20221760 Ver 1_ePCN Application_20221213

DWR
Division of Water Resources
Initial Review
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
April 13, 2022 Ver 4.3
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
Yes
No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes No
Change only if needed.
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on:
10/19/2022
BIMS # Assigned* Version#*
20221760 1
Is a payment required for this project?*
No payment required
Fee received
Fee needed - send electronic notification
What amout is owed?*
$240.00
$570.00
Reviewing Office* Select Project Reviewer*
Asheville Regional Office - [phone] Andrew Moore:eads\awmoore3
Information for Initial Review
la. Name of project:
Redwood Commons
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Steve Sceranka
1 b. Primary Contact Email:* lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
12/13/2022
Nearest Body of Water
Swannanoa River
Basin
French Broad
Water Classification
Class C
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
35.57859 -82.51263
A. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Buncombe
Is this a NCDMS Project
Yes No
Is this project a public transportation project? *
Yes No

la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
Yes
No
1 b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Nationwide Permit (NWP)
Regional General Permit (RGP)
Standard (IP)
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
Yes No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 18 - Minor Discharges
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
1f. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
Yes No
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
Yes No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes No
B. Applicant Information
ld. Who is applying for the permit?
Owner Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
Yes No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Realty Company II LLC & Swannanoa River Rd LLC
2b. Deed book and page no.:
3520/0714 & 1861/457
2c. Contact Person:
Wes Morgan
401 Water Quality Certification - Express
Riparian Buffer Authorization
2d. Address
Street Address
PO Box 15881
Address Line 2
City State / Province / Region
Asheville North Carolina
Postal /Zip Code Country
28813 United States
Yes No
Yes No

2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2f. Fax Number:
2g. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Steve Sceranka
3b. Business Name:
Buckeye Community Hope Foundation
3c. Address
Street Address
3021 E. Dublin -Granville Road
Address Line 2
City
Columbus
Postal / Zip Code
43231
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Thomas Hawkins
4b. Business Name:
ECS Southeast LLP
4c. Address
Street Address
1200 Woodruff Road
Address Line 2
Suite H-12
City
Greenville
Postal / Zip Code
29607
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
State / Province / Region
Ohio
Country
United States
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
South Carolina
Country
United States
4e. Fax Number:
1. Project Information
1 b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality / town:
Asheville
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
965854606000000 & 965853892200000
2b. Property size:
2.73

2c. Project Address
Street Address
21 Governors View Road
Address Line 2
City
Asheville
Postal / Zip Code
28805
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: *
Swannanoa River
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water: *
Class C
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
French Broad
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
060101050604
4. Project Description and History
State / Province / Region
North Carolina
Country
Buncombe County
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The site primarily consists of vegetated and wooded land. The site was formerly developed with two structures associated with the Smokey Mountain Petroleum Company. Remnants of
the former development still visible at the site include gravel areas, concrete building pads, and a partial block wall. The site was first developed for commercial use in the 1950s-1960s
and previous tenants of the site have included Watkins Motor Lines (trucking terminal), Asheville Lumber Company (window and door distributor), Mr. Morgan (HVAC ductwork), and
Smokey Mountain Petroleum Company.
The land use in the vicinity of the site is predominately a mixture of single-family residential and commercial properties.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past? *
Yes No Unknown
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0.0054
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
218
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: *
The purpose of the project is to developed the property into a 70-unit affordable housing development for seniors. Affordable housing is deemed necessary for the area based on feedback
received from the City of Asheville. The area containing the project site has limited available land that meets the requirements of the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency. The project
site is conveniently located within close proximity to amenities that seniors may require including grocery and retail stores, medical facilities, and public transportation.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
The proposed housing development would consist of a structure approximately 69,500 square feet with an 18,500 square feet footprint and containing 70 units for lease to senior citizens.
Two access drives from Governors View Road, to the north, would provide entry into the property and into the parking lot containing approximately 73 parking spaces. The project has
incurred approximately $38,000 in costs to date. During the construction phase, a construction entrance consisting of railroad ballast stone will be placed for entry to Governors View
Road. Impacts are proposed for the existing stream transecting the center of the site. A 36-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) culvert is proposed for placement within the stream. The
existing 36-inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culvert on the northeast portion of the site will be replaced with RCP. The replacement of the existing CMP culvert is not considered part of
the impacts for the project. The proposed RCP culvert will be tied into an existing 36-inch RCP culvert which currently flows under the western adjoining property. Silt fencing will be placed
along the 0.59-acre limit of disturbance for the stream culvert. Gravel and riprap pipe inlet protection will be placed to prevent sediment of the down -stream reach of the stream during
construction. A temporary stream bypass will be constructed to the south of the existing stream and lined with rolled erosion control products to prevent erosion and sediment release. The
temporary stream bypass will allow dry working conditions for the placement of the RCP culvert within the existing stream bed and will be in place for a maximum of 90 days. The RCP
culvert will be embedded to a depth of 8" below the existing grade of stream bed, which is 20% of the culvert dimenions per regional condition requirements. Following construction of the
RCP culvert, the temporary stream bypass will be removed and the existing stream flow path will be restored. Natural stream substrate from upstream of the RCP culvert will be deposited
within the culvert system through natural processes.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
Yes
Comments:
Delineated by ECS on April 22, 2021.
No Unknown
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
Preliminary Approved Not Verified Unknown N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Thomas Hawkins

