R-2822B

„a STATEo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
February 19, 2007
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: Meeting Participants
r
FROM: Wilson Stroud, Project Planning Engine
Project Development and Environmental ysis Branch
SUBJECT: Minutes of Concurrence Point #1 Meeting for NC 143,
from the Cherohala Skyway to NC 143 Business, Graham
County, Federal Aid Project STP-1127(1), State Project
8.2930301, WBS Element 34508.1.1, TIP Project R-2822 B
The Concurrence Point #1 meeting for TIP Project R-2822 B was held in the
Transportation Building BoardRoom (Room 150) on Tuesday, January 23, 2007. The
meeting was held to discuss and achieve concurrence on'the purpose and need of the
project and the project study area. The following persons attended the meeting:
David Baker U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville
Jake Riggsbee Federal Highway Administration
Chris Militscher U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Marella Buncick U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (via videoconference)
Karen Compton U. S. Forest Service
Harold Draper Tennessee Valley Authority (via videoconference)
Tyler Howe Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians (via teleconference)
Marla Chambers N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Brian Wrenn N. C. Division of Water Quality
Sarah McBride State Historic Preservation Office
Amy Simes NCDENR, Office of the Secretary, Transportation Liaison
Joel Setzer NCDOT, Division Engineer (via teleconference)
Jim Speer NCDOT, Roadway Design Unit
John Lansford NCDOT, Roadway Design Unit
John Frye NCDOT, Structure Design Unit
Don Moore NCDOT, Geotechnical Unit
Sarah Smith NCDOT, Transportation Planning Branch
Tammye Davis NCDOT, Office of Environmental Quality
Mark Staley NCDOT, Roadside Environmental Unit
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
Carla Dagnino
Kris Dramby
Mary Pope Furr
Steve Gurganus
Tim Gardiner
Jamille Robbins
Teresa Hart
James Bridges
Zahid Baloch
Marshall Edwards
April Johnson
Angela Sanderson
Michael Wray
Wilson Stroud
NCDOT, PDEA Natural Environment Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Natural Environment Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Human Environment Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Human Environment Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Human Environment Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Human Environment Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
NCDOT, PDEA Western Planning Unit
Wilson Stroud opened the meeting at approximately 3:00 p.m. by welcoming the
participants and noting the four participants attending via teleconference and
videoconference. He then asked each participant to introduce himself or herself.
Following the introductions, Wilson presented a Power Point presentation that included
slides showing: meeting agenda and goals, project description, vicinity map, project
history and schedule, existing conditions, photos taken along the project, traffic
projections, crash history, environmental features, proposed purpose and need statement,
and proposed study area. During and following the Power Point presentation, the
following topics listed below were discussed:
Posted Speed Limit
The "Existing Conditions" section of the packet distributed prior to the meeting (Item #7)
indicated the speed limit along the project ranges from 45 to 55 mph and that five curves
have advisory speed limits of 20 or 30 mph. During his presentation, Wilson noted that
the speed limit along the project actually ranges from 35 to 45 mph and that three curves
have advisory speeds of 20 or 30 mph.
Existing Typical Section
The "Proposed Improvements" section of the packet (Item #3) indicated the proposed
improvements west of West Buffalo Creek will consist of resurfacing, widening the
pavement to 22 feet, regrading the shoulders, and replacing guardrail as needed. During
his presentation, Wilson noted the existing pavement width west of West Buffalo Creek
is actually 22 feet and that improvements within that section of the project will consist of
resurfacing, regrading the shoulders, and replacing or installing new guardrail, but no
pavement widening.
Page 2 of 10
Cherohala Skyway Designation as a National Scenic Byway
Sarah McBride asked when the adjacent Cherohala Skyway was designated as a National
Scenic Byway. Joel Setzer responded that it received that designation when that section
of NC 143 was dedicated and opened to traffic in 1996.
Crash Rates - NC 143, the Cherohala Skyway, and "The Tail of the Dragon"
Karen Compton asked if the crash rate along the project has been compared with the
crash rate along the adjacent section of NC 143 to the west, known as the Cherohala
Skyway. Wilson responded that he has not compared the crash rates for those two
facilities, but that he would do so. Karen also indicated she feels the crash rates on the
project are related mainly to motorists exceeding the posted and advisory speed limits.
