19950302 Ver 1_Complete File_19950320

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
E:) F== F=1
March 22, 1995
McDowell County
DEM Project # 95302
DOT TIP # R-2020,
State Project No. 6.87901T
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Barney O' Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch E Copy
NC DOT
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. O'Quinn:
You have our approval to place fill material in waters for the purpose of road widening at US
221/NC 226 from south of SR 1434 to south of SR 1442, as you described in your application dated
14 March 1995. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General
Water Quality Certification Number 2671 or 2735. This certification allows you to use Nationwide
Permit Number 26 or General Permit 031 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: DOT's
Stream Relocation Guidelines must be followed for this project. 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 30 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.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
Jr.
95302.1tr
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
N .,C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
4 REF. N. OR O
mom: REF. NO. OR ROOM,. BLDG.
ACTION
?NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR.REQUEST -
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS' ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL.
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR.. INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER - ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
RECEIVE
2:01995
SCIENCES
N?A
EMIRON W
M

..? ----p
• G

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
March 14, 1995
District Engineer
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-5201
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
D E.Mt?
g53oa
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: McDowell County - Widening of US 221/NC 226 from South of SR 1434
to South of SR 1442; State Project No. 6.879001T; T.I.P. No. R-2020
herein includes the road widening from south of SR 1434 to south of SR 1442,
and is to be constructed utilizing state funds. A State Environmental
Assessment was completed for this project on May 22, 1992.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to upgrade 4.1
miles of the existing two-lane roadway to five lanes. The bridges over
Armstrong Creek and Hickory Bottom Branch fall within the project limits;
however, these bridge replacements were constructed as a separate project
(B-1277) in order to use federal bridge replacement funds. These bridges
were approved under Nationwide Permit No. 26 and General Permit No. 31 by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on November 2, 1992. The project proposed
The proposed work will involve stream crossings at fourteen locations
along the project corridor. Nine of the crossings will involve channel-
This project will nvolve no fill in jurisdictional wetlands-as defined
i n the Federal Manual for z nd-?e1 mead ur-- s?tc 1 canal W e t 1 ands
(1987 Manual). It is anticipated that this project may be authorized under
Nationwide Permit #26 for projects Above Headwaters, 33 CFR 330.5(3). As
this project occurs in a Designated Mountain Trout County, a letter of
chain e_s, two will require placement of new-culverts-,-and-three will require
6 tensions of existing culverts. The attached plan drawings illustrate the
work proposed at each of these crossings. All of these tributaries are
located above stream headwaters. None of these streams are Designated Public
Mountain Trout Waters.
0

March 14, 1995
Page 2
concurrence must be obtained from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC). By copy of this letter, we hereby request that WRC review
the project and provide their comments on this proposal.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact
Cyndi Bell in Raleigh at [phone] extension 305.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
CB/rfm
Enclosures
cc: Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, WRC, Marion
Mr. Steve Chapin, COE, Asheville Field Office
Mr. Eric Galamb, DEM
1 -6
NOTIFICATION FORM
INFORMATION SHEET
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
A. NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT ENGINEER. (REFER TO
ITEM B. BELOW FOR DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT APPLICATION RE-
QUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICALLY NOTE NWP 26 DIFFERENCE.)
Certain nationwide permits require notification to the Corps of Engineers before work can proceed. They are as follows:
NWP 5 (only, for discharges of 10 to 25 cubic yards)
NWP 7
NWP 13 (only for stabilization activities in excess of 500 feet in length or greater than an average of one cubic yard
per running foot)
NWP 14 (only for fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, and must include a delineation of affected special
aquatic sites)
NWP 17
NWP 18 (required when discharge exceeds 10 cubic yards or the discharge is in a special aquatic site and must include
a delineation of the affected special aquatic site, including wetlands)
NWP 21 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
NWP 26 (only for greater than 1 acre total impacts and must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites,
including wetlands)
NWP 33 (must include a restoration plan of reasonable measures to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic resources)
NWP 37
NWP 38 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
For activities that may be authorized by the above listed nationwide permits that require notification, the
applicant shall not begin work
a. Until notified that the work may proceed under the nationwide permit with any special conditions imposed by
5 the District Engineer, or
b. If notified that an individual permit may be required, or
c. Unless 30 days (calendar) have passed from the time a complete notification is received by the District Engineer
and no notice has been received from the District Engineer, and required state approvals have been obtained.
Required state approvals include: 1) a Section 401 water quality certification if authorization is requested for a
discharge of dredged or fill material, and 2) an approved coastal zone management consistency determination if
the activity will affect the coastal area.
Use of NWP 12 also requires notification to the, District Engineer, but work may not begin until written
concurrence is received from the District Engineer. The time periods described above do not apply.
Furthermore, requirements to notify the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NN1FS), and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as indicated below and on the
notification form, do not apply.
B. APPLICATION TO DEM FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION.
Certain nationwide permits require an application to DEM in order to obtain Section 401 water quality certification.
They are NWP 6, NWP 12, NWP 15, NWP 16, NWP 17, NWP 21, NWP 33, NWP 34, NWP 38, and NWP 40.
Certain nationwide permits were issued general cer`Lifications and require no application. They are NWP 3, NWP 4,
NWP 5, NWP 7, NWP 20, NWP 22, NWP 23 (requires notification to DEM), NWP 25, NWP 27, NWP 32, NWP 36,
and N VT 37.
The following nationwide permits were issued general certifications for only limited activities: NWP 13 (for projects
less than 500 feet in length), NWP 14 (for projects that impact waters only), NWP 18 (for projects with less than 10
cubic yards c:" fill in waters only), and NWP 26 (for projects with less than or equal to one-thud acre fill of waters or
wetlands). ir: ects that do not meet these criteria require application for Section 401 water quality certifications.
C.` NOTIFICATION/APPLICATION PROCEDURES.
The attached form should be used to obtain approval from the Corps of Engineers and/or the N.C. Division of
Environmental Management as specified above. The permittee should make sure that all necessary information is
provided in order to avoid delays. One copy of the completed form is required by the Corps of Engineers and seven
copies are required by DEM. Plans and maps must be on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper.
Endangered species requirement:. For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service regarding the presence of endangered species that may
be affected by the proposed project.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
RALEIGH FIELD OFFICE
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Telephone [phone]
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
HABITAT CONSERVATION DIVISION
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone [phone]
Historic resources requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the State Historic
Preservation Office regarding the presence of historic properties that may be affected by the proposed project.
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
N.C. DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
109 East Jones Street -
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone [phone]
Information obtained from these agencies should be forwarded to the Corps.

DEM ID: ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit ft NWP 26
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 ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Bor. 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. SOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
01-M (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: North Carolina Department of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. Owners Address: P. 0. Box 25201; Raleigh, NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): --- (Work): (919 733-3141
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number.
H. Franklin Vick, P. E.
Manager
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: McDowell
Nearest Town or City: Woodlawn
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Widening of US 221/NC 226 from south
of SR 1434 to south of SR 1442
6. Name of Closest Stream/River. Armstrong Creek and Hickory Bottom Branch
-7 River Tlne;n- Catawba
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [x] NO [ ]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [x] NO [ ]
Ifyes,expiain. COE NWP 26 & General Permit 31 - approved 11/2/92 for DOT Project B-1277
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
N7A
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled:
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: N/A
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11" drawings only):
Widen MEXXX%XX US 221/NC 226 from south of SR 1434 to south of SR 1442
13. Purpose of proposed work: widen existing roadway from two-lane to five lane
14. State reasons why the applicant believ?fAat this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts.
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 orproposed 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 [ ] NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
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 [ ]
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.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property?
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal?
Owner's Signature Date

. VICINITY MAP
SHOWLVG ME LOCA770M OF STAB PROJECT 6.8790017
SHMPLYG POIMS AfAR10N
&Z,
lzz?
0
i
?O'N
TO
N.
s
BEGIN CONS7RUMON
-YS- STA Il +30
U
? ry4 ? IS 1 6
-Y6- STA 1Z+00
BEGrN STATE PROJECT NO. 6.879001T
? X555 .
i?
BEGLK con
-Y9- STA u ?

h 1
N
ti

END STATE PROJECT NO. 6..
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
BEGITf CONSTRUCTION -Y13- STA 11+00
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
-Y9- STA 11 +50
yfi
tiw
nU?
r
I y
U

-110- STA 12+75
ti
ti 4
? rt
? es.
? h e O
h

S I S

NC 226
U
, 116
X11 ?
?
,jr
7,26
a
t
1 J^? f8
1-
-- E, NU
_
-I
s-22r T
0
kc
p
5 EhD CONSTRUCTION H t >
.?+ -YU- STA I2+97 0
H
5:3
M CONS:
E
-Y8REV- STA 13+5338 BK _ .
:
-1I4- STA I
-Y8- STA 11 +83.91 AH
Elm CONSTRUCTION END CONSTRUCTION
-Y7- STA 11+50 END CONSTRUCTION
-112- SrA 11+00 PRELItIINARI
00 NOT CU TOR CM
- 1_.2020 C (.•8z4oo1r
.'. _me_Dowtlt C©._
a --
Pj Pe j
S;Ee s#action SJ39-
/ 2 2 +oo-LI

/ 2 (-? 00 .

1.¢3 440-L1-
3 0
/53+55 4?-

2 9x7
5 ... /5;9 -3 5' Rcee'
-,.?--.

77
??' 6X
! _ 1_79 tZl . - 1- /KGB

03160-b CXkhd
w/49RCP
/9 7+ 00 - ?/-
/ © (Lf) ! _
¢x3RG$G
/I 202+2 5 -b- Erna!
w/4ACP
'Z 82 -rho L-

290-125 -?J-
13 ._ (?1 ..
a

295-+ 90 RC.6'G'

.. 5 c3 rn.h
1a.nn?t . C
'pi P'
LQnGj
...E
' I
3.0
4a5:
lo5
/00
500
`
0'
35
50?
400"
30. C Y
25 cY
35 CY e- le, 4, ? e-x 6A r 14,e f
US 221/NC 226 Widening
McDowell County
State Project No. 6.87890017
T.I.P. No. R-2020
Sheet 1 of 14
0
LLJ
?? . ty'! co O
` \ , ?? a .' \ ` E , f x •' " • ' In rjF,",Ix''??' ?.,? •Y,, b d-) l0 O r-f
4-4
0) p
Q:- 4 -Z - - 7 _ F-,
p- 0 o a4 (1)
W I.E.J ` `, 3E !.+ W H U2
w -P
c to
-' . ? ?`? U.L. . - N 1 ? _ ? " ,,.•""•.? { t? ?° ? ,?, I r '}' ? ` -
to
C) -4
Z, If (D
?? r r t U `I , w
J ? Z? 1 ob ' ?.' i ? / f G
.. .." Cr 1, /? ? ? t, } ''ts+: i <? 1 ?`• -....1-"' J,..-, , ? ?G..-1r,.,...•y....-
LJ J '•i
N IIl d l c: I YS
9 L7
4w ? T I r
D? d li r 0 li ?U Li
-0
O 1S ?, LIJ
yjxl`Z? (gin '
F- S.? • j 'ti 0 J
1 ?Mi I S N ?? ??
4- L
?, i iY1 J a \1t t? t LL
Oli
`rte ~i p S '' j _ Ln i ?.
r - `1•` ., `SC q+;,??•f. s' ---{•?-.v? lfS.. tf r i Y` • ?3 ' dr, C) I~
< -
u
V-•1
tT, 0)
0 co
4.3 to 0 r-4
z I f r w j N C
;i -Aj cr a o aG o
I! 1
r,...s? ! s ) w
4-3
A, 0 a)
fl l to
c L (?o . iii N I r -.,t 2`l1(?i s r A S 1 .f:
(L) E
cn 4-)
Wt. :n aj
4-1
Jt•. t 111 i'v J r? N t o
L.L
1 `" f iii ::: ? ? c • ,
r- CD lk
' J m c !.. ' ff ) ti
?-
LJ'
O
`n
:D < Cox
-j CO
LC)
Lij ?D .22 if
IL N to
Ll-
JI z
Ll+
k? C>
x ?- +I° '
ti _ ?t1? ,,,f•` I tip' ?'i?? ?,? ,?IJ ?? ?. I
.. ,
.
Ln.
DE,
°?5?.. a -
Y? v wo 1 c
Jr, 2
w i?
LLI
n
v LC)
1S

1 °
co

I W . CV
3
44
r.LLJ:.:... .q oo0:o
r o ?nU2
r
O?
Nrl41

--,0 0
?'• r, , ?1? k N U w H vi
i:? w r ? H
3
. M -

}{ W
J rn v,vl -
J co 0

In
ILI
s
` r
i
? -03 i
1

7 U4-

A.f1t?;Q 8b'PO ?•,? f' 9b•s::J. ' • '? ;.• V) cv Ei
J. J t
o '. t
U-) ff °. sn tT
w t t
(31 0 00
Lr) coo
L Ln ('o r O t i e o° I ~) rO 4.3 tp O r LO - _ Q t N
00; 1 44
I , f
° O 004 O C
o , 'p9 ( / to U Z C
.? •. r It Z I >Q O ' 4 ( l/ N r-1 P O? Lr)
i ?m z LO
o oa ai
C'4 En
LLJ
Cn 4-)
_ _.. _ _• __ _ _? _. 0 { t 1 { l . o c?
Q
° f +o
j4j
t
C J CL ° 4m
O j`w" Z t CL 4! i
< LL.
^s, J e ? I i' f
to O Cc'.3 U ,s ..z: ; 1.
11 .
r .0 S CL
I ?? } ,n l `•. i fit:.
40
f t' fit. 't e \ ` \ t
U-) 0
+ V) 40
?•rj ? -? ? ? ?0.??
Ln (\I 1,
(D <D -j ' sli
Sb f ?v ?i ; ?. L tom.. ''M
E-Y
O
O
by rn
00 0
I
Nd+
b N r4
z0oao
: t0 U z
N r-I -N O
?+ U z
U a) 4-)
Z o oa (1) ai E
in N A w H cn C
y Y Y (? a N III
y _ i ! N H
0- LLJ
56
LLJ
-LU
LLJ
Q !,j W
f1t?Y ? l ' r ? ?
a /) 1,,. ;
LL.
m o
` ifs CV Q
NJ t
r ice"
cn-
, f
cl?
}?- _• W J f. t I ? C
0 COD
Co. 0
j.
to ( r v
VIT.
cc)
ti N O 1•" Cc.?
\ t i 1. ? a. t\ :? ..q• Q Q .' H
W o
\ 1 t.
° Q? b? rn
• co 0
ts? t \ in m y+ , cm
W
yCjY \ "? r 1 L.' N ??
> 1 44
.
'o i t j•}?? U N tv z •L) V
is I 1 ti(? z O O 04 4)
ti (i) H
(a 4-3
C) X.
J
If1? x N O (1/
U ^ I?i I Imo. s`._ ; •O. A .r- 0
1 > f
> Li
o -
Q o «' xa?-'. i i_ t a ?.
l®r
C\j
O O + 0 CL - 0 N?•
Qo-
l `ms`s W 4 = \
t;
/ ??iw
14J m
Gil-
ol CL
QO o ° W / i cat 41 Q' t
T ° - o by rn
It- 0
0 _j
Q O I r ' ' .O O al 'd tp O ?- }
+. O' r 1 ?i N
3 m tri ' (' -Q: O 3 0 O a o
fl-
C%j
?.Yl'l '?, ',• ..r a .. e. OJ C N ? U z
-
w O U OJ Q1 4.-1
Tj 7} 1} } F} ?.? } i f '? '' f r +?( •? a ;. Ln. r Z a n N .t}
LJ Lwww? I ?y Llf ' p? LC) O O 0r N
N H A ?.}
LLi
Z 41
2.47 f _J
O J } _
g fl - 95.98 i ° o
c °O tit-1(( I O o
J% In • - w 1 ( a' co
' c: I ( c-
- r J E V-' ._?,r-4
? f
? ,=,r1?te•?
o,
o ' _ _ jl w + ?'v 1
v
o"` O _
+ O c'co \
+ Oof/ co Ln - - 6, ° t
CO ors ??
22A3
0 y /. O
P j f c
o f 1 ??
555- :5
/? b°° °©• r 0
t
_51 ?tll""'.
t ?.
LLJ
1 1 Q i 1. r 1 / m
LE 0
N >I • N V?
LLJ I Td .i-) ID o r-,
Q \ } s t a // N rl 4•) Q
L?j :E C) C)
Z 3:
"'o 0 CL4 0)
CD F-
' O LLJ 3 N U t1s H V!
i ... >?? N ?.. tll E-1
. lol
11 `
W3L)
cl?z?.' ?- 1
S S r'
r. o i d.. I t I .; u m.. _
W F- m r-
,?n?? ` Q Z ° -}
CT) -
tA CO
u-)
O
° o o ' zl a %
O / '? ` o cv `?~•
1
o0
o_ M
o
?
N ° J p r"' (y? l 1 `. c 111 01
co - %P- ??tJJ 'A l UJ
k., 00
(D Q)
LLJ
r- r... f1.?1 ??'??''r ?'"t? +3 5?5• ? ? ? c. : a?!?37?. ...
W ?' I ?. ' Ij} M ? •?
00 <
w' mss ' ( Q + O ?
f ? f'• 1 ? 117 ? r (t r •r ? ''' ? s ? . -K ?' . I ? c r-- ? ?" `V?
CT)
cr.
w
7S I f N _ i,?., v mW
LLJ
n V
)i
.2.4T 1. c
O B7'22'53` -W _ r
+? „ U 186:!5' .r
M CD
cc)
' ` i
Lei
ISE:
po.
fJj t ? U
_,L j : f ?5? % ?v •:` 000 0
4-3 0
j . f f- ' J S 5+.i r1 Lei N
is VV Q `? „"7r ;? 3 t W
AD.
004 o
! s j ?: r r. ?{ y to U 2
.a •? 1 1
'?, , • e ? 11 ., 11.1. r { '?-, r
LLJ 14 41
W: ' ' `?- F= % -iii ? 1}1 • , ?:? J z 3 •? ?
O o a W
IL) CL4 U)
LjjC\j
a) H
4-3
I t i a u t{? S 1 1 f?'' It C (n Il
:t
(t c '1 3 O
w
Z - `tom ` F - N
1..J ^ .Q: ' , r11? ,.`: Q {?.??'` j .\ Vie.,` ?`.:
iv C\j r-
ry)
0. 0:
Lr)
a) j dt o
AIJ
• ?: lVl
o ?' -
LLJ
=
!tit Q °g r r i' ( 0
00
{;? I f
00
O J l11 t - N'JycoN
C" 4J ID 0
O O ` (-o
O 3 ?I 41
0 0`" v.,. ooao
v O O O N
r-4 C)
rf- O cx,; - ! U N dl 2 a
W / ?; _ f N UaH V2
tr a t•._ N a) F+
L() 0
p U ..J..
LL, +
O
N r`
! 1
- f W 0
•` 1, ! f 1
Y a ? UJ
t? .. 0 06 tY
N?
QCL
t
J O
O O O Jf i
0? +O. O 7: u7 I i i _
0 -
CQO)
LA 0 N
( I: = 3 587'
0 Lc) o }
ST-22'34'E 0 :+55
F ? I 4 .7?. , . I+•?5.7? _ ? 1 `cis ? / /
89
C\j w,
f
4jLj
f r , ?.
°o S 82.2 3
`''
LLJ
Oil-
Od.
o ... E-1
00
A a> c:
z
z
( H t 00
a 3ND H?1dW- 10 t.0 Nri
??• ,t 3 w
,SL's H ?vz°a o
N r4 4-) O
.Of
0 0 0., 4)
cv
=7 (D cr
L( r Lc.
C) cr
lp
J co o
! a? :. r N
CY)
'. e... )L3 W `;. UQ O
w? pO O O
co Mw or') to O O +- +
t ,
?r w ?p + u? tr l?
13 In N?(vl-l m
tor; CO
•• ?O N L C '11 ItI 11 a U 61(10
O - m O L (`D Q >-
E. f? cr- ? Z a o CO F- (J) CLU-
(S)
Ld- (D
• c' cn
° I,' z _ LL- 0 a C-)
CC) N, cr-
t f? U3 Q- Lr
(S) co
t F- (LD
dF lL
/ H Q _C N
Ln
o:: co
r" ' r` r` 1 Z J N (n W
Q CT) v cv o ¢(nr-
cr
f cL rl C) ?. a •j o '- -J...
0 U) U LL
v z ao Ln W
Y ` JtON \ ^ ?..? Z
U N M
rn
Ln O \
CD f-) - \ Q
+ OV)
. V)
OJ N -
N ti ? 1
O O. v O v u,
(\j 0
+ co
ILI
;
ts1 C ' ' 3 d' rn tr)
,} t t t I.; ter N t` H
co
co C)
4-3 C%j
r1 ii N
+A"1.6 3 Z - t 44
CV rl 4 O
v i 1 1 I ail p O. Ln U z
1 t t i . 1 ?Q + cV UaHy
C7) Loc
.O ro
1 t. ? ?: ?D Q +
\? ? •' ?..- i ? it ;? ; ? I . , ..!- ?, Q ? .p
,t
71,
? ?4 Tit , 1 O I:. '•???,• f?>.
} i
t
LLJ
LL)
LL_ w ° (D oc
LL_ r t Li °
cr_
1 V? din , ° ° t w
1 ap ?p iwt i ,° o cr.
LLJ i I-
p'}? ww
a
?Q ' t
Z p
a a w
a Sw
U V)
N 26,`0: tai O i ')
6.g6 ? •1 i •? . O ?-
3 i
? l O-1 ir'i
'it t t N ?. cr_
i' t
1 t
lQ s CO
r49,p9 I. w E jk. } o w? 8b 2fJa8l___ __
, x
N 7030.30' w i tg9.22os,
bb-bZ-Z _ a0c580ptl
325.$1' W N?O a+Iu?
Nr
I