Agency/Consultant Company: ECS Southeast LLP
Other:
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
Yes No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
No other NWPs, RGPs, or IPs are proposed in relation to this project.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
Wetlands
Open Waters
3. Stream Impacts
Streams -tributaries
Pond Construction
Buffers
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.Impact type*
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name*
3e. Stream Type*
(?)
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
3g. S. width
3h. Impact
length*
S1
Culvert beneath proposed
parking lot.
Permanent
Culvert
S1
Perennial
Both
4
Average (feet)
218
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
218
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
218
3j. Comments:
0.018-acre, 12 cubic yards
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
0
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The site has various constraints with respect to the proposed development including required buffers/setbacks and the irregular shape of the parcels on
the southern portion of the site. Due to the small size of the site, these constraints limit the building pad for the structure, parking spaces, and access
roads to be focused on the central portion of the site.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
A retaining wall will limit the proposed development near the wetlands and upstream section of the impacted stream on the eastern portion of the site.
Additionally, construction techniques for sediment and erosion control will include silt fencing, a temporary stream bypass, and gravel and riprap inlet
protection.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
Yes No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
Proposed stream impacts for the project include 218 linear feet (0.018-acre, 12 cubic yards) of permanent stream fill (culvert) which is beneath the typical mitigation threshold of 0.02-acre
for the USACE and 300 linear feet for the DWR.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR) u
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
Yes No
If no, explain why:
On -site stream not listed or classified on the NCDEQ Surface Water Classifications GIS. Site is north of the Swannanoa River (6-78) which is classified as C. Buffers for the Swannanoa
River were not depicted on the GIS tool.

2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
Yes No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
Yes No
2c. Does this project have a stormwater management plan (SMP) reviewed and approved under a state stormwater program or state -approved local government stormwater program?
Yes No
N/A - project disturbs < 1 acre
3. Stormwater Requirements
3a. Select whether a completed stormwater management plan (SMP) is included for review and approval or if calculations are provided to document the project will not cause degradation of
downstream surface waters.*
Stormwater Management Plan Antidegradation Calculations
Comments:
SMP is still in design. SMP will comply with the applicable local regulations, which are beyond the typical State requirements. The SMP will include treatment of the first 1" of rainfall, and
extended detention for the 2yr-24hr storm and the 10yr-24hr storm events. This site specifically also is required to maintain conveyance of offsite flows and onsite runoff for the 100 year
storm through the site due to the sites location within the 100yr flood plain.
G. Supplementary Information
h
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
Yes No
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
Yes No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
Yes No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project is not associated with other developments within the greater surrounding area, nor will the project provide transportation, utilities, or other
amenities beyond those necessary for the project site itself.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
Yes No N/A
4b. Describe, in detail, the treatment methods and dispositions (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project. If the wastewater will be treated at a
treatment plant, list the capacity available at that plant.
Metropolitan Sewage District
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
Yes No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
Yes No
No Unknown
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
Yes No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
Yes No

