R-4748 (3)

4TC
Cy
•• * * d *
CONCURRENCE MEETING
INFORMATION PACKET
FOR YOUR REVIEW
PRIOR TOT MEETING
ON MARCH 21, 2006
PROJECT ENGINEER
UND A MAJOR
R-4748
Please bring this packet
to the meeting.

?j
AGENDA
Western Concurrence Meeting
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Board Room, Transportation Building
Raleigh, North Carolina
3:00 PM to 5:00 PM - Undrea Major, NCDOT, PDEA
TIP No. R-4748 - New Route from SR 1660 to SR 1662 South of US 441 Near Franklin,
Division 14, Macon County
Team Members:
Undrea Major, PDEA
Angie Pennock, USACE
Jake Riggsbee, FHWA
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, WRC
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Brian Wrenn, DWQ
Sarah McBride, SHPO
Harold Draper, TVA
Matt Roark, Southwestern RPO (non-signatory)
NCDOT Technical Support Staff and Other Aaeney Staff:
David Chang, Hydraulics
John Williamson, Right of Way
Jamie Wilson, Division 14
Mark Davis, Division 14
Jay Bennett, Roadway Design
Charles Brown, Location and Surveys
Tom Norman, Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
Don Lee, Roadside Environmental
Pat Simmons, Rail Division
Njoroge Wainaina, Geotechnical
Jim Dunlop, Traffic Engineering
Teresa Hart, PDEA
James Bridges, PDEA
Carla Dagnino, PDEA NEU
* The purpose of this meeting is to reach concurrence on Concurrence Point 2.
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA OF SR 1 660 (SILER
ROAD) AND SR 1 662 (WILEY BROWN ROAD) SOUTH OF US
64/23/441
MACON COUNTY
f?werL.
NCDOT TIP PROJECT No. R-4748
STATE PROJECT NO. 401 IS. 1.1
NEPA/SECTION 404 MERGER MEETING AGENDA
CONCURRENCE POINT 2
MARCH 21, 2006
INTRODUCTIONS AND SIGN-IN
PROJECT OVERVIEW/DESCRIPTION
ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES
DISCUSSION
SUMMARY/FINAL COMMENTS
2 ZO ?,
Oo
SECTION 404/NEPA INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POINT NO. 2
DETAILED STUDY ALTERNATIVES CARRIED FORWARD
PROJECT TITLE: Transportation Improvements in the area of SR 1660 (Siler Road) and
SR 1662 (Wiley Brown Road) South of US 64/23/441, Macon County, TIP No. R-4748,
State Project No. 40118.1.1
PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROPOSED ACTION: The purpose of the project
is to create access to sites slated for development in the vicinity of Siler Road and Wiley
Brown Road and improve traffic flow in the project area.
ALTERNATIVES TO STUDY IN DETAIL:
1. Alternative A - Northern Alignment ? Yes ? No
2. Alternative B - Center Alignment ? Yes ? No
3. Alternative C - Southern Alignment ? Yes ? No
4. No Build ? Yes ? No
5. ? Yes ? No
The project team has concurred with the alternatives to be carried forward for the proposed
project as indicated above.
NAME
AGENCY DATE
FHWA
USEPA
USACE
USFWS
NCDOT
NCWRC
NCDWQ
NCSHPO
TVA
EVALUATION OF ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS IN THE AREA OF
SR 1 660 (SILER ROAD) AND SR 1 662 (WILEY BROWN ROAD)
SOUTH OF US 64/23/441
MACON COUNTY
STATE PROJECT No. 401 1 8.1.1
NCDOT T.I.P. PROJECT No. R-4748
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MARCH 2006
PREPARED BY
MULKEY ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS
6750 TRYON ROAD
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA 2751 1
jill
ass ?'?'
., . r
4J F
y yr SIP o`_ ? 1 _ ..

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................1
2.0 Project Description ..................................................................................................1
3.0 Purpose of the Proposed Action ..............................................................................1
4.0 Public Involvement ..................................................................................................2
5.0 Screening and Design Criteria .................................................................................2
5.1 Resources Considered .......................................................................................................5
5.2 Design Criteria ...................................................................................................................5
6.0 Alternatives ...............................................................................................................5
6.1 Alternative A - Northern Alignment .............................................................................6
6.2 Alternative B - Center Alignment ..................................................................................6
6.3 Alternative C - Southern Alignment ..............................................................................6
7.0 Alternatives Analysis ................................................................................................6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Vicinity ....................................................................................................................3
Figure 2. Project Study Area and TIP Alignment ...........................................................................4
Figure 3. Environmental Features Map with Alternatives ............................................................. 7
Figure 4. Floodplain Map ..................................................................................................................10
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Comparison of Impacts by Alternative ............................................................
ill
...... 9
1V

EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This project is included in the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDO 1) 2006'
2012 T an.sportation Improiement Program (1'IP) as NCD(YT Project No. R-4748. 11n environmental
assessment is being prepared in accordance with the North Carolina l?.nvironmental Policy Act
of 1971, as amended (North Carolina General Statutes zkrticle I Chapter 113,'0, as codified in
the North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 1, Chapter 25. The schedule for this project
includes completing the environmental assessment in November 2006, right of way acquisition
occurring in 2009 and construction in 2010. The anticipated cost of the project is approximately
$8,100,000.
'
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is located in Macon County, North Carolina just south of US 64/23/441
and the Town of Franklin (see 1?igure 1).
The proposed action will provide transportation improvements in the vicinity of Sit 1660 (Siler
Road) and Sit 1662 (Wiley Brown Road). The proposed project as shown in the NCDOT TIP
includes a new location roadway connecting Siler Road and Wiley Brown Road and a new
crossing of the Little Tennessee River (see Figure 2).
The project study area is bounded on the west by US 23/441, on the north by US 64/23/441,
on the east by the Cullasaja River, and ranges from approximately 0.1 to 0.25 mile south of the
proposed '111? new location roadway. The proposed project would connect major developments
that are anticipated or underway on both sides of the Little Tennessee River and provide an
alternate route for traffic traveling to and between these locations, minimizing the amount of
traffic utilizing the regional roads for local trips.

3.0 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The primary purposes of the proposed action were approved by the NITA/Section 404 Merger
' Team at their December 8, 2005 meeting:
Create access to sites slated for development in the vicinity ofSiler Road and
' Wiley Brown Road.
The proposed action will create additional access to sites currently proposed for institutional and
commercial development on both the east and west side of the Little Tennessee River and will
facilitate better traffic circulation between these sites. Without this access, the proposed
development will increase the nhix of local traffic and regional traffic on the limited road system
in this area of Macon County. US 64/23/441 is the only current crossing of the Little Tennessee
River in the vicinity of this proposed development. As these sites develop, they will provide new
jobs that could enhance the area's economy.
0 Improve traffic flow in the project area.
The proposed road improvements will reduce future traffic that would otherwise be assigned to
existing roadways. This improvement will help separate local traffic from regional traffic,
minimizing the rate at which increases in traffic will result in lower Level of Service on existing
facilities and improving traffic safety.
4.13 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A Citizens Informational Workshop was held for the proposed project on February 15, 2006 at
the Macon County Community Building on US 23/441 (Georgia Road) in Franklin. The
purpose of the workshop was to introduce the project and present the study area to the
community. Several written comments were received at the meeting.
Thirty-nine citizens and local officials registered at the workshop. Most workshop participants
had a positive view of the proposed project as illustrated in the NCD0T TIP. Many felt that the
proposed road would be an asset to the area, making Southwestern Community College and the
new library more accessible to citizens living east of the Little Tennessee River, within the study
area and beyond. A comment was also made that the proposed road would provide better fire
department (located east of the river) access to areas west of the Little Tennessee River,
including the new community college and library.
Sorne citizens were concerned about safety, in particular in the vicinity of the Dowdle Mountain
Road (SR 1659), Wiley Brown Road, and US 64/23/441 intersections in the study area. It was
noted that 11 school buses from Macon Middle School come through these intersections to
travel west and south and that the proposed road would provide an alternative route for these
buses currently using US 64/23/441.
A representative of Duke Power Company commented on the tract of land that the company
owns east of the Little Tennessee River. He said that the land was very valuable because of
location and topography, and that it has considerable potential for commercial and/or small
industrial development. The representative voiced his concern about any proposed roadway
alignment that would impact the company's property.
5.0 SCREENING AND DESIGN CRITERIA
Potential alternatives were screened for suitability based on several criteria, including meeting the
purpose of and need for the proposed project, minimizing impacts to natural and cultural
resources, and consideration of community features. CUeographic information system (GIS) data,
aerial photography, observations from field visits, and information obtained at the Citizens
Informational Workshop were used in the analysis.
2
11 j
tt >u
ml
Au
im
M.U
uu Lu r /_ unl ?\
•
-?? R-4748
i / ? i Cry I j?•?
h01c PROJECT VICINITY
r yp Wests MI
Topton gnptre °lotia y-
Kyle ` NATIONAL
AQoone?
anrah wax?Byeb Bald .?;
r No d S 6rankh ?q Guhasa;: i?
28 Gne ss
? al Mw Sp inggs b N . `I
-11 ,+ 3 x enao1 veil,
10
?q. 14111 Dry Faflt 3ottt
Otto ?o Lake.
?+ SPpuavah
a ortoa 100 igltlarq_
t
Scaly
North Carolina Department Of
.°• Transportation
as Project Development &
Environmental Analysis
MACON COUNTY
R-4748
SR 1660 TO SR 1662
SOUTH OF US 6423/441
0 mee` 0.5 mile 1.0
FIGURE 1
O
V
O
V
00
O ?
Z M
V cl)
a O
CL
~ 'O^
v?
O
0 ?
V r
Z
Li
co
O
vw
r
N
a
0
w
O
cn U
E C: co Q
m o ti
a?
(b w C
J
L ?i•+
CV Q
d
?W. 6>+O?
u N?4
Z ?, 0 3 N v
=/ u D.
?? • LL •O co F-
L
a
?~ - Gu\\agala _ :166, °?e?a•
t

tea.

