20150839 Ver 1_401 Application_20150815

(.LearWaLer
ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
www.cwenv.com
August 17, 2015
Ms. Tasha Alexander
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 -2638
Ms. Karen Higgins
NC DWR, 401 Permitting & Buffer Unit
512 N. Salisbury Street, 9`h Floor
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
RE: Maple Trace ( +/- 67 acres)
Windsor Built Homes, Inc.
Buncombe County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Alexander and Ms. Higgins,
5
i
20'5Q39
The attached Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) and Jurisdictional Determination Request are
being submitted on behalf of Windsor Built Homes, Inc. represented by Mr. Drew Norwood. The
project site is located off Parker Cove Road in Buncombe County, North Carolina. Windsor Built
Homes, Inc. is seeking a Nationwide Permit 29 and 12 for infrastructural development associated
with the construction of a residential subdivision.
A copy of this package has been sent to Ms. Andrea Leslie of the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission and Mr. Bryan Tompkins of the US Fish and Wildlife Service for review. A copy of
this application has also been submitted to Mr. Zan Price of the NC Division of Water Resources,
Asheville Regional Office. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 828 - 698 -9800 if you have any
questions or comments.
Respectfully,
Kaylie Yankura
Biologist
Copy Furnished:
NC Wildlife Resources Commission — Andrea Leslie
US Fish and Wildlife Service — Bryan Tompkins
NC Division of Water Resources, Asheville — Zan Price
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
828 - 698 -9800 Tel
R. Clement Riddle, P.W.S
Principal
AUG I '920 l

Preliminary ORM Data Entry Fields for New Actions
SAW — 201 - BEGIN DATE [Received Date]:
Prepare file folder ❑ Assign Action ID Number in ORM EI
1. Project Name [PCN Form A2a]: Maple Trace
2. Work Type: Private W1 Institutional El Government El Commercial 11
3. Project Description / Purpose [PCN Form 133d and 133e]:
Windsor Built Homes, Inc. is seeking a Nationwide Permit 29 and 12 for infrastructural development
associated with the construction of a residential subdivision.
4. Property Owner/ Applicant [PCN Form A3 or A4]:
Windsor Built Homes, Inc.
5. Agent/ Consultant [PCN Form A5 —orORM Consultant ID Number]: ClearWater Environmental Consultants
6. Related Action ID Number(s) [PCN Form 135b]: N/A
7. Project Location -Coordinates, Street Address, and /or Location Description [PCN Form Blb]:
35.686732, - 82.523685; Site is located off Parker Cove Road in Weaverville, NC.
8. Project Location -Tax Parcel ID [PCN Form 81a]: Please Refer to Parcel Information Attachment
9. Project Location — County [PCN Form A2b]: Buncombe
10. Project Location — Nearest Municipality or Town [PCN Form A2c]: Weavervllle
11. Project Information — Nearest Waterbody [PCN Form 132a]: Reems Creek
12. Watershed / 8 -Digit Hydrologic Unit Code [PCN Form 132c]: French Broad /06010105
Authorization: Section 10 El Section 404 W1 Section 30 & 404 El
Regulatory Action Type:
Standard Permit
✓ Nationwide Permit # 29, 12
Regional General Permit #
7 Jurisdictional Determination Request
Pre - Application Request
Unauthorized Activity
Compliance
No Permit Required
Revised 20150602

Department of the Army NCDENR
Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers NC DWR, Webscape Unit
Attn: Scott McLendon, Chief Regulatory Division Attn: Karen Higgins
PO Box 1890 512 North Salisbury Street
Wilmington, NC 28402 -1890 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
1, the current landowner /managing partner of the property identified below, hereby
authorize ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC) to act on my behalf as my
agent during the processing of jurisdictional determination requests and permits to impact
Wetlands and Water of the US subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and/or Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. CEC is
authorized to provide supplemental information as needed at the request of the USACE
or DWR.
Additionally, I authorize representatives of the Wilmington District, US Army Corps of
Engineers to enter upon the property herein described for the purposes of conducting on-
site investigations and issuing a determination associated with Wetlands and Waters of
the US subject to Federal jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Property Owner of Record:
Property Owner of Address:
Phone Number:
Property Location:
Owner/Managing Partner
Printed Name:
Owner/Managing Partner Signature:
Date:
1111iaVJUe ,&o� /f / >>&IJ (1i4e,
/iGtG /GU S .�C ,ow /- �
7A,Or-
224 South Grove Street, Suite F
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Phone: [phone]
www.cwcnv.com

O� F WA7F9, G
y
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
Corps:
1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 29,12 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? I ❑ Yes ® No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ 401 For the record only for Corps Permit:
because written approval is not required? Certification:
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes ® No
1f.
Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation ❑ Yes ® No
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
1g.
Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h ❑ Yes N No
below.
1 h.
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ❑ Yes ®No
2.
Project Information
2a.
Name of project:
Maple Trace
2b.
County:
Buncombe
2c.
Nearest municipality / town:
Weaverville
2d.
Subdivision name:
Maple Trace
2e.
NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
n/a
project no:
3.
Owner Information
Windsor Built Homes Inc., Reems Creek Development Group LLC., Robertson Trust.
3a.
Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
Windsor Built Homes, Inc. has a contract in place to purchase property owned by
Reems Creek Development Group LLC and the Robertson Trust within the project
area.
3b.
Deed Book and Page No.
Windsor Built Homes, Inc. (529611196), Reams Creek Development Group LLC
(4262/1470), Robertson Trust (4673/1806)
3c.
Responsible Party (for LLC if
Drew Norwood
applicable):
3d.
Street address:
40 W. Broad Street, Suite 500
3e.
City, state, zip:
Greenville, SC 29601
3f.
Telephone no.:
n/a
3g.
Fax no.:
n/a
3h.
Email address:
n/a
Page 1 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4.
Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a.
Applicant is:
❑ Agent ❑ Other, specify:
4b.
Name:
4c.
Business name
(if applicable):
4d.
Street address:
4e.
City, state, zip:
4f.
Telephone no.:
4g.
Fax no.:
4h.
Email address:
5.
Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a.
Name:
R. Clement Riddle
5b.
Business name
ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
(if applicable):
5c.
Street address:
32 Clayton Street
5d.
City, state, zip:
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
5e.
Telephone no.:
828- 698 -9800
5f.
Fax no.:
n/a
5g.
Email address:
clement @cwenv.com
Page 2 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
1c. Property size:
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
proposed project:
Windsor Built Homes, Inc. (9752 -34- 6142 - 00000); Reams
Creek Development Group LLC (9752 -33- 9212 - 00000);
Robertson Trust (9752 -44- 2415 -00000)
Latitude: 35.686732N
(DD.DDDDDD)
67 acres
Reams Creek
Longitude: - 82.523685W
(- DD.DDDDDD)
21b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C/Tr
2c. River basin: French Broad 06010105
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The project site is currently forested /undeveloped with a network of forest roads and is located within the general vicinity
of other developed residential properties. Land use within the surrounding area is primarily residential.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
Approximately 0.09 acres.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
Approximately 2,535 linear feet.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: The proposed project involves the phased construction of a residential
development and associated infrastructure. Impacts include two culverts (one within a linear wetland and one within a
stream) related to road construction and the installation of a water line that will cross Reams Creek and tie into an existing
portion of water line.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The residential development and associated infrastructure would be constructed using typical construction and earth
moving equipment.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
project (including all prior phases) in the past? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
Comments: A request for jurisdictional determination has
been included
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency /Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Page 3 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

15. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
® Yes ❑ No
6b. If yes, explain.
Please reference the attached Site Plan for complete construction overview (Attachment A). Although construction
activity will be phased, the project site was delineated in its entirety and wetland and stream impacts will only occur in
Phase 1.
Page 4 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Welland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non -404, other) (acres)
Temporary (T)
W1 ® P [-IT Impact #1 -
Culvert
W2 ❑P ❑T
W3 ❑P ❑T
W4 ❑P ❑T
W5 ❑P ❑T
W6 ❑P ❑T
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments:
Herbaceous El Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
® Corps 0.005 (240 SF)
® DWQ
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
❑ Corps
❑ DWQ
0.005
3. Stream Impacts
Impact #2 -
® PER
[K Corps
S1 ❑ P ® T
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including
temporary impacts)
proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
Installation
S2 ®P ❑ T
3a. 3b. 3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent(P)or
intermittent
DWQ - non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
Impact #2 -
® PER
[K Corps
S1 ❑ P ® T
Water Line
Reams Creek ❑ INT
® DWQ 25 20
Installation
S2 ®P ❑ T
Impact #3 -
UT To Reems ® PER
® Corps
4.0 130
Culvert
Creek ❑ INT
® DWQ
S3 E] P F-1 T
❑ PER
El Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P F-1 T
[:1 PER
❑ Corps
[-I INT
❑ DWQ
E] PER
❑ Corps
S5 [:1 P F1 T
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
❑ PER
❑ Corps
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and
tributary impacts
150
3i. Comments:
Page 5 of 12
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of waterbody
impact number— (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary (T)
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P ❑T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments:
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or ake construction proposed, then complete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 15c. 5d.
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose
number of pond
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments:
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet)
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5e.
Upland
(acres)
Flooded
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Neuse ❑ Tar - Pamlico
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d.
6e. 6f.
Buffer impact
number— Reason
Buffer
Permanent (P) or for
Stream name mitigation
Temporary (T) impact
required?
B1 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
62 ❑P ❑T
❑Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments:
Zone 1 impact
(square feet)
❑ Other:
0
Zone 2 impact
(square feet)
Page 6 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Stream impacts were avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Only two culverts are needed to access the entire 67 acre
site.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Equipment will be operated from high ground during construction. Sediment and erosion controls will be utilized to prevent
sediment from leaving the site. Culverts will be constructed with appropriate headwalls (Figure 3.1). Stream banks will be
restored to existing conditions after water line installation via mulching, matting, and staking (Figure 3.3).
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
❑ Mitigation bank
❑ Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
Type Quantity
❑ Yes
linear feet
❑ warm ❑ cool
square feet
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
❑cold
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 7 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires ❑ Yes ® No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c. 6d. 6e.
Zone Reason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 8 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
20.9%
N Yes ❑ No
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
A Stormwater Management Plan was approved by Buncombe County— Planning and Development on 3/21/2015.
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
3b. Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
apply (check all that apply):
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? Please reference Attachment B.
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
4a. Which of the following state- implemented stormwater management programs apply
(check all that apply):
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
N Certified Local Government
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
Buncombe
N Phase II
❑ NSW
❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
N Yes ❑ No
❑
Coastal counties
❑
HQW
❑
ORW
❑
Session Law 2006 -246
❑
Other:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 9 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the ❑ Yes ®No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ❑ Yes ❑ No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application? ❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The proposed project is in a previously established residential and commercial corridor. Goods and services can be
provided by the City of Asheville. The proposed project will not result in additional development that could impact nearby
downstream water quality.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non- discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
The project will connect with an existing municipal line.
Page 10 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ❑ Yes Z No
habitat?
51b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ❑Yes Z No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. El Raleigh
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
FWS County data and the Natural Heritage Program GIS data. Potential habitat for the Northern long -eared bat may exist
within the Maple Trace project boundary. However, necessary tree clearing will occur outside of the May 15- August 15
tree clearing moratorium.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? I ❑ Yes Z No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
South Atlantic Habitat and Ecosystem IMS. Impact will not occur in a marine system.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation El Yes ®No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
National Register of Historic Places records maintained by the NC State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and available
on SHPO's HPOWEB GIS Service. The John G. and Nannie H. Barrett Farm (BN2484) is located within approximately two
miles of the proposed Maple Trace project site. Development activities will be contained to the 67 acre site and it is the
opinion of CEC that project construction will not negatively affect the integrity of this historic site.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA - designated 100 -year floodplain? I Z Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: A Flood Development Permit from Buncombe County was obtained
in July 2015 for infrastructure development within the 100 -year floodplain (Permit Number FH2015 -00133).
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA Map Service Center; map number 3700975200J
panel 9752 (effective 1/10/2010)
R. Clement Riddle i (/��7��
8--1;7-1s—
Applicant/Agent's Printed Name Applican gents Signa ure Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant
Page 11 of 12
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Alexander
251
' r�
11 eavn at Pd
Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
41en �auo X19,
Weaverville
e
Ream' C.1eek
Z �D
° 1) &s Chapel Fd
Stoney h o
°h Rd 9 Cod
C pd
---_ fjand Co' Rd
e
Woodiin
i
Dr'�a(r o I h
19
o A s
q
c ' Rd
F�4 2
� I d
251 c
° X25 0 °9v�
n lain R
a
� I �Y n'hola
� ! 0
w
I
c
'r
a \ y
d _
sib 19
Asheville
e ?r
°0 f ry 694
,F D
_ Asheville
�r0ry EmmeAd a , —.
I
'P = rr. Fnllan Ave 170
Legend Ra
Project Boundary
Drawn by: 1.4 ° G
Buncombe County, CLearWater
North Carolina
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Reems
Creek Golf
Club
0
,'r, Rd
n Project Boundary
0
4`' R
rt
P�
0
U
„
0 0.5 1
Fd
nva
c
ec
pp.2057
,dc
S°
x
'n e+
°X N
e
2
q Miles
Site Vicinity
Figure 1

a .
r
i
J
s
Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
`9._ • RACrpk
\J
CLearWater USGS Topographic Map
Buncombe County, Weaverville Quad
North Carolina
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Figure 2

