19960758 Ver 1_Complete File_19960812

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
TO: Eric Galamb
David Cox
FROM: Melba McGee
Project Review Coordinator
RE: '96-0332 EA/FONSI Improvements to NC 107
DATE: . May 7,1996
e?
EDEHN
RECE f UEp
MAY 0 91996
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Frank Vick has provided responses to the comments you raised on the above referenced
project. Please review and determine if the department can concur with the FONSI. Your
comments should be provided to me by May 24,1996. I plan to be out of the office the week of
May 27. Thanks! ! F! ! !
5f,3J96
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
? T
•
Iµ
I?
STATr QF NOl
]DEPARTMENT OF
JAMES B. k- MT JV.
GOVERNOR
DIVISION Or t'1lwrivv?,,.+
1?0. 60X 25201. MLEICK N.C. 27611-5201
April 26, 1996
Ms. Chrys Baggett
N.C. Department of Administration
State Clearinghouse
116 West Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Ms. Baggett:
StcmA1LY
RE; NC 107, from Cashiers to south of East Laporte, Jackson County, State Project
No. 6.961013, TIP Project No. R-2224, SCH File 496-E-4220-0332
In reference to your December 29, 1995 letter to Mr. Whit Webb concerning the
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) for the subject
project, the following responses are provided to address comments made by the
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR) and the N.C.-
Department of Cultural Resources (State Historic Preservation Office).
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NC))k%C)
Comment # 1- "The NCWRC will concur with the findings of this EA/FONSI, provided
the following information is provided by the NCDOT":
A table illustrating environmental and monetary costs of avoiding impacts to the tributary
to Thorpe- Rescrvoir - This table should consider an alternative which widens the existing
road away from the tributary, and compare impacts to waters and wetlands, upland forest,
residences and busincmos, and total project coat with that of the currently proposed
alternative- Such a comparison will be necessary to demonstrate that no practicable
alternativc to wetland impact is available to the NCDOT, and will be required before we
can recommend approval of the anticipated 404 permit for the project."
RECEIVED
MAY 3
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE

Z0d 18S4 :ON Tdl ND8InN3 GNU 9NINNU-1d:QI 10:80 NOW 96 90-Ali
2
Response - NCDOT has prepared an alternative design which widens NC 107 away from
the tributary to Thorpe Reservoir and avoids impacts to that stream. Table 1 compares
the alternative design (Avoidance Alternative) to the design described in the EAIFONSI
(Recommended Alternative).
TABLE 1 COMPARISON OF DESIGN ALTERNATIVES AT THE
TRIBUTARY TO THOPPE RP-SERVOIR
Avoidance Alternative
Construction Cost
Required Right of Way
Residential Relocatees
Wetland Impacts
Stream Realignment
$ 1,4SO,000
6.0 Acres
Unknown*
Unknown"
Recommended AlterzYative
$ 400,000
2.6 Acres
0
0.16 Acre
900 feet
??.
* Wetland surveys have not been*conducted along the Avoidance Alternative,
** The Avoidance Alternative will not impact the tributary to Thorpe Reservoir.
However, the Avoidance Alternative will impact a natural spring and could
cause an undetermined length of realignment of that stream.
Fable 1 compares the two alternatives for a length of approximately 2500 feet in
the vicinity of the Thorpe Reservoir tributary. Total project impacts for the recommended
alternative are listed in the State Environmental Assessmentllainding of No Significant
Impact.
Review of Table 1 indicates that the Avoidance Alternative would result in a much
higher construction cost, greater right of way impacts, and a residential relocation. Also,
the Avoidance Alternative would impact a 1-foot wide natural spring and would not utili2e
the existing pavement along NC 107.
In view of the above, NCDOT concludes that there is no practicable alternative to
realigning the tributary to the Thorpe Reservoir and impacting 0,16 acre of wetlands.
David Cox of the NCWRC and Eric Galamb of the Division of Environmental
Management have reviewed the avoidance alternative design.
Comment # 2 - "A Design for stream charnel reconstruction in areas where stream
impacts cannot be avoided - Such a design should retain the total length
Z0d 18S4 :ON '131 NOd I f1N3 GNU 9N I NNU?d : a I Z0 : 80 NOW 966-go-Au
3
and form of the existing channel, and should incorporate replacement of existing riparian
vegetation. Because the existing vegetation (primarily Rhododendron and Leucothoe
spp.) is tolerant of transplanting, it may be possible to remove and stockpile intact shrubs
for replacement during stream restoration work. The NCDDT should continue to
coordinate stream relocation designs with NCWRC staff during final design and perinitting
for this project,"
Response - NCDDT will design the stream realignment so that tlae stream meanders,
retaining as much of the total length and form as the existing channel as possible- NCDDT
is also investigating the possibility of transplanting or replacing existing riparian
vegetation. NCDDT will coordinate planting efforts with the NCWRC. In addition, the
existing strcam channel bedding material will be reused along the realigned portion of the
stream. NCDDT will continue to coordinate the stream relocation with the NCWRC
during anal design and permitting for this project.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM)
Comment # 1 - Although DEM agrees with the decision to widen existing NC 107, DEM
will only endorse the document if the HQW soil and erosion control measures are
implemented.
Response - NCDOT will implement HQW soil and erosion control measures during the
construction of the proposed project,
State Historic Preservation Office
Comment # 1 - "While we note that this project is to be state funded, the potential for
federal permits may require further consultation and compliance with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act."
Rcsponsc - This project is subject to compliance pursuant to North Carolina General
Statute 121-12(a) which requires that if a state action will have an adverse effect upon a
property listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the North Carolina Historical
Commission will be given an opportunity to comment. A survey of the project area
established that there were no National Register-listed properties located in the project
area. This concludes compliance with N, C. General Statute 121-12(a).
It is anticipated that the proposed improvements will impact approximately 0,16
acre of wetlands, which will likely be authorized by provision of 33 CFR 330.5(a) (14),
€0d ti8S4 :ON X31 NDd I nN3 QNd 9N I NNU?d : Q I 20 s 80 NOW 96 90-J,dW