Marella Buncick asked whether we have obtained crash rates along "The Tail of the
Dragon", a nearby section of US 129 that attracts motorcyclists from all over the country.
(NCDOT has not obtained those crash rates as part of this study.) Karen noted that "The
Tail of the Dragon" follows nearby US 129 and that it does not follow any portion of NC
143 or the Cherohala Skyway. ("The Tail of the Dragon" follows US 129 in Graham and
Swain Counties, North Carolina and in Blount County, Tennessee. It begins at the
Cheoah Dam in Graham County and ends near at Tabcat Creek in Blount County, a
distance of 14 miles.)
Tribal Lands (Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians)
Tyler Howe noted that, in addition to the tribal lands Wilson identified near the east end
of the project during his presentation, other tribal lands are located along NC 143 near the
west end and in the middle of the project. Tyler noted those lands appear in Figure 3 of
the handout, but are not identified as "tribal lands". (Those lands are identified in Figure
3 as, proceeding from west to east, parcels 482, 364, 477, 373, 17, 93, and 91.)
Joel noted the Snowbird community relies heavily upon NC 143 and encouraged Tyler
comment on the project from the standpoint of that community.
Tyler reiterated that the tribal lands shown in Figures 2 and 3 are not the only tribal lands
within the project limits. He noted NC 143 traverses through the heart of the Snowbird
community and that his main concern is with the portions of the project that adjoin the
tribal lands. He noted there is great potential for archaeological resources on those lands,
and he asked that we address potential cultural resource impacts as part of our study.
Tourist Traffic
Marla Chambers noted the section of NC 143 between Robbinsville and Tellico Plains,
Tennessee, as well as other area routes (including "The Tale of the Dragon", as noted
above), are marketed nationally as challenging and scenic routes for motorcyclists. She
expressed concern that the project could cause some motorcyclists to travel elsewhere, if
the challenging and scenic qualities of NC 143 are eliminated.
Page 3 of 10
U. S. Forest Service Issues
Karen noted that approximately 70 percent of the project is bordered by U. S. Forest
Service land. She requested that visual impacts on those lands be considered during the
CSS process. Jim Speer responded that visual impacts will be addressed.
FERC Coordination
Marella mentioned that coordination with FERC or the Alcoa Corporation may be
required. She noted that Alcoa has recently performed relicensing work in the project
vicinity and that there is a shoreline management plan for Santeetlah Lake.
Lead Federal Agencies
Tyler asked whether federal funds would be used on the project and, if so, which agency
would be the lead agency. Wilson responded that the project is federally funded and that
the USACE and the USDOT (FHWA) would be the lead agencies, which Jake Riggsbee
confirmed.
Section 106 Issues
Sarah McBride asked about the presence and age of any structures associated with the
fish hatchery located on the south side of NC 143 east of SR 1115. Wilson responded
that structures are present at the hatchery, but he does not know the ages of those
structures.
Steam and Water Quality Issues
Sarah McBride noted the project crosses five major streams and asked if bridge
replacement is proposed at each crossing. Wilson responded that we anticipate the two
existing bridges (at West Buffalo Creek and Snowbird Creek) will be retained and that
the existing culverts at the other crossings will be retained and extended. He noted that
additional guidance will be obtained from the Hydraulics Unit regarding those stream
crossings (the Bridge Maintenance and Structure Design Units will also be consulted, as
needed).
Purpose and Need, Proposed Typical Section, and Context Sensitive Solutions
The purpose and need statement as presented in the information packet that was sent to
the team members and NCDOT staff prior to the meeting was as follows:
The purpose of this project is to improve safety along NC 143 by
constructing wider travel lanes and shoulders and by improving the
horizontal alignment, thereby providing a safer facility with a design
more typical of "NC" routes.
Page 4 of 10
Wilson sent the following revised purpose and need statement via e-mail to the team
members and NCDOT staff on January 22, 2007 (the day before the meeting):
The purpose of this project is to provide an improved facility that
meets current design standards for NC routes.
Brian Wrenn noted the differences between the original purpose and need statement sent
out as part of the merger packet and the revised statement. Wilson explained that he had
revised the statement to avoid prescribing a specific solution.
