20130743_US 19 (2)_20090828

LEMA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
August 28, 2009
MEMORANDUM
Dee Freeman
Secretary
To: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental
Affairs
From: Brian Wrenn, Division of Water Quality, Central Office Qj
Subject: Comments on the Finding of No Significant Impact related to proposed US 19E
Improvements from existing SR 1 186 to the existing multi-lane section west of Spruce
Pine in Yancey and Mitchell Counties, State Project No. 6.909001 T, TIP R-2519B, State
Clearinghouse Project No. 10-1 175
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated July 17, 2009. The NC Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as
presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and other surface waters. NCDWQ
offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
Project Specific Comments:
This project is being planned as part of the 4041NEPA Merger Process. As a participating team
member, NCDWQ will continue to work with the team.
2. Several streams are classified as C; Tr waters of the State. NCDWQ recommends that the most
protective sediment and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of turbidity
violations in trout waters. In addition, all disturbances within trout buffers shall be conducted in
accordance with NC Division of Land Resources and NC Wildlife Resources Commission
requirements.
3. Review-of-the project reveals the.presence of surface waters classified as B; Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW) of the State in the project study area. The water quality classification of B; ORW is
one of the highest classifications in the State. NCDWQ is extremely concerned with any impacts
that may occur to streams with this classification. It is preferred that these resources be avoided if
at all possible. If it is not possible to avoid these resources, the impacts shall be minimized to the
greatest extent possible. Given the potential for impacts to these resources during the project
implementation, NCDWQ requests that NCDOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations
entitled "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0124) throughout design
and construction of the project. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .1006 and 15A NCAC 2B .0224,
NCDOT will be required to obtain a State Stormwater Permit prior to construction except in North
Carolina's twenty coastal counties.
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Location: 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: http:/lh2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
NorthCarolina
Naturally
An Equal Opportunity 1 Afrmaive Action Employer
NCDWQ is pleased to see that the stream impacts have been reduced by 2,874 linear feet through
the use of retaining walls and bridges. This was achieved through cooperation and coordination of
NCDOT with the regulatory and resource agencies.
General Comments:
After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance
and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. In
accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(h)},
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1 acre to wetlands. In the event that
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions
and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as wetland
mitigation.
6. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (I 5A NCAC
2H.0506(h)), mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single
perennial stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall be designed to
replace appropriate lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be
available for use as stream mitigation.
7. Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should continue
to include an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding
mapping.
8. NCDOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, and rip rap to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to
be included in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts,
temporary or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification
Application.
9. Where streams must be crossed, NCDWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we
realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that
culverts shall be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, NCDOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek; to the
maximum extent practicable.
10. Whenever possible, NCDWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream or grubbing of the streambanks and do not require stream channel
realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges shall allow for human and
wildlife passage beneath the structure. Fish passage and navigation by canoeists and boaters shall
not be blocked. Bridge supports (bents) shall not be placed in the stream when possible.
11. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge directly into the stream..Stormwater shall be directed across
the bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes,
vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of
NCDWQ's Stormwater Best Management Practices.
12. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or streams.
13. Borrow/waste areas shall avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practical. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certification and could
precipitate compensatory mitigation.
14. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater shall not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters.
15. Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams may require an individual permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding
401 Water Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires
satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland
or stream uses are lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application
by the NCDOT and written concurrence from NCDWQ. Please be aware that.any approval will be
contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the
maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the
inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
16. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall
not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and
fish kills.
17. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
appropriate native woody species shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall
be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact allows the area to re-vegetate
naturally and minimizes soil disturbance.
18. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands shall be placed below
the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches,
and 20 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow
low flow passage of water and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in
dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the
above structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being
maintained if requested in writing by NCDWQ. If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock
or other limiting features encountered during construction, please contact the NCDWQ for guidance
on how to proceed and to determine whether or not a permit modification will be required. ;
19. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they shall be designed to mimic natural stream cross section
as closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation, floodplain benches, and/or
sills may be required where appropriate. Widening the stream channel shall be avoided. Stream
channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing
sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
20. If foundation test borings are necessary; it shall be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3687/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey
Activities.
21. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250. .
22. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP
measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities
manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to
prevent excavation in flowing water.
23. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of
Wetland Significance (NC-CREWS) maps and soil survey maps are useful tools, their inherent
inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit
approval.
24. Heavy equipment shall be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters
from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
25. Riprap shall not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures shall be properly designed,
sized and installed.
26. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.
NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Shall you have any questions
or require any additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn at 919-733-5715.
cc: David Baker, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office
Clarence Coleman, Federal Highway Administration
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency (electronic copy only)
Marla Chambers, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mike Parker, NCDWQ Asheville Regional Office
File Copy
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Project Review Form
Project Number: 10-0075 County: Mitchell and Yancey Date Received: 08/20/2009
Due Date: 9/23/2009
Project Description: Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact - US19E
Improvement Project from SR 1186 to existing multilane section west of
Spruce Pine, TIP No. R-2519B
is Project is being reviewe d as indicated below:
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? Air Soil & Water _ Marine Fisheries
_ Fayetteville ? Water _ Coastal Management _ Water Resources
_ Mooresville ? Aquifer Protection _ Wildlife _ ? Environmental Health
_ Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer ? Wildlife - DOT _ Solid Waste Mgmt
_ Washington ? Forest Resources _ Radiation Protection
_ Wilmington _ Land Resources _ Other
? Parks & Recreation
Winston-Salem
_ Water Quality
?' W a[a.Quality_DOT'S
Air Quality
Sign-Off/Region: (Date: IIn-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
- No objection to project as proposed. - No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review _ Other (specify or attach comments)
If you have any questions, please contact
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at [e-mail]
2
9
X111 to _
N4

US 19E Improvements
From SR 1186 in Micaville to the existing multilane section west of
Yancey and Mitchell Counties
WBS Element 35609.1.1
State Project Number 6.909001T
TIP Project Number R-2519B
\gq& C
Sprucvli?e s?
,9
tPy? ?E2
6D?''s
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)
Cooperating Agency
APPROVED:
Tennessee Valley Authority
jCregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT

US 19E Improvements
From SR 1186 in Micaville to the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine
Yancey and Mitchell Counties
WBS Element 35609.1.1
State Project Number 6.909001T
TIP Project Number R-2519B
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
July 2005
Documentation Prepared in the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch by:
? L-
Bryan D. Kluchar, PE
Project Development Engineer

`??„n u,"r'rp
?. l7 ri
{{? q?
4/oSSEAL
026877
1qN D. K1
??''rnnun,?"
Linwood Stone, CPM
Project Engineer
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
US 19E Improvements
From SR 1186 in Micaville to the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine
Yancey and Mitchell Counties
WBS Element 35609. 1.1
State Project Number 6.909001T
TIP Project Number R-2519B
Proiect Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
• Additional surveys are needed for the federally protected Virginia spirea. The affect of the
proposed action on these species will be identified in the project's final environmental document.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, Right of Way Branch and
Division 13
• The Human Environment Unit will provide Right of Way with notification of the prepared
archaeological Date Recovery Plans so they may acquire parcels that contain eligible sites as soon
as possible after Right of Way authorization. Acquisition of these parcels will occur at least 12
months prior to the let date. No construction activities will be allowed within either site's limits
until the data recovery investigations are completed.
Roadway Design Unit
• The improvements to US 19E will have an effect on the National Register eligible E.W. and Dollie
Huskins House (Station 220). The proposed design will include a seeded slope that is feasible for
mowing by the owner.
• The Roadway Design Unit will coordinate with the Human Environment Unit (HEU)-Archaeology
to accurately depict archaeological sites on the design plans. If design modifications are required,
the Roadway Design Unit will contact the HEU-Archaeology.
Roadway Design Unit, Hydraulic Design Unit, and Roadside Environmental Unit
• The proposed project is located within a critical habitat area for the federally protected
Appalachian elktoe mussel. Therefore, NCDOT will implement erosion and sedimentation control
measures, as specified by NCDOT's "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC
0413.0124). Detailed plans for the placement of appropriate hydraulic drainage structures will be
determined during the final design of the project.
Division 13
• In-stream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide trout stream buffer zone should be
prohibited during the trout spawning season of October 15-April 15 to protect the egg and fry
stages of trout from off-site sedimentation during construction.
Hydraulic Design Unit
• A TVA Section 26a permit is required for all proposed obstructions involving streams or
floodplains in the Tennessee River drainage basin. The TVA is a cooperating agency for this
project.
• Coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and local authorities in the final
design stage to ensure compliance with applicable floodplain ordinances.
State Environmental Assessment page 1 of 1
July 2005
State Environmental Assessment
Prepared by the
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
of the North Carolina Department of Transportation
SUMMARY
1. Type of Action
This is a North Carolina State Administrative Action, State Environmental Assessment
(SEA).
2. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to improve
US 19E in Yancey and Mitchell Counties. The project begins at SR 1186 west of Micaville
and ends at the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine as shown by Figure 1.
Figure 2 shows an aerial view of the project area. The length of the US 19E improvement
project is approximately 7.5 miles. The purpose of the project is to add capacity,'correct
roadway deficiencies, and provide system linkage along US 19E.
Improvements to US 19E are state funded and identified as Project Number R-2519B in
the NCDOT's latest approved Transportation Improvement Program. Proposed
improvements consist of widening two-lane US 19E to a multilane facility. Right of way
acquisition is scheduled to begin in the 2006-2012 Draft TIP during fiscal year 2008.
Construction is scheduled for fiscal year 2010.
3. Alternatives Considered
Two alternatives were considered for the proposed project. The alternatives include the
No-Build Alternative and Build Alternative.
The No-Build Alternative does not increase capacity or correct existing roadway
deficiencies along US 19E. Since the No-Build Alternative does not address the purpose and
need, it is not recommended.
The Build Alternative contains one roadway improvement option along US 19E,
identified as the "Best Fit" Alternate. This improvement option generally follows the
existing alignment of US 19E to minimize impacts to the human and natural environments.
The location of this alignment was approved by the Merger Team during the concurrence
process explained in Section VI.
There are a variety of natural and human environment constraints in the Estatoe
Community. Three preliminary alignment options were developed at the request of the
Merger Team to determine the "Best Fit" alignment through this area. The three preliminary
alignment options are approximately 4000 feet in length and identified as Alternate 1,
Alternate 2, and Alternate 3. Alternate 1 widens US 19E to the north, Alternate 2 widens
US 19E to the south, and Alternate 3 widens symmetrically about the existing US 19E
centerline. The Merger Team selected Alternate 2, widen to the south, as the "Best Fit"
alignment through the Estatoe Community. Alternate 2 had fewer residential relocations,
minority relocations, stream impacts, and archaeological site impacts than Alternates 1 or 3.
In addition, Alternate 2 has the lowest total cost of the three design options. Consequently,
Alternates 1 and 3 were eliminated from further consideration.
The proposed typical section for the proposed action includes a four-lane median divided
facility with 10-foot shoulders. Shoulders include four feet of pavement to accommodate
bicycles. Figure 5 shows the typical section for the proposed action.
4. NCDOT Recommended Alternative
The NCDOT recommends the Best Fit Alternate for the improvements proposed in this
State Environmental Assessment. The total estimated cost of the proposed action is
$63,040,400 consisting of $51,200,000 for construction and $11,840,400 for right of way
acquisition.
5. Coordination
The following federal, state, and local agencies were consulted during the preparation of
this Environmental Assessment:
US Army Corps of Engineers - Asheville
US Fish and Wildlife Service - Asheville
US Environmental Protection Agency - Raleigh and Atlanta
Tennessee Valley Authority
NC Department of Administration, NC State Clearinghouse
NC Department of Public Instruction
NC Department of Cultural Resources - SHPO
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources .
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Division of Forest Resources
Division of Land Resources
Division of Parks and Recreation
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
High Country Regional Planning Organization
Yancey County
Mitchell County
Town of Spruce Pine
6. Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
Table 1 contains a summary of the quantifiable impacts associated with the Best Fit
Alternate. The impacts associated with the proposed project are described in detail in
Section V of this document.
Table 1
Summary of Impacts
Category Units Best Fit Alternate
Length miles 7.5
Residential Relocations total 75
minority 3
Business Relocations total 26
minority 0
Farm Relocations each 0
Total Relocations total 101
Non-Profit Relocations total 5
Potential Hazardous Mat. Sites each 20
Wetlands acres 0.869
Stream Impacts linear feet 9365.90
Natural Communities acres 162.47
Noise impacted receptors
residence and business) 100
Protected Species each Appalachian elktoe mussel
Historic Architecture properties 1
o Adverse Effect
Archaeology sites 2
Air Quality 1-Hour carbon monoxide
(parts per million) 2.0
Construction Cost Dollars $51,200,000
Right of Way Cost Dollars $11,840,400
Total Cost Dollars $63,040,400
National Ambient 1-hour Air Quality Standards: 35 ppm
7. Actions Required By Other Agencies
Constructing the proposed action will result in impacts to jurisdictional surface waters.
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), the US Army
Corps of Engineers will determine which type of permit is needed for the project. NCDOT
will implement erosion and sedimentation control measures, as specified by NCDOT's
"Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B.0124).
iii
The proposed project will also require a Section 401 Water Quality General Certification
from the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state issue or deny water
certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to
Waters of the United States. Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be
temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulation.
The proposed project is located in the Tennessee River Watershed. A permit pursuant to
Section 26a of the TVA Act, is required for all obstructions involving streams or floodplains
in the Tennessee River drainage basin.
8. Other Major Actions
The NCDOT TIP Project Numbers R-2518 and R-2519A are located along US 19 and
US 19E immediately west of the proposed R-2519B project. Construction for the R-2518
and R-2519A projects is scheduled to begin in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Project Number
R-2520 proposes to widen US 19E on the east side of Spruce Pine; construction is post year.
9. Additional Information
Additional information concerning the assessment can be obtained by contacting:
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone [phone]
rv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. i
1. PURPOSE AND NEED ......................................................................................................1
A. General Description of Project ........................ :..................... ..................................... 1
B. Purpose and Need ................................................................... ..................................... 1
C. Traffic Capacity ........................ :............................................. ..................................... 1
1. Existing Conditions ...................................................... .................................:...1
2. No-Build Conditions - Year 2025 ............................... .................. :.................. 2
3. Build Conditions - Year 2025 ................................'....... .................................... 2
D. Roadway Deficiencies ............................................................. .................................... 2
E. System Linkage ........................................................................ .................................... 2
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................3
A. Length of Roadway Section Studied .......... ................................................................. 3
B. Existing Typical Section ........................... .............................................................. 3
C. Speed Limits ............................................. .............................................................. 3
D. Sidewalks ............................................... ..............................................................3
E. Right of Way ............................................. .............................................................. 3
F. Railroad Crossings .................................... .............................................................. 3
G. Intersecting Roads ..................................... .............................................................. 3
H. Structures ............................................... ..............................................................3
I. Utilities ................................................. .................................................................4
J. Bicycle Routes ............................................ .................................................................4
K. School Bus Data ......................................... .......................:......................................... 4
L. Navigable Waters ........................................ ................................................................. 4
M. Greenways ................................................. .................................................................4
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED .................. .................................................................4
A. No-Build ....................................... .................................................................4
B. Build ....................................... .................................................................4
IV PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ......................................................................................5
A. Length of the Proposed Project ................................................................................... 5
B. Typical Section Description ........................................................................................ 5
C. Right of Way ............................................................... ........ 5
.................................
D. Access Control ........................................................................................................ 5
E. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control ............................................................... 5
F. Speed Limit and Design Speed ................................................................................... 5
G. Maintenance of Traffic ................................................................................................ 5
H. Noise Barriers ...........................................................................:............................ 6
1. Sidewalks ........................................................................................................6
J. Bicycle Accommodations ............................................................................................ 6
Page
K. Structures.... .............................................................. ..........................................6
L. Greenways .......................................................... ..........................................6
M. Right of Way Cost ............................................................. .......................................... 6
N. Construction Cost .............................................................. .......................................... 6
0. NCDOT Recommended Alternate .................................... .......................................... 7
V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .......................................................................................7
A. Community Description ............................................................... ............................... 7
B. Farmland ......................................................................... ...............................7
C. Social and Economic Effects ........................................................ ............................... 7
1. Community Characteristics ................................................ ............................... 7
a. Population Characteristics ........................................ ............................... 7
b. Business and Employment Characteristics .............. ............................... 10
C. Plans and Regulations ............................................... ............................... 11
d. Community Resources..: .......................................... ............................... 11
2. Community Impact Analysis ............................................. ............................... 11
a. Visual and Aesthetic Impacts ................................... ............................... 11
b. Land Use Patterns and Compatibility ....................... ............................... 1 i
C. Economic Conditions ............................................... ............................... 12
d. Transportation Access .............................................. ............................... 12
C. Transportation Network ........................................... ............................... 13
f. Community Safety .................................................... ............................... 14
3. Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment .. ............................... 14
4. Evaluation of Indirect and Cumulative Analysis ............... ............................... 16
a. Evaluation of Indirect Effects ..................................... ............................... 16
b. Evaluation of Cumulative Effects ............................... ............................... 17
c. Indirect and Cumulative Effects Conclusions .:.......... ............................... 17
5. Relocation Impacts ............................................................. ............................... 17
6. Title VI and Environmental Justice .................................... ............................... 17
7. Cultural Resources .............................................................. ............................... 18
a. Historic Architectural Resources ................................. ............................... 18
b. Archaeological Resources ............................................ ............................... 19
D. Wild and Scenic Rivers and Watersheds ..................................... ............................... 19
E. Environmental Effects .................................................................. ............................... 20
1. Physical Resources ............................................................. ............................... 21
a. Soils .............................................................................. ............................... 21
b. Water Resources ........................................................... ............................... 21
2. Biotic Resources ................................................................. ............................... 25
a. Terrestrial Communities ............................................. ............................... 25
b. Aquatic Communities ................................................. ............................... 26
3. Jurisdictional Topics ........................................................... ................................ 26
a. Waters of the United States .......................................... ............................... 26
b. Permits .......................................................................... ............................... 27

Page
c. Mitigation .............................................................................................. .......29
d. Federally Protected Species .................................................................. ....... 30
e. Federal Species of Concern ....................................................... :.......... ....... 35
4. Hazardous Materials ................................................................................... ....... 38
a. Known or Potential UST Sites ............................................................. ....... 38
b. Potentially Contaminated Sites ............................................................ ....... 40
5. Noise ............................................................................................. ......42
a. Characteristics of Noise ..................................................................... ......42
b. Noise Abatement Criteria .................................................................. ...... 42
C. Ambient Noise Levels ....................................................................... ...... 43
d. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels .................................. ...... 43
e. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours ....................................... ...... 44
f Traffic Noise Abatement Measures ................................................... ...... 44
1) Highway Alignment Selection ................................................ ...... 45
2) Traffic System Management Measures ................................... ...... 45
3) Noise Barriers .......................................................................... ...... 45
4) Other Mitigation Measures Considered .................................. ...... 46
g. No-Build Alternative ......................................................................... ......46
h. Construction Noise ............................................................................ ......46
i. Noise Analysis Summary .................................................................. ...... 47
6. Air Quality Analysis .................................................................................... ...... 47
VI. COMME NTS AND COORDINATION ..................................................................... ......49
A. Comments Received .............................................................................................. ...... 49
B. Citizens Informational Workshop ......................................................................... ......49
C. Agency Coordination ............................................................................................. ...... 50
D. Pub lic Hearing ....................................................................................................... ...... 50
TABLES
Table 1 Summary of Impacts .................................................................................... ...... iii
Table 2 Existing Deficient Horizontal and Vertical Curves .................................... ......2
Table 3 Cost Summary ............................................................................................. ...... 6
Table 4 Population Growth, 1990-2000 ................................................................... ...... 8
Table 5 Population by Race, 2000 ............................................................................ ...... 9
Table 6 Population by,Age and Median Age ........................................................... ...... 9
Table 7 Median Household Income, 1989-1999 ...................................................... ...... 10
Table 8 Percentage Below Poverty Level, 1989-1999 ............................................. ...... 10
Table 9 Potential for Land Use Change, 2000-2020 ................................................ ...... 15
Table 10 Relocation Impact Summary ....................................................................... ...... 17
Table 11 Soil Mapping Units ...................................................................................... ...... 22
Table 12 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters ................................................... ..... 23
Table 13 NCDWQ Stream Identification and Classification for Major Drainages.... ..... 24
Table 14 Plant Community Impacts ............................................................................ ..... 25
Table 15 Jurisdictional Wetland Impacts .................................................................... .....27
Page
Table 16 Jurisdictional Stream Impacts ............................................................................ 28
Table 17 Federally Protected Species Listed for Yancey and Mitchell Counties............ 31
Table 18 Federal Species of Concem (FSC) Listed for Yancey and Mitchell Counties. 35
FIGURES
Figure la
Figure 1b
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Appendix 3
Appendix 4
Appendix 4
Project Location
Project Vicinity
Project Aerial .
Level of Service
Roadway Deficiencies
Typical Section
Lane Configurations
Wetlands and Streams
Potentially Contaminated Sites
NCDOT Relocation Reports and Relocation Assistance Program
Noise Tables
Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
Wetland and Stream Locations
2025 Traffic Volumes

US 19E Improvements
From SR 1186 in Micaville to the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine
Yancey and Mitchell Counties
WBS Element 35609. 1.1
State Project Number 6.909001T
TIP Project Number R-2519B
1. PURPOSE AND NEED
A. General Description of Project
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to improve
US 19E in Yancey and Mitchell Counties. The project begins at SR 1186 on the west side of
Micaville in Yancey County and ends at the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine in
Mitchell County. The length of the US 19E improvement project is approximately 7.5 miles.
US 19E is identified as a Rural Principal Arterial in the Functional Classification System.
The route is also within North Carolina Strategic Highway Corridor 10 between Asheville
and Boone (I-26, US 191US 19E, NC 105). Figures 1 a and b show the location of the project.
Figure 2 shows an aerial view of the project area.
Improvements to US 19E are state funded. Project Number R-2519B is included in
NCDOT's latest approved Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Right of way
acquisition is scheduled in the 2006-2012 Draft TIP for state fiscal year 2008 and
construction is scheduled to begin in state fiscal year 2010.
B. Purpose and Need
The purpose of this project is to add traffic capacity, improve existing roadway
deficiencies, and provide system linkage along US 19E. The need is based on future capacity
limitations and upgrading US 19E as part of Strategic Highway Corridor 10 in northwest
North Carolina.
C. Traffic Capacity
The term "capacity" is used to express the maximum hourly rate at which vehicles can
reasonably be expected to traverse a point during a given time period under prevailing
roadway and traffic conditions. When traffic volumes approach or exceed the capacity of the
roadway, operating levels of service are diminished and congestion results. Simply defined,
level of service is a qualitative measure that describes operational conditions of a traffic
stream along a roadway or at an intersection of two roadways. Six levels of service are
defined from A to F, with Level of Service A representing the best and Level of Service F the
worst operational conditions.
1. Existing Conditions
Existing average daily traffic volumes along US 19E, within the project limits,
are 11,000 vehicles per day (vpd) near Micaville and 12,000 vpd near Spruce Pine. These
traffic volumes result in a Level of Service D near Micaville and Level of Service E near
Spruce Pine as shown in Figure 3. There are no signalized intersections within the project
limits.
2. No-Build Conditions - Year 2025
No-Build conditions in the year 2025 assume that US 19E improvements will not
be constructed. By the year 2025, average daily traffic volumes are expected to increase to
18,600 vpd near Micaville and 20,000 vpd near Spruce Pine, resulting in Level of Service E
conditions. Year 2025 traffic volumes are located in Appendix 5.
3. Build Conditions - Year 2025
The Build condition widens the existing two-lane US 19E to a four-lane divided
facility. Widening US 19E increases capacity to Level of Service B conditions in the
year 2025.
D. Roadway Deficiencies
The existing design along US 19E within the project area has several design
deficiencies according to current NCDOT design practices. The following table separates
these deficiencies into either horizontal (curves to the left or right) or vertical (curves uphill
or downhill) areas of the roadway and the corresponding design speed of the existing curve.
The approximate location of the deficient curves are shown in Figure 4. The proposed
project will improve the design speed of these curves to 60 miles per hour.
Table 2
Existing Deficient Horizontal and Vertical Curves
Horizontal Curves Vertical Curves
Station Horizontal
Design Seed Station Vertical
Design Speed
50+40 52 mp h 45+50 52 mp h
61+70 52 mp h 72+00 54 mp h
384+70 47 mp h 87+00 41 mp h
397+00 45 m h 97+00 52 mp h
412+20 50 mp h 103+00 52 mp h
252+00 46 mp h
292+00 54 mp h
E. System Linkage
The US 19E improvement project is located in northwest North Carolina where
mountains rise to heights over 6000 feet (1800 meters). In addition to providing abundant
recreational opportunities, these mountains form transportation barriers with few roadway
options for travelers in the area. Two and three-lane US 191US 19E is the most important
transportation facility between Madison, Yancey, Mitchell, and Avery Counties in
northwestern North Carolina. In addition, US 191US 19E is part of Strategic Highway
Corridor 10 providing regional mobility between Asheville and recreational opportunities in
the Boone area (I-26, US 19/US 19E, NC 105).
US 19/US 19E directly connects travelers in Madison, Yancey, Mitchell, and Avery
Counties with newly constructed I-26 (TIP Project Number A-10). This new section of
interstate recently opened between the US 19 interchange and the Tennessee State line.
Interstate 26 will attract local, regional, and nationwide travelers, thereby enhancing the
importance of US 191US 19E in northwest North Carolina.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The total length of the project is approximately 7.5 miles.
B. Existing Typical Section
US 19E is currently a two-lane rural highway with travel lane widths of 12 feet and
variable width grass shoulders.
C. Speed Limits
The speed limit through the project area is 55 miles per hour.
D. Sidewalks
No sidewalks are currently in place along US 19E.
E. Right-of Way
The existing right of way width along US 19E is approximately 150 feet.
F. Railroad Crossings
There are no active railroad crossings along US 19E. The abandoned Black Mountain
Railroad intersects at-grade with US 19E in Micaville near NC 80. Over the years of railway
inactivity, businesses were established along US 19E within the railroad corridor. There are
no plans to resume railway service.
G. Intersecting Roads
All roadways in the project area have at-grade intersections with US 19E except for the
grade separation at SR 1308 (Double Island Road) in Micaville. All intersections are stop
sign controlled; there are no traffic signals in the project area.
H. Structures
There are two existing bridges within the project area. Bridge 35 is located inYancey
County at the grade separation of US 19E and SR 1308 (Double Island Road) in Micaville.
The bridge was constructed in 1962 and is in fair condition.
Bridge 43 is located in Yancey County on US 19E over the South Toe River. The
bridge was constructed in 1956 and has an estimated remaining life of 10 years.
I. Utilities
All major utilities are located within the project area, with the exception of water and
sewer service.
J. Bicycle Routes
There are no bicycle routes in the project area.
K. School Bus Data
US 19E is a primary school bus route in Yancey and Mitchell Counties. School buses
use this route to access secondary roads and schools in the project area.
L. Navigable Waters
There are no navigable waters in the project area.
M. Greenways
There are no greenways in the project area.
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Two broad range alternatives were considered for the proposed project. The alternatives
include the No-Build Alternative, and Build Alternative.
A No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative does not increase capacity or correct existing roadway
deficiencies along US 19E. Since the No-Build Alternative does not address the purpose and
need, it is not recommended.
B. Build Alternative
The Build Alternative contains one roadway improvement option along US 19E,
identified as the Best Fit Alternate. This improvement option generally follows the existing
alignment of US 19E to minimize impacts to the human and natural environments. The
location of this alignment was approved by the Merger Team during the concurrence process
explained in Section VI.
There are a variety of natural and human environment constraints in the Estatoe
Community. Three preliminary alignment options were developed at the request of the
merger team to determine the "Best Fit" alignment through this area. The three preliminary
alignment options spanned approximately 4000 feet in length and labeled as Alternate 1,
Alternate 2, and Alternate 3. Alternate 1 shifts the US 19E centerline slightly to the north,
Alternate 2 shifts the US 19E centerline slightly to the south, and Alternate 3 widens
symmetrically about the existing US 19E centerline. The merger team selected Alternate 2,
widen to the south, as the Best Fit alignment through the Estatoe Community: Alternate 2
had fewer residential relocations, minority relocations, stream impacts, and archaeological
site impacts than Alternates 1 or 3. In addition, Alternate 2 has the lowest total cost of the
three design options.
I
4
IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A. Length of the Proposed Project
The total length of the proposed action is approximately 7.5 miles.
B. Typical Section Description
The proposed typical section is a four-lane median divided facility with 10-foot
shoulders. The median is raised with a width of 20 feet. A four-foot paved shoulder width
will accommodate bicycle travel throughout the project. Figure 5 shows the typical section
for the proposed action.
C. Right of Way
The proposed right of way width vanes throughout the length of the project and is
dependent on the terrain and other constraints. A minimum right of way width of 150 feet is
needed for the four-lane median divided typical section. The steep terrain in the project area
will extend the cut and fill areas beyond the 150-foot minimum right of way requirement.
D. Access Control
Partial control of access will be used along the US 19E improvement project. Partial
control of access provides one access point for each property owner along US 19E. Median
openings will be spaced according to current design standards.
E. . Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
At-grade intersections will be used throughout the proposed project, except for the
grade separation (Bridge 35) at US 19E and SR 1308 (Double Island Road) in Micaville. All
intersections will remain unsignalized, except for the intersection of US 19E and SR 1186 in
Micaville; this intersection is recommended for signalization. Figure 6 shows the lane
configurations of major intersections along US 19E.
F. Speed Limit and Design Speed
The current speed limit of 55 miles per hour will likely be maintained with the
proposed improvements along US 19E. The design speed is typically 5 miles per hour higher
than the posted speed limit.
G. Maintenance of Traffic
All traffic control devices used on this project will conform to the most current Manual
of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
H. Noise Barriers
No noise barriers are proposed as part.of this project.
1. Sidewalks
No sidewalks are proposed along the US 19E improvement project.
J. Bicycle Accommodations
The typical section selected for the project includes 4-foot paved shoulders. The paved
shoulder is located throughout the project and will accommodate bicycles.
K. Structures
There are two existing bridges along US 19E within the project area. Bridge 35 is
located inYancey County at the grade separation of US 19E and SR 1308 (Double Island
Road) in Micaville. The bridge was constructed in 1962 and is in fair condition. As
proposed, the bridge will be removed and replaced with a new structure.
Bridge 43 is located in Yancey County on US 19E over the South Toe River. The
bridge was constructed in 1956 and has an estimated remaining life of 10 years. As
proposed, the bridge will be removed and replaced with two separated two-lane bridges.
L. Greenways
There are no existing or planned greenways located in the project area.
M. Right of Way Cost
Right of way costs are based on the preliminary design of the three alternates studied in
detail. Right of way costs include: residential and business relocation, land and damage,
utilities, and acquisitions. The estimated right of way cost for the proposed action is
$11,840,400.
N. Construction Cost
Estimated construction costs are based on preliminary design of the proposed action.
The construction cost estimate includes items such as clearing and grubbing, earthwork,
drainage, structures, paving, and guardrail. The estimated construction cost of the proposed
action is $51,200,000. Table 3 shows the right of way cost, construction cost, and total cost
of the Best Fit Alternate.
Table 3
Cost Summary
Cost Item Best Fit Alternate
Construction Cost $51,200,000
Right of Way Cost $11,840,400
Total Cost $63,040,400
0. NCDOT Recommended Alternate
The Best Fit Alternate is the construction option recommended by NCDOT. The Best
Fit Alternate provides the best balance of alignment improvements while minimizing impacts
to the human and natural environment.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Community Description
The proposed action is located in Yancey and Mitchell Counties. Both Yancey and
Mitchell Counties are served by the High Country Council of Governments (COG) and
Regional Planning Organization (RPO) located in Boone, approximately 40 miles to the east
of Spruce Pine.
Small-scale commercial uses (convenience stores, gift shops, etc.) are concentrated
along the US 19E corridor, especially in towns or at major intersections, such as NC 80 in the
Micaville community and NC 226 in Spruce Pine. Some scattered industrial uses can be
found along the corridor, primarily between Burnsville and Spruce Pine. Low-density,
single-family housing is scattered throughout the area, but much of the land is unsuitable for
development due to the steep topography, stream crossings, and wetlands.
B. Farmland
North Carolina Executive Order Number 96, Preservation of Prime Agricultural and
Forest Lands, requires all state agencies to consider the impact of land acquisition and
construction projects on prime farmland soils, as designated by the US Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). These soils are determined by the SCS based on criteria such
as crop yield and level of input of economic resources.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) is designed to minimize the degree to
which federally sponsored programs contribute to the "unnecessary and irreversible
conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses," and to ensure that these programs are
consistent with state, local, and private programs to protect farmland. No published soil
surveys are available for Yancey and Mitchell Counties. Only Christmas tree farms exist
along US 19E; however, it does not appear that these tree farms or transportation to or from
these tree farms would be directly impacted by the proposed action.
C. Social and Economic Effects
1. Community Characteristics
a. Population Characteristics
Over the past decade, this region has experienced slower growth than
North Carolina. This could possibly be attributed to job losses in the manufacturing industry,
increased unemployment rates, and general economic recession. Table 4 indicates that the
Demographic Area had a growth rate of 13.1% from 1990 to 2000, which was higher than in
Spruce Pine (1.0%) and Mitchell County (8.7%) but less than Yancey County (15.3%) and
the State (21.4%).
Table 4
Population Growth, 1990-2000
Population Growth
Area 1990 2000 Difference % Change
Demographic Area 7,537 8,523 986 13.1%
Spruce Pine 2,010 2,030 20 1.0%
Mitchell County 14,433 15,687 1,254 8.7%
Yancey County 15,419 17,774 2,355 15.3%
North Carolina 6,628,637 8,049,313 1,420,676 21.4%
Source: US Census Bureau
The Demographic Area had the highest percentage of Whites (97.8%)
when compared to the Town of Spruce Pine (95.4%), Mitchell County (97.0% Yancey
County (95.8%), and North Carolina (70.2%). Likewise, the corresponding percentages of
minorities are very low as compared to the State as shown in Table 5. African Americans
make up less than 1% of the populations of the Demographic Area, Spruce Pine, Mitchell
County and Yancey County. The total percentage of Hispanics is relatively low in the
Demographic Area; however, the percentage in Spruce Pine is only slightly less than that of
North Carolina. Hispanic populations in Mitchell and Yancey Counties are higher than in the
Demographic Area, but less than in Spruce Pine and North Carolina.
In terms of age distribution, the Demographic Area had a similar
percentage of persons 65 years or older (18.7%) when compared to Spruce Pine (19.7%),
Mitchell County (18.6%), and Yancey County (18.2%). All four of these population areas
have a much higher percentage of persons 65 years or older when compared to North
Carolina (12.0%), as shown in Table 6. This could be due in part to the influx of retirees,
and the exodus of younger people in search of jobs elsewhere
In 1999, the Demographic Area had a higher median household income
($32,087) than that of Mitchell and Yancey Counties ($30,508 and $29,674, respectively),
and the Town of Spruce Pine ($24,766). This may be attributed to the construction of
relatively upscale retirement and vacation homes in the area. All geographic areas studied
had a lower median household income than the State ($39,184); however, the growth rates
between 1989 and 1999 for all areas except Spruce Pine were comparable to the State's rate,
as shown in Table 7.
In 1999, the Demographic Area had the lowest percentage of persons living
below the poverty level (13.4%) when compared to Spruce Pine (17.0%), Mitchell County
(13.8%), and Yancey County (15.8%). All four population areas studied had higher poverty
levels than North Carolina (12.3%) as shown in Table 8.
Table 5
Population by Race, 2000
Demographic Spruce Pine Mitchell
Yancey County
. North Carolina
Area County
Race Pop. % Pop. % Pop. oo Pop. % P. %
P P P P
. P
.
White 8,332 97.8% 1,936 95.4% 15,210 97.0% 17,033 95.8% 5,647,155 70.2%
White Hispanic 68 0.8% 20 1.0% 143 0.9% 384 2.2% 157,501 2.0%
Black or African
American 16 0.2% 8 0.4% 33 0.2% 101 0.6% 1,723,301 21.4%
Black Hispanic 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 14,244 0.2%
American Indian/ 13 0.2% 1 0.0% 23 0.1% 38 0.2% 95
333 1
2%
Alaska Native , .
American Indian /
Alaska Native 17 0.2% 10 0.5% 47 0.3% 22 0.1% 4,218 0.1%
Hispanic
Asian 6 0.1% 1 0.0% 32 0.2% 22 0.1% 112,416 1.4%
Asian Hispanic 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 1,273 0.0%
Native Hawaiian/

