19951147 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_19951207

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr„ P.E., Director
r4*9
MOM
[D F= F1
December 11, 1995
Macon County
DEN-1 Project # 951147
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality. Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Constel Partners, Inc.
P. O. Box 439
Duluth, Georgia 30136
ti'
FIL E
Dear Sirs:
You have our approval to place fill material in 0.35 acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose
of constructing a Burger King restaurant at NC 106 and Spring Street in Highlands, N.C., as you
described in your application dated 23 October 1995. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 2671. This certification
allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 26 when it is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification.
Additional written approval for the stromwater detention pond for for new on-site development is
required from DEM. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you
go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to. the
Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and
its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
Sin ely,
/' d
O.PPtop Howard, Jr. P. .
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DEM Regional Office
Mr.'John Domey
Central Files
Kent Campbell; United Consulting Group, Ltd.
951147.1tr
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
i
MEMORANDUM PRINT NAMES:
d,_.. , ? Reviewer: ?; .
TO: OHN DORNEY WQ SUPV.: Lus
Ek?24
NVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES BRANCH DATE: 13?VO-j Rs-
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
***EACH ITEM MUST BE ANSWERED (USE N/A FOR NOT APPLICABLE) **
PERMIT YR: 95 PERMIT NO: 0001147 COUNTY: MACON
APPLICANT NAME: BURGER KING - HIGHLANDS
PROJECT TYPE: COMMERCIAL FILL PERMIT TYPE:
COE It : DOT #:
RCD_FROM _CDA: APP DATE_FRM_CDA: 10/30/95
REG OFFICE: ARO
RIVER AND_SUB_BASIN _?? STR INDEX NO: 2, - 2.1 - 4-CG
STREAM-CLASS: WJS =
WL_IMPACT?: ®/N
WL-TYPE : 5 7 >"
- • 5 3
WL REQUESTED: N WL_ACR EST? : OY/N AS
WL_SCORE M : '[ WATER IMPACTED BY FILL?: YO/N
MITIGATION? : Y/ N@ MITIGATION_TYPE : ,AJ?,4
MITIGATION_SIZE:"//i DID YOU REQUEST MORE INFO?: YO
IS WETLAND RATING SHEET ATTACHED?: &N
HAVE PROJECT CHANGES/CONDITIONS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH APPLICANT?: Y/N /V/fl
RECOMMENDATION (Circle One): GEO ISSUE/COND DENY
COMMENTS:
CC: Regional Office
Central Files
81VV,R o0 /pp s
"'N-AC Sc/Nc6S
WETLAND RATING SYSTEM WORKSHEET
Project No. or description 951147 Burger King Site
Location
County Macon Nearest road or town Highlands
River Basin Little Tennessee
Nearest stream UT to Monger Creek Classification WS-III
(Club Lake)
Evaluator W.E. Anderson
Agency and address NCDEM Asheville Regional Office
Date and time evaluated November 8, 1995 1030 AM
Major Wetland Type This is an area at the confluence of two small streams
predominately urban drainage. The entire site has a high water table
except that there is a filled roadway to a sewer lift station.
Approximate size of wetland system 0.35-0.53 _ acres
Approximate extent of wetlands in area unknown acres.
within miles
Three most common plant species (in order): See application
1.
2.
3.
Soil Series (if known) See application
Hydrologic indicators
Direct surface HydroLogic connection? YES
Existing Conditions
Drainage: Streams on two perimeters
Disturbance: Approximately 20% filled by roadway
Restoration potential: Not significant
Restoration value: Minimal
Is site known to provide habitat for rare, endangered or threatened
species? Unknown If so, list species observed or recorded.
Item Number
I. Location/Landscape
1 Natural area buffer
2 Sensitive watershed
3 Dispersal corridor system
II. Ecological Values
4 Special ecological attributes
5 Wildlife habitat
6 Aquatic life
7 Water storage
8 Streambank stabilization
9 Removal of pollutants
III. Human Values
10 Outdoor recreation/education
0
11 Economic value
Score (circle one)
5 0
5 434 2 1 0
5 4 3 2 1 0
5 4 3 2 1
5 4 3 2 1
5 4 3 2 ill
5 4 3 2 1 0
5 4 3 2 1
5 4 3 2 1
5 4 3 2
5 4 3 2 1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
Total Score 3 1
Pdge Two
Site description and notes: This is a low lying lot at the confluence of
two small streams about one mile upstream from Club Lake. Club Lake is in
the critical area for the Town of Highlands water supply, the site is not
in the critical area. The area is urbanized and the associated wetlands
have little opportunity to contribute much to the environment. It would be
desirable if the site were developed so as to minimize stormwater impacts
downstream.
NOV-20-1995 16=313 FROM Asheville RO DEHNR TO AQUATIC TOX P.02

... .? x ..., r......._...._...-......... ----------
Project name +ac - '?g E l Nearest road-S4x?: :
CaytltyN cgrt _ Wetiano area04L-G,tacres Wetland widtia -
Name of evaluator 'Al. % Date, L.''
?...,
- ------- ........... ............ -----....._..,,..,.._............,.Mn,K a.meeeesfeeemseoomm?r..c m9Paa
Wetland
i
type (select one)"
? Bottomland hardwood forest ? Pine savanna
? Headwater forest ? Freshwater marsh
? Swamp forest ? eogtten
? Wet flat G3 Ephemeral wetland
? Pocosin C3 Carolina Bay
2(Other
"The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes
////rII/IIIlIIIIIIIII/IIII/I///////I/rII///I//II/rJlrrrlllrl!/////////I///1/r/I!/IrIIIIIIr/I/rir
weiuhc
Water storage x 4.00 - a?
Wetland Score
Bank/Shoreline stabi l izeti on d x 4.00
Pollutant removal J_* x 5.00 - r w
Wildlife habitat- 10 x 2.00
Awatic life value x 4.00

Recreation/Education -b_
x
1.00 r K:-0< ?78.sti88:
K>:a e.ro:mod
* Add t ooint:f in sensitivewatershe4and> iCt-.. .gnpeIntdIsturbancewithini/2 rr.'eUpstream
TOTAL P.02
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Ja mes & Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan & Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
lqllfl: '
'A4
?EHNFi
FAX TO:
FAX NUMBER:
FROM: 0
PHONE: l l ?j
NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET:
COMMENTS:
KID
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/l0% post consumer paper

T5))q-?
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, Ltd.
October 23, 1995
Mr. David Baker
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 143
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
0 1995.
RE: Request for Jurisdictional Determination
and Nationwide Permit Verification
Proposed Burger King Site - Highlands
Macon County, North Carolina
Project No. 951347-01-05
Dear Mr. Baker:
This letter serves as a request for jurisdictional determination on a proposed Burger King
Site in Macon County. Included with this request is one copy of the wetland delineation
report prepared by our company for the project planners. Please review this report for
evaluating the project and concurrence with our delineation. We additionally request a
verification that the proposed activities, qualify for nationwide permit 26, "headwaters and
isolated waters discharges". Please refer to the Impact Assessment and Federal
Regulations section of this report for our opinions on the nationwide permit requirements
for this project.
We will be glad to meet with any of your staff members if a field inspection is necessary.
If any additional infonmation is required please feel free to contact us at our office. Your
expeditious response to this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
David P. Huetter
Wildlife Ecolo s#/}
W. Kent Campbell
Wetlands Specialist -
DPH/WKC/sak
Attachments
cc: Mr. David Yow, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
808 PARK NORTH BOULEVARD ¦ SUITE 100 Q CLARKSTON. GA 30021 e TEL: [phone] ¦ FAX: [phone]