GA
h ? a?0
o

<i
k"o
O° (D o
m

d
a
s
s
s
aG
4
a10

C
0
C `v o
ca
®ek
C
C
Ca,toaggcha,98,
6?c0?•
^
g P
Fo -
?

d
Y
V
O C O
3
I
n

n
5.1 RESOURCES CONSIDERED
7'he following resource components were considered in the development of alternatives:
• Community
• Accessibility
• Public Services
• Recreational Use of Greenway
• Traffic Service
• Displacements
• Cultural Resources
• Natural Resources
• Stream and Wetland Impacts
• T'loodplain Tmpacts
• Protected Species
5.2 DESIGN CRITERIA
'1'o the extent possible, alignment centerlines were placed to minimize impacts to resources,
provide a roadway and bridge that arc constructible, and cross streams and floodplains at a
reasonable angle. The following design criteria were also used when preparing the alternatives:
1. Design speed of 40 miles per hour;
2. Maximum grade of 13 percent;
3. 'hypical Sections
a. Lane Width: 12 feet

1

b. Roadway Width: 40 feet comprised of two 12-foot lanes with 8-foot shoulders
c. Structure Width: 30 feet comprised of two 12-foot lanes and 3-foot offsets
4. Side slopes of 6:1 (minitnutn) to 2:1 (maximum) for all cut or fill heights.
6.0 ALTERNATIVES
Three alternatives for the proposed action are presented in Figure 3. A proposed 500-foot study
corridor based on the alignment centerline is shown on the figure. '1"he alternatives are variations
of the alignment shown in the NCDO'1"1'IP, which includes a new location roadway connecting
Siler Road and Wiley Brown Road and a new crossing of the 1,ittle'1'ennessee River. 'Che
alternatives increase access to sites planned for commercial and institutional development '1'hc
alternatives provide a local route for school traffic and emergency services and create a second
route to the new Macon County library and Southwestern Community College, which plans to
provide educational opportunities for over 6,000 students in the future.
5
G. 1 ALTERNATIVE A - NORTHERN ALIGNMENT
Alternative A is the northernmost alternative, traveling adjacent to US 64/23/441 and
functioning similar to a service road. This alternative begins at the northern end of Siler Road
(approximately 0.39 mile from US 23/441), forming a "T" intersection with Siler Road.
Alternative A continues cast parallel to US 64/23/441 across the Little Tennessee River, tying
into Dowdle Mountain Road just north of Wiley Brown Road.
6.2 ALTERNATIVE B - CENTER ALIGNMENT
Alternative B most closely resembles the alignment shown in the TIP. This alternative begins
approximately 0.60 mile from US 23/441 with a "T" intersection on Siler Road and continues to
the east parallel to US 64/23/441 across the Little Tennessee River. Alternative B continues to
the east, turning north to tie into Dowdle Mountain Road just north of Wiley Brown Road.
6.3 ALTERNATIVE C - SOUTHERN ALIGNMENT
Alternative C is the southernmost alternative. This alternative begins near the southern end of
Siler Road with a ""I"' intersection and continues southeast to cross the Little Tennessee River
and an unnamed tributary to the river. After crossing the river and unnamed tributary,
Alternative C continues to the northeast and ties into Dowdle Mountain Road just north of
Wiley Brown Road.
7.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
A comparison of the alternatives is shown in Table 1 and discussed below. Preliminary
background research of state files showed no known historic sites and one archaeological site
within the initial project study area. The archaeological site does not fall within the 500-foot
study corridor of any alternative.
All of the alternatives cross the existing greenway adjacent to the Little Tennessee River and a
power transmission line. All of the alternative corridors include habitat for the spotfinn chub
(federal and state Threatened) and the olive darter (Federal Species of Concern and state Special
Concern). The Little Tennessee River is Critical Habitat for the spotfin chub. All of the
alternatives bridge the Little Tennessee River. GIS National Wetlands Inventory mapping shows
no wetlands in the study area. All of the alternatives cross the 100-year floodplain (see Figure 4).
Impacts to prime farmland soils and residential displacements were calculated using a 200-foot
corridor around each alternative's centerline. Alternative A impacts 0.09 acre of prune farmland
soils and has no displacements. Alternative B impacts 1.30 acres of prime farmland soils and has
no displacements. Alternative C impacts 2.60 acres of prime farmland soils and has four
residential displacements.
Alternative B traverses steep terrain with significant elevation changes. This alternative will
require substantial earthwork. Alternative B has the greatest impacts to properties slated for
development.
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m s ? ?
?l

i
1
u
C
u
u
d
0
V.
0
CC"j
G
O
U
U

J

i
u d ?
v
> " n o

•
O
O
O
O
O
O
`?
O U
O
o
?'
O
O
O
.--1
O
'6
.a

61 p ?j N ri
^^ O
Q uu
N
1
q
O
m

W

O
v
CZ
u u

U O O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O

O

O

O

Z

Z

Z

.--?

Z
N
?r
w n
O M
NO
+

Q

V
a

u u p b.0
c o O o o O O O (*7 0 0 o o bbz r.

u -? o o r

u
N
CS
N C]

(7 l
4L
U H
C
ti
b o
?

ti u
= C
a a

U ?e
u 'a
U
a
cl ccl u
U
C u aU. N G C u V E ` f rt ?. U
i.y ?U
? f ' V C v CCU cUS A+.. u to CA O u
GC v ?C
. 00
O C) c. ? rr y w a U y I y
a"
y U -o o a v W o
y
u O
G U o ?, v u' Q a o
ca 10 '? p u ?:) U C u C=. C y O , C f u 3 u
a
o N o o
O
M
CI
L) v
i C U
U O

- ti
u ti
C N u

s
a
cs
?

? w ?

a M
a S s x x ° P-
-1 x as w . . c7
U
f
[U?
G
41
u
b
O
x
U
a
01
I

O
O
l<
cD
Sv
T
O
O
Q.
-n
C
m

y1 I s ?
. i
Sit 14
S w,?
_.... f ?.
TI ! j •••'! l+?i
? z

u?

,Y1
Ql.'.

•.I
Z
OR
Pz
oz

t
?
4# ? 0 n
a mnl
m z a?.^i
m n
m ? '^
R I?i
T

0 n
8n
O

cl [
0

-..;ci m
!6'
E- "21?1_ib i i : i 7 F JC DOT FDEA 9`T G893 t JO . 2'c i DOS
Section 404/NEPA Interagency Agreement
Concurrence Point No. 1 Purpose and Need
Project Title: Tratispoitation unprovements in the area of SR 1660 (Siler Roar-) and SR
1662 (%X,dey Brown Road) South of US 64/23/4-11, Macon County, TIP No. R 474 , STate
Project No. 40118.1.1
Purpose and Need of Proposed Project: The ptupose of the project is tc create access
to sites slated for development in the vicinity of Sder Road and NVdcv Brown Road and
unpiDve trtffic flow in the project area.
Study Area: "Ihe study area is bounded on the north by US 64/23/4,11, on the west loy US
23/441, on the east by the C.ttllasaja River, and nutges from approximately o.1 to 0.23 mile
south of the proposed new location roadway.
The project team has concurred Frith the ptupose and need for the proposed project as
described above.
Name Agenr, D
te
USEPA a
USAGE
US IZAVO-"-

NCD OT - /a- 4, / ?3
TVA
FEE-27 -20 6 1•101 J 10: 22' TEL:91`3 7 '_,r89 3 1 JAHE: DWO-HETLAt ID'S P. 2

r•

M1
- ???11< ? ? ?? Cc-? yql - MOO ?s c.,
UL(I
1
? I
- - 1 1 I - I - nti? S}. }U h? 1Y.5 L,. 1 I
ld?I -
1 n?Sec?. i n , 0l• N' `?iGY1A.liLt?\ lcr c c".?(U {,?: 1L{? ??z?J.

`- lb
u tl
/
C im " t\, k - 6 ?11 O-YIL.
?k• JCt"i tla? ?L;?c,? `?V? ItiI • ?,?{ ( l Su Lt" rfe.t ??L'?f
`
l
1
u1
l 1
?
1

f vU,c,)
• ? S Eft ? ??
`aoW^1?- i04e?rf j f??t?;v"?"? C OLJ lt?
Q pyt ?? ?

