,
~~
~~
;~ U ~O
~ ~

z~
b~
0
~~
~o
.~ a;

~
~•- ` '
. 71 b ;
wti
i:. i\
.y
• .ti-F~al[

~ ~~
0
~~
v

r
d-
N
'~~~ ~ / ,
~~~•.• V '~~ ,,.
• .,
1~~•• ~ ..
~ '•r / •~
~" / ,
i" ~ ~~,/
~,': ~ \1
\C ~~~ + m ~
- ,~
-- - I °~
o, , `~~~
N /
/~
fM' ~
V /i
i //
/ / .
/~' /.
~ ~ ~ ~ Q`. i
/f ~ m ai o w ~~
\ ~ ~ ~p
/ \ ~ N ago, w
3a~ ~~ : ~N ~ p a
~~~ ~ ~ ~
,%
~- o
~~ _ ~ ~a
~ x a ~z
O~ x ~ ~ o
/ \\ a°o w
/ u' ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ \ °~ M ao w
1 \ coo z ~
~ \ Y p a
'~` 353 ~~ s'"2 \\
~Sh `tf
/ ,~; a~ ~
~ c~ ~ \
~ \\
____ ip M
lIl M Q
~~
LL ry Z
~ I` ~ N ~ D
i E ~`' ~ w
m zd

,--1
.~
--
~

\ ~ ~; o W
v ~ rn~
~ N ~ W
i
i ~~~
`o
~ ~ m Z~
O a
~~
~~ ~
'`
/ ~ 6
S
ld S
r ~
~ --
-~~
~
~~rw
N ~
~~itR`~Ws~r \
.
~,
Fr `~~ _ _
'

/ ~
I'~ ~ ~~,
~~ ~
~ L /
~ ~ ~ ~ .'
~~
--~ m_ ~ r IN i
\~ ~ffi ~ ~ ~i ~ Q ~hQ q_P` ~
\ ~3 r-~~ 7. ti~ ti3~
i ~ !J- /~ " / i~35
\. ~ '~ ~ ~
_ i ,
~ O
O O
W
~~
0 O
y
n , v~
O IZ
Q ~ ^~
Q Z
a _
Q o ~~
~ ..~ ~
~ ~ Q ~~~
-v o o~ a~a ~ ~ ~
~ oor~o..~ ~~~
N
N000 > cn
-~ .Q000~~>~~X H~ V
V a~~~~~~Mw _ ~ ~
~~~N~oooo~ ~-
~ N
........ ... ... ~ N T--~
,-i N M ~ L!7 ~ t~ 00 ~ T..~

CO
O
rl
4~
V
(1)

i
/~
~ ~
~ 1
N
N ~
o
0

Q
i
~~
~~n
~.. ~ ~~, ~
/='
# 9 ~` ~ ~~~~,• ~ B 1
#8 \
3 15 / \
n
~,~
,• .
~ ~!~ ~~~ \
# 5 ~, ~..
.'` ~~
.~~ ~~
:~
:~~ #3 p~
~.
',~~ # 2 10
\ ~ #
~~ .' ~
~ ~ ~~~ /
,~~o . ~ . ~
~: ~
~~ )_ ~ ~.
~~~ I ~
~~ Doti ~
~~~ ~' ~ ~
ti~~~ ~ ,_ ~
C \ i

t0

U
`~
O
in
\V
~n'

~ W
~-
~

~
o
it•
L U
~
_
J U
Q
•X
O
O ~
~ W
~
r- O
• • •
,,--
I
0

~ ~~,~~
v
~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~-~~~~~Lti ~ v
~~
o Q ~~
~ ~1
,~, ~M
~`~_
- `~
.,~
~•
~~~
_;
v
C
~ W OI
C
C ~
!~ ~ O
d ~ J U
vCi 3 v
- m 1O a4
0 o a
u ~ \
v a a v
N _ >
n U
W ~ i
T
N
o ~.