DEM ID: ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provided Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL,
P.O. Box 1890 HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
-Wilimington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Box 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27656-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS. SEVEN (7)
COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: GNTML'FAZr,4a S NN-
2. Owners Address: P.O. Bete 2.4.19 CAA
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (Work): 40%4 G611 - 224.0
4. If Applicable : Agent name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
Ma UAV?a P. 14uEyTcr- UNrreO COASUL--n..ic. GiROVP , um
SOS PAZXMr1t'rK ILWO. Cl,lRKSTO?I CAA 3002.1
(404:i Z9N+-3,919
5. Location Hof work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: M ACON
Nearest Town or City: 1"L.0-^3P% : NC
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): SWE A-rr-acAA'W0
Pr?aE 3
6. Name of Closest Stream/River: CVI! -ASATAL R?vem VIAL LAM- 5"00YA4 wwo Cwg LAME ANC Q040'- W
7. River Basin: C'uu.ksA-sa. [Zweic TR??
8. Is this project located In a watershed classified as Trout, $A, HQW, ORW, WSJ, OR WSII? YES[ ] NO [>e]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [x] NO [ ]
If yes, explain: Keceve9r Felt NWP ?10 ; See AM'M CV Tsl,.rr COG: "MOOS -CD yeuN?i4,-In,?
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S. including wetlands, located on project site: 0,35 A.c.r-ff-
SEE ArMCN4M Wcc-"NV vCLA14SASMLO l F-acPbyor PIV ?Awz'O SY U.acp Cie,ssut-ru.1? Gito%?P
11. Number of acres of waters of U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled Ante rlrgv e0rlb%3%-r 0.35 Xcacs
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated
Total Impacted: 0.35 Acy-gS
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS - 8 1/2" X 11" drawings only): (!*gsTeuc-c MesT-^%J% Lhtrr
wvr" 4AyL14u4G i SER.VIGE. fZoAp ANV GVEXCrI AV.VA IMPRAV?MgNrTS .
13. Purpose of proposed work: T ab3 .,..? PW'Drose-1> 1.04 A'Cmw r,rm
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimized wetland impacts. UNA%L r -,n oeveLxw s„-a w,-tuovz ?aeteegeawtv?.+T e.a weJ-L*, .IVs
-- See AFrC7oa Sv PAC. 3
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [x] NO[
]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS. Sax Aj%,Ac,,,,Cr,Tp,*,f 3
r
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ } NO (?]
RESPONSES FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetlands delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.SM DeuNeom." P.WJ%o
B. If available, representative photographic wetlands to be impacted by project. N?A
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line. SEE 'zvo0'xr
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy. SEE A' .M"'tgp PAO$ 3
E. What is land use of surrounding property: 7e,4%r4c. 'Foci a.,s?,,? (B-3) vcs«,....z,.a ? 2L'S?oa,.n"e.L
- F. If applicable, what Is proposed method of sewage disposal? ._M._±MMI VAU S^f4%Tn¢'V S%wcIt- Lo.r
V P STU

Page 3
ATTACHMENT TO NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUEST FORM
Item 5: Specific Location
The project site is located in the southeast comer of the intersection of NC
Highway 106 (First Street) and Spring Street. Driveway entrance to lumber
yard at NC Hwy. 106 is southwest comer of project site. Hampton Inn is
located west of the project site, across NC Hwy. 106.
Item 14: Impact Minimization
Soil erosion control measures will be implemented during construction to
protect stream. In addition, modifications to the site plan have been
proposed and are currently being worked out. These modifications consist
of moving the proposed headwall from along the east boundary of the
project site further to the west. This will enable a portion of the stream to
be left in its current natural condition as well as reduce some impacts to the
wetlands on the project site.
Item 15: Presence of Protected Species
A copy of this permit application is being sent to Mr. David Yow with the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 57 Hilltop Road, Asheville,
NC.
Item 17.D: Stormwater Management
The town of Highlands' only requirement is to provide a minimum green area
of 30% of total developed area. Approximately 50% of the project area will
be green. Proposed piping of the existing stream across the project site
was based on hydrology study of basin analyzing basin for development
under existing zoning ordinances for a 100-year storm.
DUK M, ACTION ID:
Nstionwide Permit Requested (Provida Nationwide Pemdt #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that regtdre notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 eertMeation
WUJVMq=0N D==CT ZNGIN $R, wA'X'1-3-R-QUAt= MANNM
CORPS OP EMOUMM 01 (W Brt'VII ONNEW 'AL MANA0EKWr
DEPARTMR4TOFTHE ARMY NC DM%RTMWr MUM , HEALTH.
P O. Boot is" AND NATURAL, n
WIladogsoo, NC 28402,.1890 P.O. Box 29S35
Telephone 19) 251 S 11 ATM- -Ni2 JOHN DC RNEY
Telephone (919) 733-SM
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPL?ICATYON SH'10 = BE 904?? Tb THE CORPS Olt EN02;EE.
SSV'F?N (7) COpms SHOULD BE Saw TO Tim ;N1C. DIVISION OF ENVM0NM$NTAL MANAOEME
-PLf:AS$PRINF- Constel Partners, Inc,
1. Owners Name: Attn: Mr. -Ken Adams, Pres dent (A Framehiise of guroer Kino Ccre
2. Owners Addrest: PO Box. 2 4 3 9
3. Owners Phone Number (Fioew): ` _ - - - - : - CVV=k): 4 0 4 - 6 6 7 - 2 2 4 0
4. If Appiieabir. As+ent's name or raapa Apis oogmam off aW. addren, phow ==bee
Mr. Denr°_s DeWolf, DeWolf d Schmitt, P.Q.
PO Box 1296. Highlands, NC 28741
-[phone]
5. I~.=8dod or work ( WST ATTACH MAP). County- m a c o n
Nearest Town or 6w: Highlands, N•C
5Pec4flc Location'(Include road numbers. laruh=tz. etas
See Attezhed page 3
6. NuneofClearst$treArjVPJVer Cullasa ja River via Lake Sequoyah 4 Club Lake and
unnamed ri utary
7. PJver$asim Cullasa ja River Basin
8. Is flux prv'Int located in a gybed cteshfied as Trout, $A, HJwv ORW, WS L or WS 0 YES I J No JX
Proper is an Watershed. District WS-III-8
9...Have any Section 4U permits bey pr Icusly requested for use on this propert ?
NO 14•
If yes, exphiu. --
10. Estimated total number of acm of watts or the U.S., including wedaaft loan si e o 5 s c r =
a t-=had re or.t by n ed Consulting Group, Ltd.
and Permit For
tt9chiiint Page or exp ana ion
I t?v ttlandis, impacted by the pmoposed project:
'Filled end Piped conduit 0.043 acres
Drained: N o n e
FFloodod: N o n e
Excavated: None
AA'? tt Total Impact k a c r e s
?UOIp? Ekxstino 491 culver omnstream end of
oroject must be upgraded
replacod in future. This work will be dunr Uy T1TnllJJ1M QIM LI T
III n I i I 1

Page 2
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X i1" drawings only):
Construct restaurant with parking, service road and green area improveme
13. Purpose of proposed work: To develop proposed 1 .04' acre site.
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be 'ed out in wetlap" ?11so. note measu
taken to minimize wedandImpaets. Soil erosion control (8 MP measures wITT e
implemented during construction to protect stream. .(See page 3)
13. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine.Fishaja S,
reit)N re its or c
N
NS FROM TF? US VS ANI?10R NMFS SHOULD H8 FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Ofricer (Sl;ip0) regarding the pceserbce of h:
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map dwwing all wetlands, streams. anti lakes on the property. (S e e a t t a c h e d
B. If availabi-+ sentadve h of wetlands m bo R e p o r t)
mlm P?>?p itdpacted by psject. Not a v a 11 a b l e
C. If delineation was pet*=ndd by a eonsttitant. include all data Sheets televarit to the placea>wt of the
delineation line. (See attached report)
D. If a stotmwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy. ( S e e p a g e 3 )
E. What is land use of surrounding prop"? (See page 3)
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? Municipal S a n i t a r y S e w e r
Owner's Signature

REPORT
OF
WETLAND DELINEATION
Lou]
BURGER KING SITE
1.04 ACRE TRACT
HIGHLANDS, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
MR. KEN ADAMS
CONSTEL PARTNERS, LTD.
P.O. BOX 2439
DULUTH, GEORGIA 30136
PROJECT NO. 951347-01-05
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.

UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, Ltd.
October 25, 1995
Mr. Ken Adams
Constel Partners, Inc.
P.O. Box 2439
Duluth, Georgia 30136
RE: Wetland Delineation
Burger King Site
1.04 Acre Tract
Highlands, North Carolina
Project No. 951347-01-05
Dear Mr. Adams:
United Consulting Group, Ltd. is pleased to submit this report of a Wetland Delineation
on the above referenced property. Included in this report are the results of our
investigation, relevant maps, data sheets, and a topographic survey showing the areas
flagged as wetlands. Also, included in this report are recommendations for further action
with the Corps of Engineers (COE). We have forwarded this report to the COE and
requested a verification of our findings. A copy of our letter to the COE is included with
this report. We anticipate 8-12 weeks will be required for a response from the COE'and
will forward this information to you when we receive it.
We have enjoyed working with you on this project. Please feel free to contact us if you
have any questions or if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD
David P. Huetter
Wetlands Specialist
W. Kent Campbell
Senior Wetlands Specialist
DPH/WKC/sak
808 PARK NORTH BOULEVARD ¦ SUITE 100 ¦ CLARKSTON, GA 30021 ¦ TEL: [phone] ¦ FAX: [phone]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT PURPOSE AND LOCATION ................................ . . . . . . 2
DELINEATION METHODOLOGY .................................... 2
RESULTS ......................... 3
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS 4
LIMITATIONS ........................................................ 5
APPENDIX
USGS Topographic Map
Data Forms for Routine Delineation
Wetland Survey
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. &LU
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A Wetland Delineation has been completed on the 1.04 acre Burger King Site (referred to
in this report as the "project site") located in Highlands, North Carolina. The results of
this investigation are briefly summarized below. The text of the report should be reviewed
for a discussion of these items.
1. A small stream is located flowing across the south portion of the project site. A
second stream flows south along the west end of the project site. Some areas of
potential wetlands were discovered adjacent to these streams on the project site.
The wetlands and stream channel qualify as jurisdictional waters of the United
States (U.S.) as defined in 33 CFR, Part 328.3, and are regulated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE). All of the waters and wetlands located on the project
site are, in our opinion, located above the point of flow exceeding five (5) cubic
feet per second and should qualify as "headwaters" as defined in 33 CFR, Part
330.2(d).
2. If loss of waters (impacts) to jurisdictional waters is less than one acre in size and
qualifies as headwaters, then prior notification to the COE is not required
according to 33 CFR, Part 330 Appendix A(26)(b). - Based on this delineation and
calculations of the wetland area, impacts to any and all of the jurisdictional waters
on the project site should be allowed under nationwide permit 26.
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
PROJECT PURPOSE AND LOCATION
United Consulting Group, Ltd. was contracted by Constel Partners, Inc. to delineate
wetlands and other jurisdictional waters of the United States (U.S.) for a 1.04 acre tract
of land located in the Township of Highlands, Macon County, North Carolina. The tract
is referred to in this report as the "project site". The project site is located southeast
of and adjacent to the intersection of Spring Street and N.C. Highway 106. A site
location map is provided in the Appendix of this report. The project site is located in
the Mountain Physiographic Province of North Carolina and contains a stream that
eventually flows into Lake Sequoyah, which is part of the Cullasaja River drainage basin.
According to a topographic survey plan provided by DeWolf and Schmitt Architects and
prepared by L. Stephen Foster, Land Surveyor, dated January 20, 1995, the project site
is undeveloped and contains two small streams which converge off the southwest corner
of the project site. The project site contains nearly level to moderate slopes with drainage
occurring towards the south and west. This survey was used to determine the boundaries
and landscape features of the project site during the investigation.
DELINEATION METHODOLOGY
For an area to qualify as wetland there must be physical evidence on-site to satisfy
criteria within three parameters. These parameters are:
1) a dominance of wetland vegetation;
2) physical evidence of wetland hydrology; and
3) indications of hydric soils.
The criteria used to determine these parameters in the field is found in the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. This manual outlines the
currently accepted federal method for wetland delineation and was used for this
investigation. Further, wetlands were documented using the "Minimum Requirements for
Preliminary Wetland Delineations" as described in the COE Savannah District Public
Notice of January 23, 1992. The definition for other waters of the U.S., found at 33 CFR
328.3(3), was used to determine areas of jurisdiction which do not meet the criteria for
wetlands.
After in office research into available soil surveys, wetland maps, and hydrologic data for
the project site, the normal and accepted procedure for routine on-site investigation
requires different wetland communities to be sampled by establishing a plot to collect
data forthe three parameters. The plot sample consisted of identifying the dominant plant
species in each vegetated strata within the wetland community. The dominant species
2
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. 49
were then compared to their assigned indicator status which is based on the estimated
range of probability for that species occurring in a wetland. A greater than fifty percent
dominance of species in which the indicator status is either facultative, facultative
wetland, or obligate will satisfy the wetland vegetation parameter.
Concurrently with sampling the plant community for that area, a soil sample, using a
shovel or auger, was taken to determine if an aquic moisture regime (hydric) exists near
the soil's surface. A list of field indicators for hydric soil conditions is provided in the
manual for on-site determinations. In addition, physical, on-site wetland hydrology
indicators must also be present in the area to satisfy the hydrology parameter. Any
wetland hydrology indicators, which were visually recognizable, were noted for that plot
sample area.
Since many of the dominant plant species found in wetlands in this area can also occur
as dominants in uplands, comparisons with the field data for hydric soils and wetland
hydrology is emphasized for determining the limits of the wetland boundary on site. The
data from the wetland plot sample areas were then transferred to Data Forms for Routine
Wetland Determination provided by the COE. Copies of the Data Forms are provided in
the Appendix of this report. The wetland boundary was identified, flagged, and measured
for inclusion to the topographic survey and site plan.
RESULTS
In office research into Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Surveys indicated that no
hydric soils have been mapped on the project site. The soils mapped for the project
site include Tuckasegee-Whiteside Complex and Edneyville-Chestnut-Urban Land
Complex. The entire project site was then investigated for visual evidence of
wetlands. During the field investigation, two streams were located on the project. site
which converged south of the southwest comer of the project site. The streams were
located on the south and west portions of the project site, respectively, and originated
off-site from drainage swales. The south stream was approximately 10 feet wide and
flowed west 310 feet across the project site. The smaller (west) stream was 3 feet wide
and extended 100 feet south to the point where it converged with the west flowing
stream. Areas of potential wetlands were located adjacent to these stream channels.
The majority of the wetlands were located north of the west flowing stream. The
wetlands on the project site were characterized by shrub and emergent hydrophytic
vegetation, saturated soil conditions, and dark, gravelly-sandy-loam soils. This
wetland area appeared to be influenced hydrologically by subsurface flow from the
adjacent upland and poor infiltration of surface waters. The wetlands on the project
site were identified, flagged, and measured from known fixed locations for inclusion
into this report.
Two sampling plots were established in the wetland area. The data collected in the
sampling plots is a representation of the existing conditions for the wetland habitat
located on the project site. Two upland plot samples were also established for
comparison with the wetland plot sample data.
3
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. 49
The first plot sample (P-1) was established in the east portion of the wetland area, north
of the stream. Soils in this wetland area were found to be a poorly drained, sandy-loam.
Soil color or chroma values from extracted samples were compared to the Munsell Soil
Color Chart. Soil colors for the matrix ranged from very dark grayish brown to olive gray
with a Munsell reading in the 2.5Y 312 to 5Y 5/2 range. Soils in this area were saturated
to the surface with several areas of standing surface water to a 2-3 inch depth.
The plant community within the plot sample consisted of emergent vegetation. This
herbaceous layer was dominated by cut-grass, wool-grass, tearthumb, and juncus. The
dominant plants in this plot sample meet the percentage criteria for wetland vegetation.
The upland comparison plot sample (P-2) contained dry, well drained sandy-loam to
sandy-clay-loam. Soil colors were yellowish-brown with a Munsell reading of 10YR 5/6.
No wetland hydrology indicators were present in the upland plot sample. Vegetation in
the upland plot sample consisted of black birch, black cherry, Eastern white pine, Eastern
hemlock, blackberry, and wild strawberry.
The third plot sample (P-3) was established in the northwest portion of the wetland. Soils
in this plot sample were found to be a somewhat poorly drained sandy-loam with medium
to large sized gravel and rock intermixed. Soil colors for the matrix were a very dark gray
with a Munsell reading of 5Y 3/1. Bright strong brown mottles were observed throughout
with a Munsell reading of 7.5 YR 4/6. Soils in this area were saturated at the surface and
groundwater depth in the pit was 4 inches. Additional wetland characteristics such as a
sulfidic odor and oxidized rhizospheres were noted in the soil.
The plant community within this wetland plot sample consisted primarily of shrub and
herbaceous layers that were dominated by willow, blackberry, soft rush, tearthumb, and
cut-grass. The dominant plants in this plot sample meet the percentage criteria for
wetland vegetation.
The upland comparison plot sample (P-4) contained moderately well drained gravelly
loamy-sand. Soil color was olive brown with a Munsell reading of 2.5Y 413. Shovel refusal
due to increased gravel content occurred at approximately 6 inches. No wetland
hydrology indicators were present in the upland plot sample. Vegetation in the upland
plot sample consisted of Eastern white pine, dogwood, willow, wild strawberry, grasses,
and soft rush.
In addition to the data collected in the plot samples, investigation of the entire wetland
indicated additional soil characteristics and plant species that were not necessarily noted
in the plot sample areas. Plant species such as sedges, Rhododendron, elderberry,
Eastern white pine, red maple, and jewelweed occurred in scattered areas of the wetland.
Soils in several areas of the wetland contained gravel and rock intermixed. This rock and
compacted soil appeared to be reducing the normal infiltration rate of the soil and
resulted in saturated soil surface conditions. Based on a conversation with a local
construction contractor, the project site was previously a gravel yard and contained a
small office and piles of several varieties of gravel.
4
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS
Based on this investigation, the stream channels and the wetland areas meet the
criteria as jurisdictional waters and should be considered waters of the U.S., according
to 33 CFR Part 328.3(a)(3). These waters are regulated by the COE through Section
404 of the Clean Water Act., and, under certain conditions, the discharge of pollutants,
including the placement of fill material, in these waters may require prior authorization
from the COE.
Based on the USGS Topographic map (Highlands, NC-GA Quadrangle), the combined
drainage area for the two streams located on the project site is approximately 80 acres,
or 0.12 square miles. We calculated a estimated mean annual runoff values of 0.38
cubic feet per second (cfs), immediately below the convergence of the two streams.
These calculations are based on the USGS map of mean annual runoff in this drainage
basin of approximately 3.0 cfs per square mile. Because these median flow values are
less than the five (5) cfs threshold, the waters located on the project site should be
characterized, in our opinion, as "headwaters" as defined in 33 CFR, Part 330.2(d).
Wetlands on the project site were identified, flagged, and measured for inclusion into
this report. Total area of jurisdictional waters on the project site is 0.35 acres. Please
refer to the wetland map located in an envelope at the back of this report, which
shows the jurisdictional waters boundary as identified and measured.
Impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. are based on footprint size of fill
material which is then converted to acres. If loss of waters (impacts) is less than one
acre in size and qualifies as headwaters, then prior notification to the COE is not
required according to 33 CFR, Part 330 Appendix A(26)(b). The waters on the project
site should, in our opinion, meet the criteria for headwaters. According to our
calculations, impacts to these waters of the U.S. (0.35 acres) is, in our opinion, allowed
under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 26 without prior authorization from the COE. However,
we do recommend that our findings and opinions stated in the report be verified by the
proper issuing Corps of Engineers office.
LIMITATIONS
Recommendations for further coordination with the COE for verification of a wetland
delineation, issuance of a jurisdictional determination or permit to discharge fill
material in waters of the U.S. and wetlands are based on an understanding of current
federal wetland regulations, the results of the investigation, and review of proposed
development plans for the project site.
This report should not be considered an official determination for jurisdictional waters
of the U.S., including wetlands.. Only the COE has authority to make official
determinations. No warranty is expressed or implied.
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
5
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
i 4000 • . i ' `? • 4 : `/` x
^\ 8 a ..
_ H? • __°° U F
w O
Z ?
?t m s
`' - I „°= - - - poi, • •? i • B Lli 3c U i?
r t•• ? ` ?•1C"? l1J 1
E " ?? '? °° <, ? N-• Z
PROJECT SIT La
5 9
5bo Y, LOS 'k YV / ii r'. \ j 3993 I
M• • 11
/ i
?_-' 4-b ? O` '? '., Mon • ?_ ? ?. ? ??? `? )?j 4 I ?????: O
cr)
Q `\q X \ {. fo\ it I ?Ib // ???? Ql
n s T? 1 1,/
4
-LL, it cr
00
O? N
N ?
N Z
T L
0
Y Q
1 v 0 1 MILE W W J
U W
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 5000 7000 FEET
Ems:
1 Z
S
0 1 KILOMETER Q
U
z
J 3 Z .
Q Q W
U m J
U O U
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: gv.-X K,av NwK?,?os,tJC Date: to
Applicant/Owner. C,,,SML FAR: ?TIS County:
Investigator. ->.
14vE,1vP,
State: : Neap Ga??
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes 4:6-oD Community 10•
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes JJP E,cF.,--e xr W e-r,_,,,,D
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes C MD Transect ID:
(tf needed, explain on reverse.) Plot ID: p_ 1
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator
1' ScIKPus cvPE?iNVS }?g DBL 9.
2- Tv-x_vs envsvs 9j z$ . FACW + 10-
3-
LYGONuM s+r(ei11tYTVM
!H??.
QgL
11.
4,
LeMCIA 1J1V4'N1GO. NMs. FAGW 12.
5. 13.
6. 14. -
7. 15_
8. 16:
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAG) oo `/o
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
_ Aerial Photographs
Other
X , No Recorded Data Available _ Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12"
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines

Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
Depth To Free Water in Pit: (in.) -Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data

Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _ FAGNeutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)

,.
Remarks: Po?K?;s oc S,-A,,,",.r W",?,z ro 7

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):_TvcrcASEcer_WHI s\z
Taxonomy (Subgroup): 7YV?c HavwMec?*r5
AovlG ttAPLUDVL-TS
Plot ID: P-1 Page 2
Drainage Class: H WI)
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: No
11 PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Depth
CUM)
Horizon Matrix
Color Mottle Dottie
(Cain %
Z" 2.S Y. 3/2
5" 5Y s/2
10 " S Y s/2

Texkure,
Concretions,
Structure, etc.
SANDY
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking
Aquic Moisture Regime in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain In Remarks
Remarks:
SOIL ^frcr"zs_ib bf WHIT'E51q? W1Ty? Oa $L!(o {41't,'( NIGFI tYL T1?,4N NO .?y??
SltDNE ANO GOAJRy 1^IK'?'"?XC9 vJ \Tlt 40\l. . QM?L. w?"-? T~$LE?
NETLAND DETERMINATION
i riyaropnyuc vegetation Present? J No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? ire No
Hydric Soils Present?e No
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
11!§iD No 11
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WE-11-AND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 9-a6cz h,wG e 91wjLANDS, NC. Date: to k+s
Applicant/Owner: CD.js-vL_ 1?Az,,,ms County-,
Investigator. 1?„R State MA,.,
NoM,+ Cs?oL,w.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes
Community the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes C? IJPLA, ID.
is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes ? Transect ID:
(tf needed, explain on reverse.) Plot ID: p _ Z
rEGEI]ATIOH
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Spedes
Stratum
Indicator
1-'9ErVLA cr,A SU6CANOPY FACU S-
2- PRVNvs SfiRorIA A S-g CA.,oP.r FACU 10-
3- ROG141A PSCVDOAU.CtA SvgGNOPY 11.
4- PIN„s Qmosus SHRvg FAcu 12-
5- TsJGA CAAADENS\S Sttrwe, 'PAc.U 13.
6- ?JgJS ALLEG1¢NEa$IS ?ERB. 14-
7- Fks,-,_- , sp. 1-?E,ca FAC- 15-
8- T-olcAQIA VtKGiwA4jA- lIET?b. FAC- 16:
rurceni or Dominant species that are OBL. FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-) 0%
Remarks: * tAb- 1 JGL vCD Ow T%4E NhT1oJAL Us-,- or- PL-m St,.ccws (Sc)
YDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
- Stream. Lake, or Tide Gauge
-Aerial Photographs
- Other
No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water- (in.)
Depth Io Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Wefland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
_ Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12"
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels In Upper 127
Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAGNeutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Ma RYDa.OLOGY 4lA2AL?Z1LISTCS
Plot ID: F- 2 Page 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):_Tv?uASE? _ .1 .,,tt,o= AMP ex , $-IS% Drainage Class:__ rtiwD
Taxonomy (Subgroup): TYO,cAPL,??w0.ICEPrS Field Observations
AA Confirm Mapped Type: ?Ys No
hiQvt? ?APtVWL?'S _
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Depth Matrix Mottle Mottle Texture,
(urs_) Horizan Color (Color) % Concretions.
5 IoYR .S?G
LAAMY SAND
10 1 o Y2 54

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Odoron High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquiuic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain In Remarks
i
Remarks:
VETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes (t!D
Hydric Soils Present? Yes <I-RD
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
Yes (Vrg-)
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: &a&= KING C2 N,GHI AentDS , NC Date: r c I i t Jis
Applicant/Owner. Comm-L PAmm,ms County: AACo,,j
Investigator. D. ?Avr,,R State: No2r,.( C.RoL1NA
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes SC4'JG-5Hkv6 W aND
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Transect ID:
(if needed, explain on reverse.) Plot ID: P-S
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator
1- PI-VS s,-e'6.s S14ZJ6 FACU 9.
2- Rvsvs se. ;,A ' 1:-AC 10.
3. SALIx A1iGPa SkiRVG O&L 11.
4- LO!=ks. v,a?,N,ct+ FaG,.! 12
5. TVaXvs e vs vs (iFK8 . 1=AcW + 13.
6- P0L160m%1 swt try tvM ??s . 03L 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-) 83 ?,
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_ Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
Aerial Photographs
Other Inundated
X No Recorded Data Available _
Saturated in Upper 12"
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines

Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"

Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data

Depth to Saturated Soil: O (in.) _ FAG-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: * AT-?m 1 H.oK.
SoKE -SReAs Or PDNDFC W<.T'CQ w„?,., w?htip•
SOILS
Plot ID: P-3
Page 2
Map Unit Name q
(Series and Phase):_E?NEYViLLE-&FSrj,,r-U2&A.a L,NO Drainage Class:_ WD
Taxonomy (Subgroup): TYPIC -DYSr20,:gerprs Feld Observations
Confirm Mapped Type: Oi? No
11 PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Depth
(ins.) Horizon
0-10
Matrix Mottle
Color (Color)
S Y 'A -7.15 YQ 4-/'6
Texture,
Mottle Concretions,
% Structure, etc.
>10
6
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
x Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
X Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors - Other (Explain in Remarks
Remarks:
NETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? (![§a No
Hydric Soils Present? a No
? Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
Remarks:
(Circle)
No
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: giz&e-e
K,r,G @_ tt4C Date: to(???gs
/
Applicant/Owner.. l0,?5TEL.?--111 M5, County: mAco.,
Investigator. -D, 4??e rz State: CkZ-L. NA
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes No Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes No UPLAND
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes No Transect ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.) Plot ID: P-4
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator
1- PINVS S'Mog„s 54 F?-V% TA
CU 9.
2. CoCa'Js A'momvm Sr?Q.,a A
FMC' W } 10.
3. S.,L,X N,GR•A SHR?3 O&L 11.
4. -y,,-os er:Fusvs l??g . FACw + 12.
5. FAC- 13.
6. UJ,,D a UOLAND_T/E Gross {?cxs. - 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAG-) 6 o D?,
Remarks: 'g U.,Kwo, ,a CPA-KS 5%-Al" f- -.v
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
-Aerial Photographs
Other _ Inundated
X No Recorded Data Available _ Saturated in Upper 12"
- Water Marks
Drift Lines

_ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water. (in.) _ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.) _ Local Soil Survey Data
FAG-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.) _
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: o ?, L.ND
C•µn??T'e'G,S-!•LL? -
Plot ID: ?- Page 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Ph ase):_EoAEYVIuE-C'+, ra.rT - U¢sr.a 1A,4D Drainage Class: Wti
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup):_ TPIG DYSTiLOCNREYTS Confirm Mapped Type: es No
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Texture,
Depth Matrix Mottle Mottle Concretions,
(ins.) Horizon Color (Color) % Structure, etc.
?-6 2.5 Y Lf-3 GRAVELLY C>ANDY LflhM
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks
Remarks:
WEI'IAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?? No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
Yes

UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, Ltd.
October 23, 1995
Mr. David Baker
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 143
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
RE: Request for Jurisdictional Determination
and Nationwide Permit Verification
Proposed Burger King Site - Highlands
Macon County, North Carolina
Project No. 951347-01-05
Dear Mr. Baker:
95) / Y7
d OCT 0
b
This letter serves as a request for jurisdictional determination on a proposed Burger King
Site in Macon County. Included with this request is one copy of the wetland delineation
report prepared by our company for the project planners. Please review this report for
evaluating the project and concurrence with our delineation. We additionally request a
verification that the proposed activities, qualify for nationwide permit 26, "headwaters and
isolated waters discharges". Please refer to the Impact Assessment and Federal
Regulations section of this report for our opinions on the nationwide permit requirements
for this project.
We will be glad to meet with any of your staff members if a field inspection is necessary.
If any additional information is required please feel free to contact us at our office. Your
expeditious response to this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
David P. Huetter
Wildlife Eco10 ' t
W. Kent Campbell
Wetlands Specialist
DPH/WKC1sak
Attachments
cc: Mr. David Yow, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
808 PARK NORTH BOULEVARD e SUITE 100 @ CLARKSTON. GA 30021 . TEL: [phone] ¦ FAX: [phone]

DEM ID: ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provided Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
P.O. Box 1890
Willmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E
Telephone [phone]
WATER QUALITY PLANNING
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL,
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27656-0535
ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS. SEVEN (7)
COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: C-OmVrEL PmernteRS .saa..
2. Owners Address: P.O. Saw 24.39 1)u?.?rru GA
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (Work): 4o%1- Liyi - 2241-o
4. If Applicable : Agent name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
MR. DAV,a P. ILE-rrErZ , UNrreo CoasuL-n.sc. G to.+P t_-co
8018 PAexMr,=rK Tpvva. . CLAmysTc-m , Cg 3oo2.1
(40L?? 2-9 4 - 3919
5. Location'of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: MTCON
Nearest Town or City: 1A'CAL -JPT- . NC
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): S¢e ,A-rr-Ac,.,.ey pnE 3
6. Name of Closest Stream/River: CVI.LASATA llvo VIAL LAM- SKS20Y 4 wNO Cwg LAKE ^No UninlakeD
7. River Basin: CUU-ASATA Pwe - ?-QI
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WSI, OR WSII? YES [ ] NO [>e]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [x] NO [ ]
If yes, explain: lZece w- r •Foa NWP ?10 I SM ^T-y-ACAWD Coe: gAmoesmVP veLa,-se•A"Q.?J
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S. Including wetlands, located on project site: 0,35 A%c&x-
SEE ATmca?eo WcrLANv, ?Ct-??s2zA-rWa pimP6wr PxPePka.EV iY 0.acc, C.Asutal.w GaoVP
11. Number of acres of waters of U.S., including wetlands,. impacted by the proposed project:
Filled RMV PlPev eon t>%3%-r 0.35 Qc¢cs
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: 0.35 AcAtys
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS - 8 1/2" X 11" drawings only): Croasrcxvc-r s?FS-rA??,,,sr
w%-r;., 4AR44tv-16 , SER.V%C.E KoAD Ardfl CsRREnt ASLE4 IMPKbVEMtsNTS .
13. Purpose of proposed work: T ce.ds-rewcr oN Vn%e p,uwose-p 1,04 a.? vrm,
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimized wetland impacts. U,4Aal,E -m veV¢Lop S%-r¢ WVT%40%3T tw+C ACNMV?.rT eN wrr-- 'Jus
See An-J C JM ?ACsE; 3
15: You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (LSFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or criticai
habitat in the permit area that may be affected. by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [><] NO[
J
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS. S CZ ArrMC*Nc-9>pp,*,E 3

