Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20231521 Ver 1_HB-0002 - Haywood County - CE Final (3.27.2023)_20231108DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Type I or II Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form STIP Project No. HB-0002 WBS Element 49622.1.1 Federal Project No. 0040119 A. Project Description: The purpose of this project is to replace Haywood County Bridges No. 248 and 249 on 1-40 over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road). Bridge No. 248 is 174 feet long and Bridge No. 249 is 164 feet long. The replacement structure will be a culvert/tunnel approximately 200 feet long on SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road). The culvert/tunnel will include two 11-foot lanes with a 6-foot offset on the right and 8-foot offset on the left along SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road). The culvert/tunnel length is based on preliminary design information. The minimum vertical clearance for the culvert/tunnel will be 16-foot. The typical section along 1-40 will provide two 12-foot lanes in each direction along with 14-foot outside paved shoulders (17-foot total) and 6-foot inside paved shoulder (9-foot total). The approach roadway along 1-40 will extend approximately 1,300 feet from the west end of the new tunnel and 1,500 feet from the east end of the new tunnel. SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) will be closed during construction of the tunnel while traffic is detoured using SR 1631 (Freedom Drive) and SR 1004 (Newfound Road). At least two lanes of traffic in each direction will be maintained on 1-40 during construction utilizing temporary onsite detours. The roadway will be designed as an Interstate Route with a 70 mile per hour design speed. B. Description of Need and Purpose: NCDOT Bridge Management Unit records indicate Bridge No. 248 has a sufficiency rating of 76.30 out of a possible 100 for a new structure and Bridge No. 249 also has a sufficiency rating of 76.30 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. Components of Bridge No. 248 and 249 are experiencing an increasing degree of deterioration that can no longer be addressed by reasonable maintenance activities, therefore the bridge is approaching the end of its useful life. C. Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: Type I(A) - Ground Disturbing Action D. Proposed Improvements: 28. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at -grade railroad crossings, if the actions meet the constraints in 23 CFR 771.117(e)(1-6). NOTE: The following Type 1(C) Actions (NCDOT-FHWA 2019 CE Agreement, Appendix A) only require completion of Sections A through D to substantiate and document the CE classification: 1, 5, 8 (signs and pavement markings only), 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20; or several other Type 1 Action subcategories identified in past NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreements (see Appendix D). Pre -approval as a CE does not exempt activities from compliance with other federal environmental laws. v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 1 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 E. Special Proiect Information: Alternatives Discussion: No Build — The no build alternative would result in eventually closing the road which is unacceptable given the volume of traffic served by 1-40. Rehabilitation — The bridges were constructed in 1961 and the materials within the bridge are reaching the end of their useful life. Rehabilitation would require replacing the components which would constitute effectively replacing the bridge. Offsite Detour — For construction of the tunnel SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) will be closed during construction of the tunnel while traffic is detoured using SR 1631 (Freedom Drive) and SR 1004 (Newfound Road). Preferred Alternative — The preferred alternative replaces the bridges with a culvert/tunnel on SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) in the existing location. The culvert/tunnel length is based on preliminary design information. The minimum vertical clearance for the culvert/tunnel will be 16-foot. SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) will be closed during construction of the tunnel while traffic is detoured using SR 1631 (Freedom Drive) and SR 1004 (Newfound Road). At least two lanes of traffic in each direction will be maintained on 1-40 during construction utilizing temporary onsite detours. Estimated Costs: The estimated costs are as follows: R/W & Utilities: $ 2,000,000 Const: $ 7,800,000 Total: $ 9,800,000 Estimated Traffic: 2023 (Let) 61,000 vpd 2043 (Design) 87,400 vpd TTST 4% Dual 16% Design Exceptions: There is a design exception required for the shoulder width on SR 1631 (Freedom Drive) for the shoulder width. The AASHTO standard is a 6' shoulder width and the proposed design will utilize a 4' shoulder width and is consistent with the existing conditions. Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations: SR 1613 (Beaverdam Rd.) is shown in both the 2011 Haywood Co. Bicycle Plan and the 2019 Canton Bicycle & Pedestrian plan to be designated as a bicycle route. The bridges on 1-40 are to be replaced with a tunnel on Beaverdam Rd. The tunnel will have a 6' paved shoulder on one side and an 8' paved shoulder on the other that would be able to accommodate a bicycle lane. Anticipated Permit or Consultation Requirements: A Nationwide Permit will likely be required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for impacts to "Waters of the United States" resulting from this project. In addition, an NCDWR Section 401 Water Quality General Certification (GC) may be required prior to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit. The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. Public Outreach: A newsletter was sent to all property owners affected directly by this project and Public Input Webpage was setup as well. Property owners were invited to comment. No comments have been received to date. v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Endangered Species: Northern long-eared bat According to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Biotics Database, most recently updated April 2022, NLEB have been documented in Haywood County. USFWS, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) and NHP data indicate that the closest known occurrence of NLEB is approximately 9.5 miles southeast of the project site. Based on the presence suitable roost trees, the proposed project will have a biological conclusion of May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect for Northern long-eared bats. Indiana bat According to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Biotics Database, most recently updated in April 2022, MYSO have been documented in Haywood County. USFWS, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) and NHP data indicate that the closest known occurrence of MYSO is approximately 10.4 miles northwest of the project site. Based on the presence of suitable summer roost trees, the proposed project will have a biological conclusion of May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect for Indiana bats. Gray Bat According to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Biotics Database, most recently updated in April 2022, MYGR have been documented in Haywood County. USFWS, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) and NHP data indicate that the closest known occurrence of MYGR is approximately 1.3 miles southwest of the project site. Based on the lack of bat evidence on the bridge, lack of caves or mines in the project area, the proposed project will have a biological conclusion of May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect for gray bats. Rock Gnome Lichen The study area does not contain suitable habitat for rock gnome lichen as the project area does not contain deep river gorges or high elevation rock outcrops that would provide adequately humid areas. A review of NCNHP records, updated January 3, 2022, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. The biological conclusion is No Effect. Small Whorled Pogonia Habitat for small whorled pogonia was identified throughout the project limits along forested slopes and suitable streamside areas. These areas were surveyed by CEI biologists on June 22, 2022. No Isotria medeoloides plants were observed. Due to the lack of observed plants or recorded occurrences near the study area, it has been determined that HB-0002 will have No Effect on this species. Tricolored Bat According to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) Biotics Database, most recently updated in April 2022, PESU have been documented in Haywood County. This species is an at risk species that has been proposed for listing. USFWS, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) and NHP data indicate that the closest known occurrence of PESU is approximately 1.3 miles southwest of the project site. Based on the presence suitable roost trees, the proposed project will have a biological conclusion of May Affect Not Likely To Adversely Affect for tricolored bats. v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 F. Project Impact Criteria Checklists: F2. Ground Disturbing Actions - Type I (Appendix A) & Type II (Appendix B) Proposed improvement(s) that fit Type I Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement, Appendix A) including 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 12, 18, 21, 22 (ground disturbing), 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, &/or 30; &/or Type II Actions (NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement, Appendix B) answer the project impact threshold questions (below) and questions 8 - 31. • If any question 1-7 is checked "Yes" then NCDOT certification for FHWA approval is required. • If any question 8-31 is checked "Yes" then additional information will be required for those questions in Section G. PROJECT IMPACT THRESHOLDS Yes No (FHWA signature required if any of the questions 1-7 are marked "Yes".) 1 Does the project require formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ❑ 2 (USFWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)? 2 Does the project result in impacts subject to the conditions of the Bald and Golden ❑ R1 Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)? 3 Does the project generate substantial controversy or public opposition, for any ❑ R1 reason, following appropriate public involvement? 4 Does the project cause disproportionately high and adverse impacts relative to low- ❑ income and/or minority populations? 5 Does the project involve a residential or commercial displacement, or a substantial ❑ R1 amount of right of way acquisition? 6 Does the project require an Individual Section 4(f) approval? ❑ [� Does the project include adverse effects that cannot be resolved with a 7 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) under Section 106 of the National Historic ❑ R1 Preservation Act (NHPA) or have an adverse effect on a National Historic Landmark (NHL)? If any question 8-31 is checked "Yes" then additional information will be required for those questions in Section G. Other Considerations Yes No 8 Is an Endangered Species Act (ESA) determination unresolved or is the project ❑ R1 covered by a Programmatic Agreement under Section 7? 