Cover ImageDuke Power
Final Shoreline Management
Plan Update for the
Catawba-Wateree Hydro Project

(FERC No. 2232)

Volume I SMP Update


Submitted by:

Duke Power, A Division of
Duke Energy Corporation

Group Environment
Health & Safety
Lake Management

July 30, 2001

Prepared by:
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
Needham, MA

Table of Contents
Lake Assessment
Lake James
Lake James Shoreline Classification
Lake James Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Lake James Cultural Resources Assessment
Lake James Recreational Use and Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment
Lake James Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Lake Rhodhiss
Lake Rhodhiss Shoreline Classification
Lake Rhodhiss Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Lake Rhodhiss Cultural Resources Assessment
Lake Rhodhiss Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment
Lake Rhodhiss Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Lake Hickory
Lake Hickory Shoreline Classification
Lake Hickory Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Lake Hickory Cultural Resources Assessment
Lake Hickory Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment
Lake Hickory Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Lookout Shoals Lake
Lookout Shoals Lake Shoreline Classification
Lookout Shoals Lake Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Lookout Shoals Lake Cultural Resources Assessment
Lookout Shoals Lake Recreational Use and Carrying
Capacity Assessment
Lookout Shoals Lake Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Lake Norman
Lake Norman Shoreline Classification
Lake Norman Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Lake Norman Cultural Resources Assessment
Lake Norman Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment
Lake Norman Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Mountain Island Lake
Mountain Island Lake Shoreline Classification
Mountain Island Lake Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Mountain Island Lake Cultural Resources Assessment
Mountain Island Lake Recreational Use and Carrying
Capacity Assessment
Mountain Island Lake Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Lake Wylie
Lake Wylie Shoreline Classification
Lake Wylie Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Lake Wylie Cultural Resources Assessment
Lake Wylie Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment
Lake Wylie Proposed Recreational Enhancements
Fishing Creek Lake
Fishing Creek Lake Shoreline Classification
Fishing Creek Lake Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey
Fishing Creek Lake Cultural Resources Assessment
Fishing Creek Lake Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment
Fishing Creek Lake Proposed Recreational Enhancements

3.9
Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake

3.9.1
Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Shoreline Classification

3.9.2
Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey

3.9.3
Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Cultural Resources Assessment

3.9.4
Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment

3.9.5
Great Falls Lake and Rocky Creek Lake Proposed Recreational Enhancements

3.10
Lake Wateree

3.10.1
Lake Wateree Shoreline Classification

3.10.2
Lake Wateree Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey

3.10.3
Lake Wateree Cultural Resources Assessment

3.10.4
Lake Wateree Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessment

3.10.5
Lake Wateree Proposed Recreational Enhancements

 
3.2 Lake Rhodhiss

Lake Rhodhiss is a relatively small lake within the Catawba-Wateree system, located northeast of Morganton in Burke and Caldwell counties, North Carolina. Lake Rhodhiss has a surface area of about 3,021 acres and 103.9 shoreline miles at full pond elevation of 995.1 feet MSL.

3.2.1 Lake Rhodhiss Shoreline Classification

Table 3.2-1 summarizes the shoreline classification for Lake Rhodhiss, based on the July 2001 SMP maps.

Table 3.2-1.

Shoreline Classification for Lake Rhodhiss


Shoreline Classification

Shoreline Miles

Percent of Total

Commercial/Non-Residential

0.4

0.0%

Commercial/Residential

0.3

0.0%

Residential

0.4

0.0%

Business Industrial

0.4

0.0%

Public Recreation

0.4

0.0%

Public Infrastructure

1.2

1.2%

Project Operations

1.0

1.0%

Future Commercial/Non-Residential

28.1

27.0%

Future Commercial/Residential

1.8

1.7%

Future Residential

4.9

4.7%

Future Public Recreation

2.3

2.2%

Impact Minimization Zones

1.6

2.0%

Impact Minimization Zones (Dev)

0.0

0.0%

Environmental Area

24.5

23.6%

Natural Area

36.7

35.3%

Total

103.9

100.0%

 

Back to Top

3.2.2 Lake Rhodhiss Shallow Water Fish Habitat Survey

Table 3.2-2 summarizes the shoreline classification for Lake Rhodhiss, based on the
results of the SWFHS.