ADDENDUM TO PROJECT INFORMATION
NEW LOCATION ROADWAY FROM SR 1 660 (SILER ROAD)
TO SR 1 662 (WILEY BROWN ROAD) SOUTH OF US 441
MACON COUNTY
NCOOT TIP PROJECT NO. R-474B
STATE PROJECT NO. 401 1 B. 1.1
1 . TRAFFIC ADDENDUM
2. SECTION 1.4 ADDENDUM
3. CONCURRENCE FORM ADDENDUM
Macon Countv ADT's
Roadway Existing
2005 2030 No-Build
Background
Growth Only 2030 No-Build
with Planned
Development 2030 Build
Background
Growth Only 2030 Build with
Planned
Development
US 64
West of US 441 10,000 14,000 15,000 14,000 15,000
At Little TN River 22,000 30,800 44,300 27,500 33,900
East of SR 1701 21,900 30,700 43,800 30,700 43,800
US 441
North of US 64 16,700 23,400 27,700 23,400 27,700
Between US 64 and Siler Road 22,600 31,600 46,200 28,300 37,900
Between Siler Road and Commercial
Drive 22,000 30,800 38,000 30,800 38,000
South of Commercial Drive 21,300 29,800 36,600 29,800 35,900
Local Roads
SR 1660 Siler Road near US 441 400 600 11,800 3,900 11,100
New Bridge over Little TN River N/A N/A N/A 3,300 10,400
SR 1701 south of US 64 3,000 4,200 11,400 7,500 14,400
0
r' =
C1 0
h L
?s ?, (£1) 0 v w
(8611) IV5
(6s) sz
1010 (8.17)---- ? ? - .-
00 0
6 (7)-
N
J

00
rs

CA
.rA
? O
t'? u
M
r.? 0
Cll
b1.
?. w a
(08) IN
(LCZI) 0S
91) LT ly
(9t) LT
00© ?0c
7t I
J
1 55(74)
85(50)
954 (831) -10 c c 596(503) -0
7(4) 394 (303)
c,
L N ?
J
N
2(10)
-?
25(17)
11(15)
d
LA
0
0
.. a
v? ?p
.. w
0o r.
J nw
?l
d
N
N
O
0
0
r?

<y ?
J
U
00
>

0
0
? L
o
b (IZI) 98 o (61) ££
V f - (008) t'6S
4 (SIL) 9617 I I

92(122) -
689(551) -?
u,
? w
o?OO a
w

Ut
J
V1
? w

(
S) LZ O J oo
? v
(T) £
£
?- (61) £Z (i) S
(£) Z
(66) OSZ
SR 1701
1
125(49) 4
1
1 (1)
00 -
N
59)
90 (

F>7 00 00
& It
7
d
O
O
O
o
w
w
t- 4.0£) 981
4- (h: IT) L99
(0S) ZS
)Q
?Tr
A O ?+
V

0
I0
I
15(58)
F* 797 (549)-N- US 441
N
w
in
e Ak
SR 1702
^b
O
' l
O
r.r
c?
7
O
_lvL
(. a1)J
15;ti' (1413)-?
8 (10)
?l
0
a
3

d

L ?
(8I) S ..?
? v"
4 (OZ61)658
("(.8) 6£
r
1tr
ao v? s.
w
L (ZII) 691
f- (6981) VSL
r (SLO L617
000
119(70 1 1
1387 (1292)-?
134(118) i+
N
a
r
O
O
o --"p
b ?r
y
a
a
e
J
l
h"3 00
d 00
N
J
J
O
O 1.--,a
w L-(LZ) 91,
L(90Z) LZI v
f-(££b1) ZL? ?4-(OZZi) ZSS
(tb) SI
(9Zb) 09Z 1
4 (6ZIZ) ZSZT
I- (PI£) ££i
000
a
d
C7,
00
J

CIO
X11
IIIiJIIIINIIII
J
?'? MCI
r
Y r•
r'1
?a
rris CD
l:

N
b
v?o
76(104) J
942(927) -?
739(756)

156 (218)
- r
21(81)
US 441
?Tr 1056(999) ol
-?
1168(867)
.. w tj 120(339)
....
b
O v W`-i v0
V
Ch
N ?
b ?
N ?
N 4
w v
.? 1
119 (
\ -,OSJ
y(J?Z9
J
a
d
w
0
0
1
r N
r?
N i.
O
r+ O
(n J
J
w..
O w w ?
c£sr) ££z " v " cs) s
(0£) 5£ I (S) s
(s£i) St£ ?-J (S) s
SR 1701
G 0 00
5(18) * 4
291 (299) J *
*
38 (27) -? I 5(5) -0 1 F
15(21) _
N
0 0
0 ?
r^y
^N
20a (272) ?
N .. ^
N O

n
.+
29
_
N _
b
a
v
? O
y
W s'
-

b 00

O

SR 1702
x

d d
? b
o' x
a
c?
o
? C
?D
110
I?

x
0
y ?.
? cn
. O
'h
.q--l "r

4- (OZ61) 698
(Z8) G£
L(
(11) ,. I r
1 ?h9 11413?? O0 "' w
v ,.

00
00
??IIIHilIII?
i
!`n O W
cD C
(? ? N
tsya?/ ?[
t= Tw
C? VJ
4a ??
ul lz
4 N ?
(ZIT) 691 o v
4- (O L'Z9
r (£9Z) ) LSZ
©O©
119 (70 ? 1
1278(1179) 0 -
243(231)
??v^, owo
y v 1N..
d

0
-t
T.
b
U

d

O
O
C)

b , P??
?Y

a
a

J
l

1_ (9ZO 09Z
4 (9891) £ss
r- (M) 9ZT
®O©
76(104)
T
a
N ?
b
N ?
O ?
1
J
950(946) -??
501 (421)
? O
b
156 (218)
1063(999) 01
d N
N
J
J
O
1?41 C)
?
?(90Z) LZI 1-(LZ) 9b
f-(££1'I) ZL8 f-(OZZT) ZSS
(th) Si
t? r
?P
r 21(81) -? US 441
-?
1168(867)
N 120(339)
6) 1?
9145 J 1 />11
T F >1
Vol aN >1
J+ C1
00
a J r b ?
y ?
O
O
lot
a o. ?
? w a*' ?G-3
w w L o
L J Q N C t1i
h
V1 J w
Z" s °% (9bL) S9th v (S) S o w.r
f- *---T 0£ a- (S) s £ (S) S Q Q Q SR1702
10 (21? 188 (179) 33 (245(5) -0 "1 I r
15 (21) c y
-Oi
319(461) c w CD
v v ?1 ? J V I?
Vii N N,y
11i? ?wi V V./
CD
00 1. . ,.ti
O
!ti .n: 1-
ADDENDUM TO SECTION 1.4 OF PURPOSE AND NEED DOCUMENT
NEW LOCATION ROADWAY FROM SR 1 660 (SILER ROAD)
TO SR 1 662 (WILEY BROWN ROAD) SOUTH OF US 441
MACON COUNTY
NCDOT TIP PROJECT NO. R-4748
STATE PROJECT NO. 401 1 8.1 .1
The following should replace Section 1.4 in the draft Purpose and Need document for
NCDOT TIP project No. R-4748.
1.4 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The primary purposes of the proposed action include the following:
• Improve connectivity in die project area.
The proposed roadway will provide a new east/west route between Siler Road and `Ailey
Brown Road. It will also provide a local alternative route to travelers currently using US
64/23/441 and US 23/441. Improving connectivity will serve to decrease overall vehicle
miles traveled, reduce vehicle operating costs, increase access to businesses, and shorten trip
times.
• Support economic development in the project area.
The proposed action will support economic development by improving access to sites
available for institutional and commercial development in the project area. These sites will
not be viable alternatives for potential employers if they do not have appropriate access. As
the sites develop, they will provide new jobs that will enhance the area's economy.
• Improve traffic florv in the project area.
The proposed road improvements will conduct current traffic more efficiently and will
provide a route for future traffic that would otherwise be assigned to existing roadways. This
improvement will help minimize the rate at which increases in traffic result in lower Level of
Service on existing facilities.
SECTION 404/NEPA INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POINT NO. 1 PURPOSE AND NEED
PROJECT TITLE: New Location Roadway from SR 1660 (Siler Road) to SR 1662 (Wiley
Brown Road) South of US 64/23/441, Macon County, TIP No. R-4748, State Project No.
40118.1.1
PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROPOSED PROJECT: The purpose of the project is to
improve connectivity, support economic development, and improve traffic flow in the
project area.
STUDY AREA: The study area is bounded on the north by US 64/23/441, on the west by
US 23/441, on the east by the Cullasaja River, and ranges from approximately 0.1 to 0.25
mile soudi of the proposed new location roadway.
The project team has concurred with the purpose and need for the proposed project as
described above.
NAME AGENCY DATE
FHWA
USEPA
USACE
USFWS
NCDOT
NCWRC
NCDWQ
NCSHPO
TVA
CONCURRENCE MEETING
INFORMATION PACKET
December 8, 2005
9:00 AID
NCDOT BOARD MOOT
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
RALEIGH, NC
PDEA PROJECT ENGINEER
UNDREA MAJOR
919-733-7844 TEXT. 212
TIP # R-4748
MEETING TO REACH CP#1
NEW LOCATION ROADWAY FROM SR 1 660 (SILER ROAD)
TO SR 1 662 (WILEY BROWN ROAD) SOUTH OF US 64/23/441
MACON COUNTY
b
NCDOT TIP PROJECT No. R-474B
STATE PROJECT No. 401 1 S.1 . 1
NEPA/SECTION 404 MERGER MEETING AGENDA
DECEMBER B, 2005
INTRODUCTIONS AND SIGN-IN
PROJECT OVERVIEW/DESCRIPTION
PURPOSE AND NEED
DISCUSSION
SUMMARY/FINAL COMMENTS
SECTION 404/NEPA INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POI T NO. I PURPOSE AND NEED
PROJECT TITLE: rNta-r?? ura?l`from SR 1660 (Siler Road) to SR 1662 (Wiley
Brown Road) South of US 64/23/441, Macon County, TIP No. R-4748, State Project No.
40118.1.1
PURPOSE AND NEED OF PROPOSED PROJECT: The purpose of the project is to
create access to sites slated for development in the vicinity of Siler Road and Wiley Brown
Road, caand improve traffic flow in the project
area.
STUDY AREA: The study area is bounded on the north by US 64/23/441, on the west by
US 23/441, on the east by the Cullasaja River, and ranges from appro.' ately 0.1 to 0.25
mile south of the proposed new location roadway.
The project team has concurred with the purpose and need for the proposed project as
described above.
NAME AGENCY DATE
FHWA
USEPA
USACE
USIFWS
NCDOT
NCWRC
NCDWQ
NCSHPO
TVA