9 Is the project located in anadromous fish spawning waters? ❑ [1 Does the project impact waters classified as Outstanding Resource Water (ORW), 10 High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supply Watershed Critical Areas, 303(d) listed ❑ [1 impaired water bodies, buffer rules, or Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)? 11 Does the project impact Waters of the United States in any of the designated ❑ R1 mountain trout streams? 12 Does the project require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Individual ❑ R1 Section 404 Permit? 13 Will the project require an easement from a Federal Energy Regulatory ❑ Commission FERC licensed facility? v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 4 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Other Considerations for Type I and 11 Ground Disturbing Actions (continued) Yes No Does the project include a Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 14 (NHPA) effects determination other than a No Effect, including archaeological ❑ remains? 15 Does the project involve GeoEnvironmental Sites of Concerns such as gas ❑ 2 stations, dry cleaners, landfills, etc.? Does the project require work encroaching and adversely affecting a regulatory 16 floodway or work affecting the base floodplain (100-year flood) elevations of a ❑ 2 water course or lake, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 and 23 CFR 650 subpart A? 17 Is the project in a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) county and substantially ❑ affects the coastal zone and/or any Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? 18 Does the project require a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) permit? ❑ 2 19 Does the project involve construction activities in, across, or adjacent to a ❑ 2 designated Wild and Scenic River present within the project area? 20 Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) resources? ❑ [1 21 Does the project impact federal lands (e.g. U.S. Forest Service (USFS), USFWS, ❑ R1 etc.) or Tribal Lands? 22 Does the project involve any changes in access control or the modification or ❑ R1 construction of an interchange on an interstate? 23 Does the project have a permanent adverse effect on local traffic patterns or ❑ R1 community cohesiveness? 24 Will maintenance of traffic cause substantial disruption? ❑ [1 25 Is the project inconsistent with the STIP, and where applicable, the Metropolitan ❑ R1 Planning Or anization's MPO's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)? Does the project require the acquisition of lands under the protection of Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act, 26 the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), ❑ R1 Tribal Lands, or other unique areas or special lands that were acquired in fee or easement with public -use money and have deed restrictions or covenants on the property? 27 Does the project involve Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) buyout ❑ R1 properties under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HMGP ? 28 Does the project include a de minimis or programmatic Section 4(f)? ❑ [1 29 Is the project considered a Type I under the NCDOT Noise Policy? ❑ [1 30 Is there prime or important farmland soil impacted by this project as defined by the ❑ R1 Farmland Protection Policy Act FPPA ? 31 Are there other issues that arose during the project development process that ❑ 2 affected the project decision? v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 G. Additional Documentation as Required from Section F (ONLY for questions marked 'Yes'): Question 14 —Archaeological: An intensive archaeological survey and evaluation for the proposed replacement of Bridges 248 and 249 on 1-40 over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) in Haywood County, North Carolina (TIP HB-0002, PA 21-05-0006). The APE for the Project encompasses approximately 57.01 acres along the north and south sides of 1-40 east and west of Beaverdam Road (SR 1613), and measures approximately 3,265 feet (997 m) east -west and from 435 to 1,589 feet north -south. There are no federal- or state-owned lands (apart from the existing NCDOT rights of -way) within the APE. An updated review of site and report files at the OSA indicated that there has been no prior systematic survey within the Project APE. There is one previously identified site (31HW271) within the APE, however, as well as others in close proximity or in the general vicinity. Site 31 HW271 (located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of SR 1612 (Beaverdam Road) and SR 1631 (Freedom Drive)) is a large, multi -component precontact Iithic and ceramic scatter located across a terrace that also contains an existing farm. Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, and Early Mississippian components were recognized, and other precontact occupations may also be present; there is also a low -density 20th century component associated with the farm. Although most materials were confined to the plowzone, a buried A horizon is also present in some areas, and three potential cultural features were identified in shovel tests and test units. This site is recommended eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D due to its potential to provide information on regional Woodland and Mississippian period occupations, but appears to lack the characteristics necessary for eligibility under Criteria A—C. Preservation in place does not appear to be required, and archaeological data recovery excavations would be an appropriate mitigation strategy if this site cannot be avoided by construction. On Thursday, December 8, 2022 an effects meeting was held between FHWA, The Office of State Archaeology, the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Officer