20081342 Ver 1_Individual_20080902

Individual
Permit
Application
for 0 8 _ 3
42
PA
The Franklin County Pond
Prepared by:
Soil & Environmental Consultants, P.A.
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614
C,3
M
SEP 2 2008
DENR - WAi ER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH

Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
www.SandEC.com O g 1 3 4 2
To: US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Attn: Eric Alsmeyer
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Ste. 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
From: Nicole Thomson
Soil & Environmental Consultants, P.A.
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614
Re: Franklin County Pond Project
Individual Permit Application
August 29, 2008
S&EC Project # 5931
N.C. Division of Water Quality
401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit3
A I Ijl l
Attn: Cyndi Karoly
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604-2260
SEP 2 2008
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER SRANcN
On behalf of the applicant, Mr. Carlton Midyette, please find attached a complete application and
supplemental information requesting an Individual Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) and an Individual Certification from the NC Division of Water Quality. Please contact me at
[phone] if you have any questions or require additional information.
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Name
Franklin County Pond Project
Project Type
Private Pond
Owner / Applicant
Mr. Carlton Mid ette
County
Franklin
Nearest Town
Franklinton
Waterbody Name
UT to Cedar Creek
DWQ Basin / Sub -basin
03-03-01
Index Number
28-29-(2)
Class
C;NS W
USGS Cataloging Unit
03020101
IMPACT SUMMARY
Stream Impact (acres):
1.054
Wetland Impact (acres):
0.322
Open Water Impact (acres):
0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres)
1.376
Total Stream Impact (linear feet):
2,165
Attachments:
Individual Permit Application Form, Block Sheets & Supplemental Information
Charlotte Office:
Greensboro Office:
236 LePhillip Court, Suite C
3817-E Lawndale Drive
Concord, NC 28025
Greensboro, NC 27455
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

•
•
Application Form
Block 11 Agent Authorization
Block 18 Nature of Activity
Block 19 Project Purpose
Block 20 Reasons for Discharge
Block 21 Type of Material being Discharged and
the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
Block 22 Surface Areas of Wetlands and Other
Waters Filled
Block 23 Is Any Portion of the Work Already
C nmnlete?
Block 24 Names and Addresses of Adjoining
Property Owners, Lessees, etc, Whose
Supplemental Information & Figure 1
Figures 2 & 3 NRCS Soil Survey Site Vicinity Map
USGS Topographic Site Vicinity Map
Figures 4, 5, 5A & 6 Overall Site Plan, Impact
Maps & Pipe Cross Section
Figures 7 & 8 Avoidance & Minimization
Man and Mitigation Man
Figure 9 Drainage Area Map
Figure 10 NHP, OSA, & SHPO documents & map

08-1342
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-0003
(33 CFR 325) Expires December 31, 2004
The Public burden for this collection of information is $estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority of applications should require
5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
mpleting and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
ormation, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of Information
Aerations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302; and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law,
no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control
number. Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having
jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10, 33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection , Research and
Sanctuaries Act, 33 USC 1413, Section 103. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating the application for a
permit. Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and local government agencies.
Submission of requested information is voluntary, however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit
be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
5. APPLICANT'S NAME
Carlton Midyette
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
8310 Bandford Way
Raleigh, NC 27615
7 Me
a. Residence
b. Business ( 919) 571-8263
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (anwentisnotreouiredl
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614
a. Residence www. sandec . com
b. Business ( 919) 846-5900
1 1 . STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, (See Attached Authorization) to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to
furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
PAI
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE Isee instruc7ions:
Franklin County Pond
13. NAME OF WATERBODY. IF KNOWN iif­di_hij 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS ritapp#! biel
UT to Cedar Creek (Tar -Pamlico River)
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT am:3. @ 9
��
Franklin NC Qp v
COUNTY STATE SEP 2008
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN, iseein tructiansi OEr�R..WAiE r�
36.05860N, 78.4291°W (WGS84/NAD83)V�ETI}!IOD°i ND STf)RM'p'ATERB�C�
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
0rom Raleigh, take US 1/US 401 (Capital Blvd.) north toward Franklinton; continue north on US
(Capital Blvd.) to US lA (South Main St.); turn right onto Hicks Road; continue to fork in
road; bear left onto Cedar Creek Rd.; the subject property will be on the left (between
Gooseberry Ln. and N. Pastures Trl. which are on the right). See the attached Figure 1 (USGS
site vicinity map) and Figure 2 (NRCS site vicinity map).
NG FORIVI 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE.
Page 3 (Proponent: CECW-OR)
rrtMs 7 /HRU 4 TO BE
FILLED BY THE CORPS
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
5. APPLICANT'S NAME
Carlton Midyette
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
8310 Bandford Way
Raleigh, NC 27615
7 Me
a. Residence
b. Business ( 919) 571-8263
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (anwentisnotreouiredl
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, NC 27614
a. Residence www. sandec . com
b. Business ( 919) 846-5900
1 1 . STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, (See Attached Authorization) to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to
furnish, upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
PAI
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE Isee instruc7ions:
Franklin County Pond
13. NAME OF WATERBODY. IF KNOWN iif­di_hij 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS ritapp#! biel
UT to Cedar Creek (Tar -Pamlico River)
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT am:3. @ 9
��
Franklin NC Qp v
COUNTY STATE SEP 2008
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN, iseein tructiansi OEr�R..WAiE r�
36.05860N, 78.4291°W (WGS84/NAD83)V�ETI}!IOD°i ND STf)RM'p'ATERB�C�
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
0rom Raleigh, take US 1/US 401 (Capital Blvd.) north toward Franklinton; continue north on US
(Capital Blvd.) to US lA (South Main St.); turn right onto Hicks Road; continue to fork in
road; bear left onto Cedar Creek Rd.; the subject property will be on the left (between
Gooseberry Ln. and N. Pastures Trl. which are on the right). See the attached Figure 1 (USGS
site vicinity map) and Figure 2 (NRCS site vicinity map).
NG FORIVI 4345, Jul 97 EDITION OF FEB 94 IS OBSOLETE.
Page 3 (Proponent: CECW-OR)

18. Nature of Activity (Description of po%ect, include ell features)
See attached Block Sheet 18.
•
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions
See attached Block Sheet 19.
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
See attached Block Sheet 20.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Tvoe in Cubic Yards
See attached Block Sheet 21.
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (aeeinstrucrions)
See attached Block Sheet 22.
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes = No IF YES. DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
See attached Block Sheet 23.
Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (If more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list),
See attached Block Sheet 24.
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
N/A N/A N/A N/A I N/A N/A
-Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the information in this
application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the
duly authorized agent of the applicant.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
SIGNATURE OF AGENT
DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than 410,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
Page 4

0
•
•
Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
11010 Raven Ridge Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
Web Page: www.SandW.com
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
All Blanks To Be Filled In By The Current Landowner
Name:
Address:��—�,1�
Phone:"
Project Name/ Description: f r2 A NKL) fJ ����� �c r� ►�- £
Date: '1 I 16710
The Department of the Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
P.O. Box
Wilmington, NC 28402.
Atm: Cti A�M�y�`2
Field Office: iQ A L€ I #
Re: Wetlands Related Consulting and Permitting
To Whom It May Concern:
I, the currentro er owner, hereby designate and authorize Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc. to
act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of permit applications, to furnish upon request
supplemental information in support of applications, etc. from this day forward. The t1l day of
I 2 -coy
This notification supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the agent for this project.
NOTICE: This authorization, for liability and professional courtesy reasons, is valid only for
government officials to enter the property when accompanied by S&EC staff. You should call S&EC
to arrange a site meeting prior to visiting the site.
�r e
-int Property O'wner's/Name
cc: Mr. John Dorney
NCDEH & NR - DWQ, Water Quality Planning
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27607
4�opertyv Owner's Si atur
cc: Mr. Kevin Martin
Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
egentlrM
Wetland Delineation/Permitting/Mitigation Soil/Site Evaluations On -Site Septic Systems Environmental Assessments/Audits
Neuse Basin and Watershed Buffer Evaluations Groundwater Hydrology Endangered Species
Charlotte Office: [phone] • Hickory Office: [phone]

Is
FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
BLOCK 18 — Nature of Activity
The purpose of the proposed Franklin County Pond is to construct a 10+ acre pond for
recreational use on a private farm in Franklin County. The applicant has owned the land
for at least 20 years. The subject property is currently a mix of forest and agriculture
with an active cattle farm. Currently, the cattle freely roam the wetlands, streams and
associated riparian buffers.
Proposed fill totals are listed below and are depicted on the attached impact maps
(Section 12, Figures 4, 5 and 5A).
Wetland impacts
The project proposes flooding 0.310 acres of jurisdictional wetlands for the
construction of the proposed pond. In addition to the 0.310 acres, 0.012 acres of
wetland will be impacted for the proposed dam.
Stream impacts:
• The Franklin County Pond project also proposes flooding 2,017 linear feet of
perennial/important stream channel. Additionally, 128 linear feet of
perennial/important stream channel will be filled for the construction of the
proposed dam. There will also be 20 linear feet of stream channel impacted for
the proposed farm road.
Aside from the impacts proposed for the project, there are other wetland, stream channel
and associated riparian buffer areas on site that will be enhanced and preserved.
Currently, the subject property is an active cattle farm with the cattle freely grazing and
roaming the wetlands, streams and associated riparian buffers (see "Supplemental
Information - Section 6, Mitigation" for photos). Additional onsite mitigation is
proposed through the use of fences to permanently keep the cattle out of these wetlands,
streams and associated riparian buffers. These areas include 4.32 acres of contiguous
bottomland hardwood forested wetlands, approximately 6,200 linear feet of stream
channel and approximately 20 + acres of protected Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer as a
result of this onsite enhancement and preservation. Please refer to Figure 8 for a graphic
representation of the proposed enhancement and preservation areas.
The concept of resource enhancement by excluding the cattle from the areas identified in
Figure 8 has been previously discussed with Mr. Eric Alsmeyer of the US Army Corps of
Engineers. Typically, the USACE will reduce the mitigation ratios required for
permanent impacts if an applicant provides onsite stream preservation with a riparian
buffer (i.e. '/2:1). It was suggested, during previous discussions with Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
of the USAGE, that as the applicant was fencing out the cows from the streams and
associated buffers, the applicant should get more mitigation credit. Preservation
mitigation ratios usually fall between 5:1 and 10:1 whereas enhancement mitigation
ratios are typically less than that.
-1-

FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
. Therefore, as suggested in past discussions, the applicant has provided approximately a
3:1 mitigation ratio (i.e. the applicant is preserving and fencing 6,265 linear feet of
stream versus the 2,165 linear feet of stream being impacted). Associated with this
stream enhancement is the protection of an additional 10+ acres of Tar -Pamlico Riparian
Buffer area on perennial streams that are currently not subject to the Tar -Pamlico
Riparian Buffer Rules. The applicant is also proposing to preserve and fence off the
wetland pockets associated with the above streams, including the large contiguous
wetland area below the proposed pond dam. Therefore, the applicant has provided
approximately a 13:1 mitigation ratio (i.e. the applicant is preserving and fencing 4.32
acres of wetland versus the 0.322 acres being impacted).
is
•
The impacts are discussed in further detail in Block Sheet 22.
-2-

C7
•
FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
BLOCK 19 - Project Purpose
The purpose of the proposed Franklin County Pond is to construct a 10+ acre pond for
recreational use on a 400 + acre, private farm in Franklin County. The applicant has
owned the land for at least 20 years. The subject property is currently a mix of forest and
agriculture with an active cattle farm. Currently, the cattle freely roam the wetlands,
streams and associated riparian buffer areas. Additionally, the applicant and S&EC have
been working on the planning of this project for over 5 years including coordination with
the US Army Corps of Engineers.
-1-

FRANLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
• BLOCK 20 — Reasons for Discharge
•
C]
The applicant wishes to create a recreational pond feature for large mouth bass on the
subject property. The applicant has owned the subject property for at least 20 years.
Currently, the cattle freely roam the wetlands, streams and associated riparian buffer areas. The
proposed pond layout is one of four possibilities that were examined; this layout proposes
the least amount of wetland and stream impacts. Additionally, the cattle will be
permanently fenced out of the streams, wetlands and associated riparian buffer areas,
except at the proposed cattle fords, once the pond project is completed.
-1-

FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
• BLOCK 21— Type of Material being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in
Cubic Yards
JURISDICTIONAL STREAM IMPACT TABLE
* All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
** Volumes are rounded up to the nearest cubic yard and assume an average depth of
• streams to be 0.333 yards and do not account for discharge material above this 0.333-
yard assumed depth.
WETLAND IMPACT TABLE
Type of Wetland
Type of
Area of
Volume of
Impact
Type of
Stream
Material
Material
Discharge
Area of
Volume of
Impact Number
Name
Type of
Being
Impact
Impact
Discharge
Discharged
*
Impact
Dischar ed
g
Length (ft)
(acres)
(cubic yards)
0.012
19.341
Hardwood Forest
*
**
1
UT to
Cedar
Fill
Construction
128
0.089
143.443
Creek
(Dam)
Grade Fill
Total Wetland Impact
0.322
UT to
2
Cedar
Flooding
N/A
2,017
0.954
N/A
Creek
UT to
Fill
3
Cedar
(Farm
Construction
20
0.011
17.729
Creek
Road)
Grade Fill
TOTAL
--
---
---
2,165
1.054
161.172
* All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
** Volumes are rounded up to the nearest cubic yard and assume an average depth of
• streams to be 0.333 yards and do not account for discharge material above this 0.333-
yard assumed depth.
WETLAND IMPACT TABLE
* All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
** Estimated volumes are rounded up to the nearest cubic yard and assume wetlands
to be 0.333 yards deep and do not account for discharge material above this 0.333 -
yard assumed depth.
-1-
Type of Wetland
Type of
Area of
Volume of
Impact
Type of
(e.g., forested, marsh,
Material
Impact
Discharge
Number
Impact
herbaceous, bog, etc.)
Being
(acres)
(cubic
Discharged
*
yards) **
1
Dam Fill
Bottomland
Construction
0.012
19.341
Hardwood Forest
Grade Fill
2
Flooding
Bottomland
N/A
0.310
N/A
Hardwood Forest
Total Wetland Impact
0.322
19.341
* All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
** Estimated volumes are rounded up to the nearest cubic yard and assume wetlands
to be 0.333 yards deep and do not account for discharge material above this 0.333 -
yard assumed depth.
-1-

FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
0 BLOCK 22 — Surface Areas of Wetlands and Other Waters Filled
•
0
STREAM IMPACT TABLE
Stream
Impact Number
Type of
Impact
Impact Length
(LF)
Area of Impact
(acres)*
1
Dam Fill
128
0.089
2
Flooding
2,017
0.954
3
Farm Road
Fill
20
0.011
TOTAL
---
2,165
1.054
WETLAND IMPACT TABLE
* All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
IMPACT SUMMARY
Stream Impacts acres):
Type of
Type of Wetland
Area of Impact (acres)
Impact Site Number
Impact
(e.g., forested, marsh,
1.376
Total Stream Impacts (linear feet):
2,165
herbaceous, bog, etc.)
1
Dam Fill
Bottomland
0.012
Hardwood Forest
2
Flooding
Bottomland
0.310
Hardwood Forest
TOTAL
---
---
0.322
* All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
IMPACT SUMMARY
Stream Impacts acres):
1.054
Wetland Impacts (acres):
0.322
Oen Water Impacts (acres):
N/A
Total Impacts to Waters of the US (acres):
1.376
Total Stream Impacts (linear feet):
2,165
-1-

FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
0 BLOCK 23 — Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete?
•
•
Existing Conditions:
The subject property is currently a mix of forest and agriculture with an active cattle
farm. Currently, the cattle freely roam the wetland and stream areas. The subject
property is approximately 400 acres in size which the applicant has owned for 20 years.
No prior permits have been received, nor applied for, for this project.
_I_

•
•
•
FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
BLOCK 24 — Names and Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, etc,
Whose Property Adjoins the Project Site.
A list of names and addresses of property owners adjacent to the 400+ acre property is
attached. The applicant owns all the land adjacent to the proposed pond location. A
corresponding map showing the location of each property as it corresponds to the list is
also attached.
-I-

FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
BLOCK 24
THERON L MOORE
721 S LIBERTY ST
SPARTANBURG SC 29306
ROBY B & AMBER S SAWYERS
7905 RIPPLESTIR COURT
RALEIGH NC 27615
CEDAR CREEK FARMS INC
257 WEST CORNWALL RD
CARY NC 27511
KATHRYN NELL & RAYMOND R JR HIGHT
422 WILLOWOOD DR
HENDERSON NC 27536
PAUL & TERIE MEEKS
1204 CEDAR CREEK RD
FRANKLINTON NC 27525
NEAL WOODARD SHERROD
25 PEACH ORCHARD RD
LOUISBURG NC 27549
JASON & TAMARA N WRIGHT
1096 FLAT ROCK CHURCH RD
LOUISBURG NC 27549
PAIGE W SMITH
102 DERBY LN
FRANKLINTON NC 27525
EDWINA B WADFORD
70B WEATHERS ST
is YOUNGSVILLE NC 27596

FRANKLIN COUNTY POND
S&EC, PA Project No. 5931
RICHARD B GILL III
1479 MAYS CROSSROADS RD
FRANKLINTON NC 27525
JOHN W & SUSANNE L BUTZBERGER
5095 SW BIMINI CR SOUTH
PALM CITY FL 34990
MICHAEL J & MARIE C DAVINO
215 RADIO AVE
MILLER PLACE NY 11764
MACON D & MARY W HARRIS
103 HORSEMAN TRAIL
FRANKLINTON NC 27525
CONNIE W HANSON & MARY NUNNERY
W CO TRUSTEES C/O RF WRENN
9994 NC 210 HWY
FOUR OAKS NC 27524
SATTERWHITE CONSTRUCTION INC
5933 FARMWELL RD
RALEIGH NC 27610

C
•
Project No. Scale:
5931.W4 1 1" = 2000'
I
NT mm
Mgr. I Drawn
By.
Date: 8/28/08
MIDYETTE FARM ADJACENT OWNER
FRANKLIN CO. POND MAP
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC BLOCK 24
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27614
919,846-5900

.
Supplemental Information
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT.............................................................................................2
2.
WETLANDS AVOIDANCE AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS................................................2
3.
IMPACT MINIMIZATION..............................................................................................................2
4.
PROPOSED IMPACTS......................................................................................................................3
4.1
WETLAND IMPACTS......................................................................................................................3
4.2
STREAM IMPACTS.......................................................................................................................3
5.
PUBLIC INTEREST ISSUES............................................................................................................4
5.1
CONSERVATION: ...........................................................................................................................
4
5.2
WATER QUALITY: .........................................................................................................................
4
5.3
WETLANDS: ..................................................................................................................................
6
5.4
FLOOD HAZARD: ...........................................................................................................................
6
5.5
FLOODPLAIN VALUE: ....................................................................................................................
7
5.6
LAND USE: ....................................................................................................................................
7
5.7
RECREATION: ................................................................................................................................
7
5.8
SAFETY: ........................................................................................................................................
7
5.9
AESTHETICS: .................................................................................................................................
7
5.10
HISTORIC PROPERTIES: ............................................. I ...................................................................
7
5.11
WATER SUPPLY: ...........................................................................................................................
9
5.12
NAVIGATION: ................................................................................................................................
9
5.13
ENERGY NEEDS: ...........................................................................................................................
9
5.14
MINERAL NEEDS: ..........................................................................................................................
9
5.15
ECONOMICS: .................................................................................................................................
9
•
5.16
FISH & WILDLIFE VALUES: ...........................................................................................................
9
5.17
SHORE EROSION & ACCRETION: .................................................................................................
13
5.18
FOOD & FIBER PRODUCTION: ......................................................................................................
13
5.19
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: ....................................................................................................
13
5.20
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP: ..............................................................................................................
13
5.21
NEEDS AND WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE: .......................................................................................
14
6.
MITIGATION
...................................................................................................................................14

0 1. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
•
The purpose of the proposed Franklin County Pond is to construct a 10+ acre pond for
recreational use on a 400 + acre, private farm in Franklin County (see attached Figures 2
and 3). The applicant has owned the land for at least 20 years and wishes to create a
recreational pond feature for large mouth bass on the subject property. The subject
property is currently a mix of forest and agriculture with an active cattle farm. Currently,
the cattle freely roam the wetlands, streams and associated riparian buffer areas.
Additionally, the applicant and S&EC have been working on the planning of this project
for over 5 years including coordination with the US Army Corps of Engineers.
2. WETLANDS AVOIDANCE AND ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Off-site Alternatives and Avoidance:
The current location of the proposed Franklin County Pond is the preferred location for
several justifiable reasons. These include the fact that the applicant currently owns, and
has owned, the subject property for at least 20 years. For these reasons, the applicant did
not entertain an off-site alternative for the proposed pond.
On-site Avoidance:
Several pond layouts were considered for the project; however, the proposed layout
impacts the least amount of jurisdictional wetland, stream and protected Tar -Pamlico
Riparian Buffer areas (see Figure 7). As demonstrated by the different pond layouts, the
stream and wetland impacts varied from 1,951 linear feet to 5,700 linear feet and 0.40
acres to 5 acres respectively. Alternative Pond 1, while similar in impacts to the
Preferred Alternative, would cause offsite flooding during large storm events and
therefore, was not a feasible alternative. Other drainage areas on site were not considered
because they are either too small to support a pond for large mouth bass or too small to
keep a near constant water level to maintain water quality in the proposed pond. The
Preferred Alternative Pond 3 drainage area is approximately 4.19 square miles which will
be sufficient to support a pond for large mouth bass (see Figure 9).
3. IMPACT MINIMIZATION
The applicant requested a detailed wetland and stream delineation in an effort to avoid
and minimize impacts to jurisdictional areas where possible. Four pond layouts were
considered, and the one demonstrated in this application as the preferred alternative
results in the least amount of stream and wetland impacts. Additionally, the applicant
and S&EC have been working on the planning of this project for over 5 years including
coordination with the US Army Corps of Engineers.
2

0 4. PROPOSED IMPACTS
The Individual Permit Application Form (Attachment 1) and the Agent Authorization
Form (Attachment 2, Block 11) and are included as procedural documents relative to this
application.
4.1 Wetland Impacts
The Project's footprint will permanently impact approximately 0.322 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands (see attached Impact maps, Figures, 4, 5 and 5A). Please refer to
the Impact Table below for an outline of proposed wetland impacts.
0 * All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
4.2 Stream Impacts
The Project's footprint will permanently impact approximately and 2,165 linear feet of
important/perennial stream channel (see attached Impact maps, Figures 4, 5 and 5A).
Please refer to the Impact Table below for an outline of proposed jurisdictional stream
impacts.
Stream
Impact Number
Type of
Type of Wetland
Area of Impact (acres)
Impact Site Number
Impact
(e.g., forested, marsh,
0.089
2
Flooding
herbaceous, bog, etc.)
0.954
1
Dam Fill
Bottomland
0.012
TOTAL
---
Hardwood Forest
1.054
2
Flooding
Bottomland
0.310
Hardwood Forest
TOTAL
---
---
0.322
0 * All impacts have been rounded to the nearest 1/100 of an acre
4.2 Stream Impacts
The Project's footprint will permanently impact approximately and 2,165 linear feet of
important/perennial stream channel (see attached Impact maps, Figures 4, 5 and 5A).
Please refer to the Impact Table below for an outline of proposed jurisdictional stream
impacts.
Stream
Impact Number
Type of
Impact
Impact Length
(LF)
Area of Impact
(acres)*
1
Dam Fill
128
0.089
2
Flooding
2,017
0.954
3
Farm Road
Fill
20
0.011
TOTAL
---
2,165
1.054
0

•
•
I-]
5. PUBLIC INTEREST ISSUES
In a document provided by the U.S. Corps of Engineers titled "Wetlands & Corps
Wetland Regulations" and dated August 13, 2001, the Corps of Engineers lists 21
specific factors that will be reviewed related to Public Interest. These items are as
follows:
Conservation
Water Quality
Wetlands
Flood Hazard
Floodplain Value
Land Use
Recreation
Safety
Aesthetics
Historic Properties
Water Supply
Navigation
Energy Needs
Mineral Needs
Economics
Fish & Wildlife Values
Shore Erosion and Accretion
Food & Fiber Production
Environmental Concerns
Property Ownership
Needs and Welfare of the People
Responses to each of the 21 Public Interest Issues are presented below.
5.1 Conservation:
The applicant requested a detailed wetland and stream delineation in order to avoid and
minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters of the U.S. Several pond layouts were
considered for the project; however, the proposed layout demonstrates the second least
amount of stream impact and the least amount of wetland impact. The perennial channel
that is proposed to be flooded is also heavily impacted due to the cattle that roam and
graze through the stream and associated riparian area, unimpeded. Aside from the
impacts proposed for the project, there are other wetland, stream and associated riparian
areas on site that will be preserved and/or enhanced. These areas include 4.32 acres of
contiguous bottomland hardwood forested wetlands, approximately 6,200 linear feet of
stream channel and approximately 20 + acres of protected Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer
area (10 + acres of which is above what is required by the Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer
Rules) as a result of this onsite preservation and enhancement. Currently, the subject
property is an active cattle farm with the cattle freely grazing and roaming the wetland,
stream and associated riparian areas (see "Section 6, Mitigation" for photos). Onsite
mitigation is proposed through the use of fences to permanently keep the cattle out of the
above identified areas. Please refer to Figure 8 for a graphic representation of the
proposed preservation and enhancement areas. The concept of resource enhancement by
excluding the cattle from the areas identified in Figure 8 has been previously discussed
with Mr. Eric Alsmeyer of the US Army Corps of Engineers.
5.2 Water Quality:
The Site is located in the Tar -Pamlico River Basin in DWQ subbasin 03-03-01 and in
USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 03020101 (see attached Figures 1 & 2). The Site is adjacent
to Cedar Creek, which is Class C, Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW). C classified waters
are fresh surface waters that are protected for aquatic life propagation, maintenance of
biological integrity, including fishing and fish, wildlife, secondary recreation, agriculture,
0

