20071814 Ver 1_401 Application_20071007

1447 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte, NC 28203
704-334-4454
FAX [phone]
October 23, 2007
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
NC DENR
Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Subject: Pre-Construction Notification/401 Certification Package
Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project
Stanly County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Karoly:
07-1814
Please find enclosed seven (7) copies of our PCN package for the Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project
and a check of $475.00 for the permit fee. We have also included seven copies of the following supporting
data on the project:
• PCN form,
• Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Report,
• 11x17 copy of the 90% Plan Set, and
• Approved Categorical Exclusion Form.
The purpose of the project is to improve aquatic and riparian habitat by promoting natural riffle and poll
features and by reducing sediment loading. This project is being used for compensatory mitigation.
This same information has been submitted to the Asheville Regulatory Field Office of the US Army Corps of
Engineers. If you have any questions, please call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Christine Miller
Project Manager
Enclosures ~~~~ D
D ~~
O~~ 2 6 Zppl
~~,~NR,WSS6~~6RP1~+H
Yrt-'i"" _ !J~

~~ ..~
Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
07-1814
USAGE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 27
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
~ ~~LSu V
Owner/Applicant Information D ~ j 2 6 2007
Name: Baker En ineerina NY Inc
Mailing Address: 1447 S Trvon Street Suite 200 DENR -WATER 4UAI.ITY
uietr ulna gun CT(1RIMI~TFR-QANC1i
Charlotte NC 28203
Attn: Christine Miller
Telephone Number: (704) 334 - 4454 Fax Number: (704) 334 - 4492
E-mail Address: chdmiller(a~mbakercorp.com
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Christine Miller
Company Affiliation: Baker En>;ineerin~ NY Inc.
Mailing Address: 1447 S Tryon Street Suite 200
Charlotte NC 28203
Telephone Number: (704) 334 - 4454 Fax Number: (704) 334 - 4492
E-mail Address: chdmiller(a~mbakercorp.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 9

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger .than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): N/A
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 656201287591, 656201499021
4. Location
County: Stanly Nearest Town: Norwood
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): The site is accessible from
Hi way 52 south of the town of Norwood. From Hi way 52, turn west on Riverview
Road• west onto Mount Zion Church Road• crossing over the active railroad tracks. Access
to UT1 is available from the farm road access on the north side of Mount Zion Church Road,
approximately 400 feet west of the railroad tracks. (See Vicinity Map and Site Map)
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.196608°N 80.123556°W (Project Center)
6. Property size (acres): approximately 542 acres total -work area approximately 38 acres
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Rocky River
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9

8. River Basin: Yadkin-Pee Dee
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general landuse in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The historic as well as current land use of the site and
surrounding area has been primarily forested and agriculture including both crops and
pasture for cattle razing Big Cedar Creek and the two unnamed tributaries involved in the
stream restoration project are degraded in nature showing, signs of extensive bank erosion
and channel degradation.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The site will be restored as a NCEEP full delivery project. This project involves total
relocation of the majority of on-site streams in order to restore proper dimension, pattern, and
profile to the stream system The channels will be constructed offline, where feasible, and
pump around systems will be emplo~d where the proposed channel intercepts the existing
channel In-stream construction is proposed on one section of channel at the lower portion of
the project where channel width prohibits use of a pump around. Proposed in-stream
activities in this location consist of placement of stream structures desi ng_ed to protect against
bank erosion. Construction equipment to be used onsite include excavators, bull dozers, and
track trucks. No offsite borrow or spoil sites will be needed. Additional information about
the project can be found in the attached Big_Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Plan.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work:
The purpose of the project is to restore and enhance approximately 11 780 linear feet of
stream in Stanly County. Several sections of the channel are significantlydegraded. This
stream restoration site was selected based on its probability to restore hig~i quality stream
habitat where it has ceased to exist.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. Restoration plan was submitted to NCEEP for review in September 2007
and submitted comment revisions in October 2007. As of October 19, 2007, a preliminary email
was received stating_that plans have been accepted and a letter will be sent out upon receipt of
the bond.
V. Future Project Plans
u~c~a t iiii2oos
Page 3 of 9

Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No future plans. ___
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Restoration and enahancement
of 10 6861inear feet (LF) of stream and enhancement of 1 094 LF of stream.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts clue to hnth structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh, 100-year
Floodplain Nearest
Stream Impact
(acres)
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) ( es/no) (linear feet)
N/A

Total Wetland Impact (acres)
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: N/A
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
mast he included_ To calculate acrea~e_ multiply lenl?th X width. then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Type of
Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name
Impact
Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on ma) Before Im act (linear feet) (acres)
Unnamed Tributary No.
Reach UT1 1 (UT1) to Big Cedar Restoration Perennial 10' 5,210 1.20
Creek
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9

Unnamed Tributary No.
Reach UT2 2 (UT2) to Big Cedar Restoration Perennial 9' 463 0.10
Creek
Big Cedar Creek Big Cedar Creek Restoration Perennial 15' 5,391 1.86
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 11,064 3.16
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on map ocean, etc.) (acres)

N/A
Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 3.16
Wetland Impact (acres):
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 3.16
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 11,064
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
N/A
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It maybe useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
upaated t titiaoos
Page 5 of 9

site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The proposed impacts are required to restore stream functions, as described in the Big Cedar
Creek Stream Restoration Plan. The project constitutes a positive impact since it will enhance
stream function and habitat b~~rovin~ bed features in the stream and will result increase total
stream length on the site from 11 661 feet to 12 377 feet. Construction practices will follow
guidelines from the NC Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that maybe appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o. enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
See attached restoration plan: Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Plan
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9

[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/statellocal) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ^ No
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ^ No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify N/A )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buf:
Updated 11/1/2005
er multipliers.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(square feet) Miti ation
Page 7 of 9

1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.S
Total
* Zone i extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. N/A
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.
The nroiect involves work in the stream only. No work will be performed outside the stream
corridor and no impervious area will be added during this project therefore this section is not
applicable
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This is a stream restoration project that includes a conservation easement over the entire project
area The easement is being held by the State of North Carolina and restricts any future
development of the site
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9

It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Pedestrian surveys indicated no presence of threatened or endan erg ed species within the site
limits nor are there any historical preservation issues on the site. Therefore there are no
foreseen circumstances which would restrict work schedules.
Applicants Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9

07-1~
,.sM,~~jl ~ ~ A~ 4~ k_
.,, ~ -.~, y j ,'~.~ ~,
s .
~ w~
s
~f
i+,
j,
i ~
~,~. : ~~
~,,~ _ x ~'
5%(~
i~ :. ~-.. , 1Yb
rv• ~sl ~~
~' 4~. 'iG ~Ai
it .' ~-
.. -.
_'. ` r . +? ~~;~;jai'
~ ~,,V'k
/ _ ~_ .. ~
Big Cedar Creek -near top of project. High shear Big Cedar Creek -near center of project. High
stress forces cause bank instability, resulting in loss erodibility and lack of surface protection results in
chaar nnctahlP hanirc
Big Cedar Creek -cattle access point. Continuous Big Cedar Creek -near center of project. High
bed and bank disturbance causes fine sediments to near bank stress results in shear, unstable left bank.
enter the channel. Note invasive vegetation on
rieht bank.
Big Cedar Creek -typical. Long, straight, shallow Big Cedar Creek -near Mount Zion Road culvert.
pool with vegetation dominated by invasive Mass aggradation in overly wide channel.
species.