to discuss the effects the undertaking may have on archaeological site 31 HW271. Project construction plans provided by NCDOT during the meeting indicate that proposed project impacts to 31HW271 will be limited to the existing right-of-way. The current plans reflect efforts to minimize impacts to 31HW271. In total, the potential impacts to 31HW271, measure only an 161.1 square meter (0.04) acre area at the very southwest corner of the site. This portion of 31 HW271 is well outside the ceramic artifact concentration that comprises the site's NRHP determined eligible deposits, roughly 180 feet (90m) to the north. Three shovel tests excavated at 7.5-m intervals in this southwestern corner area produced a single residual (<2cm in size) sherd and twenty Iithic artifacts, all from the disturbed plow zone. A 1 x 1 m test unit excavated next to the single sherd resulted in the recovery of no additional ceramics and 54 pieces of Iithic debitage, 83.3% of which derived from the plowzone. The archaeolgical investigations conducted within the proposed 161.1 square meter area of site 31 HW271 to be affected by construction was determined to have adequately demonstrated that there is a very low likelihood that substantial Woodland or Mississippian period deposits are present in that area. The Archaic materials present are confined primarily to the plowzone, and are not associated with the intact deposits considered the contributing elements of the site's NRHP eligibility which are located well to the north and separated from the southwest corner of the portion of the site within NCDOT right-of- way by two standing structures. OSA staff expressed their concerrn about the potential for human remains to be present within the location of the intact deposits and requested that NCDOT avoid the NRHP eligible portion of 31 HW271 throughout the project's construction phase. Following presentation of the data and information on 31HW271 and the proposed HB-0002 project, officials from FHWA NCSHPO, and OSA concurred with a finding of No Adverse Effect with the conditions/commitments detailed below. v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 6 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 The following environmental commitments will be made: • Archaeological monitoring of the non-contributing element of 31 HW271 within the existing right-of- way (161.1 m) during construction activities per the request of the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. • No staging activities are to occur outside of the current project limits. v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 7 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 H. Proiect Commitments: NCDOT PROJECT COMMITMENTS STIP Project No. HB-0002 Bridge No's 248 and 249 on 1-40 Over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) Haywood County Federal Aid Project No. 0040119 WBS Element 49622.1.1 NCDOT Division 14 — Offsite Detour In order to have time to adequately reroute school busses, Haywood County Schools will be contacted at least one month prior to road closure. Contact person is Stephen Sharpe at (828)-456-2421. Haywood County Emergency Services will be contacted at least one month prior to road closure to make the necessary temporary reassignments to primary response units. Contact person is Travis Donaldson — Emergency Services Director at (828)-452-4770. NCDOT Division 14 — Archaeological Archaeological monitoring of the non-contributing element of 31 HW271 within the existing right -of- way (161.1 m) during construction activities per the request of the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. No staging activities are to occur outside of the current project limits. NCDOT Division 14 — Bridge Demolition Demolition of the existing bridge structure will be restricted to November 15 thru March 31. v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 I. Categorical Exclusion Approval: STIP Project No. HB-0002 WBS Element 49622.1.1 Federal Project No. 0040119 A R 0l �. %%•��` , Prepared By: SEAL DocuSigned by: Q2LJ99 3/27/2023 S • � s = •• Fti �% .•' Date G-,r—ed1S11PUI`M, PE, Project Manager '�,� C�•.. I NE., Wetherill Engineering SP 1111J1,1100 Prepared For: North Carolina Department of Transportation Division 14 Reviewed By: DocuSigned by: 3/27/2023 F" fwv'ut Date Ke , B IEnvironmental Supervisor Division 14 North Carolina Department of Transportation • If NO grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2 [� Approved and 3), NCDOT approves the Type I or Type I I Categorical Exclusion. • If ANY grey boxes are checked in Section F (pages 2 ❑ Certified and 3), NCDOT certifies the Type I or Type 11 Categorical Exclusion for FHWA approval. • If classified as Type III Categorical Exclusion. DocuSigned by: 3/27/2023 L�v Date -IIT831�vision 14 Bridge Management Supervisor, on behalf of Wanda Austin, PE Division Engineer Division 14 North Carolina Department of Transportation FHWA Approved: For Projects Certified by NCDOT (above), FHWA signature required. N/A Date for John F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Note: Prior to ROW or Construction authorization, a consultation may be required (please see Section Vll of the NCDOT-FHWA CE Programmatic Agreement for more details). v2019.1 HB-0002 Type 1(A) CE Page 9 )cuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 70TI-191TITIM REPLACE BRIDGES NO.248 AND 249 ON 1-40 OVER SR 1613 (BEAVERDAM ROAD) HAYWOOD COUNTY WBS 49622.1.1 NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION 14 I VICINITY MAP - FIGURE 1 1 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 LEGEND BUILDINGS EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY PROPOSED EASEMENTS IDRAI NAGE, CONSTRUCTION, AND UTI LITYI [� EXISTING ROADWAY ® EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE REMOVED � EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE RESURFACED 0 PROPOSED ROADWAY 0 TEMPORARY ROADWAY /DETOURS PROPOSED S TRUCTURES, ISLAND, CURB AND GUTTER EAIF:j EXISTING STRUCTURES, ISLAND, CURB AND GUTTER TO BE RETAINED EXISTING STRUCTURES, ISLAND, CURB AND GUTTER TO BE REMOVED LAKES, RIVER, STREAMS AND PONDS S PROPERTY LINES r a DESIGN DATA FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION: INTERSTATE DESIGN SPEED:70 MPH MAXIMUM SUPERELEVATION: 8% DATE OF ORTHOPHOTOGRAPHY: 2019 (ENS PREL➢N6INARY F➢,ANS INCOY6Q�LETEN QaLANS MAP PREPARED: SEPTEMBER 2022 BEGIN NCDOT TIP PROJECT HB-0002 -L- STA . 