Pacific Islander 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3,165 0.0%
Native Hawaiian /
Pacific Islander 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 818 0.0%
Hispanic
Other Race 5 0.1% 0 0.0% 3 0.0% 7 0.0% 9,015 0.1%
Other Race

Hispanic 20 0.2% 46 2.3% 101 0.6% 66 0.4% 177,614 2.2%
Two or More Races 38 0.4% 7 0.3% 75 0.5% 95 0.5% 79,965 1.0%
Two or More Races
Hispani c 8 0.1% 1 0.0% 19 0.1% 5 0.0% 23,295 0.3%
Total 8,523 100% 2,030 100% 15,687 100% 17,774 100% 8,049.313 100%
Total Hispanic 113 1.3% 77 3.8% 311 2.0% 478 2.7% 378,963 4.7%
Source: US Census Bureau
Table 6
Population by Age and Median Age, 2000
Demographic
Area Spruce Pine County Mitchell
Yancey County
North Carolina
Age Pop. Pop Pop. Pap Pop. PooO
P• Pop. Pop.
P• Pop. PooO
p•
19 years and under 2,010 23.6% 523 25.8% 3,649 23.3% 4,150 23.3% 2,193,360 27.2%
20-64 years 4,920 57.7% 1,108 54.6% 9,121 58.1% 10,387 58.4% 4,886,905 60.7%
65 or more years 1,593 18.7% 399 19.7% 2,917 18.6% 3,237 18.2% 969,048 12.0%
Total 8,523 100% 2,030 100% 15,687 100% 17,774 100% 8,049,313. 100%
Median Age 42.5 39.8 42.0 41.9 35.3
Source: US Census Bureau
Table 7
Median Household Income, 1989-1999
Median Household Income Growth 1989.1999
Area 1989 1999 $ Difference % Change
Demographic Area $21,498 $32,087 $10,589 49.3%
S mcePine $18,915 .$24,766 $5,851 30.9%
Mitchell County $20,554 $30,508 $9,954 48.4%
Yance Coun $19,401 $29,674 $10,273 53.0%
North Carolina $26,647 $39,184 $12,537 47.0%
Source: US Census Bureau
Table 8
Percentage Below Poverty Level, 1989-1999
Percent Below Poverty Growth, 1989-1999
Area
1989
1999
Difference
% Change
Demographic Area 14.0% 13.4% -0.6% -4.3%
Spmce Pine 16.1% 17.0% 0.9% 5.8%
Mitchell County 16.0% 13.8% -2.1% -13.3%
Yancey County 18.7% 15.8% -2.9% -15.5%
North Carolina 13.0% 12.3% -0.7% -5.4%
Source: US Census Bureau
b. Business and Employment Characteristics
The major employment centers for the Demographic Area are as far away
as Asheville and Boone, with smaller business centers at Burnsville and Spruce Pine. Local
officials identified the 19E corridor as a targeted area for potential growth. Several
businesses are located at the intersection of US 19E and NC 80S, including a Taylor Togs
plant (Levi Jeans). There is also a cluster of businesses in the area around the intersection of
US 19 E and SR 1002 (Crabtree Creek Road). Commercial and institutional uses
(convenience stores, small retail uses, schools, light industry, etc.) currently exist in several
places along the US 19E corridor, particularly around the community of Micaville and the
Town of Spruce Pine.
Both Yancey and Mitchell Counties have depressed economic situations
when compared to the rest of the State. In 2003, the North Carolina Department of
Commerce identified Mitchell County as a 21st Century Community. This program was
developed to help those counties in North Carolina that are most affected by the national
economic slow-down and changes in the State's economy. The counties are chosen based on
criteria such as economic stress, rising unemployment, reliance on "at-risk" manufacturing,
the commitment of local officials and the geographic location of the county. The goal of the
program is to build partnerships to help these counties prepare for economic development
opportunities.
10
C. Plans and Regulations
The Yancey County and Town of Burnsville Land Development Plan was
completed in September 2001. The land development plan is based upon a combination of
the technical components of land use planning and the goals and aspirations of the
community. Improving US 19E to a multilane facility is consistent with the land
development plan. A primary challenge identified in the land use plan is to guide
development along the improved US 19E transportation corridor.
Mitchell County does not have formal land use plans; however, the local
officials vision for growth is a close-knit community with cottage industries such as tree
farming, lantern making, and crafts. Tourism is also important to Mitchell County.
Improving US 19E is consistent with and included in the Region D study prepared by the
High Country Council of Governments. The Mitchell County Thoroughfare Plan is included
in this Region D study.
Neither Yancey nor Mitchell Counties have zoning regulations. However,
the Town of Spruce Pine does have a zoning ordinance enforced by the Mitchell County
Department of Inspections. A low-density residential district (R-1) is located near the eastern
project limit in Spruce Pine.
d. Community Resources
There are no police stations or EMS facilities located along the project.
The Newdale Fire Department is located on US 19E just east of SR 1435 in Yancey County.
Another volunteer fire department is located in the Estatoe community near US 19E and
Hoot Owl Road in Mitchell County.
2. Community Impact Analysis
a. Visual and Aesthetic Impacts
Visual and aesthetic impacts from the proposed action may include cutting
into hillsides and/or filling in steep slopes where the road will be widened. The addition of
two travel lanes and the median will also change the visual environment of the corridor. Any
trees or-vegetation along US 19E where the roadway will be widened will need to be
removed.
b. Land Use Patterns and Compatibility
Due to the availability of sewer and water service, the greatest potential for
new residential, industrial, and commercial development is along US 19E near the Town of
Spruce Pine. Other commercial and industrial developments already exist in the relatively
large population center. If topography allows, residential development can also occur outside
of sewer and water service areas by using wells and septic systems.
Development patterns may change with the addition of a median along
US 19E. New commercial development may be driven by concerns and issues associated
with accessibility issues created by the new median. Additionally, existing commercial
development may be affected if the median restricts access to the business, particularly any
gas stations on the corridor that rely on drive-by traffic. According to local planners, some
11
truckers have expressed displeasure with the plan to make US 19E a divided highway, as it
makes it more difficult for them to access certain businesses or perform U-turns.
C. Economic Conditions
Parcels not located where median cuts are planned may experience less
growth in property values than those properties that enjoy direct access. In addition, some
existing businesses and residences may be displaced or lose parking with the construction of
a wider roadway.
Local officials, in Mitchell County and Spruce Pine, are concerned that the
proposed action would encourage travelers to speed through Yancey and Mitchell Counties
on their way to other places. Additional signage may help to promote tourism and protect the
viability of local businesses and industry.
d. Transportation Access
1) Neighborhood Access
Small-scale commercial uses are scattered throughout the project
corridor at towns or major intersections, but land use is primarily low-density, single-family
housing along US 19E. Much of the land is unsuitable for development due to the steep
topography, stream crossings, and wetlands.
There is currently no control of access along the entire US 19E
corridor. The proposed typical section is a four-lane, divided facility with a 20-foot median.
As proposed, drivers will use U-turns and median openings to access destinations on the
opposite side of the highway. Other movements may be limited to right-in/right-out. The
proposed action will have minimal impact on the neighborhoods located in the area.
2) Commercial Access and Economic Impacts
Access along this portion of US 19E could change if a four-lane
divided facility is constructed. Left turns would not be allowed out of most driveways.
Although access to existing driveways will be maintained, some may be restricted to right-
in/right-outs due to limited median cuts. Commercial development is scattered along US 19E
and primarily located at major intersections. Therefore, much the existing commercial access
may not be affected by the widening of US 19E. There are few locations where the widening
of US 19E could affect parking availability for some of the businesses in the US 19E
corridor.
3) Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
The current US 19E facility does not contain sidewalks or bicycle
facilities within the project area. There are no proposed bicycle path projects or multi-use
trails near US 19E. The improvements to US 19E include a four-foot paved shoulder, which
will accommodate bicyclists. The four-foot paved shoulder is consistent with the other
US 19/US 19E improvements between future I-26 and Micaville.
12
4) The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
No sidewalks or wheelchair ramps currently exist along US 19E in
the project area and none are proposed in the future. Therefore, this project will not impact
any facilities for the disabled. However, a wider US 19E will be more difficult to cross.
5) Public Transit
Yancey County Transportation Authority (YCTA) provides daily
route service to residents of Yancey County. YCTA primarily coordinates transportation for
human service agencies, but also provides transportation for the general public. Service for
regular routes runs from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday, but the YCTA also
provides service on non-regular routes.
Mitchell County Transportation Authority (MCTA) provides
transportation services by contract to a number of human service agencies, as well serving
the general public with on-call service. Routes generally run from 7:30 am to 4:30 pm,
Monday through Friday.
e. Transportation Network
1) Change in Commuting Patterns
Changing commuting patterns are not likely to occur as a result of
the proposed action. US 19E is the only east-west route through both Yancey and Mitchell
Counties.
2) Consistency with Thoroughfare Plans
Both Yancey County and Mitchell County Thoroughfare Plans were
included in a Region D (High Country Council of Governments) study in the early 1990s.
Spruce Pine has a Thoroughfare Plan from the same time period. The Region D Plan lists
US 19/19E as a rural principal arterial system, which consists of a connected network of
continuous routes with substantial statewide or interstate travel. TIP Project Number R-2519
is included in the Region D plan. The Spruce Pine Plan classifies US 19E as a major
thoroughfare that serves as the primary carrier of east-west traffic. It indicates that US 19E is
an intrastate highway that is important to the region's economic development effort. The
Spruce Pine Plan also includes mention of the NCDOT plan to widen US 19E both east and
west of town.
The widening of US 19E is part of an NCDOT Strategic Highway
Corridor, and is in the NCDOT 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
Other NCDOT TIP projects in the area include:
• R-2519A - Widening of US 19 from SR 1336 west of Burnsville to SR 1186 in
Micaville. Construction scheduled to begin in 2008.
• R-2520 - Widening of US 19E/NC 194 to multi-lanes from east of Spruce Pine to
US 221. Post year construction.
• R-2598 - Upgrade of NC 226 from US 19E in Spruce Pine to the Blue Ridge
Parkway. Under construction.
13
3) Travel Time
Travel times along the corridor could improve slightly with the
widening of US 19E. The proposed action will increase capacity on US 19E and provide
exclusive left-turn lanes at median openings. When considered in conjunction with other
proposed NCDOT TIP projects like R-2518, R-2519A and R-2520, the travel time savings
would be greater.
f. Community Safety
There currently are no pedestrian or bicycle facilities along US 19E within
the project area. The widening of the road would change US 19E to a partially controlled
access facility with no amenities for pedestrians. Bicyclists would be accommodated on the
four-foot paved shoulder.
Emergency response time should improve with the construction of the
proposed action. By reducing the congestion in this area, emergency vehicles would likely
have reductions in emergency response times. By adding a median to US 19E there may be a
small delay when U-tums are required to access properties.
By reducing the number of conflict points and adding travel lanes, the
proposed project should have a positive impact on traffic congestion, traffic flow, and
vehicular safety. The widened roadway will be safer for large trucks to navigate the steep
terrain.
3. Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment
An Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE) Assessment for TIP R-2518 and R-2519
was prepared in March 2004. This report encompassed the entire US 191US 19E corridor
between future I-26 and Spruce Pine. It was determined that while much of the land is
unsuitable for development due to steep topography, it is possible that small-scale retail or
industrial uses, or single-family residential uses would locate along US 191US 19E. The
greatest potential for induced commercial and/or industrial growth is near the Towns of
Burnsville and Spruce Pine. The ICE concluded that TIP R-2518 and TIP R-2519 are
unlikely to cause substantial indirect impacts to water quality.
Water and sewer service is limited within most of the US 19/US 19E corridor.
However, water and sewer are available within the Town of Spruce Pine. Local officials
plan to construct a new wastewater treatment plant in Micaville, between Burnsville and
Spruce Pine. It is anticipated that the selected location will support the extension of water
and sewer service from Burnsville to Spruce Pine.
The proposed action may have some potential to stimulate complementary land
development by creating small-scale commercial or industrial development opportunities
along US 19E. Residential development, particularly second homes and retiree homes, may
occur in areas where the topography will allow. However, this type of development is
typically dependent on water and sewer services. For this reason, it is difficult to determine
where these residential developments would be constructed.
i
14
I.
I?
To further determine the magnitude of indirect and cumulative effects as a result of
the proposed action, an analysis of a set of environmental and economic conditions was
completed. This analysis roughly quantifies the potential for land use change over a 20-year
timeframe. A strong rating indicates a high likelihood of land use changes related to
transportation investments. Table 9 shows the results of the rating analysis for the proposed
action.
Table 9
Potential for Land Use Change, 2000-2020
Change Land
in Supply
Change in Property Forecasted vs. Land Water/Sewer Market For
Rating Accessibility Values Growth Demand Availability Development Public Policy
>3% < 10- Less
Travel Time Annual Year Current Extremely Stringent; No
Savings> >50% Pop. Supply of Services High Growth
Strong 10 min. Increase Growth Land Exist Potential Management
n
X
X X
X
„ X X X
<1% > 20- More
ime Annual Year No Plans For Extremely Stringent-,
<2 No Pop. Supply of Future Low Growth
W Change Growth Land Service Potential Management
There are several factors that seem to indicate a low potential for land use change as
a result of the proposed action. These factors include change in accessibility, change in
property values, low forecasted annual growth rate (less than I%), and a relatively low
market for development. The change in accessibility and mobility as a result of the proposed
action will be minimal; however, travel time savings will be greater when considered
cumulatively with TIP R-2518, TIP R-2519A and TIP R-2520. Local officials indicate that
land values are already high in areas where development is possible. The widened roadway
is not expected to change these property values dramatically. In addition, forecasted growth
levels are relatively low (less than I% annually) in both Yancey and Mitchell Counties. This
has not been a high growth area, and the population growth is not expected to increase,
perhaps indicating that the potential and magnitude for commercial development is limited.
On the other hand, there is available land to be developed. Some of the land along
the corridor is constrained by steep slopes and wetlands; however, there are relatively large
tracts of land just off the corridor that could be developed (primarily for residential
purposes). The water and sewer service area for Spruce Pine extends just beyond its town
limits. There are also plans to extend water and sewer services from Burnsville, west of the
project corridor, to Spruce Pine and along NC 80N to Bakersville. This, coupled with the
lack of growth management controls, indicates a slightly greater potential for land use change
along the corridor.
15
Local planners indicate development momentum is occurring along the US 19E
corridor from Burnsville to Spruce Pine, and they support the potential for economic benefits
of the proposed action. However, the relative isolation of these towns from large
employment centers, and the lack of commercial or industrial development momentum may
suggest that any induced residential, industrial and/or commercial growth would be nominal.
4. Evaluation of Indirect and Cumulative Analysis
a. Evaluation of Indirect Effects
The proposed action, along with the other related NCDOT TIP projects in the
area, may induce some small-scale commercial and industrial development on vacant tracts
of land, or re-development of vacant buildings and single-family residential uses along the
project corridor. The type of induced growth will vary depending on the location.
The land adjacent to US 19E between Micaville and Spruce Pine, which is
expected to eventually be serviced by water and sewer, and the land near the Spruce Pine
Town Limits are most likely to experience land use change. Since the proposed action is a
widening project and no new access will be provided, impacts should be primarily limited to
an area within one to two miles of the project corridor. While some of the land along the
corridor is unsuitable for development due to steep topography, streams, wetlands or other
natural features, it is possible for development (primarily residential) to occur on smaller
tracts of land. Larger tracts of developable land may be available within a couple miles of
the corridor; however, this land may have to be serviced by septic systems and wells.
New commercial uses will most likely be clustered near and in Spruce Pine at
the intersection of US 19E and NC 226. These are the most likely locations for new
commercial development because of proximity to other commercial uses and relatively larger
population centers, as well as higher traffic volumes and availability of water and sewer.
There is a slightly lower potential for growth near Micaville and NC 80 near the Taylor Togs
plant, where north-south accessibility (because of NC 80) is greater than the majority of the
rest of the proposed project corridor. In addition, local officials indicate water and sewer
services will be expanded to this area.
Although there have been industrial closings in recent years, local officials
hope that the improved accessibility provided by a widened roadway will encourage future
industry to locate in the area. It does not seem probable that large-scale industry would
locate along US 19E because of the proposed action, but the project may encourage the
location of small, tourist-related industries. If industry does locate to the area, it is likely that
some of the existing vacant buildings and sites would be filled before new buildings or sites
are developed.
It is difficult to pinpoint where residential development may occur, although it
is still most likely to take place within one to two miles of the US 19E corridor, as this is the
main east-west roadway through the region.
16
b. Evaluation of Cumulative Effects
The cumulative impact of the proposed action increases when considered along
with other proposed NCDOT TIP projects such as R-2518, R-25,19A, R-2520 and R-2598.
The combination of these transportation improvements will improve regional accessibility
throughout this part of western North Carolina.
c. Indirect and Cumulative Effects Conclusions
Although some of the factors used to evaluate indirect and cumulative impacts
indicate there is potential for land use change along the US 19E corridor, it is unlikely that
these NCDOT TIP projects will cause substantial indirect impacts to water quality. Slow
population growth and employment growth and other natural barriers (steep slopes; wetlands,
etc.) to development should minimize any deterioration in water quality that could occur due
to these NCDOT TIP projects.
5. Relocation Impacts
According to the relocation report (Appendix 1), the proposed action displaces 75
residences and 26 businesses. Three of the residences are minority dispacees. Additional
relocation information is included in Table 10. Appendix 1 also provides information on the
NCDOT relocation assistance program.
Table 10
Relocation Impact Summary
Proposed Action
Owners 62
R
id Tenants 13
es
ences Total 75
Minorl 3
Owners 22
B
i Tenants 4
us
nesses Total 26
Minori 0
Farms 0
Non-Profit Organizations 5
6. Title VI and Environmental Justice
Federal programs, under the statutes of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
have requirements to protect individuals from discrimination on the basis of race, color,
national origin, age, sex, disability, and religion. Furthermore, Executive Order 12898
"directs that programs, policies, and activities not have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on minority and low-income populations".
The demographic area has a very small minority population. Approximately 97.8%
of the demographic area population is White. Hispanics are the largest minority group at
1.3%, followed by two or more races at 0.4%, and Black or African American at 0.2%. The
potential for impacts to minority populations appears to be low.
17
Within the demographic area, there is a much higher percentage of persons age 65
or older (18.7%) than the percentage in North Carolina (12.0%). This same trend is evident
in Spruce Pine (19.7%), Yancey County (18.2%), and Mitchell County (18.6%). However, it
appears that this statistic is attributable to the relatively large number of retirees moving into
the area. Most of the new development geared towards these retirees has been located off the
US 19E corridor, and negative impacts to these communities area not anticipated.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) web site, Dayton
Elementary and Micaville Elementary Schools are both Title 1 Schools. While Micaville
Elementary is located within the project area, Dayton Elementary is located just outside of it.
Approximately 50.0% of Dayton Elementary students are eligible for free or reduced-price
lunch, while none of Micaville Elementary students are eligible. The relatively high
percentage of students at Dayton Elementary that received free or reduced lunch may
indicate some isolated pockets of low-income families.
It does not appear that there will be disproportionate impacts to minority, low-
income or other special populations. As reported earlier, the demographic area had the
lowest percentage of persons living below the poverty level (13.4%) when compared to
Spruce Pine (17.0%), Mitchell County (13.8%), and Yancey County (15.8%). Although
poverty levels were slightly higher than North Carolina (12.3%), it is unlikely that the
widened roadway will unfairly and disproportionately affect special populations along the
corridor. In addition, the relocation report (Appendix 1) indicates the majority of displacees
have income levels between $25,000 and $35,000 per year.
7. Cultural Resources
a. Historic Architectural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and with the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 36 CRF Part 800.
Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted during 1999
and 2003. All structures fifty years or more in age within the APE were photographed and
evaluated, and later reviewed by NCDOT architectural historians and the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office (HPO). NCDOT in consultation with HPO determined
that two properties within the APE - the Micaville Historic District and the E.W. and Dollie
Huskins House - are eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
1) Micaville Historic District
The Micaville Historic District is located in the heart of the Town of
Micaville in Yancey County at the intersection of SR 1186 and NC 80 south of US 19E. The
district consists of commercial and residential buildings that served the small mining and
timbering community during the first half of the twentieth century and still define its center
18
I,
today. The Micaville Historic District is eligible for listing in the National Register under
Criterion A for community planning and development and for commerce. It is also eligible
under Criterion C for architecture as a collection of early to mid-twentieth-century structures
built during the town's most significant period of growth. The National Register boundary
encompasses the remaining intact buildings that comprise the historic center of the
community. The improvements to US 19E are a minimum distance of 60 feet from the
Micaville Historic District.
2) E.W. and Dollie Haskins House
The E.W. and Dollie Huskins. House is located on US 19E in Yancey
County near the Yancey/Mitchell County line. The National Register boundary encompasses
less than two acres on the south side of US 19E, containing the house, original stone shed,
the non-contributing cinder-block garage, and the well groomed lawn. Built in the 1930's
and essentially unchanged, the E.W. and Dollie Huskins House is eligible for the National
Register under Criterion C for its Craftsman-style architecture and local stone construction.
The improvements to US 19E retain the existing right of way line along the north boundary
of the E.W. and Dollie Huskins House property.
NCDOT and HPO met on April 19, 2005 and June 28, 2005 to discuss
effects to the aforementioned properties eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places. It was determined the proposed action has no effect on the Micaville
Historic District. The proposed action will have an effect on the E.W. and Dollie Huskins
House because the fill slope will be closer to the house. NCDOT will mitigate the effect by
creating a seeded slope that is feasible for mowing by the owner.
b. Archaeological Resources
This project complies with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106. Two of the four archaeological sites (Sites
31YC31 and 31ML80) recommended eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
places are impacted by the Best Fit Alternate. If site avoidance is not possible, data recovery
excavations may be required for mitigation purposes.
Section 4(f) does not apply to archeological sites where the Administration,
after consultation with the SHPO and the ACHP, determines that the archeological resource
is important chiefly because of what can be learned by data recovery and has minimal value
for preservation in place. This exception applies both to situations where data recovery is
undertaken or where the Administration decides, with agreement of the SHPO and, where
applicable, the ACHP, not to recover the resource.
Two archaeological sites have been determined to be culturally significant.
Sites 31YC31 and 31YC183 are documented as lying within the project's APE (Area of
Potential Effects). Roadway Design will consult with the Human Environment Unit in order
to determine that these sites are adequately and accurately depicted on the design plans. The
site locations will be carried forward on the plans throughout the life of the project. Should.
19
design modifications be required for the project, the Roadway Design Unit will contact the
Human Environment Unit to assess the need for additional archaeological investigations.
Data Recovery Plans to recover archaeological materials for analysis and
interpretation of the occupation of the sites will be drawn up. Clearly defined research goals
and objectives should be stated and addressed by recovering archaeological materials for
analysis and interpretation. Such an endeavor will include documenting the depth and extent
of deposits and defining any additional intact deposits and features present within the
archaeological sites.
The Human Environment Unit will provide the Right of Way Branch with
notification of the prepared date recovery plans so they may acquire parcels that contain
eligible sites as soon as possible after right of way authorization. Acquisition of these parcels
will occur at least 12 months prior to the let date. The Right of Way Branch will notify the
Human Environment Unit as to the availability of these parcels so the data recovery
investigations may proceed. No construction activities will be allowed within either site's
limits until the data recovery investigations are completed and accepted by the Human
Environment Unit. Special provisions will be provided to the Roadway Design Unit by the
Human Environment Unit for incorporation into the final design plans that will detail the
Contractor's responsibilities regarding archaeological resources within or near the project
limits. These responsibilities will include avoiding staging activities within the limits of
known significant sites adjacent to or near the project limits that may have been avoided
during the design process as well as following the Department's Standard Specification's for
Roads and Bridges with regard to borrow pits.
D. Wild and Scenic Rivers and Watersheds
There are no water supply watersheds, Wild and Scenic Rivers, or 303 (d) listed water
bodies within the project area. The South Toe River is an Outstanding Resource Water and
is crossed by Bridge 43 on US 19E.
E. Environmental Effects
Prior to the site visit, published resource information pertaining to the project area was
reviewed and used for the site evaluation. Water resource information was obtained from
publications posted on the World Wide Web by NCDENR and NCDWQ. Information
concerning the occurrence of federally protected species in the study area was obtained from
the USFWS list of protected and candidate species (January 29, 2003) prior to initiation of
the field investigation. Information concerning species under state protection was obtained
from the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats. NCNHP files were reviewed
for documented sightings (July 30, 2003) of species on state or federal lists and locations of
significant natural areas. Records maintained by the NCNHP were consulted for documented
occurrences of federally- and state-listed species before commencing the field effort.
Subsequent reviews of NCNHP files were conducted to provide periodic record updates.
A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project route during August,
September, and early October 2003. Water resources were identified and their physical
characteristics were recorded. For the purposes of this study, a habitat assessment was
20
performed within the project area. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were
identified using a variety of observation techniques, including active searching, visual
observations, and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and
burrows).
Jurisdictional areas, if present, were identified using the three parameter approach
(hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, wetland hydrology) established in the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987).
Jurisdictional areas were characterized according to a classification scheme established by
Cowardin et al. (1979).
1. Physical Resources
The study area is located in the Blue Ridge physiographic province of western
North Carolina. The topography in the project study area is generally characterized as rolling
hills with steeply sloping, deeply cut drainage ways. Elevations in the study area range from
2,600 to 3,000 feet above mean sea level (USGS 1978, 1994). The project study area
consists of existing maintained right-of-way including fill slopes, rural residential,
commercial, agricultural, and forested areas. Surrounding land uses include agricultural,
residential, commercial, and forested lands.
a. Soils
As shown in Table 11, there are thirty-two (32) soil mapping units identified
within the project study area. Only one of these soils, Nikwasi sandy loam, is listed as a
hydric soil for Yancey County. No hydric soils are listed for Mitchell County (USDA 1995).
Of the remaining thirty-one (31) non-hydric soils, eight are known to include hydric soils in
depressions.
b. Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub-basin 06 of the French Broad River
Basin (04-03), (NCDWQ 2000) and is part of the USGS hydrologic unit for the French Broad
River (Hydrologic Unit Code 06010108) (USGS 1974). Sixty-eight (68) streams are located
within the project study area. The locations of these streams are shown in Appendix 4,
Sheets 1-13, and the physical characteristics of each of these streams is shown below in
Table 12.
The project contains sixty-seven (67) perennial streams and one intermittent
stream segment. Stream UT2D (Appendix 4) begins as an intermittent stream, and scored 14
points on the NCDWQ Stream Classification Form along its intermittent segment.
All streams in the study area classified by NCDWQ have been assigned a Best
Usage Classification of B, C, and may contain Tr and/or ORW supplemental classifications
(NCDENR 2003). The unnamed tributaries (UT) present within the project area have not
been individually classified by NCDWQ; therefore, they carry the same classification as their
receiving streams.
21
Table 11
Soil Mapping Units
Soil Mapping Unit Classification County Hydric
Inclusions'
Bandana sandy loam, 0-3 percent slopes Aeric Fluvaquents Yancey & Mitchell Yes
Biltmore sand, 0-3 percent slopes Typic Udipsamments Yancey Yes
Buladean-Chestnut complex, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Mitchell No
Cashiers fine sandy loam, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Yancey & Mitchell No
Chandler loam, 8-15 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Mitchell No
Chandler loam, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepis Mitchell No
Chandler-Micaville complex, 15-30 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Yancey & Mitchell No
Chandler-Micaville complex, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Yancey No
Chandler-Micaville complex, 50-95 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Yancey No
Clifton clay loam, 8-15 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey No
Clifton clay loam, 15-30 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey No
Dellwood-Reddies complex, 0-3 percent slopes Oxyaquic Dystrudepts Yancey & Mitchell Yes
Dillard loam, 2-8 percent slopes Aquic Hapludults Yancey Yes
Evard-Cowee complex, 8-15 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey & Mitchell No
Evard-Cowee complex, 15-30 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey & Mitchell No
Evard-Cowee complex, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey & Mitchell No
Fannin sandy clay loam, 15-30 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey & Mitchell No
Fannin sandy clay loam, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey No
Huntdale clay loam, 15-30 percent slopes Umbric Dystrochrepts Yancey No
Huntdale clay loam, 30-50 percent slopes Umbric Dystrochrepts Yancey & Mitchell No
Nikwasi sandy loam, 0-3 percent slopes Cumulic Humaquepts Yancey N
Porters-Unaka complex, 50-95 percent slopes Typic Dystrudepts Yancey No
Rosman fine sandy loam, 0-3 percent slopes Fluventic Humic Dystrudepts Yancey Yes
Saunook sandy loam, 2-8 percent slopes Humic Hapludults Yancey Yes
Saunook sandy loam, 8-15 percent slopes Humic Hapludults Yancey & Mitchell No
Saunook-Thunder complex, 15-30 percent slopes Humic Hapludults Yancey & Mitchell No
Toecane-Tusquitce complex, 8-15 percent slopes Humic Hapludultv7Ipic strude is Yancey No
Udorthents, loamy N/A Yancey & Mitchell Yes
Unison loam, 2-8 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey Yes
Unison loam, 8-15 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Yancey No
Watauga loam, 15-30 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Mitchell No
Watauga loam, 30-50 percent slopes Typic Hapludults Mitchell No