,~~a~~ ',,, ~1y ~, ;
7~ . ti ,~ ~
~:`~ ice. 4~`. ~,-`
n-
~~ ~~
~L r
~,=f~ '.tMt w...
~~~ .
~ ~- ~ ~~ ~Y.l ~ SAC:.. ~~ (.... _ ..
t ~

<.
~ +5~ ' i
~. .y
~
.
.~ ~
'J t ~ , i
~.~~ r~
~
,, :. l ac r
~*•;;,k~;
s f .
r
rIR2
~
. • '
~1~'
7
# .~ rlE+a ~ -5 i F

,
~
?~,
t .~e'../~ -sf' ~ia~LR.J~~ J ... ~
~~~
UTl -typical. Max depth in pools is controlled by UTl -below agricultural crossing. Continuous
bedrock, resulting in wide, shallow pools. bed and bank disturbance resulted in a lack of bed
definition.
~ A 5~ .~ ~x4.R
,~ cS ^~..~,.
b'
~~ ~
~F ~= .
-~ ::_^~,
s. _
,.~ k. -
i~ yi• o v '
,.;
y. _
UT2 -agricultural crossing and shear, unstable
banks below.
UT1 -typical. Historic agricultural manipulation
resulted in a straight channel lacking bedform
diversity. Agricultural activities today come within
feet of the channel.
UT1. High shear stress forces cause bank
instability, resulting in loss of bank vegetation.

07-1814
Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
..
Project Name: Bi Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project
Count Name: Stanl Count
EEP Number: D06054-D
Project S onsor: Buck En ineerin , A Unit of Michael Baker
Project Contact Name: Christine Miller Andrea S an ler
Project Contact Address: 1447 S. T on St. Suite 200, Charlotte NC 28203
Pro"ect Contact E-mail: chdmiller mbakercor .com
EEP Project Mana er: Jeff Jurek
- - ~-
The Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project is located in southeastern Stanley
County, approximately 8 miles south of the City of Albemarle the Yadkin River Basin
(Figure 1). The project site is part of degraded stream system that drains to the Rocky
River and includes the restoration of approximately 10,897 LF of stream for the
purpose of obtaining stream mitigation credit for the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Pro ram.
• - •
Reviewed By:
Date EEP-Project Manager
Conditional Approved By:
Date For Division Administrator
FHWA
^ Check this box if there are outstanding issues
Final Approval 6y:
Date For DivisionAdministrator
FHWA

-. a ..
Coastal Zone Mana ement Act CZMA
1. Is the project located in a CAMA county? ^Yes
®No
2. Does the project involve ground-disturbing activities within a CAMA Area of ^Yes
Environmental Concern (AEC)? ^ No
® N/A
3. Has a CAMA permit been secured? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
4. Has NCDCM agreed that the project is consistent with the NC Coastal Management ^Yes
Program? ^ No
® N/A
Com rehensive Environmental Res onse Com , nsation and Liabilit Act C ERCLA
1. Is this a "full-delivery" project? ®Yes
^ No
2. Has the zoning/land use of the subject property and adjacent properties ever been ^Yes
designated as commercial or industrial? ®No
^ N/A
3. As a result of a limited Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential ^Yes
hazardous waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ®No
^ N/A
4. As a result of a Phase I Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ^Yes
waste sites within or adjacent to the project area? ^ No
® N/A
5. As a result of a Phase II Site Assessment, are there known or potential hazardous ^Yes
waste sites within the project area? ^ No
® N/A
6. Is there an approved hazardous mitigation plan? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
1. Are there properties listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of ^Yes
Historic Places in the ro~ect area? ®No
2. Does the project affect such properties and does the SHPO/THPO concur? ®Yes
^ No
^ N/A
3. If the effects are adverse, have they been resolved? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Pro ert Ac uisition Policies Act Uni form Act
1. Is this a "full-delivery" project? ®Yes
^ No
2. Does the project require the acquisition of real estate? ®Yes
^ No
^ N/A
3. Was the property acquisition completed prior to the intent to use federal funds? ^Yes
® No
^ N/A
4. Has the owner of the property been informed: ®Yes
"prior to making an offer that the agency does not have condemnation authority; and ^ No
* what the fair market value is believed to be? ^ N/A

. ~
-. a ..
American Indian Reli ious Freedom Act AIRFA
1. Is the project located in a county claimed as "territory" by the Eastern Band of ^Yes
Cherokee Indians? ®No
2. Is the site of religious importance to American Indians? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
3. Is the project listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National Register of Historic ^Yes
Places? ^ No
® N/A
4. Have the effects of the project on this site been considered? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Anti uities Act AA
1. Is the project located on Federal lands? ^Yes
®No
2. Will there be loss or destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments or objects ^Yes
of antiquity? ^ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Archaeolo ical Resources Protection Act ARPA
1. Is the project located on federal or Indian lands (reservation)? ^Yes
®No
2. Will there be a loss or destruction of archaeological resources? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
3. Will a permit from the appropriate Federal agency be required? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
4. Has a permit been obtained? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Endan ered S ecies Act ESA
1. Are federal Threatened and Endangered species and/or Designated Critical Habitat ®Yes
listed for the count ? ^ No
2. Is Designated Critical Habitat or suitable habitat present for listed species? ®Yes
^ No
^ N/A
3. Are T8~E species present or is the project being conducted in Designated Critical ^Yes
Habitat? ®No
^ N/A
4. Is the project "likely to adversely affect" the specie and/or "likely to adversely modify" ^Yes
Designated Critical Habitat? ^ No
® N/A
5. Does the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries concur in the effects determination? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
6. Has the USFWS/NOAA-Fisheries rendered a "jeopardy" determination? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A

Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
1. Is the project located on Federal lands that are within a county claimed as "territory" ^Yes
b the EBCI? ®No
2. Has the EBCI indicated that Indian sacred sites may be impacted by the proposed ^Yes
project? ^ No
® N/A
3. Have accommodations been made for access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred ^Yes
sites? ^ No
® N/A
Farmland Protection Polic Act FPPA
1. Will real estate be acquired? ®Yes
^ No
2. Has NRCS determined that the project contains prime, unique, statewide or local ®Yes
important farmland? ^ No
^ N/A
3. Has the completed Form AD-1006 been submitted to NRCS? ®Yes
^ No
^ N/A
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act FWCA
1. Will the project impound, divert, channel deepen, or otherwise control/modify any ®Yes
water bod ? ^ No
2. Have the USFWS and the NCWRC been consulted? ®Yes
^ No
^ N/A
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act Section 6
1. Will the project require the conversion of such property to a use other than public, ^Yes
outdoor recreation? ®No
2. Has the NPS approved of the conversion? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Ma nuson-Stevens Fishe Conservation and Mana ement Act Essential Fish Habitat
1. Is the project located in an estuarine system? ^Yes
®No
2. Is suitable habitat present for EFH-protected species? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
3. Is sufficient design information available to make a determination of the effect of the ^Yes
project on EFH? ^ No
® N/A
4. Will the project adversely affect EFH? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
5. Has consultation with NOAH-Fisheries occurred? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Mi raty Bird Treat Act MBTA
1. Does the USFWS have any recommendations with the project relative to the MBTA? ^Yes
®No
2. Have the USFWS recommendations been incorporated? ^Yes
^ No
® N/A
Wilderness Act
1. Is the project in a Wilderness area? ^Yes
®No
2. Has a special use permit and/or easement been obtained from the maintaining ^Yes
federal agency? ^ No
® N/A