Table 3.2-2. 

Shallow Water Habitat Shoreline Classifications (Miles)


Lake

Developed

Sand

Cobble

Woody Debris

Vegetated

Natural

Undeveloped No Critical Habitat

Total

Rhodhiss

1.5

2.2

1.3

9.2

21.3

2.5

59.5

98


3.2.3 Lake Rhodhiss Cultural Resources Assessment

Within the Lake Rhodhiss Study Area, there are 66 previously recorded cultural resources including 6 architectural resources and 60 archaeological sites. Architectural resources include 2 single dwellings, 2 dams, and 2 bridges. The architectural resources range in date from the early nineteenth to the middle twentieth century. The archeological sites range from the Early Archaic through the Historic cultural periods.

Back to Top

Twenty sites are associated with the archaic periods and 14 are from the woodland period. Eleven of the prehistoric sites are habitation sites, but site function could not be determined for 23 of the archaeological sites. Fourteen of the sites are associated with the historic period. One historic archaeological site is the possible location for eighteenth-century Fort McDowell. There are also three historic cemetery sites within the study area. Fourteen of the sites have been affected by landfills, four are underwater, six are affected by erosion, and one has been destroyed, although another site is now a parking lot and another is on the site of a future road. The associated time period has not been determined for 12 of the archaeological sites.

None of the archaeological sites are listed in the National Register.

The Bellevue house is the only architectural resource listed in the National Register.

The information on both the archaeological and architectural sites from the state files is being used in preparation of the predictive model to assign the shoreline on Lake Rhodhiss either a High, Medium, Low, or No probability for the occurrence of cultural resources. Prior to the completion of the model non-exempt activities such as excavation projects, commercial marina development, and certain conveyance projects will be provided to the appropriate SHPO for review before construction or excavation activity begins within the project boundary. To ensure the potential impact to cultural resources is properly evaluated after completion of the predictive model, Lake Management will review the predictive model for all non-exempt activities. Applicants for all non-exempt lake use permitting activities in medium and high probability areas will be required to consult with the appropriate SHPO regarding their proposal.

Back to Top

3.2.4 Lake Rhodhiss Recreational Use and Carrying Capacity Assessmentv

Lake Rhodhiss Existing Recreational Areas

There are 5 developed Duke Power-owned public recreational access locations on Lake Rhodhiss and the Marsh Project area, leased by Duck's Unlimited and the State of North Carolina. Figure 3.2-1 shows the public recreational access locations. In addition, there is 1 commercial non-residential and 1 commercial residential marina that provide additional access on Lake Rhodhiss. The following sections describe the Duke Power-owned public access areas and provide estimates of the number and types of commercial recreational access facilities at Lake Rhodhiss.

Click Here to View Full
Figure 3.2-1

Lake Rhodhiss Public Recreational Access Areas

Figure 3.2-1

Back to Top

Existing Duke Power-owned Public Access Areas

The developed Duke Power-owned public access areas provide about 247 acres and about 15,756 feet of shoreline frontage of public access at Lake Rhodhiss. Combined, the developed access areas have 11 public boat ramps, 6 loading piers, and about 350 car/trailer and 20 vehicle parking spaces. Table 3.2-3 summarizes the facilities at the public access areas. The NCWRC, under an agreement with Duke Power, maintains all of the access areas on Lake Rhodhiss.

In the 1994 SMP, Duke Power proposed improving the Castle Bridge access area (replace 1 ramp with 6 new ramps, replace 2 piers with 3 new piers, and add 150 paved parking spaces), relocate the Tator Hole site (add 4 new ramps, 2 loading piers, and 100 paved parking spaces). In addition, Duke Power said it would add 5 acres of land at Castle Bridge (45 acres added), add 20 acres to the Conley Creek site (64 added) and provide 100 acres at the relocated Tator Hole site (now called the Rhodhiss site where 127 acres were provided). All of the commitments were met except for the provision of 4 boat ramps at the Rhodhiss site where, after consultation with the NCWRC and FERC, only 2 ramps and 1 pier were provided initially.