5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
Yes No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
Yes No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
An official species list from the USFWS IPaC website was requested on November 15, 2022. According to the species list, Gray Bat (Endangered),
Northern Long -Eared Bat (Threatened), Tricolored Bat (Proposed), Bog Turtle (Threatened), Appalachian Elktoe (Endangered), Monarch Butterfly
(Candidate), Mountain Sweet Pitcher -Plant (Endangered), and Rock Gnome Lichen (Endangered) were listed as species with potential to be present
within the geographic area of the project. No critical habitats were reported within the project area.
The NC NCNHP website was queried for the project on November 15, 2022. According to the response, there are recorded occurrences of Spotfin Chub
(Federal & State Protected) last observed in 1888, Blotched Chub (State Significantly Rare) last observed in 2019, and Blotchside Logperch (State
Endangered) last observed in 1945 within the project area. The City of Asheville - River Bend Park Greenway is a managed area reported to occur
within the project area. Of the aforementioned species, only Spotfin Chub was listed as federally protected. Based on the last observation date (1888) of
the species, it is considered unlikely that the species is present at the project site.
The vegetation at the project site consists of several mature hardwoods, approximately 30-40 years of age, on the northwest portion of the site, with
immature hardwood and ornamental trees planted along the western and eastern boundaries of the site. Several young river birch were observed near a
stream that enters the northeast corner of the site. The understory within the site is densely vegetated and dominated by kudzu.
Gray Bat, Northern Long -Eared Bat, Tricolored Bat
The mature hardwoods present on the northwest portion of the site were observed to have dense kudzu growth along the trunks and lower branches,
limiting their potential for use as maternity roost trees. Caves, mines, structures and other hibernacula were not observed on the project site. Based on
our observations, potential habitat for Gray Bat, Northern Long -Eared Bat, and Tricolored Bat does not appear to be present at the project site; therefore,
ECS concludes that a finding of may affect not likely to adversely affect is suitable for the project.
Bog Turtle
Riparian wetlands were observed along an unnamed stream that enters the eastern boundary of the site. The wetlands were located within a terraced
area that appears to receive regular overbank flow from the unnamed stream and contained a mixture of coarse alluvial sediment. The project site did
not contain bogs, spring seeps, marshy meadows, or other slow, muck -bottomed wetlands that are typically associated with Bog Turtle. Therefore,
suitable habitat for Bog Turtle does not appear to be present at the project site and the project should have no effect on the species.
Appalachian Elktoe
An unnamed stream (tributary to Swannanoa River) was observed within the project site. The ordinary high water mark of the stream averages four feet
in width and varies from six inches to two feet in depth. The flow within the stream is moderate when it enters the site and slows towards the culvert
outlet on the western portion of the site. The substrate within the stream bed primarily consisted of silts and sands with pebble -sized rock within the riffle
sections of the stream. The stream did not appear to contain the silt -free substrate with cobble, boulders, and/or bedrock that is considered the preferred
habitat of Appalachian Elktoe. Based on the lack of suitable habitat within the project site, ECS concludes that the project should have no effect on the
species.
Monarch Butterfly
The understory vegetation at the project site is dominated by kudzu and did not appear to contain the patches of milkweed that are considered breeding
areas for Monarch Butterfly. Flowering species are present, however, and potential exists for Monarch Butterfly to be present at the project site during
the warmer months of the year. Based on the lack of milkweed observed at the project site, ECS concludes that a may affect not likely to adversely affect
is suitable for the project.
Mountain Sweet Pitcher -Plant
Riparian wetlands were observed along an unnamed stream that enters the eastern boundary of the site. The wetlands were located within a terraced
area that appears to receive regular overbank flow from the unnamed stream and contained a mixture of coarse alluvial sediment. The project site did
not contain bogs or seepage -fed wetlands that are not subjected to regular flooding. Based on our observations, suitable habitat for Mountain Sweet
Pitcher -Plant is not present at the project site and the project should have no effect on the species.
Rock Gnome Lichen
Suitable habitat for Rock Gnome Lichen, which includes exposed rock outcroppings, cliffs, vertical rock faces, and/or boulders, was not observed on the
project site and the project should have no effect on the species.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat? *
The NOAA Fisheries Essential Fish Habitat Mapper was accessed on November 15, 2022. Essential Fish Habitat was not depicted on the project site,
nor was habitat depicted within the greater surrounding area in Asheville, North Carolina.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
Yes No