. Categorical Exclusion -Summary
Project Background
The Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project involves the restoration of approximately
10,897 linear feet of stream in Stanly County for the purpose of obtaining stream mitigation
credit for the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). The recent land use of the site has
been primarily agriculture, both cropland and pasture for cattle. The historic agricultural land
uses and degraded nature of the site present a significant opportunity for water quality and
ecosystem improvements.
The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires agencies to use an
interdisciplinary approach in planning and decision-making for actions that will have an impact
on the environment. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and NC Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) have determined that EEP projects will not involve significant impacts
and therefore a Categorical Exclusion (CE) is the appropriate type of environmental document
for this project. FHWA has also determined that stream restoration projects are considered land
disturbing activities, so Parts 2 and 3 of the EEP checklist and the following environmental laws
are applicable to this project (backup information is located in the appendix):
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)
Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR) prepared a Radius Map Report with Geocheck on
August 15, 2006. Based on the EDR report, there are no known or potential hazardous waste
sites within or adjacent to the project area. The Executive Summary of the EDR report is
included in the Appendix.
National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106)
Buck Engineering requested review and comment from the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to architectural or archaeological
resources from the restoration project on August 29, 2006. SHPO's review of the project on
September 15, 2006 found no historic resources that would be affected by the project. All
correspondence on this issue is included in the Appendix.
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Act
The property owners with land involved in the stream restoration project were notified prior to
signing the Option Agreement for the Conservation Easement, that Buck Engineering did not
have condemnation authority and what the fair market value is of the land involved. Copies of
the Option Agreement are included in the Appendix.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Buck Engineering reviewed both the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and the US Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists of rare and protected animal and plant species and found
that two federally listed species are known to occur in Stanly County: the Bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzi~).
Suitable habitat does not exist for the bald eagle since the project site is more than 0.5 miles
from open water, the preferred nesting distance of the bald eagle. Suitable habitat does exist
for Schweinitz's sunflower in woodland openings and adjacent agricultural land. A pedestrian
survey of the project area was conducted on September 14, 2006 during blooming season.
Schweinitz's sunflower was not observed in or adjacent to the project area during the field
survey; therefore, it is anticipated that project construction will have "no effect" on these two
species.
4

The USFWS was notified of the project on September 15, 2006. Buck Engineering has not
~' ~ '' received any comments from the USFWS at this time. Correspondence on this issue is
included in the Appendix.
Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
On August 29, 2006, Buck Engineering submitted the AD-1006 form for the Big Cedar Creek
site to the Stanly County Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) office. The NRCS
determined that implementation of this restoration project would result in the conversion of 23.2
acres of farmland soils. Buck Engineering submitted the completed AD-1006 form to the Stanly
County NRCS office on September 6, 2006. All correspondence on this issue is included in the
Appendix.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
A letter was sent by Buck Engineering to the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) on
September 15, 2006 requesting their comment and review on the Big Cedar Creek Stream
Restoration Project. NCWRC responded on October 2, 2006 stating they did not "anticipate
impacts to listed wildlife species". Copies of both letters are included in Appendix A.
Buck Engineering sent a letter to the USFWS on September 15, 2006 requesting their comment
and review on the Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project. Buck Engineering has not
received any comments from the USFWS at this time. All correspondence on this issue is
included in the Appendix.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
A letter was sent by Buck Engineering to the USFWS on September 15, 2006 requesting their
comment and review on the Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project in relation to migratory
birds. Buck Engineering did not receive any comments from the USFWS on this issue. All
correspondence with the USFWS is included in the Appendix.
5

October 18, 2006
Ms. Andrea Spangler
Buck Engineering, A Unit of Michael Baker
1447 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, North Carolina 28203
Subject: Categorical Exclusion Form for
Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project
Yadkin River Basin - CU# 03040105
Stanly County, North Carolina
Contract No. D06454-U
Dear Ms. Spangler:
Attached please find the approved Categorical Exclusion Form for the subject full delivery
project. Picric include a copy of the form in your Restoration Plan. You may submit an invoice
for completion of the Task 1 deliverable in the amount of $ i 50,738.00 (5% of contract).
If you have any questions, or wish to discuss this matter further, please contact me at any tithe. I
can be reached at {919) 715-1656, or email me at ~t~pe~•ce~~~,nctnail.t~et.
Sincerely,
(.ruy C. I earc:e
EEP Full Delivery Program. Supervisor
ec: file
{ s ~ ~,~~
~ ~ ~ R .~ ~ ~. ~iCDE1~Et
North ~aroli€ta Ecosysteifit [n~ar~c~nTe~~t' Program, 1652 Mail Service Ce~rter, R~l~ig{i, NC 27699-1652 / 9i9-715-4476 / www.nceep.net

Categorical Exclusion Form for Ecosystem Enhancement
Program Projects
Pro ect Name; Bi Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Pro ect
Caen ame: Cant ount
EEp Number: p -
Pra ect onsor: Buck En ineerin A Unit of Michael Baker
Pra'ect Contact: Name: Andrea S an ler
Pra'ect Contact ddress: 1447 . Tr on St. Suite 200, arlatteN 282()3
ra'ect Cont2~ot E-mails as an ler~mbakercor .com
EEP Pro ect Ana er: Jeff Jurek
~ ~. #
The Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project is located in southeastern Stanley
County, approximately 8 miles south of the City of Albemarle in the Yadkin River Basin
(Figure 1}. The project site is part of degraded stream system that drains to the Rocky
River and includes the restoration of approximately 12,040 LF of stream far the
purpose of obtaining stream mitigation credit far the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Pro ram.
~ ~ - a
Reviewed ey
Date EEP Project Manager
Conditional Approved ay:
Date For Division AdEtnintstrator
FHWA
~,] Check this box if there are outstanding Issues
Flnal Approval By:
,-
Date For Division Adrr~lnistrator
FHWA

R® Environmental
Data Resources Inc
The EDR Radius Map
with GeoCheck®
Blockhouse House Creek Stream
Restoration Project- Polk County
Tryon, NC 28782
Inquiry Number: 01735539.1r
August 15, 2006
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Management Information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 06461
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Internet: www.edrnet.com
FORM-NULL{RN