etc. except uses for primary recreation or as a source of water supply. Nutrient Sensitive
Waters (NSW) are any surface waters that experience or are subject to excessive growths
of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation. According to the DWQ's Tar -Pamlico River
Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan (2004), the lower portion of Cedar Creek,
approximately 12.15 miles, has been "Good" to "Fair" since 1990. The fish community
bioclassification was upgraded from "Fair" to "Excellent" in 2002. The upper portion of
Cedar Creek does receive a discharge from the Franklin Waste Water Treatment Plant
which has previously had 3 "WET" test failures. This portion of Cedar Creek, 6.18 miles
in length, is currently not rated.
Water quality could be impacted by the Project in several ways. First, during
construction, sediment could potentially enter the waterways. Measures are being taken
to prevent these possibilities. Current sediment and erosion control guidelines will be
adhered to. The applicant is not proposing to bring fill in for the dam. Dam fill will be
acquired onsite in close proximity to and/or within the pond footprint.
Site disturbance is anticipated to be minimal due to the nature of the proposed activities.
The applicant is not proposing to bring in fill for the dam and road construction nor is the
applicant proposing mass property grading as part of this project for the creation of the
recreational pond. Additionally, per the Franklin County NRCS Soil Survey description,
the primary soil types on the subject property are Chewacla and Wedowee, both of which
are characterized as loam to clay/loam and sandy/loam soils. Due to these soils on site
and their slightly erosional nature (as defined by the Franklin County NRCS Soil
is Survey), and the lack of a significant grade change, siltation is expected to be minimal.
During rainstorms, erosion from a cleared site will be much higher than erosion from a
forested site; however, it is important to note that only the proposed pond footprint will
be cleared.
The North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 requires that a plan to
control erosion and sedimentation be developed for any activity that disturbs one acre of
land or more. This plan must include control measures that will prevent sediment impacts
to water quality. Practices must be installed that will control sedimentation from the peak
runoff generated by the 10 -year storm. One of the best methods to control sediment
loading from construction sites is to minimize the time that land is exposed. Data
collected by NCSU researchers indicates that mulching and seeding reduce erosion rates
by approximately 95 percent. The State law requires that permanent ground cover be
established within 15 working days from when grading is completed. The Project will
meet or exceed that requirement. By following the site and grading plan and
implementing and maintaining BMPs to control construction sedimentation for the 10 -
year storm the impacts to water quality during construction will be minimized and will
not be significant.
It is also important to note that the construction of this project has the potential to greatly
improve the current water quality of several the tributaries on the subject property that
drain to Cedar Creek. Currently, the subject site is an active cattle farm and the cattle are
allowed to freely roam through the streams and wetlands. The applicant has proposed a
5

0
mitigation area directly downstream of the proposed pond and proposes to permanently
fence the cattle out of the wetland, stream and associated riparian areas, except at the
proposed designated cattle crossing, and thereby reduce the amount of sedimentation and
animal waste that contributes bacteria and nutrients directly to the surface waters.
The applicant is also proposing design criteria for the pond that include drawn down from
the bottom to regulate water temperature in the receiving streams, outlet structures
designed to re -aerate the pond water and improve the dissolved oxygen content before it
enters the receiving streams and a mandatory low flow releases.
5.3 Wetlands:
The project proposes to flood 0.310 acres of Bottomland Hardwood forested wetlands for
the proposed pond. There will bean additional 0.012 acres of wetland fill associated
with the dam construction for the proposed pond. The proposed pond also will impact
2,017 linear feet of a UT to Cedar Creek (important/perennial channel) due to flooding
for the pond. An additional 128 linear feet of the same channel will be impacted in order
to construct the dam for the pond as well as 20 linear feet of channel for the proposed
farm road (see attached Impact maps, Figures, 4, 5 and 5A).
As discussed earlier, several pond layouts were considered for the project; however, the
proposed preferred layout demonstrates the second to least amount of stream and least
amount of wetland impact. Aside from the impacts proposed for the project, there are
wetland, stream and associated riparian areas on site that will be preserved and/or
enhanced. These areas include 4.32 acres of contiguous bottomland hardwood forested
wetlands and approximately 6,200 linear feet of stream channel. In addition to the
preserved/enhanced stream channel, the applicant proposes to also preserve the
associated stream riparian buffer areas. It should be noted that there are areas proposed
to be preserved that will exceed the minimum fifty (50) foot Tar -Pamlico Riparian buffer
requirement; this will result in 10.06 acres of excess riparian buffer area (for a total of
20+ acres of Riparian Buffer preservation) being protected that is currently not protected
and subject to impacts by the roaming and grazing cattle (see Figure 8). Currently, the
subject property is an active cattle farm with the cattle freely grazing and roaming the
wetland, stream and associated riparian areas. Onsite mitigation is proposed through the
use of fences to permanently keep the cattle out of the above identified jurisdictional
areas.
5.4 Flood Hazard:
The Franklin County Pond Project is located within the 100 -year Floodplain. Proper
permits will be obtained by the applicant from the State Floodplain Mapping Program
through the local flood plain administrator once the USACE and DWQ Approvals are
secured.
31

5.5 Floodplain Value:
The Franklin County Pond Project is located within the 100 -year FEMA Floodplain. We
understand that the dam will be properly designed to ensure that it can safely convey the
appropriate design storm event through its combined spillway system. A flood study and
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will also be prepared to show how the proposed dam
will affect the upstream and downstream properties.
Flood attenuation that was provided in the section of floodplain that is lost in the dam
construction will likely be replaced by the storage provided in the proposed pond.
Floodplain habitat and wildlife passage that was previously provided in the floodplain
will likely still be available along the edge of the proposed pond.
5.6 Land Use:
Land use in the surrounding area consists mostly of undeveloped, forested and
agricultural areas with some sparse residential areas.
5.7 Recreation:
Within the project boundaries of the proposed pond, there are no designated scenic or
recreational areas. Approximately 4 miles to the north of the proposed project is the
Franklinton Park which offers a children's playground, running track, open play field,
baseball and softball field, loop trail, and picnic areas. Approximately 14 miles east of
the proposed pond is the Moose Lodge Park which offers baseball and softball fields. It
is our opinion that this project will not have any significant direct impacts on local park
areas.
5.8 Safety:
The proposed pond will be a privately used, recreational pond, therefore, public safety
issues are not relevant; however, pond design criteria such as minimizing steep slopes
along pond edges will be employed in the design.
5.9 Aesthetics:
The proposed pond is for private recreational uses.
5.10 Historic Properties:
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Raleigh, North Carolina
maintains records and locations of buildings, structures, and objects that are listed by
local governments as historic landmarks or that are listed or eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places. In May 2008 S&EC personnel searched the files at
SHPO for historical structures on the subject property for a potential county sewer line.
While this county sewer line is not related to the proposed pond project, a portion of the
proposed sewer corridor runs parallel to the proposed pond. The records check at the
7

(SHPO) revealed that there are structures within a 3 -mile radius that appear on the
National Registry (NR), Determination of Eligibility (DOE), Study List (SL), or Locally
Designated (LD) lists:
FK 441 (SL) Robideaux House
FK 3 (NR) Cooke House
FK 552 (SL) Youngsville Historic District
FK 548 (SL) (NR) McGhee House
FK 290 (SL) (NR) Van Mansion
FK 284 (NR) Franklin Depot
FK 8 (NR) Dr. J.H. Harris House
FK 478 (SL) Allen Metropolitan AME Zion Church
FK 278 (NR) Sterling Cotton Mill
FK 25 (NR) J.A. Savage House
FK 10 (NR) Shemuel Kearning House
North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA) records archaeological sites and
excavations. The record check was performed in May 2008 for the subject property for a
potential county sewer line. While this county sewer line is not related to the proposed
pond project, a portion of the proposed sewer corridor runs parallel to the proposed pond.
There are documented archaeological sites or artifacts within the boundary of the 400+
Ip acre property owned by the applicant; however, none of these sites are within the
proposed pond layout. Several archaeological sites within a 3 -mile radius of the
surrounding area have been excavated and examined for significance. Three sites within
the property boundaries owned by the applicant have been surveyed for their
archaeological significance (see Figure 10, sites FK129, FK 130, and FK131). FK 129 is
not considered a significant archaeological site due to plowed, deflated and eroded soils
(see Figure 10 and document ER 06-1327). Sites FK 130 and FK 131, which are
Prehistoric Native American archaeological sites, have not been fully evaluated or
investigated; however, these sites are not proposed to be impacted for the construction of
the pond (see Figure 10 and document ER 06-1327). The proposed Franklin County
Pond dam and flooding impacts will occur well south of the location of FK 130 and FK
131 (see Figure 10). Based upon the information supplied, sites FK129, FK 130 and
FK131 appear to be located within the proposed preservation and enhancement area (i.e.
they will be protected from impact in perpetuity).
Site ER84-7784 was reviewed and no comment was issued by OSA on the eligibility of
this area. No other documented archaeological sites on or near the property boundary area
have been determined eligible for the national registry. One additional site is located
approximately 500 feet south of the applicant's property line (see Figure 10, site FK 128).
No further studies are recommended at this time for FK 128 due to the distance from the
property line and the proposed pond layout (i.e. there are no impacts proposed in the
vicinity of FK 128).

0
5.11 Water Supply:
While the proposed project does require the flooding of the UT to Cedar Creek to create
the pond, there are no other additional water usage requirements (i.e. water supply, sewer,
etc.) for the project.
5.12 Navigation:
No navigable waters are found on this site.
5.13 Energy Needs:
This public interest issue is not applicable to this application as the proposed pond project
will not require the direct use of energy.
5.14 Mineral Needs:
This public interest issue is not applicable to this application as the proposed pond project
will not affect the need for minerals in the area nor will it produce any.
5.15 Economics:
A Fiscal Impact Analysis has not been completed on this project as it is a private pond for
the property owner's recreational uses. Any monies used for the construction of the pond
are also private.
5.16 Fish & Wildlife Values:
Federal Species
Species with Federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed for
such listing (P), or Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance (T[S/A]) are protected
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The
status of "Endangered" refers to "any species which is in endanger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range," and the status of "Threatened" refers
to "any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) receive no formal protection under the ESA. NHP records
indicate no occurrences of federally protected species within the study area. However,
one federally endangered species, the Dwarf Wedge mussel, is documented within 5,765
feet (1.1 miles) upstream of the 400+ acre property boundaries. The only documented
occurrence is on Cedar Creek, upstream of its intersection with the tributary that the
proposed pond will be impacting and therefore, no impacts to the known population will
occur as a result of the proposed pond project.
Z

Alasmidonta heterodon (Dwarf Wedge Mussel)
State -Endangered; US -Endangered.
The Dwarf Wedge Mussel is relatively small, rarely exceeding 1.5 inches in length. The
shell's outer surface (periostracum) is usually brown or yellowish brown in color, with
faint green rays that are most noticeable in young specimens. Unlike some mussel
species, the male and female shells differ slightly, with the female being wider to allow
greater space for egg development. A distinguishing characteristic of this mussel is its
dentition pattern; the right valve possesses two lateral teeth, while the left valve has only
one. This trait is opposite of all other North American species having lateral teeth (Clark
1981). The dwarf wedge mussel inhabits creek and river areas with a slow to moderate
current and a sand, gravel, or muddy bottom within the Tar and Neuse drainages, mainly
near the Fall Line. Potential suitable Habitat is located on the tributary to Cedar Creek
within proposed project boundaries. NCNHP documentation of this species occurs in
Cedar Creek approximately 1 -mile northwest (i.e. upstream) of the 400+ acre property
and the proposed project boundary (see Figure 10). As this occurrence is upstream of the
proposed project site, it is not anticipated that the proposed Franklin County Pond will
have any effect on the documented occurrence. It should also be noted that the
Franklinton Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) discharge is situated between the
proposed project site and the documented occurrence for the Dwarf Wedge Mussel. It is
commonly accepted that endangered species occurrences are rare immediately
downstream of a Waste Water Treatment Plant.
Other Rare species within a 5 -mile radius of property boundary
Alasmidonta undulata (Triangle Floater)
State -Threatened.
Triangle Floater occurs in most river systems in Piedmont and Coastal Plain, however
marginally suitable habitat occurs within the proposed project area.
Pseudognaphalium helleri (Heller's Rabbit -Tobacco)
SR -P. (Historical documentation)
Heller's Rabbit -Tobacco occurs in dry woodlands, openings, and glades, especially over
mafic rocks. There is no suitable habitat for this species on-site due to lack of suitable
soils.
Necturus lewisi (Neuse River Waterdog)
State -Special Concern species
•
10

Neuse River waterdog occurs in medium rivers and large streams in Neuse and Tar
drainages (endemic to North Carolina). There is no suitable habitat for this species within
the proposed project area.
Thermopsis mollis (Appalachian Golden -banner)
NCNHP-SR-P. (Historical documentation, i.e. has not been seen in Franklin County for
20 years)
Appalachian Golden Banner occurs on dry ridges and open woodlands. There is no
suitable habitat for this species within the proposed project area.
Other Federally listed species in Franklin County, NC:
Elliptio steinstansana (Tar River Spinymussel)
State -Endangered; US -Endangered
According to the US Fish and Wildlife Service Tar Spinymussel Recovery Plan (1992),
there are two (2) relatively good populations known to exist in the main stem of the Tar
River and a third population in Swift Creek. These occupied habitat locations are well
north of the 400+ acre property and the proposed project area. Therefore, the habitat on
the proposed project area is neither suitable nor similar to the referenced populations.
The Tar Spinymussel, one of only three freshwater mussels in the world with spines, is a
medium-sized mussel reaching about 2.5 inches in length. In young specimens, the shell's
outer surface (periostracum) is an orange -brown color with greenish rays; adults are
darker with inconspicuous rays. The inside of the shell (nacre) is yellow or pinkish at one
end and bluish -white at the other. Juveniles may have as many as 12 spines; however,
adult specimens tend to lose their spines as they mature. The Tar Spinymussel lives in
relatively silt -free uncompacted gravel and/or coarse sand in fast -flowing, well
oxygenated stream reaches. It is found in association with other mussels, but it is never
very numerous. It feeds by siphoning and filtering small food particles that are suspended
in the water.
Their method of reproduction is similar among freshwater mussel species. Males release
sperm into the water column, and the sperm are taken in by the females through their
siphons as they respire. The eggs are fertilized and develop within the females' gills into
larvae (glochidia). The females release the glochidia that must then attach to the gills or
fins of specific fish species. The glochida transform into juvenile mussels and drop off
the fish onto the stream bottom. To reiterate, potential suitable habitat for this species is
not found within the 400+ acre property or the proposed project area.
10 Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac)
11