7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
The HPOWEB 2.0 GIS tool was accessed on November 15, 2022. According to the tool, there are no documented historic or cultural resources
documented on the project site. The nearest depicted resources to the project site include BN0648 Sayles Biltmore Bleacheries Industrial Plant (Gone)
approximately 750 feet to the southwest and BN0346 Governor Locke Craig House (Gone) approximately 1,400 feet to the southeast.
Based on a review of available historic aerial imagery and topographic maps, it appears that the western parcel of the project site was first developed
with a commercial building in 1950. This parcel was occupied by Watkins Motor Lines (a trucking terminal) from 1976 until 1986. Asheville Lumber
Company (a window and door distributor) operated on the western parcel from 1986 until 1990. The eastern parcel was developed with a commercial
building in the 1960's and was occupied by Smokey Mountain Petroleum Company, Inc. (a petroleum fuel distribution facility) until 2004. Both parcels
have been vacant since a flood event that occurred in September, 2004. Circa 2019, both structures appeared to have been demolished. Our review of
historical information for adjoining or nearby properties identified the area as originally rural, residential land that transitioned to mixed -use commercial
and residential area. Remnants of the former development still visible at the site include gravel areas, concrete building pads, and a partial block wall.
Based on our review of the HPOWEB GIS tool, historic aerial imagery, and historic topographic maps, it does not appear that the redevelopment of the
project site would impact historic or archaeological resources due to the previous commercial development of the property from at least the 1950s and
the likely historic flooding that has occurred on the property due to the close proximity of the site to the Swannanoa River.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
Yes No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Areas of the property within the floodway shall remain at existing grade pre/post construction, and verified via pre/post asbuilt conditions to confirm a "No
Rise" condition within those limits. Areas within the 100 year flood plain will be elevated with the import of approximately 30,000 cubic yards of fill
bounded by retaining walls of various heights to provide a suitable building pad for the proposed structure above the 100 year flood elevation. This
floodplain encroachment and modification shall also be reviewed by and permitted with the City of Asheville Development Services Department.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
FEMA Flood Hazard Zone Map - Panel 3700965800J dated January 6, 2010
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
Redwood Commons - NWP #18.pdf 42.22MB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Thomas Hawkins
Signature
OewelL6 .Wg.rs 041,E
Date
12/13/2022