22
Table 12
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters

Stream ID and
Map Code'
Bank

Height
(feet)
Bankfull

Width
(feet)

inuosity

ubstrate

Water
Clarity USACE
Stream

Quality
Assessment
Score

Stream
Determination"
UT2A 3-6 3 None Gravel/sand Clear 45.5 Perennial
2A 18-20 15 Low Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 74.5 Perennial
2UT2A 3 2.5 None Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 48.5 Perennial
3UT2A 10 15 Low Sand/cobble Clear 63 Perennial
213 5-10 3 Low Sand/cobble Clear 60 Perennial
UT2B 0.5 2 Low Sand/cobble Clear 51 Perennial
2C 3-40 3 Moderate Sand/cobble Clear 65 Perennial
STR 10-30 60-100 Moderate Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 83 Perennial
2UT STR 5 3 Low Sand/cobble Clear 41 Perennial
UT STR 5 3 Low Sand/cobble Clear 63 Perennial
3UT STR 0.5-10 2 Low Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 34 Perennial
2D Upstream 3-4 5-6 Moderate Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 60 Perennial
2D Midstream 3-40 10 Low Sand/ raveUcobble Clear 88 Perennial
2D Downstream 2-8 12 Low Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 75 Perennial
UT21D Upstream 2 4 Low Sand/ ravel Clear 32 Intermittent
UT2D Downstream 1-3 0.5.1 Low Sand/ ravel Clear 55 Perennial
2UT213 4 2-3 Moderate Sand Clear 62 Perennial
3UT2D 3 3-15 Low Sand Clear 59 Perennial
4UT2D 0.5-10 2-20 Moderate Sand/ raveUcobble Clear 61 Perennial
UT4UT2D 0.5-6 2-3 Low Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 62 Perennial
5UT2D 1-3 1-3 Low Sand/ raveUcobble Clear 51 Perennial
6UT2D 1.3 1-3 Low Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 43 Perennial
7UT2D 2-3 2-3 Low Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 25 Perennial
8UT2D 1-3 2-6 Low Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 25 Perennial
9UT2D 1-2 1-4 Low Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 35 Perennial
10UT21) 0.5 1 Low Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 42 Perennial
11 UT2D 3-5 1..5-3 Moderate Sand/gravel/cobble Clear 50 Perennial
12UT2D 3-18 2-3 Moderate Sand/ raveUcobble Clear 35 Perennial
14UT2D 1-3 1-1.5 Moderate Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear 45 Perennial
13UT2D 1-3 1.1.5 Low Sand/ ravel/cobble ' Clear 54 Perennial
1H 2-30 3-40 Hi h Sand/gravel/cob le Clear 72 Perennial
4UT1H 2 1-3 Low Cobble/gravel/silt Clear 64 Perennial
UT1H 1-3 1-2 Low Cobble/ raveVsilt Clear 77 Perennial
2UT1H 2-10 2.6 Moderate Cobble/gravel/silt Clear 54 Perennial
11 Upstream 1-3 1-3 Low Gravel/sand/mud Clear 75 Perennial
11 Downstream 0.5-10 0.5-6 Low Cobble/sand Clear 60 Perennial
UT11 0.5 1 Low Sand/ raveVcobble Clear 47 Perennial
1CC 5-20 25 Moderate Sand/ ravel/cobble Clear .77 Perennial
UT1CC 5-20 1-5 Moderate Sand/ ravelcobble Clear 67 Perennial
UTUTICC 1 1 Low Silt/cobble Clear 57 Perennial
2UTUTICC 1-20 1 Low Silt/cobble Clear 54 Perennial
2UT1CC 1 2 Moderate Silt/cobble Clear 78 Perennial
3UTUTICC 0.5-5 1-5 Moderate Silt/cobble Clear 72 Perennial
UT3UTUTICC 0.5-5 1-2 Moderate Silt/cobble Clear 69 Perennial
UTUT3UTUTICC 0.5-3 1-5 Low Silt/cobble Clear 67 Perennial
2E 2-4 6 Moderate Cobble/ ravel/sand Clear 69 Perennial
UT2E 1 4 Moderate Cobble/gravel/sand Clear 54 Perennial
2UT2E 2 5 Moderate Silt/cobble Clear 50 Perennial
3UT2E 2 3 Moderate Silt/sand/ ravel Clear 69 Perennial
UT3UT2E 2 0.5 Low Sand/ ravel Clear 37 Perennial
2BC 2-4 15 Moderate Cobble/ raveVsand Clear 21 Perennial
23

Stream ID and
Map Code'
Bank
Height
(feet)
Bankfull
Width
(feet)

Sinuosity

Substrate

Water
Clarity USACE
Stream
Quality
Assessment
Score

Stream **
Determination
UT2BC 1 3 Low Gravel/sand Clear 55 Perennial
11UTlG 3-5 3-6 Low Gravel/cobble/sand Clear 68 Perennial
1G Upstream 0.5-1.5 2-8 Low Gravel/cobble/sand Clear 73 Perennial
1G Downstream 1-4 4.10 Moderate Silt/sand/ raveUcobble Clear 58 Perennial
UT1G 0.5-29 2-4 Low Sand/cobble Clear 50 Perennial
2UT1G 1-2 3-6 Moderate Sand/cobble Clear 66 Perennial
3UT1G 2.6 2-4 Low Sand/cobble Clear 12 Perennial
4UT1G 0-2 1-4 Low Sand/cobble Clear 51 Perennial
5UT1G 2 5 Low Sand/silt/ravel Clear 40 Perennial
6UT1G 1 2 Low Sand/ ravel Clear 18 Perennial
7UT1G 0.5 1-2 Low Silt/sand Clear 6 Perennial
8UT1G 0.5 1 Low Silt/ ravel Clear 53 Perennial
9UT1G 4 1 Low Gravel/sand Clear 52 Perennial
10UT1G 0.5 1 Low Silt Clear 72 Perennial
1D 0.5-2 1-8 Low Gravel/Sand Clear 52 Perennial
1B 2-8 2-4 Moderate Sand/clay Clear 60 Perennial
1C 0.5-3 2-8 Moderate Sand/clay Clear 64 Perennial
1F 0.5-2 1-3 Moderate Sand/clay Clear 70 Perennial
UT1F 0.5-2 0.5-2 Moderate Sand/clay Clear 60 Perennial
2UT1F 3-15 1-2 Moderate Sand/clay Clear 57 Perennial
1A 4-8 1.5.2 Low Clay/sand Clear 59 Perennial
1Z 2-18 1-2 Moderate Sand/clay Clear . 51 Perennial

*UT = Unnamed tributary
** Stream Determination is derived from information gathered during the completion of USACE Stream
Quality Assessment Worksheets and NCDWQ Stream Classification Forms
Table 13 lists the stream field identification and map code assigned in the field,
the stream name assigned by NCDWQ, the NCDWQ stream index number (SIN), and the
NCDWQ Best Usage Classification for the named streams that are either crossed by the
study area or that receive drainage from the study area. Within each drainage, all UTs carry
the same SIN and Best Usage Classification as the named stream.
Table 13
NCDWQ Stream Identification and Classification for Major Drainages
NCDWQ Stream
Identification Stream
Identification and
Ma Code NCDWQ Stream
Index Number (SIN) DWQ Best Usage
Classification
South Toe River STR 7-2-52-(30.5) B; Tr, ORW
Little Crabtree Creek 2A 7-2-52-33 C; Tr
Big Crabtree Creek 1CC 7-2-48 C; Tr
Lon Branch 2D, 6UT2D 7-2-48-52-31 C; Tr
Mine Branch UT STR 7-2-52-32 C; Tr
Brush Creek 2BC 7-2-48-4 C; Tr
-English Creek 1F, 2UT1F 7-2-42 C; Tr
A les Creek 3UT2A 7-2-52-33-11 C; Tr
24

The South Toe River and nearly all its tributaries are classified as ORW. All of
the streams that either cross the study area or receive drainage from the study area are
classified as Tr, which by definition classifies them as ORW. No streams within the study
area are designated as North Carolina Natural and Scenic Rivers, or as National Wild and
Scenic Rivers. Furthermore, the French Broad River Basin is not currently subject to riparian
buffer protection rules by the NCDWQ. None of the water resources within the project
vicinity are designated as biologically impaired water bodies regulated under the provisions
of CWA §303(d) (NCDWQ 2002).
There is one permitted discharger located within the project vicinity. Taylor
Togs waste water treatment plant (WWTP) discharges into Little Crabtree Creek, near the
eastern intersection of US 19E and SR 1186.
Short-term impacts to water quality, such as sedimentation and turbidity, may
result from construction-related activities. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion
and sedimentation will be minimized through implementation of NCDOT's "Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B.0024).
2. Biotic Resources
a. Terrestrial Communities
Four plant communities occur within the study area: Montane Oak-Hickory
Forest, Disturbed-Maintained Communities, Wetland Communities, and White Pine Forest.
Plant community impacts are based on the preliminary cut/fill sections necessary for US 19E
improvements. Plant communities impacted by the proposed action total 162.47 acres as
shown. Table 14 provides a summary of the plant community impacts associated with the
proposed action.
Table 14
Plant Community Impacts
Plant Community Type Proposed Action Impact Acres
Montane Oak-Hickory Forest 55.29
Disturbed/Maintained* 96.48
Wetland Communities 0.87
White Pine Forest 9.83
Total 162.47
It is inevitable that the project will impact area wildlife. Due to the existing
amount of urban and agricultural development in the project study area, wildlife habitat is
fragmented. Although some loss of disturbed habitat adjacent to existing road shoulders
would result, these areas are of limited value to wildlife that may utilize them. Wildlife
expected to utilize the project study area are generally acclimated to fragmented landscapes
in this area. However, fragmentation and loss of forested habitat may impact other wildlife
in the area by reducing potential nesting and foraging areas, as well as displacing animal
populations.
25
b. Aquatic Communities
Water resource impacts may also result from the physical disturbance of the
forested stream buffers that adjoin most of the streams within the study area. Removing
streamside vegetation increases direct sunlight penetration, which ultimately elevates water
temperatures within the stream. An increase in stream water temperatures often stresses or
reduces the population of aquatic organisms. Trout are a group of fishes that often succumb
to elevated water temperatures. Disturbing stream buffers can also create unstable stream
banks, further increasing downstream sedimentation. Shelter and food resources, both in the
aquatic and terrestrial portions of these organisms' life cycles, will be affected by losses in
the terrestrial communities. The loss of aquatic plants and animals will affect terrestrial
fauna that rely on them as a food source.
The removal of the riparian buffer may also increase the amount of sediment
released into the stream. Temporary and permanent impacts to aquatic organisms may result
from this increased sedimentation. Aquatic invertebrates may drift downstream during
construction and recolonize the disturbed area once it has been stabilized. Sediments have
the potential to affect fish and other aquatic life in several ways, including the clogging and
abrading of gills and other respiratory surfaces, affecting the habitat by scouring and filling
of pools and riffles, altering water chemistry, and smothering different life stages. Increased
sedimentation may cause decreased light penetration through an increase in turbidity.
In-stream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide trout stream buffer
zone should be prohibited during the trout spawning season of October 15-April 15 to protect
the egg and fry stages of trout from off-site sedimentation during construction. Temporary
construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized through
implementation of NCDOT's "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC
0413.0024).
3. Jurisdictional Topics
a. Waters of the United States
"Waters of the United States" are impacted by the proposed action. The field
assessment of the project study area for jurisdictional wetland boundaries based on current
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) methodology (Environmental Laboratory 1987)
identified twenty-six (26) areas meeting the federal criteria for wetlands. However, only
eight (8) of these wetlands are impacted by the proposed action. Jurisdictional wetland
impacts total 0.869 acres. Figure 7 shows the location of the jurisdictional wetlands. A
USACE Wetland Determination Data Form and a NCDWQ Wetland Rating Form were
completed for each wetland.
Table 15 lists information about the jurisdictional wetlands impacted by the
proposed action, including the Cowardin classification, NCDWQ Wetland Rating score, the
overall wetland quality, and the size of each wetland within the study area. The wetland
quality presented in Table 15 corresponds to the categories used by NCDWQ to define
wetland quality (a score of 0-33 represents a low quality wetland, 34-66 a medium quality
wetland, and 67-100 a high quality wetland).
26
Table 15
Jurisdictional Wetland Impacts
Wetland Identification
and Map Code Cowardin
Classification NCDW Wetland
Rating Score Overall Wetland
Quality
Impact (acres)"
5UT2D PEM1E 35 Medium 0.007
6UT2D PSS1E 37 Medium 0.743
2DN PSS1E 33 Medium 0.03
2DM PEM1E 43 Medium 0.04
lI and 241 PEM1E 46 Medium 0.023
UT2BC PEM1E 28 Low 0.02
1GD PEM1E 30 Low 0.006
TOTAL 0.869
Most of the wetlands are palustrine emergent, with some areas of palustrine
forested and palustrine scrub shrub also present. The Cowardin classification of these
wetland types are discussed below.
Palustrine forested (PFO) - These areas are identified as forested wetlands,
which are palustrine in nature. All of the palustrine forested wetlands within the study area
are broad-leaved deciduous communities (Cowardin designation PFO1). Because these
wetlands are generally found within the floodplains of perennial streams, usually in areas of
groundwater seepage, the hydrologic regime is seasonally flooded and/or saturated
(represented by Cowardin water regime modifier E).
Palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS) - These palustrine areas are dominated by
woody vegetation less than 20 feet tall. The species include true shrubs, young trees, and
trees or shrubs that are small or stunted because of environmental conditions. Scrub-shrub
wetlands may represent a successional stage leading to forested wetland, or they may be
relatively stable communities. The four palustrine scrub-shrub wetlands within the study
area are broad-leaved deciduous communities (PSS 1). Because these wetlands are typically
located along the margins of perennial streams or the margins of ponds, the hydrologic
regime is seasonally flooded and/or saturated (represented by Cowardin water regime
modifier E).
Five jurisdictional ponds are located within the study area, and are
considered "Waters of the United States". None of these ponds are directly impacted by the
proposed action.
Sixty-eight (68) jurisdictional streams are located within the study area;
however, only thirty-three (33) of these streams are impacted by the proposed action.
Figure 7 shows the location of the streams in the study area. These streams meet the
definition of surface waters and are therefore classified as Waters of the United States.
Table 16 shows the jurisdictional stream impacts for the project. There are approximately
9,365.9 linear feet of streams impacted by the proposed action.
27
Table 16
Jurisdictional Stream Impacts
Stream ID and Map Code NCDWQ stream Index Number (SIN) Stream Impact (linear feet)
2A 7-2-52-33 236.20
2UT2A 7-2-52-33 187.54
2B 7-2-52-33 308.34
UT2B 7-2-52-33 14.6
2C 7-2-52-(30.5) 154.49
STR 7-2-52-(30.5) 303.73
3UT STR 7-2-52-(30.5) 345.29
2D 7-2-52-33 3448.77
UT2D 7-2-52-33 153.65
2UT2D 7-2-52-33 95.44
3UT2D 7-2-52-33 232.79
7UT2D 7-2-52-33 101.87
10UT21) 7-2-52-33 12.65
11UT21) 7-2-52-33 5.75
12UT2D 7-2-52-33 119.66 '
13UT2D 7-2-52-33 95.86
I H 7-2-48 50.73
UT 1 H 7-2-48 28.91
2UT1H 7-248 54.59
lI 7-2-48 700.09
UT l I 7-2-48 78.13
1CC (Crabtree Creek) 7-2-48 230.39
2E 7-2-48-4 228.82
213C 7-2-48-4 96.41
1G and 2-1G 7-2-48-4 1382.95
5UT 1 G 7-2-48-4 222.58
7UT 1 G 7-2-48-4 55.99
8UT 1 G 7-2-48-4 45.77
IB 7-242 85.54
1D 7-2-42 82.96
1C 7-242 134.36
1Z 7-2-42 71.05
Total Stream Impact 9 365.90
The jurisdictional features associated with this project were verified by
USACE and NCDWQ representatives during a site visit on May 6, 2004. A Notification of
Jurisdictional Determination was issued by the USACE on September 1, 2004.
28
b. Permits
1) Section 404 and 401 Permits
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the CWA (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the USACE for the discharge of dredged or fill material
into "Waters of the United States." It is expected that the project will require a Nationwide
Permit (NWP) No. 14 [67 FR 2020, 2080; January 15, 2002]. The USACE issues a NWP
No. 14 for linear transportation projects impacting "Waters of the United States", provided
that the project is in non-tidal waters and the discharge does not cause the loss of greater than
a half an acre of "Waters of the United States" or greater than 300 linear feet of channel
permanently impacted. However, if the discharge of fill material exceeds 0.5 acre of "Waters
of the United States" for any one crossing, stream impacts exceed 300 linear feet for any one
crossing, or multiple crossings of a single stream incur impacts, then an Individual Permit
may become necessary.
2) Water Quality Certification
Section 401 of the CWA requires that the state issue or deny water quality
certifications for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge
into "Waters of the United States". Issuance of a CWA §401 Water Quality Certification
(WQC) from the NCDWQ is a prerequisite to the issuance of a CWA Section 404 Permit.
If an Individual Permit is required based upon impacts in the study area, a
corresponding CWA §401 Major Water Quality Certification will be required by NCDWQ.
If it is determined, upon refinement of project design, that a NWP No. 14 is required to
authorize impacts to "Waters of the United States", then a CWA §401 WQC No. 3404 will
be required from NCDWQ.
3) Tennessee Valley Authority
The proposed project is located in the Tennessee River Watershed. A
permit pursuant to Section 26a of the TVA Act is required for all obstructions involving
streams or floodplains in the Tennessee River drainage basin.
4) Trout Waters
All streams within the project study area carry a Tr designation by
NCDWQ. A Tr designation is for streams that are suitable for natural trout propagation and
maintenance of stocked trout. Yancey and Mitchell Counties are among the twenty-five (25)
mountain counties designated by the NCWRC as having trout waters. The South Toe River
is a designated Public Mountain Trout Water a few miles upstream of the study area. Since
the project is located in designated "trout" counties, a letter of approval from the NCWRC is
needed. In addition, an in-water work moratorium is effective from January 1 through
April 15 for rainbow trout, and October 15 through April 15 for brook and brown trout. This
moratorium is included in the Project Commitments "green sheet" at the beginning of this
document.
c. Mitigation
The USACE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)
a wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and
29
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological
and physical integrity of waters of the United States, and specifically wetlands. Mitigation of
wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands),
minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating for
impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and
compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
1) Avoidance
Jurisdictional surface waters are present within the project study area.
Through the project development process, wetlands and streams were delineated and
mapped. With the wetland, streams, and other constraints identified, the Merger Team
approved the alignment of the Best Fit Alternate which shifts the proposed action away from
wetlands and streams, to the extent practicable. As the design of the project progresses,
additional avoidance to wetlands and streams may be possible.
2) Minimization
Since the proposed action is located along existing US 19E, impacts to
"Waters of the United States" will be minimized by using as much of the existing roadway
corridor as possible. This should result in a minimal amount of new impact depending on the
final design of the widening. The Merger Team has already begun minimizing wetland and
stream impacts by developing the Best Fit Alternate. As the project design continues, there
will be additional opportunities to minimize impacts, including the "Minimization" Merger
Team meeting.
All the streams within the project area are designated Trout waters by the
NCDWQ. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be
minimized through implementation of NCDOT's "Design Standards in Sensitive
Watersheds" (15A NCAC,04B.0024).
3) Compensatory mitigation
The USACE requires compensation under a NWP No. 14 for perennial
streambed if the discharge causes the loss of greater than 0.1 acre of "Waters of United
States" or if the activity causes more than 150 linear feet of perennial streambed impacts or
intermittent streambed impacts if the intermittent stream has important aquatic function(s) as
denoted on USACE's Intermittent Channel Evaluation Form. In accordance with 15A
NCAC 211.0506(h), NCDWQ may require under WQC No. 3404 compensation for impacts
to 150 linear feet or more of jurisdictional streams and/or one acre or more of wetlands.
The USACE may require compensation for all cumulative jurisdictional
impacts to wetlands and perennial streambed or important intermittent streambed that result
from activities authorized under an Individual Permit. The NCDWQ may require
compensation for all cumulative jurisdictional stream and wetland impacts for activities
authorized under a Major Water Quality Certification (WQC).
30
d. Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E) or Threatened (T), or
Proposed (P) for such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). As shown below in Table 17, there are twelve (12)
federally protected species listed for Yancey and Mitchell Counties. Surveys for plants with
"no effect" are valid for 5 years. Surveys for other species are valid for two years from the
survey date. If the project is not constructed within those two years, then species may need
to be resurveyed before the let date.
Table 17
Federally Protected Species Listed for Yancey and Mitchell Counties
Federal Biological
Common Name Scientific Name
I
County
Status* Conclusion
Vertebrates
Bo turtle Clemm s muhlenber ii T(S/A) Not Applicable Yancey
Carolina northern flying Glaucomys sabrinus Mitchell and
E No Effect .
squirrel coloratus Yancey
Eastern cougar Puma concolor cou uar E No Effect Yancey
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis E Not Likely to Mitchell
Adversely Affect
Virginia big-eared bat Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) E No Effect Yancey
townsendii vir inianus
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe Alasmidonta raveneliana E Will Adversely Mitchell and
Affect Yancey
Spruce-fir moss spider Microhexura montiva a E No Effect Mitchell
Vascular Plants
Blue Ride goldenrod Solids o s ithamaea T No Effect Mitchell
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri T No Effect Mitchell
Houstonia montana
Roan Mountain bluet (=Hedyotis purpurea var. E No Effect Yancey
montana)
Spreading avens Geum radiatum E No Effect Yancey
Not Likely to