Project Boundary
Judsdialonel wndlands end wMen labored
on this —P hew been annealed waha sub -
male,.aunty Within, a TMnMe .,I,
,.do Global Posibrobi, System (Grill soft
Me suMeyueOl dikrentlol mo Won of that
data. GPS points may dennnstlWe
nmaehaba ears due to tMovaphy,
wgetMiw cove, sear muldpoth signal
an
Note; The Munnetra wetland and stream
b... a elpmeimate These ales
of the US define6aore. ThertMre, ell
peltNnery detemYnallons am subleoh to
tliwge unlll woolen wdfieatlon Is obtained.
GEC shongly restabonsands lost wWlen
wd,rnaon be oMWnw from the Carat poor
In easily on the Property, blinnag wy
site woM, or motlry any bpal balance on
Nls MR&MM euon.
Toy map was papered by DEC using the
thesl (narration ewlable to CEC at the
fine, of pmduaan TMs map Is for
alomullonal WNases only and should not
oo Mad to desmdne process boundedes.
macho s, property boundary lines, no
Iegel descriptions. no map shell not bo
combined to be en oman salon, of any
date depaled.
Somre Data Topa Is from Sunmmbe
coumy.
Legend
— Culvert
Stream I
Welland
I
- Linear Wetland �
Pmject Boundary
Contours �• --
Urawn oy: KAY 8.e.2015; CE.: PmjectY 739
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
Stream Impact #2
20 LF
(Figure 3.3)
Stream Impact #3
130 LF
(Figure 3.2)
CLearWater
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Wetland Impact #�
0.005 AC
(Figure 3.2)
f N
.i
0 125 250 500
1Feet
Impact Map
Figure 3

PROPOSED _-
20 LF TEMPORARY e
STREAM IMPACT
N
PROPOSED
WATER WATER MA IN
EXTENSION
a Opg D
\ w „
+s �
f
- CREEKS PROPOSED
240 S.F.
LINEAR
WETLAND
IMPACT
PROJECT BOUNDARY
z��� r i4` iS' 193`
s gi
� 1 a , gR g8, gfi• ei is”
a PROPOSED \ it AS° i9 It i6 I gi"
STORM WATER; -- 64
o POND I Oil,
z
is gs gf. gd- gi g!. i3'
iS
It BS i; aq
PROPOSED s ss _ I it " It" It" 6t"
zi 130 LF STREAM ss _ s
IMPACT I I g�a gi CC
i3 i;a °=a gia gya ` - ➢a ga
it BS iS i4 i3 11 gga 93a s5 T106—Ho it111,
o
U�v1MARY
E
d PROPOSED PERMANENT WETLAND IMPACTS N CARD'%
SQ.FT. (240± S. F.) p�� oFESSip °�'y
PROPOSED PERMANENT �1'elii Ii al's/
. STREAM IMPACTS Notf4r diffistiuction
130 LF E..
PROPOSED TEMPORARY STREAM IMPACTS °'"<< /AM R•�s`
` I ...... 20 LF ninnmia"
N
V
3 WGLA Engineering, PLLC WETLAND &
CONSULTING ENGINEERS 8, LAND PLANNERS STREAM IMPACTS
g NC License No: P -1342 Maple Trace - Phase I FIGURE 3.1
214 N. King Street Buncombe County fob #: 14122
Hendersonville, NC 28792 North Carolina Date: 6103(15
It � (828) 687 -7177 Scale: II = 200'
N wgla.com

0
0
N
L
m
Q
D
N
9
C
a
m
a
lu
w
N
a
PROPOSED ASPHALT ROAD
PROPOSED CONCRETE END%
FOR TWIN 48" HDPE CULVE
PRO
48" HOPE BURIED 12" MI
BELOW STREA
TWIN 48" CULVERT
CROSS— SECTION
N.T.S.
E MPA
2 +� S-D?i
PROPOSED CONCRETE
HEADWALLS
STREAM BED
ROADWAY
SECTION
)SED 48" HDPE
12" MINIMUM BELOW STREAM BED
SOLID END CAP
12" MINIMUM FROM INVERT OF PIPE
ON UPSTREAM SIDE
PROPOSED 24" ASPHALT DRIVE
so
-.. - - - . _I I -
PROPOSED 130 LF OF TWIN 48" RCP CULVERT
BURIED 12" MINIMUM BELOW STREAM BED
48" CULVERT
STREAM CROSS — SECTION
N.T.S.
WGLA Engineering, PLLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS
He License e, N 28792
214 N. King Street
Hendersonville, NC 28792
W% [phone]
wgla.com
Maple Trace - Phase I
Buncombe County
North Carolina
CULVERT
STREAM CROSSING
FIGURE 3.2
Job #: 14122
Date: 6103115
Scale: N.T.S.

0
N
r4
m
`o
v
v
0
3
w
D
NOTE: MATTING SHALL BE COIR FIBER, 750
GRAM PER SQ. METER WITH NOMINAL 0.50 IN.
OPENING SIZE.
ANCHOR MATTING
IN 8" TRENCH --\ 1' MIN.
MATTING PLACED FLUSH WITH BANK SURFACE,
LAP OVER DOWNSTREAM /DOWN SLOPE SEAMS
12" WOOD STAKE PLACED IN
3' O.C. DIAMOND PATTERN
SMOOTH SURFACE, REMOVE ALL �
DEBRIS AND SEED /MULCH BEFORE
PLACING MATTING
MATTING ANCHORED /
1' BELOW STREAM BED
I
WGLA Engineering, PLLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS
NC License No: P -1342
214 N. King Street
Hendersonville, NC 28792
1014 (828) 687 -7177
wgla.com
STREAM BED
gEXTEND MATTING A MIN. OF
DEPTHlVARIES BELOW STREAM BED.
1 /
PROPOSED UTILITY
PIPE LINE
Maple Trace - Phase I
Buncombe County
North Carolina
STREAM BANK
STABILIZATION
FIGURE 3.3
Job A 14122
Date: 6/03/15
Scale: N.T.S.
i
I
I

Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
Legend
- -_- j Project Boundary
Soils
CkC2; CkD2 - Clifton Clay Loam, Moderately Eroded
EvD2; EvE2 - Evard -Cowee Complex, Moderately Eroded
EwD; EwE - Evard -Cowee Complex, Stony
RsA- Rosman Fine Sandy Loam
51- — ^ - -- -
T
1—
Drawn by: KI
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
t'"'LearWater I USDA Soils Map
32 Clayton Street
Ashpviller North Carolina 29901
Figure 4

Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
1 1101
� i•
Protect Boundary
Qom! �.
�� •
M
OILy 4
Legend t• ' '�
1
Project Boundary
.2 :1'Gec1-run 9 1
Buncombe County, CLearWater
North Carolina
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
�•ti
A
• M
4
250 500 1,000
Fee
Aerial Photograph
ESRI (2011)
Figure 5

Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
1O0 Year Floodpaain
Legend
Project Boundary
O 100 -Year Floodplain
Umwn uy: KAY i.24.2UI u; Lmt. enulera7r
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
CLearWater
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
1 Project Boundary
N
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
FEMA Floodplain Map
FEMA Map Service Center
Map Panel 3700975200J
Figure 6