Brian asked whether NCDOT is anticipating any realignment of the existing road if the
"improve existing facility" alternative is selected. James Bridges responded that if the
existing facility is widened, portions of it will need to be realigned if the design speed is
to be improved. John Lansford added that approximately 50 percent of the existing road
will have to be rebuilt if the existing road is widened, and Jim Speer noted that retaining
walls may be considered in some areas to reduce impacts.
Brian questioned whether the proposed purpose and need statement would allow us to
widen the existing road for the entire length of the project. Wilson responded that it
would, reiterating that much of the existing road would need to be rebuilt to achieve a
more desirable design speed.
Karen Compton asked for clarification as to the realignment of the existing road that
would be required under the "improve existing facility" alternative. John Lansford
responded that under that alternative, only about half of the existing road would remain in
its current location if a design speed of 35 mph is proposed. John noted that although
only three curves have advisory reduced speed postings, many more do not meet the
requirements of a reasonable design speed. (Since the meeting, John has reported that the
proposed design speed is 30 mph rather than 35 mph.)
Brian asked about the phrase "design standards for NC routes" that is included in the
revised purpose and need statement. John Lansford responded that there are no design
standards for NC routes; instead, design standards are prescribed for arterial, collector,
and local routes. Wilson noted that NC 143 is a rural major collector. John noted the
proposed typical section was selected to match up with the design of the adjoining section
of NC 143 to the west (the Cherohala Skyway), which has a 35-mph design speed and 1I-
foot lanes.
It was asked if there are design standards for scenic byways. Jim Speer noted that there
are no standards for scenic byways, but noted that context sensitive solutions (CSS) will
be considered in the planning and design of the project. Clarification of the use of CSS
was then requested. Jim explained that CSS is a FHWA guide that calls for consideration
of the environmental context of a project during design, including such design
components as lane and shoulder widths. Jim further noted that both AASTO standards
and CSS guidelines will be followed for this project.
Page 5 of 10
Chris Militscher asked for clarification as to the design standards for shoulder width for
rural collectors. John Lansford responded that he believes those standards call for 6-foot
shoulders. (Since the meeting, John has reported that AASHTO standards call 12-foot
travel lanes and 8-foot useable shoulders, based upon the projected traffic volumes.).
Karen asked whether the proposed 22-foot pavement and 6-foot shoulders are in keeping
with the concept of CSS. Jim responded that this would need to be considered in the CSS
evaluation process.
Marella Buncick questioned whether including the phrase "meets design standards, " as
stated in the revised purpose and need statement, would lock us into a design that (1) may
be excessive for this road and (2) may later limit our options for CSS. Wilson suggested
noting in the purpose and need statement that CSS will be considered during project
design.
Chris indicated he preferred the initial purpose and need statement, noting that the
handout made a good case for the safety benefits of the project. He also noted that not all
the team members are familiar with AASHTO standards and CSS guidelines. He feels it
may be impracticable for us to meet those standards along the entire project, and he noted
he does not want us to be locked into alternatives that call for improvements that may not
be permittable.
John Lansford explained that CSS is not a separate set of standards; instead, it is a
method of using AASHTO or NCDOT "3-R" (Resurfacing, Restoration, and
Rehabilitation) design standards to provide a better fit with the environment.
Wilson re-read the initial purpose and need statement. James Bridges indicated he did
not feel that statement locks us into any specific standards, alternatives, or improvements.
Chris noted that he would have trouble with a statement that mentions design standards.
He expressed his concern that if we adopt a statement that includes "design standards",
and it later turns out we are not able to achieve those standards in sensitive areas, we
could be at a deadlock.
James asked if all would concur with the initial purpose and need statement (the version
included in the original packet).
Marella suggested using the original statement, but revising it to refer to scenic byways
rather than to NC routes.
Marla explained she normally supports most horizontal alignment improvements, but
noted her concern with such improvements for this project. She feels most motorists who
travel NC 143 expect it to have curves, given the mountainous terrain. She reiterated that
many of the tourists who travel the road do so to experience the challenging alignment.
She asked that we determine what the crash rate would be if the motorcycle crashes were
taken out of the analysis. She feels if we change the alignment very much, environmental
impacts would be much greater. Marla suggested that we word the statement in such a
Page 6 of 10
way that retaining 100 percent of the existing alignment and simply widening the
pavement and shoulders could be an option.