DR /kFT
PURPOSE AND NEED
FOR
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
NEW ROUTE FROM SR 1 660 (SILER ROAD) TO SR 1 662
(WILEY BROWN ROAD) SOUTH OF US 441 NEAR FRANKLIN
MACON COUNTY
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT NO. XXX
STATE PROJECT NO. 401 1 B.1 .1
NCDOT T.I.P. PROJECT No. R-4748
US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NOVEMBER 2005
PREPARED BY
MULKEY ENGINEERS AND CONSULTANTS
6750 TRYON ROAD
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA 2751 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
........................................................................................................ iii
Table of Contents
List of Figures ............................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables ................................................................................................................ iv
1.0 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Project ....................................................... 5
1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... .. 5
1.2 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................. .. 5
1.3 Summary of Need for the Proposed Action ............................................................... .. 5
1.4 Purpose of the Proposed Action .................................................................................. .. 6
1.5 Project Dcscription ......................................................................................................... 11
1.5.1 Project Setting .................................................................................................... 11
1.5.2 1 iistory of project .............................................................................................. 12
1.6 System I.inkage ................................................................................................................ 12
1.6.1 Existing Road Network .................................................................................... 12
1.6.2 Modal Interrelationships .................................................................................. 13
1.6.2.1 Railroads ............................................................................................................. 13
1.6.2.2 Airports ............................................................................................................... 13
1.6.2.3 Transit ................................................................................................................. 13
1.6.2.4 Bicycle Accommodations ................................................................................. 13
1.7 Social and Economic Conditions ................................................................................. 13
1.7.1 Dcmographics .................................................................................................... 13
1.7.2 Economy ............................................................................................................ 15
1.8 Transportation Plans ...................................................................................................... 17
1.8.1 NCDO'I' Transportation Improvement Program ........................................ 17
1.8.2 't'horoughfare Plans .......................................................................................... 18
1.9 Roadway Capacity ........................................................................................................... 18
1.9.1 Existing Characteristics .................................................................................... 18
1.9.2 I?xisting Conditions .......................................................................................... 19
1.9.3 Projected Conditions ........................................................................................ 20
1.10 Accident Analysis ............................................................................................................ 22
1.11 lienefits to State, Region, and Community ................................................................. 22
Appendix A -References and Supporting Information ............................................... 25
ui
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................7
Figure 2. Project Area Map .................................................................................................................9
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Population by Race ........................................................................................................... 14
Table 2. Age Distribution ............................................................................................................... 15
Table 3. Educational Status ............................................................................................................ 15
Table 4. Income and Poverty Status .............................................................................................. 16
Table 5. Employment by Industry ................................................................................................. 17
Table 6. 2005 Existing AM & PM LOS (Signalized Intersections) .......................................... 19
Table 7. 2005 Existing AM & PM LOS (Unsignalized Intersections) ..................................... 20
Table 8. 2030 No Build AM & PM LOS (Signalized Intersections) ......................................... 21
Table 9. 2030 No Build AM & PM LOS (Unsignalized Intersections) .................................... 21
1v
1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED
PROJECT
1 .1 INTRODUCTION
This project is included in the North Carolina Department of'T'ransportation (NCDOT) 2006-
2012 '1 ranrportation Improvement Program (TIP) as NCDO'T' Project No. R-4748. An environmental
assessment will be prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
of 1969, as amended. The content of the document will conform to Council on Environmental
Quality (Cl, Q) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. This Purpose and
Need Statement is the first phase in the preparation of the environmental assessment, and will
be incorporated into that document.
1.2 PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed project is located in Macon County,
North Carolina just south of the town of Franklin and
US 64/23/441 (Figure 1).
The proposed action will connect Siler Road (SR 1660)
to Wiley Brown Road (SR 1662) on approximately 0.6
mile of new location, two-lane roadway (figure 2). A
new crossing of the little Tennessee River is proposed
as part of the project. The project study area is
bounded on the west by US 23/441, on the north by Viler Road lookins south where proposed
US 64/23/441, on the cast by the Cullasaja River, and new location road will connect (on left).
ranges from approximately 0.1 to 0.25 mile south of
the proposed new location roadway. The proposed road would connect major developments
that are anticipated on both sides of the Little 'T'ennessee River and provide an alternate route
for traffic traveling between these locations, which would minimize the amount of traffic that
would utilize the regional roads for local trips.
1.3 SUMMARY OF NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed project is strategically important to the economic development of and
transportation service in the I ranklin area. The primary needs for the proposed action arc as
follows:
There is limited access to land available for development between Siler Road and
Wiley Brown Road
Several tracts of land arc currently being developed or are slated for future development between
Siler Road and Wiley Brown Road and the surrounding area. According to Weiss and Figura
(2003), the need for highway improvement can be justified on the basis of two sets of economic
development facts: distress and opportunity. More than twenty percent of the population in the
't'own of Franklin is below the poverty level. According to interviewed sources, several
manufacturing plants closed in the mid 1990s and some people are still recovering from these
job losses. Some of the economic distress in the area may be alleviated by new opportunities
associated with the proposed roadway, such as big box retail, hotels, restaurants, and a nearby
community college and library.
• System connectivity improvements are needed to maximize the benefit oflocal
economic development projects.
The proposed roadway will connect Siler Road and Wiley Brown Road, and provide a new route
between the US 64/23/441 and US 23/441 interchange and the at-grade intersection of US
64/23/441 and SR 1701 (Dowdle Mountain Road). Currently, travelers must use US 64/23/441
and US 23/441 if they wish to go from Wiley Brown Road to Siler Road. Alternatives to existing
travel routes that improve system connectivity with arterial roadways and US 64/23/441 and US
23/441 will provide both local commuters and tourists with travel pattern choices and enhance
connectivity of local roadways and businesses.
• Traffic in the project area is expected to increase and Level of Service on the
roadways is expected to degrade substantially by the year 2030.
By the year 2030, traffic is expected to increase by 101 percent along US 64/23/441 between US
23/441 and Dowdle Mountain Road, by 66 percent along US 23/441 north of US 64/23/441,''~
0and by 72 percent along US 23/441 south of US 64/23/441. The following intersections area
expected to experience a Level of Service F by the year 2030: US 441 at Sher Ihoad,s '3?158
O 7: ))P\ (Womack Street) at US 23/441, SR 1687 (Allman Drive) at US 441, and SR 1659 (Wells Grove
Road) at Dowdle Mountain Road. This burden on existing infrastructure will lead to increased
travel times and delays for roadway users.
vat

1.4 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ??Y ?????'
(y ( ' R
The primary purposes of the proposed action include the following: f5
• Create access to sites slated for development between Siler Road and Wiley Broom
Road.
The proposed action will create access to sites available for institutional and commercial
development and will facilitate development of these sites. Without this access, the sites will not
be viable alternatives for potential employers. As these sites develop, they will provide new jobs
that will enhance the area's economy.
• Improve connectivity in and to the project area.
The proposed roadway will provide a new cast/west route between Siler Road and Wiley Brown
Road. It will also provide a local alternative route to travelers currently using US 64/23/441 and
US 23/441. Improving connectivity will serve to decrease overall vehicle miles traveled, reduce
vehicle operating costs, increase access to businesses, and shorten trip times.
• Improve traffic flowin the project area.
The proposed road improvements will conduct future traffic that would otherwise be assigned
to existing roadways. This improvement will help minimize the rate at which increases in traffic
will result in lower Level of Service on existing facilities.
?' J bU
A
6

---I uL
M
>
tech
Im
1 use
i
i
Ilu
:111
im

? us
aR? el
G?\\asal
wee
au
Ilu
R-4748
,? su
A!
1
Q? use
C
?0 PROJECT VICINITY
h
u
?- l
- -- Te Wests Mi
C Topton hlotla 3
1
! NATIONAL 23
Kyle" 4,11
(s
ntah Aquone
o Wcyph Bow
Na 3385
f Frank lil p 14 Cullasa;a
19 64 s 7 28 Gneiss
l
A 64
? alfaad,K Springs . ; `: .??
23 z •arid.
` t'4 0 1 4 1 Dry ro1i
k•?
?,.Af?rPa. ,? Otto 7°, Lake. `
b d Sequa&ah
Norton 100 Ighlana_
.7 ? Scaly . 1?
a Au
_. _. ' lzu
trc
w
3 MA
i

?y North Carolina Department Of
Transportation
Project Development &
?• Environmental Analysis
MACON COUNTY
R-4748
SR 1660 TO SR 1662 SOUTH
OF US 441 ON NEW LOCATION
0 0.5 1.0
FIGURE 1
4w
c
O
V
C
V
'mod' 2
ti
? ¦C
Tom
. d'
O d"
Z
4
V N¦?¦
¦? O
?¦+
CL 0
Lp V/
r to
O co
U w
z Cl)
O
AOWI
Nr
??L?i.
v?
v Z`
cc cu
0 _0
Q O
ch U m
N C 00
ti
N m
W
? 9d
v
I J o r
w ? a ?..?
? V
P, ? ¦O
?; ?