303+00.00 i STAT(qz rW. „ JL r -c PUBLIC MEETING MAP d�%nwrl:O PROJECT 49622.1.1 (HB-0002) �pw HAYWOOD COUNTY 7 P �R REPLACE BRIDGES 248 AND 249 ON I-00 OVER SR16I3 (BEAVERDAM RD.) OF TRA � P "_ / oe sskw4z "L Jr, (( RETAINING HALL 0• Y . Ll - ' r� • 1 t 1 . J7 — M3 x r a s r EBL J _ o'F Lj oN_ \ \ i 4�' e �p TYPICAL SECTION NO. 1 v .. ..A.M..���� TYPICAL SECTION N0.2 � R aw "ICA, "' ION NO. 9 Q PV[POPN nP END NCDOT TIP PROJECT HB-0002 -L- STA.331+50.00 1 74� r DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No. (Internal Use 21-05-0006 r----- UPDATE -tm HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the Archaeology Group. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: HB-0002 County: Haywood WBS No.: 49622.1.1 Document Type: Federal CE Fed. Aid No: Funding: ❑ State ® Federal Federal Permits : ® Yes ❑ No Permit T e s : Project Description: Replace Bridge Nos. 248 and 249 on I-40 over Beaverdam Road. SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW Description of review activities, results, and conclusions: Review of HPO quad maps, HPO GIS information, historic designations roster, and indexes was undertaken on May 21, 2021. Based on this review, there are no existing NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects, which is defined on the following maps. All properties over fifty years of age are unremarkable and do not warrant further evaluation. October 2021 Expanded Study Area: The study area was expanded in October 2021 and is shown on the following maps. There are no properties over fifty years of age that warrant further evaluation based on a survey of the updated study area. There are no National Register listed or eligible properties and no survey is required. If design plans change, additional review will be required. Why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predictinz that there are no unidentified significant historic architectural or landscape resources in the project area: HPO quad maps and GIS information recording NR, SL, LD, DE, and SS properties for the Haywood County survey, Haywood County GIS/Tax information, and Google Maps are considered valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood of historic resources being present. There are no National Register listed or eligible properties within the APE and no survey is required. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION ❑Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN Historic Architecture and Landscapes -- NO SURVEY REQUIRED 9%� � Aw 6 ,S02-1 NCDOT Architectural Historian Date Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEYREQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 1 of 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 e ncnuRnY Q a p�® BRIDGES 248 AND 249 ORpze pl snaps Mrmslriez -- Prelareb Renp v NEO [appranpnv Pw G9 _ regpry I�M1 Deg z�B wrewepes� - i J wnc Aeyprui Q p G��nwck Em4 ��•. _ Project Location c .\ e Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEYREQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 2 of 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 S State Historic Preservation Office Historic Architecture and Landscapes NO SURVEYREQUIRED form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. Page 3 of 3 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No.: 21-05-0006 a ARCHAEOLOGICAL NO ADVERSE EFFECT DETERMINATION This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the Historic Architecture and Landscapes Team. PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: WBS No. F.A. No: HB-0002 49622.1.1 Federal Permit Required? County: Haywood Document: Federal CE Funding: ❑ State ® Federal ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: NWP 3 / NWP 14 Project Description: Replace Bridges 248 and 249 on I-40 over SR 1613 (Beaverdam Road) in Haywood County, North Carolina. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) for the proposed project encompasses approximately 57.01 acres along the north and south sides of I-40 east and west of Beaverdam Road. It measures 3,265 feet (997m) east -west and from 435 to 1,589 feet (133 to 485m) north -south. SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL REVIEW First, permitting and funding information was reviewed for determining the level of archaeological investigation required by state and federal laws. Based on the submitted "request for cultural resources review" form, the project is federally funded and requires a United States Army Corps of Engineers Permit. As such, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act applies and the Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) will serve as the lead federal agency. Next, construction design and other data was examined (when applicable) to define the character and extent of potential impacts to the project. The archaeological Area of Potential Effects (APE) was defined as all areas of potential ground disturbing activity including easements consisting of 57.01 acres In area. Once the APE