Virginia spiraea
Spiraea virginiana
T
Adversely Affect/ Mitchell and
Yancey
Unresolved
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen
I
I Gymnoderma lineare
E
No Effect
Mitchell and
Yancey
*E - Endangered, T - Threatened, T(S/A) - Threatened due to similarity of appearance.
Bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: • Not Applicable
The southern population of the bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of
Appearance to the northern population; therefore, the southern population is not afforded
protection under ESA §7. No habitat exists in the project area for the bog turtle, as there are
no freshwater wetlands characterized by slow-moving water or ditches. In addition,
freshwater wetlands characterized by marshy or boggy areas do not exist in the study area.
No known occurrence of the bog turtle has been reported by the NCNBP within the project
vicinity.
31
Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
The Carolina northern flying squirrel requires high elevation spruce-fir forests. There is no
suitable habitat present within the study area for the Carolina northern flying squirrel.
Elevations within the study area only reach a maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide
suitable environmental conditions for this species. No known occurrence of Carolina
northern flying squirrel has been reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A
Biological Conclusion of "No Effect" is rendered for this species.
Eastern cougar (Puma concolor cougar)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
The Eastern cougar requires large contiguous wilderness areas with an adequate food supply.
Males cougars of the subspecies have been know to occupy a region of 25 or more square
miles, females from 5-20 square miles. There are not sufficient contiguous areas of
wilderness within the study area, nor within the project vicinity. No known occurrence of the
Eastern cougar has been reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A Biological
Conclusion of "No Effect" is rendered for this species.
Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect
No hibernating habitat exists in the project action area for the Indiana bat. There are no
caves; one old mine shaft was found but it was small and did not provide suitable bat habitat.
The project area is characterized by agricultural and residential areas. Trees will presumably
be cut within the construction impact area, but it is extremely unlikely that any maternity
colonies would be present in these areas that are primarily open and frequently disturbed.
The identified PGIA extends 2 miles either side of the existing roadway. Although much of
the land within the PGIA is primarily agricultural and residential, there are some forested
areas as well, and there is, some potential for maternity colony trees to exist in these areas.
Indirect impacts such as land use changes in the PGIA area could result in conversion of
these forested areas to other uses. However, given the lack of records of this species in the
PGIA, and the relatively small size of forested tracts in the PGIA, it is unlikely that maternity
colonies exist in this area. Additionally, foraging habitat may exist along the riparian
corridors within the construction impact areas, as well as the identified areas of potential
indirect impacts; however, a search of the NHP database found no occurrence of the Indiana
bat in the project action area. If the Indiana bat utilizes this area for foraging, direct and
indirect impacts of project construction should have little adverse effects, as the bats can
forage upstream or downstream of the impact areas. It can be concluded that project
construction is "Not Likely to Adversely Affect" the Indiana bat.
Virginia big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
No habitat (roosting or hibernating) exists in the project action area for the Virginia big-eared
bat. There are no caves; one old mine was found, but it was small and unsuited for bat
habitat. A search of the NHP database found no occurrence of the Virginia big-eared bat in
the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this endangered
species.
32
Appalachian etktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Will Adversely Affect
The proposed widening of US 19E will result in adverse impacts to the Appalachian elktoe
and its Designated Critical Habitat in the South Toe River and North Toe River watersheds.
Appalachian elktoe individuals have been found in the project area, thus there is a potential
for direct take of a few individuals. A number of measures have been made to reduce these
impacts. There is a moderate potential for indirect impacts in the form of water quality
degradation resulting from induced land development in the South Toe River and North Toe
River watersheds occupied by the Appalachian elktoe. Cumulative impacts to the species
and its Critical Habitat may result in localized reduction/elimination of population numbers.
Further measures can be incorporated to help offset these impacts to the Appalachian elktoe
population.
The proposed widening of US 19 and US 19E from I-26 in Madison County east to Spruce
Pine in Mitchell County (R-2518 and R-2519) "will adversely affect" the Appalachian elktoe
and its Designated Critical Habitat. NCDOT is currently in Section 7 Consultation with the
USFWS for the Appalachian elktoe mussel. It is expected that this consultation will result in
reasonable and prudent measures to minimize or reduce any adverse effects to this species.
Spruce-fir moss spider (Microhexura montivaga)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
There is no suitable habitat present within the study area for the-spruce-fir moss spider. The
spruce-fir moss spider is only found at or above 5,400 feet in elevation, and requires pure red
spruce and Fraser fir stands of forests. Elevations within the study area only reach a
maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide suitable environmental conditions for this
species.
A record of this species is known from Mount Mitchell in Mitchell County; however, this
population is believed to be extirpated (66 FR 25547; July 6, 2001). In Avery County, an
occurrence is known from Grandfather Mountain, where a reproducing population is believed
to survive. Another occurrence spans Avery and Mitchell Counties on Roan Mountain,
where the population is believed to be healthy and reproducing. The USFWS has identified
critical habitat for this species in both Avery and Mitchell Counties near Elk Hollow Branch,
at elevations above 5,400 feet. No known occurrence of spruce-fir moss spider has been
reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. Due to the lack of appropriate habitat
within the study area, the proposed project, a Biological Conclusion of "No Effect" is
rendered for this species.
Blue Ridge goldenrod (Solidago spithamaea)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
There is no suitable habitat present within the study area for the Blue Ridge goldenrod. This
species requires high elevation, rocky outcrops, which are not present within the study area.
Elevations within the study area only reach a maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide
suitable environmental conditions for this species. No known occurrence of Blue Ridge
goldenrod has been reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A Biological
Conclusion of "No Effect" is rendered for this species.
33
Heller's blazing star (Datris helleri)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Heller's blazing star requires high elevation ledges, shallow acid soils, and full sunlight.
Elevations within the study area only reach a maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide
suitable environmental conditions for this species. No known occurrence of Heller's blazing
star has been reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A Biological Conclusion of
"No Effect" is rendered for this species.
Roan Mountain bluet (Houstonla montana=Hedyotis purpurea var. montana)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
There is no suitable habitat present within the study area for the Roan Mountain bluet.
Elevations within the study area only reach a maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide
suitable environmental conditions for this species. No known occurrence of Roan Mountain
bluet has been reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A Biological Conclusion
of "No Effect" is rendered for this species.
Spreading avens (Geum radiatum)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
There is no suitable habitat present within the study area for the spreading avens. Elevations
within the study area only reach a maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide suitable
environmental conditions for this species. No known occurrence of spreading avens has been
reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A Biological Conclusion of "No Effect"
is rendered for this species.
Virginia spiraea (Spiraea virginiana)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Not Likely to Adversely Affect/Unresolved
Suitable habitat exists for this species within the water bodies along the US 19E corridor,
particularly the larger streams (South Toe River, Big Crabtree Creek, and Little Crabtree
Creek). Surveys have been conducted in the project area in 2002. This species was not
found during these surveys.
The species has been recorded in the South Toe River approximately 3 miles downstream of
the project crossing of the South Toe River. Given the survey results it appears that Virginia
spirea is not present within the construction impact area. However, over two years has
passed since surveys were completed. Given the nature of dispersal of this species,
recruitment into the project construction area by this species may occur prior to construction.
Updated surveys are recommended at the project crossings.
Rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderma lineare)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
There is no suitable habitat present within the study area for the rock-gnome lichen.
Elevations within the study area only reach a maximum of 3,000 feet, which do not provide
suitable environmental conditions for this species. No known occurrence of rock-gnome
lichen has been reported by the NCNHP within the project vicinity. A Biological Conclusion
of "No Effect" is rendered for this species.
34
e. Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are those plant and animal species that may
or may not be listed in the future. These species are not legally protected under the ESA and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed
or listed as Threatened or Endangered.
Table 18 includes FSC listed for Yancey and Mitchell Counties and their state
classifications (Amoroso and Finnegan 2002 and LeGrand, et al. 2001). Organisms that are
listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state protection
under the North Carolina State Endangered Species Act of 1987 and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. However, state listed species are not protected
from NCDOT activities.
Table 18
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) Listed for Yancey and Mitchell Counties
Common Name Scientific Name State Potential County
Status Habitat
Vertebrates
Allcghany woodrat Dendroica cerulea Sc Yes Mitchell*, Yancey
Appalachian cottontail Sylvilagus obscurus SR No Mitchell, Yancey
=transitionalis)
Blotched chub Erimystax insignis SR Yes Mitchell**,
Yancey"
Eastern small-footed myotis Myotis leibii SC Yes Yancey
Hellbender Cryptobranchus alleganiensis SC Yes Mitchell, Yancey
Olive darter Percina squamata SC Yes Mitchell, Yancey
Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus borealis SC No Mitchell*, Yancey
Sharphead darter Etheostoma acuticeps T Yes Mitchell, Yancey
Southern Appalachian black-capped poeci[e atricapillus practicus SC No Mitchell
,
chickadee *
Yancey
Southern Appalachian red crossbill Loxia curvirostra SC No Mitchell, Yancey
Southern Appalachian Northern Aegolius acadicus T No Mitchell, Yancey
saw-whet owl
Southern Appalachian yellow-
Sphyrapicus varius appalaciensis
SC
Yes
Mitchell*
Yancey
bellied sapsucker ,

Southern rock vole Microtus chrotorrhinus
SC
No
Yancey
carolinensis
Invertebrates
Diana fritillary butterfly Speyeria diana SR Yes Mitchell**
Fragile glyph Glyphyalinia clingmani E No Yancey
Roan supercoil Paravitrea varidens T Yes Mitchell*
Yance
35
Common Name Scientific Name State
Status Potential
Habitat County
Yancey sideswimmer Stygobromus carolinensis SR No Yancey**
Vascular Plants
Bent avers Geum geniculatum T No Mitchell
Butternut Juglans cinerea ^ Yes Mitchell, Yancey
Cain's reedgrass Calamagrostis cainii E No Yancey
Canby's mountain lover (=cliff

green)
Paxistima canbyi
-
No
Mitchell
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga caroliniana SR-T No Mitchell, Yancey
Cuthbert's turtlehead Chelone cuthbertii SR-L Yes Yancey
Fraser fir Abies fraseri ^ No Mitchell, Yancey
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea SR-T Yes Mitchell, Yancey
Gray's lily Lilium grayi T-SC No Mitchell, Yancey
Mountain bittercress Cardamine clematitis SR-T No Mitchell, Yancey*
Mountain catchfly Silene ovata SR-T Yes Yancey
Piratebush Buckleya distichophylla E Yes Mitchell
Roan false goat's-beard Astilbe crenatiloba SR-T No Mitchell*
Roan sedge Carex roanensis SR-T Yes Mitchell
Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum E-SC Yes Mitchell*
Nonvascular Plants -
A liverwort Plagiochila sharpii SR-L No Yancey*

A liverwort Plagiochila sullivantii var.
sullivantii
SR-L
No Mitchell+,
Yance +
A liverwort Sphenolobopsis pearsonii PE No Mitchell*,
Yance *
E- Endangered, T- Threatened, PE- Proposed Endangered, SR- Significantly Rare, SC- Special Concern, -T-
Rare throughout its range, -L-The range of the species is limited to NC and adjacent states
* - Historic record (last observed over 20 years ago)
** - Obscure record (the date the element was last observed in the county is uncertain)
^ - Listed by USFWS, but not tracked by NCNHP
+- Listed by USFWS, tracked by NCNHP, but no occurrences have been reported in this county.
-- This species was observed on the grounds of a commercial greenhouse and was concluded to be introduced
in this state. It is not tracked by NCNHP.
According to North Carolina State Endangered Species Act of 1987 and the
North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, the definitions of state
statuses of plants and animals differ. Below are summaries of the statuses for each group.
Plants
Status Definition
Any species or higher taxon of plant whose continued existence as a
Endangered - viable component of the State's flora is determined to be in jeopardy.
(G$ 19B 106: 202.12)
Any resident species of plant which is likely to become an endangered
Threatened - species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. (GS 19B 106:202.12)
36
Any species of plant in North Carolina which requires monitoring but
Special Concern - Which may be collected and sold under regulations adopted under the
provisions of [the Plant Protection and Conservation Act]" (GS 19B
106:202.12).
Species which are very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20
Significantly Rare - populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by
habitat destruction (and sometimes also by direct exploitation or
disease).
Limited - The range of the species is limited to North Carolina and adjacent
states (endemic or near endemic).
Throughout- These species are rare throughout their ranges (fewer than 100
populations total)
A species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered,
Proposed - Threatened, or Special Concern, but has not yet completed the legally
mandated listing process.
Animals
Status Definition
Any native or once-native species of wild animal whose continued
existence as a viable component of the State's fauna is determined by
Endangered - the Wildlife Resources Commission to be in jeopardy or any species
'
'
of wild animal determined to be an
endangered species
pursuant to
the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the
General Statutes; 1987).
Any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
Threatened - throughout all or a significant portion of its range, or one that is
designated as a threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species
Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes; 1987).
Any species of wild animal native or once-native to North Carolina
which is determined by the Wildlife Resources Commission to require
Special Concern - monitoring but which may be taken under regulations adopted under
the provisions of this Article." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the
General Statutes; 1987).
Any species which has not been listed by the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Significantly Rare - Commission as an Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern
species, but which exists in the state in small -numbers and has been
determined by the N.C. Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring
No FSC species were observed during the site visit; however, one was recorded at NCNHP
as occurring within two miles of the project area. Olive darters were observed at two
locations in 1992. One location was approximately 1.5 miles.north of the study area in the
South Toe River. The other location was 0.25 miles west of the South Toe River bridge on
US 19E, within the study area. The olive darters were last observed in 1999.
37
4. Hazardous Materials
A "Limited Environmental Site Assessment" for the project area was conducted to
identify areas of potential environmental concern, such as underground storage tanks (UST),
above ground storage tanks (AST), hazardous waste sites, or similar problem sites. There are
no landfills or superfund sites within the project limits. Thirteen known or potential UST
sites and seven garages/body shops were identified within the proposed project corridor. The
monetary and scheduling impacts resulting from these sites is anticipated to be low to
moderate. Figure 8 shows the location of the 20 potentially contaminated sites. The
following is a description of the potential areas of concern near the proposed action.
a. Known or Potential UST Sites
Pine Hill Auto Parts
This active auto body repair shop is located approximately 0.1 miles east of
SR 1186 on the south side of US 19E. This facility operated as a gas station until the UST's
were removed in 2001. There are still two 8,000-gallon aboveground storage tanks (AST's)
still in use at the site within a concrete containment area approximately 90 feet from the
centerline of US 19E. These tanks contain kerosene and off-road diesel. An auto repair shop
also operates on the property approximately 140 feet from US 19E. Two of the service bays
in the garage have in-ground hydraulic lifts. No monitoring wells were noted on the site.
The proposed action will likely not impact the AST area, but will likely impact the business.
Silver Bullet Convenience Store
This active gas station is located just west of SR 1307 on the north side of
US 19E. The UST Section's registry shows one diesel and three gasoline UST's currently in
use at the site. The closest tank bed is approximately 136 feet from the centerline of US 19E.
The pump island is about 96 feet from the road. No monitoring wells were noted at the site
and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action will
likely not impact the UST and pump island areas.
Robinson Automotive
This former gas station is located approximately 350 feet east of SR 1149 (Rice.
Road) on the south side of US 19E. The UST Section's registry shows two USTs of
unknown product are at the site. No evidence of USTs was noted at the site. The former
pump island is approximately 92 feet from the centerline of US 19E. A waste oil AST was
noted on the west side of the building. No monitoring wells were noted at the site and it does
not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action will likely
impact the AST and UST area and the business.
Wilson General Store
This former gas station is located approximately 250 feet east of NC 80 on the
north side of US 19E. No information on the site could be located in the UST Section's
registry. Three fill ports were identified on the property. The closest UST and pump island
are approximately 90 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were noted at
the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed
action will likely not impact the UST area, but will likely impact the business.
38
Newdale Chevron
This active gas station is located approximately 0.4 miles east of SR 1423
(Newdale Church Road) on the south side of US 19E. The UST Section's registry shows one
diesel and three gasoline tanks are in use at the site. The pump island and tank bed are
approximately 92 feet from the centerline of US 19E. There is also a kerosene AST about
117 feet from the road. An auto repair shop also operates on the site and several drums of
waste fluids were noted behind the building. No monitoring wells were noted at the site and
it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action will
likely impact the pump island, tank bed and AST area. In addition, the proposed action also
will likely impact the auto repair shop on this site.
Former Newdale Grocery
This vacant gas station is located approximately 0.6 miles east of SR 1423
(Newdale Church Road) on the north side of US 19E. The UST Section's registry shows that
five tanks were removed from the site in 2003. One partially buried heating oil tank was
noted on the east side of the building. The pump island and former tank bed are
approximately 83 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were noted at the
site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action
will likely not impact the UST area and pump island, but will likely impact the business.
Young's Tractor & Equipment, Inc.
This active farm equipment business is located approximately 0.1 miles east of
SR 1423 (Newdale Church Road) on the south side of US 19E. The UST Section's registry
shows one diesel and three gasoline tanks were removed from the site in 1990. It could not
be determined where the former tank bed was located at the site. Minor soil staining was
noted in front of the garage and several drums of waste fluids were noted on the west side of
the building. The building is about 130 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring
wells were noted at the, site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation.
The proposed action will likely impact the former tank bed and the business.
Mountain Traders
This former gas station is located approximately 100 feet east of the
Yancey/Mitchell county line on the north side of US 19E. No information on the site could
be located in the UST Section's registry. Locals say the UST's were removed from the site
and no evidence of tanks could be located at the site. It is believed that the former tank bed
area is about 112 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were noted at the
site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action
will likely impact the former tank bed area and the business.
Former Ridgeway Carwash
This inactive gas station/car wash is located approximately 0.3 miles west of
SR 1233 on the north side of US 19E. The UST Section's registry shows three gasoline
tanks were removed from the site in 1986. It could not be determined where the former tank
bed was located at the site. A self-serve dollar feed pump island is still present at the site and
is located about 91 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were noted at
34
the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed
action will likely impact the pump island and the business.
Timber Ridge Log Homes
This former gas station now operates as a log home business and residence. It is
located just east of SR 1234 (Burleson Circle) on the north side of US 19E. According to the
property owner the UST's were removed approximately 15 to 20 years ago. The former tank
area and old pump island are about 94 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No evidence of
tanks could be located at the site. No monitoring wells were noted at the site and it does not
appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action will likely impact
the former tank area, pump island and the business.
Excel Mart #312 (Texaco)
This active gas station is located across from SR 1160 (Penland Road) on the
south side of US 19E. The UST Section's registry shows one diesel, one kerosene and three
gasoline tanks are in use at the site. The tank bed is approximately 113 feet from the
centerline of US 19E, while the pump island is about 128 feet from the road. No monitoring
wells were noted at the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation.
The proposed action will likely impact the tank bed area, pump island, and the business.
Former Gas Station (Calvary Assembly of God)
The site is located approximately 0.1 miles east of SR 1160 (Penland Road) on
the north side of US 19E. A church currently occupies the building, but it is believed that it
was a gas station at one time. No information on the site could be located in the UST
Section's registry. It appears that the UST's have been removed from the site and no
evidence of tanks could be located at the site. It is thought the former tank bed area is about
56 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were noted at the site and it does
not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action will likely
impact the former UST tank bed area.
Hill's Quick Stop (Amoco)
This vacant gas station is located approximately 0.4 miles east of SR 1155 (Ned
Hughes Road) on the north side of US 19E. No information on the site could be located in
the UST Section's registry. Five fill ports were noted on the property. The closest UST is 45
feet from the centerline of US 19E, while the pump island is approximately 84 feet from the
road. Several monitoring wells were noted at the site (including on the south side of US 19E)
and it appears that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action will likely
impact the UST area.
b. Potentially Contaminated Sites
Shuford Automotive
This active auto repair shop is located approximately 0.5 miles east of SR 1186
on the south side of US 19E. No drums of waste fluids were noted at the site, but there were
piles of auto parts and junk cars scattered over the property. The building is approximately
80 feet from the centerline of US 19E. Access to the building was not possible. The
proposed action will likely impact the business.
46
Ledford Tire & Trucking, Inc.
This active truck repair facility is located just east of River Walk Drive on the
south side of US 19E. The main service bay has a concrete oil-changing pit and several
drums were noted near the south corner of the building. Waste oil is pumped directly into a
waste oil furnace. The proposed action will likely impact the business and waste oil.
Precision Auto Body
This active auto body shop is located approximately 0.5 miles east of River
Walk Drive on the north side of US 19E. The facility has a spray booth and "recycler" to
dispose of waste paint. No drums of waste fluids were noted at the site. The building is
approximately 84 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were noted at the
site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed action
will likely impact the business.
Crabtree Valley Truck Parts
This active heavy equipment repair facility is just east of NC 80 on the north
side of US 19E. They have operated at the site since 1984. Several drums of waste fluids
and moderately stained soils were noted in front of the building. No monitoring wells were
noted at the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The
proposed action will likely impact the business and waste fluids.
Quality Motors
This active auto repair business is located approximately 0.3 miles east of
SR 1300 (Arbuckle Road) on the north side of US 19E. Waste fluids are stored in containers
inside the building until they are taken to another shop that has a waste oil-burning furnace.
Two AST heating oil tanks were noted behind the building. No monitoring wells were noted
at the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The proposed
action will likely not impact the AST area, but will likely impact the business. '
Kid's Auto Center
This active used car sales business is located approximately 0.4 miles east of
SR 1300 (Arbuckle Road) on the south side of US 19E. There are more than 200 cars on the
property, of which two-thirds are junk cars. Some minor staining was noted on the ground.
No service work is performed at the site, but more than 20 car batteries were on the ground
near the office building. The office is about 117 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No
monitoring wells were noted at the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under
remediation. The proposed action will likely impact the business.
Murphy's Auto Center
This active auto repair business is located approximately 0.1 miles east of
SR 1155 (Ned Hughes Road) on the north side of US 19E. There are about 150 cars on the
property, of which two-thirds are junk cars. In front of the garage bay and around a 250
gallon waste oil AST on the south side of the building, moderate staining of the ground was
noted. The garage is about 86 feet from the centerline of US 19E. No monitoring wells were
noted at the site and it does not appear that the site is currently under remediation. The
proposed action will likely impact the waste area and the business.
41
8. Noise
This analysis was performed to determine the effect on traffic noise levels in the
immediate project area as the result of proposed improvements to US 19E in Yancey and
Mitchell Counties.
a. Characteristics of Noise
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from many sources
including airplanes, factories, railroads, power generation plants, and highway vehicles.
Highway noise, or traffic noise, is usually a composite of noises from engine exhaust, drive
train, and tire-roadway interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound pressure. Since the
range of sound pressure varies greatly, a logarithmic scale is used to relate sound pressures to
some common reference level, usually the decibel (dB). Sound pressures described in
decibels are called sound pressure levels and are often defined in terms of frequency
weighted scales (A, B, C, or D).
The weighted-A decibel scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places the most emphasis on the frequency range to which the
human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels measured using a weighted-A
decibel scale are often expressed as dBA. Throughout this report, all noise levels will be
expressed in dBA's. Several examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are listed in Table N1
(Appendix 2).
Review of Table NI(Appendix 2) indicates that most individuals in urbanized
areas are exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources as they go about their daily
activities. The degree of disturbance or annoyance of unwanted sound depends essentially on
three things:
• The amount and nature of the intruding noise.
• The relationship between the background noise and the intruding noise.
• The type of activity occurring when the noise is heard.
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted intervals and are
expected individuals tend to accept the noises that intrude into their lives. Attempts have
been made to regulate many of these types of noises including airplane noise, factory noise,
railroad noise, and highway traffic noise. In relation to highway traffic noise, methods of
analysis and control have developed rapidly over the past few years.
b. Noise Abatement Criteria
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed Noise Abatement
Criteria (NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of highways to
determine whether highway noise levels are or are not compatible with various land uses.
These abatement criteria and procedures are set forth in the aforementioned Federal reference
(Title 23 CFR Part 772). A summary of the noise abatement criteria for various land uses is
presented in Table N2 (Appendix 2). The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is the level of
constant sound which in a given situation and time period has the same energy as does time
42
varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating sound levels of traffic noise are represented in
terms of a steady noise level with the same energy content.
c. Ambient Noise Levels
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project to
determine ambient (existing) noise levels for the identified land uses. The purpose of this
noise level information was to quantify the existing acoustic environment and to provide a
base for assessing the impact of noise level increases. The existing Leq noise levels in the
project area were measured at 50 foot from edge of pavement ranged from 69.5 dBA to 71.4
dBA. A background noise level of 45 dBA was determined for the project to be used in areas
where traffic noise was not the predominant source. The ambient measurement location is
shown in Figure N1 (Appendix 2) and Table N3 (Appendix 2).
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the most current
traffic noise prediction model in order to calculate existing noise levels for comparison with
noise levels actually measured. The calculated existing noise levels averaged less than
2 dBA than the measured noise levels for the location where noise measurements were
obtained. Hence, the computer model is a reliable tool in the prediction of noise levels.
Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes,
and actual vehicle speeds versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single
vehicular speed.
d. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large number of variables that
describe different cars driving at different speeds through a continual changing highway
configuration and surrounding terrain. Due to the complexity of the problem, certain
assumptions and simplifications must be made to predict highway traffic noise. The
procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study was the TNM 2.5. The TNM
traffic noise prediction model uses the number and type of vehicles on the planned roadway,
their speeds, the physical characteristics of the road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, etc.),
receptor location and height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and
barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it is noted that only preliminary alignment was available for use
in this noise analysis. Only existing natural or man-made barriers were included in setting up
the model. The roadway sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-
grade. Thus, this analysis represents the "worst-case" topographical conditions. The noise
predictions made in this report are highway-related noise predictions for the traffic conditions
during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were compared, and
the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with the proposed posted speed
limits. Hence, during all other time periods, the noise levels will be no greater than those
indicated in this report. The TNM computer model was utilized in order to determine the
number of land uses (by type) which would be impacted during the peak hour of the design
year 2025. A land use is considered impacted when exposed to noise levels approaching or
43
exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or predicted to sustain a substantial noise
increase.
e. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either: [a]
approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within
1 dBA of the Appendix 2, Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise
levels. The NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown in the lower portion of
Table N2 (Appendix 2). Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to
receptors that fall in either category.
In accordance with NCDOT 2004 Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the
Federal/State governments are not responsible for providing noise abatement measures for
new development which building permits are issued within the noise impact area of a
proposed highway after the Date of Public Knowledge. The Date of Public Knowledge of
the location of a proposed highway project will be the approval date of CEs, FONSIs, RODS,
or the Design Public Hearing, whichever comes later. For development occurring after this
public knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that noise compatible
designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
The number of receptors in each activity category for each section predicted to
become impacted by future traffic noise is shown in Table N5 (Appendix 2). These are noted
in terms of those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by either approaching
or exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a substantial increase in exterior noise levels. Under
Title 23 CFR Part 772, 92 residences, 7 businesses and 1 church are predicted to be impacted
due to highway traffic noise in the project area with the proposed action. The maximum
extent of the 72-dBA noise level contour is 89.3 feet from the center of the proposed
roadway. The maximum extent of the 67-dBA noise level contour is 150.2 feet from the
center of the proposed roadway. Contour information in Table N5 (Appendix 2) shows this
contour information by section. This information should assist local authorities in exercising
land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway within local
jurisdiction. For example, with the proper information on noise, the local authorities can
prevent further development of incompatible activities and land uses with the predicted noise
levels of an adjacent highway.
Table N6 (Appendix 2) shows the exterior traffic noise level increases for the
identified receptors by roadway section. There are no substantial noise level impacts
anticipated by the proposed action. The predicted noise level increases for this project range
up to +7 dBA. The amount of substantial noise level impacts for the proposed action can be
found in Table N6 (Appendix 2). When real-life noises are heard, it is possible barely to
detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA change is more readily noticeable.
L Traffic Noise Abatement Measures
If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative
noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts must be considered.
Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to all impacted receptors. There
44
are impacted receptors due to highway traffic noise in the project area. The following
discussion addresses the applicability of these measures to the proposed project.
1) Highway Alignment Selection
Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal or vertical orientation
of the proposed improvements in such a way as to minimize impacts and costs. The selection
of alternative alignments for noise abatement purposes must consider the balance between
noise impacts and other engineering and environmental parameters. For noise abatement,
horizontal alignment selection is primarily a matter of siting the roadway at a sufficient
distance from noise sensitive areas. Changing the highway alignment is not a viable
alternative for noise abatement.
2) Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic system management measures, which limit vehicle type, speed,
volume and time of operations, are often effective noise abatement measures. For this
project, traffic management measures are not considered appropriate for noise abatement due
to their effect on the capacity and level-of-service of the proposed facility.
Past project experience has shown that a reduction in the speed limit of 10
mph would result in a noise level reduction of approximately 1 to 2 dBA. Because most
people cannot detect a noise reduction of up to 3 dBA and because reducing the speed limit
would reduce roadway capacity, it is not considered a viable noise abatement measure. This
and other traffic system management measures, including the prohibition of truck operations,
are not considered to be consistent with the project's objective of providing a high-speed,
limited-access facility.
3) Noise Barriers
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels are often applied
with a measurable degree of success on fully controlled facilities by the application of solid
mass, attenuable measures strategically placed between the traffic sound source and the
receptors to effectively diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions. Solid
mass, attenuable measures may include. earth berms or artificial abatement walls.
The project will maintain partial control of access, meaning most
commercial establishments and residents will have a direct access connection to the proposed
roadway. Furthermore, all intersection are anticipated to adjoin the project at grade, except
for one grade separation. For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction it must be
high enough and long enough to shield the receptor from significant sections of the highway.
Access openings in the barrier severely reduce the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It
then becomes economically unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction.
Safety at access openings (driveways, crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted sight distance is
also a concern. Furthermore, to provide a sufficient reduction, a barrier's length would
normally be 8 times the distance from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor
located 50 feet from the barrier would normally require a barrier 400 feet long. An access
opening of 40 feet (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise reduction to approximately 4
dBA (FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report
45
No. FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1, USDOT, chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27). Hence, this
type of control of access effective eliminates the consideration of berms or noise walls as
noise mitigation measures.
In addition, businesses, churches, and other related establishments located
along a particular highway normally require accessibility and high visibility. Solid mass,
attenuable measures for traffic noise abatement would tend to disallow these two qualities,
and thus, would not be acceptable abatement measures in this case.
4) Other Mitigation Measures Considered
The acquisition of property in order to provide buffer zones to minimize
noise impacts is not considered to be a feasible noise mitigation measure for this project.
The cost to acquire impacted receptors for buffer zones would exceed the allowed abatement
cost per benefited receptor. The use of buffer zones to minimize impacts to future sensitive
areas is not recommended because this could be accomplished through land use control.
The use of vegetation for noise mitigation is not considered reasonable for
this project, due to the amount of substantial amount of right-of-way necessary to make
vegetative barriers effective. FHWA research has shown that a vegetative barrier should be
approximately 100 feet wide to provide a 3-dBA reduction in noise levels. In order to
provide a 5-dBA reduction, substantial amounts of additional right-of-way would be
required. The cost of the additional right-of-way and plant sufficient vegetation is estimated
to exceed the abatement cost allowed per benefited receptor. Noise insulation was also
considered; however, no public or non-profit institutions were identified that would be
impacted by this project.
g. No-Build Alternative
The traffic noise impacts for the No-Build Alternative were also considered. If
the proposed widening did not occur, 17 receptors are anticipated to approach or exceed the
FHWA NAC. Also, the receptors could anticipate experiencing an increase in exterior noise
levels of approximately 1 dBA increase. As previously noted, it is barely possible to detect
noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA change in noise levels is more readily noticed.
h. Construction Noise
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth
removal, hauling, grading, and paving. General construction noise impacts, such as
temporary speech interference for passers-by and those individuals living or working near the
project, can be expected particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving
equipment during grading operations. However, considering the relatively short-term nature
of construction noise and the limitation of construction to daytime hours, these impacts are
not expected to be substantial. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural
elements and man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of
intrusive construction noise.
i. Noise Analysis Summary
Traffic noise impacts are an unavoidable consequence of transportation projects
especially in areas where there are not traffic noise sources. All traffic noise impacts were
46
considered for noise mitigation. Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement
is not recommended, and no noise abatement measures are proposed. This evaluation
completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and unless a
major project change develops, no additional noise reports will be submitted for this project.
9. Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry and internal
combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact resulting from highway
construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to improving the
ambient air quality. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining the
impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility. Motor
vehicles emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate
matter, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate).
Automobiles are considered to be the major source of CO in the project area. For this reason,
most of the analysis presented herein is concerned with determining expected carbon
monoxide levels in the vicinity of the project due to traffic flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near a highway,
two concentration components must be used: local and background. The local concentration
is defined as the CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e.,
distances within 400 feet) of the receptor location. The background concentration is defined
by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources as "the
concentration of a pollutant at a point that is the result of emissions outside the local vicinity;
that is, the concentration at the upwind edge of the local sources."
In this study, the local concentration was determined by the NCDOT Traffic
Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer modeling and the background component
was obtained from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were ascertained, they
were added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for the area in question and
to compare to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides.
Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are carried into the atmosphere where
they react with sunlight to form ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Automotive emissions of HC
and NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued installation and
maintenance of pollution control devices on new cars. However, regarding area-wide
emissions, these technological improvements maybe offset by the increasing number of cars
on the transportation facilities of the area.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide require several
hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of ozone generally occur 10 to 20 kilometers
downwind of the source of hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as
sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The emissions of all sources
in an urban area mix together in the atmosphere, and in the presence of sunlight, the mixture
47
reacts to form ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The best example
of this type of air pollution is the smog that forms in Los Angeles, California.
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate matter and sulfur
dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources account for less than seven percent of particulate
matter emissions and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate matter
and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of non-highway sources (e.g.,
industrial, commercial, and agricultural). Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur
dioxide from automobiles are very low, there is no reason to suspect that traffic on the
project will cause air quality standards for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide to exceed the
NAAQS.
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future CO
concentrations resulting from the proposed highway improvements. "CAL3QHC - A
Modeling Methodology For Predicting Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway
Intersections" was used to predict the CO concentration near sensitive receptors.
Inputs into the mathematical model used to estimate hourly CO concentrations
consisted of a level roadway under normal conditions with predicted traffic volumes, vehicle
emission factors, and worst-case meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based
on the annual average daily traffic projections. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors
were calculated for the years 2005, 2010 and 2025 using the EPA publication "Mobile
Source Emission Factors", and the MOBILE6 mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was estimated to be 1.8 parts
per million (ppm). Consultation with the Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental
Management (DEM), North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.8 ppm is suitable for most
suburban and rural areas.
The worst-case air quality scenario was determined to be located along the limits of
the right of way at approximately 150 feet from the centerline of the proposed roadway. The
predicted 1-hour average CO concentrations for the evaluation build years of 2005, 2010 and
2025 are 2.0, 2.0 and 2.0 ppm, respectively. Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations
with the NAAQS (maximum permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour
averaging period = 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards. Since the results of the
worst-case 1-hour CO analysis for the build scenario is less than 9 ppm, it can be concluded
that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed the standard. See Tables Al through A3 for input
data and output.
The project is located in Yancey and Mitchell Counties, which have been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR
part 51 and 93 is not applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment
area. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this
attainment area.
48
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing
and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed from the project, burned or
otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any burning done will be done in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality
in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning will be done at
the greatest distance practical from dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such
as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
Also during construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust generated by construction
when the control of dust is necessary for the protection and comfort of motorists or area
residents. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for air quality of the 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments and the NEPA process, and no additional reports are necessary.
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Comments Received
The project has been coordinated with appropriate federal and state agencies listed
below. Written comments were received from agencies noted with an asterisk (*). These
comments were considered during the preparation of this assessment. Appendix 3 contains
copies of the comments received.
US Army Corps of Engineers - Asheville
US Fish and Wildlife Service - Asheville
US Environmental Protection Agency - Raleigh and Atlanta
Tennessee Valley Authority
NC Department of Administration, NC State Clearinghouse
NC Department of Public Instruction
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Division of Forest Resources
Division of Land Resources
Division of Parks and Recreation
* NC Wildlife Resources Commission
NC Department of Cultural Resources - SHPO
High Country Regional Planning Organization
Yancey County
Mitchell County
Town of Spruce Pine
B. Citizens Informational Workshop
An informal Citizens Informational Workshop for the project was held on
March 13, 2003 at Mayland Community College in Spruce Pine. Representatives from
49
NCDOT were available at the workshop to discuss the project with citizens and local
officials. Approximately 43 people attended the workshop.
C. Agency Coordination
A National Environmental Polity Act (NEPA) / 404 Merger Team was established for
the project to improve environmental protection and the regulatory process. The merger
team consists of representatives from the following state and federal agencies:
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Environmental Protection Agency
Tennessee Valley Authority
NCDENR-Division of Water Quality/Wetlands
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
NC Department of Cultural Resources
Merger team meetings were held to discuss and agree on the project purpose and need,
alternatives under consideration, and to review the impacts associated with the alternates
under consideration. The merger team concurs with the location and typical section of the
Best Fit Alternate.
Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose and Need): Concurrence on 8/20/03
Concurrence Point 2 (Alternatives): Concurrence on 9/15/04
D. Public Hearing
A public hearing will be held for this project following the circulation of this document.
At the hearing, more detailed information about the proposed improvements will be available
for the public. The public will be invited to make comments or voice concerns regarding the
proposed action. A final decision with regard to a preferred alternative will not be made until
all public hearing comments are fully evaluated.
50
FIGURES
Figure la..... Project Location
Figure lb .... Project Vicinity
Figure 2 ...... Project Aerial
Figure 3 ...... Level of Service
Figure 4 ...... Roadway Deficiencies
Figure 5 ...... Typical Section
Figure 6 ...... Lane Configurations
Figure 7 ...... Wetlands and Streams
Figure 8 ...... Potentially Contaminated Sites
W
(J W
7 Z ?
j P?Oa PW (n,? I ; y rg ? 2 W? C
m a ti
SOY- -S1/n/7 < i W O m
co 0
_ ?j N ?? c? N g<go O V 2 U
U V/ N ? / 0 u? Rai ? e u CL.
0- C) Lo 0
O ti I ? E
F4?0g? O1 ? 'd a
I ? EEO??®y W 4 O
J_? ?? ' W ?®®?es U W ~ N
? SR 1155', m Qc J
s
`F VV YY
N W GZ
?.
?sii bs SR 1156 ecayCd .
,r W
/ n
- N M
SR 1157
Rporin9 Branc
2 _ • SR 1002 ??
y CraDiree to N? A1Nno3 1n3H31IW
A1Nno3 T13H31IW ??q 'r^creek - as - / //
-'k_ \ - A1Nno3 A33NtlA
A1Nno3 A33NVA
o y? „1 I ? /?? \ >
x ~
W J O
O bti J
S w
?m ? I W SP\ O?P? g rr U
? ? ? Z Vp(A ? ?-
O , I? a E
? j1 2
a v, ` 5R
I
?g05 , 4 s Ea
Sa m P? 2
J 10C O
130° ? t ?
SR ???P , ? U
? O
w I J
0
~ R 1149 ~
5 U
LLJ
J O
y? ? > 0C 12
SR 1307 Q
1 U
_ _ SR 1308 I7 J sapfy'_,,
R 1147
I SR 1320 s u=??n•-? O
Zi 1 w
_ [E3u'x u
N ,
m
0
m W
U W
PdEP mw U1 O_ I 1 h ~Z 2 W N
L° - S NMO-L
_- -- \'Y --- i cWi o
%
c lb cw? q)
0?1 p1 2 N 41 0 W Q. W co 4F- = J J
%
v O
k , O In SOOE 74
W (n ? a m t077 Z r? W 2 O a
I 1 %% i- W Z0 in
OO j U W ti
--J Q o
%
5 5I m . ?,... 4
cs//bS 1) l 1 7 ?? 11
N 29 w `.?Lli
g W W // NS H 0 II? 01J5i
SP
/ f Ld
? N M
,?c`il r-?-? ? SR 119
O ? 0?/ 1vwSi' ? ? RWrln9 Br°?n
E R ?J?
SR 1002 ? /
CIObtreO 1 ?+$ A1NnO3 1-13HO11H
AINf103 l"13H31IW , q y`Creek cJ,
A1Nnoo A33NVA
A1Nn03 A33NtlA1`,,.'?=?
N y 1
W
J
L 1
o v , W SP 060\0?'
\m I Z p
m N ? e
sR I12
fa 7
9 Q W P 13p5 \ o s CEP
S ffi ?s 10E P
SR 1'i? P I x
0
/ SR 149
h
?S Is J
? J
h
1 Q
SR 1307 1
U O
? \ 0
5R 008
V I . o
1 W V) I_r=-?..-_ (i\\ R 1147
p
I ? ? I SR 1320 ,Y
I Q? I
a a
c
L fi
J
co
0