'
Z :O?l Q , _I ,
I? ? ? g
1
N 0, I? ?,
M W
O Q p w

1
dO Q N w N
co
J
N
`1 1
I

1
" '.J 1
. - AdONVO l1WW` I I

..
a
^ ? o
a O i ? I I

? LL-
;
? W
?I I
>n
o ., „-, n ?? - \ l0 1
N m
O O
o a)
N ul I
P / Q I
\
I

?
In in
I I
I m

1 a+ O
N
N LO :.
Y.? i ?? i

t .?1 I M /
.(•.1
Y.
In I\ r = ?.
I
1
IL--_-_-
N
W
z
0
Q
a
W
Q
O
0.
m N 1
3P29.95 w s ? ? dt :_ ?:,
7
48 CONC WA
3 ?kz
g .3
N0Oa0`?
2 ?01 ??3
is cR is
M .@b.9
r9.6z 1 29 N ?1` 3'0 7"
'
I C3 Im Y{
m I N
- IN ? •W 2t ?
V (7 2 , W
? ^ I x I 11
I ZO) I H
•,
W

1
,
F //
U
IXO ?/
? 1 J I I IWN % /
LO
1
/
LO 1

J?71
i?'
0 Id-
1 o
V
I l
o
N°
o p?•
co I Lo

W

II I W

c

N
, w to
N - N
?) N N >
/
?
1
W ? ?' ?? n l I j
1 y
1 Ix
C6 Lo
d
_ a
I i
1
?
I i I 'l
u I C' - , 4
M
1 m
? l ? I '.
I 1-
W
?
W •T
I 1 I _1_..•-_
•?1-
N - x47.6 I I
?l
? .n I ? ;
N
v?,o 1 N X7.04.22• W fZtJS?
Xp
m . X11 • 'ic
1 /
C?
P /
N

1
50 ER .'
I
I o
i Q-
5 77.0422' E

62.00

o GJ '
tN
1 I ?C 1
z Z y CnI 1 1
°o
Z -
m I I ll I
I w 1 •• I
a? .i a
t Ibl «
N
m.- 8 o
J z o 1 1 Il 1
W m.. ?,? N
,
uj tV ??
i 4J I
Q'"
' ? s I Z I 11 1
Z 3
'" _.
?
1 I I I
? I 1 Il I
? 11
?f) N ~LL?.-
?-'' l co
'rt
Q ?W Q
1
?
2 -Z * ? I
- ?? 11 1
r (n ?K4 - ` I I 1
Q-
v O i I- ll
W W
a 26.00 ' U- W
W p 77'24'tq W p H J W
gt.9a
N ©?
I?A
nl < ?? ib I V
c ` N I 1 t_ -

H

-/_ ){A
co )1
t

?. J
5t N er
` ?u?? •rfLy' N
ono 3 44 ' s
?o Ta IOU o C4 o

] N '
T
N
-I
3
? r
0
4.
-- - Uz

?? U Q1 N +J
Z3: - (D
'-, 0 004

w N 04 Vl

4-)

?r
4-3

W
O
r
1 •
0
r ?
W P
Q
1 N
W
O
13 r
1 1
1 l1
1 ?
Z

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor August 24, 1992 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Wil Vraga?%, Jr., Secretary Acting Director
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dornegp-
Monica Swi
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: EA for US 221-NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of Marion
McDowell County
State Project DOT No. 6.879001T, TIP #R-2020
EHNR # 93-0081, DEM WQ # 6457
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which may impact waters of the state including
wetlands. The following comments are offered in response to the EA/FONSI prepared
for this project which will impact 0.4 acres of wetlands.
1. Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this
project. Applications requesting coverage under our General Certification 14
will require written concurrence.
2. DOT should require that the contractor not impact additional wetland areas due
to the disposal of excavated spoil material, as a source of borrow material or
other construction related activities. Prior to the approval of any borrow source,
the contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
3. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests that these catch
basins be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible
party for maintenance. These hazardous spill catch basins should be installed
along Armstrong Creek.
4. Endorsement of the EA/FONSI by DEM does not preclude the denial of a 401
Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/733-2314 919/94,6-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 4-01 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb in DEM's
Water Quality Planning Branch.
cc: Eric Galamb
.. 3
!.%.:.I' PiH I P _t' I_ .. ::.i 1?
•l •? 7. HEN f , I'ii::.1°i L.. ! } r-,l'v- •1r`,TL1Ftir1}...
i :rat
1: - F*1; 0 _ 1 E. C:: I E- f', r 1
17: T 1_. E E:: N V I Ft C? N M E: r 1, (--*, I._ (ni 's E:: r1 E wy, (1 } I=' F; tJ 1 C:? S E t? :E r i F' F; i:? 1 I:_ i°S E:: i !'T . >' '1" C l
U 'S: 2 ....NC; :2-2.;; 'i .43 =? t,ND, N Nol;TIA Cl1:- MAF*:7:FQ-,
E-CT
'OUNT
-Y t"ICDOWEL-1-
)ATE - 0 ; _ 911/ n?
E:SF'ONSE: DUE: DATE

? q VO
V:11.DI._:I:FE
E=HVIRONME'NTAL HE AL_TH
F0RE-ET RE.30URCES
C?1L.. AND WATER
PARKST AND RECREATION
WATE-r f-L_Ata?????cr
LAND RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEME-tq-T t cl )
ASHC:4'ILLE riEGIONAL t?F1=ICE- -
AQ, WQ, GW, LQ
ITFiER

IANAGEF GlN---0F-F /R - G:EC'JN :
Ei'1 1 F
11 E-1:EE-?lE:F ;'ACTS-rlC"T
Er? •rt ! f tw
`,"?J A i _, .,-:?L ? +
DATE:
SFC ! Rork
1)ATE- :
S A RE:,lJ1._T OF:' .TH13 F;l:::'4:EEW/ THE FC-11-1-OWING' IS SUBMITTED:
NO C?C-:r._IE::C;TION TO 1:11"O.-1E-C:T AS
r,!0 CiiMMEN T
7:?q SUFF1C::IENT INF`C?F'r'MATI0N
Cr.?I'?.> a::> T ENC Y 'TPi*T'l:l', E: :N I i',?f_F.l?E::i) N 0 T P- E- 1?E::
_ CI T Hl:::F: ?' ;`PECIF"T r=,idi.; r1'i'T'F,f;li C 0Mr•iN"T
I::N' L'F;0Ni'•il:-r1. ;CIC UMl:::NIT Rl-OU:CF`1::J !R -01: R'
F; r.j-1v:c 7:0x1 i 1 r11:::F-:'?, J'gc; 1>E::r:'r;
F`E::TUFZN TO 11E::L_ --:1°1 MC:?GEE:: i`ar1a:i-?i r' i`!Y! EiS: !_S =r'iisi:!-i
US 221/NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226
North of Marion, McDowell County
State Project 6.879001T
R-2020
A
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

•w
R
APPROVED:
S
Zz
D e L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
99 and Environmental Branch, NCDOT

US 221/NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226
North of Marion, McDowell County
State Project 6.819001T
R-2020
r
N
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:

r
Linwood Stone
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
t
H. Franklin Vick, P. ., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
H
10 rr,.y • tVN ?
?•?gkkL iN ?`?•?
S/ate /9''

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION .......................... 1
A. General Description ............................... 1
B. Recommended Improvements .......................... 1
1. Length of Project ............................
2. Cross Section ........ ... ...............
3. Right of Way and Access Control ....... ....
4. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control ....
5. Design Speed .................................
6. Speed Zones ..................................
7. Hydrologic Structures ........................
8. Maintenance of Traffic .......................
9. Parking ......................................
10. Sidewalks ....................................
11. Bicycles ... ...... ..........................
12. Greenways and Trails .........................
13. Railroads ....................................
14. Utilities .................................
15. Geodetic Markers .............................
16. Cost Estimate ................................
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................... 4
A. Characteristics of the Existing Facility .......... 4

1. Functional Classification .................... 4
2. Cross Section ................................ 4
3. Right of Way ................................. 4
4. Curvature ..... ... ....... ...... ....... 4
5. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control ....... 4
6. Access Control ............................... 4
7. Speed Zones .................................. 4
8. Hydrologic Structures ........................ 5
9. Utilities ................................. 5
10. Geodetic Markers ............................. 5
B. Traffic Volumes and Capacity ..................... 5
C. Accident Record ................................... 6
III. ALT ERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION .................... 7
A. Alignment Alternatives ........................... 7
B. Cross Section Alternatives .. ................... 7
C. Public Transportation Alternative ................ 8
D. "No-Build" Alternative ............................ 8
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
A
t
.
Page
IV. LAND USE PLANNING .................................... 8
A. Status of Planning ............................... 8
B. Existing Land Use ................................ 8
C. Existing Zoning ............................... 9
D. Future Land Use Plan . ..... . .............. 9
E. Project Compatibility With Local Plans ............ 9
V. EVALUATION OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED ACTION .............. 9
A. Social and Economic Environment .................. 9
1. Population and Economics ................. 9
2. Public and Private Facilities ............... 10
3. Relocation Impacts ......................... 11
B. Cultural Resources .............................. 12
1. Architectural Resources .................... 12
2. Archaeological Resources .................... 12
C. Topography, Soils and Geology .................... 12
D. Farmland ...................................... 13
E. Water Quality . ... . ...................... 13
F. Surface Water and Ground Water ................... 13
G. Hydrology and Floodplain Involvement ............. 14
H. Wetlands ........................................ 14
I. Ecology .......................................... 14
1. Plant Communities ........................... 14
2. Animal Communities ......................... 15
J. Threatened and Endangered Species ............... 15
K. Traffic Noise ................................... 15
L. Air Quality ....... ............................ 16
M. Contaminated Properties ......................... 16
N. Construction Impacts ............................ 18
0. Secondary Impacts ................................. 19
VI. PERMITS ................................................ 19
VII. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ............................ 20
A. Government Response .............................. 20
B. Public Response ................................. 20
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
a

APPENDIX A - FIGURES
Figure 1 - Map of Project Location
Figure 2 Photographs of Selected Locations
along the Project
Figure 3 - Aerial Mosaic Showing Alternatives
Figure 4 - Estimated Traffic Volumes
Figure 5 - Alternative Typical Sections
Figure 6 - Accident Rate Summary
Figure 7 - Accident Type Summary
Figure 8 - Approximate 100-Year Floodplain Map
APPENDIX B - Written Responses from Governments

I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to improve
US 221/NC 226 in McDowell County between SR 1434 and NC 226 north of
Marion (See Figure 1 for a map showing the project location). A five-lane
shoulder section with no control of access is recommended for the portions
of the project from the beginning of the project at SR 1434 to SR 1440,
and from SR 1557 to the end of the project at NC 226. From SR 1440 to
SR 1557 a five-lane curb and gutter section is recommended. The project
calls for asymmetrical widening, as shown by Figure 2, and includes the
replacement of Bridge #104 over Armstrong Creek (Project B-1277). While
B-1277 is included in this report; a Categorical Exclusion will be
completed soon to allow B-1277 to be built using federal bridge
replacement funds. Total estimated cost of this improvement is
$10,625,000. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) calls for right
of way acquisition to begin in fiscal year 1994 and construction to begin
in fiscal year 1996.
Other projects in the area that connect with the proposed improve-
ments include the Marion Bypass (Project R-204) which is completed and
Project R-204A, the section of US 221 that links the northern end of the
bypass with the southern end of the subject project. Right of way
acquisition for R-204A is currently scheduled to begin in May 1992 and for
letting to a construction contract by August 1993.
B. Recommended Improvements
1. Length of Project
The project is 4.1 miles long.
2. Cross Section
A five-lane, 64-foot pavement, shoulder section is recommended
from SR 1434 to SR 1440 (3.0 miles) and from SR 1557 to NC 226 (0.5
mile). A five-lane, 64-foot, curb and gutter section is recommended
from SR 1440 to SR 1557 (0.6 miles). Both of these cross sections
provide five 12-foot travel lanes including two thru lanes in each
direction and a center turn lane.
3. Right of Way and Access Control
A variable right of way width is required to contain the
proposed cross section. The width ranges from 140 to 240 feet and
will be acquired asymmetrically.
No control of access to abutting properties is proposed for this
project.
2
4. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
Streets and highways that currently intersect the existing
roadway will remain at grade with stop sign control except for the
SR 1556 intersection where consideration should be given to
installing traffic signals upon completion of the project (See
discussion of this intersection in Section IIB).
5. Design Speed
The project will be designed for a minimum design speed of 50
miles per hour (MPH).
6. Speed Zones
The existing posted limits will be retained except in the
vicinity of the NCDOT Rest and Picnic Area where the Mountains-to-Sea
Trail crosses US 221. This area will have a posted limit of 45 MPH.
7. Hydrologic Structures
The proposed roadway improvement crosses five streams (See
Figure 8 for site locations). The recommended treatment of each
structure is listed below (See Section II for the size of each
existing structure).
Site Stream Proposed Structure
1 Armstrong Creek Replacement bridge 140' x 80'
2 Limekiln Creek Retain and extend existing culvert
3 unnamed creek Retain and extend existing culvert
4 unnamed creek Retain and extend existing culvert
5 unnamed creek Retain and extend existing culvert
Bridge # 104 over Armstrong Creek (B-1277) will be replaced with
a new bridge approximately 147 feet long and 80 feet wide (clear
bridge width). The new bridge will be `constructed along the existing
alignment in stages so that 'traffic can' be maintained on-site during
the construction period.
All of the existing culverts, which are recommended to be
retained and extended, should be examined during the design stage for
hydraulic adequacy and structural integrity to determine either
replacement or extension. The culvert at site number 4 is located in
a horizontal curve (superelevated) and is under minimum cover.
Widening of the roadway (extension of box culvert) at this location
may require raising the existing roadway grade by approximately 3
feet or the proposed widening may be accomplished on the west side.
Similarly, because of a steep hill at the upstream side of the box
culvert at site number 3 and the severe skew of the stream, it is
recommended that the proposed widening be done on the east side.
3
8. Maintenance of Traffic
Except for brief periods of interruption, traffic will be
maintained during construction of the subject project.
9. Parkin
There are currently no provisions for parking within the limits
of the existing roadway. The proposed improvements will not provide
for parking along the project.
10. Sidewalks
Sidewalks are not proposed as a part of this project. An 8-foot
wide berm is proposed behind the curb and gutter in the curb and
gutter section. This berm, or flat area, will provide a place where
pedestrians can walk and where others may later build a sidewalk.
11. Bicycles
No special accommodations will be provided for bicycles on this
project. The subject portion of US 221 is not included in the
Transportation Improvement Program for a bicycle improvement nor is
this section of roadway a part of the bicycling highway system.
12. Greenways and Trails
The proposed project intersects with the Mountains-to-Sea Trail,
a pedestrian hiking trail, midway the project at the NCDOT Rest Area.
(See Section V.A2 for additional discussion of this trail).
13. Railroads
No railroads cross within or adjacent to the project limits.
14. Utilities
Utilities located along the project will be accommodated during
and after construction of the project.
15. Geodetic Markers
The existing geodetic markers may be impacted by the proposed
construction activities. The N. C. Geodetic Survey should be
contacted at P. 0. Box 27687, Raleigh, N. C. 27611, [phone]
prior to construction. Intentional destruction of a geodetic
monument is a violation of N. C. General Statute 102-4.
16. Cost Estimate
The project is estimated to cost a total of $10,625,000. This
estimate includes $7,800,000 for construction and $2,825,000 for
right of way. The construction cost includes $500,000 for removal of
the existing bridge over Armstrong Creek and construction of the
4
replacement bridge. The right of way estimate includes the cost of
acquisition, utilities, and relocations. The construction estimate
includes 15% for engineering and contingencies.
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Characteristics of the Existing Facility
1. Functional Classification
The subject portion of US 221 is classified as a rural principal
arterial in the Statewide Functional Classification System and is a
part of the federal-aid system (FAP 21-1).
2. Cross Section
The subject roadway has a 20-foot wide pavement with 6-foot
usable shoulders on both sides.
3. Right of Way
There is no record of the right of way that contains the
existing cross section. However, the NCDOT claims 60 feet by
maintenance and statute.
4. Curvature
There are four grades steeper than 3% with a length of more than
500 feet. These include two 71. grades, a 6% grade and a 10% grade.
There are five horizontal curves greater than 3° including four
4° curves and one 70 curve. Approximately half (50%) of the project
length has a passing sight distance of 1000 feet while 20% of the
roadway has a passing sight distance of 1500 feet.
5. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control
The following streets intersect the subject portion of US 221
at-grade and are stop sign controlled: SR 1434, SR 1433, SR 1555 (a
loop road), SR 1451, SR 1440, SR 1556, SR 1581, SR 1557, SR 1441, SR
1442 and NC 226.