N
.--~
.~
x
bA
b
a~
0
0
0
0
cd
• ~ . v~
r" " x
~ U
V
V
O
~+ a`
7~
/--~
i-1
~ a
0
U ~
~ ~
~~
o ~
~ W

~~
~~
~~
N
U
~U
U
z
~o~
~~~
U `°
~ N ~
z~
~~
0
~~

~O
~
~
a~

~ . ...
.*~,.~
~
~~
~ ~
~ :
:
~ ,.. ,
~:~ ~ .~
~ ~~....s
x. ~•.,~#

~K HEADWALLS (TYP)
f35 LF OF 60" CLUVERT
@2.0% SLOPE, BURY
BOTTOM OF PIPE 12"
PROPOSED ROAD
REPLACE EXISTING PIPE
WITH f35 LF OF 60"
CLUVERT @2.0% SLOPE
PLAN
1"= 20'
PROPOSED ROAD
N
COMPACTED FILL
ROCK HEADWALLS (TYP)
FINISHED GRADE
BURY BOTTOM OF PIPE 12"
SECTION
1"=10'
INTEGRATION OF SITE >k ARCHITECTURE PROPOSED STREAM CROSSING
~ ~ ' STON FRIDGE
1
- AT HAYES MOUNTAIN
20 BATTERY PARK AVER 818 ~ ASHfVILLE. NC 28801 ~ 828.252.9338 ~ 828.252.0398

J
;''~ ~/~ "'Ps r ~\ n•:~ ~~~~\__.. is `
,•p~i:i
F
_ ~~ ,
~: *.~~-~-~` `i J4
%~ asp;; ,. ~
1 ~~
ak n `~ ~~ 11 c
. ji, k _ '`. .Y
7 ~
r -
R ~
~~~.~~~,
11 L.
L~ 1
` S'`\:~
~~.., A..
{.
„'now,
`l i' -v
.J '~-
~~A ,~ ~',
M~~
•A;
- ~~~f;
6° W ,
Name:ENKA
Date: 7/5/2007
Scale: 1 inch equals 4000 feet
Location: 035°35'12.72" N 082°42'43.4" W
Caption: StoneRidge at Hayes Mountain
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Copyright (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc.

Copyright (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc

Vicinity Map
h1gPQU~S'f 0 aoo m
izoo ft
~~1 J.~. -
~~ ~ 1F~A
,~ .Y
t 1 )r ~~ SSD
a
.~
V
~~
~~
7
~c R1d9~a1e Ad
~~,~~
~ ~ ~~
54mter Cast Dr
~`a/r~
s R c -p ~2
~' ~ ~
~~
~L~ ~
~~ ~1~yay pr ~'.~ ~
~T`q`~ p
~ ~
3 ~ ~"
y~ ~ ~D c
~ ¢+
t
~~
a ~ 3i
,n a o 4. ~ ~
s} oC y. .
~ 2047 tAapQuest Inc. Tr ~ ~~a.., c r, "~ d'+ 207 NAV T E Q

• Map Output
Aerial
r• r rho r t~`a1J~1 t ~~, ,~ ~ ~„y~+,~,~~ ty~ ~' ~~ .f ~ ~ ~~
t ~" "~'
~"~~~ i Rt,'~.~"r ~~ "79~9923~.a . ~f,~!t.i i"N{~~ ri'~~' y •~y
;2 t... J ~ " 6~ •
,~'
~ ~, :ti
~ ~,'`~S s ~ ~ ~i.~ ~tc'~1~i ~'a~ ~",~'' s~ irk i~~.d`~ ~~ ~ ,~
•`. '~.- °° ~ . ~. -.s,~~. }.,:; .~_' ~ ~.~ `;!'r .~ ~, 8433
~ - ~~t,ei 4r~ ~ ~( -s. i' t~ n'~ yak 0 ~ ~i~h ».~ ~
.1 { +, n~ 1 _
'~,"r~ '+y ~+. . ~ ~ ~" •, :, ..8146
.~ `~, •:~
,,,~
,~. ~ "
. s
~r~. ,
:~
.. ~,. _.. ~,,, 4292 ~~ , .,
^~~' 3938 ~ ~' = ~y ~ ~,. '~f ~'t `~r'~~"8 8080r~t
, ,F
i V : ~F 1
• ~ yr ~~. g58 ~'~ y ~.. ~ : ~ ~~ ~~~ )
1. 3818 '.~ Yt ., ~ ,! . ~ , -~ :;, ~ i
:x; s,n '`
~ . ~` ~ :. `~•8491 ~, r'`. ~e" '~ , ~ ~"iE,*%~„ l4~R ~> { ~~ ~ ~` gr ~ ~. ` ,~, I
..