Attachment A
Site Plan

3 'dY
JE3 P& ]d S x P Dl x.d � P q E
.OE1
EG9 f -"5
PHASE A
I
e [ az cp xllw P_l
37 LOTS
J
I
y
U
51PU[RD SIAxE+PCS) mM 9' 6 APL 4
I
IY 1.y 51 'Ln= Ox YVCK. NPE [ Al
a Q
IEpI�
I \'
r
wx 'a% IHN
[
f1
%"-1=� �cE;
k SOC Cp 0 BD+ ]] G C NL
;- ., _
F
,� l O
D
Q)mZ
1
.i date:9/18 /14 E
i E 5 . U pi ff IIE
r.
44
Nii']Rllxnnc« a eE SVC1. rmz....L a •rtnnrx ��
Le I.E(f.' aPE +iECJ Bv. IUIpiSpN -9iW5 t
C PO 20[ 3 %%9 +aM1EVILE H[ 39905 (B3B)
u
5 APE PfldC "u].
PYSED RJA05 IAE ,D 9E PUBLIE Y NPMF➢ EM N
LT 5 ENI1PFLi M CPU MEPI Cdi ROAD
'IILPI PdNi.
CTOGL 'ElEPxME AxD xANRAL GS ME OE
I) 'i _II4 i nL • 9�] 309D3 (9ID) 55
11 I�� • I)I r. I b � Y .` IM55. 9].S
D[ S E
u+E
f Yh {\ 5fE occ s
L B C.D
$" aortrn. L E
PHASE 1 LIMITS
27.31
\ \ \� SfREAY
)
AREA -
1 �
s II
A $K]FL SHALL PE RPXEU Cxx u n
37 LOTS i
GN!
«m ASSUUixc
I( .,
W
i 6
PA. D M
NLAWP PALE 3J HfpJ SUBGNSIp
y
U
51PU[RD SIAxE+PCS) mM 9' 6 APL 4
Q
IY 1.y 51 'Ln= Ox YVCK. NPE [ Al
a Q
P.'n. MX'IiA0l..Tl.. A
.C`A. PPPp 1. PAIIC
^ n+G]A
W
MP,I
fJ MIICEI 0.+]S[xLw �, xl
0
U
P rEC
=
GO
k SOC Cp 0 BD+ ]] G C NL
;- ., _
IB1 DA SIC va LLSL
,� l O
D
Q)mZ
L PCrC E.C. Kp
.i date:9/18 /14 E
i E 5 . U pi ff IIE
r.
44
,-9 w
9 CCU 'mE DE P
ChSjLTAPW MM E PnC;Ci
.'
'.LGt Z] I<
_5fE
4LC T ME PPCEL PCe P
p.P z C
Wwo
�m
O
U
(rn)
PFOPCGEO
- al
% I�I � I d ✓ ' � � n ae & Wm SECnaN
�EET C207)
���f/ �2t P _ C� ill � �a, ll� �• ���x uv a' r`i ,%�� I
r C t �� I'• 1
PEN SPACE G
■COMMON M •y�S � � '. � � / � �\ \ ��� ] c9 z s 5 e Es Avc'.CCn
I ■j■ t k ) S J3 3Slrt N6: P -]
C PITS ..FC FCB Sbl �� i Ib'.]] 5 Gf J 51 GG.q)1
_I PL C9]9 9U CDU¢ LCLxiv3 P,N4 nom]
]][
901P3pAaY >
_ 11- 53 z3 6IS GC - 5 : E4 lC
- _ m ccuat ru zw' .. -_
. USE'ICE
I'P' ll C.+ -UVPN P
E3
i393_zJ -3366
BUNCN4'
P --
C�E LCNNn ZEN.NL.
PNAS! 2
U0
HUOOa
w�V
I
a�
ZS
Za
�rn
P.
—I
37 LOTS i
Q
= I 29E9
t
GRAPHIC SCALE
'4 inu5F 0y,
;- ., _
, xnPm.mekbeldw.
�I515
cn re I
Revislone
.i date:9/18 /14 E
rc �
nlfwi unExC 5 s.< AaESS
l]. �•
3],Nt aw L!
I job: 14122
1
��O°t°.+e°,�'mm"
we La..em,IJ13 •"
_5fE
ill diawu: MJF sheet

Attachment B
Stormwater Management Plan Approval Letter

Buncombe County Government
Planning and Development
46 Valley Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Jon E. Creighton
Assistant County Manager /Planning
Director
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
LETTER OF APPROVAL WITH MODIFICATIONS
March 23, 2015
Drew Norwood
Winsor Built Homes, Inc.
40 West Broad Street
Greenville, S.C. 29601
Dear Mr. Norwood,
NOTICE — This is not a permit
This office has reviewed the Stormwater Plan submitted for the project listed below. We
find the plan to be acceptable with the attached modifications and /or performance
reservations and hereby issue this Letter of Approval.
The Buncombe County Stormwater Management Ordinance is a performance oriented
program requiring protection of the natural resources and adjoining properties. If,
following commencement of this project, it is determined that the plan is inadequate, this
office may require revisions to the plan and its implementation.
The approval of a stormwater plan is conditioned on the applicant's compliance with
federal and state water quality laws, regulations, and rules. All other applicable county
permits and reviews must be completed prior to issuance of the stormwater permit and
the beginning any land disturbing activity.
The approval of the stormwater permit shall require an enforceable restriction on property
usage that runs with the land, such as recorded deed restrictions or protective covenants,
to ensure that future development and redevelopment maintains the site consistent with
the approved project plans.
You must acquire a stormwater permit from this office. Submit a surety
performance bond as described in Division 5 Section 2 of the Stormwater
Management Ordinance and a permit will be issued. The required surety amount
for this project is $210,255.00.
This letter gives the notice required by Chapter 26, Environment, Article VII,
Division 2, Section 2, H(1) of our right of periodic inspection to insure compliance
with the approved plan.
Stormwater Management 250 -4848

Drew Norwood
Page 2 of 3
This approval shall become null and void if you have not made progress on the site
within six months after the date of approval. A six month extension can be granted for
good cause shown upon receiving a written request from you before the expiration of the
approved plan.
We look forward to working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
intL/ Aodjj--
Mike Goodson, PE, CPSWQ
Stormwater Administrator
Cc: WGLA Engineers, PLLC
Buncombe County Erosion Control
encl.
MODIFICATIONS FOR APPROVAL
Project name: Maple Trace Phase I
Project No.: STW2015 -00007
Location: Parkers Cove Road
Date received: February 23, 2015
Date approved: March 21, 2015
Person financially responsible: Drew Norwood
Pursuant to Section 2, (b)(8) of the stormwater ordinance the developer shall implement
stormwater best management practices which do not result in a sustained increase in
temperature in the receiving watercourse.
NOTE: The receiving u +atercourse on this project is Reems Creek. The stream
classification along this section of Reems Creek is Class C, Trout. This designation
provides additional protection against thermal pollution or increases in temperature by
state and local rules.