The NCWRC has entered into a creative partnership with Duke Power for the maintenance and operation of the non-leased access areas. Under this agreement Duke Power pays the NCWRC to maintain the access areas and the NCWRC makes at least the same capital dollar amount available to Duke Power, and agency lessees for the non boat launching portion of the access areas, for improvements that will help the boating public. This agreement is a continuation of a long established partnership with the NCWRC with the added benefit of designated cost sharing capital dollars for access area improvements.

Back to Top

Table 3.2-3. 

Lake Rhodhiss Duke Power-Owned Public Access Areas


Access Area Name

Acreage

Shoreline Frontage (ft)

Boat Ramps

Loading Piers

Fishing Piers

Car
Parking
(Spaces)

V/T*
Parking
(Spaces)

Johns River

1.8

           172

1

1

0

0

30

Huffman Bridge

2.3

           610

0

0

0

20

0

Castle Bridge

47.7

        1,290

6

3

0

0

150

Conley Creek

67.9

        4,842

2

1

0

0

70

Rhodhiss

126.9

      8,842  

2

1

0

0

100

Total

246.6

      15,756

11

6

0

20

350


* Vehicle/Trailer parking areas

Existing Commercial and Private Recreational Access

In addition to the Duke Power-owned public access areas, the public and lake neighbors can gain access to Lake Rhodhiss through a commercial non-residential marina. Private access to Lake Rhodhiss is through a private marina and private piers along the Lake Rhodhiss shoreline. Table 3.2-4 summarizes the number and types of public and private commercial non-residential and commercial residential marina facilities. Table 3.2-5 summarizes the estimated number of private piers.

Back to Top

Table 3.2-4.

Summary of Lake Rhodhiss Commercial Recreational Access Facilities


Type of Facility

Commercial
Non-Residential

Commercial Residential

Public Marinas

1

0

Private Marinas

0

1

Wet Slips

62

2

Dry Slips

0

0


Table 3.2-5. 

Summary of Lake Rhodhiss Private Recreational Access Facilities


Type of Facility

No. Private Facilities

Piers

5

Lake Rhodhiss Recreational Use Assessment

Visitation figures at the public access areas on Lake Rhodhiss were derived based on estimates of the traffic entering the Duke Power-owned public access areas. For the 1999 study period, there was an estimated total of 228,010 visits for Lake Rhodhiss at these sites. Figure 3.2-2 shows the distribution of the visitation for each month at Lake Rhodhiss for the Duke Power-owned public access areas during the 1999 study period. A visit is considered a vehicle or vehicle/trailer entering the site for any part of a day.

Figure 3.2-2.

Lake Rhodhiss Estimate of Recreational Visitation at the Duke Power-Owned Access Areas

Figure 3.2-2

Table 3.2-6 shows the estimated recreational visitation based on the traffic counter data for the sampled sites during the 1999 study period. Of the Duke Power-owned Lake Rhodhiss access areas, those experiencing the greatest usage were Castle Bridge, Rhodhiss, and Conley Creek with estimates of 51 percent, 22 percent, and 15 percent, respectively, of the total estimated use.

Back to Top

Based on survey data input, the estimated ratio for annual visits to the project area for Survey B respondents (respondents that use both public and private access areas)
compared to Survey C respondents (respondents at the public access areas) was 1.27 to 1. The estimated overall recreational visitation for Lake Rhodhiss for the 1999 study period totaled 288,655 visits.

Lake Rhodhiss Boat Carrying Capacity Assessment

The overall boat carrying capacity is assessed based on the peak boating use estimates obtained during the flyovers in the 1999 study period. The available boating acreage was adjusted from the base boats per acreage estimate (see Table 3.2-7) by the following factors (Warren and Rea, 1989, as modified):

Back to Top

Factor
Adjustment
1. Location of the lake in relation to population served
0
2. Multiple use of water area
-

3.