16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ } NO [k]
RESPONSES FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetlands delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.'GVJe DFuNe-ane,a P.epae
B. If available, representative photographic wetlands to be impacted by project. N(A
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line. Sev- Liu,. R-?,?•+ 'P-Ar6o r
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy. SEE AVr C44WV' PAGE 3
E. What is land use of surrounding property: ZeN,r4c. vem ¢vstpis" S' (T.- B) 2EStowt- tl,s.t-
F. If applicable, what Is proposed method of sewage disposal? ??„«?*,.? Sow?rA¢c Sewcy- t.o-r
VPsr"
9r
.1*0
Page 3
ATTACHMENT TO NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUEST FORM
Item 5: Specific Location
The project site is located in the southeast comer of the intersection of NC
Highway 106 (First Street) and Spring Street. Driveway entrance to lumber
yard at NC Hwy. 106 is southwest comer of project site. Hampton Inn is
located west of the project site, across NC Hwy. 106.
Item 14: Impact Minimization
Soil erosion control measures will be implemented during construction to
protect stream. In addition, modifications to the site plan have been
proposed and are currently being worked out. These modifications consist
of moving the proposed headwall from along the east boundary of the
project site further to the west. This will enable a portion of the stream to
be left in its current natural condition as well as reduce some impacts to the
wetlands on the project site.
Item 15: Presence of Protected Species
A copy of this permit application is being sent to Mr. David Yow with the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 57 Hilltop Road, Asheville,
NC.
Item 17.13: Stormwater Management
The town 'of Highlands' only requirement is to provide a minimum green area
of 30% of total developed area. Approximately 50% of the project area will
be green. Proposed piping of the existing stream across the project site
was based on hydrology study of basin analyzing basin for development
under existing zoning ordinances for a 100-year storm.
IL
DEM ID: A .n0N ID:
Nationwide Permit RequMed (Provides N&Wmwide Permit
30IlwtT IFOMFOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Eaiweers
NsUonwide permits that regnhv appUcation for Section 401 certmeadon
WE-MW=ON` DLSTRICT F,NQINEWk WATU QVALrrY PLtiN ONO
COM OP ENOII OMMON M B?t'VIItO? MANAt#ffiKWr
DEPARTMM4T OF THE AWY NC DEPARTMWP OF , HEALTH.
P.O. Boot I890 AMa NATURAL RJEOURCES
VrdM1ftPXh CMAW-CO-B I89t? P?0.8 N29535
C 1762&4535
Telephone [phone] AR a ; MR, TORND}RNEY
Telephone (919) 733-SM
ONE (1) COPY OF TMS COMPLETED APPLICATION SRO= BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF RNODME.
PLRA(7pR1CN'0r MS SHOULD B8 SENT TO Tim ,N.C. DIVISION OP ENVIRQNbQDC , MANAOM4M
Constel Partners, Inc.
I. Owners Name: Attn: Mr. Ken Adams, President (A Franchise of Burner Kino Ccre
'
PO
2. Owners Address: Box 2439
3. Owners Phone Number (Home); - - - - - - - : ?+ ?,kl: 404 - 6 s 7 - 2 2 4 0
4. II Appliaabir. A=mt's name or rnP=St'ble? corpm au official. address, pisoee m=bes
Mr. Denr- s DeWalf, DPWelf d Schmitt, P.A.
PO Box 1295. Highlands, NC 29741
-[phone]
S. Location of work (MUST ATTACH M"). County: M a c o n
Nearest Town or City: Highlands, N r.
SpeeXlc L=&tion'(1r?c1ud* road numbers. landma ts, etas
See Atta_hed P29e -3
b. NaslreOfC3t3aCStslr?C C1/j2}ya; Cullasa ja River via Lake Sequoyah & Club- Lake and
unnamed tributary
7. River$asia: Cullasaia River Basin
$. is
Popert Is on rthis pMlea IxatCd I W a ter e d Colli tMed as Tiout. SAI HOW, OW WS L or WS In. YES j j NO (Y
9...tiave any
Section 404 permits Wen pmviously requested for use on this propat ? •yg;
• r i j • NO (Al;-
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total n=bat of acM of waters of the U.S.. InaiudinS wedattds, loft 44 o s 3 A C r
a tn:hed rs ort by n ed Consulting Group, Ltd.
and Permit For
tt9chmsnt Pege' or exp ana ran
wetlands, impketed by the proposed projea:
'Filled end piped conduit 0.043 acres
Drsacd: None
Floodod. None
Flxcavated: None
. Total IftR9 cteeC_I)-. o t,:; a c
?0 tF? Exis{ln4 4AN Culvtrr ownstredm end of •
DrOjeCt mUSt be upgraded
replacm d in future. This Work will be dune !r
n i
riiiI I ? TW ??li?M DiQQ?? T