4
There are no structures, at all, located adjacent to or in the vicinity of the permit area. It
is NCDOT's conclusion that no significant properties are located within the impact area of
the pernit, and compliance with Section 106 will not be necessary.
Sincerely,
44La" H. Franklin Vick, P,E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/tp
cc_ Whit Webb, PR, Manager, Program Development Branch
Eric Midkiff, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
rod ti8S4 :ON -31 NIRI I f1N3 QNd 9N I NNUIa : Q I b0 :80 NOW 96 90-AUW
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
MEMORANDUM
December 11, 1995
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dor
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: EA/FONSI for NC 107
Jackson County
TIP #R-2224
DEHNR # 96-0332, DEM # 11110
A ILFWA
g4*79
1? EHNR
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact waters of the state including wetlands.
The document states that approximately 0.33 acres of waters including wetlands will
be impacted. Approximately 800 feet of a tributary to Thorpe Reservoir will be
relocated.
DEM is concerned that DOT has not committed to implementing HOW soil and
erosion control measures for this project. Thorpe Reservoir is under consideration for
HOW classification and may be redesignated before the climbing lanes are
constructed. Therefore, DEM requests that the HOW soil and erosion control
measures be utilized for the project.
Although DEM agrees with the decision to widen existing NC 107, DEM will only
endorse the document if the HOW soil and erosion control measures are
implemented. DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA or FONSI by DEM would
not preclude the denial of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland or water
impacts have not been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
nc107.fon
cc: Asheville COE
Eric Midkiff, DOT
FAXED
D EC '1 1 1995
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 550% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
Project Number: County:
T6 . C
Date:
? Project located in 7th floor library
)110
Date Response Due (firm deadline):
?s N? lob FYC6?V5
©? ? ?
T1 P ;ft o VW 4 N'_'
This project is being reviewed as indicated below: / V G 4 - 0 a I
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In•H ea
iew
? Asheville El All R/O Areas WATEREQWiNFisheries
`FSoil and Water
? Fayetteville ? Air d
? Coastal Management PMNN11% *nning
El Water El Water Resources ? Environmental Health
? Mooresville ?Groundwater )rwildlife ?Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer O Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster
?Coastal Management Consultant Parks and Recreation UOther (specify) -
? Wilmington
? Others
nvironmental Management
? Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
` ? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attach ed/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
? Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO
Melba McGee
PS-104
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
+s-
w
NC 107 "
From Cashiers to south of East Laporte
Jackson County
State Project No. 6.961013
T.I.P. No. R-2224
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
q- 2 5. TS ?/. 0
Date H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
-4v'?-Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
w
NC 107
From Cashiers to south of East Laporte
Jackson County
State Project No. 6.961013
T.I.P. No. R-2224
w
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
SEPTEMBER, 1995
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
•?.•??? CARO??•.,.
.• ESS1O •.
--?. y/A9 9.5 :?oE N9?:.
,
S. Eric Midkiff P. E. SEAL
Project Planning Engineer 19791
Q?
%4
EE. ti
lN?v .e!'?? S •••.....•••' ?'.i ?''••, ERIC MN"D :.•'?
J Wi son Stroud
Pr 'ect Planning Unit Head
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUMMARY
1. Type of Action
This is a State Administrative Action, combined State Environmental
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact.
2. Additional Information
The following person can be contacted for additional information
concerning this proposal and statement:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N. C. Department of Transportation
Transportation Building
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone [phone]
3. Actions Required gy Other State Agencies
The project will require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the
N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources and a U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Nationwide permit 33 CFR 330.5(A)14.
Since the proposed project is located in a designated "Trout" county,
the authorization of a nationwide permit by the COE is conditioned upon
the concurrence of the Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC).
4. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to construct
climbing lanes at two locations along NC 107 between Cashiers and East
Laporte in Jackson County. Climbing Section A is 1.1 miles in length and
begins approximately 2.4 miles north of US 64 and ends approximately 1.1
miles south of SR 1120. Section B is 1.1 miles in length and begins
approximately 400 feet north of SR 1157 (Pine Creek Road) and ends
approximately 1.1 miles south of that point.
5. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
The proposed improvements consist of constructing climbing lanes at
two locations along the studied portion of NC 107 which will provide
opportunities for motorists to pass slower traveling vehicles, resulting
in decreased travel time and less congestion for local and through
traffic. In addition, the horizontal alignment will be improved and
guardrail will be added throughout the climbing lane sections, thereby
improving the safety along NC 107.
Approximately 18 acres of additional right of way and easements will
be required. The proposed improvements will impact a small amount of
wetlands (less than 1/3 acre) and minor stream rechannel ization will be
necessary. Other environmental impacts will be minimal. No relocatees
are anticipated.
6. Basis for State Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Si nifica t
Impact
On the basis of planning and environmental studies, it is anticipated
that this project will not have a significant adverse effect on th
quality of the human and natural environment. The proposed project will
cause no changes in route classification or land use. The project as
been reviewed by appropriate federal, state, and local agencies, and no
objections have been raised. Therefore, a State Environmental
Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable for thi
project.
7. Special Project Commitments
Coordination with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
and the Corps of Engineers will be required since Jackson County i
designated as an environmentally sensitive area with respect to tro t
waters and Shoal Creek, which is located adjacent to Section B, is listed
as a designated trout water. NCDOT will maintain at least a 25-foot b ffer
between the toe of fill and the banks of Shoal Creek. In addition, N DOT
will attempt to minimize impacts to valuable stream bank vegetation along
the east side of NC 107 at the northern end of Section B by widening to
the west side of NC 107 as much as possible without severely impacting
development along the west side.
It is anticipated that an 800-foot portion of an unnamed tributary to
the Thorpe Reservoir will be rechannelized in order to accommodate he
proposed construction of Section A. During the detailed geotechnical and
hydraulic studies for the project, NCDOT will examine the possibility of
providing steeper back slopes in this area to minimize impacts to the
tributary and possibly reduce the length of rechannel ization. The stream
modifications will be designed according to NCDOT's stream
relocation\channelization guidelines. NCDOT will coordinate the proposed
stream rechannel ization with the. N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
during the fianl design of the project.
NCDOT will implement Best Management Practices to minimize impac s to
water quality.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary
PAGE
1. NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................... 1
A. General Description .. .............................. 1
B. Project Status and Historical Resume ...................... 1
C. Characteristics of Existing Facility ...................... 2
1. Route Classification ................................ 2
2. Length of Roadway ............................ 2
3. Cross Section Description ........................... 2
4. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature ................... 2
5. Right of Way and Control of Access .................. 2
6. Degree of Roadside Interference ..................... 2
7. Speed Limit ......................................... 2
8. Utilities ........................................... 2
9. School Bus Data ..................................... 2
D. Projected Traffic Volumes ................................. 3
E. Accident Analysis ..... ..... . ... ............... 3
F. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community .............. 3
G. Thoroughfare Plan ................. .. .. ........ 4
H. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Project
Vicinity ................................................ 4
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................ 4
A. General Description ..................................... 4
B. Proposed Improvements .................................... 5
1. Typical Section Description ......................... 5
2. Length of Project ................................... 5
3. Right of Way ........................................ 5
4. Design Speed ...................................... 6
5. Access Control ...................................... 6
6. Intersection Treatment .............................. 6
7. Structures .......................................... 6
8. Cost Estimates . ................................. 6
9. Geodetic Survey Markers ............................. 6
10. Capacity Analysis ............................ 6
11. Special Permits Required ............................ 7
12. Changes in the State Highway System ................. 7
13. Multiple Use of Space ............................... 7
14. Bikeways ............................................ 7
15. Sidewalks ... . .. .......................... 7
16. Anticipated Design Exceptions ....................... 7
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................... 8
A. Recommended Alternative .................................. 8
B. "Do Nothing" Alternative .................................. 8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
C. Alternate Modes of Transportation ........................
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ...................
A. Social Effects ...........................................
1. Land Use .............................................
a. Existing Land Use ..............................
b. Existing Zoning ................................
C. Future Land Use ................................
2. Neighborhood Analysis ...............................
3. Relocation Impacts ..................................
4. Public Facilities ................................
5. Historic and Cultural Resources .....................
a. Architectural/Historical Resources .............
b. Archaeological Resources .......................
B. Economic Effects ........................................
C. Environmental Effects ....................................
1. Biotic Resources ....................................
a. Methodology ....................................
b. Terrestrial Communities ... ...............
C. Impacts to Terrestrial Communities .............
d. Aquatic Communities ............................
e. Impacts to Aquatic Communities .................
2. Water Resources .....................................
a. Stream Characteristics .........................
b. Water Quality .. .......... .................
C. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources .........
3. Wetlands ............................................
4. Permits .............................................
5. Protected Species ...................................
a. Federally-Protected Species ....................
b. Federal Candidate Species ......................
C. State Protected Species .. . ..........
d. Anticipated Impacts to Protected Species .......
6. Soils ..... ... ...............................
7. Flood Hazard Evaluation .............................
8. Farmland ............................................
9. National Forest Impacts .............................
10. National Park Impacts ...............................
'AGE
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
10
10
10
10
10
10
12
13
13
14
14
14
15
16
16
17
17
20
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
11. Traffic Noise ...................................... 24
12. Air Quality .. .................................. 24
13. Stream Modification ................................ 24
14. Construction Impacts ............................... 25
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ..................................... 26
A. Comments Received ......................................... 26
B. Coordination .............................................. 27
C. Public Hearing ............................................ 28
VI. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT .................... 28
TABLES
Table 1 - Accident Rates ............. .. ... ................. 3
Table 2 - Animals Actually Observed in the Study Area ......... 12
Table 3 - Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities ...... 13
Table 4 - Federally Protected Species for Jackson County ...... 17
Table 5 - Federal Candidate Species for Jackson County ........ 21
Table 6 - State Protected Species for Jackson County .......... 22
Table 7 - Soil Types .......................................... 23
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2 - Proposed Improvements
Figure 3 - Thoroughfare Plan
Figure 4 - Proposed Typical Section
Figure 5 - 100-Year Floodplain Limits
APPENDIX - Input Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
NC 107
From Cashiers to south of East Laporte
Jackson County
State Project No. 6.961013
T.I.P. No. R-2224
I. NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description
The proposed project consists of constructing climbing lanes at two
locations along NC 107 between Cashiers and East Laporte. Climbing
Section A is 1.1 miles in length and begins approximately 2.4 miles north
of US 64 and ends approximately 1.1 miles south of SR 1120. Section B is
1.1 mile in length and begins approximately 400 feet north of SR 1157
(Pine Creek Road) and ends approximately 1.1 miles south of that point.
The proposed typical section within these two sections consists of three
12-foot lanes with 6-foot shoulders (2-foot paved). A ten foot shoulder
(2-foot paved) is proposed for part of Section B. The project is located
in Jackson County. The project area is shown in Figure 1. The proposed
improvements are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 2A.
B. Project Status and Historical Resume
The proposed project is included in the 1996-2002 NCDOT
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Right of way acquisition is
scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 1996 and construction is scheduled to
begin in Fiscal Year 1997. The TIP includes a total funding of
$ 2,870,000 for the project, including $ 620,000 for right of way
acquisition, $ 2,150,000 for construction, and $ 100,000 spent in prior
years. The total cost for the proposed improvements recommended in this
report is $ 3,392,000, including $ 2,775,000 for construction and
$ 617,000 for right of way acquisition. The total estimated cost for the
proposed improvements exceeds the TIP funding by $ 522,000.
A Feasibility Study was completed for this project in 1987. That
report identified four possible locations for climbing lanes between
Cashiers and East Laporte (14.1 miles). During the course of planning and
design studies for this project, two of those locations were eliminated.
One section, which was to be located approximately 10.5 miles north of
Cashiers (north of Section B) for a length of 4000', was eliminated
because of the potential impacts to development and to the West Fork
Tuckasegee River. Another section, which was to be located approximately
7.2 miles north of Cashiers (between Sections A and B) for a length of
2000', was eliminated due to the potential cost of earthwork required for
construction because of severe cut and fill areas. This report documents
only the impacts associated with constructing the remaining two climbing
lanes.
2
C.
Characteristics of Existing Facility
1. Route Classification
The studied portion of NC 107 is classified as a rural min r
arterial in the North Carolina Functional Classification System.
2. Length of Roadway
Each climbing lane section is approximately 1.1 miles in length.
3. Cross Section Description
NC 107 consists of a two-lane shoulder section with a pave ent
width of 18 feet and 3-to 5-foot grassed shoulders.
Two slow vehicle turn-out lanes are located in Section B. hese
lanes are approximately 12 feet wide and 400 feet long and are s own
in Figure 2A.
4. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
The majority of the studied portion of NC 107 is located in
mountainous terrain characterized by very steep grades and very po
horizontal alignment. Vertical curves range from 2% to greater hi
9%. Horizontal curves range from 0 degrees to 5 degrees.
5. Right of Way and Control of Access
. The existing right of way width along NC 107 is 30 feet
symmetrical about the existing centerline. There is no control of
access along the studied portion of NC 107.
6. Degree of Roadside Interference
Roadside interference is light along NC 107 within the proposed
-project limits. Existing development consists of residences a d a
few scattered businesses.
7. Speed Limit
The posted speed limit along the studied portions of NC 1 7 is
55 mph.
8. Utilities
Power lines exist along the studied portion of NC 107. Uthlity
conflicts are anticipated to be light.
9. School Bus Data
day.
Two school buses travel the studied portions of NC 107
ce a
3
D. Projected Traffic Volumes
The 1997 projected average daily traffic (ADT) volumes are 3700
vehicles per day (vpd) along Section A and 2800 vehicles per day along
Section B. These volumes are projected to 8,100 vpd and 5,000 vpd
respectively by the year 2017. The projections for 1997 include 2% truck
tractor semi-trailers and 3% dual tire trucks. These truck percentages
are anticipated to remain the same or near the same in the year 2017.
E. Accident Analysis
A comparison of accident rates along NC 107, from Cashiers to south
of East Laporte, and the statewide rates for rural two-lane "NC" routes is
shown in Table 1. The rates shown for NC 107 were obtained from studies
conducted along that highway from May, 1991 to April, 1994. The average
statewide rates were obtained from studies conducted from 1992 to 1994.
TABLE 1 ACCIDENT RATES
(PER 100 MILLION VEHICLE MILES)
Rates Average Statewide Rate
Accident Type Along NC 107 for rural 2-lane "NC" Routes
Total 100.13 200.7
Fatal 3.23 2.5
Injury 37.69 93.9
Nighttime 27.99 62.2
Wet Conditions 15.08 45.5
These figures indicate the accident rates along NC 107 are below the
corresponding average rates for all "NC" two-lane rural routes except for
those accidents resulting in fatalities. Approximately 41 % of the 93
accidents recorded along the project during the three-year study period
involved vehicles running off the road to the right. Approximately 16 %
of the accidents involved rear-end collisions. In the vicinity of the two
proposed climbing lanes, it is anticipated accidents will be reduced due
to the increased pavement width and wider shoulders.
F. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
Motorists using the studied portion of NC 107 are currently
experiencing travel delays due to slower traveling vehicles. Passing
trucks and other slower vehicles is nearly impossible due to the poor
horizontal alignment and extremely steep grades along NC 107. The
proposed climbing lanes will provide opportunities for passing slower
traveling vehicles, resulting in decreased travel time and less congestion
for local and through traffic.
G. Thoroughfare Plan
The Jackson County Thoroughfare plan was prepared by NCDOT i
cooperation with Jackson County and the Federal Highway Administratio and
was adopted by the NCDOT in May, 1994. That report recommended upgra ing
NC 107 in the project vicinity by widening the existing pavement a d
providing adequate shoulders. A copy of the Jackson County Thorough are
Plan is provided as Figure 3.
H. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Project Vicinity
The following projects are included in the 1996-2002 NCDOT
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and are located in the vici ity
of the proposed project (see Figure 3).
- TIP Project R-2409 consists of constructing climbing lanes and
safety improvements along US 64 from Cashiers to Rosman n
Jackson and Transylvania Counties. Right of way acquisitio and
construction are scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 1996.
- TIP Project B-3480 consists of replacing Bridge No. 39 over the
East Fork Tuckasegee River along NC 107 in Jackson Count(.
Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Fiscal ear
2001 and construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 002.
- TIP Project B-3196 consists of replacing Bridge No. 193 ove the
Thorpe Dam Spillway along SR 1157 in Jackson County. Righ of
way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 2000 and
construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 2001.
- TIP Project W-2923 consists of installing guardrail at select
locations along NC 107 between SR 1132 and SR 1158 in Jac son
County. Construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 996.
- TIP Project W-2933 consists of installing guardrail at se'
locations along NC 107 between SR 1132 and SR 1737 in Jacl
County. Construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to con!
climbing lanes at two locations along NC 107, between Cashiers and
Laporte in Jackson County. Section A is 1.1 miles in length and be
approximately 2.4 miles north of US 64 and ends approximately 1.1 a
south of SR 1120. Section B is 1.1 miles in length and begins
approximately 400 feet north of SR 1157 (Pine Creek Road) and eni
approximately 1.1 miles north of that point. The pavement along
climbing lane sections will be resurfaced and guardrail will be adds
needed. All pavement widening in Section A and most of the paveml
widening is Section B will be accomplished along the west side of NI
so that two lanes will accommodate up-grade traffic (in the northern
ect
M6.
truct
:ast
dins
les
s
he
d as
nt
107
5
direction) without realigning the existing lane configuration. In Section
B, however, widening will be accomplished along the east side of NC 107
for approximately 2300 feet in order to eliminate impacts to existing
development. Through this 2300-foot area the existing lane configuration
will be realigned so that two lanes will accommodate up-hill traffic
(northern direction). The project area is shown in Figure 1 and the
proposed improvements are shown in Figures 2 and 2A.
B. Proposed Improvements
1. Typical Section Description
Both climbing lane sections will consist of three 12-foot lanes
with 6-foot shoulders (2-foot paved). See Figure 4 for proposed
typical section. In Section B, a 10-foot shoulder (2-foot paved) is
proposed along the east side of NC 107 for a distance of
approximately 2300 feet (where widening is to be accomplished along
the east side of NC 107) at the northern end of that section to meet
AASHTO standards. A ten-foot shoulder is required through this area
because the eastern lane will be a through travel lane instead of a
climbing lane.
Two 400-foot long slow vehicle turn-out lanes are located in
Section B (See Figure 2A). The southbound slow turn-out lane,
located in the northern part of Section B, will be eliminated and
will become incorporated into the proposed climbing lane. The
northbound slow turn-out lane, located in the southern part of
Section B, will be retained.
2. Length of Project
Each climbing lane section will be approximately 1.1 miles in
length. The total project length is 2.2 miles. No improvements to
the 5-mile segment of NC 107 that separates Sections A and B are