Shoreline configuration
-
4. Amount of open water
-
5. Amount of facility and shoreline development
-
6. Crowding rating
0
 
Total
-3

Click Here to View Full

Table 3.2-6.

1999 Lake Rhodhiss Estimated Recreational Visitation at Duke Power-Owned Access Areas


Table 3.2-7.  

Boat Type Acreage Adjustment
(Source:  Modified from Warren and Rea, 1989)vv


Boat Activity Type

Low

-4

-3

-2

-1

Base

1

2

3

4

High

Fishing

10.0

9.0

8.0

6.0

5.0

4.3

4.0

3.3

3.0

2.3

2.0

Canoe/kayak

2.5

2.3

2.0

1.8

1.5

1.3

1.1

1.0

0.8

0.7

0.5

Motor boating

18.0

17.0

15.0

13.0

11.0

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

3.0

Sailing

10.0

9.0

8.0

6.0

5.0

4.3

4.0

3.3

3.0

2.3

2.0

Jet skiing

10.0

9.0

8.0

6.0

5.0

4.3

4.0

3.3

3.0

2.3

2.0

Water skiing

20.0

18.0

17.0

15.0

14.0

12.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

7.0

Table 3.2-8 summarizes the assessment of the optimum overall boat capacity based on the usable boating water surface acreage and the boating activity mix identified from the surveys. Table 3.2-9 provides the assessment of the percent capacity of the boat use for Lake Rhodhiss on the peak day during the 1999 study period. During the weekday, Lake Rhodhiss was estimated at 11 percent capacity; during the weekend, at 9 percent capacity; and during the peak holiday period, at 19 percent capacity for overall boating use.

Back to Top

Table 3.2-8. 

Lake Rhodhiss Boat Carrying Capacity Assessmentvvvv


Boat Activity

Usable Acreage

Use Factor

Opt. No. Boats

% Usage

Boat
Activity Mix

Persons/ Boat

Total Users

Fishing

 3,060

8.0

383

60%

230

3.14

722

Canoe/Kayak

3,060

2.0

1,530

12%

184

3.26

600

Motor Boating

1,743

15.0

116

13%

15

3.90

59

Sailing

1,743

8.0

 218

0%

-  

3.36

-  

Jet Skiing

1,743

8.0

218

13%

28

3.85

108

Water Skiing

 1,743

17.0

103

2%

2

4.39

9

Total

     

100%

459

 

1,498


Table 3.2-9.  

Lake Rhodhiss Estimated 1999 Study Period Boat Capacityvv


Peak Use

Weekday

% Capacity

Weekend

% Capacity

Holiday

% Capacity

No. Boats

49

11%

41

9%

89

19%

The overall boat carrying capacity assessment provides an assessment of the total surface area of boating use. To assess the areas of the lakes with higher boating density, the general location of boating activity was recorded during the flyovers for each day of aerial coverage. Figure 3.2-3 shows the location of boats during the peak use day for Lake Rhodhiss. Figure 3.2-4 shows the boating density on Lake Rhodhiss for the peak use day, and denotes areas with the greatest clustering of boating activity. Figure 3.2-5 shows the boat density map based on the composite of the five highest boating use days. This figure illustrates the areas with boating use most often occurred during the peak use days during the study period and provides an assessment of areas with high density boating during this same period.

Back to Top

Click Here to View Full
Figure 3.2-3

Lake Rhodhiss Peak Use Day Boat Counts

Figure 3.2-3

Click Here to View Full
Figure 3.2-4

Lake Rhodhiss Peak Use Day Boat Density Map

Figure 3.2-4

Click Here to View Full
Figure 3.2-5

Lake Rhodhiss Composite Peak Use Boat Density Map

Figure 3.2-5

Based on the boat capacity study in Table 3.2-9, there are no crowding problems on Lake Rhodhiss. The highest capacity reached was 19% on holiday weekends. The Peak Use Day Boat Density map, Figure 3.2-4 (for only one day), does show one area where the boat density is higher than the rest of the lake, but the acres available per boat for are adequate for all boating activities. When averaging the five highest boat count days, Figure 3.2-5, no crowding problems are identified. For all of the remaining times during the year the boat density levels are very low.