. .
L
a
i

aga tJet
aa.
i f V J 8
`\g G
Ak
gEs
tea.
`
P
?boJ
d 4

?
° o

to `

?o
to
1

aG
G
a
?a
i
C Jy o
_ v
Y
ccv + J <o
ry ai
L
u. + y

J
?7 = o9eo?aYB Cteek
Cato
i

.? /CZ n
Y i iA d

0 U)

Ln
0
N
0
o-
E 7
1 .5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.5.1 PROJECT SETTING
The proposed project is located in the central part of Macon County. Macon County is bordered
to the south by the state of Georgia, to the west by Clay and Cherokee Counties, to the north by
Swain County, and to the east by Jackson County. Although the project is just south of the
Town of Franklin, it is not within Town limits.
The proposed roadway corridor is forested we
of the Little Tennessee River and pastureland
and open field east of the river. Figures 3
through 5 in Appendix A show environmental
features, topography, and floodplains in the
project area. In the vicinity of the project's
western terminus, where the proposed road wi
intersect with Siler Road the land is either
undeveloped or in residential use. There is a
Texaco station and mini storage facility near tl
eastern terminus where the proposed road will
intersect with Wiley Brown Road. Land use
along Wiley Brown Road is residential, with the
exception of The Children's Home, which is
located near the southern end of the project are
Significant new development is being planned for the area, primarily 1
first area of significant development is located north and south of US
Little Tennessee River. This is the planned location of a resort theme
and other activities. The resort will be modeled after the fictional tow
located north of US 64/23/441. Support services such as hotels, rest
will be developed south of US 64/23/441, and will be modeled to fit
Mayberry development.
The second area of development is located along
Siler Road. Proposed developments include a
regional library and a six-building campus for
Southwestern Community College that will be the
college's future main campus. Land is currently
being graded for these developments.
A developer has recently purchased land east of
Siler Road, across from the community college
and library site, and hopes to one day develop a
convention center there (Vander Woude, 2005).
According to the developer, the project vicinity is
approximately two hours from Atlanta, Georgia.
He anticipates the proposed convention center will
garner some of the Atlanta convention market.
ivate developers. The
23/441 west of the
with extensive retail
Mayberry and will be
ts, and retail shops
ith the style of the
library site viewed
osed madway near
wn Road

I II i' ICI III
Looking east across little Tennessee River at
proposed site of road mssing.
The northern end of Siler Road near the intersection of US 23/441 is in commercial use. A bank
was recently constructed there and an office park is under development. A meeting with the
developer revealed that the bank and office park will eventually employ approximately 155 to
180 people. He also plans to construct approximately 80 to 88 residential units near the bank.
The third area identified for significant development is on the east side of the Little Tennessee
River south of US 64/23/441. Information obtained at separate meetings with Macon County's
planner and the Mayberry developer indicates that property north and south of the proposed R-
4748 alignment at the eastern end of the corridor is for sale. Current indications are a big box
retailer is looking at the property for purchase and negotiations are in the "due diligence" stage.
Typically, with this type of development, additional commercial and service-related businesses
are built on out parcels. Presently, access to this site would require traffic to utilize the existing
SR 1701 signalized intersection with US 64/23/441.
1.5.2 HISTORY OF PROJECT
In the 2006-2012 TIP the proposed project is shown as having a right-of-way date of 2009 and a
construction date of 2010. Those dates have been accelerated to July 2008 for right-of-way and
September 2009 for construction.
1.6 !SYSTEM LINKAGE
1 .6.1 EXISTING ROAD NETWORK
US 64 is part of the state's Intrastate roadway network and is classified as a Major Arterial in the
Statewide Functional Classification System. It serves as the major east-west road along the
southern border of western North Carolina, extending west to Tennessee and east across North
Carolina to the coast. In the vicinity of the proposed project, US 64 is part of Strategic Highway
Corridor 2.
US 23/441 is also part of the state's
Intrastate system and serves as a major
north-south link in western North Carolina
between the Georgia state line to the south
and US 74 near Sylva to the north. US
23/441 is designated as Other Principal
Arterial in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. In the vicinity of the
proposed project, it is part of Strategic
Highway Corridor 4.
Siler Road is a local road that connects to US
23/441 west of the proposed project and US 641231441 at US 23/441.
terminates at US 23/441. Wiley Brown Road,
also a local road, connects to US 64/23/441 via Dowdle Mountain Road to the north, and
extends south connecting back to Dowdle Mountain Road again. There are no sidewalks near
the proposed project area.
12
1.6.2 MODAL INTERRELATIONSHIPS
1.6.2.1 RAILROADS
There are no railroads in the vicinity of the proposed project.
1.6.2.2 AIRPORTS
The nearest airport to the project area is Macon County Airport. It is located approximately
three miles northwest of Franklin. The airport is open to the public and has a service breakdown
of approximately 58 percent local general aviation, 33 percent transient general aviation, 4
percent air taxi, and 4 percent military (www.airnav.com).
1.6.2.3 TRANSIT
There is currently no fixed route transit system operated by Macon County or the Town of
Franklin. An interview with Kim Angel of the town's transportation department revealed that
the Town of Franklin is planning to provide fixed route bus services in the future. The town
plans to accommodate the Siler Road/Whey Brown Road area when the community college and
library open.
1.6.2.4 BICYCLE ACCOMMODATIONS
In the vicinity of the project US 64 is part of the Mountains to Sea NC Bike Route 2. The
Mountains to Sea route is approximately 700 miles long and extends from the western North
Carolina mountains to the Atlantic Ocean (NCDOT, Mountains to .Sea, North Carolina Bicycling
Highways). US 64 is also part of a local loop bicycle route that includes Franklin, Bryson City, and
Sylva (NCDOT, August 1992).
1.7 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
1.7.1 DEMOGRAPHICS
According to US Census Bureau statistics, Macon County grew by 26.9 percent from 1990 to
2000. The Town of Franklin grew by 21.5 percent during this same time period. The town's
website notes that the current population is approximately 3,600 persons, but doubles during the
spring, summer, and fall because of tourism. This increase in population provides an increased
demand on local roads and the need for goods and services.
The total population for Macon County in 2000 was estimated at 29,811 people. According to
the NC State Demographic website (http://demog.state.nc.us) Macon County's population is
projected to grow by 17.2 percent between 2000 and 2010, by 15.3 percent between 2010 and
2020, and by 12.6 percent between 2020 and 2030.
As shown in Table 1, Macon County and the Town of Franklin have few minorities compared
to statewide figures. In particular, there is a broad gap between county and town concentrations
of Black or African American persons compared to the state level.
13
Other than a few mobile homes along Siler Road that appeared to be in poor condition, no low-
income or minority communities were noted during a visit to the project area.
As indicated in Table 2, the median age for Macon County is approximately 10 years higher than
the state median age and the percentage of persons in the 20-44 years age group is lower in
Macon County and Franklin than this age group statewide. This may be indicative of younger
people leaving the area for better job opportunities in larger towns and cities and retirees finding
the area an attractive place to settle. As shown in Table 3, persons in Macon County and
Franklin rank lower in the Bachelor's Degree or Higher education level category than people
statewide.
't'able 1. Population by Race.
Population by Race North Macon Franklin
Carolina County
5,804,656 28,969 3,330
White alone
72.1% 97.2% 95.4%
1,737,545 357 69
Black or African American alone
21.6'% 1.2% 2.0%
99,551 84 11
American Indian or Alaskan Native
1.201o 0.3% 0.3`Y°
113,689 117 22
Asian
1.4% 0.4% 0.6%
Native Hawaiian & other Pacific 3,983 5 1
Islander <0.1% <0.1(yo <0.1 %
186,629 91 17
Other race
2.3% 0.3% 0.5%
103,260 188 40
Two or more races
1.3% 0.6`Y° 1.1%
8,049,313 29,811 3,490
Total
100'% 1000/) 100%
378,963 454 105
Hispanic or Latino of any race*
4.7% 1.5% 3.0%
Source: United States Census Bureau, Census 2000.
* F lispanic or Latino populations are not considered as a single racial group, but are included within all
other racial groups.
14
Table 2. Age Distribution
Age Cohort North Macon Franklin
Carolina County
2,193,630 6,652 815
19 years and under
27.2% 22.4% 23.4%
3,078,043 8,177 1,055
20-44 years
38.3% 27.4% 30.2%
1,808,862 8,319 801
45-64 years
22.5% 27.9% 23.0%
969,048 6,666 819
65 years and older
12.0% 22.3% 23.5%
Median age 35.3 45.2 42.3
Source: United States Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Table 3. l;ducational Status
North Macon Franklin
Carolina County
High School Graduate or Higher 78.1 % 77.3% 81.5%
Bachelor's Degree or Higher 22.5% 16.2% 15.9%
Source: United States Census Bureau, Census 2000.
1 .7.2 ECONOMY
The town of Franklin has the lowest median household income among the categories presented
in Table 4. This corresponds to the relatively high poverty level, at 20.9%. According to the
Macon County planner, four manufacturing plants in the area closed in the mid 1990s, resulting
in a loss of approximately 2,000 jobs.
15
Table 4. Income and Poverty Status
North Macon Franklin
Carolina County
Median Household Income (1999) $39,184 $32,139 $21,534
Persons Below Poverty Level 12.3% 12.6% 20.9%
Source: United States Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Historically, Macon County's economy was
based upon agriculture and the timber
industry, and then transitioned to
manufacturing. As noted above, several
manufacturing plants in the Franklin area
closed in the last decade. Macon County's
planner noted that some people who
previously worked in the manufacturing
industry have been able to transition to
construction work building second homes,
which is a strong market in the area.
The economy of Macon County relics heavily on tourism. As noted in Section 1.7.1, the Town
of Franklin's population doubles during the tourist season. The Macon County Recreation Master
Plan (Macon County and Haden Stanziale, September 13, 2005) lists major natural amenities of
the county as the Nantahala National Forest, the Appalachian Mountain Range, the Little
Tennessee River, and the Appalachian Trail. Visitors to the area take part in activities such as
hiking, fishing, mining for gems, rafting, and visiting arts and crafts shows. The Town of
Franklin is the county seat and is a center of history, heritage, and the mountain way of life in
western North Carolina. The town will celebrate its 150°i anniversary in 2005 (www.franklin-
chamber.com).
Table 5 shows that Macon County and Franklin are strong in Retail Trade, which reflects the
area's reliance upon tourism. The Construction category is also strong, reinforcing the county
planner's indication of the strong market for second homes. Isducation/Health/Social Services
ranks high in all areas studied.
Major industrial employers in the Franklin area include Caterpillar Industries, Whitley Products,
Zickgraf Industries, Duotech Services, and Tektone Manufacturing (www.franklin-
chamber.com). Lowe's Home Improvement, which is located on US 23/441 near Siler Road, is a
major employer in the vicinity of the proposed project.
16
Table 5. Employment by Industry
Sector North
Carolina Macon
County Franklin
Agriculture/Forestry/Mining 1.6% 2.6% 4.7%
Construction 8.2% 14.5% 13.2%
Manufacturing 19.7% 11.5% 7.6%
Wholesale Trade 3.4% 1.4% 1.6%
Retail Trade 11.5% 14.9% 14.0%
Transportation/Warehousing/Utilities 4.6% 2.9% 2.7%
Information 2.3% 1.8% 1.9%
Finance/ Insurance /Real l?state 6.0% 5.1% 5.6%
Professional/Scientific/Management/