_.
~1 /~ s ~~.
t v ~. , j' Y ~ .. L V'v o ", ~ S
Page 1 of 2
http://gis.buncombecounty.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=sid3&Form... 7/5/2007

• Map Output
Page 1 of 2
http://gis.buncombecounty.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=sid3&Form... 7/5/2007

Map Output
Page 1 of 2
http://gis.buncombecounty.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=sid3&Form... 7/5/2007

Map Output
Page 1 of 2
http://gis.buncombecounty.org/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceName=sid3&Form... 7/5/2007

Buncombe County Soils Map

NC DENR - DIVISON OF WATER QUALITY 2B . 030 C
.0304 FRENCH BROAD RIVER BASIN
Class
Name of Stream Description Class Date Index No.
Sams Branch From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-2
Creek
Stony Fork From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-3
Creek
Wayah Branch From source to Stony Fork C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-3-1
Chestnut Creek From source to Stony Fork C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-3-2
McKinney Creek From source to Stony Fork C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-3-3
Warren Creek From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-4
Creek
White Rock Branch From source to Warren Creek C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-4-1
Glady Fork From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-5
Creek
Hogpen Branch From source to Glady Fork C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-5-1
Ballard Creek From source to Glady Fork C 09/01/74 6-76-5-5-2
Turkey Branch From source to Ballard Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-5-5-2-1
Curtis Creek From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-6
Creek
Morgan Branch From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-7
Creek
Beaverdam Creek From source to South Hominy C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-8
Creek
Jesse Branch From source to Beaverdam C;Tr 07/01/73 6-76-5-8-1
Creek
Pole Creek From source to Hominy Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-6
Bryson Branch (Jugtown From source to Pole Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-6-1
Branch)
Little Pole Creek From source to Pole Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-6-2
Young Creek From source to Pole Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-6-3
Bill Moore Creek (Enka Lake) From source to Hominy Creek C 07/01/73 6-76-7
Baldwin Field Branch From source to Bill Moore C 07/01/73 6-76-7-1
Creek
Wise Branch From source to Enka Lake, C 07/01/73 6-76-7-2
Bill Moore Cree k
Moore Creek From source to Hominy Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-8
Pond Branch From source to Hominy Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-9
Trent Branch From source to Hominy Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-10
Ragsdale Creek (Lake From source to Hominy Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-11
Ashnoca)
Canie Creek From source to Hominy Creek C 09/01/74 6-76-12
Moore Branch From source to French Broad C 09/01/74 6-77
River
Swannanoa River From source to French Broad C 09/01/74 6-78
River
Assembly Lake Entire lake and connecting B 04/01/58 6-78-1
stream to Swann anoa River
31

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Stone Ridge at Hayes Mountain
State:NC County/parish/borough: Buncombe City: Candler
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 35' 12.72"° N, Long. 82 42' 43.4"° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Pole Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TN W) Into which the aquatic resource flows:
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): 6010105
Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
^ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required)
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required)
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): ~
^ TNWs, including territorial seas
^ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
^ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
[Q Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 927 linear feet: 4-8 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.17 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Deline~tiotrManual
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
^ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section [II.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody' is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: 70aeres
Drainage area: 6 acres
Average annual rainfall: 41.63 inches
Average annual snowfall: 3.3 inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
^ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
® Tributary flows through 2 tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are 10-15 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are L(or less) river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 5-10 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1(or less) aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNWs: UT to Pole Creek, Pole Creek, Hominy Creek, French Broad River.
Tributary stream order, if known: 1 st.