Back to Top

Lake Rhodhiss Estimated Future Recreational Demand

Table 3.2-10 provides the population projections for the counties within 50-60 miles of Lake Rhodhiss. Population projections were conducted for the impact zone using a combination of 1970 - 1990 population data and 2000 and 2010 population projections from U.S. Census Bureau data; these figures were used to make projections for 2030, 2040, and 2050

Table 3.2-10.

Lake Rhodhiss Estimated Population Projections for the
Impact Zonevv


County

1999

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Burke

77,086

85,651

92,340

98,366

108,595

119,888

132,355

McDowell

37,166

41,296

44,196

46,347

50,404

54,816

59,614

Wilkes

57,966

64,407

66,789

68,158

72,777

77,710

82,976

Alexander

29,121

32,357

36,056

39,314

45,333

52,273

60,275

Watauga

37,759

41,954

45,542

48,552

56,388

65,488

76,056

Avery

14,149

15,721

16,002

16,054

16,853

17,692

18,573

Caldwell

68,560

76,178

78,758

80,411

86,374

92,779

99,659

Rutherford

54,126

60,140

62,576

64,776

69,009

73,519

78,323

Cleveland

83,358

92,620

96,803

100,034

106,779

113,979

121,664

Lincoln

54,839

60,932

70,132

79,229

94,689

113,166

135,248

Catawba

120,581

133979

146,217

157,650

176,071

196,645

219,623

Total

634,711

705,235

755,411

798,891

883,272

977,955

1,084,366

Back to Top

Table 3.2-11 provides the estimated recreational use for the impact zone through the year 2050. Current use estimates are based on spot counts and responses to surveys. The recreational use projections were estimated by computing the projected population increase for the impact zone and incorporating indexed values for future recreational use for the various activities. The index values for each activity were obtained from "Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment of Demand and Supply Trends" (Cordell, 1999). The indices are based on models that incorporate a number of variables, including age structure of the population, income, race, sex, and population density, as well as other explanatory variables. Full model parameters and estimates are available from the author.

Table 3.2-12 shows the estimated absorption percentage for the four major recreation activities that require specific lands and facilities. Picnicking, swimming, camping, and boating are activities that require specific developed facilities. The other activities listed are dispersed activities that can take place at a variety of undeveloped areas. The estimated 1999 use levels are from Table 3.2-11. The estimated demand is based on the impact zone population (population of all counties within 50-60 miles of the lake). The impact zone population is multiplied by the participation rate for the activity, which was obtained from "Emerging Markets for Outdoor Recreation in the United States: Based on the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment" (Cordell et al., 1996). Participation rates are for the South and are similar to 1995 North Carolina and South Carolina SCORP data. Specific participation rates are as follows: swimming, 37.3%; picnicking, 44.8%; camping, 22.4%; and boating, 45.0%. The product of the impact zone population and participation rates are then multiplied by the estimated of number of days of participation for each activity, which were obtained from the 1995 North Carolina SCORP. The 1999 estimated number of participants for each activity was then divided by the 1999 estimated demand to obtain the estimated absorption percentage. Absorption percentage is defined as the percent of total demand for the impact zone that is met by the individual lake.

Back to Top

Table 3.2-13 provides the estimate of the recreational facilities land acreage needed to meet the future recreational demand through the year 2050. The weighted population is the estimated impact zone population multiplied by the participation rate for each activity. The facility standards and estimated acreage needs for the facility class are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreational Facilities. The facility need is the total facility need for the impact zone based on the weighted population and the facility standards. The total facility need is then multiplied by the absorption percentage to determine the facility need for Lake Rhodhiss. The acreage needs are then based on the Lake Rhodhiss facility need multiplied by per unit acreage needs that are based on State SCORPS and FERC Guidelines for Outdoor Recreation Facilities. For Lake Rhodhiss, it is estimated that 37 acres are required to accommodate future recreational facilities demand through the year 2050. This includes 1 acre of beaches, 3 acres of picnic areas, 11 acres of campsites, and 22 acres of boat ramps.

