20080460 Ver 1_NC 294 (4)_20080528

\O T VV"1"2111 V. INvaa JI., VON ZIy
Q North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
j Division of Water Quality

May 28, 2008

MEMORANDUM

To: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs

From: Brian Wrenn, Division of Water Quality, Transportation Permitting Unit
Subject: Comments on the State EnvironmentAssessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
related to proposed improvements of C 294 from existing SR 1308 to Existing SR 1130
and replacement of Bridwo. 50 over Persimmon Creek in Cherokee County, State
Project No. 38068.1.1, TIP No. R-3622A.

This office has reviewed the referenced document dated April 30, 2008. The Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that
impact Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as presented will
result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and other surface waters. The DWQ offers the
following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:

Project Specific Comments:
1. After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance
and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical.

2. Persimmon Creek (Lake Cherokee) is class C; 303(d) waters of the State. Persimmon Creek is on
the 303(d) list for impaired use for aquatic life. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and
erosion impacts that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that the most
protective sediment and erosion control BMPs, as detailed in Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds [15A NCAC 04B .0 124], be implemented to reduce the risk of sediment-laden
runoff to Persimmon Creek.

3. In Section V.2. Waters of the United States, the document should identify in which river basin(s) the
impacts will occur.

General Comments:
1. The environmental document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed
impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. If mitigation is necessary as required
by 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h), it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan
with the environmental documentation. Appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to
issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.

One
Nw
hCarohna
Transportation Permitting Unit atura!!y
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: htto://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
Ar Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

2. Environmental assessment alternatives shall consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to
streams and wetlands from storm water runoff. These alternatives shall include road designs that
allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the
most recent version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices, such as grassed swales,
buffer areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc.

3. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules 115A NCAC 2H.0506(h)},
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream.
In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall be designed to replace appropriate
lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as
stream mitigation.
4. Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, shall continue to
include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding mapping.

5. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NC
DOT shall address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic
environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts.

6. An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required.
The type and detail of analysis shall conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the
assessment of secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004.
7. NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included
in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary
or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.

8. Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we
realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts
should be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover,
in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. When
applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
9. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands or streams.

10. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practical. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certification and could
precipitate compensatory mitigation. -

11. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater shall not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters.

12. Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams may require an individual permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding
401 Water Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires
satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland
or stream uses are lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application

NCDOT and written concurrence from the NCDWPlease be aware that any approval will
by the avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to,the
be contingent on appropnato
maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan'and the
inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
13. Bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream when possible.
channel
14. Whenever possible, the DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
within the stream or grubbing of the streambanks and doe °allow for human and
passage by and bridges
not block navigation by
require work realignment. The horizontal and vertial clearances the structurecdo not block fish provided
wildlife passage beneath
canoeists and boaters.
across
should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater formed beormed scour directed
holes,
d swales, pre-
asse
15. Bridge deck drains ro riate means (gr
the bridge and pre-treated through site-app p
etc. before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of N
vegetated buffers, )
DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices.
used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct
unsure
16. If concrete is
potential fortele elevated pH contacts and possible
waters water due t Water
ct between curing concrete and stream
contact .
concrete shall not be discharged to surface
aquatic life and fish kills,
shall be graded to its preconstruction
access roads or detours are
structures the soil soil the and
17. be seeded or mulched to
If temporary area shall
shall c
contours and elevations. Disturbed temporary
appropriate native woody species shall be planted. When using of grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws,
acallows the area to
be cleared but n t and leaving the stumps and root mat intact mechanized equip
naturally and minimizes soil disturbance. laced below the
18. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and l ~aneater than 48 inches, and 20
one foot for all culverts with a diameter
elevation of the e str streambed by diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow
percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a
r and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other struet~~ in disuding in a manner that may passage of water
.gymPorary erosio
equilibrium of n wetlands control or measures streambeds shall or not banks, d a cent tdo or upstream and down stream of the
J
being
due to bedrock or
above structures. The applicant is required to pro de evidence uthat the nable to equilibrium is
DWQ. If this for guidance on
maintained if requested in writing by construction, please contact the NC DWQ
other limiting features encountered during
and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required.
how to proceed
barrels are required, they shall be designed to mime and/or
as closely possible including pipes cross or barrels at flood plain eleva at the inlet
appropriate. sill weam here
Widening the stream channel should b aea causing sediment channel widening
deposition that
icall decreases water velocity au
or outlet end of structures typ Y
life passage.
requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic

20. If foundation test borings are necessary; it shall be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3494/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey
Activities.

21. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250. .
22. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP
measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities manual
such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to prevent
j excavation in flowing water.

23. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of
Wetland Significance (NC-CREWS) maps and soil survey maps are useful tools, their inherent
inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit
approval.

24. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment shall be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from
leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
25. Riprap shall not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be properly designed,
sized and installed.

26. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.

The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn at 919-733-5715.

cc: David Baker, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency
Marla Chambers, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Marella Buncick, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Mike Parker, DWQ Asheville Regional Office
File Copy

Department of Environment and Natural Resources

Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form

County: Cherokee Date Received: 05/15/2008
Project Number: 08-0346
Due Date: 06/11/2008

Project n: Upgrade of NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road) &
Descriptio
replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek in Cherokee County. TIP 4R-362
AA/AB.
This Project is being reviewed as indicated below:
In-House Review Marine Fisheries
Regional Office Regional Office Area
Soil & Water
Asheville Air Coastal Management
Fayetteville Water Water Resources
?
Mooresville Groundwater Wildlife Environmental Health
Solid Waste Mgmt
Raleigh Land Quality Engineer Wildlife - DOT
Washington ? Forest Resources Radiation Protection
Land Resources Other
Wilmington
Winston-Salem ? Parks & Recreation
_ Water Quality
Water Quality - DOT
Air Quality
Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Manager Sign-Off/Region:

Response (check all applicable)
No Comment
No objection to project as proposed.
Insufficient information to complete review Other (specify or attach comments)

Regional Office Only: lication,
system and update your comments in the DSS (Decision Support System) app
Please log into the IBEAM contact:
SEPA module. If you have any questions, please
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at [e-mail]

@ cg

Y
~vc8
JALin

NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to SR
Upgrade of
1130 (Sunny Point Road) & Replacement of Bridge No. 50
over Persimmon Creek
Cherokee County, N.C.

State Project No. 38068.1.1
T.I. P. Project No. R-3622A

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT / FINDING OF NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

Approved:

00S
3O Z
Dat el B. Setzer, P.E.
Division Engineer, Division 14
North Carolina Department of Transportation

I

I
1
I
Upgrade of NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to SR 1130
(Sunny Point Road) & Replacement of Bridge No. 50 over
Persimmon Creek

Cherokee County, N.C.
1
1
1 State Project No. 38068.1.1
1 T.I. P. Project No. R-3622A

1
1
1

1
1
April 2008

` DOCUMENT PREPARED BY: ••~ra~~~.N.SSR
Wilbur Smith Associates f• OBE

26 G oSo

David L. Wilver, P.E. '•,~.~'••.NG'1 NE~00
Project Manager

. DOCUMENT PREPARED FOR:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways

• a L4 J-0

. Paul White, P.E.
. Division Design Construction Engineer, Division 14
Project Manager

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

' Summary .......................................................................................................................................1

1. Description of Proposed Action 3
' A. General Description 3
B. Historical Resume and Project Status 3
C. Cost Estimate 3

' II. Need for Proposed Project 4
A. Purpose of Project 4
B. Need for Project 4
C. Benefits 6

III. Alternatives ...............6
A. No-Build ............................................................................................................................6
B. Build Alternatives 6
IV. Proposed Improvements 7
A. Roadway Cross-section and alignment 7
B. Right of Way and Access control 8
C. Speed Limit
D. Design Speed 8
E. Anticipated Design Exceptions 8
F. Intersection/ Interchanges 8
G. Service Road 8
' H. Railroad Crossings 8
1. Structures 8
J. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities/Greenways 8
K. Utilities
L. Landscaping 9
M. Noise Barriers
N. Work Zone, Traffic Control and Construction Phasing 9
. V. Environmental Effects of Proposed Action 9
A. Natural Resources 9
B. Cultural Resources ....................................................................................................17
C. Social Effects ..............................................................................................................18
D. Economic Effects .......................................................................................................19
. E. Land Use ....................................................................................................................19
F. Indirect and Cumulative Effects .............................................................................19
G. Flood Hazard Elevation ...........................................................................................19
H. Traffic Noise Analysis ..............................................................................................19
. I. Air Quality Analysis 20
J. Hazardous Material 20
K. US Forest Service Lands 20

i
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

I
VI. Comments and Coordination 22
A. Agency Coordination 22
I
VII. Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact 22
1
1

1 APPENDIX
1
Appendix A. Figures
' Appendix B. List of Agency Correspondence
Appendix C. Biological Evaluation

1
1

r
r
r

r
r
r
r

r

i

i

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
i Upgrade of NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road) &
Replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek
Cherokee County, N.C.
1 State Project No. 3.659911
T.I. P. Project No. R-3622A
1
1 NCDOT Division 14 Highway Construction:
( The NCDOT Division 14 has committed to required mitigation for the United Forest
Service in order to avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the Southern Nodding Trillium (Trillium
rugelii), a designated forest sensitive species which exists in the project right-of-way. These
commitments are as follows:
1. Document the number and spatial extent of Trillium rugelii stems within and adjacent to
Population A before vegetation is cleared or ground is disturbed in that portion of the NFS
' project corridor.
2. Once Population A has been mapped, arrangements will be made for USFS botanists to
r coordinate with the appropriate NCDOT clearing and/or grading contractors to supervise the
removal of the topsoil (approximately the upper 6") from the portion of Population A to be
impacted. The soil will then be moved northward to the relatively undisturbed forested area
' outside the clearing limits of the new alignment. This activity will occur between September
and January, while plants are dormant and most likely to withstand disturbance. The goal of
relocating the topsoil of the impacted portion of Population A is to determine whether
' movement of the topsoil a short distance (<500 feet) into a relatively unimpacted, adjacent
forested area will allow Trillium rugelii plants to reestablish themselves.
' 3. The Population A relocation area will be re-surveyed during the May following relocation to
r determine the success of the relocation effort. A summary of the re-survey will be prepared
for USFS botanists.

Division 14 Construction Engineer:
The Forest Service sign located at the entrance of the gravel road approximately 600 feet
1 east of Bridge No. 50 on the north side of NC 294, and the Forest Service sign located
approximately 500 feat east of Bridge No. 50 on the south side of the road is to be removed and
stockpiled by the contractor.
Six inches of topsoil from station 58+00 to station 61+00 is to be removed and
replaced on project as directed by the Highway Division 14 Construction Engineer as part of the
required southern nodding trillium mitigation required by the Forest Service and referred to under
the NCDOT Division 14 Highway Construction commitments mentioned above

. TIP Project R-3622A
. State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
Project Commitments - Page 1 of 1
April 2008

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

SUMMARY

1. Type of Action

This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation, State Environmental
Assessment/ Finding of No Significant Impact.

2. Description of Action
I
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen
' and realign NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road) and
replace Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek in Cherokee County (See Figure 1). The
proposed project length is approximately 1.8 miles. The total project cost is estimated to
' be $7,584,000.
For construction purposes the project is broken up into two sections, AA & AB.
The AA section is the replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek, while the
' AB section is the remaining roadway.

3. SummgH of Purpose and Need

The purpose of this project is to widen and realign this section of NC 294 and
replace Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek. Theses improvements are needed in order
to create a safer roadway by bringing this roadway and bridge up to current design
' standards, and by removing the restriction of a one-lane bridge on a two-lane roadway.

4. Alternatives Considered

Alternate locations for the widening and re-alignment scenarios, as well as the
' "no-build" alternative, were considered as alternatives to the proposed project (see
1 Section III). Alternate locations of the widening and re-alignment scenarios would result
in greater impacts to streams and wetlands. The "no build" alternative would not
effectively serve the project purpose and need.
5. Summaa of Environmental Effects

The project will result in impacts to wetlands and surface waters. Permanent
impacts to Waters of the US are expected to total 1.67 acres of wetlands, and 253 linear
feet of streams.

r The project may result in impacts to the southern nodding trillium (Trillium
rugelii). However, required and recommended mitigation measures have been
developed in order to avoid or m;nirn;ze adverse impacts to the southern nodding
trillium within the project corridor. These measures have been developed and approved
by the US Forest Service botanists.

1

dft

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

The project will result in one residential relocation.

6. Permits Required

Based on impacts to jurisdictional surface waters and discussions with David
Baker, US Army Corps of Engineers, the project will require a Regional General Permit
31 from the US Army Corps of Engineers for the bridge replacement and roadway
approaches on section AA, and Nationwide Permit 14 from the US Army Corps of
Engineers for the AB section. Additionally, a North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) Section 401 General Water Quality Certification will be required. A Section 26a
permit from the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is required prior to the
commencement of any construction activities.
7. Coordination

' This project was coordinated with the following federal and state agencies
during this study:

' US Department of the Army - Corps of Engineers
' NC Department of Cultural Resources - State Historic Preservation Office
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Division of Water Quality
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Tennessee Valley Authority
US Forest Service
' US Fish and Wildlife Service

8. Contact Information
' The following person may be contacted for additional information concerning
this assessment and its findings:

Mark Davis, Environmental Supervisor
NCDOT - Highway Division 14
253 Webster Road
Sylva, NC 28779
' [phone]

1

1

2

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

Upgrade of NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road) &
Replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek
Cherokee County, N.C.
State Project No. 3.659911
T.I. P. Project No. R-3622A
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION

A. General Description
I
The project involves the widening and realigning of NC 294 from SR 1308 (Sandy
Gap Road) to SR 1130 (Surely Point Road) in Cherokee County and replacing of Bridge
No. 50 over Persimmon Creek. The proposed project length is approximately 1.8 miles.
The general location of this proposed action is shown in Figure 1. The study area is
shown in Figure 2.

The roadway improvements will consist of two 11 foot travel lanes with eight (8)
r foot grass shoulders within a 60 foot wide right of way. The existing one lane bridge will
be replaced with a two-lane, 205 foot long bridge with a clear roadway width of 37 feet.
An aerial photograph of the project site is shown in Figure 3.
The project is included in the DRAFT 2009-2015 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) with right-of-way acquisition and construction on the bridge (R-3622AA)
scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2008 and construction of the roadway improvements
' (R-3622BB) in fiscal year 2009.

B. Historical Resume and Project Status

' The existing structure consists of a four (4) span bridge with one 10.5' span, two
(2) 49.5' spans, and another 10.5' span. The total length of the bridge is 120' with a clear
roadway width of 18'. The superstructure consists of a cast in place reinforced concrete
' deck and beams with concrete cap, columns, and spread footings for the substructure.

' The bridge was built in 1950 with a design load of M-135 or H-15. The operating
rating is 33.3 metric tons. According to the NCDOT Bridge Inspection Report (August
' 11, 2006) the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 50 is 57.6 (out of 100). The sufficiency rating
' is a calculated rating indicating the bridge's sufficiency (or capability) to remain in
service. Additionally, Bridge No. 50 is listed as "functionally obsolete" because it does
not meet current design standards due to the fact that it is a single lane bridge on a two
lane roadway. A bridge is considered deficient if it is either structurally deficient or
functionally obsolete.
C. Cost Estimates

The current cost estimates for this project as reported in the DRAFT 2009-2015
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is $7,584,000. Of this, $375,000 is for right-

3

1
I
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

' of-way acquisition, $109,000 for mitigation costs, and the remaining $7,100,000 for
construction. Current cost estimate breakdown for both section AA and AB are
1 displayed in Table 1.

' Table 1- Cost Estimate Breakdown
Project Section Right-of-Way Mitigation Construction total
R-3622AA $125,000 $109,000 $3,300,000 $3,534,000
R-3622AB $250,000 $0 $3,800,000 $4,050,000
' Total Cost Estimate for both AA & AB $7,584,000

' II. NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT

A. Purpose of Project

NC 294 is a major connector for traffic traveling between North Carolina and
Tennessee. The project is included in the DRAFT 2009-2015 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) with right-of-way acquisition and construction on the
bridge (R-3622AA) scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2008 and construction of the
' roadway improvements (R-3622BB) in fiscal year 2009. The proposed roadway
widening and realignment, including the replacement of the bridge (Bridge No. 50), is
considered necessary to improve safety on NC 294 and remove a functionally obsolete
' single lane bridge, on a two lane road.
B. Need for Project

1. Description of Existing Facilities

a. Functional Classification
' NC 294 has a functional classification of a rural major collector. Bridge No. 50 is
considered functionally obsolete.

1 b. Physical Description of Existing Facility
At present, this section of NC 294 is a two lane facility with has a variable lane
width of 9-10 feet with no usable shoulder. The existing right of way along NC 294 is 30-
35 feet wide. There is no control of access on NC 294.
c. Speed Limit
The existing posted speed limit on NC 294 is 45 mph, although there are
advisory signs posted near the curves that reduce the speed to 20 mph.

d. Intersections/Interchanges
1 Three intersections exist within the project area. SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) and
SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road) intersect with NC 294 at approximately 90 degrees in a "T"
' configuration. Both SR 1309 and SR 1130 are stop sign controlled. SR 1309 (Oak Grove
Road) intersects NC 294 with a "Y" configuration; with NC 294 being the through
movement and SR 1309 being stop sign controlled.