m W
T 7 Z I
d
I
OEP =`w aU1
I h
I 1 ¢ e
---S11Wi7 p?NMO
4' 03 R
et s ? 2 u, y oa Ffu?
E Him,
I W to / ? a m a°:
x 1 ? ? I ?? \ E g
^i
i i ? O'
_ -I ? ! W i0o9i
SR 1155' 1 IL &.
x cs CCt" j (n Jrry?Jp???'
D i` V Y
bs ?• ? ' vv yy
w I
Y W
£ 9ii N 0 1156 O??St;
6's
R
w a
W x
SR 1157
i Jy
onc l >
e 0?' ?w I ? Rya/ir?9 Br
x Q SR /002 1
C' Crabtree
A1NilOJ 113H71IW
A1Nnoz) ll3H311W 0q 1 Creek
A1Nno3 A33NVA
u
A1Nf103 A3JNGA ,',.-:."?
Mg 1
s
SR
x
N
x
H
n
x
SR
I
W

0 ..
I
In
ti l
I
uuw a ?1

i
a zw
w
p U O W
J ~
x¢x

x
a
>xy
h
N
N
a V 1
a
\S I ii'
4, V
tip. 5R II< £
1
1
a
U m
? ? m a
_ x
Y2a??- _
?? ? S3/.?If- -?\ w
,L
?) E
O _
i I V
C
L >
>
j
h
a
N
a

t

ti
H
U

W
olo?
Z
A
W
ti
?W
A
I
W
0
0
c
0
v
a?
U
'a
F
in
a?
7
b0
6T.(
US 19E
US 19E
SR 1 186
Figure 6a: Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1186.
R-25 19B
NOT TO SCALE
-- `
US 19E - _-? no
SR 1 186
US 19E
Figure 6b: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1186.
R-25 198
NOT TO SCALE
US 19E
US 19E
NC 80
Figure 6c: Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and NC 80.
R-25 19B
US 19E
NC 80
NOT TO SCALE
- US 19E
Figure 6d: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and NC 80.
R-25 19B
NOT TO SCALE
US 19E US 19E
SR 1 149
Figure 6e: Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1149.
I R-25 196
US 19E
NOT TO SCALE
`-- US 19E
SR 1 149
Figure 6f: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1149.
R-25198
NOT TO SCALE

SR 1 150
E3 9
US 19E US 19E

SR 1150
Figure 6g: Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1150.
R-25198 NOT TO SCALE
SR 1 150

US 19E _-- ?- US 19E
--- ----

SR 1 150
Figure 6h: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1150.
R-25196 NOT TO SCALE
SR 143 1
US 19E
SR 1185
R-25 19B
Figure 61:. Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1431/SR 1185.
SR 1431

US 19E
US 19E
SR 1185
Figure 6j: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1431/SR 1185.
R-25 196
US 19E
NOT TO SCALE
-NOT TO SCALE
a
SR 1300
e
US 19E US 19E
___ Figure 6k:' Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1300.
R-25198 NOT TO SCALE
SR 1300
Eel

US 19E --, d ` US 19E

Figure 61: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1300.
R-25198 NOT TO SCALE
US 19E US 19E
SR 1002
Figure 6m: Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1002.
R-25 19B NOT TO SCALE
US 19E --_ - ?- -,` US 19E
- - - - - - -
-
>
-- - - - - -
SR 1002
Figure 6n: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1002.
R-25196 NOT TO SCALE
SR 1160
US 19E
US 19E
Figure 60: Existing Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1160.
R-25 19B
SR 1160

US 19E
NOT TO SCALE
Jrp
- - - p
US 19E
Figure 6p: Proposed Geometry for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1160.
R-25 19B
NOT TO SCALE
SR 1272

US 19E US 19E

SR 1274
Figure 6q: Existing Geome try for the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 1272/SR 1274.
R-25198 NOT TO SCALE
SR 1272

US 19E --- US 19E

E3
SR 1274
Figure 6r: Proposed Geometry for
y the Intersection of
US 19 and SR 2/SR
12 1274.
R-25196 NOT TO SCALE
m
T u w
7 Z
? I
I P??P mw ? d I ? \
Sl/W17 _ 't NMOI _ _ N
? +`? u\ N
w ? ?' E
1-? --I// `??? g O
i V r! ? O in
W cn ! N ? a m
4 i ? w
- 1 !
58 O'
2 1156 ,?
m
dsi J D
m w
Z9/r dS, H ? ? 1156 g1 JSC?I .'
p u,
o w
SF 115 a?
0??/ Pw? R`oaria9 ?Brana
e? SR? %
Crabtree
A1Nn03 l"13H31IW
A1Nn03 113HO11H q Creek
A1Nn03 03NVA
A1Nn03 A33NVA
1 ye ? _ ?
o-
SV
a o
0
W o
(j Z N C N
10
o $ N o U o
0 o U q M H o in
h O CS y J
y c g` Ze li o
O Y ? li ? W li ? _
N ?i g' \i cd C Qi of N
m
0 U
h
g
C?
U Y
° g ob m ~ to C° °?
0 0? o°° jai` o? C
g°m ?x
° o h e o
C to in ?° Q. U 3 2 LL.
N M VP vi 'd r: N of O
0
APPENDIX 1
NCDOT Relocation Reports and
Relocation Assistance Program
EIS RELOCATION REPORT
® E.I.S. ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
North Carolina Department of. Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WBS: COUNTY Yancey/Mitchell Alternate 2 of 3 Alternate
I.D. NO.: R-2519 B F.A. PROJECT State Project: 6.909001T
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: US 19E Improvement Project from SR 1186 In MlcaVille to the multilane
Section West of Spruce Pi8ne in Yancey and Mitchell Counties
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Residential 62 13 75 3 0 10 36 26 3
Businesses 22 4 26 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 4 1 5 0 0.20m 0 so-150 0 0-20M 1 $0-150 0
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS 2040M 16 150-250 0 20.40M 37 150-250 4
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70M 24 250400 13 40.70M 46 250400 22
X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M 14 400-600 0 70-100M 56 400-600 7
X 2. Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 8 600 up 0 100 up 17 600 up 4
displacement? TOTAL 62 13 " > 125 37
X 3. Will business services still be available - REMARKS (Respond by Number). .,
after project? 2. See Attachment
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, 3. Yancey/Mitchell Counties have numerous small businesses
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. which are not impacted or minimally impacted by this project.
4. See Attachment
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? 8. Last resort housing will be required because there are
6. Source for available housing (list). numerous houses/mobile homes that are old and in poor
X 7. Will additional housing programs be
needed? shape. It also appears that several relocatees may be
somehwat low income.
X a. Should Last Resort Housing be
considered? 11. Public housing is available with the Housing Authority in both
Yancey and Mitchell Counties.
X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. 12. After reviewing the MLS; talking with realtors in the area, and
families? looking at realty publications, it appears that adequate DSS
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project? housing will be available.
X 11. Is public housing available? 14. Suitble business sites are available according to Carolina,
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing Mountain Realty, Premier Mtn. Properties, and Burnsville
Realty.
housing available during relocation period?
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within
financial means?
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 18-24 mo5 kzT!"

January 13, 2005 ?4ti•?
E H+:

X7,05
Date
Right of Way Agent Relocation Co dinator Date
FRM15-E Revised 09-02 Urlglnal a 1 uopy:. Heiocation Woi?niaw9 Cnnv nblelnn Relocation File

I
N I

01 I I ?
L

` I -- I I I
N
°
h O N

Co _
° C
Y
N_ L
v
(D
a
' N p 7) 0
I= N °

(c
CL o
CL
l
!
Y°
a
°
I c
(n as 5 N
C O
0 a0
M I? L L m- 0 0

W
I
-y

.
ca

03

t

71 _
a) 0
h L
_ Nom...

=
ca
E
i m
Io l 0
?
l `
y
?
'
aL
I?
I y
(y
ID MC)
s
a
C C m Q d
N
C o
C N N U -O IL Y
°U d
. °. 3 E(D m?
c ! o
I 2m
a)
a).2
2
JS:
?i3
1
j
taco
Z: 3
12
L?
h N
?V
0
DC
=
i
LL dO
N _
ImV
V
I
: d
m
= co
0
Y
v o m N E N
? I o o N C
a mD

Q I , IZ 0
U LI
v
Iya
co N
at
I
7 D
0N0
N Oi
c3

'
a1 a) C
co
E
10Ca
o'a?
o
< a"
Ia lac °D
o
f 'c
ma
I
°

d

Im

o
0 p

co 0
m

V (61
E

... ?

1
N
i
a
!0 NY ?'
13: m
a)
`- a)
a d

Iz U
O L

y
m (0
!
I

I m
d N ml
I
¢ L

?
-? O
IN li I I I ! ' I ! ? I is
I°; I I I I 3
i I ? I 1 1 3

I? IO
O I
i0 'O
O C
OI
C
N I
f0
O 1
0
?0
O
O
Y
C c c
I? I
I ?
j I ?I i I I I
' I
41 ? i 1 I I
• O co N O,(7 W CO C
Y O lli
r IA G N l0 C C
c
W a
W ? I ?
I
I I
I
(D
C L?
NI v
j
t m
O C ca ao o
(c
as
(
C CD `
?
Q
N
0
N
f0 `O
CL m
ca Q U CD
co + p j N
a) C
N
I Q).
O
.0 ca
r
C-)
CL

N
N 0
= 5
D
N 'D
C
'r CL a)
CO
U C's -
a ca (D
I U)
y
CO
CL 0 Q ?
a
U I (
a
O O o6 n C O
O C CO
d) ° ° O D
12 E
I
a
a)
cc: ?
a)
id N
o
m O

'

L

°
°a

Q
a (o I w Q. N 0 ca P ° .
ia
c 7? N a
= 0? op? f m ? -aNi d 0t y tic j) ?
I r m
Q ?
a)
CL
I
! Z
I
F
I ? {
a
s c L E Z a d ? N ?m3? ym ? a
CY U

m Eo U a) nL Em co j j °o `o a) >.
cn
o '
m
cacN
Q. N O -a
N
!
(0 NI
0

N
C m
L b
U a
Y
- m

a)
N
o

?
C N 0 C

O
C w

02

C
CO

N

Cn
_°-yl

= O E

a) NCO
01 2
CIS aOOO)111I

C =
0
O (n

a
) p
a`) oi V
l a
H
m2
?
L
Z O C
a=aci
tc
a
?
N O
mE

...
m

IQ

O

1

I

0AI

'

C

?O

`N

? O

C V

H C

O N a

UO

L
c

C
I
-
N
(pNr

O ,

q
=' 0

p

3
I o? Y
I .= C N
C'- =' 0
mom C/1
O
C
R' p
Ni

= N Q
co

o CL ` Q

CD CL

(Co 0 I
?E C
CN0.

3
L =
° I

U C d
N
V (?
°

I O
ON .N

1
O
(Lpl

-

y

r
ia)01N

C tC
0.
y
L
,<?'C7

NK
Y'

' pi I
.O

0
?+Z

a? 0
co a1

ca N•
MfN0

O
°

•
3
Q ?
O G

N CD O?

0
L .

N`1 t0
`
a) tU Q (D N D

C`ii
C C

=E
O co

A??

= O

roO

L 'O
Id J CD N: 21Q I m ' QI Z Z .
0 N' O
(.7 _.. EI U W I 2 LL Z H i C/) L N N O O;;i - ._! O Di U D7
1 I
ILL
% c
O O d I N I i
LL LL ! I
u LL ILL
Il i
L-(n I
In LL I I
LL W I
CLLn I I
LL I
U-
U-
U- I j (
? .
LL
Cn
i
a
?- 0 C O O 1
N
G -O I C> 010
OO fn
l
O OI c> I
O O
O O
O O
O ?
O I O
O O
O 1 O 1
0 0 O
O O
O
O.N
71Lf7 ?O I CO t17 N o o I O O O
I C i
a0 n m 1 0 I aa Ir I ?
IQ mlc+M Ir '
I I rir
I
I N I co
! N I
I CJ
I ' N
I N ! r
? 'N
II
? I ? ?

N ? ,

f7 R I ?

IN C6
I i

r.:

C6

O
O
r I
r ?
r i
LV I
r I
L+f
r ' I
I
r I I
ui (p •
r Ir
h
r
I I LI
I
i I ?
C7
O
N
CD
[b
c
N
Q
V
C
O
d
C
a)
L
U
a
py
T
j l
L
o ?? ? I

'D o f

'o I

F ?
N = O

I
r
o
0,0

C R

O.
. 0 :3 C
0
a
ra
Ian
! I
r
- o
N
E o_ a
m
` ,

O
'y C _
i
OI
L
" I
I
- 0
C Qi
O C

° U col
col

ar

ca .1

o' i .`

m

E

`
! 1
' N
0 d
n j
.0 ''
a
! CSI j
. I n
SO m
DC
0.0 o
r c 2 >

!

N
u
1
O co N
_0 all
o
N L
5
N

f0

N
° N

j
d pj
' OI

I
:5 9 02
i Q
L

l
O

c
Q

m p
i v m
m a v°
L ro ICI a
E d oI a 0
Oo Ua?. m cnU) m mm
l ? o
IN 1 0 IOI O O O O O O 'O CI O C

I I I
I ?
I I ? 1 ( 7

O

o

R

O

N

,

0

O

1 L7.

D

n C
;
O
c
? I I
I
L o
o

3
p cc
N IU
m
CD -
O
'
V
CL
N
C
a N d o a
n N N
d
N !b N `
°

N
m °

C
o

ro

I

L
N

I
U >

CI c)

y. co
° E

Q a

0
fn N I d V I ?+ N t7 'D
CnI 3 N M
N W
I U) I m
` o¢ I ?
v E i E
U co ?I d o c
m
`o I
a p y
ca 0D
oV m
? N
?.
o
L I c
n c Nm
? a cp
a>
CY)
NI cu ` U
n
'
v U
m U
U U
o
o

CI

E O
T ji F-
6 ?,
I 0
D c
+
? m
J r C ° ? L 0
o '
m I LL
O
C I E
L 7
ca m
c -m LL
?O f)
CL L
) .
dl
1
.tC (C9
5

- J
y a
tN0 UI
Z
I s
co
om
t
_
tf

?
d CL

. a 1
I 8
O mi
I
` cu N
E? atil
?; Q
,
..
-
`z V
U I
°°j? m
3
d a 0
m°' oml

p1 EI

?l t

U I v

w Z aO

U 2 E
0:1
? L
2
!/) L
O
U Z
L O•>
I- Eli d

ml oc

> a? Z
? I I r I , I
LL

U LL I

N LL I

?
1 LL I

N LL I

U LL I

U I LL

N
I
'LL
U1
LL
co
LL
Icn
ILL
U
LL
LL
U
O

c O 1
I
m 1 0

0, 0

10 0

N O

N O

N O

O
O
co O
10
N 0 10,
10 C
N 0

m
O O

0
O
q , 0
N I N r N 17 1: 1*1
I I i 1? ^ N

C6

i I

G

N

i

a II

ei I

16
I
n c0

1 O;

I0

r
O
r N N N r
N N L
N N N IN N 1ID m
co
0
N
N
cV
d
Q
C
O
.N
O
C
N
L
cc
Q

N
The Division of Highways offers a Relocation Assistance Program to help minimize
the effects of displacement on families. The occupants of the affected residences may
qualify for aid under one or more of the NCDOT relocation programs. It is the policy of the
NCDOT to ensure that comparable replacement housing will be available prior to
construction of state and federally assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board
of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize the inconvenience of
relocation:
*Relocation Assistance,
*Relocation Moving Payments, and
*Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be
available to assist displacees with information such as availability and prices of homes,
apartments, or businesses for sale or rent and financing or other housing programs. The
Relocation Moving Payments Program, in general, provides for payment of actual moving
expenses encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or tenant to
purchase or rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable financing arrangement (in
cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and qualify and.up to
$5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in accordance
with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act
of 1970 (Public Law 91-646), and/or the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-
5 through 133-18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in
relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At least one relocation
officer is assigned to each highway project for this purpose.
The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced families, individuals,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations for relocation assistance advisory
services without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will
schedule its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for negotiations and possession
of replacement housing which meets decent, safe, and sanitary standards. The displacees are
given at least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT purchases the property. Relocation of
displaced persons will be offered in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public
utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of replacement property will be
within the financial means of the families and individuals displaced and will be reasonably
accessible to their places of employment. The relocation officer will also assist owners of
displaced businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations in searching for and
moving to replacement property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will receive an
explanation regarding all available options, such as (1) purchase of replacement housing, (2)
rental of replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-
occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply
information concerning other state or federal programs offering assistance to displaced
persons and will provide other advisory services as needed in order to minimize hardships to
displaced persons in adjusting to a new location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the displacee
for the costs of moving personal property from homes, businesses, non-profit organizations,
and farm operations acquired for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for
Owners, NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for
replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs
and, if applicable, make a payment for any increased interest expenses for replacement
dwellings. Reimbursement to owner-occupants for replacement housing payments, increased
interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed $22,500 (combined
total), except under the Last Resort Housing provision.
A,displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to
rent a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on
the purchase of a replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state
determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the NCDOT's state or
federally-assisted construction projects unless and until comparable replacement housing has
been offered or provided for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to
displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining eligibility or the
extent of eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any other
federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not
available, or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial means, and the
replacement payment exceeds the federal/state legal limitation. The purpose of the program
is to allow broad latitudes in methods of implementation by the state so that decent, safe, and
sanitary replacement housing can be provided.
m
w
Y
za o
W W U
W ?
O U
?z
z?
U
Q
W
01

w Q v rn

z
0
F b T N
_a
./
?[. v

lE V
N
L
N
L
V o U U
LU
w
Q
N
tC
F

O ?
U
O
?
y ? V
0

U
N
? N
w
F
A
? ?
N
N
Q O O M

U n N

? w
o
o N
w
O
3 w ?

0 0
0
0
?
? a o
h
T T T
d N L
A
E A
E tC
E
s
o
0

0
7 ?-
V
<
Q

-
? s

w
[--? n. N C1
N
Ga
O
z
v
a
? a
z X
W
W W
Q ?
Hz
U
w
wQ
CC
F
ti
T
N ^
N N
c ti
b ?
O u
00 (U
s
'. Y
a6
O ?
F. U
W
.'7
R
Q
w
m
W
Q
? [y] {3?
N
N
O ? Z f +

.?
W
W
1 i?

cQc Or Or
-
W

l
Q r

q
W
04
a
F'
3 o 0
q O rn rn
Q V
a
F U
q
W
W

z 0I a =
z

W v W
Fn Q W
o
W
Q U
Z - -
<
q
=
? 7
z uuj a a
a O
O o
O W ? m U
¢Fy ¢ cn
$
a U v
o
p W
U.

a
d
o z ° v 5
a <
5
a
m
W

V _ N
W
y q
O
O .`
4. N
N C
t
o
fi .o
c
o ?
N
O y
U y
0
? N
?L.
?^ W
A m
v
? U
o ?
.c
o ?
? 0.
d ?
Cs.
o V
c ?
H N
T ?
? O.
? U
` E
v.
o
o °c
aA
d d
O O
qq
.a
v
m
A
a
O
? a
zW
W W
Q ?
Fz
U
w
dw
F
N
a
a
T
C7 Gq
C rn
N
N N
::) a
O ZM
rn F
? U
00
c
E T
W
W ,.
rn
u
E
'u.
w

W ? ¢
?y] L[]
M
M
?
o ? z + +

w
w ¢

J

O
z
}
Q
W
F -
U_
O
.a
a
0.
} ? w w
F'
3 o 0
0 0

O
U
? O
W
a
? a w
.a
z
a z

W
w
W
i
m O w .fl ? ?

¢ a
r
Y
u.1 3
x ?
¢

Z W a -
a
a N
z 0 s
W ° v m
a
z
u
o
O W
LL 'n ? N

y l V m a
..
W
M v

ao
a
m o
o .`
w
t .C
r
E '
O
?x
N ?
o ?
o
? o
N
C
O
U y
N 7
0
G y
eon
o U
.F
O ?
U r
r
?? a
v o;
N
c V
y M
N N
T ?-
`" a
? U
0 0,
.b .E
N y
n. 'o
O G
P. N
N N
d d
Q Q
v
a
O
w
W W
O
U
w
H
cO
a
T
Cq p?
? rn
N
N N
cl)
O 3k
O O
U
C v
8 DO
?I
rn

E
Y
Q
m
w
w ""1
W W
a N N
o z + +

N
W X

w
O

U_
p

a
F'
3 o 0
p o - ?
Q a ? N
?
F U

? p ?

W -
<
w d Q a _
z

-
F
w d
w o
W
CO O W N
-°
z

w z 3 v rn
F p n o
-
W X O O
z W w u
r
CZ T
O o
O
F W U W
F
Q
cn
p E
W
U- N
O Cc.
N
ct p °' 9 v
o
a a ? .
m' u

? p
e
3 ?
A
0
Q .?
v
v c
t
E .`
Qv
?v
o ?
s
e o
t N
Q N
U y
N 7
0
C y
?Ln
tCd OQp
C U
Q A
.c
v
a
m ?
y w
? V
G M
N ?
? Q
0 0,
v .?
N y
Q L:
6 ?
y? N
U N
C C
pp
,.j w

A
a
O
? a
zx
w
W W
Hz°
U
w
a
a
T
M M
?o O,
N ^'
N N
Z
O Zk
? E.
b 'c
0
O 7
" U
b
00
U
cn_
E T
O O
i. U
w y.
rn
cn
2
ro
m
w
W
o'w?z +

>¢
LLI
W
LA
0
z }
w
U?
0
W V
a
l
Fv
3
0 v
i
0 m
m o
o o
o
o
K '
V m
F e
W N

N
O

cl N
z 0
a Z
u
N
F o
a`
0

o

Q LLJ

z w a

Z O
W ^
m
m

U N

LL

? E
O
?y

U

U
z

a
.Qa
S w
pG w
a
U
W
? n
n
- v
n
-
04 ?
. o0
O
O .`
U
? C
0 0
E y
0
o A
o
? o
? t
N
U y
N 7
d .U
0
G N
N
? G
n oon
o
o ?
N r
d a
as ?
? U
N M
H N
T '-
m G
? V
O p,
b .?
N y
O C
a w
N
U N
OA
A
a
CG
O
zx
W
W rW
Fm¢- O
U
w
w

y
a
T
m m
N
N N
O 3k
- a
O\ F
N
b
O U
0o y
w
O ?
w cd
W ?.
V)
Cd
.v+
N
(D
m
N Lit] C[? N N ?D ' I M ' N O M ?O N M In N .-. rn v? v? t? ? ? r

? G

Z)

o

o
I
ioo

3

10,

3

a

3

v

?