recommended.
3. Right of Way
Due to the severe mountainous terrain of the project area, the
construction limits for the proposed project will vary from 30 to 300
feet from the existing NC 107 centerline. During final design a
uniform proposed right of way width may be established. Construction
easements will also be required in some locations, in addition to any
uniform right of way width, to contain the side slopes due to the
severe topography. Approximately 18 acres of right of way and
easements will be required. The majority of widening will be
accomplished along the west side of NC 107 in both proposed climbing
lane sections. In Section B, widening will be accomplished along the
east side of NC 107 for approximately 2300 feet in order to minimized
impacts to existing development. The preliminary construction limits
are shown in Figures 2 and 2A.
6
4. Design Speed
The design speed for the studied portions of NC 107 is 60
The anticipated posted speed limit along the project is 55 mph.
5. Access Control
No control of access is proposed for this project.
6. Intersection Treatment
There are no intersecting roads along the two proposed cli
lane sections -
7. Structures
There are no major stream crossings within the limits of t
proposed climbing lanes. The hydraulic adequacy and structu
integrity of existing minor drainage structures will be assess
detail during final hydraulic design to ensure that they can
retained and extended.
8. Cost Estimates
Roadway Construction: $ 2,775,000
Right of Way: $ 617,000
Total $ 3,392,000
9. Geodetic Survey Markers
The proposed action may impact two geodetic survey markers.
North Carolina Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to
construction.
10. Capacity Analysis
The concept of level of service (LOS) is defined as a
qualitative measure describing operational conditions within
traffic stream and how these conditions are perceived by motor
and/or passengers. A level of service definition generally desc
these conditions in terms of such factors as speed, travel ti
freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenienc
safety. Six levels are defined for each type of facility for
analysis procedures are available. They are given letter desig
from A to F, with A representing the best level of service an
representing the worst.
)i ng
two
1
in
The
a
sts
1 bes
IV ,
and
hich
ation
F
A capacity analysis was performed to determine the level of
service (LOS) at which NC 107 will operate for the years 1997 and
2017 without any improvements. In 1997 the studied portions of
NC 107 will operate at LOS E. In 2017 the studied portions of C 107
will operate at LOS F.
7
The 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) outlines a method for
assessing the need for a heavy vehicle climbing lane. The HCM gives
three criteria for providing a climbing lane. They are as follows:
1. Upgrade flow rate exceeds 200 vph
2. Upgrade truck flow rate exceeds 20 vph
3. One of the following exists:
a. LOS E or F exists on the grade
b. LOS on grade is two or more levels less than on approach
c. Trucks must reduce speeds by more than 10 mph on the
upgrade
By the design year 2017 all three criteria will be met for both
proposed climbing lane sections.
11. Special Permits Required
The project will require a 401 Water Quality Certification from
the N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources and
a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Nationwide permit 33 CFR
330.5(A)14.
Since the proposed project is located in a designated "Trout"
county, the authorization of a nationwide permit by the COE is
conditioned upon the concurrence of the Wildlife Resources Commission
(WRC).
12. Changes In the State Highway System
No changes in the State highway system will result from the
proposed project.
13. Multiple Use of Space
There are no plans to utilize the right of way for any purposes
other than public utilities, which will be allowed use of the right
of way within certain limitations.
14. Bikeways
The need for special accommodations for bicycles along the
project has not been identified.
15. Sidewalks
The need for sidewalks along the project has not been
identified.
16. Anticipated Design Exceptions
No design exceptions are anticipated at this time.
8
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Recommended Alternative
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to const uct
climbing lanes at two locations along NC 107 between Cashiers and Ea t
Laporte in Jackson County. Section A is 1.1 miles in length and begins
approximately 2.4 miles north of US 64 and ends approximately 1.1 miles
south of SR 1120. Section B is 1.1 miles in length and begins
approximately 400 feet north of SR 1157 (Pine Creek Road) and ends
approximately 1.1 miles north of that point. The pavement along th
climbing lane sections will be resurfaced and guardrail will be added as
needed. The proposed cross section will consist of three 12-foot la es
with 6-foot shoulders (2-foot paved). A ten-foot shoulder (2-foot pav d)
is proposed along the east side of NC 107 for approximately 2300 feet in
the northern part of Section B. All pavement widening in Section A nd
most of the pavement widening in Section B will be accomplished along the
west side of NC 107 so that two lanes will accommodate up-grade traf is
(in the northern direction) without realigning the existing lane
configuration. In Section B, however, widening will be accomplished a ong
the east side of NC 107 for approximately 2300 feet in order to elimi ate
impacts to existing development. Through this 2300-foot area the exis ing
lane configuration will be realigned so that two lanes will accommod to
up-hill traffic (northern direction). The proposed improvements are s own
in Figures 2 and 2A.
B. "Do Nothing" Alternative
Although this alternative would avoid the limited adverse
environmental impacts that are anticipated to result from the project,
there would be no positive effect on the traffic carrying service of he
studied portions of NC 107. Therefore, this alternative is not
recommended.
C. Alternate Modes of Transportation
The purpose of the proposed action is to provide climbing lanes
two steep sections of NC 107 in order to allow passing of slower mov
vehicles. No alternate mode of transportation is considered to be
practical alternative to meet this objective.
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
1. Land Use
a. Existing Land Use
The project area is only sparsely developed, with
residences and businesses fronting NC 107. Section A
the most development of the two areas slated for imprc
and includes "The Forest" resort community, a Jehovah's
long
'ng
scat ered
includes
IYa111 IIY,
Wit ess
9
Kingdom Hall, a real estate office, and several residences. The
roadway runs along the extreme southeastern shore of Thorpe
Reservoir, a man-made lake used for production of hydroelectric
power. Land along the roadway in Section B is wooded and also
supports several single family residences with direct access to
NC 107.
b. Existing Zoning
Jackson County has not developed a land planning program
and has not adopted a land use plan or zoning ordinance.
C. Future Land Use
Jackson County has adopted a water supply watershed
protection ordinance which addresses the project area. The
ordinance identifies the critical area and the source of the
watershed of the county's drinking water supply, the Tuckasegee
River. Neither of the two proposed climbing lane sections are
located near the critical area or the Tuckasegee River.
2. Neighborhood Analysis
The proposed project is located in Jackson County. It is in the
western section of the state and is bounded by Macon, Swain, Haywood,
and Transylvania Counties, and also by South Carolina and Georgia.
Based on population estimates, Jackson County has a population of
27,573. It is basically a rural county with a population density of
54.72 persons per square mile in 1990.
The few scattered homes and businesses within the climbing lane
sections will not be adversely affected by the proposed construction.
The project will not disrupt community cohesion, displace residences
and businesses, or interfere with the accessibility of facilities and
services.
3. Relocation Impacts
It is anticipated the proposed action will not require any
businesses or residences to relocate.
4. Public Facilities
The proposed action will not adversely impact any public
facilities.
5. Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Architectural/Historical Resources
The State Historic Preservation Officer has concurred with
NCDOT that no National Register-listed properties are located
within the area of potential effect for the project (see letter
on page A-25 in the Appendix). No further compliance with G.S.
121-12(a) is required.
10
b. Archaeolooical Resources
During the course of an archaeological survey conducte by
NCDOT, no sites were identified within the project area. The
State Historic Preservation Officer concurs with NCDOT's
findings and agrees that no further archaeological investigation
is needed for this project (see concurrence letter on, page -24
of the Appendix). These comments are made in accord with G.S.
121-12(a) and Executive Order XVI.
B. Economic Effects
In March, 1994 Jackson County had a total of 13,230 in the civilian
labor force. Out of this total, 12,380 were gainfully employed. This
left an unemployment total of 840, or 6.4 percent.
The proposed climbing lanes will aid in reducing congestion alc
NC 107, thus reducing road user costs and providing greater efficienc,
transporting goods and services.
C. Environmental Effects
1. Biotic Resources
a. Methodology
A preliminary review of resource information was condui
prior to field investigations. Resource information uses
includes: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps
(Glenville, Big Ridge), NCDOT aerial photographs of the pro,
area, Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil maps, Fish any
Wildlife Service (FWS) lists of protected and candidate spec
and N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NC-NHP) database of uncoi
and protected species and unique habitats. General fief
surveys were conducted by NCDOT staff biologists on July 1
1993; June 28, 1994; and August 5, 1994. Plant communities
their associated wildlife were identified and recorded.
Wildlife was identified using the following observation
techniques: active searching and capture, visual observati
and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds
tracks, and burrows).
b. Terrestrial Communities
The two terrestrial communities found in the project
are the Disturbed Roadside Community and the Cove Fores
Community. The faunal components of these communities wil
discussed with the appropriate floral community components.
in
ect
ies,
3,
and
rea
be
11
Disturbed Roadside Community
The Disturbed Roadside Community occurs along both
shoulders of NC 107 and in clearings located within the proposed
right of way. Habitats differ in each section; however, the
dominant species are similar throughout the project. Common
roadside species found in the subject project include: club moss
(Lycopodium spp.), Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides),
hay scented fern (Dennstaedtia unctilobula), fescue (Festuca
sp.), buckhorn plantain (Plantago anceolata), dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale), red clover (Trifolium rap tens), wild
carrot (Daucus carota), poke weed (Phytolacca americana),
blueberry (Vaccinium spp.), blackberry (Rubus spp.), milkweed
(Asclepias sp.) f Bering spurge (Euhp orbia corollata), phlox
(Phlox sp.), blackeyed susan (Rudbeckia sp.), loosestrife
(Lysimachia sp.), Joe pye weed (Eupatorium maculatum), kudzu
(Pueraria lobata), honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), catbriar
(Smi app.), hawthorne (Crataegus un lora), mountain laurel
(KaTmia latifolia), rose bay (Rhododendron maximum), striped
maple (Acer pensylvanicum), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis),
and smooth sumac (Rhus lg abra). Tree saplings found in the
study area include: dogwood (Cornus amomum), yellow birch
(Betula alleghaniensis), tag a der(A nlus serrulata), black
cherry (Prunus serotina), white oak ( uercus alba), tulip tree
(Liriodendron tulipifera), slippery elm (Ulmus rubra), red maple
(A. rubrum), black locust (Robinia pseuodo-acacia), and
sassafras (Sassafras albidum).
Roadside communities form an edge that is utilized by many
opportunistic animals. Many of the species described below can
also be found in woodland habitats. Opportunistic feeders such
as turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) and Virginia opossum
(Didelphis virginiana) feed on carrion on the roadside
shoulders. Grassy roadsides and lawns are grazed by white
tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and eastern cottontail
rabbits (Sylvilagus f1oridanus). Animals such as woodchucks
(Marmota monax) also use roadsides to forage and to dig burrows.
Overgrown waste areas provide a habitat that is attractive to
opportunistic animals such as broadhead skink (Eumeces
laticeps), black racer (Coluber constrictor), corn snake (Elaphe
ug ttata), shrews (Sorex spp.), rock vole (Microtus
chrotorrhinus), and on-g-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata , which
utilize this habitat for feeding or shelter:
Cove Forest Community
The Cove Forest Community provides habitat diversity that
cannot be found in other mountain forest communities. All of
the woodlands located within the project's proposed right-of-way
are classified as cove forests. The dominant species are
similar in each section, but the diversity may differ slightly.
The canopy in this community is composed of red maple, white
pine (Pinus strobus), tulip tree, black locust, white oak,
12
hickory (Carya spp.), red oak ( uercus rubra), and haw (Vi
sp.). The subcanopy includes individuals of rose bay, do(
hemlock (Tsu a canadensis), mountain laurel, chestnut sap
(Castanea dentata), and sassafras. The groundcover is con
of Christmas fern, cranefly orchid (Tipularia discolor
Pipsissewa (Chimaphila umbellata), blueberry, catbriar, an
moccasin flower (Cypripedium acaule).
Animals found in this community can generally also be
utilizing roadside/disturbed habitats. Woodland lizards
salamanders such as the coal skink (Eumeces anthracinus)
Jordan's salamander (Plethodon 'off rdan), and the southern rep
salamander (P. serrates) live under damp logs and leaf li-
foraging for small -arthropods and molluscs. Small mammals
as shrews and the rodents live in tunnels beneath the fors
floor. Cove forest inhabitants include the eastern box tur
(Terrapene carolina), northern cricket frog (Acris crepitai
black racer (Coluber constrictor), Virginia opossum, rep
squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus), southern flying squir,
(Glaucomys volans), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), r
vole (Microtus chrotorrhinus), and eastern woodrat (Neotc
floridana).
Table 2 details animals actually observed in the proj
area.
C. Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Destruction of terrestrial communities along the pro.
alignment will result in the loss of foraging and breedi
habitats for many of the terrestrial species which utilize
area. Loss of these habitats will result in a reduction
displacement of species found in the project study area.
3 lists the anticipated impacts to terrestrial communities.
TABLE 2 ANIMALS ACTUALLY OBSERVED IN THE STUDY AREA
(Common Names)
cray fish
rock bass
black belly salamander
mountain dusky salamander
shovelnose salamander
rat snake
black racer
northern water snake
queen snake
Carolina Wren
solitary vireo
hooded Warbler
dark-eyed junco
black and white warbler
rufous-sided towhee
northern flicker
chipping sparrow
gray catbird
tufted titmouse
Carolina chicadee
chestnut-sided warbler
red-eyed vireo
red tailed hawk
American crow
turkey vulture
eastern chipmunk
raccon
woodchuck
ruby-throated humingbi
ink
?t
le
1
:k
is
le
13
TABLE 3 ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
Community Types Section A Section B
Disturbed Roadside 2 acres 3 acres
Cove Forest 6 acres 9 acres
Total 8 acres 12 acres
d. Aquatic Communities
The Aquatic Communities located in the project study area
are an unnamed tributary to Thorpe Resevoir, located near
Section A, and Shoal Creek, located in Section B. These streams
contain an abundance of vertebrate and invertebrate fauna,
including species of crayfish, salamanders, and fish.
Shoal Creek Community
Fast flowing mountain streams such as Shoal Creek with
rocky substrates offer ideal habitat for crayfish (Cambarus spp.
and Procambarus spp.) and neritic salamanders, such as the
blackbelly salamander (Desmognathus quad ramaculatus) and the
mountain dusky salamander (D_. ochrophacus). These animals live
in rocky pools and feed on invertebrate larvae, detritus, and
smaller salamanders. This stream is also habitat for bullfrog
(Rana catesbeiana) and eastern musk turtle (Sternotherus
odoratus t at utilize this area for food and shelter. Fish
species that are found in this type of stream are generally
grazers without jaw teeth such as the central stoneroller
(Cam ostoma anomalum), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), and
rosysi a dace (Cli ostoma funduloides).
Unnamed Tributary Lo Th r Resevoir Community
This unnamed tributary offers a high diversity of habitats
in the clear shallow pools and frequent riffle zones as it flows
through the study area. A variety of animal species utilize
these habitats, either permanently or temporarily, to complete
their life cycle.. Species likely to occur in this stream
include: rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss, northern dusky
salamander (Desmognathus fuscus), and black belly salamander (D.
quadramaculatus).
e. Impacts to Aquatic Communities
Potential impacts to the aquatic environments include
increased sedimentation and toxic runoff from construction
related erosion. Increased sedimentation can cause mortality in
sensitive species through reduction of dissolved oxygen,
14
smothering of fish eggs and invertebrate larva, burying de osit
feeders, and clogging gills and filter feeding appendages.
Sensitive organisms found in mountain streams include fish eggs
and salamander larvae. To minimize impacts to streams in the
study area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection
of Surface Waters will be enforced during the construction tage
of the project.
2. Water Resources
This section describes the physical aspects of the water
resources in the project area and their relationship to major ter
systems.
a. Stream Characteristics
The subject project is located in the Little Tennes ee
River Basin. An unnamed tributary to Thorpe Resevoir is locate
near Section A, while Shoal Creek is located near Section B.
The Thorpe Resevoir tributary parallels NC 107 on the west
side for a distance of approximately 800 feet within Section A.
This slow meandering mountain stream has a dense covering of
mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), with water depths ranging
from 4 to 10 inches and is no more than 4 feet wide at any
point. The stream bed is composed of coarse gravel and pe bles
with infrequent large stones.
Shoal Creek parallels NC 107 on the east side for a
distance of approximately 2600 feet within Section B. This
creek is described as having a fast flow over substrate
containing boulder, cobble, and gravel size particles. The flow
in this stream is controlled by a series of pools and falls with
frequent riffle zones. Depths in Shoal Creek range from two
inches in riffles to six inches in deep pools. Shoal Creek is
located along the east side of NC 107 in the northern hall' of
Section B.
b. Water Quality
The best usage classification for the Thorpe Resev it
tributary is WS-III & B as assigned by the North Caroli a
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (D HNR),
Little Tennessee River Drainage Basin Classifications and ater
Quality Standards, 1993. The best usage classification or
Shoal Creek is WS III. WS-III is defined as waters protected as
water supplies which are generally in low to moderately
developed watersheds suitable for all Class C uses. Class B is
defined as those waters designated for primary recreation and
any other usage specified by the "C" classification. Class C
waters are defined as suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, an
agriculture.
15
No High Quality Waters, Outstanding Resource Waters, or
Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) occur within the project area.
Jackson County is designated as a "Trout" county by the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC). Shoal Creek is a WRC
Designated Public Mountain Trout Water (DPMTW). However, within
the project area, Shoal Creek does not carry this designation.
The DPMTW designation located along Shoal Creek occurs 0.5 mile
from the proposed construction.
The Benthic Macro invertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN)
addresses long term trends in water quality at fixed monitoring
sites by sampling for selected benthic macro invertebrates.
These organisms are sensitive to very subtle changes in water
quality. Good water quality is associated with high taxa
richness (the number of different types of organisms) and the
presence of many intolerant species. Water quality degradation
gradually eliminates the more sensitive species and leads to a
community structure quite different from that in an unstressed
waterbody. Specific data is not available for the immediate
project area.
C. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
NCDOT representatives met with representatives of the N.C.
Division of Environmental Management and the Wildlife Resources
Commission on the project site to discuss the project's impact
on water resources. That meeting is documented in Section V.B
of this report.
Construction related impacts include reduced water quality,
increased sedimentation, toxic runoff, alterations of the water
level due to interruptions or additions to water flow, and the
destruction of natural substrate due to stream rechannelization.
Reduced water quality could include changes in water clarity,
dissolved oxygen, or temperature. In order to minimize impacts
to physical and biotic aquatic resources in the project area,
NCDOT will enforce Best Management Practices for the Protection
of Surface Waters and Sedimentation Control Guidelines during
construction.
The proposed improvements will necessitate the placement of
fill material closer to Shoal Creek. NCDOT will maintain at
least a 25-foot buffer between the toe of fill and the banks of
Shoal Creek. NCDOT will investigate the possibility of
steepening the back slopes or providing a retaining wall in
order to minimize impacts to Shoal Creek and to maintain at
least a 25-foot buffer between fill material and the creek
banks.
16
It is anticipated that the proposed improvements wi 1
require approximately 800'of channel relocation of the Thorpe
Resevoir tributary in Section A. Upon the completion o
geotechnical and hydraulic studies, NCDOT will investigate the
possibility of using steeper back slopes in order to reduce
impacts to the tributary and possibly reduce the length of
rechannel ization. The stream modifications will be designed
according to NCDOT's stream relocation/channelization
guidelines.
3. Wetlands
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of
"Waters of the United States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and n
accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Ac (33
U.S.C. 1344) and are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Enginee s.
Potential wetland communities were evaluated using the criteria
specified in the 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manual". For an area to be considered a wetland, the following hree
specifications must be met:
1) presence of hydric soils (low soil chroma values)
2) presence of hydrophytic vegetation
3) saturated soils, oxidized rhizospheres, matted vegetation, high
water marks on trees, buttressed tree bases, and surface ro ts.
Two small jurisdictional wetland sites will be impacted by the
construction of Section A. The impacted wetland sites, which amount
to less than 0.33 acre, are located along the west side of NC 07
between Macdonald Real Estate and the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's
Witnesses. The flora found in these two wetland sites is dominated by
jack in the pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), jewel weed (Impatiens p.),
red trillium (Trillium erectum), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamo ea),
hay scented fern (Dennstaedtia punctilobula), and day lily