r

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary----------------------------------------- ------------- ES1
Overview Map---------------------------------------------- ------------ 2
Detail Map------------------------------------------------- ------------ 3
Map Findings Summary-------------------------- ------- ------------- 4
Map Findings---------------------------------------------- ------------. 6
Orphan Summary------------------------------------------- ------------ 9
Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ GR-1
GEOCHECK ADDENDUM
Physical Setting Source Addendum_____________________________ ____________ A-1
Physical Setting Source Summary______________________________ ____________- A-2
Physical SettingSSURGOSoiIMap_____________________________ _____________ A-5
Physical Setting Source Map__________________________________ ____________- A-11
Physical Setting Source Map Findings___________________________ ____________ A-12
Physical Setting Source Records Searched_______________________ ____________- A-19
Thank you for your business.
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments.
Disclaimer -Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained froppm a variety of public and other sources r9easonably available to Eppnvironmental Data
other Sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSfED OR IMP IE IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORTroEN IRONMENTALexist from
DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment pertormed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.
Copyright 2006 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanbom Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other
trademarks used herein are the roe of their res ective owners.
TC01735539.1r Page 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR).
The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA's Standards
and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of
environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate.
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
RESTORATION PROJECT- POLK COUNTY
TRYON, NC 28782
COORDINATES
Latitude (North):
Longitude (West):
Universal Tranver:
UTM X (Meters):
UTM Y (Meters):
Elevation:
35.201500 - 35° 12' S.4"
82.175500 - 82° 10' 31.8"
>e Mercator: Zone 17
392992.3
3895823.8
912 ft. above sea level
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY
Target Property Map: 35082-82 LANDRUM, SC
Most Recent Revision: 1987
TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS
The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR.
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the
following databases:
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL_________________________ National Priority List
Proposed NPL_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Proposed National Priority List Sites
Delisted NPL________________ National Priority List Deletions
NPL RECOVERY____________.Fedeval Superfund Liens
CERCLIS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System
CERC-NFRAP_______________ CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
CORRACTS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Corrective Action Report
RCRA-TSDF_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
RCRA-LQG_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
TC01735539.tr EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
RCRA-SQG_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information
ERNS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Emergency Response Notification System
HMIRS_______________________ Razardous Materials Information Reporting System
US ENG CONTROLS________ Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL________. Sltes with Institutional Controls
DOD_________________________ Department of Defense Sites
FUDS________________________ FormeAy Used Defense Sites
US BROWNFIELDS__________ AListing of Brownfields Sites
CONSENT___________________ Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD_________________________ Recnrds Of Decision
UMTRA______________________ Vranium Mill Tailings Sites
ODI__________________________ open Dump Inventory
TRIS_________________________ Tnxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA________________________ Tnxic Substances Control Act
FTTS________________________ FIFRA/TSCATrackingSystem-FIFRA(Federallnsecticide,Fungicide,&
Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
SSTS________________________ Section 7 Tracking Systems
ICIS_________________________. lntegrated Compliance Information System
PADS________________________ POB Activity Database System
MLTS________________________ Materlal Licensing Tracking System
MINES_______________________ Mlnes Master Index File
FINDS_______________________ Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
RAATS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
NC SHWS___________________ Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
SC SHWS___________ ________.Slte Assessment Section Project List
NC HSDS___________ _________Razardous Substance Disposal Site
SC GWCI____________ ________ Groundwater Contamination Inventory
NC SWF/LF_________ _________Llst of Solid Waste Facilities
SC SWF/LF__________ ________Permltted Landfills List
NC OLI______________ ________ Old Landfill Inventory
SC LUST____________ ________ Leaking Underground Storage Tank List
NC LUST TRUST____ ________ State Trust Fund Database
NC UST_____________ _________Petrnleum Underground Storage Tank Database
SC UST_____________ _________Oomprehensive Underground Storage Tanks
NC AST_____________ ________.RST Database
SC AST_____________ _________Rboveground Storage Tank List
SC Spills____________ ________ Spill List
NC INST CONTROL ________. No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
SC AUL____________ ________. Land Use Controls
NC VCP_____________ ________. Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
SC VCP_____________ ________.Vnluntary Cleanup Sites
NC DRYCLEANERS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Drycleaning Sites
SC DRYCLEANERS_ ________ DrycleanerDatabase
NC BROWNFIELDS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. Brownfields Projects Inventory
SC BROWNFIELDS__ ________Brnwnfields Sites Listing
NC NPDES__________ ________. NPDES Facility Location Listing
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV____________.lndian Reservations
INDIAN LUST________________Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
INDIAN UST_________________ Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
TC01735539.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants___ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
EDR Historical Auto StationsEDR Proprietary Historic Gas Stations
EDR Historical Cleaners____. EDR Proprietary Historic Dry Cleaners
SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified.
Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on
a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity
should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been
differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property.
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed
data on individual sites can be reviewed.
Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases.
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis.
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
NC IMD: Incident Management Database.
A review of the NC IMD list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/2006 has revealed that there is 1 NC
IMD site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dist /Dir Map ID Page
SANDY PLAINS TEXACO 6213 SOUTH HIGHWAY 9 1/2 - 1 WSW 1 6
NC LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incidents Management Database contains an inventory
of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environment, &
Natural Resources' Incidents by Address.
A review of the NC LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/02/2006 has revealed that there is 1
NC LUST site within approximately 1 mile of the target property.
Equal/Higher Elevation Address Dist /Dir Map ID Page
SANDY PLAINS TEXACO 6213 SOUTH HIGHWAY 9 1/2 - 1 WSW 1 6
Incident Phase: Closed Out
TC01735539.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3

EXECUTNE SUMMARY
Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped:
Site Name
CARTRETTE FIELD
LITTLE MOUNTAIN LANDFILL
POLK COUNTY MSW LANDFILL
POLK COUNTY C&D LANDFILL
TRYON TOWN OF
ELLIS M. PINCHER & VMH, INC.
GREENVILLE WOOD WASTE RECYCLING CENTER WOOD GRINDI
COLUMBUS CHEVRON-550 GAL. UST
DUKE POWER OPNS CTR-TRYON
COLUMBUS BP SERVICE
DIAMOND B KWIK SHOPS INC
FOWLERS GROCERY
SOUTHERN GROCERY
FAIRVIEW AIRPORT
RONNIES CITGO
AMOCO #961
RICHARD THOMPSON RESIDENCE
DILLS GROCERY
WEST STATE LINE GULF SERVICE
TRYON LUMBER CO
TLC CHEVROLET INC
FAIRVIEW AIRPORT
SPINX 165
SANDY PLAINS TEXACO 10283
RED FOX COUNTRY CLUB
SOUTHERN MERCERIZ-DIV OF DI
DIXIE YARNS FACILITY (FORMER)
LITTLE MOUNTAIN LDFL
TRYON PLANT WWTP
Database(s)
NC SHWS
NC SHWS, NC VCP
NC SWF/LF
NC SWF/LF
NC SWF/LF
NC SWF/LF
SC SWF/LF
NC LUST, NC IMD
NC LUST, NC IMD
NC LUST, NC IMD
FINDS, SC LUST
FINDS, SC LUST
FINDS, SC LUST
FINDS, SC LUST
SC LUST, SC UST
NC LUST TRUST
NC LUST TRUST
SC UST
SC UST
SC UST
SC UST
SC UST
SC UST
NC UST
NC UST
RCRA-SOG, FINDS
NC IMD
NC OLI
NC NPDES
TC01735539.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4

OVERVIEW MAP - 01735681.1 r
Tq~
r~_ i

~ ~

/ ~ , '
~ ~
~.
t!
~';}',ti
j
U'l

1

~ Target Property
Sites at elevatons higher than
or equal to the target property
• Sites at elevations lower than
the target property
L Manufactured Gas Plants
National Priority List Sites
Landfill Sites
~~ Dept. Defense Sites
0 ll2 1 2Mtle5
-j Indian Reservations BIA Hazardous Substance
n/ County Boundary Disposal Sites
Oil & Gas pipelines
National Wetland Inventory
State Wetlands
SITE NAME: Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration CLIENT: Buck Engineering
ADDRESS: Stanley County CONTACT: Andrea Spangler
Norwood NC 28128 INQUIRY#: 01735681.1r
LAT/LONG: 35.1989 / 80.1303 DATE: August 15, 2006
Copyright ~; 2006 EDR, Ina cs~ 2006 Tale AUas Rel. 07!2005.
r /. /