was defined, a map review and site file search was conducted utilizing on-line resources provided to the NCDOT by the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on Tuesday, July 6, 2021. No NRHP eligible archaeological sites were located within the APE. However, numerous archaeological sites have been documented in the general vicinity of the APE with a couple of archaeological sites directly adjacent and 31HW271 at least partially within the projects APE. Examination of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), State Study Listed (SL), Locally Designated (LD), Determined Eligible (DE), and Surveyed Site (SS) properties employing resources available on the NCSHPO website is important in establishing the location of noteworthy historic occupations related to a perspective construction impact area. A cross-check of these mapped resources concluded that none of the above properties with potential contributing archaeological components are situated within the APE. In addition, historic maps of Haywood County were appraised to identify former structure locations, land use patterns, cemeteries, or other confirmation of historic occupation in the project vicinity. Archaeological/historical reference materials were inspected as well. In general, the cultural background review established that no previously recorded archaeological sites, cemeteries, or NRHP properties with potential archaeological components are located within the APE. Based on cultural -historical factors, the 2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO ADVERSE EFFECTDETERMINATION" FORM 1 of 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No.: 21-05-0006 APE was considered to have a moderate potential for the presense of significant archaeological resources. Further, topographic, geologic, flood boundary, and NRCS soil survey maps were referenced to evaluate pedeological, geomorphological, hydrological, and other environmental determinants that may have resulted in past occupation at this location. Aerial and on -ground photographs (NCDOT Spatial Data Viewer) and the Google Street View map application (when amenable) were also examined/utilized for additional assessment of disturbances, both natural and human induced, which can compromise the integrity of archaeological sites. Environmental/impact factors suggest a slightly heightened potential for archaeological resource recovery, particularly in the non - disturbed areas of the APE beyond the existing right of way. The archaeological fieldwork was conducted intermittently from December 15, 2021, to January 27, 2022 under the direction of Michael Nelson and required approximately 48 person -days to complete. The fieldwork included systematic pedestrian reconnaissance of the entire APE (minus those properties for which a landowner denied access) and systematic shovel testing at 15-m intervals of all areas except for wetlands and areas showing visible and severe disturbance. Supplemental shovel tests were excavated at 7.5-m intervals to delineate cultural material. Shovel tests measured at least 30 cm in diameter and were excavated to sterile subsoil or bedrock, or a minimum depth of 75 cm. A total of 358 shovel tests and four 1 X 1 m test units were excavated as part of the project. The fieldwork revisited one previously recorded archaeological site (31HW271) and identifed four newly recorded sites (31HW668-31HW671). Four of those sites contain precontact components, including one (31HW271) dating from the Late Archaic through the Early Mississippian periods and one (31HW668) containing a nondiagnostic precontact ceramic sherd; the other two precontact sites (31HW670 and 31HW671) are represented only by nondiagnostic lithic components. Three sites contain postcontact components, including one (31HW669) representing a late 19th through 20th century occupation; 20th century artifacts were also recovered on two predominantly precontact sites (31HW271 and 31HW670). Site 31HW271 is a large precontact site extending across several residential yards and farm fields at the northeastern corner of the intersection of Freedom Drive and Beaverdam Road, north of I- 40. Postcontact artifacts are also present in association with the extant houses/farm complex. Site 31HW271 was originally identified by an avocational archaeologist as a low -density surface lithic scatter of Archaic (e.g., Morrow Mountain, Savannah River) PPKs and nondiagnostic tool fragments and debitage around a former sawmill located along the edge of the Project APE. Based on the Project survey, the site boundaries have been expanded to the south; the site may also continue outside the APE to the northeast, although much of the area of the former sawmill has been filled and built upon. As currently defined, 31HW271 measures approximately 135 m north - south by 105 m east -west. The site is bounded to the north (within the area of the recent development) by consecutive negative shovel tests, to the east by negative shovel tests and the edge of the APE, to the south by negative shovel tests and Freedom Drive, and to the west by Beaverdam Road. Site 31HW271 is a large, multi -component precontact lithic and ceramic scatter located across a terrace that also contains an existing farm. Late Archaic, Middle Woodland, and Early Mississippian components were recognized, and other precontact occupations may also be present; there is also a low -density 20th century component associated with the farm. Although most 2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO ADVERSE EFFECTDETERM[NATION" FORM 2of5 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No.: 21-05-0006 materials were confined to the plowzone, a buried A horizon is also present in some