20061539 Ver 1_401 Application_20060906

~'..
PRE-CONSTRUCTION NO
NWP N0.2~
for
2pp6~539
Grey Rock Development ~__
Rutherford County, North Carolina Y - ; `,'~
i . _..~ ~ r ._ ~~~
Prepared for:
Land Resource Companies
IANI)
1Z1~SOL:RC;L
c~~~ii~.~nii:s
Prepared by:
Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC
Woodstock, Georgia
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5
.., ~ ~ ~ ~II,I .
p~C~~~~n~~.I
;.
f . SEP 1 8 2006 '!'.~/ ~~
R
C~ T ILY SECTIO
L ZONAL OFFICE
t
September 15, 2006

r
.. . .
.., ~:e,. ....... , . ,. .~.,~:,. , ,.u... ,~
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL CON
September 1,5, 2006 ~'
Mr. Steve Chapin l"~ la - ~ S 3 g
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
X51 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 288oi-5oo6
r'
-~a I . 1 ~
~~ i
~~~
!
hi SEP 1 8 2006 U
, ~.
:~ ;

'. V~JATER QUALITY SECTION ~.M
t~~"-'='./il_LE REGIONAL OFFICE _ #
Mr. Kevin Barnett ~ ~; et. ; : , ...' ~•:. . _.
North Q~rolirta`D'in:°df°Wat~i~~~~y":`"."~
Asheville Regional Office
logo U.S. ~o Highway
Swannanoa, North Carolina 28~~8
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification -Nationwide Permit No. 27,
General Certification Nos. 3402 and 8495
Grey Rock Development
Rutherford County, North Carolina
WEC Project No. o2-oTt9o5 ~'""~ ~'~'~,.":~
~-
~~ CEi~'~Q
Dear Sirs:
•
On behalf of our client, Land Resource Companies (LRC), Wetland & Ecological
Consultants (WEC) respectfully requests authorization for the above referenced project
pursuant to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), Nationwide Permit {NWP) No. 2~
and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ), General Certification (GC) Nos.
3402 and 3495• The use of NWP No. 2~ and GC No. 3495 for this project requires the
submittal of this preconstruction notification (PCN). Notification and written
concurrence for the use of GC No. 3402 is required due to DWQ-cited violation of an
issued 4oi Water Quality Certification (WQC) for the Grey Rock Development.
Background
The road corridors of the Grey Rock development comprise 33.2 miles on the 3,928-acre
property located east of North Carolina State Route (NCSR) 2~gb and west of NCSR
i3i4, a majority of which is located in Rutherford County, North Carolina (Figure i). The
property is centered at latitude 35° 29' 43" N and longitude 82° 12' lg" W. The subject
site is located within the Upper Broad River Watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code
o3o5oio5}.
•
o ~~~~~ p
3225 South Cherokee bane N~~~~yy~{ ~tr~~p~~~ Phone: [phone]
Bldq.Boo Fax: [phone]
Woodstock, Georgia 30188 www.wet-eco.com

Pre-Conshvction Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 8t 3495 September 15, 2006
Grey RockDeuelop-nent WECProjectNo. oa-o~go5
The boundaries of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on the proposed road corridors were
delineated by WEC personnel during the period of August 3o through September 2,
2005. The result of this delineation, as well as the appropriate maps, data sheets, and
photographs were submitted to the USACE, Wilmington District, on March 28, 2006 in a
jurisdictional waters verification request which has been attached for your review
(Appendix A).
The proposed action for which written concurrence is requested pursuant to NWP No. 27
and GC No. 3495 consists of restoration of piped stream segments beneath existing
logging roads that will be replaced with plate arch bridges along the proposed road
corridors of the Grey Rock Development. Additionally, the use of NWP No. 27 and GC
No. 3495 is requested for removal of sediment from a stream segment impacted during
road construction.
Authorization for the use of GC No. 3402 is requested for io linear feet of perennial
stream impact associated with improvement of an existing logging road crossing of
Buffalo Creek, including culvert replacement. The USACE, Wilmington District,
authorized the culvert replacement activity pursuant to NWP No. 39 on November 30,
2005. The use of NWP No. 39 was authorized for the above-mentioned stream culvert
replacement, as well as an additional logging road crossing of an unnamed perennial
stream.
Based on our review of the USACE General Permit Verification (Appendix B), the
Buffalo Creek crossings included the replacement of a 3o-foot culvert with twin culverts,
5o feet in length, resulting in 20 linear feet of impact, and the unnamed perennial stream
crossing involved replacing a 3o-foot long culvert with a 5o-foot long pipe, resulting in
20 linear feet of impact, with cumulative project impacts comprising 40 linear feet of
perennial stream. However, DWQ personnel field inspection revealed that bo-foot twin
culverts were installed at the Buffalo Creek road crossing, thus the activity resulted in io
linear feet of unauthorized impact to jurisdictional waters, with cumulative project
impacts totaling 50 linear feet of perennial stream.
WEC respectfially requests USACE authorization for the above referenced project under
NWP No. 2~ -Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities, and DWQ written
•
2

Pre-Construction Nohfioafion - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 ~ 3495
Grey Rock Development
September 15, 2006
WECProjectNo. o2-o~igo5
concurrence pursuant to GC No. 349 -Stream Restoration, Enhancement and
i Stabilization and Wetland and Riparian Restoration and Creation Activities
Certification and GC No. 3402 - Residential, Commercial, and Institutional
Developments.
Nationwide Permit General Conditions Summary
We have provided the following information to document compliance with the USACE,
NWP general conditions. Each condition and subcategory is itemized below.
General Condition i -Navigation
The project sites do not occur within navigable waters.
General Condition 2 -Proper Maintenance
All proposed in stream structures will be maintained to sustain adequate flow
conditions.
General Condition ~ -Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls
Best Management Practices (BMPs) and proper erosion and sedimentation controls
in accordance with the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control .Planning and
Design Manual will be followed during completion of the proposed activities.
General Condition a -Aquatic Life Movements
The proposed instream structures implemented in stream restoration activities
(Appendix C) will be designed to allow life cycle movement of aquatic life indigenous
to the project area.
General Condition. 5 -Equipment
The proposed project will not result in land disturbance to wetlands on the subject
site.
General Condition 6 -Regional and Case-By-Case Conditions
Final Regional Conditions for Nationwide Permits in the Wilmington District
i. Waters Excluded from NWP or Subject to Additional Notification
Requirements:
a. Waters excluded from the use of NWP:
i) Waters designated as anadromous fish spawning areas.
Not applicable
3

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 2~, GCNos. 3Qo2 & 3r~93 September 15, 2006
Grey Rock Deueiopmertt WECPrnjectNo. 02-071905
2) Waters of the U.S. designated as sturgeon spawning areas.
Not applicable
b. Waters subject to additional notification requirements:
1) Waters designated as "Outstanding Resource Waters"
(ORW), "High Quality Waters" (HQW), "Inland Primary
Nursery Areas" (IPNA), contiguous wetlands, or "Primary
Nursery Areas" (PNA).
Not applicable
2) Waters in a designated "Area of Environmental Concern"
(AEC) in the 20 coastal counties of eastern North Carolina.
Not applicable
3) Waters on a Barrier Island of North Carolina.
Not applicable
4) "Mountain or Piedmont Bog" of North Carolina.
Not applicable
5) Mountain Trout Waters within the 2g designated counties
of North Carolina.
The project site is located in Buncombe and Rutherford
Counties which are designated as containing Mountain
Trout Waters. The proposed project will comply with NWP
General Condition No. i3 and all applicable general and
regional conditions for NWP No. 27. In addition, a copy of
this PCN will be submitted to the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission for review and comment.
6) Areas closed to shell fishing.
Not applicable
2. List of Final Corps Regional Modifications and Conditions for All
Nationwide Permits:
a. Individual or multiple NWPs may not be used for activities that
result in the cumulative loss or degradation of greater than 300
total linear feet of streambed that exhibits important aquatic
functions.
•
4

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. a~, GCNos. 34oa &3498 September i5, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProjectNo. oa-on9o5
Not applicable, the proposed activity for which NWP No. 27
authorization is required involves the restoration of piped stream
segments and will not result in a loss of jurisdictional waters of the
U.S.
b. Impacts to more than ~o total linear feet of perennial streambed
or intermittent streambed (if the intermittent stream has
important aquatic function) require notification and
compensatory mitigation.
The proposed stream restoration will not result in any impacts to
jurisdictional waters.
c. For all NWPs which allow the use of concrete as a building
material, measures will be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete,
including bags of uncured concrete, from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened.
The plate arch bridge structures proposed for stream crossing are
pre-cast and hardened before they are placed above the streams.
d. For all NWPs that allow for the use of rip-rap material for bank
stabilization, filter cloth must be placed underneath the rip-rap.
If rip-rap is used for bank stabilization purposes for this project,
geotextile fabric or a similar filter cloth will be placed beneath the
r rip-rap.
e. For all NWPs that involve the construction of culverts, measures
will be included in the construction that will promote the safe
passage of fish and aquatic organisms.
The proposed project involves the removal of existing stream
culverts and channel restoration. The restored stream channels
will be designed to allow free passage of fish and other aquatic
organisms indigenous to the project site. In addition, instream
structures will be placed in the restored channels to provide
aquatic habitat. The plate arch bridges proposed for road
crossing will be constructed above the restored stream segments
and will not impact the stream bed or disrupt stream flow.
3. Additional Regional Conditions Applicable to these Nationwide Permits:
Not applicable.
DWQ General Certification Conditions for NWP No. 27~ (WOC No. 3485)
i. Wetland and/or riparian area restoration and creation projects which are
for compensatory mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit (and not
including projects that only involve stream restoration or enhancement
work described in Condition Nos. 2 and 3 below) that are proposed under
5

Pre-Construction Notification - NWP No. 2~, GCNos. 34oa & 3895
Grey Rock Development
September i5, 2006
WECPrajectNo. o2-on9o5
this General Certification require written application to and approval
from the DWQ.
Not applicable.
2. Stream restoration projects that are intended for compensatory mitigation
or compensatory mitigation credit, that are intended to resolve a
violation, or that are in association with a development project shall
require an application, fee, and written concurrence from the DWQ. The
applicant is required to notify DWQ in writing with three copies of
detailed restoration plans and specifications before the impact occurs.
The proposed stream restoration is associated with a residential
development and, as detailed below, will provide compensatory mitigation
for project-related stream impacts; therefore, this PCN has been
submitted to DWQ requesting written concurrence and includes the
appropriate application fee. The proposed activities include culvert
removal and channel restoration at existing logging road stream crossings
along the proposed road corridors of the residential development (Figures
2a-d). Plate arch bridges (Figure 3) will be constructed above the restored
channels with support structures installed a minimum of io feet beyond
the top-of--bank of the newly restored streams.
The dimensions of the restored stream channels have been designed using
undisturbed stream segments on the property for reference. Metes-and-
. bounds surveys, including detailed topography, longitudinal and cross-
sectional profiles of six loo-foot stream segments on-site, were conducted
to collect reference data from segments representing the variety of size of
streams present on the proposed road corridors. Based on reference
conditions, conceptual stream restoration plans were developed for each
of the three typical stream sizes observed on the project site: i) medium
perennial (Buffalo Creek), 2) small perennial, and 3) small intermittent
streams. Three copies of the stream restoration typicals have been
included in the attached Mitigation Plan (Appendix C) for documentation
of project compliance with the DWQ definition of stream restoration.
Stream restoration actions also include removal of sediment discharged to
a stream segment on-site as a result of road grading activities. This
restoration activity is intended to resolve a violation issued for the project
by DWQ by letter dated May 5, 2006 for Preclusion of Best Usage.
Sediment will be removed from the subject stream using hand shovels to
preserve the underlying stream substrate. The excavated sediment will be
transported and deposited to an undisturbed upland location by bucket to
avoid subsequent runoff and discharge to streams on the subject site.
Sediment removal will be overseen by WEC personnel to ensure that the
proposed activity is conducted in accordance with the terms and
conditions of NWP No. 27 and GC No. 3495 as well as all applicable water
quality standards.
3. Stream enhancement projects that are intended for compensatory
mitigation or compensatory mitigation credit, that are intended to resolve
6

Pre-Construcifon Noit; ficxition - NWPNo. 2~, GCNos. 3402 &r 3495 September i5, 2oofi
Grey RockDeuelopment WECProjectNo. o2-on9o5
a violation, or that are in association with a development project shall
require an application, fee, and written concurrence from DWQ.
Not applicable, the proposed activity does not involve stream
enhancement.
4. The applicant is required to notify the Division in writing with three
copies of detailed enhancement plans and specifications before the impact
occurs if the stream enhancement project disturbs greater than goo feet
of stream bank or if the project proposes the use of in stream structures.
The proposed stream channel restoration associated with culvert removal
will include the use of instream structures as depicted in the attached
Mitigation Plan (Appendix C). Three copies of the instream structure
detail specifications have been provided to DWQ for review.
g. Stream stabilization projects that include the use of any structure or fill in
the existing stream bed or disturb greater that goo feet of stream bank
that are proposed under this General Certification require written
application to and approval from the Division of Water Quality.
Not applicable.
6. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman
River Basins (or any other major river basins with Riparian Area
. Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in effect at the time of application)
requires written concurrence for this Certification from DWQ in
accordance with igA NCAC 2B.ozoo.
The proposed project is located in the Upper Broad River Watershed of
the Broad River Basin. The subject site contains Buffalo Creek, as well as
unnamed tributaries to Bailey Creek, Taylor Creek, and Lake Lure. Based
on our review of DWQ Basinwide Information Management System,
Bailey, Buffalo, and Taylor Creeks, as well as Lake Lure are classified as
Trout Waters and require a 2g-foot undisturbed buffer. Therefore, all
streams located on the property will require a zg-foot buffer as they are
tributaries to the aforementioned named streams classified as Trout
Waters.
A 2g-foot undisturbed buffer will be preserved adjacent to all streams on
the property with the exception of the proposed road crossings. For each
proposed road crossing, the length of buffer encroachments will be
limited to ioo linear feet in accordance with North Carolina Division of
Land Resources (DLR), Land Quality Section requirements for site
development. All proposed buffer encroachments associated with the
proposed road corridor construction are depicted on Figures 2a-d. Table i
provides the linear footage, square footage, and acreage of each proposed
buffer encroachment, as well as latitude/longitude coordinates.
•
7

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 34oa &8495 September i5, aoo6
Grey RockDeaelopment WECProjectNo. oa-o~lgo5
~. If written concurrence is required, then the project must be built and
maintained according to the plans approved by the written concurrence
• and Certification from the DWQ.
The proposed stream restoration will be conducted in accordance with the
plans approved by DWQ prior to initiation of the restoration activities.
Please note that the attached plans for stream restoration (Appendix C)
are typicals based on reference stream parameters. Restored stream
channel dimensions on-site may deviate slightly based on field conditions
at each of the 25 road crossings proposed for culvert replacement with
plate arch bridges. If on-site restoration deviates substantially from the
proposed restoration plans or the proposed restoration is infeasible due to
field conditions, DWQ will be notified and written concurrence will be
requested prior to completion of the activity.
8. Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed
those outlined in the most recent version of the 'North Carolina Erosion
and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual" shall be designed,
installed, and maintained properly to assure compliance with the
appropriate turbidity water quality standard.
The proposed project will be designed in accordance with sediment and
erosion control practices outlined in the most recent version of the North
Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual
and appropriate erosion and sediment control devices will be installed,
operated, and maintained in accordance with this manual during
S completion of the proposed stream restoration activities. BMPs will be
employed to ensure that the turbidity of receiving trout waters on-site and
downstream of the project does not exceed io NTUs due to stream
restoration actions.
g. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters
shall be removed and the original grade restored after the DLR has
released the project.
Any erosion and sediment control devices placed in existing stream
channels during completion of the proposed actions will be removed and
any disturbed areas will be returned to pre-construction contours upon
completion of stream restoration.
io. Any rip-rap shall be of such a size and density so as not to be able to be
carried off by wave or current action and consist of clean rock or masonry
material free of debris or toxic pollutants. Rip-rap shall not be installed in
the streambed except in specific areas required for velocity control and to
ensure structural integrity of bank stabilization measures. If rip-rap is to
be installed within the streambed, the amount and location must be
approved in writing by the DLR and DWQ.
The proposed instream boulder clusters (See Appendix C, Figure 6) will
consist of rock excavated from the project site and will be used to
• dissipate stream flow and provide aquatic habitat. It is our understanding
8

Pre-Construcrion Nohfioarion - NWPNo. a~, GCNos. 3402 &3495
Grey Rock Development
September 15, aoob
WECProjectNo. oa-o~i9o5
that the use of rip-rap for grade control structures and bank protection,
• such as the proposed log "K" dams, wing deflectors, and channel
constrictors (See Appendix C, Figures 2-5), is acceptable under GC No.
3495• However, rock excavated during construction of the proposed
residential roads will be used for construction of these structures, where
feasible, prior to the installation of rip-rap. If the use of Rip-rap is
necessary for stabilization of restored stream banks, the imported rock
will be placed upon geotextile fabric or similar filter cloth, will be of
sufficient size and density to prevent removal by normal wave action, and
will be free of toxic pollutants and debris.
ii. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into
contact with freshwaters of the state until the concrete has hardened.
Please refer to NWP General Condition 6 -Wilmington District Regional
Condition 2(c) on page 5 of this document.
12. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid
until a Finding of No Significant Impact or Record of Decision is issued by
the State Clearinghouse.
Not applicable
i3. Additional site-specific conditions maybe added to projects which require
written concurrence under this Certification in order to ensure
compliance with all applicable water quality and effluent standards.
• The proposed stream restoration will be conducted in accordance with
any additional site specific conditions required by DWQ pursuant to GC
No. 3495•
i4. Projects with any impacts to streams, wetlands, and/or waters that have
received a Notice of Violation from the Division of Land Resources and/or
the Division of Water Quality are required to submit a complete
application and receive written concurrence to use this Certification
regardless of the proposed impact amount to streams, wetlands, and
waters.
The Grey Rock Development received a Notice of violation from DWQ
dated May 5, 2006 for the following violations: i) failure to secure a 4oi
WQC, 2) preclusion of best usage, and 3) NCGOloooo Stormwater Permit
Conditions Violations. The failure to secure a 4oi WQC resulted from io
linear feet of unauthorized impact to Buffalo Creek and sedimentation of
an unnamed tributary to Buffalo Creek associated with road grading.
This PCN has been submitted requesting USACE and DWQ authorization
pursuant to NWP No. 2~ and GC No. 3495 respectively, for restoration of
the stream segment adversely affected by the sediment. In addition, we
are requesting written concurrence from DWQ for the use of GC No. 3402
for the io linear feet of unauthorized stream impact associated with
•
9

Pre-Construction Nohficafion - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &r 3495 September 15, 2006
Grey Rock Development WEC Project No. oa-o~i9o5
culvert replacement on Buffalo Creek. Compliance with the general
conditions of GC No. 3402 is detailed below.
i5. Concurrence from DWQ that this Certification applies to an individual
project shall expire three years from the date of the cover letter from
DWQ or the notification sent to DWQ.
The proposed stream restoration actions will be completed within three
years upon DWQ approval of the use of GC No. 3495•
i6. Standard Erosion and Sediment Control Practices:
a. Erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be
designed, installed, operated, and maintained in accordance with
the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and
Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual.
Please refer to GC No. 3495 Condition No. 8 on page 8 of this
document.
b. Design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment
and erosion control measures must be such that they equal, or
exceed, the requirements specified in the most recent version of
the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual.
Please refer to GC No. 3495 Condition No. 8 on page 8 of this
document.
c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures
must be designed, installed, operated, and maintained in
accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina
Surface Mining Manual.
Not applicable.
d. Reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the
reclamation in accordance with the requirements of the
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
Not applicable.
e. Sufficient materials required for stabilization and/or repair of
erosion control measures and stormwater routing and treatment
shall be on site at all times.
The contractor completing the proposed stream restoration shall
maintain adequate materials on-site for stabilization and/or
repair of erosion control measures implemented in the completion
of the stream restoration for the duration of the proposed
activities.
•
io

Pre-Construction Nokfia~tion -NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &3495 September 15, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProjectNo. o2-on9o5
i~. No Impacts Beyond those in Application
The proposed project will not result in any additional impacts to streams,
wetlands, or riparian areas other than those described in this PCN and
depicted on the proposed site plan (Figures 2a-d). Construction of the
restored stream channels, including erosion and sediment control
measures, will be conducted in accordance with applicable water quality
standards, statutes, and/or rules in place during completion of the
proposed activity.
i8. No Sediment and Erosion Control Measures in Wetlands
The proposed project will not result in land disturbance to wetlands on
the project site. However, if sediment and erosion control devices are
placed in wetlands, they will be removed upon completion of construction
and any disturbed wetland area will be restored to pre-construction
conditions.
DWQ General Certification Conditions for NWP No. 32CW No. 3402)
i. Enumerating and Reporting of Impacts:
a. Streams -Impacts to streams shall be measured as length of the
centerline of the normal flow channel. Permanent and/or
temporary stream impacts shall be enumerated on the entire
project for all impacts regardless of which NWPs are used. Stream
relocations and stream bed and/or bank hardening are considered
to be permanent impacts.
Construction of the road corridors to serve the residential
development resulted in stream impacts associated with culvert
replacement. Stream impacts resulted from the replacement of
two existing 3o-foot culverts beneath existing road crossings of
Buffalo Creek and an unnamed perennial stream with longer
culverts to accommodate wider roads necessary for residential
development. As described in the after-the-fact NWP No. 39 PCN
for the proposed activity submitted to the USACE, Wilmington
District by LRC on September 26, 2ooS (Appendix D), the new
culverts were 5o-feet in length and resulted in 20 linear feet of
permanent impact for each crossing, with cumulative impacts of
40 linear feet of stream. The NWP No. 39 was authorized by the
USACE, Wilmington District on November 30, zoos (USACE
Action ID No. 200630060 for the culvert replacement.
Based on DWQ personnel field inspection, the culvert replacement
on Buffalo Creek resulted in installation of 6o-foot twin culverts.
Our review of a survey of the road crossing provided by R.L.
Greene Surveying & Mapping (Figure 4) verified the results of the
DWQ field inspection. Therefore, impacts to Buffalo Creek
associated with road widening resulted in 30 linear feet of
ii

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &3495
Grey Rock Deaelopment
September 15, 2006
WECProjeciNo. o2-op9o5
permanent impact due to the installation of twin culverts, 6o-feet
in length, with cumulative project impacts comprising 50 linear
feet of stream.
b. Wetlands -Impacts to wetlands shall be measured as area.
Permanent and/or temporary wetland impacts shall be
enumerated on the entire project for all impacts regardless of
which NWPs are used.
Not applicable, the project will not impact wetlands.
c. Lakes and Ponds -Impacts to waters other than streams and
wetlands shall be measured as area.
Not applicable.
d. Total stream impacts greater than or equal to ~o cumulative feet
of stream length for the entire project require written notification
to and approval by the DWQ.
Not applicable, the proposed activity will not result in cumulative
stream impacts exceeding ~o linear feet.
e. Impacts to waters of equal to or greater than i/3 of an acre require
written notification to and approval by the DWQ.
Not applicable, the proposed activity will not result in impacts to
waters of the U.S. exceeding i/3 of an acre.
f. Wetland impacts of greater or equal to i/3 of an acre east of I-95
and i/io of an acre west of I-95 require written notification to and
approval by the DWQ. Any impacts to wetlands adjacent to waters
designated as outstanding resource waters ORW, SA, WS-I, WS-II
or Trout or are designated as North Carolina or National Wild and
Scenic River and wetlands classified as SWL and/or UWL as well
as wetlands described in i5A NCAC 2H.o5o6 (e) require a
complete application and written concurrence from DWQ.
Not applicable.
g. Written notification to DWQ is required for all applications that
propose to use NWP i8. This notification requirement will be
satisfied by providing two copies of the PCN form to DWQ at the
same time that the PCN form is sent to the USACE. A formal
application and fee is not required unless DWQ decides that an
Individual Certification will be required for the project.
Not applicable.
h. Proposed fill or substantial modification for any amount of
. wetlands classified in accordance with i,SA NCAC 2B.oioi (e) (~}
12

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 2y, GCNos. 3402 &r 3495 September 15, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProjectNo. 02-0905
as Unique Wetlands (UWL) shall require written concurrence
• from DWQ.
Not applicable.
2. Impacts to any stream length in the Neuse, Tar-Pamlico or Randleman
River Basins (or any other major river basins with Riparian Area
Protection Rules [Buffer Rules] in effect at the time of application) require
written concurrence under the above referenced Certification.
Please refer to GC No. 3495 Condition No. 6 on page ~ of this document.
3. Irrespective of other application thresholds in the General Certification all
impacts to perennial waters and their associated buffers require written
approval from DWQ.
The proposed project resulted in impacts to Buffalo Creek and an
unnamed perennial stream associated with culvert replacement. The
proposed activity was previously authorized by the USACE, Wilmington
District for 40 linear of stream impact. Based on DWQ personnel field
inspection, the culvert replacement resulted in 50 linear feet of impact.
Therefore, this PCN has been submitted requesting written approval from
DWQ for the additional io linear feet of perennial stream impact
pursuant to GC No. 3495•
4. Additional site-specific stormwater management requirements may be
• added to this Certification at DWQ's discretion on a case-by-case basis for
projects that have or are anticipated to have impervious cover of greater
than 3o percent.
Not applicable. However, all proposed road corridors will be 18 feet wide,
with the exception of the main thoroughfare (Grey Rock Parkway) which
will be 22 feet in width. Based on these road widths, impervious surface
acreage associated with the road corridors will be approximately 5~ acres
and represents approximately i.5 percent of the total site acreage (3,928
acres).
Additionally, in watersheds within one mile and draining to 3o3(d)-listed
waters, as well as watersheds that are classified as nutrient sensitive
waters (NSW), water supply waters (WS), trout waters (Tr), high quality
waters (HQW), and outstanding resource waters (ORW), DWQ shall
require that extended detention wetlands, bio-retention areas, and ponds
followed by forested filter strips be constructed as part of the stormwater
management plan when asite-specific stormwater management plan is
required.
The proposed project is located within a watershed classified as trout
waters; however, the development of the proposed road corridors to serve
the residential development does not include the construction of
stormwater management facilities.

~3

Pre-Construcrion Notification - NWPNo. ay, GCNos. 34oa &3495 September i5, 2006
Grey RockDeuelopment WECProjectNo. oa-o~9o5
5. Compensatory stream mitigation shall be required at a 1:1 ratio for not
only perennial but also intermittent stream impacts that require
application to DWQ in watersheds classified as ORW, HQW, Tr, WS-I and
WS-II.
Compensatory mitigation for 50 linear feet of impacts to Buffalo Creek
and an unnamed perennial stream associated with culvert replacement
will be completed through on-site channel restoration of piped stream
segments along the existing logging roads proposed for road
improvement. These restoration actions will exceed a i:l mitigation ratio,
as each restored stream segment will have a minimum length of 30 linear
feet with 25 segments proposed for restoration. Thus, the minimum
length of the on-site stream restoration is anticipated to be 750 linear feet,
which represents a x.5:1 stream mitigation ratio. Please refer to the
attached Mitigation Plan (Appendix C) for a detailed description of the
proposed on-site mitigation.
6. In accordance with North Carolina General Statute Section i43-215.3D(e},
any application fora 4oi Water Quality Certification must include the
appropriate fee.
Payment of the $20o fee for minor water quality certifications has been
included with this PCN.
~. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.o5o6(h), compensatory mitigation may
be required for impacts to i5o linear feet or more of stream and/or one
acre or more of wetlands for an entire project.
Not applicable. Stream impacts associated with the proposed project do
not exceed i5o linear feet and no wetland impacts are proposed.
8. For any project involving the re-alignment of streams, a stream relocation
plan must be included with the 4oi application for written DWQ
approval.
Not applicable.
9. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and
wetlands must be placed below the elevation of the streambed to allow
low flow passage of water and aquatic life.
The 6o-foot twin culverts that replaced the 3o-foot culvert at the road
crossing of Buffalo Creek were installed to maintain low flow conditions
and allow the movement of aquatic life indigenous to the stream.
io. Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed
those outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment
and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual" or the "North Carolina
Surface Mining Manual" whichever is more appropriate shall be in full
compliance with all specifications governing proper design, installation

Pre-Construction Nottffcation - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &3495
Grey Rock Development
September 15, 2006
WECProjectNo. oa-o~t9o5
and operation and maintenance of such BMPs in order to assure
compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard.
Please refer to GC No. 3495 Condition No. 8 on page 8 of this document.
ii. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands and waters
shall be removed and the original grade restored within two months after
the DLR has released the project.
Please refer to GC No. 3495 Condition No. 9 on page 8 of this document.
12. Additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects proposed
under this Certification in order to ensure compliance with all applicable
water quality and effluent standards.
The proposed project will be conducted in accordance with any additional
site specific conditions required by DWQ pursuant to GC No. 3402.
i3. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into
contact with waters of the State until the concrete has hardened.
Please refer to NWP General Condition No. 6 -Wilmington District
Regional Condition No. 2(c) on page 5 of this document.
i4. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid
until a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSn or Record of Decision
• (ROD) is issued by the State Clearinghouse.
Not applicable
i5. If this Certification is used to access building sites, all lots owned by the
applicant must be buildable without additional fill beyond that explicitly
allowed under other General Certifications.
This GC No. 3402 is required for unauthorized impacts associated with
road improvement to serve the residential development. Although, the
road will provide access to future residential lots, the proposed project
does not include lot construction. However, future residential lot
construction is not anticipated to impact jurisdictional waters on the
subject site. No additional fill to jurisdictional waters will be required for
road construction activities as all remaining stream crossings will be
constructed with plate arch bridges (Figure 3) with support footings
constructed on natural high ground.
i6. Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all lots with
remaining jurisdictional wetlands and waters or areas within 5o feet of all
streams and ponds.
A deed notification will be placed on all lots containing jurisdictional
wetlands, streams, or protected stream buffers including a statement that
• said property contains jurisdictional waters or protected buffers and that
i5

Pre-Consiniction Notification -NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &3gg5
Grey Rock Development
September 15, 2006
WEC Project No. 02-0~ 905
any future alteration of these areas will be conducted in accordance with
all applicable state regulations. Documentation of these deed restrictions
or intent to provide deed notifications will be submitted to DWQ within
3o days of the issuance of GC No. 3402 by DWQ.
i~. When written concurrence is required, the applicant is required to use the
most recent version of the Certification of Completion form to notify
DWQ when all work included in the 4oi Certification is completed.
Due to the fact that the culvert replacement for which written concurrence
from DWQ is required has previously been completed, WEC does not
intend to submit a Certification of Completion for the activity.
i$. Concurrence from DWQ that this Certification applies to an individual
project shall expire three years from the date of the cover letter from
DWQ or on the same day as the expiration date of the corresponding
Nationwide Permit (i.e., NWP No. 39)•
The culvert replacement, for which DWQ concurrence is required,
pursuant to GC No. 3402, was completed prior to the submittal of this
PCN.
General Condition ~ -Wild and Scenic Rivers
The project site is not located in or adjacent to a Wild and Scenic River.
. General Condition 8 -Tribal Rights
The project site is not located within or adjacent to a Native American reservation or
Bureau of Indian Affairs land.
General Condition g -Water Quality Certification
The proposed activities will be conducted in accordance with applicable conditions
of the DWQ GC No. 3495•
General Condition io -Coastal Zone Management
The project site is not located in or adjacent to a coastal area.
General Condition iY -Endangered Species
WEC conducted a literature and records review of information available from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NCNHP) concerning the potential occurrence of federally threatened or
endangered species on the project site. According to our review of the USFWS and
NCNHP databases, i6 federally protected plant and animal species occur in
Buncombe and Rutherford Counties (Appendix E). The proposed project site lacks
the preferred habitat for a majority of the identified species. The mussel and fish
species identified are associated with the Tennessee River drainage, whereas the
• project site is located in the Broad River basin of the Atlantic slope drainage. The
i6

Pre-Construction Noh; fication - NWPNo. a~, GCNos. ggoa Sr 3498 September 15, aoo6
Grey RockDevetop-nent WECProjectNo. oa-o~tgo5
project site does contain potential habitat for the white irisette (Sisyrinchium
• dichotomum), a herbaceous plant; however further investigations of NCRHP
geographic information system data on the extent of this endangered species
revealed that no known populations are located on the project site. Therefore, the
proposed project is not anticipated to adversely affect federally protected species.
General Condition i2 -Historic Properties
RS. Webb & Associates completed a literature review and records search for the
proposed project area during the period of May 29-3i, 2006 (Appendix F). The
investigation was conducted to identify previously recorded archeological sites or
historic structures within or around the project area. Background data and records
on the project area were reviewed and evaluated from the following repositories:
• State Archeological Site Files (Raleigh, North Carolina)
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (Raleigh, North Carolina)
• State Archives (Raleigh, North Carolina)
According to the literature review and site file search, no known state or federally
listed cultural resources are located within the study site, and the proposed project
is not anticipated to adversely affect any site listed on The National Register of
Historic Places or sites eligible for listing.
General Condition i3 -Notification
. (a) Timing: The prospective permittee must notify the District Engineer with a PCN
as early as possible. The District Engineer must determine if the notification is
complete within 3o days of the date of receipt and can request additional
information necessary to make the PCN complete only once.
WEC believes that the contents of this package constitute a complete PCN.
(b) Contents of the Notification: The following information addresses NWP General
Condition ~,3(b):
i) Name, address, and telephone number of the prospective
permittee:
Mr. Lee Prescott
Land Resource Companies
119 Arcade Street, Suite 200
Lake Lure, North Carolina 28746
(888) 5io-5263
2) Location of the Proposed Project:
The proposed project site is located east of NCSR 2796 and west of
NCSR i3~4, with a majority of the property located in Rutherford
County, North Carolina (Figure i). The property is centered at
latitude 35° 29' 43" N and longitude 82° 12' 19" W

17

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &3495 September 15, 2006
Grey RockDeueloprnenY WECProjectNo. 02-071905
3) Project description, purpose, effects:
• Please refer to GC No. 3495 Condition No. 2 on page 6 of this
document.
4) Delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands:
WEC conducted the field delineation of the proposed road
corridors on the project site during the period of August 30
through September 2, 2005. Areas considered by WEC to be
jurisdictional waters are depicted on Figures 2a-d of Appendix A.
5-~) NWP special conditions applicable to other NWPs
Not applicable.
8) For NWP No. 27 the PCN must include documentation of the
prior condition of the site that will reverted by the permitee.
As described above and documented in the attached Jurisdictional
Waters Verification Request (See Photograph Nos. i-3 of
Appendix A), the areas proposed for stream restoration currently
consist of piped stream segments beneath existing logging roads
and jeep trails.
9-i6) Not applicable.
i~) Names of federal protected species affected.
Please refer to NWP General Condition No. ii on pages i6-i~ of
this document.
i8) National Register of Historic Places Affected:
Please refer to General Condition No. 12 on page 17 of this
document.
(c) Form of Notification:
The joint USAGE, Wilmington District, and DWQ PCN form is attached.
General Condition i4 -Compliance Certification
A signed certification will be submitted to the USAGE, Wilmington District, upon
completion of the project. The certification will include:
a) A statement that the authorized work was conducted in accordance with USAGE
authorization, including any general or specific conditions;
b) A statement that any required mitigation was completed in accordance with the
permit conditions; and
18

Pre-Construction Not~icatwn - NWPNo. 2q, GCNos. 3402 &3495 September 15, 2006
Grey RockDeuelopment WECProjectNo. o2-oyi9o5
. c) The signature of the permitee certifying the completion of the work and
mitigation.
General Condition ~ -Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits
Not applicable.
General Condition 16 -Water Supply Intakes
The proposed construction is not located within the vicinity of a public water supply
intake.
C~neral Condition i7 -Shellfish Beds
The proposed project is not located within or adjacent to a shellfish bed.
General Condition i8 -Suitable Material
No unsuitable material will be used during the completion of stream restoration
actions in jurisdictional waters.
General Condition ig -Mitigation
The proposed road construction activity has been designed to avoid and minimize
impacts to jurisdictional waters through the construction of plate arch bridges at all
• future stream crossings. Compensatory mitigation for the stream impacts
associated with previous culvert replacement activities (i.e., So linear feet of
perennial stream) will be conducted through on-site stream restoration as described
in the attached Mitigation Plan (Appendix C).
C.~eneral Condition 20 -Spawning Areas
Not applicable
General Condition 21-Management of Water Flows
The plate arch bridges, including support footings, will be constructed landward of
the ordinary high water of the streams on-site to ensure that stream flow is not
impeded (Figure 3).
General Condition 22 -Adverse Effects from Impoundments
Not applicable.
General Condition 23 -Waterfowl Breeding Areas
The project site does not contain any known waterfowl breeding areas.
•
i9

Pre-Construction Nohfioation - NWPNo. 2~, GCNos. 3402 8r 3498 September i8, 2006
Grey Rockl7evetopment WECProjectNo. 02-01908
General Condition 24 -Removal of Temporary Fills
• All temporary fills proposed during the stream restoration or road construction
activities will be removed and the affected areas will be returned to pre-construction
contours.
General Condition 2,5 -Designated Critical Resource Waters
Not applicable.
General Condition 26 -Fills within ioo-year Floodplains
The project will not result in above grade fill placed within the ioo-year floodplain.
General Condition 2z -Construction Period
The proposed stream restoration activities will be completed within 12 months of
the expiration date of NWP No. 27, scheduled to expire on March 18, 200.
Conclusion
The proposed Grey Rock Development previously resulted in 50 linear feet of perennial
stream impact associated with culvert replacement for road improvement purposes. The
• USACE, Wilmington District, issued after-the-fact authorization for 50 linear feet of
perennial stream impact on November 30, 2005 pursuant to NWP No. 39 (USACE
Action ID No. 200630060. Based on DWQ correspondence, it is our understanding that
Section 4oi WQC was attached with the Section 404 Permit authorization from the
USACE, Wilmington District.
A modification to this NWP No. 39 was submitted to the USACE, Wilmington District, by
WEC on June 30, 2006 to document io linear feet of unauthorized impact to Buffalo
Creek associated with culvert removal identified by DWQ personnel. In a Notice of
Violation issued to LRC by DWQ on May 5, 2006, the io additional linear feet of stream
impact was cited as violation of an issued 4oi WQC. Therefore, WEC has submitted this
PCN documenting project compliance with all applicable conditions of GC No. 3402,
requesting DWQ after-the-fact authorization for the additional io linear feet of stream
impact pursuant to GC No. 3402.
DWQ also cited LRC for failure to secure 4oi WQC in the above referenced Notice of
Volation for discharge of sediment into a stream on-site resulting from road grading
•
20

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &,3495 September i5, 2006
