20221593 Ver 1_9 20220624_22-387_USACE_Queen Street_Henderson Co_20221107

BNT OR Tye' FISHSERVICE
�o United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
gRCH 3 1Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street Suite B
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
June 24, 2022
Mr. David Rabon
Atlas Environmental, Inc.
338 S. Sharon Amity Road, 9411
Charlotte, North Carolina 28211
Subject: Queen Street Residential Development in Hendersonville, Henderson County, North Carolina.
Dear Mr. Rabon:
On June 15, 2022, we received (via email) your information requesting our review of the subject project.
We have reviewed the information that you presented for this request and the following comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.§ 4321 et
seq.) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 - 1543) (Act).
Proiect Description
According to the information provided, Moore & Son Site Contractors proposes to construct a 32-unit,
residential townhome development and associated infrastructure on approximately 14.2 acres at 153
Queen Street in Hendersonville, Henderson County, North Carolina. The site is primarily cleared with an
existing residence.
Federally Listed Species
An assessment of suitable habitat and/or presence/absence species surveys for eight species were
conducted by environmental specialist with Atlas Environmental, Inc. on May 12, 2022. The findings
were compiled and included in the review requests submitted to our office on June 15, 2022. The
following species and their associated habitats were evaluated.
Species
Status'
Bog turtle
Glyptemys muhlenbergii
T(S/A), ARS
Bunched arrowhead
Sagittaria fasciculata
E
Gray bat
Myotis grisescens
E
Monarch
Danaus plexippus
CAN
Mountain sweet pitcher plant
Sarracenia jonesii
E
Northern long-eared bat
Myotis septentrionalis
T, PE
Small whorled pogonia
Isotria medeoloides
T
Swamp pink
Helonias bullata
T
'E = endangered, PE = proposed endangered, T = threatened, T(S/A) =
threatened due to similarity of appearance, ARS = at -risk species, and
CAN = candidate species.

The review request states that no suitable habitat is present for bunched arrowhead, gray bat, mountain
sweet pitcher plant, small whorled pogonia, or swamp pink. Based on the information provided, we agree
with the assessment that no suitable habitat is present for these species. As such, section 7 consultation is
not required for these species.
Bog turtle is federally listed as threatened (due to similarity of appearance) and is not subject to section 7
consultation, therefore, an effects determination is not necessary. However, it is a species of concern for
our office, and we appreciate the project proponent Is consideration of bog turtle when evaluating the
action area for impacts to federally listed species and their habitats. If bog turtle or suitable habitat is
identified on future projects within the proposed action area or proposed activities will impact hydrology
of suitable habitat (i.e. changing drainage patterns to/from wetlands), we recommend coordinating the
project with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission.
Monarch butterfly is a candidate species, and we appreciate the project proponent Is consideration of
monarch butterfly when evaluating the action area for impacts to federally listed species and their
habitats. The species is not subject to section 7 consultation, and a determination of effects is not
necessary. General recommendations for pollinators can be provided and would be protective of monarch
butterfly should the project proponent like to implement them in the future.
Suitable summer roosting habitat for northern long-eared bat (NLEB) may be present at the site. The 4(d)
rule exempts incidental take of NLEB associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 mile from a
known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during the pup
season (June 1— July 31). The proposed project occurs at a location where any incidental take that may
result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule. Although not required, we encourage the
project proponent to avoid any associated tree clearing activities during the NLEB active season from
April 1 — October 15.
On March 23, 2022, the Service published a proposal to reclassify NLEB as endangered under the Act.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has ordered the Service to complete a new final
listing determination for the NLEB by November 2022 (Case 1:15-cv-00477, March 1, 2021). The bat,
currently listed as threatened, faces extinction due to the range -wide impacts of white -nose syndrome
(WNS), a deadly fungal disease affecting cave -dwelling bats across the continent. The proposed
reclassification, if finalized, would remove the current 4(d) rule for the NLEB, as these rules may be
applied only to threatened species. Depending on the type of effects a project has on NLEB, the change
in the species' status may trigger the need to re -initiate consultation for any actions that are not completed
and for which the Federal action agency retains discretion once the new listing determination becomes
effective (anticipated to occur by December 30, 2022). If your project may result in incidental take of
NLEB after the new listing goes into effect this will need to be addressed in an updated consultation that
includes an Incidental Take Statement. If your project may require re -initiation of consultation, please
contact our office for additional guidance.
We believe the requirements under section 7 of the Act are fulfilled for the federally listed species
discussed above. However, obligations under section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if. (1) new
information reveals impacts of the identified action may affect listed species or critical habitat in a
manner not previously considered, (2) the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that was
not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be
affected by the identified action.