?r

?r-?
I

?o,

r

o

-

rn

?

?n

y !?

3

?

rn
{> i ~ i * 1 I ! i* I* i *
I i*
LLI
1
I
I
I I I

U

Q
3

? F
N_

Q a?
0
0
a a?
0
o
o.
0
y;
o
0
o
?n 2'
0
o
o
0
yi
r rL
0
vi
rn .?
0
0
N
0
0
r J
0
0
v C
0
0
M w
0,
0
r
' .?
0
o
-
0
yi
M
0
o
o .,
0
o
rn .,
0
vi
- C
0
o
r a I
0
vi
v, w
0
vi
r C
0
o
?0 a'
0
o
? cL
0
v;
_
-
- _ _ _ _ 1 -
U I
? ? L?1
W Q f
uu a w - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

F
W rwii [ail

?

?

?

?
r
cc x
v r l x .c z r - - e v o0 0 ? c - r ' n
`
I ? ?I ?
Q
U
?
F C7 Q $ w v w

w X O
zwx ? >
=
.o .
?

F
?

m

U

m

m

m

m

m

m

w

w

U

U 0

U

m

m

m

m

m

m

m

LM

w

CC
F
u

Cl) U

z
o _
O
(L w

`J
?j
N
U

y
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
V
U
U
U
U

y

y o
?j

y
U
U
N
U
W
U
0
U
0
U
0
U
U
V
U
U
d
U
,Z
^ [? N N N N N N Y N U U b b 0 O b
? J C
y C
y C
y 9
y ;C
y y 'O
N b
y y 0
'
y 'O
y ? y
O Q
O y
N
x y
m y
N
x y
N
a y
U
x y
U
x y
W
x y
N
a L
U t
U >
m >
w
O 7
m 0
a 0
x 0
a U
x N
ct U
oe N
a N
x L
U N
a
U - ?n ?o r oo rn o _ N ? ? vi ? r o0 a o ? N -1
{r
. o0
b
3 ?
0
O .O
?. v
v C
o
v
E ?
?v
0
o
? o
G `^
O vl
U y
y 7
G y
L C
} w
n a0yo
o V
o
r
= a
?ta
w
? U
c?
N N
T ?
Av
o
0 y
O C
c. m
y y
v v
?A
v
a
0
z?
W
W W
Hz°
U
w

N
fn
(d
ty
T
Q7 CG
,?D rn
N
N
aC4
a?
'b K
? U
s
y
T
O C
2
E
y
N

? ? I I ? ? I I I ? l
U
W ? Mo ir V? MiN N in lip ? M M C M <{ M N M M AO i
N N N
V
OLQ +
i I
r _ L
c
G ? I
3 10?
?O M
r M
oo ??
? I? O M
r l r -
r 3 ?O
'o D\
co 3 Q?
4n W M O
r vI
? IO?
1l N P H IV
U X a l a l a
J Q I• w w w Iw Iw w + w w Iw .w
i

I i ? ' ? I i
r
•
.__
-
t- ? t I .
? II i
L i I I
I
' I' 1' i C

I i
a e[ cC z ? ? -1 a a r[ -j ce -j -j -j -I U -Ji ce -j
-j
-j
3 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0l 0 0 01 0 0 0 0

D
D . v1
?D O
- vt
?O O
a O
- ?n
0 O
0 O
?D h
x N
?O vi
V vi
- O
r O
r O
M ?n
x ?n
O O
?O ?n
O l O
r ?n
O 'n
- O
N

F p
,
V
'
' v c

O
v r
?o ^
? '.O x .O r x x ?n r rn ?O N ?D ? O x N ?G O r r

Q a
F C7
? Q Y
U
W o
[L

Q ice. Q O (/i yI V`
z w a = Z)
J

c
0 0
w m m m m m m m m u U co u u co co m m m m m = W
Q ¢ U .

z COO

u. vl
W w ?
U d
U ?
U d
U v
U d
V ?
U d
U
y
y ?
U
y
y d
U v
U v
U
y d
U d
V ?
U a,
U ?,,
y
(1] C
U C
U C
C! C
N C
C! C
U G
U C
N y
d y
Y C
N y
d y
U G
U G
N C
L y
d C
L C
U C
U C
U cj y
U t
~
° ¢
V1 y
N N
N N
N y
N y
d N
U y
N y
N y
'? y y
N y
7 y
'J' N
U VI
N N
N y y
L y
N y
N y
tl y
'J' 'J'
L
F
y .a ? rL a: a' a oC oS cC tL m m a m m u: c+: w m c d c+: c4 U m U
W'
V r oo rn o - N M y In
M In
M c
M cc
r1
In M o
V -
V N
V rn
O a
V ?n
C
N N N N rJ N r? M M rn r?

00
3 x
ary L
o .s
L
v?
00
,11 x
c ?
0
5
?o
? r
C '^
o =
U y
y 7
d L
O
C y
a c
} W
m m
o U
a
C N
U r
r
7
?? a
Ha
°c U
y M
y N
T ?
3 °oa
a .?
o y
o °c
L ?
o.
y y
v u
Q
r] w
M
v
a
COO
O
zX
w
ww
W O
F z
U
Cz.

ti
a
T
cm
N n
o ?
? .v
b Li
0
? U
DD
.V+
T
O N
w
Y
Ca
Q
ti
w
? I ? ' I I I
LL,
(f.?

'
M

I
M
AO I
SO
?
V
?n
V
O'
er

°
M

M
Mj
?0
?D
?O
?O
M
VI
VI

MI

MI

VI

M
O u7 + + +I + + + + + + + + +I + + + + + + +I +I + +I +I +
Z ,
--I . I ? I I I

(
? j
? = ? D`I! o0' NI
' ^j r a\ 00 a0 V a0 r r ^ ^ ^ bj ?D r O CI r ?O
?'
I ¢ i + +' + + • + ' ? + + + + + l it + ? + i + ? + i + j +

?I , I ? ,
I Ill 1
_

1
j ? l I ? I
o ? j I i I
? j

j l I
-j U ce Q: _l ..] cC -1 _.1 ? .? _ -j o c C4 cr. , z z .? -j
3 CA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0
'o t
o
0;
0'
0
0
0
0
_ N i°D N N I 0°O O°? 7 N M C I V V O°+ O°? P v1 i°O O w C v'ni
.
F U T ? - -
W U I I I I ?
N
W a
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
"

z U

z
04

-?

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

- -
0.

z u
Lu
[zl n W
N
?p 1 ?D N 'V c r1 ? O V ?/1 7 °t Vl n ?n Z r1 N r r1 1

-
} v?
F C7
cn 3 LLI

X
°
a
z
z u
x
o
0
w
=
m
m
m
m
m
m
U
V
U
w
m
m
m
U
U
m
m
U
m
m
m
m
m
co
F
4
' ¢ ?i
}
?` U N
W
p
(„?. W O
?y
d
N
6!
4l
N
O
N

U
GI

U
O

U
N

U
N

U
6l

U
N

U

u
U

d
V

U

d
U
CL1 U U U U U U N N N L N VI N
N N N L
C4 yO 0_ N
o N
v N
o N
e N
v_ N
g c d
.5 N
c N
a N
v_ N
,v_ d
.5 d
.5 N
0 N
0 5 N
g N
o d
72 v o
V v_
O F
v
v _
v
u
a"i
a"i
v N
> N
> N 'J'
t 41
u N
u N
u N N
> N
u y
v N
o N
v N
u N
u N
v I
u N
u
F a a cG a x x x x m m m U W. w o: 0
m on w n: m w a C d a a
?y r a0 D` O -- N M V a' ?n ?O r a0 U O ^-' N r1 cr vi ?p r o0
K V 7 v: vt ?n vl ?n ? ?n vi vl ?n vi O ?O ?O ?D ?O ?D ?O ?O ?O
Q ?
m ?
m
o .°
o
fi .o
v
C ?
0
? o
N
0
u u
N 7
L d
C N
? C
rw
V
? Coo
u
0m
.. U
p
.Y
o
r
?? a
U
0 V
G
M
y N
T N
0 U
O p,
E
N N
O C
aA
N N
r u
Q

U
a
fY?
O
zw
W W
a
? O
Hz
U
w
w

a
M Co
N
N ?
c
r?
o 4t
v
p C
O U
U
T
N
O G
u"' cd
W }
a

Y
d
ti

j l j
?] Q V ? I
iV1 N ',n V yt (
I V1 M jM ?O b N M M V iM ?p IN
O W +
I ?+ + I+ + + + i+ + j il+ + + I+ + + + + I + ,+
z-? __ - - I__- ?_- __ •__. .-_ .-_ __ J _ _-
I j
a • + + + • • + + + + • + + + ?+
Q

?
I
I - r
I j
,
o j ? I i 1
r I
1
Q ` -- - - - - _. L
- - - - __

3 F 0 0 0
o 0
? 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 0
? 0
o 0
o 0
? 0
o 0
o 0
? 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0
i 0
n
O ? o
,n ?
v rn o 00 = ,n ,n o. v c P r oo M r c n?
M n
o ?o M o "
,n I
,n
O c

z O ° ? - _ -
a z
j

n
z
W v
a
i
r
i
v
N
M
M
?O
oo
r
.O
N
N
o0
N
7
,n
r
N
?n
r
T
cr
r
x
N
-
0
0
Q
N ? 3
?
P
a
? x o
Z W 0.'
? ?
,

z o
0 0
=
m
m
m
m
u
m
m
co
m
co
m
m
u
m
u
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
U
C?

U
E

"," ?° v
U
C v
U
C v
U
C v
U
C
ry
ry v
U
C v
U
C v
U
C v
U
C v
U
C 'v
V
C v
U
C
y
ry v
U
C
y
ry v
U
G v
U
C v
U
C v
U
C v
U
G v
'U
G v
U
C
y
ry
y
Q ?yj U U U U M1> U N V N v
U
U
0 V N U N U v v d U d U
a ? _, v v o v_ .E o ;o ;_ ,v_ v v v
_ 5

N a ,5

y 72

N 72 v_ v v_

?
o
N
a
H
C
N
c
ry
O
('"' VJ y
U y
N N
U y
U ry
? y
U y
N ry
V y
U y
V y
U y
v 7 y
U
x ? N
x y
U
x y
v
: y
U
: y
L
4 v
: N
w 7
m 7
m
a .a ? d n: cG C4 m o; a: o4 a rx a4 cG m m u a c v
U P
e o
r -
r Q
? N
r M
r -s
r ,n
r ?o
r r
r oo
r P
r o
o0 -
00 N
00 M
0o
ao ,n
00 ?o
00 r
00 ao
00 P
0o o
P -
P
L1
O .O
d
O C
O G
E .`
19 X0
0
a
.? o
s
O ry
U
ry >
G y
? C
t Z`
o0U
o V
C ?
o ?
r
N w
LZ.
? U
ry M
in N
0 0,
v .?
y m
0 oc
y ?
U
Q '.1
Q
a
O
W
W W
O
?z
U
w
w
y
N
a
T
b ?
N
N ?
o4t
Q` F
'b C
O?
0o y
r
EC
G
O
w`
W }?
rn
N
y
0]
Lull)
? w M V M N N ? M 'M ISO M M M ?O ?n ' ?O '?U M N N M
O w u + + I+ + I+ + + + i+ i+ + + + + + I+ I + + I+ + i+ +
z ] ? I '
I I I i
O+ vl T iO r r M
? - vt r ?D oO vi oO OA T O

r
D\b
l?o ?
w a a2 1
x ! x x x x x x x x ! I1.
x x x ix x x

I I I
t ? ?
? ? I I ? ? i l
I } '
Q i f L l

1 i
i

3
F
ti - ?
ol ?z;
o, Q?
o c?

o z

o C?

o z

o 0c

o

,

o z

o ce

o z

o C?

o -j

o
l r

0 ?- ?

0 -j

0

0

0

o 0

0
? ?

0
o

0

? cc

0
o
Q Q v ??
r ?
N o
r ?
- o
o o
rn o
n o
.n o
r o
M o
M o
r o
v ?
v? o
M o
r ?
rn o
? o
M N N o - ?
I
a "
o
? Q u
c
LQ a.

Z I
w .-1 0. o
y
az' r
Cd '
F V Q
? z 3 ?
Q
a
¢ a
_

Z

l l
0 Q')
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
u
m
m
m
u
m
m
m
m
M
M
m
m
m
m
m
a
U I

W o
LL ?
`a ?y v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U
y v
U v
U v
U
y v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U v
U

Q: Q N
V U
:C U
b N
b U
'O V U
b U
Z1 U
C U
:O U
;O U
'O N
,G U
'O U
'O N
C U
C U
9 U
V N
V U
:C U
b U
b U
'O
z
a
(n N
N y
N y
U y
N N
N
s y
U y
N .
y
7 N
N N
U N
U y
7 N
N N
N y
0 y
0 y
0 N
U N
U y
L N
U y
U y
U
o a ? x x ce a x u x a m x x m co x x 04 a x a a x x ce ce
.
w
V N M
\ ? M
? ?
\ r
a 00
P T
0 O
0
0 N
0 M
0 R
0 ?n
0 iD
0 r
0 00
0 D\
0 O
- ^-
- N
- M
- K
- ?n
^
[1
,? Q. D T O D

A ?
3 `O
O
o o
.
s.
o
? .o
C N
O
L
.? o
s
C y
o ti
U y
y 7
v v
0
C N
? G
>- w
go
o V
? b
s
o ?
r
2 a
v o:
o U
y M
? N
T '-
A 6
A U
O p,
b
N y
O C
n. A
y y
v U
Q Q
a +?

v
a
O
zx
w
W W
v7
F O
U
W
w

M m
?c C?
N
N 'n
0
n a
Q1 E"'
(1) N
?D .v
O a
l u
?c =
m
Ls.
V)
v
a]

l I I I ,
W,¢
W W
M
M
M
N I
? i
?n i
?O
N
?O
?
r I
?O I
?
iN I
M
N
?O
I
?D
?
r
-
M
N

W U
O
>
?

+

+
I

I+
I

i+

+

+

'+
I

+

I

+
I

+

+
I

+

+

I+

+

I

+
l

+
I

i+
? ? i ?

__?
.._
-. -
?
nO ?
o
e
!r
e I
a I
IN
'40 i
3

a
a

a
ir

?o
'-

lr
I?

ro
M

r
I3

a

r
-

r
3

a
io

;r
to

?o
o

lr
o

oo
00

;?o
13

a
N

r
i-

r
loo

i?
>iX l

i

I
i

0. W

?" <Y <Y d C ? ? CC lr -j w w w w 0L J .] ? <Y d d K ,? J
3 F' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

C
- - N -
-
-
-
-
-
-
O J m
s O
Ly
W V i - - N
?
fY
z 0 G ..1 c c c c _ _ c c c c c c c a = c _
a
ty i U
L
C O

b ? ? 00 ?O x O N ?O ?n c ?n
? M v ? O y N N n K r oo r n 0 M
Q z .-1 W
?
rn $
? o

Y = E
z w
01 S - a
z .
O o N
W m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m u = m m m m m

C4 E 0
W `'
W 1/1
U `'
?+ al
u v
u v
o a>
u al
u v
u v
u v
u w
o v
u v
u v
c? v
g v
° v
° al
° v
°
m
?'" al
° al
° Q v °'
? W C C C C G C G C G C C C C G C C C rn W 'C C G C C
„?
04

°` N

t U

v U

;v N

v N

:o U

v N

v N

a N

v U

v_ N

v U

v_ N

v U

v_ U

:o U

;o U

a U

c

? U

v_ N

,v_ N

;o N

v_ L

v_

a
U1 N
U N
N N
U N
N N
U N
N N
U fA
U N
N N
N Vl
U N
U Vl
N N
N N
U N
U N N

7 y

4
! N

U N

U N

U N

N
a a '? a' cC C w u: a! rL n w K a o: a 04 C4 rY d m D 0
4 c a G
c d
W b r oo O• O - N M R In ?O Q r O O -• N r? O M
? r
V ? ? ? - N N (`I N N N j N N "
N N M M M M M f
1 M M
Q
m a
3 `o
O
O .?
v
N C
t
? .o
v
0
?v
o ?
5
D_ O
? y
O
U y
N 1
C y
? G
Y W
v
o U
c ?
a ?
o?
r
a
? U
N M
y N
itl a
0 $,
v .?
N y
o c
6 ?
N tli
r u
Q Q
`] Y
r
N
W
n
4
O
? a
zx
w
ww
Q ?
Fz
U_
W
W
0.
N ?
N N
t?
o ?
O U
U
{-i T
W
W ,.
a1
E
-tt
34
W
an
1
1 1
w? Q
w ? M 7 ? M M N N ?O iD ?D ? ? h V1 M

? M
a V
O u + + + + + + + + + i+ + + +

'U o o o - N ? o vl ao r 3 3 - r ?o
w `O

w

a

o r I

U
O
uj -j
'
a v

-
c
' o
Vl y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Q
C)
C1
O
O
c,l
Q
O
O
O
Q ? N N - N N N - - - - N - -
U
F d `O
Q N
w N
N
z O

F w
W vwi ??d ?- 'n

m O ly
'ov r
vl r o0 0 00 0 N - v'J cr ?o N M
z
O

F C7 Q ? w
? (? ? ? _ c c c c _ _ _ c c c c _
fn Q
w X O 'O V)
Z w x
v
y a
z O N
W e m m w m m m V m m m m u m M u

Q Q
f?
N

?y m
U y
U v
V v
U a?
U
y v
U v
U w
U v
U
m a?
V a>
U
y
w d
' d
y, z v_ ,v_ $ ,v_ v ;c
N ,5 v ;g ,v_ v ,5
y d b .5

Q
V1 y
U y
U ?'
U y
d y
V
N y
9 y
U y
U y y
U
7 y
d y
U
a ..> O w a: ?n o: a w m ? a e
a4 a m o: w m
w
u w
a
o
-
N
M
V
?n
`O
r
R
=
O
0'
V
O
h
-
?n
N
of
M M V V ? "S 7 V V

ao
m ao
0
o .?
.. u
^? c
r .
0 \`o
E .`
C ?
0
s°
C y
O m
U y
O
C y
a ?
O ?
° c
O ?
r
d
v a
N
a
? U
y M
y N
?. y
1O a
o Q,
N y
o ?
o. m
y
d U
Q
a
? a
zX
W
W W
F O
U_
W
u4
a
y
N
a
C
N ?
N
? CG
0 zrg
? a
b
? U
C?
O ?

O
id
Q
N
w
W

W ?
W r N a `O r a M h Mi a ?O M ?O
V l
O
-1

U
I I
b
? a o OO N ?
l N 3 rn
? 3 o.
? a
? a
? ol
? o
r r
?o ?o
?o
? ? ?o r ?o r r r a o a i I

I I I
?

i
_

u
I

O
U
-j
-j
C
2?
G'
J
w
.j
Q
..7
tG
-3
Q?
Q
3 -.
rA
y
o
0
0
0
0
w
0
0
0
i
0
0
0
0
0
h
0
0
0
O
_
Q '? O N O
w w O
w O
r v O
a O O
CO O
ap M O
O O
a ut
Q a T O N _ _
?
F a ? I I

LLJ
z
o Q
a z
d

W
w
z P.
a] v
i L
i]
C u'
O
?
?
.0
00
?n
v1
.?
'n
-
?c
a
-
a
a
a
o

W

Q
0 - - - - - - - - -- - - -

F C7 Q A w
? 3 a P

W X O ? ?
z w a
0

H o ? U m u m U m m m u ml m m m m m cm

C
U
Y
v

7 i ?°
y d
o
m d
o
y d
o d
u d
u
y d
u d
u d
o v
u d
u d
u d
o
G W v u v v u = v v v v u v v v u v
04 Q o? = .a 5 .o 5 a
i
v ;o v ,g v o ;o v v v o
O z
ti
`? y
u .
y
o y

v .
y
o y N
a? _
y
y y
o y
v N
u N
u y
u y
w y
u N
u
F U m cx m ? m 04 o4 a m a o; n: c rX a' oC
W r1 <{ ut r 00 P O -- N M a vt r 00
V H h h h h b O b b b b

Q
A
O
O .?
N
r .5
O
o `u
y
C
O
5
O '^
U y
y 7
N N
0
C y
9 C
?^ W
N o00
u
o
=O N
u r
r
N W
o U
= M
=? N
T
m 4.
? V
0 1O
v
y y
o °c
N N
Q
z
w
.a
LO
F-'
O?
N
LLB
a_
F
.C
7
0
U
t
U
T
a?
U
W
cn
ID
O ? O W O O O
F F.
U
r
o ? p F p o 0 0 0 0
m
- - - - - -- - -
._
U
a
O
_
-__ '- --- --- -
o U
W U U o - ?n
^ r
Li.
C
?
o X? W m v `D ? `O ?
a ,
F
_

Q
Q ? fn N ?O
A LLLJ 9 M V O n

Z

F F
p
Q
F
O v
U s cy? c?
p N o
r o0 00 00
r
O O? ?O N
W O ?O ?O ?O ?O

LLI

Q
o o

b

?

b

b
V1 ? ?

Q'
..1
O
O
W
b
O
h
r
r N
r N
r
W m Y

o

O a, S m ao'
vi
W ° ? aC
O
F
O. a ?
U C

? ? ? O N N
p e°o C

E
0 E
0 E
o y E
R
Y LL LL W LL m
Q W
T W
O? W
T W o
T N
^ N

Y
m
?
N
rn
?
3
a
0
ai
? a
N
y O
6
O
.. a
V w
v O
? L
C ?
o U
? Y
Y ?
E
V O
Y V.
t a
E
o ?
a E
Y E
? Y
?ro
E
Y y
N
Y
C 0
A o
N_6.n
a U
O Q
N 9
r
a
? m
o Q
0
d'.
o
^ N
N
4t
Q ?
N
z?a
W ? U
? a C
W T
? y
O "
z?
U ?
w w
rA
W
? Q

FOF?? 0 0 0 0 0
aC)V
F

a
Q fail LL1
¢
zUj
,
Q J r„
O
O
O
O
O
N V
?oz
z
LU ^ o 0 0 0 0
N
Q
C4 v
V
Z N
o O O O O O
`
..1 N

w
a ? O O O O O
W
z
? o 0 0 0 0 0
O

F rn
X 0 0 0 0 o

a:
O

C ? N h ? N
O v
V a' o ?
.-1
O U ? •? Q

a
? 'c
c o
d O
F
o y. v
Q .? U C

F
a
O cn
?
o

c v .

N
m O
w LY U OC b a

E
0 E
0 E
0 c E
o
w q. .
Li
N LL

N

?
a N

a
r7 cn C43
o
Z ? N rt O
N
z
w
m
F
w
0
L
N
u
? N
z
C 0]
F
5 c
y
0
N '
tC U
T .G
o
c c
w^ w
'O '00
a¢
N
APPENDIX 3
Comments Received from Federal,
State, and Local Agencies
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
December 11, 2002
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe
Subject: US 19E Improvements from SR 1186 in Yancey County to the Existing Multilane
Section West of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County, North Carolina, State Project
No. 6.909001 IT, TIP Project No. R-2519B '
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to improve US 19E from SR 1186 in
Yancey County to west of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County. Given the early stages of the
proposal and subsequent lack of detail, we will limit our comments primarily to listed species.
We will provide comments on impacts to aquatic resources and terrestrial wildlife habitat when
more detailed information is available, including wetland delineation, stream impacts, and
overall project maps. Our comments are provided in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Enclosed is a list of species from Mitchell and Yancey Counties that are on the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants as well as Federal species of concern. Our
records indicate known locations of the federally endangered Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta
raveneliana), the federally threatened Virginia,spiraea (Spiraea virginiana), and the threatened
due to similarity of appearance bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) in the vicinity of the project.
The project also crosses the South Toe River on a reach designated as critical habitat for the
Appalachian elktoe and crosses Big Crabtree Creek upstream of its confluence with the North
Toe River.
We are concerned about effects to listed species from this project, in particular, the Appalachian
elktoe mussel and its designated critical habitat in the Nolichucky River basin. This project
likely will have direct effects on the elktoe and is an extension of two other State projects,
R-2518 and R-2519A, both of which are likely to impact this species or its habitat. Under the
Act, an analysis of cumulative effects would include all of these projects. Under the National
Environmental Policy Act, a cumulative effects analysis would include these projects and bridge
replacements B-2848 and B-1443, both of which would have direct effects on the elktoe in the
North Toe River. We strongly recommend that this project be considered as a part of the analysis
for R-2518 and R-2519A to adequately address direct, indirect, and cumulative effects to the
Appalachian elktoe, its designated critical habitat, and tributaries to its habitat.
In North Carolina the bog turtle is federally listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance.
While the bog turtle in North Carolina does not require Section 7 consultation, it is a species of
concern for which the North Carolina Department of Transportation is actively managing habitat
on mitigation sites. Additionally, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission considers
this animal rare in North Carolina and participates actively in surveys and conservation efforts on
its behalf. We would encourage habitat assessments and surveys for this species to locate and
protect it in the project area. Federal species of concern are not legally protected under the Act
and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, unless they are formally
proposed or listed as endangered or threatened. We are including these species in our response to
give you advance notification and to request your assistance in protecting them if any are found
in the vicinity of your project.
If you have questions about these comments, please contact Ms. Marella Buncick of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 237. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-03-063.
Sincerely,
Brian P. Cole
State Supervisor
Enclosure
cc:
Ms. Marla J. Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, 12275 Swift Road, Oakboro, NC 28129
Mr. Steve Lund, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Ms. Cynthia Van Der Wiele, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, Wetlands Section, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-1621
ENDANGERED, THREATENED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES AND
FEDERAL SPECIES OF CONCERN, MITCHELL AND
YANCEY COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA
This list was adapted from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's County Species List. It is a
listing, for Mitchell and Yancey Counties, of North Carolina's federally listed and proposed endangered,
threatened, and candidate species and Federal species of concern (for a complete list of rare species in
the state, please contact the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program). The information in this list is
compiled from a variety of sources, including field surveys, museums and herbariums, literature, and
personal communications. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database is dynamic; with
new records being added and old records being revised as new information is received. Please note that
this list cannot be considered a definitive record of listed species and Federal species of concern, and it
should not be considered a substitute for field surveys.
Critical habitat: Critical habitat is noted, with a description, for the counties where it is designated or
proposed.
Aquatic species: Fishes and aquatic invertebrates are noted for counties where they are known to occur.
However, projects may have effects on downstream aquatic systems in adjacent
counties.
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
MITCHELL COUNTY
Critical Habitat Designation:
Spruce-fir moss spider, Microhexura montivaga - Critical habitat designated (see the
July 6, 2001, Federal Register, 66:35547-35566).
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation:
Appalachian elktoe, Alasmidonta raveneliana - Main stem of the North Toe River,
Yancey and Mitchell Counties, North Carolina, from the confluence of Big Crabtree
Creek, downstream to the confluence of the South Toe River; the main stem of the South
Toe River, Yancey County, North Carolina, from the N.C. State Route 1152 Bridge,
downstream to its confluence with the North Toe River; the main stem of the Toe River,
Yancey and Mitchell Counties, North Carolina, from the confluence of the North Toe
River and the South Toe River, downstream to the confluence of the Cane River; the
main stem of the Cane River, Yancey County, North Carolina, from the N.C. State Route
1381 Bridge, downstream to its confluence with the Toe River; and the main stem of the
Nolichucky River from the confluence of the Toe River and the Cane River in Yancey
County and Mitchell County, North Carolina, downstream to the U.S. Highway 23/19W
Bridge southwest of Erwin, Unicoi County, Tennessee.
Vertebrates
Southern Appalachian saw-whet owl
Olive-sided flycatcher
Blotched chub
Carolina northern flying squirrel
Aegolius acadicus
Contopus borealis
Erimystax insignis
Glaucomyssabrinus coloratus
FSC
FSC
FSC
Endangered
Alarch 7, 2002 Page I of4
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
Southern Appalachian red crossbill Loxia curvirostra
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis
Alleghany woodrat Neotoma magister
Southern Appalachian black-capped Parus atricapillus practicus
chickadee
Olive darter
Southern Appalachian yellow-bellied
sapsucker
Appalachian cottontail
Percina squamata
Sphyrapicus varius appalaciensis
Sylvilagus obscurus
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe
Spruce-fir moss spider.
Roan supercoil
Diana fritillary butterfly
Vascular Plants
Fraser fir
Piratebush
Roan sedge
Tall larkspur
Glade spurge
Bent avens
Spreading avens
Butternut
Heller's blazing star
Gray's lily
Canby's mountain lover (=cliff
green)
Blue Ridge goldenrod
Virginia spiraea
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen
A liverwort
A liverwort
YANCEY COUNTY
Alasmidonta raveneliana
Microhexura montivaga
Paravitrea varidens
Speyeria dana
Abies fraseri
Buckleya distichophylla
Carex roanensis
Delphinium exaltatum
Euphorbia purpurea
Geum geniculatum
Geum radiation
Juglans cinerea
Liatris helleri
Lilium grayi
Paxistima canbyi
Solidago spithamaea
Spiraea virginiana
Gymnoderma lineare
Plagiochila sullivantii var. sullivantii
Sphenolobopsis pearsonii
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation:
FSC
Endangered
(winter records)
FSC*
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
Endangered
Endangered
FSC
FSC*
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC*
FSC
FSC
Endangered
FSC
Threatened
FSC
FSC*
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
FSC
FSC
Appalachian elktoe, Alasmidonta raveneliana - Main stem of the North Toe River,
Yancey and Mitchell Counties, North Carolina, from the confluence of Big Crabtree
Creek, downstream to the confluence of the South Toe River; the main stem of the South
Toe River, Yancey County, North Carolina, from the N.C. State Route 1152 Bridge,
downstream to its confluence with the North Toe River; the main stem of the Toe River,
Yancey and Mitchell Counties, North Carolina, from the confluence of the North Toe
River and the South Toe River, downstream to the confluence of the Cane River; the
main stem of the Cane River, Yancey County, North Carolina, from the N.C. State Route
1381 Bridge, downstream to its confluence with the Toe River; and the main stem of the
March 7. 2002 Page 2 of4
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
Nolichucky River from the confluence of the Toe River and the Cane River in Yancey.
County and Mitchell County, North Carolina, downstream to the U.S. Highway 23/19W
Bridge southwest of Erwin, Unicoi County, Tennessee.