4

I
1
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
1
I
1 e. Railroad Crossings
There are no railroad crossings in the project area.
1 f. Structures
The only major structure, other than Bridge No. 50, that exists within the project
area is a 7'x12' concrete box culvert. This structure carries an unnamed tributary to Lake
Cherokee under the existing roadway. This structure will be extended as part of this
' project.

Bridge No. 50 carries NC 294 over Persimmon Creek. This bridge has a single
lane and a total length of 120', with a clear roadway width of 18'. The superstructure
' consists of cast in place reinforced concrete deck and beams with concrete cap, column,
and spread footings for the substructure. It was built in 1950 and has a sufficiency rating
of 57.6 out of 100.

' g. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities/Greenways
There are no special provisions for bicycle traffic along any of the roads within
the project boundary.

' No sidewalks or greenways exist along any roads within the project boundary.
h. Utilities
t There are existing utilities in the project area, however none of them will be
affected or have to be relocated for this project.

1 i. School Bus Usage
School bus usage is not anticipated to be affected by this project. Some minor
delays may occur during construction activities but NC 294 will remain open to traffic
r during construction.

' j. Traffic Carrying Capacity
The 2006 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) along NC 294 in the project area was 3,050
Vehicles per Day (vpd). At present existing NC 294 in the project area operates at an
' LOS of A. LOS of A means that motorists experience smooth free flow conditions with
no traffic delays.

' NC 294 in the project area is projected to have an ADT of 6,000 vpd with 3%
' truck traffic in 2025. With a projected ADT of 6,000 vpd, NC 294 will continue to operate
at a LOS of A.
k. Accident Data
' A Strip Analysis Report generated by the NCDOT Traffic Engineering Accident
Analysis System indicates that approximately 11 crashes occurred along NC 294 within
the project boundary during the period of October 2002 to September 2005. Of these,
eight (8) were property damage only crashes, while three (3) had injuries.

5

i
i
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
1

1. Airports
There are no airports within a 3 mile radius of this project. This project will not
affect any aviation facilities or operations.
m. Other Highway Projects in the Area
There are no known highway or roadway projects occurring in the area.

C. Benefits of Proposed Project

The main benefit of the project will be safety. This project will replace a
functionally obsolete one-lane bridge on a two-lane road. Additionally, the roadway
improvements will straighten out the curves that exist in this section of roadway by
bringing them up to design speed standards. This will also result in an increase of the
site distance for drivers along this section of NC 294. The typical section of the improved
roadway will have 11 foot lanes and eight (8) foot grass shoulders whereas the existing
roadway has a variable lane width of 9-10 feet with no usable shoulder (Appendix A).
i

III. ALTERNATIVES

A. No-Build
The "no-build" alternative involves making no improvements to the existing
roadway or bridge. This alternative will not result in any impacts to the natural or
' human environment. In addition, no right-of-way from the Forest Service would be
' needed. However, the "no-build" alternative would not address the project purpose and
need.
1
B. Build Alternatives

Each of the Build Alternatives involves upgrading existing NC 294 from the
1 intersection with SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) to the intersection with SR 1130 (Sunny
r Point Road), a distance of 1.8 miles. The roadway will be widened to a two-lane
r undivided shoulder section with eight (8) foot grass shoulders. The proposed new
roadway will meet current design and safety standards. In addition to the widening of
r the existing roadway and straightening out some of the dangerous curves, the existing
r functionally obsolete single-lane bridge (Bridge No. 50) will be replaced with a safer
two-lane bridge which meets current design standards.
r
r Three Build Alternatives were considered for upgrading NC 294 in the project
r study area and replacing Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek. The Southern
Alternative considers widening and realigning the roadway as necessary to the southern
r side of the existing NC 294, and replacing Bridge No. 50 with a parallel bridge on the
r south side as well. The Northern Alternative considers widening and realigning the
roadway as necessary to the northern side of the existing NC 294, and replacing Bridge
No. 50 with a parallel bridge on the north side. The Symmetric Alternative considers
r
6

I
1
I R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

widening the existing roadway equally on both sides and replace Bridge No. 50 with a
bridge in the same location.
I
It was decided that the Northern Build Alternative is the least environmentally
` damaging and most practicable alternative. It will result in the least impact to Waters of
the US and allows for NC 294 to remain open to traffic during construction because
traffic will be able to utilize the existing bridge in the interim. In an effort to avoid and
minimize impacts to wetlands and surface waters to the greatest extent practicable, the
' design of this alternative focused on keeping the widening and straightening of the
existing roadway to the north side. Widening the existing road on the south side or
equally on both sides would result in a much greater amount of wetland and stream
' impacts.
The Southern Build Alternative would result in much greater impacts to Waters
of the US. In addition, right-of-way acquisition costs would be greater because more
private property would need to be acquired than does for the selected alternative, and
construction costs would be higher as well, because the bridge would need to be longer.

' The Symmetric Build Alternative would result in needing to demolish and
remove Bridge No. 50 first. This would increase costs and create a high potential for
both greater temporary and permanent impacts to Water of the US, most notably
Persimmon Creek and its associated wetlands, and water quality, since it will be difficult
' to keep debris and equipment out of the water during demolition. Also, this section of
' NC 294 would have to remain closed to thru traffic during bridge demolition and
construction, thus creating the need for a traffic detour and having an effect on existing
travel patterns.

IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

A. Roadway Cross-section and Alignment
Existing NC 294 between SR 1308 (Sandy Gap Road) and SR 1130 (Sunny Point
Road) will be widened to include two (2) 11 foot lanes with eight (8) foot grass
shoulders. Bridge No. 50 will be replaced with a two-lane, 205 foot long and 40 foot wide
bridge.

The re-alignment of NC 294 consists of straightening out of the existing curves in
this section of roadway to meet the design speed standards.

1 B. Right of Way and Access Control

A total right of way width of 60 feet is proposed for this entire section of
roadway. There is no control of access to NC 294 in the project area.

i 7

I

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
1
I
' C. Speed Limit

This section of NC 294 will continue to have a posted speed limit of 45 upon
completion of this project.

D. Design Speed

This project has a 45 mph design speed.

E. Anticipated Design Exceptions
' There are no design exceptions of this project.

F. Intersections/Interchanges

t This project will not adversely effect the intersections in this section of roadway.
The existing intersection configuration will remain the same and continue to be stop sign
r controlled.

G. Service Roads

' No service roads are proposed within the project limits.

H. Railroad Crossings

No railroad crossings are proposed within the project limits.

I. Structures
The existing single lane Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek will be replaced
with a two (2) lane, 205 feet long, 40 feet wide bridge. The new bridge will be installed
parallel with the existing bridge on the north side.

An existing Tx12' concrete box culvert that carries an unnamed tributary to Lake
• Cherokee under existing NC 294 will be extended.

J. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities/Greenways

There will be no special accommodations for bicycles constructed as part of this
project.

• No sidewalks or greenway trails will be constructed for this project.

K. Utilities

S There will be no impacts to utilities resulting from this project.
•
•
• 8
•

•
•

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

L. Landscaping
i
No special landscaping is proposed as a part of this project. Disturbed areas
along the project will be reseeded with grass.
M. Noise Barriers
1
1 No noise barriers are proposed along the project alignment.

1 N. Work Zone, Traffic Control and Construction Phasing

' The proposed Construction Phasing for this project will be in three (3) phases.
Phase 1 will be to construct the proposed bridge and a portion of the approaches
without interfering with the existing traffic pattern.

` Phase II will be to construct and open one lane. A two way temporary signal will
be utilized with traffic remaining on the existing alignment. Most of the north side of the
proposed roadway will be constructed. The tie in area from the existing alignment to the
' proposed alignment will be paved, and traffic will be redirected into a one lane, two
' way pattern on the proposed alignment utilizing temporary signals.

Phase III will entail complete construction of the south side of the roadway and
' opening to traffic in the proposed pattern.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION

A. Natural Resources

1. Biotic Resources

Biotic Resources include terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Descriptions of the
biotic resources identified in the project area and a summary of this project's anticipated
effects on these resources follows. This information is presented in the context of plant
and fauna classifications.

a. Terrestrial Communities

Three natural communities were identified within the project study area: Low
Mountain Alluvial Forest, Pine Woodland, Oak-Hickory Forest, and Emergent
. Community. In addition to these plant communities, there are also areas of agricultural
. land, emergent community, and maintained/ disturbed land. Plant community areas are
presented in the following table and are depicted on Figures 3a and 3b.
. Table 2 summarizes acreages of plant communities located within the project
. study area. Areas presented are based on the total project study area (21.54 acres).

9

i
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
I
I
( Impervious road surfaces and open water are not included in the plant communities
within the project study area.
Table 2. Summary of Plant Communities Present in the Project Study Areaa.
Plant Community Area (ac) % of Project Study Area
Low Mountain Alluvial Forest 1.28 5.94
Pine Woodland 0.21 0.98
Oak-Hickory Forest 8.68 40.30
r Agricultural Land 2.62 12.16
Emergent 0.16 0.74
Maintained-Disturbed 4.06 18.85

Total: 17.01 78.97
a Project Study Area includes open water attributed to Persimmon Creek (S1) (0.11 ac) (0.51 percent) and
` impervious surfaces (4.42 ac) (20.52 percent) not included in this plant community assessment.
b. Aquatic Communities

The diversity of the stream in the project study area provides habitat for a variety
of aquatic species. Large streams, such as Persimmon Creek, with good water quality
and a diversity of aquatic habitats are expected to support a more diverse assemblage of
' fish and other aquatic organisms than smaller tributaries. The variety of flow
characteristics, microhabitat, and substrate within these streams have the potential to
support an array of species.

Persimmon Creek has been sampled by the DWQ Biological Assessment Unit in
2004 (DWQ 2005, DWQ 2006d). Common fish species expected to occur within the
project study area stream include green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), greenside darter
1 (Etheostoma blennioides), northern hog sucker (Hypentelium nigricans), spotted bass
(Micropterus punctulatus), mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdii), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus),
creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), mountain brook lamprey (Iclitliyomyzon greeleyi),
mirror shiner (Notropis spectrunculus), and central stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum).

r The stream channels within the project study area provide benthic habitat for
amphibians and aquatic reptiles. No amphibians or aquatic reptiles were observed
within the project study area. The small freshwater wetland areas within the project
study area may provide potential breeding habitat for amphibians such as southern
leopard frog (Rana splwnocepliala), green frog, and pickerel frog (Rana palustris).
c. Summary of Anticipated Effects

The replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek will primarily impact
the Oak-Hickory Forest community and maintained-disturbed community, including
vegetated ecotonal areas adjacent to existing road shoulders. Areas modified by
r construction (but not paved) will become road shoulders and early successional habitat.
Reduced habitat will displace some wildlife farther from the roadway. The replacement
of Bridge No. 50 is expected to have an overall minimal impact on terrestrial wildlife

. 10

f R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

' populations compared to existing conditions. Aquatic wildlife may be temporarily
displaced during the construction of the proposed project.

No long-term or permanent impacts to aquatic communities are expected to
' result from the proposed project. Any species that may be temporarily displaced would
be expected to re-colonize the area quickly once construction is complete. Potential
impacts to down-stream aquatic habitat can be avoided by bridging Persimmon Creek to
' maintain regular flow and stream integrity. Support structures should be designed to
avoid wetland or open water habitats whenever possible. In addition, temporary
impacts to downstream habitats from increased sediment during construction should be
reduced by limiting in-stream work to an absolute minimum, except for the removal of
the portion of the sub-structure below the water. Waterborne sediment flowing
downstream can be minimized by use of a floating silt curtain. Stockpiled material
should be kept a minimum of 50 feet from the stream channel. Silt fences should also be
erected around any stockpiled material in order to minimize the chance of erosion or
' run-off from affecting the stream channel. Bridge Demolition and Removal (BDR)
should follow current NCDOT Guidelines (NCDOT 1999). BMPs for the protection of
surface waters should be strictly enforced to reduce impacts during all construction
10 phases.
2. Waters of the United States

' Water bodies such as rivers, lakes, and streams are subject to jurisdictional
' consideration under the Section 404 program. However, by regulation, wetlands are
also considered "Waters of the United States." The term "Jurisdictional Area" will be
used to refer to both wetlands and traditional surface waters such as rivers, streams and
lakes for the remainder of this document. Based on field investigations, the project study
area contains five jurisdictional wetland areas and five jurisdictional stream channels.
Areas of these systems within the project study area are summarized in Table 3 and are
1 depicted on Figures 4a and 4b. Brief descriptions of the jurisdictional Areas existing in
' the project study area are provided in the following sections.
1 Table 3. Summa of Jurisdictional Areas Present in the R-3622a Project Study Area.
WETLANDS
Feature Wetland Type- Area (acre)
Number
W1 PEM (non-riparian) 0.16
r W2a PFO ri arian0.24
W2b PFO (riparian) 0.26
W2c PFO (riparian) 0.07
W3 PFO (riparian) 0.25
W4 PFO (riparian) 0.90
W5 PFO (non-riparian) 0.01
TOTAL: 1.89

' 11

I
I
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
1
I
Table 3. Continued
I
I SURFACE WATERS
STREAMS
1 Feature Characteristicsb Length (linear ft) Area Stream Name
Number (acre)
S1ac R3UBH 148 0.02 Persimmon Creek
S1bc R3UBH 101 0.03 Persimmon Creek
S1c R3UBH 138 0.11 Persimmon Creek
S2 R3UBH 63 <0.01 UT #1 to Persimmon
Creek
a S3a R3UBH 129 0.05 UT #1 to Lake Cherokee
S3b R3UBH 45 0.02 UT #1 to Lake Cherokee
Sac R3UBH 29 0.01 UT #1 to Lake Cherokee
S3d R3UBH 115 0.03 UT #1 to Lake Cherokee
S3e R3UBH 30 0.01 UT #1 to Lake Cherokee
' S3f R3UBH 504 0.10 UT #1 to Lake Cherokee
S4 R3UBH 24 <0.01 UT #1 to UT #1 of Lake
Cherokee
S5 R3UBH 29 <0.01 UT#2 to UT#1 of Lake
Cherokee
F-- 1 TOTAL: 1,355 0.83
Wetland Type: PFO palustrine, forested; PEM palustrine, emergent
b Stream Type: R3UBH upper perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded.
` Stream channel is not completely within project study area. Area is for portion of channel within study limits
a. Streams, Rivers, Impoundments
There are five jurisdictional stream channels within the project study area.

r Persimmon Creek (Figures 3a and 3b in Appendix A) is the only named stream located
within the project study area, located upstream of NC 294 and downstream of NC 294,
this feature is impounded as Lake Cherokee. Persimmon Creek flows northeast through
the project study area.
Jurisdictional stream channels within the project study area have been analyzed
based on physical characteristics (Cowardin classification and Natural Stream Channel
Classification). Channels within the project study area are considered to be perennial,
riverine systems (Cowardin Classification). Based on our preliminary Level I results,
two stream channel types are present within the project study area, B and F. The upper
reach of Persimmon Creek within the project study area is characterized as a B type
channel, and the lower reach is characterized as an F type channel. The unnamed
M tributaries are characterized as B type channels. Due to the presence of stream channels
throughout the project study area, impacts to these areas may be unavoidable.
Approximately 1,355 linear feet of stream channel is present within the project study
area, occupying approximately 0.41 acre within the 21.54-acre project study area.

r - 12

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

b. Wetlands

Jurisdictional wetlands located in the project study area have been analyzed
1
based on vegetation type (Cowardin Classification) and source of dominant hydrologic
influence (riparian or non-riparian). These characteristics were used to determine the
alternative that best avoids and minimizes impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. Due to
the presence of wetland areas throughout the project study area, impacts to these areas
are unavoidable. The palustrine, forested wetland within the project study area
accounts for 1.73 acres of the 21.54-acre project study area. The palustrine, emergent
wetland accounts for 0.16 acre of the 21.54-acre project study area.
f Wetlands within the project study area vary in vegetative composition,
depending in part on hydrologic regime and site-specific disturbances. Two Cowardin
wetland types were identified within the project study area: palustrine, forested (PFO)
and palustrine emergent (PEM). Other Cowardin types characterizing stream channels
and surface waters and are discussed in Section 4.1.3.
Palustrine Forested (PFO) - The area identified as a palustrine, forested
' jurisdictional wetland consists of the Low Mountain Alluvial Forest community type
' and small areas of the Oak-Hickory Forest community type. These systems are
considered palustrine but are influenced by overbank flooding from Persimmon Creek
and its unnamed tributaries. Vegetation within this community is described in Section
1 3.1.1. Wildlife habitat value in this system is considered high due to vegetation diversity
and aquatic affiliation, which offer vital components (food, water, and cover).