0 NC- Endangered US- Endangered
Michaux's Sumac, or False Poison Sumac (Rhus michauxii), is a low, densely hairy shrub
with erect stems which are mostly 0.3 to 0.6 in in height. Michaux's Sumac forms dense
clumps when in healthy populations. The compound leaves are divided into 7 to 13
leaflets originating from a hairy rachis (axis), which may be narrowly winged near the
apex. Each leaf is finely to coarsely toothed on its edges. The leaflets are 4 to 9 cm (1.5 to
3.5 in.) in length, 2 to 5 cm (0.79 to 2 in.) in width, oblong to oblong -lanceolate, sessile,
sharply pointed at the apex, rounded at the base, dull on the upper surface of the leaf,
veined, and slightly hairy on their bottoms. The shrub's compound leaves are narrowly
winged at their base. The species is dioecious (individual plants are either male or
female). The flowers are arranged in dense, terminal panicles and have 4 to 5, tiny,
greenish -yellow to white petals and are 4 to 5 parted. The flowers and fruit of male plants
are solitary while the flowers on a female plant are grouped in 3 to 5 stalked clusters.
Flowering is between April to August depending on weather conditions and habitat. From
approximately August to November, a deep red, densely hairy fruit (drupe) is produced
and is 5 to 6 mm in diameter (USFWS 2007 and Patrick et. al. 2007).
Michaux's sumac is shade intolerant, inhabits sandy or rocky open woods (USFWS
2007), highway rights -of way, roadsides, or edges of artificially maintained clearings
(Patrick et. al. 2007) in association with basic (USFWS 2007) to circumneutral soils
(NatureServe, 2008). Apparently, this plant survives best in areas where some form of
disturbance has provided an open area (Patrick et. al. 2007). Although roadside
occurrences appear to be thriving in the presence of some level of disturbance (i.e.,
mowing), they are always under the constant threat of catastrophic disturbance. Roadbed
widening or heavy equipment activity on cleared lands, for example, may dramatically
reduce the number of individuals (NatureServe 2008).
No suitable habitat for Michaux's Sumac is found in the proposed pond area within the
proposed project area. Soils on-site are more acidic than the typical soils in which this
species prefers and the proposed pond area is comprised of stream, wetland and riparian
areas, none of which is suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac.
No Threatened and Endangered species surveys have been completed for this site.
Common Species:
The study area is characterized by a mosaic of agricultural, forested, and residential land
that offers little components to support a rich diversity of wildlife.
White-tailed deer, raccoon, and gray squirrels, cottontails and other animals common to
the eastern NC may be seen along with an occasional opossum or red fox. Geese feed in
open fields and shallow waters. Forested areas contain a mixture of hardwoods and
conifers in the canopy such as Loblolly Pine, Liriodendron tulipifera (Tulip Poplar), and
Liquidambar (Sweet Gum). A sparse subcanopy is dominated by Ligustrum japonicum
(Japanese Privet bush) and occasional Juniperus virginiana (Juniper).
12

• 5.17 Shore Erosion & Accretion:
This public interest issue is not applicable to this project as the proposed pond is inland
and will not affect shore erosion or accretion.
5.18 Food & Fiber Production:
This public interest issue is not applicable to this application as the proposed pond project
will not be producing any food or fiber. The cattle that are currently using the property
will continue to have access to the remaining pasture land on the 400 + acre site.
5.19 Environmental Concerns:
Noise
This surrounding land use near the subject property is predominantly forested and/or
agricultural in nature. There are sparse residential homes in the area. Any noise in the
area is directly related to local residents and the active farming that is still on-going. For
example, the noise generated on site is primarily the result of the operation of
automobiles, trucks, farm equipment, livestock, etc. Other current sources of noise are
construction related (e.g. power tools, etc.). Expected project related, temporary sources
of noise include the heavy equipment associated with the pond construction efforts
performed by the applicant or associated sub -contractors. Currently, noise levels are low
on-site, partially due to the size of the subject property. Noise levels are expected to
increase during the normal working hours due to construction of the pond. Construction
is normally limited to daylight hours when loud noises are more tolerable. Every
reasonable effort will be made to minimize construction noise. Immediately following
completion of the project, noise levels will be similar to other agricultural/farming
communities within the area and what is experienced on site now.
Prevention of Contamination
During construction of the proposed pond and associated dam structure, there is the
potential for accidental spills of fuels such as gasoline or diesel from the mechanical
equipment. All re -fueling will occur in designated upland areas, as far as feasible from
surface waters. Spills that may occur will be contained immediately by certified
personnel and disposed of appropriately. Any appropriate requirements (including the
Material Safety Data Sheet) will be followed for storage and disposal of any substance
that can be considered toxic. Overall, the impacts from toxic substances should be
extremely minimal and are anticipated to be absent altogether. This project is to create a
private, recreation pond (i.e. not a commercial site or roadway project) and therefore, it is
our opinion that no significant impacts from toxic substances will occur.
5.20 Property Ownership:
Please refer to the list of names and addresses of property owners adjacent to the 400+
acre property in Block 24. The applicant owns all the land adjacent to the proposed pond
. location. A corresponding map showing the location of each property as it corresponds
to the list is also attached.
13

. 5.21 Needs and Welfare of the People:
The proposed pond project is a privately funded project on private land for private
recreational use. The proposed Sediment and Erosion Control BMPs will ensure that the
proposed project does not negatively affect the surrounding communities or areas
downstream.
6. MITIGATION
Typically, the USACE will reduce the mitigation ratios required for permanent impacts if
an applicant provides onsite stream preservation with a riparian buffer (i.e. '/2:1). It was
suggested, during previous discussions with Mr. Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE, that if the
applicant was to fence out the cows from the streams and associated buffers, the applicant
should get more mitigation credit. Preservation mitigation ratios usually fall between 5:1
and 10:1 whereas enhancement mitigation ratios are typically less than that. Therefore,
as suggested in past discussions, the applicant has provided approximately a 3:1
mitigation ratio (i.e. the applicant is preserving and fencing 6,265 linear feet of stream
versus the 2,165 linear feet of stream being impacted). The applicant is also proposing to
preserve and fence off the wetland pockets associated with the above streams, including
the large contiguous wetland area below the proposed pond dam. Therefore, the
applicant has provided approximately a 13:1 mitigation ratio (i.e. the applicant is
preserving and fencing 4.32 acres of wetland versus the 0.322 acres being impacted). See
Figures 1 and 8.
As mentioned previously, wetland mitigation will be required for the proposed 0.322
acres of wetland impacts due to the pond and dam creation. As stated above, the
applicant proposes to preserve and enhance 4.32 acres of contiguous wetlands onsite.
Because the project's cumulative impacts are less than 1 acre of wetland, the Division of
Water Quality will not require mitigation for the wetland impacts. Due to the
enhancement and preservation being offered on-site as mitigation we are neither
proposing a payment to a private mitigation bank nor a payment to the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP) for wetland mitigation.
The project proposes impact to 2,157 linear feet of highly degraded and eroded
perennial/important stream channel for the proposed pond creation, dam fill and farm
road crossing. The applicant is proposing to preserve and enhance approximately 6,200
linear feet of stream channel and approximately 10 + acres of protected Tar -Pamlico
Riparian Buffer onsite. The applicant is also proposing to buffer existing perennial
channels that were not previously buffered, which will result in additional 10+ acres of
protected Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer onsite, for a total of 20+ acres of Riparian Buffer
preservation. The applicant also recognizes that the proposed pond will also be subject to
the Tar -Pamlico Riparian Buffer Rules. Because the project's cumulative fill impacts to
streams do not exceed 150 linear feet, the Division of Water Quality will not require
stream mitigation. Due to the on-site preservation and enhancement of streams and the
associated riparian buffers, we are we are neither proposing a payment to a private
mitigation bank nor a payment to the Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) for
wetland mitigation.
14

S&EC was contracted to identify intermittent and perennial channels on the property (see
Figures 1 and 8, Feature C) and evaluate them as potential mitigation candidates for
preservation and enhancement mitigation credit (see Figures 1 and 8, Features A, B, C
and H). Streams were identified as intermittent or perennial using current DWQ stream
identification techniques. Specific attention was given to evidence of agricultural impact
to the streams. In addition to the streams, the large contiguous wetland in the vicinity of
Features A and B (see Figure 8) was also reviewed and evaluated for impacts from the
grazing livestock. The following photographs are used to illustrate the degradation and
level of impact to each feature reviewed.
Based on our evaluation of the amount and severity of agricultural impacts, streams were
divided into three categories; highly impacted streams, moderately impacted streams, and
minimally impacted streams. Streams were considered highly impacted when livestock
impacts were severe, current, and consistently observed throughout the reach. Streams
were considered moderately impacted when livestock impacts were moderate in severity,
isolated to only a few locations throughout the reach, or when they were believed to be
relict (not current). Streams were considered minimally impacted when there were
minimal impacts from the ongoing agriculture. The streams and their associated riparian
buffers that are proposed to be preserved and enhanced are highlighted below with their
current field descriptions and supporting photos.
Feature B was identified as an intermittent channel from its origin to its confluence with
Feature A. The upper portion of Feature B (from its origin to the stop point in the
wetland area) S&EC has identified as a minimally impacted stream. However the lower
reach of Feature B (from the lower start point to Feature C) is believed to be a moderately
impacted stream. Please refer to Figure 8 for the location of Feature B.
0 Photo # 1 - Feature B, showing livestock trample
15

•
•
Feature C is the main channel which flows north through the middle of the property (UT
to Cedar Creek). The level of agricultural impact on Feature C ranges from moderately
to highly impacted throughout its course on the property, as demonstrated by Photos 2
through 4 below. The floodplain area is separated by a gated fence from the rest of the
range however, it is obvious that the area is currently used for grazing. Please refer to
Figure 8 for the location of Feature C.
Photo # 2 — Evidence of livestock crossing on Feature C
Photo # 3 — Evidence of livestock trample and waste on Feature C
16

�J
Photo # 4 — Evidence of livestock trample and waste on Feature C
Feature D was identified as perennial channel. Feature D is considered by S&EC to be a
highly impacted stream throughout its reach. Multiple cattle crossings as well as
livestock waste were observed in and near the channel, as evidenced by Photos 5 through
8 below. Feature D is the proposed area to be flooded for the construction of the pond.
Please see Figure 8 for the location of Feature D.
0 Photo # 5 — Evidence of livestock trample and animal waste on Feature D
17

0
Photo # 8 — Evidence of livestock crossing on Feature D
Feature H was identified as a perennial channel which flows into the floodplain wetlands.
Feature H is considered by S&EC to be a moderately impacted stream within the project
area as there were several observations of livestock impact. Please see Figure 8 for the
location of Feature H.
0 Photo # 9 — Evidence of livestock impact on Feature H
19

C
n
There is also a large, contiguous 4+ acre wetland in the vicinity of Features A and B (see
Figure 8). This large wetland area showed evidence of livestock trample and waste
throughout its extent. Photos 10 through 11 demonstrate the livestock impact.
Photo # 10 — Evidence of livestock impact to Wetland Area
Photo 0 # 11 — Evidence of livestock trample through Wetland Area
20

•
As noted earlier, the USACE will reduce the mitigation ratios required for permanent
proposed impacts to jurisdictional streams if an applicant provides onsite stream
preservation with a riparian buffer (i.e. '/2:1). Previous discussions with Mr. Eric
Alsmeyer of the USAGE, suggested that as the applicant was prepared to permanently
fence out the cows from the streams and associated buffers, the applicant should get more
mitigation credit. Preservation mitigation ratios usually fall between 5:1 and 10:1
whereas enhancement mitigation ratios are typically less than that.
As demonstrated in the above photographs, the level of impact to the stream and wetland
areas identified on Figure 8 is extensive. The applicant is providing a 3:1 mitigation ratio
(i.e. the applicant is preserving and fencing 6,265 linear feet of stream versus the 2,165
linear feet of stream being impacted) for the proposed stream impact due to the
construction of the pond. By fencing the livestock out of the stream and associated
riparian areas, the applicant is further protecting the water quality of those areas by
removing the sedimentation and waste entering those streams caused by the livestock.
The applicant is also proposing to preserve and permanently fence off the wetland
pockets associated with the above streams, including the large contiguous wetland area
below the proposed pond dam (see Figure 8). Therefore, the applicant has provided a
13:1 mitigation ratio (i.e. the applicant is preserving and fencing 4.32 acres of wetland
versus the 0.322 acres being impacted) for the proposed wetland impact due to the
construction of the pond. As noted above with the streams and associated riparian areas,
the applicant is providing additional water quality protection by removing the disturbance
and waste material caused by the livestock tromping in the wetlands.
21