Page 2
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1R" X 11" drawings only)r:
Construct restaurant with parking, service road and green area improveme
13. Purpose of proposed work: To develop proposed 1 .04' acre site.
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be earned out in wetlap?. Ab 1so note n?ea
taken to ttsininsize wetland impacts. Soil erosion control (B m P measures w i e - implemented during construction to protect stream. .(See page 3)
13. You arerequired to contact the U.S. Fish and 1Vildlife Service (UW"WS) and/or National Marine_Fisheries Se
relth ) regor c:
N(
NSES i+RQM TFiS USFWS AND10R NMFS SHOULD 88 FORWARDED TO CORPS.
15. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) mgading the potence of hi
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the. proposed project? Have you done so'? Ym ( J ?;(
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional Information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams. and lakes on the property. ( S e e a t t a c h e d
B. If available, m smtetivC h of wetlands to be R e p o r t )
Pn P?i?p impacted by p[vject. Not a v a i l a b l e
C. If delineation was perfonndd by a consultant. include all data:lmd telavant to ft place nmt of the
delin"dCMlhm (See attached report)
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project„ attach copy. ( S e e p a g e 3 )
E. What is land use of surrounding property? (See page 3)
F . I f applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? municipal S a n i t a r y S e w e r
Owner's signature ?"
REPORT
OF
WETLAND DELINEATION
ON
BURGER KING SITE
1.04 ACRE TRACT
HIGHLANDS, NORTH CAROLINA
FOR
MR. KEN ADAMS
CONSTEL PARTNERS, LTD.
P.O. BOX 2439
DULUTH, GEORGIA 30136
PROJECT NO. 951347-01-05
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
AM
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, Ltd.
October 25, 1995
Mr. Ken Adams
Constel Partners, Inc.
P.O. Box 2439
Duluth, Georgia 30136
RE: Wetland Delineation
Burger King Site
1.04 Acre Tract
Highlands, North Carolina
Project No. 951347-01-05
Dear Mr. Adams:
United Consulting Group, Ltd. is pleased to submit this report of a Wetland Delineation
on the above referenced property. Included in this report are the results of our
investigation, relevant maps, data sheets, and a topographic survey showing the areas
flagged as wetlands. Also, included in this report are recommendations forfurther action
with the Corps of Engineers (COE). We have forwarded this report to the COE and
requested a verification of our findings. A copy of our letter to the COE is included with
this report. We anticipate 8-12 weeks will be required for a response from the COE and
will forward this information to you when we receive it.
We have enjoyed working with you on this project. Please feel free to contact us if you
have any questions or if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
David P. Huetter
Wetlands Specialist
W. Kent Campbell
Senior Wetlands Specialist
DPH/WKC/sak
808 PARK NORTH BOULEVARD ¦ SUITE 100 ¦ CLARKSTON, GA 30021 ¦ TEL: [phone] ¦ FAX: [phone]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT PURPOSE AND LOCATION ...................................... 2
DELINEATION METHODOLOGY .......................................... 2
RESULTS ......................................................... 3
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS ........................ 4
LIMITATIONS ........................................................ 5
APPENDIX
USGS Topographic Map
Data Fonrns for Routine Delineation
Wetland Survey
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A Wetland Delineation has been completed on the 1.04 acre Burger King Site (referred to
in this report as the "project site") located in Highlands, North Carolina. The results of
this investigation are briefly summarized below. The text of the report should be reviewed
for a discussion of these items.
1. A small stream is located flowing across the south portion of the project site. A
second stream flows south along the west end of the project site. Some areas of
potential wetlands were discovered adjacent to these streams on the project site.
The wetlands and stream channel qualify as jurisdictional waters of the United
States (U.S.) as defined in 33 CFR, Part 328.3, and are regulated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE). All of the waters and wetlands located on the project
site are, in our opinion, located above the point of flow exceeding five (5) cubic
feet per second and should qualify as "headwaters" as defined in 33 CFR, Part
330.2(d).
2. If loss of waters (impacts) to jurisdictional waters is less than one acre in size and
qualifies as headwaters, then prior notification to the COE is not required
according to 33 CFR, Part 330 Appendix A(26)(b). -Based on this delineation and
calculations of the wetland area, impacts to any and all of the jurisdictional waters
on the project site should be allowed under nationwide pennit 26.
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
PROJECT PURPOSE AND LOCATION
United Consulting Group, Ltd. was contracted by Constel Partners, Inc. to delineate
wetlands and other jurisdictional waters of the United States (U.S.) for a 1.04 acre tract
of land located in the Township of Highlands, Macon County, North Carolina. The tract
is referred to in this report as the "project site". The project site is located southeast
of and adjacent to the intersection of Spring Street and N.C. Highway 106. A site
location map is provided in the Appendix of this report. The project site is located in
the Mountain Physiographic Province of North Carolina and contains a stream that
eventually flows into Lake Sequoyah, which is part of the Cullasaja River drainage basin.
According to a topographic survey plan provided by DeWolf and Schmitt Architects and
prepared by L. Stephen Foster, Land Surveyor, dated January 20, 1995, the project site
is undeveloped and contains two small streams which converge off the southwest comer
of the project site. The project site contains nearly level to moderate slopes with drainage
occurring towards the south and west. This survey was used to determine the boundaries
and landscape features of the project site during the investigation.
DELINEATION METHODOLOGY
For an area to qualify as wetland there must be physical evidence on-site to satisfy
criteria within three parameters. These parameters are:
1) a dominance of wetland vegetation;
2) physical evidence of wetland hydrology; and
3) indications of hydric soils.
The criteria used to determine these parameters in the field is found in the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. This manual outlines the
currently accepted federal method for wetland delineation and was used for this
investigation. Further, wetlands were documented using the "Minimum Requirements for
Preliminary Wetland Delineations" as described in the COE Savannah District Public
Notice of January 23, 1992. The definition for other waters of the U.S., found at 33 CFR
328.3(3), was used to determine areas of jurisdiction which do not meet the criteria for
wetlands.
After in office research into available soil surveys, wetland maps, and hydrologic data for
the project site, the normal and accepted procedure for routine on-site investigation
requires different wetland communities to be sampled by establishing a plot to collect
data forthe three parameters. The plot sample consisted of identifying the dominant plant
species in each vegetated strata within the wetland community. The dominant species
2
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
were then compared to their assigned indicator status which is based on the estimated
range of probability for that species occurring in a wetland. A greater than fifty percent
dominance of species in which the indicator status is either facultative, facultative
wetland, or obligate will satisfy the wetland vegetation parameter.
Concurrently with sampling the plant community for that area, a soil sample, using a
shovel or auger, was taken to determine if an aquic moisture regime (hydric) exists near
the soil's surface. A list of field indicators for hydric soil conditions is provided in the
manual for on-site determinations. In addition, physical, on-site wetland hydrology
indicators must also be, present in the area to satisfy the hydrology parameter. Any
wetland hydrology indicators, which were visually recognizable, were noted for that plot
sample area.
Since many of the dominant plant species found in wetlands in this area can also occur
as dominants in uplands, comparisons with the field data for hydric soils and wetland
hydrology is emphasized for determining the limits of the wetland boundary on site. The
data from the wetland plot sample areas were then transferred to Data Forms for Routine
Wetland Determination provided by the COE. Copies of the Data Forms are provided in
the Appendix of this report. The wetland boundary was identified, flagged, and measured
for inclusion to the topographic survey and site plan.
RESULTS
In office research into Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Surveys indicated that no
hydric soils have been mapped on the project site, The soils mapped for the project
site include Tuckasegee-Whiteside Complex and Edneyville-Chestnut-Urban Land
Complex. The entire project site was then investigated for visual evidence of
wetlands. During the field investigation, two streams were located on the project. site
which converged south of the southwest comer of the project site. The streams were
located on the south and west portions of the project site, respectively, and originated
off-site from drainage swales. The south stream was approximately 10 feet wide and
flowed west 310 feet across the project site. The smaller (west) stream was 3 feet wide
and extended 100 feet south to the point where it converged with the west flowing
stream. Areas of potential wetlands were located adjacent to these stream channels.
The majority of the wetlands were located north of the west flowing stream. The
wetlands on the project site were characterized by shrub and emergent hydrophytic
vegetation, saturated soil conditions, and dark, gravelly-sandy-loam soils. This
wetland area appeared to be influenced hydrologically by subsurface flow from the
adjacent upland and poor infiltration of surface waters. The wetlands on the project
site were identified, flagged, and measured from known fixed locations for inclusion
into this report.
Two sampling plots were established in the wetland area. The data collected in the
sampling plots is a representation of the existing conditions for the wetland habitat
located on the project site. Two upland plot samples were also established for
comparison with the wetland plot sample data.
3
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
The first plot sample (P-1) was established in the east portion of the wetland area, north
of the stream. Soils in this wetland area were found to be a poorly drained, sandy-loam.
Soil color or chroma values from extracted samples were compared to the Munsell Soil
Color Chart. Soil colors for the matrix ranged from very dark grayish brown to olive gray
with a Munsell reading in the 2.5Y 3/2 to 5Y 5/2 range. Soils in this area were saturated
to the surface with several areas of standing surface water to a 2-3 inch depth.
The plant community within the plot sample consisted of emergent vegetation. This
herbaceous layer was dominated by cut-grass, wool-grass, tearthumb, and juncus. The
dominant plants in this plot sample meet the percentage criteria for wetland vegetation.
The upland comparison plot sample (P-2) contained dry, well drained sandy-loam to
sandy-clay-loam. Soil colors were yellowish-brown with a Munsell reading of 10YR 5/6.
No wetland hydrology indicators were present in the upland plot sample. Vegetation in
the upland plot sample consisted of black birch, black cherry, Eastern white pine, Eastern
hemlock, blackberry, and wild strawberry.
The third plot sample (P-3) was established in the northwest portion of the wetland. Soils
in this plot sample were found to be a somewhat poorly drained sandy-loam with medium
to large sized gravel and rock intermixed. Soil colors for the matrix were a very dark gray
with a Munsell reading of 5Y 3/1. Bright strong brown mottles were observed throughout
with a Munsell reading of 7.5 YR 416. Soils in this area were saturated at the surface and
groundwater depth in the pit was 4 inches. Additional wetland characteristics such as a
sulfidic odor and oxidized rhizospheres were noted in the soil.
The plant community within this wetland plot sample consisted primarily of shrub and
herbaceous layers that were dominated by willow, blackberry, soft rush, tearthumb, and
cut-grass. The dominant plants in this plot sample meet the percentage criteria for
wetland vegetation.
The upland comparison plot sample (P-4) contained moderately well drained gravelly
loamy-sand. Soil colorwas olive brown with a Munsell reading of 2.5Y4/3. Shovel refusal
due to increased gravel content occurred at approximately 6 inches. No wetland
hydrology indicators were present in the upland plot sample. Vegetation in the upland
plot sample consisted of Eastern white pine, dogwood, willow, wild strawberry, grasses,
and soft rush.
In addition to the data collected in the plot samples, investigation of the entire wetland
indicated additional soil characteristics and plant species that were not necessarily noted
in the plot sample areas. Plant species such as sedges, Rhododendron, elderberry,
Eastem white pine, red maple, and jewelweed occurred in scattered areas of the wetland.
Soils in several areas of the wetland contained gravel and rock intermixed. This rock and
compacted soil appeared to be reducing the normal infiltration rate of the soil and
resulted in saturated soil surface conditions. Based on a conversation with a local
construction contractor, the project site was previously a gravel yard and contained a
small office and piles of several varieties of gravel.
4
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD. 4
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS
Based on this investigation, the stream channels and the wetland areas meet the
criteria as jurisdictional waters and should be considered waters of the U.S., according
to 33 CFR Part 328.3(a)(3). These waters are regulated by the COE through Section
404 of the Clean Water Act., and, under certain conditions, the discharge of pollutants,
including the placement of fill material, in these waters may require prior authorization
from the COE.
Based on the USGS Topographic map (Highlands, NC-GA Quadrangle), the combined
drainage area for the two streams located on the project site is approximately 80 acres,
or 0.12 square miles. We calculated a estimated mean annual runoff values of 0.38
cubic feet per second (cfs), immediately below the convergence of the two streams.
These calculations are based on the USGS map of mean annual runoff in this drainage
basin of approximately 3.0 cfs per square mile. Because these median flow values are
less than the five (5) cfs threshold, the waters located on the project site should be
characterized, in our opinion, as "headwaters" as defined in 33 CFR, Part 330.2(d).
Wetlands on the project site were identified, flagged, and measured for inclusion into
this report. Total area of jurisdictional waters on the project site is 0.35 acres. Please
refer to the wetland map located in an envelope at the back of this report, which
shows the jurisdictional waters boundary as identified and measured.
Impacts to wetlands and other waters of the U.S. are based on footprint size of fill
material which is then converted to acres. If loss of waters (impacts) is less than one
acre in size and qualifies as headwaters, then prior notification to the COE is not
required according to 33 CFR, Part 330 Appendix A(26)(b). The waters on the project
site should, in our opinion, meet the criteria for headwaters. According to our
calculations, impacts to these waters of the U.S. (0.35 acres) is, in our opinion, allowed
under Nationwide Permit (NWP) 26 without prior authorization from the COE. However,
we do recommend that our findings and opinions stated in the report be verified by the
proper issuing Corps of Engineers office.
LIMITATIONS
Recommendations for further coordination with the COE for verification of a wetland
delineation, issuance of a jurisdictional determination or permit to discharge fill
material in waters of the U.S. and wetlands are based on an understanding of current
federal wetland regulations, the results of the investigation, and review of proposed
development plans for the project site.
This report should not be considered an official determination for jurisdictional waters
of the U.S., including wetlands. Only the COE has authority to make official
determinations. No warranty is expressed or implied.
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
5
UNITED CONSULTING GROUP, LTD.
?` 4000 ' < / ` \ : • ' ?? u
0 y ? ? I ?, rr
v u G?"J
I n ? 6 G ? ? •1;? ??/- • 11 e(?
r u 3f ? ..,? o a s
• ? h ri P u ?
r ? N Ir rr •) ?_
j -4N
IL CL x
• NL • moo U O F
/ /. _ •
r4 OL
?\ Z Z C
Ili 0 m U
(j( CL w z 2Ci
6 '
I-- Ir
I W.: 1 a Q
CD IM
n ?' a ? o©• 7 ?? '
PROJECT SITE" ._ 1 T-• ^.,. J S
L AS 7 t 1 ?'
50 r, • Lae 't 0 r.'/ I ° ' '??% . •? ?? .?. •\i ? 39F33
?• gll' `? •' o •° ams qtr r
N •?•
.111, Co 00
!__ ;mob , Q ?? '. Mon • ?,_ ? ? ?• I' ? •¢'`?? ? ,/ ? . it ? f? O
rr
CY)
CF)
?\ " `•? • ?i ?soo ? ?t ? } 11 'Iri_?1 ? ??\
.n ? a ?, ., ? • app 1 L ,I I ? t // ?,a o
,`??1 ?? ,' `f? ' ?_ •,?' ?."i„•,?` •t_ ? ? ? '??1 !: ?? ?? __ a 'I- r!? ? ? F- 'Z
ILI
IL cc
N
N o Z.
T I_
Y
0 4
1 1 MILE W 9
U L LI
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET ?
1 Z
s 0 1 KILOMETER O
U
z
J Z .
4 Q Lu
cA O U
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: gu2C,-R lGav Nwuu??os,uC Date: i o ???
Applicant/Owner Co amL P.,k'7JS-r_S Coun
: MAIN
Investigator. b. µ?£ State
N e ati.% Gaov,.?e.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes ® Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes ctg?D Transect ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.) plot ID:
P_ 1
V`EGECATION
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator
1. Sc?KPvs cYPertNUS }•?ertg, OBL 9-
2- Tuucus ?Frusvs EZ$ . FACW + 10-
3. POLYCaONJN s+,??-trrvn? ±I?t-r?6. Q?.L 11-
4• egMSIe v1w,Nie.01 NeRg. FAGW 12-
4- 13.
6. 14. -
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL. FACW, or FAG (excluding FAC-) 1C)0%
Remarks:
HyLiKOLOG7
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
_ Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available _ Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12"
-Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns In Wetlands
Depth of Surface Water.
(gyn.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels In Upper 12,
Depth 16 Free Water in Pit: 4
(in-) _ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Saturated Soil: o gyn.
C ) - FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: .
i'ocK?•s oc ST.wD?.JG W.+? -n, Z..