Palustrine Emergent (PEM) - The palustrine emergent jurisdictional wetland
area consists of a small area of common cattail, soft rush and tag alder. This wetland is
palustrine in nature, with hydrology driven by groundwater. Due to its small size and
limited vegetation, this area does not provide high value.
r c. Summary of Anticipated Effects

1 Construction of the proposed project may impact water resources by one or more
of the following processes: bridge and causeway widening, box culvert and/or pipe
construction, and box culvert and pipe extension. Construction activities could alter
and/or interrupt stream flows and water levels at each stream crossing. This type of
disruption to a stream reduces stream flow downstream of the project. Temporary
diversions of water flow tend to raise the water level upstream from the project and
lower the water level downstream of the project.
Project construction may result in the following additional impacts to surface waters:

Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion.
r Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction.
r Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
r vegetation removal.

r 13
r
r
r

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

Changes in water temperature due to vegetation removal.
Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction,
and toxic spills, and increased vehicular use.

Construction of this project will result in the impact less than 0.01 acres of PEM
wetland, 1.66 acres of PFO wetland, 253 linear feet of permanent stream impact, and 41
linear feet of temporary stream impacts.
P d. Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation

1 Avoidance - Due to the location of Persimmon Creek, its unnamed tributaries,
' and wetlands within the project study area, avoidance of all jurisdictional impacts is not
be possible. The location of the bridge replacement was chosen in order to avoid the
impacts to jurisdictional areas as much as practical. Demolishing the existing bridge and
replacing it in the same location would result in much greater impacts to Persimmon
Creek and its associated wetlands. Replacing Bridge No. 50 with a parallel bridge on the
south side would result in a much longer and more expensive bridge and greater
wetland impacts. The replacement bridge is designed to avoid impacts to Persimmon
Creek and it's wetlands by spanning the entire water body and not locating any
' structures in the channel. Additionally, it does not require any work to take place in the
water during construction.

' Minimization -Reduction of fill slopes to a 2:1 ratio reduced unnecessary
impacts. Impacts to the stream have been minimized by designing support structures to
avoid the open water habitat of Persimmon Creek. Realigning and widening NC 294 on
' the north side has further minimized impacts to the unnamed tributary to Lake
' Cherokee that runs parallel to the roadway on the south side. Design Standards in
Sensitive Watersheds should be adhered to since Persimmon Creek is classified as a
trout stream by the NC DWQ and WRC.

Compensatory mitigation - Compensatory mitigation will be required for all
unavoidable impacts. It is anticipated that all permanent impacts to jurisdictional Areas
on this project will require compensatory mitigation. In accordance with the
"Memorandum of Agreement Among the North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District" (MOA), July 22, 2003, the North
r Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will be requested to provide off-site mitigation to satisfy the federal
CWA compensatory mitigation requirements for this project.
e. Permit Requirements

Based on impacts to jurisdictional surface waters and discussions with David
Baker, US Army Corps of Engineers, the project will require a Regional General Permit
. 31 from the US Army Corps of Engineers for the bridge replacement and roadway
approaches on section AA and Nationwide Permit 14 from the US Army Corps of

14

Ok

1
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
1 -
I
Engineers for the AB section. Additionally, a North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) Section 401 General Water Quality Certification will be required.
i
i This project study area is part of the Tennessee Valley Drainage basin and is
under the Authority of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). As part of the permit
process, NCDOT must apply to the TVA for a Section 26a Permit as well.
3. Rare and Protected Species

a. Federally-Protected Species

Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or
officially Proposed (P) for such listing, are protected under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq.) as amended. Habitat evaluations were conducted
during the field review on 25 January 2006. Table 4 lists the Biological Conclusion for
' each federally protected species. Additionally, surveys were conducted over the
summer of 2007 for the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalist) and the Small whorled pogonia
(Isotria medeoloides ) as part of Biological Evaluations required by the Forest Service. No
' individuals of either species were observed. A copy of the full Biological Evaluation
' report is included as Appendix C.

Table 4. Federally Protected Species in Cherokee County, North Carolina.
Federal Biological
Common Name Scientific Name
Designation Conclusion
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus BGPA No Effect
` Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/ A) N/A
Indiana bat Myotis sodalist E* No Effect
Littlewing pearlymussel Pegias fibula E No Effect
' Cumberland bean Villosa trabalis E No Effect
i Tan riffleshell Epioblasma florentina zvalkeri E No Effect
Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides T No Effect
*Summer Habitat only
b. Federally Species of Concern/State-Protected Species
1
® The January 31, 2008 USFWS list also includes a category of species designated as
"Federal Species of Concern" (FSC). The FSC designation provides no federal protection
under the ESA for the species listed. However, these are listed since they may attain
federally protected status in the future. Table 5 lists the sixteen FSC species listed for
Cherokee County, their state designations, and whether potential habitat for those
species is present within the project study area. Table 5 also lists two Candidate species,
which are taxa under consideration for official listing for which there is sufficient
information to support listing, but these species are not yet protected under the ESA.

1

. 15

i
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

i
Table 5. Federal Species of Concern in Cherokee County, North Carolina.

State Habitat
Common Name Scientific Name Designationa Availabl
e
Eastern small-footed bat Myotis leibii SC Yes
Hellbender Crtyptobranchus alleganiensis SC No
Junaluska salamander Eunycea junaluska T No
Mountain spotted chub Erimystax insignis eristigma SR No
Northern pine snake Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus SC No
Olive darter Percina squamata SC No
Rafinesque's big-eared bat Conjnorliinus rafinesquii T No
Seepage salamander Desmognatlius aeneus SR No
( A harvestman Fumontana deprehendor SR No
Diana fritillary Speyeria Diana W2 No
' Knotty rocksnail Elimia christyi SR No
Parrish crayfish Cambarus parrishi SR Yes
Tennessee clubshell Pleurobema ovi fibmw E No
' Tennessee heelsplitter Lasmigona holstonia E No
' Mountain catchfly Silene ovata SR-T No
A liverwort Plagiochila sullivantii var. sullivantii SR-T No
Candidate Species
' Sicklefin redhorse Moxostoma sp.1 SR (PT) No
' White fringeless orchid Platantltera integrilabia E No
a E - Endangered; T - Threatened; SC - Special Concern; SR - Significantly Rare; PT - Proposed Threatened;
PE - Proposed Endangered; SR-L - Significantly Rare, range of species is limited to North Carolina and
adjacent states; SR-T - Significantly Rare, species is rare throughout its range; W2 - Watch List species rare
to uncommon, but probably not in trouble.
b Potential habitat based on Franklin and Finnegan (2004), LeGrand, et al. (2004), and other literature
previously cited.
1
' A review of records held by the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) do not document any
t known occurrences of any FSC species within 3.0 miles of the project study area.
c. State Protected Species
r Species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and plants with the North Carolina
status of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), and Special Concern (SC) receive limited
i protection under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 et seq.) and
' the North Carolina Plant Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.). A review of the
NHP records indicates no known occurrences of any State protected species
1 documented within 3.0 miles of the project study area.
' 4. Soils

Overall , soils within the project study area have been subjected to disturbance by
construction of the existing roadway, residential development, an existing powerline
easement, and maintained pasture lands.

16

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

The portion of the project study area covered by preliminary soils mapping
indicates that four soil mapping units are present: Cullowhee fine sandy loam, 0 to 3
percent slopes, occasionally flooded (45A); Rosman loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes,
occasionally flooded (82A); Thurmont-Dillard complex, 8-15% slopes (131D); and
Junaluska-Brasstown Complex, 30-50% slopes (310F).

1 5. Acidic Rock
I
In a letter dated May 16, 2006 the DWQ raised concerns about the presence of
acidic rock in the project corridor. Geo-technical investigations did not specifically test
for conductivity or resistivity; however, rock that would produce acidic runoff is
normally expected to contain pyrite-type minerals. Little or no pyrite was visible in the
' core samples obtained from the project corridor; therefore, it is not anticipated that
acidic runoff would result from the rocks present.
r B. Cultural Resources

This project is subject to North Carolina General Statue 121-12(a). Although no
federal funds will be used for the construction, the needed permit from the US Army
' Corps of Engineers acts as the nexus requiring adherence to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1996, as amended.

1. Historic Architectural Resources

Three (3) potentially historic structures were identified within a one-mile radius of
the project site on the Persimmon Creek USGS topographic quadrangle at the North
' Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NC HPO). The three (3) structures are
Harshaw Chapel, Harshaw Cemetery and a log and frame crib. Harshaw Chapel and
Cemetery are located to the northwest of the intersection of SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road)
1 and NC 294 and listed on the National Register (NR). The log and frame crib (utilized
for corn storage) is located southwest of the intersection of Holly Road and NC 294, off
an unnamed secondary road. The Western-Asheville Historic Office was contacted
regarding this property and they have no information indicating the crib is listed on the
' NR or Study List (SL). Ms. Rebecca Johnson stated the property is probably of no
significance and she can find no record of the property. Ms. Rebecca Johnson also stated
that the Harshaw Chapel and Cemetery are located within the town of Sylva and are not
documented in the correct location on the quads at HPO. Therefore, there are no
i historical structures located within a one-mile radius of the project site.
The NCDOT Human Environment Unit (HEU) solicited comments regarding the
` project from the HPO. On April 16, 2007 the HPO provided comments only on
archaeology, therefore it has been assumed by NCDOT Human Environment Unit
. (HEU) that there are no issues for historic structures and this project will not impact any
historic resources.

. 17

1

1 R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

' 2. Archaeological Resources
One (1) archeological site was identified within a one-mile radius of the project
site on the Persimmon Creek USGS topographic quadrangle at the North Carolina Office
of State Archeology. The site is located to the west of NC 294, near the intersection with
Holly Road, adjacent to a stream, Hickey Branch. The North Carolina Office of State
Archaeology has not surveyed the site and the site is listed as "potential." This site is
not located within the project limits.

In a letter dated June 9, 2006 and included in Appendix B, the HPO
recommended that a comprehensive survey be conducted to identify and evaluate the
' significance of archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the
proposed project.

' An Archaeological Survey of the project area was conducted by NCDOT Human
' Environment Unit (HEU) staff and the survey report was submitted to the HPO on
September 6, 2007 and to the USFS, the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians (EBCI), the
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on
' September 19, 2007. Additional report copies were forwarded to the USFS on October 26,
' 2007. Two isolated finds were identified and were recommended as not eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. A recommendation of no further
archaeological work was made. Therefore, this project will not impact archaeological
resources. A concurrence letter from the HPO was received on December 7, 2007.
C. Social Effects

1. Neighborhoods/Communities

1 Land uses in the immediate project area are a mixture of pasture/open
field/ agricultural and forest. There are a few single family residences which exist along
NC 294. There are no neighborhoods or subdivisions in the project area. The nearest
community is the town of Murphy, located approximately eight (8) miles to the
northeast as the crow flies. Therefore this project will not have an effect on any
neighborhoods or communities.

2. Relocation of Residences and Businesses

' One mobile home located along NC 294 will have to be relocated because of this
project. There are no businesses existing within the project boundaries and therefore, no
business relocations will occur.
1
3. Environmental justice

No low income or minority populations will be affected by this project.

18

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

I
4. Public Facilities
1
There are no schools, churches, hospitals, post offices, fire stations, police stations, or
any other type of public facility located along NC 294 in the project area.

D. Economic Effects
1
1 The project is not expected to induce or hinder economic development in the
project area.
1
E. Land Use
The project is located in Land uses in a rural, unincorporated part of Cherokee
County which is dominated by large areas of forest intermixed with some small fields.
` Much of the land in the project area is owned by the US Forest Service and is part of the
' Nanatahala National Forest. There are no zoning regulations in place in the project area.

F. Indirect and Cumulative Effects

' This project is unlikely to result induced development. The improved roadway
improvements, including the bridge replacement, will not provide new access to large
undeveloped tracts of land. Future development along NC 294 will most likely be
limited to single residential parcels, not associated with a neighborhood or subdivision
r development. Developable land along NC 294 within the project area is limited because
the majority of the land is owned by the Forest Service.

' G. Flood Hazard Elevation

Flood Hazard Zone AE exists in the project area (See dfirm panels in Appendix
A). Bridge No. 50 and a portion of the roadway approaches he within this Zone.
' Additionally, the entirety of Persimmon Creek within the project area is in Zone AE.
' Zone AE are areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual chance flood event.
When constructing this project, local, state, and federal regulations regarding
encroachment into the 100 year floodplain will be followed.

H. Traffic Noise Analysis

The land use in the vicinity of the project is forest land and open fields. There are
a few isolated residences near the beginning and end of the project, but they are far-off
from the roadway and no impacts are anticipated. Also, the proposed project is not an
access controlled facility and the projected ADT in 2025 is expected to be only 6,000
vehicles per day. In addition, the project is not adding lanes nor will it generate more
traffic then what is presently using the existing roadway. Therefore, the proposed
project does not have any noise impacts.

19

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
1
I
Temporary noise impacts may occur during construction activities. Such
activities are expected to be earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving. Generally
1 temporary construction noise impacts, such as temporary speech interference for
passersby and individuals living or working near the project, can be expected. In some
1 areas, construction noise impacts can be expected to be greater due to the close
proximity of existing residences. However, considering the relatively short term nature
of construction noise, these impacts are not expected to be substantial. The contractor
1 can limit times for which certain types of construction operations may be undertaken.
This would assist in minimising impacts to sensitive receptors in the project vicinity.
1
1 I. Air uality Analysis
Cherokee County is in attainment for all categories of the National Ambient Air
1 Quality Standards (NAAQS). The good air quality of the area is attributable to the
mountainous location, the absence of industries, degree of agriculture, vast forest land,
' and undeveloped land. The proposed roadway widening and realignment, including the
replacement of the bridge, does not impact or worsen the existing air quality of the
region, no transportation control measures or detailed hot spot analysis are required.

' Temporary air quality impacts that may occur from construction activities
include the dust emissions generated by the construction of the new facility and the
demolition of the existing structure. Emissions related to sandblasting, construction
' equipment, and the emissions from construction-generated traffic or diversions of traffic
' may arise during construction of the proposed project. During construction activities,
materials resulting from clearing and grubbing, demolition, or other operations should
be properly disposed of by the client, in accordance with applicable local laws and
' ordinances and regulations from the North Carolina Department of Transportation
' Environmental Division and the Division of Air Quality-North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources. Also during construction, measures should be
taken to reduce the dust generated by construction for the protection and comfort of
' motorists or residents in the area.

1 J. Hazardous Material
' A survey of known and potential hazardous material sites, generators, and
underground storage tanks within the study area was performed by Environmental
Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). No potential hazardous material sites, generators, or
' underground storage tanks are located in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, this
' project will not increase the potential for a hazardous spill occurring or for hazardous
substance to impact the natural environment, including surface and/or ground waters.

' K. US Forest Service Lands

' Approximately 0.8 linear miles of the project crosses National Forest Service
(NFS) Lands. Since the NCDOT requires the NFS to issue right-of-way for the proposed
project a Biologic Evaluation to assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects the
project may have on federal endangered, threatened, forest sensitive (TES), or forest

20

1
I
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

1
` concern (FC) species on National Forest System (NFS) lands was performed. In addition
to TES and FC surveys on NFS lands, surveys were also performed for federal
1 endangered and threatened species on both NFS and private lands within the project
corridor.

For detailed results of these surveys refer to the Biological Evaluation included as
Appendix C. In summary, 9 species of wildlife, 16 aquatic species, and 21 botanical
` species were surveyed for. Of these, only one botanical TES species was found within
the NFS project corridor and no federal species were found in the overall project
f corridor.
' Southern Nodding Trillium (Trillium rugelli) is a TES and was identified in two
separate areas within the NFS project corridor. The larger of the two Trillium rugelii
populations is located just north of NC 294, near the intersection of NC 294 and the
gravel access road to the USFS Cherokee Lake Picnic Area. Approximately 120 Trillium
' rugelii stems are located in this area. The smaller population is located on the south side
of NC 294, across from the intersection of NC 294 and Holly Road and is comprised of
approximately 30 stems. Refer to Appendix C for a map depicting their locations.

' Of the two populations identified the proposed project will only affect one of
these (Population A); however, the proposed project is not likely to cause a trend to
federal listing or a loss of viability because the remainder of Population A is expected to
persist, and population B will not be affected.

Mitigation measures have been developed in order to avoid or minimize adverse
' impacts to southern nodding trillium within the project corridor. Required mitigation
' measures include:

1. Documenting the number and spatial extent of Trillium rugelli stems within and
adjacent to Population A before vegetation is cleared or ground is disturbed in that
' portion of the NFS project corridor.
2. Once Population A has been mapped, arrangements will be made for USFS botanists
to coordinate with the appropriate NCDOT clearing and/or grading contractors to
supervise the removal of the topsoil (approximately the upper 6") from the portion
of Population A to be impacted. The soil will then be moved northward to the
i relatively undisturbed forested area outside the clearing limits of the new alignment.
This activity will occur between September and January, while plants are dormant
and most likely to withstand disturbance. The goal of relocating the topsoil of the
impacted portion of Population A is to determine whether movement of the topsoil a
short distance (<500 feet) into a relatively unimpacted, adjacent forested area will
allow Trillium rugelii plants to reestablish themselves.

3. The Population A relocation area will be re-surveyed during the May following
relocation to determine the success of the relocation effort. A summary of the re-
survey will be prepared for USFS botanists.