Appendix I: PCN Application &
Appendices

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.4 January 2009
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
❑ Section 10 Permit
0 Section 404 Permit
lb. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: #18 or General Permit (GP) number:
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
❑ Yes 0 No
ld. Type(s) of approval sought from
the DWQ (check all that apply):
— Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
— Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
0 401 Water Quality Certification
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ
401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
■ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for
mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank
or in -lieu fee program.
• Yes 0 No
lg. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
• Yes // No
lh. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
• Yes 0 No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
Redwood Commons
2b. County:
Buncombe
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Asheville
2d. Subdivision name:
Redwood Commons
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Realty Company II LLC & Swannanoa River Rd LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
3520/0714 & 1861/457
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
Wes Morgan
3d. Street address:
PO Box 15881
3e. City, state, zip:
Asheville, North Carolina, 28813
3f. Telephone no.:
[phone]
3g. Fax no.:
N/A
3h. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent 0 Other, specify: Prospective Purchaser
4b. Name:
Steve Sceranka
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
Buckeye Community Hope Foundation
4d. Street address:
3021 E. Dublin -Granville Road
4e. City, state, zip:
Columbus, Ohio, 43231
4f. Telephone no.:
[phone]
4g. Fax no.:
N/A
4h. Email address:
[e-mail]
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
Thomas Hawkins
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
ECS Southeast LLP
5c. Street address:
1200 Woodruff Road, Suite H-12
5d. City, state, zip:
Greenville, South Carolina, 29607
5e. Telephone no.:
[phone]
5f. Fax no.:
N/A
5g. Email address:
[e-mail]
Page 2 of 10

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
la. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
965854606000000 & 965853892200000
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.57859 Longitude: -82.51263
lc. Property size:
2.73 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water to proposed project:
Swannanoa River
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
French Broad
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
See appendices.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.0054
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 218
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
See appendices.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See appendices.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
• Yes 0 No • Unknown
Comments.
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made?
Preliminary • Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known): Thomas Hawkins
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other: ECS Southeast LLP
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
The project site was delineated by ECS on April 22, 2021. The findings have not been verified with the Corps or State at this time.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Yes /1 No Unknown
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
• Yes No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections
❑ Wetlands
were completed below for your project (check
all that apply):
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
0 Streams — tributaries • Buffers
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
Wetland impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
2b.
Type of impact
2c.
Type of wetland
2d.
Forested
2e.
Type of jurisdiction
Corps (404,10) or
DWQ (401, other)
2f.
Area of
impact
(acres)
W1 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W2 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W3 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W4 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W5 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
W6 -
Choose one
Choose one
Yes/No
-
2g. Total Wetland Impacts:
2h. Comments:
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
Stream impact
number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
3b.
Type of impact
3c.
Stream name
3d.
Perennial (PER) or
intermittent (INT)?
3e.
Type of
jurisdiction
3f.
Average
stream
width
(feet)
3g.
Impact
length
(linear
feet)
S1 P
Culvert
Stream S1
PER
Corps
4
218
S2 -
Choose one
-
-
S3 -
Choose one
-
-
S4 -
Choose one
-
-
S5 -
Choose one
-
-
S6 -
Choose one
-
-
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
218
3i. Comments:
218 linear feet (0.018-Acre, 12 cubic yards below the plane of the ordinary high water mark) of fill via culvert proposed for project.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable)
4c.
Type of impact
4d.
Waterbody
type
4e.
Area of impact (acres)
01 -
Choose one
Choose
02 -
Choose one
Choose
03 -
Choose one
Choose
04 -
Choose one
Choose
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a.
Pond ID number
5b.
Proposed use or
purpose of pond
5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
5d.
Stream Impacts (feet)
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
P1
Choose one
P2
Choose one
5f. Total:
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a. Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar -Pamlico
Catawba ❑ Randleman ❑ Other:
6b.
Buffer Impact
number—
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Stream name
6e.
Buffer
mitigation
required?
6f.
Zone 1
impact
(square
feet)
6g.
Zone 2
impact
(square
feet)
B1 -
Yes/No
B2 -
Yes/No
B3 -
Yes/No
B4 -
Yes/No
B5 -
Yes/No
B6 -
Yes/No
6h. Total Buffer Impacts:
6i. Comments:
Page 5 of 10