OPTION TO PURCHASE CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS OPTION TO PURCHASE CONSERVATION EASEMENT (the "Option") is made
and entered into this 13th day of March, 2006 (the "Effective Date"), by and among Ann Lefler
Thompson, Doris Lefler West, John U. Garner, and David L. Garner (the "Grantor"), and BUCK
ENGINEERING PC, a North Carolina professional corporation ("Buck").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Grantor is the owner of two tracts of real property located in Stanly County, North
Carolina, containing 449.7 and 93.4 acres, more or less, as more particularly described on Exhibit A
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, together with the improvements thereon and all
appurtenances thereto belonging and appertaining, and all creeks, streams, rights-of-way, roads, streets
and ways bounding said real property (collectively the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, Grantor has agreed to convey to Buck, an exclusive right and option to acquire a
conservation easement, as more particularly described on the attached Exhibit B (the "Easement"), over
the Property in accordance with the terms of this Option; and
WHEREAS, Buck is interested in acquiring the Easement in order to develop and construct a full
delivery wetland, stream, and/or buffer restoration project over the lands covered by the Easement (the
"Work") in conjunction with requests for proposals issued under the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(formerly the Wetlands Restoration Program) within the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources ("DENR") and Buck has agreed to undertake such Work with respect to the Easement
in accordance with the scope of work set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Buck hereby notifies Grantor that: (i) Buck believes the fair market
value of the Easement is the Purchase Price, pursuant to Paragraph 4(a), together with the value of the
environmental improvements to be made to the Easement by Buck in performing the Work on the
Easement; and (ii) Buck does not possess the power of eminent domain;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of Five Thousand dollars ($5,000.00) (the
"Option Deposit") and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Grant of Option. Grantor hereby grants unto Buck, its successors and assigns, including
a third-party designated by Buck qualified to be the grantee of a conservation easement under N.C.G.S.
§121-35, the exclusive right and option to purchase the Easement in accordance with and subject to the
terms and conditions set forth in this Option.
2. Term. The term of this Option shall commence on the Effective Date and shall expire
Twelve (12) months after the Effective Date (the "Term"), unless extended by the parties, in writing. A
Memorandum of Option to Purchase Easement in the form attached as Exhibit D shall be executed by
both parties simultaneously with this Option and recorded at Buck's sole discretion and expense in the
county where the Property is located to provide record notice of this Option. In no event shall this Option
be recorded or filed in the public records.

Book Page
1108 0459
Prepared by and Return:
Shawn Wilkerson
Buck Engineering
1447 S. Tryon Ste. 200
Charlotte, NC 28203
FILED
STJdiLY COUNTY NC
03/10/200.6 11:40 AM
CECIL ]1LMOND
Register Of Deeds
EXHIBIT D
MEMORANDUM OF OPTION TO PURCHASE CONSERVATION EASEMENT
THIS MEMORANDUM FOR OPTION TO PURCHASE CONSERVATION EASEMENT
("Memorandum") is made and entered into this 13th day of March, 2006, by and between Ann Lefler
Thompson, Doris Lefler West, John U. Garner, and David L. Garner, ("Grantor") and BUCK
ENGINEERING PC, a North Carolina professional corporation ("Buck").
WHEREAS, Grantor and Buck have entered into a certain Option to Purchase Conservation
Easement (the "Option") dated March 11, 2006, pursuant to which Grantor granted to Buck, its successors
and assigns, an option to purchase a conservation easement (the "Easement") over certain real property
located in Stanly County, North Carolina, which is more particularly described on the attached
Exhibit D.1 and
WHEREAS, The parties enter into this Memorandum for the purpose of setting forth certain
terms and conditions of the Option and to provide constructive notice of the Option;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties hereby agree as follows.
1. The term of the Option commenced on March 13, 2006 and shall expire on March 13,
2007.
2. All of the provisions set forth in the Option are incorporated in this Memorandum by
reference.
3. The Option shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their
respective heirs, successors and assigns.
[SIGNATURES AND NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGES]
11

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Memorandum as of the date first
above written.
GRANTOR:
B ~'~ f"7 /
y'
Print Name: Doris Lefler West
Title:
STATE OF SO `~h ~ ~~/~Q
COUNTY OF ~~~"ehc~=
;;~~~~~~ , YV
I, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that ~D~'~~e ~~personally
appeared before me this day and acknowledged that he/she voluntarily executed the foregoing instrument.
I have received satisfactory evidence of the principal's identity in the form of SG
,~r~ vets' L-cer-sE' .
This the ~1 Ghday of ~~ 2006.
fficia ignatur'epf No~Y
~/9iet~ L /Y~/~~1~! ,Notary Public
Notary Public Notary's printed or typed name
My Commission Expires: c/.9N ~ ~O/~
[AFFIX NOTARIAL STAMP-SEAL]
11

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Memorandum as of the date first
above written.
GRANTOR:

Print Name: Ann Lefler Thompson
Title:
STATE OF ~„~,rN ~~~, N ti
COUNTY OF ~~~
I, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that ~u~ L~ ~,F27,J,~,~personally
appeared before me this day and acknowledged that he/she voluntarily executed the foregoing instrument.
I have received satisfactory evidence of the principal's identity in the form of
~ c 'vim„~2 L, ~ E~s~
This the ~ day of !'I~c«I , 200(0 .
ic' gnature of Notary
,_ t ~„(~u~fl SSwruM), Notary Public
Notary Public Notary's printed or typed name
My Commission Expires: ~~ 12 ~ Zoi n
[AFFIX NOTARIAL STAMP-SEAL]
12

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Memorandum as of the date first
above written.
GRANTOR: ~~--.
Print Name: ~hn U. Gamer
Title:
STATE OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF GRAYSON
I, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that John U . Garner personally
appeared before me this day and acknowledged that he/she voluntarily executed the foregoing instrument.
I have received satisfactory evidence of the principal's identity in the form of
VA driver's license
This the 9th day of March ~ 20 06 ,
ti~ ~
O cial Signature of Notary
Darlene F. Edwards ,Notary Public
Notary Public Notary's printed or typed name
My Commission Expires: May 31, 2006
[AFFIX NOTARIAL STAMP-SEAL]
14

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Memorandum as of the date first
above written.
GRANTOR: 1
By: Q'`'`'"~
Print Name: David L. Garner
Title:
STATE OF ~0!-~V~l ~It'
COUNTY OF~~ bf~. //~~
I, a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid, certify that ~V~~170.t"AU` . personally
appeared before me this day and acknowledged that he/she voluntarily executed the foregoing instrument.
I have received satisfactory evidence of the principal's identity in the form of
i~IG ~L_~~_•
This the ~ day of 20~~4 .
Notary Public Notary's prQrted or typed name
My Commission Expires: ~ ~ ((~ ~ ~~
~N„ua~mNwa,~
[AFFIX NOTARIAL STAMP-SE~Biw;~ A ~'4s
~ ~oTaRyt~ o
~ .:~--
~~ pU81.~C'~ci a
y~y~~ ~~ ?a;.
y ~~CA C0~1}11~~~ ~ ass
~~.
y~~~41 u.puAt~~
14