21

dk

I
R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI
I
It is also recommended that approximately 20 Trillium rugelii stems within the
impacted portion of Population A be removed during August-September to be relocated
to a suitable location off-site. The off-site location has yet to be finalized, but would
' most likely be on lands administered by a local university or plant conservatory.
The USFS issued a Public Road Easement for this project on March 27, 2008 (see
Appendix B).

VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION

A. Agency Coordination

The appropriate federal, state, and local agencies have been coordinated with.
Comments regarding the proposed project were requested from various federal, state,
' and local agencies. The agencies listed below have responded. All but the Corps of
Engineers have commented in writing, copies of which are included in Appendix B.

' US Department of the Army - Corps of Engineers
1 NC Department of Cultural Resources - State Historic Preservation Office
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Natural Heritage Program
Division of Water Quality
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
1 Tennessee Valley Authority
US Forest Service
US Fish and Wildlife Service

VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

' Based on a study of the impacts of the proposed action, as documented in the
State Environmental Assessment, and on comments from federal, state, and local
agencies, it is the finding of the North Carolina Department of Transportation that the
' project will not have a significant impact upon the quality of the human or natural
environment. The proposed action is not controversial from an environmental
1 perspective. No significant impacts on natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic resources
are expected. In view of the above evaluation, it has been determined that a State
Environmental Impact Statement will not be required.

• 22

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

1

I
1
1
{ Appendix A: Figures

1

1
1
1

1

1
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
1 z

/

"'k

~nacr w.u w ver r,a
a>•aA +
.oswa Naa+ ~a
e+®a oa.i
INLMPLB B PLANS
PRIGLIIMR~1 Ry PLANS
EXISTING PAVEMENT
2 2
h
8 817 N R
L
q VARIES (See Plans)
- ' ' POINT' ' pD' ORIGINAL GROUND
ORIGINAL GROUND 2y -Q8 4Y
4d u 777
T n u v m W i c'y WFIX:INf' DETAIL
GRADE TO THIS LINE ORIGINAL GROUND
ORIGINAL GROUND
TYPICAL SECTION NO.I NOTES:
: TOTAL SHOULDER WIDTH TO RE INCREASED 3' WHERE GUARDRAIL IS USED.
USE ON: -L-Sfo.f0+00.00 to 5!0.20+0040 304,
-L-Sla.23+00D0 to Sta.35+00.00 1517 I50'
-L-St0.J6+00,00 to Sic. 37+2837 / 4, PAVEYfNT EDGf SLOPES ARE I/UwtE55 OTHERW'ISf NDTE0.
-L-Sta.40+02D6 to Sfa.41+00 .0 154'
-L-Sto.43+00.00 M Sto.48+00D0
-L-Sta.63+8921 toSta.65+50D0 z 4 PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
-L-Sto.75+78.69 to Sto.78+5040
-L-Ste.88+5040 to Sta.69+5040
-L-Sto.95+9248 to Sta.99+7790 Cl TYPEPfrdPOSE9O39.APPNDA
AT><.NwAVERAGE
RL ANA ETIJ 1 JE
POINT 5
r OF Two LdERS.
c PAOPEOSEO VAR. DEPTH. ASPHALT CW C SURFK£ CTYP 5939. AT Al AVERAGE RATE ~f LIDS PTYPICAL SECTION ON STRUCTURE CZ IN. DEPTH. ro eE INACED W 2DwPoeE NI RS MaT DEPTH.
LESS .
8D' 8~ .d 8A' USE ON: -L- 51o. 54+22D1(BEGIN BRIDGE) M LS PAa+ A gsE ADR GREATER THAN D AP/'RO1G~ GNP C17NGWTEPoIESto. 55+93.42 LEND BRIDGE) D~ WURSEtrPE AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF JPOINT ~2 PRtwtlSEO VM.OrPTN. ASPHALT OM IMTEMED'ATE COMRSE.
TYPE A90& K AN AvERAfiE RATE OF M LRS PER Sr PER
ORIGINAL GR 14D'~ HD' 7i ORIGINAL GROUND IIw. DEPTH. TO BE Pf.CED IN LNERS AM LESS THAN rlA 23 M. NOR GREATER THAN 40 A M @PfH.
Q'INO 4d
4d El TYPe0D9"w4 NEB RATE 45~G ElBSVSY
i n m n i ?V EG fj P/tlPOSEO VMLDEPTH ASPHKT LYwtC. BAfE CCiJk
TYpE 8[$OB, A7 AN AVERAGE RATE O° M fD5 A' PER I
IN. DEPfN, TD 8E PLICED /w ll ERS AOT LESS THAN JD W.
CRAOE TO THIS LINE ORIGINAL GROUND /Art (NEATER iHAw 53 Ix. Po DEPTH.
ORIGINAL GROUND J/ a0lOP AMMUPTE BATE MWM
TYPICAL SECTION NO.2 T EARTH YATEPoAL
USE ON, -L-St0.ZO+00.00 to Sta.23+00D0
-L-Sto.35+OODO to Sta.36+00D0 U ETISTIAC vNEYEK
-L-Sta.37+28.37 to Sta.40+02D6
-L-Sta.41+OODO to Ste-43+00.00 LL L -L-Sto.48+00DO to Sta.54+220'Begin Bridge) V
-L-Sta.55+93.42 ?End Bridge) to Sta.63+8921 wADAG
L-Stu.65+50DO to Sta.75+78.69
-L-Ste.78+50.00 to Sto.88+50,00 W We xae
iy -L-Sto.89+50.0 to Sta.95+9248
f
i'
QL

••4wc~ ~ ~ mkt
•f r

.'t' ~'F t J VIII i r f
~r I r l~ i C y _ , e --A,~,t}~~M

wit si is •I\4'% 'C. t' r 1 C} N f ! ° E 1 C ~•'~~y llr .

` f ` JNt CP f4• - ~p•~\~.,~Y. ~ 1'Yt '3. ~ ~S L°'~j' ei~r ~ ~}?l~ F''~'i~l t
\ . v-F ! 1 `-1' :y - • f
;Sd7A/
1 i 1 = S ~ 4o- b t 7.71 f~~j~l r 1 i ss
t ~ J - ~ , ~ - ti l 1, y ~ ~ I. • Y 1 ~.l ' i ~ ~ 1 ~..r- ~r~ r ` ~ ~i,\•..•~f ;;,r,
f - •l
454
)r,.1+ r `frv r ~t
71
MH,i s• f j"' i t 7 f y, } ,;f~ (/r~^,' 4~'A:.
tL' B18 a~ •a~ .r d t' ' r~#1 j i y , jai 1, t,' s ; f ~ke
~e7-
Bridge No:50 Location
'L t F 1 %fi JA
S~~d#~ 1r ° ft CIA:
, 4
t
i t c Begin Project
e °d, s ti y
\am
l
{.1 , ~'J'f f ¢~,Lr pi o-P~' , ~'1~9e.6 ~rtr l_r !F ti; i t S's ~.'fl £1
r i
L )S(, •1 F P 1y tl S HR'6k I k -j ...y ( 4 F

' ';,a ice Y..~.~/! } ~ l- f fiC~i~ t .i~ .-r ~'SX~; f if ~ r ~I~~ I"~"~"= \ i ~ ~ ;x ~t.,.
r "r.
~ ' ~ ,y~~Di' . ti ~ , ~ i l f ~-~f t' ~i f ' r 7 ~ ~ ~ :•~i r ~ ~J i. -r ~ g -k-" I IV
Cr",'~wll r,•t rYr~,,~`(-'t `~l{,(~•, i` f~ L} < v~ 4`rm.+ End ProjeCtj,
- _ 11 d 14yR t { "Fyiy`f G="`rt...5._ . f~e/ Mr 4ih 1~ _f ..~~tfi~ 1 r\~
y r )•~ffe t `?i..' c 'i'•° { S ~I f`-q4 rJ_= r ~e
,.,1~~ _ ~ L~~ f F e ~e. ~ J`j~r (1 r ~ Y ~u 1¦ Cr-, F ii
4 m t ~ J/~ { `i~ i • 'j ~~f= ( 4. r t E s _ e f ~ t_ f".,'y~
!~'f..,t:..`I f .Jr~..s.J'"'s,( _ f• , i..+l, o- t J~'`"_•{L"t1~1 'jt~
t~~~. ~ k ~LeGti~ 1 ~ ti b~
F -
.-.r i ,s ~ ~ ~ -b ? 1/~ ~d~a, w of ,y~ " t ~ ;.w \ ~ a.y
fma-i.~ .~7,!`. f„" ''~~1~ I.~f~ fr r r..i '~~iZ"",5., Y~~," C FrF~?'j'1 -"~/r
> ~ c i'ce'' ~ ~ :J j"F l ~ t,?1</ ~)J ,1' dl' ~ \ j a..c ~r ~'''t.°'~I r S ~`~1 ~ •
~ F\\ cif 4 t/ r a,~` ~r r , r t• ~ f • ~ r. a
Project Boundary Ia, r t: L
1 ~ f J
500 1"000 Y
Feet
1..
1 inch equals 800 feet
Source: USGS Digital Raster Graphics, ~F°~'~ ~r ~ F t
Persimmon Creek Quadrangle,1982`}
J !
Disclaimer: Information represented on this map
was derived from secondary data sources and is
to be used for general planning purposes only. % t rs «r sr
No warranties or representations of accuracy
are expressed or implied. 1
V 71 t A.~l •F. / Cherokee County, North Carolina
Project Location Map Project: R-3622A
Bridge No.50 Replacement Date: Aril 2008
w' Cherokee County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd:
Nr T Rkr T.I.P. No. R-3622A
Figure:
~

i
7 i
a
1 ,w , I

Bridge No:50 Location

Begin Project°

E-

Rl~.s~ i'_ ;fie TA i{IIS
~F ate' - - ~"~LVih

J

6

End Project
__1
u~

Project Boundary
j
0 325 650
Feet
1 inch equals 450 feet
Source: USGS Digital Qrtho Quad,
Persimmon Creek Quadrangle,1998
Disclaimer: Information represented on this map
was derived from secondary data sources and is
to be used for general planning purposes only.
No warranties or representations of accuracy
are expressed or implied.
Cherokee County, North Carolina
Project Aerial Project: R-3622A
Bridge No.50 Replacement Date: Aril 2008
H, A Cherokee County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd-
T.I.P. No. R-3622A
Figure: 2
t

t

w
v
Iu

F~
^ ^
.
o .

Js
t
1
Mir

'.00 a 1 a,

f ,
Rai ~

o is
f6 J Q8'
N Q o= s 5
' ° P Mfg.` "5'+ 'C N .C @ S.a
1 -E
d " O .r C M U p ~ ~ e
O OU- y O 7dN m
u z 0,2 N O O M rn o Z B
CIO C O C -2 (L 7 C O E E ~b
N~a. V CD 0
N N Al.
Y> C N
2 E 0) CU
rLw0 0¢Q~ EQ y
Fx _ ®®000®0®
Plant Communities Project: R
Bridge No. 50 Replacement Date: May 2006
Cherokee County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JUG
T.I.P. No. R-3622A
Figure: 3a
1 O 1Projecte\OkceslAshevilie(EE)/2005%EE050381MS\R3822Ayrq,tlpn, 05/09/08, q:00 pM
I

(

~I

E
+t
}

R. I

. o
m _E
I - _ C g m S S

`ALL v1 JO~ d $ IS -11
$ e
M Z5 Z5
ID a-
c~i O O cO Y> U C O O o ~a
01000®
r-I
Plant Communities Project: R
Bridge No. 50 Replacement Date: May 2006
N~ Cherokee County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JUG
T.I.P. No. R-3622A
Figure: 3b
Q:%ProjectslOificeslAsheville(EE)XEE05036WS%R3622A_p a.dpn, 05108/05, 4:00 pM
,i

k"
V MI in
- - U) i t x p 'At
z~ 4
a _
kd ~
- 4 . Mn - rte
a
c
l € ' o
ti
1 ~ r

N

. g ;

y

a
try
a E

Ate:
a

w Sul
'M W
U 30 ~4 €
LL
$ ~
O Ma (4) =VF2 I
'C o D :3 :3 (L ff
o_
1
Jurisdictional Areas Project: R
Bridge No. 50 Replacement Date: May 2006
Y ~~2 Cherokee County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JUG
a< T.I.P. No. R-3622A Figure: 4a
J
y O:1Projects%OfrwsWShevi6e(EE)/20051EE050301MS1R36224_jud$A_v03.dgn, 05109/06.4:00 PM
1

g

e
rt
-

4 (Y)

r y

i y
ce)
a

F

u

j ;
n ,
b ~

Ln

tC0 E
J L
O g
70
€ p (0 yT
Wa .
Um~ aj U U `c4 t,E gg3
co ti =

?J SPA Jurisdictional Areas Project:
Bridge No. 50 Replacement Date: May 2006
Cherokee County, North Carolina Drwn/Chkd: AJS/JUG
A, T.I.P. No. R-3622A Figure: 4b
O:\Projeets\OfficeslA$heville(EE)/20051EE050381MSYt 3622AJudsB_v03.dgn, 05/09/08, 4:00 PM
)

APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET

LL 5~ 500
ZONE X4k
ZON~ A \
UllUCJUUIII NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM

/ y FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
ZONE X
i
y}?
CHEROKEE COUNTY,
rm31 NORTH CAROLINA
(UNINCORPORATED AREAS)
PANEL 151 OF 200
1 (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED)
231
1 PANELIOCATIOrv

COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER
N
370059 0157 B
NI N1\•Y EFFECTIVE DATE:
FEBRUARY 2, 1989

Federal Emergency Management Agency

IIY. r .n e~,? coot d. oemm a m..eo....r.mm.a neee m.o. e
vnctetl u.inS F-MROnu~ Trys map aoe. n.t taleet clu~pn
m amenEmeN. Mies may AM Eee. maEe.IIEt.WeN m lM d.le m tM
title N.ek. Fw ika lalvl plotluN IrlMm.tlon .Ikful Wtipnal RoeE Imunnce
Prepnm EeoO map. cMCk tM FeMA Fl..tl M.D 9ton M waw.m.c.hma.SDa

r v
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
H 2000 0 2000 I_I _ to 29,

ZONE X NATIONAL FLOOD INSORANCE PR06RAMl
T`a M UWIIIiI
II
err cn

Prrsinnn t .
o"A"h ZONE A
3:
Elp 01
FIRM
...:,i FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
'-ZONE A THIS AREA IS SHOWN ON
MAP PANEL 370059 0157 CHEROKEE COUNTY,
UP PI,,- = K p~~ LR NORTH CAROLINA
(UNINCORPORATED AREAS)
~2 rLOai,:'
PANEL 175 OF 200
(SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED)
PAN! L IOCAT10N
ZONE X
r `
COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER
-U
370059 0175 B
EFFECTIVE DATE:
FEBRUARY 2, 1989
~!P
~G
{ Federal Emergency Management Agency
c
"1 Tn4 b hn a114r r ' a. poitlen el [M aGvn /tlertrceU Loos mhp h
~ ~ ulrknas Wrap FJJR On1.k/e TI• mp Cx• nR ,e1M elunpn
THIS AREA IS SHOWN ON ro.•~ ~m
~ I Pmpn,n Ions nMpk eMCk tM FEMq Flahs M•p iron •1 www.nuo.M1magw

R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

I
I
1
Appendix B: Agency Correspondence

1
I

1
1
1

1

r
1
1

1

1
I
/
1

i
r

r
r
r
r

r
r
r

r
r

i
I.
AIIJ
NCDENR

? North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
? Michael F. Easley, Governor a~r41 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
)0)
April.3, 2006;
w'F APR .h 5 790E.
Mr. Raj it Ramkumar t
Wilbur Smith Associates
421 Fayetteville Street Mall, Suite 1303'
' Raleigh, NC 27601 - .ElC1A,a'. r'
Subject:, Widening of NC 294, between Sunny Point Road and Oak Grove Road; Cherokee County
Dear Mr. Ramkumar

' The Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species, significant natural communities, or
significant natural heritage areas at the site nor within 0.9 mile of the project area. Our Program has a
record of the Significantly Rare.blue-winged warbler (Vermivora pinus), from just west of the road at the l:
extreme western edge of the project area. This record was in 1974, so we do not know if the species is is
still .present at that site or at. other places within the project area. We doubt that a road widening project.
I:
would impact the species.
' Also, the.U.S... Forest Service's.Nantahala National Forest lies on both sides of the project area in the I
i vicinity of Lake Cherokee. Please. consult with that agency regarding potential impacts to their lands.
You.may wish to check the Natural.Heritage.Program database website at www.ncnhp.org fora listing of
' rare plants and :animals and significant natural communities in the county and on the topographic quad
insp. Alternatively, the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (CGIA) provides digital
' Natural Heritage data online on a cost recovery basis. Subscribers can get site specific information on
GIS.layers with Natural. Heritage Program rare species occurrences and Significant Natural Heritage
Areas..The. CGIA, website, provides Element Occurrence (BO) ID numbers (instead of species name), and
the data user is then encouraged to contact the Natural Heritage Program for detailed information. This
service allows the user to quickly and efficiently get site specific NHP data without visiting the NHP
workroom or waiting for the Information Request to be answered by NHP staff. For more information
about data formats, pricing structure and ordering procedures., visit
http://www.cgia..state.nc.uS/r,gdb/datalist.html, or call CGIA Production Services at [phone].
Please. do.not hesitate to contact me at 9119-715-8697 if you have. questions or need further information.
Sincerely, l
r Harry E. LeGrand, Jr., :Zoologist. f
Natural Heritage Program...
r t
i
r 1
F'
r
1601, Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27669-1601 O e f: .
m
Phone:. [phone] - FAX: [phone] - Internet www.enr.state.nc.us NofthCalararO~lIla
• w....J~J.~11V 1'1..1 A_....~..n.
G.
•

I
I
' DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
151 PATTON AVENUE
? ROOM 208
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801-5006
I REPLY M
ATTENTION OF: June 22, 2005
1
Regulatory Division
1 Action ID No. 200532204
1
1

Mr. Richard L. Hardison, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
DDC, Highway Division 14
` 253 Webstex Dii ve
Sylva, North Carolina 28779

' Dear Mr. Haridson:

Please reference your letter of June 17, 2005 requesting our scoping comments on the
' realignment of approximately 1.8 miles of NC 294 from North Carolina State Road (SR) 1309
i (Clontis Road) to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road), including a bridge replacement over Lake
Cherokee. The proposed project is located approximately 6.5 miles west of the Town of Murphy
in Cherokee County, North Carolina.
' A Department of the Army (DA) permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge of fill material in waters
of the United States, including temporary access fills and disposal of construction debris.
' Specific permit requirements will depend on the final design of the project, extent of fill work
within the waters of the United States, construction methods, and other factors.