LEGEND
ate/ PERENNIAL STREAM (TO BE
USED AS MITIGATION)
PERENNIAL STREAM
(IMPACTED)
PERENNIAL STREAM
(NON -IMPACTED)
LINEAR WETLAND
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND
PROPOSED POND FOOTPRINT
PROPOSED POND DAM
PROPERTY LINE
NOTE:
THIS MAP ONLY
IDENTIFIES THE
JURISDICTIONAL
WETLANDS AND THE
WATERS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PROPOSED
POND IMPACTS AND
MITIGATION.
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 " = 700'
0 700
P o. Seale:
s r = goo•
Project Mgr. Drawn By:
NT MM
Date: 08128108
NOTE:
PERENNIAL
CHANNEL
CONTINUES
40 C
q���CROss/
�G
PROPOSED
POND
AND DAM
i
/ l
P
,rr ,
�1
i
20, ,
NON -IMPACTED
PERENNIAL NON -IMPACTED \
STREAM i WETLANDS
J
FEATURE REFERENCE MAP
FIG. 1
MIDYETTE FARM SOURCE:
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
FRANKLIN CO. POND Raleigh, NC 27614
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC 919-846-5900

- INS �` -.t 'L �.-_..� _-..� _ �$_-i-r� y-•�-�__+ ` ,�_.-.,�: �.. I - _ _ i= �!'.�.-'
Ai
till
;% -t7-
i`2/
MY
W#E
`,''-i' ,moi -- -� - �-� � SITE _ c; -' �`�. + ,(J� �:' �. 'hl/[v[�/l%•J/,f-' , '/ ;
� �-V Jr.;ij- H" t r, \\ � \ � ' \? �""��l � �: �� .�. • j{� 'ey Y1105 � /J I C �. � y, 1r
', I �� / f'` � r /. - .'�} �` 1t ! -✓./i' t 11'x_- \ `� � .� � 1 1(� ( ; •.
//_ I� I' J' t�j jJj/�'" ..+ r'` (-....% JII y � � - �' � � ` ( ' ; f r ' ; A' .�r� r• , \� ` �\1 �f/.
�`_ �r` •t,! -•� t�1•. \`� `�' � 1i J � _ !� `. 1 e ` ' foo ` _ "� /> _.�-_� C' eJ �,
USGSTOPOGRAPHIC MAP ;"
"� \ �/�- `• r
�1/ � �f1, ��,_ +...=..=',e< FIG.t+2
Protect No. Scale:
59t1.W4 1°=2000' MIDYETTE FARM SOURCE:
Project Mgr. Drawn By: FRANKLINTON 11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
NT MM FRANKLIN CO. POND USGS QUADRANGLE Raleigh, NC 27614
Date: 8/28/08 FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC DATED:1999 919'846-5900

LEGEND
PERENNIAL STREAM (TO BE
USED AS MITIGATION)
/n PERENNIAL STREAM
(IMPACTED)
PERENNIAL STREAM
(NON -IMPACTED)
LINEAR WETLAND
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND
J PROPOSED POND FOOTPRINT
PROPOSED POND DAM
PROPERTY LINE
NOTE:
THIS MAP ONLY
IDENTIFIES THE
JURISDICTIONAL
WETLANDS AND THE
WATERS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE PROPOSED
POND IMPACTS AND
MITIGATION.
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 " = 700'
0 700
Vo. Style:
r = T00•
Project Mgr. Drawn By:
NT MM
Date: 08128108
.20,
ROgO
NON -IMPACTED
PERENNIAL
STREAM
MIDYETTE FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
NOTE:
PERENNIAL
CHANNEL
CONTINUES
MITIGATION
MAP
(FIG. 8)
40 C
cRoss/
Nc
PROPOSED
POND
NOTE:
AND DAM
CATTLE
L
CROSSING
NOT
INCLUDED
IN
J
i AREA.
i I
� I
c i
i
i
I
M PACT MAP
• (FIG. 5)
NON -IMPACTED
WETLANDS
SOURCE:
OVERALL MAP
FIG. 4
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27614
919-846-5900

•MIDYETTE FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
LEGEND
IMPACTED PERENNIAL STREAM
® JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND
LINEAR WETLAND
PROPOSED POND FOOTPRINT
J
PROPOSED POND DAM
PROPERTY LINE
IMPACT TOTALS:
INSET 1: DAM -FILL IMPACTS
STREAM: 128 LF
3902 SF / 0.089 AC
WETLAND: 530 SF / 0.012 AC
INSET 2:
POND -FLOODING IMPACTS
STREAMS: 2017 LF
41579 SF / 0.954 AC
WETLANDS:
13500 SF / 0.310 AC
INSET 3: PIPE -FILL IMPACT
STREAM:20LF
470 SF / 0.011 AC
GRAPHIC SCALE
�1 " = 300'
300
INSET 2
POND -FLOODING
NON -IMPACTED
PERENNIAL STREAM
J
INSET 3
PIPE -FILL
IT r NON -IMPACTED
WETLANDS
IMPACT MAP
FIG. 5

MIDYETTE FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
WETLAND IMPACT:
530 SF / 0.012 AC
STREAM I M PACT:
PROPOSED DAM 128 LF
3902 SF / 0.089 AC
1
• DAM -FILL IMPACTS
FIG. 5A - INSET 1

•MIDYETTE FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
0
WETLAND IMPACTS: �
13500 SF / 0.310 AC c /
c \
PROPOSED POND i II
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 " = 200'
200
J
STREAM IMPACTS:
2017 LF
{ 41,579 SF / 0.954 AC
POND -FLOODING IMPACTS
FIG. 5A - INSET 2

i
MIDYETTE FARM
J FRANKLIN CO. POND
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
2p,
&o
�Ro
SS/N
� G
GRAPHIC SCALE
1" = 50'
0 50
U.
i
\ STREAM IMPACT:
20 LF
470 SF / 0.011 AC
PIPE -FILL IMPACTS
FIG. 5A - INSET 3

C
•
MIDYETTE FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
PIPE -FILL IMPACT
STREAM: 20 LF
470 SF
0.011 AC
4'
PIPE 4'
PIPE
":,;;rvy»: �'*' � i.•°t :::�,Fj'�;y;..A.t� ; �;r";::r ��y �:� .
a.s...n.M•tK"'j'n.�'t,%�vr�.... i.� •�ari'�r•.w+."r
aS
•1r,�,�• .
_
�� t-..:;' .��Sy:hN;'.. � :d•i-., .. .v:-.y,�:f•7', .,4.�:,-,;:f,:'t�.,::, .
.[-�t^7'y�.��:,•d .?i?•..�;4�.r,W �y,�x.w•i'•r''.s�
y..•x�.�4; +%'i% Y^7. `.T'
.Z�y: r\ro. SJ
.+ y°tii. •'..�'A.�'rM ,4; r�a'< `'
.t'�,v!_�...".�•Y
?•„�,y`rfyi•y.a '+Yi .S/,t♦`a.- N?i G�:�'.
J'�,1�4''�r.
.s.'Yy� ,k +.�=^�Y��\.i%i'>N�jf'u R•t
:riF.�+'ir-'t�„�''..'• ate';: <t%d: ;y.Y.
ti
1•L•�,`,"�.�� .1 'g•1.
�;Yer” aa,e�F�!f> ti:�ir"' +.�ry'.�.
•S:iy\^�.'K-� ^'.+:i'!}l
^r -t. •3:i4�.�s:���i_ .[i
JiHylf\.. �'{r�;.C��': 4i!'.
�'4r�1. �,F.a�• — itt::
�'1�+�!Y•�'Y' F. %f.'
h,;�t',i.�s.K}
T!'3' ����, �iF;y41`H�%L�!.
f::,�.,tr. +,1�.Y y.F•.w',.
;xL
�1q4�
21'
STREAM
WIDTH
GRAPHIC SCALE
1" = 5'
PIPE -FILL X -SECTION
(SEE FIG. 5A INSET 3)
FIG. 6

41
ALTERNATIVE PLAN
POND 1 - 311,361 SF (7.15 AC)
Q
STREAM IMPACTS: 1,951 LF
-d—
WETLAND IMPACTS: 17,637 SF (0.40 AC)
WETLAND
o
ALTERNATIVE PLAN
POND 2 - 514,571 SF (11.81 AC)
STREAM IMPACTS: 2,394 LF
WETLAND IMPACTS: 23,180 SF (0.53 AC)
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE PLAN
1 POND 3 - 457,514 SF (10.50 AC)
STREAM IMPACTS: 2,165 LF
WETLAND IMPACTS: 14,500 SF (0.33 AC)
M
/
Q
♦
ALTERNATIVE PLAN
I
POND 4 - 1,528,188 SF (35.08 AC)
STREAM IMPACTS: 5,700 LF
i
WETLAND IMPACTS: 217,713 SF (4.99 AC)
D
N
�
N
� '
Q
Q
O
D
�
l
/ I
i
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 " = 450'
1
0 450
PROPOSED POND PLAN
FIG. 7
o.
Sca11 V=450
MIDYETTE FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
SOURCE:
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27614
Im
Project Mgr.
Drawn By:
NT
MM
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
919-846-5900
Date: 08128108

0
•
MITIGATION TOTALS:
EXISTING BUFFERED
v PERENNIAL STREAMS
PROPOSED TO BE ENHANCED
4,392 LF
55,932 SF / 1.28 AC
EXISTING UN -BUFFERED
PERENNNIAL STREAMS
PROPOSED TO BE ENHANCED `•
1,873 LF
24,527 SF / 0.57 AC
® JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
PROPOSED TO BE PRESERVED
188,276 SF / 4.32 AC
LINEAR WETLANDS
944 LF
2832 SF / 0.065 AC
EXISTING 50' BUFFERS
438,249 SF / 10.06 AC
ADDITIONAL BUFFERED AREAS
FROM FENCING (NOT INCLUDING
WETLANDS)
447,090 SF / 10.26 AC
PROPERTY LINE
"EXISTING UN -BUFFERED STREAM
CHANNELS WILL BE
VOLUNTARILY BUFFERED AT
PROJECT COMPLETION
(I ., FENCES INSTALLED)
GRAPHIC SCALE 40,
1 " = 300'
0 300
PROPOSED
POND AND DAM \
1
NOTE: \
CATTLE
CROSSING NOT
INCLUDED IN
MITIGATION
AREA.
H
NOTE:
PERENNIAL
CHANNEL
CONTINUES
C
MITIGATION MAP
FIG. 8

,.� I�1 `. t `,I ftiL�'- l± rf,�'� / � I% i ;�"'^'_ ;• \t ;'"Y''`sd►�V1 I..1`
{ �`� 'ti''i l r J. � ! � ,�, ....1 ` ..;^ � � • it
�-; �;� �11 c •�. \ ,� irr,� +
� � - � ; \,.,• � -^' — i .: �� r,\ \vim I —�
t
-
ff
���'�� � .' 1,, •ir ;'��'I;'I'` �? � :�' }��V(�ti, \ y � � 1 �� ,; `
\�_ 7� , ��', •,i �.`r�rj�lti ��,�fl ,� `��`�. �i ��;�� .�.t#,� �"...L'� /�,� � J '•�� �\\./ fir.
�\\?'^ ��J !� ��f �� `\; ` � ` n il� �al .1 ( "'tl�� 'f i^ � JJ.,� _ ._-� .�'`. �'' �\•j ir. •'�,�' I ;
lam! , _ `� "� ' � "� �, t •�� -� , !!� 1t\�•,� ��..��, '. ,' , � `• `' , �. - �� �--i;��
4.19 SQ MILES-
�`` DRAINAGE AREA ;\ \.. , ` it rj ,� ► + rr� y ,.� +.
Ir
. i r -J
' ti } t - u2s ! / _, ; (`ti , • �,,. �. ; � r a � ; ; �' �, �. ^. ' � •ems`; .� -
J1
/.���. ate} l� �... � � `� 1. ` 1\ � Ji r.J ' f \\�` ���' - �/.i' ♦., ` `'ti4,1, , t�
��� ( •r. \�+A r' , `-. x-;`11 �; `-�� �� � J ;. i i! �: = �"'� � �f y! �� �% .� '1'` t,r�•g� I� ,//( .�.
�: .r__ v '✓ , Vii" } /�� \ `�' �� ` 1 } (t� ! F
-� f/ ��` _ ..� .f� GIN �.' �•' 1: �''•' v 1 +r i Cc:. ,• i f ,�
Will %
W # E
i+ J
DRAINAGE AREA MAP
s , �' �,,1`�• ` _� ��.�` - FIG. 9,'�.
Project No. Scale:
5931.W4 1°=20o0' MIDYETTE FARM SOURCE:
Project Mgr. Drawn FRANKLIN CO. POND FRANKLINTON 11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
NT MM USGS QUADRANGLE 19.8Raleigh, 59 27614
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC DATED: 1999 9198465900
Date: 8/28/08