Grey RockDeuetopment YV~CProjectNo. o2-o7i9o5
activities. In response to this violation notice, WEC has submitted this PCN
• documenting project compliance with all applicable conditions of NWP No. 27 and GC
No. 3495 requesting USACE and DWQ authorization for removal of sediment from the
impacted stream segment. Additionally, notification has been submitted and project
authorization is requested, pursuant to NWP No. 2~ and GC No. 3495 for restoration of
piped stream segments beneath existing logging roads along the proposed residential
road corridors to be replaced with plate arch bridges on the improved residential roads.
As described above, all future stream crossings along the proposed road corridors of the
Grey Rock Development will be constructed with plate arch bridges which will result in
no disturbance to jurisdictional waters on the project site. During stream restoration
and road construction activities, appropriate erosion and sedimentation control devices
will be used on the project site and the proposed activity will comply with all applicable
NWP general and regional conditions and DWQ WQC conditions.
Based on this submittal, we respectfully request USACE and DWQ authorization for
construction of the proposed road corridors to serve the Grey Rock Development
pursuant to NWP No. 2~ and GC Nos. 3402 and 3495 respectively. Please contact the
undersigned at ~0-591-9990 if you have any questions regarding this request.
Sincerely,
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, LLC
.1.,,p
Jason E. Morrell ~ ~a, Ja es R Fudge IV, .W.B., C.E.
Project Ecologist Managing Member
Enclosures: Pre-construction Notification Form
Agent Authorization Letter
Table 1-Proposed Stream Crossings and Riparian Buffer Encroachments
Figure 1-Site Location Map
Figures 2a-d -Proposed Stream Crossing & Buffer Encroachments
Figure 3 -Plate Arch Bridge Typical
Figure 4 -Buffalo Creek Road Crossing
Appendix A -Jurisdictional Verification Request
Appendix B -General Permit Verification
Appendix C -Mitigation Plan
Appendix D -September 26, 2005 Pre-Construction Notification Form
Appendix E -Protected Species Literature Review
Appendix F -Cultural Resources Literature Review
21

Pre-Construction Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 Rr 3495 September 15, 2006
Grey RockDeaelopment WECProjectNo. o2-o7i9o5
i cc: Mr. Lovick Evans, LCE Engineers
Mr. Dave McHenry, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. George Miners, Land Resource Companies
Mr. Lee Prescott, Land Resource Companies

•
22

•
Pre-construction Notification Form

•
Office Use Only: Form Version Much OS
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. X 0 0 6 1 5 3 9
(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 Numbers} Requested: Nationwide Permit No. 27
~NWP 27~; General Certification Nos. 3402 (GC 3402) and 3495 (GC 3495
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 D ~~~ `" "' ~ D
~ ~ '~Q06
1. Owner/Applicant Information j~P
Name: Land Resource Companies _.~_T~:a huALiTY
Mailing Address: 119 Arcade Street .~,.,~ ~s ~rto stb'~°~"'"
Suite 200
Lake Lure NC 28746
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: lprescott(u~landresource.com
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: Mr. James R. Fudge. IV
Company Affiliation: Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC
Mailing Address: 3225 South Cherokee Lane
Building 800
Woodstock GA 30188
Telephone Number:~770) 591-9990 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: irfudge(c~wet-eco com
Page 1 of 10

• 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: Grey Rock
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 528-1-14
4. Location
• County: Buncombe & Rutherford Nearest Town: Lake Lure
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From Lake Lure take U.S.
Highway 74 east, turn left onto Buffalo Shoals Road, and proceed north. Buffalo Shoals
Road becomes Buffalo Creek Road. Continue north on Buffalo Creek Road and the entrance
to the subject site is located on the left.
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): Please see Table 1 listin Ig at/lon~; coordinates for each
of the proposed stream crossings.
6. Property size (acres): 3 928.41 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Buffalo Creek
8. River Basin: Broad River
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
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 areas proposed for stream restoration currents consist
of pined segments beneath existin lg_ o~~ing roads and jeep trails. The majority of the
Page 2 of 10

• 3 928 41-acre property is forested and~ast land uses included timber harvesting and
recreational activities Road improvement construction has been completed on portions of
the existing logging roads and a single residential home, the HGTV Dream Home, has been
constructed on the subject site
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The overall project involves the construction of a residential development and attendant
features including 33.2 miles of road comdors on a 3,928-acre property. Initial road
construction activities included the replacement of existing culverts on Buffalo Creek and an
unnamed tributary, Culvert replacement activities associated with the project were
previously authorized by the USACE Wilmington District pursuant to NWP 39 and included
40 linear feet of perennial stream impact Based on DWQpersonnel field inspection, culvert
replacement activities resulted in 50 linear feet of perennial stream impact; therefore, DWO
written concurrence is requested pursuant to GC 3402 for an additional 10 linear feet of
stream impact resulting from culvert replacement at an existing road crossing of Buffalo
The proposed action for which written concurrence is requested pursuant to NWP 27 and GC
3495 consists of restoration of piped stream segments beneath existing logging roads that
will be replaced with plate arch brid eg_s along the proposed road corridors. Additionally, the
use of NWP 27 and GC 3495 also is requested for removal of sediment from a stream
segment impacted during land disturbance associated with site development. Equipment
used for the stream restoration and plate arch bridge construction may include, but is not
limited to, graders dozers track hoes cranes and trucks. The sediment removal in
jurisdictional waters will be conducted manually using_shovels, buckets, and wheel barrows.
I I . Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the proposed activit iy s to
improve road corridors to adequately serve the residential development on the property. To
avoid impacts to streams associated with road widening_plate arch bridges are proposed for
all future crossings of intermittent and perennial streams along, the road comdors. The
purpose of the proposed stream restoration is to remove piped stream segments and re-
establish functional stream channels on the pro~erty. In addition sediment removal is
necessary to restore the substrate of a stream segment impacted by road construction
activities on-site.
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. An after-the-fact NWP 39 was authorized by the USACE, Wilmin on
Page 3 of 10

• District, on November 30 2005 (USAGE Action ID No. 200630067) for stream impacts
resulting. from culvert replacement associated with road improvements to serve the residential
development Specifically stream impacts resulted from replacement of two existing 30-foot
culverts beneath existing road crossings of Buffalo Creek and an unnamed perennial stream with
50-foot culverts to accommodate wider roads necessarX for residential development. Each of the
new culverts resulted in 201inear feet of permanent impact, with cumulative impacts of 40 linear
feet of stream. Based on DWQ field inspection, it was determined that impacts to Buffalo Creek
associated with road widening resulted in 30 linear feet of permanent impact with cumulative
project impacts comprising 50 linear feet of stream. An addendum to the NWP 39 for the
activity was submitted to the USAGE Wilmington District, on June 30, 2006 documenting the
additional l O linear feet of stream impact resulting. from the activity.
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.
Land Resource Companies antic~ates completing a future phase (Phase 4) of the residential
development. However, the final road layout for this phase has not been determined at this time.
Additionall,.y, the future Qhase is not anticipated to result in stream or wetland impacts as all
stream crossings will be constructed with plate arch brid es See Fi ug re 3).
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.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The proposed stream restoration
activities will not result in impacts to iurisdictional waters, as the restored channels will.
replace piped stream segments. Additionally sediment removal will be conducted manually
and will not result in disturbance to the stream bed or bank. As described above, permanent
stream impacts of SO linear feet previously occurred with culvert replacement, with 40 linear
feet of these impacts previously authorized by the USAGE, Wilmington District.
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. The proposed project will not
• result in wetland impact.
Page 4 of 10

. 3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: A single forested
wetland area approximated 0 09 acre in size was observed adjacent to the proposed road
corridors serving the residential development See Figure 2a).
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 Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
Before Im ct (linear feet) (acres)
Crossing No. 1 N/A Culvert Replacement Perennial 3 20 0.001
(See Figure 2a)
Crossing No. 19 Buffalo Creek Culvert Replacement Perennial 10 30 0.01
(See Figure 2a)
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 50 0.011
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, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc. The proposed project will not
result in open water impacts.
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.011
Wetland Im act acres): N/A
Open Water Impact (acres): N/A
Total Im act to Waters of the U. S. (acres) 0.011
Total Stream Im act (linear feet): 50
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
•
Page 5 of 10

• Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watenng, imgation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stonnwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
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. The proposed project will
avoid stream impacts through the construction of plate arch bridges at all crossings of
undisturbed and restored stream segments on the proposed road corridors to serve the residential
development The footings for the arch culverts will be constructed landward of the stream ton-
of-bank and will not disturb the stream bank or disrupt stream flow. Stream buffer impacts have
been minimized by locating stream crossings on existing logging roads and jeep trails where
feasible to minimize clearing of undisturbed riparian buffers. Impacts to riparian buffers
associated with road construction are necessary to provide adequate width for two lanes of
vehicular travel within the residential devel~ment.
VIII. Mitigation
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
Page 6 of 10

Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o. enr.state. nc. us/ncwetlands/strmgide. html.
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/lineaz 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.
A miti ate ion plan for previous stream impacts associated with culvert replacement is attached
Appendix Cl.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Cazolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
(919) 715-047b 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 regazding 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 (lineaz feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
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 aze 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 Cleazinghouse? 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,
Page 7 of 10

. 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.
Will the project impact protected ripazian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 1 SA NCAC 2B .0259 (Taz-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other please
identify: The proposed project is located in the Upper Broad River Watershed (H d~gic
Unit Code 03050105 of the Broad River Basin. The sub,~ct site contains Buffalo Creek, as
well as unnamed tributaries to Bailey Creek, Taylor Creek, and Lake Lure. Based on our
review of DWQ Basinwide Information Management System, Bailey, Buffalo, and Taylor
Creeks, as well as Lake Lure, are classified as Trout Waters and require a 25-foot
undisturbed buffer. Therefore all streams located on the property will require a 25-foot
buffer as they are tributazies to the aforementioned named streams classified as Trout Waters.
The project will impact protected riparian buffers due to road widening at existing logging
road crossings and construction of new road crossin sg with plate arch bridges.
Yes®No^
2. If "yes", identify the squaze feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
Please refer to the attached Figures 2a-2d which depict the proposed buffer encroachments
associated with the proposed road construction and Table 1 which provides square footage
• and acreage of the buffer encroachments.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers. The proposed project does not require buffer mitigation as the proposed
activity will result in approximately 3.9 acres of buffer encroachment, which represents 6.2
percent of the total~rotected buffer azea on the property (62.9 acres). Further, the lineaz
footage of buffer encroachment is approximately 5.306 lineaz feet of the 109,540 linear feet
of stream buffer on-site.
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
Ripazian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. N/A
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
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. Existing impervious surfaces on the project site include the HGTV Dream
House building pad which represents a neelisible percentage of the 3,928-acre propertv.All
proposed road corridors will be 18 feet wide, with the exception of the main thorou hg fare (Grey
• Rock Pazkwax) which will be 22 feet wide. Based on these road widths impervious acreage
associated with the road comdors will be approximately 57 acres and represents 1.5 percent of
Page 8 of 10

the total site acreage. Best Management Practices will be implemented and maintained during
road construction in accordance with the North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control
Planning and Design Manual to ensure protection of streams and wetlands on property
XII. 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.
The proposed road corridor construction does not require sewa a disposal and will not result in
wastewater discharge. Aseptic sewage disposal system has been proposed for future residential
homes on the project site.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (1 SA NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ® No ^
The proposed project was issued a Notice of Violation b~Q on May 5 2006 for Violations
of an issued 401 Water Quali Certification for the additional 10 linear feet of stream impact to
Buffalo Creek resulting from culvert replacement, as well as Failure to Secure a 401 Water
Quali Certification and Preclusion of Best Usage for earthern fill of an unnamed tributary t0
Buffalo Creek resulting from the failure to control sediment during road construction on-site
This PCN has been submitted requesting USACE and DWQ authorization pursuant to NWP 27
• and GC 3495, respectively for restoration of the stream segment impacted by the sediment fill
In addition. we are requesting written concurrence from DWQ for the use of GC 3402 for the 10
linear feet of unauthorized stream impact associated with culvert replacement on Buffalo Creek
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ® No ^
The request for written concurrence for the use of GC 3402 for culvert replacement activities
constitutes an after-the-fact application as the stream impact has already occurred
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:
Althoueh future residential development is proposed on the property no additional impacts to
streams or wetlands are anticipated Additionallx anx future stream crossings associated with
road construction to serve future phases of the residential development will be constructed using
plate arch bridges to avoid stream impacts
•
Page 9 of 10

• 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).
9-/s-e~~
Applican~lAgent's gignature
(Agent Authorization Letter attached.)
Date
•
•
Page 10 of 10

•
Agent Authorization Letter

•
•
March 28, 2006

LAND
RESOURCE
COMPANIES
~Y:
MAR ~ z zoos
Mr. Steve Chapin
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Subject: Agent Authorization Letter
Grey Rock Development
Buncombe and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Chapin:
Land Resource Companies (LRC) currently owns a 3,928.41-acre property in Buncombe
and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina proposed for residential development. The
intent of this letter is to authorize Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC to act on
behalf of LRC for the purposes of obtaining a jurisdictional determination from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, for the proposed road corridors on the
subject property. If you have any questions regarding this agent authorization letter
please contact the undersigned at [phone].
Sincerely
RESOURCE COMPANIES
•
Vice President of Development
cc: Mr. Jason Morrell, Wetland & Ecological Consultants
2000 RiverEdae Farkway, Suite X80, Atlanta, Georgia 30328, 7e1: ;70-818-0100, Fax: [phone], www,landresource.com

Pre-Con~on Notification - NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 3498 ~ Se tem6er i 2006
P 5,
Grey RockDeuelopment WECProjectNo. o2-o~s9o5
Table 1. Proposed Stream Crossings and Riparian Buffer Encroachments on Trout Waters for the Grey Rock
Development Rutherford County, North Carolina.
Road Crossing
No./ ROW* Buffer Buffer Crossing /
Encroachment Linear Square Buffer Encroachment
Letter Figure** Footage Footage Acreage Type Lat Lo Co rd'

1
3a
100
4,955
0.11
Road / ng o mates
35 30' 29.4" N / 82 12' 11" W
A ga 299 1,073 0.02 ROW 35 30'30.4"N / 82 12' 10.5" W
2 $a loo 5,148 0.12 Road 35 30' 12.67" N / 8212' 9 04" W
B 3a 598 1,734 0.04 ROW
35 30' 9.33"N / 82 12' 9.16" W
3 3a loo 5,224 0.12 Road 35 30' 7" N / 82 12" 12' W
4 3a loo 3,485 0.08 Road 35 30' 7.6" N / 8212' 14.4" W
5 3a 75 5,193 0.12 Road 35 30' 5.28" N / 82 12' 8.2" W
C gb 121 269 0.006 ROW 35 ~9~ 47.02" N / 8211' 59.95~~ ~'
6 ga loo 5,028 0.12 Road
35 30'0.45" N / 82 12' 13.53" W
7 ga loo 5,107 0.12 Road 35 29~ 51.77~~ N / 821214.50"W
8 ga 100 5,562 0.13 Road 35 ~9~ 48.95" N / 8212' 10.12" W
D 3c 371 1,533 0.04 ROW 35 29' 19.17" N / 8212' 42.86" W
9 3a 100 5,209 0.12 Road 35 30' 7.26" N / 8211' 31.47" W
io 3a loo 5,122 0.12 Road 35 30' 7.57" N / 8211' 31.35~~ W
u ga loo 5,415 0.12 Road 35 30' 10.85" N / 82 11' 34.68" W
i2 ga loo 5,174 0.12 Road 35 30' 13.64" N / 8211' 58.81" W
13 3a 100 4,956 0.11 Road 35 30' 12.51" N / 8211' 26.57" W
14 3a loo 4,951 0.11 Road 35 30' 21.79" N / 8211' 23.22" W
15 ga loo 5,254 0.12 Road 35 30' 25.06" N /8211' 45.84~~ W
16 ga 100 4,871 0.11 Road 35 30~ 33.53~~ N / 8211' 35.70" W
17 3a 100 5,158 0.12 Road 35 30' 37.69" N / 8211' 16.31" W
i8 ga loo 5,271 0.12 Road 35 30'37.08" N / 8211' 15.90"W
E 3d 700 2,674 0.06 ROW 35 30' 31.61" N / 8212' 42.86" W
19 ga loo 5,035 0.12 Road 35 29' 56.27" N / 8210' 56.42" W
20 3b loo 4,980 0.11 Road 35 ~9~ 46.89" N / 8212' 3.54' W
21 $b loo 5,035 0.12 Road 35 ~9~ 37.25~~ N / 821143.34~~ W
22 gb loo 5,201 0.12 Road 35 ~9~ 35.26" N / 82 11' 18.12" W
23 3c loo 5,057 0.12 Road 35 ~9~ 38.17"N / 8212' 17.78" W
Page 1 of 2

Pre-Coon Nottfication -NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 3495 ~ Se tember i , 2006
Grey RockDeuelopment WECProjectNo. 02 01905
Table i. Continued Proposed Stream Crossings and Riparian Buffer Encroachments on (Trout Waters) for the
Grey Rock Development Rutherford County, North Carolina.
Road Crossing/
ROW*
Encroachment Linear Encroachment
Number (ft.) Total Sq. ft. Total Acrage Type Lat /Long
24 3c loo 5,102 0.12 Road 35 29' 24.88" N / 82 12' 26.05" W
25 3c 100 5,032 0.12 Road 35 29' 23.31" N / 82 12 25.99~~ ~'
26 3c loo 5,102 0.12 Road "
N / 8212 29.6
35 29 20.67
W
27 3c loo 5,230 0.12 Road ~~
4
35 29 23.19 N / 8212 47.01 W
28 gc loo 5,060 0.12 Road
35 29' 10.44" N / 8213' 1.09" W
29 3c loo 5,365 0.12 Road 35 29' 8.15" N / 8213' 1.64" W
30 3d loo 4,981 0.11 Road 35 30' 17 23" N / 8213' 1.27" W
31 3d loo 5,188 0.12 Road 35 30' 21.45" N / 8212' 57.87" W
32 3d loo 5,235 0.06 Road 35 30' 16 21"N / 8212' 40 92" W
TOTAL 5,268 169,970 3.86
*ROW- Road Right-of-Way
*'" See Figures 2a - 2d for Stream Crossings /ROW Enchroachment locations
NOTE: Culvert replacement activites have previously been completed on road crossing No. 1 and 19 and permitted under USACE
Nation Wide Permit No. 39
Page 2 of 2

rJ ~~ ~ !^ ~ .fit ) 1 ~ ~! ! ~ ~--" ~~ ~tQ, \S ~ j ~-'.~~ ~ t~;_ .:~ / ~':
~ ~ n ~ ~' ;'- L1 'e: _ \ ~*. ~F~atal F ~ ~ / r %,,
~ ~ ;1 t\ ; \~ ~ ~ ~ t' \ ~~~ ~ 11 ~~ ~\ '~ _`! ~.. ~ ., _ _ )~ -'-~ :;.- r( ..• [~. \ `~,
;XIS ~ / ~~ ! ,\3 ~ ~\~~' ~ \ ~ ~ ~/ ~~ ~T~~ 1 / ~.. ~ ,.~ ! ~ % t .~ _. t~- ~ ! ~ i
,;-~ ~_- C ~ ,•,., ~; ~,~' ~ s -- - -~C~~LL\``~``/~ ~ ~ . sue".., "`. } ! ~~ -1 -„
~ j~~' ~ NCSR2796 ~' ~"'~ : ~_.~- - ti~~ '. - -_-~,' ~~~..b~ `\_ '
ly ` l ~ ~ ` ~ ~J \^~vi~
; ^ k a.,. ~ 1 Pnsh , .. ~, ; ; ~
,,
..~ +
9 ~ ,.
,- _ --- . -.~_.~ ~ ~ J
A~ tt ! - i~i i
--• ~ 4 1 r--^ ~ _
,.
.5, ~°j^'°°_': -~ f" ~ 1 ', , ~~,` \1 l e ~ ~~.~ NCSR 1314
% ~ '`` `---t I
.~_. . y,L..__. l ~_ _~_~~_.T__ .-.-y,-... a.... .....i j .. ~ j ~. a t~.
-= Legend ~.-_ _--_ _. ->,.. =- ~ _ ~ ,,
~_ _ ~,. ~
Approximate Property Boundary o~ ' \__, ~ E ~~; ~.~'
Base Map Sources: USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangles: Lake Lure & Moffitt Hill, North Carolina 1:36,000
Grey Rock Development = Figure >L
Rutherford County, ~T~D & ECOLOGICAL Site Location Map
North Carolina CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Georgia WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

1:12,000

A
15
~ 17 ~ -®
~..._~.Jy~\.
%• `\n
../•
~... ~
_ 1,
_ ' 18
Gre3' Rock p~~ ~ 14
2 \~~
fin` i1 r_.__..

~. i ~
3 ~ _ •\ '•~ ~~ ~- _~ ~ Base Map provided by LCE Engineers, Inc.
~~ ~"-~...___~ y~ _ ..'+Y13-. ,~ Legend
8~41v `~ - - Perennial Stream
4 ~• ~' .,~"°'-~•--- 5_i Week ~__~~ "_--, 1 •.
~. •' ~
~ .. ~ ~ ~ •,.. •• ~ - Intermittent Stream
~~ ~ < •~ '"~ \~~~~~- __~.._, ~ ~~, -- 25-foot Stream Buffer
6 # ~"'.'~~~ ~ ~-~ ~_~ \~ ~1 ~ Wetland
~"~ ~ ~~ ~ Property Boundary
~~~~~~ Roads
~a
a~
~.• _ . ~~`
- - ~~ ~ Existing Logging Roads to be Abandoned
NOTES: Stream locations are approximate. Label Nos. i-~ and 9-i9 identify stream crossing along the proposed road corridors. Stream Crossing Nos. i and i9 have previously been
constructed and authorized pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 39 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. Label letters A and B identify locations of road
right-of--way encroachment into the 25-foot buffer on trout waters.
lk~'igure 2a
.i:
Grey Rock Development Proposed Stream Crossings
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL and Riparian Encroachment
Rutherford County, North Carolina CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Ga. WEC Project No. 02-0~><905