BUCK ENGINEERING PC, a North Carolina
professi al corporation
By: ~ .
Print Name: Shawn Wilkerson
Title: Vice-President
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ~lJ~x~
I, Feu.,-r >J,r~fwee S~tt~M~l _, the undersigned Notary Public of the County and
State aforesaid, certify that gruwn~ 1,,~i~Ker~sb,~r personally appeared before me this day,
acknowledging to me that he is t1,4~- 1~t~s~esKc of r3~<K Fw ~.uueew~ls. ~~, a North
Carolina professional corporation and that he acknowledged to me that he voluntarily signed the
foregoing document for the purposes therein expressed and in the representative capacity so
stated. I have received satisfactory evidence of the principal's identity in the form of
N C Datoea L ~c ~~s~
Witness my hand and Notarial stamp or seal, this Z*~ day of M~ac~ , 200.
oil Pu11blic
F~.VN lA/'~Nf~Zi2D a3t Vt ~ M A IJ
Typed or Printed Name of Notary
My Commission Expires: MAY 12~ Zav
15

September 15, 2006
Shannon Deaton,
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission
Division of Inland Fisheries
1721 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Buck Engineering
A Unit of Michael Baker
1447 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte, NC 28203
704-334-4454
FAX [phone]
Subject: North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP)
Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project
Stanly County, NC
Dear Ms. Deaton,
The purpose of this letter is to request review and comment on any possible issues that might emerge with
respect to the fish and wildlife associated with the Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project, located in
Stanly County (a USGS site map with approximate areas of potential ground disturbance is enclosed).
The Big Cedar Creek site has been identified for the purpose of providing in-kind mitigation for
unavoidable stream channel impacts. Several sections of the channel have been identified as significantly
degraded. This stream restoration site was selected based on its probability to restore high quality stream
habitat where it has ceased to exist. The conceptual plan for this project calls for the restoration of these
channels [o a stable condition. This process will involve the restoration of natural channel dimension,
pattern and profile and the reestablishment of forested riparian buffers within the project area.
A threatened and endangered species survey was conducted on September 14, 2006 for the two federally
protected species listed for Stanly County: bald eagle (Haliaeetc~s lecicocephalus) and Schweinitz's
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). Suitable habitat does not exist for the bald eagle since the project
site is more than 0.5 miles from open water, the preferred nesting distance of the bald eagle. Suitable
habitat does exist for Schweinitz's sunflower but no species were observed in or adjacent to the project
area during the field survey; therefore, it is anticipated that these species will not be impacted by the
proposed project.
We have enclosed a copy of the vicinity map and USGS topographic map that includes the proposed
stream restoration project site. We ask that you review this information to determine the presence of any
constraints concerning protected species. Your correspondence will be forwarded to the North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program for consideration.
Challeng~eUs.

We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with
any questions that you may have concerning this stream restoration project (704-319-7889).
Sincerely,
Eric Mularski
Buck Engineering
A Unit of Michael Baker
Chal/engeUs_

~ North Carolina ~'~Vildlife Resources Commission
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
2 October 2006
Mr. Eric Mularski
Buck Engineering - A Unit of Michael Baker
1447 S. Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28203
Subject: Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project, Stanly County, North Carolina.
Dear Mr. Mularski:
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the subject
document. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and North Carolina General Statutes
(G.S. 113-131 et seq.).
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program has identified a stream restoration site
along Big Cedar Creek in the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin. Several sections of channel have been
identified as significantly degraded. The stream will be restored to natural channel dimension, pattern
and profile and forested riparian buffers will be re-established.
There are records for the state threatened Roanoke slabshell (Elliptio roanokensis) downstream in
Rocky River. We recommend you consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding potential
impacts to Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinltzit~.
Stream and wetland restoration projects often improve water quality and aquatic habitat.
Provided measures are taken to minimize erosion and sedimentation from construction/restoration
activities, we do not anticipate the project to result in significant adverse impacts to aquatic and terrestrial
wildlife resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you require further assistance, please
contact our office at [phone].
Sincerely,
_..~~1-~-~.~-~ ~,~,~
Shari L. Bryant
Piedmont Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

,,
4 .,...:,~ . ,
~....
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries 1721 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Faz: [phone]

. .
August ?~J, ?U06
1is. Renzssa Brown
District Conservationist
2b03?-C Newt Road
Albemarle, Iv'C ?S()()[
Subject: North Carolina Ecosystem F.nhancemcnt Program
Big Cedar Creek Sh~c:am Restoration Prc~jcct,
Stanly County. NC
[dear h4s. Brown:
Buck Engineering
A Unit of Michael Baker
1447 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte. NC 28203
704-334-4454
FAX [phone]
The purposed of this letter is to request your assistance in iompletin~~ a Farmland Conversion Impac!
Rating form for the subject sire. Enclosed please find a copy of Lhe lone, vicinity Wrap, USGS topographic
map, and soils map of the project site. For this stream restoration project, ground disturbing activities arc
indicated by the areas bounded in red on the encioscd mafx. 'These aretis include'?.3 acres of Oakboro
silt loam, U.9 acres of Congaree tine sandy loam, and 0.1 acre of T3adin ch<mnery silt loam wide 1 ~-4~`~~
slopes. Based on our evaluation. ~~~~ estimate that ?3.? acres of Primz Farmland ~~rill be converted tee
nunagricuhural use by this action.
W'e knew that ti~ou have more famiiiarit~~~ with the region ~u~d we ~~ill be happy to maku an_y changes to the
farm that you deem appropriate. Please. return the farm to us with your determinations and we will fill out
the remainder of the form. Our Fax number is (7t)4) 334-44y?.
If you have any questions, please feel tree to contact me at (7U4) 31 ~)-7851 or a5panglertu;mbakerc;orp.com.
Thank you tf~r your assistance in thin matter.
SIRCeI'etV,
Andrea Spamaer
Buck En~*iueering
.1 Unit of l4~fichael Baker

t"
United States
Department of
USDA Agriculture
September 7, 2006
Ms Andrea Spangler
Buck Engineering
1447 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28203
Dear Ms. Spangler;
Natural Resources
Conservation
Service
530 West Innes Street
Salisbury, NC 28144
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
I have completed the Farmland Impact Conversion Rating forms (AD1006).
After section VII of the form is completed, please send a copy back to me for the
files.
If you need a further i _ ormation, please call.
~~
~f - '.. ,,
Alan Walters
Resource Soil Scientist ~~ ~ ~ f~ ~~~
`~`~ ~ ,.
S [fr ~., iicu rnt r, ~s
w..:.

' RECEIVED SEP - 5 2006
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request 8/29/06
Name Of Project Big Cedar Creek Federal Agency Involved FHWA/EEP
Proposed Land Use Stream Restoration County And State Stanly County, NC
PART II (To be completed by NRCS) Date Request Received By MRCS ~ ~/~ ~~~
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form). ~' ^ Acres Irri ated .Average Farm Size
l ~ (J /~j>r~~
Major Crop(s)
~~ ~~ Farmable Lrand In Govt. Jurisdiction
Acres: I ~ ~ Z ~ 2 %~~j, ~ Amount Of Farmland As Defined in FPPA
Acres: f 2,.. % ~,
Na~m^e-O~f Land Evaluation~tSystem Used tJame Of Local Site j~ ` ~e~nt System Date Land Evaluation Ret ed NRCS
Attemative Site Rati
PART III (To be co pleted by Federal Agency) Site A Site B Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 23.3
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly 0.0
C. Total Acres In Site 23.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland ~ ~ ~ _
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
-- -
-- ---
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted /'
__ _.
_
_
D. Percentage Ot Fatmtand In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value 2, ,
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 010 100 Points) 0 ~ ,7 0 0 0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(6) Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
6. Distance To Urban Support Services
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
9. Availability Of Fann Support Services ___ _
10. On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 0 0 0 0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 0 0 0
Total Site Assessment (From Part V/ above or a local
site assessment) 160 0 ~ 0 0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260 0 0 0 0