Vertebrates
Southern Appalachian saw-whet owl
Bog turtle
Olive-sided flycatcher
Virginia big-eared bat
Aegolius acadicus
Clemmys muhlenbergii
Contopus borealis
Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) townsendii
virginianus
Cryptobranchus alleganiensis
Erimystax insignis
Felis concolor couguar
Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus
Loxia curvirostra
Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis
Myotis leibii
Neotoma magister
Parus atricapillus practicus
FSC
T(S/A)'
FSC
Endangered
Hel lbender
Blotched chub
Eastern cougar
Carolina northern flying squirrel
Southern Appalachian red crossbill
Southern rock vole
Eastern small-footed myotis
Alleghany woodrat
Southern Appalachian black-capped
chickadee
Olive darter
Southern Appalachian yellow-bellied
sapsucker
Appalachian cottontail
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe
Fragile glyph
Spruce-fir moss spider
Roan supercoil
Yancey sideswimmer
Vascular Plants
Fraser fir
Cain's reedgrass
Mountain bittercress
Glade spurge
Spreading avens
Roan Mountain bluet
Butternut
Gray's lily
Carolina saxifrage
Mountain catchfly
Virginia spiraea
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen
A liverwort
FSC
FSC
Endangered*
Endangered
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
Percina squamata FSC
Sphyrapicus varius appalaciensis FSC
Sylvilagus obscurus
Alasmidonta raveneliana
Glyphyalinia clingmani
Microhexura montivaga
Paravitrea varidens
Stygobromus carolinensis
Abies fraseri
Calamagrostis cainii
Cardamine clematitis
Euphorbia purpurea
Geum radiatum
Houstonia montana (=Hedyotis purpurea
var. montana)
Juglans cinerea
Lilium grayi
Saxifraga caroliniana
Silene ovata
Spiraea virginiana
Gymnoderma lineare
Plagiochila sharpii
FSC
Endangered
FSC
Endangered
FSC*
FSC*
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
Endangered
Endangered
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
Threatened
Endangered
FSC
March 7, 2002 Page 3 of 4
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
A liverwort Plagiochila sullivantii var. sullivantii FSC
A liverwort Sphenolohopsis pearsonii FSC
KEY:
Status Definition
Endangered A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
FSC A Federal species of concem--a species that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly
C2 candidate species or species under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient
information to support listing).
T(S/A) Threatened due to similarity of appearance (e.g., American alligator )--a species that is
threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
These species are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7
consultation.
Species with 1, 2, 3, or 4 asterisks behind them indicate historic, obscure, or incidental records.
"Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
"Obscure record - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
"""IncidentaVmigrant record - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.
""Historic record - obscure and incidental record.
'In the November 4, 1997, Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle (from New
York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south to Georgia)
was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans the collection and
interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation
has no effect on land-management activities by private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern
population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers
the southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.
March 7, 2002 Page 4 of 4
MA
Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499
November 26, 2002
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
US 19E IMPROVEMENTS FROM SR 1186 IN YANCEY COUNTY TO THE EXISTING
MULTILANE SECTION WEST OF SPRUCE PINE IN MITCHELL COUNTY, SOUTH TOE
RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NORTH CAROLINA, STATE PROJECT NO. 6.909001T, TIP NO.
R-2519B
TVA has reviewed the October 24, 2002, request for comments on the proposed multilane
construction of US 19E between Micaville and Spruce Pine. We are not aware of any unique
environmental issues associated with this project, although a previously evaluated segment (US
19/19E Improvements between Mars Hill and Burnsville) had the potential to affect the
Appalchian elktoe and other endangered and threatened species. The environmental
documentation prepared for this project should note that an approval under Section 26a of the
TVA Act would be required for culverts, bridges, and stream relocations involving Little Crabtree
Creek, South Toe River, Long Branch, Big Crabtree Creek, Brushy Creek, and other Tennessee
River tributary streams.
We would appreciate the inclusion of TVA in any interagency or merger team meetings related
to this project. Even though it is anticipated that the project will be processed as a state funded
Environmental Assessment, TVA would appreciate the opportunity to serve as a cooperating
agency in the preparation of the environmental document. TVA was included as a cooperating
agency in the State EA for US 19/19E, TIP Project Number R-1518 and R-2519A.
Should you have any questions, please contact Harold M. Draper at [phone] or
[e-mail].
Sincerely,
?gv
Jon M. Loney, Manager
NEPA Administration
Environmental Policy and Planning
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Parks and Recreation
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary Philip K. McKnellys iirector
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Environmental Management Director
FROM: Brian Strong. DPR Environmental Review Coordinator
DATE: November 13, 2002
SUBJECT: . Review of Scoping Sheets for US 19E Improvements from SR 1 186 in Yancey
County to the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County,
State Project No. 6.909001T, TIP Project No. R-2519B.
The primary concern for this project is the crossing of the South Toe River. The South
Toe River Aquatic Habitat is a Significant Natural Heritage Area of statewide significance. This
stretch supports three rare animals, Appalachian elktoe (Alasmiclonta raveneliana), blotchside
darter (Percina burtoni), and olive darter (Percina squan:ata). The Appalachian elktoe is both
state and federally listed as Endangered, the blotchside darter is state listed as Endangered, and
the olive darter is listed as Significantly Rare. The federally listed Virginia spiraea (Spiraea
virginiana) occurs on the river bank about three miles downstream and would also potentially be
affected by impacts to the river.
If you have any questions regarding these comments please contact me at
[phone].
cc: Project files (2)-
1615 Mail Service Center. Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1615
Phone: 919-733-:1S1 \ Fax: [phone] `, Internet: www.ncsparks.net
Or cA
1 Oc/? I .yR^?Y`OG
November 13, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe. Ph.D.. Environmental Management Director
NCDOT, Project Development & Environmental Analysis
FROM: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele. NCDOT Coordinator GtZI&O
SUBJECT: Review of Scopine Sheets for US 19E Improvements from SR 1186 in Yancey County to
the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County. State Project No.
6.90900 IT, TIP Project R-2519B.
This letter is in reply to your correspondence dated October 24, 2002 in which you requested comments
for the referenced project. Preliminary analysis of the project indicates the following streams may be
impacted in Hydrologic Unit 040306:
Strewn Index No. Classification
• Unnamed tributaries to North Toe River 7-2 *WS-IV trout
• Brushy Creek and UTs 7-2-48-4 C trout
• Big Crabtree Creek 7-2-48 C trout
• Long Creek 7-2-48-2-3 C trout
• South Toe River and unnamed tributaries 7-2-52 B trout ORW
• Ayles Creek 7-2-52-33-11 C trout
• Little Crabtree Creek and UT's 7-2-52-33 C trout
* May be reclassified to High Quality Water (HQW)
The Division of Water Quality offers these corrunents:
Environmental Documentation
• The environmental document pertaining to this project should provide a detailed and itemized
presentation of the proposed impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. There
should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required, it is
preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted
that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of
a §401 Water Quality Certification.
• As the Scoping Sheets indicate that this project proposes to widen to multi-lanes, and the facility is a
principal arterial, NCDWQ will require a Cumulative and Secondary Impact Study on the project.
Design and Construction Considerations
NC Division of Water Quality strongly supports improving the existing roadway over alignments on
new location. If an altemative other than improve existing is selected, documentation will be required
to demonstrate the impracticality or unfeasibility of improving the existing roadway.
• Due to the excellent quality of the resources (noted in the French Broad River Basinwide Water
Quality Plan DWQ May 2000) the DWQ will require that NCDOT strictly adhere to North Carolina eDE
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Divisionnf Water Quality
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699.1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), hdp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwellands/
regulations entitled. "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" 115A NCAC 04B .0124 (a) - (d);
see http://ncrules.state.nc.us/ncadministrativ_/titlel5aenviron-/chapter04sedime-/default.htm] and
NCDOT's publication. Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters (March
1997) throughout design and construction of the project. Please be aware of turbidity standards for
trout streams (not to exceed 10 NTU's) and construction moratoriums dates set by the NC Wildlife
Resource Commission may apply, based on their findings. Enforcement of sediment and erosion
control laws will help to reduce impacts on these streams.
Hazardous spill catch basins may be required along crossings of the South Toe River in order to
protect these resources.
According to the 2000 French Broad River Basinn ide Water Quality Plan, habitat degradation and
turbidity are noted problem parameters for this section of the sub-basin.
In order to reduce sedimentation in receiving waters, the following are recommended during
construction:
Use phased grading/seeding plans.
Limit time of exposure.
Plant temporary ground cover.
Use sediment basins and traps.
Same day seeding and mulching is strongly encouraged.
• Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands. Sediment should be
removed from any water pumped from behind a cofferdam before the water is returned to the stream.
• The hydraulic design of the project shall route storm water through grass-lined ditches. vegetated
buffers or to storm water collection devices prior to entering streams.
• Machinery shall not be used in the stream channels unless absolutely necessary. Vegetation should
not be removed from the stream bank unless it is absolutely necessary. Especially avoid removing
large trees and undercut banks. If large, undercut trees must be removed, then cut the trunks and
leave the stumps and root systems in place to minimize damage to stream banks.
• Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. Compensatory mitigation will be required if
wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
• Wetland and stream impacts should be avoided to the maximum extent practical. If this is not
possible, alternatives that minimize wetland impacts should be chosen. In accordance with the
NCDWQ Wetlands Rules 115A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) }, mitigation will be required for impacts of
greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that mitigation becomes
required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values. In
accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3)}, the Wetland
Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
Use qualified personnel to perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit approval.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Cynthia Van Der Wiele at [phone].
PC: Steve Lund, USACE Asheville Field Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, NCWRC
File Copy
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. FuI1wond, E.eecutn e Director
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Marla Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator ?/?,?i
Habitat Conservation Program, NCWRC "811- L^ `
DATE: May 23, 2003
SUBJECT: Review ofNCDOT scoping sheets for improvements to US 19E from SR 1186 in
Yancey County to the existing multilane section west of Spruce Pine in Mitchell
County. TIP No. R-2519B.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting comments from the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) regarding impacts to fish and
wildlife resources resulting from the subject project. Staff biologists have reviewed the
information provided on the scoping sheets and have the following preliminary comments.
These comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The NCDOT proposes to widen US 19E to a four-lane divided highway with partial
control of access. The project crosses the South Toe River, Cranberry Creek and several other
tributaries. The South Toe River is designated B Tr ORW south of the project crossing and C Tr
along and north of the project, however the river is expected to be too low in the watershed for
trout reproduction in the project vicinity. The following protected species have been found in the
South Toe River in the US 19E project area: Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana),
federal and state endangered; wavy-rayed lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola), state special concern;
blotchside logperch (Percina burtoni), state endangered; olive darter (Percina squamata), federal
species of concern and state special concern; and hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis),
federal species of concern and state special concern. Consultation with the U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service is expected. Surveys should be conducted on the South Toe River and
Cranberry Creek by biologists with both state and federal endangered species permits to assess
potential direct project impacts.
MailingAddress: DM,iono1lnlandFieh,.i .:Iia:-. _c,ic; r?h,ACI?'I
Telephone: 19 19) ?:z?-j6;; Fa_: (91'd) 71,_-,()4;
US 19 E, TIP No. R-2519B
Mitchell & Yancey Counties
May 23, 2003
NC WRC recommends an in-water work moratorium from April 1 to June 30 in the South
Toe River to protect the Appalachian elktoe, blotchside logperch, and olive darter during their
breeding seasons, as well as smallmouth bass reproduction. Cranberry Creek and other perennial
stream crossings should have an in-water and 25-foot trout buffer work moratorium from
October 15 to April 15. Sediment and erosion control measures should adhere to the design
standards for sensitive watersheds (15A NCAC 4B .0124 (a)-(d)) and be strictly maintained until.
project completion. Secondary and cumulative impacts are important concerns for this area of
the state and should be sufficiently addressed in the environmental document.
In addition, to help facilitate document preparation and the review process, our general
information needs are outlined below:
Description of fishery and wildlife resources within the project area, including a listing of
federally or state designated threatened, endangered, or special concern species. Potential
borrow areas to be used for project construction should be included in the inventories. A
listing of designated plant species can be developed through consultation with the
following programs:
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
1615 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N. C. 27699-1615
[phone]
and,
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the project. If applicable, include the
linear feet of stream that will be channelized or relocated.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreage impacted by the project. Wetland acreage
should include all project-related areas that may undergo hydrologic change as a result of
ditching, other drainage, or filling for project construction. Wetland identification may
be accomplished through coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE). If the USACE is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands should be
identified and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreage of upland wildlife habitat impacted by the proposed
project. Potential borrow sites and waste areas should be included.
5. Show the extent to which the project will result in loss, degradation, or fragmentation of
wildlife habitat (wetlands or uplands).
US 19 E, TIP No. R-2519B
Mitchell & Yancey Counties 3 May 23, 2003
6. Include the mitigation plan for avoiding, minimizing or compensating for direct and
indirect degradation in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.
7. Address the overall environmental effects of the project construction and quantify the
contribution of this individual project to environmental degradation.
8. Provide a discussion of the probable impacts on natural resources, which will result from
secondary development, facilitated by the improved road access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be coordinated with other state, municipal, or private
development projects, a description of these projects should be included in the
environmental document, and all project sponsors should be identified.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages of this project.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Marella Buncick, USFWS
Cynthia Van Der Wiele, NCDWQ
Sarah Kopplin, NHP
8R8
ono
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Historical Resources
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Office of Archives and History
October 20, 2003
MEMORANDUM
TO: Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: David Brook ?? ;=-rt5 rC>.?
SUBJECT: Scoping Sheets, US 19E Improvements from SR 12186 in Yancey County to
Existing Multilane Section West of Spruce Pine, R-2519B, Mitchell County,
ER02-11410
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and located the following structure and
district of historical or'architectural importance within the general area of this project:
RC and Zora Hise House, Intersection of Old US 19E and
Double Island Road, Micaville
Micaville Historic District, Micaville
We recommend that a Department of Transportation architectural historian identify and
evaluate any structures over fifty years of age within the project area, and report the findings
to us.
In addition, both Yancey and Mitchell Counties have not been surveyed in over fifteen years.
In terms of archaeological resources, this area of the state is extremely rich in prehistoric
occupation sites. Several different types of archaeological sites have been recorded within the
area, ranging from temporary hunting camps, to larger base camps, to more sedentary
occupation sites. Several archaeological sites of the historic period are also recorded within the
study area.
www.hoo.dcr.state.nc.us
Location %lailing Addresu TtltphoudFaf
AD?I INISTRA TION 507 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4617 sail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-7617 [phone] • 733-8653
RESTORAriON 515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4617 %tail Service Center. Raleigh NC 276994617 1919) 733-6547 • 7154801
SURVEY PLANNING 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 %tail Service Center. Raleigh NC 276994617 [phone] • 715-4801
October 20, 2003
Page 2 -
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist to
identify and evaluate the significance of archaeological remains that may be damaged or
destroyed by the proposed project. Potential effects on unknown resources must be assessed
prior to the initiation of construction activities.
Two copies of the resulting archaeological survey report, as well as one copy of the
appropriate site forms, should be forwarded to us for review and comment as soon as they are
available and well in advance of any construction activities.
A list of archaeological consultants who have conducted or expressed an interest in contract
work in North Carolina is available at www.arch.dcr.state.nc.us /consults. The archaeologists
listed, or any other experienced archaeologist, may be contacted to conduct the recommended
survey.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with
Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 500.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT
State Project No.: 6.909001T T.I.P. No.: R-2519B County: Yancey/Mitchell
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: Widen US 19E from SR 1186 (Old US 19) to existing multilane west of
Spruce Pine
On April 19, 2005 representatives of the
X North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
? Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
X North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
? Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed
? There are no effects on the National Register-listed property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
There are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
? There is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on
the reverse.
? There is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the
.y'
Representative, NCDOT
Date
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
State Historic Preservation Officer Date

State Project No.: 6.90900 IT T.LP. No.: R-2519B County: Yancey/Mitchell
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
N;C4t-V(11,e- Aso (b 4)
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.
Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT VC/
FHWA HPO J

State Project No.: 6.909001T T.I.P. No.: R-2519B County: Yancey/Mitchell
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: Widen US 19E from SR 1186 (Old US 19) to existing multilane
west of Spruce Pine
Onj_,? Z9, 2005 representatives of the
X North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
X North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
? Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed .
? There are no effects on the National Register-listed property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
? There are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
? There is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the .
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on
the reverse.
There is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the
reverse.
AA QAN/1
Representative, NCDOT
FHWA, for the Division =sti
?
Representative, HPO
tate Historic Preservation Officer
other Federal Agency
I
ate
Zg ? 5
Date
7&
Date
2
Date
State Project No.: 6.909001T T.LP. No.: R-2519B County: Yancey/Mitchell
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).

Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.
Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).
,aCpoT
Initialed: NCDOT V L FHWA?

HPO.S, L?
MI TC HEL L CO UN TY
P.O. BOX 409, BAKERSVILLE, NC 28705 E-mail: mitctygmitchell.main.nc.us
TELEPHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]
October 29, 2002
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
NC Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Re: US 19E Improvements from SR 1186 in Yancey County to the
Existing Multilane Section West of Spruce Pine in Mitchell County;
State Project No. 6.909001T; TIP Project No. R-2519B
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
To our knowledge, there are no environmental impacts that could potentially arise from
the proposed improvements to US 19E. Neither are there permits or approvals that our
agency would require.
Should you or your staff have any other questions or need further assistance in some
other manner, please do not hesitate to call the Mitchell County administration office,
828/688-2139, extension 110.
Sincerely,

?ft Harry Anderson, Chairman
Mitchell County Board of Commissioners
SHN
t 'tTluT.'.^'e `
ie? x*? (
KR-4 W
%"' W v?y y :? ?)J
6" fit, <t
??. '?~°-F *r ..e"tq?'?T ?'t?tt•• LC ? tv?C"? O /q l.t k?,?I?
?`?*` m pry '7}.i *i°, ln,.?. ?f"it ? ? ; r ((,.0,1?• r ?? q
p w'?6 g
i ? i ??P[ ik1?9 ? ` '? •: ° Qzy?}r. UUU,V' `
,, "rr rii 1! n 4t?f?*'Y.?T.•ki a'RR;' ?},
lw?

ww
w
Z N
w
a~
Z
Fw?m
O
_?
_? ZU
rn
_
? w=V? m
(n w N
? O
z O =
aF- H
~ O
4 C
J
(D w L
3

S 0
? I
w -a
y Z
?
.? <
W Cl)
N w
g OZ
?Q
LL ?

?' y o,
.I j
r. ? ':,.r;.• ?` . t-. `r.- ? .4? '>." ? x+` 4> ?,.3{gF?r• Sy4u?t? '_?., `?.
< .? 1T R l ? . ? ?, ? dux ? ? -b?. h? ?,?
.•"'??(?,+Y .t £ ? _•nl ?../ X4.•4 .e irR ?I R. ?;y''?a7 B ?°`. >aa` 'k'?s4+. tr
-oil
, Ii a -lR "n.
Y?t? K pl?`ljy "r ? ?q u4/!/!n - `. RS ? •a ?. _ ? ?f?:j? ,?T.l ,,/ ??.
-,, s's3^`'
• ? ?,e F?) "'kF?en?..?.(J.,3 ?j?j'? ?tR7 s i. ? Q:'' ? E , ?W ~ Y.
._FIT'm,? z's?• .? 4 RI .r t .;. _ .1 ,,x,? ° ! d'` •f?R,y, „? f
> " '- 7 v • .yam s
,
9ZZ t
f
TR
.. ? '...?"'; y _. ss' _ n ? o RAY b •"# 2?• .t. 4``2,.
! ?.?¢!' ` S ? `'• 4 !} tl •52:? ? iC, 2 ? ' ? - ! "`t t {l.Tw?{• ?f1.L
`??( L M1 O ; ? ? l
-
-
;. K4', vw \?^'^?(t`s?` ° FS 4 _ i•°R.., 603 y R, $F1ca ?h ??, ..b 4 ?\ S
a.,t?. 4:s?A I.• <_,.??i; ? •¢? :?R ?j?r` ?p: .,?s }Y?' m?.,o ??'? j ?p°Vp?q,.
9?Z t+? . . -? ?,y+ ,y .b"R ! .f ?? ? X1 ab?•az*.,Y, i 1 °? nu,:?
. f ? u` Rry S .? 'n « C f l
Irn
Ell Z15
ow.
f ! .?fe.?)?{ / \tiw ? ? S 'J':,ly ?12Rr
lilt • ?1'l:/''FRDy'- L ? (? ' i` ? tla f, ?.. 8
:r
t'
n >r G _
Sy o c'd? 5 'X `'* "y
ZVI
n r l
--• .L'r ..:.J?? Cif !.\, '41...,..??.? ?.r"w...Jr..s.....'1....nW: ,.p? ?? ?.?NMIAr.,.? o ?I?? "."? CaA
t ? o ? e V ? 7(. -`? j ...? Yype„+?. ' a •? ??y? y?? ',fig
.n-Y-eR "?' ?'• \ "'??}J". J.\ VV 3' / y• r ?? " r.:.,`V? ',t„ /t_ .,?' r "' ? .. S
. t .
/ L'" 'fCt V+
y, . *v. t Jr?'? A ate t('S -. • +y :r ?• Tire.. O ,?- . (y '.... _ ` u
?r a ?i. IA "? / Qf ?• ! O • S kt?'*1.?1 »I' ?i t ?f! fi,y? .. ? ?y?
{ ? w. 7h y 1 ?o- ?e fy i lT'?p'FY' ?/./; '?v. 4i t 3?•+h.?' ?J ,? m
-'I \ l - .? ,•n yy ?t • ^ A'IL`.
f may.. 0'. AL
'?`. ?? y4a, 4'`•• \ ; Y.?rQ,t.'r ,'1r t.?` ?•{.S' ... ^ o r L4 a
N ? -
• ?L
t>Z
t ., °,?.?.?y? G1'?,jJ?. '' ?- d? • ? °Y / o Q a.'f4 m = ??Z?.", •?•l`tj
_• , Yi Y o ! ^ 'yV??j^?r !J .. ? -apt ? 2??pi t ,? - [Y ; ?`..r? :aan ?, j* F<•/p.<?'e
4 ?? • ... l • `?`. 4? f [3 *t ?.-'•xdti? :T V?I j Ylllt "u ('
f?'V(Jttj ?r r g?f;t
It.
Z el ?s 00 , ? °; A a nt?s
????? .gYff I.•\.. "1.• _ ? ?• j }.?. -W`? ?tY r 1"t.?Y _ ?Yn? ??(. S
M..tz •: ? C1T ? 'c ? i a ? Q ?? ,?' ?. f ? -Y !!ff[I?JT'' JJTT••^, CU. /
r?•. .?",3` e'.'. ? f 4. ? \.' •`? •OV ? "4 5Y". *?s %&' s,. ?.''`{ `gtie?,.. v. t,
?.-" ? '3??r. tat Q , •:? _?O ? ? ? # 1?M?i?r?'i?r"l fl,^? ?'
W ll.?low, z
11 d Z LL
w S .f r•1w1H'n I i f?41'' Q `„{? ,I'Ny xtr •? .'•! ??J , ® yr l 7 W ?
W j O = 0)i
,&'{,.,,z '_ a? yLt1 ! ?. ` ; 'F,I,t.{• / =m- :,? to . ?:
u r n 1' S' J N
e v ti-$ 4 a ? : Y ? " 11F t? ? WdJ r o
W
t ...'. 'a ??aa ?a? ?}Y`y.? ! ??^y?((r P .?i1?- • w* :? -yr F'ee??{ ? ? St. p%'?• J<.?n '{-..CS '? ? ?22? u? ? pip C ? pm
:p: KX?"1 5"iC?,?'. J'"1r 4?NV.iT •`^ :a p ?6b V y y 7 O w 0 O
%
?45 cc
z CL
"Ir ?} aw 'yyr}F ts? At"' tti• _ ty'.`?m'E:.1'+ c7 ??u co (n a p•
i tl ? a "?.
f T ''?. a<- jtf S .nyt k 0 'C i. ?' W }
t {4V' .e^- UTM' S 4 ".f; }7tV f1.. a LJJ F
v`r' •{ ' .' F l-r r,,, -s „4' `>rtE. ?z O Z t ?
r(rf` ?• ."i?a4 .. 4wy. t` c4 p``yf 'x, LL
r
r x
?,?r ?? ? ?. •, »?' e tug bb p ? i? cl n? ? ? ..tJc
r >.s.•{; oo $ t k s?j'.? r? ,? r. 9:' ? a o ? z • Y o ? ,1..?1G/S'? ? r Q po P ? ^t#`??-t
{
s•
?
"?.
v fo' yys,
i •r`. oN ?}". -i-
y 'may = e i ? a v t, ? r x .
° ?°. il"y`?_ ty. 's 74?-?t y-m.5:`? ?}'r, `n t pk7??A, s?Q?y?F?"?,6•?•.,t, ?jd.. • f? dl, ? f.??
1t?"k' _ ?•`?? ?, r?yy{4?.,?t'a. r •_ F •?'J' b a ..Cip?, `S??Yt'?x•-?. ? pr'-?
5?? `r.. Ar• u ?-?'4 ?Y.K? ? ?PJ•_"'? ??? ltr _ p0'? F4 ? ?a ?' < $ a? {? c.
`{7" ?` '--1 , ?.. C'r S' "?w{ ! ^t I T ' u ` q )y r.! :;: f ix •' ?l u i
hyK y {t'0. S p ri
1)
r • A?'p9'?'* 'i"?`y?.`(-'? ? v. ,,?' i?." f ?r r - o? 4? ', o Yc ' ?Q(/ '
t ?t?`p s• b ?k'TTtrv.? w *?. ` - R.?j `G6 $. ? d? ¢f ? o -°b
?. " yy 1` { th 3?? }e'?a.d•??'?„ta? (?'}" £.? in p na sx
??zk. ? ?` " ?'`'~ X'KT'% `?' ,'• ` x^? 'a"t ???'?w I ? ?" ,. ? ° , ?? YyYCJ^Ya?" ?L?`Syc v•• •` N" ?rf? a?rt;.'??.?.?+ . Q a:' +- ? ? .r- o'pi? _ ??*>-.13 g??'1°. ?'??. ti ?° .xr ?' ? r^ +'L??k?????,°`v ?1 s a_ a•?
ZT;
? Tt? y?t?sy?
d •
+d A.
`c.y! r '{k {aro ?, • r ?dx.( ayyt. ` k ?{'-!`'X?SZZ _i> "^,,,.
y '?aY :Sa ?? ?? i,'?3a' ?'?" C ?.?•'? i"' IM rr?+?tZ y'?T ?-.r ? S'' ? ?c.+=?!'•" a'ilSY
_ ?'ti;? 1 .??; --^?'•y[<w'??? ?" 1 ..-2? 3... a ? %!z `{0 , "/ 4a ?„'? cY?? `? `?ik n'IC? C
py
+'4?]S4 .-?'_s lT?.r.' ?? ??' r 11.0. ,.w a^J ?t.• AT"C`-Y?p Y..- j
fir 'V
! q
G ???? _ ? RJ. ? t? "t }?, ?-"•?y'?"?'? ? ? L`?Lq '4?-??Q , t?? ? `4t4,'y? ,. J ?,2,.?i ? - ? - ?J ?t+- ' "`- `.
v ..4 v1A, ,T 7"' r .t •7`dg!' i xs '„F `-2"C o YR$ ?,?.g '?6', f,:'- ?l h n
a
3wF
b "?. a--• L as 'w?+.Sr?p, ?d ?' '?,,,a. l .??(?j y)"?`•,t?£? ,?}s. c !QM' J,, 6*i' o- t30 GI? 0 -9'" '"T'4'6
ms's _ a.- +Y,'? •,._ _-? c?`, n b'?„ ''?"?''?ik'k tiC.1 ` ? ? J K.y? ''?( tl?l ? .., ? o1So ? `? a 'S-'? ? ? ?,E\ ? Y°-''? +?;t -
y?? _ '? ? `?? _? y`Y ? --?r ?y rr ?`.x'i'-rl ?•bat ti N. ?. QUO •b'. '? o' ?{ r'? ..ji4. ~ /-l
Lccy <,•?+. " Y .t '. ». ? r t .Fl-.4?1"rt .y^.£,x ia. ?. r !}Slh4?.pga ";i?1"_ ? ?.
?" .a _ C4 ? ?-T't•? ?., t -{nti., F3??ic?? ; 4rM1a?: ?s "?) ? e e`{??2J!?.ot w'?° ?. `e','7 tF -?{ ?...,
?p,'+*u. ;'...,, a,?,.?r-.t::H' o:, ?u ?+. 'ay4? "-., { ?e •y.',, ng a?sj?I, _,U $ 8?. .t.•{/F 6 +-?s',,?«?•?-,:;,s"' r.
LL 9 ?
?..:.d:dFR: +......,._.. f!f. .( ,'fin-.a. °' -j'?'? N ,.n Er• sA •-k' ?'k ?,
x
? u ?? ` •? 'A ? i? $? ?' ?t a" ?? s t y ?}4 ".?{ , S?Y'•C yp..,Yr ii
? '° - ?? ++ ?- i-? ? y .? 'v ? S ? ?? ism / ? 0 ? q , ?. _ ?
F. ,7' YU? .p -ra- • "R'=J` '` s...?nnn{ ®;`' 4?._? 4 v ?? a, 3 lyrF Y ??`_ / Kc
dcY: a? S vA `t ;,'`+?`.?t+t,?'p, `4 s• f •\!'. r • y??61 5,??a?? ?,?,c..tY.-C .
??? ?o? 7?,'h`y j??i'?,-i-??''?h? _ r' ?-:. ? ?? ? ? \' ®• 4 ?.. _ ?E"? °i:?144??-GY ?j.?
2 ?' _}? ??ta •`. x"`?t,te,.?? ??,r•.'?" ?x•r'r???' r S A??'
;'.?".=T f c> Y `?6'7.. ?y '? 4 °•a yf •,,; t i `L?F+- .'S ?p,,xi d}- ?' s?? ,`i E Ir
? 'R y.?xb ,b T"° ;'{'?"r"'.i+?.`''"?''' p +??+yya/, ry, a$9•s •' xis ? 4. }. •o u? Sa.- r f.
,.,.. .?•¢ ,-`: ?, i i.'.' }?' , , ?• .c• ,"" •'J'rH.'S y,'t.."`o r `_' ?y au-.. n '+?.,,?3.7 J t c+ d s . 'fir r
y'^?, .a ?- xy. v ? ,. +?c}?`7^= ???t L7V• ?'?f 1? Y+'® ;? %' ?`?`'?•• '5 ?, _ ?'+-$$?' ?"'.
i 3. _ ? \?r F ? _-? s a ,..o` ? ? v?? ?.•1 ? 3??'?dr xak. ? ` ? ?~? f'??7.i". ? ° ? }? ?.
e
tea. y y ? •Y'.. a. C-„ S Y4?.`, t1 lq _
Y' s b M _ 5
t ?&4 •ay, `! , .,?.,, 5' ? • . +pSY nY f ? x?.. +' s 1." x ? p 1 "? rt., • ? ?U •. a9#
+ t? t ?". ?,,rAF
,. ? La+°.?.'???.e?.?C7.1??,+,. nQr _ _ ?.. ? ?- .J :-"*'m• `iC'hr ti ? ? ?.. s" ? ?? r)' ??. y
.. r y? iii t ? + J
4 iy? }? ?? `4 •"?`? \ +.?.. °-'?t .r ) ' y?z?yt?Q? (? - ?'T• r xr° Qy.. ?...?.yZ,+: t +r i _
TM?,?v„ z + ? ,??`2.. ? ^y5?. a ? 1 ,.A.?O o i ? • ?.""'f { ?° ° `" (? r T ! ".?Q ,:•1a`.'r• `t" r????- 4, ?'r
`; fir; i •:, f7 ~< ?+?,'? .,•-,?,y?`?, t . ? ? =tl :af. Wr?-
~
R 55
_ l??y n •? ? nn ? 44j;O ? ??? •M ? ??J •? ?s?+?" Vr . Y T_ u-
nt •( d )I:f r + ~+'.
70
i?, x (? ? sC S
41e _ am4t'
i.
? tom{
IL4S
(y ? ?? . C-ltk_'?.y4Yt !. + , ? t.. tir ?'?'?...:.si • ?? ? "?' +?#;? ? ? ? x,M1GS?,(4
v
x
V v .?.
z? ir4 ?? ? "Y