6. Access Control
There is no control of access along the project.
7. Speed Zones
The route has a posted speed limit of 55 MPH for a distance of
approximately 2.5 miles south of Woodlawn and north of SR 1433. The
remaining project length has a posted speed limited of 45 MPH.
5
8. Hydrologic Structures
The existing roadway crosses five streams (See Figure 8 for site
locations). The size of each structure and average daily flow rate
is listed below:
Average Daily Flow
Site Stream Existing Structure (cubic feet per second)
1 Armstrong Creek 96' x 20' bridge 63.0
2 Limekiln Creek 2 @ 8' x 8' RCBC 5.2
3 unnamed creek 1 @ 6' x 5' RCBC 0.4
4 unnamed creek 2 @ 8' x 7' RCBC 2.8
5 unnamed creek 1 @ 7' x 6' RCBC 1.2
Bridge #104 over Armstrong Creek was built in 1933. Overall
length is 96 feet and clear roadway width is 20 feet. The structure
has a sufficiency rating of 50.6 and an estimated remaining life of
18 years. The overall condition of the bridge is rated "fair".
9. Utilities
Telephone and electric utilities are located along the project.
10. Geodetic Markers
Thirteen (13) geodetic markers are located along the project.
B. Traffic Volumes and Capacity
The current average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on the subject route
range from a high of 9,800 vehicles per day (vpd) at the southern end of
the project to a low of 8,700 vpd at the northern end. The current
average daily truck traffic volumes on the route range from a high of 588
(6%) truck tractor semi-trailers (TTST) per day and 490 (5%) dual tired
trucks (DTT) per day to a low of 435 (5%) TTST and 348 (4%) DTT at the
respective locations.
The design year (2010) ADT on the route ranges from a high of 18,000
vpd at the southern end of the project to a low of 15,700 vpd at the
northern end. Design year average daily truck traffic ranges from a high
of 1080 (6%) TTST and 900 (5%) DTT to a 1 ow of 785 (5%) TTST and 628 (4%)
DTT at the respective locations (see Figure 4 for existing and design year
traffic volumes). The design hour volume (DHV) for this project is 10%.
Presently, this segment of US 221 is operating at level of service E
during peak periods. Level of service E represents operating conditions
at or near capacity. Driver comfort and convenience are extremely poor
and driver frustration is generally high. Without the proposed
improvements, increasing traffic volumes will soon reach level of service
F. This level represents over saturated or jammed traffic conditions.
Upon completion of the proposed project, the level of service will improve
6
to level of service B throughout the project length (except at the
US 221/SR 1556 intersection) and operate at level of service D by the year
2010. This level represents high density but stable vehicular flow.
The US 221/SR 1556 intersection (unsignalized) is currently operating
at a level of service F because of delays in making left turns from SR
1556 onto US 221. If no improvements are made at this intersection, there
will also be critical delays making right turns onto US 221 by the end of
the planning period. If signalized, the traffic capacity of the subject
intersection would improve to a level of service B for 1990 volumes. This
level could be maintained for year 2010 traffic volumes if a separate left
turn lane is provided on SR 1556.
C. Accident Record
During the four year period from January 1, 1986 through December 31,
1989, there were a total of 139 accidents on US 221 between SR 1434 and
NC 226 resulting in a total accident rate of 2.21 accidents per million
vehicle miles (ACC/MVM). This rate is higher than the statewide
three-year average total rate of 1.80 ACC/MVM for rural US routes for
1987-1989. There were a total of 3 fatalities on the subject portion of
US 221, resulting in a fatal accident rate of 0.048 ACC/MVM. This rate is
also higher than the statewide three-year average fatal rate of 0.031
ACC/MVM for similar routes (See Figure 6 for a comparison of these and
other rates with statewide average rates).
The three primary types of accidents on the subject portion of US 221
were rear-end collisions (30%), accidents involved in running off the road
(26%), and angle accidents (12%). These three types of accidents
accounted for over two-thirds (68%) of the total number of accidents.
Also, approximately forty-five percent of the total number of accidents
occurred at or adjacent to intersections along the project. The following
is a listing of the accidents by type (See Figure 7 for a graphically
illustrated summary):
Number of Percent of
Type Accidents Accidents
Ran Off Road - Right 27 19.4
Ran Off Road - Left 9 6.5
No-Collision-Overturn 1 .7
Pedestrian 1 .7
Bicycle 1 .7
Animal 4 2.9
Fixed Object 2 1.4
Other Object 3 2.2
Rear-End Slow or Stop 34 24.5
Rear-End Turn 8 5.8
Left Turn - Same Road 6 4.3
Left Turn - Cross Traffic 7 5.0
Head On 7 5.0
Sideswipe 10 7.2
Angle 17 12.2
Backing up 2 1.4
139 100.0
The proposed improvements, two additional thru lanes, a center
left-turn lane and intersection revisions, will reduce the potential for
many of these types of accidents, particularly the three primary types.
The center left-turn lane will provide a place for motorists to stop
before attempting to turn without hindering traffic flow in either
direction. The additional thru lanes will allow drivers to slow for right
turns onto intersecting streets and driveways without slowing the entire
thru movement.
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
The alternatives considered for this project, consist of several
alignment and cross section alternatives, the public transportation
alternative, and the "no-build" alternative.
A. Alignment Alternatives
An asymmetric alignment was studied for the entire project length to
minimize potential adverse impacts on the human and natural environment.
The studied alignment minimizes the number of displacees and avoids
disrupting the Pisgah National Forest Woodlawn Work Center and the NCDOT
Roadside Park and Rest Area. In the vicinity of the Woodlawn community
(between SR 1440 and SR 1442), where development is more intense on both
sides of US 221, three alignment alternatives were studied. These
alignments include symmetric widening and asymmetric widening on both the
east and west sides of the existing roadway.
Study results are as follows:
Number of Displacees
Alternative Business Residential Total
Symmetric 0 0 0
Asymmetric to the East 2 6 8
Asymmetric to the West 6 11 17
Based on these findings, the symmetrical alignment is recommended for
US 221 between SR 1440 and SR 1557.
B. Cross Section Alternatives
Two cross section alternatives were studied for this project. They
are (1) a 5-lane curb and gutter section and (2) a 5-lane shoulder
section. The curb and gutter section requires approximately 140 to
240-foot right of way while the shoulder section requires approximately
180 to 280-foot right of way. A five-lane, 64-foot pavement, shoulder
section is recommended from SR 1434 to SR 1440 and from SR 1557 to NC 226.
A five-lane, 64-foot, curb and gutter section is recommended from SR 1440
to SR 1557. See Figure 2 for the right of way limits of the recommended
cross section and Table 1 for a summary of costs and displacees.
8
Other cross sections considered for this project include a 3-lane
curb and gutter section and a 4-lane curb and gutter section. Both of
these cross sections would provide project cost savings. However, the
3-lane section would not provide adequate thru lanes to accommodate
existing and future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. The
4-lane curb and gutter section would not accommodate future left turn
volumes at an acceptable level of service. Without a center left turn
lane the roadway would not only have a capacity deficiency but also a high
accident potential. Drivers normally accustomed to using the left lane of
a highway as a high speed through lane would be faced with drivers slowed
or stopped while making the left turn movement. Because of traffic
carrying capacity inadequacies and high accident potentials associated
with these alternative cross sections, both alternatives were eliminated.
C. Public Transportation Alternative
The major constituent of traffic using NC 221 is thru trips, and
development in the area is primarily rural and of low density. This land
use pattern does not lend itself to a public transportation system.
Therefore, public transportation is not a viable alternative to the
proposed improvements.
D. "No-Build" Alternatives
The ""No-Build" alternative was considered during project
development. This alternative presents negative impacts to future traffic
operations along US 221/NC 226. The route is currently operating at level
of service E during peak periods and will continue to deteriorate as
future traffic demands increase. Enhanced safety, greater traffic
carrying capacity and improved mobility and accessibility are currently
needed. For these reasons, the no-build alternative is rejected.
IV. LAND USE PLANNING
A. Status of Plannin
The proposed improvement lies within the jurisdiction of McDowell
County. The county has no planning staff, land use controls, zoning, or
land use plan.
The entire project is within the U. S. Forest Service acquisition
boundary of the Pisgah National Forest, although only a small area of land
actually owned by the U. S. Forest Service is intersected by US 221-
NC 226.
B. Existing Land Use
The proposed improvement is located north of Marion, in an area with
linear residential, industrial, and commercial development interspersed
with undeveloped, wooded land.
9
Several stone quarries are located adjacent to the roadway throughout
the project. There is a mix of uses along the roadway, with single-family
residential structures next to industrial and commercial uses.
Several churches and a cemetery are located along the roadway. Most
are set well away from the existing roadway, though one church, north of
SR 1440, will be directly impacted by the proposed improvement.
A commercial node is located between SR 1440 and SR 1441. Included
in the node are a hotel, convenience store, lumber yard, automotive parts
suppliers, and a produce market. Several vacant commercial structures and
single family residences also exist in the area.
The Woodlawn Work Center and a picnic area, operated by the U. S.
Forest Service is accessed via SR 1451 from US 221-NC 226.
C. Existing Zoning
As previously discussed, no zoning districts have been established
for the area since the county has not adopted a zoning ordinance.
D. Future Land Use Plan
According to the U. S. Forest Service's Land and Resource Management
Plan: 1986-2000, the portion of the Pisgah National Forest intersected by
the roadway has been designated as a Management Area 2B. These management
areas are designated for "motorized recreation". The forest in this area
is managed to provide a high level of scenic quality, as well as provide
habitat for animals which prefer a wide variety of forest conditions and
can also tolerate human disturbance. If the area is to be used for timber
harvest, the primary method used will likely be the group selection
method.
E. Project Compatibility with Local Plans
The proposed roadway improvement does not conflict with the
management plan for the Pisgah National Forest, the only land use plan
specific to the area.
V. EVALUATION OF PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED
A. Social and Economic Environment
1. Population and Economics
The subject portion of US 221/NC 226 is located in the foothills
of western central North Carolina between Marion, the county seat of
McDowell County and the Blue Ridge Parkway. McDowell County has a
resident population of nearby 37,000 (1989 estimate). According to
April 1990 statistics compiled on the North Carolina civilian labor
force, McDowell County had a total labor force of approximately
16,000 workers and an unemployment rate of 4.8 percent.
10
2. Public and Private Facilities
There are several public and private facilities located along
the subject project. These include the Pisgah National Forest, the
Pisgah National Forest Woodlawn Work Center, and the Woodlawn Fire
Station.
An NCDOT Roadside Rest and Picnic Area is located along US 221
near SR 1451. NCDOT has a special use permit to lease the land from
the U. S. Forest Service for operating and maintaining a roadside
picnic park consisting of picnic tables, fireplaces, restrooms, and
septic facilities to benefit the traveling public. Plans call for
relocating these facilities to a currently undetermined location
along the Marion Bypass. Construction will begin in FY 1993 and take
about one year to complete. After the new rest area is completed,
the existing facility will be closed.
The Mountains-to-Sea Trail crosses US 221 at the NCDOT Roadside
Rest and Picnic Area. The Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resource (EHNR) has initiated cooperative agreements with
both the National Park Service and the U. S. Forest Service to
develop this trail. The trail is being built and maintained by
volunteers who have spent the past 13 years constructing the trail.
The Division of Parks and Recreation requests that consideration be
given to providing a pedestrian overpass for the trail to cross
US 221. This request has been discussed with representatives of the
Division of Parks and Recreation and the U. S. Forest Service. The
NCDOT does not consider the typical five-lane cross section of
sufficient width to present a substantial hazard to crossing.
Consideration of this provision is more appropriate for control of
access facilities where the overpass would provide essential access
across the road. Furthermore, the area terrain is such that an
overpass would require elevating both sides of the road to provide
acceptable vertical clearance over US 221. The cost of providing
this structure would be prohibitive and hikers would likely avoid
climbing up and down several steps when they could simply wait for
clearing of traffic and cross the road-at-grade. The NCDOT will,
however, erect appropriate signs for the pedestrian crossing and
reduce the posted speed limit from 55 MPH to 45 MPH in this area.
Upon completion of the new roadside park and picnic area on the
Marion Bypass, the Division of Parks and Recreation also requests the
NCDOT to leave the existing parking lot at the facility for use as a
"trail head" lot for the Mountain-to-Sea Trail. The proposed
widening of US 221 will be accomplished on the east side of the
existing roadway which will minimize taking from the parking lot.
Once the NCDOT opens the new rest area, use of the existing parking
lot and facilities will be determined by their owner, the U. S.
Forest Service.
The following churches are also located along the project:
Landis Presbyterian Church, Hicks Chapel Baptist Church (includes
cemetery), Landmark Non-Denominational Church and Woodlawn Baptist
Church.
11
I
3. Relocation Impacts
Based on a preliminary design, the recommended alternative will
require the displacement of 12 families and 6 businesses. More
detailed information is contained in the relocation report in
Appendix B. The Division of Highways offers a Relocation Assistance
Program to help minimize the effects of displacement on the families
and businesses.
The Relocation Program will be conducted in accordance with the
North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act GS-133-17. The program is
designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in occupying a
new place to live or in which to do business. At least one
relocation officer is assigned to each highway project for this
purpose.
The relocation officer will, at the time right of way is
authorized, determine the needs of displaced families, individuals,
business concerns, non-profit organizations, and farm operations for
relocation assistance advisory services, moving cost, replacement
housing payments, mortgage differential and incidental cost without
regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. He will
contact the displacee, within ample time prior to displacement, to
allow negotiations for, and possession of replacement housing which
meets decent, safe and sanitary standards and is adequate to
accommodate the relocatee. Relocation of displaced persons will be
made in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public
utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of
replacement housing offered will be within the financial means of the
families and individuals displaced. Replacement properties will be
made available to the displaced families and individuals in the same
general area from which they are being displaced and reasonably
accessible to their places of employment. The relocation officer
will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-profit
organizations, and farm operations in locating and moving to
replacement property.
All tenant and' owner occupant displacees will receive an
explanation regarding all options available to them, such as (1)
purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of replacement housing,
either private or public, or (3) relocating existing owner-occupant
housing. The relocation officer will also supply information
concerning other State or Federal 'Programs offering assistance to,
displaced persons and will provide other advisory services as needed
in order to minimize hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a
new location. Last resort housing will be provided, if necessary, in
accordance with North Carolina law.
The Moving and Replacement Housing Payments Program is designed
to (a) compensate the relocatee for the costs of moving from homes
business and farm operations acquired for a highway project, (b)
provide incidental purchase payments for replacement dwellings such
as attorneys' fees, and prepayment penalty, appraisals, and other
12
closing costs and (c) make payment for any increased interest
expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement for replacement
housing payments, increased interest payments, and incidental
purchase expenses may not exceed $22,500 combined total, unless last
resort housing becomes necessary. Tenants may receive a rental
assistance payment not to exceed $5,250 unless last resort housing
becomes necessary.
B. Cultural Resources
1. Architectural Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) requested in a
memorandum dated June 15, 1990, that the Department of Transportation
architectural historian survey the area of potential environmental
effect for significant historical structures and submit the results
to SHPO for review. The architectural historian submitted a report
to the SHPO on October 12, 1990. In a memorandum from the SHPO dated
November 8, 1990 the SHPO concurred that there are no National
Register-listed properties in the area of potential effect and
further compliance with G. S. 121-12(a) was not necessary.
2. Archaeological Resources
Since the project is along an established highway, much of the
corridor is developed or has at some time in the recent past been
affected by residential or commercial development. Areas with
potential for significant archaeological sites were intensively
surveyed. No previously unrecorded archaeological sites were found
during the intensive survey covering approximately one-forth of the
four mile project. Previous archaeological surveys in the vicinity
have recorded some prehistoric sites, but none of these sites extend
into the right of way or proposed construction limits. No
archaeological sites in the probable area of impact or in the
immediate vicinity are listed on the National Register or Historic
Places.
C. Topography, Soils and Geology
Terrain in the vicinity of the project is rolling with natural draws
and streams that provide good drainage. The topography ranges from nearby
level depressions to strongly sloping uplands. Slopes range from 0 to 60
percent.
A published soil survey for McDowell County is not available at this
time. Soils have been mapped in the project area and information was
provided by the local SCS office. Ten soil units are located in the
project area, they include: Hayesville-Evard complex, Junaluska-Brasstown
complex, Loamy Udorthents, Rabun loam, Urban land, Braddock clay loam,
Rosman loam, sandy Udifluvents and Iotla sandy loam. Iotla sandy is the
only mapping unit that is classified as having hydric inclusions or wet
spots.
13
Iotla sandy loam, formed in loamy alluvium, are somewhat poorly
drained soils appearing on floodplains. Slopes range from 0 to 3 percent.
Sandy Udifluvents are frequently flooded soils found in depressions.
Rosman loam are occasionally flooded soils found on 0 to 3 percent slopes.
They are well drained soils with a high infiltration rate.
The other mapped soil units; Hayesville-Evard complex,
Junaluska-Brasstown complex, loamy Udorthents, Rabun loam, Urban land, and
Braddock clay loam, are all classified as upland soils. They are well
drained soils found on gently sloping to very steep intermountain plateaus
and valleys. Slopes range from 2 to 60 percent.
There is the possibility of sinkholes on this project. Sinkholes or
solution cavities have been reported in the Woodlawn Quarry, along SR 1556
just east of NC 226 and at the American Thread Plant.
D. Farmland
According to the U. S. Soil Conservation Service, there are no prime
or important farmland soils within the project area.
E. Water Quality
Armstrong Creek, tributaries to Limekiln Creek, and tributaries to
Tom's Creek?'are to be crossed. These streams are not Designated Public
Mountain Trout Waters as determined by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission. The following water quality classifications (DEHNR,
DEM 1989) were assigned to these streams:
Armstrong Creek WS-III Tr
Limeki In Creek C
South Fork Tom's Creek C Tr
Class C indicates a water supply segment suitable for fish and
wildlife propagation, secondary recreation, agriculture, and other uses
requiring waters of lower quality. WS-III indicates a water supply
segment with no categorical restrictions on watershed development or
discharges; suitable for all Class C uses. Trout waters indicated by Tr
are suitable for trout propagation and maintenance of stocked trout.
F. Surface Water and Ground Water
Thirteen streams, tributaries of Limekiln and South Fork Tom's Creek,
all approximately 5 feet wide, will be impacted from project construction.
Six streams are labelled perennial and seven as intermittent. Bridge
construction will impact Armstrong Creek (approximately 20_feet wide), and
associated wetlands. Smaller stream crossings will require a minor amount
of fill, while others will require major amounts of fill material
depending on the topography at each location. Culverts are not in place
at all of these stream crossings, since flow is intermittent.
14
G. Hvdrolouv and Floodplain Involvement
McDowell County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Program; however, because of the size of Limekiln Creek and the three
unnamed streams, these creeks are not considered flood hazard areas and
are not included in a detailed study. A complete flood study has been
completed for Armstrong Creek and the limits of the 100-year floodplain
have been shown by Figure 9.
H. Wetlands
Anticipated wetland impacts are minor, totalling less than 1 acre.
Two wetlands were identified: tributaries of Limekiln Creek and South
Fork Tom's Creek. Total impacted acreage of these wetlands is estimated
to be 0.10 acre. Another wetland, adjacent to Armstrong Creek, occupies
approximately 0.30 acre. Total wetland impacts associated with this
project are approximately 0.40 acres.
Minor wetland impacts and surface
fall under the Minor Road Crossing Fill
Provisions of 33 CFR 330.5(a) 114).
water takings are most likely to
section of the ationwide Permit
"Best Management Practices" should be practiced during construction.
Restrictions to prevent excessive erosion and creek siltation should be
undertaken. Both Limekiln and South Fork Tom's Creek drain into the
Catawba River. It is especially imperative to control siltation in these
streams, because small mouth bass are being introduced downstream into the
Catawba River, and this species, a popular sport fish, is especially
vulnerable to sedimentation.
I. Ecology
1. Plant Communities
Four plant communities will be impacted from proposed
construction. Mesic upland hardwood communities are located adjacent
to streams. The predominant canopy species is tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), which was common throughout the project
corridor. Other canopy species, present in smaller numbers, include
sycamore (Plata us occidentalis), red maple Acer rubrum , southern
red oak uercus falcata , a red oak uercus falcata and short-leaf
pine Pinus echinata Upland hardwood communities reach maturity in
some locations. Drier sites support white oak uercus alba ,
southern red oak and short leaf pine. Understory and shrub layers,
dense in certain locations, contain the following species: sourwood
(Oxydendron arboreum , silky dogwood Cornus amomum , flowering
dogwood Cornus florida , persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), red
maple, tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), honey locust (Gleditsia
triacanthos), box elder (Acer ne undo sassafras (Sassafras
albidum , smooth sumac Rhus labra , rhododendron (Rhododendron
minus and mountain laure Kalmia latifolia . Rose Rosa sp.),
honeysuckle Lonicera japonica), grape Vitis sp., verbesina
(Verbesina sp.), poke (Phytolacca america thoroughwort (Eupatorium
fistulosum) and rumex Rumex sp.) are common ground cover plants.
15
Forested and nonforested wetland communities are located in
depressions adjacent to streams and on nearby floodplains. Sycamore,
river birch Betula ni ra and alder Alnus serrulata are common
canopy species in forested areas. Carex Carex sp.), jewel weed
(Impatiens sp.) and willow seedlings Salix sp.) were also common.
One nonforested site, in a maintained residential site, supported
primarily cattail T ha sp.), Juncus Juncus sp.) and grasses.
The third community is an upland grass-dominated area. This
community has been cleared recently. Dominant species include broom
straw (Andropogon sp.), sourwood seedlings, patches of black-berry,
short leaf pine seedlings, strawberry Fra aria sp.) and the hairy
cap moss (Polytrichum sp.).
Another impacted community are grassy roadside shoulders located
within highway right-of-ways. These areas support various grasses,
herbs, and shrubs. The more predominant species are tree of heaven,
blackberry, tulip poplar, clover Trifolium sp.), plantain Planta o
sp.), phlox Phlox sp.), Queen Anne's Lace Daucus carota and
Cnidoscolus (Cnidoscolus stimulosus).
2. Animal Communities
Terrestrial communities and aquatic communities (associated with
streams) will be impacted from construction. Animals,that are most
likely impacted are opossum, short-tailed shrew, eastern mole,
eastern cottontail, eastern chipmunk, gray squirrel, southern flying
squirrel, white footed mouse, raccoon, striped skunk, bobcat and
white tailed deer. Reptiles such as snapping turtle (one spotted in
the field), snakes, lizards and amphibians will also be impacted.
Avian fauna impacted include species commonly associated with the
area such as robins, blue jays, pileated woodpeckers, warblers,
thrushes, chickadee, tufted titmouse and red eyed vireo.
Occasionally one may find other mammals such as hairy tailed mole,
New England cottontail, woodchuck, deer mouse, golden mouse, wood
rat, jumping mice, spotted skunk, long-tailed weasel and gray fox.
J. Threatened and Endangered Species
Mountain Golden Heather Hudsonia montana , a small shrub that has a
federal and state status of threatened, was listed as a potential
inhabitant in the project area according to the Natural Heritage Program
files. This plant, which is commonly found on shrub balds, was not
observed during field studies. There are no threatened or endangered
species known to be found or observed in this area.
K. Traffic Noise
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise level
either approaches or exceeds the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC), or
substantially exceeds existing noise levels.
16