Fish and Wildlife Resource Recommendations
We offer the following general recommendations for the benefit of fish and wildlife resources:
Equipment Use in Riparian Areas and In -Stream. Equipment should be operated from the
streambank. If in -stream work is necessary, stone causeways, work bridges, or mats (designed
for the specific location and type of equipment) should be used. Work pads on streambanks or
approaches to in -stream work areas should minimize disturbance to woody vegetation.
Equipment operated in riparian areas and in/near aquatic resources should be inspected daily and
maintained regularly to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. Construction staging, toxic material storage, and
equipment maintenance, including refueling, should occur outside of the riparian area. The
project proponent should report any toxic material spills in riparian areas and/or aquatic resources
to the Service within 24 hours.
Erosion and Sedimentation Control. Construction activities near aquatic resources, streams,
and wetlands have the potential to cause bank destabilization, water pollution, and water quality
degradation if measures to control site runoff are not properly installed and maintained. In order
to effectively reduce erosion and sedimentation impacts, best management practices specific to
the extent and type of construction should be designed and installed prior to land -disturbing
activities and should be maintained throughout construction. Natural fiber matting (coir) should
be used for erosion control as synthetic netting can trap animals and persists in the environment
beyond its intended purpose. Land disturbance should be limited to what can be stabilized
quickly, preferably by the end of the workday. Once construction is complete, disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native riparian grass and tree species as soon as possible. For
maximum benefits to water quality and bank stabilization, riparian areas should be forested;
however, if the areas are maintained in grass, they should not be mowed. The Service can
provide information on potential sources of plant material upon request.
A complete design manual that is consistent with the requirements of the North Carolina
Sedimentation and Pollution Control Act and Administrative Rules, can be found at the following
website: https:lldeq.nc.govlabout/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources.
Impervious Surfaces/Stormwater/Low Impact Development (LID). Increased development
contributes to the increased quantity and decreased quality of stormwater entering project area
waterways. Additionally, increased development outside the floodplain increases stormwater
flows already caused by the lack of or loss of riparian buffers and floodplain development.
Recent studies' have shown that areas of 10 percent to 20 percent impervious surface (such as
roofs, roads, and parking lots) double the amount of stormwater runoff compared to natural cover
and decrease deep infiltration (groundwater recharge) by 16 percent. At 35 — 50 percent
impervious surface, runoff triples, and deep infiltration is decreased by 40 percent. Above 75
percent impervious surface, runoff is 5.5 times higher than natural cover, and deep infiltration is
decreased by 80 percent. Additionally, the adequate treatment of stormwater at project sites is
essential for the protection of water quality and aquatic habitat. Impervious surfaces also collect
pathogens, metals, sediment, and chemical pollutants and quickly transmit them (via stormwater
runoff) to receiving waters. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, this
nonpoint-source pollution is one of the major threats to water quality in the United States, posing
'Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (15 federal agencies of the United States Government).
Published October 1998, Revised August 2001. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices.
GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2:EN 3/PT.653. ISBN-0-934213-59-3.

one of the greatest threats to aquatic life, and is also linked to chronic and acute illnesses in
human populations from exposure through drinking water and contact recreational.
Increased stormwater runoff also directly damages aquatic and riparian habitat, causing
streambank and stream channel scouring. Additionally, impervious surfaces reduce groundwater
recharge, resulting in even lower than expected stream flows during drought periods, which can
induce potentially catastrophic effects for fish, mussels, and other aquatic life. To avoid any
additional impacts to habitat quality within the watershed, we recommend that all new
developments, regardless of the percentage of impervious surface area created, implement
stormwater retention and treatment measures designed to replicate and maintain the hydrograph at
the preconstruction condition.
We recommend the use of low impact development techniques,2 such as reduced road widths,
grassed swales in place of curb and gutter, rain gardens, and wetland retention areas, for retaining
and treating stormwater runoff rather than the more traditional measures, such as large retention
ponds, etc. These designs often cost less to install and significantly reduce environmental
impacts from development.
Where detention ponds are used, stormwater outlets should drain through a vegetated area prior to
reaching any natural stream or wetland area. Detention structures should be designed to allow for
the slow discharge of stormwater, attenuating the potential adverse effects of stormwater surges;
thermal spikes; and sediment, nutrient, and chemical discharges. Also, because the purpose of
stormwater control measures is to protect streams and wetlands, no stormwater control measures
or best management practices should be installed within any stream (perennial or intermittent) or
wetland.
We also recommend that consideration be given to the use of pervious materials (i.e., pervious
concrete, interlocking/open paving blocks, etc.) for the construction of roads, driveways,
sidewalks, etc. Pervious surfaces minimize changes to the hydrology of the watershed and can be
used to facilitate groundwater recharge. Pervious materials are also less likely to absorb and store
heat and allow the cooler soil below to cool the pavement. Additionally, pervious concrete
requires less maintenance and is less susceptible to freeze/thaw cracking due to large voids within
the concrete.
Use of any of the proposed stormwater collection devices described above will dramatically
decrease the quantity and increase the quality of stormwater runoff.
Stream Buffers. Natural, forested riparian buffers are critical to the health of aquatic
ecosystems. They accomplish the following:
o Catch and filter runoff, thereby helping to prevent nonpoint-source pollutants from
reaching streams.
o Enhance the in -stream processing of both point- and nonpoint-source pollutants.
o Act as "sponges" by absorbing runoff (which reduces the severity of floods) and by
allowing runoff to infiltrate and recharge groundwater levels (which maintains stream
flows during dry periods).
o Catch and help prevent excess woody debris from entering the stream and creating
logjams.
2We recommend visiting the Environmental Protection Agency's Web site (ht62://www.fga.goL/polluted-runoff-
nonpoint-source pollution/urban-runoff--low-impact-development) for additional information and fact sheets
regarding the implementation of low -impact -development techniques.
4