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the arid
West.
s Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review azea, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ®Natural
^ Artificial (man-made). Explain:
^ Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: 5 feet
Average depth:.5 feet
Average side slopes: 2:1.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
® Silts ®Sands ^ Concrete
^ Cobbles ^ Gravel ^ Muck
^ Bedrock ^ Vegetation. Type/%cover:
^ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run riffle/pool complexes. Explain: wetland.
Tributary geometry: Meandering
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): 10-20
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Seasonal flow
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: 20 (or greater)
Describe flow regime: perennial.
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Con>f;ned. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
^ Bed and banks
^ OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
^ clear, natural line impressed on the bank ^
® changes in the character of soil ^
^ shelving ^
^ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ^
^ leaf litter disturbed or washed away ^
® sediment deposition ^
^ water staining
^ other (list):
^ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determ
^ High Tide Line indicated by:
^ oil or scum line along shore objects
^ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
^ physical markings/characteristics
^ tidal gauges
^ other (list):
the presence of litter and debris
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
the presence of wrack line
sediment sorting
scour
multiple observed or predicted flow events
abrupt change in plant community
ine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
^ survey to available datum;
^ physical markings;
^ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
`A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OH WM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporazily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
^ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
^ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size:0.17 acres
Wetland type. Explain herbaceous.
Wetland quality. Explain:poor, cattle impacted.
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: Intermittent flow. Explain:
Surface flow is: Discrete and confined
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Unknown. Explain findings:
^ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
^ Directly abutting
^ Not directly abutting
^ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
® Ecological connection. Explain: Stream flows into wetland.
^ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are 10.15 river miles from TNW.
Project waters are 5=10 aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Wetlapd to navigsble waters.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the 500-year or greater floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain: has been impacted by cattle.
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
® Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):agricultural use- buffer on river right side forested.
^ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
^ Habitat for:
^ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
^ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
^ Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
^ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: 2
Approximately (0.17) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (YMl Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)
water supplied by perennial stream
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TN Ws, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TN W?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section [1[.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/VVETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
^ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
^ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial:
^ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
^ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
^ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
® Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section I[I.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
^ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section IILC.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
^ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section 1[I.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
^ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATEJ WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):10
^ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
^ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
^ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
^ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
^ Other factors. Explain:
aSee Footnote # 3.
v To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section I I1. D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
^ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
^ Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
[f potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
^ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
^ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
^ Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
^ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
^ Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
^ Lakes/ponds: acres.
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
^ Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
^ Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
^ Lakes/ponds: acres.
^ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
^ Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicanUconsultant.
^ Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
^ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
^ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
^ Corps navigable waters' study:
^ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
^ USGS NHD data.
^ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
^ U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
^ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
^ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
^ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
^ FEMA/FIRM maps:
^ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
^ Photographs: ^ Aerial (Name & Date):
or ^ Other (Name & Date):
^ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
^ Applicable/supporting case law:
^ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
^ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

DELINEATION PERFORMED BY: WETLAND AND NATURAL RESOURCE CONSULTANTS
P.O. Box 882, Canton, NC 28716
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
WETLAND DATA FORM -ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Determination Manual)
Project /Site: Stoneridge at Hayes Mountain Date: 08-22-07
Applicant /Owner: SJH Enterprises, LLC County: Bumcombe
Investigator: Kevin Mitchell and Joel McSwain State: NC
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes x No Community ID:WL
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical situation)?Yes_ No X TranseCt ID: WL
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No x Plot ID: WL
(explain on reverse if needed)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus effusus H FACW+ 9.