(Hemerocallis fulva)..
4. Permits
Surface water and wetland impacts are likely to be authorized by
provision of 33 CFR 330.5(a) (14). This permit authorizes
construction provided the following conditions are met:
(1) The width of the fill is limited to the minimum nece?sary
for the actual crossing;
(2) The fill placed in Water of the United States is limi ed to
a filled area of no more than 1/3 acre;
(3) No more than a total of 200 linear feet of the fill fi
roadway can occur in special aquatic sites, includ
wetlands;
the
ng
17
(4) The crossing is culverted, bridged, or otherwise designed
to prevent the restriction of and to withstand expected
high flows, tidal flows, and movement of aquatic organisms,
and;
(5) The crossing, including all temporary and permanent
attendant features, is part of a single and complete
project for crossing of a Water of the United States.
Since the proposed project is located in a designated "Trout"
county, the authorization of a nationwide permit by the COE is
conditioned upon the concurrence of the Wildlife Resource Commission
(WRC).
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM)
Section 401 Water Quality General Certification is also required.
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the State issue or
deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed
activity that may result in a discharge into waters of the United
States. The issuance of a 401 permit from DEM is a prerequisite to
issuance of a CAMA or Section 404 Permit. This project will require
a 401 Water Quality General Certification from DEM prior to the
issuance of the Nationwide permit. ,
5. Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals have been in, or are in
the process of, decline either due to natural forces or the
encroachment of man on its habitat. The following sections discuss
these species and their relationship to the subject project.
a. Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended.
Effective March 28, 1995 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
lists six federally protected species (see Table 4) for Jackson
County.
Table 4. Federally Protected Species for Jackson County.
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Helonias bullata
Isotria medeoloides
Falco peregrinus
Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus
Myotis sodalis
Gymnoderma lineare
COMMON NAME STATUS
Swamp pink T
Small whorled pogonia T
Peregrine falcon E
Carolina northern flying
squirrel E
Indiana bat E
Rock gnome lichen E
18
"E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatener with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
"T" denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range).
The following is a description of these species, their habit t
requirements, and conclusions regarding their relationship to the su ject
project.
Swam Pink Helonias Bullata
This perennial plant grows from tuberous rhizomes. It as
lance-shaped, smooth, evergreen leaves that grow in basal rosette.
The 12-to 14-inch hollow stem is topped with a short, dense,
spike-like raceme of pink or purplish flowers. The fruit is a three
lobed, papery capsule, 0.12-0.2 inches long and 0.32-0.4 inches wide.
Swamp pink is found in freshwater wetland areas including spr'ng
seepages, swamps, bogs, meadows, and along the margins of mar by
meandering streams.
Suitable habitat for the swamp pink occurs in wetland sites
located in Section A. A plant-by-plant survey was conducted i all
suitable habitat found in the study area on August 12, 1994. No
individuals of swamp pink were identified. No effects to the swamp
pink will occur as result of the proposed action.
Small-whorled o onia Isotria medeoloides)
This perennial orchid has long pubescent roots and a hollo stem
3.8 to 10 inches tall. Stems terminate in a whorl of five or six
light green, elliptical leaves that are somewhat pointed. Lea es
measure approximately 3.2 X 0.16 inches. One or two light green
flowers are produced at the end of the stem. Flowers have sh rt
sepals that are only 1 inch long. The small-whorled pogonia gr ws in
second growth deciduous or deciduous-coniferous forests with an open
canopy, open shrub layer, and sparse herb layer.
Suitable habitat for the small-whorled pogonia exists in the
project area. A plant-by-plant survey was conducted on June 14, 1994
by walking in all suitable habitat located within the project 1 mits.
Indian cucumber root, a species commonly associated with the
small-whorled pogonia, was identified in both climbing lane sections..
No specimens of the small-whorled pogonia were observed in the study
area. The proposed construction will not adversely impact the
small-whorled pogonia.
19
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus)
The peregrine falcon is between 1.3 and 1.6 feet long and 3.0 to
3.6 feet wide. In this species the female is roughly 25% larger than
the male. Plumage along its back is dark with the underside being
lighter and barred and spotted. It is most easily recognized by the
dark crown and a dark wedge that extends below the eye forming a
distinct helmet. Like all falcons, it is characterized by pointed
wings in flight. Immature falcons have dark-brownish backs and
heavily streaked underparts. Nesting for the falcons is generally on
high cliff ledges, but they may also nest in broken off tree tops in
the eastern deciduous forest and on skyscrapers and bridges in urban
areas. Nesting occurs from mid-March to May.
Although the peregrine falcon could potentially use open habitat
in the study area for foraging, no suitable habitat for nesting was
identified in or near the study area and no individuals are known to
nest in the vicinity. Therefore, no effects to the federally
protected species are anticipated as a result of the proposed action.
Carolina northern flying squirrel Glaucom s sabrinus coloratus) LEI
The northern flying squirrel is a small gliding rodent. It is a
solely nocturnal animal with large dark eyes. Juvenile squirrels
have a uniform dark grey and an off-white underside. Adult squirrels
are characteristically grey with a brownish, tan, or reddish wash on
the back and a greyish-white to buffy white underside. This squirrel
is found above 5,000 feet in the transition zone between hardwood and
coniferous forests. Nests are generally found in the hardwood
forest. The squirrels occupy tree cavities, wookpecker holes, and
leaf nests.
Habitat for the northern flying squirrel is not found at
elevations below 5,000 feet. Elevations in the study area range from
2000 to 4000 feet. The proposed project will not affect the Carolina
northern flying squirrel.
Indiana Bat M otis sodalis
Adult Indiana bats are the smallest bats found in western North
Carolina. They measure 3 inches in length and weigh 1/8-1/4 ounce.
Rivers as foraging areas and as migration routes are extremely
important to this species. Optimum foraging is over streams with
mature riparian vegetation overhanging the water. Streams that have
been stripped of their riparian vegetation do not appear to offer
suitable foraging habitat.
The Indiana bat is known from Jackson County only from an
undated collection taken at Kitchen's Cave near Sylva. Riparian
habitat found in section B of the study area provides suitable
foraging habitat for the bat. No caves or maternity colonies were
identified in the study area. Even with suitable foraging habitat
available, without caves suitable for roosting and hibernation, it is
unlikely that this species will utilize habitat found in the study
area. No impacts to the Indiana bat will occur as result of the
proposed action.
20
Rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderma lineare
The rock gnome lichen is a narrow endemic, restricted to areas
of high humidity. These high humidity environments occur on igh
elevation (> 4000 ft.) mountaintops and cliff faces which are
frequently bathed in fog or lower elevation (> 2500 ft.) deep gorges
in the Southern Appalachians. The rock gnome lichen primarily occurs
on vertical rock faces where seepage water from forest soils a ove
flows only at very wet times. The rock gnome lichen is almost lways
found growing with the moss Adreaea in these vertical intermit ent
seeps.
Suitable habitat for the rock gnome lichen does not exist within
the studied project area; therefore, no impacts to the rock gnome
lichen will occur as a result of the proposed project.
b. Federal Candidate Species
Federal Candidate species are not legally protected under
the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally
proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Surveys for
federal candidate species were not conducted. Table 5 lists
federal candidate species for Jackson County.
21
TABLE 5 FEDERAL CANDIDATE SPECIES FOR JACKSON COUNTY
Scientific Name Common Name
Aneides aeneus
Cryptobranchus allegiensis
Percina squamata
Cambarus reburrus
Mesodon Orestes
Speyeria diana
Bryocrumia vivicolor
Cheilolejeunea evansii
Delphinium exaltatum
Lophocolea appalachiana
Mnium carolinianum
Ponotropsis o orata
Plagiochila caduciloba
Plagiochila echinata
Plagiochila char ii
Plagiochila sullivantii
var. spinigera
Plagiochila s. var.
sullivantii
Plagiochila virginica
var. caroliniana
Saxifraga caroliniana
Schlotheimia lancifo is
Silene ovata
Senecio millefolium
S henolobo sis pearsonii
Tortu a ammonsiana
Waldsteinia lobata
Eu horbia purpurea
ans cinerea
JugLysimachia fraseri
Habitat
Green salamander Yes
Hellbender Yes
Olive Darter Yes
French Broad Stream Crayfish No
Engraved Covert No
Diana fritillary butterfly Yes
Gorge moss * Yes
a liverwort * Yes
Tall larkspur * No
Wolf's milk spurge Yes
Butternut Yes
Fraser's loosestrife Yes
a liverwort No
Carolina mnium * Yes
Sweet pinesap No
a liverwort Yes
a liverwort * Yes
a liverwort * Yes
a liverwort * No
a liverwort * No
a liverwort *
Cray's saxifrage
Highland's moss
Mountain catchfly
Divided-leaf ragwort
A liverwort *
Ammon's tortula
Barren strawberry
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Note: All federal candidates presented are classified as C2
* denotes no specimen taken in at least 20 years
c. State Protected Species
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered
(E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), or Special
Concern (SC) are given protection by the State Endangered
Species Act and the N.C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act
of 1979, administered and enforced by the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission and the N.C. Department of
Agriculture. Table 6 lists the state-protected species for
Jackson County.
22
Surveys for state
search of the North
data-base of rare and
records of occurrence
area.
protected species
Carolina Natural
protected species
of state-protected
were not conducte . A
Heritage. Program'
failed to turn up any
species in the study,
TABLE 6 STATE-PROTECTED SPECIES FOR JACKSON COUNTY
Scientific Name
Aneides aeneus
Cryptobranchus allegiensis
Mesodon orestes
Bryocrumia ivcolor
Delphinium exaltatum
Gymnoderma lineare
L ssimach?ia fraseri
Schlotheimia lancifolia
Senecio millefolium
Common Name Status
Green salamander E
Hellbender SC
Engraved covert T
Gorge moss * E
Tall larkspur * E-SC
Rock gnome lichen PE
Fraser's loosestrife E
Highland's moss * T
Divided-leaf rafwort T
no specimen taken in at least 20 years.
d. Anticipated Impacts to Protected Species
No impacts to federally protected species are antici
from construction of the project.
6. Soils
The topography of the area is characterized as mountainous.
Elevations in the study area range from 2000 to 4000 feet and oil
profiles are generally deep and well-drained. Prevalent soil type:
are given in Table 7.
23
TABLE 7 SOIL TYPES
Symbol
Map Unit Name
CuD Cullasaja-Tuckasegee complex
CuE Cullasaja-Tuckasegee comples
(30-50% slopes, stoney)
EdC Edneyville-Chestnut complex
(8-15% slopes, stoney)
EdD Edneyville-Chestnut complex
(15-30% slopes, stoney)
PwD Plott fine sandy loam
(15-30% slopes, stoney)
Ud Udorthents (loamy)
NkA Nikwasi fine sandy loam
2% slopes, frequently flooded
Soils of the Edneyville and Chestnut Series (EdC, EdD) consist
of coarse-loamy, moderately deep, well drained soils that occur on
gently sloping to very steep ridges and side slopes. Slopes range
from 2-95%.
Soils of the Cullasaja and Tuckasegee Series (CuD, CuE) consist
of loamy-skeletal, very deep, well drained soils on toe slopes, fans,
and benches in coves in the Southern Appalachian Mountains. These
soils are formed in colluvium and are found on 8-95% slopes.
7. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Jackson County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Regular Program; however, none of the crossings involved in this
project are in a detailed study area. The approximate limits of the
100-year flood boundaries are shown in Figure 5. The proposed
improvements will not affect floodplains in the vicinity of the
project.
8. Farmland
North Carolina Executive Order No. 96, Conservation of Prime
Agriculture and Forest Lands, requires state agencies to minimize the
impact of construction and land acquisition projects on prime and
important farmland soils. Due to the area's very steep terrain,
farming is not a feasible land use within the project area.
Therefore, no further consideration of farmland impacts is necessary.
24
9. National Forest Impacts
The proposed construction is located near the boundary of
Nantahalia National Forest. The U.S. Forest Service was consult
determine the project's impact on National Forest land. The L
Forest Service has stated that no National Forest Systems lands
be directly impacted by the proposed right of way of the project
letter on page A-8 of the Appendix).
10. National Park Impacts
According to the National Park Service, the proposed
will not affect the Blue Ridge Parkway, which is located s
miles northeast of NC 107. See letter on page A-7 of the App
11. Traffic Noise
The 67 Leq and the 72 Leq contours are expected to be with!
proposed right of way for the project. The exterior noise lei
increases for the receptors in the areas of the climbing lanes
expected to be approximately 2 dBA. Generally, a 3 dBA increa!
considered to be a barely perceptible change. The project will
substantially increase traffic volumes, and no additional thrc
lanes are planned. Hence, the project's impact on noise levels
be insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construct
but will be temporary. This evaluation completes the assessm
requirements of FHPM 7-7-3 (highway traffic noise) and no addit
reports are required.
12. Air Quality
The project is located within the Mountain Air Quality Coi
Region. The ambient air quality for Jackson County has bee
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Qu
Standards. This project is located in an area where the Sta
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation cl
measures. Hence, the conformity procedures of Title 23, Code
Federal Regulations, Part 770 do not apply to this project.
If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shat
done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations c
North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NC
2D.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment requirement
FHPM 7-7-9 (air quality) and no additional reports are required
13. Stream Modification
the
ed to
.S.
will
(see
ix.
n the
el
are
e is
not
ugh
will
on,
-nt
onal
trol
1 i ty
:e
ntrol
of
be
F the
C
of
Approximately 800 feet of stream rechannelization is anticipated
due to the proposed improvements. This rechannel ization will be
required for an 800-foot section of a tributary to Thorpe Rese oir
along the west side of NC 107 just south of Macdonald Real Estate in
Section A (see Figure 2). A description of the tributary is given in
Section IV.C.2 of this report. The rechannelization is necessa y to
accommodate the proposed improvements while avoiding impacts to
25
existing development along the east side of NC 107. During the
detailed geotechnical and hydraulic studies for the project, NCDOT
will examine the possibility of providing steeper back slopes in this
area to minimize impacts to the tributary and possibly reduce the
length of rechannelization.
14. Construction Impacts
To minimize potential adverse effects caused by construction
activities, the following measures, along with those already
mentioned, will be enforced during the construction phase:
a. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas outside of
the right-of-way and provided by the contractor, unless
otherwise required by the plans or Special Provisions or
unless disposal within the right-of-way is permitted by the
Engineer.
b. During construction of the proposed project, all materials
resulting from clearing and grubbing, demolition, or other
operations will be removed from the project, burned, or
otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any burning will
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and
ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan for Air Quality. Care will be taken to
insure burning will be done at the greatest distance
practicable from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public.
Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
C. Dust control will be exercised at all times to prevent
endangering the safety and general welfare of the public
and to prevent diminishing the value, utility, or
appearance of any public or private properties.
d. An erosion control schedule will be devised by the
contractor before work is started. The schedule will show
the time relationship between phases of the work which must
be coordinated to reduce erosion and shall describe
construction practices and temporary erosion control
measures which will be used to minimize erosion. In
conjunction with the erosion control schedule, the
contractor will be required to follow those provisions of
the plans and specifications which pertain to erosion and
siltation. These contract provisions are in accordance
with the strict erosion control measures as outlined in the
Department of Transportation's FHPM 6-7-3-1. Temporary
erosion control measures such as the use of berms, dikes,
dams, silt basins, etc. will be used as needed.
e. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as
possible to alleviate breeding areas for mosquitoes.
f. An extensive rodent control program will be established if
structures are to be removed or demolished.
26
g. Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
h. The construction of the project is not expected to cause
any serious disruptions in service to any of the utilities
serving the area. Before construction is started, a
preconstruction conference involving the contracto ,
pertinent local officials, and the Division of High ays
will be held to discuss various construction procedur s.
i. Prior to construction, a determination will be mace
regarding the need to relocate or adjust any existing
utilities in the project area. A determination of wh ther
the NCDOT or the utility owner will be responsible fo this
work will be made at the time.
j. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for
use on this project, the contractor shall obtain
certification from the State Department of Cultural
Resources certifying that the removal of material from the
borrow source will have no effect on any known distr ct,
site, building, structure, or object that is include in
the National Register of Historic Places. A copy of his
certification shall be furnished to the Engineer prio to
performing any work on the proposed borrow source.
k. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be
subjected to brief disruption during construction of the
project. Every effort will be made to insure that he
transportation needs of the public will be met both during
and after construction.
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Comments Received
During this planning study, comments were requested from the
following federal, state and local agencies. Written comments were
received from agencies noted with an asterisk (*) and are included i the
Appendix of this report.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
Environmental Protection Agency
* Federal Emergency Management Administration
* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
* National Park Service
* National Forest Service
* N.C. Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
* N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
* N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
* N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
Southwestern N.C. Planning & Economic Development Commission
Jackson County Commissioners
* Tennessee Valley Authority
27
B. Coordination
NCDOT representatives met with representatives of the N.C. Division
of Environmental Management (DEM) and N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
(WRC) on June 6, 1995 at the project site to discuss the project's impact
on water resources. The discussions centered on two subjects: 1) Impacts
to the unnamed tributary of Thorpe Resevoir in Section A and 2) Impacts to
Shoal Creek in Section B.
1) Unnamed Tributary of Thorpe Resevoir
The proposed improvements will require the rechannel ization of
an 800-foot section of an unnamed tributary to Thorpe Resevoir in
Section A. As discussed in Section II.A of this report, west side
widening is proposed along Section A in order to accommodate two
northbound lanes without realigning the existing lane configuration.
WRC and DEM representatives requested that any widening be
accomplished along the east side of NC 107, away from the tributary,
in order to reduce or eliminate the need to rechannelize.
NCDOT examined the possibility of shifting the proposed widening
to the east side of NC 107, away from the tributary. Residential
development exists just north and.south of the proposed stream
rechannel ization along the east side of NC 107. In order to
construct the proposed climbing lane in Section A so that
rechannel ization would not be necessary, several residences located
just north and south of the stream on the east side of NC 107 would
be severely impacted and would possibly be relocated; therefore, this
alternative is not recommended. NCDOT will examine the possibility
of steepening the back slopes in the vicinity of the Thorpe Resevoir
tributary to lessen the project's impact on that stream and possibly
reduce the length of rechannelization.
2) Shoal Creek
The proposed improvements will require the placement of fill
material closer to Shoal Creek in Section B. In this area widening
will be accomplished along the east side of NC 107 in order to
eliminate impacts to existing development. WRC and DEM officials
recommended providing at least a 25-foot buffer between the fill
material and the stream bank. They were also concerned about the loss
of valuable vegetation near the stream, especially near the northern
part of Section B where the stream is closest to NC 107.
NCDOT will maintain at least a 25-foot buffer between the fill
material and the stream bank. NCDOT will also revise the design so
that more widening will be accomplished on the west side of NC 107
near the northern end of Section B so that valuable stream bank
vegetation along the east side of NC 107 will not be destroyed.
28
C. Public Hearing
An open forum public hearing will be held following the completi
this report to provide detailed information on the project to loci
citizens. At the hearing, interested citizens will be provided t
opportunity to review plans of the proposed improvements, talk to N
representatives, and provide comments concerning the project.
VI. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
m of
1
e
Based upon environmental studies and comments received from federal,
state, and local agencies, it has been concluded that the proposed action
will have no significant adverse effect upon the quality of the
environment. The following is the basis for this conclusion:
a. The project is not controversial on environmental grounds.
b. No significant adverse impacts on natural, ecological, cultural
or scenic resources of national, state, or local significance
are expected. No impacts to federally-protected species are
expected.
C. The project will not have an adverse effect on historic
architectural or archaeological sites.
d. No significant detrimental impact on air or water quality or on
ambient noise levels of adjoining areas is expected.
e. The project is consistent with local plans and will not di ide
or disrupt a community. No businesses or residences will be
relocated.
In view of the above, it has
Significant is applicable to this
the environmental review.
been determined that a Finding of No
project. This State EA/FONSI compl to
SEM/tp