Site Selected:
Date Of Selection Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes ~ No
Reason For Selection.`

(See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10-83)
This form was electronically produced by National Production Services Staff

~ Y
September 15, 2006
Marella Buncick
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Buck Engineering
A Unit of Michael Baker
1447 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte, NC 28203
704-334-4454
FAX [phone]
Subject: North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP),
Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project,
Stanly County, NC
Dear Ms. Buncick:
The purpose of this letter is to provide additional information to your office on the potential effects to
threatened and endangered species from the NCEEP Big Cedar Creek Stream Restoration Project in
Stanly County for your review and comment.
We have obtained an updated species list for Stanly County from your web site (http://nc-
es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html). The threatened and endangered species listed for Stanly County are: the
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii).
Since the project involves primarily degraded streams and wooded areas, federally protected species are
not expected to be impacted by the proposed project. Suitable habitat does not exist for the bald eagle
since the project site is more than 0.5 miles from open water, the preferred nesting distance of the bald
eagle. Suitable habitat does exist for Schweinitz's sunflower in woodland openings and adjacent
agricultural land. A pedestrian survey of the project area was conducted on September 14, 2006 during
blooming season. Schweinitz's sunflower was not observed in or adjacent to the project area during the
field survey; therefore, it is anticipated that project construction will have "no effect" on these two
species.
Please provide comments on any possible issues that might emerge with respect to endangered species,
migratory birds or other trust resources from the construction of a stream restoration project on the subject
property. A vicinity map showing the project location and a USGS map showing the approximate areas
of potential ground disturbance are enclosed.
If we have not heard from you in 30 days we will assume that our biological conclusions are correct, that
you do not have any comments regarding associated laws, and that you do not have any information
relevant to this project at the current time.

Your correspondence will be forwarded to NCEEP for consideration. We thank you in advance for your
timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to contact us with any questions that you may have
concerning this stream restoration project.
Sincerely,
Eric Mularski
Buck Engineering
A Unit of Michael Baker

.. .
August 2~), `~lHi
Renee Gli:dhiH-Earley
State i-tistorir Preservatiat t)ftice
4tii7 Niait Service (::enter
Raleigh, E+IC' ~7(it39-~t{i t 7
Subjcr:t: Nor[h Cxrolinu Ecl><;ystcm Etthanrcux:ttt Program,
Sig t;eciar Creek Stream Rcsloratian Project,
Stanly County, NC
Dear iVis. Gtedltill-E:Irley:
Buck Engineering
A Unit of tiAichaei Baker
1447 S. Tryon St.
Charlotte, NG 28203
704-334-4454
FAX [phone]
The North Carolina Ea)system Einh~u:ceittent Program (EEP} requests review ttnd c~u3mt;itt un an}•'
lx)ssible issues that might t:nterge with respt~ct iu arclt<teoh~ f;icai ur cultural rt:sourres associated with a
putetuiat strcattt t~;storation project on the attat:htitl site (u vieiitily ttaap, <t t3SGS map n€ poteatixl grnauttl
disturUance areas, and a soils map are enclusrtiy.
The Sig Cedar Greek site tits (x:ea idetttii'icd fur the poi}wse of providing in-kirxt ntit"Igatioit for
unavoidal)te stream channel imparts. 't'he project will include nne rraclt of i3ig Cectar Creek and two
11i111atilCd tr[l)UIslrit'S, UTi and UT3, ail of which hive seclic)t3S of c:hanitel tlt<tt arc tticltttited as
significantly ricgrxded. No art;hitecturai structures or tacheotogicat artifacts have been observed ur noted
during pre;iiminary surveys of the site tar res[uratian lnirposes. in xdditiun, the majority oC the rite has
historically Veen disturbed due to agricuiturai purixtses sut:h as uralghtsltsng, titiittg, ~tnd cattle gra~u3g.
We <isk that ynu review this sift: haled un tlx; attstched infornttitiun to determine lire presence of historic
properties. "f'hank you in advance fur your tintl:iy reslx)nsc and cooperation. I)teast: fetal froe to u)ntael u
~}~idt any yuestions that you lttay have Cpltt:CrilJng till: eXieltt Uf ti](" Slit' dlSillrhitn(:E: assot:taled Lvlth tilts
prat CCt_
SI13rereiy, .+
i ~s_
~~ndrea Spaitgter ~~.~`~
Buck Enpinecring
A Unit of Michael Baker
a spanbler~ift nbakercurp.t:um
704-3 i+)-7554

Wr a~ o~
•~~~.
Michael f7. Iasley, Gavemar
Insbeth C.F:vans, Secretary
Jcffrcp J. Crow, kk fwty Secretary
September I5, 2006
Andrea Spangler
Buck Engineering
A Unit of Michael Baker
1447 South Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28203
Re: EEP, Tiig Cedar Creek Stream Restoration, Stanly County, ER 06-2369
Dear Ms. Spangler:
Thank you for your letter of August 29, 2006, concerning the above project.
gffice of Archives mid i listory
IJivis~n of Historical Rcsaurccs
llavid Bronk, Director
We have conducted a review of the proposed undertaking and are aware of no historic resources that would be
affected by the project. Therefore, we have no catnrnent on the undertaking as proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council an Historic Preservation's Regulations fox Compliance with Section 106 codifled at 36 CFR
Part 800.
'T`hank you for your cooperation and consideration. if you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763, ext. 246. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
Peter Sandbeck b~ /1-pNl
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservadan Uffice
Peter D. Sandbedc, Admini~tntor
ADMiNISTRATtON S07 N. FSlotmt Street, Rakgh NC. 4617 Mail Savice Center, Raleigh NC 27691-4617
RESTORATION SIS N. Illount Sttact, Raleigh NC. 4617 Mai Service Cemer, Raleigh NC. 2767)-1617
SURVEY & PLANNING 51S N. fllount Street, Rakigh, NC 4617 Mai Service Cente6 Ralepglt NC 27699-q(.17

0 7~ i 8 1 4
A ' I
I •I `pa i , ,

~~ YADKIN j r ~ ~

{ ~ ~
~ ~ •
2n
~
`
'I ~

t ~ fieln

~
~
~ ~ ! ~~ ~ YADKIN
., _ , ; 03-07-0

~
OCT 2 b

~, ~
X007 _ ,~, A ~
•
~ ~

i ~
ENR - wArEr~ m
u `$wi_i l Y ,• ~+
~ ~ . ~
`I ~ AND STORMINA R BRFWGFI ; • ~
,~aa ,
. :;,r iz.,- - ~I ~
1, Y KI f
~.
-07-0

~._,rd ~
~ ~ ~~
~~ ~
s~atr. I e"j0c
~+'~°
/
1 / I ,~
<,~
:
tt
1, ; m
i ~fADKIN ~ ..
. ~
'`
~ ~~03-07-13 ,,c~a ~
YAD N ~~% j
03-0 -12 f ~