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
The site has various constraints with respect to the proposed development including required buffers/setbacks and the irregular shape of the parcels
on the southern portion of the site. Due to the small size of the site, these constraints limit the building pad for the structure, parking spaces, and
access roads to be focused on the central portion of the site.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
A retaining wall will limit the proposed development near the wetlands and upstream section of the impacted stream on the eastern portion of the site.
Additionally, construction techniques for sediment and erosion control will include silt fencing, a temporary stream bypass, and gravel and riprap inlet
protection.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
• Yes 0 No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
fee program
Mitigation
• Mitigation bank
■Payment to in lieu
❑ Permittee Responsible
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Type: Choose one
Quantity:
Quantity:
Quantity:
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
• Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
Choose one
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non -riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
• Yes @ No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
• Yes 0 No
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
On -site stream not listed or classified on the NCDEQ Surface Water Classifications GIS. Site is north of
the Swannanoa River (6-78) which is classified as C. Buffers for the Swannanoa River were not depicted
on the GIS tool.
• Yes • No
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
55 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
0 Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
SMP is still in design. SMP will comply with the applicable local regulations, which are beyond the typical State requirements. The SMP will include
treatment of the first 1" of rainfall, and extended detention for the 2yr-24hr storm and the 10yr-24hr storm events. This site specifically also is required
to maintain conveyance of offsite flows and onsite runoff for the 100 year storm through the site due to the site's location within the 100yr flood plain.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
City of Asheville - Development Serv. Dept.
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
City of Asheville
3b. Which of the following locally -implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
@ Phase II
• NSW
UMP
❑ ❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
❑Yes 0 No
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state -implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
❑Coastal counties
❑HQW
ORW
0 Session Law 2006-246
❑Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
• Yes 0 No
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
0 Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
• Yes 0 No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the
use of public (federal/state) land?
❑ Yes 0 No
lb. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
• Yes • No
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.)
Comments:
❑Yes ■ No
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
• Yes /1 No
2b. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?
• Yes /1 No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
• Yes /1 No
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project is not associated with other developments within the greater surrounding area, nor will the project provide transportation, utilities, or other
amenities beyond those necessary for the project site itself.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non -discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Metropolitan Sewage District will provide sanitary sewer services to the project site.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.4 January 2009

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or•
habitat?
Yes 0 No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act
impacts?
❑ Yes
0 No
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
-
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
See appendices.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat?
• Yes 1/ No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
The NOAA Fisheries Essential Fish Habitat Mapper was accessed on November 15, 2022. Essential Fish Habitat was not depicted on the project site,
nor was habitat depicted within the greater surrounding area in Asheville, North Carolina.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
❑ Yes
1/ No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
See appendices.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?
❑ No
0 Yes
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
See appendices.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?
FEMA Flood Hazard Zone Map - Panel 3700965800J dated January 6, 2010.
f t
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name
12-13-2022
Date
Applicant/Agent's Signature
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization
letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 10 of 10