""`-"- ~
L... _ -
20 ~-_ N
~, '~ .,
,~~
_.....
_ yam,' _. s _ 1\/
.. .. ... 1 i .,%'
\... Y'~"
1
;~ ,~+
''' , SW SE
,,
~.~ _ _
~~_ `~ ~; ~
~~~~.
~~a
c~ ~_ ._'-
_.....-
__ _ ;_::~
y~
t _. Legend
`~ --Perennial Stream
l
~a ~- ~ Intermittent Stream
~.
~'~~ --25-foot Stream Buffer
>~'
,~%~ ~ Property Boundary
Roads
t
?(~ Existing logging roads to be abandoned
Base Map provided by LCE Engineers, Inc. i:i2,ooo
NOTES: Stream locations are approximate. Label Nos. 8 and 20-22 identify stream crossing along the proposed road corridors.
Label letter C identifies a proposed road right-of--way encroachment into the 25-foot buffer on trout waters.
,~ Figure 2b
s=
Grey Rock Development Proposed Stream Crossings and
Rutherford County, North Carolina WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Riparian Buffer Encroachment
CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

/ V L
N
NE ~ __-
~W
.~ °~
~~
SW SE '~``y ~ B~fato ~•Pek
_____
- 27 ,,,,_ _ .,~
yf i `G , ~ 26 ~~
E`~ ~ ••~.
~~~~ ~ ° x~Aro-.
i
~~~
\, ~28 I aJ+ 4
Legend ;~ ~~
r/ ss_
--Perennial Stream ~`
..~~~.
-- Intermittent Stream `~ -
-25-foot Stream Buffer j
Property Boundary
-Roads
Existing Logging Roads to be Abandoned , ,,
Base Map provided by LCE Engineers, Inc.
NOTES: Stream locations are approximate. Label Nos. 23-29 identify stream crossings along the proposed road corridor.
Label letter D identifies the location of road right of way encroachment into the 25-foot buffer on trout waters.
1:12,000 ~
~ Figure 2c
.~:- -
Grey Rock Development Proposed Stream Crossings and
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Riparian Buffer Encroachment
Rutherford County, North Carolina CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

N
NW NE
SW SE
31
E
Grey Rork
"'^~.,~~,,„_..._ pkwy
32
30
Legend
---Perennial Stream
- Intermittent Stream
-25-foot Stream Buffer
Property Boundary
-Roads
Existing Logging Roads to be Abandoned
Base Map provided by LCE Engineers, Inc.
NOTES: Stream locations are approximate. Label Nos. 30-32 identify stream crossing along the proposed road corridor.
Label letter E identifies the location of road right of way encroachment into the 25-foot buffer on trout waters.
~„°`
1:12,000
Figure 2d
4,. ,
Grey Rock Development Proposed Stream Crossing and
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Riparian Buffer Encroachment
Rutherford County, North Carolina CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Ga. WEC Project No. 02-0~><905

• • •
ALUMINUM STRUCTURAL PLATE ARCH BRIDGE
NOT TO SCALE
Base Drawing provided by LCE Engineers, Inc.
Grey Rock Development
Rutherford County, North Carolina
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
CONSULTANTS, LLC
NOTE: ALUMINUM STRUCTURE PLATE ARCH
0.125" THICKNESS
36' WIDTH
BY CONTECH
Figure g
Plate Arch Bridge Typical
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

N
E
S
Base Map Source provided by R.L. Greene Surveying & Mapping, PA
Grey Rock Development
Rutherford County,
North Carolina
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Georgia
1:600 I
Figure 4
Buffalo Creek Road Crossing
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

•
APPENDIX A
Jurisdictional Verification Request

WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, LLC
March 28, 2006
Mr. Steve Chapin
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
1,51 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 288oi-5oo6
FILE COPS'
Subject: Jurisdictional Waters Verification Request
Grey Rock Development
Buncombe and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina
WEC Project No. o2-o~t9o5
Dear Mr. Chapin:
On behalf of our client, Land Resources Companies, Wetland & Ecological Consultants
(WEC) requests verification of the jurisdictional waters on approximately 33.2 miles of
road corridors proposed for the Grey Rock Development in Buncombe and Rutherford
• Counties, North Carolina. The road corridors are located within a 3,9i~-acre property
located east of State Route 2796 (NCSR 2796) and west of State Route i3i4 (NCSR 1314),
a majority of which is located in Rutherford County (Figure i). The property is centered
at latitude N 35° 29' 43" N and longitude 82° 12' 19" W. Attached are the appropriate
maps, data sheets, and photographs for your review.
The majority of the soils on the 3,9i~-acre property consist of well-drained Edneyville-
Chestnut and Evard-Cowee soil complexes on uplands. The remainder of the property is
mapped as containing somewhat excessively drained Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop soil
complex, well drained Greenlee-Tate soils complex, and well drained to moderately well
drained Bandana-Ostin soil complex on floodplains. The latter is classified as containing
poorly drained components of hydric soil in Rutherford County by the National Resource
Conservation Service (MRCS) (Figure 2).
Based on field observations, the majority of the proposed road corridors on the subject site
currently contain gravel roads and improved jeep trails with corrugated metal pipes
installed on the stream crossings (Photograph No. i). The road corridors will be an
• expansion of the existing roads with aright-of--way (ROW) width of 45 feet.
3225 South Cherokee Lane Phone: [phone]
Bldg.8oo F'ax~ 770-591-9993
Woodstock, Georgia 30188 www.wet-eco.com

Jurisdictional Verification Request March 28, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProjectNo. o2-on9o5
•
WEC personnel conducted the field delineation of federal jurisdictional waters on the
proposed road corridors on the property during the period of August 3o through
September a, 200. The boundaries of federal jurisdictional waters were flagged in the
field with pink survey tape. The streams delineated on the proposed road corridors either
cross the existing roads perpendicularly or flow adjacent to the roads. Stream segments
and wetland areas located within the proposed ROW boundaries or within close proximity
to the existing road beds (i.e. 5o-ioo feet) also were delineated.
Jurisdictional waters delineated by WEC personnel on proposed road corridors were
comprised of eight perennial streams, including Bailey Creek (Photograph No. 2) and
Buffalo Creek (Photograph No. 3), i8 intermittent streams, and one wetland area (Figures
3-4)• The majority of the streams on the road corridor are tributaries to the two named
streams. The remainder of the streams located on the road corridor, as well as Buffalo
Creek, are tributaries to Lake Lure and all streams on the proposed road corridors are
located within the Upper Broad River Watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code o3o5oio6).
. Please note that the cumulative number of proposed stream crossings/ROW
encroachments depicted on Figures 3a-d (40) exceeds the total number of streams
delineated (26) because several streams cross the road corridors more than once on the
project site.
As stated above, all stream crossings on the existing roads on the property consist of
corrugated metal culverts. Based on previous correspondence with you, it is our
understanding that the extent of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. associated with existing,
piped road crossings is determined based on the age of the existing culvert. For
replacement of a culvert installed after 1996, we understand that the extent of
jurisdictional waters is comprised of the linear footage of stream in the existing culvert.
For culverts installed prior to 1996, we understand that the stream flow within the
culvert pipe is not considered jurisdictional waters. Based on our field observations and
our understanding of site history, the existing culverts appear to have been installed
prior to 1996. Therefore, we are requesting verification of the extent of jurisdictional
waters located within the proposed road corridors and outside of the existing culverts.
• The wetland area observed on the property (Photograph No. 4) is located adjacent to an
existing road crossing of an intermittent stream along the proposed road corridor. This
2

Jurisdictional Verificarion Request March 28, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProjectNo. oa-on9og
• wetland is comprised of herbaceous and scrub/shrub vegetation and is located within the
proposed ROW of the road corridor (Figure 4}.
The jurisdictional areas located on the proposed road corridors (eight perennial stream,
18 intermittent streams, and one wetland area) were marked in the field with pink survey
tape. The approximate locations of the delineated jurisdictional boundaries are shown
on Figures 3a-d. We respectfully request USACE verification of the delineated
boundaries presented in this letter and marked in the field. In addition to the figures
depicting our delineated boundaries and site data sheets, we have provided an agent
authorization letter (Appendix A), as well as a survey plat of the property (Appendix B)
containing the proposed road corridors. If you have any questions regarding this request
or this project, please contact the undersigned at (T7o) 591-9990•
Sincerely,
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS, LLC
• Jason E. Morrell
Project Ecologist
.--~-d,l
~~~ ~
James R. Fudge IV, C.W.B., C.E.
Managing Member
Enclosures: Figure 1-Site Location Map
Figure 2 -Site Soils Map
Figure 3a-d -Jurisdictional Waters Maps
Figure 4 -Jurisdictional Wetland and Data Points
Photographs (1-4)
Site Data Forms '?'
Appendix A -Agent Authorization Letter
Appendix B -Survey Plat
cc: Mr. Lovick Evans, LCE Engineers
Mr. George Miners, Land Resource Companies
•
3