areas, and three potential cultural features were identified in shovel tests and test units. As a result of these invesigations site 31HW271 was determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion D due to its potential to provide information on regional Woodland and Mississippian period occupations. Site 31HW271 is the only NRHP eligible archaeological site within the APE. The soils at 31HW271 are mapped as Dillsboro loam, 2-8% slopes (DsB), which is a well -drained soil of old alluvium and/or colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock found along terraces and fans. At least three different soil profiles were observed within the shovel tests and test units (TUs) at 31HW271. The soils in the southwestern corner of the site, between the existing house and Freedom Drive and Beaverdam Road, were characterized by a basic Ap horizon (plowzone) of dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2) clay loam to approximate depths of 30-40 cmbs atop light yellowish brown (1 OYR 6/4) clay to depths of up to 65-78 cmbs, at which point cobbles or the water table was encountered. Soils across much of the remainder of the site had a similar profile of brown (7.5YR 4/3) to reddish brown (5YR 4/4) sandy loam Ap horizon to approximate depths of 22-37 cmbs over a yellowish red (5YR 5/6) clay B horizon to approximate depths of 70-75 cmbs (see Figures 22 and 23, below). One test unit (TU 3) and 12 shovel tests in the north - central and northwestern portions of the site encountered a thin but distinct truncated buried plowzone (Apb horizon) beneath the modern plowzone; a similar stratum was present in one shovel test at the eastern end of the site. Those profiles consisted of a dark brown (7.5YR 3/4) sandy clay loam to 21-27 cmbs over a 5-12 cm thick buried A horizon of very dark grayish brown (IOYR 3/2) clay loam. That soil was underlain by brown (7.5YR 4/4) clay loam to clay B horizon soils over reddish yellow (7.5YR 6/6) clay with gravels to approximately 100 cmbs. A total of 174 shovel tests were excavated across the site at both 15- and 7.5-m intervals, with 78 (44.8%) yielding totals of 323 precontact artifacts and four postcontact (20th century) artifacts. The precontact artifact density ranged from 1 to 10 artifacts per shovel test. Most of the artifacts were recovered from the modern or buried plowzones; only 76 lithic artifacts and four ceramics were recovered from the B horizon in the combined shovel tests and TUs. While the lithic artifacts were relatively evenly dispersed across the site, the precontact ceramic artifacts were primarily recovered in the north -central portion of the site. Their distribution closely follows that of the buried Ap horizon, although not all sherds were recovered from that horizon. Due to the presence of a moderate density of precontact artifacts from the plowzone, the apparent buried A horizon (which was not clearly visible as a plowzone in shovel tests), and a potential feature encountered in a shovel test, four 1 X 1 m test units were excavated at 31HW271. TU 1 was placed at the southern end of the site along Freedom Drive, alongside a shovel test that contained precontact ceramic and lithic artifacts. TU 2 was located in the north -central portion of the site, atop a shovel test that encountered a potential feature (post), and TU 4 was excavated immediately to the east to further expose a second potential feature partially exposed in TU 2. TU 3 was placed approximately 30 m west of TU 2 to investigate the buried A horizon documented in nearby shovel tests. The test units yielded an additional 468 precontact and four postcontact artifacts. Three potential cultural features were identified in the TUs, including a potential posthole (Feature 1) in TU 1 at the southern end of the site and two potential pits (Features 3 and 4) in TUs 2 and 4 in the north -central portion of the site. (Feature number 2 was originally assigned to a stain that proved to be clearly non -cultural). 2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO ADVERSE EFFECTDETERM[NATION" FORM 3 of 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No.: �21-05-0006 Feature 1, located along the west wall of TU 1, was recognized only as it was exposed in the wall profile during the test unit excavation. It was a small (12 x 12 cm) circular stain of dark brown (1 OYR 3/3) clay mottled with oxidized flecks and charcoal that extended to a depth of 36 cm below the ApB horizon interface, with insloping sides that taper to a point. No artifacts were observed originating within the stain itself. While this stain appeared to be a possible post, the fill was slightly different in texture from typical feature fill, and due to that fact and its tapered nature it is likley that it is a tree root instead. Feature 3 was a stain originally observed in a shovel test and was completely exposed at the base of the plowzone in TU 2. Feature 3 was roughly oval shaped, measuring 24 by 19 cm with very dark brown (7.5YR 2.5/3) silty clay loam fill with light charcoal flecking. The feature was bisected along a north -south axis with the west half collected as a flotation sample (currently unprocessed) and the east half screened in the field. Feature 3 had a depth of 17 cm with slightly insloping sides and a concave base. One precontact sherd with an unidentified surface decoration and three quartzite flakes were recovered from Feature 3. The presence of a larger mottled stain west of Feature 3 in the northwest corner of the test unit prompted the excavation of TU 4 to the east to further investigate the stain, designated Feature 4. Although the feature was not fully exposed by TU 4 and was not investigated further, it appears to represent a sizeable (i.e., 60+ x 60+ cm) pit that is at least 45 cm deep. Feature 4 was left intact (other than the small portion in the corner of Test Unit 2); no artifacts were observed originating solely within the feature. A total of 799 artifacts were collected from the shovel tests (n=327) and test units (n=472) at 31HW271. The artifact assemblage includes 121 precontact ceramic sherds, 670 precontact lithic artifacts, and just eight postcontact artifacts. Most of the sherds are small and cannot be conclusively assigned to types, but the assemblage includes a Middle Woodland period Pigeon phase (200 B.C.