The traffic noise impacts of this project in terms of increased noise
levels are predicted to range from +3 to +8 dBA. When real-life noises
are heard, level changes of 2-3 dBA are barely perceptible. A 5 dBA
change is more readily noticeable, and a 10 dBA change is judged by most
people as a doubling or a halving of the loudness of the sound.
The number of receivers in each activity category that are predicted
to approach or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) are shown in
Table N3. As shown, 32 receptors (28 residences and 4 businesses) in the
project area are predicted to approach or exceed the NAC, if the road is
widened on its current alignment. Other information included in Table N3
is the maximum extent of the 72 and 67 dBA noise level contours. This
information should assist local authorities in exercising land use control
over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway in local
jurisdiction and to prevent further development of incompatible activities
and land uses.
The project will maintain no control of access, most commercial
establishments and residences will have direct driveway connections, and
all intersections will adjoin the project at grade. Based on past project
experience, this negates the effectiveness of any physical abatement
measures. Thus making no traffic noise abatement reasonable or feasible
along this project. No traffic abatement measures are proposed.
L. Air Quality
The project is located in the Eastern Mountain Air Quality Control
Region. The ambient air quality for McDowell County has been determined
to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Since this project is located in an area where the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control measures, the
conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this project.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting
from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed
from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by the contractor. Any
burning done will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and
ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning
will be done at the greatest distance practicable from dwellings and not
when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public.
Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
M. Contaminated Properties
A field survey of the subject project corridor was conducted to
identify any potential hazardous material involvement from properties/
operations located adjacent to the project. In addition to a field
survey, a records search of environmental agencies was conducted.
Underground Storage Tanks
A reconnaissance survey identified 7 sites with potential underground
storage tank involvement within the project area. A subsequent records
17
search of the DEM/Groundwater Section was conducted to determine the
status of these tanks. Based on the results of this investigation, the
following information was obtained:
Site No. 1
221-SAV-A-STOP Exxon located left of Sta. 135 + 50 to Sta. 137 has 5
currently operating USTs. This site is located outside the proposed
project limits and should not be affected.
Site No. 2
An abandoned convenience store, which operated under the name
"Hollifield's Grocery", is located left of Sta. 150 to Sta. 151. According
to Mike Royster, the owner of Royster Oil Company, the USTs which were
located at this facility have been removed.
Site No. 3
Woodlawn Foodcenter located left of Sta. 316 + 50 to Sta. 318. This
facility is an active site with 4 USTs. The tanks are constructed of
steel and were installed in 1979. The tank capacities and contents are
respectively: three 10-12,000g gasoline tanks and one diesel fuel tank.
The tanks are registered with DEM/GW, ID number 0-029436. The canopy and
pump island, which are within the proposed right of way limits could be
effected.
Site No. 4
Former Woodlawn Amoco located left of Sta. 318 + 25 to Sta. 320 has 4
permanently closed USTs. The tanks are constructed of steel and were
installed in 1965. The tank capacities and contents are respectively: two
7,500g gasoline, one 8,000g gasoline and one 560g gasoline. The tanks are
registered with DEM/GW, ID number 0-014318. According to a representative
of Ledbetter Oil Company, negotiations are presently taking place for tank
removal.
Site No. 5
Quick Jax, an operating convenience store, located right of Sta. 321
to Sta. 322 has 5 USTs. The tanks are constructed of steel and were
installed in 1980. The tank capacities and contents are respectively: one
8,000g gasoline, two 7,500g gasoline, one 1,000g kerosene and one 1,000g
diesel fuel. The tanks are registered with DEM/GW, ID number 0-026139.
The canopy and pump island, which are within the proposed right of way
limits could be affected.
Cite Nn_ A
Woodlawn Lumber Company located left of Sta. 337 to Sta. 346 has 2
currently operating USTs. The facility has two 10,000g capacity tanks
containing diesel fuel. These tanks are registered with DEM/GW, ID number
0-003114. The tanks appear to be well outside the proposed right of way
limits.
18
Site No. 7
Tony's Texaco located left of Sta. 358 has 4 currently operating
USTs. The tanks are constructed of steel and all but one was installed in
1972. The tank capacities and contents are respectively: two 10,000g
gasoline, one 4,000g gasoline and one 1,000g diesel fuel. These tanks are
registered with DEM/GW, ID number of 0-014301. It is anticipated that
most of the existing facility will be affected by the project.
Quarries
Two quarrying operations were also identified within the proposed
project limits. Waycaster quarry, which is located left of Sta. 179 to
Sta. 183+ 50, could be affected. The larger Woodlawn Quarry should not be
affected, since its main operation is greater than 300 feet right of Sta.
315 + to Sta. 320.
Other Potentially Contaminated Properties
The files of the Division of Solid Waste Management were consulted to
determine whether any unregulated dumps or other potentially contaminated
properties were within the corridor. Based on those records and the EPA's
Superfund list, two sites were identified as being within the project
area. A subsequent investigation of the location of these sites revealed
the following information:
Site No. 1
The American Thread facility, EPA ID #NCD003157377, is located at
least one-half mile east of the proposed project on SR 1556.
Site No. 2
Baxter Healthcare Corporation (former Travenol Labs), EPA ID
NCD05914764, is located at least three miles north of the proposed project
on US 221.
N. Construction Impacts
There are environmental impacts associated with the construction of
highways. These impacts are generally of short term duration and measures
will be taken to mitigate them.
Traffic along the subject portion of US 221/NC 226 may experience
brief periods of disruption during construction. These will be of short
duration.
Telephone and electric service are available in the project area. The
Division of Highways will hold a preconstruction conference with
representatives of the NCDOT, the contractor, representatives of the
involved utility companies, and pertinent local officials. Methods to
coordinate utility adjustments and to minimize damage or disruption of
existing service will be discussed at this conference.
19
The contractor shall maintain the surface of all waste areas during
construction of the project until the completion of all seeding and
mulching in accordance with the general requirements concerning erosion
and siltation covered in Article 107-13 of the Standard Specifications
entitled "Control of Erosion, Siltation and. Pollution". The N. C.
Division of Highways has also developed an Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Program which has been approved by the N. C. Sedimentation Control
Commission.' This program consists of rigorous requirements to minimize
erosion and sedimentation contained in the N. C. Highway Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures together with the policies of the
Division of Highways regarding control of accelerated erosion and
sedimentation on work performed by state forces.
Solid wastes will be disposed of in strict adherence to the Division
of Highways "Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures". The
contractor shall be required to observe and comply with all laws,
ordinances, regulations, orders and decrees regarding the disposal of
solid waste. Solid waste will not be placed into any existing land
disposal site which is in violation of state rules and regulations.
Disposal of waste or debris (including vegetation from land clearing,
demolition, construction, and land clearing materials) in active public
waste or disposal areas will not be permitted without prior written
approval by the responsible engineer. Such disposal will not be permitted
when it will result in excessive siltation or pollution.
Waste or debris shall be disposed of in areas that are outside of the
right of way and provided by the contractor unless otherwise required by
the plans or special provisions or unless disposal within the right of way
is permitted by the responsible engineer.
Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as possible to
alleviate breeding areas for mosquitoes. In addition, care will be taken
not to block existing drainage ditches. Where structures are to be
removed or demolished, an extensive rodent control program will be
implemented to prevent migration of rodents into surrounding areas.
0. Secondary Impacts
The proposed action could result in environmental effects that are
indirectly attributable to implementation of the proposed action. Such
impacts include increasing the overall development potential of existing
land uses.
Other secondary impacts include the use of biologically productive
land. As the corridor continues to develop, more natural areas are
removed from biologically productive uses. Such alterations could have a
negative impact on animal habitat.
VI. PERMITS
Based on the minor wetland impacts and surface water takings (See
Section V.H. for a discussion of wetlands and impacts), the Nationwide
Section 404 Permit provisions of 33 CFR 330.5(9) (14) are applicable and
the provisions of 330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
20
VII. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Government Response
Comments on the proposed project were requested from the agencies
listed below. An asterisk indicates that a written response was received.
These comments are incorporated into the environmental assessment
contained in this report. A copy of the comments is included in
Appendix C.
U. S. Appalachian Regional Commission - Washington
*U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington
*U. S. Department of Agriculture (Forest Service) - Marion
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services - Atlanta
U. S. Department of the Interior - Washington
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
*U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Asheville
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
U. S Geological Survey - Raleigh
*U. S. Soil Conservation Service - Raleigh
*Tennessee Valley Authority
*N. C. State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Human Resources
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Isothermal Planning and Economic Development Commission
McDowell County
*City of Marion
B. Public Response
In addition to the written requests for information from appropriate
agencies and governmental bodies, an informational workshop was held on
June 26, 1990 at the County Administration Building in Marion to discuss
the subject road improvement project. The NCDOT Office of Public Affairs
advertised the meeting in the local media prior to its being held and the
meeting was covered by The McDowell News. Approximately 65 persons
attended the gathering including representatives of the NCDOT.
In general, the subject project is strongly supported by local
residents. In fact, several residents from the Ashford area of northern
McDowell County requested that the improvements to US 221 be extended
north of the subject project limits.
A summary of other comments include the following:
Comment:
The portion of US 221 south of the subject project (R-204A)
should be completed prior to or at the same time as R-2020 to avoid a
"bottleneck" between the Marion Bypass and the subject project.
21
Response:
According to the Roadway Design Unit, a preliminary design for
Project R-204A is currently scheduled for completion in February 1991
and a public hearing is tentatively set for March 1991. Right of way
acquisition is scheduled to begin in May 1992 and the project may be
let to contract for construction by August 1993. This schedule calls
for construction of-this portion of US 221 to begin approximately two
years ahead of R-2020.
Comment:
The NCDOT should widen the subject roadway on the east side of
the existing alignment south of Woodlawn in the vicinity of the
Woodlawn rock quarry since the State of North Carolina owns land in
this area.
Response:
The proposed alignment calls
alignment to reduce land taking
residents.
for widening east of the existing
and relocation impacts on area
Comment:
"In the Woodlawn area where there are houses and businesses on
both sides of the highway, put the proposed road on one side" . .
"This might allow those affected most the financial means to
relocate." There is "no need to ruin everyone and leave them hanging
on the side of a five-lane road". However, some other residents say
that widening on only one side of the road would be unfair.
Residents on both sides of the road should share in any loss of
property.
Response:
Because of development on both sides of the road in the Woodlawn
area, the NCDOT has studied symmetric and assymmetric alignments for
the proposed project and recommends the symmetric option because it
will result in the least number of displacees.
LS/wp
PAS
B-12771
P SILVER KNOB
? wooD
4"d BALD
Lake
R-204A
PROJECT
' LIMITS
3
4P?B 12
1414 91
GP 15 ?/
1214
Green'-- ?
R-204 1191
1 1245 PROJECT
f e 190
LIMITS -
1161 I 1
? 1463 1a , 1 ? F'
115
40
1 78- 031.01316
44, _ 1211 Providence
Ili
c' HARMS MTN.
Sugar
Hill .
NORTH CAROLINA
McDOWELL COUNTY
I?G PINNACLE
ryl MTN.
1573
b
PiHt
>s6o
Q't POW
R-2020
PROJECT'-.
LIMITS
IM?.,??? ? JP?ES
?
LAKE
t?
so1rllPe"
^ 6.2 70
EAST MARION
POP. 1.851 \
\
(UNNO
1750
J(? CA
rF?•
WEST MAMON
POP. 1,596
r -e
1794 .1
.3 793 t
O
S`r 1796
,786 b
k IA
1C
L
1796 li
1163
`
,61782
?
neo
1781
M
I,
35°45' O' 1411
?
OQ
01
,,O
146
11 6
1 93
3
'L4a WAY
? n
1549 /,
.4
1.3 1.3 '.y PAS 70 TO MORGANTON
O
L Ile O
Mtn. 1763
1764 `o?
e -
1 R
`O Lfe¢k X40 TO MORGANTON -- )1M1 y G
1803 70
d
b
OaaJ b 1760 1765 1763 O? 35-40'
IB 6
757 it
1756 1764
,7ss
S 6 1764 .6
46 ti
! 1764 1i t
1 1
738 'D
•o
nse ~ 1767
1798 9 6+
?? 'D ? I767
n / 1769 O
O 1768
1800 1799
Y \
1798 1769
U
1798
o PILOT MTN. QO?
?n .Ina qO
Muddy }i3:31 .Q h1771 ?o 64 1840- 1771 I`
0 1807 Oywnville??
5°J ./ ? Aga
n \.9 Ina 0
IM ` y71 T/
0 1777 lA 1776 '7
Ie03 1776 ?Ar O BOLIN -yam
/. KNOB
0
US 221
BETWEEN SR 1434 AND NC 226
NORTH OF MARION
McDOWELL COUNTY
R-2020
0 mile 2 FIGURE 1
L I I.
O
a
N
_O
U
W
Lij
F-
z
I`n
?t
U)
N
N
cn
D
z
O
U
LtJ
W
z
N
N
z
N
N
D

W
il?
O C?i
Z ?-1-
a
F-
U)
W a
M W
W cr-
a
Q Z
C) Q)
cr- 0-
F--
O
0
U
z
lq-
O
0
z
LLI
O
m
TZ
1 a_
a_
a
,i
N
N
cr)

.m r Q ,N w a
Sj? kit
° r
N t
IV-
9
k.
1 Y,'