Appendices:
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP "Setting the Standard for Service"
Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental • Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F-1078
NC Registered Geologists Firm C-406
SC Registered Engineering Firm 323F
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of
the project at the time of this application:
The site primarily consists of vegetated and wooded land. The site was formerly developed with two
structures associated with the Smokey Mountain Petroleum Company. Remnants of the former
development still visible at the site include gravel areas, concrete building pads, and a partial block
wall. The site was first developed for commercial use in the 1950s-1960s and previous tenants of
the site have included Watkins Motor Lines (trucking terminal), Asheville Lumber Company (window
and door distributor), Mr. Morgan (HVAC ductwork), and Smokey Mountain Petroleum Company.
The land use in the vicinity of the site is predominately a mixture of single-family residential and
commercial properties.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
The purpose of the project is to develop the property into a 70-unit affordable housing development
for seniors. Affordable housing is deemed necessary for the area based on feedback received from
the City of Asheville. The area containing the project site has limited available land that meets the
requirements of the North Carolina Housing Finance Agency. The project site is conveniently located
within close proximity to amenities that seniors may require including grocery and retail stores,
medical facilities, and public transportation.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of
equipment to be used:
The proposed housing development would consist of a structure approximately 69,500 square feet
with an 18,500 square feet footprint and containing 70 units for lease to senior citizens. Two access
drives from Governors View Road, to the north, would provide entry into the property and into the
parking lot containing approximately 73 parking spaces. The project has incurred approximately
$38,000 in costs to date. During the construction phase, a construction entrance consisting of
railroad ballast stone will be placed for entry to Governors View Road. Impacts are proposed for the
existing stream transecting the center of the site. A 36-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) culvert
is proposed for placement within the stream. The existing 36-inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP)
culvert on the northeast portion of the site will be replaced with RCP. The replacement of the existing
CMP culvert is not considered part of the impacts for the project. The proposed RCP culvert will be
tied into an existing 36-inch RCP culvert which currently flows under the western adjoining property.
Silt fencing will be placed along the 0.59-acre limit of disturbance for the stream culvert. Gravel and
riprap pipe inlet protection will be placed to prevent sediment of the down -stream reach of the stream
during construction. A temporary stream bypass will be constructed to the south of the existing
stream and lined with rolled erosion control products to prevent erosion and sediment release. The
temporary stream bypass will allow dry working conditions for the placement of the RCP culvert
within the existing stream bed and will be in place for a maximum of 90 days. The RCP culvert will
be embedded to a depth of 8" below the existing grade of stream bed, which is 20% of the culvert
dimenions per regional condition requirements. Following construction of the RCP culvert, the
temporary stream bypass will be removed and the existing stream flow path will be restored. Natural
stream substrate from upstream of the RCP culvert will be deposited within the culvert system
through natural processes.
ECS Capitol Services, PLLC • ECS Florida, LLC • ECS Mid -Atlantic, LLC • ECS Midwest, LLC • ECS Southeast, LLP • ECS Texas, LLP
www.ecslimited,cam

5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact
Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
An official species list from the USFWS IPaC website was requested on November 15, 2022.
According to the species list, Gray Bat (Endangered), Northern Long -Eared Bat (Threatened),
Tricolored Bat (Proposed), Bog Turtle (Threatened), Appalachian Elktoe (Endangered), Monarch
Butterfly (Candidate), Mountain Sweet Pitcher -Plant (Endangered), and Rock Gnome Lichen
(Endangered) were listed as species with potential to be present within the geographic area of the
project. No critical habitats were reported within the project area.
The NC NCNHP website was queried for the project on November 15, 2022. According to the
response, there are recorded occurrences of Spotfin Chub (Federal & State Protected) last observed
in 1888, Blotched Chub (State Significantly Rare) last observed in 2019, and Blotchside Logperch
(State Endangered) last observed in 1945 within the project area. The City of Asheville - River Bend
Park Greenway is a managed area reported to occur within the project area. Of the aforementioned
species, only Spotfin Chub was listed as federally protected. Based on the last observation date
(1888) of the species, it is considered unlikely that the species is present at the project site.
The vegetation at the project site consists of several mature hardwoods, approximately 30-40 years
of age, on the northwest portion of the site, with immature hardwood and ornamental trees planted
along the western and eastern boundaries of the site. Several young river birch were observed near
a stream that enters the northeast corner of the site. The understory within the site is densely
vegetated and dominated by kudzu.
Gray Bat, Northern Long -Eared Bat, Tricolored Bat
The mature hardwoods present on the northwest portion of the site were observed to have dense
kudzu growth along the trunks and lower branches, limiting their potential for use as maternity roost
trees. Caves, mines, structures and other hibernacula were not observed on the project site. Based
on our observations, potential habitat for Gray Bat, Northern Long -Eared Bat, and Tricolored Bat
does not appear to be present at the project site; therefore, ECS concludes that a finding of may
affect not likely to adversely affect is suitable for the project.
Bog Turtle
Riparian wetlands were observed along an unnamed stream that enters the eastern boundary of the
site. The wetlands were located within a terraced area that appears to receive regular overbank flow
from the unnamed stream and contained a mixture of coarse alluvial sediment. The project site did
not contain bogs, spring seeps, marshy meadows, or other slow, muck -bottomed wetlands that are
typically associated with Bog Turtle. Therefore, suitable habitat for Bog Turtle does not appear to be
present at the project site and the project should have no effect on the species.
Appalachian Elktoe
An unnamed stream (tributary to Swannanoa River) was observed within the project site. The
ordinary high water mark of the stream averages four feet in width and varies from six inches to two
feet in depth. The flow within the stream is moderate when it enters the site and slows towards the
culvert outlet on the western portion of the site. The substrate within the stream bed primarily
consisted of silts and sands with pebble -sized rock within the riffle sections of the stream. The stream
did not appear to contain the silt -free substrate with cobble, boulders, and/or bedrock that is
considered the preferred habitat of Appalachian Elktoe. Based on the lack of suitable habitat within
the project site, ECS concludes that the project should have no effect on the species.
Monarch Butterfly
The understory vegetation at the project site is dominated by kudzu and did not appear to contain
the patches of milkweed that are considered breeding areas for Monarch Butterfly. Flowering
species are present, however, and potential exists for Monarch Butterfly to be present at the project
site during the warmer months of the year. Based on the lack of milkweed observed at the project