—A.D. 200) check stamped simple everted rim, four Pigeon check stamped body sherds with crushed quartz temper, and two Mississippian period Early Pisgah phase (A.D. 1000- 1200) sherds, including a fine -line rectilinear complicated stamped sherd and a rectilinear complicated stamped sherd. Other sherds include three with an unidentified stamped surface treatment and one with unidentified surface decoration. The remaining precontact ceramic artifacts include 19 eroded sherds and 91 sherds less than two cm in size. (This project falls within a North Carolina County in which the following federally recognized tribes have expressed an interest: Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, Muscogee (Creek) Nation and Catawba Indian Nation. We recommend that you ensure that this documentation is forwarded to these tribes using the process described in the current NCDOT Tribal Protocol and PA Procedures Manual.) SUMMARY OF NO ADVERSE EFFECTS DETERMINATION Archaeology Site 31HW271 NRHP D Number(s): Criteria: Explanation of No Adverse Effect: On Thursday, December 8, 2022 an effects meeting was held between FHWA, The Office of State Archaeology, the North Carolina State Historic Presevation Office, the North Carolina Department of 2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO ADVERSE EFFECTDETERM[NATION" FORM 4of5 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No.: �21-05-0006 Transportation and the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Officer to disucss the effects the undertaking may have on archaeological site 31HW271. Project construction plans provided by NCDOT during the meeting indicate that proposed project impacts to 31HW271 will be limited to the existing right-of-way. The current plans reflect efforts to minimize impacts to 3IHW271. In total, the potential impacts to 31HW271, measure only an 161.1 square meter (0.04) acre area at the very southwest corner of the site. This portion of 31HW271 is well outside the ceramic artifact concentration that comprises the site's NRHP determined eligible deposits, roughly 180 feet (90m) to the north. Three shovel tests excavated at 7.5-m intervals in this southwestern corner area produced a single residual (<2cm in size) sherd and twenty lithic artifacts, all from the disturbed plow zone. A 1 x 1 in test unit excavated next to the single sherd resulted in the recovery of no additional ceramics and 54 pieces of lithic debitage, 83.3% of which derived from the plowzone. The archaeolgical investigations conducted within the proposed 161.1 square meter area of site 31HW271 to be affected by construction was determined to have adequately demonstrated that there is a very low likelihood that substantial Woodland or Mississippian period deposits are present in that area. The Archaic materials present are confined primarily to the plowzone, and are not associated with the intact deposits considered the contributing elements of the site's NRHP eligibility which are located well to the north and separated from the southwest corner of the portion of the site within NCDOT right-of-way by two standing structures. OSA staff expressed their concerrn about the potential for human remains to be present within the location of the intact deposits and requested that NCDOT avoid the NRHP eligible portion of 31HW271 throughout the project's construction phase. Following presentation of the data and information on 31HW271 and the proposed BB-0002 project, officials from FHWA NCSHPO, and OSA concurred with a finding of No Adverse Effect with the conditions/commitments detailed below. List of Environmental Commitments: *Archaeological monitoring of the non-contributing element of 31HW271 within the existing right-of- way (161.1 m) during construction activities per the request of the Cherokee Nation Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. *No staging activities are to occur outside of the current project limits. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: KZ Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info VDesign Plans SIGNED: Scott Halvorsen NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST ❑ Photos ❑Correspondence Date 12/ 15/2022 2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT ARCHAEOLOGY TEAM "NO ADVERSE EFFECTDETERMINATION" FORM 5of5 DocuSign Envelope ID: OA43377E-EECF-425D-BEFE-2727D99A9701 Project Tracking No.: 21-05-0006 dk F/ l! .� ice'- \� 'f • '%_, ;N t,Br gg—es'2,4:8./_249, '# , of tv l P n-C,Son hi fj f ��pp `�, 1 ; �< I✓�"� .►- (lifer � �,�f•�--\. _� ����(`r�S�.. _;t \'����./.� d. USGS I S mi(me seAts Qafd"Ae Map 0 i UNT(A N.C. N Mdc• VA J•q,M1 IN -� - w E mc «, CA x Ki1ua•ifr. Figure 1: HB-0002 Project Vicinity Map illustrating the location of the archaeological APE. 2020 PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENI'AR(:HAFOI,OGY TEAM "NO ADVERSE I:FFECTDETERMINATION" FORM 6 of 8 ALI go r,•: � `t SO ••� �•ro . _,f • • Ira syl ml em •� ••(Aj Site Boundary Bridges 248 /249 ` (IIB•0002)APF ... 1i\►- llydrography D 15 30 Motors Contour Inter=atoot S .4 �l„i■u,nTq.T�p�u p,Al.,rla�l r�.iawiail. �.IMI�1�li.r lMJ- /� %INN ow le Aw ow r Z Q 19 D w0.ri 'i l i9 d T.