2. Salix nigra T FACW 10.
3. Fraxinus pennsylvanica T FACW li.
4. Impatiens capensis H FACW- 12.
5. Polygonum virginanum H FACW 13.
6. Carex sp H FACW 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC excluding FAC-). 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe In Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs Primary Indicators:
Other x inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12"
No Recorded Data Available water Marks
Drift Lines
Field Observations: x Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water: 1(in.) Secondary Indicators:
x Oxidized Roots Channels in Upper 12"
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 2 in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: 1 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): See Buncombe Count y Soils Drainage Class:
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Descriution:
Depth Matrix Colors Mottl e Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 A 10YR4/1 Sandy Clay Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon x High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
x Aquic Moisture Regime Listed On Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes x No
Is the Sampling Point
Within a Wetland? Yes x No
Remarks:

USACE AID#_
~ ~
~~~~i
DWQ#
~~~~- 153 1
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:

1. Applicant's name: Stonerid ee at Hayes Mountain 2. Evaluator's name: K. Mitchell. J. McSwain
3. Date of evaluation: AUQUSt 22, 2007 4. Time of evaluation: 12:00 pm
5. Name of stream: UT 6. River basin: French Broad
7. Approximate drainage area: 64 ac. 8. Stream order: first
9. Length of reach evaluated: 150 feet 10. County: Buncombe
11. Site coordinates (if known):35. 5856844N / 82.7146716 W 12. Subdivision name (if any):_Stoneridge at Hayes Mountain
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):-
l4. Proposed channel work (if any):
15. Recent weather conditions:
16. Site conditions at time of visit: hot and
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: ^Section 10 ^Tidal Waters ^Essential Fisheries Habitat
^Trout Waters ^Outstanding Resource Waters ^ Nutrient Sensitive Waters ^Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES^ NO® If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES® NO^
20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES® NO^
21. Estimated watershed land use: 5% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 40% Agricultural
55% Forested
22. Bankfull width: 5'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%)
25. Channel sinuosity: ^Straight Occasional bends
_% Cleared /Logged % Other
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2'
[1Gentle (2 to 4%) ^Moderate (4 to 10%) fSteep (> ] 0%)
^Frequent meander ^Very sinuous ^Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 33 Comments:
Evaluator's Signature
__ _ _ .
Site # (indicate on attached
Date
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
#
#" C~~~ST~+~`S~
' w
r , ,,,
r~k ~o~stt P~edmgp~t f -
;; 000 Presence of flaw /persistent pools in stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 4 - 5 3
01 no flow or saturation = 0; strop flow = max Dints
2 Evidence of past human alteration. 0- 6 0- 5 0- 5 0
extensive alteration = 0; no .alteration =max. Dints

~ 3 Riparian zone 0- 6 0- 4 0- 5 2
' ~
° no buffer = 0• Conti ous wide buffer = max Dints

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges.
0-5
0-4
4-4
0
: extensive dischar es = 0; no dischar es = max rots
,
Groundwater .discharge

U - 3

0 - 4

`~ - 4

4
no dischar e = 0• s rip ,see s, wetlands, etc. ° max rots
~~,
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0-4
0-4
0-2
1
~,,.. no flood lain = O; extensive flood lain = max rots
~~
t
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access
0-5
0-4
0-2
2
Art dee 1 entrenched = 0; fre went floodin = max rots
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
j 0- 6 0- 4 0- 2 2
no wetlands = 0• lar a ad
acent wetlands = max Dints
9 Channel. sinuosity 0- 5 0- 4 0 -3 0
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max' Dints
E O Sediment input 0.5 0- 4 0- 4 0
extensive sition= 0• little or no sediment = max Dints
'~
l 1 Size & diversityof channel bed substrate ,~
NA "
0 - 4
©- 5
0
fine, homo enous = O; lar a :diverse sizes = max Dints
'
l2 Evidence of channel incision or widening
0-~
0-4
Q-5
5
~• dee 1 incised = Q• stable bed & banks = max rots
~ 13 Presence of major bank failures 0- 5 0- 5 0- 5 5
severe erosion = 0• na erosion, stable banks = max Dints

14 Root. depth and density on banks
0 - 3
0 - 4
0 - 5
1
no visible roots = 0• dense roots throw out = max Dints

'
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock,. or timber production
0-5
0-4
0-5
0
,: substantial im act =0; no evidence = max omts

'
16 Presencx of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes
0-3
0-5
0-6
0
no riillesfri les ar Dols = O; well-develo ed = max Dints

f
1 ~ Habitat complexity
0 - 6
0 - 6
4 - 6
0
little or no habitat = 0; fre wen varied habitats = max Dints

'
i 8 Canopy coverage over streambed
U - 5
0 - 5
0 - 5
1
no shadin ve station = A; .continuous cano = max Dints)

l9 Substrate embeddedness
'' ' ~'~~
0 - 4
; 0 - 4
4
dee 1 embedded = 0' Loose structure -max

20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4j
0-4
0-5
Q-5
0
~ no evidence = 0• common numerous es ° max rots
~ ~
l Presence of amphibians
~
0-4
0-4
U-4
3
Q no evidence = 0; common numerous es = max rots
""~
4'
'?