Wilson responded that NCDOT is obligated to look at the cause of the crashes and to take
appropriate corrective measures to reduce the likelihood of those crashes, given that the
crash rates for the project exceed both the statewide and critical rates. He agreed to
determine what the crash rate would be if the motorcycle crashes were excluded.
Joel Setzer indicated he feels most of the tourists travelling on NC 143 are doing so to
reach the Cherohala Skyway and they are not necessarily travelling on this section of road
for its scenic value. He does not feel improving the alignment of NC 143 would
discourage tourists from travelling that route, and he noted there are other nearby sections
of roads with challenging alignments. He noted the main points of interest to tourists
within the project limits are the Nantahala National Forest and Snowbird Creek.
John Lansford noted this section of NC 143 differs from the Cherohala Skyway in that it
serves local traffic, as well as tourist traffic. He noted this section of NC 143 serves a
mixture of traffic, including school buses, service trucks, local residents, and tourists.
Marella explained that she is not opposed to some realignment of NC 143. She is
concerned, however, that the revised purpose and need statement, which mentions design
standards, would bind us to improvements that may not be permittable by all of the
agencies (for example, the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service). She expressed her desire for us to keep our options open. Marla
concurred with Marella's observations.
Brian recognized the need to widen and realign at least some portions of NC 143 to
improve safety, but noted the potential for acidic rock in the project area and the negative
impacts acidic rock can have on aquatic communities. He emphasized that we should
accommodate the "widen existing" alternative in selecting a purpose and need statement.
Chris suggested that the purpose and need statement be revised to include improving the
horizontal alignment, if that can be done without incurring major impacts to the
environment.
James revised the statement on the Power Point slide to read more like the statement
included in the original merger package, but adding the word "possibly" before
"improving"and changing "NC routes" to "scenic byways". Karen expressed concern that
the new suggesting wording could rule out certain options, and she noted that she feels
the revised wording still tends to prescribe a solution. Wilson noted that detailed
discussion of the alternatives to be studied will be addressed at the next concurrence point
meeting (CP #2).
Teresa Hart asked Karen to clarify her concerns with the most recently suggested version
of the statement. Karen explained that she feels safety is the overall goal and that the
original statement and the most recently suggested one both go too far in offering
solutions. Sarah McBride indicated she agrees with Karen and suggested that "by
constructing wider travel lanes and shoulders and by improving the horizontal alignment"
Page 7 of 10
be removed from the statement. Chris further suggested that the second reference to
safety be removed, noting its redundancy.
Jim reiterated that there are no set standards for scenic byways. Joel suggested
referencing the Cherohala Skyway (which was designed using AASHTO standards) in the
statement rather than scenic byways. Karen expressed concern with NC 143 being
improved to match the typical section of the Cherohala Skyway. Joel responded that he
feels NCDOT's intent in placing the project in the TIP, based upon input received from
local officials and residents, was to improve NC 143 to standards similar to those used for
the Skyway. Jake indicated 11-foot lanes, the width provided on the Skyway, are the
absolute minimum lane widths that FHWA will allow. Jim agreed, noting 11-foot lanes
are proposed, even considering CSS guidelines.
Sarah McBride suggested including "consideration of CSS" in the purpose and need
statement, and Teresa agreed. James revised the statement to read:
The purpose of this action is to improve safety along NC 143 using
context sensitive solutions.
Joel asked if this statement would restrict us from considering new location alternatives.
Everyone agreed it would not. The above purpose and need statement was adopted.
Project Study Area
Marella asked for clarification of the TIP project description, noting the references in the
TIP to Sections A and B. Wilson and Joel explained that R-2822 A called for intersection
improvements, minor realignment, and guardrail work on NC 143 from south of SR 1115
to north of SR 1125 (near the Snowbird community), a distance of 0.7 mile. The project
was processed under State Miminum Criteria guidelines, and construction was completed
in November 1996.
Wilson described the proposed project study area, which was shown in Figure 3, on the
aerial photographs included in the merger packets, and on the aerial photographs
displayed at the meeting. He noted that the shown proposed study area would allow the
study of new location alternatives within the eastern portion of the project, where existing
NC 143 follows a more sinuous course.