f

V `+ "1
'. a" :"'~ 'r 1

~ ! ~ S ~ ~
_~
~~ Legend .~-. ~ ~' ~. - -`- ~
_~ __.,~ ~; ~_ x
Approximate Property Boundary ~`'~-. ~` ~-_ `~,~
~•
k 1 ~ ~ i ~t "` ~ "#'`i : ti" ~ ~~ _ tom, w
:~'~ ~.. .?~. .$' '~~. ~wntat~ ,tom, -.,
Base Map Sources: USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangles: Lake Lure 8~ Moffitt Hill, North Carolina 1:36,000
Grey Rock Development %- Figure i
Buncombe & Rutherford ~T~D & ECOLOGICAL Site Location Map
CONSULTANTS, LLC
Counties, North Carolina Woodstock, Georgia WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

N
W E
S

-v~-/ ~ v ~
~~
n
,U
`z-~l
Legend
ArD -Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop complex, 15-30% slopes
ArF -Ashe-Cleveland-Rock outcrop complex, 50-95% slopes
Bandana-Ostin compex, 0-3% slopes, occasionally flooded
EcD - Edneyville-Chestnut complex, 15-30% slopes, very stony
EcE - Edneyvil-e-Chestnut complex, 30-50% slopes, very stony
EvD -Evard-Cowee complex, 15-30% slopes, stony
EvE -Evard-Cowee complex, 30-50% slopes, stony
EwF -Evard-Cowee complex, 50-85% slopes, rocky
GaD -Greenlee-Tate complex, 15-30% slopes, extremely bouldery
GbF -Greenlee-Tate complex, 30-70% slopes, rubbly
Property Boundary
Base Map Sources: NRCS SSURGO Spatial Soils Data: Rutherford County, North Carolina
Grey Rock Development
Buncombe & Rutherford
Counties, North Carolina
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
CONSULTANTS, LLC
Figure 2
1:36,000
Site Soils Map
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

A
Legend
Perennial Stream
-"'-"" Intermittent Stream
- Property Boundary
Proposed Road Corridor
Jurisdictional Waters Location
® Wetland
Sep Figure 4
ree
Base Map Source: Conceptual Site Design Plan provided by LCE Engineers, Inc.
NOTE: Stream locations are approximate.
Grey Rock Development 6 '
Rutherford County, North Carolina WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
CONSULTANTS, LLC
1:12,000
Figure 3a
Jurisdictional Waters Map (NE Quadrant)
WEC Project No. 02-o'7i9o5

~~
B~,~`'alo Creek ~ N

' ~,,,~,,, ~,,,~,,,A
''~,,,
^"-'^
Legend
~,,,_, Perennial Stream
,,~,,,_,,,_,,,~,,,~
~ $
`
~, a
,~
r -"'-"° Intermittent Stream
,,
~'„~.4 ~ ' ."~~.~.'° Property Boundary
a
~
`
~~__ Proposed Road Corridor
~-m, ~,~,...
r
Jurisdictional Waters Location
is
~..~
t
a
a
Base Map Source: Conceptual Site Design Plan provided by LCE Engineers, Inc. 1:12,000
NOTE: Stream locations are approximate.
Figure 3b
Grey Rock Development

Rutherford County, North Carolina WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Jurisdictional Waters Map (SE Quadrant)
CONSULTANTS, LLC
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5
Woodstock Ga.

A~
Legend
Perennial Stream
-"'-"'" Intermittent Stream
Property Boundary
Proposed Road Corridor
Jurisdictional Waters Location
Base Map Source: Conceptual Site Design Plan provided by LCE Engineers, Inc.
NOTE: Stream locations are approximate.
Grey Rock Development
Buncombe & Rutherford Counties,
North Carolina
b
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
CONSULTANTS, LLC
,..._
,..
,~"~4
'~.,
v,~u~n
1:12,000
Figure 3c
Jurisdictional Waters Map (SW
WEC Project No. 02-o'7i9o5

•
•
•
.lurisdictional Waters Verification Request
Grey Rock Development
Photos Taken Auyust 30 -September 2, 200,5
WI;C Project No. o2-oft yo,5

•
•
•
.furisdictionu(Wuters Verification Request Photos Taken Auyust 30 -September 2, 2005
Grey Rock Development WHC Project No. 02-o~~yo5

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
•
•
•
Pa e 1 of 2
ProjecUSite: WEC Project No. 02-071905 Date: 8/31/2005
Applicant/Owner: Land Resource Companies County: Rutherford
Investigator: JEM State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes X^ No ^ Community ID: Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ^ No ~ Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes ^ No Q Plot ID: Data Point 1
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Microstegium vimineum herb FAC+ 9.
2. Osmunda cinnamomea herb FACW+ 10.
3. Polystichum acrostichoides herb FAC 11.
4. Boehmeria cylindrica herb FACW+ 12.
5. Acer rubrum S/S FAC 13.
6. Liriodendron tulipifera S/S FACU 14.
7. Carpinus caroliniana S/S FAC 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 86%
Remarks:
Greater than 50% of the vegetation is FA C or wetter; therefore the wetland vegetation criterion is met for Data Point 1.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators
_ Stream, Lake, or Ti de Gauge Inundated
Aerial Photographs _
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_Other Water Marks
X No Recorded Data Available _
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: _
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in.) Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 0 (in.) _
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
A primary indicator of hydrology was observed; therefore the hydrology criterion is met for Data Point 1.

•
Hydric Soil Indicators:
•
SOILS Pro'ect/Site: WEC Pro'ect No. 02-071905 Data Point 1
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Evazd-Cowee complex Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy Field Observations
(Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type?
Profile Description:
Depth
(inches) Horizon
0-7
_ Histosol
Histic Epipedon
_ Sulfidic Odor
_Aquic Moisture Regime
_ Reducing Conditions
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors
Matrix Color Mottle
(Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast
2.5 Y 3/2 none
Gley 1 2.5/l0Y none
Yes ^ No
Texture, Concretions,
Structure, etc.
silt
sandy clay loam
_ Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remazks)
An indicator of hydric soil was observed; therefore the hydric soils criterion was met for Data Point 1.
WETLAND DETERMiNATiO1`
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X^ No ^ Is This Sampling Point Within A Wetland
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X^ No ^ Yes Q No ^
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X^ No ^
Remarks: This site satisfies all three criteria for wetland determination.
Prepazed by: JEM Checked by: TJF
LOIl
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
•
•

ProjecUSite: WEC Project No. 02-071905 Date:
ApplicanUOwner: Land Resource Companies County:
Investigator: JEM State:
~ Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes X^ No
the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes ^ No
the azea a potential Problem Area? Yes ^ No
'needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Page 1 of 2
8/31/2005
Rutherford
North Carolina
Community ID: Upland
Transect ID:
Plot ID: Data Point 2
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Microstegium vimineum herb FAC+ 9.
2. Osmunda cinnamomea herb FACW+ 10.
3. Polystichum acrostichoides herb FAC 11.
4. Boehmeria cylindrica herb FACW+ 12.
5. Carpinus caroliniana S/S FAC 13.
6. Liriodendron lulipifera S/S FACU 14.
7. Liriodendron tulipifera tree FACU 15.
8. Paulownia tomentosa tree FACU 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC-) 63%
Remarks:
Greater than 50% of the vegetation is FAC or wetter; therefore the wetland vegetation criterion is met for Data Point 2.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Primary Indicators
_ Stream, Lake, or Ti de Gauge _ Inundated
_ Aerial Photographs _ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Other _ Water Marks
X No Recorded Data Available _ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: _
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: N/A (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: N/A (in.) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indicators of hydrology were observed; therefore the hydrology criterion is not met for Data Point 2.

•
JU1LS rro ecUStte: WEC rro ect No. UZ-U71yU~ 1Jata Yomt L r e ~ or ~
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Evazd-Cowee complex Drainage Class: well drained
Taxonomy Field Observations
(Subgroup): Confirm Mapped Type? Yes ^ No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Mansell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-16 10 YR 3/2 none loam
Hydric Soil Indicators
•
_ Histosol _ Concretions
_ Histic Epipedon _ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy
_ Sulfidic Odor Soils
_Aquic Moisture Regime Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Reducing Conditions _ Listed on Locat Hydric Soils List
_ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _ Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remazks)
s: No indicators of hydric soil were observed; therefore the hydric soils criterion was not met for Data Point 2.
W1r1LA1Vll LCIt',KNLtVAl1VP
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X^ No ^ Is This Sampling Point Within A Wetland
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ~ No ^ Yes X^ No ^
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X^ No ^
Remarks: This site satisfies all three criteria for wetland determination.
Prepared by: JEM Checked by: TJF
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
•

•
APPENDIX A
Agent Authorization Letter

•

•
•
March 28, 2006
LAND
RESOURCE
COMPANIES
Mr. Steve Chapin
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
MAR 3 r 2006
Subject: Agent Authorization Letter
Grey Rock Development
Buncombe and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Chapin:
Land Resource Companies (LRC) currently owns a 3,928.41-acre property in Buncombe
and Rutherford Counties, North Carolina proposed for residential development. The
intent of this letter is to authorize Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC to act on
behalf of LRC for the purposes of obtaining a jurisdictional determination from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, for the proposed road corridors on the
subject property. If you have any questions regarding this agent authorization letter
please contact the undersigned at [phone].
Sincerely
RESOURCE COMPANIES
•
Vice President of Development
cc: Mr. Jason Morrell, Wetland & Ecological Consultants
2000 RiverEdge Parkway, Suite 580, Atlanta, Georgia 30328, Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone], www.landresource.com

s
APPBNDIX B
Survey Plat
•

•
APPENDIX B
General Permit Verification

•

MRY. l b. 1UU6 Z: j1 YM (aKAY KU(;K NU. ULU r. L
•
Action ID. 20 0067
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
County: R ord USGS Quad: Moffitt '
GENERAL PERMIT (F.1/GIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner /Authorized ,Agent: LRC But~alo Creek, LLC. Attn~ Mitch Miller
Address; p,0. Boa 430
Hendersonville. NC 28793
Telephone No.:
Size and location of property (water body, road name/zzusnber, tovrl[1, etc,): Gre ek deveI ent
lot t d on 3 9 re tract no of LAke Lu a off of B alo Creek vad.
Description of projects area and activity: This tiermlt authorizes after-the-fact last lativu of 2 road
crossln~s on unnamed tributaries to serve a residential develou ent Cro slag #1 involves
replacine 30 LF of eaistin~ culvert with 50 LF of 48 Inch Averts Crossing #2 involves
replacing 30 LF of culvert with 50 LF of 60 inch cult' Yt, ALL WOR.I{ MUST BE DONE IN
STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH SUBMITTED PLANS -'-
Applicable Law; ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
^ Scctioa 10 (Rivera and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Regional General Permit Number:
• Nationwide Permit Number: 39
~Cvur work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the
attached Nationwide conditions and your subrrutted plane, Any violation of the attached conditions or deviativa
fi•om your submitted plans may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate
legal action.
This vetYftcation is valid until the NWP ie modified, reissued, or revoked, All of the existing NWP's are
scheduled to be modified, reissued, or revoked piYOr tv March 18, 2007. It is incumbent upon you to reunain
informed of the changes to the NWP's. We will issue a public notico when the NWP's are reissued. Furthermore, if
you commence or are under contract to commence this aetivity before tJae date that the relevant nationwide permit is
modified or revoked, you will have twelve (12) months fi•om the daft of the modification or revocation of the NWP
to Complete the activity under the present tetras and conditions of this nationwide perriait,
Activities subject to Secdvn 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality
Certification. You should contact the NC Division of Watet Quality (telephone [phone] to determine
Seekion 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject tv regulation under the Coastal Area
Management Act (LAMA), prior tv beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management .
This Department o£the Army verification dots avt relieve the permittec of fife responsibility to obtain any other
required Federal, State yr local approvals/permits,
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of
~nginecre regulatory program, please contact Steve Chapin at 828-271-7980 x232,
• Corps Regulatory Official Steve in Date; November 30, x605
]expiration Date of Verification: March 18.2007