Administrative
7.7%
7.2%
9.6%
Educational/Health/Social Services 19.2% 18.3% 24.6%
Arts/Entertainment/Accommodation/

Food Services
6.9%
9.7%
5.8%
Other Services 4.6% 6.4% 4.8%
Public Administration 4.1% 3.6% 3.8%
Source: United States Census Bureau, Census 2000.
In general, the county's unemployment rate over the last ten years has not fluctuated
dramatically on an annual basis (North Carolina Employment Security Commission,
www.ncesc.com). The average annual unemployment rate for Macon County in 2004 was 4.6
percent. The statewide rate for that year was 5.5 percent. The Macon County peak rate in 2004
was 6.0 percent in February, and the low rate was 3.4 percent in September. The most recent
figures available are for July 2005, which show the Macon County unemployment rate at 4.6
percent and the statewide rate at 5.9 percent.
I .B TRANSPORTATION PLANS
1 .6.1 NCDOT TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROI3RAM
The NCDOTT 2006-2012 Tran.iportation Improvement Program (TIP) lists the proposed project as R-
4748. There are no other TIP projects in the vicinity of the project.
17
1.8.Z THOROUGHFARE PLANS
An interview with Macon County's planner revealed that there are no transportation or
thoroughfare plans available for the project area. There are also no land use, comprehensive, or
zoning plans available.
The Southwestern Commission serves as the lead planning agency for the Rural Transportation
Planning Organization (RPO) (Southwestern Commission, www.regiona.org) serving Cherokee,
Clay, Graham, Macon, Jackson, and Swain Counties. According to Matt Roark, the RPO
Coordinator (Roark, personal communication), an annual Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy (CEDS) update lists current infrastructure needs across the region. Mr.
Roark said that the proposed project is not included in the document because the CEDS is
broad based and does not list specific projects.
1.9 ROADWAY CAPACITY
1.9.1 EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed project is a new location two-
lane roadway to connect Siler Road and Wiley
Brown Road. These two local routes connect
directly or through other local roads to US
64/23/441.
US 64/23/441 is a four-lane divided highway
with shoulders and a grass median. The speed
limit near the project area is 55 miles per hour
(mph). Two parallel bridges on US
64/23/441 cross the Little Tennessee River
north of the proposed project site.
A partial-clover interchange currently links US 23/441 and US 64/23/441 just north of the
study area. South of US 64/23/441 and northbound through the interchange, US 23/441 is a
partially divided four-lane roadway with shoulders. In the vicinity of the intersection with Siler
Road, there is a concrete median and turn lanes. The speed limit there is 45 mph.
Siler Road is a two-lane rural roadway with grass
shoulders. A signalized intersection provides access to
US 23/441 approximately 1,000 feet south of the US
64/23/441 interchange. Wiley Brown Road is also a
two-lane rural roadway with grass shoulders. There
are no speed limits posted. Dowdlc Mountain Road
has a signalized at-grade intersection on US
64/23/441. NCDOT Division 14 recently added this
temporary signal to address safety concerns associated
in particular with bus and other traffic traveling to and
from Macon Middle School on Wells Grove Road.
Dowdle Mountain Road is a two-lane rural roadway
18
Looking east at-mrs US 23/441 at Siler Road
Dowdle Mountain Road at intersection with
Jr/iley Brown Road (left).
with grass shoulders which serves as a collector for several local roads including Wiley Brown
Road and Wells Grove Road. There are no sidewalks near the proposed project area.
1.9.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The 2005 average daily traffic (All)) along US 64/23/441 between US 23/441 and Dowdle
Mountain Road is 22,000 vehicles per day (vpd) (see figure 6 in Appendix A). The ADT along
US 23/441 is 16,700 vpd north of US 64/23/441 and 21,300 south of US 64/23/441. Truck
traffic is approximately three percent along US 64/23/441 and one percent along US 23/441.
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure that characterizes the operational conditions
within a traffic stream and the perception of traffic service by motorists and passengers. The
Transportation Research Board's I lighway Capaczty Manual generally describes these conditions in
terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, and
comfort and convenience. Six levels are used, ranging from A to F. For roadways, LOS A
indicates no congestion while LOS F represents more traffic demand than road capacity and
extreme delays. The engineering profession generally accepts LOS D as a minimally acceptable
operating condition for signalized intersections.
I?xisting LOS in 2005 for the AM and PM peak hours was computed using Synchro traffic signal
software from Trafficware (Parsons Brinckerhoff, 2005). For this analysis, signal timing was
optimized at each location to provide a valid comparison with future operations. The average
intersection LOS results for existing conditions arc presented in Tables 6 and 7 for signalized
and unsignalized intersections, respectively. Note that specific approaches may operate better or
worse than the average intersection LOS shown.
't'able 6. 2005 I'?Ixisting AM & PM LOS (Signalized Intersections)

ns
Int
r
ti 2005
e
sec
o AM Peak PM Peak
US 441 @ US 641?13 Off ramp/ Franklin Plaza A A
US 441 @ SR 1660 (Siler Road) A A
US 64 @ SR 1701/ SR 1702 (Oak Forest Lane) C 13
19
Table 7. 2005 I-4xisting AM & PM LOS (Unsignalized Intersections)
Intersection & Critical Approach 2005
AM Peak PM Peak
SR 1158 (Womack Street) @ US 441 (P,B critical) C C
US 64 Off Ramp @ US 441 (WB and NB left critical) B B
SR 1687 (Allman Drive) @ US 441 (WB and E'B critical) C F
SR 1659 (Dowdle Mountain Road) @ SR 1701 (1?B critical) C B
Specific findings of 2005 intersection operations analysis are:
The three signalized intersections currently operate at acceptable levels of LOS C or
better.
The unsignalized intersection of SR 1687 (Allman Drive) at US 23/441 experiences LOS
F conditions during the PM peak period. The critical movement is the eastbound
movement on Allman Drive.
• All other unsignalized intersections operate acceptably in 2005.
1.9.3 PROJECTED CONDITIONS
The projected 2030 ADT on US 64/23/441 is based on background growth as well as
development projections. The background ADT is approximately 30,800 vpd and the specific
development in the area is expected to generate an additional 13,500 vpd along US 64/23/441,
resulting in a total projected ADT of 44,300 vpd along US 64/23/441 (see Figure 7 in Appendix
A). Truck traffic remains at three percent.
The background ADT on US 23/441 is approximately 23,400 vpd north of US 64/23/441 and
the specific development is expected to generate an additional 4,300 vpd in the area, resulting in
a total projected ADT of 27,700 vpd. South of US 64/23/441, US 23/441 has a background
ADT of 29,800 vpd and the specific development in the area is expected to generate an
additional 6,800 vpd. The result is a total projected ADT of 36,600 vpd. Truck traffic retrains at
one percent.
The 2030 No-Build LOS was evaluated for the AM and PM peak hours. Future signal timings
were optimized at each location. The average intersection LOS results for future No-Build
conditions are presented in Tables 8 and 9 for signalized and unsignalized intersections,
respectively. Note that specific approaches may operate better or worse than the average
intersection LOS shown.
20
I'able 8. 2030 No-Build AM & PM LOS (Signalized Intersections)

i
I 2030
ntersect
ons
AM Peak
PM Peak
US 441 @ US 64 I?B Off ramp/ Franklin Plaza A B
US 441 @ SR 1660 (Siler Road) I? I"
US 64 @ SR 1701 / SR 1702 (Oak Forest Lane) 1 ? 1;
t\ awf
l`
fable 9. 2030 No-Build AM & PM LOS (Unsignalized Intersections)