Jurisdictional Determination Information

Delineation Boundary
Juds ildional emilanM and winters Idenlifed
on this map haw been boated wbho suk,
mem, amamq u1 iron, a TAnae .,I,
Slade Glonal Poslllnnln0 System (GPS) and
Na Suther,mol dlflaremlal conetlloo of land
data GPS pole. may dennnstmde
nmlmclabk intro. due to lopigraphy,
organdow cover, tender mor ipalh al nal
Not, Tire Illustrated walNltl and stream
brntbns are mppmehnmle. Tease areas
now been Mooed N the old', Inmevea
they hew not been surveyed. Alhm.,h
CbeMhter Emuonmmrrlal Cmaiduar s, Inc
(CEC) In Sum dent In our assessment the
W Army C. of Easterners (COrys) Is the
any v0enry that San make final de ddans
re'l nfin jams iclbnal ""Vino and embers
llne
of the 05 deallons. Therefore, all
pretiMnary delerMnvllons are sublM N
Jlenge until wrluen ved@sMn Is Samoan.
CEC snonoly ...We that wntben
wi f ®Yon be dbalne s from the Cams poor
IS cbSl, on Ina pmpedy. beghlnag any
Site woA. or nalde, any legal entrance an
IMS dedermhauon.
This map was prepared by CEC using the
beat loimnulan aweae ll to CEC al the
J. of ymdudhn. Tnis map b for
hfoanallonal wrmeas anh and should not
I used to determine prec6e MuMmdes,
madwan, pmpem, boundary lines, n
evil dasaiptlane This map Shall net oe
ansWed to M an mlfaal Suety of any
data depkled.
Wun'e Data: Tape Is hom aunmmba
County.
Legend
i Wetland Data Form
Culvert
Stream
Welland
Linear Welland
Delineation Boundary
Contours
Drawn by: KAY 7.30.2016; CE
; lorcjectJ 738
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
W7
dl
W't
Wr
NJ
W4
>a
I�
C earWater
32 Clayton Sheet
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
I0 125 250 500
Feet
Stream & Wetland
Delineation Map
Delineated July 29, 2015
Figure 7
Juritliedonal Wafer
Welland
(AC)
Slenmms (LF)
Wi
0.002
at
a0 1
W2
Deal
S2
757
W3
0.01
53
1,115
W4
0.003
S4
451
W5
0.001
55
I7II+
00
We
0.002
W7
0.02
We
0.004
Taal
0.0&5
Total
2,5J5
Legend
i Wetland Data Form
Culvert
Stream
Welland
Linear Welland
Delineation Boundary
Contours
Drawn by: KAY 7.30.2016; CE
; lorcjectJ 738
Buncombe County,
North Carolina
Maple Trace ( +/- 67 AC)
W7
dl
W't
Wr
NJ
W4
>a
I�
C earWater
32 Clayton Sheet
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
I0 125 250 500
Feet
Stream & Wetland
Delineation Map
Delineated July 29, 2015
Figure 7

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section W of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER:
C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State:North Carolina County/parish/borough: Buncombe City: Weaverville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35.686732° N, Long. - 82.5236850
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Reems Creek
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) into which the aquatic resource flows: French Broad
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC): French Broad 06010105
® Check if map /diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
❑ Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
❑ Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
❑ Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
❑ Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There KR "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply):'
❑ TNWs, including territorial seas
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
® Relatively permanent waters' (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
® Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
❑ Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non - wetland waters: 2,535 linear feet: 4 -10 width (fl) and/or acres.
Wetlands: 0.09 acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: PatabB+bed by OHWM.
Elevation of established OH WM (if known):
2. Non - regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
El Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
' Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
' For purposes of this forth, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year -round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally'
(e.g., typically 3 months).
' Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section III.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section III.B below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent':
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):
This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non - navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year -round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year -round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbody° is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section IILB3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.0 below.
1. Characteristics of non -TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick Lbt
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
❑ Tributary flows directly into TNW.
❑ Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick Lbt river miles from RPW.
Project waters are 1 Ick Lfst aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are 1?14 List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW':
Tributary stream order, if known:
' Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
' Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that anolv):
Tributary is: ❑ Natural
❑ Artificial (man- made). Explain:
❑ Manipulated (man- altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: plck bt.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
❑ Silts ❑ Sands ❑ Concrete
❑ Cobbles ❑ Gravel ❑ Muck
❑ Bedrock ❑ Vegetation. Type / %cover:
❑ Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Fick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year:
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: PickLhtt. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Rick:1. #. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
❑ Bed and banks
❑ OHWM' (check all indicators that apply):
❑ clear, natural line impressed on the bank
❑
the presence of litter and debris
❑ changes in the character of soil
❑
destruction of terrestrial vegetation
❑ shelving
❑
the presence of wrack line
❑ vegetation matted down, bent, or absent
❑
sediment sorting
❑ leaf litter disturbed or washed away
❑
scour
❑ sediment deposition
❑
multiple observed or predicted flow events
❑ water staining
❑
abrupt change in plant community
❑ other (list):
❑ Discontinuous OHWM.' Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to del=
El High Tide Line indicated by: ❑&
❑ oil or scum line along shore objects
❑ fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore)
❑ physical markings/characteristics
❑ tidal gauges
❑ other (list):
ne lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply)
Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
❑ survey to available datum;
❑ physical markings;
❑ vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man -made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a mck outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
@id.

(Iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non -TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non -TNW:
Flow is: Pick List. Explain:
Surface flow is: Pick List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
❑ Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adiacencv Determination with Non -TNW:
❑ Directly abutting
❑ Not directly abutting
❑ Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
❑ Ecological connection. Explain:
❑ Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximitv (Relationshir) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: PlckList.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within thelcist floodplain.
(it) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
❑ Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
❑ Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
❑ Habitat for:
❑ Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
❑ Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
❑ Other environmentally - sensitive species. Explain findings:
❑ Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis:
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

For each wetland, specify the following:
Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (YIN) Size (in acres)
Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:
C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION
A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and /or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume, duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TN W?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non -RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non -RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section II1.13:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
❑ TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year -round are jurisdictional, Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: Continuous bed and bank, prescence of flow without precipitation.
❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates forjurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
® Tributary waters: 2,535 linear feet 4 -10 width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non -RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
❑ Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
® Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
® Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year- round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW: Wetlands discharge directly into channel.
❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.09 acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 0.00 acres.
6. Wetlands adjacent to non -RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.
As a general role, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remainsjurisdictional.
❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1 -6), or
❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA- STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):rs
❑ which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
❑ from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
❑ which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
❑ Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
❑ Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination
'See Footnote # 3.
'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
" Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Q Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Q Other non - wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
0 Wetlands: acres.
F. NON - JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Q Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
❑ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
O Waters do not meet the `Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
❑ Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
El Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Q Lakes/ponds: acres.
[] Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
0 Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non - jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Q Non - wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other non - wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
i Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply - checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
® Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
❑ Office concurs with data sheets /delineation report.
❑ Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
❑ Corps navigable waters' study:
❑ U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
❑ USGS NHD data.
❑ USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
® U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name: 1:24K Weaverville Quad.
❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
❑ FEMA/FIRM maps:
❑ 100 -year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
® Photographs: ® Aerial (Name & Date):ESRI (2011).
or ❑ Other (Name & Date):
❑ Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
❑ Applicable/supporting case law:
❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
❑ Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: This JD forth applies to all streams and wetlands on the site.