Am _4
i it
14
e
to 14
R s
` ..
RV, ,:: R'2c h J .! ?' °. /'", - •`.nek R4'a.
aw`: ?', r°,. <?, as t > +'°y; G?7,.s ?$ `•? F`.' '
c 11 k t
} "-
%
F
i
t4,
?g`?F''r
.,;, ,:s' s: x „: g . .??.; r???,, ?? ??? fin. ? 5? x-ti• a, + ?` ,?.:? ? R L ??rvt r ?e J•? ?? ? ?
?'' `??• ?'." r ? `??. .??? ? ?'?° g ,? °'?'?'t ?{kp j? ? ??sr? _ 4 '? ? a{? A MJ'? "tfixd 44
_ _ ? 9t 1 ' i?*. - M e- r % a, "^t.'*'? ?..K.? '; F' '', r -' ,I ?'. 4 ` 7-, " sn wid l' I ' ,,:' r r"'"
- ?? -,?,, "!i:,7? , ? ?, - , ,? , , , ? , i W,
,11
!mss- a ?y ,s ? M "?,.?, pp { t 1 +K
sue' w , '? ? rF w ti; .. ? ? y # -? to b.; ?i ?. -T `C :? j, 1 M A'
', P 3 3' 4 w i[M -; F\ i L x .. §,Y° < , t ", a . ' ., •1•? F' M L
C
I , - , I I "I , ? I - , , - "'g," *,,,,-?-, ,,?,7?",,- , `??, 1? " 4? , I - 'i'l , ? I " "
S
1? ? V ", , ?. I , , -- ?, - I I ?, ` , k
, -ail- A .'+- x _ Y''
a ,4 ° ,I' I. :?,' Ifi a
e , r,, . _ ,,, -<° IJIINil 11 I,
i .#' ?} ,t ?, is +r 1 _ J ! 1 ...1 t w ;yM,? ''pr {
",.. ? ,y.
$? M
/r '$° pt x t ' It, \-
r
,
r A.
k .. ?:x w - '? # .
F ' ,r *?..?_ " t`? 11 ?? sue, I -±n;* y .,;t m: -
, f 1r .
aH x
P
„ a
;,- 1, ti r .?" z W r 3 F-
? ? _ ? , <. , U , w ? I,
11, I , , k ":?,- 1? w p
?„ _
1-1 In i
'.
I 'I", IV 1,'?,,,,?, - ", ? -', ? "r-* -,?vl , - I . lk ? -A-F I
- v
t t ?` , f'ar: (` ?? `d y'`t ,A I
119,
x fie ,. , Y t ? ^?. , '"? I'll Oup -0?- ?,- ;:,,?,??
I -1 -r,' ? " , - , K t ? ,? 4 I., n
)l I ,? tI-4?14
? ', ., ? , - , ??Il. e?" ? I ;, - , 1-1':?l ?
W- - ?", ' ? ,? k, ? L ? ''
; a_'' a -•;{ F s`. ,ti ,°' .!', yp yJ1 •,?t ?S f,. ht ", .. t r. ?r", tz'. t i{-
1 '=
G' a -k s ' ?. - `- ka -., 5 ?`i }# ?, ° p, ' - I, en's.
4 ? k'
? 1, '? -?', 4 -1 ? V - ? - - , 1, - ? " , , , , - ? A .
A ''' ?' k •7'...- -,;a ,, ? ? ?? ?".-. r " ' ? }`f ?"f _ `` ; .. W ??,'.i ' U d ,y? °1 •?N?: '? a- g.3 `
. ..t _
v
>. a v' f ??
?;
q,. ' . ,... {y
ne`'4'f >f o`^ ;. A't : ry,_ {. 0°f.: y Q i ?+ '' Y -_--`
11 - 11
I . . ? Fn 7 , "
11 y r m. y'. _ A i, ,e,, ? §, ??= l r .r ; ? , ' a. m T ? ? j
?? -, , ,,, - I . - ?, ?,--,--, ? " ,i ',4 ? 1. , - I . +1, "§ , 'I .i *
= z
{ °'' a 11
z?a .v -? '?°' I 11 ..? y P ''' 3 * ;lam.
° '- - , W .R, ka` `0 ?a, ..?i "?, ,? ?r,. ? W. I
. , I y '? yt '., k f C z N p
:, " , ? '
' -f n; x zou6 cM
[z. in
. , ? I , , ,
: ,'? x? c k , MC ' u)-O_JCV
4 tlr ;> , -, ,..r 2 „ s {. ,? ?- v, /' s .# .rt : y i t °"yam.. C. C Z :2, x Z R , ?-` 1, e I ,-,? - ; 4 -
ns `•, e 3 4?. »j ; 11 }£' - + f. `i ,,.ad" - fi 4 ., y Z 1 z Z Z CC 0 x
ll? ?, .? I I I.- ? , -, ? I ll?l - ? ? 0'- 0 , " MErA`m 3Z?
?¢ a fs a i z2
F 7 a ,' L ~
?^ Y
Y ?''k -R `' l„ - '- k;?%I< { }i"' t. ys °a`'•4a, # k. • (*
?? m
? .,r' ?*. s' ? a k 11 t, , " ? `, F ?' ' s Y. '?
I ? ,)
*;? g W -,,aF., ' 5 ?, `sr?' ff * 'v? ,u^ - ,I 4 4 m" 3 A 3 ? ZC. - I. tC'
'dye',?."T'.°, a 3 , <". It f` t. - *t 4F ?G,y.'t7I y s s'w I _ • LL
,'y_p`,. ' i' 'F% y. ?t*r i' ` fsY:? f .k'.9' , - F!r/ ??r"
.#' `C. ?.
. ?. ? , ?? ? ?l s 16.1 - p ?r, 6t 1.
x . m Y 4 ?
?t . h
j?
•, }# V ?, iii
40,? ""'i- , Ty -, Z F ? 1?? - $' oilij
1 < # 6 ,. .. mt . F b ! °it wtr .yp ,,: ?.i .. I G 4a'e _ "'
x + '? 9
'_ , , - ?, t?' e . , ", ? Zl? 11
? r s Y.
? N, I , _ I . ? T r,,,
Tr ' ate- a 9 . .5 5 8 '"Y? - E ;,' '. -!{...
,11 1. 111, `11* v s s.. ? Y a.. sG 9 ,dy ?`
f ._ ;: ?t?'L
` # .
'i la+ ,?td" r C. 'T h° u k1F° Fn;.''s y.-
' a { s''- {r ?- '? . / ?. ? AF S 'I I T; w i 4 ^,?d'` 6 k , s,
I I ** 44 f?- -. . . . I'k " I -,-.;.- . - . '.. - ? - . I ? I - .71 - I - 11 I - ?
11
: ? ?-l ?- '? I
h?*Na 4- 17-
,??
a
rf
r
G w ,,? _. kr +ril v >4' '
, - 'i " 11 11 u . , s - -? ? 11
c1
c: - 4. f <.+ P s:; ex e •A?s l .raga',` &,`f ? .
-,-? t j , A t a9r ' rb -'?' w' y ?A ? e k: ,
r £:.
r * ' G .. ,-err r ` fit - 4'trs y -, y r M?' I °, ' h
Y? a FF` A; P 2 a u r , z5 p yi p t# $ h i d t? t,- `
,X* ,-,}% ;,, Y .x - ''. y ry, ' f s#w • s '? wp' i 1:,. ' t .?a k'°
ak
t
`^ .x. ?14 +.l ,, p r'.i, ? .; , b: ki.` (-x% " r aty p .?+' ? `;`',{ . i
a,y .a+.%; "? ,s"+,a _ s,x >< ''"sf"'' w, y ?A?, + -ep'Y?`, cfS3 ?? ?,' kY'I
} g r' ,fi s r ` , r
r Y*x ez ^ r
?- a _ t .'
„ ' - ; 1 8 -
-<y'_ , F"` $. -+ •. , '$ # `F . -x \ ad ? ^m dy''' y Gi.a7 r `gs' g+ t? Y
- d = Ya
<u iffy '?'? '?. { eF # ',•''.,,.+ i?; ' * '
€ , # + 1 r , a t3
, ? 4? ? tj? I ,- , v ? ,;? i -P. ;"
kt . *,? ,? l, e i i I n r t, t y r?
I -M - 11-11 I 4t L .?, I, ` w ? " : F s c,, tits 1,.'rt ? rr
,. A ¢?
'*:. o- K. Sr -? ° ids -, k 9.? r h ., 7 ; °'.# z? C +?y d. ?` ° ', *H' +
ki,? I '.. , V ? , , , - -! l I , I v - - A 4
.11 I I ? -Y, I . 6 - I 1? x ? , ? 1, ? I " ,?. ," 4 , , I , ,:?: , -, i??-, . - - I 4fl.? *
, 4 , I I ? 4?4 , , N, , ,
t 4 a le ,;;' i. w 1? n: 't `k st 3r ?'ri ?'. r ` ;,, k e '_ -3 ? ? fir 5'. t'
11 , {
" 14, r' y„ •, 'R` ' t , . Y " :` E °> r,., p i ,, i -'u° < R;y 4 , ,?':A
I rt f?a``s.;' ,s* ` '? +?, , p \ .> , ; -. P\ yp"` _ ? r.,;. ' x" ??,. X i iy,a .1. ? A ?'4 ? , q ... 't. .. 11
;,; 3 ? s \t ,m . t PAy t. 'T" s k r? N' , x .Y ^
° d ' tii +...' `L, S 4.a r ;13Ak? n' 5' A,?
I- I 't`''om p t ? {ce,
..+
'i"ll ; e? ? - y : e 7 _ .t'.7E r ,?` i 'qj? I ? s 'PFi- i • t -r y5' ?-
. 3w §. f` 1e,3 r ^tl " k 5+ 1? ,q Y*` ¢s •tYe.y?
a it 'Y "ex f .- '` }- r b, `4,' ?x` r'" r .t y ;.
" n a. a , ,te a i ? z„ , k" wR. -, \ r
w
A 53i .IIa'T+ ALe" ""?:"? ` ? 3ya,F < ?. - d..i asp .?.;s s a ?' : '§ ..a p.^,r t € „, .,?5 ^ ?
.p $ `? 'b#. 11 .. k , a`.: ;'" :D '.N4;`•.- n q3 ay,....,_''"" d7 x3 - '"t'?± ..'M,+w"`
r Al'."!',?..., .7 -a° } r k 1't ?'`J- ,ri -- '' fsrh?x'.' r??'s e J " 1 .!y. ,':t` 5 \ i"p'ri,,. . 3), .,,, 1!.'?
,
X yi-:° -=.r'' '''` .K r.V ?";g 5" sr , ', _ f ? '.`+ .- , i'ce'` :i
bt' ?.r1? `?*F . ,+.. : y?" :-, . 4"' ..'FY` 'trR `h + ?,s ? +? ,
Tom.',' ` } ? .,+ ..< N I k rYir '.. ^? ?C.:e e
,? M
s fi .. :1 '&0. - y?8..
. `.Si'F.Pj zYd-,i_:3. c
.. . _ L .. ....,@ .> _ _
445
04
S
I A,
C -i.sb 4?i S" 4
4, r

' '? ? ,u?
? '?
'??` "?,
_? . , .
. ? ? >?
? y,?.
? ? ~ ? ? a? ,?.? _
1

ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
US 221/NC 226 BETWEEN SR 1434 AND NC 226
NORTH OF MARION, McDOWELL COUNTY, R-2020
1990 ADT IN HUNDREDS
2010 ADT IN HUNDREDS
55 I US 221
69'

e
50
90
NC 226 -
TTST - 3%
DUAL-4%
DHV - 10%
2
SR 1440 4
TTST - 0%
DUAL-1%
DHV -10%
1
SR 1433 2
TTST - 0%
DUAL - 1%
DHV -10%
12
SR 1434 24
TTST - 1 %
DUAL-3%
DHV -10%
s I
T6-
41
74
87
157
96
174
1
1
1
3
96
176
96
X77
96
177
97
178
1-
1-
1+
2
98
180
4
8
8
16
102
188
4 17
1 2
3 SR 1535
1 NORTH LEG
2 TTST - 0%
DUAL - 1%
DHV - 10%
7 31 SR 1556
13
2a TTST - 1
DUAL-3%
DHV -10%
1- 2
1 3 SR 1535
1+ SOUTH LEG
2 TTST-0%
DUAL-1%
DHV -10%
TTST - 6%
DUAL-5%
DHV -10%
FIGURE 4
4
t
U)
z
0
,U^
Ljj
V /
U
w
a
01-1
w
I-
a
O
N
O
N
z
? N O
W
H W
C/)
D
dS w
N O

U } O
J 2
W ?
Z
J Z
Q

_ LO
-?? ? I I a
OD
N
O

to',
r
.?
\114
7
N
N
N
N
N
T
cr
D
LL
ACCIDENT RATE SUMMARY
R-2020, US 221, WDOWELL COUNTY

f
l
Accidents per.100 million vehicle miles
260,
200
160
100
60
0
ACCIDENT TYPE SUMMARY
R-2020, US221, WDOWELL COUNTY
Percent Accidents
36
10 --- --
t6

20

16 ---
10 _.? --

6 =lux
Ran Off Rd Rear End Lt Turn Head On Angle Other
Averages from 01/01/86 thru 12/31/89
? S 21
FIGURE 7
Total Fatal Nonfatal Night Wet
Averages from 01/01/86 thru 12/31/89
U8 221 M NC Avg.- U8 Routes
FIGURE 6
%
t Conley' e r I
? ? ? 11, )? 1 ` l.._\ ,..? / ?l?` ??: ? ?'? 1 (/C! D/, l.. ' C? .\J? 1 M.n - , ? ?i? ,. • ? , , ._ \ ? ? \
HrancM1 -? '/? ?!? ? If
N A-
> END PROJECT
.\?r (???• 41 l ? I? ? .? ?---- ? --?,? Ol0
' .?: r? /';' ? -; .-- ; Is •? /?i% ?? , ?D/;t: 1/ L - ? _ ?;, o '; l• eek ? t .'; ' ? .' Jl r rJu ? '?, 1
r u
?\?4,??f.`\%\ ?,._q`r?/.' o /• ), ' i r ` ?1.:. SITE I
SEE FIGURE 8A ning ?.
sin
c e. ? ??? - "` \ _-- - /• ? .a / ? `• Epp
.:y Yancey Pon a
>> ::_ J
' ? -"1 ?' I/? /^ 1 / • . }? ?sw/? % ?I_ a •. + \,? ?'? t ` I
? cz2oo ?,_ ? ' ?j? ? / / ?bo- \ `\ ( ? ? `.? -Swlmnlteg ol?' • ? • / .? . II
SITE 2 dla y \ .\} l
'N NX
«. _ .?
?'%}?> ?? ??•\\'> '` 0 SITE 5 ro _ o l
-•.'drBVE lrr -' L, '? \ / \C? • 1 3
\`?':.\, -? V ? + - ?`' ieoo. /(( 1i• 1. 7?j •? /; t
00
I C • .
,J ; (%i ? ' , as:y ? rr,• ?? III ??_ / ' ? ? / q ^ ? /VOID l
77-
V v ,
•
31T 3
U, V
)S ,, ?t )? j IS ITE 4
?(??? 1,?._?? ?-? ? ??, t? ?t \ ? •(_? i1t-.? ? ?o "?.? 1d) i -3i.` = i?... I _ r, ?.?I 0 ` ? ?, '? C??Tp 4/ '.
-?\) ? C\SI. j - ?. ? ? • vJ tt % 1 ?r ?'t? -?.. ? ,j?u8tf -., •? ? / / ? ? ?j^v\ • '": •I \ \ `?• ,"""' 'R•??- --;!i
•To rre
i; 1 '} it / r' '/\1 `??, g• ,r 11?C?? / / ?z// /1 / / J_ ;? ?'. ?:.! (`,,,riles!
1 141 ,
Vary
BEGIN PROJECT •' r °
ol?:-1-? 1 c?
gan BM • \. J(? .! ?? . , 1 T
j? or
Ire
1 3%
nilly •1-?1-``\ \ '1 ,.1
'c
'Vliar'kin

o
z
elp
s!F
21y d • 7
r ? t i a1 Cv ? / ? ? !
?h 4 Ch v ?'S'? U c l?c^ s!
+ I s t ; v r 1 s?\i E! OD
t
CMD
0) cr) CO + t t 'tYl , ;,i•.^ O .+'i.. r.J;>,i:. 'in ?j , N
+`.,..:r V r, ?J (?
383
C*) 00
w CO co 5+
w ?ka12 Ott ,
N W '•?` ? b •?=
trr POP. 5 _Q ti ?? n y? ?t W j? Q
r
l s??? ?s I
Z iRY tfft(t,i-
Ak,
It Nn
qtr !1 W
Cf)
c Z r ??ritFg (? ?' ?+
c ?t<.s',Y:il i?U??r ??r t? 1"_ ,_(• 3t ba1) ? z'?i'+. L
x B O 1 t O m ? Nh y; &7 mid"` Q ,: 1 f ;' 1Y.?? L t a
Ijl Q ` k.a av.tX??t y?? L t ;d `tX?C ° t,y4
z .:e• t It ?1 r'k• '4t's.?°'!?
yypy y \ .?I
0 / Sn 8 °""ti Y43YF qh? kk Ri M?)- ?''.?5, J J 1 t 1
_ y k ?t
,? a ?F ??ri •, ?IY i' ? ...v UL Ox?1't
?00 c t ??yJy. J r! +F' F
• \. ' A ? ?v i1t' ?1 $ F'^yt ? OI '(!?? fi?dki? ?• r1.. c
t ?yM
Z 3 x 1
V
00 c N ?
•t !V
Q ??yy}C
f +e t(ti ?? r :Fy w w '
1. + { w M?+ nE .9 *°vr? ' ?..' E aR?, Z Z
?
.. .. ...._.- . _. ?- +> t' '. • r. _ a.\ x 4f) roc s a'+i.?''ttsy????l??ti -i'- - ?? ? 00
t , .Q +a,:.t+:ss1 SN Y, .'tt..:?tS .Dir'uSM 'd1
1t n *4 4 a,?1? :s l3{?I?h ? S? + t 1 L} _7t. r / .?i? M ??" '0000 ?
1 ^ ? ll S,S t g 1t`T ty??u 4, ..
i• L: j f t t W
.17
?, f • ?`? f 11 '
? r ? I
IN REPLY REFER TO
Planning Division
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
June 28, 1990
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
`'i . /990
r`
y;14 vq"
r
H BR??
We have reviewed your letter of May 14, 1990, requesting information for
"US 221-NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of Marion, McDowell County,
R-2020, State Project #6.879001T" and offer the following comments.
This proposed project crosses Armstrong Creek where there is an identified
flood plain. The effects of the proposed project on the flood plain and
floodway should be evaluated and coordinated with the local government
(Ref. Panel 40 of 200, McDowell County Flood Insurance Rate Map dated
July 15, 1988).
Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge
of excavated or fill material in waters of the United States or any adjacent
and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with this project, including disposal
of construction debris. Department of the Army permit requirements will
depend on the final project design, area of waters and/or wetlands filled,
construction methods, etc. Under our mitigation policy, impacts to wetlands
should first be avoided or minimized. We will then consider compensation or
mitigation for unavoidable impacts. When final plans are completed, including
the extent and location of any work within waters of the United States and
wetlands, our Regulatory Branch would appreciate the opportunity to review
these plans for a project-specific determination of Department of the Army
permit requirements. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. David
Baker, Regulatory Branch, at [phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can be of
further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Fn erely2n!ng Lawrence nders
Chief, P1 Division

01p)
United States Forest Grandfather
Department of Service Ranger District
Agriculture
Reply to: 2700
Date: July 11, 1950
1'r. L. J. Ward, P.B., tanager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of highways
N.C. DepartiLent of Tranportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Ward:
P. 0. Box 510
?.4 . Court u T. Logan Strs.
Marion, NC 28752
4 a?
vG ?'
z l-
G) fir. 6
!9
This letters in response to the public meeting in Ifarion on June 26, 1990
concerning the widening of U.S. 221/N.C. 226 between SR 11434 and NC 226 North
of 11arion.
This project would effect a section: of national Forest land as well as our work
center facilities just south of I.oodlawn. Our concerns are as follows:
1. Any expansion of the existing right-of-way to the west frog its
current location would have an adverse effect on our primary work
center shop building and its associated grounds. Expansion to the
east would also involve National Forest land but there are no
improvements on that side of the road and that would be our
preference.
2. Any significant reduction of the grade adjacent to our facilities
could impact our entrance road and require its re-location.
3. The Mountain-to-the Sea Trail crosses the highway just south of the
existing roadside park. Requiring hikers to cross five lanes of busy
traffic could be extremely dangerous. You may need to consider a foot
bridge to solve this problem.

S
14. It is our understanding that the existing roadside park adjacent to
our work center would be closed and a new one constructed on the
Marion by-pass. Under the terns of the special use permit for the
existing facility you will be required to remove all improverients and
return the site to its natural state if you no longer plan to use the
area. Depending on how your project impacts the area, it is possible
that the parking lot of the roadside area could be used as a "trail
head" parking lot for the E;ountain-to-the-Sea Trail.
FS-8200-28a (5/84)
0 d? .
°? ? As you move forward with this project please keep us informed. The person who
1s you will need to wort: with in regards to easements across rational Forest land
is Joe tloore in the Forest Supervisor's office in Asheville. If you have
questions or we can be of assistance please let us :snow.
Sincerely,
Ila'
MICHAEL F. ANDERSON
District Ranger

cc: Forest Supervisor
S
FS-6200-28a (5/84)
United States Soil
e Department of Conservation
Agriculture Service
V
1
Mr. L. J. Ward., P.E.
Manager of Planning and Research Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
.
4405 Bland Road, Suite 205
Raleigh, NC 27609
Telephone: [phone]
June 6, 1990
.! r
n r,
Re: US 221-NC 226 between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of Marion, 1k A111''
County, R-2020, State Project No. 6.879001T `
Dear Mr. Ward:
This is in response to your request for Important Farmland Information for
this project. There is a small area of important farmland at junction
NC226 and US 221, north end of the project area. The rest of the area does
not have important farmland. This is because of the steep to very steep
landscapes, cut and fill areas, and urban development along the project
area.
Sincerely,
Bobbye J. Jones
State Conservationist
cc: Kayla B. Hudson

O The Soil Conservation Service
`J is en agency of the
Department of Agriculture
ENT OF ¦
TAR MKN=W
United States Department of the Interior
A FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
ASHEVILLE FIELD OFFICE
100 OTIS STREET, ROOM 224 ¦
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801
June 5, 1990 L'
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Research Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Subject: Proposed improvements to US221-NC 226 between SR 1434 and NC 226
north of Marion, McDowell County, North Carolina (State Project
No. 6.879001T, TIP No. R-2020)
This responds to your letter of May 14, 1990 (received May 16, 1990),
requesting our comments on the subject proposal. These comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is particularly concerned about the
potential impacts the proposed action may have on endangered/threatened
species and on stream and wetland ecosystems within the project impact
area. Preference should be given to alternative alignments, stream
crossing structures, and construction techniques that avoid and/or minimize
encroachment and impacts to these resources.
The enclosed page identifies federally protected endangered (E) and
threatened (T) species that may occur in the area of influence of this
proposed action. The legal responsibilities of a Federal agency or their
designated non-Federal representative under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act, as amended, were detailed in material sent to you previously.
If you would like another copy of this material or if you have any
questions, please contact Mr. John Fridell at 704/259-0321 (FTS 672-0321).
The Service's review of any environmental document would be greatly
facilitated if the document contained the following information:
(1) A complete analysis and comparison of all available alternatives
including the no action alternative.
(2) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within
existing and required additional rights-of-way and any areas,
such as borrow areas, which may be affected directly or
indirectly by the proposed improvements.
(3) Acreage and descriptions of branches, creeks, streams, rivers, or
wetlands which will be filled as a consequence of proposed
highway improvements. Wetlands affected by the proposed project
should be mapped in accordance with the Federal Manual for
(4) Linear feet of any water courses which will be relocated as a
consequence of the proposed improvements.
R (5) Acreage of upland habitats, by cover type, which will be
eliminated as a consequence of proposed highway improvements.
(6) Techniques which will be employed for designing and constructing
any relocated stream channels or for creating replacement
wetlands.
(7) Description of all expected secondary and cumulative
environmental impacts associated with this proposed work.
(8) Mitigation measures which will be employed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce, or compensate for habitat value losses associated with
any of the proposed improvements.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments and request that
you continue to keep us apprised on the progress of this project. In any
future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our log
number 4-2-90-061.
Sin jerely,
U
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
Enclosure
cc:
Section Manager, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Archdale
Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC. 27611
Mr. Charles Roe, Director, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Rob Sutter, North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Plant
Conservation Program, P.O. Box 27647, Raleigh, NC 27611
Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, Box 26806,
Raleigh, NC 27611
Field Supervisor, FWS, P.O. Box 33726, Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
IN REPLY REFER TO
LOG NO. 4-2-90-061
LISTED SPECIES
r BIRDS ?i-'f-•`
'goun-tain golden-heather - Hudsonia montana (T)
STATUS REVIEW SPECIES
"Status Review" (SR) species are not legally protected under the Endangered
• Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
endangered/threatened. We are including these species in our response for
the purpose of giving you advance notification. These species may be
listed in the future, at which time they will be protected under the
Endangered Species Act. In the meantime, we would appreciate anything you
might do to avoid impacting them.
PLANTS
Oconee-bells - Shortia Qalacifolia (SR)
Gray's lily - Lilium gravi (SR)
A
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE --°'
L.-
FM208 06/13/90 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS'
MAILED TO FROM
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION MRS. CHRYS-VIBAGWw' T.
L.J+ WARD DIRECTOR
PLANNING S RESEARCH BRANCH N C STATE CLE'A'
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SCDPING FOR COMMENTS ON IMPACT OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO
US 221-NC 226 BETWEEN SR 1434 AND NC 226 NORTH OF MARION
(TIP R-2020)
SA I NO 90E 422 00915 PROGRAM TITLE - S COPI NG
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED i ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SH3ULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone]-
. C.C. REGION C

e + SLAT,
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Douglas G. Lewis
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Planning and Assessment
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
FROM: Melba McGee le
RE: 90-0915 Improving U.S. 221/NC 226 McDowell County
DATE: June 19, 1990
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed scoping notice. Comments from our
divisions have been attached and should be adequately addressed
in the environmental document.
bb: MM
attachments