Intersection & Critical Approach 2030
AM Peak PM Peak
SR 1158 (Womack Street) @ US 441 (EB and WB critical) 1; F
US 64 Off Ramp @ US 441 (WB and NB left critical) C C
SR 1687 (Allman Drive) @ US 441 (1;B and WB critical) F F
SR 1659 (Dowdle Mountain Road) @ SR 1701 (FIB and WB critical) F F
Specific findings of 2030 intersection operations include:
• 'fhe signalized intersection of US 23/441 at Siler Road would operate at LOS F in both
the 2030 AM and PM peak periods under the No-Build scenario. Although formal
improvement options have not been analyzed, potential improvements would include
the provision of a southbound dual left turn lane on US 23/441 and westbound free
flow right lane to serve traffic entering and exiting the Siler Road development area
south of US 64/23/441.
• The signalized intersection of US 64/23/441 at llowdle Mountain Road/SR 1702 (Oak
Forest Lane) is projected to operate at LOS E in the 2030 AM and PM peak periods.
Although formal improvement options have not been analyzed, potential improvements
would include the provision of westbound dual left turn lanes on US 64/23/441 and
northbound dual left turn lanes on llowdle Mountain Road to serve traffic entering and
exiting the planned big box retail east of the Little "Tennessee River.
21
By 2030 three of the four unsignalized intersections under study will operate at LOS F
on the critical approach. Specific recommendations for geometric improvements, such as
turn bays or traffic signals, will be studied as part of the analysis of the Build scenario.
The unsignalized intersection of the westbound off ramp from US 64/23/441 at US
23/441 is projected to operate acceptably in 2030, primarily due to only one conflicting
movement, the northbound left turn, having to yield to opposing traffic.
1 .1 O ACCIDENT ANALYSIS
Traffic accident information was analyzed for several roads within the project area. Accident
data provided by the NCDOT is summarized below.
During the time period from June 1, 2002 to May 31, 2005 there were a total of eight accidents
on Siler Road from US 23/441 to the dead end. Six of the eight accidents occurred at the
intersection of Siler Road and US 23/441. There were no fatalities. The total crash rate was
1,525.45 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles. The 2001-2003 statewide crash rate for rural
secondary roads was 348.57 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles.
US 23/441 was analyzed from Allman Drive to the US 64/23/441 interchange for the time
period of June 1, 2002 to May 31, 2005. There were 35 accidents, with concentrations at Allman
Drive, and the two entrances to Franklin Plaza, which is located on US 23/441 across from Siler
Road and adjacent to the US 64/23/441 interchange. 't'here were no fatalities. The total crash
rate was 407.85 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles. In comparison, the 2001-2003 statewide
crash rate for rural United States roads was 133.06 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles.
During the time period from June 1, 2002 to May 31, 2005 there was one accident on Wiley
Brown Road from SR 1701 to Dowdle Mountain Road. There were no fatalities. The total crash
rate was 434.48 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles. As stated above, the 2001-2003 statewide
crash rate for rural secondary roads was 348.57 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles.
US 23/64/441 was analyzed from US 23/441 Business Interchange Ramps to SR 1701 /Oak
Forest Lane for the time period of June 1, 2002 to May 31, 2005. "There were a total of twelve
accidents, none of which included fatalities. Three accidents occurred at the double bridges that
cross the Little Tennessee River. Two accidents occurred at SR 1701 /Oak Forest Lane. The rest
were scattered throughout the studied section. The total crash rate was 41.27 crashes per 100
million vehicle miles. As previously noted, the 2001-2003 statewide crash rate for rural United
States roads was 133.06 crashes per 100 million vehicle miles.
1 .1 1 BENEFITS TO STATE, REOION, AND COMMUNITY
Current and future developments in the proposed project area will play a vital role in the
economic success of the community and region. New jobs associated with these developments
will help to relieve economic distress in the area. The proposed project is expected to enhance
economic growth and development in the project area, thereby favorably affecting the tax base.
In consideration of the planned growth for this area, this project will enhance the safety and
general welfare of regional residents and commuters by providing an alternative travel route for
the flow of employees, goods, services, and traffic.
22
It is important that actions taken in the area are timely and well-planned. This project will ensure
that appropriate access to educational facilities and development sites is provided, and that
traffic volume is properly managed.
23
APPENDIX A -REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING
INFORMATION
25
REFERENCES
AirNav.com. Macon County Airport, Franklin, North Carolina. www.airnav.com.
Angel, Kim. 2005. personal communication. 828-349-2565.
Franklin Chamber of Commerce. www.franklin-chamber.com.
Macon County. www.maconnc.or .
Macon County and Haden Stanziale. September 13, 2005. Macon County Reovation Master Plan.
North Carolina State Demographics. http://demog.state.nc.us.
North Carolina Department of 't'ransportation. Mountains to .S'ea, Nortli Carolina Bicycling 1 Iigl)ways.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. August 1992. Nantahala Area Road Improvements,
Project No. BIC 21-93 Alva Map.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program.
-,vww.ncdot.org.
North Carolina Employment Security Commission. www.nccsc.com.
Parsons Brinkerhoff. 2005. R-1748 Macon County };nvironmental Assessment 1 ra/ficAnalysis & Report
to Support Purpose & Need.
Roark, Matt. 11 / 14/05. personal communication, 828-488-9211, extension 3035.
Southwestern Commission. www.regiona.org.
't'own of Franklin. ww-,v.franklinnc.com.
United States Census Bureau. www.census.gov.
Vander Woudc, James. 2005. Personal communication.
Weiss, Martin H. and Roger Figura. 2003. A Provisional I ypolowy of Highway Economic Development
Projeds. Federal Highway Administration. www.fhwa.dot.gov.
K ? 9Y8$€
? Q g m a ? ?F€4?
s Z $ ? ? o?G ??s5
W O F 1
a g w 2 °i E
J r k?}y E E
C=a V ~ m O OI. z<V 4€ E? Q
G m V ?t 0? Q f J ?` <
W W s-:
O=ff >o w) Z q v? Fs g
V?? O 1I?? H C4 W~ 0. PC J a E A
C O O W 0 E o n ? pX O 15; E
Z W 7 U.W V M JU cTELL
J t?En
J !!
n ??.?J' r' .?-. ??, ?^A'S .I•, ;= '•• ,N 0[91 'L?._ `
s! 8T iv ? ?,
141
• _x-l / 5 ? ? spa . y + i ?w?•r:- d
?\ 71T / ?\ 'fey ;y? d, • • 4r , +°e•• ;?y 'If, k
y 7 • S? .? by 4a_:? •,tl
s C p
a
?' -/ .?/••+ X1991 bT ..• -•.6• ~i! ,
--a9t 'as
` Q i .. • +r
'' aass a"? Z99i'a
ISV
Z h
U.
?I: =? an ?? 5 !? ?L,? n =:•
o
'lis
?'? , y??? w• ril. A6N p Isl.
'as
a\; .'a+..,! ,fit.,/ fF. ...• s10
yl 4TH %!v
y4 a'f'?? h
a ?_`• `,?eE,sJ%' sr ?' Q N ?
v1P' 1
5 l ....Cai ssas. • .•W?
LO
/W
LL
UL
cz
a
O
O
LL
cz
N
0
0

D °D
0
can o
o 0
.? o
0
CD
90
Z
CD
(D
C2
T?T
D
4i G
a1 'If

n
0
'i
o ? O
(a) 0
(Stl t) Ito
(6S) SZ
q- JI Ii
C%NNw
892'
'd
W
0 J O?
(OS11Zt ? ? vJ ? (tOt)43I
4- Qal) GOS I I 4- (m t) L4S
(9I) Li I I ((S) ZS
aoa 444 iii -100
??
85 (r0) 55(7,1)
..
9SIC331 - o
? ooh 39 (30i)-?
V]
t1l
a

I? •
Owed •
?Q ' Tl

o ?

161

fJ'Q ?

O
?
I- lei

rt-
:a,:;
N
;n
A
A
0
0
rn
A
N
ti
W
O
O
a
A -4
v
SR1701 J 1 L
(fs) LZ
r- (cG) as z
r,

1
h?
V
.,J
?J
N
V
!w a
?? ? (tZl)9S b;o
L?? '4- (SIL)4GY
ro
t- (GO
4- (C4a) htS
„ 1502)
921) ) - 777(;-1))-? US 441
639 (. L
05 1 -?
I F lp
(pA?P.-
+h U
F' °J
v
I?
rt
t7
CJt
A
N
N
O
O
O

r a v

(I) f
5
,4 LIO

2(10) 1
23(17) -?
11(15)
c7 o C?
is (a9) -I ? I
1(1) -?
90 09) ..m e?
riiv s
N
;v
a
(3

A
A
0
0
rn
v
O
O
V
SR1702
tir+
I

ro
Mr
0
cn
cD
CD
m
x
to
a?
0
O
CD
N
? V
D m
o
N• ?
o 0
a
0
0
cD
90
Z
(D
(D
Q
0
D
(6c".