Your letter describes wetland areas located on the National Wetlands Inventory Maps.
Before any work is undertaken, we strongly suggest that the wetlands and streams that maybe
effected be delineated and surveyed. Such mapping would help avoid any unintentional
disturbance of wetlands or waters of the United States within the project boundary, would aid in
' planning, and be essential to any application for a permit which might be submitted. Surveyed
' wetland lines must be field verified and confirmed in writing by our staff to be acceptable.

The following items need to be addressed in the project planning report:

Our experience has shown that replacing bridges with culverts often results in sufficient
1 adverse impacts to consider the work as having more than minimal impacts on the aquatic
environment. If the proposed bridge replacement would include the installation of
culverts, a through discussion of the appropriate avoidance and minimization techniques
r must be included. In addition, NCDOT must demonstrate that the work will not result in

I
I

I
I
1
1

I
more than minimal impacts to the aquatic environment, specifically addressing the
passage of aquatic life. The work must also not alter the stream hydraulics and create
flooding of adjacent properties or result in unstable stream banks.
1
1 The report should contain the amount of permanent and temporary impacts to waters and
wetlands as well as a description of the type of habitat that will be affected by the
1 proposed project.
• Off-site detours are generally preferable to on-site (temporary) detours that impact waters
or wetlands. If an on-site detour is the recommended action, justification should be
provided that demonstrates that alternatives with lesser impacts are not practicable.
Please note that an on-site detour constructed on a spanning structure could potentially
avoid permanent impacts to waters and/or wetlands and should be considered whenever
an on-site detour is the recommended action. For proposed projects and associated on-
site detours that cause minimal losses of wetlands or waters, an approved restoration and
' monitoring plan will be required prior to issuance of DA authorization. For proposed
' projects and associated on-site detours that cause more than minimal losses of waters or
wetlands, an individual permit and compensatory mitigation proposal for the unavoidable
impacts may be required.

' • Project commitments should include the removal of all temporary fills from waters and
wetlands and "time-of-year" restrictions on in-stream work if recommended by the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission.

' All restored areas should be planted with endemic vegetation including trees, if
appropriate. For projects proposing a temporary on-site detour, the entire detour area,
including any previous detour from past construction activities, should be removed in its
entirety.

• The report should provide an estimate of the linear feet of new impacts to streams
resulting from construction of the project.
• The report must discuss and recommend bridge demolition methods and include any
impacts associated with demolition and debris removal. The report should incorporate
the recommendations found in the NCDOT policy entitled "Bridge Demolition and
' Removal in Waters of the United States" dated September 20, 1999, and the NCDOT
"Best Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activities" dated August
2003.

' • Detailed information relative to the presence of federally-listed threatened or endangered
1 species and/or the presence of habitat for these species must be included with any permit
1 application.

1
I
I

1
1
1
1 A discussion of any necessary coordination with the United States Forest Service and
appropriate documentation must be provided with any permit application.

' Based on the information provided for the referenced project site, the realignment of NC
' 294 and the replacement of the subject bridge have the potential for significant adverse impacts
to aquatic resources. Further information and study will be required before an impact
determination can be made.

' Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me in the Asheville Field Office at telephone
[phone] extension 226.
Sincerely,

i Angie Pennock, Regulatory Project Manager
r Asheville Field Office

r
r
r

r
r
r

I
1

1
1

1

r
r North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
r Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director

r
TO: Mr. Richard L. Hardison, P. E.
Highway Division 14, NCDOT
FROM: Marla Chambers, Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator 44
Habitat Conservation Program, NCWRC

DATE: August 12, 2005

r SUBJECT: Scoping review ofNCDOT's proposed realignment of NC 294 and bridge
replacement over Lake Cherokee, Cherokee County. TIP No. R-3622A.

North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting comments from the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) regarding impacts to fish and
' wildlife resources resulting from the subject project. Staff biologists have reviewed the
' information provided and have the following preliminary comments. These comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
1 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C.
661-667d).
The NCDOT proposes to realign NC 294 from SR 1309 to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road),
including a bridge replacement over Lake Cherokee, for a project length of approximately 1.8
miles. A portion of the project is located within U.S. Forest Service land and access to Lake
Cherokee and its dam are located off NC 294 near Persimmon Creek. It appears that Persimmon
® Creek and an unnamed tributary, both Class C waters, are adjacent to NC 294 in the project area
and flow to Lake Cherokee, which is considered part of the Hiwassee River, Class B waters.
Persimmon Creek is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout Water; however,
trout reproduction is not expected in the project area. At least two wetlands are in the study area,
including one located under the bridge. Public access should not be negatively impacted by the
r project.
A number of federal and state listed species have been observed in the southwestern
portion of Cherokee County and have the potential to be impacted by the project, including the
blue-winged warbler (Vermivora pinus), state Significantly Rare; mountain chorus frog

Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] - Fag: [phone]

1 NC 294, Lake Cherokee & Persimmon Cr. 2 August 12, 2005
R-3622A, Cherokee County
1
(Pseudacris brachyphona), state Special Concern; and several listed salamanders (including
Federal Species of Concern). There is also potential for the bog turtle (Glyptemys muhlenbergii),
federally Threatened (due to Similarity of Appearance) and state Threatened, to occur. Surveys
for suitable habitat and potential presence of federal and state listed species should be conducted.
In addition, to help facilitate document preparation and the review process, our general
( information needs for road projects are outlined 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. 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
following programs:

The Natural Heritage Program
htt p://www.ncspark net/nhp
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N. C. 27699-1601
and,
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
' Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]

' 2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the project. If applicable, include the
linear feet of stream that will be channelized or relocated.
' 3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreage impacted by the project. Wetland acreage
i 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
' (USACE). If the USACE is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands should be
identified and criteria listed.

4. Cover type maps showing acreage of upland wildlife habitat impacted by the proposed
' project. Potential borrow sites and waste areas should be included.
' 5. Show the extent to which the project will result in loss, degradation, or fragmentation of
wildlife habitat (wetlands or uplands).

6. Include the mitigation plan for avoiding, minimizing or compensating for direct and
' indirect degradation in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.

7. Address the overall environmental effects of the project construction and quantify the
contribution of this individual project to environmental degradation.

I
1

1 NC 294, Lake Cherokee & Persimmon Cr.
~ 3 August 12, 2005
R-3622A, Cherokee County 1

8. Provide a discussion of the probable impacts on natural resources, which will result from
secondary development, facilitated by the improved road access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be coordinated with other state, municipal, or private
development projects, a description of these projects should be included in the
environmental document, and all project sponsors should be identified.

Our standard recommendations for bridge replacement projects of this scope are as
follows:

1.. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require work
within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal and
' vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage beneath
the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by canoeists and
boaters.

2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.

' 4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.

5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should be
planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using temporary
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws,
mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat
1 intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.

6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the stream
underneath the bridge.
• 7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the option of requesting
additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can recommend that the
project require an individual `404' permit.

8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, I&. Logan Williams with the
NCDOT - ONE should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species
. may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
information on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project.
• 9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled "Stream
• Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should be followed.

1

' NC 294, Lake Cherokee & Persimmon Cr.
R-3622A, Cherokee County 4 August 12, 2005

10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.

11. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources must
be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
' maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within
15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.

13. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where
possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.

14. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants
into streams.
15. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and should
be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
' construction is completed.

16. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to
prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids,
or other toxic materials.

17. If culvert installation is being considered, conduct subsurface investigations prior to
structure design to determine design options and constraints and to ensure that wildlife
passage issues are addressed.

i If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the
culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels are required, barrels other
than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or floodplain
bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be reconnected to
floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by utilizing sills on the
r upstream end to restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be
filled with sediment so as not to cause noxious or mosquito breeding conditions.
Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow barrel during low flows to
accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or
. notched baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This
. should enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by

i

I
NC 294, Lake Cherokee & Persimmon Cr. 5 August 12, 2005
R-3622A, Cherokee County
I maintaining channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish
I and other aquatic organisms. In essence, the base flow barrel(s) should provide a
continuum of water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of
velocity.
I
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain
' dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water
velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts
aquatic life passage.

4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a
manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should
' be professionally designed, sized, and installed.

In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and
' located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed
down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in riparian areas. If the area that is reclaimed
was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If successful, the site may
be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other projects in the watershed.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and maintain
' sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent wet concrete from
contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of bridges with spanning
structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is recommended in most cases.
i Spanning structures allow Wildlife passage along streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation
and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages of this project.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at [phone].

cc: Michael R. Parker, NCDWQ
Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Sarah McRae, NCNB?
r
r

r
r
r
r

r
r

1
1
P

USDA United States Forest National Forests in North Carolina 160A Ziilicoa Street
Department of Service Supervisor's Office P.O. Box 2750
1 Agriculture Asheville, NC 28802
82&257-4200
File Code: 2730-2
Date: May 1, 2006

Ms. Deniece D. Swinton
WILBUR SMITH ARSfJCIATES 1
Wilbur Smith Associates
7015-H Albert Pick Road MAY 0 4 2006
' Greensboro, NC 27409
GREE>NSbOR0, NC
Dear Ms. Swinton:
This letter responds to your April 14, 2006 request for input on the proposal to widen NC 294 i.
' and replace the bridge over Cherokee Lake (WSA Project No. 526177, T.I.P. Project Number R-
3 622A) in Cherokee County. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project.
' About 0.75 miles of the road and the bridge replacement are located on United States Forest
Service (FS) property. All North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) projects i
located on FS lands require a biological evaluation (BE) of impacts of the project on our
resources. The National Forests in North Carolina works with NCDOT's Project Development
i and Environmental Analysis branch in Raleigh to complete BEs on NCDOT projects located on
FS lands. In addition, we need to review and accept the findings of NCDOT archeology
evaluating the impacts of the proposed project. Once we have biological and archeological
clearances on the preferred alternative, we can issue a Public Road Easement for the road.
E:
realignment and bridge replacement. F
Your letter does not provide enough details of the proposal on the road realignment and the
bridge replacement for us to make specific comments on the project. In order to make
1 substantive comments and to properly evaluate the impacts to Forest Service resources we will
need detailed descriptions of the proposal and any alternatives that are being considered.
Sincerely,

tom..

KAREN L. COMPTON
Environmental Coordinator

cc: Joe Bonnette, Acting District Ranger
Jim Hauser, NCDOT, PDEA Branch
is
t.::
f.:
4kiF.
• S Caring for.the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper

I

WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES

1 MAY 18 2006
1
1 GREENSBORO, NC
1 Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499
1 '
' May 11, 2006

Ms. Deniece D. Swinton, P.E.
Wilbur Smith Associates
7015-H Albert Pick Road
Greensboro, North Carolina 27409
' Dear Ms. Swinton:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA): NC 294 WIDENING FROM SR 1309 (OAK
GROVE ROAD) TO SR 1130 (SUNNY POINT ROAD), CHEROKEE COUNTY, TIP j
PROJECT NO. R-3622A, WSA PROJECT NO. 526177
' TVA has reviewed information provided in your letter of April 14, 2006, on the proposed
widening of NC 294 in Cherokee County. We understand that the project is state
funded and that an EA will be prepared under the North Carolina Environmental Policy
Act.
i
' In order to enhance our review and involvement with the project, we request that TVA be
' included as a cooperating agency in the state EA. The EA should note that an approval
under Section 26a of the TVA Act would be needed for new bridge crossings, culvert
' extensions, and stream relocations, if any, proposed in association with the widening
project.
t
Should you have any questions, please contact Harold M. Draper at [phone] or
[e-mail].
' Sincerely,

Jon 4 M. Aey, a ger
NEPA Policy
Environmental Stewardship and Policy

cc: Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
i
j

I

~ 1

(t

WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
d"Vp:
JUN 19 2006
GREENSBORO, NC

1
1 North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
' State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
' Michael V. r?asley, Governor Office of Archivcs and I Tiston,
lishcth C. Hvans, Secretary Division of I hstorictl Resources
' Jeffrey.). Crow, Deputy Seeretarv David Brook, Director
I
June 9, 2006
I!
1
Deniece D. Swinton, P.F...
Wilbur Srrith Associates
7015-H Albert Pick Road
Greensboro, NC 27409
I`
Re: NC 294 from SR 1309 to SR 1130, R-3622A, Cherokee County, ER 06-1175
r Dear Ms. Swinton:
t I.
is
' Thank you for your letter of April 14, 2006, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of historical or architectural importance
' located within the planning area. However, this area has not been surveyed in over twenty-years and there may f
' be structures of which we are unaware located within the planning area.
' We recommend that a Department of Transportation architectural historian identify and evaluate any
structures over fifty years of age within the project area and report the findings to us.
1 is
' There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries. However, the project area has s
never been systematically surveyed to determine the location or significance of archaeological resources. Based
' on the topographic and hydrological situation there is a high probability the presence of prehistoric or
historic archaeological sites.
r
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist to identify and
' evaluate the significance of archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project.
' Potential effects on unknown resources must be assessed prior to the initiation of construction activities.
f
k
1 Two copies of the resulting archaeological survey report, as well as one copy of the appropriate site forms,
should be forwarded to us for review and comment as soon as they are available and well in advance of any
construction activities.
I
' .A list of archaeological consultants who have conducted or expressed an interest in contract work in North i.
Carolina is available at,,vxw.arch.dcr.stite.nc.us/consults.htni. The archaeologists listed, or any other
experienced archaeologist, may be contacted to conduct the recommended survey.
4
LocationMailingAddress Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street, ltalcigh,NC 4617 Mail Scnice Center, Ralcilfi NC 276914(117 (919)73:1.4763/73."653 r
x)19)7316547/715 4N01
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Scnticc (:enter, Raleigh NC 2701),1617
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount Street, Ralcigh, NC . 4617 Mail Scn•ice (:enter, Raleigh N(270994617 x)19)'• 316545/7154901
I'
r

i
I
I
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.

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. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.

i Sincerely,

' ?eter Sandbeck
I
i
is

I

r

{
f
F:

! k.

4

E'
F:

f:
4
I
~ f.

F
~ I.

1 • ,MITH gsso SMITH qs

1 m n ~ so

ug 1 3101 3 DEC

1 RgLE1G~ ~gCEIGH,~G

' North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
r State Historic Preservation Office
r x Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Office of Archives and History
r Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary Division of Historical Resources
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary David Brook, Director
r
r December 7, 2007
MEMORANDUM
' TO: Matt Wilkerson, Archaeology Supervisor
Division of Highways
' North Carolina Department of Transportation
1 FROM: Peter Sandbeck 0*1 1 e)~/

SUBJECT: NC 294 Widening from SR 1309 to SR 1130, R-3622A, Cherokee County, ER 06-1175

Thank you for your letter of September 6, 2007, transmitting the archaeological survey report by Jesse Zinn
and Shane Petersen for the above project. We apologize for the delay in our response.

During the course of the survey, two isolated finds were located within the project area. For purposes of
compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur that the following properties
are not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places:
31CE733 and 31CE734

These sites lack sufficient artifact density to yield information important to history or prehistory.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Fart 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have any questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/807-6579.

1
Location: 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 Telephone/Fax: [phone]-6599

I

Michael F. Easley, Governor
NIATF,4 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
\O~ QG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
y Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 16, 2006
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
' MEMORANDUM MAY 3 1 2006

To: Deniece Swinton, PE, Project Engineer, Wilbur Smith Associates
GREENSBORO, NC
' From: Brian L. Wrenn, Transportation Permitting Unit, NCDWQ 60
` Subject: Request for Scoping Comments for the Proposed Widening of NC 294 from SR 1309
(Oak Grove Road) to SR 1130 (Sunny Point Road) in Cherokee County, TIP Project No.
R-3622A, WSA No. 526177

' This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible
' for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the
U.S., including wetlands. Based on a preliminary review of the project study area, tributaries, wetlands
and riparian buffers associated with the following named stream could be impacted by the proposed
project:
Stream/Surface Water River Basin Classification Stream Index No. is
r Persimmon Creek (Lake Hiawassee C 1-63
Cherokee
i DWQ has the following comments:

1 Project Specific Comments:

1, Persimmon Creek is class C waters of the State. However, the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
has posted Persimmon Creek as Hatchery Supported Waters. DWQ recommends that the most .
protective sedimentation and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of turbidity
violations in trout waters. In addition, all disturbances within trout buffers should be conducted in
accordance with the NC Division of Land Resources and NC Wildlife Resources Commission
requirements. Also, wetlands are located at various sites along Persimmon Creek and its tributaries.
and Lake Cherokee. All wetlands within the project area should be identified.
2. DWQ has concerns regarding the potential for acidic rock in the project corridor. Pre-construction
geotechnical testing should be conducted for the presence of acidic rock. If any acidic rock is found,:
efforts should be made to avoid and minimize disturbance of these areas. As part of the 401 Water
Quality Certification, DWQ will require a treatment and mitigation plan for handling and disposing of
I.
acidic rock.
3. DWQ has concerns with the parallel orientation of Persimmon Creek to the proposed project.
Widening of NC 294 should be conducted to avoid and minimize impacts to Persimmon Creek and
. associated tributaries and wetlands as much as possible. This may include but is not limited to
. widening to the roadside opposite of Persimmon Creek, steeper fill slopes, and retaining walls.
• 1~~thCaro]~~a
. Transportation Permitting Unit ll~lflR!
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 Y.
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Ralegh, North Carolina 27604 4t,
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] Internet: http:l/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands kk
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
r
•

1

I
May 16, 2006
Page 2

1

General Comments:
i
L. The environmental document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed
impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. If mitigation is necessary as required
by 15A NCAC 211.0506(h), it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan
' with the environmental documentation. Appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to
issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
' 2. Environmental document alternatives should consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to
streams and wetlands from stone water runoff. These alternatives should include road designs that
allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the
r most recent version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices, such as grassed swales,
buffer areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc.
3. After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance
' and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. In
' accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules 11 5A NCAC 2H.0506(h)),
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1 acre to wetlands. In the event that mitigation
' is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values.
The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as wetland mitigation. E
4. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules {15A NCAC 2H.0506(h)), C
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream.
' In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate
' lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as
t,
stream mitigation.
1 5. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NC i
1 DOT should address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic F:
' environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts.
1 6. If a bridge is being replaced with a hydraulic conveyance other than another bridge, DWQ believes
the use of a Nationwide Permit may be required. Please contact the US Army Corp of Engineers to j
determine the required permit(s).
7. If the old bridge is removed, no discharge of bridge material into surface waters is allowed unless
N otherwise authorized by the US ACOE. Strict adherence to the Corps of Engineers guidelines for
1 bridge demolition will be a condition of the 401 Water Quality Certification.
' 8. Bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream when possible.
i
9. Whenever possible, the DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require k
work within the stream or grubbing of the streambanks and do not require stream channel
realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allow for human and wildlife
passage beneath the structure, do not block fish passage and do not block navigation by canoeists and
r boaters.
r
r
r
r
r
r
r

' May 16, 2006
Page 3

10. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater should be directed
across the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed,scour
holes, vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of
' NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices.
11. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct contact
' between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete should
not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and
fish kills.
` i
12. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction
' contours and elevations. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
appropriate native woody species should be planted. When using temporary structures the area
should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact allows the area to re-vegetate
naturally and minimizes soil disturbance.
' 13. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands shall be below the
elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20
1 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow
passage of water and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures including r.
temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-
' equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the
above structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being r
maintained if requested in writing by DWQ. If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or t.
other limiting features encountered during construction, please contact the NC DWQ for guidance on
how to proceed and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required.
14. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they should be designed to mimic natural stream cross E.
1 section as closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation and/or sills where
appropriate. Widening the stream channel should be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet
or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires
increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
15. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3494/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey
Activities. t,
E'
16. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented and f
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion I.
Control Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250. I!
t
17. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area unless otherwise a
approved by NC DWQ. Approved BMP measures from the most current version of NCDOT f
r
Construction and Maintenance Activities manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other
diversion structures should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water..
f
18. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands and streams.
1

d1k

' May 16, 2006
Page 4

` 19. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practical. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.

' 20. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of Wetland
Significance (NC-CREWS) maps and soil survey maps are useful tools, their inherent inaccuracies
' require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit approval.
21. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
' minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from
t leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
f
22. In most cases, the DWQ prefers the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with
' road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and located to i
avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the
1 structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed and the approach fills {
' removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed and restored to the natural
ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. Tall E
1 fescue should not be used in riparian areas.
' 23. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be properly designed,
sized and installed.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
' Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn at 919-733-5715.
6
Y

q!.

pc: Steve Lund, USACE Asheville Field Office
Mike Parker, NCDWQ, Asheville Regional Office
Clarence Coleman, Federal Highway Administration
Chris Militscher, USEPA s
. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Marella Buncick, USFWS ir.
File Copy`

k
t

t
F
i
i
i
•
•

I

1
I
Q~~gN}op
ryF
ate" "y; United States Department of the Interior
p
g
1 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
1 MgRCH ,Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
July 27, 2005

Mr. Richard L. Hardison, P.E.
' North Carolina Department of Transportation
DDC, Highway Division 14
253 Webster Drive
Sylva, North Carolina 28779
Dear Mr. Hardison:

1 Subject: Proposed Realignment and Improvement of NC 294 and Bridge Replacement over Lake
e Cherokee, State Project WBS 38068, TIP No. R-3622A, Cherokee County, North Carolina

As requested by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), we have reviewed the,
subject proposed project and are providing the following comments in accordance with the Fish and
M 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).
The NCDOT is proposing to realign and improve NC 294 in Cherokee County from SR 1309 to SR 1130,
approximately 1.8 miles, including the replacement of the bridge over Lake Cherokee. The proposed
improvements are to improve safety for the traveling public.
In the scoping package for this project, you included the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants, as well as federal species of concern, for Cherokee County. Federal species of
' concern are not legally protected under the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
section 7, unless they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or threatened. We request your
assistance in protecting them if any are found in the vicinity of this project. Although our records indicate
no known locations of federally protected species in the vicinity of the project, we recommend conducting
habitat assessments and surveying any suitable habitat in the project area for these species prior to any
further planning or on-the-ground activities to ensure that no adverse impacts occur.
If you have questions about these comments please contact Ms. Marella Buncick of our staff at
. 828/258-3939, Ext. 237. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log
. Number 4-2-05-310.
Sinc ly,

Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor

1
I

1
1 USDA United States Forest National Forests in North Carolina 160A Zillicoa Street
Department of Service Supervisor's Office P.O. Box 2750
' Agriculture Asheville, NC 28802
828-257-4200
1
File Code: 2360/2730-2
Date: April 1, 2008
Matt Wilkerson
Archaeology Supervisor
NC DOT Office of Human Environment
1583 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1583

Dear Mr. Wilkerson:

Thank you for submitting the report Archaeological Survey for the Improvement of NC 294,
Cherokee County, North Carolina for review.
The archaeological field investigations were very thorough and are well documented. As only
' two isolated finds were recorded we concur with their assessments as not National Register of
' Historic Places (NRHP) eligible. We agree with the determination that the proposed road work
will have no effect on NRHP eligible properties.
We appreciate the continued efforts of you and your staff in coordinating with us.

Sincerely,

~00xe j g.
t FOR
I LYNN L. HICKS
i Engineering, Heritage Resources, & Recreation
Staff Officer

' cc: Lands & Special Uses, Tusquitee RD, Nantahala Zone Archaeologist

s y~,
Caring for the Land and Serving People Printed on Recycled Paper ~rl

s

1 04/07/2008 06:33 8285864043 NCDOT DIVISION 14 PAGE 02/06
1

USDA United States Forest National Forests in North Carolina 160 ZILLICOA. ST STE A
Department of Service Supervisor's Office ASHEV ILLS NC 28801-1082
Agriculture 828-2574200
' File Code: 2730-2
Date: April 1, 2008
1
1 Ms. Betty Yancey RECEIVED
r Right of Way Agent
North. Carolina Department of Transportation APR 0 2 2008
1546 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1546
Dear Ms. Yancey:~~~t~N 14
Enclosed you will find the executed Public Road Easement and Contract Stipulations for NC 294
' and Bridge No. 50 located on National Forest System lands in Cb.erokec County, North Carolina.
' Please record this easement with the registrars' office and provide us with the book and page
number when completed.
Please ensure that your engineer has incorporated the Construction Stipulations into the design of
the road and that they contact Tusquitee District Ranger Steve Lohr at 828-837-5152 prior to
beginning construction.

If you have any questions regarding this, please give me a call at 828-257-4230.
Sincerely,

G-,~ -S,,

KAREN L. COMPTON
Environmental Coordinator
r Enclosures

Cc: teve Lohr, Tusquitee District Ranger
Joel Setzer, NCDOT, Division 14

. Caring for the Land and Serving People PrUnedon ROCAd oPaper

1

1 04/07/2008 06:33 8285864043 NCDOT DIVISION 14 PAGE 03/06

1 -

1
r
r

r
r
r

r
r Authorization ID: TUS103622 FS-2700-9f (03/06)
' Contact ID: TUS10326 OMB No. 0596.000?_
Use Code: 741

U. S. DEPARTMENT er AGRICULTURE ^ rti
Forest Service ((~~'~({~}J~ ~j
PUBLIC ROAD EASEMENT
National Forest Roads and Trails Act,
1 October 13, 1964, (P. L. 88-6M
36 CFR 251.50, et seq
THIS EASEMENT, dated this pRI day of March 2006, from the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
acting by and through the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, hereinafter called Grantor, to the
r North Carolina Department of Transportation, hereinafter called Grantee.
' WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Grantee has applied for a grant of an easement under the Act of October 13, 1964 (78
Stat. 1089, 16 U.S.C. 532.538), for a road over certain lands or assignable easements owned by the
1 United States in the County of Cherokee, State of North Carolina, and administered by the Forest
Service, Department of Agriculture.
NOW THEREFORE, Grantor does hereby grant to Grantee an easement for a public road and highway
along and across a strip of land, hereinafter defined as the right-of-way for NC 294 and Bridge No. 50
over Persimmon Creek, over and across the lands in the County of Cherokee, State of North Carolina, as
described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
The word "right-of-way" when used herein means said strip of land whether or not there is an existing
road or highway located thereon. Except where it is defined more specifically, the word "highway" shall
mean roads or highways now existing or hereafter constructed on the right-of-way or any segment of
such roads or highways.
This grant is made subject to the following terms, provisions, and conditions:
1" Outstanding valid claims, if any, existing on the date of this grant.
• 2. The easement herein granted is limited to use of the described right-of-way for the purpose of
construction, operation, and maintenance of a highway in accordance with approved plans,
. specifications, and stipulations described in the following conditions numbered 3 and 4 and does
not include the grant of any rights for nonhighway purposes or facilities; Provided, That the Forest
Service shall not exercise its right to use or authorize the use of any portion of the right-of-way for
nonhighway purposes when such use would interfere with the free flow of traffic or impair the full
z

I

I 04/07/2008 06:33 8285864043 NCDOT DIVISION 14 PAGE 04/06

(I

use and safety of the highway; and Provided further, That nothing herein shall preclude the Forest
Service from locating National Forest and other Department of Agriculture information signs on the
portions of the right-of-way outside of construction limits.
' 3, The design and construction of the highway project situated on this right-of-way shall conform with
plans, specifications, and written stipulations approved by the Forest Supervisor.
4. Any reconstruction of the highway situated on this right-of-way shall conform with plans,
' specifications, and written stipulations approved by the Forest Supervisor or authorized
representative prior to beginning such reconstruction.
5. Consistent with highway safety standards, the Grantee shall:
a. Protect and preserve soil and vegetative cover and scenic and esthetic values on the right-of-
way outside of construction limits,
b. Provide for the prevention and control of soil erosion within the right-of-way and adjacent
' lands that might be affected by the construction operation, or maintenance of the highway,
and shall vegetate and keep vegetated with suitable species all earth cut or fill slopes feasible
' for revegetation or other areas on which ground cover is destroyed, The Grantee shall
perform these activities where it is deemed necessary during a joint review between the
authorized Forest Officer and Grantee prior to completion of the highway. The Grantee also
shall maintain all terracing, water bars, leadoff ditches, or other preventive works that may be
necessary to accomplish this objective. This provision also shall apply to waste disposal
areas and slopes that are reshaped following slides that occur during or after construction.
6_ The Grantee shall: Establish no borrow, sand, or gravel pits; stone quarry; permanent storage
areas; sites for highway-operation and maintenance facilities; camps; supply depots; or disposal
areas within the right-of-way, unless shown on approved construction plans, without first obtaining
approval of the authorized Forest Officer.
' 7. The Grantee shall maintain the right-of-way clearing by means of chemicals only after the Forest
' Supervisor has given specific written approval. Application for such approval must be in writing
and must specify the time, method, chemicals, and the exact portion of the right-of-way to be
1 chemically treated.
1 S. The Grantee does by the acceptance of this document covenant and agree for itself, its assigns,
and its successors in interest to the property here granted or any part thereof, that the covenant
set forth below shall attach to and run with the land:
(a) That the Grantee shall operate the described property and its appurtenant areas and its
buildings and facilities whether or not on the land therein granted as a public road, in full
compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and all requirements Imposed by or
pursuant to the regulations issued there under by the Department of Agriculture and in effect
on the date of this document to the end that no person in the United States shall, on the
grounds of race, sex, color, religion, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any programs or activities
provided thereon; and
(b) That the United States shall have the right to judicial enforcement of these covenants not only
as to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, but also as to lessees and licensees dofrrg
business or extending services under contractual or other arrangements on the land therein
conveyed.
The Chief, Forest Service, may terminate this easement, or any segment thereof, (1) by consent of the
Grantee, (2) by condemnation, or (3) after a five (5) year period of nonuse, by a determination to cancel
after notification and opportunity for hearing as prescribed by law.
1
2

d1k

04/07/2008 06:33 8285864043 NCDOT DIVISION 14 PAGE 05/06

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor, by its Forest Supervisor. Forest Service, has executed this
/ easement pursuant to the delegation of authority to the Chief, Forest Service, 7 CFR 2.60, and the
delegation of authority by the Chief, Forest Service, dated August 22, 1984 (49 FR 34283), on the day
and year first above written.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

i
MART E HILLIARD
Forest Supervisor
' Forest Service
Department of Agriculture
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BUNCOMBE
1, Raymond M. Johns 11, a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that Marisue
Hilliard, Forest Supervisor, National Forests in North Carolina, personally appeared before me this day
and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument.
' Witnessed my hand and official seal, this the day of March, 2006.
waoti PA Jp~oz
n Z ytA

Notary Public
1

My commission expires October 22, 2011
°4peaaevonn~a`'
Atcerdinp to the paperwork Raduetion Acl of 1895, no persons ora ragsked to respond to a eolloc loon of Info.-hart unless it ernweys a valid OMB control number. Tha velid
OMB control number for fhla 1Mormatbn collection is 059&ooe2,
• This infomrallon Is needed by lha Forest ger Acs to evaluate raquesls to use National Ftxaet System lands and tnanago Ihosa lands to protect natural rosourcas, administer the
. use, and ensure loubae haelth and safety. This infemad- Is required to obtain fir rainin n baneflL The out[" for that requirement is provided by the Organic Act of 1897 and
the Federal Land Polley and Monspemem Act of 1978, which tuiWag, the Secretary of Agriculture to pnomul7so sines and regulations for avihorying and managing National
Fornsl System lands. These slat tea. slang with the term Permit Act, Natlonol Foreal Ski Area Permit AM. GranifsuThya Ael, lAraml Lapsing Act Alaska Term Parmh Act, Act
. w September 3, 1954, wilderna%ru Act, Nalional Forest Ronds and Tralls Act, Act of Novomber 15, 1973, Atchedaopehl Rasvuroes Protection Act, end Alaska National Interest
Lando Conservation Act, oulhorlm the Secretary of Agricultme to Issue authorixatione for the use and occups"ol National Forest Syslam lands. Tha gecrefary of
Aprlcunuta's regulations fir 36 CFR Pan 251, Subpart estebaen Procaduras for ISaulng those auftlilleliono,
The Privacy Act of 1974 (0 U.S.C. 5522) and the Frandom cl information Act (5 U.S.C, 552) govern the confMonilpitly to be provided for Irdbrmatlen received by IN Forest
. service.
Public reporting burden for this collection of Information, 11 roqua.iad, Is eatknated to avoraga 1 Four per response ter onniml financial information; nvarpga 1 flour per response
to prepare orvposts operation endlor rnaintenenco plan; average 1 hour per reeponsa for Inspection repons; and an averepe of 1 hour ter and+reWeat that may inrluda spoh
Fhings its reports, logs. In[Wly and user Information, sublease information, rind other shelter miacellanaous Infometlon requosls. This Includes me time for ravlawinp
Inatruchons, SnarchIng aldating We Abumps, gathering and rrmintalning 1118 data ncedAd, and oornpiving and retirawing the collection 01 inlormaUon,
3