The estimated acreage needs for the reservoir are total usable acreage needs. Usable land acreage at existing developed public recreational facilities can be counted toward meeting these needs. Duke Power sites, county and state parks, and other private and public agencies will meet these needs. Duke Power is expected to meet a portion of the future recreational land needs. The entire estimated need will be met by a combination of opportunities from all sources.

For Lake Rhodhiss, the most frequently identified recreational facility needs mentioned boat ramps, restrooms and picnic areas. In the past 5 years, 6 new boat ramps have been added to the lake and they are currently underutilized, so no additional boat ramps are proposed at this time. A picnic area is proposed by the Town of Sawmills at the Conley Creek access area. Restrooms will not be provided at unsupervised access areas because of the potential vandalism problems that could occur at these remote sites.

Back to Top

Table 3.2-11. 

Lake Rhodhiss Estimated Future Recreational Use


Activity

Est. 1999 Rec Use

Rec Use 2010

Rec Use 2020

Rec Use 2030

Rec Use 2040

Rec Use 2050

Motor Boating*

61,202

66,169

71,301

80,596

92,572

106,968

Boat Fishing*

146,546

169,902

191,927

222,594

250,368

275,646

Bank/Pier Fishing

51,564

59,782

67,532

78,323

88,095

96,990

Lake Swimming

51,862

58,794

65,636

76,517

90,231

107,345

Canoeing*

14,075

15,753

17,238

20,198

24,574

31,060

Jet Skiing*

31,561

34,122

36,769

41,562

47,738

55,162

Kayaking*

2,815

3,043

3,279

3,705

4,289

5,067

Tailrace Fishing

5,928

6,873

7,764

9,005

10,128

11,151

Sailing*

0

0

0

0

0

0

Water Ski/Tubing*

32,456

35,090

37,811

42,741

49,092

56,726

Backpacking

5,928

7,641

9,634

12,430

15,591

19,316

Hunting

23,713

24,627

25,214

26,587

27,326

27,928

Tent/Vehicle Camp

17,785

23,415

30,062

39,359

50,701

64,445

Windsurfing

0

0

0

0

0

0

Bicycling

0

0

0

0

0

0

Picnicking

32,158

38,052

44,399

53,928

65,609

79,834

Sightseeing

32,158

39,254

46,939

57,713

70,845

86,356

Hiking

5,928

7,458

9,121

11,397

13,889

16,607

Wildlife Viewing

2,815

3,609

4,555

5,760

6,995

8,177

Using Playgrounds

0

0

0

0

0

0

Sub-total*

288,655

324,079

358,325

411,396

468,633

530,629

Total

518,494

593,584

669,181

782,415

908,043

1,048,777

 

Back to Top

Table 3.2-12.

Lake Rhodhiss Estimated Absorption Percentage for Reservoir


Activity

Estimated 1999 Participants

Estimated 1999 Demand

Absorption Percentage

Swimming

51,862

1,967,369

2.6%

Picnicking

32,158

1,222,707

2.6%

Camping

17,785

476,287

3.1%

Boating

288,655

1,570,910

18.4%


Table 3.2-13. 

Lake Rhodhiss Estimated Recreational Facility Land
Acreage Needs


A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

Activity

Year

Weighted Population

Facility Standard

Facility Need

Facility Class

Lake Rhodhiss Share

Acreage

Swimming

2010

281,768

1 per 50,000

5.64

beaches

0.15

0.81

 

2020

297,986

1 per 50,000

5.96

beaches

0.15

0.85

 

2030

329,460

1 per 50,000

6.59

beaches

0.17

0.94

 

2040

362,724

1 per 50,000

7.25

beaches

0.19

1.04

 

2050

399,346

1 per 50,000

7.99

beaches

0.21

1.16

Picnicking

2010

338,424

1 per 500

676.85

tables

17.60

1.76

 

2020

357,903

1 per 500

715.81

tables

18.61

1.86

 

2030

395,706

1 per 500

791.41

tables

20.58

2.06

 