(Ora) ag
b (111-J;
mg 0"1.',)- t
r,? w
S flu)-? Pd?
/iN
J??

b ?

r,
00 r
a ? r
`? ? ?
(Z11) G9t
4-- (Ste 0 K.
(S± t) "T

000
119 (T t
37 (L'92)---*

?
134018)

En

rr? ? O
E=o
O N
?W
CD
I? •
Mood
. ;e a
N
a
8
0u's
.
h
14 4
4- ((-.41 Z) iiT Lq?? {9Q?} Gf t v ?1
000 lr6 (Zlg)_I 21(81)
,6(104) -? 1173067)
-?
106 (973)
932 Q27) -- ? ?? 115(339)
T39 656) fh ?
.A?
.ty
0
0
Q1
W
V1
O
O
Q
?a
.w
? 'h L
v u (Z30 uz
(I ON
SR1701 5U'?
.c (2))
15 (21)
o?
'h
C v
s
cD?
wr
'h
h n
\/ 1J
is r r 509)
-
o !?w3? Pj 210 (M)
v v q
u
N
(T
.a
ci`J
r
V/
co

0
a
.yA.
?o
to
t- (S) S
CS) ?
,41 Fl,
fa r 'h
r
1? h? L
v
T
,6
ON
ci
li
H
X
to
'o
f?
Q1
A
N
y
V
O
O

SR1702
ro
?tl
C`
??-(Owl) A}S
r'(tt}SI
tt US 441
?hu
vv
.0
U`
n?
Y
40
b b
rt. O
O G
?j O
1-d
O
N
c?
I?
Pf'
-r1
(B
C
CD
su
N
O
W
O
Z
0
W
Q
tv
0
0
3
CD
N
OLDS BEAU LOCATION INFORMATION
Rehearsal Places near Old Beau
Davis Bourne inn, Independence, VA, 276-773-9384
Website: http://www.dtvisboui-neinn.com/index.litm]
Email: info @davisbourneinn.com
27 miles from Olde Beau
Massage
Brenda Washington
146 Sparta Heights
Sparta, NC 28675
336-657-0528 Business hours made by appointment only. Located at Jodi's and the Wellness
Center.
Center for Energy Therapy
1048 Bullhead Road
Sparta, NC 28675-8851
336-372-5958
Offering Intergrated Energy Therapy (IEG). EEG is massage from "the inside out."
Lodp,in?
Alleg,hany Inn
341 North Main Street in Sparta
Sparta, NC 28675
888-372-2501 or 336-372-2501
website: http://www.alleghanyinn.com/
Email: [e-mail]
40 rooms, $46-$66
Bluffs Lodge
45385 Blue Ridge Parkway
Laurel Springs, NC 28644
336-372-4499 $80
Located at milepost 241 on the Blue Ridge Parkway, this affordably charming hillside lodge with
sweeping views of surrounding mountains. Outdoor patio with fireplace.
Website: htip://foreverloclaina.com/Ioclein,,,.cfm?Propert 'Key=74
High Meadows Inn
P.O. Box 222
Roaring Gap, NC 28668
336-363-2221
email: [e-mail]
$54-110
Website: http://nikolasathi!hmeadows.com/
Photography
http://www.studioroxic.com/bridal portraits.htm
emailed for pricelist- more artistic
http://www.caudiIlsplioto,-,rapliy.com/
pricelist online
http://sparta-nc.com/presnells/
not as impressive
Honeymoon
St. Lucia
littp://www.stonefieldvillas.com/index.html#Hcadline
Superior $190/night or 1330/week ($1600 on website extra $270?)
Deluxe $250/night or 1750/week (2250 extra 500)
http://www.oasismaripot.com/index.html
Private Sea House $1505/week
Ocean Cottage (apartment) $1085/week
w'
o?0? w p r??pc
f
o IF;R? <
MEMORANDUM
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
November 22, 2005
To: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director, PDEA, NCDOT
From: Brian L. Wrenn, Transportation Permitting Unit, NCDWQ &10
Subject: Request for Scoping Comments for the Proposed Connector of SR 1600 (Siler Road) to
SR 1662 (Wiley Brown Road) in Macon County, TIP Project No. R-4748.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the
U.S., including wetlands. Based on a preliminary review of the project study area, tributaries, wetlands
and riparian buffers associated with the following named streams could be impacted by the proposed
project:
Stream Name River Basin Stream Classification Stream Index Number
Little Tennessee River Little Tennessee C 2-(1)
Cullasaja River Little Tennessee B; Tr 2-21-(5.5)
DWQ has the following comments:
Project Specific Comments:
1. Any temporary or permanent impacts that would be associated with this project could potentially
require a 404 permit and a 401 Water Quality Certification. The Army Corps of Engineers will make
the determination for the type of permit required. DWQ would issue a corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification for the impacts based on a complete and accurate application.
2. Cullasaja River are Class B; Tr waters of the State. DWQ recommends that the most protective
sedimentation and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of turbidity violations in
trout waters. In addition, all disturbances within trout buffers should be conducted in accordance with
NC Division of Land Resource and NC Wildlife Resources Commission requirements.
3. The scoping notice indicates that the purpose of the project is to stimulate economic development.
Using economic development as the project purpose will place greater importance on the secondary
and cumulative impacts analysis. DWQ will request that an agreement between the DWQ, the Town
of Franklin, Macon County, and other resource and regulatory agencies be developed to plan a growth
strategy for the area to reduce the secondary and cumulative impacts associated with this project.
4. DWQ requests that the crossing structure over the Little Tennessee River be a bridge. The Little
Tennessee River is a critical wildlife habitat for many threatened and endangered species. If possible,
bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
5. The NC DOT should strictly adhere to sediment and erosion control Best Management Practices as
described for High Quality Waters entitled "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] /FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Eaual Oooortunity/Affirmative Action Fmnlover - 50% Rer:vnled/10% Post Consumer Now
November 22, 2005
Page 2
6. Stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly into streams or surface waters. Stormwater
should be directed in to site-appropriate control measures such as, grassed swales, pre-formed scour
holes, vegetated buffers, etc.
General Comments:
1. DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work within the stream
and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by
bridges allows for human and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules 115A NCAC
2H. 0506(b)(6) 1, mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single
perennial stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to
replace appropriate lost functions and values. In accordance with the Environmental Management
Commission's Rules 115A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3)1, the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may
be available for use as stream mitigation. A discussion of potential mitigations strategies should be
included in the EA.
3. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater should be directed
across the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour
holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to NCDOT Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters
4. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream. Concrete is
mostly made up of lime (calcium carbonate) and when in a dry or wet state (not hardened) calcium
carbonate is very soluble in water and has a pH of approximately 12. In an unhardened state concrete
or cement will change the pH of fresh water to very basic and will cause fish and other
macroinvertebrate kills.
5. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be
implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be maintained regularly,
especially following rainfall events.
6. Bare soil should be stabilized through vegetation or other means as quickly as feasible to prevent
sedimentation of water resources.
7. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
8. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
9. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
10. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags, rock
berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent excavation
in flowing water.
w
November 22, 2005
Page 3
11. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from
leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road closure.
If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and located to avoid wetland
impacts, to minimize the need for clearing, and to avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will
be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-
year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The area
should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in
riparian areas. If the area that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to
wetlands. If successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn 919-733-5715.
pc: Angie Pennock, USACE Asheville Field Office
Mike Parker, NCDWQ, Asheville Regional Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Marella Buncick, USFWS
File Copy
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPE M'
( iovr:ItNOIt
SI:('Itli'I'ARY
Cynthia Van Der Wicle
N. C. Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
RI Environmental Assessment: Connect SR 1660 (Siler Road) to SR 1662 (Viley Brown Road)
on approximately 0.6 mile of new location and construct new crossing over Little Tennessee
River, Macon County, TIP Project No. R-4748.
Dear Ms. Van Der Wiele:
The North Carolina Department of'T'ransportation (NCDO"I) is initiating an environmental study of
the referenced project. The project is located just south of the town of Franklin and US 64/23/441
(Figure 1). The NCDOT has retained Mulkey Engineers and Consultants to prepare an Environmental
Assessment pursuant to the National L?nvironmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 USC 4321 et
seq.). The project is programmed in the NCDOT 2006-2012 'T'ransportation Improvement Program
("ITP).
The project is intended to stimulate local economic development by providing access to proposed
commercial and institutional projects and future projects. The following provides additional details on
the project area:
October 24, 2005
• The project is located in the Little Tennessee River Basin in subbasin 04-04-01.
• The stream classification for the Little Tennessee River in the project area is "C" and the
stream index number is 2-(1).
• The project is located in NCIJOT Division 14.
• There are no nearby NCDOT TIP projects.
• A GIS-level screening showed no hazardous material sites in the project area.
• The following species are listed as 'T'hreatened or Endangered for Macon County:
Common Name
Bog Turtle
Indiana bat
Spotfn chub
Appalachian clktoe
Little-wing pcarlymussel
Small-whorled pogonia
Virginia spiraca
Scientific Name
Clean yqs n1uhlenher?ii
Myotl.r Jvdaks
CyprineIla (= I Tyhop-h) monacha
Alastniidonta raveneliana
Pews f,bula
Isolria medeoloides
,Spiraea vi?giniana
Status
't'hreatened (S/A)
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
l'hreatened
't'hreatened
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEEISITE: WWW. DOH. DOT. STATE. NC. US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
NCDOT TIP No. R-4748
Macon County
The purpose of this letter is to initiate coordination with federal, state, and local agencies and other
interested groups. A formal project scoping meeting will be held on November 15, 2005 at 10:30 a.m.
in Room 470 (Project Development and Environmental Analysis conference room). If you are unable
to attend the meeting, please submit your comments on project-area conditions or issues of special
concern in writing to the NCDOT by November 23, 2005.
If further information regarding the proposed action or the environmental analysis process is required,
please contact Undrea Major, NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch at
919-733-7844, Ext. 212, or by email at [e-mail].
Environment4`Mvlanagement Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
GJT/Isw
cc: project file
z
0
z
Q
00 ?
Z
? -
¦
ON
Z :)
L6
El (3
W
7 =
0 ?.
CL 13
aN
p N
HW
O
0 ?
L
z
0
a^
W
?o
N
cn

N
0
W-
0
co U
c
v

c in 2 cr

?a
W
14 z
z J 0
W []
19 W
aL

l

0
1
N3
i0 O
\ Q'
CO)
z

d

m
?
a

a
a so
Y I Y
J N
y ?T)
iT

J )

Y

% W
? 1 u
O O

ebb S /£Z m
o-
N _
O
o-