•

•
•
AdIk

i
04/07/2008 05:33 8285864043 NCDOT DIVISION 14 PAGE 06/0G

ExhibitA
Public Road Easement
North Carolina 294 and Bridge No. 30
i Cherokee County, North Carolina
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1

M~Q /

5 Bridge No. 50 y

F 44
1 • J 6 End Easement

Begin Easements 8
w { M

e
. Legend Such Easement shall run 30 feet on each side of
the centerline of the road, excluding cuts and fills N
. ]National Forest and as shown on the approved project plans.
. [ ; Private Land Feet
. y 0 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

THIS MAP IS NOT A C ERTI FI E D SURVEY AND HAS NOT BEEN REVIEWED BYALOCAL GOVERN ME NT AGENCY
. FOR COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS,

1

1 R-3622A State Environmental Assessment/FONSI

I

I
1
1
Appendix C: Biological Evaluation

1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
1

1

1
I
BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION

1
NC 294 WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 50 OVER PERSIMMON CREEK
1

r NANTAHALA NATIONAL FOREST
1
TUSQUITEE RANGER DISTRICT

r CHEROKEE COUNTY
r
r NORTH CAROLINA

r
1

' Submitted to:

Wilbur Smith Associates
Raleigh, North Carolina

Submitted by:

. Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
. P. O. Box 241
. Whittier, North Carolina

August 23, 2007

I

i TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 1.0 Introduction I
1 1.1 Objectives and Purpose of Biological Evaluation
1.2 Proposed Action .............................................................................................................2
1.3 Purpose and Need of Proposed Action ..........................................................................2
1.4 Project Area and Existing Conditions 3
I
2.0 Threatened, Endangered, Forest Sensitive and Forest Concern Species ...............4
2.1 Species Considered ........................................................................................................4
2.2 Analysis and Survey Methodology 7
# 2.3 Survey Results .............................................................................................................10
3.0 Direct, Indirect and Cumulative Effects ..................................................................13

4.0 Required and Recommended Mitigation Measures ...............................................14

5.0 Investigators ...............................................................................................................14

6.0 References ...................................................................................................................15

1 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Rare terrestrial wildlife species with documented or potential habitat within the
project area ...........................................................................................................................5
Table 2. Rare aquatic species with documented or potential habitat within the project
' area .......................................................................................................................................5
Table 3. Rare botanical species with documented or potential habitat within the project
1 area .......................................................................................................................................6
Table 4. Fish species captured during electroshocking efforts on Lake Cherokee,
Persimmon Creek and an unnamed tributary to Lake Cherokee, in Cherokee County, NC,
' May 10, 2007 .....................................................................................................................11
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of North Carolina Department of Transportation's proposed NC 294
road improvement project and bridge replacement, Cherokee County, North Carolina..... 2
Figure 2. Location of individual sampling efforts during rare species surveys, NC 294
road improvement project, Cherokee County, North Carolina ............................................8
Figure 3. Location of the two populations of Trillium rugelii, a USFS forest sensitive
species, within the NC 294 road improvement project area, Cherokee County, North
Carolina ..............................................................................................................................12

BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
NC 294 Widening and Realignment
i Replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek
Cherokee County, North Carolina
Nantahala National Forest
1 Tusquitee Ranger District

1
1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE OF THE BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
The purpose of this Biological Evaluation is to assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative
effects that the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) NC 294 road
improvement project may have on federal endangered, threatened, forest sensitive (TES),
' or forest concern (FC) species on National Forest System (NFS) lands in Cherokee
County, NC. The scope of this Biological Evaluation does not include possible
environmental impacts not associated with TES and FC species. General environmental
impacts are included in the Draft State Environmental Assessment, NC 294 Widening and
Realignment, Replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek, Cherokee County,
N. C. (prepared for NCDOT by Wilbur Smith Associates, May 2006).

General objectives of the Biological Evaluation are:
' . to ensure that Forest Service actions do not contribute to loss of viability of
any native or desired non-native plant or animal species or contribute to trends
toward Federal listing of any species,
` • to comply with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act that actions of
' Federal agencies not jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
adversely modify critical habitat of federally listed species,
to provide a standard process to ensure that TES species receive full
consideration in the decision-making process,
• to address the effects of management activities to TES species habitat and/or
potential habitat on the Nantahala/Pisgah National Forest TES species list, and
to incorporate any mitigation measures specifically addressing any potential
' impacts from management activities related to this project to TES species or
' their habitat or potential habitat.
1 This Biological Evaluation includes rare species survey results for USES Forest
' Sensitive and USES Forest Concern species on NFS lands within the project corridor;
this area is designated by the yellow line in Figure 1 and is referred to as the "NFS
project corridor". This document also includes the survey results for federal
endangered and threatened species on both NFS and private lands within the project
corridor, this area is designated by the red line in Figure I and is referred to as the
"NCDOT project corridor". The NFS project corridor is a 0.8-mile section of the 1.8-
mile NCDOT project corridor.

1
r
i

!

1.2 PROPOSED ACTION
The NCDOT proposes to widen and realign 1.8 miles of NC 294 in Cherokee County (TIP
No. R-3 622A). The road improvement will begin just west of State Road 1130 (Sunny
Point Road) and end just east of State Road 1309 (Oak Grove Road). Bridge No. 50 over
Persimmon Creek will be replaced as part as the road improvement project. The proposed
road improvement will include 11-foot lanes with 8-foot grassed shoulders on a 60-foot
minimum right-of-way. The proposed alignment of the road is within 100 feet of the
current roadway for the majority of the 1.8-mile NCDOT project corridor. The bridge
over Persimmon Creek will be replaced with a new two-lane bridge approximately 146
feet long.
1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED
NC 294 is classified as a rural major collector and serves traffic traveling between North
Carolina and Tennessee. Existing traffic volume averages 3,050 vehicles per day; this
volume is expected to roughly double by the year 2025. Approximately 11 crashes
occurred within the proposed project area during the period October 2002 to September
2005. The proposed road improvements, including the replacement of bridge No. 50 over
Persimmon Creek, is considered necessary to improve safety on NC 294 and to remove a
functionally obsolete single lane bridge.

A; L

1 ~U~~

fill
_-.airy {MiyR ~1''~' 'SFr :I'A Pmiecr Loraiion y\Ir
1383 'J ~i
~i ~ y V 4

2 ,.moo 4.ou
WDOTirnjecl Corridor r' 0 Goo 1.2UU Fat
NFS Project Corridor

j Figure 1. Location of North Carolina Department of Transportation's proposed NC 294
road improvement project and bridge replacement, Cherokee County, North Carolina.

1

1.4 PROJECT AREA AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project area is located within the Persimmon Creek watershed upstream of Lake
Cherokee on the Tusquitee Ranger District within Nantahala National Forest, Cherokee
County, North Carolina (Figure 1). Approximately 0.8 linear miles of the project crosses
NFS lands within the central portion of the project area. Figure 1 illustrates the location
of the project area, including both the NCDOT project corridor and the NFS project
corridor.
i
Topography surrounding the NCDOT project corridor is characterized by gently rolling
areas within the valleys bordered by relatively steep slopes on adjacent ridges. The
' project area includes elevations from approximately 1,530 feet above mean sea level
(MSL) to 1,680 feet above MSL. The distribution of vegetative communities within the
1 project area is a function of topography, soils, hydrology, and human influences. Several
1 natural community types (Schafale and Weakley 1990) were identified within the project
' area; these natural communities included Montane Oak-Hickory, Piedmont/Low Mountain
Alluvial, Montane Alluvial, and Acidic Cove forests. Wetland areas also occur in
association with the backwaters of Lake Cherokee and Persimmon Creek. In addition to
the natural community types found in the project area, disturbed/maintained vegetative
communities were also common throughout the project area where residences, roadsides,
and agricultural land uses occur.
' Acidic Cove forest occurs on moist, acidic soils, usually on steep slopes adjacent to
mountain streams. This forest type occurs in a relatively limited portion of the project
corridor, adjacent to the small, unnamed tributary which flows from the southeast into
Lake Cherokee. The overstory includes Canada hemlock, yellow birch, sweet birch, red
r maple, tulip poplar, and red oak. Witch hazel is common in the understory, and
' rhododendron and doghobble are the most common shrubs. The herb layer is sparse and
is usually limited to a few species.

Montane Alluvial forest is found on stream and river floodplains at moderate to high
1 elevations on alluvial soils. The canopy contains a mixture of bottomland and mesophytic
tree species such as Canada hemlock, sycamore, yellow birch, white oak, red maple,
yellow poplar, and river birch. American hornbeam, witch hazel, and black willow are
common in the understory. The shrub layer is composed of rhododendron, hazel alder,
and doghobble. The herb layer is quite variable, depending on the individual site.

Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial forest is generally similar to Montane Alluvial forest,
but differs in that it contains lower elevation alluvial plant species such as sweetgum,
boxelder, green ash, American elm, and winged elm. The species composition found in
the bottomlands associated with Persimmon Creek within the NFS project area suggest
i that this forest is intermediate between Montane Alluvial and Piedmont/Low Mountain
Alluvial forest types.
Montane Oak-hickory forest generally dominates the upland, forested portions of the
. NFS project area. This forest type occurs on moderately warm upper and middle slopes,

especially gently convex slopes at moderate elevations. The canopy is dominated by a
mixture of oaks, including white oak, chestnut oak, red oak, black oak, along with pignut
hickory. Sourwood, black gum, and red maple are common in the understory. Flame
azalea, mountain laurel, and American chestnut are common shrubs, along with some
vaccinium species. The herb layer in this forest is highly variable, depending on the site
characteristics. Although not one of the recognized forest types by Schafale and Weakley
(1990), a stand of planted pine dominates a portion of the project area east of Lake
Cherokee and north of the existing NC 294. The original vegetative community in this
I area was most likely Montane Oak-Hickory as well.
I
1
2.0 THREATENED, ENDANGERED, FOREST SENSITIVE AND FOREST
CONCERN SPECIES
1
' 2.1 SPECIES CONSIDERED
' TES species and Forest concern (FC) species to be included in the analysis were identified
by the following methods:
' . Filtering the lists of TES and FC species on the Nantahala-Pisgah Forests by
County of occurrence;
Reviewing the habitat requirements and preferences of the filtered TES and
FC species lists. Habitat requirements and preferences of these plant and
' animal species were based on a variety of sources, including the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, USFS (TES and FC)
lists, NatureServe© database, and other reference materials. Natural
community classification follows Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina, (Schafale and Weakley, 1990);
Consulting with biologists, botanists, and other individuals knowledgeable of
TES species occurrences and habitats;
• Conducting field surveys for TES and FC species within the NFS project
corridor, and federally threatened and endangered species within the NCDOT
project corridor. Personnel from Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc. and its
subcontractors conducted the field surveys. Individual survey methodologies
are described in Section 2.2 below.

The following USFS personnel were consulted during the process of species evaluation:
Doreen Miller - Nantahala National Forest wildlife biologist; Sheryl Bryan - National
. Forests in NC fisheries biologist; Duke Rankin - Nantahala National Forest botanist; and
. Gary Kauffman - National Forests in NC forest botanical specialist.
WILDLIFE RESOURCES
Among the terrestrial wildlife species, 2 federally listed, 5 forest sensitive, and 11 forest
concern species were initially considered for this analysis. These 18 species were listed
by the USFS, NCNHP, or US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as occurring or
probably occurring in Cherokee County. Of these species, all but 2 federally listed, 4
forest sensitive, and 3 forest concern species were dropped from the list for analysis.

These species were dropped from consideration based on absence of specific habitat
requirements habitat and lack of known records near the NCDOT project corridor. The
analysis and field surveys focused on the 9 remaining species, listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Rare terrestrial wildlife species with documented or potential habitat within the
ro'ect area.
us NC
Group Designation* Sciendfic Name Common Name Status Rank'
Mammal Endangered M otis sodalist Indiana Bat E S1
Threatened
Reptile S/A Clemm s muhlenber i Bo Turtle T S/A S2
Junaluska
' Amphibian Sensitive Eu cea 'unaluska Salamander FSC S2
Am hibian Sensitive Plethodon aureolus Tellico Salamander S2
S3B,
' Bird Sensitive Haliaeetus leucoce halus Bald Eagle S3N
Eastern Small-footed
Mammal Sensitive M otis leibii Bat FSC S3
' Amphibian Forest concern Amb stoma tal oideum Mole Salamander S2
Mountain Chorus
' Amphibian Forest concern Pseudacris brach hona Fro Sl
Bird Forest concern Vermivora inus Blue-winged Warbler S2B
*Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance (S/A): as listed by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
' Sensitive (S): as listed by the U.S. Forest Service (Region 8, 2001)
Forest concern (FC): as listed by the National Forests in North Carolina, must meet at least one of the
/ following: (1) State Rank S1, S2, or S3; (2) Federal Species of Concern; or (3) State Threatened or
Endangered
AQUATIC RESOURCES
` Among the aquatic animal species, 1 federally listed, 3 forest sensitive, and 13 forest
concern species were initially considered for this analysis. These 17 species were listed
i by the USFS, NCNHP, or USFWS as occurring or probably occurring in Cherokee
1 County. Of these species, 1 forest sensitive species, the Tennessee heelsplitter mussel,
' was dropped from the list for analysis as no known current records exist in the Hiawassee
' River system. The analysis and field surveys focused on the 16 remaining species, listed
in Table 2.
Table 2. Rare aquatic species with documented or potential habitat within the project
r area.
US NC
Group Designatiion* Scientific Name Common Name Status Rank
Mussel Endangered Villosatrabalis Cumberland Bean E S1
Crayfish Sensitive Cambarus pa rishi Hiwassee Headwaters FSC S2S3
Cra fish
Fish Sensitive Percina squamata Olive Darter FSC S2
Amphibian Forest concern Cryptobranchus Hellbender FSC S3
alle aniensis
Fish Forest concern Erimystax insignis Blotched Chub FSC S2
Fish Forest concern Moxostoma species 1 Sicklefm Redhorse FSC S1S2

Fish Forest concern Sander (Stizostedion) Sauger S2
canadensis
Mayfly Forest concern Baetopus trishae A Mayfly S1
Mayfly Forest concern Habrophlediodes spp A Mayfly S2
I Mussel Forest concern Elliptio dilatata Spike S1
Mussel Forest concern Lampsilis fasciola Wavy-rayed S1
Lam mussel
Mussel Forest concern Pleurobema oviforme Tennessee Clubshell FSC S1
' Mussel Forest concern Villosa iris Rainbow S1
Mussel Forest concern Villosa vanuxemensis Mountain Creekshell S l
Snail Forest concern Elimia (Goniobasis) Knotty Elimnia S1
interru to
Snail Forest concern Leptoxis virgata Smooth Mudalia FSC SU
BOTANICAL RESOURCES
Among the botanical species, 1 federally listed, 10 forest sensitive, and 11 forest concern
species were initially considered for this analysis. These 22 species were listed by the
USFS, NCNHP, or USFWS as occurring or probably occurring in Cherokee County. Of
these species, 1 forest sensitive species, Aneura maxima (a liverwort), and 1 forest
concern species, Cephaloziella spinicaulis (a liverwort) was dropped from the list for
analysis as neither of their specific habitat types (spray cliffs and high elevation rocky
1 summits, respectively) occur within or near the project area. The analysis and field
' surveys focused on the 20 remaining species, listed in Table 3.