site, ECS concludes that a may affect not likely to adversely affect is suitable for the project.
Mountain Sweet Pitcher -Plant
Riparian wetlands were observed along an unnamed stream that enters the eastern boundary of the
site. The wetlands were located within a terraced area that appears to receive regular overbank flow
from the unnamed stream and contained a mixture of coarse alluvial sediment. The project site did
not contain bogs or seepage -fed wetlands that are not subjected to regular flooding. Based on our
observations, suitable habitat for Mountain Sweet Pitcher -Plant is not present at the project site and
the project should have no effect on the species.
Rock Gnome Lichen
Suitable habitat for Rock Gnome Lichen, which includes exposed rock outcroppings, cliffs, vertical
rock faces, and/or boulders, was not observed on the project site and the project should have no
effect on the species.
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic
or archaeological resources?
The HPOWEB 2.0 GIS tool was accessed on November 15, 2022. According to the tool, there are
no documented historic or cultural resources documented on the project site. The nearest depicted
resources to the project site include BN0648 Sayles Biltmore Bleacheries Industrial Plant (Gone)
approximately 750 feet to the southwest and BN0346 Governor Locke Craig House (Gone)
approximately 1,400 feet to the southeast.
Based on a review of available historic aerial imagery and topographic maps, it appears that the
western parcel of the project site was first developed with a commercial building in 1950. This parcel
was occupied by Watkins Motor Lines (a trucking terminal) from 1976 until 1986. Asheville Lumber
Company (a window and door distributor) operated on the western parcel from 1986 until 1990. The
eastern parcel was developed with a commercial building in the 1960's and was occupied by
Smokey Mountain Petroleum Company, Inc. (a petroleum fuel distribution facility) until 2004. Both
parcels have been vacant since a flood event that occurred in September, 2004. Circa 2019, both
structures appeared to have been demolished. Our review of historical information for adjoining or
nearby properties identified the area as originally rural, residential land that transitioned to mixed -
use commercial and residential area. Remnants of the former development still visible at the site
include gravel areas, concrete building pads, and a partial block wall.
Based on our review of the HPOWEB GIS tool, historic aerial imagery, and historic topographic
maps, it does not appear that the redevelopment of the project site would impact historic or
archaeological resources due to the previous commercial development of the property from at least
the 1950s and the likely historic flooding that has occurred on the property due to the close proximity
of the site to the Swannanoa River.
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
Areas of the property within the floodway shall remain at existing grade pre/post construction, and
verified via pre/post as -built conditions to confirm a "No Rise" condition within those limits. Areas
within the 100-year flood plain will be elevated with the import of approximately 30,000 cubic yards
of fill bounded by retaining walls of various heights to provide a suitable building pad for the proposed
structure above the 100 year flood elevation. This floodplain encroachment and modification shall
also be reviewed by and permitted with the City of Asheville Development Services Department.

Appendix II: ORM Form