P.U. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina ?7oll-7oK Telephone [phone],
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
June 8, 1990
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Carol Tingley
SUBJECT: 90-0915 Widen US 221-NC 226, McDowell County
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the proposal to
widen US 221-NC 226 in McDowell County. The Mountains-to-Sea
Trail crosses this segment of highway just south of the Woodlawn
Rest Area and the Woodlawn Forest Service Work Center. A
five-lane cross section for the highway would create a potential
hazard to trail users.
The Department of Transportation should seriously consider some
type of overpass structure for the trail crossing. If this is
not possible, appropriate signage, striping, trail relocation, or
other measures should be included in the project design to
improve the safety of this pedestrian crossing. The Department
of Transportation should coordinate with our Western Regional
Trails Coordinator, Dwayne Stutzman, at [phone] to discuss
the trail crossing.
Our Natural Heritage Program database contains one record for a
listed species located within the vicinity of the project. A
large population of oconee bells (Shortia galacifolia), a species
listed as endangered in North Carolina and a candidate for
federal status, grows along a tributary of Toms Creek 0.2 miles
west of US 221, between the highway and SR 1433. This population
does not seem likely to be threatened by the project.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project.
CT/sk
cc:Dwayne Stutzman
Chuck Roe
3158

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919-133-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
FROM: W. Don Baker, Program Manag
Division of Boating and Inla isheries
DATE: May 29, 1990
SUBJECT: US 221-NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of
Marion, McDowell County. (90-0915)
These comments are provided in response to your request
of May 21, 1990, for information for input relating to fish
and wildlife concerns for the proposed subject project.
Wildlife Resources Commission review of the environmental
document would be greatly facilitated if it contained:
1. A description of fishery and wildlife resources,
including habitats, existing within, or impacted
by the project.
2. The quantity of wetlands, streams, lakes, ponds
and other fish or wildlife habitats to be graded,
filled or otherwise disturbed.
3. Stream relocations, crossings or other proposed
construction activity that may impact them.
4. Acreage of upland habitat impacted by cover type.
5. Mitigation measures proposed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce, or compensate for fish and wildlife
habitat losses.
Thank you for the opportunity for input during the
pre-planning stage for this project. We will be happy to
assist in any manner feasible during all phases of the
project.
WDB/lp

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Project Number
90-0915
Coun y
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
4 3 4
Project Name 26 Type of. Project
The following are our comments on the above referenced subject.
The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system improvements
must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the award of a contract or the
initiation of construction (as required by 10 NCAC 100 .0900 et. seq.). For information, contact
the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
Several water lines possibly are located in the path of an adjacent to the proposed project.
Due to a possible rupture during construction, the contractor should contact the appropriate water
system officials to specify a work schedule.
The proposed project will be constructed near water resources which are used for drinking. Precautions
should be taken to prevent contamination of the watershed and stream by oil or other harmful substances.
Additional information is available by contacting the Public Water Supply Section at [phone].
Back flow preventors should be installed on all incoming potable water lines. Additional information
is available by contacting the Public Water Supply Section at [phone].
This project will be classified as a community public water supply and must comply with state
and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the applicant should
contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
if this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of adjacent
waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish sanitation program,
the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Branch [phone].
The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their requirements
for septic tank installations (as required under 10 NCAC 10A .1900 et. seq. and/or sanitary facilities
requirements for this project if applicable.) For information concerning septic tank and other
on-site waste disposal methods, contact the On-site Sewage Branch at [phone].
The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated structures,
an extensive rodent control project may be necessary in order to prevent the migration of the
rodents to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control, contact the local health
department or the Public Health Pest Management Section [phone].
The spoil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding problem.
For informaiton concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the applicant should contact
the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
Ca ? ? T 9v
Reviewer Branch/Unit Date
a o
y ? A
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Charles H. Gardner
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director

-r 1- 1 1j: f
1 v; _ _
2 C. 17 C C- ;7 1
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Forest Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Griffiths Forestry Center Harry F. Layman
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary 2411 Garner Road Director
` Clayton, North Carolina 27520
May 30, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins
Staff Forester `",•-? " ./
SUBJECT: EA of the Proposed Improvements to US 221-NC 226 Between SR 1434
and NC 226, North of Marion in McDowell County, N. C.
PROJECT #90-0915
DUE DATE 6-11-90
To better determine the impact, if any, to forestry in the area of the
proposed project, the Environmental Assessment should contain the following
information concerning the proposed improvements for the possible right-
of-way purchases for the project:
1. The number of total woodland acres that would be taken out of timber
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
2. The acres breakdown of this woodland concerning present conditions
such as clear-cut areas, young growing timber, and fully stocked
stands of very productive timber within the new right-of-way
purchases for disturbed and undisturbed portions.
3. The site indexes of the forest soils that would be involved within
the proposed right-of-way, so as to be able to determine the
productivity of these forest soils in the area.
4. The number of woodland acres that would affect any watersheds in the
area, if the woodland was removed.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Melba McGee
PROJECT X690-0915
Page 2
5. If woodland is involved, it is hoped that the timber could be
merchandised and sold to lessen the need for piling and burning of
debris during right-of-way construction.
Provisions should be indicated in the EA that the contractor will
make all efforts to salvage any merchantable timber to permit
construction, once the contractor takes charge of the right-of-way.
6. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction
phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to
the remaining standing trees outside of the right-of-way boundary
and construction limits.
We would hope that the improvements would have the least impact to forest
and related resources in that area.
DHR: la
cc: Fred White
File
a SUrE n
Wt?d a. ,? ny
C I A
trk pave`??
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor John N. Morris
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
June 7, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: John Sutherland,
SUBJECT: 90-0915, Improving U.S. 221/NC 226 in McDowell County
We have the following comments on the above project:
1. At stream and wetland crossings, utilize bridges whenever
possible to minimize habitat losses and floodplain
encroachment.
2. Minimize the loss of timber and prime farmland.
3. Provide vegetation buffers when highway passes close to
residential areas.
4. Mitigate the loss of wetlands and forests.
5. Minimize the use of curb and gutter; maximize the use of
porous pavement and grass swales.
6. Involve local landowners in gathering data on impacts; be
flexible on location of alternatives - adjust them to meet
local concerns.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 276117687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
$f4Tf.-
c?1 UG.-c
North Carolina
Department of Administration
James G. Martin, Governor James S. Lofton, Secretary
July 5, 1990
TO: L.J. Ward, N.C Dept. of Transportation
r,J
FROM: Chrys Baggett, State Clearinghouse
RE: SCH #90-E-4220-0915; Scoping - US 221 Upgrade McDowell County
Attached are additional comments which were submitted following
our clearance letter on your:
_ Notification to Clearinghouse of Intent to Apply for
Assistance
X Environmental Review
Other
If you have questions regarding these comments, please contact me
at [phone].
CB/it
Attachment
116 West Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8003 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
A
srr£ o .
3
?,?Q2526 Z17??9?
ti JUr'? t 990
w
?"CLis?Ei a
SECREI;:ri"S urn it";E V
r_ L)OA 3)rJ
I
State of North Carolina / L 2 i kka
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
Edythe M. McKinney
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Assistant Secretary for
Environmental Protection
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee e
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 90-0915 Scoping - US 221 Upgrade in McDowell County
North of Marion
DATE: June 25, 1990
The attached comments were submitted to this office after
the state's review period. The Department of Transportation is
requested to adequately address these comments.
bb: MM
attachment
P0. Box 27(,87 Pwlrigh. North Carolina 27611-7687 Idephone 911) 7 3 3-4984
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
1??
June 19, 1990 l?v JU 1990 ?^ N
MEMORANDUM ?-, D0A '?'?t!Cti 01
T0: ZllL??
°?r/ i
Melba McGee
FROM: Steve Tedder I,(
SUBJECT: Project No. 90-090 Scoping Comments for Proposed
US 221 Upgrade in McDowell County North of Marion
The following DEM comments address potential impacts to water
quality and wetlands.
Surface Water Quality
The extreme northern end of the proposed road improvements,
just north of Woodlawn, will cross Armstrong Creek which is
classified WS-III Tr. The classification means that the stream
is used as a water supply and is suitable for trout propagation.
NCDOT should strive to minimize the water quality impacts of the
project on Armstrong Creek.
Construction impacts can be reduced through strict adherence
to required sediment control measures. This is especially
important in light of the trout classification. Longer term
nonpoint source impacts associated with highway use can be
minimized by avoiding use of curb and
pollutants on the road surface and gutter, which traps
waters, and instead giving considera
pies tion toemaintaininglvegetated
filter strips along the road shoulders.
Wetlands
ands
The brief project summary provided by NCDOT does not indicate
whether any wetlands may be impacted. A water quality
certification will be required if a Section 404 permit is
required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. A prequisite to
issuance of the certification will be assurances that NCDOT has
followed the Clean Water Act's 404(b)(1)
mitigation, if necessary, guidelines and that
should clearly delineate the boundarieseandIn this regard, the EA
of the type(s) of wetlands, if an provide a description
y, the s that ma
impacted by this project. It shou
ldabe notedathat sediment be
control and wetland avoidance would not consitute mitigation for
impacted wetlands.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on this
project during the planning phase. Please contact Mr Al
if you have any quest4
ons. (733-5083) -- Clark

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources

James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
September 28, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Improvements to US 221-NC 226, R-2020,
McDowell County, CH 90-E-4220-0915,
ER 91-7342
Thank you for your letter of September 11, 1990, transmitting the
archaeological survey report by Thomas Padgett concerning the above
project.
During the course of the survey no archaeological sites were located
within the project area. Mr. Padgett has recommended that no further
archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this
project. We concur with this recommendation since this project will not
involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CFR Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comments, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: T. Padgett
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
y}y ???4
W D
prwvd? C?L+
f
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
June 15, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State /
Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: US 221-NC 226 between SR 1434 and NC 226 north
of Marion, R-2020, 6.879001T, McDowell County
CH 90-E-4220-0915
We have received notification from the state Clearinghouse concerning
the above project.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures
of historical or architectural importance-located within the planning
area. However, since a comprehensive historical architectural inventory
of McDowell County has never been conducted, there may be structures of
which we are unaware located within the planning area.
We recommend that the Department of Transportation retain'a qualified
architectural historian to define and survey the area of potential
effect of this project. This consultant should coordinate the survey
with Martha Fullington of our Western Office in Asheville. Ms. Fullington
can be reached at 704/298-5024.

Portions of the proposed project area are considered to have a high
probability for the location of significant archaeological resources.
This is particularly true for the northern end of the project. We
recommend that a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted prior
to the start of construction activities.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106,_codified at
36 CFR Part 800.
109 EastJones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Page Two
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
Linwood Stone
Barbara Church

.w STATF q
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
November 8, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: William S. Price, Jr.

Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
SUBJECT: US 221-NC 226 between SR 1434 and NC 226
north of Marion, R-2020, 6.879001T, McDowell
County, CH 90-E-4220-0915, GS 91-0035
We have reviewed your letter of October 12, 1990, and concur that there are
no National Register-listed properties in the area of potential effect and
further compliance with G.S. 121-12(a) is not necessary.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive
Order XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Ms.
Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 733-4763.
WSP:slw
cc: B. Church

109 EastJones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
yyy Via
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
June 15, 1990
M'F'MnRANDUM
C
hV
r
VIN
Q
, 199a
,S11
Resour f-11GNl?ygY
Division of
William S.? ctor
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State C?" v Vlfv
Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: us 221-NC 226 between SR 1434 and NC 226 north
of Marion, R-2020, 6.879001T, McDowell County
CH 90-E-4220-0915
We have received notification from the State Clearinghouse concerning
the above project.
Ay-oj
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures
of historical or architectural importance located within the planning
area. However, since a comprehensive historical architectural inventory
of McDowell County has never been conducted, there may be structures of
which we are unaware located within the planning area.
We recommend that the Department of Transportation retain a qualified
architectural historian to define and survey the area of potential
effect of this project. This consultant should coordinate the survey
with Martha Fullington of our Western Office in Asheville. Ms. Fullington
can be reached at 704/298-5024.
Portions of the proposed project area are considered to have a high
probability for the location of significant archaeological resources.
This is particularly true for the northern end of the project. We
recommend that a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted prior
to the start of construction activities.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CFR Part 800.
109 EastJones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Page Two
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
Linwood Stone
Barbara Church

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
NORRIS, TENNESSEE 37828
MAY 31 1990

Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager of Planning and Research
R North Carolina Department
of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:

`vU
4 1990
? ?fis'EP,RC??
US 221-NC 226 BETWEEN SR 1434 and NC 226 NORTH OF MARION, MCDOWELL
COUNTY, R-2020, STATE PROJECT #6.879001T
This is response to your May 14 request for TVA's comments on the states
proposal to widen the subject highway.
This project is located outside the Tennessee River drainage area and
TVA's power service area. Therefore, we have no comments.
Please let us know if we may be of further assistance.
Sincerely,

Truitt M. Fore, Manager
Property Management and
Administration Department
Land Resources

An Equal Opportunity Employer
CITY OF MARION
P.O. Drawer 700
Marion, North Carolina 28752
F
?y t

Sincerely,

May 21, 1990
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager of Planning & Research
NC Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
V'
OFFICE OF THE
MAYOR
MAY 2 9 1990
! DIVISICi, r r
r? `.
a, ?'?S i?RGN?
SUBJECT: US 221-NC-226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of
Marion, McDowell County, R-2020, State Project
#6.879001T
Dear Mr. Ward:
I am in receipt of your letter of May 14, 1990 concerning the
above referenced project.
I would like to take this means to let you know that I can
see no problems with the project at this time. I heartily
endorse the project and would like to see work begin as soon
as possible.
If I can be of any assistance to you, please do not hesitate
to call.
AEC/lae
Z"'?A. E e r e t t e Clark
Ma or
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4 • •
Division of Environmental Management A a MAI 0 ?! James B, Hunt, ,Secretar ^ c
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary LJ C
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 1, 1993
Memorandum
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorn
CO'V
X
Monica Swihart
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: FONSI for US 221-NC 226 Bet,?ieen SR 1434 and NC 226 North of
Marion
McDowell County
State Project DOT No. 6.879001T, TIP #13-2020
EHINR # 93-0990, DEM WQ # 9693
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which may impact waters of the state including
wetlands. The following comments are offered in response to the EA/FONSI prepared
for this project which will impact 0.2 acres of wetlands. All of our concerns were
adequately addressed in the FONSI. Endorsement of the FONSI by DEM does not
preclude the denial of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification sh,uld be directed to Eric Galamb in DEM's
Water Quality Planning Branch.
us221.fon
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

q'? 93
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT
PROJECT REVIEW FORM
CTLE - FONlSI-WIDENING OF US 221/NC 225 FROM SR 1434 TO SOUTH OF ER 1 442 IN
MCDOWELL COUNTY; TIP NO R-2020
OJECT DISTRIBUTION LIST
NO 93-0990. WILDLIFE:
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
)UNTY - MCDOWELL FOREST RESOURCES
SOIL AND WATER
YTE - 06/21/93 PARK. S AND RECREATION
WATER PLANNING
SPONEE DUE DATE - °7 ?3 3- LAND RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (WQ).
ASHE`r ILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
ACS, WQ, GW, LQ
OTHER:
to Vol&
JUN c 1993 =ZZ88' 1 70?"
NDS GROUP
UALITY SECTION_
=WATWEV?
NAGER SIGN!-OFF/REGION: DATE: -HOUSE REV
IEWER/AGENCY : DATE:
A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW, THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
_-• NO OBJECTION TO PROJECT AS PROPOSED
NO COMMENT
INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
CONSISTENCY STATEMENT NEEDED -- NOT DEEDED
OTHER (SPECIFY AND ATTACH COMMENTS)
-- ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUiSAT REQUIRED UNDER THE
PROVISIONS OF NEPA AND EEPA
RETURN! TO MELBA MCGEE, DIVISION OF PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT

US 221/NC 226
From SR 1434 to South of SR 1442
McDowell County
State Project No. 6.879001T
T.I.P. Project No. R-2020
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611

Approved:
Date L.J. Ward, P.E., Manager
f°~ Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
US 221/NC 226
From SR 1434 to South of SR 1442
McDowell County
State Project No. 6.879001T
T.I.P. Project No. R-2020
n