Table 3. Rare botanical species with documented or potential habitat within the project
area.
1 US NC
' Group Designation* Scientific Name Common Name Status Rank
' Small Whorled
Vascular plant Threatened Isotria medeoloides Po onia T S1
' Botrychium Alabama Grape
i Vascular plant Sensitive 'enmanii Fern S1
Small Spreading
Vascular plant Sensitive Cleistes bi aria Po onia S2
Lichen Sensitive H droth ria venosa An Aquatic Lichen S2
Megaceros
Hornwort Sensitive aeni maticus A Hornwort S2S3
Platanthera White Fringeless
Vascular plant Sensitive inte rilabia Orchid FSC SX
Cumberland Rose
Vascular plant Sensitive Sabatia ca itata Gentian SR
Vascular lant Sensitive Silene ovata Mountain Catchfl FSC S2
Southern Nodding
Vascular plant Sensitive Trillium ru elii Trillium S2
Sweet White
. Vascular plant Sensitive Trillium simile Trillium S1
Calystegia
. catesbianassp. Blue Ridge
Vascular plant Forest concern sericata Bindweed S2
Vascular plant Forest concern Carex cherokeensis Cherokee Sedge S1

Vascular plant Forest concem Carex ro'ecta Necklace Sedge S1
Vascular plant Forest concern Cara ur uri era Purple Sedge S1
Frasera
Vascular plant Forest concern caroliniensis Columbo S2S3
Pedicularis
Vascular plant Forest concern lanceolata Swam Lousewort S1
Plagiochila
Liverwort Forest concem ludoviciana A Liverwort S1
Spigelia
Vascular plant Forest concern marilandica Pink root S1
Vascular plant Forest concern Stewartia ovata Mountain Camellia S2
Vascular plant Forest concern Trientalis borealis Starflower S1
I
2.2 ANALYSIS AND SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Potential effects to TES species and impacts to FC species were assessed via field surveys
for species' habitat and species' occurrence. Generalized surveys were used to assess
potential habitat for rare species; these surveys occurred during each field visit. Targeted
surveys for rare species within each of the three biological disciplines (terrestrial wildlife,
aquatic animals, and botanical species) occurred at various times, depending on the
species being evaluated. For the purpose of this investigation, the main focus of the
terrestrial field survey efforts was concentrated within 100 feet of the proposed centerline
of the road. These sites were chosen because they were in, or near, areas where
disturbance (project-related activity, such as grading and clearing) are scheduled to occur.
Figure 2 shows the location of the various sampling efforts. Timing and methodology for
each of the sampling efforts is discussed below.

i

!r
fj
t 11f r~

~ I

7 f~r~

h

Legend
xcvorro~ c.~ ~ a
NFS Fmko CorrW r
-1 L Fhb tspk Dies
Cn~fhk Abw6 W 4rthk ~pk eefts z75 _530 _ 4100 U00
2.hM1
C' 9-rb~d Feu
AfMt oe1 A[w .
A
Figure 2. Location of individual sampling efforts during rare species surveys, NC 294
road improvement project, Cherokee County, North Carolina.
WILDLIFE RESOURCES - SUR VEY METHODS
Surveys for terrestrial wildlife species included mist net surveys for bat species,
installation of coverboards for salamander species, aural surveys for frog and avian
species, as well as opportunistic visual searches for amphibians and reptiles.
)
Standard mist netting techniques were used to survey bat species throughout the NCDOT
project corridor, with particular emphasis on the federally endangered Indiana bat and the
forest sensitive Eastern small-footed bat. Mist net surveys occurred over six nights
between May 21 and July 12, 2007. Mist netting methodology followed USFWS Mist
Netting Guidelines (Indiana Bat Draft Recovery Plan, 1999) and the mist net setup
apparatus described by Gardner et al. (1989). The Guidelines establish a minimum
approach to mist netting. Net sites are established throughout the area to be surveyed. A
minimum of two nights of netting is required at each net site, with two net sites per
kilometer of corridor to be surveyed. Each net site in turn consists of at least two net
locations. Net locations are typically 30 meters apart at each net site. Mist netting began
before sunset and the effort extended into the night until approximately 1 - 3 a.m.
)
Mist netting activities were conducted under the authority of a USFWS Endangered and
Threatened Species Collecting Permit (TE108990-0) and through a North Carolina

i
1
Wildlife Resources Commission (NC)vVRC) Endangered Species Permit (NC-2007 ES
205).

Twenty-four coverboards were installed in April 2007 and checked concurrently with
other surveys (mist net surveys, aquatic surveys) through July 2007. Coverboard
methodology followed that described in Heyer et al. (1994); coverboards were placed in
wet areas near Persimmon Creek and its tributaries within the NFS project corridor.
Although coverboards are used to sample for a variety of species, this methodology and
placement was particularly focused toward sampling for the mole salamander. Mole
salamanders have been reported in similar habitats (wet areas near impoundments) in
Cherokee County (Doreen Miller, personal communication). Opportunistic visual
' searches were also conducted within the NFS project corridor for the Tellico salamander
and Junaluska salamander.
During field visits from April through July 2007, aural surveys were conducted
' concurrently with other field work. Morning aural surveys were particularly targeted
toward blue-winged warblers whereas evening aural surveys were focused toward
detection of mountain chorus frogs. Both of these species have distinctive, audible calls;
both of these species have been previously documented on NFS lands in Cherokee County
' (Doreen Miller, personal communication).

Wetland areas within the project corridor were also searched for the presence of the
t federally threatened bog turtle. Portions of the project corridor adjacent to Lake Cherokee
' were also evaluated for impacts to potential nest and/or roost trees for the bald eagle.

AQUATIC RESOURCES - SUR VEY METHODS
' All aquatic sampling occurred during the period May 8-10, 2007. Sampling
methodologies were chosen to detect the presence of all rare aquatic species with
documented or potential habitat within the project area (Table 2). Surveys for rare aquatic
animal species included boat- and backpack-based electroshocking, mussel surveys,
crayfish collection, and benthic macroinvertebrate collection.
1 Boat-mounted electroshocking was used to sample Lake Cherokee within the NFS project
corridor. Backpack-mounted electroshocking was used to sample Persimmon Creek and
the unnamed tributary to Lake Cherokee east of the NC 294 bridge. Boat electrofishing
N was conducted with a Smith-Root Type VI boat mounted unit powered by a 4000-watt
gasoline generator. The voltage setting was dependent on water conductivity. The backpack
unit consisted of a small Honda generator with a 120 VAC output and a variable voltage
step-up transformer. All habitat types were sampled within an area of approximately 300
feet downstream and about 200 feet upstream of the centerline of the road crossing. All
fishes collected by electrofishing or netting were identified to species and counted prior to
release.

Extensive mussel and aquatic snail surveys were conducted in Persimmon Creek and in
the unnamed tributary to Lake Cherokee east of the NC 294 bridge. Crayfish were
collected opportunistically during these surveys, as well as during electroshocking efforts.

dk

1
I

1
I
Minnow traps baited with chicken liver were also used to sample crayfish in Persimmon
Creek, the unnamed tributary to Lake Cherokee east of the NC 294 bridge, and an
unnamed tributary to Persimmon Creek. An extensive benthic macroinvertebrate kick
composite sample was taken in representative habitats in Persimmon Creek and the
unnamed tributary to Lake Cherokee east of the NC 294 bridge.
I
Aquatic sampling activities were conducted under the authority of a USFWS Endangered
( and Threatened Species Collecting Permit (TE083941-2), a NCWRC Endangered Species
Permit (NC-2007 ES 121), and a NCWRC Scientific Fish Collection License (No. 1012).
Mark Cantrell of the USFWS Asheville Field Office was on-site during the aquatic
surveys.
BOTANICAL RESOURCES - SUR VEY METHODS
The NFS project corridor was surveyed for all rare plant species for which documented or
potential habitat existed (Table 3). The NCDOT project corridor was surveyed for
' federally listed plant species. A pedestrian survey of the project corridor was conducted
on May 23, 2007. The timing of this survey was designed to coincide with the optimal
survey window for rare plant species possibly occurring on the site.

' 2.3 SURVEY RESULTS

I WILDLIFE RESOURCES - SURVEY RESULTS
Mist net surveys were conducted at 3 sites (with multiple net locations per site) over 6
' nights. A total of 14 net-nights yielded captures of 3 bat species including the little brown
bat (Myotis lucifugus), red bat (Lasiurus borealis), and northern long-eared bat (Myotis
septentrionalis). No Indiana bats or eastern small-footed bats were captured by mist
netting; none of the three species captured has status with the USFWS or USFS.
Coverboards and surrounding habitats were checked for salamanders on 8 occasions
during the sampling period. None of the three rare salamander species listed in Table 1
was found during the surveys.

No mountain chorus frogs were identified during the aural surveys. One forest concern
bird species, the blue-winged warbler (Vermivora pinus) was heard singing on the
morning of May 8. This individual was located on private land adjacent to the western
' boundary of the NFS lands included in the surveys. This individual appears to have been
a transient; field surveys on seven other occasions between May and July did not detect
the blue-winged warbler again.

' No bog turtles were found during visual surveys in the project area. No bald eagles were
1 observed within the project area nor were any apparent nest or roost trees present within
i the project area.

I

I
I

AQUATIC RESOURCES -SURVEY RESULTS
Electroshocking of Lake Cherokee, Persimmon Creek, and tributaries within the project
area yielded no rare aquatic animal species listed in Table 3. Fish species captured during
the electroshocking efforts are listed in Table 4.
1
1 Table 4. Fish species captured during electroshocking efforts on Lake Cherokee,
' Persimmon Creek and an unnamed tributary to Lake Cherokee, in Cherokee County, NC,
May 10, 2007.
Scientific Name Common Name
' Unnamed Tributary to Lake Cherokee located east of NC 294 bridge
' Cottus bairdi Mottled Sculpin
Lepomis auritus Redbreast Sunfish
Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill
r Semotilus atromaculatus Creek Chub
Ameiurus nebulosus Brown Bullhead
khthvomvzon greeleyi Mountain Brook Lamprey
' Notropis spectrunculus Mirror Shiner
Persimmon, Creek
Nocomis micropogon River Chub
' Cottus bairdi Mottled Sculpin
' Etheostoma blennioides Greenside Darter
Lepomis auritus Redbreast Sunfish
1 Hypentelium nigricans Northern Hogsucker
' Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow Trout
Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill
1 Campostoma anomalum Central Stoneroller
' Lake Cherokee
' Perca flavescens Yellow Perch
Hypentelium nigricans Northern Hogsucker
Moxostoma erythrurum Golden Redhorse
' Micropterus salmoides Largemouth bass
Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill
1 Lepomis microlophus Redear sunfish
Lepomis auritus Redbreast sunfish
No mussels were found in Persimmon Creek, the unnamed tributary of Lake Cherokee, or
the unnamed tributary to Persimmon Creek within the project corridor. Neither of the rare
aquatic snail species (Elimia interrupta or Leptoxis virgata) were encountered during the
aquatic surveys. No hellbenders were found during the course of mussel surveys or
during the electroshocking efforts.
Crayfish sampled during the surveys consisted of Cambarus (Cambarus) bartonii,
Cambarus (Puncticambarus) hiwasseensis, and Cambarus (Hiaticambarus) longirostris.
No individuals of the forest sensitive Hiwassee headwaters crayfish (Cambarus parrishi)
were found during the surveys.

i
3
Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were processed in the laboratory where all Baetidae
and Leptophlebiidae mayflies were removed and examined under a microscope. Neither
of the two forest concern mayflies (Habrophlebiodes spp. or Baetopus trishae) were
present in the samples.

BOTANICAL RESOURCES - SURVEYRESULTS
No federally listed species were found during the botanical surveys within the NCDOT or
NFS project corridor. One forest sensitive species, southern nodding trillium (Trillium
rugellii) was identified in two separate areas within the NFS project corridor. The larger
of the two Trillium rugelii populations is located just north of NC 294, near the
intersection of NC 294 and the gravel access road to the USFS Cherokee Lake Picnic
Area. Approximately 120 Trillium rugelii stems are located in this area. The smaller
population is located on the south side of NC 294, across from the intersection of NC 294
and Holly Road and is comprised of approximately 30 stems. Figure 3 shows the location
of the two Trillium rugelii populations as well as their approximate spatial extent. The
i larger population of Trillium rugelii located at the intersection of NC 294 and the gravel
access road to the USFS Cherokee Lake Picnic Area will be referred to as "Population A"
whereas the smaller population will be referred to as "Population B."

N 'lee.

OY

1

Legend
ar NCDOT Project Corridor
NFS Project Corridor
Triffian rugelii Popolatioa A 0 190 3&1 7W 1110 1,510
0 Trilliae rugelG PopWatioa B Fcci
® Poteatial SON Retocatiome Site for Impacted Portion of PopalaH®p A

Figure 3. Location of the two populations of Trillium rugelii, a USFS forest sensitive
species, within the NC 294 road improvement project area, Cherokee County, North
Carolina. *Note: Polygons representing the two populations are approximate and are
only intended to reflect the general location and extent of the two populations.

I

I

3.0 DIRECT, INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Effects to a species can be classified as direct, indirect, or cumulative. Direct effects to a
species occur at the same time and place as the project activity. Indirect effects are caused
by the project activity, but may appear at a later time or at a distance from the project
activity area. Cumulative effects on species are those effects that result from incremental
impacts of the proposed action when added to other past, present and reasonably
' foreseeable future actions.
No federally endangered or threatened species were documented within the NCDOT
project corridor. Southern nodding trillium is a forest sensitive species and is the only
t rare (TES or FC) plant or animal species documented within the NFS project corridor.
The following effects analysis will focus on potential effects to this species.

y Direct and Indirect Effects - Approximately 3/4 of the stems (approximately 90 plants)
' located in Trillium rugelii Population A will be directly affected by the proposed road
improvement and bridge replacement project. The proposed road alignment is located
approximately 75 feet to the north of the existing roadway in the vicinity of Population A.
Construction of the new road will result in burying much of Population A with fill
' material. Trillium rugelii requires a fairly rich, moist microhabitat most often found in
rich coves and bottomlands with a closed canopy. An indirect effect to the remaining
plants in Population A may be the creation of a drier microclimate near the edge of the
new alignment.

Cumulative Effects - Trillium rugelii has been documented within 20 North Carolina
counties, 13 of which occur within the western North Carolina Mountains (Franklin &
' Finnegan 2006; David Danley, Pisgah National Forest botanist, personal communication;
Gary Kauffman, National Forests in NC forest botanical specialist, personal
communication). The species primarily occurs at lower elevations in the mountains, from
1200-3000 feet above sea level. Twenty Trillium rugelii populations have been
documented within the Nantahala or Pisgah National Forests. These populations vary in
' abundance from 20-50 individuals covering less than 1 acre to more than ten thousand
individuals covering an area greater than 100 acres. Besides the population located
1 within the Lake Cherokee area, 3 additional populations have been documented on NFS
i lands within Cherokee County.
During the last 10 years, Trillium rugelii has been impacted in 2 projects on the Pisgah
Ranger District and one project in the Nantahala Ranger District. These projects did not
result in the complete loss of the species from the respective project area.

r Determination of Effect - Due to a modification (northern shift) of the proposed road
alignment in the vicinity of Holly Road, no effect is expected for Population B. Individual
plants within Population A will be impacted by the proposed improvement project. The
proposed project is not likely to cause a trend to federal listing or a loss of viability
r because the remainder of Population A is expected to persist, and Population B will not be
r affected.

r
r
r

r
r

1

r
r
4.0 REQUIRED AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONMEASURES
Mitigation measures have been developed in order to avoid or minimize adverse impacts
1 to southern nodding trillium within the project corridor. Required mitigation measures
include:

r 1. Documenting the number and spatial extent of Trillium rugelii stems within and
adjacent to Population A before vegetation is cleared or ground is disturbed in that
portion of the NFS project corridor.
2. Once Population A has been mapped, arrangements will be made for USFS botanists
to coordinate with the appropriate NCDOT clearing and/or grading contractors to
' supervise the removal of the topsoil (approximately the upper 6") from the portion of
' Population A to be impacted. The soil will then be moved northward to the relatively
i undisturbed forested area outside the clearing limits of the new alignment. This
activity will occur between September and January, while plants are dormant and most
s ' likely to withstand disturbance. The goal of relocating the topsoil of the impacted
portion of Population A is to determine whether movement of the topsoil a short
distance (<500 feet) into a relatively unimpacted, adjacent forested area will allow
Trillium rugelii plants to reestablish themselves.
t 3. The Population A relocation area will be re-surveyed during the May following
relocation to determine the success of the relocation effort. A summary of the re-
survey will be prepared for USFS botanists.

/ It is also recommended that approximately 20 Trillium rugelii stems within the impacted
r portion of Population A be removed during August-September to be relocated to a suitable
location off-site. The off-site location has yet to be finalized, but would most likely be on
lands administered by a local university or plant conservatory.

5.0 INVESTIGATORS
' The following personnel assisted with document preparation, analysis, and/or field
t surveys associated with this investigation:
Terrestrial Wildlife Surveys and Document Preparation
Benjamin R. Laseter, Ph.D. - Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
Leslie K. Bilbrey - Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
' Ronald E. Spears - MACTEC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
Botanical Surveys
Mike Ivey - Botanical Specialist
r Aquatic Surveys and Aquatic Species Identification
r John L. Boaze - Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
Bill Smith - Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
r Charles Lawson - Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
r Christopher S. Brown - Fish and Wildlife Associates, Inc.
Wendell Pennington - Pennington and Associates, Inc.
r Joel Warsham - Pennington and Associates, Inc.
r Mark A. Cantrell - US Fish and Wildlife Service, Asheville Field Office
r

r
r
r

r

1
M
1

1
1
1 6.0 REFERENCES:
Franklin, M.A. and J.T. Finnegan. 2006. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare plant
1 species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, N.C. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina. 137 pp.
Gardner, J.E., J.D. Garner and J.E. Hofinan. 1989. A portable mist netting system for
capturing bats with emphasis on Myotis sodalis (Indiana bat). Bat Res. News 30
' (1):1-8.

Heyer, W.R., M.A. Donnelly, R.W. McDiarmid, L.C. Hayek, M.S. Foster. 1994.
Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Amphibians.
` Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. 359 pp.

Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh,
i North Carolina. 321 pp.

` U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Agency Draft Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) Revised
Recovery Plan. Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 53 pp.

Wilbur Smith Associates. 2006. Draft State Environmental Assessment, NC 294
Widening and Realignment, Replacement of Bridge No. 50 over Persimmon Creek,
r Cherokee County, N.C.

r

r
r
r
r

r
r
r

r
r
r

r
r