F 4,
..5. O :. a ???(i. .?i`•,?s
` $ *^ 53. .: yv ,F? r F ?.t ,;> ? .,r•1 `• M'? } .... , +\. ... i44 ,3 `..
NAO
?. :? ,•?`?.. t" ,? ,.>.: act ? :,`" : -i;,:.:;t:`
ICI
co C0
„fit ? 3,,:: 3 h tF: ,?? i :,,? •'n,.i ^s„ ..
F.x W
l C3A• F +7..:F. 1{
?? f i I
v: :'f• .
,f F`•"F i i : ~ .:..F^' a +"i:::.•^•'.+ f i . , f r? L,'iy •i, •<. Ii
{J,., ^?:•h??f 4 ? .}'? fie.. Vie:,, 1

4
"ps V"
. All Ali

C ;

Cl)
'
o
cn .
a

0 ?

Z
Z0

G' 7'

Z

? v j
?
T
n Z O
rn ??'s4 E? `.T
d
?
Cl) j x w
C/) m ?

4 it,
z

`/ x -.Ai L22
ul a`
S W A I N
'`? i ? -?/ = i '? •?.?_. %r 5 ?i ! ri•=iii i , 7r T? ¦
???{1t ?? ? - .. a.n ? Y? t ?:?0.:,.aF ?• iF°•?.?E -t ?i. _ W?f ? ??\.^, Ao
z
/ ? r?.??y • 4 ^c. c d _ _ er wit z
i ' • i bp?p c• z? ? i? f5'?M ? `.
?e?° 1$ ?? ! ?' s •' ?i t S ? ? 'ice •? P' J i .?;i e
vol
i to E
14
s s ? ? l a cy. .:? , -?' ? a . i ? 9 ?.? e - ? }ri `` : f •?e.
__? Nr 1? la- ?•. ?i• ...?, ?' ?cr \?s a '?•i ? c ? i ^ - ? ?11 7 \
Ask
" 6
,??;? ?'y°.i•'• tl? `'P ,j,7 ,`- 1 N? ? •uT m _ y* } ? n1Al?ln?v? ? k/, St FV c?? 46:??C•
C`? ` °•i9° 4i ?' ` a??T-' S??"' ~••. _ ? ? ?6 L r1^??1, r` L> ?? ? 1? a[?t --
,Af
41
? - ? '. ;: ? it ,?' ? ? a? `•/' -_ •?
N r ^ ? 4
S N V i 1

O
a el

J w y o o pq ? o

? L m° r ,w
N
? ?
R
t C ' 'n = >• Z ]? 666 ?

y m o o !
E? W $ a n tZfDi ??
ti
C
m z -?
w
^"'414 i .11-41:1011111

HEM M?{???
a

r f r ?
C1
'II'.IE?IIIU [ lil. 'O o

r
f:it
F
8 ? ` 9 •i
? ?
9
?
? ?
4 ?'
9
?
?
{
s
f

W
O
?o J
Z
3
Q
O
h
Z
Q

3
v ? oy

y
C

? m
Q

W
4
?o J
* O
W
J
Z
O
C
W
J
W
a

W
a
h
N
W
h
0
0
Q
m
O
h
W
h
O
h
Q
Q
W
a
a

Wa
F"'1

f? as s
*
4 J ??2?
w

SECTION A s9 \
i •
.i

"l
,
D
l
?srz srr, a ?
a?
zc 2:
? : r'

.
Q
y
1
iisys o?=sa s`
C
x?
v
Q?L:
/
• / s¢zz Lr.
s
?,

x
O
:rl ?_? h H i
i
:w%+,•;•? by •rr :a
rt O A. ? ?
=ra??•,? ?y'1'
y V
a Oq •?` i
• Z ___?: W
• ,•
•?~ ma==y a•? asses '? .-r 4 p p
.lb. r-Ci d'?
• ?`' !'`y_f' `sir`,, ? i?
.. i? ?2a=)\?
!aaa(•
.tsL:?a?'' ?!
u
rt
!? s
?0 v
•
:i
. p
tre Q
n W
P Z
r
O
N
l
y y' 11
27-
asy :t
, yac.'sc?? ?_rr_aLa=t 1?syyr

I
J ;
4? x
a
Q
W
4
Q
i
LEGEND
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
LIMITS
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
1114 it I. s !n ?\? J
?? z a
n
J
SHEET 1 OF 2 /
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 107
FROM CASHIERS TO SOUTH
OF EAST LAPORTE
JACKSON COUNTY
TIP NO. R-2224
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN LIMITS FIG. 5

I
= ? u
_ N
°
ac °
i'.