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Document Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
AA&A
C .4 Ma is C. Lapomarda
Project Planning Engineer
Robert P. Hanson, P.E.
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
• Lubin Prevatt, P.E.
Assistant Branch Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
?.•??? CARpi
??.?'?ESSIn? ti's
SEAL
17282
• r
NcI Nc? oe,,
fir P.
HP\`.,?•'
A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION ......................................
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS ..................................
A. Permits.... .........................................
B. Geodetic Markers ......................................
C. Forest Resources ......................................
D. Culverts.... . ..................................
E. Greenways andTrails ..................................
F. Roadside Rest and Picnic Area .........................
G. Stream Relocation .....................................
III. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ..................
A. Project Limits.. ...... ..............................
B. Surface Water and Ground Water ........................
C. Cost Estimates ........................................
IV. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS ..................................
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment...........
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment.....
C. Comments Received During and Following the
Public Hearing ....................................
V. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT .................
FIGURES
APPENDIX
PAGE
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
8
9
4
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
US 221/NC 226
From SR 1434 to South of SR 1442
McDowell County
State Project No. 6.879001T
T.I.P. Project No. R-2020
I. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State
Finding Of No Significant Impact (SFONSI).
The NCDOT has determined that this project will not have any
significant impact on the human or natural environment. This SFONSI is
based on the State Environmental Assessment (SEA) which was approved by
NCDOT on May 22, 1992.
The NCDOT proposes to widen US 221/NC 226 in McDowell County from
SR 1434 to south of SR 1442, a distance of approximately 3.7 miles. The
design speed for the project is 50 mph. The proposed typical section
consists of a five lane shoulder section from SR 1434 to SR 1440
(3.0 miles) with 150 feet of right of way. From SR 1440 to south of
SR 1442 (0.7 miles) a five lane curb and gutter section is recommended
with right of way varying from 80 feet to 150 feet. There will be no
control of access. Project R-2020 will require the relocation of 6
families and 5 businesses. The proposed project has a total estimated
cost of $8,597,000. This includes $6,400,000 for construction and
$2,197,000 for right of way.
Project R-2020 is included in the 1993-1999 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin
in Federal Fiscal Year 1993. Construction is scheduled to begin in
Federal Fiscal Year 1995. The estimated TIP cost is $9,690,000. This
estimate includes $6,900,000 for construction and $2,360,000 for right of
way.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
A. Permits
The area of wetland impacts will total approximately 0.20 acres. It
is anticipated the Nationwide Permit for Minor Road Crossing Fills [33 CFR
330.5(a) (14)] will apply. NCDOT will obtain a letter of concurrence from
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission regarding the Nationwide
Permits because the project is located in a "Trout Water" County.
In accordance with United States Forest Service (USFS) regulations,
NCDOT will also obtain a Right of Entry permit for the widening of US 221/
NC 226 through the Pisgah National Forest. This permit will require a
Protected, Endangered, Threatened, and Sensitive (P.E.T.S.) species survey
to be conducted prior to the transfer of any USFS property to NCDOT.
NCDOT will contract with the USFS to perform this survey.
2
B. Geodetic Markers
Seventeen geodetic survey markers may be impacted by the proposed
project. NCDOT will contact the N.C. Geodetic Survey prior to
construction so that affected markers can be relocated.
C. Forest Resources
It is recommended that the contractor consider salvaging any pulpwood
or saw timber along the project, marketing such timber where possible.
D. Culverts
If structurally feasible, culvert extensions will be buried 12 inches
into the substrate to facilitate the movement of aquatic organisms.
E. . Greenways and Trails
The Mountains-to-Sea Trail crosses US 221/NC 226 at the NCDOT
Roadside Rest and Picnic Area. The Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources initiated cooperative agreements with both the National
Parks Service and the USFS to develop this trail. Volunteers have spent
the past 13 years building and maintaining the trail for public
recreation. The NCDOT will place the appropriate signing to delineate
this existing pedestrian crossing. As part of this project's design,
NCDOT will reduce the posted speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph throughout
the project. This will improve the safety of the pedestrian crossing.
F. Roadside Rest and Picnic Area
A new rest area (TIP No. K-2502) is under construction approximately
4.5 miles south of this project on the Marion Bypass project (TIP No.
R-204) After completion of this new rest area, ownership of the existing
roadside rest and picnic area and the adjacent parking lot located on
US 221 at SR 1451 will revert to the USFS. This area will be used as a
"trail-head" for the Mountains-to-Sea Trail.
G. Stream Relocation
Existing stream sections will be surveyed for depth, width, and slope
characteristics. Any relocated stream channel will be designed and
constructed to closely imitate the existing section. Stream relocations
have been coordinated with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission and the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
3
IV. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Project Limits
The Department of Transportation originally proposed R-2020 as the
4.1 mile widening of US 221/NC 226 from SR 1434 to NC 226. This was the
route studied in the SEA. After the completion of the SEA, replacement of
Bridge #104 over Armstrong Creek and the realignment of the US 221/NC 226
intersection was funded as a separate project, B-1277. Federal-Aid funds
will be used to purchase right of way and to construct the bridge. State
funds will be used to purchase right of way and revise the intersection.
A Categorical Exclusion (CE) was approved by NCDOT for B-1277 on June 26,
1992. Right of way acquisition for B-1277 began in Federal Fiscal Year
1992 and construction will begin in Federal Fiscal Year 1993.
The revised scope of R-2020 consists of widening US 221/NC 226 from
SR 1434 to south of SR 1442, approximately 3.7 miles. This SFONSI
addresses the findings within the new project limits.
B. Surface Water and Ground Water -- nz_ P? /w -z3 -/27-7
The SEA states w ill cross,five streams, impact thirteen
0 cres of wetlands. Under the new project limits
streams, and impact t.4t
for R-2020, eleven ms, all tributaries of Limekiln and South Fork
Tom's Creek, will be within project limits. Four of these streams pass
under the roadway through culverts. The existing culverts will be
extended under R-2020. The remaining streams may require partial
relocation and/or a pipe under the road to facilitate the flow of water.
The total wetland impact associated with the streams is 0.10 acre. An
additional 0.10 acre of impacts to forested wetlands is anticipated.
C. Cost Estimates
The total estimated cost presented in the SEA was $10,625,000. This
included $7,800,000 for construction and $2,825,000 for right of way. The
revised total cost for the new project limits is estimated at $8,597,000.
Included in the total cost is $6,400,000 for construction and $2,197,000
for right of way.
IV. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
The State Environmental Assessment was approved by NCDOT on May 22,
1992 and circulated to the appropriate federal, state, and local review
agencies. Listed below are the agencies to which the SEA was distributed.
U.S. Appalachian Regional Commission- Washington
*U.S. Army Corps of Engineers- Wilmington
U.S. Department of Agriculture (Forest Service)- Marion
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services- Atlanta
4
U.S. Department of the Interior- Washington
U.S..Environmental Protection Agency- Atlanta
*U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Asheville
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- Raleigh
U.S. Geological Survey- Raleigh
U.S. Soil Conservation Service- Raleigh
Tennessee Valley Authority
*N.C. State Clearinghouse
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N.C. Department of Human Resources
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
*N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources
Isothermal Planning and Economic Development Commission
McDowell County
City of Marion
Written comments were received from agencies denoted with an asterisk
(*). Copies of the letters received are included in the Appendix.
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
The following is a list of the comments received during the SEA'S
review process and the NCDOT's responses:
1. US Army Corps of Engineers
Comment: "The widening is sited in McDowell County which
participates in the Federal Flood Insurance Program. The
project has a planned crossing of Armstrong Creek which has been
studied by detailed methods with the 100-year flood elevations
determined. The roadway widening and extended drainage
structure's hydraulic effects on the 100-year flood levels
should be addressed in the Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI)."
Response: The Armstrong Creek bridge replacement was separated
from project R-2020 and designated as B-1277. A CE was
approved by NCDOT for B-1277 on June 26, 1992. Effects to the
Armstrong Creek Floodplain were addressed in the CE. Neither
project R-2020 nor project B-1277 will have any significant
adverse effects on the floodplain.
Comment: "The FONSI should include a mitigation plan to offset
unavoidable wetland impacts. Although specific mitigation sites
may not be known at that time, the FONSI should include those
concepts of mitigation considered, the proposed ratios of
compensatory mitigation, and the acreage of mitigation proposed
according to wetland types.
Response: The total wetland taking on the project is 0.2 acres
and is expected to be permitted under the Nationwide Permit for
Minor Road Crossing Fills. NCDOT does not propose specific
5

2.
mitigation for this wetland impact. Best Management Practices
will be used to minimize any wetland impact to the extent
practicable.
US Department of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service
J
Comment: "The assessment states here that the proposed roadway
improvement will cross five streams- Armstrong Creek, Limekiln
Creek, and three unnamed creeks. However, it states on Page 13
that 'Thirteen streams, all approximately 5 feet wide, will be
impacted from project construction.' What exactly are the
wetland impacts (acreage and type) associated with this
project?"
Response: See Section IV., Revisions to the Environmental
Assessment.
Comment: "If possible, all the existing culverts should be
replaced with spanning structures (such as a bottomless
culvert). If culverts are to be extended, the extensions should
be constructed and placed in such a manner that they will not
impede the up- or downstream movement of aquatic organisms
(buried 12 inches into the substrate to allow fish passage)."
Response: If structurally feasible, culvert extensions will be
buried 12 inches into the substrate to facilitate the movement
of aquatic organisms. Spanning structures are not proposed as
part of this project.
Comments: "Stringent erosion and sedimentation control measures
should be employed during all phases of culvert construction and
bridge replacement activities... . Construction should be
accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact water
entering or flowing into the streams to reduce the likelihood of
fish kills associated with bridge construction. Existing
riparian vegetation should be protected wherever possible, and
disturbed areas should be replanted immediately after
construction is completed."
Response: NCDOT Best Management Practices will be employed
during all construction activities in order to protect the water
quality and aquatic life present in the stream.
Comment: "The project area falls within a portion of the Pisgah
National Forest designated by the U.S. Forest Service as
Management Area 2B. Areas designated as such allow motorized
recreation and are managed to provide a high level of scenic
quality, as well as provide habitat for animals that prefer a
diversity of forest habitats and can tolerate human disturbance.
The Service does not believe that a five-lane highway falls
within this management definition."
6
Response: NCDOT coordinated this project with the United States
Forest Service (USFS). The Forest Service does not object to
the widening of US 221/NC 226. Since Management Area 2B is
designated for motorized travel, the forest service prefers
NCDOT to widen the existing road in this area rather than to
build the facility on new location. In addition, a five lane
typical section minimizes impacts to adjacent Forest Service
property compared to other alternatives (such as a four lane
median-divided typical section).
Comment: "Has the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determined that
this project could be handled through the nationwide Section 404
permit provisions?"
Response: Applicable permits will be determined after further
design. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has only made general
comments on the project at this time.
3. N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Comment: "We would like to formally ask that the requests
expressed by the Division of Parks and Recreation for work at
the intersection of US 221 and the Mountains-to-Sea Trail be
given consideration under DOT's program for the utilization of
enhancement funds provided for North Carolina by the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency [Act] of 1991."
Response: NCDOT is studying appropriate signing to be placed at
this trail crossing. Any signing will be funded by regular
project funds. NCDOT does not consider an elevated walkway to
be practical at this location due to cost and potential use.
4. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Comment: "The NCDOT states on page 2 that five streams will be
crossed by the project, but then indicates on page 14 that
thirteen streams will be impacted by this project. On page 14,
the NCDOT estimates that the project will impact 0.40 acre of
wetlands associated with streams. Please indicate whether the
0.40 acre includes impacts to all thirteen streams and describe
all streams to be impacted."
Response: See Section IV., Revisions to the Environmental
Assessment
Comment: "The existing culvert near the fire-damaged waterbed
store [this is a furniture store] upstream of the culvert under
the road was installed incorrectly so that it is elevated above
the stream bed. If this is included in the NCDOT's right-of-way
for this project, we request that this culvert be re-installed
and be buried 1 foot into the substrate."
Response: If this structure conflicts with the design of the
.proposed project, it will be removed for construction of the new
facility. If structurally feasible, all new culverts will be
buried one foot into the substrate.
Comment: "If concrete will be used, construction must be
accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact water
entering or flowing in streams. This will reduce the likelihood
of fish kills associated with bridge and/or headwall
construction."
Response: See response to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
comment, (page 5).
Comment: "The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has exercised
discretionary authority in 25 "Trout Water" counties (which.
includes McDowell County) so that applicants for Nationwide
Permits in these counties must submit a duplicate application to
the NCWRC to obtain a letter of concurrence. We anticipate
receiving this information from the NCDOT at a later date."
Response: The NCDOT will coordinate with the NCWRC to receive
this letter of concurrence.
Comment: "Temporary ground cover ...must be placed on all bare
soil during construction. Permanent vegetation in these same
areas must be established within 15 days of ground disturbing
activities to provide long term erosion control."
Response: The NCDOT will follow applicable Best Management
Practices during all construction activities.
5. N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation
Comment: "...the Division has previously expressed concerns
about the safety of hikers crossing US 221 at the
Mountains-to-Sea Trail. We do not believe... simply reducing the
posted speed limit from 55 mph to 45 mph in this location will
alleviate this hazard.
An elevated walkway still appears to be the best means of
avoiding this problem. If this is truly not feasible at this
location, we suggest that parking areas be created on both sides
of the highway... . In addition to reducing the posted speed
limit in this location, we would also like to see flashing
warning lights, clearly marked pedestrian cross-walks, and signs
indicating the north and south trailheads."
Response: NCDOT does not consider an elevated walkway to be
practical at this location due to cost and potential use. As
stated, the speed limit will be reduced to 45 mph. After
completion of the project, further reduction of the speed
8
limit in this area will be considered. NCDOT is currently
studying the appropriate pedestrian warning signs, warning
lights, or crosswalks to be placed at this crossing.
6. N.C. Division of Environmental Management
Comment: "Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM
requests that these catch basins be placed at all water supply
stream crossings. Identify the responsible party for
maintenance. These hazardous spill catch basins should be
installed along Armstrong Creek."
Response: Replacement of the bridge over Armstrong Creek was
separated from project R-2020 and designated as B-1277. This
issue is addressed in the CE for B-1277. There are no other
drinking water supply stream crossings on the project.
7. N.C. Division of Forest Resources
Comment: "We could not find where the document addresses our
original scoping comments of May 30, 1990. Most importantly,
how many woodland acres will have to be removed to permit the
project? What is the current condition of this woodland, etc.?
Will the ROW contractor attempt salvage of merchandise trees
that have to be cut?"
Response: Approximately 26.1 acres of Mesic Upland Hardwood
will be cut along the 3.7 mile project. It can not be
determined at this time whether the timber has any salvage
value, but the contractor will be urged to sell any timber of
value.
C. Comments Received During and Following the Public Hearing
A public hearing was held for the proposed project on January 19,
1993 at McDowell County High School in Marion. Approximately 130 people
attended the hearing which was advertised through the local news media.
The hearing was conducted by NCDOT and consisted of an explanation of the
current project status, proposed design, and right of way requirements.
Interested citizens were invited to provide written and/or verbal comments
and questions.
The majority of the comments received related to the following
topics:
1. Selection of symmetrical widening through Woodlawn instead of
asymmetrical widening.
2. Proposed speed limit of the widened road in the northern end of
the project.
A,
9
3. Suggestion of using US 221/NC 226 and SR 1556 (American Thread
.Road) as a one-way pair facility.
4. Concerns of property owners over the effect of the project on
their properties.
Three alignment alternatives were studied for the portion of the
project which passes through Woodlawn. These alignments included
asymmetrical widening on either the east or west side and symmetrical
widening of the existing roadway. Study results show that widening to the
east would result in 8 relocatees, widening to the west would result in 17
relocatees, and symmetric widening would not have any relocatees.
Eventhough both east and west sides of the road will be affected by
symmetrical widening, it is the most cost effective alternative.
The proposed speed limit through Woodlawn is 45 mph. The posted speed
will be monitored after construction to ensure safe operating conditions.
Using the existing US 221/NC 226 route and SR 1556 (American Thread
Road) as a one-way pair is not considered feasible because of the wide
separation between the two facilities.
Most of the questions at the public hearing concerned the project's
effect to individual properties. Those questions dealt with such topics
as driveway placement and replacement, construction easements, and
compensation for property. Questions relating to specific properties were
answered individually at the public hearing.
V. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the proposed project as documented in the SEA,
and upon comments received from the federal, state, and local agencies, it
is the finding of NCDOT that the project will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the human or natural environment. The proposed
improvements will improve traffic operations in the area and enhance
safety for motorists using the route. The proposed action will not have a
significant adverse impact on air, noise, or water quality in McDowell
County. The proposed project is consistent with plans and goals adopted
by McDowell County and the State of North Carolina. Therefore, an
environmental impact statement or further environmental analysis will not
be required.
MCL/pl r
FIGURES
invil
_ Falls
w.- -? ? - 122
4 8? (5 ?l
s 9 LittI wi zerl i '
26
j / Woo w
/ Mc ELL 5`.
12 e 6 0
ahn t Meb ?-
`? f .... Pleasy"Garden 5 70
`?'? ?p\SGpN I OG arin 8
oft 8 70
3 1 enwood
` gecrest
,-ow ft*ft Sugar Hill 8 Dysartsvi
221
I I
0 s`
P 1U1 _
< 4A
Q? NETTLE PATCH 2.0 X y 1s63 156 1
.2
n
F? FAS b
.0 S 14
GE 1443 //
100 A 1456 C>?k 226 ?? 2t DOBSON KNOB
A 2.5 - ,
Sevier
?rPa. A END PROJECT SR 144
POND \
l ?P SILVER KNOB Wood[— Z \
Hone ?. o
O 1440 15
2\
CK CREEK GAP 226
I 1ss1
LA-5-1
WOOD ? H° ta¢K , A ?, lssz ....
9 1 °.
eo Q' <' .3
x Tss > ,? +
o
5
I ,• BALD MTN. 3 1?J ??
SEQIN PROJECT
3 15 ???CI' 1552
Sony Vale 14
S cLake 144 lsn ~ 1pb`
8? ! C IN ° '".?, 1436 Tahoma ? Henklm
\\\) t.
]S7Z 1.2 221 C
4]1 N ?? gE
&
7.9 'Sh fle Field 1? PI•+`
v
OA?44i // Nebo
80 GARDEN CREEK f?S 1.3
POP. 1,161
Q' (UNINC.) O
ear (g ,,'rL SOUn1EW
_:`- -AIACKEr Clear C F C 70 ?t 4.2 70
t EAST MARION
ae Pleesent \ q' POP. ARL 1,851 1,451
1455 t?,? Gardens ?? v IuNa+q FAI
1.3
/ AT RAI
748 150 4147
1
?F 74 a PYIB
153 1214 arq'yL^?RION v 1741 y,9 4
GP? 15 1191 OP. 3.684 ?f,1p b F 1750 ?Ja? b t
1]14
? ;?:? 1 Greenlee ?;?0 K .? 7.0 r ? ?,;
1252 G ::' / y 1757 .fir 1757
4

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONAIENTAL
k.. BRANCH
US 221 / NC 226
FROM SR 1434 TO SOUTH OF SR 1442
McDOWELL COUNTY
R - 2020
I FIG. 1

1
ESTIMATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES
US 221/NC 226 FROM SR 1434 TO SOUTH OF 1442
NORTH OF MARION, McDOWELL COUNTY, R-2020
1990 ADT IN HUNDREDS
2010 ADT IN HUNDREDS
US 221
87
157
4 17
7 31 SR 1556
13
24
TTST - 1%
DUAL-3%
96 DHV - 10%
174
2 1
SR 1440 4 1
TTST - 0% a
DUAL - 1%
DHV - 10%
96
176
1 2
1 3 SR 1535
NORTH LEG
1
96 2 TTST - 0%
177 DUAL-l%
DHV - 10%
96
177 1_ 2
1 3 SR 1535
SOUTH LEG
1+
2 TTST - 0%
DUAL-l%
97 DHV - 10%
8
1 1-