MRY, lb. 'LUUb Z:jIYM GKAY KU(;K NU, ULU Y, j
.•
Determination of Jurisdiction:
^ Hsacd on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above
described project area. This preliminary determination is not as appealable actiom under the Regulatory
Program Administrative Appaal Process (Reference 33 CFR Part 331),
^ There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit
requirem~enta of Section 10 of the Rivets and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless
there is a change in the law vz our published regulations, this deterlninativn may be relied upon for a peziod not
tv exceed five years from the date of this notification.
® There ate waters of the U8 and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the
law or our published regulations, this doterrnunation may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years
$orn the date of this notification,
^ The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous active.
Please reference jui7sdiotlonal determination issued _ Active ID
Basis o£ Jurisdictional Determination,: _~3uffalo Creek>Lake Lure>Droa~tivor
• Co[pa Regulatory Official: Steve Chaffin
Date November 30.2005
Copy Furnished:
Land Planning Copaborative
•

MRY. l b, 1UU6 L: 31 rM GKRY KU~K
NU, uZU r, 4
Permit Number; 200630067
Permit Type: NW39
Name of County: Rutherford
Name of Permittee: LRC Buffalo Creek, LLC
Date of Issuance: November 30, 2005
Project Manager: Steve Chapin
• Upon completion of the activity authorised by this permit and any mitigation required by the
permit, sign this ccrtiiication and return it tv the following address:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Attention: CESAW-RG-A
151 Patton .A,venue, Room 208 ~~
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S. Army
Corps of Bngineers zepresentative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to
permit suspension, modification, or revocation,
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit bas been completed in
accordatce with the terms and conditions of the said permit, and required mitigativz~ was
coznpletad in accordance with the pemait conditions.
Signature of Permittee
Date
•

•
APPENDIX C
Mitigation Plan

•
MITIGATION PLAN
for
Grey Rock Development
Rutherford County, North Carolina
Prepared for:
Land Resource Companies

IANI~
1t1;SOUlZCL
--c i~ ai inn n i hs
Prepared by:
Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC
Woodstock, Georgia
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5
September i5, 2006
•

Mitigation Plan September 1g, 2006
Grey Rock Deuelopmenf WEC Project No.o2-o~i9o5
• TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
i.o INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. i
2.o COMPENSATION ................................................................................. 2
2.1 ON-SITE MITIGATION ............................................................... 2
2.1.1 Stream Restoration ............................................................. 2
2.1.2 Mitigation Monitoring ......................................................... 4
2.1.3 Success Criteria ................................................................... 5
2.1.4 Remedial Actions ................................................................ 5
2.1.5 Easement and Holding ........................................................ 5
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
FIGURES
i Restored Channel Cross Section
2 Channel Constrictor Plan View
3 Wing Deflector Plan View
. 4 Log "K" Dam Plan View
5 Log "K" Dam Section View
6 Boulder Cluster Plan View
APPENDICES
A Stream Restoration Typicals (3 copies to DWQ)
B Vegetative Streambank Stabilization Details (3 copies to DWQ)
•
ii

Mitigation Plan
Grey Rock Development
• 1.0 INTRODUCTION
September ig, 2006
WEC Project No.o2-on9o5
Land Resource Companies (LRC) is currently developing attendant infrastructure,
including 33.2 miles of road corridors, for a residential subdivision on a 3,928-acre tract
located east of North Carolina State Route (NCSR) 2~g6 and west of NCSR 1314, a
majority of which is located in Rutherford County, North Carolina. The property is
centered at latitude 35° 29' 43"Nand longitude 82° 12' 19" W. The subject site is located
within the Upper Broad River Watershed (Hydrologic Unit Code o3o5oio5).
The boundaries of jurisdictional waters of the U.S. on the proposed road corridors of the
project site were delineated by Wetland & Ecological Consultants (WEC) personnel
during the period of August 3o through September 2, 2005. The result of this
delineation were submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), Wilmington
District, on March 28, 2006 in a request for verification of jurisdictional waters of the
U.S., including eight perennial streams, i8 intermittent streams, and one wetland area.
The subject site contains Buffalo Creek, as well as unnamed tributaries to Bailey Creek,
• Taylor Creek, and Lake Lure. Based on our review of North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) Basinwide Information Management System, Bailey, Buffalo, and Taylor
Creeks, as well as Lake Lure are classified as Trout Waters. Therefore, all streams
observed on the property are located in watersheds classified as Trout Waters, as they
are tributaries to the aforementioned named streams.
On November 30, 2005 the USAGE, Wilmington District, issued authorization for
stream culvert replacement at two existing logging road stream crossings on the property
pursuant to Nationwide Permit No. 39 -Residential, Commercial, and Institutional
Developments. Based on our review of the Notice of Violation and Enforcement Action
Recommendation submitted to LRC by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) on May 5, 2006, it is our understanding that Section 4oi Water Quality
Certification (WQC) was attached to Section 404 Permit authorization issued by USAGE
for the culvert replacement. Based on the USAGE General Permit Verification (USAGE
Action ID No. 200630060, one of the two crossings included the replacement of a 30-
foot culvert with twin culverts, 5o feet in length on Buffalo Creek and the second crossing
• involved replacing a 3o-foot long culvert with a 5o-foot long pipe at an unnamed
perennial stream.
i

Mitigation Plan September is, 2006
Grey RockDeuelopment WECProjectNo.o2-on9o5
• Upon field inspection of the improved Buffalo Creek road crossing, DWQ personnel
determined that the twin culverts installed at the crossing are 6o feet in length, thus the
activity resulted in io linear feet of unauthorized impact to a perennial stream. Based on
this violation of an issued WQC, Mr. Kevin Barnett of DWQ requested that a pre-
construction notification be submitted for the io linear feet of stream impact pursuant to
DWQ General Certification (GC) No. 3402 -Residential, Commercial, and Institutional
DeUelopments. In accordance with WQC Condition No. 5, WEC, on behalf of LRC,
proposes the following on-site mitigation plan to compensate for perennial stream
impacts associated with culvert replacement. All jurisdictional waters impacts will be
mitigated on-site through stream restoration efforts.
This mitigation plan includes on-site channel restoration of select perennial and
intermittent stream segments currently piped beneath existing logging roads. The
proposed stream restoration has been developed in accordance with Stream Mitigation
Guidelines -April 2003 prepared by a workgroup consisting of representatives from
USACE, Wilmington District, DWQ, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Natural
Resources Conservation Service, and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission.
2.0 COMPENSATION
2.1 ON-SITE MITIGATION
2. i. i Stream Restoration
Proposed stream restoration activities include culvert removal and channel restoration at
locations along existing logging roads proposed for residential road improvement. Plate
arch bridges will be constructed at the former logging road crossings above the restored
channels with support structures installed a minimum of io feet landward of the top-of-
bank of the newly restored stream segments.
• The dimensions of the restored stream channels have been designed using undisturbed
stream segments on the property for reference. Metes-and-bounds surveys, including
2

Mitigation Plan September i5, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProject No.o2-on9o5
• detailed topography and longitudinal and cross-sectional profiles of six ioo-foot stream
segments on-site, were conducted to collect reference data from segments representing
the variety of size of streams present on the proposed road corridors. Based on reference
conditions, conceptual stream restoration plans were developed for each of the three
typical stream sizes observed on the project site: i) medium perennial (Buffalo Creek), 2)
small perennial, and 3) small intermittent (Appendix A).
Restored channel parameters, including sinuosity, cross sectional and longitudinal
profiles, were designed based on reference stream conditions. Prior to culvert pipe
removal, stream flow will be diverted using pumps or similar mechanism to avoid
erosion and sedimentation of downstream water. Upon culvert removal, the restored
stream channels will be excavated and graded "in the dry" to a 2: i slope (Figure i). The
newly established stream banks will be stabilized in accordance with the Vegetative
Streambank Stabilization practice standards and specifications detailed in the North
Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual (Appendix B).
The proposed stream restoration does not include planting of tree species in the adjacent
riparian areas, as the restored stream channels will be located beneath plate arch bridges.
•
In addition to channel restoration, instream structures will be installed in the restored
channels to provide bank and channel stability, as well habitat for aquatic organisms.
Proposed instream structures include log "K" dams, channel constrictors, wing
deflectors, and boulder clusters. Detailed typical engineering drawings of these
structures have been provided (Figures 2-6). The attached stream restoration typicals
(Appendix A) depict the proposed locations for each of the instream structures within the
restored channels.
Channel constrictors (Figure 2) are proposed at the upstream end of the restored stream
segments to divert stream flow into the new channels and protect streambanks from
erosion. Wing deflectors (Figure 3) will be installed at the outer banks of significant
bends in the restored channels to prevent bank erosion and undercutting. Log "K" dams
(Figures 4 and 5) will be installed at the downstream end of the stream segments to
provide grade control and reduce stream flow velocity in the restored channels thereby
decreasing the potential for streambank erosion. Additionally, the log K-dams provide a
• secondary biological benefit of providing pool habitat for aquatic organisms. Boulder
3

Mitigation Plan
Grey Rock Development
September 1$, 2006
WEC Project No.o2-on9o5
• clusters (Figure 6) will be placed throughout the restored stream channels to dissipate
stream flow velocity, thereby reducing potential erosion, and also will create riffle habitat
for aquatic organisms.
The proposed stream restoration actions will be conducted at 25 locations along the
proposed road corridors on the project site. Although the exact linear footage of stream
restoration is unknown at this time, based on survey data of existing culverts on-site that
range in length from 3o to 8o feet, each stream restoration segment will have a
minimum length of 30 linear feet. Therefore, the minimum length of cumulative stream
restoration is anticipated to be 750 linear feet and represents a i5:i mitigation ratio for
the 50 linear feet of impact resulting from previous culvert replacement activities. This
mitigation ratio exceeds the is i ratio required in GC No. 3402 Condition No. 5 for stream
impacts in watersheds classified as trout waters.
2.1.2 Mitigation Monitoring
The stream restoration areas will be monitored for three consecutive years upon
• completion of mitigation actions. Mitigation monitoring will include photo
documentation, channel stability analysis, and biological monitoring of benthic
macroinvertebrate populations. Mitigation monitoring will be conducted during the
summer season (June-September). Five of the 25 restored stream segments on-site will
be monitored to serve as representative sample locations for the stream restoration effort
and will be established during the initial mitigation monitoring event. A mitigation
monitoring report will be submitted to USACE, Wilmington District, and DWQ upon
completion of each monitoring event to document existing conditions and assess the
level of achievement of the success criteria for the stream restoration actions.
Photo documentation will include longitudinal and lateral photos of the restored stream
channels at reference sites that will be established during the first year monitoring event.
Channel stability will be analyzed by surveying channel cross sections, longitudinal
profiles, and conducting pebble counts. Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling will be
conducted in accordance with DWQ Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Protocols
for Compensatory Stream Restoration Projects dated July 2002, or the most recent
version available during the monitoring event.
4

Mitigation Plan September is, 2006
Grey Rock Development WECProject No.o2-o~Ygos
• 2.1.3 Success Criteria
The success criteria for the stream restoration have been proposed in accordance with
the above referenced DWQ stream mitigation guidelines. Channel stability success will
be based on a lack of bank erosion, as well as minimal evidence of instability, including
down-cutting, sediment deposition, and increase in sand or finer substrate material.
Success criteria for biological monitoring includes maintained or improved populations
of benthic macroinvertebrates as compared to existing conditions and a positive trend in
species composition over the monitoring period.
2.1.4 Remedial Actions
In the event that the proposed stream restoration fails to achieve the prescribed success
criteria upon completion of the three year monitoring period, remedial actions will be
taken to ensure future success of the restoration effort. If substantial evidence of
channel instability is observed, a plan for remedial action will be developed and
submitted to USACE, Wilmington District, and DWQ for approval prior to
implementation. Remedial actions for failure to achieve the biological success criteria
• will include an evaluation of the likely causes for failure, remedial action plan
development, and implementation upon USACE and DWQ approval.
2.1.5 Easement and Holding
Long-term protection of the proposed stream restoration areas will be achieved through
the filing of a restrictive covenant and/or the establishment of a conservation easement.
The restrictive covenant will be recorded on the property deed in accordance with
USACE, Wilmington District, and DWQ guidance and will protect the on-site mitigation
area from further impacts for perpetuity. A conservation easement, if established, will
provide long-term stewardship of the proposed stream restoration areas and would be
held by a third party organization. Prior to implementation of the stream restoration
actions, a description of the proposed method of long-term protection will be submitted
to the USACE, Wilmington District, and DWQ for approval.
•
5

oorTrRa wrrwc
NOTES:
1. SURABLE MATERIAL EXGVATED TO CONSTRUCT
RESTORED CHANNEL NAY BE USED TO CONSTRUCT
oN-sTrE eERMS. ExcESS WTEiiiAL Arn/oR uNSURAeLE
W-TERTAL SHALL BE DISPOSED of 8Y THE CONTRACTDR
AT A LOGTKIN SAnSFACTDRY TO THE PROJECT MANAGER.
2 RESTORED p1AWPE1 BANKS AND BOTTOM SWILL ~
SUBpJZED PROMPTLY USMIG A SEID MO(TURE ACCEPTABLE
TO THE PROJECT MANAGER.
3. WM1DW STAKING: ALONG EACH CHANNtl BANK, PLACE 01~
NIM.LOW STAKE EVERY 6 LKIFR FEET OF CHANNEL, STAGGERING
suKEx ALONG eANKS FROM vPPER• To 'LOWER' PLACEMENT.
APPROxiMATE NUMBER aF srAKES REQUIRED FOR ETTItttE
LENGTH OF RESTORED CIIANNEl:
4. EROSION CONTROL MATTING FOR RESTORED CHANNEL SHALL
8E NSTALLID AND Ytl1EDIATELY SPROPRIATE
GROTIIING ZONE ~/j`/~
z. ~
,`~~ ~
~~ ~
~~
,,<, ~
rn~
s ~..
x
Base
& Miller
~;
i
CHAiINEL
VARIES (11' TO 15' I
,.
3
a?
lV
v
MIM.LOW STAKES,
APPROX 24' LONG

vPPER'
PucorExT
,~ APPROX. 0.75 C.Y. OF
EXGVATKMI REQUIRED PER
LINEAR FOOT OF CHAlWEL
(ASSUMWG 2.5' DEPTH).
towER'
PLACOrENr
PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
TYPICAL SECTION
CHANNEL RESTORATION
Grey Rock Development -`~ Figure i
Mitigation Plan ~~ Restored Channel Cross Section
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
Rutherford County, Georgia CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

~I
J EMBED INTO
z ~ STREAM BANK
~~ w
ow
of ~o
J
O iV N
C
4' BRACE LOG, 12' OIA.