Joel asked John Lansford to discuss the existing horizontal alignment and typical section
west of West Buffalo Creek in more detail. (Within this portion of the project, NC 143
consists of a 2-lane, 22-foot pavement with 6-foot grassed shoulders. East of the West
Buffalo Creek, NC 143 consists of a 2-lane, 18-foot pavement with 1-4 foot grassed
shoulders.) John explained that for the portion of the project west of West Buffalo Creek,
only resurfacing, guardrail replacement and installation, and shoulder grading are
proposed. He noted that design exceptions would likely be needed within this segment
due to the two horizontal curves with advisory speed limits of 30 mph. John noted that if
those curves were improved to meet a 35-mph design, impacts to adjacent properties
(including tribal properties) would. likely be greater.
Page 8 of 10
Joel suggested the possibility of processing the portions of the project west and east of
West Buffalo Creek separately, given the distinction between the existing conditions (and
therefore between the proposed improvements) proposed for those two segments. He
feels this would reduce the amount of study needed for the segment to the west, thus
saving time and money. Joel indicated he will look into this possibility. Teresa asked if
the project could be split during this meeting, or if it should occur during the CP #2
meeting. Joel asked if the presence of the West Buffalo Creek bridge would impact the
possible project split. John Lansford responded that it would not, since the bridge is
expected to be retained. Marla asked for verification of the existing typical section along
the western segment, and Wilson confirmed that it has 11-foot lanes and 6-foot grassed
shoulders.
James asked if anyone objected to the proposed study area, noting that it could be revised
at a future date if the project limits are changed for the possible split at West Buffalo
Creek. Chris responded that for other projects, the project study areas have been revised
later in the merger process based upon further development of the alternatives. Chris
suggested that the study area statement be revised to include the date shown on Figure 3
(December 2006). He also requested that the date of Figure 3 be included in the meeting
minutes.
Sarah McBride asked if the shown study area replicates the scoping done in 2001.
Wilson responded that the study area does include the new location alternatives that have
been studied and discussed with the U. S. Forest Service.
Tyler requested that we continue to consider the impact of the project on tribal lands, and
he requested clarification of the proposed improvements west of West Buffalo Creek.
Wilson explained that the portion of the project west of West Buffalo Creek will involve
less work than the portion to the east and, therefore, it may be preferable to study that
segment separately. Wilson also noted that if the project is split into two separate
projects at West Buffalo Creek, Division 14 would likely perform the portion to the west.
The following study area statement was adopted:
The proposed study area is variable in width and is shown in attached
Figure 3 (dated December 2006).
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4:45 p.m.
Adopted Purpose and Need and Project Study Area Statements:
• Purpose and Need: The purpose of this action is to
improve safety along NC 143 using context sensitive
solutions.
• Proiect Study Area: The proposed study area is variable in width
and is shown in attached Figure 3 (dated December 2006).
Page 9 of 10
Additional Agency Comments
Prior to the meeting, Bill Gibson, the Executive Director of the Southwestern RPO,
provided the following comments on the project:
"Nonetheless, the Southwestern RPO is very familiar with the subject
project (R-2822 B, NC 143 Graham County).
We are very aware of the self-evident need for a safer, straighter, more
motorist-friendly connection from the Cherohala Parkway into
Robbinsville. The economies of Robbinsville, Graham County and
Southwestern NC would benefit.
I am confident that the Southwestern RPO would/will support this
initiative."
Note: Please contact Wilson Stroud at 919-733-7844, extension 310, if you have any
questions or comments regarding these minutes.
JWS
Attachments: CP#1 concurrence forms (3 sheets)
Figure 3 - Project study area
Cc: Jamie Wilson, NCDOT, Division Construction Engineer
Dewayne Sykes, NCDOT, Roadway Design Unit
David Chang, NCDOT, Hydraulics Unit
Missy Dickens, NCDOT, PDEA Staff Engineer
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT, PDEA Human Environment Unit
Topsy Skinner, PDEA Concurrence Meeting Coordinator
Page 10 of 10
SECTION 404 / NEPA MERGER INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POINT 1 : PURPOSE AND NEED
AND STUDY AREA DEFINED
Proiect Title: NC 143 improvements, from the Cherohala Skyway to NC 143 Business West of
Robbinsville, Graham County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1127(1); State Project No.
8.2930301, WBS Element.34508. 1. 1, TIP Project No. R-2822 B
Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action: The purpose of this action is to improve safety
along NC 143 using context sensitive solutions.