Parcel Information

7/21/2015
Buncombe County Tax Lookup- Property Card
{` COUNTY OF BUNCOMBE, NORTH CAROLINA
Web Property Record Card
9 - 9752-34-6142 -00000
Owner Information
Owners:
WINDSOR BUILT HOMES
INC
Address:
40 W BROAD ST STE 500
GREENVILLE SC 296o1
Property
PARKER COVE RD
Location:
Taxing Districts
County: Buncombe County
City:
Fire: REEMS CREEK FIRE
School:
Authority:
Transfer Price Legal Reference
Date
WARRANTYOR
03/23/15 $512,000 SPL /COMP
TRANSFER
Date Printed: 7/21/2015
Parcel Information
Status:
Deed Date:
Deed Book /Page:
Plat Book /Page:
Legal Reference:
Total Property Value: 208,400
Active
3/23/2015
5296 / 1196
0144/0070
WARRANTY OR SPL /COMP
TRANSFER
Location: PARKER COVE RD
Class: UNDEVELOPED TRACT
Neighborhood: REEMS CREEK ROAD
Subdivision:
Sub Lot: TRACT 1
Zoning:
Conservation /Easement: N
Flood: Y
Ownership History
Deed Vacant
Book /Page Qualified When
Sold
5296 / 1196 Yes Yes
Assessment History
Land Data Total Acres: 22.o6 Land Value: Other
Acres 208,400 Improvements
Segment# Units Description
1 16.10 Acres LASS 1
12 .96 Acres LASS 2
Account Seller Names
REEMS CREEK
8213288 DEVELOPMENT
GROUP LLC
Value: o
Total Building Value: o
htlpJ /w . buncombetax .org/PropertyCard.aspx 1/1

7/21/2015
Buncombe County Tax Lookup - Property Card
COUNTY OF BUNCOMBE, NORTH CAROLINA
Web Property Record Card
4 9752-33-9212-00000
Owner Information
Owners:
REEMS CREEK DEVELOPMENT
GROUP LLC
Address:
78 DILLINGHAM RD
ASHEVILLE NC 28805
Property
PARKER COVE RD
Location:
Taxing Districts
County: Buncombe County
City:
Fire: REEMS CREEK FIRE
School:
Authority:
No Owner History
Land Data Total Acres: 43.45
Acres
Date Printed: 7/21/2015
Parcel Information
Status:
Deed Date:
Deed Book /Page:
Plat Book /Page:
Legal Reference:
Location:
Class:
Neighborhood:
Subdivision:
Total Property Value:
369,500
Active
8/1/2oo6
4262/1478
0104/0171
WARRANTY OR SPL /PARC
PARKER COVE RD
UNDEVELOPED TRACT
REEMS CREEK ROAD
JAS B & BLANCHE
ROBERTSON
Sub Lot:
Zoning:
Conservation /Easement: N
Flood: N
Ownership History
Assessment History
Land Value: Other
369,500 Improvements
Segment# Units Description
I1 24.33 Acres LASS 1
�2 19.12 Acres LASS 2
Value: o
Total Building Value: o
httpl /w . bmcombetax.org/PropertyCard.aspx 1/1

7/21/2015
r
Buncombe County Tax Lookup- Property Card
COUNTY OF BUNCOMBE,
NORTH CAROLINA
Web Property Record Card
9752-44 - 2415-00000
Owner Information
2 7 7
Property
Parcel Information
Owners: BLANCHE R ROBERTSON MARITAL
Status:
TRUST
Deed Date:
JAMES B ROBERTSON & DAVID B
Deed Book /Page:
Address:
Plat Book /Page:
21 PARKER COVE RD
Legal Reference:
WEAVERVILLE NC 8 8
Location:
Class:
Neighborhood:
Subdivision:
Total Property Value:
415,500
Active
4/27/2009
4673 / i8o6
0104/0171
WARRANTY OR SPL /COMP
TRANSFER
00021 PARKER COVE RD
MULTIPLE RESIDENCES
REEMS CREEK ROAD
JAS B & BLANCHE
Sub Lot:
Zoning:
Conservation /Easement: N
Flood: Y
Ownership History
Transfer
2 7 7
Property
00021 PARKER COVE RD
Location:
Date
Taxing Districts
When
County:
Buncombe County
City:
Fire:
REEMS CREEK FIRE
School:
Authority:
Location:
Class:
Neighborhood:
Subdivision:
Total Property Value:
415,500
Active
4/27/2009
4673 / i8o6
0104/0171
WARRANTY OR SPL /COMP
TRANSFER
00021 PARKER COVE RD
MULTIPLE RESIDENCES
REEMS CREEK ROAD
JAS B & BLANCHE
Sub Lot:
Zoning:
Conservation /Easement: N
Flood: Y
Ownership History
Transfer
Deed
Vacant
Seller
Date
Price Legal Reference Book /Page Qualified
When
Account
Names
Sold
ROBERTSON
JAMES
04/27/09
$0
WARRANTY OR
4673 / 18o6 No: C
No
8215179
RANSFER
ROBERTSON
BLANCHE
ROBERTS
ROBERTSON
10 /ii/o6
$o
WARRANTY ORANSFER 4299 / 0261 No: C
No
5211400
SL /C
ROBERTSON
BLANCHE
Assessment History
Year
Account
Acres Land Bldgs Assessed Desc
Exemptions Deferred Taxable
IOt
P r
12015
8236483
10.08 147,000 267,200 1,300 415,500
0
0
415,500
2014
8236483
10.08 147,000 267,200 1,300 415,500
0
0
415,500
2013
8236483
10.08 147,000 267,200 1,300 415,500
0
0
415,500
12012
8236483
10.08 167,400 235,500 1,300 404,200
0
0
404,200 1
12011
18236483
jio.o8 167,400 235,500 1,300 404,200
0
0
404,200
2010
18236483
110.08 167,400 23o,600 1,300 399,300
0
0
399,300
12009
18215179
11o.o8 167,400 23o,600l1,300 399,300
0
10
399,300 1
12008
1
18215179
1
10.08 167,400 23o,600l1,300 399,300
1 1
0
10
399,300 1
htlp! /w
. buncombetax .org/PropertyCard.aspx
1
1
1
112