o Stabilize stream banks and maintain natural channel morphology.
o Provide coarse woody debris for habitat structure and most of the dissolved organic
carbon and other nutrients necessary for the aquatic food web.
o Maintain air and water temperatures around the stream.
Forested riparian buffers (a minimum 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and 100 feet wide
along perennial streams [or the full extent of the 100-year floodplain, whichever is greater])
should be created and/or maintained adjacent to all aquatic areas. Within the watersheds
supporting federally listed aquatic species, we recommend undisturbed, forested buffers that are
naturally vegetated with trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation. These buffers should extend a
minimum of 200 feet from the banks of all perennial streams and a minimum of 100 feet from
the banks of all intermittent streams (or the full extent of the 100-year floodplain, whichever is
greater.) Impervious surfaces, ditches, pipes, roads, utility lines (sewer, water, gas, transmission,
etc.), and other infrastructure that requires maintenance, cleared rights -of -way and/or compromise
the functions and values of the forested buffers should not occur within these riparian areas.
Stream Crossings. Bridges or spanning structures should be used for all permanent roadway
crossings of streams and associated wetlands. Structures should span the channel and the
floodplain in order to minimize impacts to aquatic resources, allow for the movement of aquatic
and terrestrial organisms, and eliminate the need to place fill in streams, wetlands, and
floodplains.
Bridges should be designed and constructed so that no piers or bents are placed in the stream,
approaches and abutments do not constrict the stream channel, and the crossing is perpendicular
to the stream. Spanning some or all of the floodplain allows stream access to the floodplain,
dissipates energy during high flows, and provides terrestrial wildlife passage. When bank
stabilization is necessary, we recommend that the use of riprap be minimized and that a
riprap-free buffer zone be maintained under the bridge to allow for wildlife movement. If fill in
the floodplain is necessary, floodplain culverts should be added through the fill to allow the
stream access to the floodplain during high flows.
If bridges are not possible and culverts are the only option, we suggest using bottomless culverts.
Bottomless culverts preserve the natural stream substrate, create less disturbance during
construction, and provide a more natural post -construction channel. Culverts should be of
sufficient size to leave natural stream functions and habitats at the crossing site unimpeded.
Culvert installation and presence should not change water depth, volume (flow), or velocity levels
that permit aquatic organism passage; and accommodate the movement of debris and bed material
during bankfull events. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
• Utility Line Crossings. In the interest of reducing impacts to natural resources, utility crossings
(i.e., sewer, gas, and water lines) should be kept to a minimum, and all utility infrastructure
(including manholes) should be kept out of riparian buffer areas. If a utility crossing is necessary,
we recommend that you first consider the use of directional boring. Directional boring under
streams significantly minimizes impacts to aquatic resources and riparian buffers.
If directional boring cannot be used and trenching is determined to be the only viable method,
every effort should be made to ensure that impacts to in -stream features are minimized and
stabilized upon completion of the project. Our past experiences with open -trench crossings
indicate that this technique increases the likelihood for future lateral movement of the stream
(which could undercut or erode around the utility line), and the correction of such problems could
result in costly future maintenance and devastating impacts to natural resources. Therefore, as

much work as possible should be accomplished in the dry, and the amount of disturbance should
not exceed what can be successfully stabilized by the end of the workday. In -stream work should
avoid the spring fish spawning season and should consider forecasted high flow events.
Regardless of the crossing method, all utility lines should cross streams perpendicularly. We
strongly encourage that a qualified biologist monitor the work area until the work is complete in
order to identify any additional impact -minimization measures. The Service may be available to
assist you in this effort.
To determine if any maintenance is required, the work site should be monitored at least every 3
months during the first 24 months and annually thereafter. Moreover, we recommend the
development of a riparian monitoring and maintenance program that would outline procedures for
the prompt stabilization of streambanks near the utility crossing (should any streambank erosion
or destabilization occur) throughout the life of this project.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Ms. Rebekah Reid of
our staff at rebekah [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future correspondence concerning
this project, please reference Log Number 4-2-22-387.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor