20071505 Ver 4_Response to USACE_20160608

I
CiearWater
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
June 7, 2016 wvvw.cwenv.com
Mr. David Brown JUN 0 8
US Army Corps of Engineers ?016
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 0wArER
Asheville, North Carolina 28801 &BUFF PE M� ,ES
RE: Response to Corps Request for Additional Info
Seven Falls Bonded Phases
Henderson County, North Carolina
Action ID SAW -2013-01159; DWR Project # 07-1505 v4
Dear Mr. Brown,
Please reference the letter dated May 11, 2016 (Attachment A) sent by the US Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) in response to the permit application submitted by
ClearWater Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC), on behalf of Henderson County
represented by Mr. Marcus Jones. The permit application requested written authorization
for the unauthorized impacts associated with development of the Seven Falls residential
development. The additional items requested by the Corps are summarized and discussed
below.
Corps Comment #1 - "In order to comply with requirements under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act for this proposed federal permit, a data recovery plan
for archaeological site 31HN220 shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Corps and NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO)."
TRC Environmental Corporation developed a Data Recovery Plan in July of
2015. The plan remains valid and applicable to site 31 HN220. The applicant is
aware that the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and Data Recovery Plan
approved by SHPO and attached to the Corps' May 11, 2016 letter (Attachment
A) would become special conditions of the 404 permit.
Corps Comment #2 — "Provide a remedial action plan for aquatic life passage at existing
impact areas 3, S, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13."
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, NC 28801
828-698-9800 Tel
The proposed remedial action plan for aquatic life passage was outlined in the
applicant's response letter dated March 3, 2016. The plan from that letter has
been included as a stand-alone document in Attachment B of this letter. The
applicant is aware that the remedial action plan for aquatic life passage would
become a special condition of the 404 permit.

f
Mr David Brown
06.0716
Page 2 of 2
Corps Comment #3 — "Provide a stream stabilization/sediment removal plan for streams
in the project area."
The proposed stream stabilization/sediment removal plan was outlined in the
applicant's response letter dated March 3, 2016. The plan from that letter has
been included as a stand-alone document in Attachment C of this letter. The
applicant is aware that the stabilization/sediment removal plan would become a
special condition of the 404 permit.
Corps Comment #4 — "Submit an acceptance letter from NCDEQ-Division of Mitigation
Services for compensatory mitigation of up to 3,584 linear feet of cool water stream
credits in the French Broad River, basin 06010105."
By letter dated May 17, 2016, DMS has indicated they are willing to accept
payment for stream impacts that may require compensatory mitigation up to 1,792
linear feet associated with development at Seven Falls. The acceptance letter is
enclosed for review (Attachment D).
The applicant believes the information submitted in this package addresses all issues set
forth by the Corps in their letter dated May 11, 2016. Should you have any questions or
comments concerning this project please do not hesitate to contact me at 828-698-9800.
Sincerely,
Rebekah N. Reid
Senior Project Manager
Cc: Aivision of Water Resources - Jennifer-Burdette
NC Wildlife Resources Commission — Andrea Leslie
R. 2t ?4e.W.S.
Principal

Attachment A
Corps Request for Additional Information
(dated May 11, 2016)
PI�MCDUN 08 2016 D

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
;�► �� 1 151 PATTON AVENUE
ROOM 208 -
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
May 11, 2016
Action ID: SAW -2013-01159
C1earWater Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Attn.: Clement Riddle
32 Clayton Road
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Request for Additional Information — Seven Falls Bonded Phases Permit Application
Dear Mr. Riddle:
Reference is made to your letters, with attachments, dated March 3, 2016 in response to
Corps and NC Wildlife Resource Commission (WRC) comments pertaining to the Department of
the Army (DA) pen -nit application, submitted on behalf of Henderson County, associated with
the completion of subdivision road infrastructure and permitting of existing, unauthorized stream
impacts in the 302 -acre bonded phases of the residential development known as Seven Falls in
the Etowah community of Henderson County, North Carolina. The Corps has reviewed the
above noted documents and is requesting the following additional information.
1. In order to comply with requirements under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act for this proposed federal permit, a data recovery plan for
archaeological site 31 HN220 shall b-� submitted for review and approval by the
Corps and NC Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO). The approved plan and the attached memorandum of
agreement (MOA), provided by SHPO, will become special conditions of
impending DA authorization.
2. Provide a remedial action plan for aquatic life passage at existing impact areas 3,
5, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13. This plan shall be submitted to the Corps and NCRWC
for review and approval. The approved plan will become a special condition of
impending DA authorization.
Provide a stream stabilization/sediment removal plan for streams in the project
area. This plan shall be submitted to the Corps, WRC, and NC Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) - Division of Water Resources for review and
approval. The approved plan will become a special condition of impending DA
authorization.
4. Submit an acceptance letter from NCDEQ-Division of Mitigation Services for
compensatory mitigation of up to 3.584 linear feet of cool water stream credits in
the French Broad River basin 06010105.

Please provide the information requested by July 29, 2016. If you have any questions please
contact me at 828-384-1890. extension 232.
Sincerely,
David Brown. PG
Regulatory Specialist/Geologist
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
Copy:
Henderson County
Attn.: Marcus,Jones, Director of Engineering
'1 Historic Courthouse Square
Hendersonville, NC 28792
USFWS
Attn' Bryan Tompkins
160 ZiIIicoa,S'treet
Asheville, NC 28801
NCDEQ-DWR
Att.: Zan Price
2090"U.S.'Highway 70
SNvannanoa; NC 28778
NCWRC
Attn.:.Andrea Leslie
2083QGr_eat,Smoky Mountain Parkway
Waynesville, NC 28786
NC'DNCR-SHPO
r Ann.: Renee Gledhill -Earley
4617 Mail Service Center
;Raleigh, -NC 2769911617

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,
AND
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER,
SUBMITTED TO
THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
FOR
SEVEN FALLS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, HENDERSON COUNTY.
NORTH CAROLINA
WHEREAS, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is considering issuance of a permit to
Henderson County for completion of subdivision roads and infrastructure at Seven Falls
residential development (the Undertaking); and
WHEREAS, the USACE has detenmined that the Undertaking could adversely affect
archaeological site 31 HN220 (Field Site I), a property determined eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places (National Register); and
WHEREAS, the USACE has consulted with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR 800, regulations implementing Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 306108); and
WHEREAS, Henderson County (County) and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI)
have been invited to participate in the consultation and concur in this Memorandum of
Agreement (Agreement),
NOW, THEREFORE, the USACE, and the North Carolina SHPO agree that the Undertaking
shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account
the effect of the Undertaking on historic properties.
STIPULATIONS
The USACE will include the following conditions in any permit issued for the Undertaking
I. Treatment of Significant Archaeological Resources
In the event that archaeological remains at site 31 HN220 (Field Site 1), cannot be
avoided and protected in perpetuity from ground disturbing activities, the County shall,
prior to any construction activities at the site, engage the services of an experienced
archaeologist to implement the Data Recovery Plan, approved by the SHPO and EBCI
and attached as Appendix A to this Agreement.
Upon completion of the Data Recovery efforts, a Management Summary detailing the
completion and results of the field investigations will be submitted to the SHPO and
EBCI within ten days of the completion of the fieldwork. The analysis and report

preparation will be completed within six months after completion of the field work. Final
reports of the investigation at 31 HN220 will be provided to the SHPO and EBCI.
Il. Preservation Covenants
In the event that the archaeological site on the Seven Falls property is to be preserved in
place, the County shall enter into a Preservation Agreement providing for its protection.
Such Preservation Agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the SHPO and EBCI
prior to its recording by the County.
III. Dispute Resolution
Should the North Carolina SHPO or any other party to this Agreement object within (30)
days to any plans or documentation provided for review pursuant to this Agreement, the
USACE shall consult with the parties to resolve the objection. If the USACE or the North
Carolina SHPO determines that the objection cannot be resolved, the USACE will
forward all documentation relevant to the dispute to the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (Council). Within thirty (30) days after receipt of all pertinent
documentation, the Council will either:
A. Provide the USACE with recommendations which the USACE will take into account
in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute, or
B. Notify the USACE that it will comment pursuant to 36 CFR Section 800.7(c) and
proceed to comment. Any Council comment provided in response to such a request
will be taken into account by the USACE, in accordance with 36 CFR Section 800.7
(c) (4) with reference to the subject of the dispute.
1V. Amendment
Any party to this Agreement may request that it be amended or modified, whereupon the
USACE, SHPO, the County, EBCI, and when applicable, the ACNP, shall consult in
accordance with 36CFR800.6(c)(7) to consider such revision(s).
Any resulting amendments or addenda shall be developed and executed among USACE,
SHPO, the County, EBCI, and when applicable, the ACHP, in the same manner as the
original Agreement.
V. Termination
Pursuant to 36CFR800.6(c)(8), USACE, SHPO, and the County may terminate this
Agreement by providing 30 days notice to the other parties, provided that the parties shall
consult during the period prior to termination to seek agreement on amendments or other
actions that would avoid termination.

r; : Execution of this Agreementbythe_USACE and the North Carolina SHPO;, its subsequent- . • ' -, ,r;
acceptance by the Council and, implementation of its terms, evidence that US'ACE,
hasafforded " r i
the Council-an opportunity to comment on the Undertaking, and1'thatthe USACE,
has-taken,.
account the effects of the Undertaking on'historic properties.
-
AGREED:--,
` - •"� `'�--�`� Date:
BY:
States' '''C of Engineers, Wi1rhin on DistrictrY ors
r
•lYf I• �. yin
_, t _ .,
BY!"-"f,• Date:
, .r
North Carolina'•State Historic Preservation Officer
,
`
T " , ,
�`' �
. • •` ` .
1. �
CONCU
`rye, 1
, .i_ I_1.
i
•—,•
%F'f�.
i/. ' '
V `,.
� i
By: - Date:
-
' County of Henderson
'
�. - ."-
'
,•
. _! • - • .,' - " - Date:
B
.r L- ,
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
.
;v - „ _ ,•
_ By: Date:
- - Advisory,Counci] on Historic Preservation

r . `
APPENDIX A
�
DATA
" ,
RECOVERY PLAN FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE 31HN220` "
AT THE SEVEN FALLS GOLF AND RIVER.CLUB,
HENDERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
='
COE ACTION 1D#: SAW -2013-01159
ER 07-0660
•
}_
� [•tit �' n
'G
;�,�
-
Submitted to
;
WILLIAM G. LAPSLEY & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
= ..
214 N. Bing Street
Hendersonville, North Carolina 28792
By
TRC ENVIRONMENTAL. CORPORATION
50101, Governors Drive, Suite 250
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27517
July 10, 2015

Ties Data Recovery- Plan specifies proposed measures to mitigate adverse effects to NRNP -eligible
archaeological site 31HN220, which will be impacted by planned construction within the Bonded
Phases of the Seven Falls Golf and River Club in Henderson County, North Carolina. This historic
period site is situated adjacent to an access road on a proposed residential lot within the
development.
This plan is an updated version of the Data Recovery Plan for Archaeological Sites 31HN220 and
31H7V222 at the Seven Falls Golf and River Club, Henderson County, North Carolina, which was
provided as Appendix l of the Memorandum of Agreement for the Seven Falls Golf and River Club
(COE Action I.D. #2007-3367), which was executed in 2008. This plan has been updated to remove
references to site 31HN222 (as it will not be impacted by the presently planned construction) and to
update personnel information, but is otherwise essentially unchanged from the 2008 plan.
SITE DESCRIPTION
31HN220 is a historic period site situated on an upland ridge saddle on the west side of an access
road that extends south to Folly Road and approximately 2.75 km south of the French Broad River
(Cox et al. 2008:41-44). The core area of the site measures approximately 35 m east -west x 15 m
north -south. Neither the road nor the structure appears to be depicted on historic maps dating to
1907-1938, and no documentary information on prior ownership or occupancy is presently
available.
This site contains two fieldstone piles that likely represent chimney falls, along with a low-density
artifact scatter. During the 2007-2008, survey a small assemblage of artifacts was collected from the
surface of the adjacent access road, the ground surface surrounding the rock piles, and one of five
shovel tests. The soils encountered in the shovel tests were deflated and consisted of a yellowish
brown silt loam A horizon that was approximately 15 cm thick and overlay a yellowish red clay loam
B horizon.
The artifact assemblage includes a porcelain doll's head fragment; a machine cut nail (ca. 1805-
1900); a Mason's 1858 patent canning jar fragment (ca. 1858-1920); a colorless liquor bottle
fragment; undecorated blue -tinted ironstone sherds (ca. 1840-1885); and a few undecorated and
decorated whiteware sherds, including a mold decorated pitcher fragment, a polychrome hand
painted sherd in Bright Palette colors with an unidentified green floral pattern (ca. 1830s -1860s),
and a red cut sponge stamped sherd (ca. 1845-1930) (Majewsld and O'Brien 1987; Miller 2000).
Based on the artifact assemblage, 31 HN220 appears to date to the mid- to late 19'h century. Given
the meager artifact assemblage, however, it is possible that the occupation began earlier in the 19'h
century and/or continued into the early 2& century.
DATA RECOVERY EXCAVATIONS
This Data Recovery Plan begins with a review of research questions that can potentially be
addressed using data from 31 HN220. Subsequent sections detail the proposed research procedures,
including those for background research, fieldwork, laboratory analyses, reporting, and curation, as
well as procedures to be used in the event of the discovery of potential human graves or remains.
II. Research Questions
Site 31HN220 include the remains of at least one structure dating to the 19'h and possibly the early
20'h centuries. It appears to represent'a small-scale rural farmstead, considered one of the -essential
elements of the Carolina or Upland South landscape (Beaman et al. 1998; Jordan-Bychkov 2003;
Olson 1998). Although such farmsteads were once ubiquitous, very few sites of this type and time
period have been investigated in North Carolina, particularly in the western region of the state
(Beaman et al. 1998; Greene n.d; Linda HalL personal communication 2008; John Mintz, personal
communication 2008).
77be investigation of site 31 HN220 offers the opportunity to explore many aspects of rural domestic
life in western North Carolina during tivs period. The research questions focus on capturing social
Page 6

and economic data from the resources, and are intended to utilize data from archaeological,
documentary, and possibly oral history sources.
1. \YUhat is the spatial layout and organization of the site? What domestic structures and
outbuildings were present, and how was the farmstead landscape organized in relation to the
nearby creeks, roads, and landscape features?
2. What is the timing and duration of occupation? Do the principal architectural features
represent contemporaneous or successive buildings? Is it possible to identify the former
owners or inhabitants using documentary or oral historical information?
3. \XThat material culture inventory is represented, and what information can these materials
provide concerning the economic status of its inhabitants and their integration into broader
commercial and social networks?
4. Are subsistence practices visible within the archaeological records of the site? What is the
historical or archaeological evidence for food storage by the residents? What data can the site
provide regarding the living conditions, diet, and farming practices of these rural occupants?
5. What information can the site provide about broader patterns of settlement growth and
abandonment, material culture use, subsistence, and economic patterns in Henderson
County and in the North Carolina mountains? How do the architectural patterns, spatial
organization, and artifact assemblages and material cultural remains from the site compare
.with similar sites that have been investigated (to varying degrees) elsewhere in the
Appalachians (e.g., Groover 1998; Horning 1995, 2000a, 2000b; Shumate and Evans -
Shumate 1996; Tanner 2004; Webb and Jones 2006), Piedmont (Beaman et al. 1998; Joseph
and Reed 1997; Stine 1989), and Sandhills (Steen 2005, 2006, 2008)?
II1. Research Methods
Background Research. The work will begin with additional background research to supplement
the more general research conducted as part of the previous survey (Cox et al. 2008). This research
will take several forms. On a general level, the researchers will continue to accumulate comparative
data on the historic archaeology of western North Carolina and the surrounding region. This will be
accomplished both through continuing literature review and through consultations with other
researchers in the region.
More specific documentary and oral lvstory research will also be conducted, including continued
examination of primary and secondary references concerning Henderson County history, the
analysis of historic maps, deeds, and vital statistics and census records, and possibly informant
interviews. In particular, TRC will attempt to trace the chain of title for the property and to match
information from that research with available census data. In addition, we will consult with former
landowners and local historians and genealogists in an attempt to identify individuals with
knowledge of the farnistead and surrounding region.
Field Methods. Many of the research questions are most effectively answered using data from
discrete features and on spatial patterning of features, and for this reason the excavations will
include both hand excavation and mechanized stripping and feature excavation.
Sile Cleaning and Preparalronn. Investigations will begin with site preparation. All downed vegetation and
underbrush will be removed, and a survey grid Evill be established. All excavations will be conducted
in the metric system and reported in both metric and English equivalents. In association with the
site preparation, digital photographs will be taken to document die pre -excavation conditions.
Clare In ferral Scowl Terliug. Excavations will begin with systematic 5-m interval shovel testing across
the site area. l'he shovel testing will continue along each grid line until two consecutive negative
Page 7

shovel tests have been excavated and the landform has been completely covered. Each shovel test
will be 30 cm in diameter, and all artifacts will be screened through '/,-inch hardware cloth. Shovel
tests will be excavated to the base of the A/E soil horizon, averaging between 10 and 25 cm in
depth. In conjunction with the shovel testing, staff will conduct additional pedestrian survey of
adjacent landforms (including steams and ravines) to check for evidence of outlying features such as
spring boxes or refuse deposits.
IV. Aletal Detector Surrey. Limited metal detector survey will be conducted to supplement the
shovel testing results. Initially, the metal detector will be used to survey two -m wide
transects in a cruciform pattern across the site and the adjacent landform. All hits will be
flagged and mapped using die total station, and a sample of up to 100 metal detector huts
will be excavated to aid in understanding the distribution of metal artifacts across the site
and their relationship to structure and feature locations and apparent activity areas.
Chinmg, Fall Excavation. At least one chimney fall will be investigated to expose and record the
original fire box and hearth and gather information on structure orientation. Artifacts recovered as
part of this work will be piece -plotted as appropriate, and test units will be excavated in the hearth
area.
V. Hand Excamted Units. Up to 12 1 x 1 m square hand -excavated units will be placed to
investigate architectural features, gather artifact samples, and investigate apparent artifact
concentrations or features encountered in the shovel testing or metal detector survey.
The units will include at least two excavation units placed in an apparent hearth area, and
at least three units organized into a 1 x 3 m trench designed to intersect a wall line.
All units will be excavated in 10 cm levels within natural strata. All soil from the hand -excavated
units will be screened through'/, -inch or smaller mesh. A level form -will be completed for every
level excavated and a unit summary form will be completed for each unit This form will include a
description of the strata and recovered artifacts, elevations (both below surface and in reference to
the site datum), a plan map showing any features or soil anomalies, and a hist of all artifact bags,
flotation samples, and other samples removed from the unit. All soils will be described using the
Munsell color system and the USDA soil texture designations. The top of each level within each
stratum will be scraped and examined for the presence of features. If no features are present,
excavation of the next level will proceed. Representative unit profiles will be drawn and
photographed, and plan drawings will be made as necessary.
Mechanised Stripping. Following the hand excavation, mechanized stripping will be used to remove the
remaining topsoil from the structure and yard area to search for subsurface features, including any
hearth -front cellars that may be present. The stripping will be conducted using a backhoe with a
toothless bucket. All stopping will be monitored by one or more archaeologists, who will shovel
shave the area as necessary and systematically flag all potential features as they are exposed.
Feahar Recordation and Excavation. All possible cultural features (pits, postholes, etc.) will be flagged
when first exposed and given a unique number for subsequent tracking purposes. Features will then
be mapped using a total station, drawn and photographed, and excavated.
Standardized techniques .will be used to record and excavate features, although these may vary
depending on feature size and apparent type. Initially, each feature will be carefully defined by
troweling or shovel shaving and mapped in plan view. Photographs will be taken of the feature in
plan. Each feature will be cross-sectioned along its long axis. The initial half will be excavated by
natural strata (fill zones) if these can easily be recognized, or removed in a single unit if not. The
feature will then be mapped and photographed in profile, and the remainder of the fill will be
excavated by natural strata or fill zones. If at any time a feature is determined to be noncultural in
origin (e.g., rodent burrow, tree root), excavation will be terminated.
All information generated from feature excavation will be recorded on a feature form. Standard soil
descriptions will be completed for each fill zone, and data will be recorded concerning form,
Page 8

evidence of burning, etc. Flotation samples (121 in volume) may be taken from each feature
depending on its type and significance. The remaining feature fill will be screened through either
one-quarter inch mesh or window screen, depending on its provenience.
In the event that large or especially complex features, or large numbers of features, are identified, the
Contractor will consult with the client and SHPO to determine appropriate sampling and excavation
strategies.
VI. Hmnann Rennains. Although no gravesites are known to be located within the areas to be
excavated, it is possible that graves will be identified during the excavations. In the event
that apparent marked or unmarked graves are identified, information regarding their
number and location will be provided to the landowner, so that they can be preserved or
relocated in accordance with North Carolina General Statutes. In the event that human
remains are observed, work in the immediate area will stop immediately, and
notifications will proceed in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 70-3, The
Unnvarked Hnnnann Burial and Skeletal Remains Protection Act.
VII. Laboratory Methods. The following laboratory methods will be employed.
Artifact Processing. All project materials will be returned to TRC's Asheville or Chapel Hill laboratory
for processing. Initially, all artifact and sample bags will be checked against provenience data from
field records. The artifacts then will be washed, dried, and rebagged in 4 mil plastic zippered bags.
Artifact Analyses. Historic period artifacts will be classified according to material type and function.
Every effort will be made to describe artifacts as precisely as possible, including the identification of
specific artifact varieties (e.g., liquor bottle, lamp chimney, teacup, and chamber pot), manufacturers
(e.g., Globe Pottery Company), or brands (e.g., Mason's Improved). Ceramic artifacts will be
classified according to recognized types (e.g., pearhvare, ironstone) and by decorative technique (e.g.,
hand-painted, transfer print, decal) and vessel form. Similarly, bottles will be described by type,
color, sire, manufacturing technique, and closure type. The analysis will include a minimum vessel
count for ceramics and glass. When possible, historic artifacts also will be analyzed to determine
their date of manufacture. This will involve analysis of individual diagnostic artifacts (e.g., bottles,
buttons or coins), as well as the possible application'of the mean ceramic dating technique.
Published and on-line artifact sources that will be used include Fike (1987), Jones and Sullivan
(1989), Lindsey (2010), Miller (2000), Nelson (1968), Noel Hume (1969), Samford and Miller (2012),
South (1977), Toulouse (1971), and others. As the final step, sherds will be mended to form
complete or partial vessels. The number and proveniences of these mends will be recorded, allowing
for quantified cross-mend analysis. This technique provides a means of better understanding the
relationship between archaeological areas, units and levels, and their stratigraphic context within a
historic site, as well as providing insights into refuse disposal processes and site formation processes.
All artifacts will be grouped according to the artifact pattern model originally devised by South
(1977) and revised by Garrow (1982). Originally developed by South for the identification of artifact
patterning among British Colonial sites, the model will be used here only as a method of artifact
classification. This allows for the org2ni2ation of artifacts on both the provenience and component
levels, and also facilitates any future cross-comparisons with other assemblages formatted in this
manner.
Any prehistoric artifacts that are recovered will be analyzed according to standard regional
typologies.
Otljer Specialized Annal les. Flotation samples will be processed using a Flote-Tech system from
Dausman Technical Services, or its equivalent This electric-powered flotation tank separates heavy
and light fractions, and a removable dam can be slipped into place to gather very light materials
from the heavy fraction, such as bone and dense charcoal. The resulting light and heavy fractions
will be dried for further processing.
Page 9

Archneobotanical analyses of handpicked and flotation samples will follow a modification of the
procedure outlined by Yarnell (1974:113-114). First, all samples will be sieved through 4 mm, 2 mtn,
1 nun, and 0.5 mm screens. Contaminants will be removed before weighing charcoal with an
electronic balance accurate to 0.0001 g. In large samples, contamination weight will be estimated by
using a raffle sampler to produce a subsample for quantitative analysis. Charcoal larger than 2 min
will be sorted and quantified by counting fragments; charcoal 0.5-2 mm will be scanned for
presence/absence of rare categories; and seeds removed and identified.
The faunal analyses will concentrate on identifying the economic use(s) of the specimens by the
site's inhabitants. Faunal remains will be analyzed according to species, portion, size, age at time of
death, burning, other intentional cultural modification, and any postdepositional alteration and/or
modification. Nondiagnostic fragments will be sorted as either thermally altered or nonthermally
altered. The Number of Individual Specimens (NIS) and the Minimum Number of Individuals
(A4NI) will be ascertained for each taxon.
Curation. All artifacts, field notes, photographs, and other project materials recovered from the
project will be temporally curated by the Contractor. Permanent curation arrangements will be
determined in consultation with the client and SHPO.
Reporting. A Management Summary documenting the successful completion of the fieldwork
phase of the project will be submitted to the client, the SHPO, the COE, TVA, and the EBCI within
ten days of the completion of the fieldwork phase of the investigations. This summary will
document that the work has been completed in accordance with the data recovery plan, and should
provide sufficient information for construction clearance to be granted.
The draft technical report will be submitted to the client, the OSA, the COE, TVA, and the EBCI
within six months afar completion of the fieldwork. This report will meet all North Carolina state
guidelines. The final report will address the comments received from all reviewers, will be submitted
within 30 days of receipt of all draft report review comments. Final report copies will be supplied to
the client, the OSA, the COE, TVA, and the EBCI, and will be made available to appropriate
research facilities.
PERSONNEL
The investigations at 31HN220 will be carried out by personnel from TRC's Chapel Hill and
Asheville offices. Mr. Paul Webb, Program Manager for those offices, will serve as Project Manager.
The Principal Investigator and Project Director for the project will be Mr. Michael Nelson of TRC's
Asheville office.
REFERENCES CITED
Beaman, Thomas E., Jr., John J. Mintz, and Kenneth W. Robinson
1998 "All the Rustle and Bustle is Gone:" A Landscape History of the Beam Family Property, Cleveland
County, North Carolina North CamGnaArahaeolog 47:66-82.
Benyshek, Tasha
2007 Letter report on the Seven Falls Golf and River Club Cultural Resources Background Study and
Archaeological Reconnaissance, Henderson County, North Carolina. Submitted to William G. Lapsley and
Associates, P.A., Hendersonville, North Carolina.
Cox, Belinda, Paul Webb, Bruce idol, and Heather Olson
2008 Archaeolgoical Survey of the Proposed Seven Falls Golf & River Club, Henderson County, North
Carolina. Submitted to William G. Lapsley and Associates, P.A , Asheville
Fike, Richard
Page 10

1987 The Bottle Book: A Comprehensive Guide to Historic, Embossed Medicine Bottles. Gibbs Smith,
Layton, Utah.
Garrow, Patrick 14.
1982 Archaeological Investigations of the Washington, D.C. Civic Center Site. Soil Systems, Inc., Marietta,
Georgia. Submitted to the Department of Housing and Community Development, Government of the District
of Columbia, Washington, D.C.
Greene, Lance
n.d `:A Rather Desolate Appearance": Subsistence Farming in the Southern Appalacluans, 1838-1938.
Unpublished manuscript.
Groover, Mark D.
1998 The Gibbs Farmstead: An Archaeological Study of Rural Economy and Material Life in Southern
Appalachia, 1790-1920. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee,
Knoxville. University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Horning, Audrey
1995 Myth Versus Reality: Agricultural Adaptation and Innovation in the Nicholson Hollow District,
Shenandoah National Park. In Upland Archaeology in the East, compiled by Michael B. Barber, Eugene B.
Barfield, Harry A. Jaeger, and William Hranick-y, pp. 107-115. USDA Forest Service Special Publication
No. 38, pt. 5. Archaeology Society of Virginia, Richmond.
2000a Archaeological Considerations of "Appalachian" Identify: Community -Based Archaeology in the Blue
Ridge Mountains. In The Archaeology of Communities: A New World Perspective, edited by Marcello
Canuto and Jason Yaeger, pp. 210-230. Routeledge, London.
2000b Beyond the Valley: Interaction, Image, and Identity in the Virginia Blue Ridge. In After the
Backcountry: Nineteenth -Century Life in the Valley of Virginia, edited by Warren Hofstra and Kenneth
Koons, pp. 145-168. University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
Jones, Olive, and Catherine Sullivan
1989 The Parks Canada Glass Glossary for the Description of Containers, Tableware, Flat Glass and
Closures. Parks Canada, Ottawa.
Jordan-Bychkov, Terry G.
2003 The Upland South: the Making of an American Falk Region mid Landscape. Center for American
Places, Sante Fe.
Joseph, Joe, and Mary Beth Reed
1997 "We Were Just Dirt Farmers": The Archaeology of Piedmont Farmstead Landscapes. In Carolina'
Historical Landtrapu: Arrhaeolagical Per*ertives, edited by Linda F. Stine, Martha Zierden, Lesley M. Drucker, and
Christopher Judge, pp. 85-96. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Page 11

Lindsey, Bill
2010 Historic Glass Bottle Identification & Information li`ebsite. ONLINE. Society for Historical
Archaeology and Bureau of Land Management.litty://www.sha.ore/bottle/index.htm.
Majewski, Teresita, and Michael J. O'Brien
1987 The Use and Misuse of Ninetecnth-Century English and American Ceramics in Archaeological
Analysis. In Advances in Archaeological Method and Theon, Vol. 11, edited by M.B. Schiffer, pp. 97-209.
Academic Press, Orlando.
Miller, George L.
2000 Telling Time for Archaeologists. Northeast Historical Archaeology 29:1-22.
Nelson, Lee H.
1968 Nail chronology as an aid to dating old buildings. American Association for State and Local History
Technical Leaflet 48, History News 24(11):1-11.
Noel Hume, Ivor
1969 A Guide to Artifacts of Colonial America. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Olson, Ted
1998 Blue Ridge Folk -life. University Press of Mississippi, Jackson.
Samford, Patna and George L. Miller
2012 Post -Colonial Ceramics: Printed Wares. Diagnostic Artifacts in Maryland. ONLINE. Maryland
Archaeological Conservation Lab. hap1/www.iefn� tit org/diagnostic/Post-Colonial°Jo2OCcramics/inder-
PostColonialCeramics.h tat.
Shumate, M. Scott, and Patti Evans -Shumate
1996 Phase 11 Testing at Thirteen Prehistoric and Historic Sites on the Dmmis Cemetery Tract, Nantahala
National Forest, Swain County, North Carolina. ASU Laboratories of Archaeological Science Technical
Report No. 5. Report on file, National Forests in North Carolina, Asheville.
South, Stanley
1977 Method and Theory in Historical Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
Steen, Carl
2005 Phase 11 Archaeological Testing and Evaluation of Thirteen Sites, Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Volunie 2: Four Historic Sites. Palmetto Research Institute, Irmo, South Carolina. Submitted to Southeast
Archaeological Center, National Park Service, Tallahassee, Florida. -
2006 Testing at Five Historic Sites along Cabin Branch on Fort Bragg, 2004. Diachronic Research
Foundation, Columbia, South Carolina for TRC Garrow Associates, Inc., Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Submitted to U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Champaign, Illinois.
2008 The Long Slreet/Argyle Community: NRNP Eligibility Evaluation at Four Archaeological sites on Fort
Bragg, Hoke, County, North Carolina. Diachronic Research Foundation, Columbia, South Carolina for TRC
Garrow Associates, Inc., Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Submitted to U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center, Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, Champaign, Illinois.
Stine, Linda France
1989 Raised Up in Hard Times: Factors Affecting Material Culture on Upland Piedmont Farmsteads, Circa
1900-1940. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill.
Tanner, Wendy S.R.
2004 Preliminary Report of Investigation and Archaeological Survey of Four Rural Domestic Sites in the
Great Smolt' Mountains National Park. Submitted to the Southeast Archaeological Center, National Park
Service, Tallahassee, Florida.
Toulouse, Julian Harrison
1971 Bottle Makers and Their Marks. Thomas Nelson Inc., New York.
Webb, Paul, and Damon Jones
2006 Cultural Resources Investigations for the North Shore Road Project, Swain County, North Carolina.
Submitted to ARCADIS G&M of North Carolina, Inc., Raleigh.
Yarnell, Richard A.
1974 Plant Food and Cultivation of the Salt Cavers. In Archaeology of the hlarnrnoth Cmme Area, edited by
Patty Jo Watson, pp. 113-122. Academic Press, New York.
Page 12

Attachment B
Remedial Action Plan for
Aquatic Life Passage
.'
-
a
j,

Remedial Action Plan for Aquatic Life Passage
It is the understanding of the applicant that the issued permit would require provisions for
aquatic life passage at the road crossings previously installed at Seven Falls. The project
engineers have reviewed the crossing locations identified by the US Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) and have developed remedial actions to be included as Special
Conditions of the issued permit. The identified crossings are noted on the attached map
(Figure 1). Remedial actions include installation of a "splash rock" and an "engineered
solution". Installation of a splash rock would include placement of a large flat boulder
(minimum 2 -foot by 2 -foot) below the culvert and angled down to meet the existing
stream bottom. The boulder would be installed so that the culvert would be overlapping
the boulder by at least 4 inches (Figure 2). The engineered solution would include
excavating a small portion of the road embankment, cutting off a portion of the existing
culvert, and installing two junction manholes. Between the junction manholes would be
an angled culvert that decreases the elevation of the culvert so that the culvert outlet
would be at the existing stream bed elevation (Figure 3). A site-specific design for each
engineered solution would be prepared and submitted after issuance of the permit.
Remedial action would require additional stream impacts at each crossing location.
Listed below are the culverts identified in the comment, the proposed remedial action,
and the additional stream impact required.
• Culvert #3 — Splash rock, 5 additional linear feet of stream impact required.
• Culvert #5 — Splash rock, 5 additional linear feet of stream impact required.
• Culvert #9 — Culvert #9 would need to be increased to 115 linear feet (per permit
application); the culvert diameter also needs to be increased. The existing culvert
would be removed and replaced with a culvert of the required length and
diameter. The new culvert would be installed to allow for aquatic life passage.
• Culvert #10 — Engineered solution, 30 additional linear feet of stream impact
required.
• Culvert #11 — Engineered solution, 30 additional linear feet of stream impact
required.
• Culvert #12 — Engineered solution, 30 additional linear feet of stream impact
required. An additional 75 linear feet of stream restoration would occur below
Culvert #12. Natural channel design including activities such as the installation
of step -pools, bank sloping, and supplemental plantings would be included in the
plan. A conceptual plan is included for review (Figure 4); a final design would be
provided for review and approval after issuance of the permit.
• Culvert #13 —Splash rock, 5 additional linear feet of stream impact required.
Each culvert location identified above would be visually monitored for one year. Results
of the monitoring would be submitted to the Corps and NC Division of Water Resources
(DWR) for review.

Seven Falls Bonded Phases (+/- 302 AC)
Inspect 115
90 LF
Impact 114
67 LF - measured
Qncmase to 97 LF)
Existing Bridg
to be Reply
Existing Bridge
to be Replaced
I
I
I
i
Impact 010 -147 LF 1
cad Engineered Solution - 30LF
I
I
1
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
Henderson County,
North Carolina
Impact 112 -186 LF
Engineered Sok don - 30LF
Stream Restoration - 75LF
Impact 111 -101 LF
Engineered SokAon - 301F
Impe.1113 - 375 LF
Splash Rock - 5LF
"Crosing # 14 has an existing 67 -foot
culvert that would be increase to 97 feet,
for a total new impact of 30 feet.
Stream Impacts
Impact #
Measured
For Permit
1
0
104
2
93
93
3
113
113
4
43
43
5
62
62
6
245
245
7
106
106
9
57
115
10
147
147
11
101
101
12
168
168
13
375
375
14**
67
30
15
1 90
190
Totals
1 1667
1792
"Crosing # 14 has an existing 67 -foot
culvert that would be increase to 97 feet,
for a total new impact of 30 feet.
Mitigation
Stream (DMS) at 2:1 3,584 linear feet
Wetlands 0 acres
Open Water n/a
Inspect 13 - 113 LF
Splash Rock - 51-F
93 LF 02
93 LF J Insp.ct 14
— 43 LF
Sedirnent Removal 1 and
Stream ReaIgnrsserd
Impact 11 70 LF
0 LF -measured
(ncr to 104 LF) ,�- +irrp-A 15 - 62LF
_.— �T--- I Splash Rock - SLF
Impact R7 1
Seven Falls Project Data
-_.�
�„i 108 L�
Total Project Area
+/_ 302 acres
(in bonded phases)
State Roads
Jurisdictional Waters of the US in
Bonded Phases
Streams
18,335 LF
Wetlands
0.79 acres
Open Water
0.31 acres
Jurisdictional Impacts in Bonded
Phases
Streams
1,792 LF for stream crossings
90 LF for engineered solution
15 LF for splash rock
15 LF for stream restoration
50 LF for headcut repair
Total
2,022 LF
Wetlands
0.1 acres
Open Water
0 acres
Sediment Removal
1,430 LF
Avoidance/Minimization in Bonded Phases
Stream
16,313 LF (89 %)
Wetlands
0.78 acres (99%)
Open Water
0.31 acres (100%)
Mitigation
Stream (DMS) at 2:1 3,584 linear feet
Wetlands 0 acres
Open Water n/a
Inspect 13 - 113 LF
Splash Rock - 51-F
93 LF 02
93 LF J Insp.ct 14
— 43 LF
Sedirnent Removal 1 and
Stream ReaIgnrsserd
Impact 11 70 LF
0 LF -measured
(ncr to 104 LF) ,�- +irrp-A 15 - 62LF
_.— �T--- I Splash Rock - SLF
Sedknent Rensoval 3
30 LF
\\I
i
Sedlnlent Removal 4
1,300 LF
\
\
FlaedaR >»
Loll 139
\ 1 Has" RepelrlFrench Drain - 50LF
Cutiurel Resource Are.
CLear"Wa
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Impact 116
245 LF
Legend
Impact R7 1
Stream
-_.�
�„i 108 L�
Inspect 09
Entrance Road
57 LF - rrssasumd
State Roads
Wetland
Qnaeeee ro 11 s LF)
Open Water
Bonded Parcels
-J _
Sediment Removal
Impact 18
0.01 AC
Sedkrlsnt RemwN 2 1
>o LF
Sedknent Rensoval 3
30 LF
\\I
i
Sedlnlent Removal 4
1,300 LF
\
\
FlaedaR >»
Loll 139
\ 1 Has" RepelrlFrench Drain - 50LF
Cutiurel Resource Are.
CLear"Wa
32 Clayton Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
Impact 116
245 LF
Legend
Stream
- - - - USGS Streams
- -- Culvert
Entrance Road
- -- Linear Wetland
State Roads
Wetland
Roads Not to Complete
Open Water
Bonded Parcels
Cultural Resources Bonded Phases Boundary
Sediment Removal
Seven Falls - Bonded Phases Plan
and Impact Map - UPDATED
Figure 1

EX. RO
CULVEF
rmurUZ)LU art-rr�n RUUM
BOULDER TO BE
INSTALLED BELOW PIPE
(MIN BOULDER SIZE 2'X2')
WGLA Engineering, PLLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS
NC License No: P-1342
214 N. King Street
+ Hendersonville, NC 28792
[phone]
' wgla com
Cc
SEVEN FALLS
BOND PROJECT
HENDERSON COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
NCARO,
J� gf E SSl 7-.
mi I"
►
S A _
Nor,Eror _
�
on
AM
Figure 2
SPLASH ROCK
PERCHED
REPAIR
Job #: 15144
Date: 12/15
Scale: N.T.S.

EXISTING ROADWAY
FILL EMBANKMENT
ROPOSED
_ TRANSITION PIPING
— — _ EX. "PERCHED"
OUTLET CONDITION
EX. ROADWAY
CULVERT — J
EX. STREAM
BELOW FILL
SLOPE
PROPOSED
JUNCTION MANHOLE
(4' DIAMETER)
PROPOSED -
PIPE OUTLET TO OR
BELOW GRADE
WGLA Engineering, PLLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS
NC License No: P-1342
tKing Street
Hendersonville,
nville, NC 28792
[phone]
�AN wgla.com
ifmi
SEA• _
�V O Of _
/ M,``��.
II1111111 � Figure 3
PIPED PERCHED
SEVEN FALLS PIPE REPAIR
BOND PROJECT
HENDERSON COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
Job #: 15144
Date: 12/15
Scale: N.T.S.

.',.///CONCEPTUAL STREAM
CHANNEL RESTORATION.
DETAILED DESIGN TO BE
SUBMITTED AT A LATER DATE.
1/7
,\ r
_ EXISTING
CULVERT
IMPACT #12 ' •'
PREVIOUSLY
GRADED ROADWAY
Cc
,ron
A M Figure 4
WGLA Engineering, PLLC IMPACT #12
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS SEVEN FALLS STREAM CHANNEL
NC License No: P-1342- BOND PROJECT RESTORATION
214 N. King Street HENDERSON COUNTY Job #15144
Hendersonville, NC 28792 NORTH CAROLINA Date: 2/16
[phone] Scole.l =50'
�� wglo.com

' Attachment C
Strearri Stabilization/Sediment
4 .Removal -Plan
21

Stream Stabilization/Sediment Removal Plan
It is the understanding of the applicant that the issued permit would require stream
stabilization and removal of accumulated sediment within several stream channels at
Seven Falls. Clearwater Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC) conducted an
assessment of all streams and wetlands within the bonded phase of Seven Falls during
June of 2015 and has developed the following stabilization and sediment removal
strategy to be included as a Special Condition of the issued permit.
The applicant would propose to remove sediment only in areas dominated by pockets of
fine sediment and sands in excess of 4 inches. Any sediment accumulation less than 4
inches and areas with sediment deposition mixed with native gravels and cobble would
be left in place. CEC identified four stream reaches as needing stabilization and/or
sediment removal: three unnamed tributaries (UT) to Folly Creek and one UT to Little
Willow Creek (Figure 1). Each reach is discussed below.
• Sediment Removal 1 (UT Little Willow Creek) is below Culvert #3 and Culvert
#4. There is approximately 70 linear feet of stream channel that has accumulated
sediment below Culvert #4 due to'silt fencing in the stream. The silt fence would
be removed or cut to ground level and the channel below Culvert #4 would be
rerouted to join the channel below Culvert #3. Some sediment would need to be
removed from behind the silt fence prior to removal to eliminate chances of
sediment entering the channel below Culvert #3. Any remaining sediment would
be matted and seeded in place. Sediment removal in this location would likely
take place by hand (shovels and buckets). The sediment would be placed at least
30 feet from the stream channel and stabilized.
Approximately 100 feet downstream of the culverts there is an erosional gully and
a parallel channel that appears to be the original stream channel. Water appears to
flow through both channels especially during high flows. A channel plug would
be placed just upslope of the erosional gully and all stream flow would be directed
to the original stream channel. A schematic showing the proposed actions below
Culvert #3 and Culvert #4 is included for review (Figure 2). A site-specific
design for remedial actions below Culvert #3 and Culvert #4 would be prepared
and submitted after issuance of the certification.
• Sediment Removal 2 (UT Folly Creek) is located'immediately upslope of an old
logging road. It appears that an old debris jam caused sediment to collect in this
area. Sediment removal would be limited to the area behind the debris jam.
Sediment removal in this location would - take place by hand (shovels and
buckets). The sediment would be placed at least 30 feet from the stream channel
and stabilized.
• Sediment, Removal 3 (UT Folly Creek) is located immediately upslope of a fallen
tree in the channel. It appears that the fallen tree caused sediment to collect in
this area. Sediment removal would be limited to the area upslope of the fallen
tree. Sediment removal in this location would likely take place by hand (shovels

and buckets). The sediment would be placed at least 30 feet from the stream
channel and stabilized.
• Sediment Removal 4 (UT Folly Creek) is located in the steep valley on the
southeastern property boundary. Sources of sediment include an unstable headcut
within Lot 139. Sediment is concentrated in localized areas and varies in depth
from 4-16 inches. Sediment removal would be limited to the localized areas.
Sediment removal in this location would take place by hand (shovels and buckets)
and, due to steep terrain, the sediment would be placed 5-30+ feet from the stream
channel (depending on location) and stabilized.
The project engineers have assessed the headcut in Lot 139 and have developed
remedial actions to be included as Special Conditions of the issued certification.
Proposed remedial actions include installation of a French drain in the headcut
that would extend approximately 50 feet downslope to an area of stable banks.
The headcut area would be filled with additional stone and a top layer of soil.
The area would be matted and seeded upon completion of construction. A
schematic showing the proposed actions within Lot 139 is included for review
(Figure 3). A site-specific design for remedial actions within Lot 139 would be
prepared and submitted after issuance of the certification.
Prior to sediment removal at each of the removal areas identified, two coir logs would be
staked into the stream channel at different locations downstream of the removal areas.
These logs would act as temporary sediment dams during the removal process. Sediment
removal would be conducted upstream to downstream and sediment that is resuspended
and collected behind the logs would be removed upon completion of the sediment
removal in the upstream reach.
A report documenting existing stream conditions at each stabilization and sediment
removal location would be submitted prior to commencement of the proposed work.
Subsequently, a report documenting stream conditions after stabilization and sediment
removal occurs would also be submitted for approval. CEC would monitor on-going
sediment removal at regular intervals and DWR would approve the work when complete.