--.._..i;-:T­­ : 'm. 1, ­. .1 ". ".7 .". .. -
. - I........ -­'�:.2:.',- , . - . . - .i.:, . ... . - , " -­-.­ I .­_, - .. .j".11 . . - . .
- % '-.'­`!`­�-,-;.,.--'_ I .1. �•
.., .. , .:..*- - f .. 1. � .. ., ... p... '.. . . � , . '\�' , - , . �. .--..I .: ., ., - j, . - .
. , ._....; ��. .... . .. �:_ . 17 �11 .: t .
. �-,..`-)11';, ­�,� ­ 11- - I., 7 1;. .. . "; 01 I . . ­,?:�.F­ '. A,
... � .. . - ;.. FK 548 (SL) (NR) .. '. . ,�','� " FK 290 (SL) (NR) Van Mansion I . . .- __..'_1 - I. I....,
.. : ... ..;,."., - -, ..,_.: , .:: - _. ..- LEGEND I .
... ........_... C.L. MCGhee house `­­, ,.''- ­; - . � . . . . . . . ,C:..-.. I . . I
-,,� ­ � �:S�; .: *, - .' 0 =historical structures f.
' - . `,'r
.. � , -~e,,,,.......'
.. ­ . -
,
,,.. .,�,) �•
-- '.
.77 Ilk. -,'.'.` (. - ", "!" 13- historical areas -
� � 7.7. 7-,:--t;... �. , FK 284 (NR) Franklinton Depot :.-: -.�
:,40_1- I .t )� - .
- KXIIIAIOI , ... , .*1, - d.4�: �
- ,'* -". -- .1
:_ I C...g, :��!"...
� "' '" 1, - ",
�, . . X1_e,k1:; .. .: - . !, ..
. -5.. .
.... -i-
, . . �r .., , - *. - ", ',.. I .. - ,�• . . - " ." * =archaeological sites � ..
LA.. . .. , , - , - . .
.A;;, ,P,� i . - . - , ".. I . I * . I -, , - -
" , - ,!, . . 1.
,!,
, . '. .. - . . I . '. - . .. lk� I
.". .
478 (SL) Allen ...��, �­�x' '' ....".".., - :;,:-., ,,,,-:-,. . __� .1, I
.1 IP " - ..... ..,�-�,.",.��i ,, � 1. . , ,:1 I ,
.... 'S� � . - 4,.. . -_
__ . � 11,%. .7 '' . .__.111� , ,4%.,.
, -
.... I . if Sr, '.. -t,'. .*.'** ... ... -. �-__t- �, -.,, 1. . -.- , .,. J., ".", 0f � archaeological sites . .
- , 1 z . .- 1., y : " _. .. ... - - - .
tropolitan AME Zion Church �, ..4-ilij.. .... . , . - . i:r 4- .;,. I , � _ : ..'...., - .. .. , .
I . -k.',';,..* - ... _. .. .!.
_; % .11 ..,.,. - ,..-,. - .1. " These locations are not to be publicized
'
. .. . ' . .
�.111.1 .. . . .
.. .
.. - e -I' -- --.'-.-7'. :,, �4. �i ;.
.. . . I . If.,• , I . j ' :.. .": .,'- . _ '-_4: due to their sensiti ty
�
­ � - .. ­;.-. .. . �,*
. - * �` .. ­-_--__.'...,.-- . '< A (W) Dr. J.H. Harris . -
.
.1 s' ... - . .,,_ .
.
. " , . r * " , ... , ;,. ,11 . , !I- .. L--.......�.?`: ,--.: =Natural Heritage element occurrences J.'*
�14.0. : 1. ... '.-
I , ,---. ...'t." .'......- '_ . - - ;.- _* *_ .!� '. I .. . ..,.:!3 1 42�
I , � - � .� �. . . I .. " ".. ,2r . , , iia:; A.
, .-�,i , . : .: - - . - ill ... � .
, . . . - . � � I , . _7
� - ., , .. . ; � : . - . _.: i;.: - ;.. - 1-,. o . . _'. __� ,j - . . . . . . . I - , :,*,.." '. : .� = Property boundary .
� ­ _;1. . . ,
_ , . . !
I i. �. I , . . . .. , .:i`'$: : .... .. 17. .. .,.. . ... �
-... , . , 4C7
� . .i..;..-. .:..- ..J._ zi. :. !.,. ,.,':
. . .._....:� , ?_..I. ­;. .......
i - �..__. 6'...'.-.. " '. .. .. .I.. _ .-.. .... .. �11 - :..-..
r - ..f .. .. , ... - .". _.I.....* .. . , V,
- I : �i:, ,:".n.: _....
W..
FK 287 (NR) Sterling Cotton . , , � . . . . . . .- . . - - I A. . . ... I . .;W .
.
... Ir . . l•:'
, . ..
.I. I - , �I �._ - . ..,:_.".. ,
- .
-- - I ;`..'� ;X.. .1 -,. : .-.,.: � : . .. - %.. ..� .. I - .. - .. . ,.:
, , - ., -7 - . . � ... t,_- - . .
. .. , . I �' ;'- � ." , , * ,. -�,, "'. .-14 , �..,Li6l_,�i - .
- - . . , , .
.
- .� ., .-.�-�, ; .. : , r � ;;.,,, '. ;;. . � . , -',
. -f- ..-..,. ­ ....... /�- - t. FK 25 (NR) J.A.J -il-,'!" " ` �. . . . _' . - 7­.� '.. t ;
- - �� .. .I: : .,.,i.. .A. Savage House J- -;',- ..", . . .. . 1. . ... -
'. . . ., , . ­ -.! I..: ., , .
, . 1,ice`
.%�-.:­ . I �, ... :+1..,. ` ,�, " ", , I . ,
.��,,, -,- I,- ... .. -.- _/. -•. 1.
, I - -
- ..:.-; - - . . . - * -, . ... - - ._.,.,., . . . , .
T . - " , _`-­�_1_ . . . _ ,_ . ­ ,
.1 . I - I ...,..:.A,. -,.-- A, ...-I-ir.... .-.-- . ­ i * . . , , , ,,:-'. .
. . I , , .. . .... , . - - , . . . . - . , . 11
•
., , , � .. - ! - , -.--': I. **. �", � '.* . .. I , _.. J'. 1�
A * I /. . *_ --.:,. ..-' _.-.`�.' `--.. : ,- -, " , ., ��l " .�:�. I ,� - , . I . . ;*1
... . , . .. I., 1� . �_ -,_,.-" .i. - -',-' , . - ...":-: I .. .... . I...,� . I r *.'­ � � I. :
-,-, .�.'.:.-;.. , .;. , .. _ � . - . , - .,\ , , - .. . I .
, .,;,�i . I. : . . " , . �:.,_ ... ..`*,,,� ..: ", , , , ,. i .,II"...,. .. ...: I �, -- -, .. � . , . . ;-t .
L".. ��. t.., k.. .. % .. . . .. . . .. . . .. - ! .� - 31. I ", " .../':- ..
... , �.. - .. . I . ; .. , , , I . .. - .. - r'. , *:.. . '. .: ., - >.: , -, `.- '-`41 , , : - ". ." , .., -. .., -, . � . . . . .
. I I.. I . .,.'.-,. : - . '. " - .. , . I - � - .A ,.: .. � , /. .4 � -, 11 . .-*.".:, f" -.
1.1 . ..
:icer--- � -, I , - - - I.- I-' * �'A '-. 1:'. '. , " I .; - . :. ­ , :.,.: -, .- -:, '. " -.:;...:­�* I" .- , , . . , , .
.. . � ... . . Xll., .'.7; .. .. :1. - �. - . . 1A.I.-.�!:! � .., ..;t - .�: . , .. .
I..... . . %. I . .'. - -, .I. -I, ..'.. I . - .
., . . 11 . . ...'. �1. ;, ,a ".. L , .. ..'.". . -'-. ". - -, '.�. . ., .
, - I -1 , . . .. , .; ,
,.�:'t.: *: , . .. .. , .. - .. . ! .c.J.- , , - .:.". ,�­ ,�. ,
. - , I ': I .:.. - .,% -; - * . . � . :... :.r
-.I";��O",: ..
� :,.- � - , . . . -.,, I
. , -l.,.I"; - .. . .. . 7 * �,� I. . - , - --. I .: �., .').,, - .,. . . . .: , V, . : . . , I ; . .,--,, �:: .'. ,
- ,,� . . . . - . . . .6; �
. '..: /,.. .... ,I ,. . ,
..,...-.,..: . , .`., ..­,\:, : -4�-:` '. � ", ..'..;.,.,..N.-' : " : ,:. - i.:�
- ... .: ., . :,�! .; ;.','. .
I .1� . . *.-. .. , . , .. '..; ! " - e - ,,, -i.'. -, .:..-' -,
.:,. .;..; 11 %� .`-�;�!.' .� . �. �.., :.. - , . ,*. .. . , . ". . . .
- , .- . . I .1 , -� if� f. I .. -_"
.
i : , '... � .. " . I- _- ; � : . .. ki. .,..:.;.. : : .. ;,..i .;.:. *, .. .. . . ; � . � ,,.. ..... _,:�.,. ,.L. - - . , , I . .
..1. �- .. . ...., .--: � . 41.,��­ . '. - , t ,!, .::.� -
" ...4T. . .,
.." ", , .. : -. -1 �' - -, .;; , . a ,
; ............ . .,-.,% �. ii . - - " - - c. . .. "" ,�, ,% " .. '-- , , , �-' I;, , ,� ,.`.- -.-.. - ,; - '. , ,* - .., .-' , - � .'!'
. , .".., ­­, -'-: ...: I.. , .. .." - . , :��., .
" - . . - , - - I . ,,,�',.' . . , ­ -, ..'j. � �
.'.*.;, . � . I " , . . - , ", .:. �.- .-:.. ..; x. . . . .. :! ., , . , : ,., - .. ­
- "'': . " -.-..�.� .. '. A - ,:- * '. - I - , . T, " ., . ... * ,.I - .
, " � .. .... !�!) .i .., : . _0 , �, ,
,..,.;., - , . 1. ,,, FK10 (NR) Shernuel Kearning House --­­)­ --�.;'-.­ � . , " - `.�'- ". . ... 1, ... .,.
- � � 14.1''.4. , , * .. !:.�. ,. , _. :."'. . .". ... .*: * , . - .. ... Z..", %
. 14' 1. - .. .. 11-i" " ........ . ... . ­ . ..
i .�, ,� .", .!k - - .. . ..,•' . �� . , . I. , , , - . . ..,.:
". -,� .:,Vi'''i..
:­­ ­ . . . 11 .X, '. . .. .. .-4- � -" , .. .. . . .
I , . .; �.. . , - -�..1 , . . . ..\_
'�­ I i.-'.. . : . ,: . :. ,
� I . ..... . . . . . . ., ., . :-.­­, � . . ;"-.,..-. . '.' : .'�. '. .. , -, , � -,. . - - - ..-,f-.1 9 � - , ;`�'. , , - . I . . ..
... - .,. ... , -�. ;, . ..., .,!! '' <1' '. _ , - .i 4.,"'. ;,-'.-' ; %-.. ,-1 . ; . ,_� 1
- ;� ... . . . � .' I - : f... * � -, , - 11 --. 11. �, _�, . - . . - ; , . . .
.1 '; '_ ­Vf -, - . .1 - .
' ­ . '.',,
*
..� " .. t ` - � . -Z , � . � e .
!� . *­ , - I "I....... '... - - _, , .. . . I .. .. . " .. . . :.. . .. . . ,
.
- I . . 15'. ,; ..., :, . 7:, . I , . . ;,:, ,%'.�. I , I . ��. ; . ;1."'""�. 'L .,:';* "": , ,; -� , .. . .. . .
, . .:, , � , , : * z .t � , , - - - ­ -� - .. -,�', - I
. .* !�' , l" .
. �: . . , , . It
- .. . .::- I ., � . , ;17"r�-'.:­., . . .f . -N- - , , - . - . . .. .
. �!,-' !.* c , . , ..-, .
-,%.. ��.: . ... .. . .. 1!: "'. :, I ..1. . , . - ... " . . .. � - .- ... ".... % . - ., -
, j ... . .. .. - __ ......,., . ­ . . . - . .. - �
;.::��,�.-._.,:,-. . ,
: . % . I.- ; I - . . I ` ,-;, e, . , - .. - , -.. .
. . ;
% . . . ; , . � ... - - - ,;.* " - " j
% . �
I � : . . . (
. . ­. �,4.�.� . .. � ... , . - ., . .-� -1 - .. .... . - , .
: . , - - ­ ". ., � , "..;. -, . , - - .%�'.. . . �4 .• � ..
, -.',',� '.�, - ...F '. , - ; . . ,..<.
....' .�.- - .; ! ., . % . - "_ �. 1. \ '. " .�.�;'.
: * . . .. , . . ."", . , . . . � - . .. 1 . .. '. � ,-*,:., '. - .: . . " :: .,. �...., .. " . .
,
, - - ). . '. .. , . . "... � .,�, . .1 ., - ,-..,.,-',�. .
. . ", , ,; , - �- � ...- . -
,
I. .. :'-.'*' * . .., , . . ; , , . , , . I .
If .. . .... . . , ... -,:::: �� .. ­ . I -1. , . .:
. � -, . ., ., . , , * ., ., "! � . - - . . ; . . - .., . - .�-
- - - - ­..;: I ii:�.,.-,'. � : � " . . � '. .. I I . A. - '. ,. *. -�.. -, k, -
..-_ , - . - _.' - - - �0-- . - . - .. . I �- ­;, - \i.,.-,-- - , ., '-"-.-I .- ': '-.' "T .: 1, ..�-­--,,- .; "..... i - . - . li .. A.
� - . . .., . "I * 1: , I I
. I.. . . ,� I -, . I .... . _ � .W . . . . . .... , .
' .. . . . .. - - `1 . . - .. .. . _* " .
* * ,
. -.; . . . . ... . -
_011. , - *! ". . . . .;-..*.-`-. ;.* '.*:-";, �.
.'�.*
'.. , �� - - :-.:. ... . - ­ ` _' . . .. I.. . . - �
.__ - .., , .. -.11 - , . ' ' I , ."'. .',,7 - . . . . .. . , ;�:.. - --
. I �. �- i2 - . ) �:; ;61 -7,1�* '��'-�;�' -' '. ' V . ... % I -I'; ..�, , ,�Z-:-. '. '. " - . .­ - I I . . -, , �, ,. � '...
I - , .1 . '! ; ,,�`:Y�* .. .".7 C.., . i I - - I,
.. I I - I I. -I - . )`.Y,�-,­.�­­ ��, . '.�;'. . :�,j. .''! . I - , .,
. I . - ..... -*.-.j,. , -r
-:..;
.�*!... .". - _
1 1 � . I
. .
'j. .t.... .:....­­:-
- . .
- - .
, " .. .. I-% V,;:_ '.1
. . .. .. -
. , . .�_
. .
�% .:
A;4*
I
0 I—- :e.j ...... ..., ,.. 52
i1}.
I - - '. .. ., ,'4* ". .
-
)" ,.---.:-..'7-_. .�. ..... I ,
.. I- I .;
. r 11 � _� 1. .-'I.,- . . :.., . .. , -.:..... , , - I . , .i -
I . � I I , I I � .. ; . . .. .� - . ­.,... � - .... ': ,.:, - ­ -! . , . .::(. '.
. . . . ! ". __1 I - .­.. , . I . . 1 9 . ..... . , "
- ), �
,,�.�__!� _1 .1 ,_ %, , � ! . ... .. I
- � �--- - -- . -.11 . �-. , �
-...,;, � I
� % - * ' � -. ---- -4 -, - . .... .....
_r-,V6rtebra-te Animali'1:,'''',`''I,f, ,,,*,
. . "" ­ � - ­t,.',.j
� .
I � 1. , .... ... :.:i.�..-'...,-.,.: . ....1.. -;,.. ....,
. - ..
.. . I
,.-..-; I... -
'I .�-, %.,; . , .
. . ". . , . ... . .�, ..'.., .. , .3 _
, ... I, -1-1, � . � _��5 ,�*::!,..�.!..,-......,F.:..,.,:..- ;I : " �... � 7".:- � "
I .. � I I- "I . I" :�. . I L H 11 .11 .. , ..�.Z. - �- -:�;-7;�;--'�:­�r­; I.'. FK 3 (NR) ;.' ,;,. :, , t
, . " I *.,��%,tiz..-, -, ,-'%.:,;­ - , .;-. . �,.t - , -.,,
I .", . t I . ...... �.
I,��,­ -'.. - � ,,'.�,I.. - - " ' .'♦' ,J: �
,1 .... - .,'._--­- * .. .31.:, � - , !�'- 1?_., , - \.
. I '.... I , , * .......1
,­- ­.­ ._..._,._".- .. " '...