~.
q ~

~
~ ;
I f
`
/ ~
~

p
i
52

/ +-
'` ti f
~

~
~ L'~
`~,
~ ~
~ / ~ ~~~

~/
V
AS on ~
_~ ~
` ~ 1
;od r
(1
HU 03040105060080 ~~~~
~

I
' ~

Pro'ect Site ;`
a~°°r
°~+
~
• 1
a ~ YA KIN • ~
~
a I 1
~
a I
~
~ + . ~ ~
YADKIN ~
•
~
~
r + ~
• U_3-07-10
~e ~ l
I f

P
' ~
~
~: ~
i
i
~
e ~
Map Inset September ?007
Vicinity Map
-~Tri-~rtr~~T,-,a-
~ !
%
~ -,EGEND Big Cedar Creek
~ l
I~
~~~~ ~~'
~~ O USGS Hydrologic Unil
Stream Restoration Project
~
~(' .. NC'DWQ Sub-basin Stanly County, NC

1{ 1~U151'Jl~~l ~~~ \rJ ~ ~ ounry,NC l_1 (~uuntie5

r nnr,rcn~. t~

P
'
P I
'

054
D

~ ~ 4
© ~
~ ~
,f
.
'm
c ~ X
- rviiies
~}tidr(- VvAI'ER QUALITY
WETWJOS AND STORMINATERBRANCH

~,
.+r ~ ..
v ~$ ~~ ~ .
r.
s: ~ ~
'~ ~ u } ~ ~~ r ~.~ - - ~..,~,~
~:f t't4 ;_~: ~ ~ ~~~, ~~r * ~ - ...~,~p `J „gym
Yr ~ 1
a
,.. ~..
1
1 ~a;- ~ g ~ _ ~ _ ~ '~r,,
Wit" ~ ~, ~~ ~ ~~ j ~f ~ ~':v
} ~ T, 3ryr - ~. . P.~ t +iSWpL'• t ` Ai~~ ~ . I1r~ ~ ~ u~6.
~.... ~ .~ ~ fir ~\~E°y j f _ ~ E~A
;k.'"w~. ~ ~ ~ } ~ ~ Win' ~ ,
September 2U07
~~G~N~ p ~ ~ Site Map
~ i ~,« ..et ~«,~ << _ (J Big Cedar Creek
~ __~ "li ~n t N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .ire I+ ~J .StCeanl HeStOCatlOn PCOJCCt
O C T 2 6 200 ~ Stanly County,lvC
1 ~;cc~systell ~
wart wa pro s~ cwNU r~
k•~-•r~,~ o o2e ~ 6RAJVC'r~ ~ •
EEP Project No.: D06054-D M~ias

,
1
_ • mate)
Approxi y 100'
_ j r
t t 1 _
1 _- l+ 1 _ !
r. '; . — � �-- — any i_bL. , . .°,, � '•� .
°
!1 tj ts'4,'.•� i.'a,•
.� 16
4 t\ r I f
I%
minimal _ minimal disturbance
,� I ,� i� , �. 1 ,__s; within stream channel
1 a 1� t tiNN
1
' + .—.. t °"__ -y '•Ili 1 r . , i I .
September 2007
USGS Topographic Map
LEGEND Rig Cedar Creek
OWN
Stream Restoration Project
Approximate Disturbance OWN Parcels Stanly County, NCJ
� Project Reaches iJ �/
OCT 2 6 Zoo7
a� em n -
PROGRAM EEP Project No.: D06054-D4TIANOSANDS7"no:'EiVh . 400 BoFeet

,~
4
BaB BaB

BaB
Soils V
BaB -Badin channery silt loam, 2-8 % slopes
- BaD -Badin channery silt loam, 8-15% slopes
~~'
BaF -Badin channery silt loam, 15-45 % slopes '""''"
Co -Congaree fine sandy loam, frequently flooded
EcB -Enon cobbly loam, 2-8 % slopes B
®EcD -Enon colbbly loam, 8-15 % slopes
EnC -Enon very stony loam, 4-15% slopes
EnE -Enon very stony loam, 15-45% slopes ~ =!
GoC -Goldston very channery silt loam, 4-15% slopes '; d~ •-~~
GoF -Goldston very channery silt loam, 15-45 % slopes Bab
Mh8 - Misenheimer channery silt loam, 0-4 % slopes ApprOXlmately 1 ~0~
Oa - Oakboro silt loam, frequently flooded GoF
GoF
TcB2 -Tatum channery silty clay loam, 2-8% slopes aD
TcD2 -Tatum channery silty clay loam, 8-15 % slopes
Ud - Udorthents, loamy ~~
`'''3
w -Water BaD
,~
EcB GoC Bab
t; u'

r

BaD
BaB
E
GoC BaD

,.
,, }.

BaD ,
4
i BaD
Tc62

BaB ~~
~ _;,, minimal disturbance
GoF l within stream channel

C Bae ~ -
BaB ~~

~ ~
GoF
BaD
~
4• TcB
Approxim ately 100' '• ,
BaB •/ BaF
„"' ~

i`°•',
BaD
GoF /
Bab ,,,,ra:i7~
GoF
GoF
LEGEND September 2007 Soils Map
~.- - Big Cedar Creek
i - ~ Approximate Disturbance rea ~ Project Reaches
p ~ ~~ D Stream Restoration Project
Streams Stanly County, NC
l
' ~COS~SteIll O C T 2 s 2007
['EP Project Nn.: D06054-D o aoo 80Faat © ~ ~
,~,,. ~ . , DENR -
H

~, 4i
{ 1
A` " ` ~ ,~,'~ a~~~ ".~' k ~ ~ µ€~~~ i ~~ L ; ' rip. ~i ~ ~ T
~, n
~ t .. t
'n.-..~ e ~~ 't .,y,. ~" ,~'~ ~ X~ Y ~ -'I',~ c ., ,
~+
t k " _ ~ i3r~ y~~rf't t yf~ t o ++~ s .-s rt4 ~ ` ,~ _ 1.
i ~ '~, • ~' s t A
u 4 ` ~ ~ Js ~ w, r `~,
..~~( rat. S.: NMc x ' >!d ~ ~ ... ~~ ~" D 1~!
~~ ~ ~-r anyy,, ''~ ,~P ~ ~,s ~ ~, ` s , ~ E ~
1~` ,y d`. ~ ,, ` ~{
w:
iw
F'~"' s ••# °1 ' 9~
t ~ •
2 + ,~~- i
l;_
- i
~ / ,.1~' ,:9f ~ ~ , ~ it M ` _ i e~ ~ `{.
r
its }~~'"' y ~' Y I ~f~;1~
~ r f" ~ " ~°.,~ 4
,.
r~; of ` ~ 1 ; ; i>I'4 s ,' • ~ _ 1 ~ ~ / ~ +t'.
w~ ~
Y~ ` s .cr+
~ ~ ,~ ~, i
c k ~
i ~ ~.
~ _
" ~ • J" '' fir:. , r ,. ~ "' .,~
r
~ ~ f '~ ~ <~
1~y t U:~ !! rr ate" %a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~,~ ~'" I - _
r ~
LEGEND Scptcmber ?007
Proposed Design
y. ~ Preservation Existing Stream Alignment Big Cedar Creek
o Enhancement Streams Stream Restoration Prgjec[
Stanly County, NC
o Restoration ~ ~ r(~~~~
[, ,,^ SteIll ~~ ~ ~ Approximate Disturhanc ea
l,'t)S~l .~ C T 2 6 2001
~•~:~,~.~~~~.~ o aoo soo
EEP Project No.: D06054-D Feet
NETLMID3 Nt+D STUftMW.A1~IgRANCN