2040

435,658

1 per 500

871.32

tables

22.67

2.27

 

2050

479,643

1 per 500

959.29

tables

25.26

2.53

Camping

2010

169,212

6 per 1,000

1,015.27

campsites

31.47

7.87

 

2020

178,952

6 per 1,000

1,073.71

campsites

33.28

8.32

 

2030

197,853

6 per 1,000

1,187.12

campsites

36.80

9.20

 

2040

217,829

6 per 1,000

1,306.97

campsites

40.54

10.13

 

2050

239,822

6 per 1,000

1,438.93

campsites

45.18

11.29

Boating

2010

339,935

1 per 4000

84.98

boat ramps

15.64

15.64

 

2020

359,501

1 per 4000

89.88

boat ramps

16.54

16.54

 

2030

397,472

1 per 4000

99.37

boat ramps

18.28

18.28

 

2040

437,603

1 per 4000

109.40

boat ramps

20.14

20.14

 

2050

481,784

1 per 4000

120.45

boat ramps

22.45

22.45

         

Total Acreage for 2050

37.42

 

Back to Top

3.2.5 Lake Rhodhiss Proposed Recreational Enhancements

Based on comments received from the Recreation Use and Needs Survey conducted for Duke Power in 1999, the respondents indicated a need for more boat ramps, picnicking, gas pumps, more public access and restroom facilities on Lake Rhodhiss. Through the AAII agency leases, additional picnicking, trails, fishing access and restroom facilities will be constructed in the next 5 years to meet the identified needs.

Additional gas pumps and other facilities may also be installed as Duke Power begins accepting access area lease requests by non-agency groups for the access areas not leased to the agencies. The non-agency groups had to wait until after June 1, 2000 (the deadline for agencies to submit an application, plan and schedule) before Duke Power would consider accepting their applications.

Based on the projected population projections, facility standards and estimated acreage needs for the facility class, approximately 37 acres will be needed through 2050 to meet future recreational facility demand. Currently, 247 acres of mainland have been reserved for recreational use. The land is good topographically and will be able to support the facilities identified by the survey respondents in the Recreation Use and Needs Study.

Some items that concerned recreationists were cleanup of trash and control of shoreline development. Duke Power supports and participates in the annual Big Sweep project to cleanup litter from the shoreline of the lakes. On Lake Rhodhiss development of the shoreline is regulated by the counties. The amount of shoreline where Duke Power will allow construction within the project boundary has been reduced from the 1994 SMP.

The NCWRC has entered into a creative partnership with Duke Power for the maintenance and operation of the non-leased access areas. Under this agreement Duke Power pays the NCWRC to maintain the access areas and the NCWRC makes at least the same capital dollar amount available to Duke Power, and agency lessees for the non boat launching portion of the access areas, for improvements that will help the boating public. This agreement is a continuation of a long established partnership with the NCWRC with the added benefit of designated cost sharing capital dollars for access area improvements.

Back to Top

The known proposed recreational changes for Lake Rhodhiss follow:

Duke Power Access

Johns River Access Area, Burke County, North Carolina

The changes proposed for this site in the next 5 years are:


Replace the existing pier and boat ramp.

Pave the site.

Huffman Bridge Fishing Area, Burke County, North Carolina

The changes proposed for this site in the next 5 years are to pave the access road and parking lot.

Conley Creek Access Area, Caldwell County, North Carolina

The changes proposed by the Town of Sawmills for this site during the following Fiscal Years:

Fiscal Year 2000-2001


Construct 2 fishing piers.

Construct approximately 2.5 miles of nature trail.

Construct a picnic shelter.

Back to Top

Fiscal Year 2001-2002


Construct 2 fishing piers.

Fiscal Year 2002-2003


Grade for future athletic fields.

Fiscal Year 2003-2004


Construct soccer/football fields.

Fiscal Year 2004-2005


Construction of baseball/softball fields.

Duke Power Islands

The NCWRC has expressed an interest in managing the islands on Lake Rhodhiss. A management plan is being developed and may be completed for the SMP filing in 2001.

Next

Back to Top