. .. , . I . .,..,.: ­_ . - ., - Cooke House ­.. ,- '.
'Z . "
. , - . ..,
" , ,
.
.1 ... - *
V
- - . "_ * ,..i: .-.:- , 7 .
.(­­ I. " .
, . .... , , . 1 . _... , - . , . ,�.. . 6-�.!.­.:�,I _1 --.�-_ .. _� . : .
` . � , . . - ,* *­ ...;.,:. ,. , . ' 11 ­ - , .:,"'W, ': .
, - _.. , 14% . . - ... �, .';' - . ...., -.z7.%, , -�­�� ..': � L I . �,� �­ 21'�"-, I? _: -1 � - , - - '�
; . I .� 1 - ic *: � . 1 *, .: ..,.,*. - - ��... ..". .� .... � . I.- - ,' _ _ . ) " . .. -.-- .. _, " , ., �- � .. ."_"..,! . . L.: ". 2;i . -,
._�,,�,Zi*' ..:_.-:'--1 , .! - .,:, . '� , , '\� . "! W. '. ' _:�. -,
. 1%. .. -,,�-; . . :, ." * . . : �Z.> ' . *..;7. .'.�­ - ..
- .. *r
,., - .: ! I I � , �" - .1 - :
�1, . . � ,�� . .. .1 t . 1 t '.
. . ­ , .... .... . , - .. I ­ ... ... ... :
. . I . �L! - , - -r.", . .. , _�. �*., , , ­ , ". . - ' ..
. .. .. . . � "­��,, ...., 1.---,' ��' - 1"'' . , ..'. 11 ...., 1. , ,:. _.: , � ... %. 411 ER 4-7784 : � . .�, r
i* . -...L,... - ... " � ­. . if ;, _'� .. . , V
. W _ I;-- , . . .. . i�:;:
0 . " " - - . . . � j... �..
,-"�p: ;:,. I.j;,-',-f, '....'. , . . ...-- . : , ..,�.. ��-. -
- -, �%j!
..�.-", .. , . ,-1.
..
,
'.'�. � . . - --. ."
. - .I..., �!.-j,%',"', .' ,.1�.-,._,-.;!..­;.'..
. . ... ...."?.. 11- ., .. : �-,�. , , . , :t :. ..-A I - - : .1, *% 1%.:
. I -.1 .... . , . .I . , * . -.1 :lily
. ,., '. , ... . ;. ...; :.. -;,"t'. . . . f..�­,A - �`;"":, i - * - , ;, . , 4 -, -.1 , - / -'--_�7C, 1 - 1,,-� '
�. . . .., . ;!,.,1.,,-, * -.".)"71. .. .4.,t. "... - -., . I . - - -:- " I - ­: . , I
, " , '�. ; ,
, . _. ; --,�.­.1
. - - " .. ..... i., , .., ,._'1.-:jI ­� ..... .... * .
, . , 1� ".. - . .. : ., 4 . ,
" ,,'i . - .. . .;:�,..*-%*­ - . , ." '.`-_` *- I.- cr<
, - . - �.. . - I " ". .- ,!.'.'�'.-� -,-,' -.`�. - - , 1-��'.-'..` i. ..".... '.' '. * , � , 'N . . .
.. .. �! . I . . , , . .:. . %� - . .. .;
. ,. ... - , " _.".... . .- - ... -
. � , . . - : .., � :� . . �, . ..7 .) .. - I
. , ., I '� 1"�. a. r .,S -�-.,. ,'! * - F -'- I' - - �---� -'�,^
, , " $t .;*, - : ...j. . ... . . `:­ *. -* � - I - i.�- ­ "I.- ... . 1. - , i:� :,!� " , "%, -.�,��".! -
- - f..., - ;: . -, . .. .:.: X- 1 �. I , -.1., . ... ,*, .
,.:. ,., . , ,...I - I, 128 � ­.. , �, I.......
� .. --­ -4 �, :.". ,�.-'. ....". - , .. %,,,:*- -. - A ". ..'....'.. w. . ..'. .. - .
, . - ..., ..).,;" . � .. .,. . . I ' -
.- - .-.
. `�- ,�- ... - ... . . .. % . , .. .. _'_:._-�-'-.'- .7'
'Z . :r�'-, .. .*. .,.,. - - , . �....' ".", - � 1, 1,�"- '. . . .. - .. ". .. - ';.'.- .. .. t
. . I - ,ft, ---.j ., - - �. ; , ..-:­:�, -�-:- � _--�1`-A`j-'_'1-"--!'- '.. .. _--. , tr,"i" ; , , , -- - V. -, . . . , .t; -'.. 6 5. , ". ., (_
. -*fl..-.. -1 .. .1. .. . .. I` ,-".:n.,' � - - , .", ,.:' , . � _! , . T - - . -_1
..
�_'.�.'_ ";; . �,
_ �, .:... � . '<%'..
, . . . 1. ,
,' .. ....� .. . .... . . . )
ii.::
, ;- ,., .. - '. `:'�;- " ,,, .,1.'.`. .
. .
­ .. .. '. . - .. .. .:� V -_. :7 ,
- .. , . :.. , I ;% . '. .", -,�-­." - - : I , ; ..,-:: . , . :. . (4 . .
. . . .., . . ,/"" � ! � . ,�.,­.,. - "", * i .,.:",\ '...
- . , - .. - 4:.1-- , . . - �'.. - I' / .. . ; , - . . .- . ,- - -
�-';.'
, '. , . �-,-; .
%.)
.,%/'
;z ...... �
.'.'��` .- I 1..'.-;,.-..�, ,%..'! -� ! �­ � . _: . ... �;. ". ,; ,
.. .� 11. - . , . W., , j .Z.): ! 11,"-.�_�`. '_... ` - , , ' ' -
.. I .L;.. -,�.. .. ... -, --,, . . :.. .1 , .�V". , -L, , _1� � ?-,".r""'�,".'
.. . - - --1 .. I . ... P.." ­ / ,�..',-­ -.._--_..- . .,. . , , J I
,,.,... . . . -, .., ,:. - " , - ­.� - , - 11
. - ......, - . ., - .. .. ! . i . . . �
. . . . . . . . , , , , - .1 . , .1 - ­ . q . . . .1 .. - -
- - J.. -I �-,�5'?!t. .. . ... -J, . . � � , , � :- - ,� � - . . .: '�. ..:. - . . ­ ".....; . .. .
ji - " -, .: , . - .. . . � _ . . '.
_.. . . . -.,--. . . :FFK 441 (SL Robideaux House I:. .. +
". . .... .. . _...: 16�­­- 1 . ... , '. . . .I:.. , '! I - .. ... . � ...7'.... . --\, , . t.. . , ��. " , i':..>: �`.2,� , , , , " , ) .. ,
- ... � I - . � .. . I .'* f!.-,'. � - ,.
, - 7- - . . ;4 ..,I .;.'-.�,­:r"" ,1 , '*. : .: _ - -� ..*. * ... �-;`�. ;.-, . .--'. I :, ..­.- - .. .......� ; ... . , 4 . � ".. . I , . . j- ", Ao - � 4", :". ... . .. � .. ".
. - .. ...L.".. , k,�
I �1­ .-..� .,."*".;,.-.3t:..�-.;,."."..,;��'-4� "'....F .:. I :". "N" - ; '-' .. - . : .. . .� :,:, '.-�,­:,. ...1 . . ... " . . 1Z - , . I . . .. , ­ I . .. .. . -
. . -� .4'........ .. .. . 1, J. .-' , . A'k_ _-_',�-�% ..:, ..."�.,.! , - i..-.-.-. .� . . .. .
. . . I .. . . I. -I ';!: � �', 1,"::: 4-,' I". L" , � .,'�. . . . ­ • .. . . . .
. ... " 1, . I ." . -;e: .. "-- '7' - ' I .. . - :":. .. _,�'.. , 't♦
.. - , ,:--: 4,.,e . , *. .1, . . � . ... . . I ..:;".. ". . 'Z
; - - - 11.: , ... .�,. ',�.,/ . . �. ,.1, -... � - .. . - ` 1-1p.-11. '. . - , ., : %, *:7- . � - - . ....: -
�! . � .;- 11 ...... . ,; _7 . . .. . . ....,� _' ' ' .. _'. '_'�.__' � -,4
. , .*,-,-�.-� " r!.'-?'.'1..-'�­ I . , . , , . . . ", 11. .... I , -:.'-.'-:,. ", : . , . . '. , - ,
- - � .. . - .. .. ..
. , - . �,-_ :,.. * , I . . . - - . I -- .. � , , .".., .,. --- -, - - I - !
i ..... - ......, .. - ..4.-\. " �,- -, -1 J�­.- . ­�'­- .: :--� - .- 127 - '. -, .- ..'.
�'....%,.�.- . I ... Z - , . ,�. r . I ...... : . - � _.
. . .. . . . -:' .. .. - .. , .:. . .. . ...., 4, * -
.... . . . . 1, ­ ,11...­�, ., --. '.. /7'... - �. . ..... "'. - - _- ` , " -.1 . . ;:. . I.' ­.- - :. �, , .I*:. _,....C-... . ., - if ---�:, - ...
- - , , -- - . . ..
I... . I I .1 . ! ,�- ,; , : '. ,
, . '. i,
. . . . . t... , . . ... _ I .. � I . .
­ . -, - . , . - - - ... - - ­� -.' .". . , , ;­�:
, 21. . I ..
, , . . .... . .,. .. . . , . .:: '. '.*,-. . . . .­. . . � . 1,% .... ... .: .."I:. , .. , 1. " '�. �-. . . , - - -.' . , -
.i . , . . - I �� . . . .,. .. ,- ..". - . . ., '. .. - _ - . ; , .. ": .. - * '.' ­..
- ,,�..... � -"':71'.7 -' �', . .. 1� -I,!-. . :...
: .. I
. _ - , � .
I . � . . . , ..., ��'- -, - .�:­ - , �.� ., ., . ':,. .- .... .'-.,.'* .. - i-IFT1.
. , ;
, .
: . . " . I , , . .7 . .
. . . I , .,.'�- " . .
. .. "� ..
I .
__ .. -S.
- ,
J-.- �
. . . � . ; � ,.1, '- , - " � '.. - .
. .. ..v. '..;,"' ..,
� fir"''
. .....4. '' . . ..". �V ­ -
. ..
.1,, -.1. ." .. .. � .. ..... . d.
. 1. - , - 1,
, . I ,
�.*"?%,,-: .:',' :;- ­-A=�-. .I.. . '. �.! : t, .. , ": % ; .., . .� - , .....
_-^1 . V: -.\. - . "..,
� . . . . , f . I .. , . I - ... , .." .. o .. I �-.,-;,�-."- k iN-*.._.1.-":,.,.!j " .. �, �.-,%.. ..-..-. . ­:�..j,-.'.. . ...%f....�
. � - - -
I I I " `I!., '. , "..: *.-, i,-.P ­x ). '. 1. - '.7 - - .., .
. I.F ...� .... 4, . ... - . . - . . 1. .� ... . I . ­ - '.1.
-;0". - 1". , .. '..", � . -7 '. ,X: - _,-�,% L.'..­'-­�,\!;! "'.".. ." ..', . ?..,. . . - . . . . . , . ...:, , .,&.::^
, *1 - i.. .
, . , . - P. -.1 - - - . I - - - . . . . ... . . . . - .. . , . .
.1 - . ... . ­ � ��, .. -1. .
'.. '. _.'.1 -".:,,! ;
" " , _.: :, I !"��e. -'.;.*,;.-.7,':C� .,��;­ . . . .. . .-
.
.
. .
. . .
. __ ,,- i4. .
`'J
,
. . I. * , . . � .. .. . t / � .1
. : .. , . ., t . .. PAW. - , . I .. . , '!t,.; . -, � : . .... .... . , *� .. .
. . , . , I I ..
-
. � . to. , .. , VIN11, - . �- ' FK 552 (SL) Youngsville Historic District `.,,.- 'J;,� . - I', ; '� ,.,I _r "
! ­ . 1. . ... .: ..- trict �,.:_ ,;.----..--, . �*, .. '. .. '. -, ,,:. - ­ I
. I;. 1, - : "" : , � , , " 1. , . . .
. . : ,,'� , � .. .:. o:, . .�­ "
� .- " ..:.-­;;'� � .. , .a.L'...."', . ; -,,:,�- *,- . . . ` . .
Vaso4m,r. la, -.. �Icjt - - I . .. , ,_.�, .- .NIR1.1. . 1' -Y:l I F ­...�..
I . __ ­ , .:.- 1, - " %. i . -... 1, -.-!',- I -1,-4.. ? ... ... �).
Vit.
X I '. .- " -- -- - - 1-1: ... 0., I . 1'.q.. -,. .:.,.., I., . . . . .. . . .1 , ­
. . . -1 , .. , .: '.,�­ "", , ."J. . .\ .. . ... ,
.( - - -N ... ... . .... -1 .
. I / I - ;* . 11 ...7 - �. - -�- 1, - , .;: - . : k., A: 4., , . I ., \ . ,:
. - . ... .,.,. . ,
. il... .. .t. , I . ;--,t:--
I I � 11
- " . .
. .
,�i.. . . _.; '.."... . . -
. . . , .
,
�­
..I....'.-�.:..."!.�..
'I... *., ',
, . r '.-; . ­:'.. . � -.4�',_�':":'_, '
' "
.. 'n
,
1--. Mansion i'o n '
"
,
-
.
.
1_�
_-4 1
11._�_
� i
;
�
I
fl
.1
�.
I
. -7. . . . . :.:. . ... i'.. *. 'I.,"""...i�.,-.�',.,,--.:.'-..,-".-,""":�.
_.� . . ..."...., t, ---;. ­., I.- - ,;� - .1-i"...'V.1- ..."... .. -_ -
.. , , . ;:­., . .
N.J , ..�� /. ­ - ,
� : ­ -,\:t7l ... ... I -:- --,-.*- .1.: ..., �. ..,'[.,�_', %Ix, , - -
­ ",:I,::;. �', � 11.�,­ . ,_......�.. .(
. ' ' . - , - I .. .1 . . - % .. . . ". . ,. . , . . I � . . ., _._:,-.,-. ... - -.,6,�. : -%. �-_
.,:�X, . ... , -
. N 1-j. , ­ * '. " - , ... � - ", , %;� -',.' V' - �, . I . I - . ' I
. .1. �, ... ",;- . .. �. .,... .. ._�__- ' ' " - .
....... 1.1: . ..'jy.; --.'�--- -NATURAL HERITAGE'ARCHAELOGICAL'. I
� � .-.-:---.,.-f.�'�...,"!;_. .. .-.. __.� .k.__.�'1,-.*..
­.._�.,,_ .1. . ­:­
. t - 0 .
.". o � ;..-''. . ., -
I , '.. ... �. " _: " '' - ;..� ... y � I .
.L;.: I ­'. . L"-. _..\,�, .,.! - ,....'-, I , � ­... _­;. -
, ."� . . . - - - . :,�....-...-77 �
, .X ", ­ _:,:,'. -.:,.,. I.. ;.:11. - ..
.. [E�;��:>.,-!,.-�'V'...:Z� �. ... ., illx I I ) - -
'. -.-_'.0 " , � o;, /..*,
t­'.....'...�.i. L , . ': .. . ..
'I ­,.,... . I- ,,,� ­, -A ...'.. .
- I � - -,;'r ­" 'L*..,_ .�.!; -�. * V AND HISTORICAL'SITE MAF:--,--�­--::-�:-:�1":,
�.;71- . ,J' *
-- ` , "'. '
. .' - . . .. .. .
- '. I , ' I - !.I'.-.., I .,;...,.,, -,;., - '...
....I:-., -:, - _,I. *1. .1 , ' ,.,* , ��-­-1.�,­ .;,-,�'­�'.` �'-
. " V, . I , .
..r. .. .11
.. - . - �: I"ll......". :...,.�', .. .: ­., ...:.; -?i . . . . . -..'1.�.-..:.1
, . ,
.
.. !. : . . I . ". �:., ..1.
* .1 ­ - . . -4. I... ...
.
.. _'... 't. ''I �' 1. .. . - . �.,.�:�, " .: -;�-:i . ..­:,�!.-.-�.-,.---,I:; ... ... 1, ., : . �.'-_­,:_�_­_%
- ..
. . . I , . -�,­';�.--Ji FIG.:. .�,...-..L�. :�,..._, ... - , .
. .. 'j .. , �� ,._,
. _ .. .� ... - � :�' '
* , ... . _ ...:-:`,�._`%-,% ",
, , . , .. .; . , ,... ... 7 ,, -_
., , , - ,
. ".. - .
I : .._ . .,, .
"--;,t:.-:w. .1. . . I-
- .. - . : . .
..S 'It _ . _� %-.:-:, . _.
x . 10
: .. . . ., _. .
I , _c - . ,-. .. . �­ , .. ... j .. * ` , - ,
.., � . . . , . .. - .
;:. . - � .
.4'..,
-, : . ... -;.It.., ...-. ., . . .
­ !
PrVect No.
W4
59MIDYETTE
Scale:
I 1"=4000'
FARM
FRANKLIN CO. POND
SOURCE:
FRANKLINTON 110108 KenRite Rd.
aleoNC 27614
1 0
Project mgr.
1
Drawn By:
I
N T
mm
FRANKLIN COUNTY, NC
USGS QUADRANGLE 9198
DATED: 1999 919��
I
Date: 8/28/08