7012015 Buncombe County Tax Lookup - Property Card
12007 18215179 110.08 1167,4001230,60011,300 1399,300 1 10
Land Data Total Acres: 1o.o8 Land Value: Other Improvements
Acres 147,000 IImprov# Description
Segment# Units Description J I2 ST UB OR
1 8.27 Acres CLASS 1 f BARN
2 1.81 Acres CLASS 2
3 2.00 Each HOME SITE
Building Structures
Res.
Building ID
1
Refinement
(Foundation
Roof Type
HVAC
Style
1 STORY
CONVENTIONAL
Description
Sq Bsmt Bsmt
Feet SgFt Finished
1616 0 0
PIERS
GABLE W/ METAL
NO CENTRAL SYSTEM
ISection ISgF
12 STORY LIVING AREAho24
LIVING AREA LEVEL 1 X592
JENCLOSED PORCH 18o
SCREENED PORCH 1200
JOPEN PORCH 1256
t I # Stories
12.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
11.00
Section I SgFt I # Stories
(LIVING AREA LEVEL 112173 1.00
(PATIO 1200 1.00
IO�,PEN PORCH 17 1.00
�vARAGE 25 1.00
(OPEN PORCH X163 11.00
Built -Ins
Full Bath(s)
Bedrooms(s)
Bsmt
Finished
10 1399,300
Value: 1,300
Year Units
1940 325 Square
Feet
Year
Built Grade Condition Value
1878 D P 65365
Units
1
3
ZOOM
Year
Built
1966
Built -Ins
Full Bath(s)
Fireplace /Gas Log
Bedrooms(s)
Zoo
Grade Condition Value
C N 201855
Units
2
1
3
Total Building Value: 267,200
htlpl /w .buncombetax.ortyProp"Card.aspx 2t2
Building Structures
Res. Building
g
Style Bsmt
ID
Feet SgFt
2
RANCH 2173 2173 t
Refinement
Description
Foundation
CONVENTIONAL
Roof Type
GABLE W/ COMP. SHGL.
HVAC
HEAT WITH A/C
Section I SgFt I # Stories
(LIVING AREA LEVEL 112173 1.00
(PATIO 1200 1.00
IO�,PEN PORCH 17 1.00
�vARAGE 25 1.00
(OPEN PORCH X163 11.00
Built -Ins
Full Bath(s)
Bedrooms(s)
Bsmt
Finished
10 1399,300
Value: 1,300
Year Units
1940 325 Square
Feet
Year
Built Grade Condition Value
1878 D P 65365
Units
1
3
ZOOM
Year
Built
1966
Built -Ins
Full Bath(s)
Fireplace /Gas Log
Bedrooms(s)
Zoo
Grade Condition Value
C N 201855
Units
2
1
3
Total Building Value: 267,200
htlpl /w .buncombetax.ortyProp"Card.aspx 2t2

s, n

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: 739 /Maple Trace City /County: Buncombe County Sampling Date: 07 /29/2015
Applicant/Owner: Windsor Built Homes, Inc. State: NC Sampling Point: W2
Investigator(s): RN, KY Section, Township, Range:
landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Drainage Local relief: Concave Slope ( %): <1
Subregion: LRR N Lat.: 35.687021 Long.: - 82.524465 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: Ewd - Evard -Cowee complex, 30 to 15 percent slopes, stony NW I Classification:
Are climatic /hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year.Y (If no, explain in remarks)
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "normal
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? circumstances" present? Yes
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y I Is the sampled area within a wetland?
Hydric soil present? Y
Wetland hydrology present? Y If yes, optional wetland site ID: Wetland 2
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
HYDROLOGY
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Water (All
_True Aquatic plants
_Surface
X High Water Table (A2)
_Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI)
X Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
Marks (137)
Roots (C3)
_Water
Deposits (B2)
_Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_Sediment
_ Drift Deposits (83)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
_Algal Mal or Crust (134)
_Soils (C6)
Deposits (B5)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_Iron
Inundation Visible on Aerial
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
Imagery (87)
Water- Stained Leaves (139)
Aquatic Fauna (B13)
Field Observations
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
_Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(BB)
_Drainage Patterns (810)
—Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_ Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
X Crayfish Burrows (Ca)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_Stunted or Stressed Plants lot)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_Shallow Aquitard (D3)
_ Microtopographic Relief (D4)
FAG- Neutral Test (D5)
Surface water present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland
Water table present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 4 hydrology
Saturation present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 1 present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Descrive recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections , if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Sampling Point: W2
50/20 Thresholds
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
20% °/
50
Tree Stratum Plot Size (
30 )
Cover
Species
Staus
Tree Stratum 4 10
1
Acer mbmm
20
Y
FAG
Sapling /Shrub Stratum 6 15
2
Herb Stratum 13 34
3
Woody Vine Stratum 0 0
4
5
Dominance Test Worksheet
6
Number of Dominant
7
Species that are OBL,
8
FACW, or FAC: 5 (A)
9
Total Number of Dominant
10
Species Across all Strata: 5 (B)
20
= Total Cover
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
Sapling / Shuub
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
FACW, or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
plot Size (
Stratum
15 )
%Cover
Species
Staus
1
Lindera benzoin
30
Y
FAC
Prevalence Index Worksheet
2
Total % Cover of:
3
OBL species 0 x 1= 0
4
FACW species 28 x2= 56
5
FAC species 79 x3= 237
6
FACU species 10 x4= 40
7
UPL species 0 X5= 0
8
Column totals 117 (A) 333 (B)
9
Prevalence Index = B/A = 2.85
10
30
= Total Cover
Hydrophylic Vegetation Indicators:
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
Herb Stratum Plot Size (
5 )
%Cover
Species
Staus
X Dominance test is >50%
1
cylindrica
15
Y
FACW
X Prevalence index is 59.0•
2
�gehmena
area spa.
15
V
FAC
Morphogical adaptations • (provide
3
Viola sop.
10
Y
FAC
supporting data in Remarks or on a
4
Betu/a nip�fraa
5
N
FACW
_ separate sheet)
5
Polystichum acrq ictIoides
5
N
FACU
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
6
F�axinus♦a�a�nsylvanrca
3
N
FACW
_(explain)
7
Pas mular/am
3
N
FACU
•IrMicatom of hydnc soil and wetland hydrology must be
8
Adseema Irghyllum
3
N
FACW
present, unless disturbed or problematic
9
Osmunda cmnamomeum
2
N
FACW
10
h]� theumum car�deyRS
2
N
FAC
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
11
F aeissus gwnque%lia
2
N
FACU_
Tree - Woody plants 31n. (7.6 cm) or more in diameter at
12
M a Wlglnlan8
2
N
FAG
bread height (DBH), regardless of height.
13
14
Sapling /shrub - Woody plants lase than 3 in. DBH and
15
greater than 3.28 It (1 m) tall.
67
= Total Cover
Herb - All hedraceaus (non- woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.281t tall.
Woody Vine
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
plat Size (
Stratum
30 )
%Cover
Species
Starts
Woody vbres- All woody vines greater than 3.28 it in
1
height.
2
3
4
Hydrophytic
5
vegetation
0
= Total Cover
present? V
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet) Meandering Survey
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region