~ PLACED ON SLANT WffH
'
'

~ m HIGH END
PLACED
~, ~ OVERTOP CONSTRICTOR LOG
~~ ~
v
~
m !1 UU
x '"` ~
> £%
~t r~
~: ?~
~~
3' (TYP.)
CHANNEL BOTTOM
6' LONG, 12' DIA :
CONSTRICTOR LOG
~ PLACED FLAT AT
j~ CHANNEL BOTTOM
• ELEVATION.
GDOT TYPE
3 RIPRAP
APPROX.
2 C.Y.
REQUIRED)
I
NOTES:

DIRECTION 1
OF FLOW
2.
I 3.
PLAN VIEW
NOT TO SCALE
I Y
~Z
U
0
O
f-
I
CONSTRICTOR LOGS AND BRACE LOGS SHALL BE TO THE
DIMENSIONS SHOWN, UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE
PROJECT MANAGER.
LOGS SHALL BE SYCAMORE OR OTHER ROT RESISTANT LOGS
APPROVED BY THE PROJECT MANAGER.
RIPRAP (APPROX. 2 C.Y. REQUIRED) SHALL BE GDOT TYPE 3
PIED OVERTOP GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. PLACEMENT SHALL BE
THE LJMffS INDICATED BY THE PROJECT MANAGER.
WING DEFLECTOR
Base Drawing provided by Arcadis, Geraghty & Miller
Grey Rock Development `' Figure 3
Mitigation Plan - Wing Deflector Plan View
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL
Rutherford County, Georgia CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock, Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

s' LONG StFAORf Lab
TOP aF BANK
-- -- -- - s.-0. -
5' LONG S18PORf IaGS __
~3) -.
Z:1 S~ SIaPE LYf OF RFRAP
OnECIION OF FLOW
,~ ~
APPROX. 2-1/2 C.Y. GOOF TYPE 3 RPRAP
(SYALIFR RDCXS pl I~SIREAY 5~,,,~
PLACE1Ettf Lens To BE OETETafm
er PRO~ELT MANAGER.
I ~t snE sLaPE
Base
TS' LONG lDG GNN
oemom Y ~.
BEYao TOP of BANK
- e' LONG BRACE laG
(2 RBGtA1rED)
I Z:T SITE SLOPE
APPNQX. 2-1/2 C.Y. GOaf TYPE 3 RPRAP
ROCXS ON OOwIbl1ElW SDE).
11f15 70 ~ OEIERINED
MANAGER

J ~
o ~ OfECIION OF flow
~
Law Fww
X 4'
I x~ soE sLGPE
~ ~ -- = -__
~~ ~ ~-TOP of eANt - - -
C+ $ 4
~?
A.~, I +
~ ._ 'U SIRFJW BANE (2' i/l)
~~:
a ~~ PLAN VIEW
~' f1 NOT TO SCALE
s ~ ~~wW L~a ~M
& Miller
Grey Rock Development Figure 4
Mitigation Plan
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Log "K" Dam Plan View
Rutherford County, Georgia CONSULTAN'T'S, LLC
Woodstock Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

Yl1Tl~ELS_LIS[
~~,MAN OAY LOG, 12' a~. 15' LOWG
'(2) MACE LOGS. 8' OUI, 8' LONG
(3) SUPPORT LOGS, 12' aA., 5' LONG
(4) DRIFT PWS
GEOTEXII.E FABRIC (70 SF.)
GOOF TYPE 3 RPRAP (5 C.Y.)
5' LONG SUPPORT lDL
(3 REQUIRED). SEE NOTE
GOOT TYPE 3 RPRI
SEE NOTE
aRCCTION
aF rTAW
.~'<C~ 1.
12' 00. LOG DAY, 15' LONG
(SEE NOTE i).
NOTCH
6' WIDE X 4' DEEP)
DRFT PI ~ A~ pFy, 'A_ BRACE LOG
J ` - SEE NOTE 1) ~~ ~ ~ EIANK
~::
:•..
::~:::::. .. EMBED BRACE LOG NIfO
= STREIW BANK
SEE
PLAN
~•
GDOT TYPE 3 RIPRAP
s• ~=~:: o0o SEE NDTE 2, CLIANNEL Bor~M
2•-0• . ~ ELEV. •c~
~~(w"~) ~ ~1°n.~ ~-cEmExlr.E cawPACr Fu.L eErwEEN ~ 1' (~+.)
L!
'
L
N e
L~
NotES: (s+sx MAxwuM oENSmq
1. sr~cAMORE OR oiHER ROT TtESTSUNT Lots APPROVED BY THE PRQJECT MANAGER SHALL BE USED FQR CON5IRUCTTON. SEE wTE)iIALS Usr FQR LAC T>ESIGN
LENGTHS AND DgL1ETFR.
Z DESIar TXtANATIG sllowN ON THESE PLANS ASSUIE DVWETTR OF LOGS USED MEET TTIE S¢ES IPDKATED w Tlf wmnALS Llsr. IF THE OTACT SIZES SPECFTEA
ARE NOT AVA~E, THE CONTRACTOR MAY UTDIZE ALTERNATE SQE LOG PROVIDED THE STRUCRIRE FUNCTIONS AS NTELIDFD. THE PROJECT MANAGER MUST
APPROVE MATERIALS/SIZE ALTERNATES REGARaFSS OF WHETTER OES51GP1 ALTERNATES ARE APPitOVm BY THE PROJECT MANAGER, OESK11 ELEVATIONS FOR lOP OF
EERiI (ELEV. 117. CONTROL ELEVATION (ELEV. 'B~, AND CWVVNEL B01T011 (E].EV. 'C7 SWILL ~ YAMUMED NAiHN t0.1' TOLERANCE OF ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON
iHESE DRAWINGS.

~ 1 G00T TYPE 3 t>1PRAP SHALL BE PLACED AS SHOWN, HOWEVETt, STONES SHALL EIE SEPARATED BY SRE AND TTE LARGER STONES PLACED ON THE DOWNSTREIW
SIDE OF TFE LOG

O DAM.
.P,~ ~ ~ 4. SUPPORT LAGS (3 REQUIRED) SHALL EE BURED AT LEAST 3/4 OF 11fR OIMIETER
' "~
~
_
' ~ f ~ SECTION A

fir-' ~:

~
'~
NOT TO SCAIF
~7
1r~
LOG K DAM
~-.~ _ _
Base
& Miller
Grey Rock Development -` Figure 5
Mitigation Plan
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Log "K" Dam Section View
Rutherford County, Georgia CONSULTANTS, LLC
Woodstock. Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

~CHANNELmBOTTOM~
PLACE 2 GROUPS OF BOULDER
LUSTERS (3 BOULDERS PER
GROUPING).
Y 1st GROUP OF I I Y
zz~~ 3 BOULDERS I
a~ ( w w
Z ' N l! ( Z
~~ ~ I ( ~ ~~
N V
r
Q. N X N d
O
O I I ~ O
a
I
2nd GROUP OF I I
3 BOULDERS I
I •_
I I NOTES:
1. BOULDERS SHALL BE 'WFJITHEREO'
;~~, ~ IN APPEARANCE AND MEASURE
`°~ -rz I I APPROXIMATELY 24' IN DUIMETER.
~~ ~ ~ 2. THE PROJECT MANAGER, AT HIS
~~ DISCRETION, MAY DIRECT THE
~+L9.J CONTTiACTOR TO PLACE BOULDER
~.
~~ ,~ ~ PLAN VIEW CLUSTERS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS
_ ~ ~ NOT TO SCALE OTHER THAN THOSE APPROXIMATE
~ LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
~ BOULDER CLUSTERS
Base
Arcadis, Geraghty & Miller
Grey Rock Development -`~ Figure 6
Mitigation Plan
WETLAND & ECOLOGICAL Boulder Cluster Plan View
Rutherford County, Georgia CONSULTAN'T'S, LLC
Woodstock. Ga. WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5

•
APPENDIX A
Stream Restoration ~picals

•

2gp8
CHANNEL CONSTRICTOR
28p4
~~
~- \. O
--_~_~_ \
_'-,- -_
2g96 __
-~ -- _ _ _``1_
:BEfATIV STREAMBANK STABI~ TION--~"_-----
Ve oy ~ HA~1~E•D ~~EA ~ -' _ ~ ~ a
?,45 S.F. ' ~-
-~ `
SEE DETAIL, ~ \~ , `~
,~ ~.D LOCATION -EXISTING ROD ~,

GREY ROCK
CF~N~EY ROCK TOWN8HP, RUTFERFOFiD COUNTY, KC.
•f •• •• • ~~/ BO L~DER CLUSTERS ~ ~' ~' ~ 35 LINEAL F T _ ,
q• ••• ~ ••• • EE X 3' W1G
~.': ' :9~;.:;:;.• ~ EE DETAIL ~.' STREAM RESTORATION
\ ~ '~~,'•;;•E;• ~ ~~ LOG K-DAM REMOVE EXIS 15" Cti
• ~• ' i / SEE DETAIL
,~: ~• ~~
.•.t~•• :•~.•
,/ 10 0 f0 20 30
/ SCALf IN FEET

• "
•~
NK Affil fL'~i (WN ~
HA ED EA ~ ~
25 ~ ~
S D L }
`~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
\~, ~ \~~
8TREAM CRO88N0 FiE8TORATION TYPICAL
?488
!1t68ER-CLUST!`RS
SEE DETAI_L_________
____-
80~ 8A~ -
~\
o~ ~!s
awn
GIiE 8-30-06
sour t'=fo~
s~uu crrossfrfc
noNS.owc
~~
2q~~,
E ~'~~
~ `~

"I
S€P~ 1200,.
GENR • `~NATER QUa,!.
W'ETLANDSAND STLu'.~'rVATEii
SMALL NTERMTTENT STREAM TYPICAL
LOCATION, PHASE 9
CROS8Na B
EQUESTRUIN CENTER
Tel. [phone]
ENGINEERS, INC
P.O. Boz 1125
Roswell, cA soo77

2128
PHASE 3
.__ ,___ _'__ 8 VEGETATIVE REAL
CHANNEL CONS
SEE DETAIL
,Zg2A
\ \
,,
,,
BOULDER CLUSTERS
SEE DETAIL
~ ~~ ~ /
~~
- ,``
~~
'~~.
BAILEY CRE ~~~ ~ ~ ,
. EK
I
j ~ 10 0 JO 20 30
I ~
I I / SCAIE 1N FEET
~ I
BANK STABILIZATION ~ 40 U A6-EE TT,~~(~3' W
HATCHED AREA ~ OF ST EAM Rf9TORAT101
700 S.F. ~ 1
SEE DETAIL ~ REMOyE EXISTf NG 36"
_f~ 1 --_
' TOR I BOULD R CLUSTERS
~ SEE DETAIL ~ ~
.. ..1:::..:.:;t; ...;~:
..,2 .. ~o . .. ..: ..,' .... .
~... s~...~.:. ......
,~
`_ \
\ ____ _ ~
~ ` BOTTOM OF ~ ~

,r.. 8 ...... ....::......::~:
...~.x~ ~ ....
.. ;~~.
. ash. .
~ ....~.7~~ ~;
TATj~f~STRE STABILIZA ION 1 1
~~ HATCHED AREA 1 ~ 1
430 S. F 1 c^ a 1 `,
--'---SE~DET91L_ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 }
ut~n ~ ~ti,~~r~ ~wAl~r7
INETtAMDS AND StORl~k4TEA Blot,..
--~- 2 _~~` ,i
11 c~;= p~ 11 ~ , _
~`
o
1 ~ ~~ Z 1 ~ <yEDIUM PEREMNAL STREAM TYPICAL
~ ~a ~` N
LOCATION PHASE S
_ __ \ ~ ~
\ ,~\ ~ CR088N© 8
212 4 ,, ~ ~ AT BALEY CREEK
8TREAM CROSSNQ RESTORATION TYPICAL
GREY ROCK
Vii I RVH1~ T~~tigr~- 1'W I I~rVrN VWI~ 1 ~ r IRV.
U
ZW
I
-,
i~
.~
.~
(BOULDER CLUSTERS
`, SEE DETAIL D ~ ~ ~ ~ ll ~ D
".~ v
SFP 2 ] 2006
Tel.[phone]
ENGINEERS, INC
P.O. Box 1125
Ros~rell, GA 30077
LOG~K-DAM
SEE DETAIL

BOULDER CLUSTERS
~ -' SEE DETAIL
\-~
,,
~_
~~ ~
\~
~~
"Y~
CHANNEL CORST~CT
SEE DETAIL ~ ~ 00 LINEAL FEET X 3' WIDE _
~ ~ \ OF ESTORATION
~~~ ~
PHASE 1 •:. :: •: ~ k\S~,~ .. ; ~~~::•: • .. ...:::...... ......
.. ;~,. .... :,2.~.~ ..:':r.".:::•.:•:::.::•.: .: GRAVEL Rp .,
... ..... '~; :~::.~: ... .:.. ..... .... A~
BOULDER CLUSTER .. '.tt'::: ...:.:.. ~•::•:•::::.::' :. '`' ' .. ~ 2 ..... ...... ' :::... ' ' :...... ' • . .
SEE DETAIL ... w. .... ' l.•: .:.. ~ .:;c:::' • .::~.. :•r::•::' .:.:•: ...• .;;; . '..,~..
'.x•::'.. ... • ~~ '
.F:• . z• ... ..

~~n
N WING DEFLECTOR ~
SEE DETAIL
---
.. \ ~~
.. x~a,.... ~ ~
".~:~,':::::..:. ~~VEBETATIVE STREAMBANK STABILIZATION
~' ~"•"""" \ HATCHED ARE4
.... . ~........ ~ Vt ~~ .~~,.0 1,950 S.F.
~ ~ • • • GRA ROAD
~•~. •. ~ ,~ 15 SEED OLD _ _ VEL_ - - - - - -
:.• '~~
~ ,/

BOULDER C
SEE DET
'•~ -.
•
i ~
vfcErari E srREA~
V ~' 1
a~~ o~cwvnoN ~
~-•1
ISM
~~
. ~ .. ~ ~
••~,~ :, . '.,~ , - GREYROCK , ARKWAY \~
~, ~ :~:: \
'.
~ / ~--^
........:'.:•t::•:•::::• • ~.~4 .......• .: ~ ::.:• ::.:....:..........
{ • '•
~t ~.• ~ ~~
1 ~1 •.
1
10\S~ F. I-I~TCF~'D~, A R
1
STREAM CR088NQ RESTORATION TYPICAL
GREY ROCK
r~ •~~ ~,in n, r '"^711 ~",~~ ,i "a~" ~ '"~:~ "~n nn~~ •~I n
10 0 f0 20 30
SCALE IN FEET
LOG K-DAM
~~~ ~ BOULDER CLUSTERS
SEE E~41L'~
~ ~
1c~~ ~----___
,` ~~ ,
_ I
e `
fJ
SEP 2 12006
H
WATERM~IA ER BRA
,~~~~N1D STtfi , .
8MAU. PERENNIAL STREAM TYPICAL
LOCATION PHASE 1
cROSSINa ~
LOT 429
!, orwnr as
a+~o
°"~ ' ENGINEERS, INC ~~~
'~, SriitF 1 ~ f 0'
~ ~~ STREAM CROSSING ~
Te1.[phone]
P.O. or 1125
U
W
2

•
APPENDIX B
Vegetative Streambank Stabilization Details

•

•
APPENDIX D
LRC Pre-Construction Notification Form
(September 26, 2005)

• Office Use Only:
USAGE Action ID No.
any particular item is not
L Processing

_. __-__--- ~ 1 ~~// ~
DWQ No.
to this project, please enter "Not App e ~~nc~
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^
^ Section 10 Permit ^
^ 401 Water Quality Certification
CFA j~ ~'~ CO_
~A
Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: 404
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 Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), 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), eck here: ^
C~C~CQbC~ D
II. Applicant Information
SEP 2 1 2006
1. Owner/Applicant Information DENR -
Name: LRC Buffalo Creek LLC ,.,~, ...-_ .. _wArER
W~4TER BRANCH
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 430
Hendersonville NC 28793
Telephone Number: 828/698-0622 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: Mitch Mill r
Company Affiliation: Assistant Sales Director
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 430
Hendersonville NC 28793
• Telephone Number: 828/698-0622 Fax Number: 828/693-8876
E-mail Address: mmiller~a landresource.com
Page 5 of 12

• IIL 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: Greyrock
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Buncombe County DB 811 PG 496
Rutherford County DB 3043 PG 880
• 4. Location
County: Rutherford Nearest Town: Lake Lure
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): GreXrock -Phase 1
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): U.S. 74 north out of Lake Lure;
Left onto Bill's Creek Road• R_ght onto Buffalo Creek Road; Left into yroiect entrance.
5. Site coordinates, if available (IJTM or La 1L,ong):
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres): 3 917 Acres
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Bailev Creek
8. River Basin: Broad River
(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/.)
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 is an undevel~ed wooded parcel. The projeck
• roads are under construction A single house has been constructed as the HGTV Dream
Home.
Page 6 of 12

• 10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Greyrock
is a 3 917 acre residential subdivision f 1 693 acres of developed land with 910 +/- lots and
2 224 acres of Qreserved open s~acel Phase 1 of the property consists of developma 348
acres~l91 lots and 43 935 linear feet of road) T'he roads will be built usma trackhoes,
bulldozers & off-road trucks. Earthwork for the road conshuction will be balanced on site.
The two stream crossings in phase 1 involves replacing existing culverts. Stream Crossing
#1 involves r lacin 30 if of existin ulvert with 50 if of tv~nn 48" culverts. Stream
Crossin #2 involves re lacin 30 if of existin culvert with SO if of 60" culvert
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The replacement of (2 existing stream crossing
culverts is required to accommodate the improved subdivision road and to upgrade the
existin culvert to accommodate a 50- ear storm event.
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.
N/A
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.
A comprehensive inventorx of all streams on the property is currently being conducted. Future
ermit a lications ma be re uired de endm u on the stream invento and the final road
all ent.
VL 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. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanem
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must 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.
Page 7 of 12