2 1-
SR 1433
TTST - 0% 2+

DUAL-l%
DHV - 10%
98
180
12 4
SR 1434 24 8
TTST - 1 % 8 TTST - 6%
DUAL-3% 6 DUAL-5%
DHV - 10% 102 DHV - 10%
188
FIGURE 4
REVISED

bo
U)
Z
O

V
W
C
J
Q
U
CL

W

H
Q
Z
x
W
J
Q
bo
N 1 '''-
N Of
r

r
in
bo

w

O
Z
Q
C-),

U
W

Q
J
LO
bo

t9

d?
7 LO
W
0
W
co'
_ cn

w
LL cc
c6
N t•
-,? -
NJ
CV _
N1im
r
ZV
d

N
d?
a ?
Z
0
U
W
CO)
m
w
0
O
N
W
Q
J
U)
APPENDIX
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO August 10, 1992
Planning Division
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
?SIv4?o
?' ?? 121992 x
D?- D
p?v?S?QN OF
9? N?G,HW AN(S
We have reviewed your letter of June 22, 1992, requesting comments on
highway improvements described in the "State Environmental Assessment for
US 221/NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of Marion, McDowell County,
State Project 6.879001T, R-2020." On July 30, 1992, by telephone, we
requested a comment deadline extension to August 10, 1992. The extension
was granted by Mr. Bill Goodwin,of your office.
The US 221 widening would not cross any U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
constructed flood control or navigation projects.
The widening is sited in McDowell County which participates in the
Federal Flood Insurance Program. The project has a planned crossing
of Armstrong Creek which has been studied by detailed methods with the
100-year flood elevations determined. The roadway widening and extended
drainage structure's hydraulic effects on the 100-year flood levels
should be addressed in the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
For those stream crossings that have not had their flood hazard defined,
the roadway widening and extended or added drainage structures should be
designed with no more than a 1.0-foot flood surcharge above the 100-year
flood. The project's hydraulic effect should be coordinated with McDowell
County for possible revisions to their flood insurance maps and report.
Executive Order 11988 should be reviewed and complied with.
Based on information furnished in the draft Environmental Assessment,
the project will impact about a 0.4-acre of wetlands, primarily on
Armstrong Creek. The FONSI should include a mitigation plan to offset
unavoidable wetland impacts. Although specific mitigation sites may
not be known at that time, the FONSI should include those concepts of
mitigation considered, the proposed ratios of compensatory mitigation,
and the acreage of mitigation proposed according to wetland types.
A-1
-2-
Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the
discharge of excavated or fill material in waters of the United States or
any adjacent and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with your proposed
improvements, including disposal of construction debris. On February 6,
1990, the Department of the Army and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to
determine the type and level of mitigation necessary to comply with the
Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Under this MOA, impacts to
waters and wetlands should be avoided or minimized through the selection
of the least damaging, practical alternative; appropriate and practical
steps should be taken to minimize impacts on waters and wetlands; and
compensation should be made for any remaining unavoidable impacts to
the extent appropriate and practical. When final plans for the widening
of US 221 are complete, including the extent and location of any work
within waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory Branch
would appreciate the opportunity to review those plans for a project-
specific determination of Department of the Army permit requirements.
Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Lund of our
Regulatory Branch, Asheville, North Carolina, at [phone].
We appreciate the opportunity
three copies of the,"Finding of No
further assistance to you, please
to comment on this project and request
Significant Impact." If we can be of
do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
4? '?F-?#
Lawrence W. Saunders
Chief, Planning Division
A=2
Tor
TAKES
ate" " ?0% United States Department of the Interior PR
IDE A?
AMERI
W O
? a
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
p9 Asheville Field Office
ggCH 3 ?B 330 Ridgefield Court
Asheville, North Carolina 28806 !.`"?
, co v ?
August 5, 1992 O
AUG 7 1992
(7,
DIVISION OF V
%` HIGHWAYS ?QZ
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager `?RESEA??
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Subject: State environmental assessment for US 221/NC 226 between
SR 1434 and NC 226, north of Marion, McDowell County, North
Carolina, State Project 6.879001T, T.I.P #R-2020
This responds to your letter of June 22, 1992, received July 27, 1992,
requesting our comments on the subject document. These comments are
provided in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) biologist conducted a site inspection on August 3, 1992.
GENERAL COMMENTS
As you are aware, the Service provided a list of proposed, threatened,
and endangered species for McDowell County on June 5, 1990, to alert the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) of species that may
occur in the project area. While we appreciate the length of time to
1 .. the 1 , i.
COMp t e to design p, i aiis and prepare necessary EiivJ i r o niieii i,a i diiC mii2li $. s
for this project, it is important to keep abreast. of, and consider
potential impacts to, newly listed or proposed species.
In the past 2 years the following species were added to the McDowell
County list: Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus) - endangered, Cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea) -
candidate, and butternut (Juglans cinerea) - candidate. According to our
records, the Carolina northern flying squirrel is not known to occur in
the project area, and we concur with your determination that mountain
golden heather is not within the immediate project vicinity. In view of
this, we believe that the requirements of Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act, as amended (Act), have been satisfied. However, obligations
under Section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information
suggests that the action may affect listed species in a manner not
previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a
A-3
manner not previously considered, or (3) a new species is listed or
critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified
action. The legal responsibilities under Section 7 of the Act are on
file with the NCDOT. If you would like a copy of this material or if you
have any questions, please contact Ms. Janice Nicholls of our staff at
704/665-1195, Ext. 227.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
Page 2, Number 7 - The assessment states here that the proposed
roadway improvement will cross five streams--Armstrong Creek,
Limekiln Creek, and three unnamed creeks. However, it states
on Page 13 that "Thirteen streams, tributaries of Limekiln and
South Fork Tom's Creek, all approximately 5 feet wide, will be
impacted from project construction." What exactly are the
wetland impacts (acreage and type) associated with this
project? The sentence, "Smaller stream crossings will require
a minor amount of fill, while others will require major amounts
of fill material...," suggests that this is not known.
If possible, all the existing culverts should be replaced with
spanning structures (such as a bottomless culvert). If
culverts are to be extended, the extensions should be
constructed and placed in such a manner that they will not
impede the up- or downstream movement of aquatic organisms
(buried 12 inches into the substrate to allow fish passage).
The Service recommends that the NCDOT consider replacing
adjacent culverts (i.e., to box culverts) at Sites 3 and 4
(Site 3 has a round hanging culvert on the west side of the
road, and Site 4 has an oversized round culvert on the east
side of the road near the Wacaster Stone Company). If they are
within the project impact area, these culverts should be
replaced with box-type culverts (see comments on placement
above).
Stringent erosion and sedimentation control measures should be
employed during all phases of culvert construction and bridge
replacement activities (as implied on Page 14, recommending the
use of "Best Management Practices"). Construction should be
accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact water
entering or flowing into the streams to reduce the likelihood
of fish kills associated with bridge construction. Existing
riparian vegetation should be protected wherever possible, and
disturbed areas should be replanted immediately after
construction is completed.
Page 9, under D and E - The project area falls within a portion
of the Pisgah National Forest designated by the U.S. Forest
Service as Management Area 2B. Areas designated as such allow
motorized recreation and are managed to provide a high level of
scenic quality, as well as provide habitat for animals that
prefer a diversity of forest habitats and can tolerate human
disturbance. The Service does not believe that a five-lane
highway falls within this management definition.
A-4
.
Page 14, under H - Again, we are not clear about anticipated
wetland impacts. Does the total of 0.40 acre include the
impacts to all 13 streams?
Page 19, under Permits - Has the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
determined that this project could be handled through the
nationwide Section 404 permit provisions?
The proposed finding of no significant impact for this project appears
appropriate at this time. We appreciate the opportunity to provide these
comments and request that you continue to keep us informed on the
progress of this project. In any future correspondence concerning this
project, please reference Log Number 4-2-92-094.
Sincerely,
John A. Fridell
Acting Field Supervisor
cc:
Mr. Dennis Stewart, Division of Boating and Inland Fisheries, North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 512 N. Salisbury Street,
Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
Mr. Randall C. Wilson, Nongame Section Manager, Division of Wildlife
Management, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
Mr. Cecil Frost, North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Plant
Conservation Program, P.O. Box 27647, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Bob Johnson, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory
Office, Room 75, Grove Arcade Building, 37 Battery Park Avenue,
Asheville, NC 28801

A-S
5TATi
;;?•? ? Gur .off.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
Melba McGee F?
Project Review Coordinator

4 . '

93-0081 - Environmental Assessment for
Proposed Improvements to US 221-NC 226,
Marion, McDowell County
August 31, 1992

Douglas G. Lewis
Director
Planning and Assessment
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources has
reviewed the Environmental Assessment for proposed improvements to
US221/226 between SR1434 and NC 226 north of Marion, McDowell Co.,
TIP ## R-2020.
The attached comments express points of concern which must be
addressed in the EA/FONSI. We also recommend that the Department
of Transportation (DOT). work with our commenting divisions before
final project plans are implemented so unnecessary delays can be
avoided.
In conclusion, we would like to formally ask that the requests
expressed by the Division of Parks & Recreation for work at the
intersection of US221 and the Mountains-to-Sea Trail be given
consideration under DOT's program for ,the utilization of
enhancement funds provided for North•Carolina by the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency of 1991.
Thank you for the opportunity to be involved with this project.
MM: bb
Attachments
cc: David Foster
P.O. Box 27637, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]

z
A-6

4S`
J9

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: Dennis Stewart, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program Avl?
DATE: August 24, 1992
SUBJECT: State Clearinghouse #93-0081, review and comments on
Environmental Assessment for proposed improvements to US 221-
NC 226 between SR 1434 and NC 226 north of Marion, McDowell
County (State Project 6.879001T, TIP #R-2020)
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review
and comments on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for proposed
improvements to US 221-NC 226 between SR 1434 (Tom Creek Road) and NC
226 north of Marion in McDowell County. These comments are provided in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d.) and the North
Carolina Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 through 113A-10; 1 NCAC
25).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes.
to widen a 4.1-mile stretch of US 221-NC 226 (currently a 2-lane
roadway) to a 5-lane roadway. A bridge over Armstrong Creek will be
replaced with a new bridge, while culverts in Limekiln-Creek and three
unnamed tributaries to Tom Creek will be retained and extended. The
NCDOT indicates that 0.40 acre of wetlands associated with streams will
be impacted by this project.

4
T
Staff field biologists of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) conducted a site visit on August 3, 1992. Wildlife
habitat consists of mixed hardwoods and grassy areas, which provide
habitat for many species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and
invertebrates. Wetlands in the area are associated with streams and
were mostly vegetated with sycamore and alder. Armstrong Creek (CAT 7-
12-3) is Designated Public Mountain Trout Water upstream of the
project, but also provides good habitat for trout near the bridge to be
replaced. Limekiln Creek (CAT 7-12-2) and three unnamed tributaries to
Tom Creek are somewhat degraded from sedinentation and contain limited
habitat for small species of nongame fish.
A-7
The NCWRC does not object to this project; however, we have the '
following comments and recommendations to minimized adverse impacts to
fish and wildlife resources of the project area:
1) More information is needed regarding impacts to wetlands. The
NCDOT states on page 2 that five streams will be crossed by the
project, but then indicates on page 13 that thirteen streams will
be impacted by this project. On page 14, the NCDOT estimates that
the project will impact 0.40 acre of wetlands associated with
streams. Please indicate whether the 0.40 acre includes impacts
to all thirteen streams and describe all streams to be impacted.
2) We are pleased that the existing bridge over Armstrong Creek is to
be replaced with another bridge. New culverts and culvert
extensions should be buried 1 foot into the substrate where
possible to facilitate fish passage and prevent silt from
depositing near each culvert. The existing culvert near the fire-
damaged waterbed store upstream of the culvert under the road was
installed incorrectly so that it is elevated above-the stream bed.
If this is included in the NCDOT's right-of-way for this project,
we request that this culvert be re-installed and be buried 1 foot
into the substrate.
3) If concrete will be used, construction must be accomplished so
that wet concrete does not contact water entering or flowing in
streams. This will reduce the likelihood of fish kills associated
with bridge and/or headwall construction.
4) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has exercised discretionary
authority in 25 "Trout Water" counties (which includes McDowell
County) so that applicants for Nationwide Permits in these
counties must submit a .duplicate application to the NCWRC to
obtain a letter of concurrence. We anticipate receiving this
information from the NCDOT at a later date.
5) Temporary ground cover (e.g. hardwood mulch, straw, etc.) must be
placed on all bare soil during construction. Permanent vegetation
in these same areas must be established within 15 days of ground
disturbing activities to provide long term erosion control.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
project We look forward to receiving additional information
concerning wetlands impacts resulting from the project. If we can be
of further assistance, please advise.
cc: Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Biologist
Mr. Chris Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. Jack Mason, District 8 Wildlife Biologist
Mr. David Yow, NCWRC Highway Coordinator
Ms. Janice Nicholls, USFWS, Asheville }
IV
A-8

DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
August 19, 1992
Memorandum
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Stephen Hall a
SUBJECT: EA -- US 221/NC 226 Improvements, Marion
REFERENCE: 93-0081
As noted in the document (p. 10 and Appendix B), the Division has
previously expressed concerns about the safety of hikers crossing
US 221 at its intersection with the Mountains-to-Sea Trail. We
do not believe that the suggested plan of simply reducing the
posted speed limit from 55 to 45 mph in this location will
alleviate this hazard.
An elevated walkway still appears to be the best means of
avoiding this.problem. If this is truly not feasible at this
location, we suggest that parking areas be created on both sides
of the highway, one serving the north trailhead, the other the
south trailhead. While this would not solve the safety problem
for through-hikers, it would for those who are entering or
exiting the trail at this point. In addition to reducing the
posted speed limit in this location, we would also like to see
flashing warning lights, clearly marked pedestrian cross-walks,
and signs indicating the north and south trailheads.
cc: Darrell McBane, State Trails Coordinator, DPR
Dwayne Stutzman, Western Regional Trails Specialist, DPR
A-9
Jt `y. n .r ,
State of North Carolina

Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management -- -
I_
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor August 24, 1992 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Wil &aq&%, Jr., Secretary Acting Director
To: Melba McGee
Through: John D=4
-
Monica Swi
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: EA for US 221-NC 226 Between SR 1434 and NC 226 North of Marion
McDowell County
State Project DOT No. 6.879001T, TIP #R-2020
EHNR # 93-0081, DEM WQ # 6457
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which may impact waters of the state including
wetlands. The following comments are offered in response to the EA/FONSI prepared
for this project which will impact 0.4 acres of wetlands.
1. Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this
project. Applications requesting coverage under our General Certification 14
will require written concurrence.
2. DOT should require that the contractor not impact additional wetland areas due
to the disposal of excavated spoil material, as a source of borrow material or
other construction related activities. Prior to the approval of any borrow source,
the contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
3. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests that these catch
basins be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible
party for maintenance. These hazardous spill catch basins should be installed
along Armstrong Creek.
4. Endorsement of the EA/FONSI by DEM does not preclude the denial of a 401
Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Faycttcv il;c Mooresville Raleigh Washin_:;)n Wilrrlingurn watston-Salem
704/251-6205 919/486-:541 70./663-1699 9191733-231 ; 919/946-,•481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevent
F'.U. Box 29535, Ralcigh• North Carc:ir.a 27625-053 1,.ei:`:onc 9''9-733-7015
A-n Fluual Oppollunit.,;........u:c ;;C'iml ;iu?cr
A-10
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb in DEM's
Water Quality Planning Branch.
cc: Eric Galamb

t?

A-11
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Reviewing Office
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Protect Number. 'Due Date:
• ? i
After review of (his project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be Obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Ouestions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form. !
All applications. information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Regional Office. ?-
PERMITS
?
Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment
facilities, sewer system extensions, & sewer
systems not discharging into state surface waters.
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water and/or
a permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities
discharging into stale surface waters.
water Use Permit \
r .-
Well Construction Permit
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Application 90 days before begin construction or award of
construction contracts On-site inspection. Post -application
technical conference usual
Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection.
Pre-application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to
construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES. Reply
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permi I -whichever is later.
Pre-application technical conference usually necessary
Complete application must be received and permit issued
prior to the installation of a well.
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property
i Dredge and Fill Permit owner On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
_ ma require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
r Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
LJ facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.05 N/A
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 20.0520. `? t•
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
O7 Jtttn ?.. 7
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A ? r'•.. ?7 >;
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal
NIA , .. ,
Prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
919.733.0820.
D Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 2D.0800.
Tne Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing V 'ty._An erosion, edimentatio
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office ` u }}rect.) at least 30
days before be innin activity. A fee of $30 for the first acre and S20.00 for each additional acre or art must accompany the plan
D The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinart"ce:
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR. Bond amount
Mining Permit varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any area
mined greater than one acre must be permtted. The appropriate bone
must be received before the permit can be issued.
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit
exceeds a days
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 22
171 Counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils
f-1
LJ1 Od Refining Facilities
Darn Selety Permit
On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required '*if more
than live acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections
shoulc be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned."
NIA
If permit required. application 60 days before begin construction.
Apph;;ant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to? prepare plans.
inspec! construction, certify construction is according to EHNR approv
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. Anc
a 404 oermit from Corps of Engineers An inspection of site is neces.
sary :o verily Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of 5200.00 must ac
company the application. An additional processing fee based on a
percer!age or the total project cos! will be required upon completion
kG
orma? Process
Time
(statutory time
limit)
---
3 days
(90 days)
90.120 days
(NIA)
30 days
(NIA)
7 days
(15 days)
55 days
(90 days)
60 Cays
(90 days)
60 days
(90 (Jays)
20 days
(30 days)
(30 da)s)
30 days
(60 days)
I day
(N/A)
1 day
(N/A)
90.120 days
IN/A)
30 days
(60 days.
A-12
• Forestry
1; STA
N.C. - Where it all began
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Forest Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Stanford M. Adams
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Griffiths Forestry Center Director
2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
August 12, 1992
MEMORANDUM 1
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester _ D 1 Q
SUBJECT: DOT EA for Proposed Improvements to US 221 - NC 226 Between SR 1434
and NC 226 North of Marion in McDowell County
PROJECT: #93-0081
DUE DATE: 8-20-92
We have reviewed the above subject document and have the following comments:
1. We could not find where the document addresses our original scoping
comments of May 30, 1990. Most importantly, how many woodland
acres will have to be removed to permit the project? What is the
current condition of this woodland, etc.? Will the ROW contractor
attempt salvage of merchantable trees that have to -be cut?
2. We have no objections to the project, but would like to see more
information about the affected woodland.
DHR:la
pc: Warren Boyette - CO
File
N r... 2 'n.Jvigh 27011 -r,r- Iclrpi, mr vI,l -:: ?IW
A-13

S
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
r:
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS _ Charles H. Gardner
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Project Number: e73 -C, j-/ County: ?/?j''e/?GwZZL
Project Name: L/. Z ?/ ??/L Z Z
Geodetic Survey
v This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
Q,,.
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at 319) *33-383/?
I ``c Q2 y
Reviewer Date
rr- 'n,
N t' L':"
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment t
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
/ increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
V The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at [phone].

Reviewer
Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An EnL;.v Oppor,unity .-,!--irmarive acdon employer A-14
--rI7;
???STAT
EHON TKE SAMER
A BM
.r\"$. ? r.
.,,.A FAMIS
IA,
A-15
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Maria Lapomarda, Project Planning Engineer
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 8, 1993
SUBJECT: Additional comments regarding widening of US 221/NC 226
from SR 1434 to south of SR 1442, McDowell County
(State Project #6.879001T, TIP #R-2020)
This correspondence responds to a request by you for
additional comments regarding the proposed widening of US 221/NC
226 from SR 1434 to south of SR 1442 in McDowell County. The
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) previously
commented on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for this project
in a memorandum dated August 24, 1992 to Ms. Melba McGee of the
Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources.
Specifically you requested that I provide comments regarding
several-stream channel relocations that were not covered in the
EA. I conducted a site visit on April 2, 1993 to further assess
the fisheries and wildlife resources of the project area.
The NCWRC has the following comments and recommendations
regarding each stream relocation:
Locations lA and 1B - (150 and 500 feet respectively)
These sites involve an extremely small tributary (1-2 feet
bankfull width) to Tom's Creek across from Import Auto Salvage
and Old Tom Creek Road. The tributary too small and degraded
from sedimentation to support fish. The NCWRC has no objection
with plans to relocate this tributary.
Location 2 - (440 feet)
This site involves a tributary to Tom's Creek flowing
through a yard at 1883 Highway 221 North. The tributary has a
A-16
bankfull width of 4-5 feet and substrate of silt, gravel, and
cobble. It-is unlikely that the stream supports trout, but it
does provide habitat for various species of nongame fish such as
chubs, dace, and suckers. Riparian vegetation included grass in
front of the house and mixed hardwoods upstream and downstream of
this section. The NCWRC has no objection to the relocation of
this stream, provided the new channel matches the old in terms of
t length, average width, depth, slope, meanders, and substrate.
Native trees and shrubs should be planted along the new channel
to provide bank stability and shade to the stream.
Location 3 - (200 feet)
This site involves a tributary to Tom's Creek across from
the southern end of Hicks Chapel Road Loop. The tributary has a
bankfull width of 3-4 feet and is severely degraded from
sedimentation. It is unlikely that the stream supports fish, and
the NCWRC has no objection to the relocation of this tributary.
Locations 4A and 4B - (700 and 1000 feet respectively_
These sites involve an intermittent stream near the northern
end of Hicks Chapel Road Loop. The stream is much too small and
degraded to support fish. The NCWRC has no objection to the
relocation of this stream.
Location 5 - (500 feet)
This site involves a small tributary to Limekiln Creek near
American Thread Road. The stream is too small (bankfull width of
1-2 feet) and degraded from sedimentation to support fish. The
NCWRC has no objection to the relocation of this stream.
You mentioned on the phone that this project will likely
require only a nationwide 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) rather than an individual permit. Based on past
experience, I recommend that this be resolved with the COE before
an application for a nationwide 404 permit is sent to the NCWRC
for review. The NCDOT circulated an application for a nationwide
404 permit for the project immediately adjoining this project to
the south (R-204A) only to find that the COE required an
individual 404 permit for that project.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
project. If you have any questions regarding these comments,
please contact me at 704/652-4257.
cc: Mr. Chris Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Ms. Janice Nicholls, USFWS, Asheville
A-17