SOIL Sampling Point: W2
Profile Description: (Describe to th : depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absenc of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Texture Remarks
(Inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc"
0 -6 10YR3 /1 100 Silt Loam
Type: C4oncentration, D= Deplebn, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains
*Location: PL =Pore Lining, M= Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
(A1)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA
_Histisol
Histic Epipedon (A2)
147,148)
Histic (A3)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
—Black
Sulfide (A4)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
_Hydrogen
Layers (A5)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_Stratified
2 cm Muck (At 0) (LRR N)
_Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Below Dark Suface (Al 1)
Redox Depressions (F8)
_Depleted
Dark Surface (All 2)
_Iran-Manganese Masses (F12)
_Thick
Sandy Mucky Mineral
_(LRR N, MLRA 136)
N, MLRA 147,148)
Umbria Surface IN 3) (MLRA
_(S1)(LRR
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ 136, 122)
_Sandy
Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils
_Sandy
Matrix (S6)
(F19) (MLRA 148)
_Stripped
Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21)
—Dark
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
_(MLRA 127, 147)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1498
_ Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 1498)
—Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
'Indicators of hydrephytic vegetation and weltand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: Rock
Depth (inches): 6
Remarks:
Hydric soil present?
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: 739 /Maple Trace City /County: Buncombe County Sampling Date: 07/29/2015
Applicant/Owner: Windsor Built Homes, Inc. Slate: NC Sampling Point: W6
Investigator(s): RN, KY Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Drainage Local relief: Concave Slope (% ): <1
Subregion: LRR N Lat.: 35.68577 Long.: - 82.524128 Datum: NAD83
Soil Map Unit Name: EwE- Evard -Cowee complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes, stony NWI Classification:
Are climatic /hydrologic conditions of the site typical for this time of the year? Y (If no, explain in remarks)
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "normal
Are vegetation , soil , or hydrology naturally problematic? circumstances" present? Yes
(If needed, explain any answers in remarks)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Y I Is the sampled area within a wetland? Y
Hydric soil present? Y
Wetland hydrology present? Y If yes, optional wetland site ID: Welland 6
Remarks: (Explain alternative procedures here or in a separate report.)
W_11 14X0Ze17
(includes capillary fringe)
Descrive recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections , if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two
Primary Indicators (minimum of one
is required; check all that apply)
_Surface Soil Cracks (86)
_Surface Water (All
_True Aquatic plants
_Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(BB)
X High Water Table (A2)
_Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
_Drainage Patterns (810)
7 Saturation (A3)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living
—Moss Trim Lines (B16)
_Water Marks (131)
—Roots (C3)
_Dry- Season Water Table (C2)
_Sediment Deposits (B2)
_Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
_Crayfish Burrows (C8)
_ Drift Deposits (B3)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled
_Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
_Soils (C6)
_Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
_ Iron Deposits (135)
_Thin Muck Surface (C7)
_ Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Inundation Visible on Aerial
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
X Geomorphic Position (D2)
_Imagery (B7)
_Shallow Aquitard (D3)
—Water-Stained Leaves (139)
_ Microtopographic Relief (134)
Aquatic Fauna (B73)
FAC- Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:
Surface water present? Yes
No X Depth (inches):
Wetland
Water table present? Yes
X No Depth (inches): 3
hydrology
Saturation present? Yes
X No Depth (inches): 1
present? Y
(includes capillary fringe)
Descrive recorded data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections , if available:
Remarks:
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region

VEGETATION - Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
Sapling /Shurb
Stratum
1 Lindera benzoin
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
Plot Size ( 30 ) Absolute Dominant Indicator
Cover Species Staus
Plot Size ( 15 )
Herb Stratum Plot Size (
1 Carex ;ppp.
2 Polystichum acrosticholdes
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
5 )
Woody Vine plot Size ( 30 )
Stratum
1
2
3
4
5
0 = Total Cover
Absolute Dominant Indicator
%Cover Species Staus
10 Y FAC
Sampling Point:
W6
50120 Thresholds
20% 50%
Tree Stratum
0 0
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
2 5
Herb Stratum
12 31
Woody Vine Stratum
0 0
Dominance Test Worksheet
Staus
Number of Dominant
60
Species that are OBL,
FAC
FACW, or FAC:
2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
FACU
Species Across all Strata:
2 (B)
Percent of Dominant
Species that are OBL,
FACW, or FAC: 100.00% (A/B)
Prevalence Index Worksheet
_separate sheet)
Total % Cover of:
OBL species 0 x 1 =
0
FACW species 0 x2=
0
FAC species 70 x3=
210
FACU species 2 x4=
B
UPL species 0 x5=
0
Column totals 72 (A)
218 (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A = 3.03
10
= Total Cover
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
Rapid test for hydrophytic vegetation
%Cover
Species
Staus
X Dominance test is >50%
60
Y
FAC
Index is s3A'
2
N
FACU
_Prevalence
Morphogical adaptations' (provide
supporting data in Remarks or on a
_separate sheet)
Problematic hydrophytic vegetation'
_(explain)
•Iodkators of hyddc soil and ealland hydrology must be
present, unless disturbed or problematic
Definitions of Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants 3 in. (7.e cm) or more in diameter at
bread height (DBH), regardless of height.
Sapling/shrub - Woody plants less than 3In. DBH and
greater than 3.28 it (1 m) tail.
62
= Total Cover
Herb - All herbaceous (non-woody) plants, regardless of
size, and woody plants less than 3.20 it tall.
Absolute
Dominant
Indicator
% Cover
Species
Stalls
Woody vines- All woody vines greater than 3.28 It in
height.
0
Remarks: (Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet)
Hydrophytic
vegetation
= Total Cover present? Y
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region

SOIL
Sampling Point: W6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features Texture Remarks
(Inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type' Loc"
0 -5 5Y4/1 90 10YR4 /6 10 C PL
Type: C4oncentration, D =Deple {ion, RM= Reduced Matrix, CS= Covered or Coated Sand Grains
*Location: PL =Pare Lining, M= Matrix
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils:
Histisol (Al)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA
_2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR K, L, MLRA 1498
_
Histic Epipedon (A2)
147,148)
_Coast Prairie Redox (A16) (LRR K, L, R)
Histic (A3)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 149B)
_Black
Sulfide (A4)
X Depleted Matrix (F3)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
—Hydrogen
Layers (A5)
_ Redox Dark Surface (F6)
_Other (Explain in Remarks)
—Stratified
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
—Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Below Dark Suface (At 1)
_ Redox Depressions (F8)
—Depleted
Dark Surface (Al2)
—Iron-Manganese Masses (F12)
_Thick
Sandy Mucky Mineral
_(LRR N, MLRA 136)
N, MLRA 147,148)
Umbric Surface (F13) (MLRA
_(S1)(LRR
Gleyed Matrix (S4)
_ 136, 122)
—Sandy
Redox (S5)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils
_Sandy
Matrix (S6)
(F19) (MLRA 148)
_Stripped
Surface (S7)
Red Parent Material (F21)
—Dark
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8)
_(MLRA 127, 147)
(MLRA 147, 148)
'Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and welland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type: Rock
Depth (inches): 5
Remarks:
Hydric soil present? Y
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region