_ t
>: <
z?
Uu? v ?' ..
g' tl Y
z t '
0
rn 1"' u ? '- a "€'
U0?
2 2 / \

?t ;,
y n
b
-INCH

/
N
-
faea?? ?
R ? M/ t? .far,
'
III {i
u
11 ?i

?ri== SECTION B .

x
W =-
z i
ON
RIVER {
z
-0
•'1 ?saas:? VV
y i
N +r a
w + n
,;- X
W.
z

LEGEND E`
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
......... LIMITS
mm", B i t PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
1
aim
z
h .. ,,wQ? i??es `??
11 Na ?/ a? :_,_
N A,01 \ I/
M
R
y?
Ay
X
W
z
0
N
1 N 14
// -- F I4
a?"a -_ gn pie .
NJ
Is ox
??+ ? ..
e
8 4
n
tl ?.
SHEET 2 OF 2
-w
v

M--.
?\ t
\`
u"
... z.T .ar //
p
X
W
n z
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 10
FROM CASHIERS TO SOUTH
OF EAST LAPORTE
JACKSON COUNTY
TIP NO. R-2224
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN LIMITS FIG. S
APPENDIX

R4-NT
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Region IV
1371" Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 700
Atlanta, GA 30309
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
March 11, 1993
C E /_Pp?
0
.
RE: Proposed Improvement Statement
Jackson County, North Carolina
Constructing Climbing Lanes for NC 107
Dear Mr. Ward:
z MAR 2 2 1993
Z 0
This is in response to the letter we received March 8, 1993, for
the above-referenced project.
Jackson County, North Carolina., is participating in the Regular
Phase of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The 100-year
floodplain and regulatory floodways have not been identified for
Jackson County.
Your agency must ensure compliance with the floodplain management
measures as enacted by the State of North Carolina. In this regard,
it is imperative your agency coordinate closely with the
appropriate staff in the Floodplain Management Section of the
Division of Emergency Management and with the local community
officials.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact Ms. Bel Marquez
at [phone].
Sincerely,
YYIoAA? O T\0-
Mary Anne Lyle, Chief
Risk Assessment Section, NTHD

A-1
QtNEt+T e 9 TAKES
United States Department of the Interior ?ER?IINN
9
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
a-sj9 Asheville Field Office
330 Ridgefield Court
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
March 31, 1993 ' ON
r.
0 S 1993
I OP
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager )!.ry ??'S <<;r'%
Planning and Environmental Branch ?v%VA,!?PfCF?Lh
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation '
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Subject: Scoping for proposed improvements to NC 107 from south of East
Laport to Cashiers, Jackson County, North Carolina, TIP
No. R-2224
Your letter of March 3, 1993 (received March 10, 1993), sent to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) Raleigh Field Office, was
forwarded to our office for response. Our office handles requests of
this nature for the western part of the state, which includes Jackson
County. You requested any information that would be useful in evaluating
the potential environmental impacts of the subject project. The
following comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
According to information provided in your letter, this project will
involve the construction of climbing lanes in three sections along NC 107
from south of East Laport to Cashiers. The climbing lanes will require
70-feet of right-of-way in 2,400-foot, 1,900-foot, and 6,600-foot
sections, primarily along the west side of the road (except for the third
section, which may be constructed along the east side). The map provided
with your letter was for a different project in Gates and Hertford
Counties, North Carolina.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is particularly concerned
about the potential impacts the proposed actions may have on listed.or
proposed endangered or threatened species and on stream and wetland
ecosystems within the project impact area. Preference should..be given to
alternative alignments, stream-crossing structures, and construction
A-2

techniques that avoid or minimize encroachment and impacts to these
resources.
The enclosed pages identify federally protected endangered and threatened
species known from Jackson County that may occur within the area of
influence of this proposed action. The legal responsibilities of a
Federal agency or their designated non-Federal representative under
Section 7 of the Act are on file with the Federal Highway Administration.
The enclosed pages also contain a list of candidate species that are
currently under status review by the Service which may occur in the
project impact area. Candidate species are not legally protected under
the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or
threatened. We are including these species in our response to give you
advance notification. The presence or absence of these species in the
project impact area should be addressed in any environmental document
prepared for this project.
The Service's review of the environmental document would be greatly
facilitated if the document contained the following information:
(1) A complete analysis and comparison of the available
alternatives (the build and no-build alternatives).
(2) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources
within existing and required additional rights-of-way
and any areas, such as borrow areas, that may be
affected directly or indirectly by the proposed
climbing lanes.
(3) Acreage and description of wetlands that will be
filled as a consequence of the proposed road
improvements. Wetlands affected by the proposed
project should be mapped in accordance with the
Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands. We recommend contacting the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory
Field Office, to determine the need for a Section 404
Clean Water Act permit (704/259-0855).
(4) Acreage of upland habitat, by cover type, that will
be eliminated because of the proposed project.
(5) Description of all expected secondary and cumulative
environmental impacts associated with this proposed work.
(6) Mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid,
eliminate, reduce, or compensate for habitat value
losses associated with any of the proposed project:
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these scoping comments and
request that you continue to keep us informed as to the progress of this
project. In any future correspondence concerning this project,--please'
r
A-3
reference our Log Number 4-2-93-058. Also, please note our address--
330 Ridgefield Court, Asheville, North Carolina 28806--for future
projects involving.tgp western counties of North Carolina.
Sincerely,
Nora A. Murdock,
Acting Field Supervisor
cc:
Mr. Randy C. Wilson, Section Manager, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife and
Permits Section, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
Archdale Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
Mr. Dennis L. Stewart, Program Manager, Division of Boating and Inland
Fisheries, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Archdale
Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
Ms. Linda Pearsall,-Director, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Cecil Frost, North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Plant
Conservation Program, P.O. Box 27647, Raleigh, NC 27611
r

A-4

I

JACKSON COUNTY
LISTED SPECIES
MAMMALS
Indiana bat ( otis sodalis) - Endangered*
Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus) - Endangered
BIRDS
Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) - Endangered
IN REPLY REFER TO
LOG NO. 4-2-93-058
PAGE I OF 2
PLANTS
Small whorled pogoni'a (Isotria medeoloides) - Endangered
Swamp pink (Helonias bulls a) - Threatened
NDIDATE SPECIES
AMPHIBIANS
Green salamander (Aneides aeneus)
Hellbender (Crvptobranchus alleaaniensis)
FISHES
Olive darter (Percina sauamata)
CRUSTACEANS
French Broad stream crayfish (Cambarus reburrus)
SNAILS
Engraved covert ( esodon orestes)
INSECTS
Diana fritillary butterfly (SSpeveria dim)
PLANTS
Gorge moss (Brvocrumia vivicolor)*
A liverwort (Cheiloleieunea vansi')*
Tall larkspur (Delphinium exaltatum)*
Wolf's milk spurge (u horbia Rurpurea)
Rock gnome lichen (Gvmnoderma i ear )
Butternut (Juglans cinerea)
Fraser's loosestrife (Lvsimachia fraseri)
A liverwort (Loohocolea appalachiana)*
Carolina mnium (Mnium carolinianum)*
Sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata)
A liverwort (Plaaiochila cauduciloba)
A liverwort (Plaaiochila echinata)*
A-5

IN REPLY REFER TO
LOG NO. 4-2-93-058
PAGE 2 OF 2
A liverwort (Plagiochila`shar ii)*
A liverwort (Plaaiochila sullivantii var. spiniuera)*
A liverwort (Plagiochila s. var. sullivantii)*
A liverwort (Pla4iochila virginica var. caroliniana)*
Gray's saxifrage (Saxifraga caroliniana)
Highlands moss (Schlotheimia lancifolia)*
Mountain catchfly (Silene ovata)
Divided-leaf ragwort (Senecio nmillefolium) •
A liverwort (Sphenolobopsis pearsoni)*
Ammons' tortula (ortul ammonsiana)
Barren strawberry (Waldsteinia lobata)
*Indicates no specimen from Jackson County in at least 20 years.
f
A-6

NT s 1y
W
o
IN REIN REFER TO:
United States Department of the Interior
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY
?'. 200 BB&T Building
One Pack Square
Ashevillc. North Carolina 28801
March 9, 1993
Mr. L.J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25261
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5261
Dear Mr. Ward:
C?
TAKE
PRWN?W
AMERKA ?
e-f
MAR 12 1993
DIVISIcsy OF
2C??HIGHWAYS
This is in response to your March 3, 1993, letter regarding
improvements to NC 167 from south of East Laport to Cashiers,
Jackson County, State Project No. 6.961613, TIP No. R-2224.
This proposed project will not affect the Blue Ridge Parkway, which
in Jackson County is located several miles northeast of NC 167.
However, we would appreciate receiving a map showing the precise
locations of the three climbing lanes proposed for NC 167. The map
that accompanied your March 3 letter gave us a much better idea of
improvements contemplated for US 13 in Gates and Hertford Counties.
Thank you for keeping us informed of your planning projects and for
allowing us the opportunity to review and comment on them.
Sincerely,
/Jams C. Rydn, Chief
ource Planning and
Professional Services

'r
?t
f •
A-7
f.?;. United States Forest National Forests United States Federal
Department of Service in North Carolina Court House Building
Agriculture 100 Otis Street
P.O. Box 2750
Asheville, NC 28802
Reply to: 2720
Date: February 23, 1993
Mr. Eric Midkiff
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611 ,
Dear Mr. Midkiff: ,
We have received your February 16, 1993 letter to John Chesley concerning the
proposed improvements to NC 107 from Tuckasegee to Cashiers in Jackson County,
NC.
There will be no National Forest Systems lands directly impacted by the
right-of-way on the proposed project; however, we would request an opportunity
to review your Environmental Analysis for possible effects of down stream
impacts on the Tuckasegee River.
If you have any questions, please contact Joe Moore at [phone].
Sincerely,
ITCH GURG US
Di ector, Lands d Minerals

IAc(
A-8
'Caring for the Land and Serving People
. North Carolina
Department of Administration
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
June 3, 1993
Mr. L.J. Ward
N.C. Department of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
Highway Building '
Dear Mr. Ward:
Katie G. Dorsett, Sectary
CGS I V
40
3uH 0 4 05
pIVIS1GN S •,
ZZ?? N?GHWp ?Q,
FNVIRON
RE: SCH File #91-E-4220-0743; Scoping for Comments for an
Environmental Review for NC 107, From South of East Laport
to Cashiers: TIP No. 6.961013, TIP No. R-2224
The above referenced environmental information has been reviewed
through the State Clearinghouse under the provisions of the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
Attached to this letter are comments made by agencies, after
reviewing this document, which identify issues to be addressed
in the environmental review document. For compliance with the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act, the appropriate
document should be forwarded to the State Clearinghouse for
environmental review. Should you have any questions, please
call 733-7232.
Sincerely,
Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
C F,
CB: jt ?• -
'' -?.
`Attachments
cc: Region E V .1(fi V 1993
. ??..? •...-
A-9
116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603.8003 Telephone [phone]
0 . State Courier 51-01.00
r,?n
11
' o& SUrt u
pwr
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James & Hunt, Jr., Governor
a

TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee 1
Project Review Coordinator
Jonathan R Howes, Secretary
RE: 93-0743 Scoping Improvements to NC 107,
South of East Laport to Cashiers, Jackson County
DATE: April 22, 1993
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed project. The attached comments are a
result of this review. More specific comments will be provided
during the environmental review process.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. If, during the
preparation of the environmental document, additional information
is needed, the applicant is encouraged to notify our respective
divisions.
MM:bb
Attachments
cc: David Foster

ll A-10
P.O Box 27697, Raleief', North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Emplovcr
..swc.
-State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512. North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
April 2, 1993
MEMORANDUM

TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
,
FROM: Monica Swihartr;'Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project' Review #93-0743; Scoping Comments - NCDOT
Improvements to NC 107, From South of East Laport to
Cashiers, Jackson County, TIP No. R-2224
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:.
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayeamille Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington.: Winston-Salem
704251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-47W 9191946-6481 9191397-3900 919/896-7007
A-11
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535.MaWgh. North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Oppornmity Affirmative Action Employer

Melba McGee
April 2, 1993
Page 2
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6') Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
H. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent
practicable.' Prior to the approval of any borrow/waste site
in a wetland, the contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification
from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilized the existing road alignments as, much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
8649er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb

f
• A-12

aMM
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James R Hunt, Jr., Governor

. March 23, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: nda S wall
FROM: rY i eman
n ironmental Engineer
Public Water Supply Section
SUBJECT: Clearinghouse Review _ o 7y3
DOT Upgrade of N. C. 107 .5'c its y 3
East LaPorte to Cashiers
Jonathan & Howes, Secretary
Comments relative to subject matter:
1) Intake from two water treatment plants 10.3 miles downstream.
(a) Western Carolina University 01-50-116
(b) Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority (Proposed) 01-50-035
2) one community well approximately 300 feet west of section #3. No impact
expected from this activity.
3) Section #1 will be near an impoundment for discharge from the adjacent power
plant. Sedimentation control measures will be needed if the construction
will be downstream of this intake.
JF/bbr±.
A-13
PC! Sax 27687, Rakigh, North Carolina 2760-7687 -Tekphone 9197334984 Fax [phone]
• An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

REVIEW
ROUTING SHEET
DATE : = / 2l /-D
SYSTEM NAME ; COUNTY ?S -W
PROJECT: L*14*m4 1107 ?i 1A?o?c,? rye ?s? s
DESIGN ENGINEER: PHONE:
ASSIGNED TO:_
DATE ASSIGNED DATE DUE:
DATE RECEIVED:
ENGINEER j r yam:
TECHNICAN:
COMMENTS: &
0_ r ; -<, rp ?wc v ii-
k Lil rc;? D )
-,54i ELF -fA ttpN c o??
IXA-N phi
_U1t(f Sys+c Afi
jljWct ?nWw ,y 0 F??10 M
zli 43 -t,- 3o
tf