Seven Falls Bonded Phases (+/- 302 AC)
1.
1�
\
\
11
II
1
1
/
r
r�
I
I
I
1
1
I
l
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
1\
r \
^ 1
Z
C\I
� 1
6
I
i
Impact #14
67 LF -measured 1
(increase to 97 LF) 1 _ 1 1 i
-E..1,,g Bridge —1 / Impact N70 - 147 LF
to be Repleted Engineered Solution - 30LF
/\�1
Existing Bridge
to be Replaced
0 250 500 1,000 1,500
Feet
Henderson County,
North Carolina
impact 012- 188 LF
Engineered Sol tion - 30LF
Stream Reetora8on - 75LF
\1
Impact 011 - 101 LF
Engineered Solution - 301-F
Impact 013 - 375 LF
Splash Rack - 5LF
*Trosing # 14 has an existing 67 -foot
culvert that would be increase to 97 feet,
for a total new impact of 30 feet.
Stream Impacts
Impact #
Measured
For Permit
1
0
104
2
93
93
3
113
113
4
43
43
5
62
62
6
245
245
7
106
106
9
57
115
10
147
1 147
11
101
101
12
168
168
13
375
375
14**
67
30
15
90
90
Totals
1667
1792
*Trosing # 14 has an existing 67 -foot
culvert that would be increase to 97 feet,
for a total new impact of 30 feet.
Mitigation
Stream (DMS) at 2:1 3,584 linear feet
Wetlands 0 acres
Open Water n/a
Impact 03 - 113 LF
Splash Rock - SLF
I93 LFmpact 02 �
ct 041
Impa43LF —(II
_ Sediment Removal 1 and
_ Stream Realignment
70 LF
Irtpact al - _
0 LF - measured
pncrease to 104impact NS - e2 LF
Splash Rock - SLF
impact a9
57 LF - measured
Owens to 115 LF)
Impact NB
0.01 AC
Sedlrtwnt Renwal 2
30 LF
Impt108 LmpeF5 LF
7 � \� /%

REMOVE EXISTING
FENCING AND "`;_� -� '
ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT IMPACT #3
16*
"IMPACT #4 \
'��j/i
'DIR-9CT�=L�O.WiBAG�K
jiT4: �-bl GN''A�i4'NN L
Ai
NEWLY
LUG NEWLY FORMED
/
/ FORMED CHANNEL �; CHANNEL WITH
i; TO BE ABANDON % {� l �� N' BOULDERS & FILLIf
It
STRb �CKANNEL-__ — �_------
OFm G a
SEA
"OtFox
0
Co ° � p ion
/A M ,��
I"11111100 Figure 2
WGLA Engineering, PLLC IMPACT #3 & #4
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS SEVEN FALLS STREAM CHANNEL
NC License No: P-1342 BOND PROJECT RESTORATION
214 N. King Street HENDERSON COUNTY Job #15144
k Hendersonville, NC 28792 NORTH CAROLINA Date: 216
[phone]
wgla.com Scale:l " =50'

IN
r r'I�1
,---
j,ili
1lf iii � , ��, �� ��� , ` '• � • - _ _ -�_ '_ _'����' � � �'�_-• ��,� -: �,1, //''�
`t PROVIDE 'COMPACTf D
2:1 'MAX `SLOPE `AT
;END ;OF dRAI',
14
�V-
�� EXISTING_- ^-~--- -
HEf�OCUT TO BE -
PREP IR9 -WITW- A
FRENCH -DRAIN---
(SEE DETAIL-�
I �" NCAl?
O
!; \14
WGLA Engineering, PLLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS
NC License No: P-1342
N. King Street
Hendersonville, NC 28792
[phone]
wgla.com
SEVEN FALLS
BOND PROJECT
HENDERSON COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
nmmor
OVEFC
./AM 1' • ,�•
''m1111011 Figure 3a
HEADCUT REPAIR
Job #15144
Date: 3/16
Scole:i =50'

CLEAN SOIL BACKFILL
FINISHED GRADE
MIRAFI 140L TO
COMPLETELY ENCASE
STONE-- OVERLAP TOP
(OVERLAP FABRIC 12" MIN.
_ SECTIONS 4' MIN.)
• - -,�moi. ��+�".�^f�».�' v i
TUTT"tip" •$`�' ,-� '+
AS REQUIRED
WASHED STONE
EQUIVALENT TO NCDOT
18" STD. SIZE #57
18" 6" DIA. PERFORATED
PIPE (SDR 35) HOLES DOWN
SET ON, 4"-6" OF STONE BED
FRENCH DRAIN
NOT TO SCALE" -
N CAR
e
Cor � 0"on
/A M.
Figure A
WGLA Engineering, PLLC
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & LAND PLANNERS SEVEN FALLS FRENCH DRAIN DETAIL
NC License No:, - P-1342 BOND PROJECT =
214 N. King_ Street HENDERSON COUNTY Job #15144
Hendersonville, NC 28792 NORTH CAROLINA Date: 3/16
4—� - [phone]''. � Scale: N.T.S. ._
wglo.com

Attachihimt,D'
DMS- Ac'cepta­nceIetter
(dke"d May 17,2016)

Mitigation Services
ENV I RO NNE NTAL QUAL IT
May 17, 2016
Marcus Jones
Henderson County
1 Historic Courthouse Square
Hendersonville, NC 28792
Project: Seven Falls
PAT MCCRORY
DONALD R VAN DER VAART
S, r, I—
Expiration of Acceptance: November 17, 2016
County: Henderson
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) is willing to accept
payment for compensatory mitigation for impacts associated with the above referenced project as indicated in the
table below. Please note that this decision does not assure that participation in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation
program will be approved by the permit issuing agencies as mitigation fog project impacts. It is the responsibility
of the applicant to contact permitting agencies to determine if payment to the DMS will be approved You must
also comply with all other state, federal or local government permits, regulations or authorizations associated with
the proposed activity including G.S. § 143-214.11.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter and is not transferable. If we have not
received a copy of the issued 404 Permit/401 Certification/CAMA permit within this time frame, this
acceptance will expire. It is the applicant's responsibility to send copies of the permits to DMS. Once DMS
receives a copy of the permit(s) an invoice will be issued based on the required mitigation in that permit and
payment must be made prior to conducting the authorized work The amount of the in -lieu fee to be paid by an
applicant is calculated based upon the Fee Schedule and policies listed at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/eep.
Based on the information supplied by you in your request to use the DMS, the impacts that may require
compensatory mitigation are summarized in the following table. The amount of mitigation required and assigned -
to DMS for this impact is determined by permitting agencies and may exceed the impact amounts shown below
Impact
River
CU Location
Stream (feet)
Wetlands (acres) Buffer I
Buffer II
Basin
(8 -digit HUC)
(Sq Ft.)
(Sq. Ft.)
Cold
Cool
Warm
Ri arian
Non -Riparian
Coastal Marsh
French
06010105
0
1,792
0
0
0
0 0
0
Broad
Upon receipt of payment, DMS will take responsibility for providing the compensatory mitigation. The mitigation
will be performed in accordance with the In -Lieu Fee Program instrument dated July 28, 2010 and 15A NCAC
02B 0295 as applicable. Thank you for your interest in the DMS in -lieu fee mitigation program. If you have any
questions or need additional information, please contact Kelly Williams at [phone].
Sincerely,
a4a
Jam . Stanfill
Asset anagement Supervisor
cc- David Brown, USACE-Asheville
Rebekah Reid,,agent
State of North Carolina 1 Envrronmenlal Quality I Mitigation Services -
1652 Mad Semcc Ccnter I Raklgh. NC 27699-1652 1 217 W loriev Simi. Suite 3000
9197078976 T