_
Presenceof fish
0-4
0-4
Q-4
0
no evidence = 0• common numerous es = rnax Dints
~3 Evidence. of wildlife use 0~ 6 0- 5 0- 5 0
no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max' rots)
~~ ~,~, :r 'lull
lav ~~
~V~a~~: T~
i
~
~
r~~ ~ r ' ~#
~~Q~IIt.~
~
k
~
-
,
;
_
8~. -
. TOTAL SORE ~,~atez~,~}' „° '°,, 33
* These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
iDate: 8/22/2007 Project: StoneRidge Latitude: 035 35 12.47°
Evaluator: Mitchell, McSwain Site: Longitude: 082 42 44.28°
Total Point 26 County: Buncombe Other: Enka
Stream is at least intermittent if > 19 or e.g. Quad Name
-ennial if > 30
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 10.5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1. Continuous bed and bank" 0 1 2 3
2. Sinuosi 0 1 2 3
3. In-channel structure; riffle- ool se uence 0 1 2 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sortin 0 1 2 3
5. Active/relic flood lain 0 1 2 3
6. De ositional bars or benches 0 1 2 3
7. Braided channel 0 1 2 3
8. Recent alluvial de osits 0 1 2 3
9. Natural levees" 0 1 2 3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 3
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 1.5
12. Natural valle or drains ewa 0 0.5 1 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on existing USGS
or NRCS ma or other documented evidence No = 0 Yes - 3
'' Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 9 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
14. Groundwater flow/dischar e 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hours since rain, or
Water in Channel -- d or rowin season 0 1 2 3
16. Leaflitter 1.5 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on lants or debris 0 0.5 1 1.5
18. Or anic debris lines or files Wrack lines 0 0.5 1 1.5
19. H dric soils redoximor hic features resent? No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Biology (Subtotal = 6.5 ) Absent Weak Moderate Strong
20. Fibrous roots in channel"" 3 2 1 0
21. Rooted lants in channel** 3 2 1 0
22. Cra fish 0 0.5 1 1.5
23. Bivalves 0 1 2 3
24. Fish. 0 0.5 1 1.5
25. Am hibians 0 0.5 1 1.5
26. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 0 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous al ae; eri h on 0 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizin bacteria/fun us 0 0.5 1 1.5
29. Wetland lants in streambed"" FAC=0.5; FACW=0.75; OBL=1.5; SAV=2.0; Omer=o
*" Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants
Notes:

Stone Ridge Project Site
Candler, NC
Buncombe County
Water Feature Damage by Cattle, July 5, 2007

Poor quality streambed from cattle presence (July 5, 2007)
Grazed streambed and banks (July 5, 2007)

(July 5, 2007)
Eroded bed and banks (July 5, 2007)
Cattle disturbance (July 5, 2007)

(July 5, 2007)
Gleyed wetland soils (July 22, 2007)
Hydric Wetland Soil (July 22, 2007)

Stream feature showing cutbanks and presence of Iron oxidizing bacteria (July 22, 2007)
Cyperus species (July 22, 2007)

4 .....,. ..'. ~'
~,~' d ~ 4k a ~~'''
~~:"
~.,ae } 5
'M :.
~ ~.: ~ '\
~ 1
%' +~ .
w~~+"K"'r a "}n + ~ :" #' ~ "t"; ~rm~ . ,y ra " rah ,a "~,
"'M ~ ~ ~.~ ~.~., , :: ~ ~ . ~~~ ..ro~w~i . Me '~'"'" ~
New vegetative matter (July 22, 2007)
Ncw Vegetative Matter (July 22, 2007)
Amphibian Presence (July 22, 2007)

Jewelweed (Impatiens capensis) (July 22, 2007)
Grazed Forest Understory (July 22, 2007)