A-14
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Saw * Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan & Howes, Secretary
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
March 16, 1993
TO: Melba McGee ,
FROM: David Harrison/
SUBJECT: Improvements to NC 107, Jackson County.
Project Number 93-0743
The proposed improvements involve construction of climbing lanes
in three locations along NC 107. The Environmental Assessment
should identify any unique, prime, or important farmlands that
would be impacted by the project. A wetlands evaluation should
be included.
x'33 n
i r
It •'J
DH/t1 c
G
A-15 '
PQ. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Cuohm 276117687 Tdeox a 919.733-4984 Fax / 919733-0513
An Egtd Opporttmhy Affirmative Acexn Employer
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment Health, and Natural Resoureee? ',
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMWNTS C t •H. Gardner
WOliam W. Cob4* Jr., Secretary Director
Project Number: 3 - o 2 Y3 County: AC f SIXA?
Project Name: / 1 ?Q
Geodetic Survey
-? This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional. destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at (919)
Reviewe Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
l? If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased•design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control commission.
other (comments attached) ;
,919')-:733-4574.
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at ( i
Reviewer Date
A-16
P.O. Box 27687 • (Welsh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Ooportunlty Aftmative Action Employer
?l
e? WRDUFE
10
rs> MOLE W A ti- BEY s [A`° \ F `? ?• a. 38
COUKITOP
IATK
CARM 4 CARYEIIM ®UTT 1673 COxAIm l r:y MANAGEMENT
®R u ?CECtL
1 N A N T. A *,H eA l
AREA
1737
Lffff cwk
61rIi M10? .r "®• . -- IpIHT• MQQ
1>y!. I?ITf 1671 rnt h?l Hlv. 6.010 ti .R., •?+.I: t 2
1MRIiAAKE NNRtINS 1[ \_ :`,? ..21jif .?
VATIfICK a ox 'lum CONNtO? . yy ?, -•??:: UR 17)!
` MRKER ¢.} , Rkh MwM°w ®j Es 15
G'
1731 umr 1670 O
a A- NOSES
\•, 4 a
"
COOK" s„ ?-/
17r. 1771
SUCICETE
luL
OOL
TRA1 ,{l " Ills e ?aN. `ienF +
.1621107 i-f11tJOER i+x e
JA., et1NEY 1101 MM
1AIK \ R3E m uH L Maa Covell t? aw. 3,%0 x`r UR 1
qq i,UU,• a °• t? tNi 1749
LR p
y'6 d1J a LL ti. re.R
.\?I ,, , ' .i. ?rerlt ?- a 71101PSON %/ N A T I K,`-,:r A La pz_u es
21 EC 1A
A 1 1 J ?° t SLUM IUIT 1745 yA lM 174E ®UR L.,
lumn . ?° 2>?2 a lffi 6 w Oj •' A 1 : ?? nf4 UIT 747
Ss.aedl 'ti I !L!t J MELTON C;dk Rids x^`:•
a S EM L°tal lLfl' j MORNETNEAD :+ Q,.
l7it'4 v 1J77t-' 0 N N s10 ILA = 1 . 1 7 •. v2!•.';. :
Lm firs R yg,l s a? A LNf 1 DOl hITOt JILL L i7 • . % 1063
~'2'•'• ••
• 1 Him 1122 p 1 ' ek C,Nk • 90: lzgt
% Is73 / 12:
J1t1 1m T lJ1t . a a , L ufl. ?1 tk v 161a
`yA t ? 1W t/11 iM0 '= 1»I lEm INIIRtIKTOxe 1 e ER 90) "h A
CLIFF
!)t7 TrckawlN 1167 OIDA TK
?ANTMt! 0406 " Pf1 167'9 a SqS y +"" _3; T TV ? 21 E
??/ !1!V IAIO • ° •4 'r - '!?LI'LM 1!E LR sOh L}2e
• ) ` cue °? 11)T Lsp
lLl 113f c dFCt. P >
iS LIR utl :t: LAK ?•ti ?, ?° fq• 17 ?"r:.l.
s y, Cma GITTS 1747
a 906 fit,
1Y.;427 CEDAR CUFF
1161 MerrYi" .._:
L f LAKE
M 'Lo" ?'t4• LNT 162 HEAR CREEK
?y 11u i, /.f: F O R E 5 T •. '+ , •,., J
we"
NIGC R40s L CONEY MTK 9of
GARY KHMS M
BIV. 4.79m tuxwfff •s i;? 0". 4,400 one O'
- [[,?
!t°• -•? y? R? MG KN06 ?S •• W N
4 \?? > / •1•„ ELEV.1,600
A ats
tllT AN t7 CIfe1 llxOtllf Y-: „ 21 Ec 10
Moss xw-A T„f ft y Cqn TI[I[,[? L?`?
4 UIT 16[S 1?•+•.
Pigs ROT M
?• f,
SiGIS
91406 Lm
:{<COID MTM::: ti ?
JEWINS 1647 1=M
Onvic
so awoe
'Al
001?k6 Strkq 7=ASEGEE 1 G' 1m KACKRM MM=•.rf 5 ?::?
!? • OL i:1 « FALLS ?? a• II BEV. 4,500 G'Ft ••.?
r of P ?i[s
Jig
°; ? y? }SL 111! fA?T 6otR Q e .: ;?
a Jm EM h ??? ? ?/ F ''??•4,j O
.8 LIAO
7 y .,.ir. aLMrriLM?. O ^a• y1 G E
Lbl LNT 9 ca
j D JJ2! -' _171 ..;,J u EC ! ??llWNOGSAOC'?4T t
OID ROOCY lilt 0 ` JIM
1 U? 1J71 • ERWI ® • ? 21 E? 6 ?*PUWA
Lf
• ?• A > 13!
MM / 1.4n (, - m
4y b v
• `Lf) (}. 11_ J' ,w1U L.V J A LAKE. FAIR LO
LM 1662 •??l iJSE 1!!1 ?? TIT 0 0". 7,140 tf N rAr
p Lto 1 y0 ! SS
1r\0? 11M6.i Y°Mir MJr< I iJ ? 113 9 P R SS. illT
•IS/U /I•dq
NOOMOf MTII ?./'•? `P A no ,4 Uff I. 165
T(! `h f
110!lsCK MAM?AIN loot Get ROCK 1 107 1A? 111 t ? SAPPHIR?
?? •??^6 "MM ?4 LL2 -1 LAKE
3.2 1.0 If
16 ::r'.'i'•.':;s,'•?.',? ' 1W. 3.104/
`. YatOW MM •' > lu
ELEV. 1.143 .i •1 -?,;, 1657 ' G[MNET TOP MM
9 EO iT?,p 1 d ? N ss - cILSxIE?FS y I".w?4.621 .
LH 21 Es 4
Ip• ,
CASHERS
7S TO?.710
,..
HIP$ ;
C ?f•?..? L is OEM ?y?, '- ?1 / ; •. ;a'
O 10 1111,44"m. COURTHOUSE C U9t = Iln L9f?
COwe•G? DEVIL
350831 u?e?E MIN @ x
?' is py ?d(?' b'YMtTESID SiDES -
::=r. A-171
"y.,
i

I1
`DIVISION-OF PARRS AND RECREATION
March 22, 1993
Memorandum
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Stephen Hall
SUBJECT: Scoping -- NC 107 Improvements, Jackson County
REFERENCE: 93-0743
The Natural Heritage Program database contains records for two
species of rare plants occurring within the vicinity of the
proposed project. Golden seal (Hvdrastis canadensis), state-
listed as Endangered/Special Concern, has been recorded from
along NC 107 at two locations just south of Section 1. Pink-
shell azalea (Rhododendron vasevi), considered significantly rare
in North Carolina, also occurs at one of these sites. Both are
found primarily in rich cove forests.
Should these species or suitable habitat be discovered within the
project area, we recommend that alignments be selected that avoid
them as much as possible.

A-18
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 92
512 N., Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment .
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: David Yow, Highway Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 2, 1993
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) regarding fish and wildlife
concerns for improvements to NC 107 from south of East
Laport to Cashiers, Jackson County, North Carolina, TIP
No. R-2224, SCH Project No. 93-0743.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. L. J. Ward of
the NCDOT for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and wildlife
resources resulting from the subject project. The N. C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed
improvements, and our comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (G.S.
113A-1 et seq., as amended; 1 NCAC 25) and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The NCDOT proposes to construct climbing lanes in three
locations along NC 107 from south of East Laport to Cashiers in
Jackson County. Specific NCWRC concerns are listed below by
project section:
Section 1: This site lies between NC 107 and the West Fork
Tuckasegee River. The primary concern here is the p6ssible
encroachment on the river, since the 70 feet of right-of-way
required by the NCDOT for this project may involve chhhnel-
relocation and/or severe sedimentation impacts,;:. West Fork
Tuckasegee River is Designated Public Mountain TYout Water
(DPMTW) and contains a good brown trout fishefy,fhat. is
heavily fished. The river is stocked bienniall,•with brown
trout fingerlings. The NCWRC would oppose any?pr63ect
designs that involve.relocation, channelization, or filling
./
A-19
Memo Page 2 April 2, 1993
of these waters. Also in the vicinity is Little Glenville
Lake and the Nantahala Power and Light powerhouse associated
with Thorpe Reservoir (also called Glenville Lake). Little
Glenville Lake isibecoming filled with silt and is no longer
DPMTW.
Section 2: This site involves encroachment on Shoal Creek,
which closely parallels NC 107 in this area. Shoal Creek is
DPMTW from where the Glenville Lake pipeline crosses this
creek downstream to the confluence with West Fork Tuckasegee
River, and degradation of upstream areas may impact these
waters as well. Shoal Creek is stoAed periodically with
brown trout fingerlings and is heavily fished. Concerns
regarding this area are similar to those listed for the West
Fork Tuckasegee River above.
Section 3: The NCWRC has no special concerns regarding
DPMTW from this section of the project, although impacts to
small tributaries may affect downstream waters and should be
avoided or minimized.
For purposes of reference, our informational needs regarding
the upcoming environmental document are listed below:
1. Description of fishery and wildlife resources within
the project area, including a listing of federally or
state designated threatened, endangered, or special
concern species. When practicable, potential borrow
areas to be used for project construction should be
included in the inventories. A listing of designated
plant species can be developed through consultation
with:
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
Cecil C. Frost, Coordinator
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
In addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered Species
Program maintains databases for location?bf 'vertebrate
wildlife species. While there is no charge for the
./
A-20

Memo Page 3 April 2, 1993
list, a service charge for computer time is involved.
Additional information may be obtained from:
Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame and Endangered Species Program
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27604-1188
[phone].
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the
project. The need for channelizing or relocating
portions of streams crossed and the extent of such
activities.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted by
the project. Wetland acreages should include all
project-related areas that may undergo hydrologic
change as a result of ditching, other drainage, or
filling for project construction. Wetland
identification may be accomplished through coordination
with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). If the
COE is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands
should be identified and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland wildlife
habitat impacted by the proposed project. Potential
borrow sites should be included.
5. The extent to which the project will result in loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat
(wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing or compensating for
direct and indirect degradation in habitat quality as
well as quantitative losses.
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which analyzes
the environmental effects of highway construction and
quantifies the contribution of this individual project
to environmental degradation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early
planning stages for this project. If I can further assist your
office, please contact me at [phone].
cc Joffrey Brooks, District 9 Wildlife Biologist
Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist,. ;.
Stephanie Goudreau, Mtn. Region Habitat Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Progead< gr.
Janice Nicholls, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Serv4bb
A-21

' yco 'rte ^ .
S 'V
19,113
IVA
:1L:1i -.:.,,
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources hivt?d'
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor Divis oit?" f ?? .andYHisto
Betty Ray McCain, secretary William'S-Fric?dt., Director
June 1, 1993
MEMORANDUM

TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Trans ortation
FROM: David Brook N GZ'i/ ?;
Deputy State is oric Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Improvements to NC 107 from south of East Laport to
Cashiers, Jackson County, R-2224, 6.961013, CH
93-E-4220-0743
A-
G?1 V O
JUN 0 21993
?Z
DIVISION OF
C$ HIGHWAYS
?VVIRON?
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structures of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the
project:
Columbus Wilson House. NC 107, 1.5 mile north of SR 1145.
Millford Moody House. NC 107 at the junction with SR 1123.
Thorpe Power Plant Worker Housing. NC 107, 2.1 mile north of SR 1131.
None of the above properties have been evaluated for National Register eligibility.
We are aware of no National Register-listed or state study list properties located in
the area of potential effect.
There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries.
However, the project area has never been systematically surveyed to determine
the location of significance of archaeological resources. Segments 1 and 3 have a
high potential for the presence of significant archaeological resources and'we
recommend that these two areas be subject to comprehensive archaeological
survey prior to construction activities.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR, Part"800.
A-22
109 Fact Jones Street • Raleiah North Carolina 77M1.7R07 ??
Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
B. Church
T. Padgett

&-r2 3
00,
to -

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
July 1, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Trans, ortation
t '
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State sto c reservation Officer
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
SUBJECT: Improve NC 107 south of East Laport to Cashiers, R-
2224, Jackson County, CH 93-E-4220-0743, GS 93-
0066
Thank you for your letter of June 10, 1993, transmitting the archaeological survey
report by Bill Jurgelski and Kenneth Robinson concerning the above project.
During the course of the survey no sites were located within the project area. The
authors have has recommended that no further archaeological investigation be
conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this recommendation
since this project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order
XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee Gledhill-
Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: Tom Padgett
A-24
6!993

IM T.gcf T-oc Qlrnnf . Dnloinh Nnrfh rnrnun? 77(!11_7Rl17 91
dY s ~
.-
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain. Secretary
November 17, 1993
MEMORANDUM
11
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State 1-16 ric Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Construction of three climbing lanes, NC 107 from
Cashiers to south of East Laport, Jackson County, R-
2224, 6.961013, GS 94-0018

EI\
t 9 1993
0weUVOnw
Thank you for your letter of October 11, 1993, concerning the above project. We
have reviewed the phase I historic architectural resources survey report prepared
by Helen Ross for the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
We concur that no National Register-listed properties are within the area of
potential effect for the project. In terms of historic architectural resources, no
further compliance with G.S. 121-12(a) is required.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order
XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee Gledhill-
Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: B. Church

i
A-25

' JUN 1 4 1993
,. ZZ DIVISIGN IF
2C HIGHWAY
Termessae Valey At4hoft, 400 West Simnh FIJI Drive. Knon*e. Tennessee 37902.1499 C?
ON;
June 11, 1993
r'2 JaN
j99
• 3
L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager ?,?? •? ?G??
Planning and Environmental Branch l' fl.;
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 26511-5201 ,
Dear Mr. Ward:
NC 107, FROM SOUTH OF EAST LAPORT TO CASHIERS, JACKSON COUNTY, STATE
PROJECT NO. 6.961013, TIP NO. R-2224
TVA has reviewed your March 3 letter and offers the following comments:
1. Golden seal (Hvdrastis canadensis), a state-listed endangered
plant, is reported in the immediate vicinity of Section 1 and may
occur along Section 2.
2. All three sites along NC 107 appear to be within the acquisition
boundary of the Nantahala National Forest. If so, coordination
with the U.S. Forest Service should be done.
3. The proposed project potentially encroaches on the floodplain of
the west fork of the Tuskasegee River. We have no available flood
data for this portion of the Tuskasegee River, but potential flood
impacts to the proposed improvements should be considered.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact
Dale K. Fowler of my staff at [phone] in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Sincerely,
M. Pau Schmierbach, Manager
Environmental Quality
A-26
RECEIVED P
-Q ment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
SEp 2 1 ??? ? Project located in 7th floor library
ffice of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Project Review Form r'Qcp Project Number. County: Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline):
04-3-?1fs a,
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All R/O Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ? Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning

? M
r
ill ? Water ? Water Resources ? Environmental Health
,
oo
esv
e ? Groundwater Wildlife
? Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer ? Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources - "fl David Foster
? Coastal Management Consultant Mi-arks and Recreation ? Other (specify)
? Wilmington
? Others
Environmental Management
? Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart

e s5
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager.
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
?.Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attach ed/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
? Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
PS-104
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
ti .. V
NC 107
From Cashiers to south of East Laporte
Jackson County
State Project No. 6.961013
T.I.P. No. R-2224

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Date H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
ea
co
??YY sEd
?.rs?
6R 0V R O
APR- 510
State of North Carolina - -
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512. North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
MEMORANDUM
April 2, 1993
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
FROM: Monica Swihart?,"Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #93-0743; Scoping Comments - NCDOT
Improvements to NC 107, From South of East Laport to
Cashiers, Jackson County, TIP No. R-2224
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:.
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 7041663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
.?. . f
Melba McGee
April 2, 1993
Page 2
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
H. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent
practicable. Prior to the approval of any borrow/waste site
in a wetland, the contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification
from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilized the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
8649er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
y ,?1
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
TO: REF, NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
rnr_ G-iC _ rrr?S?i?mh Dan
FROM:. REF. OR ROOM, BLDG.

ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER 9UR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
?. 222

' UXPV
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TMNSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
March 3, 1993
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
?WR - 51993
j
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Gal amb L?7W ETLANDS GROUF1?
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor A TER ?AUrY
FROM: L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental arxct?
SUBJECT: NC 107, From South of East Laport to Cashiers, Jackson
County, State Project No. 6.961013, TIP No. R-2224
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to NC 107. The project is included
in the 1993-1999 North Carolina Transportation Improvement Program and is
scheduled for right of way in fiscal year 1994 and construction in fiscal
year 1996.
The proposed improvements consist of constructing climbing lanes in
three locations along NC 107 from south of East Laport to Cashiers. A
vicinity map showing the project area is attached. The following is a
description of each impact area:
Section 1: This section begins 1.5 miles south of SR 1132 and ends 2400
feet south of that point. Seventy feet of right of way, measured from the
edge of pavement, will be required along the west side of NC 107 for that
2400-foot section.
Section 2: This section begins 0.5 miles south of SR 1158 and ends 1900
feet south of that point. Seventy feet of right of way, measured from the
edge of pavement, will be required along the west side of NC 107 for this
1900-foot section.
Section 3: This section begins 0.8 miles south of SR 1120 and ends 6600
feet south of that point. Seventy feet of right of way, measured from the
edge of pavement, will be required along the west side or along the east side
of NC 107 for this 6600-foot section.

Mar4'i 3,, 1993
Page 2
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful
in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project. If applicable,
please identify any permits or approvals which may be required by your
agency. Your comments will be used in the preparation of a document
evaluating environmental impacts of the project. It is desirable that your
agency respond by May 31, 1993 so that your comments can be used in the
preparation of this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Eric
Midkiff, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at [phone].
LJW/pl r
Attachment

GATES-HERTFORD
COUNTIES
Reynoldson Drum Hill Cori),
CAROLINA 3 p Gates
Como s G 3 A- T E S'
258 odu Buckland 7 32
7 13 3 3 37 3 158 15
O urfreesbo ure $ nbury
2 Mapleton A 158 13 1 e.Choor Mil?F,ond
4 atesville+ 7 sro1 Po.k
+ Winton 3 37 Trotville$andw
3 Tunis HoK
Menol ?L 6 Cofie
7 2
Unio d 2
'H 6 E" 3 F O 4
a' John s k* Ahoskie Harrell it '
7 6 4 J 2 10 3
re 1 _
0
C G u N I y ,o ? ?- - 3 cu a I e. I Il r ..., R. _ END - -
!., - VIR_G.INIA_ STATE LINE:- -,
PROJECT y8.
,
--- ----- -- 1u1
-°
1. lilz rLilt oC u ' Uffi `
111; 9Ay Dukr
Iw.
v_
L
° 1J ] • Don Otaurb m C?k
!o
Ill] .?;LM
1 12t 37
Fx a J31t ? zw .° ` .
G? . ' i?oo ` 3 1 Hoz.ha. ,t
N.d

' 31
ly f
hoed q
w
- I•E 1711 1,1
.2e. . GATES COUNTY
1 u¢i ?, _. 7
o T.p,y \? GnM Lit
L 1 . IS Vlll.ylon 1ll
Lt ro]
- I' L>of ? 3 L
I>N 4 .oe]
?0 111E O
W111Tf'OAK POcosIN
I
w J
Ser.m
1LSl e
1 1
l 17J,t llos
U e, \, 1194 J
4 1141.
' 1111
!
» 114!
1131
_
pets ?
9
.
?
!O .1 `
q

?J 1)01 i
'?i .° Roden yf2
L111
Se
Torhael
!a ?.
1»e
_- ll4m.
! WWI. Ook )
1 I?i1 .31I .1 E-
-- Cane. H?qh .
r
1111 ) Y !
?s \
1. Crmv
p

. li 11ll.
]i
FManon ' 1U

-.
. LM
> la Ge..read. m. 3
u,
Si
°ry'
? lilt L
4 -L
? \3 •J 1.2
ILL, -f
u3 j
_ 1J
! /
q
' 11
1.111 .L J
!12
, E

ti
L3 _0
\`( ir,*

//
112L
y
.1 E- s

^
TA)?O •? J111 .3: ?Y:
?`
1
?
1
7 Iss l1i k
1? C
,

1.ffi
1t I.3
!3JS - rpla
r•V
GA7E51'1lse]lE '^
2or ^.
131 MI
l
h
e"
a L!! ,
' . S 14 reiw
111

c
e 0
N \-'
11Q1 ?."un
''L 11 \
- ?'oa ? Army
--..'' ,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 13
FROM SR 1457 NEAR WINTON
TO VIRGINIA STATE LINE
GATES-HEARTFORD COUNTIES
T. I. P. NO. R-2507
FIG. 1
BEGIN HERTFORD COUNTY.
COF, E r]
lD
^"1oTe PROJECT
Ilia
1 7
n.e..m n.M.
l

y.? srnTta
N d wm? ^
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
March 5, 1993 _
R?6L?Qd??r
8
IMR -
196p_F
F
WETLANDS GROUP 1
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Gal amb WATER UALITV SECTION
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: Eric Midkiff ? M
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: NC 107, From South of East Laport to Cashiers, Jackson
County, State Project No. 6.961013, TIP No. R-2224
In reference to the start of study notification sent March 3, 1993 for
the subject project, please disregard the vicinity map included with that
letter and replace with this map.
EM/plr
Attachment

\ f
?
J ^ 21
`?
-A
1171 .4 174
i 133 FAS •7
1
Tuckosegee
- Sar' 28
? N 1134

?
yl 1181
.e t ?:
CEDAR CLIFFS I 1
ELEV. 31427 FqA
7 ?Oh
'

SECTION 1 ?
I
7r

NOB
92 v " 9
JACKSON COUNTY
?CO 1 129
A.3 Creek ?--??
? Trout -- 'cn
1b 1128.
PILOT MTN.
1 158 SECTION 2 1129
tg
Green 116\
\i Creek 2 ?w.GU.
'
t
ullowhee
+ - Gay 10 East Laporl ! 5623
ll' J A C 3 K S 270 rj',
Tuckasege '

l 281
` ih.,PF 9
Dom \\
Tho?
Glenvill

?u ?
e
e
6 \

a 10 64 10 Tnx
shiers
2
High Sapp'
Hampton
.
?
ds 6

TURKEY
KNOB
107 3o Big Ridge
Ch.
EGEE,
S r' 11 27 BLACKROCK MTN.
l1? 3 7 ° ELEV. 4,500
D, 1157
1159 > 1129 1126 1
y 112_5 O
1173 y cY 6 O
1124 1121
1156 ° 7 1
1123 o
Gl envill e LAUREL KNOB
( N 1124 1122 ELEV. 4,500
145 , ?THORPE 1155
RESERVOIR 7 6 1120
r'
ELEV. 1154 1121
°
3,492 ' 120
c ?
1145 O .7 <_71:?)
7. 1146
/.0114 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
53 1 149 1145 1 145 1 114_4 F DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Creek 1.9 qp PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
a 1148 ` 1.5 BRANCH
'ellow Mtn. 1145 NC 107
52 Ch.- SECTION 3 _ FROM CASHIERS TO TUCKASEGEE
1'9 1 149 JACKSON COUNTY
e !'es 2 T. I. P. NO. R-2224
0
fi I- 6
1142 107
11

1.0
2.8 .
Q
YELLOW MTN• 1144 a
ELEV. 5,145. ofi
A 1 Norton 1 ?.

1 150
ti FIG. 1
\ ' c1
-1143 5
;??
?? .
?.•;., p \

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 1 • •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt,Jr., Govemor
Jonathan B. Howesi Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
August 21, 1996
Jackson County
DWQ Project # 960758
State Proj. No. 6.961013
TIP# R-2224
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Franklin Vick
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201-
Dear Mr. Vick:
You have our approval to place fill material in 0.19 acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose of
constructing climbing lanes along NC 107, as you described in your application dated 2 August 1996.
After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Number 2671. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 26 when it is
issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. For this
approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes- the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786:
Sincerely, '
n Howard, Jr. P.E.
Attachment
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Feld Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
960758.1tr
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

W
?d lpla ^
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
August 2, 1996
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. Cliff Winefordner
Chief, Southern Section
Dear Sir:
960758
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
RECEIVED
AU6 1.21996
ENVIRONMENTAL 8( IENCES
BRANCH
G 11SJVLu
SUBJECT: Jackson County - Construction of Climbing Lanes along NC 107 from
Cashiers to South of East Laport; T.I.P. No. R-2224; State Project
No. 6.961013
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to construct climbing
lanes at three locations along NC 107 in Jackson County. The project is described fully in
a State Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact approved on
September 29, 1995. This document is available upon request. The existing roadway will
remain open to traffic throughout constructi
The proposed work will involve 0of re of fill in wetlands asso ciated
with two unnamed tributaries. The attac ings and summary sheet describe
the proposed construction in wetlands. sings are located above
headwaters.
It is anticipated that the proposed work may be authorized under Nationwide
Permit 926 for projects Above Headwaters, 33 CFR 330.5(3). Application is hereby made
for a Corps of Engineers 404 Permit as required for such activities. By copy of this letter,
we are also requesting 401 Water Quality Certification by the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality. In accordance with procedures for projects located in the designated
mountain trout counties, concurrence is also requested from the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission.
(9

2
Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questions, please call Cyndi Bell at
[phone], Extension 306.
Sincere ,
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/mlt
Attachments
cc: Mr. Steve Lund, COE, NCDOT Coordinator
Mr. David Yow, WRC, Marion
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Kelly Barger, P. E., Program Development
Mr. Don Morton, P. E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P. E., Hydraulics
Mr. William Rogers, P. E., Structure Design
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., Roadway Design
Mr. F. D. Martin, P. E., Division 14 Engineer
t
DEM ID: ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Boy. 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation; Planning & En'ironmental Branch
2. Owners Address: P 0 Box 25201; Raleigh; NC 27611 -
3. Owners Phone Number (Home):
(Work): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number.
H. Franklin Vick P.E.
Manager
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: Jackson
Nearest Town or City: Cashiers
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): L provements to NC 107 - Site No. 1
Station 132+00; Site No. 2 Station 137+00 - approximately 2.5 miles north of Cashiers.
6. Name of Closest StreanVRiver: Shoal Creek
7. River Basin: West Fork Tuckasegee River
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [X] NO [ ]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO [X]
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
0.45 acre
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: 0.19 acre
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: 0.19 acre

12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/21' X 11" drawings only): Addition of
climbing lanes to NC 107
13. Purpose of proposed work: To improve safety by providing climbing lanes for truck
traffic-.
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts. Existing alignment to be followed - wetlands are
adiacent to this linear oroiect.
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [X ] NO [ ]
RESPONSES. FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? ?:YES ] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property?
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? - ZZSignnature Date

? z z
r r
n z z
o m
O ?
?N P.
D z
("? tv
O
N
D
(7
r
s
11
a
i
0

m Z
a
>? o
ZM
0
0
o?
ff
Z
o z
2 a
V
z
'--i
m

II
II -
II ?
II = I
II
II ? ?
it I
II
Iy :_
1.
C7 I
III `
W II I
? II
it
11 .
1 11
1 I1
1 11
11 -
1 1? 11
\ 1'1
m \\ .\\-
??\ \ J) \
X
V, V \
Ola f JN
m
r
D
Z
r_
N
D

d

II
I?
II
II
II
II
I -: I
SX
'o O
? I I
m II I
?' I I
.I
I I
1 I
I I
II
I I
11
? 11
r
D
Z

-o
D
-D
.l
11 A `\
t7
D
rn
1 1 11 ?J
0
0
0
0
r
0>
C N
-? (/1
D D
/1
?
Q
C

r
D

I

LJ

m

o -- OF:

75
7 O ? ? ?-7

rT4i
1ri ( ?y
?t T

\J
rn G
I(ft
i z C> ?fl
G?
I
i
I
I
(I
I
I ?
?
AI
m
0
C
?>
Cl
co
,r
co
cn
U'
0
J_ FIE-' i
V1
c
0
i
r
!LA
I -.i
?S
1?
n
y r ^
z z
O A
O r
D ?
C7 CA
O
O
D
"y
I?
n
L?
?n
V

z

n z ^? ..
d

ao ? o ? z
?
x
'
s -,
>

r

v
z
FT?
N
\ o
(P- 7L
-o q
\ \ O \??\
68 Obiy
Olaf JN
i 1
1
d

.a
M
r
D
Z
N N
L ? O r_
N N
D Rl
\\ \ C,

TOTAL 1 0.19 0.06
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JACKSON COUNTY
PROJECT: 6.961013, R-2224
NC 107 FROM SOUTH OF
EAST LAPORT TO CASHIERS
SHEET (? OF A'
SUMMARY OF WETLAND SITES