Plot ID: P-1 Page 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):_TcKASEGES_WH, 5« ?Hp e-IS% Drainage Class: M??D
Taxonomy (Subgroup)- " Field Observations
1 rv,c aoLVmQQ? Mapped T-
Aout, PAPLub--,-e Confirm Type: No
11 PROFILE DESCRIPTION
QePth
Cats.)
Horizon Matrix
Color Mottle
(w
Mottle Texture,
Concretions,
or) Structure
t
, e
a
Z" 2.5 Y . 3/2

5
c, Y s?z SANDY LonM
? S.?ruoY I...c,,,,.?
10 13Y 52
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking
Aquic Moisture Regime in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain In Remarks
Remarks:
SAIL APPCtir25-rv mf WNITESip? W,'t'L? Oc Stalol4TL.7 NIGNeyL 'i's1.1,M NO
STONE J-30 Guv? ?.rncvtn.xcs vJ?rn so„ Q"?R?- W?'ci1-'1Z '?/yF>L?.
AYET LAND DETERMINATION
nyaropnyuc vegetation Present? ?& No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Ye No
Hydric Soils Present? Ye No
Kemarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
No II --
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WEll-AND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: 9-a6ez K,NG 2 1- *KLA,.,vs,1.IC Date: 1o („19s
Applicant/Owner. C.NS-V L PAitrNMS County:
Investigator. 1??E "`°''
State: NcR„+ CaRo,.,w.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes
(1,5? Community the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes (IgD UA y ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes L? Transect 1D:
(tf needed, explain on reverse.) plot ID: p _ Z
'EGETATION
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator
1- g rvLA Lrxrm Su6CAJOPY FACU 9.
2- PRvm,s SERon,JA. S-S Cswcpy FACU 10.
3- K0111,A PSEVDPACAC.,A SugGNOPy 1t.
4, pl4vs s7mo6Js SHRv s FACU 12-
5' T
sJGA ciwooE.as(s S?,R„g FgCU 13.
v
6' ?JBJS ALLEGi1¢N,EaS15 ER3. 14.
7- FESTk c sp. OE-K& FAC- 15-
8. FRAGA ,A v1kGitJ1A4JA- FAC-
I

16-
rercent of uominant 5pectes that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAG) 0% 1
Remarks: * N*• ,NeL.ecz-b 0,4 •rtiE N"-n-.JAL L sr Pw.,rr Spm"Es (SE)
YDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
-Aerial Photographs
Other
4 No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water. (in.)
Depth 16 Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12"
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels In Upper 12'
-Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
-Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: t , HYDPOLOGY
Plot ID.-, F- ,L Page 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): KAS6ccc_W- s,? ?Mp x 6-is% Drainage Class:_ MWD
Taxonomy (Subgroup): TNcAP?„Mge?s Feld Observations
?'11 Confirm Mapped Type: No
Aa„tc T14PtvVVL+S
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Depth matrix
(i=-) Horizon Color
S 10 YK S/6
10 10 YR 54

Mottle Texzme.
Mottle Concretions,
(Color) % Structure, etc-
LOAMY SAMD
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sand Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain In Remarks
Remarks:
VEZIAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
Yes Q§)
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: guac_m KING Q N?GHUkNDS , NC Date: 1 11 1q-s-
Applicant/Owner. Comsm? PART,., ms County: r(a?,N
Investigator. D. l-Avrw State: N, GaoL?N?
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes SGr?V6-5H/RU6 ?eruND
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes Transect ID:
(If needed, explain on reverse.) _ Plot ID: P-3
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator Dominant Plant
Species
Stratum
Indicator
1. PINVS SZ-Rp6uS SHRVS FA" 9.
2. RvsVs SP. SNQvg FAC 10.
3. SAUx N?a?, SHRV(; o?? 11.
4. Lees. v?wwLCA elf- 1? ?AcW 12.
5. Tv?c?s EFFus?s MFRS . T=Ac?.1 13.
6. PoLY6oMdM S.A.( Tr's"n . -% (-ITZs . 06L 14. -
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-) 83 ?,
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks): Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
- Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge Primary Indicators:
-Aerial Photographs
Other Inundated
.X, No Recorded Data Available _
A Saturated in Upper 12"
_ Water Marks
_ Drift Lines

Field Observations: Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

Depth of Surface Water. (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12"

Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) ,,r- Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data

Depth to Saturated Soil: O (in.) _ FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: * A7T?-R 1 H,.oK.
SOME l.R-?S ofr" PoNDED WA.'RQ W l'fz'IIN W ERJ?.?SD ,
Plot ID: P-3 Page 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):_EDNEYVILLF-(!AES-rW rr- Uas.r4,a iA,NO Drainage Class:- WD
Taxonomy (Subgroup)- Field Observations
TYPIC DYS, ?ocaeEFrs Confirm Mapped Type: No
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Depth
(ins.) Horizon
0-10
Matrix Mottle
Color (Color)
S Y 1/1• -7.15 YK 4-/6
Texture,
Mottle Concretions,
% Structure, etc.
>10
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
x Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
4 Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks
ii Remarks:
NETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?? No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? (X§k No
Hydric Soils Present?e No
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
No
. 1 1
Plot ID: p- Page 2
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):_EflriEVvi"E-G., T,,,rr _ Va?aN n Drainage Class: W-
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Topic D ySTq_0GU Rer-rS Confirm Mapped Type: es No
PROFILE DESCRIPTION
Depth Matrix Mottle Mottle
(ins.) Horizon Color (Color) %
0-r. 2.,5 Y - 4-/3
Texture,
Concretions,
Structure, etc.
69A V e

Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol
Histic Epipedon
Sulfidic Odor
Aquic Moisture Regime
Reducing Conditions
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors
Remarks:
Concretions
High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Listed on Local Hydric Soils. List
Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Other (Explain in Remarks
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?<!!Sji? No (Circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
Hydric Soils Present? Yes fiO
Remarks:
Is this Sampling Point
Within a Wetland?
(Circle)
Yes ®°