W LW N
W
r
az
F W D Co
O
Z
rn .
?
T-
W U?
4
EL -j
> coLu
o
w0
o Ut-
U--

2 r Z
Z i
??Qa
U
? 3W3
y U) U } d
p
2 ff 0 C)

LL
?
t
y4 r' ?M.41 fIr Y ZA ? .. ,rii ?T 8k3 ' ? 'tf.?) r 4 ????Jj•?? _ _
l I?•1 ff ? f
+? r^ ? J ?' ?• ? zip N `? ~ ' ?
..? w ,a ?:?' _,- <?-.x 'k '? M.• ? ? d .... ? ^sF j $ r- ®r:? ?,?r: 4 oc ?.. 'a'"-.?. yC"..
'" ,.y'Q ?,;?? `'b 1?^" q ':,. •as..n, ??? i ? x •vlr"* Ch s ? ?iy aV??`{A ? ?
pp w^
rr ? ? ? r en xr. ?.
?F?r r ? x ??lm? ?d'?` ? CS «; t 8? •`s o ^t ,? u. ^' ?•?: ?!;)i f ? 3 k -
11 1
?' ? `fl! ??n'. ?f. Q?A'r 4151 ?.YT ?• ?+- _? ?• 0 a3 ,.' ? t?ri `' ?. L
?M".. er 47 ys?'r k ? uY t "?T _ J L..' ra '
° A?•-.fie'^?? -+? ?:U`S,. .µ ? ? ?rry,/+?13<1 ??R 1fl56 ? Q?'tr ? :.
?_:q?r???? ?•f?• ? F? ? fF Gii ??yxf1"?` ?:' '.vsy/?•' - 1? ? 'p f.
'pt '{. ?? yai?A 1 "C'??ryf f? 'T - C?. F+Ayt f!-Gi •1 !9}s? 3" i'-.i
,? •L 3 x.,...T ? ,aai . V ?3 , 'Lf+i f °.? ? - yr.
A 4
;_ c ? t. "? `? -k? , ^ + -" a? ,- '#' ?f q ?- ? Y ysa.'' 'd''w3`a '+x,5 e
?7?5j?s ??, ? ? ? ?(? ^? Q?f '; ''?' •? . 4Yfi.?YY r•"?44'&'?"4 ? ?? - a,#„ < °-•`????°s
`*r? C
n i
A
y
'- y. r d A g a f .. - P d si' ?? Y?''Y - 1 °S
1 'T 1 -r . ?-
o 01 o?p ? k
??. ???.: ? ,???'? • ? R 115 ._ ko ?
Fz=-?'-*J .• df? 1 '. L4'-e.
PC b
? _a0 F y - ? ? `•qy,'.?? Ct + ,/ „} Vl . CI'?"y"<?''?'`'`?-? •dI ? 1.
"r ° t? : r?.'cyt?y, r" ?. ? w ??, 'O,. Q l? aq(?t?? f: ? • ?.j)`F?o C?
"..,':+. G si+L'« F> Pt1?'a.C ' SY.r` .t b YI:.°,} 'C? ``f
lJF
, Fr
r . y
y, :a'i' •.? 'r+ . i,. 'Q; ?"'fjt ? O t? per;

H

Z U
W N
?' a~
( FW7) fT]
0
7 Zv
rn
?.U C
j CN
o _
> N W
W O =
a?
U Z
ru
c
LLI
L
N
'
0
$ w p
$
0
za
?a
U) U) CL
=QYJ ~
i Z

c.
f '
J TJ
T-
7Y -'Y •? iL Ytr. {{?/ .y: °??._. • -r -:gjT' ;F R !'-' . ^a
?+.?- -" ?« rr K - g ?• ?. ?, ?? as 3
?FI?F 0 r v? ? t L ?y f+ 0 fi ?? m. . 3??'?Tr'?".i?nc • w: :y °,".__, `?
?,g ?3'i-r ? ?. ,? J i ? •..`?•a'??f?- f / ?. ..h O.. .r ?! ? t-/. 1 F>'` `?"q•.a'?a. Jrn P-]' ?v, ? aV
?.. w c"u- ? ?.:, RS•}r?d?4? i, ? .r? 'sY'?' { ??}?+ ?? . .' oo.-.' r e {1t ?`?,
J..
.. "? ..e '-isyt-Vy'!y .. Yr '? t ?$.:? Ct°?'t ? 7?pp . t3" O 1 _". - _5-•f -'r t. QF,.Q 9 9 ?ai y*:.F ?T4y1 ur 1t7 y1N - 4 ? J ?J 417
G? '"'`,LF +e-:E•:?? ????.
?a.Ja'Wi ... t o Y'
s ?'.?;
%
ass ;+ B"'•- _ ?}. ?: trt?' }? ?L.Ji??? Q?t ? ° >;` • yo ?? r L t^?t?,? ?:? '? _ ?j.?.??,.
rfL.?„i {;'?,fS. 4y "? O. 't ` " m N/ i vy"°f„' c.•ri
°4. ro ?' s'.\'` ?' <, i•?}'Vr,'i•v4t ) E.`. '<:.t 1O.
i?'. ?•1'?J
6.::43..1
;% FF
?""'I"` •Y ' _r. ,.[+ '' o
I I r `+»-?, ?C?dv" ?} IF
d y tr + ?p? f. `'
jai
FIN'
?.,} n yy ?y?r fifi
•'^t4,
btu w*? y JoP 6 +ry 0 ?1' a _, Cr?`^?j/'j?? l s Z?ul ?J
re?
4f. rl
F,l
~+ n t, . j?F1( { .rte(' b y '... i",C
'A,' a r ry, 'Y Jc, ? P ijyM ?g- Wi. ? `1^'va'*?,c?•.-??t ?R ? 'Y" r
r:
%
• *c
?'f,
d 0 • Mt t
?A, m+ •.. 'J.D ..y fit.' M Iff((? 1? 1• "u.? ?? 1.?. ,• y/? ,f1 ,? ?r K ??' ;.
%
n?64F_l
17,
?t A -
7. +r : J .`?_ ? ' ?dd f i?r?`Y 6 og7: I,?fl'.f; 4 0 q `} •r , ?N Rtj O
%,o 7, 17
??? ? ?~?'.[ 't+ln+.}:r. C 0,. ..°tl???s: ?? •,} °yy?y`r?J'?F 1 ?.y .a.. .?. : 5. y o i j(???;. _ r?? O
''t?-+.?.k ?? w.r. i' il.F! ? ? ? ? ° E' C{/ . r 'i!' j • ? f\ 3i iyir{ ` 4 ?? ? • r a ^a,,....
`?' ? _ f g ?? ?^ ? .o-' '-.7: * >q, U °Hy} ?•? "i ?,`r'? 1 z r: , 2 ?a???".
fjo
va?. ? i} :rt i y a _??;?`-r .1? O - _ c ?.i-• S.Q? ?'S.?.° ,. ? ? r Ic- ?jj ?•
'fL? ? ?? •s} ?R ? 4 i ?F! N ?/'??^*?XYr} r '' f '.A^ r ? { a"?'
r e ? a
Ap !jj
LC.j?(?®??????? L r y' ".Ff4'? ??Yk
t ?, L _ /! j??3yy
tyt '4 C4 `?? / i41`'y? `(1'Y`tr ,YS.; 7 $. P I Y r'.
Z_ Fl
° s .. v # 1s,A ,..tier ?. +.?} !7 \ .a\d }! ??V ?5• .:k • < .,eye "?l^ ?,3 d
h rt*;r ^}y-. { tl it'? 4a?_ ? ???h ??????? ? q?? ? w?^ •sl.vAF a *.
,s?- ? j ? r ' .,?! ? ?i: ? -y p?°; /?'0 ?t sS? ?? pp,,., •?Y_ ?•t.,,x x'?„r`r
oj?w ?• F. ? ,gS y,j.. 9#i`rY?r??3 r ! P 4 ,' ? ?, . ` 'l y?-,,;?yi•_ ?LC...wrr' r r, _ f.
?'" ? ? ??• ? i !y ,f t?i7?P,. ?'.. !'. ?r? ?? ` ' ., x.YP .7p?'r?w'. i.... o-? 1? ? ? s y
.6 Jt ?'` ++s iYUe 4? ti
i,; . A,?e-., t •? 'yww"*?..,???yR.' t ?y1 S S n , 'r :,? _ ?tl ?. t ?; • ?
0 ? 9?,ftf tt Ar s a 1 ?S'J? ?? ? . `7, l?' •.+? k?Aw3?. t.
?r•? •? ? ? ?F, ?'?_. .: .' , ? , •??, .tea' L '`?{,
_. __.•_ Di• a'!' "' '?? '•, ?o ' .>. Rif .

N
W W
Z_ N
W
Q a z c?
:D M
rc Z V U
7 rn
w
?? W U
wa

$ _
>v7w? o

' C) m
of 0UH
z
F- U

24 O 0 z
.-
n %
?¢

W v7v7}a

C) C)

?
r

LL Q
}
hyr
t ..
t

5. Sty ;' %-!%'t m e .a ` FFa
70 "?- < tci =t}i.? ,y-- ^4 O ao r' q
C?Mt`y'e?('? 4 ?,':T 1^-••-•` ?it?iS.?'r? a ._ "1 _ ?y' ?? •?.r. O?J ,' ....?1 ?y.,? y 1... ,!.!f" ."ti__•?LY?; ; r 1 ? ?4???-f„?'- ?-
' ?/'f'?y. ••i t t c'1? x Fd .n: et:?. a?"m.3+'+edt' -,rw'. • K .! (?S° i ` r -¢txv`f'' c °'. > r
W !x" M1 r? .ik t. ? 4 n4 S>
Ud:•? sv` ?. C ? `b ? r°a ,r.. G,i ?C?.a ? > .F a. g • ,
ns B
?°4 ht a.rp?•y.'i?' ' "k>.J f ; ^'t - op - .. Yy?• ? v'??i•y.#^. .",a?""'"?` 4 `h. a , ° 1e
k 1 ? "''?-!'?i' ? ?. ,?°.: - } .6ytiYC' ?' v^?0? ?•? ?? tr ?y r ? ?_ ?? ?-^? ? ? ; ? ? .. r, 3?
,+••i.F', `?1' „c Nr i Ak •^ a?_' !? ,'" _-•^L 't:1 ?. y3 v?J"rrq r.,fc
v? ?tI
+vo "fit is ir• +. , t1 ,.?.W - ?O? ,JW t?)?. ?t
gran ??''. ya ??, _ ? ? rl ? . ? . iu... ?°. ?r ? ? ? r a ??T n ':+ !i'? JY?'•
?.? ??j???,.;,?.t?.p??.rr? ?•? ?. ° y?. y ? ? ' - • 1'? ??. ' ° "?-n i:.? t • ? a?D ° c''7 0 °::
s??#???P Y, 1? U+. ?/? ' ?'ft 7•• 1? . 1 ?' ?? d tV bN? a 3+?? 5? eQ ? i{+G -M1l? ?.
a ?•' 3\? ?s , tiia?,?: . Rx??7 ?. ..-,?.y. ? k w'4?".G _kti« t F ?? .? .. rE,?",?J .,.?9t' ? ? 6T ..
/?pa/7 ? `"i? ' ?r t.? „'. ?..?. ?, y rQ?irLr ;; "?? ?!f ° ' r ' ©: ? '? :;`?' X? a? ? {t ?
/`,+x-? -+"i«..c?r. •'C'a+r- 3147- * -+c r fS / 4,. Q
'?. .-4. ??•d•'ic ;r T n a..-- i .:.p ? T+? C.' t? i) m i • n ?t r
i
?wvoWM_;?? Y fJ-
\.? ?•. ?rvtl 7r3- }`3 ` 'b? ?i v8.2s73 J• . A
w. #" '9y t '* i,J• " i i''" r"S +,..:. 'Fl``'y. 4i ,
10 oil d5 > x.? «6
o Q f:f ' s^ ffv?"tr.?tr A,a ?Y'i t +L '. .tr t _ *`?:: 7'! y ..? AYR ?? fir'o•'••j o r
to ?'.!•'+rrfr ?` r,J'..Crri ??'c?i4i? ?,,.. 4?s l,-,Aj rt»`"?"?;:a kb 3 r' i'r?} ?$?'£.1 .'
?['?'- .YY"?•? .' ? A * _. ?4 ? . ` { , a t' ? O'C ?` '. Q
5.41''/I ?•!.•.-M ?' .I LJJ Yy? r?' 1 ? a ? _ ? iy ? eT?,r?.qq ,a7
?. ? h fi?.s J ?A?rvh" .q ? ,. • • GYP' d:. f`? 1+ ? ?'. Y7 "'Fa+ ?•'F'•• $ S."j y
l?v"l °•t-# r' ^"` # ?,.`F.?rs-'S? , ? ,y,?a,goraY.q,. ts,r @ .o fyl•l?`=' c.,?yt.-•?
o'4r•'S'?• J ?G'. ?? x•?•.. ?? r: 5:? ?r'• `? ?br .-?.ki:?F° °.,- TJ l 9.Fr?.
e 9
,yr r. ¢^ G t ea3 li . o am+? .? "? .. f' ?& MW
+GSCri?, k. 'ter - U W y.y - F I ~ {--
?. rr?-.i ^3 ti:'P'E _?SG._ Y?. 'o ?'t ?. ,! ?r -,q:? ?'Y b 9 t ? 1•?? ?rvF'^rJ ? r. t
W ?' -tg4f - M.
i?--A,?,a .• ?• ,_ ?,'°' °ao ? o??f - ? ?', .r, t , ;.?•.?, y,..,p -?, .;, w Z_
•`q ?y i? r?Q ' s.++
[„ a'l.•S`EV?_ i b O ?e.: y?F S, .*1: '?" 'Ki '?A3''?'a.
'? '?(?, .. 5r`?.? Qt•,?+?" ? . ?-?r _ ®. , '?-a ., n ,. sad`: Y ? . m
h L" :p .w" x y Y y
+ 1, 1
ck,
T'?„? _ ? .a ? ?u T? .s •? ? .P f• `tJCa r ?? Y VWl ?' ? 'iT.r?S
' O Y?G9;>1?TJ"' .?. T w`'r p Oy+y 0 ?C1 W Y. ?. `l`tnl` ? _ ?J' o,,.?? •?z_? a/' to h.???
.?? "' ? - ' rt C? - ,,??•?, a - 7CW4 ' + i Y ?,.-r" d`?'7 1 ? ?d?- jar ? '...'?F
A a•+Y
' ? iG - ; i' 'r ? ?iL..d.,, N .I?' ?? °?'.? - {. wl? • U ? ?? r.Z•?.y'12Zr1???..
O g v $ar (_?\ rp' , dif- ?, " f Y'
NA
ell o,<' '. y -s.•'
"...6,? ? !..-.sN?,?;i• s`y ? y?»,.` asr•{ .?+ 3.. b ,.?: ,, '•ear} X- ? .r
- ct •nki X'r>? r ?? . `?°r' '`? 't? 0 4 y ,? '`?` • ` ? ? )b? ?• ? t ?.v.x A ?y lam. § .tr,?--. s, -r
? ? ? { '? t 4 tb" ? 'V ^i? a t''z.' r• ' ?•+4"it ' Wy. }Y., ` 0 Yk ? ^t' a.?4r 9i
p \
+tl? •. say ? i0 .&` ?,x r S ?S °v ?C - "?.C°• .{, F??? ?N..? G.'
O ? ? ref. 'rte W 1 O p ,? _ x • • { fM1 L
v
y
r s??.'tn L r `1
Y.1- •. \ 1 G•'1 l ?- U +li L• Tefr` ?1 ?.U ,p 1> u
lei,
t 0. ' a: S.. n CC ' o
s
/?+?? ;? 'l"?•,y?.,.:'? 48.E ?j"e'4.?< t???y D+1•+i? x?? ?s ? ?' ? °e i,
? ? w: 8 °??? i+-•"?t ? y ."?4 • -^ b d?? R ? ? '° xe N? O /'?° V e ai
.

rr<.,
't
N

_ co
LU LL
z
W
1 y
F w
aZ
Q
a FwD(n

O
S
7 Z V
rn

2 j
J N m

`
&

? ? _

CL _j .
> u
) w n

W O NO 2 L
LL O O F-
F- 0
I
a
F
-U C.
c
G w
° Q?
°,?z
i o a
?Q
W ? } H
LLI
f : C) L)
Z

1
C° tIX"• 9 p - , ryw ?' ",+c r c'i" + ?? y 'a ' ' ©? • ??wq,,.'? r? N? y?r? ?d r
???''. ? p9 Y ? K?'Y. 089 t • Q ly?l" ? ` yy. ? -?F', o } 1. f ? ?{ c
r
.
. a".r? ? ? ??? , ? °9 p ,rv y x fit.^. t+ ?'? x y 'O •J oy'.
S^.Y p? p
30
Fw q.° v a? i ?t; [h7,t O? I ?.7?i1 ? rerfv'r_?y,.1,°.^"?. C^ 8 -d .» 3' ?A 4r.laa o ?'
iR3 Yy?ebY . ? jJ °?.? > Y...• mt '? .?V? O 0 Q ? ° ? uy 1 Ly` ? i? ?'. S
"f' q 2 ir` zq,6 p ,*'l v' #l?X ?x - a? 1Y1/ "^ •O'? ?(Q (?tiJ rr ? ° ®? o g p? ? t? ? ?_'.iSyi..Cyf>V ?•?+ .
?t '~ aw j e .. ??,. .?, ,, ?•' }?" o,fl r :•'L?7?`I Il(((? :. " _ ? ?'°? 'p>o °.}M °?"( ??'?. ti, ? C?? ..-.
?Ss'?3fe'i. 3r?''. JR1. •i > .. j?3; : -h+ ' ?• r .mow ,q.? ? ' 9 ?° 8no ? _ `t °'? 9 .p° ? ?"?,,..Q y-^^. ? {?`?
ay'..a^.-wrst _" aq l'' ¢"s >-i? EE.'' F1° " ?'?"`' s ,,.tyy"c•' Z',! °['1,,'r'r ?j`^..
nN
e> J `E'rS?•, (I • ? Fil ?' a o 0o3g?(?y?.. _ ° Sl ,,y., 6 . '? `i?`'?2'ti S.T}? -
r ' ?? ??r+Y #.?? .i? tv, ??d4?*f' °?j's ,.fv?.. •(?. -r tf?`.5 j `ry'?ai,?
Iu ??p
a ) p r+'? 1?`,i J, V Y a ?wrr .1i 411's. c 6? . a It ,.
C
.r•? ffi ?'?,?,.?-- OF r' Y?R L?, ? ? 'xs", ? 'S` '' a?'f? ? rY ? p, ? e.ti ? ? ,? ''+' 1. ? ?"'? + .
RMa+ »?. `y ?, g ' '.. ?,; T/r ?-•^???y?'. j •?., .. aYF o1 ' '?'f?•'.
`• V ?' y,.s ?n ?u>:. _ „t i• ?+^ t?? t ?aa .F, «?• ?:•.- O? .Cay. { •? 4 r ?.1
4.tA?7 a ? i}.
lf?J? ?Py Tr + II4 JIx t ry° ®q lp, r
p. .( 3y''? ` + ? '• y 9d.?* Y 4'}Y'? ?!` ??' -?v +?'? t .,?'i r 4'.:, .? Q o ? 8 j fr ? ? ? v,?,
+" f 1..? ? ` ro Y;. ?. E. ,?,. .. ? +?: r ',? ?? ? r ` ! , Y?,...t1"•??Y[[???aS?y [.'i o ? t ? ?Cyp ?,,? 7? J
? A 1 ??` n ! -' / '}?,. ^+}? ?? >?lJ?? rr.^ .F+ ?? ,?$?I r?,f?y?', ,? ? ?'? ?.\,, `j(?yf ..? o?GY/• P'?.
••? - 8 r aZ' ? ? ? i ? i '? ?? { /•'4^. i?lf"f w 1 • .ate ? , i\ i ,» ? : , O' O r .{?v J
yaN ^ YCt omp?? F n
xQ`' sF A ?.. WT-?];r"'4n:. l.,v •?+.r. ? Y w.r?.. .?,)' l?ji:l?'ai..
ot,
p
Z? W
r" ter. +,. 'sue.-' i/ ? z7 (s.* t o lk"1?t,]?r ,? _ _? 7 2 ~ U'
{'?.? _ SyyY- _ ! YY'T }` l:.y Imo. yQ'Y jv,?+ ?'u, p.; § (S IQ cZ U O O)
H `fy .' N/ "\' ?5y%_ [ ? ?YFf'TIl -? r}. ?. ?l?/ 4 Fy\?I LL3aN L W J N LL
CL J r 0
ry Pl 'M .. 'emu .(7 }`('`-"?'..f ~? ' a?? :. oa ,'•?• ??/? -4yu NI ``'? '?` j'3? '? ? ? (? _ ? w
?fy-'Y A, n? /e... Y lAr 'a?.''.'°?".3i `?,'? .[? r -P m. -?L`kv,'`'S?; ?'?„s •fY ?:'? ??'it•s? ? 0 2' 0 (J F ?
TF1cY?+-I^^r ? ??? '1, o ('?• _? r° a?ff,l"?
U) U)
,^ -1 J.s? 4 - -?' •dd ,,/ ® ? r ? 1 k i n° J ' Yy Z
i
v -`
_ n v.

Cie
.
" C ,..? t as t ?'
?•^ ° yp
' 1 "tly
t
i
T`
sk-11 ?l
.41 V) 2c c
?i m ?cp z O
is 3 c^ / ?? a
t °' o ?c \\ z m D
-co 0) LLJ n
-0 Z LA
T? a r?r j o J
- O L r Z Q S J -J Ti W
a?' N }+ Sc= 0 0 o z (L w O
c av)z c? U
3° J c? V o m U c?zo?z q W Of V
0-? Q)
l w c
cn. - v v ?? ,? o tnfm t > O> U1 U
- U »- m 4 7 L O W cv 1 bC - -" O L? H x Z W
cn a o `? c o e z O o CL L 1O U Lv
- h c - ° Q: Z Q
c (1)
¦¦_?.• b
=C do
m C C/7 z? et' ? ? L J' Q ? ' ? 4 is
CID c
V
4b 4-1 xsD LU
:iE %A
?Q
_ N
_ N .n ...
CL
W
Q' 4J co °' ° Q ^ O c V
%n LL. a)
• o,'
, . J m, p. [ cC
Cn ..JJ0VV
C
co
:r in
ao m
f
Q),- wanly a/ m
r- 4/ a Ln
U
Rrt `
4 d \.C
i
7 ti _ 40
v C
c
•, ?, C? S 00 + C Y L CO -
° ? 04
l N O r C
cc ? ?n cfl ? ?
_ ?>ii l c? t ??g cz
' a. M ) o ?
•? o a s r_ \?3_ 0 m e o
°- `U a ?? a
Lf)
YA?
U1 r?.® C1' ?+ N Rl
°X) O o r? i
® - M
i • Q `' O
C: I
. w.
r ?\ N O r yJ LO _
r-CWDLD
In +
Q? ( c ?_. N (li LiEr f y
? ? T o
a
o
CD ` c
1 co
tio .01
?a t, Mo

?i

4
1

- - ?

Q
C?
C
x
as
c
N
m
0
N
d
Z

N
O
C
PP st A i
w
r?
-A0 .4, y-p1? i ti y yr u
tv?
W
;r.? . 4
:.i a
1 I
J

00o v ???i ? ?' 4
N '
f-
E o
m
y

19,
?. N
E
m
E
Air
404
m
a?
L
a
i
7
°
f0
(d
z

m
y
Q E
m
=

y
3

m N
c
d LL
E m
? m
2 a in
T
? J
J _ y c
C

Lo LL

LL
y

c p
C
I ' LI ILI

.
•
` LL 0
o
it ?? ??, ,
•?_ r

'
\M 1 C I ?

i N.
Ig 4'.
~ krti ?4 mss' +'' I1 ?1
K Y
i At
y ' Ii L'J
G
v
J ..
.i
All,

a

N
N
L
U]
a
m
a?
O
O
Z
? ? ro
Lf)
LL O
h .? ?''• O
?/
1. •?
V fit..
z
p ` - 1 o
W r 5 9
ilk
1
y
m y a 3
v ? o
Q n
c C
m y E y
I? T
13
= L
m y
-J o v

Flt, ?

r

r
?". 4 IcaJ ,? u
it N
C
44* t*
••.ti• '? 3 a: j i ?
' ,?? ?`' a 6 L a fn U n
t ? C
• ? Iv

? Ser Snrer a
D y
40
CV)
N
L
U)
a
O
z
4. r ? d ? ? LL
.r a c ? E
' ? '•? art _:.?'. {7? C ? N
Ot,
v - y m
Yr: :?S o c ? ?'c
;J r1 c t
c
7 p in
'l to ? ? G
I ion
1 ?
r .• '•ya '1.?G' ' _ . LL O

yam".
r 7 1 I f7 S

n t ;

V
T?j (0
•
"

U) .2

yy f ?? ? U d c

U_ CD

I - OP

4
, -4.
e
l
l
f
?
1R
r L ' / -n I. _ ? z
'
I .:-. ? ??, •?? 1 ? r
Y r .•? / ? ^t-6? i ? . .' rt tj? a f v_ c3
•
?? ? ? 1
-? jl t? a ? • r I
•s i?? ll+s'a'??R
.-1
17 L I

is
rn
a?
t
I

E
E
m _d
m
4 _ c a
E
m v m
a c v
= y
d
a1 o
LL
4) o a
J
c
? = C
O ?
C LL IU
E = O
o ?
va c a
a _d
a c ?
I 1
I .' S

a
cu
a?
U
i
7
O
N
f6
J
76
Z
N
L
11 O
O
'n

r cv
U;
N
C:
I u
z
LL:jS c

- ?
?

?Y y z

6 '?

1 6
i .

107
a.
• I ,i III.
m r+
? 16\ L ?'.
Y
S ? • j • .. ? ? f 4?
TAI ?.
v:'s?'
L`1

S? 'L ? iv ..JO: •? ?,?J-.. RJR: II ?
N
r
N
a?
L
a-
m
C
U
O
N
Of
CO
M
Z
E
m m
N
Q ? ? LL
N ? QI
T
c v
? o
LL
J
? O N
Y C
ul U 'tp
O 4 Y ?p
O` C -O
r m m 5
1UP
1I
`a)
a)
LL o
0

0
N
N
O
z
1
m 3
tf'
sl
V1 U
Z

D o
?
L

IqV
I
r r a ro ?1, m. ?i a? N N a? '9 rN,
fO a a b
y y4'
97
?n I N N O r. n
rn ? "! I ? ? T y
^' N
N L7 N C 3 .+
d ? ? w
a
,-. w I 4
J
7 I Q 3
I rf I I '
c ?
i •-
N ? - r- ?
7 N A? - M N 7 r_ z rj -
i, 0 1 CJ T? d a
r
? w CA
n
NCA -j x. w .fib -?w ?
T? Z ? II i I ?tir•. ?? ??
4r` .- m
?w
", ? c w w
I C
:wz
m f ? T T
i
n
Vic, '' ? ? r n? a
?' 7 M
rv, ^r_n
-? n w
r•; .y' 'o n O.
I n t
CL
N N w C? » ? N
Cn IJ Lo
L ^ ? , ? IJ fn 1 ? w
m l l aIt ? w N? I ,,..? T ^f
?_ - .ray ? s,1 ..? N
C? I ? f -fin
3 .? C to
N N
'? d Ca d
xm ? d a
!? ` 0
w
c
?NM .
-Ti
c ` { ,?
`1 g
mxoOz
rfl T C5 ? C Z7JHmO
?I y
O <
O In H- H H- i
x m Ln
-0 O z?ozn
Z N D
Z m O O O
Q n 2 n O g? "1mmXlr,
cn y rrzl In \ r-oH3>n
r -D it nOn"
N n C r, DmI°z°
Q I14 m rZn M
??-< n
Ul -n H n `n
? ` J l/1 2 N ? ,?+1
CU ti fri ?z-+
n
z
j CA f n
r
w
v
I C 41P -?_
A n ` ?? R? I h] I