Phase I Archaeological Survey
Ray's Creek Interceptor Sewer
Franklin County; North Carolina
(SHPO Tracking Number ER 06-1327)
By
'William rterreIl and Kenneth W. Robinson
Wake .Forest University Archeology Laboratories
•
Submitter) to Robbs, Upchurch & Associates
Southern Pines, NC
March 5, 2007
r:
�J�A;;) I G�Q

•
Management Summary
The Wake Forest University Archeology Laboratories conducted a Phase I
archaeological survey and assessment of the proposed Ray's Creek Interceptor Sewer line
in Franklin County, North Carolina (SHPO Tracking Number CH 06-1327). The field
survey included survey of a 13,214 -foot long sewer corridor. The width of the corridor
was 40 feet. The survey resulted in the identification of five prehistoric Native American
archaeological sites (designated site numbers 31FK127 to 131). Four of the sites yielded
only prehistoric lithic artifacts, and the fifth site (31FK131) yielded lithic and ceramic
artifacts. None of the sites contain temporally diagnostic lithic artifacts. The few small
ceramic sherds from site 31FK131 have crushed quartz temper and fabric impressed
exteriors, indicating the site was occupied at least briefly during the Middle Woodland
period.
One of the sites, 31 FK128, is located outside the sewer corridor and will not be
affected by the sewer construction activities. Although the site does not appear to be a
significant resource, it was not intensively investigated or fully assessed for
archaeological significance. The sewer corridor will pass through or along the edge of
sites 31FK127 and 31FK129, but neither of these sites is considered a significant
archaeological site due to plowed, deflated azid eroded soils. No further investigation of
these two sites is recommended.
• Sites 31FK130 and 31FK131 will be impacted as the sewer corridor extends
through each site. However, shovel testing within the sewer corridor has shown that the
corridor area does not contain significant archaeological resources. As long as the sewer
construction is limited to the proposed corridor, no additional archaeological
investigation in the corridor is recommended. The parts of each of these sites that lie
outside the sewer corridor were not archaeologically investigated, but these areas will be
avoided and no archaeological investigation is recommended as long as the sewer
construction is limited to the designated corridor.
•
In general, as long as sewer construction activities are limited to the designated
corridor as it is currently defined, significant archaeological resources will not be affected
by the proposed sewer project. Therefore, no additional archaeological documentation is
recommended for this project, and it is recommended that the project receive the
necessary clearances so it can proceed.
Archaeological Assessment, Ray's Creek Interceptor Page 1
Franklin County; NC

L_J
interpreted as a modern plowzone. There was no evidence for any preserved sub-
plowzone cultural midden. That the soils in this field have been significantly reduced due
to many years of plowing and cultivation is attested to by the fact that this field was once
terraced in an effort to slow down the soil erosion, and then subsequently plowed and
cultivated to the point that these terraces have been nearly erased from the landscape.
The presence of fabric impressed, crushed quartz tempered ceramic sherds
indicates the site was occupied as late as the Middle Woodland period, but it may have
been used sporadically beginning in the Archaic period. The low density of artifacts
observed in the shovel tests within the sewer corridor would suggest that this was a short-
term campsite, although the ceramics could be indicative of a small Woodland period
village.
Shovel testing revealed a deep plowzone but no evidence of any intact subsurface
cultural strata within the sewer corridor. Evidence that the field was once terraced, and
that the terraces then became drastically reduced by erosion, indicates that this field has
experienced significant plowing and cultivation over many years. It is highly unlikely
that the part of this archaeological site contained within the proposed sewer corridor
contains preserved archaeological features or subsurface archaeological middens.
Therefore, it is highly unlikely that construction of the sewer within the proposed corridor
will disturb any important archaeological remains. Therefore, it is concluded that as long
as the planned sewer construction is restricted to the corridor as it is currently planned,
• significant archaeological resources will not be affected. However, the area outside the
sewer corridor has not been fully investigated and evaluated and if that portion of the site
is ever rmpactprl, - should receive addrtronal archaeological rnvestrgatron and assessment
to determine if significant archaeological resources are present.
Stunmary ,tnd Conclusions
A Phase I archaeological survey and assessment of the proposed Ray's Creel,
sewer corridor in Franklin County was conducted, resulting in the identification of five
prehistoric Native American archaeological sites within or near the project area (Figure
3). Each of these sites was assessed for sewer impacts and archaeological and historical
significance.
One site, 31FK128, was found to be located outside the sewer corridor and it will
not be"impacted. The remaining four sites will be partially impacted by the sewer
construction. Two of the affected sites, 31FK127 and 31FK129, are not significant
archaeological resources and no additional documentation or investigation is
recommended for these sites. The sewer corridor passes through the other two affected
sites, 31FK130 and 31FK131. However, archaeological testing found that the corridor
i passing through the sites lacks preserved archaeological deposits, and as long as the
l sewer construction is confined to the corridor as it is currently proposed, there should be
no loss of importance archaeological information. The areas of sites 31 FK130 and
I 31FK131 outside the corridor have not been fully evaluated, but as long as the sewer
•
Archaeological Assessment, Ray's Creek Interceptor Page 14
Franklin County, NC

. construction is confined to the corridor as it is currently planned, these areas will not be
affected.
In summary, it appears that as long as construction of the proposed Ray's Creek
sewer is confined to the corridor that is currently planned, there will be no adverse
impacts to significant archaeological resources. It is recommended that the project be
given clearance so that the sewer construction can proceed.
•
• Archaeological Assessment, Ray's Creek Interceptor Page 15
Franklin County, NC

ilk I
1. r
'J
3 K,
4—
)a
J
t
4
U,
it
-Ra
r(v k
e,
(a ve
4
J I N 129
f
Jur
/A
�j
OP
( vi
7K
L g: -
It
"v
tu
7—
FK1
5�
-1, tv.
Figure 3. USGS Franklijiton topographic quadrangle map showing approximate path of Ray's
0 Creek
• Interceptor Sewer (black line) and locations of archaeological sites (red).