• 1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Stream Crossing #1 involves
reylacin 301E of existing culvert with SO if of (21 twin 48" culverts.
Stream Crossing #2 involves re~lacin~ 301E of existtne culvert with SO if of 60" culvert.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100 year Floodplain**
es/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***

d t
•
it
li hanized cl goading, fill,
o
e
m
* List each impact separately and rdentrfy temporary rmpacts. Impacts mclrrde, but are not . mec earmg,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both shructure and flooding.
ss 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIltM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, ar
online at h_p://www.ferna.eov.
sss List a wetland type that best descnlres wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwa2a marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if we#land is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: The
• comprehensive stream inventory will provide the wetland acreatae.
Total area of wetland impact proposed: -The comprehensive stream inventory will provide
the total im act area to wetlands.
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
1
Type of Impact*

Culvert Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
201E
Stream Name**

Unnamed Tnbutary Average Width
of Stream
Before Im ct
5' Perennial or
I~ermittent?
lease )
Perennial
2 Culvert 201E Unnamed Tributary 4' Peremrial

act s
List each im
eparately and ide~ify
temporary impa mcl but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-oap,
cts. Impacts ude,
p
dams (separately list impacts due to bath stnrchrre and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain~
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, cnb wall, gabions, ebc.~ excavation, ditchmglstraightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, Plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
• ` Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (rmnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.uses.¢ov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and Printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.toyozone.com.
www.mapguesl.com, etc.).
• Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 401E
Page 8 of 12

•
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Innpact ~~ °f Name of Waterbody
Site Number Type of Impact* In-Pact (if applicable)
(indicate on ) (acres)
• List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bav. ocean. etc.)
to: fill, excavation, dredging,
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.):
•
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
•
VII. Lnpact 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.
The ro sell road and lot la out into rates usin existin roads and stream crossin s as
much as possible to avoid additional stream crossings and to reduce site disturbance impacts.
Roads and lots are not~roposed in areas of steep slopes to preserve the existing vegetation and
Qrovide buffers to the streams The lots back up to open space preserves which provide
extensive buffers to existing streams and drainage ways Approximately 1/3 of the property will
be developed with roads and lots The remainingacreage will remain as an undevelo_
preserve with hiking and equestrian trails The existing culverts will have to be replaced with
lamer sized and longer pipes to accommodate the road improvements. The proposed road design
will not exceed 1501inear feet of new impacts to the streams. New road stream crossings will
will into orate late-arch brill es for no additional im act. Eroston control measures have been
desi ell to test existin streams and buffers from sedimentation.
Page 9 of 12

• VIII. Mitigation
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 March 9, 2000, 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 aze 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 NCWRP 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/strm~ide.html.
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 (acreagellinear 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 sepazate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http_//h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
• Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet}: N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Page 10 of 12

• Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
1X. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federaUstate) funds or the use of public
(federaUstate) land?
Yes ^ No
If yes, does the project require prepazation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Cazolina 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 ^
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 Butlers (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 w_ ith 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.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ^ No ^ If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the squaze 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# ( uare feet) Multiplier ~~~
1 3
2 1.5
Total
• ' Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
Page 11 of 12

• If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XL Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both 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.
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.
Individual septic systems
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. 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).
•
Page 12 of 12
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)

•
APPENDIX E
Protected Species Literature Review

• •
Pre-Construction Nohfication - NWP No. 27, GC Nos. 3402 & 3495
Grey Rock Development
•
September i5, 2006
WEC Project No. o2-o~i9o5
Anoendix AA: Federally threatened and endangered animal and plant species listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services as potentially
occurring in Rutherford and Buncombe County, North Carolina.

Species Name
(Scientf fec Name)
Federal Associated preferred Habitat
Status* Countiesz Habitat
Available in
Project Area3
INVERTEBRATE
Appalachian elktoe E Buncombe Occurs in shallow medium-sized creeks and rivers with No
(Alasmidonta raueneliana) cool, well-oxygenated, and moderate- to fast-flowing
water. It has been observed in gravelly substrates, often
mixed with cobble and boulders; in cracks in bedrock; and
occasionally in relatively silt-free, coarse, and sandy
substrata. Endemic to the Tennessee River system in
Western North Carolina and Eastern Tennessee.
Oyster mussel E Buncombe Typically occurs in sand and gravel substrate in streams No
(Epioblasma capsaeformis) ranging from medium-sized creeks to large rivers. Prefers
shallow riffles and shoals and has been found associated
with water willow (Justicia americana) beds, and in areas
with coarse sand to boulder substratum and in pockets of
gravel between bedrock ledges in areas of swift current.
Historic distribution included Cumberlandian region of
Tennessee and Cumberland River drainages; presumed to
be extirpated from North Carolina.
Tan riffleshell E Buncombe Inhabits sand and gravel substrates and is usually found in No
(Epioblasma florentina walkers) headwaters, riffles and shoals. Known from the French
Broad River in North Carolina; possibly extirpated.
FISH
Spotfin chub T Buncombe This species has been observed associated with sand, No
(Erimonax monachus) gravel, rubble, boulder, and bedrock substrates in
moderate to swift current in the Tennessee River drainage.
of 4

• •
Pre-Construction Notification -NWPNo. 27, GCNos. 3402 &3495
Grey Rock Development
•
September i5, 2006
WECProjectNo. o2-o~i9o5
Appendix A: Federally threatened and endangered animal and plant species listed by U.S. Fish and V~ldlife Services as potentially
occurring in Rutherford and Buncombe County, North Carolina.
S ecies Name Federal Associated Habitat
P Preferred Habitat Available in
(Scient~ic Name) Status* Counties2 Project Area3
REPTILE
Bog turtle
(Glyptemys muhlenbergii~
Indiana myotis
(Myotis sodalis)
Gray myotis
(Myotis grisescens)
Carolina Northern flying squirrel
(Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus)
Buncombe Inhabits slow, shallow, muck-bottomed rivulets of
sphagnum bogs, calcareous fens, marshy/sedge-tussock
meadows, spring seeps, wet cow pastures, and shrub
swamps; the habitat usually contains an abundance of
sedges or mossy cover.
Rutherford Limestone caves are used for winter hibernation; preferred
caves have a temperature averaging 3~ degrees to 43
degrees Fahrenheit in midwinter, and a relative humidity
averaging 8~ percent. Summer foraging by females and
juveniles is limited to riparian and floodplain areas. Males
forage over floodplain ridges and hillside forests and
usually roost in caves.
No
No
Buncombe Colonies are restricted entirely to caves or cave-like No
habitats. During summer the bats are highly selective for
caves providing specific temperature and roost conditions.
Usually these caves are all located within a kilometer of a
river or reservoir. In winter they utilize only deep, vertical
caves having a temperature of 42-52 degrees Fahrenheit.
Buncombe Occurs primarily in the ecotone, or vegetation transition No
zone, between the coniferous and northern hardwood
forests. Both forest types are used in the search for food,
while the hardwood areas are needed for nesting sites.
During the cooler months, squirrels commonly occupy tree
cavities and woodpecker holes.
2 of 4

• • •
Pre-Construction Notification - NWP No. 27, GC Nos. 3402 & 3495
Grey Rock Development
September 15, 2006
WEC Project No. 02-071 9 05
~pendix A: Federally threatened and endangered animal and plant species listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services as potentially
occurring in Rutherford and Buncombe County, North Carolina.
Species Name Federal Associated preferred Habitat Habitat
(Scient}~ic Name) Statuses Counties2 Available in
Project Area3
Eastern cougar E Buncombe Occupies a wide variety of habitats: swamps, riparian No
(Puma concolor cougar) woodlands, mountainous country with good cover of brush
or woodland, etc. The primary need is apparently for a
large wilderness area with an adequate food supply. Male
cougars of other subspecies have been observed to occupy
a range of 25 or more square miles, and females from 5 to
20 square miles.
PLANTS
Small whorled pogonia T Rutherford Generally known from open, dry, deciduous woods with No
(Isotria medeoloides) acid soil. It occurs in habitat where there is relatively high
shrub coverage or high sapling density, flowering appears
to be inhibited.
Bunched arrowhead E Buncombe Grows in seepage areas which have little or no net flow but No
(Sagittaria fasciculata) are not stagnant. The soil in the seepages can be
characterized as sandy loams overtopped by a muck layer
ranging in depth from 25 to 6o centimeters. Shaded sites
have larger, more vigorous plants than open areas.
Anticipated to be extirpated from Buncombe County.
Mountain sweet pitcher plant E Buncombe Restricted to bogs and streamsides along the Blue Ridge No
(Sarracenia jonesit) Divide, this plant's populations are generally found in level
depressions associated with floodplains. The bog soils are
deep, poorly-drained combinations of loam, sand, and silt,
with a high organic matter content and a medium to
highly acidic composition.
White irisette E Rutherford Occurs on rich, basic soils probably weathered from Yes
(Sisyrinchium dichotomum) amphibolite. It grows in clearings and the edges of upland
woods where the canopy is thin and often where down-
slope runoff has removed much of the deep litter layer.
The irisette is dependent on some form of disturbance to
maintain the open quality of its habitat (maintained right-
. of-ways).
3 of 4

• •
Pre-Construction Notification - NWP No. 2y, GC Nos. 3402 & 3495
Grey Rock Development
September is•6
WEC Project No. 02-01905
Annendix AA: Federally threatened and endangered animal and plant species listed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services as potentially
occurring in Rutherford and Buncombe County, North Carolina.
Habitat
Species Name Federal Associated preferred Habitat Available in
(ScientFficName) Status* Counties2 ProjectArea3
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf T Rutherford Grows in acidic, sandy loam soils along bluffs and nearby No
(Hexastylis nan flora) slopes, in boggy areas adjacent to creekheads and streams,
and along the slopes of hillsides and ravines. The species
needs Pacolet, Madison gravelly sandy loam, or Musella
fine sandy loam soils to grow and survive.
Spreading avens
(Geum radiatum)
Virginia spiraea
(spiraea virginiana)
Prepared by: VAH, 06-07-06 Checked by: JEM, 06-23-06
Buncombe Inhabits high elevation cliffs, outcrops, and steep slopes No
which are exposed to full sun. The substrate at all the
population sites is composed of various igneous,
metamorphic, and metasedimentary rocks.
Buncombe Occurs along rocky, flood-scoured riverbanks in gorges or No
canyons. Flood scouring is essential to this plant's survival
because it eliminates taller woody competitors and creates
riverwash deposits and early successional habitats.
spiraea is found in thickets.
' Listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region IV (Federal), Apri12006.
: Listed by North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program (State), May 2006.
s Project area is limited to proposed road corridors of the Grey Rock Development (see Figures 2-5).
Federal Status
E =Endangered
T =Threatened
of 4

•
APPENDIX F
Cultural Resources Literature Review

R.S. Webb & Associates
Cultural Resource Management Consultants
2800 Holly Springs Parkway, Suite 200 • P.O. Drawer 1319
• Holly Springs, Georgia 30142
Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
June 6, 2006
Mr. Jason E. Morrell
Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC
3225 South Cherokee Lane, Bldg. 800
Woodstock, GA 30188
Subject: Cultural Resources Literature Review
Proposed Grey Rock Development Tract Road Corridors
Rutherford and Buncombe Counties, North Carolina
R.S. Webb & Associates No. OS-099-119
Dear Mr. Morrell:
During the period ofi May 29 through May 31, 2006, R.S. Webb & Associates conducted a cultural resources
literature review ofthe proposed Grey Rock development tract site in Rutherford and Buncombe Counties,
North Carolina. The review was conducted to identity state recognized cultural resources within or adjacent
• to the project area. A "cultural resource" is defined as a discrete area of human activity that is more than 50
years old.
The study area is located in the northwest corner of Rutherford County, north of Lake Lure and Chimney
Rock. west of Buffalo Creek, and east and south of Rutherford County's boundary with Buncombe County,
North Carolina. The development tract is located on the Lake Lure and Moffett Hill, North Carolina
quadrangles (Figure 1).
METHODOLOGY
Literunn•e and Records Search: Atthe State Archeological Site Files (Raleigh, North Carolina), official files
and maps were examined, and a review of the pertinent site forms was conducted. At the North Carolina
Department ofCultural Resources (NCDCR) in Raleigh, pertinent compliance document files, official maps,
and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)/pending files were reviewed, and Rutherford County
historic structures survey files were examined. Historic maps, county histories, and aerial photographs were
examined at the State Archives (Raleigh). Rutherford County land was granted on ahead-right basis. A
random search of some lands granted using Buffalo Creek as a reference revealed no record of land granted
in the project area. The Offrcial Military Atlas of the Civil War (Davis et al. 1983) was also consulted for
military activity in the vicinity.
RESULTS
National Register of Historic Places: The files at the NCDCR revealed that no NRHP listed/eligible
properties are located within 1.0 mile of the project area.
• County Historic Structure Studies: Historic preservation surveys have been conducted in Rutherford and
Buncombe Counties, but no structures were recorded within 0.5 mile of the study area.

Proposed Grey Rock Development Tract, Rutherford and Buncombe Counties, North Carolina Page 2
June 6, 2006
Archeological Resources: Review of maps at the state archeological site files revealed that no previously
• recorded archeological sites are located within the project area. Three sites are recorded within 1.0 mile of
the project area. Only one of these (31BN239) has an associated file on record with the state (Figure 1).
The two other sites, one labeled "RF 100" (located 3,000 feet east of the study area) and one with no
designation (located 5,000 feet south ofthe study area, between Lake Lure and Bald Mountain Lake), were
marked on the state's resource map, but no further information was available regarding their nature.
Archeological site 31BN239 (Hall Site) is approximately 2,450 feet north of the study area, in Buncombe
County. Site 31 BN239 was recorded by an amateur on August 27, 198, and is believed to be a small
prehistoric (Middle to Late Woodland/Mississippian)hahitation site. The site is reported to contain Connestee
and Pisgah pottery, and large amounts of debitage. No determination/recommendation of eligibility for
inclusion on the NRHP was made, but furthertesting was encouraged based on the site's similarity to other
important sites.
•
Civil War Features: Review of the Official Military Atlas of the Civil War (Davis et al. 1983) revealed
that Ashevil le was the center ofthe main route through the Great Smokey Mountains, between South Carolina
and Tennessee. Some Union infantry forces may have passed the project vicinity as part of early (1862)
campaigns in Kentucky. General George Stoneman's calvary traveled the square between Rutherfordton,
Hendersonville, Asheville, and Marion (around the study area) in support of General William Sherman's
march through the Carolinas in March and April, 1865.
Historic Structarres or Features on Aerial Photographs and Historic Maps: Only an incomplete set of
aerial photographs, flown on March 7, 1939, were available atthe state archives in Raleigh. They highlight
the rough nature of the terrain of the study area, and show small areas of agricultural improvement in the
valleys of larger creeks around the study area. Rutherford County maps dated 1818, 1846, and 1877 indicate
no settlement in the study area. A 1927 map by R. E. Carpenter shows structures along the road that
paralleled Buffalo Creek, the eastern boundary of the study area, and along a road at or near the northern
boundary ofthe project area (Figure 1). A 1938 State Highway and Public Works Commission map shows
a group of four dwellings and a saw mill in the study area, west of Buffalo Creek and south of an unnamed
creek (Figure 1). Based on differences in map scales, the placement of these structures is approximate.
County maps and histories indicate Lake Lure (southeast of the study area) was impounded in the middle-
1920s. Settlement of the area likely escalated following that project.
CONCLUSIONS
•
Based on the information available during the literature review and site file search, no NRHP eligible/listed
properties, state-recognized historic strucriires, or previously recorded archeological sites were located within
or adjacent to the project area. The 1927 and 1938 maps indicate a mill and structures within and adjacent
to the project area.
CLOSING COMMENTS
If you have any questions concerning our findings, please contact Steve Webb at 770-345-0706. We
appreciate the opportunity to work with Wetland & Ecological Consultants, LLC on this project.
Sincerely,
R.S. WEBB & ASSOCIATES
Neil J. Bowen
Historian
Robert S. Webb
President and Senior Principal Archeologist
Enclosures: Figure 1

Proposed Grey Rock Development Tract, Rzrtherjord and Bzmcombe Counties, North Carolina Page 3
June (, 2(!O6
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Davis, G.B., L.J. Perry and J.W. Kirkley, compiled by C.D. Cowles
1983 Atlas to Accompany the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies. Reprint
ofthe 1891-1895 edition. The Fairfax Press, New York.
•
•

r°`~-..
_,P.~
`~, r
~ y
d ~
- `,
~' J ~ __ I
F~
~. . ; ~•
t ,....
~ Previously Recorded Archeological Site
^ Structures on the 1927 Map
Map Source: DeLorme 3-D TopoQuads, 2002 Scale
0 871 meters
0 2857 feet
Figure 1 Previously Recorded Cultural Resources in the Vicinity of the Project Area
RSWA No. OS-099-119
t