Study Area: The proposed study area is variable in width and is shown in attached Figure 3
(Dated December 2006).
The Merger Process Team met on January 23, 2007 and concurred with the Purpose and
Need and Study Area for the proposed improvements to NC 143.
USACE - a o 7
David aker Date
USEPA --- l J 2.3 ?0 7
Christopher A. Mili`tscher Date
NCDWQ 4?
Brian Wrenn D to
FHWA Gt._ ?G?4?.23/??0
Jake Riggsbee, P.E. Date
USFWS 4A
rella Buncick Da
NCWRC 1<4 k 040 144441 (-Z-'v7
Marla J. C bers Date
SHPO 1 23 a/ THPO
' Sarah McBride Date
USFS
TVA
Tyler Howe Date
Karen Compton Date Harold Draper Date
NCDO 1-23-0 7
??ilson Stroud Date
Abstaining Agencies
Name A enc Date

01/24/2007 13:48 NC DOT PDEA 4 918284882462 NO.522
SECTION 4041 NEPA MERGER INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONC'U'RRENCE POINT 1: PURPOSE AND NEED
AND STUD'Y' AREA DEFINED
Project Title: NC 143 improvements, from the Cherohala Skyway to NC 143 Business West of
Robbinsville, Graham County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1127(1), State Project No.
8.2930301, WBS Element 34508.1.1, TIP Project No. R-2822 B
Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action: The purpose of this action is to improve safety
along NC 143 using context sensitive solutions.
Study Area: The proposed study area is variable in width and is shown in attached Figure 3
(Dated December 2006).
The Merger Process Team met on January 23, 2007 and concurred with the Purpose and
Need and. Study Area for the proposed improvements to NC 143.
USAGE ??7
David a -.4 to
USEPA? l •Z3 ?0 7
Christopher A. Militscher Date
NCDWQ
Brian Wrenn D to
--L4?
SBY0
'vSarub McBride Date
USFS
IrU Compton Date
NCDO
Icon Stroud Date
D02
FPIWA / VG?4 l ?3? ?o -7
Jake Riggsbee, P.I+ Date
USFWS
Marellu Huncick Date
NCWRC
Marla J. Cl rbers Date
TI?PO y =Tc., - 07
y Howe Date
TVA
Abs_ ing Ass? enctes
Name Auen Date
Harold Draper
Date
01/24/2007 13:49 NC DOT PDEA 4 918656323451 NO.523
SECTION 404 / NEPA MERGER INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POINT 1: PUkPOSE AND NEED
AND STUDY AREA DEFINED
Project Title: NC 143 improvements, from the Cherohala Skyway to NC 143 Business West of
RobbinsAlle, Graham County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1127(1), State Project No.
8.2930301, WES Element 34508.1.1, TIP Project No. R-2822 B
PurRose avid Need of the Proposed Action: The purpose of this action is to improve safety
along ITC 143 using context sensitive solutions.
Study Area: The proposed study area is variable in width and is shown in attached Figure 3
(Dated December 2006).
The Merger Process Team met on January 23, 2007 and concurred with the purpose and
Need and Study Area for the proposed improvements to NC 143.
Ania&-J-ft-
USAGE '7
a to

Christopher A. Mititaoher Datte
NCDWQ
Brian Wrenn to
nk McBride Date
USFS
Kam CoMVton Date
NCDO ?'2 3- 0 7
)son Stroud Date
Name
D02
?r4
`1.23 ?t9?
MW A
Jake RiMbco, P.B. Date
USFWS
Morena Buncick Date
NCWRC P 4
Marla J. ChAers Date
THPO
Tyler Howe Date
4Y,
- ,'
TVA *t
Harold Draper We
Abstaining Agencies
Agency Date

lY? O 7?? } by ',
t d
t
f r?

?
3
S
C

. f.
!um ?.
f w ? ,f
STUDY AREA - QUAD MAP
NC 143 FROM THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT ?4oF "Ofl" `49¢?
CHEROHALA SKYWAY TO OF TRANSPORTATION y
z NC 143 BUS WEST OF DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS =
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ROBBINSVILLE '
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH 9?yFNTaFraneS°??
GRAHAM COUNTY
TIP PROJECT R-2822B